[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


             INDUSTRY AND LABOR PERSPECTIVES: A FURTHER 
              LOOK AT NORTH AMERICAN SUPPLY CHAIN  
              CHALLENGES

=======================================================================

                                (117-35)

                             REMOTE HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                           NOVEMBER 17, 2021

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
             
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]             


     Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
     transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                             transportation
                             
                                __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
47-301 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                
 
             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

  PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
DON YOUNG, Alaska                      District of Columbia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BOB GIBBS, Ohio                      RICK LARSEN, Washington
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky              STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois               JOHN GARAMENDI, California
JOHN KATKO, New York                 HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr., 
BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   Georgia
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana             ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina         DINA TITUS, Nevada
MIKE BOST, Illinois                  SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           JARED HUFFMAN, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California             JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas            FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida               DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania   MARK DeSAULNIER, California
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON,            STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
  Puerto Rico                        SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota              TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee              GREG STANTON, Arizona
DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota          COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey       SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi           JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas                 ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
NANCY MACE, South Carolina           CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York         CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas                SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida           JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
MICHELLE STEEL, California           CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
                                     KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
                                     MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
                                     NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
                                     MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
                                     TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     4
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     5
    Prepared statement...........................................     6

                               WITNESSES

Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf 
  of the American Association of Port Authorities, oral statement     8
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive Officer, American 
  Trucking Associations, oral statement..........................    15
    Prepared statement...........................................    16
Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer, Association 
  of American Railroads, oral statement..........................    25
    Prepared statement...........................................    27
Anne Reinke, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Transportation Intermediaries Association, oral statement......    32
    Prepared statement...........................................    34
David HC Correll, Ph.D., Research Scientist and Lecturer, 
  Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation 
  and Logistics, oral statement..................................    38
    Prepared statement...........................................    40
Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation Trades Department, 
  AFL-CIO, oral statement........................................    42
    Prepared statement...........................................    44

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Letter of October 18, 2021, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, 
  U.S. Department of Transportation, from the Agricultural 
  Transportation Working Group, Submitted for the Record by Hon. 
  Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford......................................    50
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio:
    Statement of the OOIDA Foundation............................    61
    Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair 
      and Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on 
      Transportation and Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase, 
      President, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety...........   123
    Statement of Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line and 
      Regional Railroad Association..............................   130
    Statement of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes 
      Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.....   132
    Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair 
      and Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on 
      Transportation and Infrastructure, from Jessica Durrum, 
      Ports Project Director, Los Angeles Alliance for a New 
      Economy....................................................   133
Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Gavin Newsom, Governor, 
  State of California, from Hon. Michelle Steel et al., Submitted 
  for the Record by Hon. Michelle Steel..........................   104
Statement of the Shippers Coalition, Submitted for the Record by 
  Hon. Dusty Johnson of South Dakota.............................   117
Letter of December 1, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair and 
  Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation 
  and Infrastructure, from Robyn M. Boerstling, Vice President, 
  Infrastructure, Innovation, and Human Resources Policy, 
  National Association of Manufacturers, Submitted for the Record 
  by Hon. Sam Graves.............................................   137
Submissions for the Record by Hon. John Garamendi:
    Letter of September 13, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. 
      Dusty Johnson from Accustom Brokerage, LLC et al...........   139
    Letter of August 9, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. 
      Dusty Johnson from the Agriculture Transportation Coalition 
      et al......................................................   141
    Letter of September 24, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. 
      Dusty Johnson from Jacob Cassady, Director, Government 
      Relations, Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers.....   143
    Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter DeFazio, Chair and 
      Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on 
      Transportation and Infrastructure, from Gary Shapiro, 
      President and CEO, Consumer Technology Association.........   144
    Letter of October 4, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. 
      Dusty Johnson from Steve DeHaan, President and CEO, 
      International Warehouse Logistics Association..............   145
    Statement of Eric R. Byer, President and CEO, National 
      Association of Chemical Distributors.......................   146
    Letter of October 4, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. 
      Dusty Johnson from Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries 
      Association................................................   148

                                APPENDIX

Questions to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of Long 
  Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
  Authorities, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   149
    Hon. Sam Graves..............................................   149
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   150
    Hon. Michelle Steel..........................................   150
    Hon. Steve Cohen.............................................   152
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   152
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   153
    Hon. John Garamendi..........................................   153
    Hon. Seth Moulton............................................   154
    Hon. Nikema Williams.........................................   154
Questions to Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
  American Trucking Associations, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   154
    Hon. Sam Graves..............................................   155
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   157
    Hon. Michelle Steel..........................................   157
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   157
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   158
    Hon. Sharice Davids..........................................   159
Questions to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive 
  Officer, Association of American Railroads, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   161
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   161
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   163
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   164
    Hon. Sharice Davids..........................................   164
    Hon. Seth Moulton............................................   165
Questions to Anne Reinke, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
  Transportation Intermediaries Association, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   168
    Hon. Sam Graves..............................................   168
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   169
    Hon. Michelle Steel..........................................   169
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   170
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   170
    Hon. Sharice Davids..........................................   171
Questions to David HC Correll, Ph.D., Research Scientist and 
  Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for 
  Transportation and Logistics, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   171
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   172
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   173
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   173
    Hon. Sharice Davids..........................................   173
Questions to Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation Trades 
  Department, AFL-CIO, from:
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio........................................   174
    Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................   175
    Hon. Andre Carson............................................   175
    Hon. Stephen F. Lynch........................................   175
    Hon. Sharice Davids..........................................   176
    Hon. Seth Moulton............................................   177

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                           November 15, 2021

    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

    TO:      LMembers of Congress, Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure
    FROM:  LStaff, Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure
    RE:      LHearing on ``Industry and Labor Perspectives: A 
Further Look at North American Supply Chain Challenges.''
_______________________________________________________________________


                                PURPOSE

    The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will 
hold a hearing on Wednesday, November 17, 2021, at 10:30 a.m. 
EST to examine North American supply chain challenges. The 
hearing will take place in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building 
and via Zoom. The Committee will hear testimony from the 
following representatives of the transportation industry and 
its workforce: Mario Cordero of the Port of Long Beach on 
behalf of the American Association of Port Authorities, Chris 
Spear of the American Trucking Associations, Ian Jefferies of 
the Association of American Railroads, Anne Reinke of the 
Transportation Intermediaries Association, David Correll of the 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation 
and Logistics, and Greg Regan of the Transportation Trades 
Department, AFL-CIO.

                               BACKGROUND

COVID-19 AND THE SUPPLY CHAIN

    The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many aspects of the 
global supply chain. In response to several COVID-19 outbreaks 
across factories in Asia in 2019-2020, factories shut down.\1\ 
Shipping companies also cut schedules, anticipating that with 
reduced levels of activity due to outbreaks and quarantine, 
overall demand would drop.\2\ However, shipping capacity proved 
to be key as Americans increased their demands for consumer 
goods in 2021.\3\ The surge in consumer goods, particularly 
moving from Asia into West Coast ports by ship and through the 
rest of the country via truck and rail, inundated the system. 
The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach have experienced 
significant cargo volume increases, and have been at times 
unable to process incoming shipping containers as they arrived, 
resulting in cargo logjams off shore and within the port 
complex. COVID-19 has exposed fragilities in transportation 
networks, with disruption in one part of the supply chain 
having a ripple effect across all parts of the supply chain, 
from manufacturers to suppliers and distributors.\4\ What has 
followed since has resulted in container and other equipment 
shortages, port and rail congestion, and shipping delays. The 
lack of available space onboard vessels, trains, trucks, in 
distribution warehouses, and at ports has impacted industries 
and frustrated consumers across the country and increased 
prices on some goods and commodities.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Simina Mistreanu, Forbes, ``China's Factories Are Reeling from 
Forced Coronavirus Closures.'' February 23, 2020. https://
www.forbes.com/sites/siminamistreanu/2020/02/23/chinas-factories-are-
reeling-from-forced-coronavirus-closures/?sh=21d514eb73f2. Accessed 
November 11, 2021.
    \2\ United Nations on Trade and Development, ``COVID-19 cuts global 
maritime trade, transforms industry.'' November 12, 2020. https://
unctad.org/news/covid-19-cuts-global-maritime-trade-transforms-
industry. Accessed November 11, 2021.
    \3\ New York Times. ``How the Supply Chain Broke, and Why it Won't 
Be Fixed Anytime Soon.'' https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/22/business/
shortages-supply-chain.html. Accessed October 23, 2021
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Online retail has fundamentally changed how products are 
purchased and distributed. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 
e-commerce sales have grown from just over five percent of 
total retail sales in the first quarter of 2012 to over 13 
percent of total retail sales in the second quarter of 2021.\6\ 
E-commerce accounted for $791.7 billion in 2020, a 32.4% 
increase from 2019.\7\ As a result of this trend, the demands 
for freight movements by truck, and the need for more timely 
and efficient deliveries, have grown significantly. This has 
also prompted changes to supply chains and increased the focus 
on first-mile and last-mile delivery of freight that impacts 
both urban and rural areas.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ U.S. Census Bureau, Quarterly Retail E-Commerce Sales, 3rd 
Quarter 2019 (https://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/pdf/
ec_current.pdf).
    \7\ Digital Commerce 360, ``US E-Commerce Grows 32.4% in 2020,'' 
(https://www.digitalcommerce360.com/article/us-ecommerce-sales/).
    \8\ Shelagh Dolan, Business Insider. ``The challenges of last mile 
delivery logistics and the tech solutions cutting costs in the final 
mile,'' January 21, 2021. https://www.businessinsider.com/last-mile-
delivery-shipping-explained
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Cross-modal freight tonnage has recovered from the 
beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics (BTS) measures the amount of freight 
carried by the transportation industry using an index called 
the Freight Transportation Services Index (FTSI). In September 
2021, the FTSI shows a seasonally-adjusted mark of 135.8 in 
September 2021, which is below the all-time high of 142 in 
April 2019, but significantly above the COVID-19 low of 125.3 
in April 2020. The FTSI, which declined from the April 2021 
level, is a good predictor of changes in the economic growth 
rate. Shipments of raw materials and intermediate goods occur 
before consumers and other businesses buy the products made 
from them. So, freight activity is seen as an early indicator 
of economic growth or decline. When more freight is being 
shipped, that generally signals a future increase in economic 
activity. When less freight is demanded, that points to 
decreasing economic activity.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ BTS Technical Brief. ``What the Transportation Services Index, 
Dow Transportation Index, and Cass Freight Index Tell Us.'' August. 
2019. https://www.bts.gov/sites/bts.dot.gov/files/docs/explore-topics-
and-geography/topics/transportation-and-economy/226881/what-tsi-dow-
transportation-index-cass-freight-index-tell-us.pdf. Accessed November 
10, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Freight Transportation Services Index, September 2016	September 2021
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Source: September 2021 Freight Transportation Services Index (TSI), BTS 
                                 67-21

MARITIME INDUSTRY OVERVIEW AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

    The COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unprecedented shift in 
consumer spending as Americans shifted spending from services 
to goods, exposing gaps in the supply chain and container 
processing capacity across the country and worldwide.\10\ In 
response to several coronavirus outbreaks across factories in 
Asia during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 
factories shut down.\11\ Shipping companies then cut schedules, 
anticipating reduced demand resulting from further COVID-19 
restrictions. As a result, almost every ship and container has 
been deployed into the market since Fall 2020.\12\ October 2021 
saw a record-breaking total of 100 container ships sitting idle 
awaiting dock availability at the Ports of LA and Long 
Beach.\13\ These delays are expected to continue well into 
2022.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ The Journal of Commerce. ``ONE's Nixon says US port 
productivity gaps mean congestion for months.'' https://www.joc.com/
port-news/us-ports/tpm21-one%E2%80%99s-nixon-says-us-port-productivity-
gaps-mean-congestion-months_20210302.html.
    \11\ Simina Mistreanu, Forbes, ``China's Factories Are Reeling from 
Forced Coronavirus Closures.'' February 23, 2020. https://
www.forbes.com/sites/siminamistreanu/2020/02/23/chinas-factories-are-
reeling-from-forced-coronavirus-closures/?sh=21d514eb73f2. Accessed 
November 11, 2021.
    \12\ The New York Times. ``I've Never Seen Anything Like This: 
Chaos Strikes Global Shipping.'' https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/06/
business/global-shipping.html. Accessed June 7, 2021.
    \13\ NBC News. ``As 100 ships idle offshore, California communities 
see rise in toxic pollutants.'' October 29, 2021. https://
www.nbcnews.com/business/100-ships-idle-offshore-california-
communities-see-rise-toxic-pollutan-rcna3984.
    \14\ https://www.reuters.com/business/global-economy-asian-
factories-stagnate-chinas-slowdown-supply-constraints-hit-2021-10-01/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to Maersk, the world's largest container shipping 
corporation, its East (Asia)-West (North America) trade has 
been the most impacted route in the market.\15\ Currently, for 
every three containers that China exports to the U.S. West 
Coast, only one is imported back, exacerbating the trade 
imbalance.\16\ This uneven recovery has caused container 
shortages where they are needed most. As a result, global 
container rates jumped nearly 290 percent \17\, from an average 
of $1,377 per 40-foot container in March 2020 to $9,195.41 in 
November 2021.\18\ Despite these higher numbers, the price per 
container has fallen since mid-October including a drop of 4.9 
percent the first week of November 2021.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Financial Times. ``How coronavirus is changing global shipping 
routes.'' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvG8c8v5Nfw
    \16\ Reuters. ``Boxed out: China's exports pinched by global run on 
shipping containers.'' https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-
shipping-container/boxed-out-chinas-exports-pinched-by-global-run-on-
shipping-containers-idUSKBN28K0UA.
    \17\ Bloomberg. ``Container Shipping Rates Drift Lower After a 
Record-Setting Climb.'' https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/
2021-10-11/supply-chain-latest-container-shipping-rates-are-drifting-
lower.
    \18\ Drewry Supply Chain Advisors. ``World Container Index--09 
Nov.'' https://www.drewry.co.uk/supply-chain-advisors/supply-chain-
expertise/world-container-index-assessed-by-drewry. Accessed November 
8, 2021.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Beyond the lack of capacity on vessels and getting 
containers from the vessels into port, containers face 
additional backlogs once offloaded and moved to marine 
terminals. Due to the sheer number of containers and cargo 
transiting through ports, marine terminals are at capacity-
limiting movement into, out of, and within the port.\20\ As 
containers are stacked higher and higher, the ability to access 
containers is affected further extending delays and 
bottlenecks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/18/business/container-port-record-
backlog/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Port accessibility continues to be a significant issue 
affecting truckers and other transporters in the supply chain. 
For example, the lack of appointments due to congestion and 
demand to enter terminal gates to repossess import containers 
for U.S.-based exporters has severely affected how port 
distribution centers are accepting containers.\21\ Containers 
are filling terminals and storage locations, making it 
difficult for truckers to return containers to a terminal, or 
move them geographically out of a given zone.\22\ Recently, 
some containers have been kept sitting idle for up to 30 days, 
representing a significant opportunity cost.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ Agriculture Transportation Coalition. ``Overview: The Current 
Export Crisis.'' https://soyagrainsalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/
2021/02/AgTC-The-Current-Export-Crisis_02-12-21.pdf.
    \22\ The Journal of Commerce. ``Import deluge fills LA-LB terminals 
to capacity.'' https://www.joc.com/port-news/us-ports/import-deluge-
fills-la-lb-terminals-capacity_20201209.html.
    \23\ The Journal of Commerce. ``FMC reviewing whether ag export 
booking rejections violate Shipping Act.'' https://www.joc.com/print/
3647481.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRUCKING INDUSTRY OVERVIEW AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

    Freight moves by truck on more than four million miles of 
public roads (including 223,000 miles on the National Highway 
System) and 616,000 bridges.\24\ The trucking industry is made 
up by over 996,000 trucking companies and more than 3.3 million 
commercial drivers.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ U.S. Department of Transportation, National Freight Strategic 
Plan, September 2020, page. 6. https://www.transportation.gov/sites/
dot.gov/files/2020-09/NFSP_fullplan_508.pdf. Accessed November 11, 
2021.
    \25\ American Trucking Associations, Economics and Industry Data, 
https://www.trucking.org/economics-and-industry-data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Trucks carried 10.2 billion tons of freight in 2020, and 
trucking accounts for approximately 80.4 percent of all freight 
tonnage by value and 72.5 percent by weight.\26\ According to 
the BTS, long-haul freight truck traffic is projected to 
increase ``dramatically'' on the National Highway System over 
the next three decades, from 311 million miles per day in 2015 
to 488 million miles per day by 2045.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ American Trucking Associations, Economics and Industry Data, 
https://www.trucking.org/economics-and-industry-data.
    \27\ Bureau of Transportation Statistics, ``Freight Transportation 
System Extent and Use'' (https://data.transportation.gov/stories/s/
Freight-Transportation-System-Extent-Use/r3vy-npqd).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Truck freight tonnage continues to steadily recover. 
According to the American Trucking Associations' Seasonally-
Adjusted (SA) For-Hire Truck Tonnage Index, September 2021 
marked a 2.4% increase from August 2021.\28\ The September 2021 
SA Index was also a 1.7% year-over-year increase from September 
2020, indicating steady growth.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ American Trucking Associations, ``Index 1.7% Above September 
2020,'' (https://www.trucking.org/news-insights/ata-truck-tonnage-
index-increased-24-september).
    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Current supply chain challenges have amplified longstanding 
issues in truck freight delivery. These include a lack of truck 
parking, congestion at freight bottlenecks, and poor conditions 
at intermodal connectors. The increasing cost and shortage of 
equipment, such as chassis, has hindered the capacity of the 
trucking industry to move freight.\30\ Port inefficiencies, 
such as poor information sharing and a lack of available, 
interoperable chassis, also limit how frequently and swiftly 
trucks can pick up loads, contributing to delays in loading and 
unloading at shipping facilities, a form of ``detention time.'' 
\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ American Trucking Associations, Comments in the Federal 
Register, ``America's Supply Chains and the Transportation Industrial 
Base,'' Docket No. DOT-OST-2021-0106, p. 5.
    \31\ Id. p. 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Detention time is time spent at shipping and receiving 
facilities beyond that which is legitimately needed for loading 
and unloading, as specified by contracts. Contracts between 
shippers, receivers, and motor carriers generally define limits 
on loading and unloading time at 2 hours.\32\ Any time beyond 
that is detention time.\33\ Loading and unloading times can 
vary based on the type of cargo, operations at the facility, 
congestion at a facility, and other factors.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ U.S. DOT Office of Inspector General, ``Estimates Show 
Commercial Driver Detention Increases Crash Risks and Costs, but 
Current Data Limit Further Analysis,'' p. 3 (Jan 2018).
    \33\ U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Commercial Motor 
Carriers: More Could Be Done to Determine Impact of Excessive Loading 
and Unloading Wait Times on Hours of Service Violations, GAO-11-198, 
January 2011.
    \34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Excessive detention time creates both safety and financial 
issues for truckers.\35\ A U.S. Department of Transportation 
Inspector General study estimated that a 15-minute increase in 
average dwell time--the total time spent by a truck at a 
facility--increases the average expected crash rate by 6.2 
percent.\36\ The same study found that detention time is 
associated with reductions in annual earnings of $1.1 billion 
to $1.3 billion for for-hire commercial drivers in the 
truckload sector, and that detention reduces net income by 
$250.6 million to $302.9 million annually for motor carriers in 
that sector.\37\ There is no accurate, industry-wide data on 
detention time, especially during the pandemic. The bipartisan 
infrastructure framework, recently passed as the Senate 
Amendment to H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act, directed FMCSA to enter into a contract with the 
Transportation Research Board to conduct a study on driver 
compensation--one factor that will be studied is payment for 
detention time.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ Owner-Operators Independent Drivers Association, Comments in 
the Federal Register, ``America's Supply Chains and the Transportation 
Industrial Base,'' Docket No. DOT-OST-2021-0106, p. 2.
    \36\ U.S. DOT Office of Inspector General, ``Estimates Show 
Commercial Driver Detention Increases Crash Risks and Costs, but 
Current Data Limit Further Analysis,'' p. 6 (Jan 2018).
    \37\ U.S. DOT Office of Inspector General, ``Estimates Show 
Commercial Driver Detention Increases Crash Risks and Costs, but 
Current Data Limit Further Analysis,'' p. 6 (Jan 2018).
    \38\ Senate Amendment to HR. 3684, Sec. 23022
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The COVID-19 crisis has renewed a focus on workforce 
challenges in the trucking industry, including claims of a 
truck driver shortage.
    As truck freight tonnage has risen in recent decades, the 
industry has faced increasing workforce challenges.\39\ For the 
past several years, larger motor carriers have identified a 
difficulty in attracting truck drivers, with recent American 
Trucking Associations (ATA) estimates showing a shortage of 
80,000 drivers, a 30% increase over pre-pandemic estimates.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ New York Times, ``The Biggest Kink in America's Supply Chain: 
Not Enough Truckers,'' November 9, 2021. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/
11/09/us/politics/trucker-shortage-supply-chain.html
    \40\ American Trucking Associations, ``ATA Chief Economist Pegs 
Driver Shortage at Historic High,'' October 25, 2021, (https://
www.trucking.org/news-insights/ata-chief-economist-pegs-driver-
shortage-historic-high).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Currently, 49 states and the District of Columbia allow 18 
to 20 year old truck drivers to operate commercial vehicles for 
intrastate commerce only and do not allow them to operate 
vehicles in interstate commerce.\41\ ATA and others support 
changing federal rules to allow drivers to operate in 
interstate commerce at 18 years old.\42\ However, current 
federal rules prohibit a driver from operating interstate until 
21 years old, largely because crash data indicate that the 
typical driver under the age of 21 is approximately three times 
more likely to be the cause of a fatal crash.\43\ Under Section 
5404 of the FAST Act, Congress authorized a pilot program for 
individuals between the ages of 18 and 21 to drive commercial 
vehicles across state lines, but only for those with commercial 
motor vehicle training in the Armed Services. On September 4, 
2020, FMCSA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
soliciting comments on a broader proposed pilot program for 
drivers ages 18-21 to operate in interstate commerce. The 
military pilot remains ongoing, while the agency has not taken 
further action to establish a broader pilot. The recently 
passed Senate amendment to H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, directs DOT to establish, within 60 
days, an apprenticeship pilot program for CDL drivers under the 
age of 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ American Trucking Associations, Comments in the Federal 
Register, ``America's Supply Chains and the Transportation Industrial 
Base,'' Docket No. DOT-OST-2021-0106, p. 19
    \42\ American Trucking Associations, Comments in the Federal 
Register, ``America's Supply Chains and the Transportation Industrial 
Base,'' Docket No. DOT-OST-2021-0106, p. 19
    \43\ Centers for Disease Control, ``Teen Drivers: Get the Facts.'' 
Accessed November 8, 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/transportationsafety/
teen_drivers/teendrivers_factsheet.html#::text=
The%20risk%20of%20motor%20vehicle,be%20in%20a%20fatal%20crash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other segments of the industry cite driver retention as the 
workforce challenge most plaguing the industry, highlighting 
driver wages and working conditions as obstacles to attracting 
and retaining qualified drivers.\44\ These groups point to U.S. 
Department of Labor analysis of trucking industry turnover 
rates,\45\ as well as FMCSA estimates that over 400,000 
commercial driver's licenses (CDLs) are issued each year.\46\ 
Most truck drivers today are paid by the mile or by the load, 
not by the time it takes to make a delivery. Drivers are also 
subject to hours-of-service limits, limiting the time they are 
legally allowed to operate.\47\ Supply chain delays that are 
outside of the control of drivers--such as congestion at ports 
and excessive detention time at shipper and receiver 
facilities--affect how much a driver can earn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\ Todd Spencer, Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, 
Testimony to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
(June 12, 2019) (https://docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/PW12/20190612/
109600/HHRG-116-PW12-Wstate-SpencerT-20190612.pdf).
    \45\ U.S. Department of Labor, ``Is the U.S. labor market for truck 
drivers broken?'', March 2019, (https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2019/
article/is-the-us-labor-market-for-truck-drivers-broken.htm).
    \46\ FreightWaves, ``OOIDA urges Biden administration to bust 
driver shortage `myth','' August 2021, (https://www.freightwaves.com/
news/ooida-urges-biden-administration-to-bust-driver-shortage-myth).
    \47\ https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-of-service
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

RAIL INDUSTRY OVERVIEW AND CURRENT CHALLENGES

    In 2019, railroads carried nearly one-third of the nation's 
freight.\48\ While freight rail carloads have declined over the 
last twenty years, intermodal rail freight traffic has 
increased over the same timeframe.\49\ Rail intermodal is the 
long-haul movement of shipping containers and truck trailers by 
rail, combined with a truck or water movement at one or both 
ends.\50\ Class I railroads have reduced their workforce. In 
2015, the Class I workforce average was 169,478 workers. By 
2019 and pre-COVID, some 29,000 jobs were eliminated, a 17 
percent decrease.\51\ In 2020, railroads eliminated another 
20,000 jobs, a 14 percent decrease from the prior year.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \48\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Pocket Guide to 
Transportation 2019, Page 3.
    \49\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Pocket Guide to 
Transportation 2021, Page 7.
    \50\ Federal Highway Administration, Background and Definitions--
The Role of the National Highway System Connectors--FHWA Freight 
Management and Operations (dot.gov)
    \51\ Surface Transportation Board, Economic Data, Employment Data, 
Accessed November 5, 2021, https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-
data/employment-data/
    \52\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    More than 40 percent of freight rail carloads and 
intermodal units is based on international trade.\53\ Further, 
this market accounts for approximately 35 percent of U.S. rail 
revenue and more than a quarter of U.S. rail tonnage.\54\ 
During this same six-month period in 2021, the Class I railroad 
workforce averaged 114,909 workers, compared to 144,346 workers 
during the same six-month period in 2019. Some weeks in late 
2020 and the first half of 2021, U.S. railroads were handling 
more than 300,000 containers and trailers per week.\55\ To 
right size the imbalance of volumes and staffing levels, 
railroads have attempted to re-hire some furloughed workers and 
train new employees, though according to shippers and the 
Surface Transportation Board, they have been unsuccessful at 
hiring or retaining an adequate workforce following the 
reduction in forces described above.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\ Comments of the Association of American Railroads to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation's Notice of Request for Information 
published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2021 (Docket N. DOT-
OST-2021-0106). Page 3.
    \54\ Id.
    \55\ https://www.aar.org/supply-chain
    \56\ Paul Ziobro, The Wall Street Journal. ``Shortage of Railroad 
Workers Threatens Recovery.'' July 22, 2021. https://www.wsj.com/
articles/shortage-of-railroad-workers-threatens-recovery-11626953584
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to suppressed workforce levels and previously 
planned cuts to yard capacity, freight railroads are 
encountering an imbalance between incoming and outgoing freight 
that constrains terminal fluidity.\57\ Certain rail terminals 
are not designed for long-term storage of significant numbers 
of containers and two of the largest U.S. railroads temporarily 
restricted shipments to Chicago this past summer in order to 
clear space.\58\ Extreme weather events, including wildfires in 
the western United States and hurricanes in the Gulf Coast have 
further constrained the national railroad system in the last 
year.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ Comments of the Association of American Railroads to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation's Notice of Request for Information 
published in the Federal Register on September 16, 2021 (Docket N. DOT-
OST-2021-0106). Page 9.
    \58\ David Lynch, The Washington Post. ``From Ports to Rail Yards, 
Global Supply Lines Struggle Amid Virus Outbreaks In The Developing 
World.'' July 26, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/
07/27/supply-chains-freight-rail-ports/
    \59\ Steff Chavez, Financial Times. ``Wildfires and `Violent' 
Weather Leave Railroad Giant Facing $100m Bill.'' September 16, 2021. 
https://www.ft.com/content/8f5c8360-19eb-437a-b55c-4c393ffa0ba5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONCLUSION

    This hearing will explore ideas, improvements, and 
solutions to alleviate the current supply chain challenges. On 
February 24, 2021, the Biden administration issued Executive 
Order 4017, ``America's Supply Chains'' and convened a Supply 
Chain Taskforce to help support and improve America's supply 
chain.\60\ Similarly, the recently passed Senate Amendment to 
H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, includes 
$27.75 billion in competitive grant programs that are eligible 
to fund highway and intermodal freight improvements and port 
infrastructure projects, in addition to hundreds of billions of 
dollars for investments in roads, bridges, and rail. These 
funds can support projects critical to maintaining, improving, 
and increasing the resiliency of the nation's supply chain.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \60\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/
2021/06/08/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-supply-
chain-disruptions-task-force-to-address-short-term-supply-chain-
discontinuities/
    \61\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684/
text
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              WITNESS LIST

     LMr. Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of 
Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
Authorities
     LMr. Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive 
Officer, American Trucking Associations
     LMr. Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive 
Officer, Association of American Railroads
     LMs. Anne Reinke, President and Chief Executive 
Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association
     LMr. David Correll, Lecturer, Massachusetts 
Institute of Technology Center for Transportation and Logistics
     LMr. Greg Regan, President, Transportation Trades 
Department, AFL-CIO

 
   INDUSTRY AND LABOR PERSPECTIVES: A FURTHER LOOK AT NORTH AMERICAN 
                        SUPPLY CHAIN CHALLENGES

                              ----------                              


                      WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                            Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to call, at 11:06 a.m. in room 
2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Peter A. 
DeFazio (Chair of the committee) presiding.
    Members present in person: Mr. Larsen of Washington, Mr. 
Garamendi, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Stanton, Ms. 
Strickland, Mr. Graves of Missouri, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Rodney 
Davis, Dr. Babin, Mr. Rouzer, Mr. Westerman, Mr. Mast, Miss 
Gonzalez-Colon, Mr. Stauber, Mr. Burchett, Dr. Van Drew, Mr. 
Guest, and Ms. Malliotakis.
    Members present remotely: Mr. DeFazio, Ms. Norton, Ms. 
Johnson of Texas, Mr. Sires, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Mr. 
Carson, Ms. Titus, Ms. Wilson of Florida, Mr. Payne, Mr. 
Lowenthal, Mr. DeSaulnier, Mr. Malinowski, Mr. Allred, Ms. 
Davids of Kansas, Mr. Garcia of Illinois, Mr. Delgado, Mr. 
Lamb, Mr. Auchincloss, Ms. Bourdeaux, Mr. Kahele, Ms. Williams 
of Georgia, Mr. Massie, Mr. Perry, Mr. Graves of Louisiana, Mr. 
Bost, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. 
Balderson, Mr. Johnson of South Dakota, Ms. Van Duyne, Mr. 
Gimenez, and Mrs. Steel.
    Mr. DeFazio. The committee will come to order.
    I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to 
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    As a reminder, please keep your microphone muted, unless 
speaking. Should I hear background noise, I will yell at you 
and tell you to mute.
    To insert a document into the record, please email it to 
[email protected].
    Now, with that, I recognize myself for my opening 
statement.
    Supply chain challenges stemming from new freight shipment 
patterns in a world impacted by COVID-19 continue to hamper 
business and consumers. Americans are buying more items from 
overseas, instead of spending money on vacations, events, and 
other things regarding services.
    So, no one knows whether these are temporary or permanent 
changes, as we dig out from under the pandemic.
    Now, some will try to blame the Biden administration for 
these woes. But let's remember, nearly every part of the supply 
chain is dominated by private businesses. Shipping 
conglomerates, marine terminal operators, rail, trucking, 
warehouse operators are non-Federal entities, ports.
    And private businesses are enjoying robust profits across 
the freight sector. They are responsible for their business 
decisions on whether to pursue capital and labor investments 
needed to accommodate freight demand. That is why I am eager to 
hear from today's witnesses on what they are doing to overcome 
the freight chokepoints we have been experiencing for months.
    We held a hearing in the Coast Guard and Maritime 
Transportation Subcommittee in June on this issue, but the 
freight challenges remain, and are projected to continue until 
next year.
    At the same time as these challenges persist, the freight 
industries--ocean carriers, railroads, marine terminal 
operators, trucking companies, et cetera--continue to earn 
robust profits: in 2020, more than $800 billion, collectively. 
So, congestion, apparently, is not bad for the bottom line, 
just bad for the American consumer, in terms of availability 
and price inflation.
    I have served on this committee 35 years, pretty much 
evenly split between the majority and the minority. During 
those years, for the most part, this committee has searched for 
resolution of real problems, not politically driven, 
opportunistic, finger-pointing. Yes, America has a crisis in 
its supply chain, delaying delivery of needed materials from 
manufacturing, and driving up the cost of consumer goods. The 
solutions are, for the most part, not simple, nor short term. 
It will require real work, Federal investment, policy changes, 
and, hopefully, bipartisan cooperation by this committee and 
others of jurisdiction.
    I call the problem the 3Ds: dependence, driven by Wall 
Street, and decades of so-called free trade policy at the 
behest of corporate profits to escape environmental laws, 
regulation, labor rights, and other things.
    We have become incredibly dependent upon goods and 
materials and supplies from overseas.
    And then, two, disinvestment. Again, driven by Wall Street 
and corporate executives, oriented toward short-term profits--
think Hunter Harrison, so-called Precision Scheduled 
Railroading, a disaster for shippers, but great for the bottom 
line. Oh, it also impinges on safety. But otherwise, it is a 
great idea. And also, disinvestment has been driven by mindless 
opposition to needed critical Federal investment in our 
transportation sectors.
    All of the above weaken United States capability to meet 
critical needs in a time of crisis. N95s, anybody?
    And then three, deregulation, leading to massive mergers, 
lack of real competition across many sectors of the economy, 
leading to oligopolistic practices in supply and pricing. The 
Federal Maritime Commission snoozed while there were massive, 
foreign-dominated mergers in ocean freight. The Federal 
Railroad Administration stood by as freight service and safety 
deteriorated under co-called Precision Scheduled Railroading.
    Since April 20th, consumer goods consumption is up. From 
April 20 to now, 32 percent. That is 15 percent more than pre-
pandemic levels. Last month, we ran a $100 billion trade 
deficit, $100 billion of trade deficit because of our 
dependence on imports. Ocean shipping costs, up 500 percent in 
12 months. The west coast is inundated with foreign imports. 
Disinvestment in port infrastructure by the Federal Government, 
lack of investment in our highways and bridges, congestion 
caused by that, no truck parking, the list goes on and on 
because of Federal neglect and the reluctance to make needed 
Federal investments.
    Now, we will hear a lot about the shortage of truckdrivers. 
For years, I have talked about detention time. You get to the 
warehouse, and they say, ``Oh, why don't you go get in that 
line over there?'' Five hours later, six hours later, maybe you 
have gotten unloaded, maybe you are out of duty time now. That 
is your tough luck. It is no skin off their back, it doesn't 
cost them anything to make you sit there. In the old days, it 
did. If they made you sit for hours on end, they had to pay 
you. But right now, this is what you would call an external 
diseconomy; they put the cost on the truckdrivers, and I have 
been trying to pursue this issue for quite some time.
    We are getting some interesting statistics about this. The 
DOT inspector general says that truckdrivers lost between $1 
and $1.3 billion in earnings because of detention time. We will 
hear from Dr. Correll, who says that in the 11 hours of driving 
allowed, the average truckdriver drives 6\1/2\ hours. That is a 
pretty damn inefficient system. If we could make the system 
efficient, if we could put consequences on those places where 
truckdrivers have to unload--and we will hear more about that 
from Dr. Correll--that would solve a lot of problems.
    Similarly, J.B. Hunt senior vice president of corporate 
safety, security, and driver personnel, Greer Woodruff, said 
the driver issue comes down relative to supply and demand. ``I 
happen to believe we have plenty of drivers. We don't use them 
very well.'' When asked how it could be more efficient, he said 
expedite loading and unloading times, allow drop-and-hook, add 
flexible appointment times and appointment times to allow for 
efficient transit and rest time, work with shippers to 
accommodate onsite parking, and provide consistency in loads 
and lanes, all of which would squeeze more time out of a driver 
and add capacity to the market.
    So, the President has tried to jawbone the private sector, 
and that would include labor, the ports, the marine terminal 
operators, and others who are involved in this. But ultimately, 
they are independent decisionmakers. He has also, just Monday, 
signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, $17 billion 
for long-overdue investment in our ports. And that, along with 
the money that we finally freed up last year, the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund, will begin to deal with the issues of 
access to our ports, and more throughput through our ports.
    That bill also includes tens of billions of dollars in 
bridges, chokepoints, highways that will, again, mitigate 
congestion, and make drivers be able to work more efficiently.
    Hopefully, this hearing will move beyond political partisan 
talking points, and begin to identify and work on real 
solutions, real long-term solutions.
    [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in 
      Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Supply chain challenges stemming from new freight shipment patterns 
in a world impacted by COVID-19 continue to hamper businesses and 
consumers. Americans are buying more items from overseas instead of 
spending money on vacations, events, and other experiences. And no one 
knows if these changes are temporary or permanent as we dig out from 
under the pandemic.
    While some try to blame the Biden administration for these woes, 
let's all remember the supply chain is dominated by private businesses 
who are enjoying robust profits across the freight sector. They are 
responsible for their business decisions on whether to pursue capital 
and labor investments needed to accommodate freight demand. That's why 
I am eager to hear from our witnesses today about what they are doing 
to overcome the freight chokepoints we've been experiencing for months.
    We held a hearing in the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation 
Subcommittee in June on this issue, but the freight challenges remain 
and are projected to continue into next year. At the same time as these 
challenges persist, the freight industries--ocean carriers, railroads 
and trucking companies--continued to earn robust profits in 2020, 
earning more than $800 billion collectively. It seems like congestion 
isn't terrible for big business.
    Let's start this hearing by stipulating some facts:
      The freight industry is trying to meet record demand for 
consumer goods, particularly moving from Asia into West Coast ports by 
ship and through the rest of the country via truck and rail.
      Ocean shipping rates have increased by over 500 percent 
since this surge in demand began last year, taking a toll on companies 
and consumers.
      The freight network is now inundated, and disruption in 
one part of the supply chain has a ripple effect across all parts of 
the chain, from manufacturers to suppliers and distributors.
      Some of the current issues the supply chain is facing 
have been exacerbated by ``just in time'' practices being unable to 
withstand the changes in demand over the last two years.
      U.S. port congestion is not new. Ports need serious 
capital investments to keep up with the rest of the world, as well as 
better data sharing capabilities across the supply chain.
      Railroads are struggling to move these containers too. 
Since 2015, Class I railroads have slashed their workforce by almost 30 
percent and closed several rail yards. In 2020 Class I railroads 
reinvested $6.3 billion less in their capital programs than they did in 
2015 and Wall Street pushed operating ratios and stock buybacks ever 
higher.
      Trucking companies have been struggling for a decade to 
retain truckers, a direct result of real wages and working conditions 
that are obstacles to attracting and retaining qualified drivers.

    I am astonished that our supply chain industry representatives are 
still calling the time we're in unprecedented. I thought business 
metrics were done on a quarterly basis--I thought businesses were 
nimble and able to turn on a dime, it's what I hear from colleagues all 
the time on why we should reduce regulations on companies, but we're 
eight quarters in and it appears to me that businesses are still 
waiting for it to be 2019 again.
    The freight network requires continued investment in capital, 
private and public, and a skilled workforce that is adequately 
compensated with reasonable working conditions. I am grateful to the 
men and women in our transportation workforce who have remained on the 
job despite the pandemic.
    Today my colleagues on the other side will offer up a litany of 
reasons why this is the Democrats' fault. They will offer solutions 
that encourage low wages and abysmal working conditions. I expect to 
hear that vaccine mandates, unemployment benefits, federal spending, 
and climate emission reductions are worsening freight congestion. None 
of that is true.
    The simple answer is the private sector needs to be more nimble, 
focus less on quarterly profits to appease Wall Street bigwigs, and 
retain the resilience to meet surges in demand. The transportation 
sector needs to invest more of their robust profits back into their 
capital programs and should refrain from burdening employees with 
impossible productivity metrics and unreasonable working conditions 
that further the labor shortage.
    Thinking about the big picture, I think this debate is another 
clear example of the downside to unfettered free trade, where the U.S. 
is now dependent on Asian nations for manufacturing. We wouldn't have 
these levels of port congestion challenges if we made more products 
here in the U.S.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how they are 
working together to address the short-term supply chain challenges. I 
have no doubt that a number of them will use the opportunity today to 
press for perennial priorities they have long sought, pandemic or 
supply-chain challenges or not. For our part, Congress recently passed 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed on Monday by 
President Biden. We're doing our part to make billions of dollars in 
long-term investments in our freight supply chain, and I hope to hear 
from witnesses how they will amplify those investments for future 
generations.

    Mr. DeFazio. With that I would recognize Ranking Member 
Graves.
    Mr. Graves of Missouri. Thank you, and I want to thank our 
witnesses for testifying today. And I am very interested to 
hear what members of the panel have to say about the 
bottlenecks in our Nation's supply chain, because it is truly a 
crisis.
    Thanksgiving stands to be the most expensive ever. And if 
you are not getting ahead of your holiday shopping now, you are 
likely going to find limited options the closer that we get to 
Christmas. The general public, quite frankly, is extremely 
concerned by this.
    And every person that is going to be testifying today 
represents essential workers who are feeling the impacts of 
this crisis firsthand. The companies and workers that you 
represent kept our economy running during COVID-19, during the 
pandemic, and we all appreciate that work, and it is ongoing. 
But the pandemic made us recognize that an efficient supply 
chain could benefit from increased redundancies and capacities.
    There isn't one simple solution, and that is a fact. As the 
chairman pointed out, this is a very complex problem, and there 
are many factors that contribute to the high cost of moving 
goods throughout the Nation's supply chain.
    But having said that, the policies that the President, the 
Speaker, and Leader Schumer are pursuing are not only missing 
the mark, but they are making matters worse. The radical agenda 
that they continue to pursue through budget reconciliation and 
administrative actions, it increases energy and transportation 
costs, it discourages work, and it drives up already 
skyrocketing inflation. And all of this is exacerbating the 
problem; it is not fixing it.
    For example, the President's press conference on October 
13th demonstrated both a lack of understanding of this complex 
issue, and the fact that his administration has no real plan to 
solve it. I was personally offended by his call for the private 
sector to step up, while his administration does very little 
but compound the problem, specifically calling out terminal 
operators, railways, trucking companies, shippers, and other 
retailers. The companies and workers are not here to provide 
cover to bail out the administration's bad policies. The 100 
containerships sitting outside the Ports of Los Angeles and 
Long Beach, they aren't just magically going to go away.
    I also think we need to hear from those folks who aren't 
here today, most notably the users of the system: importers, 
the exporters, retail, agriculture, and the administration 
officials that oversee it, including the newly announced 
infrastructure czar.
    Republican Members, we have already heard from many groups 
and individuals who want to share their ideas on how to improve 
this situation. In fact, just 2 weeks ago we convened a 
roundtable meeting to hear what issues the stakeholders 
themselves are facing.
    So, I look forward to hearing from today's witnesses on 
their ideas, even if it is highlighting how this administration 
can simply do no harm or, in this case, do no more harm.
    Do no more harm to our supply chain by straining the 
workforce through the application of a vaccine mandate. Do no 
more harm to our supply chain by turning a blind eye to State 
and local regulations that are interfering with interstate 
commerce. Do no more harm to our supply chain by encouraging 
regulations that upend the independent contracting model that 
so many in our supply chain work through. Do no more harm by 
pushing environmental regulations that stop warehouses from 
being built, or goods being moved by truck. Do no more harm to 
our supply chain by pushing policies that disincentivize work 
and vocational jobs.
    I do look forward to hearing from our panelists today, and 
with that, I yield back the balance.
    [Mr. Graves of Missouri's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress 
     from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chair DeFazio, for holding this hearing, and thank you 
to our witnesses for being here today.
    I am very interested to hear what the members of our panel have to 
say about the bottlenecks in our Nation's supply chain, because it 
truly is a crisis. Thanksgiving stands to be the most expensive ever, 
and if you're not getting ahead of your holiday shopping now, you'll 
likely find limited options the closer we get to Christmas. The general 
public, quite frankly, is extremely concerned.
    Every person testifying today represents essential workers who are 
feeling the impacts of this crisis firsthand. The companies and workers 
you represent kept our economy running during the COVID-19 pandemic, 
and we appreciate your work.
    The pandemic made us recognize that an efficient supply chain could 
benefit from increased redundancies and capacity.
    There won't be one simple solution to this complex problem. There 
are many factors that contribute to the high cost of moving goods 
throughout our Nation's supply chain. But the policies the President, 
Speaker Pelosi, and Leader Schumer are pursuing are not only missing 
the mark--they're making matters even worse.
    The radical agenda they continue to pursue through budget 
reconciliation and administrative actions increase energy and 
transportation costs, discourage work, and drive up already 
skyrocketing inflation--and all of this is exacerbating the problem, 
not fixing it.
    For example, the President's press conference on October 13th 
demonstrated both a lack of understanding of this complex issue, and 
the fact that his Administration has no real plan to solve it. I was 
personally offended by his call for the private sector to ``step up'' 
while his Administration does little but compound the problem, 
specifically calling out ``terminal operators, railways, trucking 
companies, shippers, and other retailers.'' Your companies and workers 
are not here to provide cover or bail out this Administration's bad 
policies. The 100 container ships sitting outside of the Ports of Los 
Angeles and Long Beach won't just magically go away.
    I also think we need to hear from those who aren't here today. Most 
notably, the users of the system, importers, exporters, retail, 
agriculture, and the Administration officials who oversee it, including 
the newly announced `infrastructure czar.'
    Republican members have already heard from many groups and 
individuals who want to share their ideas about how to improve this 
situation. In fact, two weeks ago, we convened a roundtable meeting to 
hear what issues stakeholders are facing.
    We look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about their 
ideas, even if it's highlighting how this Administration can simply 
``do no harm''--or in this case, ``to do no more harm.''
    Do no more harm to our supply chain by straining the workforce 
through the application of a vaccine mandate.
    Do no more harm to our supply chain by turning a blind eye to state 
and local regulations that are interfering with interstate commerce.
    Do no more harm to our supply chain by encouraging regulations that 
upend the independent contracting model that so many in our supply 
chain work through.
    Do no more harm by pushing environmental regulations that stop 
warehouses from being built, or goods moving by truck.
    Do no more harm to our supply chain by pushing policies that 
disincentivize work and vocational jobs.
    I look forward to hearing from the panelists today, and I yield 
back the balance of my time.

    Mr. DeFazio. I wish that whoever is in charge wouldn't mute 
me. I can mute myself when necessary, thank you. I think I am 
back on, I don't see my video. Hold on. There, if you--because 
then, when you mute me, I have trouble getting my video back 
on. The video will not go on. There. OK. Again, whoever is in 
charge, please don't mute me. I can mute myself. Thank you.
    I would now like to welcome the witnesses on our panel: 
Mario Cordero, executive director, Port of Long Beach, on 
behalf of the American Association of Port Authorities; Chris 
Spear, president and chief executive officer, American Trucking 
Associations; Ian Jefferies, president and chief executive 
officer, Association of American Railroads; Anne Reinke, 
president and chief executive officer, Transportation 
Intermediaries Association; David Correll, lecturer, 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation 
Logistics; and Greg Regan, president, Transportation Trades 
Department, AFL-CIO.
    Thanks to all of you for taking the time to join us today. 
We look forward to your testimony.
    Without objection, our witnesses' full statements will be 
included in the record. And since your written testimony is 
made part of the record, the committee asks that you limit your 
oral testimony to 5 minutes. And, if possible, don't just read 
something, but actually maybe react to other panelists, or 
something I said, or Mr. Graves said, if you would like.
    So, I would now recognize Representative Lowenthal for a 
short introduction of Mr. Cordero.
    Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Chairman DeFazio. I am honored to 
introduce my friend, Mario Cordero, who is recognized as an 
international maritime industry leader.
    Mario is the executive director of the Port of Long Beach, 
which is located in my district, and he has held this position 
since 2017. I have had the privilege of working with Mario to 
make sure that the Port of Long Beach is a clean, efficient, 
and dynamic fixture of our community since he first joined the 
Board of Harbor Commissioners in Long Beach in 2003.
    I would like to also just point out that President Obama 
appointed Mario to the Federal Maritime Commission in 2011, and 
he was appointed as the Chair of the Commission from 2013 to 
2017.
    There are few people more qualified to speak on port 
issues, and I look forward to his full testimony. Thank you, 
Mr. Chair, and I yield back.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you, Representative Lowenthal.
    And with that I would now recognize Mario Cordero for 5 
minutes.

 TESTIMONY OF MARIO CORDERO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PORT OF LONG 
     BEACH, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PORT 
    AUTHORITIES; CHRIS SPEAR, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
    OFFICER, AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS; IAN JEFFERIES, 
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN 
RAILROADS; ANNE REINKE, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 
 TRANSPORTATION INTERMEDIARIES ASSOCIATION; DAVID HC CORRELL, 
Ph.D., RESEARCH SCIENTIST AND LECTURER, MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE 
  OF TECHNOLOGY CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS; AND 
GREGORY R. REGAN, PRESIDENT, TRANSPORTATION TRADES DEPARTMENT, 
                            AFL-CIO

    Mr. Cordero. Good morning, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member 
Graves, and members of the committee. My name is Mario Cordero, 
I am the executive director of the Port of Long Beach, and 
chairman of the board of the American Association of Port 
Authorities, a unified voice for the seaport industry in the 
Americas.
    I would like to thank the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure for holding this hearing and soliciting input 
from stakeholders in the supply chain regarding the challenges 
we face and the critical investments needed.
    I am speaking today on behalf of AAPA, and in my role as 
executive director of the Port of Long Beach, but also as a 
stakeholder in the White House Supply Chain Disruptions Task 
Force.
    Before I begin, I would like to first acknowledge the work 
of the committee in crafting and passing the bipartisan 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act by infusing an 
unprecedented $17 billion to improve infrastructure. We can 
take real action to make our supply chain resilient.
    AAPA represents 130 public port authorities in the United 
States, Canada, the Caribbean, and Latin America. For more than 
a century, the AAPA membership has empowered port authorities 
and their maritime industry partners to serve global customers 
and create economic and social value for their communities.
    As the second busiest container seaport in the United 
States, the Port of Long Beach handles trade valued at more 
than $200 billion annually, and supports 2.6 million jobs 
across the Nation. Together, with the Port of Los Angeles, the 
San Pedro Bay Port Complex moves more than 40 percent of our 
Nation's waterborne goods, making it the Nation's largest and 
most strategic port complex.
    The port has been at the forefront of seeking a framework 
for extending hours of operation in the supply chain, with the 
goal of 24/7, a framework I first referenced back in 2018, in 
recognition of the cargo forecast at that time. Transitioning 
to 24/7 operation will not only address supply chain backlogs, 
but will also reduce truck congestion and move goods quicker 
through the complex. Essentially, it is not only good for the 
environment, but it does reduce costs throughout the supply 
chain.
    Our International Longshore and Warehouse Union partners 
and essential workforce have kept the cargo moving as the 
entire supply chain workforce. The supply chain workers are to 
be commended for their tireless work to keep America moving.
    While the ships anchored off the coast of Long Beach and 
Los Angeles have garnered attention, U.S. ports are not the 
only ones facing the congestion. In October, there were 180 
container vessels anchored and waiting to dock off the coast of 
China. Shipping is a global industry, with the onset of the 
pandemic causing major disruption in shipping and 
manufacturing, from which the global economy is still in a 
recovery mode.
    With the backing of the Biden administration, we are 
working with marine terminal operators to expand their hours of 
operation. When I met with President Joe Biden in the White 
House in October, I learned that he too held a vision of a 24/7 
supply chain. I was very encouraged to hear his support for 
this bold concept.
    The Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are not the only 
ports addressing backlogs. The Georgia Ports Authority recently 
announced that they would convert five existing inland 
facilities into container yards to ease congestion. This 
project is possible, thanks to the cooperation with the White 
House and the Department of Transportation, who announced that 
ports would be able to repurpose unspent grant funds from past 
projects to address supply chain congestion. The Georgia Ports 
Authority will spend $8 million from past grants for this 
project, and it is my hope that other ports will be able to 
take advantage of this opportunity, as well.
    I am hopeful that 24/7 operations will help mitigate the 
current surge, setting a framework for how we do things 
differently in the future. The San Pedro Bay Port Complex is on 
track to move 20 million TEUs in containers in this year. 
According to the current forecast, this number will only 
increase in the coming years, thus requiring transformational 
change in the Nation's most important supply chain region.
    We need to build for the future. Federal attention must not 
stop when the number of vessels at anchorage does return to 
zero. We must make U.S. ports a national priority. For the 
decade spanning 2018 through 2028, the AAPA identified $20 
billion in multimodal and rail access needs for U.S. ports. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, along with the 
accompanying surface transportation reauthorization, takes 
significant steps towards making up this gap. The set-aside of 
$5 billion for multimodal projects within the supplemental 
funding of the RAISE program will direct much-needed funds 
towards the kind of projects that get cargo moving more 
efficiently.
    I will note to the committee that the maritime ports create 
$5.4 trillion in economic activity, annually, representing 26 
percent of our Nation's GDP.
    I want to thank U.S. Transportation Secretary Buttigieg for 
working closely with the California State Transportation 
Secretary David Kim to prioritize Federal funding for projects 
that will help alleviate freight bottlenecks in the country's 
largest port complex.
    U.S. ports welcome the opportunity to pursue Federal funds 
for emission reduction and clean energy projects authorized by 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The ports would 
benefit from the funding to address climate change and energy 
resiliency in the Build Back Better Act, and urges Congress to 
advance that legislation. I applaud Congress for including in 
the legislation $3.5 billion for new grant programs to invest 
in electric equipment at the ports, and these investments will 
help ports move cargo faster, improving the health of port 
communities.
    The Port of Long Beach and AAPA appreciates the support of 
this committee, Congress, and the administration for working 
with all of the stakeholders to create a more resilient supply 
chain. The U.S. maritime industry will continue to evolve and 
adapt for more efficient and a greener tomorrow.
    Thank you so much to the committee, and I welcome your 
questions in this hearing. And again, I appreciate your 
engagement in this very important subject matter.
    [Mr. Cordero's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of Long 
    Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port Authorities
    Good morning Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and members 
of the Committee.
    My name is Mario Cordero, and I am the Executive Director of the 
Port of Long Beach (Port) and the Chairman of the Board of the American 
Association of Port Authorities (AAPA), the unified voice of the 
seaport industry in the Americas. I would like to thank the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure for holding this hearing and 
soliciting input from stakeholders in the supply chain regarding the 
challenges we face and the critical investments needed.
    I am speaking to you today on behalf of AAPA and in my role as 
Executive Director of the Port of Long Beach, but also as a stakeholder 
in the White House Supply Chain Disruption Task Force. Before I begin, 
I would first like to acknowledge the work of this Committee in 
crafting and passing the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment & Jobs 
Act. By infusing an unprecedented $17 billion to improve infrastructure 
at coastal ports, inland ports, waterways, and land ports of entry 
along the border, we can take real action to make our supply chain 
resilient.
    AAPA represents more than 130 public port authorities in the U.S., 
Canada, the Caribbean and Latin America. For more than a century, AAPA 
membership has empowered port authorities and their maritime industry 
partners to serve global customers and create economic and social value 
for their communities.
    The Port of Long Beach is the premier U.S. gateway for trans-
Pacific trade and a trailblazer in innovative goods movement, safety, 
environmental stewardship and sustainability. As the second-busiest 
container seaport in the United States, the Port of Long Beach handles 
trade valued at more than $200 billion annually and supports 2.6 
million jobs across the nation. The Port of Long Beach is one of the 
few U.S. ports that can welcome today's largest vessels, serving 175 
shipping lines with connections to 217 seaports around the world. 
Together with the Port of Los Angeles, the San Pedro Bay Ports Complex 
moves more than 40% of our nation's waterborne goods, making this the 
nation's largest and most strategic Port complex.
    In recognition of this Committee's role in authorizing U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers projects, I would like to note that the Port 
recently received a signed Chief's Report for our deep draft navigation 
study. I look forward to working with the Committee in seeing this 
project authorized for construction in the forthcoming Water Resources 
Development Act of 2022.
    Goods moving through the Port of Long Beach originate in or are 
destined for every congressional district in the United States. In 
2020, the Port handled more than 8.1 million container units, achieving 
the best year in its history. This year, we project to surpass that 
record and move nearly 9 million container units.
    The Port has been at the forefront of seeking a framework for 
extending hours of operation in the supply chain, with the goal of 24-
7, a framework I first referenced back in January 2018, in recognition 
of the cargo forecast at that time. Transitioning to 24-7 operations 
will not only help address supply chain backlogs, but will also reduce 
truck congestion and move goods quicker through the complex. With 
Southern California highways already congested, implementing policies 
that enable greater access for trucks outside of the normal workday 
will reduce emissions from idling and enable truck drivers to get to 
their destination quicker. Efficiency is not only good for the 
environment, but reduces costs throughout the supply chain.
    As I speak with you today, we have approximately 70 container ships 
off the southern California coast, waiting to get into a berth at Long 
Beach or at our neighbor, Los Angeles. The record was reached in late 
October with 80 container ships at anchor or in drift areas. For those 
who live and work in Long Beach, this recent phenomenon is a stunning 
change of scenery. The normal number for container ships at anchor in 
the ports complex is zero.
    Thanks to our supply chain essential workforce, the Port of Long 
Beach has not shut down for a single day during the pandemic. Our 
International Longshore & Warehouse Union (ILWU) partners have kept the 
cargo moving, as have the marine terminal operators, truck drivers, 
rail workers, ship crews, tugboat crews, and the entire supply chain 
workforce. Supply chain workers are to be commended for their tireless 
work to keep America moving.
    While ships anchored off the coast of Long Beach and Los Angeles 
have garnered attention, U.S. ports are not the only ones facing record 
congestion. As of October 22nd, there were 180 container vessels 
anchored and waiting to dock off the coast of China. Following a major 
typhoon in July, there were 361 vessels in China anchored and waiting 
to dock.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/2021-port-congestion-
report/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shipping is a global industry. Backlogs overseas delay shipments in 
the United States. The onset of the pandemic caused major disruption in 
shipping and manufacturing from which the global economy is still in a 
recovery mode.
    As you will hear today, there are many reasons for the backlog in 
our nation's supply chain. The surge in demand for consumer goods has 
created bottlenecks at multiple points. Just as some of our coastal 
ports are congested, so too are rail intermodal terminals in America's 
heartland. To alleviate supply chain congestion, we need to address 
shortages at each stage in the supply chain, which is why I am pleased 
to be speaking alongside representatives from the truck and rail 
industries today.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.freightwaves.com/news/us-class-i-railroads-to-feds-
dont-blame-us
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During a recent briefing and tour of the Port with Congressman 
Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Congressman Lou Correa (D-CA), Congressman Issa 
framed the dilemma we are in quite simply as a ``200-car pileup.'' You 
can focus all you want on the end of the pileup, but to get to the true 
cause or causes of it, you need to look closely at the first vehicles 
at the front of the crash and the conditions in which they were 
driving.
    My focus today will be to share with you some of the challenges we 
are facing in our nation's supply chain pileup, what the Port of Long 
Beach is doing in the short-term to resolve congestion and in the long-
term to prevent it from happening again, and to discuss ways the U.S. 
government could help us solve this crisis to make the U.S. supply 
chain stronger and more competitive. Essentially, we need 
transformational change.
                          Short-Term Solutions
    The Port of Long Beach has six container terminals which can handle 
140-150,000 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs). Despite our ability to 
handle this level of cargo, current cargo demands are causing our 
terminals to run out of space. Currently, ships waiting to dock at the 
Port of Long Beach are carrying approximately 530,000 container units. 
Compounding the challenge is that terminals are being utilized for 
temporary container storage, something that no port terminal is 
designed to handle. Together with the Port of Los Angeles, we are 
working to create more capacity at our terminals and move cargo as 
quickly as possible by implementing new measures to encourage the 
timely movement of containers.
    First, the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles have begun 
implementing a surcharge for containers left too long on the terminals. 
In the case of containers scheduled to move by truck, ocean carriers 
will be charged for every container dwelling nine days or more. For 
containers moving by rail, ocean carriers will be charged if the 
container has dwelled for six days or more.
    Second, beginning on November first, the ports intend to charge 
ocean liner companies with cargo in those two categories $100 per 
container, increasing in $100 increments per container per day.
    And third, with the backing of the Biden Administration, we are 
working with our marine terminal operators to expand their hours of 
operation. When I met with President Biden in the White House in 
October, I learned that he too held a vision for a 24-7 supply chain. I 
was very encouraged to hear his support for this bold concept.
    A few weeks before my meeting with President Biden, the Total 
Terminals International (TTI) terminal in the Port of Long Beach agreed 
to a pilot project to explore a framework for 24-7 operations. We have 
been working with other supply chain partners to encourage them to use 
the new hours at the TTI terminal.
    Truckers and cargo owners are slowly warming to the expanded hours; 
however, there is still ample opportunity for more deliveries during 
the late shift from 3 a.m. to 7 a.m. and labor is available and on 
call.
    U.S. Transportation Secretary Buttigieg and U.S. Envoy John Porcari 
have been instrumental in bringing large retail companies to the table 
to move and unload containers during these extended hours.
    Other terminals are ``flexing gates.'' This means they are opening 
earlier and staying open later. Some are adding Friday night and 
weekend gates.
    The collaboration and commitments made by the Biden-Harris 
Administration, ports, terminal operators, labor, retailers, warehouses 
and cities are moving the needle in the right direction. We all come to 
the table with drive, determination, expertise and commitment to 
solving this crisis. The White House Supply Chain Disruption Task Force 
will report our trials, errors, and successes on a biweekly basis. This 
transparent process brings greater awareness to policy makers and the 
public about the importance, complexity and fragility of this vital 
component of our nation's economy.
    Meanwhile, the Port's Short Term Overflow Resource--known as STOR--
has been successful. This 64-acre facility in the Port is working to 
provide container transfer and temporary storage during this cargo 
surge. Today, it has fourteen thousand containers at the site. We are 
in the process of securing an additional 5 acres to provide more 
temporary relief.
    We also appreciate the California Governor's Office of Business and 
Economic Development (GoBiz), under the leadership of Dee Dee Myers, 
actively working with port terminals and trucking companies to identify 
public and private land that can be used for temporary storage during 
this surge.
    The Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles are not the only American 
ports addressing backlogs. The Georgia Ports Authority recently 
announced it would convert five existing inland facilities into 
container yards to ease congestion. By getting containers off the dock 
and into these new facilities, space will clear up to unload further 
container ships more efficiently. This project is possible thanks to 
cooperation with the White House and Department of Transportation, who 
announced that ports would be able to repurpose unspent grant funds 
from past projects to address supply chain congestion. The Georgia 
Ports Authority will spend $8 million from past grants for this 
project, and it is my hope that other ports will be able to take 
advantage of this opportunity as well.
    Port of Long Beach terminals are also ramping up on-dock rail 
operations, a priority component to further cargo velocity and diminish 
congestion in our transportation highways. We grew from about 20 
percent of cargo moving by rail on Port property earlier in the year, 
to about 27 percent in the summer.
    Along those lines, the Port of Long Beach and the Utah Inland Port 
Authority are expecting to increase rail-hauled cargo. This will be 
done with the development of more cost-effective and innovative 
strategies aimed at moving goods quickly, safely and efficiently 
between Long Beach and Utah.
    I am hopeful that 24-7 operations will help mitigate this current 
surge, setting a framework for how we do things differently in the 
future. The San Pedro Bay Complex is forecasted to move 20 million TEUs 
in the coming years, thus requiring transformational change in the 
nation's most important supply chain region.
    24-7 operations cannot be implemented overnight. The Port of Long 
Beach has taken the first step, and we look forward to other links in 
the supply chain joining us.
                      Mid- to Long-Term Solutions
    In 1995, the Port of Long Beach developed a comprehensive master 
plan to identify critical infrastructure improvements needed to ensure 
that Port operations could handle cargo forecasts. The Port Master Plan 
has been amended a dozen times to incorporate specific projects. In 
2019, the Port updated the full plan to reflect new laws, regulations 
and policies adopted over the last three decades. Because of these 
proactive efforts, several major infrastructure investments came online 
in the last year and a half and have served as tremendous assets in 
helping the Port to address global congestion. The first was the 
replacement of the Gerald Desmond Bridge in 2020. Imagine that up until 
then, 15% of the cargo moved by truck in the U.S. travelled across a 
dilapidating bridge with only two lanes and no emergency shoulders. The 
new bridge, named the Long Beach International Gateway, has four lanes 
plus shoulders, allowing little to no disruption on this important 
supply chain artery.
    The second project, which came online in June 2021, is the 
completion of the electrified Long Beach Container Terminal (LBCT), 
which immediately added one million TEUs of capacity to the Port.
    These two projects cost more than $3 billion, but the return on 
investment was immediately realized. Without these investments, I 
assure you we would have more supply chain bottlenecks and vessels at 
anchorage. We also recognize that there is more work to be done and 
more investments to be made to modernize the flow of goods through the 
Port. The Port of Long Beach plans on investing more than $1 billion in 
on-dock rail projects alone, which will help us move about 35% of our 
cargo via rail by 2030. Pier B will increase use of on-dock railyards 
by 157,000 TEUs annually. This project will result in the faster 
movement of goods and will eliminate approximately 224,000 annual truck 
trips, resulting in less congestion and better air quality.
    While we institute short- and mid-term solutions, we need to look 
at the big picture and build for the future. Federal attention must not 
stop when the number of vessels at anchorage returns to zero. We must 
make U.S. ports a national priority all the time, not just in crisis. 
Every single American relies on seaports every day, and investing in 
this infrastructure will benefit American businesses and consumers in 
every state.
    For the decade spanning 2018 through 2028, AAPA identified $20 
billion in multimodal and rail access needs at U.S. ports. The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, along with the accompanying 
Surface Transportation Reauthorization, takes significant steps towards 
making up this gap. In particular, the ports industry is pleased to see 
the cap on multimodal projects raised for the Infrastructure for 
Rebuilding America (INFRA) grant program. Additionally, the set-aside 
of $5 billion for multimodal projects within the supplemental funding 
for the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and 
Equity (RAISE) grant program will direct much needed funds towards the 
kind of projects that get cargo moving more efficiently from ships to 
rail and trucks. I applaud this Committee and Congress for taking these 
steps to increase parity between funding for port infrastructure needs 
and those of other modes of transportation. I look forward to working 
with this Committee and the Department of Transportation to ensure that 
port multimodal projects are funded adequately through the INFRA, 
RAISE, and Consolidated Rail and Infrastructure Safety Improvements 
(CRISI) grant programs, all of which received billions of dollars in 
funding through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    Maritime ports create $5.4 trillion in economic activity annually, 
representing 26% of our Nation's GDP. Ports are responsible for 30.8 
million direct, induced, and indirect jobs. Ports exist to facilitate 
an integrated, end-to-end supply chain. We optimize goods movement. We 
build and invest. Ports serve as an engine for economic prosperity in 
our local communities and provide access to markets across the globe 
for communities nationwide. But, we cannot do it alone. We need the 
U.S. federal government to be our partners.
    I want to thank U.S. Transportation Secretary Buttigieg for working 
closely with California State Transportation Secretary David Kim to 
prioritize federal funding for projects that will help alleviate 
freight bottlenecks in the country's largest and most financially 
important port complex.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is going to create a 
playbook for states on how to use grant and loan programs to support 
the movement of goods. I applaud USDOT and the White House for 
committing to opening the competitive grant process for $240 million 
through the Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP) within 45 
days and an additional $475 million from the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act within 90 days. USDOT will develop and issue revised 
guidance on State Freight Plans that incorporates best worldwide 
freight planning practices. Freight plans will include supply chain 
cargo flows, an inventory of commercial ports, the impacts of e-
commerce on freight infrastructure, and an assessment of truck parking 
facilities. These more holistic plans will help the federal and state 
governments be more strategic in directing funding and resources to the 
greatest economic development needs in the supply chain.
            Greening U.S. Ports While Remaining Competitive
    The Port of Long Beach is on track for a greener future, creating 
the world's most modern, efficient and sustainable seaport. The Ports 
of Long Beach and Los Angeles were at the forefront of environmental 
stewardship with their adoption of its Clean Air Action Plan (CAAP or 
Plan) in 2006, which was updated in 2010 and again in 2017. The Plan 
yielded reductions of 88% diesel particulate matter, 97% sulfur oxides, 
58% nitrogen oxides, and 19% greenhouse gas emissions.
    Programs, such as the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act (DERA) have 
been instrumental in implementation of our forward-thinking 
environmental initiatives.
    As part of its industry-leading $4 billion capital improvement 
program, the Port is building some of the most modern, efficient, and 
sustainable marine facilities in the world to accommodate bigger ships, 
while generating thousands of new jobs. The Port has made great strides 
in reducing harmful air emissions from port-related operations, 
improving water quality in the harbor, protecting marine wildlife, and 
implementing environmentally sustainable practices throughout the Port.
    The Port of Long Beach is investing in renewable energy and 
terminal improvements with the goal of transitioning terminal cargo-
handling equipment to zero emissions by 2030 and on-road drayage trucks 
by 2035, at a cost of more than $14 billion.
    The Port is undertaking energy initiatives that will provide 
reliability, resiliency, and economic competitiveness to the Port of 
Long Beach, the San Pedro Bay Ports Complex and its marine terminal 
tenants. Renewable energy technologies, other self-generation systems, 
controls, and energy storage will allow the Port to isolate operations 
from the local energy grid during times of emergency or outage. The 
entire Port community will benefit from the Port's reduced demand for 
grid power, a lowered carbon footprint, and improved air quality as the 
equipment we use changes from diesel- to electricity-powered.
    The Port is committed to reducing congestion and air emissions that 
are harmful to our neighbors and the region. As I previously mentioned, 
we see on-dock rail capabilities as providing a critical environmental 
benefit by enabling more containers to be loaded directly onto rail and 
thereby reducing the number of trucks required to serve the Port, 
furthering the efficient movement of cargo.
    The Port will pursue federal funds for emission reduction and clean 
energy projects authorized in the Infrastructure Investment in Jobs 
Act. The Port would benefit from funding to address climate change and 
energy resiliency in the Build Back Better Act and urges Congress to 
advance that legislation. I applaud Congress for including in that 
legislation $3.5 billion for a new grant program to invest in electric 
equipment at ports. A recent survey of AAPA members revealed a need of 
$50 billion for port electrification projects the next ten years. These 
include purchasing electric cargo-handling equipment, shore power 
projects, electric grid improvements, and hydrogen fuel production. All 
of these investments will help ports move cargo faster while improving 
the health of port communities. As ports around the world shift towards 
electric equipment, it is critical we not fall behind. Unless we re-
shore crane and cargo-handling equipment manufacturing, we will 
continue subsidizing machine yards in Europe and Southeast Asia. I 
respectfully request that this Committee continue working with the 
ports and manufacturing industries to re-shore the manufacture of this 
equipment. Federal funding for electric equipment at ports will spur a 
new market of American-made machinery.
    To create greater efficiencies and improve air quality and the 
health of our planet, we need to make significant investments in the 
supply chain workforce.
    The Port of Long Beach is committed to creating and supporting 
programs that advance the development of a skilled workforce in 
international trade, goods movement and related professions, such as 
advanced technology, engineering, and environmental sciences. We have 
forged fruitful partnerships with the Long Beach Unified School 
District, Long Beach City College, and California State University, 
Long Beach, creating a workforce pipeline to port-related industries. 
Additionally, the Port of Long Beach Academy of Global Logistics at 
Cabrillo and Jordan high schools combines academic curriculum with 
industry-relevant training and information to support academic and 
career development.
    Together with the Port of Los Angeles, and the ILWU, the Port of 
Long Beach is about to embark on building a $150 million Workforce 
Training Campus, where port workers throughout the U.S. will be able to 
get hands-on training in a simulated terminal environment. Receiving 
substantial hours of training in a safe environment that does not 
disrupt port operations will result in safer operations and greater 
efficiencies at our ports. We also hope to test new green innovations 
in this space to help prepare labor to use and repair these new 
technologies. Investments in supply chain workforce training are vital 
to our success to maintain a competitive edge and protect our 
environment.
    The Port of Long Beach and AAPA appreciate the support of this 
Committee, Congress, and the Administration for working with all 
stakeholders to create a more resilient supply chain.
    The pandemic has tested every aspect of our lives in ways that we 
could have never imagined, but the U.S. maritime industry will continue 
to evolve and adapt for a more efficient and greener tomorrow.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the Committee, I would 
be more than happy to answer any questions you may have.

    Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Mr. Cordero.
    Now on to Mr. Spear, the American Trucking Associations.
    Mr. Spear. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and 
members of this committee, good morning.
    Our Nation's supply chain is made up of a complex series of 
contributing factors, including modes and intermodal 
connectors, sourcing, and talent pools governed by several 
jurisdictions of laws and regulations. Most recently, we 
witnessed a chronic slow return to work across all segments of 
the economy, trucking included, compounded by the growing 
backlog of ships at ports, container displacement, chassis and 
yard shortages, chip and sensor shortages, trade and tariffs, 
immigration, and cross-border enforcement, the Colonial 
Pipeline hack, the Suez Canal blockage, decaying 
infrastructure, an increasing number of natural disasters, all 
topped off with a global pandemic.
    This is the 25th time ATA has testified on these factors in 
the last 5 years. Again, it's in my written testimony, so let 
me just zero in on two supply chain factors that remain ATA 
front-burner priorities.
    First is infrastructure. This issue has been and remains a 
tier 1 priority for our members in industry. It has always been 
about what is best for the country. This is about real people 
getting the job done when it matters most, and this pandemic 
has been no exception. For trucking, that is nearly 8 million 
people, 1 in 18 jobs in America, where a truckdriver is the top 
job in 29 States.
    Roads and bridges aren't political theater. They're our 
shop floor. That is what we have been telling Congress for the 
last 5 years, so it shouldn't surprise anyone on this committee 
as to why we supported this bipartisan infrastructure bill, and 
why we will remain very vocal about why it is the most 
important, historic, immediate, and impactful decision that 
directly addresses our Nation's ailing supply chain.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act became law 
because a majority in Congress decided to put the country ahead 
of themselves. My members repeatedly asked, begged for this to 
happen. Here is why. Since the pandemic began, truckers 
continued to serve America, moving 72.5 percent of the Nation's 
freight tonnage, and serving more than 80 percent of U.S. 
communities that exclusively rely on trucks--milk, eggs, bread, 
fuel, PPE, test kits, and now the vaccine itself.
    So, as you turn to oversight, it is going to be critical 
that discretionary moneys address congestion in the top 
bottlenecks and intermodal connectors, of which 70 percent are 
State and local jurisdiction, and that funding be provided, as 
the chairman said, for truck parking, like in the House-passed 
bill, which costs the average driver $5,500 in direct 
compensation, annually.
    Second, the slow return to post-pandemic work. Matching 
talent with consumer demand has long been a headwind for our 
industry. Truckers entered COVID-19 short 61,500 drivers, now 
at 80,000 short as we exit the pandemic. These annually 
reported numbers are sound and accurate. They reflect what any 
one of you would experience waiting for service at a 
restaurant, standing in longer lines at a grocery store 
checkout, or even flying and experiencing the added delays and 
cancellations, not from weather, but from airline crews unable 
to keep up with a surge in travel.
    Pay has increased substantially, especially in the most 
challenging sectors of our industry. Long-haul earnings, for 
instance, are up 24.3 percent since the beginning of 2019, and 
increasing at five times their historic average, which is 
nearly 10 percent, year over year. Yet the shortage and the 
retention of talent remains, elevating other contributing 
factors, including lifestyle changes, more time with family, 
work flexibility choices that only independent contractors 
enjoy, time lost from severe congestion, and detention time, 
and the added layers of mandates, including requiring our 
workforce to vaccinate for a job that has one of the lowest 
risk and exposure rates in the country.
    Apprenticeships that train younger talent to safely and 
responsibly operate this equipment will help, thanks to the 
language from the bipartisan DRIVE Safe Act included in the 
IIJA. But we need to do more: urban hiring, including more 
minorities and women, more veterans and exiting military 
personnel, harmonizing CDL testing requirements and, of course, 
taking care of our current workforce, including retirement 
incentives and stronger health and wellness programs, all 
things our industry is not just doing, but committed to doing 
better.
    Now, I recognize the divisive environment we all find 
ourselves. So, let me close with this. Stop blaming everyone 
for the things you don't do, and start taking credit for the 
things you should do.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [Mr. Spear's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive 
                Officer, American Trucking Associations
    Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the 
Committee, on behalf of the American Trucking Associations (ATA) \1\, 
thank you for providing me with the opportunity to testify before you 
today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ American Trucking Associations is the largest national trade 
association for the trucking industry. Through a federation of 50 
affiliated state trucking associations and industry-related conferences 
and councils, ATA is the voice of the industry America depends on most 
to move our nation's freight. Follow ATA on Twitter or on Facebook. 
Trucking Moves America Forward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ATA is an 88-year-old federation and the largest national trade 
organization representing the 7.65 million men and women working in the 
trucking industry. ATA is a fifty-state federation that encompasses 
34,000 motor carriers and their affiliated suppliers. ATA represents 
every sector of the industry, from Less-than-Truckload to Truckload, 
agriculture and livestock transporters to auto haulers and movers, and 
from the large motor carriers to owner-operators as well as mom-and-pop 
one-truck operations. ATA member companies have overcome tremendous 
challenges over the past twenty months and continue to adjust as 
inefficiencies intensify disruptions in international and domestic 
supply chains.
    Despite mounting challenges, the trucking industry continues to 
play a critical role in sustaining our nation's economy. Trucks deliver 
critical foodstuffs to store shelves, personal protective equipment 
(PPE) to our nation's first responders, and gasoline to every community 
nationwide. We enable flexible multimodal supply chains by moving goods 
the last mile from maritime, rail, air, and intermodal facilities. 
Truck drivers perform an indispensable service, and their work moving 
goods across the country is vital to our economy and way of life.
    The trucking industry moves over 70 percent of the nation's freight 
tonnage every year \2\, and more than 80 percent of U.S. communities 
rely exclusively on trucking to meet their freight transportation 
needs. Over the next decade, trucks will be tasked with moving 2.4 
billion more tons of freight than they do today, and will continue to 
deliver the vast majority of goods to American communities.\3\ The 
trucking industry is also one of the country's leading employers, 
including over 3.6 million drivers.\4\ Trucking accounts for one out of 
every eighteen American jobs, and ``truck driver'' is the top job in 29 
states.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ U.S. Census Bureau Commodity Flow Survey, 2017.
    \3\ Freight Transportation Forecast 2020 to 2031. American Trucking 
Associations, 2020.
    \4\ American Trucking Trends 2020. American Trucking Associations.
    \5\ https://www.marketwatch.com/story/keep-on-truckin-in-a-
majority-of-states-its-the-most-popular-job-2015-02-09
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As evidenced by the response to the COVID-19 pandemic, and as 
highlighted by the current challenges facing our supply chains, 
trucking is the dynamic linchpin of the U.S. economy. When trucks are 
not operating efficiently, those slowdowns reverberate throughout the 
supply chain, and our supply chain partners feel the secondary impact 
on both the front- and back-ends. The supply chain is inherently 
interconnected and multimodal, and the supply chain issues we are 
witnessing today are a result of years of inaction that allowed small 
problems to metastasize into nationwide disruptions.
    This hearing presents a unique opportunity for key supply chain 
stakeholders to highlight major headwinds for freight transportation, 
and for this Committee to consider targeted solutions that improve the 
safety, efficiency, and resiliency of the supply chain during this 
ongoing national recovery. Deteriorating roads and bridges, severe 
congestion, freight bottlenecks, and unprecedented backlogs of cargo at 
our U.S. ports and inland terminals all place significant strains on 
the trucking industry and our supply chain partners, and absent short-
term and long-term remedies, these problems could permanently inflate 
the cost of moving goods.
    Also, in spite of the dangers posed by the pandemic, America's 
truckers proudly answered the call to deliver necessities across the 
country around-the-clock without interruption. Truckers perform their 
duties irrespective of the challenges brought on by public health 
emergencies, dilapidated and failing infrastructure, rising equipment 
costs, and intrusive regulatory burdens that make it difficult for 
companies to operate. But we need your help to ensure we can continue 
to deliver for the American people.
    As the Committee examines the nation's supply chain challenges, I 
ask that you please consider four key areas: 1) infrastructure 
investment, 2) workforce development, 3) challenges created by 
equipment and labor shortages at U.S. maritime ports, inland storage 
facilities, and distribution centers, and 4) potential consequences of 
an employer-based vaccine mandate. I will address each of these areas 
in detail in my testimony, as they are critical to ensuring the 
economic vitality and competitiveness of the American trucking industry 
and broader supply chain.
    Thank you for holding today's hearing to consider these critical 
issues. I look forward to working with you to share information and 
inform potential opportunities to alleviate these supply chain 
disruptions and protect the safe and efficient movement of our nation's 
goods.
            Key Issues for the Commercial Trucking Industry:
1) Infrastructure Investment:
    Well-maintained, reliable, and efficient infrastructure is crucial 
to the delivery of our nation's freight--both international and 
domestic--and is vital to our country's economic and social well-being. 
That is why ATA applauds the November 5th House passage of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), a broadly bipartisan 
bill that will provide important investments to maintain and improve 
our core interstate system. Importantly, this bill also targets 
additional funding for intermodal freight connectors and projects of 
national significance that are critical for supply chain continuity. 
ATA strongly and vocally supported this important legislation, and we 
are pleased that Congress has finally moved to ensure that the roads 
and bridges that carry the nation's economy are safe, reliable, and 
prepared for future growth.
    Enactment of the IIJA is all the more important in the context of 
the escalating problems that plague our supply chain and the nation's 
highway infrastructure. Highway congestion, for example, adds nearly 
$75 billion to the cost of freight transportation each year.\6\ In 
2016, truck drivers sat in traffic for nearly 1.2 billion hours, 
equivalent to more than 425,000 drivers sitting idle for a year.\7\ 
This caused the trucking industry to consume an additional 6.87 billion 
gallons of fuel in 2016, representing approximately 13% of the 
industry's fuel consumption, and resulting in 67.3 million metric tons 
of excess carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Cost of Congestion to the Trucking Industry: 2018 Update. 
American Transportation Research Institute, Oct. 2018.
    \7\ Ibid.
    \8\ Fixing the 12% Case Study: Atlanta, GA. American Transportation 
Research Institute, Feb. 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congestion serves as a brake on economic growth and job creation 
nationwide. A first-world economy cannot survive a developing-world 
infrastructure system. As such, the federal government has an 
obligation to ensure that necessary resources are available to address 
this self-imposed and completely solvable situation. More specifically, 
ATA recommends that at least $5 billion in federal-aid highway funds 
should be set aside annually to address highway bottlenecks in key 
freight corridors that drastically impede the efficient movement of 
goods. Furthermore, given the importance of the National Highway 
System--and especially the Interstate System--to the supply chain, a 
greater share of federal investment should be directed toward the 
maintenance and improvement of these highways.
    Another barrier to supply chain efficiency is the poor state of 
freight intermodal connectors--those roads that connect ports, rail 
yards, airports and other intermodal facilities to the National Highway 
System. While they are an essential part of the freight distribution 
system, many are neglected and are not given the attention they deserve 
given their importance to the nation's economy. Just 9% of intermodal 
connectors are in good or very good condition, 35% are in fair 
condition, 19% are in mediocre condition, and 37% are in poor 
condition.\9\ Not only do poor roads damage both vehicles and the 
freight they carry, but the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) found 
a correlation between poor roads and vehicle speed. Average speed on a 
connector in poor condition was 22% lower than on a connector in fair 
or better condition.\10\ FHWA further found that congestion on freight 
intermodal connectors causes 1,059,238 hours of truck delay annually 
and 12,181,234 hours of automobile delay.\11\ Congestion on freight 
intermodal connectors adds nearly $71 million to freight transportation 
costs each year.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Freight Intermodal Connectors Study. Federal Highway 
Administration, April 2017.
    \10\ Ibid.
    \11\ Ibid.
    \12\ An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2018 Update. 
American Transportation Research Institute, Oct. 2018. Estimates 
average truck operational cost of $66.65 per hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One possible reason connectors are neglected is that the vast 
majority of these roads--70%--are under the jurisdiction of a local or 
county government.\13\ Yet, these roads are serving critical regional, 
national, and international needs well beyond the geographic boundaries 
of the jurisdictions that have responsibility for them, and these 
broader benefits may not be factored into the local jurisdictions' 
spending decisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While intermodal connectors are eligible for federal funding under 
formula programs, it is clear that simple eligibility does not yield 
the results our country and the supply chain need. ATA supports a set-
aside of funding for freight intermodal connectors to ensure that these 
critical arteries are given the attention and resources they deserve.
    Additionally, we advise against federal policies that are likely to 
prevent or hamstring state and local agencies' efforts to expand 
highway capacity. This includes conditioning the expenditure of federal 
funds for new capacity on a showing that alternatives, such as 
operational strategies or investment in alternative transportation 
modes, are definitively ruled out. The National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) process already requires the consideration of alternatives, 
and layering additional requirements onto the existing process would be 
unnecessary, costly, and cumbersome. We also urge any policies that 
seek to eliminate or downgrade highways in the name of equity or 
environmental justice fully take into consideration the impacts of 
these approaches on supply chain efficiency.
    While the IIJA did not set aside funding for either highway 
bottleneck elimination or intermodal connectors, these projects are 
eligible for funding under several of the discretionary programs, 
including the Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Projects 
Program, the Bridge Investment Program, the National Infrastructure 
Project Assistance Program, and the Local and Regional Project 
Assistance Program. Congress should provide the necessary oversight to 
ensure that the resources available from these important programs are 
used primarily for projects that improve transportation safety and 
mobility, and that address infrastructure deficiencies that contribute 
to supply chain inefficiencies. These programs should not be used to 
advance parochial agendas that are outside of their Congressionally-
mandated scope.
    A further barrier to supply chain efficiency is the shortage of 
truck parking, which has been well documented for decades. In 2015, the 
FHWA's Jason's Law report recognized the shortage of truck parking 
capacity as a serious highway safety concern. The FHWA found that more 
than 75 percent of truck drivers and almost 66 percent of logistics 
personnel ``regularly [experienced] problems with finding safe parking 
locations when rest was needed.'' Due to inaction at the federal, 
state, and local level, the truck parking shortage has only worsened 
since 2016. In 2019, the FHWA found that the percentage of drivers who 
regularly experienced difficulty finding truck parking had skyrocketed 
from 75 percent to 98 percent. The truck parking shortage is not just a 
safety and compliance issue; it is also an economic issue for drivers 
and fleets. Time spent looking for available truck parking costs the 
average driver about $5,500 in direct lost compensation--or a 12% cut 
in annual pay. Truck drivers give up an average of 56 minutes of 
available drive time per day by parking early rather than risk being 
unable to find parking down the road. The result is declining industry 
productivity and further depletion of the driver pool, both of which 
contribute to supply chain inefficiencies.
    Federal investment in the expansion of trucking parking capacity is 
key to addressing this problem. ATA thanks the committee for including 
$1 billion in its surface transportation bill for truck parking 
capacity expansion. Unfortunately, the IIJA did not include dedicated 
funding for truck parking. We encourage Congress to seek other 
opportunities to address this critical problem.
    Underpinning all of these recommendations is the need for a long-
term, stable revenue source. Without one, states will find it difficult 
to commit to funding crucial and expensive projects. The fuel tax has, 
for at least a century, provided that stable income. However, a failure 
to increase the rate of the federal fuel tax since 1993 has caused the 
value of the revenue generated to be significantly reduced due to 
inflation. While the fuel tax will likely have to be replaced or 
supplemented at some point, it will be a viable revenue source for at 
least the next decade, and the rate of tax should be raised and indexed 
to inflation. In the meantime, the Administration should work with 
Congress, the states, and the private sector to find a viable 
replacement for the fuel tax that can provide stable highway funding 
for the foreseeable future. The IIJA included funding for national, 
state, and local pilot programs to explore new revenue sources. ATA 
looks forward to working with USDOT and grant recipients to implement a 
robust and comprehensive research and testing program.
2) Workforce Development:
    The trucking industry, which serves as the linchpin of our nation's 
economy and supply chain, has faced an escalating driver shortage over 
the past years. The driver shortage is the result of many concurrent 
factors, but the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the trucking industry's 
already-dire labor constraints. The COVID-19 pandemic brought with it 
the temporary closures of state DMV's and truck driver training 
schools, which dried up the already-fragile pipeline of new drivers 
entering the trucking industry. This pipeline is still slow and 
inefficient today. As a result, companies working throughout the 
nation's supply chain are facing higher transportation costs, leading 
to increased prices for consumers on everything from electronics to 
food. The driver shortage is a looming threat that, if unaddressed, 
could destabilize the continuity of trucking operations with a ripple 
effects across the supply chain that will be felt by everyday 
Americans.
    According to statistics released within the last month, the 
trucking industry is currently short 80,000 drivers.\14\ That deficit 
will only continue to grow unless Congress and regulators modernize 
regulations that govern who can drive in interstate commerce and make 
targeted investments in programs to attract a new, diverse generation 
of drivers and supply chain workers to the transportation industry. 
Without substantial action, by 2030 and at current trends, the driver 
shortage could grow to 160,000.\15\ Overall, nearly one million new 
drivers will need to be trained and hired in the next decade to keep 
pace with increasing consumer demand and an aging workforce.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Driver Shortage Update 2021. American Trucking Associations. 
October 25, 2021.
    \15\ Ibid.
    \16\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The trucking industry offers fulfilling careers with family-
sustaining salaries--all without the debt that often accompanies a 
college degree--but obsolete regulatory barriers prevent the trucking 
industry from offering these pathways to recent high school graduates 
who may otherwise want to pursue a career in trucking. The Bureau of 
Labor Statistics (BLS) reported a mean salary of $47,130 for truck 
drivers in a May 2020 report.\17\ Additionally, an industry survey 
shows the average truck driver earns over $54,000 per year, plus 
benefits like health insurance, a retirement plan (e.g., 401(k)), and 
paid time off.\18\ Since 2014, private fleet drivers have seen their 
pay rise from $73,000 to more than $86,000, or a gain of nearly 
18%.\19\ In addition to rising pay, many fleets offer generous signing 
bonuses and other expanded benefits packages to attract and keep 
drivers. We want to welcome more individuals into the trucking 
industry, but we need Congress' help to open up career pathways that 
are currently closed to qualified people due to outdated regulatory 
barriers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ Heavy and Tractor-trailer Truck Drivers : Occupational Outlook 
Handbook: : U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (bls.gov)
    \18\ ATA Driver Compensation Study (2017); American Trucking 
Associations. https://www.atabusinesssolutions.com/ATAStore/
ProductDetails/productid/3852684.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To that end, ATA is pleased that the IIJA included important 
workforce development programs that we believe will create new career 
pathways into trucking. ATA is particularly enthusiastic about three 
provisions, including a pilot program (based on the DRIVE Safe Act, 
H.R.1745) that will allow highly-trained younger drivers to operate in 
interstate commerce, the establishment of an advisory board to promote 
the recruitment and retention of women in the trucking workforce (based 
on the Promoting Women in Trucking Workforce Act, H.R.1341), and the 
authorization of a program to promote and improve job opportunities for 
a diverse transportation workforce (based on the Promoting Service in 
Transportation Act, H.R.3310).
    The DRIVE Safe Act pilot program will allow the U.S. Department of 
Transportation to collect the data to show what 49 states and the 
District of Columbia already recognize: that 18-to-20-year-olds can be 
trained to operate safely in interstate commerce and help meet the 
critical need for 80,000 new truck drivers nationwide. Currently, 
federal regulations require an individual to be 21 years of age in 
order to operate a commercial vehicle across state lines or transport 
interstate freight. This, despite the fact that a driver--today--can 
obtain their commercial driver's license (CDL) between the ages of 18-
20 and operate solely within state lines in 49 states and the District 
of Columbia. This pilot program will enable 3,000 drivers to operate in 
interstate commerce once they have successfully completed a rigorous 
training program. Ultimately, the data generated from this pilot 
program will demonstrate that young drivers can add critically-needed 
resilience and capacity to national supply chains if they receive the 
appropriate training in trucks equipped with the latest safety 
technology. To qualify to operate in interstate commerce under the 
pilot program, drivers must complete 400 hours of training using 
leading safety equipment, including 240 hours with an experienced 
mentor, on top of the current minimum requirements to obtain a CDL for 
drivers of all ages. The capacity that can be unlocked by bringing 
safe, trained, younger drivers into the workforce is critically 
important to ensuring the supply chain continuity that has eluded us 
for so long. Make no mistake, this pilot program is not a step toward 
allowing untrained individuals to operate a CMV, but rather a data-
driven innovation designed to identify those individuals who can, with 
the correct amount of training, safely operate a CMV in interstate 
commerce.
    The IIJA provisions based on the Promoting Women in Trucking 
Workforce Act and the Promoting Service in Transportation Act are also 
important tools for our nation's supply chains to attract a younger and 
more diverse workforce. Although women currently make up 47% of the 
workforce, only 7% of truck drivers are women \20\ and only roughly 26% 
of all transportation and warehousing jobs are held by women.\21\ For 
too long, blue-collar professions like trucking have been stigmatized, 
and the disproportionate emphasis on four-year colleges at the expense 
of vocational schools and the skilled trades has discouraged too many 
potential drivers from getting behind the wheel. ATA supports both of 
these important legislative efforts and applauds their inclusion in the 
IIJA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ American Trucking Trends 2020. American Trucking Associations.
    \21\ Monthly Employment in the Transportation and Warehousing 
Sector. USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics. September 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The inclusion of these workforce provisions in the IIJA will take 
significant steps in establishing new career pathways into the trucking 
industry. Broadening and diversifying the talent pools from which the 
trucking industry recruits will help to alleviate a significant 
pressure point imperiling the supply chain.
    As this Committee and Congress consider additional measures to 
address the current supply chain disruptions, the truck driver shortage 
and workforce development should be major focal points of any future 
action. Given that the current shortage of truck drivers stands at 
80,000, an immediate option for consideration should be an emergency 
funding authorization of workforce training dollars for job 
opportunities in essential critical infrastructure workforces, like the 
trucking industry. By subsidizing CDL training and testing, Congress 
can help qualified individuals overcome the financial barriers to entry 
and assist in an immediate infusion of trained drivers to allay current 
supply chain pressures. Similarly, ATA supports the enactment of the 
JOBS Act (H.R.2037), which would make CDL Training and Truck Driving 
Schools more likely to be eligible to receive federal Pell Grant 
funding, enabling workers to obtain the necessary credentials to join 
the trucking workforce without incurring significant debt. That all 
being said, ATA believes that any legislative proposals to expand the 
trucking workforce must be supported by the appropriate safety 
standards and performance criteria.
    ATA also appreciates and supports the steps government agencies 
have taken to address driver recruitment bottlenecks, such as issuing 
emergency waivers and declarations during the pandemic, and we believe 
some of those should be made permanent.
    For example, permanent waivers on certain requirements for 
Commercial Learners Permits (CLP) and Third-Party Testing could assist 
in easing the current delays associated with the testing of drivers who 
wish to obtain their CDL. These delays existed prior to the COVID-19 
public health crisis and have only been exacerbated by the pandemic. 
ATA anticipates that the existing backlog of testing appointments will 
steadily increase in the future and encourages the Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to harmonize state licensing 
procedures, including, for example, state of domicile requirements and 
Third-Party Testing.
    FMCSA has mandated that an individual's state of domicile must 
accept the results of a CDL skills test that was administered out-of-
state; however, the rule does not require the state of domicile to also 
accept the results of an out-of-state knowledge test. As a result, 
driver candidates who obtain training out-of-state are required to 
travel back to their state of domicile to obtain their credentials, 
creating an unnecessary burden. It has become all the more important to 
allow trainees to test, train, and receive their relevant credentials--
be it a CLP or a CDL--without having to travel back and forth to their 
state of domicile during the pandemic, and there's no safety 
justification that would warrant returning to that requirement as we 
recover from the public health crisis.
    Finally, I would be remiss if I did not address a piece of 
legislation that would be extremely harmful to the trucking industry 
and hurt the very workers it purports to help: the Protecting the Right 
to Organize (PRO) Act (H.R.842). The PRO Act, which I know many of you 
support, includes a provision that would effectively bar the trucking 
industry from utilizing the independent contractor business model. The 
trucking industry, American consumers, and the integrity of the 
nation's supply chain depend on independent contractors, and the 
implementation of a restrictive national test to limit independent 
contractor status would jeopardize the livelihoods of over 350,000 
owner-operators, destabilizing America's supply chain and irreparably 
harming the U.S. economy.
    The involvement of independent contractors in trucking promotes 
efficiency and an increased ability to meet customer demand, which has 
been acutely necessary during heightened delivery periods like the 
COVID-19 pandemic, and annually during the peak holiday season. 
Americans choose to work as independent contractors because of the 
economic opportunity it provides and the empowerment to select the 
conditions (e.g., hours and routes) that suit their lifestyles. 
Accordingly, the Americans who choose to become owner-operators in 
trucking should be respected and supported in their endeavors, not 
driven out of business because of the authoritarian view that employee 
status is better for them.
3) Port Productivity Challenges:
    As media and policymakers focus on the backlog of imported cargo at 
U.S. maritime ports, particularly on the West Coast, it is an 
opportunity to examine the long-term trends in port practices that 
reduce the resilience of supply chains. Volumes are surging at a time 
when labor and equipment shortages leave inland distributors unable to 
accommodate the demand. Inabilities to process cargo at ports, dray 
import and export containers between ports and inland distribution 
facilities, and transport inland goods efficiently between production 
facilities and warehouses all create challenges for the overall supply 
chain. Ultimately, there is an incentive misalignment between major 
players in the supply chain, and in order to move cargo efficiently at 
ports, all supply chain partners should, at a minimum, share that 
mutual goal.
    The entire supply chain would benefit from steps to incentivize 
communication between supply chain partners, realign financial 
incentives by modernizing regulations related to detention and 
demurrage charges by ocean carriers and marine terminal operators, and 
address the chassis and equipment shortage.
            Improving Communication
    Private sector supply chain partners need to continue improving 
their communication to avoid supply chain breakdowns in the face of 
peak season demands, a lack of carrier capacity, limited equipment 
availability, and ongoing labor supply challenges. Congress and federal 
regulators must understand the full context of the current and 
potential bottlenecks in order to respond accordingly with effective 
and meaningful relief.
    For instance, a port remaining open 24/7 will do little to increase 
the flexibility of the supply chain if the port does not have adequate 
equipment available to move containers, or is slow to process the 
trucks that serve the facilities, or if inland warehouses are full or 
only staffed to open their shipping docks for limited hours. Solutions 
should focus on addressing the constraints specific to those port 
facilities, not merely increasing the amount of time a driver can 
operate in order to overcome the inefficiencies.
    In addition to the delays and limited hours of operation at inland 
facilities complicating the carriage of goods to and from ports, the 
ports themselves struggle with disjointed information sharing. ATA 
members working in intermodal freight, report that information systems 
and notifications vary substantially between facilities. Each terminal 
within a larger port often has its own information sharing system, an 
inefficient state of affairs for truck drivers and supply chain 
participants that would otherwise benefit from more global availability 
of information. For example, truckers working at ports often must 
return containers or chassis at one terminal then pick up new equipment 
at a different terminal, a process complicated by the fact that most 
terminals within a port operate on different appointment systems. Short 
notice of constantly-changing windows of availability for cargo and 
equipment pickup and drop-off at each terminal only increases the level 
of miscommunication.
            Modernizing Incentives at Ports
    Too often, the delays for pickup and return of equipment and cargo 
for the movement of goods at ports are due to circumstances beyond 
motor carriers' control. Part of the challenge is in obtaining the 
necessary equipment, particularly chassis, to move containers to 
warehouses. Additionally, labor shortages at those inland facilities 
can slow the loading and unloading of goods. Federal hours of service 
regulations do not account for or accommodate labor challenges, so the 
time a driver spends waiting on a chassis to move goods from the port, 
or missing the delivery window at an inland facility because of delays 
at the port is unrecoverable. Drivers and equipment are critical 
resources for the overall supply chain, and ensuring effective 
utilization of both is critical to alleviating the current port backlog 
and strengthening long-term efficiency.
    The answer to these myriad challenges is not increasing the amount 
of time a driver can be on-duty, but rather restoring financial 
incentives for ocean carriers and marine terminal operators to work 
with shippers and carriers to move goods efficiently. Steamship lines 
and marine terminal operators should not benefit from unreasonable 
demurrage charges when cargo is not made available to carriers and 
shippers in a timely manner, and they should not be able to levy unfair 
charges for the late return of containers when there is no space for 
the carrier or shipper to return the equipment or when terminals are 
not open.
    If drivers are unable to return a container and obtain the proper 
chassis, they cannot pick up their next container, slowing operations 
and contributing to the buildup of containers at the port. In addition 
to improving port information sharing and restoring fairness to the 
financial incentives for moving cargo, there is a critical need to 
incentivize better chassis management and to secure more chassis and 
equipment to move more containers at ports.
            Pass the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 (H.R.4996)
    The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) has extensively studied the 
issue of unjust and unreasonable practices relating to detention and 
demurrage charges levied on motor carriers and shippers by ocean 
carriers and marine terminal operators. Last year the FMC issued an 
Interpretive Rule on detention and demurrage that outlined how these 
charges should be used to help properly incentivize the efficient 
movement of freight. Unfortunately, the rule has not brought the 
changes that were intended and motor carriers working at ports still 
receive bills for detention and demurrage that can be in violation of 
the regulation. These companies are all too often then forced to spend 
time and resources protesting these unfair penalties. If these protests 
are unsuccessful, then they must weigh the risks of pursuing litigation 
or arbitration with large, global shipping lines to recover their 
losses.
    Due to consolidation, there are now fewer than a dozen major 
steamship lines, and those that are remaining have organized into three 
alliances, shrinking the marketplace even further. For truckers and 
shippers who must do business with the ocean carriers to transport 
freight, there often is little recourse when they believe they have 
been treated unfairly on detention and demurrage, chassis charges, or a 
host of other issues.
    ATA is pleased to support the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021, 
introduced earlier this year by Representatives John Garamendi (D-CA) 
and Dusty Johnson (R-SD) to end these unfair practices and ensure that 
all parties are properly focused on the efficient movement of freight. 
The legislation would require ocean shippers to certify that all 
detention and demurrage charges comply with the FMC regulation and 
place the burden of proof on the ocean carriers. Importantly for 
truckers who do not contract with the ocean carriers but are the ones 
who receive these bills, it would also require FMC to examine whether 
these charges should be billed to any party other than the shipper. The 
consolidation we have seen in recent years means that the maritime 
marketplace has changed significantly, and it is time that the law was 
updated to reflect this. We urge the Committee to take up this 
legislation as soon as possible.
            Equipment Availability
    There is virtually zero availability of chassis, which is a 
critical chokepoint for U.S. ports at this time. Trucking companies and 
intermodal equipment providers that purchase this equipment rely on 
both domestic and foreign suppliers. Recent trade actions, including 
Section 301 tariffs imposed during the Trump Administration and an 
antidumping and countervailing duty ruling from the Department of 
Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) earlier 
this year, limit chassis availability from global sources. ATA is 
concerned that the combination of the tariffs and duties only increases 
the cost of chassis without providing a sizeable increase in domestic 
production to meet the demands of the U.S. intermodal marketplace. 
Without increased chassis availability, motor carriers will continue to 
struggle to meet consumer demand in an efficient and timely manner.
    A lack of interoperability for chassis in certain locations further 
strains the motor carriers and shippers moving products through our 
ports. Many ocean carriers require motor carriers to use chassis from 
their preferred intermodal equipment provider in order to pick up a 
container from that shipping line. This is true even for merchant 
haulage where the shipper contracts directly with the motor carrier for 
land transportation rather than with the ocean carrier. This could 
require a motor carrier to return one chassis and pick up another one 
just to pick up a container from a specific ocean shipping line. This 
inefficient system that allows ocean carriers to sideline competition 
also prevents motor carriers from choosing their own chassis provider, 
adding time and expense that is eventually passed on to consumers.
    Finally, the supply chain challenges that make it harder to move 
freight efficiently are compounded by the inability to receive new 
trucks and the necessary parts to maintain fleets. These shortages are 
making it harder to keep trucks on the road and placing the economy at 
risk of an even greater capacity shortage. Semiconductor shortages are 
slowing delivery of new equipment because OEMs are being forced to idle 
plants as they wait to build up sufficient stock to produce trucks. 
Fleets are cannibalizing older equipment to keep their assets moving as 
best they can. These shortages will continue to challenge those 
companies working in the supply chain, and we encourage the members of 
this Committee to consider these industry concerns.
4) Vaccine Mandate
    Supply chain issues are not just the result of inefficiencies at 
ports, failing infrastructure throughout the nation, and regulations 
standing in the way of progress, but also the result of unintended 
consequences from unwise policy decisions. As we made clear in our 
comments [https://ata.msgfocus.com/c/1UbQ1tbTx1oURLRQe6lyDbjMy] to the 
Administration on the OSHA vaccine or testing mandate, while ATA has 
promoted voluntary vaccinations amongst the trucking industry, we are 
adamantly opposed to misguided mandates on the trucking workforce.
    The Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) COVID-19 
Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) specifically exempts employees who 
exclusively work outdoors or remotely and have minimal contact with 
others indoors. And as you know, commercial truck drivers spend the 
vast majority of their workday alone in the cab and outside. All 
indications thus far from the Department of Labor suggest this 
exemption applies to the commercial truck driver population. We are 
also thankful that OSHA stated in its rule that employers who are both 
government contractors subject to a separate requirement under 
contracting provisions will not also have to meet the requirements of 
the OSHA rule.
    While we are pleased the rule exempts a large part of the trucking 
industry and doesn't overlay with the federal contractor requirements, 
it does not, however, take into account that trucking is not a one-
size-fits-all industry, and we continue to believe OSHA is using 
extraordinary authority unwisely, applying it across all industries at 
an arbitrary threshold of 100 employees that fails to factor in actual 
risks.
    As mentioned above, there are labor shortages causing 
inefficiencies at ports, inland warehouses, and distribution 
facilities. America's trucking industry is built on a deregulated model 
with hundreds of thousands of licensed motor carriers of all shapes and 
sizes. Setting an arbitrary threshold for vaccine mandates based on 
company size puts the companies above that threshold at a disadvantage 
where their drivers and workers can simply leave for jobs at companies 
where they will not be subject to a mandate. Trucking workforce data 
gathered by ATA indicates that an employer-based vaccination mandate 
based on the arbitrary threshold of 100 employees could mean the loss 
of up to 37% of drivers for covered companies to retirements, attrition 
to smaller carriers, or conversion to independent contractor owner-
operators. Federal regulations should not play favorites among 
competitive industries, but this proposal does exactly that.
    ATA strongly supports efforts to provide access to vaccination and 
COVID-19 testing broadly throughout the country. To that end our 
members working in the supply chain play a major role in ensuring 
distribution of vaccines and medicines nationwide. More broadly, 
truckers ensure that institutions and families across the country have 
access to necessities--milk, eggs, bread, produce, fuel, and the COVID-
19 vaccine itself--despite the ongoing challenges to daily life. 
Truckers in fleets of all sizes play a role in meeting that demand and 
transporting the goods we all need.
    While this Committee considers ways to support resiliency in our 
nation's supply chains, ATA requests that members be aware of the 
following necessary provisions that ATA explained to the Administration 
should have also been included to protect the supply chain:
    (1)  A specific written exemption for truck drivers akin to that 
provided by Canada for its drivers or alternatively deferring coverage 
of truck drivers under a vaccine or testing protocol to the traditional 
regulating agency with transportation expertise--the Federal Motor 
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)--rather than OSHA; and
    (2)  A reasonable implementation timeline of not less than 90 days.

    Without these two changes at least, there is almost no way that the 
vaccine mandate doesn't further deteriorate our supply chain situation. 
This mandate is wholly unnecessary based on our data also. While much 
of the country was sequestered in their homes over the past eighteen 
months, the trucking industry served its essential function, and did so 
successfully with safety standards developed by public health experts. 
In fact, ATA surveyed its members and provided data to the 
Administration showing that our drivers were well below the infection 
and mortality rates of the general population. We support the 
Administration's goals of increased vaccination rates and clear health 
guidelines to enhance protections for all Americans. We have urged 
trucking industry employees to get vaccinated and will continue to do 
so. We will also continue to work with federal authorities to increase 
voluntary vaccination rates for our sector.
    Unfortunately, however, the OSHA rule together with the federal 
contractor vaccination mandate, will have significant unintended 
consequences. Because the rule does not take into account the effects 
on the trucking industry, ATA has been forced to take action against 
the ETS to protect the industry. Because of its one-size-fits-all 
approach and short implementation timeline as well as logistical 
impossibility of administering testing on our incredibly mobile 
workforce, the rule inherently fails to balance the risks of a single 
standard for all industries against the broad impact that such a rule 
will have in exacerbating challenges to the supply chain and economy. 
Even if the ultimate goal is something we all agree on--increasing 
vaccination protections and defeating the COVID-19 pandemic--it is 
vital that public health measures first do no harm. This one will make 
the supply chain difficulties worse if it is not revisited 
substantially and that is why ATA felt compelled to bring a legal 
challenge in spite of our overall support for the Administration's 
goals.
                              Conclusion:
    Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the 
Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify before the 
Committee at a moment when the challenges facing our nation's supply 
chains are significant and complex. The members of the American 
Trucking Associations are working ceaselessly to move goods across this 
country, and I appreciate the opportunity to present you with insights 
on steps that can be taken to meet those challenges help improve the 
nation's movement of goods.
    The entire ATA federation stands ready to work hand-in-hand with 
Congress and the Biden Administration to address the issues we are 
discussing today. Thank you.

    Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman for his strong 
statement.
    Now to Mr. Jefferies, Ian Jefferies.
    Mr. Jefferies. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, 
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be 
here today representing America's freight railroads.
    While the past 2 years have been extremely challenging for 
all of us, I am immensely proud of the continued resolve of 
railroads, and their constant movement of goods, and doing it 
in a safe manner throughout the pandemic. It is a testament to 
our employees' commitment and dedication, and a result of 
sustained private investment, which has resulted in railroads 
having the highest rated infrastructure in the country, 
according to the American Society of Civil Engineers.
    Speaking of investment, our industry applauds the passage 
of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a historic 
downpayment on the Nation's future that will make critical 
investments and pay dividends for years to come. Railroads are 
especially appreciative of the $845 million per year for 
highway-rail grade crossing safety and elimination projects, 
along with commonsense improvements to the Federal permitting 
process to increase timeliness and predictability for getting 
projects approved and money put to work.
    If I can leave you with one point today, though, it is 
this: the Nation's railroads have been, are, and will continue 
to operate 24/7. Day and night, we are moving carload traffic, 
bulk freight, and intermodal containers throughout the country, 
collaborating with all of our supply chain partners to deliver 
the goods customers and communities rely on.
    Over the past 1\1/2\ years, railroads have taken several 
steps to keep goods moving and maximize fluidity, particularly 
in intermodal terminals. These facilities were never intended 
to be used for storage, so it is a top priority to maintain 
fluidity and keep goods moving, not store them. For instance, 
railroads have rerouted traffic away from congested hubs, 
reopened dormant intermodal yards, and, where possible, 
increased storage and capacity in existing yards to offload 
more containers.
    Railroads are also providing incentives to our trucking 
partners to use off-peak hours and weekends for pickups to 
maintain the flow of goods out of the yards. At the local 
level, railroads are bypassing constrained local truck 
movements by interchanging goods directly between railroads, 
shifting from rubber tire interchange to steel wheel 
interchange to alleviate crosstown drayage.
    On the employment side, while properly sourced for demand 
in some regions, railroads are also hiring across crafts and 
other markets, where appropriate.
    In short, railroads are pulling multiple levers to maintain 
fluidity. In the first 6 months of 2021, railroads moved more 
intermodal containers than they had in any other 6-month period 
in their history. Even today, railroads have capacity, and are 
open to taking on additional business, especially in the 
international intermodal space.
    Yet, as we know full well, today's supply chain challenges 
are multifaceted. Largely, this is the result of a fundamental 
shift that has occurred in the economy since the onset of the 
pandemic. While the services portion of the economy has 
substantially dropped off, the goods portion of the economy has 
dramatically increased.
    And beyond the unprecedented change in demand, well-
documented labor shortages in critical segments of the supply 
chain, including trucking, warehousing, and other industries, a 
lack of available chassis, and extremely limited warehouse 
space--3.6 percent vacancy rate in warehouses, nationwide--has 
hampered the integrated supply chain, and delayed on-time 
deliveries.
    Recent steps taken by partners in the supply chain, such as 
the mentioned shift to 24/7 operations at the Ports of L.A. and 
Long Beach, and the activity at the Port of Savannah, as well, 
to increase throughput and capacity, are all encouraging steps. 
But I think it is clear there are no quick fixes, and we in the 
supply chain are all in this together until the challenge is 
met and overcome.
    From the policy perspective, lawmakers and regulators 
should be focused on how to safely maximize goods movement and 
meet demand today and into the future. This starts with 
encouraging innovation and deployment of safety and capacity-
enhancing technologies. We must make the most efficient use of 
the infrastructure we have, while also expanding where 
possible.
    In the rail space, one example is automated track 
inspection, a data-driven technology that allows for more track 
to be inspected, while keeping lines open. The result? A higher 
level of safety, while no loss to fluidity. We should continue 
to look for innovative ideas like this to make the most of our 
infrastructure.
    Policymakers would also be wise to reject efforts to 
mandate forced access, or competitive switching, as some call 
it, at the Surface Transportation Board, which would only add 
complexity and slow down goods movement. Thank you to the 90-
plus Members of the House who wrote in opposition of this 
recently. The last thing we should be doing right now is 
knowingly enacting policies that will gum up the works and 
adversely affect fluidity.
    Now, in closing, while our Nation is currently facing 
complex challenges, freight railroads will continue to work 
with our partners to keep goods moving today and into the 
future.
    Thank you for the efforts across the industries represented 
today, and thank you for the efforts of our employees 
throughout the pandemic. Without them, the economies, frankly, 
would not have continued to function. Thank you, and I am happy 
to answer any questions you might have.
    [Mr. Jefferies' prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive 
               Officer, Association of American Railroads
                              Introduction
    On behalf of the members of the Association of American Railroads 
(AAR), thank you for the opportunity to testify. AAR's members account 
for the vast majority of America's freight railroad mileage, employees, 
revenue, and traffic. Together with their Mexican and Canadian 
counterparts, U.S. freight railroads form an integrated, continent-wide 
network that provides the world's best rail service.
    Freight supply chains are complex systems driven by global and 
domestic stakeholders. While their operations are constantly facing 
pressures, unprecedented events have arisen in the past 18 months that 
have led to significant supply chain dislocations. America's freight 
railroads are doing their part though--through significant investments 
in their private infrastructure and equipment, development and 
implementation of innovative technologies, cooperation with their 
customers and supply chain partners, and operational enhancements--to 
maintain network fluidity and ensure sufficient capacity to deliver the 
goods upon which our economy depends.
                    Railroads' Role in Supply Chains
    An international freight shipment involves railroads and other 
stakeholders taking timely, appropriate actions to keep the system 
working in a precisely coordinated sequence. Railroads provide a 24/7 
critical link in that supply chain, serving as the middle mover from 
the port to a rail terminal, with our partners in the trucking, 
warehouse, and port communities at either end.
    For example, movement of a container from a manufacturer in Asia to 
a retailer in the eastern United States will require the efforts of 
numerous entities, such as steamship lines; truckers; railroads; ports; 
drayage providers; owners of truck chassis, shipping containers, and 
warehouses; as well as manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers of 
goods. A railroad's role in this supply chain begins after the 
manufacturer delivers the container to a port in Asia, a 3- to 5-week 
trip across the Pacific Ocean on a steamship occurs, and the container 
is unloaded at a West Coast port and made available for pickup.
    Railroads then begin the movement of this freight in one of three 
ways: loading the container onto a railcar at the port; loading the 
container onto a railcar at a nearby intermodal rail facility after it 
has been moved there on a chassis via short-distance truck 
transportation (drayage); or loading the container onto a railcar at an 
intermodal rail facility following transport by truck drayage to an 
inland warehouse where the freight was transferred into a larger 
``domestic container'' and then transported by truck drayage again to 
that intermodal rail facility. The train carrying the container then 
heads inland. As no single railroad stretches across the country, the 
container must be ``interchanged'' with a second railroad. This 
exchange could also include another truck drayage between the terminals 
of those respective railroads.
    The rail journey then concludes at a rail intermodal terminal on 
the East Coast near the container's final destination where it is 
lifted off its railcar and either placed directly onto a chassis or on 
the ground depending on the terminal design and operation (wheeled or 
grounded). Railroads provide some ``free time'' to store the container 
at the intermodal terminal while awaiting pick-up and transportation to 
a nearby warehouse or directly to a retail outlet for unloading. In 
normal times, the container is moved out of the intermodal terminal 
within a matter of hours to a few days. Once transferred to its final 
destination and unloaded, the empty container is picked up again by 
drayage trucks and generally either returned to a rail intermodal 
facility or to a nearby port, where it re-enters the supply chain.
   Global Supply Chains Have Seen Huge Dislocations Over the Past 18 
                                 Months
    The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted global manufacturing 
capabilities and caused major fluctuations in consumer consumption 
patterns. At the outset of the pandemic in March and April 2020, 
consumer spending plummeted, and retailers' inventories rose sharply. 
Soon thereafter the economy recovered, but consumer spending had 
shifted significantly, resulting in increased demand for goods while 
service-sector industries--e.g., travel, restaurants--suffered 
enormously. By June 2020, consumer spending on goods was higher than in 
January 2020 (Figure 1) and continued trending higher. Few firms saw 
these spending patterns coming; even fewer were prepared for them. 
Retailers tried, but were unable, to catch up. In fact, by spring 2021, 
inventories had fallen to record lows, which they remain close to today 
(Figure 2).

                                Figure 1
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                Figure 2
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Similarly, rail intermodal volumes fell between 12 and 17 percent 
on a year-over-year basis between March and May 2020, and volumes were 
expected to remain low for months. Instead, intermodal volumes rose 
sharply in the summer of 2020, surpassing 2019 levels by August and 
breaking the all-time monthly record for intermodal traffic in November 
2020. That record was then broken again in January and April 2021 
(Figure 3). In many weeks in late 2020 and the first half of 2021, U.S. 
railroads were handling close to 300,000 containers and trailers, 
levels that no one expected when the pandemic began. Intermodal volume 
in the first six months of 2021 was far higher than ever recorded 
before for the same period, and the rail industry saw a year-over-year 
increase in intermodal traffic for 12 months.

                                Figure 3
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    Roughly half of rail intermodal volume is either imports or 
exports, and these significant gains in intermodal volumes were 
paralleled at our nation's ports. To handle these increased volumes and 
avoid bottlenecks, all stakeholders needed to do their part to maintain 
a safe, efficient flow of freight. However, when that has not happened 
in recent months, such as when goods suppliers and receivers make 
decisions to overextend their capacity by ordering additional freight 
when warehouses are full or they lack sufficient labor to handle such 
goods, the supply chain has become dislocated. Some examples of 
continuing challenges experienced by rail customers and other supply 
chain participants include:
      Labor shortages at ports, trucking firms, warehouses, 
manufacturers, and retailers;
      A shortage of drayage and long-haul truck capacity, 
chassis, and warehouse space; and
      Container and container ship availability concerns that 
are driving firms to purchase large quantities of goods that may not 
actually be needed for months.

    Additionally, some events have occurred that have exacerbated 
pandemic-related challenges to the functioning of supply chains, such 
as:
      Pre-existing trade disputes with other nations;
      Extreme weather events, including wildfires, hurricanes, 
and severe flooding and storms; and
      A nearly week-long blockage of the Suez Canal in March 
2021.
       Impacts of Supply Chains Dislocations on the Rail Industry
    For railroads, by far the single most problematic supply chain 
development in recent months has been the inability of many rail 
customers to effectively process the flow of traffic--especially 
intermodal containers--into and out of rail terminals. For example, 
when a container arrives at a destination rail terminal, it cannot be 
picked up unless a driver, drayage truck, and chassis are available and 
a destination warehouse or receiver facility has workers and space. 
Often appointment times are needed at these warehouses or receiver 
facilities, and if the driver, chassis, and drayage cannot meet that 
appointment time, it could take days to arrange another. As a result, 
containers are remaining at rail facilities for longer periods--
referred to as ``container dwell.''
    That is a significant problem because rail intermodal terminals are 
focused on throughput and are neither designed for, nor physically 
capable of, long-term storage of significant numbers of containers. 
There is some flex within the rail system to absorb and accommodate 
limited spikes and volatility, but the recent massive imbalances are 
not sustainable and create severe problems that reverberate throughout 
the supply chain. For example, traffic on rail mainlines backs up 
because there is no room at rail terminals for new shipments. This 
limits the ability of railroads to serve their customers and supplies 
of containers and chassis then become imbalanced because they are not 
being moved to high demand areas. Moreover, the physical act of moving 
containers within a terminal requires railroads to expend resources 
that would be much better used moving goods to their destination. When 
these and other related problems become entrenched, as they are today, 
it becomes extraordinarily difficult to ``reset'' the system to its 
normal level of throughput and reliability.
  Railroads' Efforts to Address Challenges and Work with Supply Chain 
                                Partners
    Railroads have worked diligently to ensure that supply chains 
remain fluid and that they are able to meet present and future freight 
transportation demand. First, railroads have and will continue to 
operate 24 hours per day and 7 days per week and would welcome freight 
transportation customers and other supply chain partners to do the 
same. Substantial supply chain capacity could be generated immediately 
from this change, and this would permit transportation providers to 
``catch up'' when backups occur. Railroads appreciate that some supply 
chain participants have recently taken steps in this direction.
    Second, railroads are partnering with their customers to find 
constructive ways to modify their operations and maintain network 
fluidity. Some of these changes, where possible, include:
      Increasing coordination between railroads to better 
manage the flow of traffic and with the trucking industry to take 
shipments as soon as warehousing capacity is available;
      Offering incentives to customers for weekend or off-hour 
in-gating at facilities near ports and for out-gating a container when 
they in-gate a container at other facilities;
      Re-routing traffic away from busier terminals to less 
crowded terminals;
      Reopening closed terminals to create additional storage 
capacity;
      Increasing available storage capacity and staging space 
in and outside of terminals;
      Creating additional railroad-to-railroad interchanges to 
limit demand on truck drayage; and
      Mounting containers onto any chassis brought in to help 
reduce dead-miles for truckers.

    Third, railroads typically make available a variety of online 
tools, apps, and other technologies that provide their customers with 
full visibility regarding a shipment's journey over rail networks. This 
allows for customers to trace shipments in real time, more efficiently 
prioritize retrieval of containers, and minimize time spent in rail 
facilities.
    Fourth, railroads can incentivize customers to pick up freight in a 
timely manner through charging progressively higher storage fees after 
a reasonable initial period of ``free time.'' These fees help railroads 
maintain service reliability, efficient use of rail capacity and 
assets, and fluidity on the rail network. And ultimately storage fees 
function to ensure railroads can do what they are in business to do--
move goods.
    Fifth, AAR publicly releases aggregated data on a weekly basis 
about the commodities and intermodal volume that move by rail 
throughout the United States, Canada, and Mexico. This publication 
includes detailed information at the commodity level, offers year-over-
year comparisons for weekly, monthly, and year-to-date durations, and 
provides needed insight into ongoing rail traffic levels for supply 
chain partners, rail customers, and governmental entities.
    Sixth, freight railroads have invested more than $740 billion of 
private capital since 1980--an average of over $25 billion in recent 
years--into their infrastructure and equipment to make rail operations 
safer, more resilient, and more efficient. The American Society of 
Civil Engineers has recognized the impact of these investments by 
awarding the rail network its highest grade for any type of 
infrastructure in its last two report cards.
    Finally, railroads rely on and greatly respect the skill and 
professionalism of their employees as they steadfastly work to address 
today's supply chain challenges and keep our economy moving. Railroads 
are confident that they have the right assets and headcount to manage 
the network at current and increased traffic levels and are hiring to 
address attrition and meet needed operational capacity. As is the case 
with other industries, it can be challenging today to fill open 
positions, but members are working hard to meet those needs.
    Railroads will continue to evaluate business needs and adjust asset 
levels to ensure there is sufficient capacity to serve their customers 
and keep supply chains moving. In fact, a report recently released by 
the Northwestern University Transportation Center found that railroads 
showed significant agility to respond during rises in intermodal 
traffic throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, due to recent 
lower intermodal volumes, railroads currently have additional capacity 
to meet any short-term increases or shifts in demand for freight 
transportation and stand ready to serve their customers.
   How Congress Can Be Helpful in Alleviating Supply Chain Challenges
    Congress should encourage the use of innovative technologies to 
enhance safety and operational efficiency and focus on performance-
based policies that are supported by evidence. Most importantly, 
policymakers should avoid undermining railroads' ongoing efforts and 
collaboration with stakeholders to keep the national rail network 
fluid, especially when supply chains are already facing severe 
challenges. Discussed below are several legislative and regulatory 
proposals that could impact the functionality of our nation's supply 
chains.
H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
    Railroads thank Congress for enacting IIJA. This bipartisan 
legislation will modernize the nation's public infrastructure and 
further the efficiency of our freight transportation systems and supply 
chains. By authorizing and making significant investments through the 
Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA), Rebuilding American 
Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE), Port 
Infrastructure Development, Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety 
Improvements (CRISI), and Railroad Crossing Elimination grant programs, 
projects will be constructed that increase the fluidity of our supply 
chains, such as improving first and last mile intermodal connections; 
advancing projects of national and regional significance, including 
multimodal connection infrastructure projects; and enabling the public 
sector to partner with industry on mutually beneficial projects, such 
as the CREATE program in Chicago.
Surface Transportation Board (STB), ``Forced Switching,'' and Cost-
        Benefit Analysis
    Congress should ensure that the STB maintains the balanced economic 
regulatory system set forth in the Staggers Act. If the STB were 
permitted to unwisely expand rail regulation, the quality of rail 
service would be diminished and the efficiency of the entire supply 
chain would suffer.
    One problematic proposal being considered by the STB is ``forced 
switching,'' which would allow the STB to order one railroad to switch 
traffic with another railroad even without a finding of anti-
competitive conduct. As this proposal would force one railroad to 
provide its infrastructure and other assets for the benefit of another 
railroad, this would create a disincentive to make new investments in 
customer-specific infrastructure. Additionally, as switches can add 
time and complexity to rail movements, the STB's proposal would disrupt 
traffic patterns, potentially produce congestion in rail yards, and 
undermine efficient rail service. While there is no good time for bad 
regulations, now is the worst time to introduce inefficiencies into the 
supply chain.
    Congress should instead direct the STB to institute a rulemaking 
based upon AAR's petition to incorporate cost-benefit analysis into its 
rulemaking processes. Meaningful cost-benefit analysis requires 
agencies to be informed by the most up-to-date, reliable information 
and to evaluate whether additional rules will achieve positive outcomes 
and at what cost prior to adopting new regulations. A formal cost-
benefit analysis would ensure future supply chain fluidity, as impacts 
on the supply chain would be formally accounted for when the STB 
considers new regulations.
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Automated Track Inspection, and 
        Two-Person Crews
    Railroads urge Congress to direct the FRA and other modal 
administrations at the Department of Transportation (DOT) to be more 
forward-looking in their rulemaking processes and approaches to the 
development, testing, and incorporation of new safety technologies. 
Achieving maximum benefits from new technologies will require a modern 
performance-based regulatory framework that does not hinder innovation, 
encourages railroads to keep investing in new technologies, and 
maintains FRA oversight to ensure the protection of rail employees, 
customers, and the public at large.
    As part of these efforts, Congress should ensure that FRA 
regulations do not ``lock in'' existing technologies and processes and 
stifle the incorporation of new safety technologies. A current 
problematic example of this at the FRA is with automated track 
inspections (ATI), which are conducted using track geometry technology 
installed in freight cars or on locomotives that move at-speed in 
revenue service and without the need to set-aside track time to conduct 
visual inspections. These automated systems gather massive amounts of 
data and analyze it for patterns and warning signs, empowering a shift 
from reactive to preventative track maintenance. During testing, ATI 
has overwhelmingly shown its safety benefits. Indeed, in some 
instances, ATI testing of track has resulted in more than a 90 percent 
reduction in unprotected main track defects. Congress should ensure 
that the FRA remains a cooperative partner with railroads in either 
encouraging the further testing of ATI through timely review and 
approval of waivers and test programs or taking steps to further enable 
the use of this safety technology, such as by updating half-century-old 
track inspection regulations. Either way supply chains will benefit 
from the efficiency gains.
    Additionally, Congress should ensure the FRA uses current data to 
establish the need for any new regulation and validates that safety 
benefits exceed the cost of its implementation. A problematic proposal 
being considered by the FRA is a requirement that a minimum of two crew 
members operate in freight locomotive cabs indefinitely. There are no 
data showing that a two-person crew mandate would enhance safety. 
Moreover, this mandate could stifle the adoption of new technologies 
that would enhance the safety and efficiency of the rail network in the 
long-term. In opposing this rule, railroads are not seeking the ability 
to utilize one-person crews haphazardly, but rather they want to work 
with rail labor under the existing collective bargaining framework--as 
they have for decades--to identify when conditions would allow for a 
reduction in the number of crewmembers without jeopardizing safety.
Environmental Reviews and Permitting
    Congress should ensure that environmental regulations do not 
function to inhibit the expansion, development, or construction of rail 
facilities that would meet supply chain needs and our customers' 
freight transportation demand. A primary example is the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Federal agencies should promulgate 
regulations that allow for careful, thorough consideration of the 
environmental impacts of proposed projects but in a time-limited manner 
that does not cause unnecessary delay. Such an approach would expedite 
projects that enhance supply chain fluidity but would not prevent 
comprehensive, effective environmental reviews from taking place. 
Additionally, DOT should ensure that its modal administrations are 
applying environmental review standards and procedures consistently to 
ensure equal treatment between the various modes of transportation. 
Moreover, DOT could more efficiently utilize categorical exclusions 
which would ensure federal resources are better focused on those 
actions requiring an Environmental Assessment and Environmental Impact 
Statements. Further, expressly allowing modal administrations to apply 
the categorical exclusions of other modal administrations or federal 
agencies would promote flexibility and efficiency in the environmental 
review process and consistency within DOT.
    Railroads appreciate that Congress included project permitting 
provisions in IIJA, such as One Federal Decision, which consolidates 
decision-making and expedites deadlines, and the Federal Permitting 
Reform and Jobs Act, which makes the Federal Permitting Improvement 
Steering Council permanent and establishes a goal of two years for 
reviews. These provisions will ensure that federal dollars and 
railroads' private investments for infrastructure projects will go 
farther and that the construction of projects on the rail network to 
enhance supply chain efficiency and meet the nation's current and 
future freight transportation demand will not be unnecessarily delayed.
                               Conclusion
    Returning fluidity to rail networks will take time and require 
enhanced cooperation by all parties to determine which actions are 
needed to improve supply chain performance. This is not a new way of 
operating for railroads; they work closely with their customers, 
transportation partners, policymakers, and others on an ongoing basis 
to understand and meet expected service needs. Railroads will continue 
to work with these entities to find ways to solve these problems as 
quickly as possible.

    Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Mr. Jefferies, a very succinct 
statement.
    Ms. Reinke?
    Ms. Reinke. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and 
members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee, thank you for inviting me to speak with you today 
regarding disruptions in the supply chain. My name is Anne 
Reinke, I am the president and CEO of the Transportation 
Intermediaries Association, or TIA.
    I am honored to be here today to represent our more than 
1,800 member companies. Our members act as the central 
connection between the shipper and the carrier, matching the 
shipper's freight with a carrier who will ultimately move the 
product, regardless of mode.
    From our members' perspective, today's supply chain 
disruptions are the result of a perfect storm caused by a host 
of issues that have resulted in the gridlock we are 
experiencing. On the supply side, there are shortages in almost 
every link of the chain, from labor to equipment to warehousing 
space. And on the demand side, freight is moving about 11 
percent higher than the already elevated normal, or more than 
50 percent greater than the previous peak in 2005. Capacity 
simply cannot be added as fast to keep up.
    The chairman mentioned the three D's. I think the solution 
results in the three I's: investment, innovation, and 
interaction among stakeholders in the supply chain. We think 
the Government can incentivize investment in efficiency. And 
for industry, we think that they can prioritize forging 
relationships and deploying innovative technologies to amplify 
capacity.
    Supply chain stakeholders have been working for decades to 
increase its overall efficiency to meet public demands, as e-
commerce has proliferated. These just-in-time delivery efforts 
produce significant efficiencies and worked extremely well in a 
relatively stable economy. However, efficiencies can also 
result in a lack of slack in the system. When there is a 
significant event like a global pandemic that disrupts the 
normal flow of goods, those freight networks have little slack 
and, therefore, limited ability to adjust to market conditions. 
That is what we face today.
    There is no single silver bullet to cure all the supply 
chain challenges. However, there are several ways to help the 
movement of goods that could yield benefits over time.
    First, while we are in an unprecedented era, it is critical 
to understand that the market can and will adjust, but it does 
take time. One way to handle this is for shippers to rely more 
heavily on brokers, as they exist to provide more flexibility 
through their relationships and technology. Brokers can be 
capacity amplifiers.
    Second, wherever possible, infrastructure funding should 
support the supply chain. TIA applauds the Congress for the 
passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the 
historic investment in our Nation's transportation and 
infrastructure projects and needs. In the long term, the 
Federal Government can be a key partner in helping build a more 
resilient supply chain, nationwide. Programs that support 
freight, ports, and congestion reduction, like those in the 
IIJA, will help to bolster safety and throughput, and address 
our Nation's congested roads and aging bridges.
    The private infrastructure investment of our world-class 
freight railroads should also continue to be incentivized to 
address the current surge in intermodal freight. As part of our 
investment, we must focus on innovation. TIA members are 
industry leaders in the technology space to keep up with an 
ever-evolving and growing marketplace. These solutions include 
maximum freight visibility with real-time data, automation in 
the back-end office, and utilizing artificial intelligence. 
3PLs are one segment of the supply chain, and we welcome 
additional data or technology efforts from other sectors.
    Third, the Government can examine existing or pending 
regulations, and determine whether they encourage productivity 
and access to workforce, or deter both. The AB5 law and 
regulation, and the California Air Resources Board regulations 
may be exacerbating the supply chain situation by narrowing the 
pool of available drivers, equipment, and companies. TIA is 
aware some of these laws in mind are not implemented yet, but 
the effects to capacity are already being felt by brokers and 
motor carriers.
    States should balance their priorities with the need to 
move freight safely and efficiently. That is why we are 
concerned about the PRO Act and its nationwide implications. In 
other words, the Government can encourage or inhibit investment 
through its actions on grants and regulations.
    Finally, TIA continues to push for a motor carrier safety 
rating process that uses data, rather than an outdated and 
underresourced physical audit system. This antiquated system 
has led to the FMCSA rating only 10 percent of trucking 
companies, with the other 90 percent being unrated, 
compromising both safety and capacity. This untenable situation 
can be fixed, however: H.R. 3042, the Motor Carrier Safety 
Selection Standard Act of 2021, would promote a broader pool of 
safe-rated motor carriers. TIA would urge the committee to move 
this legislation forward as quickly as possible.
    I appreciate the opportunity to testify before the 
committee today to provide the perspective of the 3PL industry 
and offer some potential solutions. I would be happy to answer 
any questions.
    [Ms. Reinke's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Anne Reinke, President and Chief Executive 
           Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association
    Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the House 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to speak with you today regarding concerns and disruptions 
in the supply chain that directly impact the free-flowing movement of 
freight in the U.S. and its impact on the American consumer. I 
appreciate the opportunity to give the perspective of our members today 
and provide some potential pragmatic solutions that could help 
alleviate the disruptions.
    My name is Anne Reinke; I am the President & CEO of the 
Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA). I am honored to be 
here today to represent our more than 1,800 member companies. TIA is 
the professional organization of the $214 billion third-party logistics 
industry. Our members essentially serve as the central connection 
between shipper and carrier, matching our shipper's (customer) freight 
with the carrier who will ultimately move the product, regardless of 
mode. TIA members utilize the latest technology to efficiently plan 
global freight transportation across all modes, gain real-time 
visibility of inventory-in-transit and proactively manage delays 
specific to ocean/port and inland truck/rail capacity challenges. 
Additionally, TIA members increase collaboration between all modes of 
transportation and recognize the incredibly hard work and dedication 
that trucking companies, railroads, ocean liners, and airlines play in 
the supply chain. TIA is the largest organization exclusively 
representing transportation intermediaries of all disciplines doing 
business in domestic and international commerce.
    Our members have a unique perspective and view into the supply 
chain across all modes, because their entire goal is to help get goods 
efficiently from one place to another. From our members' perspective, 
the supply chain disruptions that we see today are the result of a 
perfect storm. The supply chain crisis is not the cause of one or even 
a small number of defined issues, but rather a host of issues that 
resulted in the failures we are all experiencing. On the supply side, 
irrespective of the mode of transportation, there is a labor shortage 
in all areas of the supply chain (plant employees, drivers, train 
operators and warehouse employees), a chip shortage, a lack of 
available chassis, and a lack of warehouse and container storage. And 
on the demand side, freight is moving at historic peaks, as the 
pandemic spurred a focus on the goods economy in the absence of a 
service economy. Capacity simply cannot be added as fast to keep up, 
though we know all our partners in the supply chain are doing as much 
as they can as fast as they can. We also have to remember that the 
supply chain challenges are not confined to the U.S., it is a global 
phenomenon.
    Now more than ever, freight transportation intermediaries are the 
vital point of connection between freight that needs to be hauled and 
the trucking and rail operators that need to move it. There's no silver 
bullet solution on the horizon, even with millions of dollars pouring 
into transportation and logistics technology. Such technology is being 
put to use in building new platforms and systems to try to solve the 
cascading crises that have mounted over the past two years. Instead, 
the keys to solving this ongoing supply chain crisis lie in having the 
government incentivize investment and efficiency, and for industry 
stakeholders to prioritize forging relationships and deploying 
innovative technology. All industry stakeholders must find new avenues 
for working together and making more efficient use of existing 
capacity, equipment, labor, technology, and warehousing space.
    To that end, TIA applauds the U.S. House of Representatives and the 
U.S. Senate for the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act (IIJA) and the historic investment in our nation's transportation 
and infrastructure projects and needs. Specifically, three provisions 
relating to TIA membership, including a section that clarifies the role 
of ``dispatch services'' in the supply chain, a full review of the 
FMCSA Consumer Complaint Database, and a pilot program for 18- to 20-
year-old drivers. Importantly, the bill also includes a 
transformational investment in funding and grants for infrastructure to 
support ports and the freight network.
                               About TIA:
    TIA members include more than 1,800 motor carrier property brokers, 
surface freight forwarders, international ocean transportation 
intermediaries (ocean freight forwarders and NVOCCs), air forwarders, 
customs brokers, warehouse operators, logistics management companies, 
and intermodal marketing companies. TIA members handle the purchase of 
more than $100 billion worth of transportation each year and employ 
more than 130,000 people across the country.
    TIA is also the U.S. member of the International Federation of 
Freight Forwarders Associations(FIATA), the worldwide trade association 
of transportation intermediaries representing approximately 50,000 
companies in virtually every trading country.
    Transportation intermediaries or third-party logistics 
professionals act somewhat as the ``travel agents'' for freight; 
however, given the wide varieties of freight, specific needs of each 
shipper, and the diverse issues applicable to any one load means that 
third-party logistics professionals must have expertise far beyond what 
a traditional ``travel agent'' must possess. Using hard-won 
relationships and advanced technologies, these companies serve tens of 
thousands of shippers and carriers, bringing together the 
transportation needs of the cargo interests with the corresponding 
capacity and special equipment offered by rail, motor, air, and ocean 
carriers.
    Transportation intermediaries are companies whose expertise is 
providing mode and carrier-neutral transportation arrangements for 
shippers with specific needs and requirements and matching those with 
the ability and expertise of the underlying operating carriers.
                          Supply Chain Crisis:
    Stakeholders to the supply chain have been working for decades to 
increase its overall efficiency as the public now expects consistency 
and transparency in the delivery of products, or ``just in time 
delivery'', due in large part to the e-commerce utilized by companies 
like Amazon and consumer demand. This resulted in eliminating 
``excess'' inventory, optimizing networks and transportation modes, 
increasing labor productivity, and reducing overall labor costs. These 
efforts produced significant supply chain efficiencies and worked 
extremely well in a relatively stable economy and transportation 
network.
    However, efficiencies can also result in a lack of ``slack'' in the 
system. When there is a significant event like a global pandemic that 
disrupts the normal flow of goods, the supply chain networks have 
little slack and therefore limited ability to adjust to market 
conditions. All resources (trucks, rail assets, labor, and 
infrastructure) are already assigned to the normal network and shifting 
them in a different direction takes time. Historically, we have seen 
these kinds of market dislocations in 2014 with the polar vortex in the 
Midwest and during various hurricane seasons. However, the global 
nature and sheer magnitude of the COVID-19 global pandemic has 
exacerbated this issue to its breaking point.
    Furthermore, the demand for freight takes this disruption to 
another level. Generally, after minor events, the demand grows for 
freight, but not at this rate. At its peak after the opening of the 
economy, the demand for freight was 11% higher or more than 50% greater 
than the previous peak in 2005. The costs to move freight throughout 
the supply chain is drastically on the rise because of these 
disruptions, which directly impact everyone throughout the supply chain 
and ultimately the end consumers. We are seeing this firsthand as 
prices jumped 6.2% in October, which is the biggest inflation surge in 
more than 30 years.
    There are certainly several key factors causing challenges--a lack 
of truck drivers and other critical workforce, a lack of equipment 
availability (chassis) due to shortages and increased dwell time, and 
delays in permitted facilities that provide necessary warehousing 
space. It is important to remember that all these issues are only part 
of the links in a complex supply chain and have been affected by a 
variety of reasons.
                          Potential Solutions:
    While there is no single solution or action that will immediately 
alleviate the supply chain disruption there are several issues that 
could be addressed that would help the movement of goods. First, while 
we are in unprecedented times, it's critical to understand that the 
market can and will adjust, but it takes time. There are some ways that 
the government can help to expedite the process in the short and long 
term, but I would caution any significant government intervention that 
could have the perverse outcome of slowing the market response. One way 
to handle this is for shippers to rely more heavily on the spot market 
and brokers, as they exist to provide more flexibility in the supply 
chain for situations like these. Brokers can use their technology and 
relationships to find critical capacity for shippers, when the demand 
for freight movements exceed the freight moving under contract. Our 
members are reporting that the request for brokers is more than twice 
the amount than normal. Our members stand ready to assist in any way 
possible to alleviate the crisis.
    An immediate way that the government can help the supply chain is 
to help free up productivity and access to the markets, as well as 
support access to drivers. For example, there are current state laws 
that could further impede the efficient movement of goods and should be 
rolled back or suspended during this crisis. Some TIA members doing 
business in California are concerned that the AB 5 law, which 
essentially bars independent contractors from operating in the state, 
will further exacerbate the supply chain situation by narrowing the 
pool of available drivers and companies. For example, at the ports 
themselves, the majority of dray carriers operating at the ports are 
independent contractors. TIA is aware that the law is working its way 
through the legal system and is currently under a legal stay until the 
Supreme Court decides its fate, but the effects to the capacity can 
already be felt by brokers and motor carriers. This California law 
attacks the independent contractor model and is upsetting a highly 
fluid and competitive marketplace and inhibiting to every available 
company and driver. When almost 90% of all trucking companies are small 
fleets of fewer than five trucks and the economy is in the middle of a 
crisis, this law seems short sighted and imprudent. As a side note, 
many of these fleets in addition to the larger ones were willing and 
ready to enter the worst hot zones of the pandemic to ensure that 
essential goods were delivered.
    TIA supports all trucking companies and works tirelessly through 
our Association and members to ensure that the conditions of truck 
drivers continue to improve and create a win-win-win value proposition 
for all parties involved. A diversified and decentralized freight 
system that can adapt to market changes rapidly is the key to our 
economic health, growth and national security. You can look at the 
Colonial Pipeline data breach, if only 100 motor carriers existed in 
the supply chain one hack could severely impair our supply chain. With 
nearly 300,000 for-hire trucking companies with an average size of five 
or fewer trucks, redundancies are built in the system. The PRO Act, 
which would change the way independent contractors are classified at 
the federal level would make this a national issue and have devastating 
effects on the transportation market.
    In the same vein, certain state environmental regulations are also 
acting as a chokehold to port access. Let me be clear, TIA is a firm 
believer in reducing the carbon footprint and becoming a green 
industry. TIA works closely with the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) SmartWay program to incentivize our members to utilize clean 
trucking companies, but regulations must be right-sized, discrete, and 
not a deterrent to the efficient movement of freight. For example, 
several of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) laws directly 
impact the way our members conduct their business and capacity in the 
State. Specifically, our members have to navigate CARB's Truck and Bus 
Regulation, the Tractor-Trailer Greenhouse Gas Regulation, and the 
Transport Refrigeration Unit Airborne Toxic Control Measure (TRU ATCM) 
regulation. Additionally, there is a proposed regulation the Advanced 
Clean Fleets regulation that seeks to achieve the goal of zero-emission 
trucks and buses in the state of California by 2045 everywhere.
    These regulations promulgated from CARB would hold our members 
accountable for motor carrier emissions compliance for all freight 
arranged in the State of California. The scope of the requirement is so 
broad that it requires our members to check compliance of specific 
trucks and is beyond the scope of how the industry works. These 
regulations have led directly to several members not doing business in 
the State anymore, and the same can be said for motor carriers as well, 
who may not have the resources to install all these green technologies. 
These regulations have led to a situation where a carrier may haul the 
freight to the state line and refuse to enter the state, which in turn 
requires another carrier to finish the load that is willing to operate 
in the state of California. These regulations can be promulgated on 
interstate commerce based on a federal waiver under the Clean Air Act 
that was given to the State of California. In the long term, TIA would 
implore Congress to remove this waiver, but in the short term, TIA 
would urge the State of California and Governor Newsom to temporarily 
suspend the AB 5 law and these environmental regulations to alleviate 
the disruption.
    Third, wherever possible infrastructure funding should support the 
supply chain. This is an area where, long term, the federal government 
can be a key partner in helping to build a more resilient supply chain 
nationwide. The IIJA is an important investment in that endeavor. Key 
programs to support freight, ports and congestion reduction will help 
to bolster throughput. TIA also appreciates President Biden's recent 
announcement to help unlock grant funding at the ports. This should be 
true for the entire supply chain. While the pinch point is currently at 
the ports, the supply chain must work fluidly at every point. Our 
members must help move freight from point A to B and use all modes of 
transportation to make that happen efficiently. Today, our nation's 
outdated infrastructure system relies on congested roads and aging 
bridges that have a direct impact on freight efficiently and safely 
moving forward. We also have world class freight rail networks and 
their private investment in their infrastructure should continue to be 
incentivized, to help mitigate the current congestion in intermodal 
lanes.
    Third, we must focus on innovation. TIA members continue to be 
industry leaders in the technology space as they must constantly 
innovate to address an ever evolving and growing industry. For example, 
our members utilize the latest technology to facilitate the movement of 
freight from one point to another. These solutions include maximum 
freight visibility with real-time data, automation in the back-end 
office, and utilizing artificial intelligence. However, as one segment 
of the supply chain network, there is only so much they can do. 
Additional data or technology may be necessary across other sectors. We 
are interested to learn more about the Administration's recent 
announcement to focus on building a data framework to help move goods 
more efficiently. This framework may be useful if it reflects the 
actual nature of how freight is moved and where and how data is shared. 
As the government considers this step, the 3PL industry should be an 
integral part of that discussion.
    Finally, TIA has been for many years concerned about the motor 
carrier safety rating process and its effects on the marketplace, 
capacity and most importantly safety. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration (FMCSA) is still using an outdated physical audit system 
to rate motor carriers for safety. This antiquated system has led to 
90% of trucking companies being ``unrated.'' This system creates 
confusion and conflicting information in the carrier selection and 
vetting process that leads directly to a backlog and time constraints 
on our member's operations. This lack of clarity is causing several 
thousand small motor carriers from being utilized and ultimately 
decreases the capacity of available trucking companies to our members. 
TIA members and the industry need a new system that is built on fair 
and reliable data which will expedite the process of selecting a motor 
carrier and give industry stakeholders like ours more certainty on the 
carriers they utilize and ensure that only the safest carriers are 
selected.
    TIA has fully endorsed and supported H.R. 3042. The ``Motor Carrier 
Safety Selection Standard Act of 2021,'' sponsored by Congressman 
Moulton (D-6th/MA) and Congressman Gallagher (R-8th/WI). H.R. 3042 
would ask the FMCSA to begin the process of developing a new Safety 
Fitness Determination (SFD) process to change the way carriers are 
rated. TIA applauds Congressmen Moulton and Gallagher for their 
leadership on this legislation and would ask the Committee to markup 
this legislation as soon as possible to move it forward.
                              Conclusion:
    I appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Committee today 
to provide the perspective of the 3PL industry and offer some potential 
solutions. I would be happy to answer any questions.

    Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Ms. Reinke, 4:59, right on point 
there, thank you.
    Dr. Correll?
    Mr. Correll. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and 
all the members of this committee, thank you for convening this 
important session, and thank you for including me in it.
    My name is David Correll. I am a research scientist and 
lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center 
for Transportation and Logistics, where I study the working 
conditions, the quality of life, and the utilization of 
American truckdrivers.
    So far, my teams and I have analyzed the working hours and 
pickup and delivery experiences of around 4,000 American over-
the-road truckdrivers in snapshots from 2016 to 2020. We have 
also analyzed thousands of freight pickup and delivery 
appointments using data provided to us by shipper and broker 
companies, and we supplement this analysis with frequent 
conversations with truckdrivers, their management, as well as 
the shippers and the receivers who hire these drivers' 
services.
    The observations that I want to bring to into this 
committee's conversation are, one, that my analysis suggests 
that the existing population of American long-haul truckdrivers 
are seriously underutilized, and have been so since at least 
2016, when the data shared with me begins; two, that this 
chronic underutilization problem does not seem to be a function 
of what the drivers themselves do or don't do, but rather an 
unfortunate consequence of our conventions for scheduling and 
processing their pickup and delivery appointments; and three, 
that large, new datasets like the ones I have been fortunate 
enough to analyze, ones that cross firm boundaries, are 
critical when coming up with solutions for improving our 
American supply chains.
    Based on our analysis of the electronic working records of 
truckdrivers, I estimate, as Chairman DeFazio noted in his 
introduction, that American long-haul, full-truckload 
truckdrivers spend, on average, 6.5 hours of every working day 
driving. Yet, according to Federal safety regulations, they are 
allowed to drive for 11 hours per day. This, of course, implies 
that 40 percent of America's trucking capacity is left on the 
table every day. This is, of course, especially troubling 
during times of perceived shortage and crisis, like we find 
ourselves now.
    I also observe across many thousands of pickup and delivery 
appointments from all over the country that the detention of 
truckdrivers varies in predictable cycles, based on the time of 
day of their arrival. Drivers who arrive during typical first-
shift warehouse appointments--say, 5 or 6 a.m. to 2 or 3 p.m.--
are processed much more quickly, on average, than drivers who 
arrive outside of these first-shift hours. This is true across 
all datasets provided to our lab from multiple different 
sources.
    This leads me to first conclude, if you will allow me a 
brief computing analogy, that what we are facing is sort of a 
software problem, not necessarily a hardware problem, at the 
warehouses and distribution centers where the truckdrivers show 
up. That is, our existing warehouses and distribution centers 
do show the capacity to get trucks loaded and unloaded 
relatively quickly, but they do so only from around 6 a.m. to 2 
p.m. on the weekdays, which represents one-third or less of 
every working day.
    I submit to this committee that America's current supply 
chain problems are simply too big to commit only one-third of 
our weekdays to our best efforts at unclogging them.
    I would also like to address the patterns I observed when 
analyzing behavior of the system by day of week. I observed 
that long-haul truckdrivers who stay with their employers do 
most of their driving on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays of 
every week. They drive, on average, fewer hours on weekends. 
This is, in itself, not wholly surprising. However, I have 
compared these patterns in both soft markets, where drivers' 
time is valued less in the marketplace, and tight markets, 
where they have a price incentive to drive more. This 
comparison test allows us to study what changes in pay actually 
incentivize American drivers to do.
    In my observation, it turns out that when truckdrivers are 
paid more, they drive more, but that they can usually only find 
those extra hours on the weekends. The increase in pay does not 
result in statistically significant increases in driving hours 
on weekdays. Why is this the case? I interpret this result as 
further evidence that, as we currently have our American supply 
chains programmed and scheduled, there is simply no available 
extra truck driving capacity in the American system during the 
workweek. The days that drivers show the ability to offer 
additional surge capacity are on the weekends. Unfortunately, I 
have also observed in the data and in anecdotal conversations 
that there are far fewer freight appointments available to 
American truckdrivers on weekends.
    To conclude my comments, I hope that I have brought to this 
committee the perspective of chronic American truckdriver 
underutilization, which I believe to be generally 
underappreciated, but fundamental to any meaningful effort to 
come up with a solution. In fact, by my calculations, adding 
only 18 valuable driving minutes back to every existing 
truckdriver's day could be enough to overcome what many of us 
feel is a driver shortage.
    I hope I have conveyed the idea that solutions to the 
truckdriver shortage are most readily found in the scheduling 
practices of the shippers and receivers they visit, not behind 
the wheel or in the cab of the truck itself.
    And I hope that I have given some evidence to this 
committee of the potential for large, aggregated boundary-
crossing datasets, like the ones I analyzed, to help us 
scientifically identify where the problems in our American 
supply chain lie.
    I look forward to being as helpful to this body as I can 
be. Thank you.
    [Mr. Correll's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of David HC Correll, Ph.D., Research Scientist and 
      Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for 
                      Transportation and Logistics
    My name is Dr. David Correll. I am a Research Scientist at the 
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation and 
Logistics (MIT CTL). MIT CTL is an entity at the Massachusetts 
Institute of Technology that is focused on delivering high-quality 
supply chain management education and applied and impactful research on 
questions of logistics, transportation, planning.
    At MIT CTL, I co-direct a research group called the MIT FreightLab, 
which studies freight transportation, with a particular emphasis on 
American trucking. In our lab, I lead a project called the Driver 
Initiative, which looks to uncover new insights and identify specific 
opportunities to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and quality of 
life of American over-the-road (OTR) truck drivers by analyzing data 
from their daily work logs (Electronic Logging Devices ``ELDs''), as 
well as the systems that schedule and monitor their pickups and 
dropoffs (Transportation Management Systems ``TMSs'').
    So far, my student teams and I have analyzed the working hours and 
pickup and delivery experiences of approximately 4,000 OTR truck 
drivers employed by one mid-sized and one large national carrier in 
snapshots from 2016 to 2020. We have also analyzed thousands of freight 
pickup and delivery appointments using data provided to us by shipper 
and broker companies. We supplement this analytical work with frequent 
conversations with truck drivers, their management, as well as the 
shippers and receivers who hire these drivers' services.
    This research program, along with ongoing conversations with 
logistics and transportations professionals, leads me to a few 
conclusions I am honored to share with your committee today.
            Chronic Under-Utilization of the American Driver
    First, I believe that the American truck driver is chronically 
under-utilized, and has been since at least 2016 when our data begins. 
Based on our analysis of electronic working records, I estimate that 
American long-haul, full-truckload truck drivers spend, on average, 6.5 
hours per working day driving their vehicles. Yet, according to hours 
of service regulations, they are allowed to drive for a maximum of 11 
hours per day. This implies that 40% of America's trucking capacity is 
left on the table every day. [1] This result is especially troubling in 
times of perceived shortage and crisis like we find ourselves today.
    To put my argument in the context of the `driver shortage', the 
American Trucking Association estimates the national driver deficit at 
80,000 drivers. By my calculation, this represents about 4.4% 
(conservatively) of the US Census Bureau's estimation of 1.8 million 
employee Class-8 freight truck drivers in the United States [2]. Adding 
4.5% back to a long-haul truck drivers' working day of 6.5 hours would 
mean adding only 18 minutes. Seen this way, an 18-minute improvement to 
the daily average utilization of America's existing cadre of truck 
drivers could be equivalent in effect to recruiting new ones and then 
similarly squandering their time too. My research leads me to see the 
current situation not so much as a headcount shortage of drivers, but 
rather an endemic undervaluing of our American truck drivers' time.
                        Detention's Daily Cycles
    My analysis suggests that American truck drivers' daily driving 
time is reduced by the systems and infrastructure that they are subject 
to when they are loaded and unloaded. This same notion is frequently 
referred to in the industry as driver detention. I observe across many 
thousands of recorded pickup and delivery appointments from all over 
the country that detention of truck drivers varies in predictable 
cycles based on the time of day of their arrival. Drivers who arrive 
during typical first-shift appointments (5 or 6 am to 2 or 3pm) are 
processed much more quickly on average than drivers who arrive outside 
of these hours. This is true across data sets provided to our lab for 
analysis by trucking companies, shippers, and brokers, and covers all 
types of freight appointments (`live loads' and `drop-and-hooks') and 
types of customers. [3,4,5,6] This leads me personally to believe that 
the detention problem is--to use an analogy--a software problem not a 
hardware problem. That is, the warehouses and distribution centers that 
we have show the capacity to get trucks loaded and unloaded quickly--
but they commit to staffing policies and plans that realize this 
potential for only one-third or less of every working day. I submit to 
this committee that America's current supply chain problems are too big 
to commit only one-third of our weekdays to our best efforts at 
unclogging them.
                 Long-Haul Truck Drivers' Weekly Cycles
    Another issue that I study is truck driver retention. That is, how 
can truck drivers' electronic logs predict if a driver will quit? This 
work is ongoing and preliminary but offers a few insights already that 
I think may be relevant to this committee's decision making. Long-haul 
truck drivers who stay with their employers tend to do most of their 
driving on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays of every week. They 
drive on average, fewer hours on weekends. This is, in itself, not 
wholly surprising. However, I have compared these patterns in both soft 
(low price per mile for the driver) and tight (high price per mile for 
the driver) markets. This comparison test allows us to study what 
changes in pay actually incentivize America's truck drivers to do.
    In my data, it turns out that when drivers are paid more, they 
drive more on weekends, but the same amount on weekdays. The drivers' 
average hours per day driving do not change on the money-making days 
Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays. On these days they reach the national 
average of 6.5 hours per day or slightly more. However, higher prices 
do seem to incent drivers to drive slightly, but significantly, more on 
Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays [7]. Why is this the case? I interpret 
this result as evidence that there is no available extra truck driver 
capacity in the American system during the workweek, when facilities 
are open but operating under staffing policies that de facto limit 
drivers to only 6.5 hours daily driving. The only days that drivers 
show the ability to offer additional surge capacity are on the 
weekends. Unfortunately, I have also observed anecdotally that many 
warehouses and distribution centers do not offer weekend freight 
appointments, or if they do, it is in limited capacity.
                              Conclusions
    My research leads me to see the issue of America's truck drivers 
not as a crisis of head count, but rather of working hours. American 
supply chains do not make effective use of the drivers we have, and 
thereby reduces national competitiveness, contributes to the industry's 
very high turnover rate, and makes doing a critical job at times very 
unpleasant and less lucrative than it could be. I don't think that we 
can afford to let any crisis go to waste, especially not this one. I 
encourage this committee to consider measures to get more out of our 
existing cadre of American truck drivers.
                            Recommendations
    Below are two programs I recommend as starting points for 
addressing the issues outlined in my testimony:
    1.  Governmental leadership in coordinating, analyzing, and 
distributing data on detention times at American shippers and 
receivers. This extant data is typically siloed and difficult for any 
one group to collect and to collate. Leadership from Washington could 
facilitate overcoming these data collection obstacles.
    2.  Governmental support for a standardized system of evaluation of 
American shippers and receivers that measures both (1) detention time, 
and (2) working conditions for visiting truck drivers. Standardizing 
such an evaluation would allow carriers to more accurately price 
services to underperforming shippers and receivers, and thereby unlock 
more market pressure to reduce national detention times.
References
[1]  ``Is There a Truck Driver Shortage or a Utilization Crisis?'' 
    David HC Correll MIT CTL blog October 21 2019https://medium.com/
    mitsupplychain/is-there-a-truck-driver-shortage-or-a-capacity-
    crisis-73a7d7a5bcb

[2]  US Bureau of Labor Statistics May 2020 National Employment and 
    Wage Estimates https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

[3]  ``Application of Linear Models, Random Forest, and Gradient 
    Boosting Methods to Identify Key Factors and Predict Truck Dwell 
    Time for a Global 3PL Company'', By Sireethorn Benjatanont and 
    Dylan Tantuico, supervised by David HC Correll and Christopher 
    Mejia Argueta. MIT Working paper July 2020

[4]  ``Utilization of the American Truck Driver'', Mei QingZhang and 
    Adam. Buttgenbach, supervised by David HC Correll. MIT Working 
    paper July 2020

[5]  ``Diving Deep into the Determinants of Driver Dwell'', Leora 
    Reyhan Sauter, Michelle CatherineRoy, supervised by David HC 
    Correll and Christopher Caplice. MIT Working Paper June 2021

[6]  ``Optimizing Fleet Utilization by Adjusting Customer Delivery 
    Appointment Times'', Colleen Copley and Charles Lu, supervised by 
    David HC Correll. MIT Working Paper July 2020

[7]  ``Two Quasi-Experiments Concerning Working Conditions of American 
    Truck Drivers'' by David Correll, Christopher Caplice, and Bobby 
    Martens. MIT Working Paper March 2021

    Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Doctor.
    With that we turn to Greg Regan.
    Mr. Regan. Thank you, Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member 
Graves, for inviting me to testify today.
    Before I begin, I want to take the opportunity to 
acknowledge the anniversary of Larry Willis' untimely passing, 
which occurred 1 year ago this month. His leadership at TTD, 
the friendship and mentorship he gave me and our whole staff, 
are severely missed by all of us as we reflect back on his 
memory. Attending Monday's signing ceremony for the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was a reminder of 
Larry's unflinching optimism that we can still get big things 
done in this country. It is easy for any of us to fall into the 
trappings of cynicism these days. But Larry never did. TTD and 
the entire labor movement are better off because of it.
    Now to the matter at hand. I am speaking to you today on 
behalf of TTD's 33 affiliated unions, whose members have a 
front-row seat to the very serious challenges facing America's 
supply chain. They include the workers directly engaged in 
freight transportation at railroads, at ports, and in trucking, 
as well as those who work in industries like manufacturing, 
that have been hamstrung by their inability to get materials in 
a timely manner.
    I must be perfectly clear on two points.
    First, we cannot solve this problem by scapegoating 
individuals who had nothing to do with its origins. Cynical 
attempts to place the blame on President Biden, for example, 
have no rooting in truth, and do nothing to alleviate the empty 
shelves your constituents are seeing back home.
    Second, there are some policymakers and pundits using this 
opportunity to place the blame on hard-working Americans, to 
undermine their collective bargaining rights, demean their 
work, further deteriorate safety and working conditions, or to 
eliminate their jobs altogether. Even on this panel, there are 
those who believe that the solution is to continue the use of 
perverse misclassification employment models, and to undermine 
the right of workers to form and join unions. Placing blame for 
this crisis on the shoulders of working people is unacceptable. 
These are the very people who are laboring day and night to 
tackle this crisis, and it is upon their shoulders that we will 
find long-term solutions.
    We know that the major contributing factors to this crisis 
are a combination of a sudden spike in freight volume, coupled 
with shortsighted industry practices that left our system 
inelastic and incapable of meeting soaring demand. 
Unfortunately, while the drastic spike in demand was 
unpredictable, the results, in many ways, were inevitable.
    For years, the Class I railroads have pursued an operating 
model known as Precision Scheduled Railroading, or PSR. Through 
the PSR model, the railroads all but ensured that their 
operations would not be able to rapidly respond to economic 
shocks or rapid changes in the flow of traffic, like those we 
are now seeing.
    The real-world impact of the freight railroad business 
model is that they slashed 20 percent of their workforce in 
just the 5 years prior to the pandemic, and levels have 
continued to decline, even as businesses have rebounded and 
carloads have returned to near 2019 levels. Greater and more 
reliable freight rail service was obviously needed. The 
railroads only dug in further to their profit-at-all-costs, 
skeleton crew operations. Other freight railroad actions to eke 
out every last dime, including the mothballing of locomotives, 
left them even less prepared, less capable, and less safe.
    Some claim a shortage of employees in the supply chain as a 
major factor in this crisis. Such claims imply that workers 
needed to perform the job do not exist today in this market. 
This is simply not the case. COVID has awoken many Americans to 
the real failures of our labor market. Many employers simply 
fail to provide the incentives, including good wages, benefits, 
and working conditions that will attract and retain skilled 
workers. This is certainly true in rail, where our unions 
report mid-career employees walking away from formerly good 
jobs and secure retirements, due to eroding and deteriorating 
workplace conditions.
    We see a similar result in trucking, where enormous 
turnover rates and abusive practices like intentional 
misclassification are commonplace.
    As Congress works to solve these ongoing challenges and 
prevent future interruptions, we call on you to work closely 
with supply chain employees and their union representatives 
across the Nation to develop real solutions. Proposed solutions 
must consider and address the impact that a reduced rail 
workforce and degradation in service quality have had on supply 
chain disruptions, let alone whether current railroad 
operations are consistent with statutory common carrier 
obligations.
    Solutions must also include robust and well-directed 
investments in our Nation's freight infrastructure. To that 
end, we strongly applaud the enactment of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, which provides $2.2 billion for a port 
infrastructure development program, offering a lifeline to the 
almost half of all U.S. ports who state that better rail access 
could increase throughput capacity by over 25 percent.
    Congress should also consider novel approaches to supply 
chain challenges that would create jobs and economic activity. 
For example, the expansion of waterborne transportation 
alternatives through our marine highways may ease the supply 
chain bottleneck, particularly at major ports.
    Finally, we once again call on you to reject ill-conceived 
efforts to hijack the crisis to attack supply chain workers. 
The pursuit of a more efficient supply chain cannot be an 
excuse to eliminate or deconstruct critical regulatory 
safeguards, such as fatigue protections, or to water down 
carefully crafted training and qualification requirements.
    Thank you again, and I look forward to the----
    [Audio interruption.]
    Mr. Regan [continuing]. Opportunity to answer your 
questions.
    [Mr. Regan's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
   Prepared Statement of Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation 
                       Trades Department, AFL-CIO
    On behalf of the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) 
and our 33 affiliated unions, I first want to thank Chairman DeFazio 
and Ranking Member Graves for inviting me to testify before the 
Committee today on the extremely timely issue of supply chain 
challenges and congestion. The employees represented by TTD-affiliated 
unions have had a front-row seat to the serious challenges facing 
America's supply chain--including the workers directly engaged in 
freight transportation at railroads and ports, and who work in 
industries that have been hamstrung by the inability to procure key 
materials in a timely manner.
                     The State of the Supply Chain
    The fact that these disruptions have resulted in enormous economic, 
financial, and environmental costs is clear. Despite no shortage of 
finger-pointing and over-simplifying, we must acknowledge that the root 
cause of our supply chain bottlenecks is multivariate. Principally, we 
know that year to date, overall cargo volume through the Port of LA 
Long Beach, for example, has increased by a massive 26% compared to 
2020, driven in part by a sharp uptick in consumer demand for durable 
goods.\1\ This remarkable rise in cargo volumes has stressed every 
component of the freight transportation network, frequently to the 
breaking point. By way of example, earlier this year, Union Pacific 
found itself unable to clear backlogs, and stopped running desperately 
needed trains between the West Coast and its Global IV gateway in 
Chicago. Burlington Northern Santa Fe similarly began rationing service 
over its LA-LB to Chicago routes. Still, today, dozens of cargo ships 
remain anchored off the port, currently unable to dock due to lack of 
capacity at port terminals. Terminal operators at both LA-LB and the 
Port of Savannah are attempting to repurpose additional facilities to 
store overflow containers, as storage at the port has been exhausted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.portoflosangeles.org/business/statistics/container-
statistics
    https://www.clevelandfed.org/en/newsroom-and-events/publications/
economic-commentary/2021-economic-commentaries/ec-202116-durable-goods-
spending-during-covid19-pandemic.aspx
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is not surprising that this historic increase in cargo volumes 
and demand would result in supply chain challenges. There are few if 
any industries that would be positioned to handle this level of new 
demand without difficulties. This is particularly true with one as 
complex and interconnected as freight transportation. Ultimately, there 
is no actor, decision, or policy that is individually responsible for 
the scenario the nation finds itself in. However, as we seek to move 
past these supply chain bottlenecks, Congress and the administration 
must acknowledge and examine conditions that increased the severity of 
the crisis, alongside efforts to alleviate the backlogs of today and 
tomorrow.
    I must also take this opportunity to be perfectly clear on one 
point. There are many in Congress and in the industries our members 
serve who are cynically using this opportunity to scapegoat hard-
working Americans, undermine their collective bargaining rights, and 
further deteriorate safety and working conditions for supply chain 
employees. Putting any amount of blame for this crisis on the shoulders 
of your constituents--the American workers who drive this economy 
through thick and thin--is unacceptable. We reject this misguided 
placement of blame out of hand and urge all policy makers to do the 
same.
               Unexpected Conditions, Inevitable Results
    The supply chain crisis has put a spotlight on components of the 
freight network that were particularly ill-prepared for the demand 
shock of the last year. Recently, 160 House Republicans signed on to a 
letter which stated that ``The current supply chain crisis exposes how 
close to its limit our transportation system operates. There is little 
redundant capacity.'' \2\ TTD could not agree more strongly with this 
analysis. There is nowhere where this lack of redundant capacity is and 
was more acute than at Class I railroads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://republicans-transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
2021-10-20_supply_chain_
crisis_letter.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As TTD has testified before this Committee several times 
previously, for years the Class I railroads have pursued an operating 
model known as precision scheduled railroading, or PSR. PSR operations 
seek to maximize operating ratios--a railroad's expenses as a 
percentage of revenue--to appease shareholders and increase returns. 
Fundamentally, a PSR railroad abandons the traditional operating model 
of a service industry that responds to the variable demand of its 
customers. Instead, it operates on a regimented schedule more akin to 
passenger rail. After eliminating on-demand response, flexibility in 
the construction of train consists, and the availability of service, 
railroads then jettison capital assets like locomotives and cars and 
slash jobs across the network.
    In doing so, Class I railroads all but ensured their operations 
would not be able to rapidly respond to economic shocks or rapid 
changes in the flow of traffic, like those the nation is currently 
experiencing. This is evident in the hollowing out of the industry that 
has taken place in recent years. During the five-year period between 
2014 and 2019, Class I railroads eliminated a staggering 20% of their 
overall workforce. I might add that many of these freight rail 
employees have specialized skills and training--many require 
certification--that are not easily replicated in the broad US 
workforce.
    Throughout the pandemic, employment dropped further as freight 
volumes collapsed. However, freight rail has enjoyed a ``v-shaped'' 
recovery--carloads have nearly returned to 2019 levels. Yet, Class I 
carriers today employ fewer employees than they did pre-pandemic, and 
amid the supply chain crisis, employment continued to decrease in 
August and September of this year. Further, in the first three quarters 
of FYI '21, an analysis of four Class I railroads shows a shocking -
19.5% decrease in employee service hours compared to FY '19, while 
handling only 3.2% fewer carloads. At a time when more, and more 
reliable, freight rail service was badly needed, railroads have only 
dug further into profit-first skeleton crew operations. We are 
unequivocal--these reductions have resulted in a rail network that is 
less prepared, less capable, and less safe.
    Not only do railroads lack the personnel to respond nimbly to the 
supply chain crisis, but they frequently also lack equipment. In its 
2020 financial disclosures, Union Pacific stated that it had reduced 
its active locomotive fleet by 24% and only managed to keep 58% of its 
remaining locomotives in service. Other carriers have similarly 
eliminated equipment, and TTD unions report that equipment not in use 
is often not kept in a state of good repair, meaning that it cannot 
quickly be put into service when needed. As a result, when a surge of 
force was required to resolve congestion issues, railroads were left 
without the institutional flexibility required to do so quickly.
    Service that has run between LA-LB, Chicago, and other hubs bears 
evidence of PSR, as railroads continued to prioritize shareholder 
returns over high-quality operations during the worst moments of the 
supply chain crisis. We are aware of at least one Class I that 
restricted many of its trains, including those serving the West Coast, 
to traveling at a speed of 40 M.P.H despite operating over track rated 
for much higher speeds. These limitations are unrelated to safety or 
operational requirements, but instead exist to extract further revenue 
by reducing fuel costs, even if doing so further exacerbates delays and 
supply chain chokepoints.
    While drastic spikes in demand were always likely to result in 
significant operational challenges, the lack of elasticity among 
freight railroads has worsened and extended supply chain challenges. 
Rail labor is not alone in identifying the industry as an ongoing 
chokepoint in the supply chain crisis. Surface Transportation Board 
Chairman Marty Oberman penned a letter on preparedness to railroad CEOs 
stating his concern about ``the extent to which these service issues 
may be related to or exacerbated by a broader trend of rail labor 
reductions that has been occurring over the past several years.'' In 
additional remarks, he added that ``operating the railroads with that 
many fewer employees makes it difficult to avoid cuts in service, 
provide more reliable service, and reduce poor on-time performance that 
does not compete well with truck.''
    While rail carriers will cite that some metrics have improved, many 
of these improvements are recent--for example, rail dwell times at West 
Coast ports didn't begin a sustained decrease until August.\3\ Further, 
despite these efforts intermodal rail volumes have actually decreased 
year over year, with U.S. intermodal volumes for September 6.7% lower 
than September 2020, as shippers look elsewhere to move cargo.\4\ It is 
clear that challenges persist, and have persisted longer than they 
needed to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.pmsaship.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/West-Coast-
Trade-Report-October-2021.pdf
    \4\ https://www.freightwaves.com/news/us-intermodal-rail-traffic-
softens-in-september-on-supply-chain-woes
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Good Jobs Attract Strong Workforces
    Today, Class I's are acknowledging the need to hire additional 
employees to meet demand, and we strongly encourage them to do so. 
However, in a tight labor market,\5\ rail employers are pointing to so-
called ``labor shortages'' as an explanation for ongoing difficulties 
in staffing. TTD rejects any characterization that the rail industry is 
suddenly experiencing a shortage beyond its control, given the 
calculated elimination of tens of thousands of jobs over the past 
decade. If the existing rail workforce is inadequate to handle current 
freight demand, and we believe that it is, this is the result of 
intentional decision-making by Class I carriers as they've embraced the 
PSR model. They must be held accountable during this supply chain 
crisis for decisions that have contracted our freight rail capacity and 
left our economy in a worse state as a result.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=E9Bs
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Not only have carriers drastically cut headcount, but they have 
also fostered workplace conditions that have degraded the quality of 
railroad employment. TTD unions have increasingly reported on the 
phenomenon of mid-career rail employees resigning from well-paying jobs 
and giving up stable retirements due to an unwillingness to continue to 
work in unsafe conditions where the perpetual threat of furlough looms 
large. According to data provided by the Railroad Retirement Board, 
even when adjusting for retirements, approximately 7,200 employees left 
the rail industry during the pandemic. The bulk of these individuals 
were employed by Class I railroads. While targeted hiring campaigns and 
incentive programs to boost ranks are certainly welcomed, an ongoing 
exodus of highly-skilled and experienced employees is liable to 
undermine any forward progress.
    More generally, we do not believe that a shortage of employees in 
the supply chain is a factor in current conditions. A workforce 
shortage implies that the workers needed to perform a job do not exist 
in the market. What we have today in our economy is the failure of 
employers to respond to market conditions and provide the incentives--
wages, benefits, working conditions, that will attract the workforce 
they need. In addition to rail, proponents of the shortage explanation 
frequently cite trucking as an example of an industry where total 
employment is lacking despite best efforts. Yet, the 90% turnover rate 
for long-haul truckers speaks to a similar market response from drivers 
who are disinterested in long hours, low wages, and a difficult working 
environment.\6\ As an example, port truck drivers working for XPO 
Logistics recently won a settlement of nearly $30M after successfully 
arguing that they had been willfully misclassified under federal labor 
law, to deny them fair wages, benefits, and bargaining rights.\7\ The 
mistreatment faced by XPO drivers, operating in a key node of the 
supply chain, was hardly unique. The failure of an employer to 
incentivize its future workforce is not synonymous with a labor 
shortage, and the solutions are not interchangeable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/article/15064753/
driver-turnover-rate-holding-steady
    \7\ https://teamster.org/2021/10/xpo-drivers-achieve-nearly-30-
million-in-settlements-after-company-misclassified-its-workers/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             A Path Forward
    As Congress and the administration continue to work to solve the 
ongoing challenges, and prevent future interruptions of this magnitude, 
we call on you to work closely with supply chain employees and their 
union representatives across the nation to develop long and short-term 
solutions to the supply chain crisis.
    This must include considerations of the impacts of the drastic 
reduction in the rail workforce and degradation in service quality, how 
these factors have contributed to supply chain disruptions, and even if 
the manner in which railroads have chosen to operate is consistent with 
statutory common carrier obligations. We encourage the pursuit of long-
term structural changes that will reverse the current path of the 
industry and return to the prioritization of long-term viability, high-
quality service, and the creation and support of thousands of good 
jobs.
    Solutions must also include robust and well-directed investments in 
our nation's freight infrastructure. To this end, TTD strongly applauds 
the enactment of the generational Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act (IIJA). We thank President Biden and Vice President Harris for 
their leadership, Chairman DeFazio for his unceasing commitment to a 
revolutionary modernization of our nation's infrastructure, and the 
members of Congress who understood the importance and impact of passing 
the IIJA.
    As policymakers and the private sector consider strategies to 
expedite the flow of goods at major ports, the $2.2 billion the bill 
contains for the Port Infrastructure Development Program offers a 
lifeline to the nearly half of U.S. ports that state that better rail 
access could increase throughput capacity by over 25%.\8\ To achieve 
the greatest economic impact for IIJA, it is essential that the 
legislation is implemented in a way that sustains good-paying jobs 
while acting as an economic force multiplier throughout the supply 
chain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ https://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/
State%20of%20Freight%20III.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congress should also consider novel approaches to supply chain 
challenges that would create jobs and economic activity. For example, 
the expansion of waterborne transportation alternatives through our 
Marine Highways may alleviate symptoms of a supply chain bottleneck, 
particularly at major ports. Short sea shipping is the practice of 
commercial waterborne transportation utilizing America's Marine 
Highways and is a practical alternative to moving freight from major 
ports to its destination. Typically, cargos arrive at large U.S. ports 
aboard massive deep-sea vessels, are unloaded, and then transferred to 
trucks and rail carriers. A fully developed short sea shipping sector, 
utilizing smaller cargo vessels, would supplement and complement 
services provided by rail and truck transportation and would provide 
shippers with an additional alternative to direct goods to their final 
destination. In addition, being able to use our waterways more 
consistently would create benefits for the U.S. maritime industry by 
creating good jobs aboard vessels and at ports and shipyards, while 
reducing port congestion.
    We also call on you to reject ill-conceived efforts to hijack the 
crisis to attack supply chain workers and their industries. The pursuit 
of a more efficient supply chain cannot be an excuse to eliminate or 
deconstruct critical regulatory safeguards, such as fatigue 
protections, or to water down carefully crafted training and 
qualification requirements. In particular, we strenuously oppose 
legislation that seeks to amend long-standing labor law to deny 
collective bargaining rights. Transportation labor views any such 
efforts as an unwarranted and deeply misguided assault on employees in 
the supply chain who continue to work tirelessly to keep the economy 
and the flow of commerce moving.
    TTD thanks the Committee for the opportunity to testify today on 
the significant challenges facing our supply chain. We look forward to 
continuing to work together to alleviate current congestion and to 
foster more resilient freight transportation industries well into the 
future.

    Mr. DeFazio. Eleanor, please mute. I think it is you. No, 
you are muted. Who is it?
    OK, whoever is not muted, thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Regan. Now we will move to questions. I 
first recognize myself.
    Dr. Correll, I had read your written testimony, and the 18 
minutes was something novel that I didn't see, or maybe I 
missed in the written testimony. Could you go over that again?
    I mean, 18 minutes would do what for our efficiency, and 
backlog, and need for drivers?
    Mr. Correll. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question. So, the 
origin of that calculation is to take the number that my 
colleagues at the ATA bring up for the estimate of the size of 
the truckdriver shortage. So, when we look at that, you know, 
how many is it this year, they just came out with a new number 
of 80,000 truckdrivers short.
    Where I come up with my calculations to say, all right, 
well, how many truckdrivers do we have? And so, according to 
the U.S. Census data, we have 1.8 million. Well, 80,000 is 
around 4\1/2\ percent of 1.8 million. How do we add 4\1/2\ 
percent back to our existing population of drivers, instead of 
bringing in a new headcount? If we do that, it is only 18 
minutes.
    So, the idea of that calculation is to look at the estimate 
of the shortage, and look at a solution that is not raising 
headcount, but raising utilization.
    Mr. DeFazio. That is a pretty extraordinary figure.
    Both to you and to maybe Mr. Spear and Ms. Reinke, the 
issue of detention time. We used to penalize the warehouses if 
they made people sit. Right now, that is no cost to them. You 
sit, you run out of time, you sit. You know, you drive out of 
service, or whatever. How can we rectify that?
    Mr. Spear. That is----
    Mr. DeFazio. Briefly.
    Mr. Spear. I will go first with that, Mr. Chairman. It is a 
relationship that we have to improve with those that we are 
picking up from. There are instances that we have had where our 
drivers aren't even allowed to park on their property, unless 
it is within a defined period of time. And if they are later in 
traffic, and they get there and miss their window, then they 
have to wait longer. If they do get on the property, they are 
not even allowed to use the restroom. Our drivers are treated 
deplorably in many instances. It is a relationship that we just 
have to improve.
    These folks are moving 72.5 percent of the domestic freight 
in this country, and they are heroes. They have been doing it 
throughout the pandemic. When everybody ran for cover, these 
folks got in their trucks, and got the job done. They restocked 
the shelves, and now they are moving the vaccine. So, for them 
to be treated like this, to wait indefinitely, is a serious 
problem, and it is measurable, and it is impactful on us. That 
time reduces the clock that they can drive.
    So, it is--the 6 hours, or what was mentioned earlier, is a 
figure that comes from that. It also comes from congestion, 
which the IIJA is going to, obviously, alleviate. So, there are 
improvements in that, that that number should go up as we spend 
less time in traffic.
    Detention is still an issue. That is not in the IIJA, and 
it is just something that we are going to have to work with 
folks in our supply chain to resolve, because it is just 
untenable. It is not sustainable to have drivers wait that long 
and run their clocks down. It is not productive for the entire 
economy.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you.
    Ms. Reinke, from a broker's perspective?
    Ms. Reinke. Yes, I couldn't agree with Mr. Spear more. It 
is a relationship issue. Our members, our brokers want to 
maintain good relationships with their motor carrier customers 
because, otherwise, if they don't, those guys don't--guys and 
gals--don't come back to them. And we are only as good as the 
relationships we have with our shippers, on the one hand, and 
the motor carriers on the other. So, it doesn't do any good to 
have the carriers waiting outside.
    Now, obviously, there is a warehouse labor shortage, as you 
know; that is certainly what we are seeing. We want to work 
together to devise a solution. We are in absolute agreement.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you. How about from an economist's 
perspective, Mr. Cordero?
    Mr. Correll. For me, or for Mr. Cordero?
    Mr. DeFazio. No, sorry, for you, Mr. Correll, yes.
    Mr. Correll. No problem, thank you. So, from someone who 
analyzes data perspective, I think there is a great opportunity 
here, and I would like to represent it just briefly by way of 
analogy. If I go to a restaurant in New York City, I can look 
at the New York Board of Health food safety grade as a letter 
grade outside that restaurant, and know what I am working with, 
or what I am getting into by going to that restaurant.
    I think that aggregating and collecting data on detention 
time at our shippers, and also collecting data on their 
experience, and the dignity with which they are treated at the 
facilities, like Mr. Spear brought up, creating that kind of 
dataset would be very valuable in one obvious way that we could 
make public, some of these issues that I think we are all 
acknowledging we see.
    But the second way is that it could unlock market potential 
to improve it, because, without that kind of aggregated 
dataset, our carrier community can't accurately price in 
expected detention or expected poor treatment of their drivers 
at facilities. If we aggregated those rankings, similar to the 
way we do with restaurants, we could communicate to the carrier 
community, ``This is what you are getting if you do business 
there, and price it as you need to, to make it worth your 
time.'' I think it would be a very helpful innovation, using 
the data.
    Mr. DeFazio. Interesting. So, I wonder who we would get to 
do that.
    Ms. Reinke, would brokers be an appropriate place to 
aggregate and publicize that?
    Ms. Reinke. Well, to the extent we have visibility into 
that data, sure, we, you know----
    Mr. DeFazio. Well, I mean, you are dispatching loads. The 
drivers could--you could ask them, ``What was your experience, 
how long did you wait, how were you treated,'' and aggregate 
it.
    Ms. Reinke. Right. I mean, data is the coin of the realm. 
And typically, you are right, brokers have access to a lot of 
data, across--from the beginning of the transaction, the middle 
of the transaction, to the end of the transaction. So, yes.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, anybody else have any ideas on that? This 
has really been something I have been working on for more than 
15 years, detention time issues.
    Mr. Correll. Just a technical note, if it is helpful to 
you, Chairman DeFazio.
    So, when I do this for the companies that share their data 
with me, one of the things that I can do is give them a quick 
letter grade--A, B, C, D--on all of their customers for 
detention. That tends to be valuable, from a management 
perspective.
    The problem of trying to do it--so, a carrier can do it 
with places they have already visited, but they won't have any 
data for somewhere they have never visited. And so, if they ask 
another company and say, what was your experience at this 
place, each company codes it in their own unique way, which is 
not readable across all the different companies. So, if I am 
going to Company XYZ in Des Moines, Iowa, my naming convention 
will not be readable to all the other companies that might use 
their own naming conventions.
    So, that is somewhere I think Federal leadership could 
help, giving a standardized, unique identifying code to all of 
our shippers and warehouses, so we have a way to know exactly 
who we are talking about when we share these ratings.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, interesting. Sort of a private-sector 
solution to a private-sector problem. So, thank you.
    OK, my time has expired. I would now recognize Ranking 
Member Graves.
    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman----
    Mr. DeFazio. Oh, sorry, Ranking Member Crawford, I am 
sorry.
    Mr. Crawford. That is no problem. Thank you. Just real 
quick, I have a letter here from the Agricultural 
Transportation Working Group submitted in response to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation's request for information that 
will be used to prepare a report for President Biden on supply 
chains for the industrial base. I would ask unanimous consent 
to have that entered into the record.
    Mr. DeFazio. Without objection.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
  Letter of October 18, 2021, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, U.S. 
  Department of Transportation, from the Agricultural Transportation 
   Working Group, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' 
                                Crawford
                                          Submitted Electronically.
                                                  October 18, 2021.
The Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building, Ground Floor (W12-140), 
        Washington, DC 20590-0001.

RE: Docket No. DOT-OST-2021-0106

    Dear Secretary Buttigieg:
    The associations that make up the Agricultural Transportation 
Working Group (ATWG) submit this statement in response to the U.S. 
Department of Transportation's (USDOT) request for information that 
will be used to prepare a report for President Biden on supply chains 
for the industrial base.
    The undersigned agricultural producer, commodity, agribusiness and 
food-related national organizations respectfully request the Biden 
administration's support to advance transportation infrastructure and 
policies for truck, rail, waterways and ports that will enhance the 
efficient and cost-effective transport of agricultural and food 
products. The farmers, ranchers, food and beverage manufacturers, 
processors, package suppliers, farm supply dealers and agricultural 
product marketers that comprise our collective memberships are 
dedicated to providing safe, abundant, affordable and sustainably 
produced human and animal food, fiber and other agricultural products 
that directly benefit U.S. and global consumers and contribute 
significantly to U.S. economic growth and trade. Importantly, they also 
support and sustain millions of American jobs, many in rural 
communities.
    The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent surge in consumer demand has 
resulted in major supply chain disruptions, including in the food and 
agricultural supply chain. The disruptions are ongoing, and the work 
performed by President Biden's Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force that 
is co-chaired by the Secretaries of Transportation, Agriculture and 
Commerce is important to support resilient, diverse, and secure supply 
chains. Such supply chains are buttressed by strong transportation 
infrastructure and flexible policy and are needed to ensure America's 
farmers, ranchers, commodity handlers, processors and food 
manufacturers can reliably deliver high-quality, cost-effective 
products to domestic and global consumers.
    More needs to be done to institutionalize the lessons that are 
being learned from the pandemic to ensure resiliency of the food and 
agricultural supply chain. We respectfully offer for your consideration 
the following recommendations:
                                 Labor
    Presently, inadequate labor availability is the largest supply 
chain constraint facing the U.S. agricultural industry. ATWG members 
are unable to fill open positions throughout the production, 
transportation, warehousing, and processing phases of the supply chain. 
These shortages are directly impacting our members' ability to meet 
consumer demands. Not only does a labor shortage make it difficult to 
keep pace with open positions, but it also makes it more challenging to 
add shifts to keep pace with increasing demand for agricultural 
products. The lack of access to labor threatens operations and supply 
chain resiliency and leads to lost productivity and higher prices for 
food and agricultural products along the supply chain.
    During the pandemic, as agriculture continued to operate while also 
prioritizing the health and safety of their employees, the shortages of 
personal protective equipment, disinfectants, and other COVID-19 
mitigation tools created challenges. In planning for the next crisis, 
the U.S. government should ensure that the food supply chain continues 
to be deemed essential and receives priority access to necessary 
supplies in future response plans. Furthermore, the U.S. government 
should consider efforts to create national stockpiles of supplies, such 
as respirators and face masks which are required for application of 
certain pesticides.
    Specifically, within DOT's jurisdiction, policies to increase 
trucking productivity would be helpful as would harmonizing the federal 
truck driving age limit with the state age limit to provide a more 
accessible pathway into the trucking industry for drivers aged 18-20.
    Another specific concern is how a forthcoming Emergency Temporary 
Standard (ETS) regarding vaccines is implemented. We support the use of 
vaccines to fight the spread of COVID-19, but as announced, the ETS 
could cause serious labor disruptions for agribusinesses. We encourage 
the administration to continue to recognize the critical infrastructure 
status of the food and agriculture sector and provide flexibility for 
agricultural employers to avoid the negative effects a vaccine mandate 
would have on the efficiency and reliability of the agricultural supply 
chain. We would like to partner in developing solutions and educational 
programs that will expand the number of vaccinated workers without 
introducing additional risks to the agricultural supply chain.
                             Climate Policy
    The ability for the U.S. food and agricultural sector to continue 
as the world's largest hinges on the availability of cropland to 
produce raw agricultural commodities. The production of raw 
agricultural commodities is the beginning and most important part of 
the food and agricultural supply chain. An abundant, affordable, 
sustainable, and wholesome supply of raw agricultural commodities is a 
prerequisite for the remaining steps in the food and agricultural 
supply chain.
    Due to the inherent linkage between the first step in the food and 
agricultural supply chain, the production of raw agricultural 
commodities, and the climate change policies that are under 
consideration, the ATWG urges the Transportation, Agriculture and 
Commerce Departments to assess their climate change policies and supply 
chain policies in tandem. Policies that idle cropland and reduce U.S. 
agricultural output result in less U.S. agricultural market share and 
harm rural economies.
    As an alternative to cropland idling climate change polices, the 
ATWG urges the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to prioritize 
federal resources toward working land programs to achieve large 
environmental and economic benefits by incentivizing broader adoption 
of best management farming and ranching practices across potentially 
hundreds of millions of our nation's best acres for agricultural 
production.
                Transportation Policy and Infrastructure
    The ATWG recommends strengthening U.S. freight transportation 
policy and infrastructure to help ensure there are many efficient ways 
for agricultural commodities and products to flow throughout the 
agricultural supply chain. The ATWG believes the U.S. freight 
transportation system can be strengthened through the following ways:
    1.  Adopt solutions to better balance the needs of ocean carriers 
with the needs of our agricultural exports.
    2.  Increase federal investment to modernize U.S. inland waterways 
locks and dams--particularly those on the Upper Mississippi River and 
Illinois River (UMR-IR) System--and fully utilizing the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund for its intended purpose of dredging U.S. ports 
and harbors.
    3.  Foster increased competition among freight railroads and other 
transportation modes, provide a better method for challenging 
unreasonable rail rates and require railroad carriers to provide 
increased access to railroad service data to enhance agricultural 
supply chain operations.
    4.  Increase motor carrier capacity through regulatory reform and 
legislative change and investing strategically in rural roads and 
bridges through collaboration with states.
                           Container Shipping
    We are supportive of efforts to better balance the needs of ocean 
carriers with the needs of our agricultural exports. Concerns over 
ocean carriers and terminals practices at U.S. ports include ignoring 
the Federal Maritime Commission's existing demurrage and detention 
guidelines, making containers unavailable to carry agricultural export 
cargo, cancelling or refusing export container bookings and a 
persistent lack of timely notice of changes to U.S. shippers.
    The lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic's shock to global 
trade have resulted in a backlog of container ships waiting to unload 
outside the West Coast's most critical shipping ports. Ongoing 
congestion and related logistical obstacles threaten U.S. farmers' and 
ranchers' ability to meet much-welcome increases in foreign demand for 
our products.
    Elevated imports and exports have caused considerable congestion 
both on water and land as the ports fill with the extra containers. To 
avoid congestion and to get containers back to Asia as quickly as 
possible so that they can be refilled with more import goods, there has 
been an increase in the shipment of empty containers out of the West 
Coast ports. Some consider it more efficient to ship empty containers, 
rather than waiting for export goods to be loaded, which has led to a 
significant decline in the number of containers available to 
agricultural exporters.
    Across California's three major ports, the shipment of empty 
containers jumped 56% from an average of 1.16 million TEUs (20-foot 
equivalent units) in the first quarters of 2018-2020 to 1.81 million 
TEUs in the first quarter of 2021. Compared to the first quarter of 
2020 alone, the first quarter of 2021 represents an 80% increase in 
empty export container units. At the Port of Los Angeles, in 2021, 
through July, nearly 75% of all exported containers were empty. 
Accessibility to export containers has been further limited by record 
shipping costs and harmful surcharges. With these factors combined, the 
ability for farmers and ranchers to fulfill oversees contracts has been 
significantly impacted, with some estimations nearing $1.5 billion in 
lost agricultural exports.
    All these harmful patterns are contributing to supply chain 
dysfunction, increased costs for U.S. agricultural exporters and 
preventing U.S. shippers from capturing export opportunities. The ocean 
shipping industry has vastly changed in recent years, increasingly to 
the detriment of U.S. exporters.
                            Inland Waterways
    A modern, efficient inland waterways transportation system (locks 
and dams) is critical to U.S. agriculture and the entire U.S. economy. 
Our nation's inland water navigation system is a low-cost and 
environmentally sustainable way to get crop inputs, such as fertilizer 
and farm supplies, to farmers and for delivering harvests, such as 
grains and other crops, to domestic and international markets. In 2020, 
the United States exported 29 percent of its grains and oilseeds. Of 
this quantity, more than half transited the Mississippi River System, 
while 29 percent moved through the Columbia-Snake River System in the 
Pacific Northwest, and 5 percent was shipped through the Texas Gulf. 
U.S. agricultural exports traditionally contribute a nearly $15-$20 
billion surplus to the U.S. balance of trade, as well as provide 
upwards of 20 percent of U.S. farm income.
    Unfortunately, most locks on the UMR-IR System were built in the 
1930's and have long surpassed their projected 50-year design life. 
These locks were built when 600-foot locks were the standard. Today, a 
full barge tow is 1,200-feet so upgrading this aging infrastructure is 
a necessity and will strengthen U.S. agricultural competitiveness and 
the resilience of the country's supply chain. A 2016 study by the 
University of Tennessee and funded by USDA, looked at two locks along 
the UMR-IR and found that unscheduled outages would result in the loss 
of 12,500 jobs and reduce economic activity by $4.2 billion.
    Another significant study issued in August 2019 and conducted by 
Agribusiness Consulting (formerly Informa Economics) under a contract 
with the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service, entitled ``Importance of 
Inland Waterways to U.S. Agriculture'', quantified both the critical 
connection between the inland waterways and the competitiveness of 
American agriculture in global markets, as well as the economic costs 
of delaying renovation of America's river transport network.
    Among other things, the study found that the inland waterways 
system saves between $7 billion to $9 billion annually over the cost of 
shipping by other modes (values based on all goods currently being 
moved on the water compared to the same volume transported by rail). It 
also found that every dollar of waterways activity output results in 
$1.89 in additional U.S. economic activity directly related to the 
waterways.
    Most significantly, the study found that compared to the status 
quo, increasing investment in the inland waterways system by $6.3 
billion over a 10-year period (through 2029) and $400 million per year 
thereafter through 2045 cumulatively would grow the waterways' 
contribution to U.S. gross domestic product by 20 percent (to $64 
billion) and increase waterways-related employment by 19 percent, to 
472,000 jobs. The study says this option would more than offset the 
cost of completing all the proposed projects and would increase the 
market value of U.S. corn and soybeans by $39 billion. Conversely, 
reduced investment would decrease the market value of those commodities 
by $58 billion.
    In addition to the economic and competitiveness enhancing benefits 
of the inland waterways transportation system, the environmental and 
energy efficiency qualities must also be recognized. According to a 
2017 study by the Texas A&M Transportation Institute prepared for the 
National Waterways Foundation, barge transportation produces the least 
amount of CO2 emissions compared to rail (30% more) & truck (1,000% 
more). Further, a 15-barge tow can carry the same amount of cargo as 
1,050 semi-trucks or 216 railcars. Barge transportation is the most 
fuel-efficient form of surface transportation and policymakers should 
prioritize the modernization of U.S. locks and dams in any 
infrastructure bill as well as the annual appropriations process.
    Specifically, the ATWG urges support for the funding and 
construction of the top 15 lock and dam projects identified by the Army 
Corps of Engineers in the 2020 Capital Investment Strategy (CIS). The 
CIS outlines a scenario where all 15 projects could be constructed in 
10 years at a cost of $7 billion. This includes seven additional 1,200-
foot locks on the Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway as part 
of the Navigation Ecosystem Sustainability Program (NESP). Lock and Dam 
25 on the Upper Mississippi River is part of NESP, and the top ranked 
new construction start on this list of 15 priority projects. The ATWG 
urges USDA to continue to reinforce with Congress and the Office of 
Management and Budget, the importance of funding and constructing the 
NESP locks and dams to bring U.S. inland waterways transportation into 
the 21st century.
                      Rail Competition and Service
    Rail transportation remains an important mode for transporting 
agricultural products, even though its modal share has declined 
significantly. While truck and water transportation are often viewed as 
potential competitors to rail, they have significant limitations that 
prevent them from providing effective competition on all but a narrow 
range of movements. Water transportation cannot compete with rail 
except for traffic moving between an origin and destination on a 
navigable waterway. Truck transportation is significantly less 
efficient than rail, making it uncompetitive except for short 
distances. Today, four railroads haul more than 90 percent of all 
freight rail traffic and rail rates \1\ have crossed a threshold that 
can make truck transportation the only viable option for many shippers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Rail rates to ship anhydrous ammonia, which is a key ingredient 
for 75% of the essential fertilizers utilized by farmers, have 
increased over 200% in the past 20 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Rail carrier implementation of large cost-cutting initiatives, such 
as so-called precision scheduled railroading (PSR), have disrupted rail 
service to many agricultural shippers. PSR focuses on removing network 
capacity in rail carrier operations to increase their operating-ratio 
profits. The loss of this capacity generally results in poor service 
for shipping and receiving customers and removes substantial rail 
network elasticity. This can turn an upward change in demand or a 
weather event into a severe and long-lasting disruption to service. The 
removal of capacity through PSR may make the rail carriers slightly 
more profitable but it comes at a high cost for rail customers in the 
agricultural sector.
    The ATWG believes it is necessary to seek all available options to 
increase competition among freight railroads and other transportation 
modes and provide shippers and receivers with increased access to 
railroad service information to enable informed business and capital 
investment planning.
    The Surface Transportation Board (STB) can increase competition 
among railroads by finalizing a long-pending proceeding on reciprocal 
(also referred to as ``competitive'') switching. Competitive switching 
will enable shippers and receivers that are captive to one rail 
carrier, but are near a second rail carrier, to gain access to the 
second carrier via a short distance switch.
    For shippers and receivers that are not close to a second rail 
carrier to benefit from competitive switching, there is a rulemaking 
underway at STB--known as the Final Offer Rate Review--that the ATWG 
hopes will result in a more streamlined, simplified, and less costly 
process for challenging unreasonable rail rates.
    Lastly, greater access to rail carrier data is needed by shippers 
and receivers to help optimize their supply chain operations. The ATWG 
commends STB for requesting information on first-mile/last-mile rail 
service, which is an often overlooked, but extremely important area in 
the agricultural supply chain.
    While STB has jurisdiction over disputes related to railroad 
service and rates, there are some areas where the USDOT can help. The 
DOT has delegated authority to the rail industry via the Association of 
American Railroads (AAR) Tank Car Committee (TCC). For many years, 
shippers have been trying to work with AAR and DOT to reform the 
processes of the TCC. Historically, TCC has imposed measures on 
shippers that raise serious concerns about the extent of TCC authority. 
While this is a complicated issue, to date, DOT has not responded to a 
shipper-industry petition filed in 2016 on this matter.\2\ In recent 
years, regulatory actions imposed or initiated by the TCC, without a 
cost-benefit analysis, have raised shipping costs for the fertilizer 
industry by millions of dollars. DOT can and should make an effort to 
reform the AAR Tank Car Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Petition No. P-1678; Docket No. PHMSA 2016-0093
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Motor Carrier Freight Transportation Efficiency
    The ATWG believes supply chain resiliency can be enhanced by 
strengthening the motor carrier freight transportation sector through 
streamlined and cost-effective regulatory and/or legislative policy. To 
increase transportation capacity and efficiency of this sector, the 
ATWG recommends the following regulatory and legislative policies:
    1.  Adoption of policies to mitigate the ongoing truck driver 
shortage, such as removing the commercial driver's license (CDL) 
restrictions on drivers aged 18-20 that creates an obstacle to 
recruiting a new generation of drivers into the industry. There are 49 
U.S. states that allow 18-year-olds to obtain a CDL, but federal law 
prohibits them from driving across state lines until they are 21. The 
ATWG is supportive of pathways that include additional training to 
bring more drivers aged 18-20 into the industry.
    2.  With the challenges facing supply chains and a shortage of 
drivers, we continue to see bottlenecks, supply constraints and 
increased costs when moving goods across the country. As we saw in the 
early days of the pandemic, much of the agriculture supply chain relies 
on just-in-time delivery. This is also extremely important when 
considering the need for animal feed, farm supplies to arrive at the 
appropriate time during planting season as well as completing harvest 
before crops spoil or the season ends. It is also critical that we can 
safely transport our live animals and insects to their destinations 
without delay.
         We recommend that USDA and USDOT continue to coordinate to 
ensure agricultural haulers and the rest of the trucking industry have 
the flexibilities needed to provide timely delivery of essential 
products. Flexibilities such as relief from Hours-of-Service 
requirements have been critical over the last 18 months. Our industry 
has proven that we can maintain a high level of safety while also 
efficiently delivering wholesome and affordable food to the American 
consumer.
    3.  Adoption of a 10% axle tolerance for dry bulk shipments. This 
bipartisan policy, supported by Rep. Anthony Brown (D-Md.) and Rep. 
Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), was included in H.R. 3684, the INVEST in 
America Act.
         Load shifts during transport can result in tickets for drivers 
because a portion of the truck becomes heavier than allowed under 
current law, even though the overall truck weight is below the federal 
truck weight limit of 80,000 pounds. The ATWG supports this policy 
already adopted by 38 states on state/county roads that authorizes an 
axle weight tolerance to account for this shifting during transport.
    4.  Adoption of a pilot program to achieve economic and 
environmental efficiencies through a modest increase in federal truck 
weight limits.
         Lower Interstate Highway System truck weight limits relative 
to state road truck weight limits are a barrier to economic and 
environmental efficiency. The 80,000-lbs. gross vehicle weight (GVW) 
limit on Interstate Highways has been in place since 1982 despite major 
advancements in vehicle safety and paving technology.
         If a state's truck weight limit for its roads is 91,000 pounds 
and the Interstate Highway weight limit is 80,000 pounds, and the route 
includes an Interstate Highway then the driver's utilized freight limit 
is only 80,000 pounds. This can prevent trucks from utilizing the best 
shipping route if it includes Interstate Highways, which are our 
nation's safest and best built and maintained roads. A tractor-trailer 
combination loaded to 80,000 pounds carries approximately 50,000 pounds 
of freight. At 91,000 pounds, the tractor-trailer combination carries 
about 60,000 pounds of freight, amounting to about a 20 percent 
increase in freight efficiency and an associated reduction in its 
carbon footprint.
         The ATWG urges authorization of an opt-in pilot program to 
modestly increase truck weight limits by allowing 91,000-lb., six-axle 
vehicles on federal Interstate Highways in 10 states. This 
configuration complies with the federal bridge formula and is shown to 
have better braking capacity than 80,000-lb., five-axle trucks.
         In March 2020, Congress provided states with the option to 
determine truck weight limits for 120 days through Section 22003 of the 
CARES Act and the ensuing trucking efficiencies were gained safely.
    5.  Maintaining the existing minimum financial liability coverage 
level for motor carriers.
         Efforts to increase liability insurance for motor carriers 
beyond the current $750,000 level will increase freight costs without 
any known safety benefits. Annual premiums for each truck are already 
significant at about $5,000 per year. Whereas the minimum automobile 
liability insurance for most states is less than $100,000, which is 
inequitable to the $750,000 minimum for truck financial liability. 
Raising the minimum financial liability coverage level for motor 
carriers will increase the already inequitable difference between 
coverage for automobiles and motor carriers.
    6.  Support necessary reforms to modernize the Farm-Related 
Restricted CDL program, which has currently been adopted by 24 states. 
The Farm-Related Restricted Commercial Driver's License (CDL) or more 
commonly referred to as the ``Seasonal Ag CDL'' program has been an 
essential seasonal program for farm-related service industries since 
1992. These industries have a very strong transportation safety record 
and it has not been diminished since these federal regulations have 
been in place. The Seasonal Ag CDL program has helped promote economic 
growth for America's agricultural industries serving the essential 
needs of farmers during the busy planting and harvesting seasons. Due 
to challenging weather events, the increase in crop production 
diversification, technological advances and weight increases in light 
duty pickup trucks and agricultural equipment over the past several 
decades, it is necessary to modernize the federal regulations providing 
the framework for these state administered programs. The temporary 
shutdown of the state Department of Motor Vehicles offices throughout 
the nation during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic also caused major 
disruptions for farm-related service industries and their rural 
communities.
         More flexibility is needed and can be provided by expanding 
the total days allowed to utilize Farm-Related Restricted CDL drivers 
by up to 270 days to accommodate for the longer seasons, which can 
fluctuate from year to year due to climate change as well as more 
diversified crop production. Individual states would maintain the 
ability to set the seasons these days could be utilized by the 
industry. The new 12-month seasons restart should occur each calendar 
year on January 1 to prevent any overlap of seasons from the previous 
year and the requirement for an in-person seasonal renewal should be 
eliminated.
                          Concluding Statement
    The ATWG commends the Departments of Transportation, Agriculture 
and Commerce for seeking ways to support resilient, diverse, and secure 
supply chains to help ensure U.S. economic prosperity and national 
security. Such supply chains are needed to ensure America's farmers, 
ranchers, commodity handlers, processors and food manufacturers can 
reliably deliver high-quality, cost-effective products to domestic and 
global consumers.
    The ATWG's most pressing recommendation is to address labor 
availability, which is among the largest supply chain constraints 
facing the agricultural sector. The lack of access to labor threatens 
operations and supply chain resiliency and leads to lost productivity 
and higher prices for food and agricultural products along the supply 
chain. Specifically, within DOT's jurisdiction, policies to increase 
trucking productivity would be helpful as would harmonizing the federal 
truck driving age limit with the state age limit to provide a more 
accessible pathway into the trucking industry for drivers aged 18-20.
    Further, the ATWG recommends USDA agencies collaborate on their 
climate change and supply chain polices due to their inherent linkage 
to the production of raw agricultural commodities--the first step in 
the food and agricultural supply chain and the most likely step to be 
impacted by climate change policies. As an alternative to cropland 
idling climate change polices, the ATWG urges USDA to prioritize 
federal resources toward working land programs to achieve large 
environmental and economic benefits by incentivizing broader adoption 
of best management farming and ranching practices.
    The ATWG supports strengthening U.S. freight transportation policy 
and infrastructure to help ensure there are many efficient ways for 
agricultural commodities and products to flow throughout the 
agricultural supply chain. The ATWG believes the U.S. freight 
transportation system can be strengthened through the following ways:
    1,  Adopt solutions to better balance the needs of ocean carriers 
with the needs of our agricultural exports.
    2,  Increase federal investment to modernize U.S. inland waterways 
locks and dams--particularly those on the UMR-IR System--and fully 
utilizing the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for its intended purpose of 
dredging U.S. ports and harbors.
    3,  Foster increased competition among freight railroads and other 
transportation modes, provide a better method for challenging 
unreasonable rail rates and require railroad carriers to provide 
increased access to railroad service data to enhance agricultural 
supply chain operations.
    4,  Increase motor carrier capacity through regulatory reform and 
legislative change.

    Thank you for this opportunity to provide information that will be 
used to prepare a report for President Biden on supply chains for the 
industrial base. We believe our responses provide ideas to support 
supply chain policies that will allow U.S. farmers, ranchers, commodity 
handlers, processors, and food manufacturers to reliably deliver high-
quality, cost-effective products to domestic and global consumers.
    We look forward to working with you to support U.S. agriculture's 
adoption of resilient, diverse, and secure supply chain practices.
        Sincerely,
                    Agricultural Transportation Working Group:

Agricultural and Food Transporters Conference.
Agricultural Retailers Association.
Agriculture Transportation Coalition.
Amcot.
American Beekeeping Federation.
American Farm Bureau Federation.
American Feed Industry Association.
American Frozen Food Institute.
American Pulse Association.
American Seed Trade Association.
American Sheep Industry Association.
American Soybean Association.
Corn Refiners Association.
Farm Credit Council.
Fresh Produce Association of the Americas.
Growth Energy.
Hardwood Federation.
Institute of Shortening and Edible Oils.
International Dairy Foods Association.
Livestock Marketing Association.
National Aquaculture Association.
National Association of Wheat Growers.
National Barley Growers Association.
National Cattlemen's Beef Association.
National Corn Growers Association.
National Cotton Council.
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.
National Grain and Feed Association.
National Grange.
National Grocers Association.
National Milk Producers Federation.
National Oilseed Processors Association.
National Potato Council.
National Sorghum Producers.
National Sunflower Association.
North American Millers' Association.
North American Renderers Association.
Pet Food Institute.
Specialty Soya & Grains Alliance.
The Fertilizer Institute.
United Dairymen of Arizona.
United Fresh Produce Association.
United States Cattlemen's Association.
USA Dry Pea & Lentil Council.
USA Rice.
U.S. Canola Association.
US Dry Bean Council.
U.S. Pea & Lentil Trade Association.
U.S. Poultry & Egg Association.
Waterways Council, Inc.
WineAmerica.

    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me start with 
Mr. Cordero.
    I read last week there were nearly 60,000 shipping 
containers sitting at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. 
That is enough containers to stretch the entire State of 
Arkansas on Interstate 40, just for perspective. You say that 
these ports have recently implemented a container excess dwell 
fee that increases in $100 increments per container per day, 
starting on day 9 for trucking companies, day 6 for rail 
companies.
    Since the implementation of the container excess dwell fee, 
how much money has been collected from the carriers?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, thank you, Ranking Member, for your 
question.
    With regard to the fee that is in question, we have not 
moved forward to collect a fee as of yet. But I will say this. 
I think it is a fair representation to make that, as a result 
of that collaboration with our stakeholders, and this button 
that we needed to press to get them to the table--I am 
referring to the carriers--we have had very good collaboration, 
in terms of being able to reduce loaded import containers that 
have been at these terminals 9 days or more, just to get the 
context here.
    Mr. Crawford. So, by letting them know that we are going to 
fine you, then you have started to move containers. Is that 
what I am hearing from you?
    Mr. Cordero. Yes. So, I think we have some----
    Mr. Crawford. OK. So how would you spend the money that you 
collect on these fines? How would that be spent?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, number one, this actually was not meant 
as a revenue enhancer, by no means. What the----
    Mr. Crawford. OK, because you stated earlier in your 
testimony that there were billions of dollars authorized in the 
so-called bipartisan transportation infrastructure bill. So, 
certainly, you don't need any more money. So, it sounds to me 
like what we are trying to do here is just sort of leverage a 
little bit of authority to move things along a little more 
swiftly. Is that the case?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, I think, again, it is fair to say that 
the carriers have responded, and we haven't had a reduction at 
the port complex here, as much as----
    Mr. Crawford. OK.
    Mr. Cordero [continuing]. Percentile, with regard to those 
containers that were----
    Mr. Crawford. Let's talk about that with the carriers. I 
would like to move--I appreciate your comments. I would like to 
move to Mr. Spear, president of the American Trucking 
Associations.
    It is safe to say you interact with truckers on a pretty 
regular basis. Is that not correct, Mr. Spear?
    Mr. Spear. Almost daily, Congressman.
    Mr. Crawford. Excellent. So, what kind of costs do you 
anticipate, with the implementation of fees like this, that Mr. 
Cordero just described?
    Mr. Spear. Well, it is just another layer that we are going 
to have to bear. I don't think that is a good solution.
    It is just one chokepoint of many, and if you can stay open 
24/7, you just got to have more people putting in the time at 
those ports to move those containers. And so----
    Mr. Crawford. On that score, Mr. Spear, let me ask you 
this. I didn't mean to interrupt you, but my time is limited. 
But on that score, as I said, you talk to trucking companies 
and truckers on the daily. Are you telling us that there is not 
a shortage of truckdrivers, as has been suggested by some?
    Mr. Spear. There is a shortage, and a shortage across every 
sector of the economy. We are not exempt from that. We have had 
a shortage coming into the pandemic. It is nothing new to us.
    Mr. Crawford. OK.
    Mr. Spear. It is space at the yards. If you got that many 
containers empty and full, you don't have enough room to move 
them. So, staging these outside the ports and other open areas, 
it is probably a wise move right now. It is just not enough 
room to move this stuff. So, it is just so condensed into a 
fine area that the throughput is really causing the problem. 
So, penalizing people isn't going to speed it up, in my 
opinion.
    Mr. Crawford. So, assessing fines and fees associated with 
that is probably just going to be exacerbating the problem with 
inflation, is that what you would suggest?
    Mr. Spear. I don't think it does anything, Congressman. I 
really don't. You need space. You need throughput. You need 
more hours being put in to move these boxes, either on a rail 
or onto the chassis. We have got a chassis shortage. You have 
got container displacement.
    Mr. Crawford. Yes.
    Mr. Spear. The problems are plenty, but you need more room. 
And it is just bottlenecked there. So, fining people for it is 
not going to speed it up, in my view.
    Mr. Crawford. OK. In the time that I have remaining, Mr. 
Correll, can you describe your last visit to a trucking 
terminal, or to a port?
    Mr. Correll. Well, thank you, sir. I have never been to a 
port. My last visit to a trucking terminal would be, just by 
memory, probably about a year ago.
    Mr. Crawford. A year ago? What about a rail yard?
    Mr. Correll. Never, sir.
    Mr. Crawford. So, to a large degree, your analysis is in 
the abstract, so you don't really interact with the relevant 
stakeholders regarding the issues that we are discussing. Is 
that correct?
    Mr. Correll. No, I wouldn't agree with that, sir. I 
frequently communicate with truckdrivers, their management. But 
as far as physical visits to the locations you mentioned, you 
are right, I have not been there in quite a while.
    Mr. Crawford. All right, thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, I thank the gentleman. I can't see who is 
next in the queue, I wasn't given a list. And I believe----
    Ms. Norton. It is me, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. DeFazio. OK, all right, Eleanor. Eleanor, you are 
recognized.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this important 
hearing on the supply chain dilemma we face. My first question 
is to Mr. Spear.
    Mr. Spear, your testimony calls for increased workforce 
recruitment among 18- to 20-year-old truckdrivers to address 
the shortage. But I am also interested in hearing your thoughts 
on workforce retention among the existing pool of commercial 
drivers, in light of this 90-percent turnover rate, because 
that could happen to 18- to 20-year-olds, too, if you were 
given that, as requested.
    Drivers are paid by the mile, which means they are not 
compensated for hours in long lines. In light of recent 
challenges in the supply chain, does the trucking industry plan 
to improve worker conditions and driver pay in order to 
incentivize driver retention?
    Mr. Spear. Yes, Congresswoman. The number that you cited, 
the 90 percent, is accurate. But I want to qualify that, 
because it is really limited to the hardest segment of our 
industry, which is the long haul. And this is the long haul, 
where you are gone 3 or 4 weeks at a time. You have got a wife 
or a husband. You have got kids at home. That is a long time to 
be away. And so, the retention rate at the long-haul segment of 
our industry is actually going to be much, much higher than 
elsewhere in the industry. But that is the number that is high, 
and everybody likes to cite it. But I do want to qualify that. 
And it is a problem, but that is the hardest sector, and that 
is why. It is lifestyle issues, more time with family----
    Ms. Norton. And it is where the supply chain problem is.
    Mr. Spear. Well, it is certainly compounding the problem, 
but it has always been a problem. This was a problem before the 
supply chain was in focus, even before the pandemic.
    So, pay has gone up higher in this segment than any other 
segment within our industry. And they are still not coming 
back. So, it does suggest to us, Congresswoman, that there are 
other problems at play here.
    There are lifestyle issues. We have got to do a better job 
of taking care of our own, especially with healthcare and 
wellness programs, but retirement incentives, keeping them in 
the saddle longer, knowing that, if they retire here, they are 
going to do well.
    Look, this is a good-paying job. And on the long haul, you 
can probably earn more than anywhere else in the industry, 
because you are away so much. But we have got drivers earning 
$75,000 to $100,000 a year with full benefits in that segment, 
without a college degree and all the debt that comes with it. 
So, they are good-paying jobs. It could be higher, but there 
are a lot of other factors I am telling you that we have got to 
focus in on: the wellness programs, the healthcare, the 
retirement incentives. These are all things that we have got to 
do if we are going to bring that retention rate down in the 
long-haul segment.
    Ms. Norton. That is helpful to hear.
    Mr. Cordero, the Port of Long Beach has expanded its hours 
as much as possible, 24 hours, 7 days a week. That is all you 
can do. Yet the trucking industry still struggles to make use 
of these expanded hours to pick up loaded containers because of 
the shortage of space inundated with empty containers.
    Could you elaborate on the restrictions that limit when and 
where these empty shipping containers can be returned to ports?
    What can be done in the short term to return empty 
containers more quickly, and free, therefore, crucial 
transportation equipment needed to pick up loaded cargo, Mr. 
Cordero?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, thank you, Madam Congressmember. Let me 
make three points.
    Let's all recognize that, as has been stated, we are in a 
national crisis with the supply chain. And in fact, it is a 
global crisis. So, I think--I wanted to make one point--is that 
the fragility of the supply chain has come up now, because of 
this unprecedented and unforeseen event that we have, the 
health pandemic. So, my point is that, even in normal times, 
the issues that we are discussing this morning are the issues 
that we were discussing in normal times, in terms of----
    [Audio malfunction.]
    Mr. Cordero [continuing]. And the truckdrivers. So, to your 
question, I think what the Port of Long Beach has done, we have 
now allocated almost 100 acres of space here, within the port, 
to stage containers to help with this scenario.
    And number two, I thoroughly support what Mr. Spear was 
representing with regard to the plight of the truckdrivers 
because, again, in normal times--in normal times--we have 
truckdrivers waiting 2 hours to get into a terminal. We cannot 
tolerate that model any longer. Thus, the reason for the 24/7 
framework discussion, to distribute the volume.
    And let me say this. The 20 million containers, TEU 
containers at this port complex, is expected to move now for 
year 2021. That is not a surprising amount. That was forecasted 
back in 2010. What is surprising is the event that now has 
brought these issues to surface.
    So, I think, again, there is a lot of legitimacy here with 
regard to what you are hearing about the truck driving industry 
and the truckdrivers. So, we do need to find ways for them to 
be able to increase their earnings, make more truck turn times, 
and have gates available to them so that, again, we could have 
more fluidity, in terms of how we move this cargo, at least as 
it relates to the trucking sector component.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you.
    Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman, I thank the gentlelady.
    At this point, two things. I am going to enter into the 
record, with unanimous consent, an OOIDA Foundation statement 
on flaws in the driver shortage narrative.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
     Statement of the OOIDA Foundation, Submitted for the Record by
                         Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
    OOIDA Foundation Statement on Flaws in Driver Shortage Narrative
    Numerous media outlets in recent months have sought to cover 
various issues impacting the trucking industry, including the notion of 
a chronic and persistent driver shortage. Much of the discussion 
surrounding this issue stems from several statements released by the 
American Trucking Association (ATA) suggesting that the industry is 
short about 80,000 drivers and could surpass 160,000 drivers by 2030. A 
careful review of the facts however paints a completely different 
picture, one that is marked by retention issues and, at times, an 
unattractive working environment due in large part to long hours and 
inadequate compensation.
    ATA's stance on the driver shortage issue centers upon their own 
analysis. As far as the OOIDA Foundation (OOFI) can determine, this is 
the only report which attempts to substantiate the belief of a 
shortage. Thus it is imperative to examine these reports in order to 
verify ATA's claims. This is easier said than done as ATA provides no 
substantial methodology for how they arrive at their figures. Instead, 
we are left with a few vague paragraphs, making it utterly impossible 
for OOFI, or any outside researcher, to validate or invalidate ATA's 
conclusions. Thus in response, OOFI has collected information from 
various articles and reports emanating outside of OOFI speaking on the 
notion of a driver shortage. It is important to note that the data 
presented below is hardly exhaustive. We conclude through this evidence 
that there is no shortage of drivers, but rather there is a high 
turnover rate in particular segments of the industry.
       Basic Economics: Is There Really A Truck Driver Shortage?
    In May 2021, Greg Rosalsky, a writer and reporter at NPR's Planet 
Money, published an article emphasizing how basic economics can shed 
light on the supposed driver shortage. The following was taken directly 
from Mr. Rosalsky's article: \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/05/25/999784202/is-
there-really-a-truck-driver-shortage

        ``The lobbying organization for the nation's big trucking 
        employers, the American Trucking Associations (ATA), has been 
        making this argument since the 1980s, yet store shelves somehow 
        remained stocked. In a capitalist system, where you can pay 
        people to do basically anything, how is it even possible to 
        have a worker shortage for multiple decades?
          In a 2019 study published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor 
        Statistics, economists Stephen V. Burks and Kristen Monaco 
        investigated claims by industry leaders that the trucking labor 
        market was somehow ``broken'' enough to create a decades-long 
        shortage. Standard economics says if you don't have enough 
        workers, you raise wages and within a reasonable amount of 
        time, presto, no more shortage. Is trucking somehow different? 
        A thorough investigation led them to conclude that the trucking 
        labor market is not different. It is not broken. Yes, they say, 
        the trucking labor market is ``tight''--meaning that companies 
        are competing to fill open jobs--but it functions in the same 
        way as any other labor market.''

    ATA, as well as other large truck lobbying organizations, have been 
claiming a driver shortage for decades. In 2000, the Truckload Carriers 
Association petitioned the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
(FMCSA) to lower the federal Commercial Driver's License (CDL) age 
requirement to 18, citing a driver shortage as the primary reason for 
their effort. In the nearly 20 years since the petition, there has 
never been a significant disruption in the delivery of goods by truck 
due to a lack of drivers and hundreds of thousands of new CDLs have 
been issued each year. Over this time, driver compensation has remained 
relatively stagnant, failing to increase at a rate that even reflects 
inflation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://trucksafety.org/letter-opposing-wheel-act-drive-safe-
act/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The authors of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) report 
concluded that the view of a long-standing shortage of drivers is 
puzzling considering empirical labor economics. They found that ``the 
market for truck drivers works about as well as that for other blue-
collar occupations, and that, broadly speaking, we should expect that 
if wages rise when the labor market for truck drivers is too tight, the 
potential for any long-term shortages will be ameliorated.\3\'' In 
fact, according to the report, driver employment is actually stable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2019/article/is-the-us-labor-
market-for-truck-drivers-broken.htm?mod=article_inline
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The true issue is not a driver shortage but driver retention, which 
is why the Secretary of the Department of Transportation Pete Buttigieg 
hosted a roundtable in July on truck driver recruitment and 
retention.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/secretary-pete-
buttigieg-and-secretary-marty-walsh-host-roundtable-trucking-industry

        ``According to the ATA's own statistics, the average annual 
        turnover rate for long-haul truckers at big trucking companies 
        has been greater than 90% for decades. That means, for example, 
        if a company has ten truckers, nine will be gone within a year; 
        or, equivalently, three of their driver positions have to each 
        be refilled three times in a single year because so many new 
        drivers leave within a few months.\5\''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2021/05/25/999784202/is-
there-really-a-truck-driver-shortage

    The BLS report found that truck driver employment was associated 
with driver compensation, and that the current supply of drivers is 
more than adequate to respond to the overall growth in demand. The 
chart below helps to demonstrate this correlation by depicting a more 
significant increase or decrease in the number of truck drivers in 
comparison to the percentage of wage increases starting in April 2020. 
Again, the authors of the BLS report concluded that though the market 
tends to be tight, it imposes no constraints on entry into (or exit 
from) the occupation. ``There is thus no reason to think that, given 
sufficient time, driver supply should fail to respond to price signals 
in the standard way.''



    OOFI suggests that if large trucking companies would spend more 
resources addressing the most serious issues from the perspective of 
the driver, then perhaps they might be able to improve driver 
retention. Every year the American Transportation Research Institute 
(ATRI) releases the top critical issues in trucking. In their report, 
ATRI highlights the stark contrast between those issues which drivers 
face and those issues which motor carriers face.

Table 1: Comparison of Commercial Driver Issues and Motor Carrier Issues
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Rank                Commercial Drivers    Motor Carriers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...............................  Driver              Driver Shortage.
                                   Compensation
                                   (tie)/Truck
                                   Parking (tie).
2...............................  Detention/Delay at  Driver Retention.
                                   Customer
                                   Facilities.
3...............................  Fuel Prices.......  Lawsuit Abuse
                                                       Reform.
4...............................  Driver Training     CSA.
                                   Standards.
5...............................  Hours-of-Service    Driver
                                   Rules.              Compensation.
6...............................  ELD Mandate.......  Insurance Cost/
                                                       Availability.
7...............................  Driver Distraction  Diesel Technician
                                                       Shortage.
8...............................  Transportation      Transportation
                                   Infrastructure/     Infrastructure/
                                   Congestion/         Congestion/
                                   Funding.            Funding.
9...............................  Speed Limiters....  Driver
                                                       Distraction.
10..............................  CSA...............  Detention/Delay at
                                                       Customer
                                                       Facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

             Employment: There Is No Truck Driver Shortage
    In November 2021, Quartz, a news outlet focused upon global 
economics, noted that ``the assertion that the US is suffering from the 
latest round of a 16-year truck driver shortage is misleading at 
best.\6\'' Stating that the real shortage is a lack of good trucking 
jobs that can attract and retain workers in a tight market. According 
to figures released by FMCSA and the American Association of Motor 
Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), states issue more than 450,000 new 
commercial driver's licenses every year.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://qz.com/2086977/there-is-no-truck-driver-shortage-in-
the-us/
    \7\ FMCSA, Regulatory Evaluation of Minimum Training Requirements 
for Entry-Level Commercial Motor Vehicle Operators Final Rule, Federal 
Motor Carrier Safety Administration (Nov 2016), pg. 39
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Department of Transportation (DOT) published a press release in 
July 2021 explaining that the states were issuing an average of 50,000 
CDLs per month during the first half of 2021. This figure was 14 
percent higher than the monthly average in 2019 and 60 percent higher 
than the 2020 monthly average. Moreover, FMCSA granted operating 
authority to 92,000 motor carriers in the first six months of 2021, an 
increase of 88 percent over the same time period in 2020 and 60 percent 
more than the same time period in 2019. This is further supported in 
the Bureau of Transportation Statistics' (BTS) release concerning the 
unemployment rate for the truck transportation industry \8\ as shown in 
the chart below.\9\ All of these figures in combination with ATA's 
turnover statistics clearly indicate a driver surplus, not a shortage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Truck transportation (NAICS 484) includes industries providing 
over-the-road transportation of cargo using motor vehicles, such as 
trucks and tractor trailers. It does not include support activities for 
road transportation, freight transportation arrangement services, the 
Postal Service (covered in NAICS 491), or courier services.
    \9\ https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/Unemployment-Rates-U-S-
Transportation-Sector-or-Oc/28xr-p3t9


From the Industry's Perspective: We Probably Have More Drivers than We 
                        Did Before the Pandemic
    In June 2019, FMCSA released an information collection request 
(ICR) concerning the estimated burden truck drivers and motor carriers 
incur to comply with the Agency's reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements to maintain driver qualification (DQ) files. The Agency 
ultimately decided to increase its estimated burden primarily because 
``the number of CMV drivers and the frequency of their hiring have 
increased since the Agency's 2016 estimate of this burden.\10\'' FMCSA 
further stated that, ``The increase in burden hours is primarily the 
result of a larger driver population and a higher driver turnover rate, 
both of which affect the volume of documents produced and filed in DQ 
files.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-06-10/pdf/2019-
12169.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    OOFI agrees with FMCSA's assessment, as well as many other 
stakeholders in the trucking industry, such as FTR's Vice President of 
Trucking Avery Vise, Convoy's director of economic research Aaron 
Terrazas, and J.B. Hunt's Senior Vice President of Corporate Safety, 
Security, and Driver Personnel Greer Woodruff. Each of these 
stakeholders provided comments in a recent article in Commercial 
Carrier Journal.\11\ We have presented excerpts below:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ https://www.ccjdigital.com/business/article/15114726/driver-
shortage-more-about-excess-freight-than-drivers

        ``FTR Vice President of Trucking Avery Vise noted that in terms 
        of sheer driver population, ``we probably have more than we did 
        before the pandemic'' based on the recovery of headcount in 
        payroll employment along with a surge in new for-hire carriers 
        dating back to July 2020.
          Aaron Terrazas, director of economic research at digital 
        freight network Convoy, said he also doesn't subscribe to the 
        idea that there is a chronic undersupply of drivers, because 
        almost all relevant labor and payroll data suggests ``trucking 
        industry employment across the board is close to, or right at, 
        or slightly above, pre-pandemic levels.''
          Similarly, J.B. Hunt Senior Vice President Corporate Safety, 
        Security and Driver Personnel Greer Woodruff said the driver 
        issue always comes down relative to supply and demand, and that 
        it's always seeking equilibrium. ``As long as there's demand 
        that's outpacing supply then there's an associated cost to the 
        supply chain,'' he said. ``I happen to believe we have plenty 
        of drivers. We don't use them very well.''

    When asked how the trucking industry could improve its efficiency, 
Woodruff explained that carriers could add capacity without adding 
drivers or trucks by simply expediting loading and unloading times, 
allowing drop-and-hook, adding flexible appointment times and 
appointment times that allow for efficient transit and rest time; 
working with shippers to accommodate onsite parking; and providing 
consistency in loads and lanes--all of which should squeeze more drive 
time out of a driver and add capacity into the market.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Ibid
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Inefficiency: Problems in the Supply Chain Are due to Excessive 
                  Detention Not a Shortage of Drivers
    The inefficiency which the supply chain faces today is not due to a 
lack of drivers, but because of increased detention time. Detention 
time, or in particular the period that a driver is not paid while he or 
she waits to be loaded or unloaded, is an issue of primary concern for 
the trucking industry. In a recent survey conducted by OOFI, over 900 
respondents expressed their professional opinions and experiences with 
detention, many of whom felt that detention time not only impacted 
their financial livelihood but that it also negatively impacted safety 
on the roadways. As one member stated, ``this is one of the biggest 
issues affecting hours of service and safety. Drivers encountering 
unexpected long detention, feel forced to drive faster, harder, and 
longer to make up for perceived lost time.''
    Depending on a motor carrier's type of operation, a driver may 
drive up to either 60 hours in seven days or 70 hours in eight days. 
Every moment a shipper or receiver holds up a driver at dock, waiting 
to load or unload, can wreak havoc on his or her HOS, meaning that 
their available drive time is greatly limited. According to the survey 
results, a majority of both those who operate under the 60 hour/7 day 
rule and those who operate under the 70 hour/8 day rule spend between 
12 and 20 hours each week waiting to load and unload their truck. In 
other words, those complying with the 60-hour rule spend approximately 
20% to 33% of their possible compensated drive time in detention, while 
those complying with the 70-hour rule spend 17% to 29% of their drive 
time in detention.
    Anyone wanting to increase the efficiency of the overall supply 
chain must first begin with detention time, not driver shortage. 
FreightWaves recently interviewed multiple company executives from 
trucking companies servicing major ports in California who dispute the 
idea of a driver shortage, saying that they were actually shedding 
drivers because of the lack of consistent work due to port congestion 
bottlenecks, equipment, and efficiency issues.\13\ One of the 
executives, Miguel Silva, president of Intermodal Logistics at the Port 
of Oakland, said, ``I have customers calling me daily, telling me to 
name my price, that money is no object, but to please, just pull their 
containers. I wish it was that simple.'' Another executive told 
FreightWaves that his drivers sometimes wait four to six hours to maybe 
pull one container per truck each day. Prior to the congestion crisis, 
his drivers averaged three to four ``turns'' each day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ https://www.freightwaves.com/news/truckers-tired-of-taking-
blame-for-congestion-crisis-at-
california-ports?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=
FW_Daily_11_3_21&utm_term=Truckers+tired+of+taking+blame+
for+congestion+crisis+at+California+ports&utm_id=72965&sfmc_id=190812
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Wrong Solutions: Under-21 Polices Are Not the Answer
    ATA and other large carriers have pushed to lower the federal CDL 
driving age requirement from 21 to 18 in an attempt to solve the 
supposed driver shortage problem. However, this is the wrong solution 
for a problem which does even exist. J.B. Hunt's Greer Woodruff stated 
that, based on past risk profiles, lowering the driving age is a 
legitimate safety concern, saying, ``I don't necessarily see that 
solving the problem.\14\''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ https://www.ccjdigital.com/business/article/15114726/driver-
shortage-more-about-excess-freight-than-drivers
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Instead, Woodruff suggested a different solution by noting that the 
overall industry is averaging between 6.4 and 6.5 hours of actual 
driving time out of a possible 11-hours. ``If you could move that 
needle to just 8.45, that's a 30% increase in capacity without adding 
any drivers or trucks, and that's meaningful. That's over 1,000 drivers 
and trucks that would be available to the supply chain if we could find 
out how to harness that.\15\''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ Ibid.

    Mr. DeFazio. And I am now going to yield the chair to 
Representative Strickland, who will continue to recognize 
Members for their questions for the panel. Thank you.
    Ms. Strickland [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I now 
recognize Representative Massie for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Massie. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
    Mr. Correll, since you are from my alma mater, MIT, I have 
to ask you at least the first question. Can you tell us--I know 
it is very complicated, but could you give us the biggest 
single factor contributing to our supply chain issues right 
now?
    Mr. Correll. Thank you, sir, and honored to have a 
conversation with an alum.
    I apologize for dodging the question a bit, but I--the 
framing that I hope to bring to the conversation is the one 
that I have heard in the comments from the previous speakers, 
is that it is a complicated mess of issues.
    So, I guess, the most helpful thing I can do is to perhaps 
offer a framing that at least expresses how I would answer that 
question, or how I see the biggest issue, and I think what it 
is is that we tend to frame this, to use a television analogy, 
kind of like it is a detective show. Like, if we just analyzed 
this issue consistently enough, or cleverly enough, we are 
going to ID the one culprit.
    But I apologize for the maybe off-color reference, but I 
don't think it is a detective show. I think it is a reality 
weight loss show. We are all just sort of now living with the 
consequences and the prioritizations that we have made in 
America over years, and over the pandemic. And the only way 
that we can do better is to reprioritize in a way that respects 
truckdrivers' time, respects truckdrivers' dignity, harmonizes 
our systems.
    So, that was a long way of saying that I think the biggest 
problem is the framing, and the framing is to look for single 
culprits when, in fact, it is a mix of causes.
    Mr. Massie. Well, let me try another oversimplified 
question. If we could do one thing in Congress to alleviate the 
supply chain issues that we are seeing right now, policy-wise, 
what do you think that could be? Or two or three things.
    Mr. Correll. Sure, thank you. To put it broadly, I think 
that we should make the supply chain and logistics sector a 
high-tech place to work again. So, we are talking a lot about 
improving efficiency and utilization. And, in many workplaces, 
that just means having access to the latest tools. I think, 
oftentimes, our schedulers, our drivers, our warehouse workers 
don't always have access to those kinds of tools.
    The other advantage of that, I think, is that, as a 
lifelong employee myself, one way that employers show me that 
they respect my time and my efforts is by giving me a state-of-
the-art workplace that makes the most of the time I give to 
them. And so, I think, if the Government could help us make our 
warehouses and our supply chains, and particularly the 
interface, where trucks come to warehouses, where they gate-in 
and gate-out, more sophisticated, and high-tech, and more 
respectful of their time and dignity, that would be the most 
beneficial move I can imagine.
    Mr. Massie. All right. Well, thank you very much. We will 
start by trying not to get in the way of private industry, 
where they implement those things.
    Mr. Regan, is it true the AFL-CIO is suing the Biden 
administration to expand the OSHA vaccine mandate to cover more 
businesses?
    Mr. Regan. Yes, that is correct.
    Mr. Massie. Why would you do that?
    Mr. Regan. Well, the broader AFL-CIO wants to make sure 
that every worker has the protections of an OSHA protection. 
This was, again, about the ETS, not about a vaccine mandate. 
This was about the OSHA ETS.
    Mr. Massie. Some people think it is because employers are 
leaving larger, union-based companies that have 100 or more 
employees, where those shops are more likely to be unionized 
than, say, a small shop. Isn't it true that the AFL-CIO could 
lose membership because of this mandate, if it applies only to 
100 or more?
    Isn't that part of the motivation for making sure that 
everybody has to suffer under these mandates, if the companies 
100 or more are going to suffer under them?
    Mr. Regan. That was certainly not part of the intention of 
the lawsuit.
    Mr. Massie. Does the AFL-CIO have a formal policy of 
supporting religious and medical exemptions, when your members 
apply for those?
    Mr. Regan. We have a formal policy, of course, of making 
sure that our collective bargaining agreements for all of our 
unions are being honored in the process of implementing these 
mandates and making sure that people are properly protected. 
That is our obligation, is through the collective bargaining 
process.
    Mr. Massie. Does the AFL-CIO support the concept of natural 
immunity, or the notion that somebody who has already had COVID 
and recovered, maybe because they worked through the pandemic 
when others didn't, shouldn't be required to get the vaccine?
    Mr. Regan. That issue has not come up. We support everybody 
getting vaccinated, and we support making sure that workers are 
not harmed in the process.
    Mr. Massie. So, given that there is little to no benefit to 
getting vaccinated if you have already had COVID and developed 
a natural immunity, do you support your workers when they apply 
for medical exemptions based on natural immunity?
    Mr. Regan. I don't have the medical expertise to determine 
whether that is accurate or not.
    But again, this issue and the issue we are dealing with 
right now is not about the vaccine mandate. We are dealing with 
workforce conditions and dealing with problems with our 
infrastructure.
    Mr. Massie. All right, my time has expired. Thank you, 
Madam Chairwoman.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Johnson from Texas for 5 minutes.
    [Pause.]
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Can you hear me?
    Ms. Strickland. We can now, thank you.
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Well, thank you very much. I would 
like to ask all of the witnesses, or whomever will respond.
    As chairperson of the House Committee on Science, Space, 
and Technology, I am really curious to know whether--the State 
of Texas has been developing several critical components to 
develop spaceports. Do any of you know if there is timely, 
impactful strategy to aid in the development of these?
    We have probably the largest moving of goods from both 
California and Texas in the country. And so, we know that we 
are a major, major trade and good movement area.
    So, whoever wants to start, I would appreciate it.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Correll. I am sorry----
    Ms. Strickland. Any of our witnesses? Thank you.
    Mr. Correll. I am afraid I didn't follow the question. Was 
it about port policy recommendations for Texas?
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Spaceports. We are so large, and very 
congested in our major urban areas, that there is some talk and 
plan for the spaceports for the--delivering goods. And I 
wondered if anyone on the panel has any plan or hearing of a 
plan to support this type of transportation.
    Mr. Cordero. So, Congresswoman, are you referring to 
additional space outside the port authority, like land, so that 
we could stage these containers? Is that what you are referring 
to?
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Yes.
    Mr. Cordero. OK, so thank you, and that is a very good 
question.
    So, let me answer that question by simply indicating that I 
think it is fair to say that ports across the Nation--the 
question of what we call inland port connectivity, which 
basically means taking the containers out of the port complex, 
and moving them to, like, an inland area. And I think that 
subject is very apropos, or that question is very apropos, 
given the situation that we are in at the current time.
    In my comments, I made reference to the fact that the Port 
of Savannah, the Georgia Port Authority, is moving in that 
direction. For the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, we are 
having discussions with regard to the inland port connectivity.
    So again, it is very key that, as we continue to advance 
reform in the supply chain, of what I call transformational 
change in the supply chain, it must include space outside the 
immediate port authority to move these containers through 
distribution and warehouse regions.
    So, again, I think that is a subject matter that is very 
much in California being discussed.
    So, I think I may have answered your question. I can follow 
up with an answer, if you have more specificity on this issue. 
Thank you so much.
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Well, thank you. We have a very large 
inland port in my district. I am from a very large trade area.
    Is there anyone else on the panel who would like to 
comment?
    Mr. Spear. Yes, I would just----
    Mr. Jefferies. Certainly, Congresswoman----
    Mr. Spear [continuing]. Mr. Cordero's comments, that that 
was what I was alluding to earlier about getting those 
containers, both full and empty, out of the condensed space of 
the port, and into other open areas, where we can logistically 
move them more quickly. So, I think that is exactly what you 
are alluding to. I think that is a very good interim solution 
that will improve the throughput.
    Your State, obviously, not just your district, your State, 
in Texas, has 7 of the top 100 bottlenecks in the country. So, 
you are very familiar with congestion. And it was there long 
before this pandemic. So, it has compounded now, as a result of 
that, and we need to get innovative about how we reposition and 
move freight more efficiently. So, more space, clearly, is a 
solution for that, at least in the interim, possibly even long-
term.
    Mr. Jefferies. Congresswoman, I would certainly reiterate 
those points from the rail perspective. Rail is a vital part of 
Texas, and certainly there are a colossal amount of goods 
moving by rail in and throughout Texas. And we feel that rail 
is really well positioned. When you have on-dock rail, you can 
put upwards of 200-plus containers, and get them out of the 
port, out of that immediate congestion inland, into a yard 
where perhaps it is closer to final destination, and our 
trucking partners can take the final leg of the trip there.
    So, that is absolutely spot on, something we are supportive 
of, something we are very active in, including the State of 
Texas and throughout the country, and something we need to keep 
a focus on, moving forward. So, absolutely, great question.
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you. Anyone else?
    Ms. Reinke. I would just say, Congresswoman, anything that 
expands capacity is something that would benefit the supply 
chain and our members. So, thank you.
    Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and 
I will yield back.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you.
    And as a reminder to those of us here in this room, we are 
required to wear masks, unless we are sipping a beverage or 
speaking. So please adhere to that.
    I now recognize Representative Davis for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Rodney Davis. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
    First off, I am really intrigued by the Rock 'Em Sock 'Em 
Robots that are behind you in your frame, Ms. Reinke. Are you 
going to bring those in for a hearing in person at some point?
    Ms. Reinke. Sure, at your request. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Rodney Davis. We might be able to solve some problems 
here in Congress, with a couple of games of Rock 'Em Sock 'Em 
Robots, right?
    Well, bring it in for us, we would love to mess around with 
it.
    Ms. Reinke. I will get it out of eyeshot for the next time.
    Mr. Rodney Davis. Oh no, no. Keep it there. We enjoy it. 
But my questions are first going to be for Mr. Spear.
    Mr. Spear, there have been complaints that dwell time, the 
amount of time that equipment is out on the street before being 
returned for another move, for containers and chassis, is 
actually increasing. If dwell times today in the Los Angeles-
Long Beach Basin are two to three times the historical levels, 
which is what has been reported, how does that reduce freight 
fluidity?
    Mr. Spear. Well, it is complicating it. And again, a lot of 
this, too, is the condensed space in the ports, where it is 
bottlenecking. You have a flood of these containers coming in. 
We have container displacement, full and empty. We talked about 
that.
    But we also have a chassis shortage. And chassis choice is 
a big issue for our industry. We are actually litigating in 
that space, to make certain that motor carriers have the 
ability to have choice in that, and not be pushed into a 
particular product that they have to use. So, more choice is 
something that we are arguing for, and I think we will prevail 
on that front.
    But coming into this pandemic, and now with the supply 
chain wait, this is a chokepoint, and it is occurring right at 
the port. So, the chassis shortage is really a problem that is 
increasing our ability--or inability, I guess--to improve on 
turn times.
    Mr. Rodney Davis. Well, what can be done to ensure that 
equipment is returned more quickly, so that we can reduce these 
dwell times and increase the fluidity?
    I mean is the ports' push to get containers off the 
terminal, and stage empty containers at off-dock locations 
helping with equipment availability?
    Mr. Spear. Well, certainly, given our motor carriers, the 
choice of their own equipment would help. That would certainly 
increase the amount of equipment out there to be used.
    And second, I think giving access to these ports with 
independent contractors, they have been pushed out. Owner-
operators aren't allowed in. So, this is a problem. And so, we 
have got to suspend some of these rules, I would say, 
permanently. But in a time of crisis, as has been widely 
discussed during this hearing, it seems appropriate that we 
alleviate some of that, and get the drivers that can come in 
that have been barred from operating in these areas. So, that 
would certainly help, in terms of increasing turn times.
    Mr. Rodney Davis. Well, I appreciate your testimony, Mr. 
Spear, and, actually, the testimony of everybody on this panel. 
It is very interesting to note that the administration talked 
about addressing the supply chain issues at our ports, the two 
in particular that I mentioned earlier, but we are just not 
seeing the actions that I think are going to solve the problem.
    I think we can come up with some better ideas. I have 
talked about utilizing TRANSCOM, based at Scott Air Force Base 
in Illinois. They can move battalions of weaponry across the 
globe to a war zone; I think they might be able to help solve 
some of the problems at the Port of Long Beach and the Port of 
Los Angeles, just to name a few.
    But I do want to let the witnesses know, especially Mr. 
Jefferies, I was being called earlier, when I was asking 
questions, by my colleague, Garret Graves. And I tried to 
remain as stoic as you did when I was doing the exact same 
thing to you during your testimony earlier today. So congrats, 
my friend, and I don't have any questions for anyone else. I am 
going to yield back the balance of my time.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now call on Representative 
Larsen for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Larsen. Thank you. Mr. Spear, based on Representative 
Davis' questions, do you have any ideas about increasing 
production of chassis as a solution? And how would that occur?
    Mr. Spear. Well, this is a complicated matter, as we have, 
obviously, had trade from countries like China provide that 
equipment. That has existed for quite a long time now. With the 
tariffs in place, that production has now had to shift to the 
U.S., and that was occurring right before the pandemic had hit, 
and all these problems we are describing within the supply 
chain. So, it is a compounding problem. It is a shift in 
production, back to the U.S., and building that capacity here, 
domestically. If that is the case, that is what is going to 
have to happen.
    So, like many things beyond chassis, we have got a chip 
shortage. Microchips, obviously, are not just for cars, but 
they are also for trucks. And they are both less profitable in 
cars and trucks than they are in the phones that we have, or 
our iPads, and so on. They are more profitable in that hand-
held equipment than they are in a car or a truck. And so, 
productivity and the economics of supply and sourcing are 
causing a problem. It is just another illustration, no 
different than the chassis themselves.
    So, repositioning and shifting production back to the U.S. 
is something that--if that has got to happen, it is what it is 
going to take to get the chassis available that we are going to 
need to meet the demand.
    Mr. Larsen. Yes, thank you.
    Mr. Cordero, your testimony mentions that some terminals at 
the Port of Long Beach are exploring that framework for 24/7 
operations. You mentioned this earlier, I think, in response to 
earlier questions. But can you expand a little bit on what is 
the status of that framework?
    And can other ports use this framework? I have got, nearby, 
the Ports of Seattle and Tacoma.
    Mr. Cordero. Thank you for your question, Congressmember.
    Number one, the Port of Long Beach has a pilot project with 
one of our terminals, Total Terminals International. It is a 
24/7 pilot project. And what we are doing right now is we are 
having a robust conversation with many of the stakeholders, the 
beneficial cargo owners, the truckers, and the railroads. As 
one witness has already indicated, the railroads are totally in 
on the 24/7 movement. But the whole point is it is a beginning 
of a framework.
    Like I indicated, we need transformational change in major 
container gateways. And, of course, here in southern 
California, and your ports, Tacoma, Seattle, up in the 
Northwest--but for southern California, again, when you move 20 
million containers, that number is not going to get any less 
after this crisis is over.
    Mr. Larsen. Yes.
    Mr. Cordero. I think the whole purpose is, again, this is a 
great time and--to use a cliche--crisis brings opportunities, 
and we have an opportunity to transform our model, how we 
operate here, in terms of the movement of container cargo.
    Mr. Larsen. And presumably longshore is part of that 
conversation.
    Mr. Cordero. They are, and I could represent to you that 
longshore labor is ready. They are supportive, and it is just a 
question of, again, taking--you just can't flip a switch and 
change this model today. But the good news, there is a lot of 
conversation in terms of that being the objective.
    Mr. Larsen. Yes. On a recent study of ports in Washington 
State and in California--including your port, I think--found 
that, during the period of 2016 to 2020, ports in British 
Columbia received $372 million in direct Canadian Federal 
funding, compared to $45 million in Washington, and $179 
million in California.
    Are the Federal funding mechanisms for ports meeting 
current demand, and how will the infrastructure bill close that 
gap?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, first of all, it is welcome news for 
port authorities to have an infrastructure bill that--again, in 
the best interest of the Nation, something we needed for 
decades. And it is even more comforting that we have $17 
billion earmarked for ports and waterways. So, it is a very 
good step in the direction that we need to take.
    As you reference, our competitors, whether it is Asia, 
whether it is Canada, whether it is Mexico, not only have a lot 
more infrastructure investment, but, more specifically, a 
national freight policy, which--again, this is another matter I 
wanted to bring to the attention of the committee, how 
important that would be.
    So, suffice it to say that again, $17 billion is welcome 
news, but going forward, we can't stop when this crisis is 
over. We need to continue to invest in our port and maritime 
industry, because we all know how essential this operation is, 
to the point where what--why we are having this hearing, is 
because of the impact it has had, not only to our commercial--
--
    Mr. Larsen. Yes, thank you.
    Mr. Cordero [continuing]. Exporters----
    Mr. Larsen. It is----
    Mr. Cordero [continuing]. And the economy.
    Mr. Larsen. Yes, and Madam Chair, just a point of personal 
privilege, if I could just communicate to Mr. Cordero to let 
his spouse know today there are two ships at anchorage in 
Holmes Harbor, not three. So, we are making progress.
    Mr. Cordero. Thank you for helping the marriage, 
Congressman.
    Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you, Rep. Larsen. I now recognize 
Representative Babin for 5 minutes.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you, Madam Chair. I really appreciate the 
chairman and the ranking member for having this hearing. It is 
one of the most important topics right now under our 
committee's jurisdiction, because of the supply chain effects 
and its effects on every single American in the most tangible 
way.
    So much happens in the world that we don't feel or, 
frankly, even know about. But, as we have seen, when our supply 
chain is interrupted, the ripple effect is felt in every store, 
on every shelf, and in every pocketbook. And like my colleagues 
before me have said, there isn't one solution. This is a very 
complex and convoluted problem made up of many, many variables. 
We will need to work together to end this crisis, and I hope 
and pray that we do.
    But I do know one thing for sure: President Biden and my 
friends on the other side of the aisle are certainly not 
helping the problem by spending trillions that we don't have, 
creating more burdensome regulations, implementing vaccine 
mandates, and increasing taxes in a whopping way. And with that 
I would like to ask Mr. Spear from the ATA a question.
    Mr. Spear, last week the White House announced a series of 
moves intended to alleviate port congestion and supply chain 
shortages. The administration noted an ``assessment of truck 
parking facilities'' as part of this effort.
    And as a former truckdriver myself, I was very interested 
to see that in 2013 the initial Jason's Law Truck Parking 
Survey indicated parking shortages were a national safety 
concern--2013, that is. A pending updated Jason's Law survey is 
expected to reveal many of the same conclusions, including that 
parking shortages are still a major problem in every State and 
region, and challenges exist in funding and maintaining parking 
in both the public and private sectors.
    Truckers all across my district tell me all the time that 
they are sick of studies and reports that all draw the very 
same conclusions: that there is a truck parking crisis in 
America. So, in your opinion, is yet another assessment the 
best use of Government resources to solve this truck parking 
crisis?
    Mr. Spear. We know the problem, Congressman, you just 
outlined it. I mean, we have got 3\1/2\ million truckdrivers in 
this country, and that is our number, and that is a valid 
number. And you have got 313,000 truck parking spaces, 
nationally, and that is according to the report you just cited. 
So, we know that problem, that is well measured, that is well 
defined. But do the math. That is for every 11 truckdrivers 
there is 1 truck parking space. This is a problem.
    And we keep adding layers, in terms of the rest breaks they 
have got to take, and there is no place to take them. I mean, 
you can drive just north of DC, here on I-95, and you will see 
multiple trucks parked on the shoulders. It is dangerous. It is 
dangerous to them, it is dangerous to the motoring public. And 
so, hopefully, the IIJA provides more moneys in there.
    But, as was in the House-passed bill, $1 billion for truck 
parking wasn't included in the IIJA. So, the money is given to 
the Secretary, our discretionary. I sure hope that they are 
looking at this problem and----
    Dr. Babin. Absolutely.
    Mr. Spear [continuing]. And allocating some of that money 
for this problem, because it really is a crisis, and it is 
something that we have got to solve. So, we strongly support 
that.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you very much, I appreciate it. And with 
the remainder of my time, I would like to ask a question of Mr. 
Cordero.
    Mr. Cordero, for your awareness, I have the privilege of 
representing the Port of Houston, as well as the Houston Ship 
Channel, which is the busiest deep draft waterway in the Nation 
and has more than 200,000 annual barge movements.
    After working closely with the Trump administration to 
secure authorization appropriation and a New Start designation, 
the port just broke ground on Project 11, which will deepen and 
widen the Houston Ship Channel, and create more efficient 
waterways for vessels, improving storm resiliency and 
bolstering the port's economic impact.
    But with all this growth, we still will need more jobs. We 
need more labor forces. And with the current labor shortage, 
thanks to vaccine mandates and the extension of Federal 
unemployment benefits, how can we make sure that there will be 
a technically trained labor market to sufficiently fill those 
gaps?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, thank you for your question, 
Congressman.
    And again, my----
    Dr. Babin. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Cordero [continuing]. Good friend Mr. Guenther at the 
Port of Houston has done a great job over there, at the Port of 
Houston.
    To your question, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, 
we are collaborating and moving forward with a work training 
center here that is going to be a changing dynamic, in terms of 
how we train that workforce.
    So, as you have indicated, and as some commentators have 
already made, this industry is not immune from the whole issue 
about the labor force across the country affecting many 
sectors. But for the port industry, we recognize that, again, 
there has to be a lot of work done in work development, work 
enforcement here, in terms of workforce development. And that 
is what we are doing here, at the Ports of Long Beach and Los 
Angeles.
    So, in that regard, I also want to pitch the importance of 
digital transformation, and making sure we have the funds for 
the workforce of the future, in terms of how important that is 
going to be, with regard to creating greater efficiencies here 
at our ports, here in America.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you very much, and I will yield back, 
because I am out of time.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Johnson of Georgia for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding 
this hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your time and 
your testimony.
    The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically exposed the 
vulnerability of global supply chains, and today millions of 
Americans are discovering half-empty store shelves, longer 
delivery times, and increasingly expensive consumer goods. 
Supply chain issues stem from several factors, including an 
extraordinary surge in demand for goods and factory shutdowns 
abroad. However, the situation is compounded by deteriorating 
working conditions for truckdrivers and the negative effects of 
climate change. Only by addressing the vulnerabilities in our 
system can we revitalize our global supply chain 
infrastructure.
    Mr. Regan, your testimony indicates that so-called labor 
shortages are insufficient to explain the current supply chain 
dynamics. You argue that the failure of employers to respond to 
market conditions and provide incentives to workers, such as 
quality wages, benefits, working conditions, and the like, 
undermine the workforce. How would you characterize working 
conditions of long-haul truckdrivers, and what changes need to 
be made to increase driver retention in the trucking industry?
    Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question, sir. Again, I think 
one of the major issues facing the truck driving workforce has 
to do with workforce misclassification. You have a lot of 
situations where they are not directly employed by the trucking 
companies, they are independently contracted out, they are 
leasing the equipment. In some cases, that drastically reduces 
their pay and their incentive to stay in the workforce.
    My friends at the Teamsters Union, who represent far more 
truckers than I do, have said a lot about this subject. But, in 
general, this is an issue that has showed a continual decline 
in the workforce in the trucking industry.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. The current situation 
has renewed calls by Mr. Spear and others to allow drivers ages 
18 to 21 to operate trucks interstate to address the driver 
shortage or an inability of motor carriers to attract and 
retain drivers. Do you have concerns with the safety of 
allowing 18- to 21-year-olds to drive trucks interstate?
    Mr. Regan. Yes, I think there are safety concerns there. 
But, I know that in the IIJA that was just passed, there is an 
authorization of a pilot program to allow this, which, 
hopefully, will allow us to understand what the shortcomings or 
what the benefits of this will be. And they are going to be 
able to assess whether this is a viable solution, moving 
forward.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
    Mr. Cordero, your testimony indicates that the Georgia 
Ports Authority is addressing backlogs by easing congestion, 
such as clearing up space to unload containerships more 
efficiently. This is possible due to cooperation with the White 
House and Department of Transportation, which announced that 
ports would be able to repurpose unspent grant funds from past 
projects to address supply chain congestion. In fact, the 
Georgia Ports Authority will spend $8 million from past grants 
for this project.
    In addition to these changes, how can the Georgia Ports 
Authority build resilience against future shocks to the supply 
chain?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, again, I think, also, I would like to 
acknowledge my good friend, Griff Lynch at the Port Authority 
there, at Savannah, on these issues.
    So, I think, again, what we need to do is that, in the port 
connectivity across the Nation, that is going to be very 
important.
    And I think also, my colleague there has also referenced 
extended gate hours. In fact, you referenced that commentary a 
couple of years back at a conference in New York.
    But again, I think the main point here is we need to create 
fluidity here in the supply chain, and it has to be a supply 
chain issue. It is not just a port authority or a terminal.
    And again, going forward, digital transformation is going 
to be very important, in terms of how we use technology with 
regard to further transparency and visibility in the movement 
of cargo. I can represent that all port authorities here are 
looking in that same subject matter. But at this point, there 
is no single reason that we could point to to solve the current 
crisis that we are in. Again, this is a global crisis.
    But suffice it to say that the good news is we are moving 
the cargo, the men and women who are working at these ports 
across America are moving the cargo. They are essential 
workers. And as noted, one reason for the situation is the 
economy that we are looking to, the 6-percent GDP growth for 
this year, and consumers are buying more than ever. So, I think 
it is a confluence of factors.
    But to your question, I think those are some areas that 
port authorities, again, can continue to move forward to 
transform the supply chain.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Perry for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Perry. Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got to say, at the 
onset of the hearing, I listened to the chairman go on for 
about 5 minutes with a stream of what I consider to be vapid 
and incendiary partisan principles and rhetoric, and then, at 
the end of it, demand that no one else engage in incendiary 
partisan rhetoric. It is incredible to me that somebody can be 
in Washington for over 30 years on this committee, and not 
understand that Washington isn't the solution, Washington is 
the problem.
    With that, I mean, I certainly appreciate the fact that the 
majority has finally woken up to the fact that there is a 
supply chain crisis. But I can't help but lament the fact that 
this hearing comes in the wake of the Socialists on both sides 
of the aisle, pumping another $1.25 trillion into our economy, 
without any consideration of the inflationary impacts of these 
policies during a time of record inflation.
    In fact, I would argue there is a pattern of bipartisan 
folly in this committee and this Congress that have not only 
contributed to the supply chain crises we see today, but to 
seek to actively worsen the situation by, essentially, pouring 
gasoline on that fire, seeking to add unnecessary and 
destructive environmental and labor restrictions that kill the 
ability of the hard-working Americans to deliver the goods 
needed by their fellow citizens.
    One of the contributing factors that has resulted in the 
supply chain crisis is the oppressive regulatory environment in 
California, and the destructive impacts it has had on the 
workforce in that State. There is absolutely no question 
California's ports have been hit hardest here. But the majority 
and their supporters on our side of the aisle desperately seek 
to divert the attention away from the true reason why that is 
the case, as they seek to bring California-style regulation, 
poverty, and destruction across the rest of the Nation. That is 
a great plan.
    California has actively sought to kill the trucking 
industry in its State, and the oppressive hand of the State 
government has led to many truckers to abandon routes within 
the State, whether it is CARB's unnecessary economically 
destructive regulations, or AB5, which effectively outlaws 
owner-operators by redefining ``employee'' to end independent 
contractors, in order to ensure big labor bosses can organize a 
wider swath of the workforce without putting in any work.
    Outlawing independent truckers is essentially what they 
did, and we are sitting here talking about solutions to a 
truckdriver shortage and supply chain problems, and we don't 
even bring it up. It is incredible to me.
    Unfortunately, the Biden administration, the Socialist 
majority, and their fellow travelers in our party aren't 
seeking ways to alleviate the destruction caused by these 
policies. They are seeking to nationalize it. The PRO Act would 
bring an AB5-style war on independent contractors into Federal 
law, destroying the businesses of nearly 350,000 to 400,000 
owner-operators in the U.S. trucking workforce. Oh, that sounds 
like a great solution. Washington is right on cue to be there 
to help.
    Unfortunately, every single Democrat and four Republicans 
on this committee voted in order to do this, despite repeated 
warnings by the trucking industry that we are currently 
experiencing a trucker shortage, without taking hundreds of 
thousands of qualified drivers off the road to appease the big 
labor bosses and these Members' support over their 
constituents' best interests. Appalling.
    Mr. Spear, what would be the impact on the trucking 
workforce if the owner-operator model was banned overnight, as 
the majority and some of my Republican colleagues seek to do? 
What would be the impact?
    Mr. Spear. You are just going to see it continue to inflate 
the problem, our inability to get goods to the shelves. Your 
constituents, and constituents across every district in this 
country are going to go from eight apples down to three, maybe 
even two. OK, that is just choice, and it is going to go away, 
because you have fewer people to drive it.
    Over 80 percent of the communities in this country are 
exclusively dependent on trucks for their goods. You got to 
have a driver behind it. So, unless we are going to go 
driverless tomorrow, you are going to have to attract and 
retain talent to do it. You are going to need owner-operators, 
you are going to need independent contractors.
    The only reason that this whole reclassification debate is 
even out there is because they want to organize it. But if you 
go and talk to an independent contractor, they are going to 
tell you, ``Hey, I chose this. No one put a gun to my head. OK? 
I chose this occupation because I wanted more time at home.'' 
It is seasonal work, it is part-time work. Whatever the reason 
is, they chose it. And they want to take choice away from these 
folks. They don't want them to have that option, because they 
want to organize, and they want them part of the union.
    Well, they don't want to be part of the union. And if they 
do want to be part of the union, they can join the union. No 
one is telling them either way. They can do either one, but it 
is their choice. We are going to win that in the Supreme Court. 
They just asked the Solicitor General to look at that, which 
means, to me, that they are serious about taking up AB5. And I 
believe we are going to win that solution, and we will settle 
this once and for all.
    Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Spear. I couldn't have said it 
better myself.
    Madam Chair, I yield the balance.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Carson for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Carson. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    After seeing so much congestion at ports, I would like to 
get your thoughts on what positive rail might play in 
strengthening our supply chain, not just in terms of more 
efficient movement of goods and materials, but in improving our 
human infrastructure, too.
    Precision Scheduled Railroading sounds impressive, but it 
seems counterintuitive to plan for longer trains, but smaller 
crew sizes. And our transportation systems are really, quite 
frankly, I mean, as I like to say, respectfully, they are only 
as strong as our people and our workers. And in a place like 
Indiana, the crossroads of America, we have to address the 
congestion on the roads that, unfortunately, results when 
downtown and critical streets are blocked by painfully long 
freight trains.
    So, how can these disruptions be improved, as we are 
working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Mr. Jefferies. Well, thank you for that question, 
Congressman. There are several aspects to it, so I will try to 
take them one by one.
    So, I certainly agree with you that we are only as strong 
as our people, our employees. And that is why I think we are so 
proud of our employees getting the job done over the past 18-
plus months, when most of us were able to work from home. 
Railroads didn't stop running. We are a 24/7 operation, and so 
thanks to our employees' dedication and commitment to doing 
that and doing it safely.
    Railroading is absolutely a strong industry for an employee 
to spend a career in. Average wages and benefits, over $130,000 
a year. It is one of the last remaining industries where an 
employee with a high school graduation can support a family and 
live a middle-class life with a very strong and comfortable 
retirement. And that is why we have employees for several 
generations working for decades at a time in our industry.
    Now, to your point about congestion, we actually think that 
rail is a huge part of solving the congestion problem, writ 
large. More goods moving by rail, more containers being on the 
back of rail, that is less congestion on the highways, less 
wear and tear on the highways. And this is not an anti-truck 
statement. Truckers are certainly our big competition, but they 
are also our biggest partners. And that is why we are sitting 
here together advocating, I think, on a lot of the same 
principles.
    We have got an integrated supply network, and we have got 
to make sure it is functioning as efficiently as possible. 
Railroads out of the west coast have capacity right now. We can 
take on additional volumes, we can take on additional 
containers to get them to the middle of the country, where they 
can be distributed to their final destination.
    The issue of grade crossings is certainly an area that 
absolutely presents challenges for communities, and one that we 
do not take lightly. And while every grade crossing is 
different, there is certainly no one-size-fits-all answer. A 
number of steps can be taken to help alleviate the challenge.
    First and foremost, a grade crossing that doesn't exist is 
the best one out there. And so, the $3 billion included in the 
infrastructure bill that is dedicated solely to grade 
separations, a huge effort by Congress to get that across the 
finish line, and something that we are very supportive of, very 
excited to work with our community partners to put that money 
to work, and in the high-profile grade crossings.
    But when you can't separate a grade crossing, it is 
important to make sure that it has up-to-date safety devices, 
up-to-date protection. Again, something that was prioritized in 
the infrastructure bill.
    From the rail standpoint, what can we do? Well, we can 
absolutely look at our operations, and look to minimize the 
time that a train is sitting, blocking a crossing, or look at 
our hours for when trains are running through communities, to 
minimize the impact on peak traffic times.
    We can also provide information in advance to motorists. 
So, if there is a blocked crossing ahead, you can deploy 
dynamic signage to make sure that a motorist is aware that that 
blocked crossing is ahead of them, and perhaps there is an 
opportunity to reroute.
    So, we have got to continue to work on this. It is an 
industry priority. I can tell you right now, firsthand, it has 
our CEO's attention at the executive level and the industry 
level, and it is something that we have got to keep a shoulder 
into, as an industry, but also working with our communities.
    Mr. Carson. That is great, that is great, thank you.
    Thank you, Madam Chair, I yield back.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Weber for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Weber of Texas. Thank you, ma'am. This is a question 
for Mr. Cordero.
    In your materials you say that long-term infrastructure 
investment is needed to secure our supply chains. But the 
question is, what if the investment comes along with strings 
that prohibit us from improving efficiency or installing 
automation that would actually help make for a more seamless 
supply chain?
    And I want to put a couple of caveats in there, Mr. 
Cordero. What do you think would hurt building a dependable 
supply chain more, would it be a mandate to have to join a 
union, or would it be mask mandates? Which of those would you 
think is the most egregious?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, thank you, Congressman. And I would like 
to thank you for your support of the port authorities----
    Mr. Weber of Texas. You bet.
    Mr. Cordero. As a Member, as you recall, when I was 
Chairman of the Federal Maritime Commission, you were very 
supportive of ports and, of course, the PORTS Caucus, and your 
participation in that.
    To your question, I think what is critical now for the 
supply chain is how we create efficiencies and reduce costs in 
the movement of cargo. We are in a very competitive environment 
right now. And, obviously, what this crisis has brought forth, 
Congressman, is certainly the issues that we discussed back in 
2015. And I am referring to the July 2015 report released by 
the Federal Maritime Commission on this very issue: congestion.
    So, I think, in this crisis, I think it is fair to say that 
no port has essentially closed down, certainly not L.A./Long 
Beach, because of this crisis.
    I will say that, with regard to the mask and the vaccine 
mandate, that has mitigated the impact on the workforce, here 
on the docks. Earlier this year, due to the leadership of our 
mayor, Robert Garcia, and Governor Gavin Newsom, we moved 
forward to make sure those vaccinations were available to the 
men and women that worked on the docks. And I will represent I 
think that action substantially mitigated the impact on the 
labor that we would have had, but for not----
    Mr. Weber of Texas. Right, and I would agree with that. But 
I think you have got to move that product away from the docks, 
and it is going to--I think--I am surprised that the number 
quoted was 80 percent. I think, basically, about everything 
Americans touch is going to come on a truck somewhere. Not 
everybody has a railroad in their backyard, and not everybody 
is next to one.
    So, I want to go to this question for you and Mr. Spear, as 
well, and that is, I ran a hotshot company for about 2 years 
before I ran for the State legislature, and I am thoroughly 
familiar with USDOT regulations, TxDOT regulations, and did a 
lot of stuff, seen a lot of big truckers on the road. Now, with 
the shortage of truckdrivers, does it make sense for us to 
allow 18- to 21-year-olds to drive?
    And maybe this is for you, Mr. Spear: Has the truckdrivers, 
the union, the Teamsters, have they taken a position against it 
or for it?
    Obviously, the military is able to do that, train 18- to 
21-year-olds to do it. Has there been a study done? What are 
your thoughts, Mr. Spear? A couple of questions there.
    Mr. Spear. So, 49 States in the U.S., including yours, 
Congressman, allow an 18-year-old to drive a class 8, they just 
can't cross State lines.
    Mr. Weber of Texas. Right.
    Mr. Spear. So, you can go from El Paso to Texarkana and 
back, no problem. You just can't cross into Texarkana, 
Arkansas, which makes absolutely no sense.
    By the way, in those 49 States, there is absolutely no 
training and no technology requirements for that equipment for 
that 18-year-old. The DRIVE Safe Act, which is bipartisan, both 
chambers, and the provisions that were included from that act 
in the IIJA, create a national program, 3,000 young people that 
we can properly train, up to 400 hours of training, which--240 
of those hours you have to have an experienced driver in the 
cab with them. You have got to have technology equipment, AEB, 
speed controls, anti-collision. All that--cameras have to be on 
that equipment. So, this is a step toward safety, not away.
    And rightfully to your point, I have got a--my oldest son 
is right now at Fort Benning, OK? We are sending 18-, 19-, and 
20-year-olds overseas to defend our freedom, do the 
unthinkable. And I am pretty sure that, if we can train them 
properly to do that, we can teach them how to cross State lines 
in a class 8, and that language will get it done. So, I am very 
confident we can do this safely and responsibly.
    Mr. Weber of Texas. To that point, I will make this 
comment, of course. Once they have driven across Texas, they 
have already driven across several States, basically.
    And has the Teamsters Union taken a position on that 
concept?
    Mr. Spear. Well, I will defer to Greg on that. It is passed 
now in the IIJA, so, we can debate whether they are for or 
against, but it is going to happen. Now we need to work with 
the agency to get it right. Greg alluded to that. I support 
what Greg said. Let's get it right. Let's make certain that we 
are not compromising safety. They can responsibly operate this 
equipment already. Let's add these conditions to it, and get it 
right.
    And if we can do that, what we are doing here now is 
bringing this young, talented pool into our industry, long 
term. That should be good for my industry. That should be good 
for the unions. That is more people, long term, they can 
recruit from. So, if you look at it through that lens, and you 
can do this responsibly, I think it is good policy.
    So, wait and see, but I think we got some work to do to get 
it right, and I think it will be done right.
    Mr. Weber of Texas. Well, thank you for that. I have run 
over my time, so I am going to need to yield back. Thank you so 
much.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Titus for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Titus. Thank you very much, and I want to thank our 
chairman, Mr. DeFazio, for focusing this important hearing on 
the bottlenecks at ports and our supply chain. I hear that all 
the time, because we have to import almost everything we have 
in Las Vegas, whether it is chicken wings or car parts. And so, 
this is very important to us.
    I have been reading a lot of the headlines in the Wall 
Street Journal about Target, Walmart, and the different 
companies that are stocking up for the holidays, and they are 
pretty optimistic, and they are expecting a 10-percent increase 
also in e-commerce from last year, which was a record high, 
even with all the problems that we had with COVID. So, this is 
going to increase, it is not going to backslide, I don't 
believe, as we move forward. So, we see this increased request, 
and increased demand that is far above whatever our production 
levels are. So, we need to look at that, as well as the 
shipment of these goods.
    We have seen the problem as we looked at the airline 
industry. A lot of the airlines didn't anticipate that our 
recovery would happen so quickly. They laid people off, people 
had early retirement, they were slow in getting them back. And 
then when, suddenly people wanted to start traveling--we saw 
that in Las Vegas--they weren't able to accommodate that. And 
you have seen flights canceled, and a lot of problems at 
airports.
    So, we also heard from, I think Mr. Cordero, that the 
canceling of passenger flights has also affected cargo, because 
there is a lot of cargo down there in those baggage 
compartments of the airplanes.
    Now, a lot of my colleagues across the aisle have been 
offering all these solutions, which really aren't solutions at 
all, they are just kind of a rehashing of old problems, or old 
things that they have always been talking about, like reducing 
safety and reducing environmental protections. I don't think 
that is going to solve any of our problems. We ought to be 
looking at how to make this safer and more effective, going 
forward. We ought to be talking about how vaccines will help us 
get over COVID. And once that happens, the economy really can 
come back even more than it already has, and how are we going 
to deal with it. That is what we need to be doing, looking 
forward.
    You heard some talk about inland ports, dry land ports. I 
think Eddie Bernice Johnson mentioned it. All the investments 
that are coming out of the infrastructure bill and the Build 
Back Better bill will help places like Las Vegas upgrade its 
infrastructure, so we can become an inland port. And that can 
help with these supply chain issues, as well. That should be 
our focus in this hearing, not some looking back to the past 
for things that didn't work, even then.
    My question, though, is a followup from what Mr. Massie 
said, and I would direct this to Mr. Correll.
    You were talking about technological improvements. Well, we 
are certainly familiar in this committee with outdated 
technology. We saw that in the airline industry, where they 
were still using paper slips to schedule aircraft. We needed to 
bring that into the 21st century. Mr. Correll, could you 
elaborate on what kind of technological things that we need to 
do, not just for big companies like Amazon, but for other 
companies, too, to help with this, going forward?
    And then I would ask Mr. Jefferies and Mr. Spear if you 
could talk about what your clients, or your organizations, or 
your folks and members are doing to address these technological 
needs, as well.
    Mr. Correll. Excellent, thank you very much for the 
question. I will be brief, to save time for my fellow 
witnesses, as well.
    I think there is tremendous opportunity, to use the airline 
as an example, to understand what we can do better. So, thank 
you for setting that in the way that you did.
    If we think about what happens when a truckdriver arrives 
at a facility, oftentimes they come in, they stop at a gate, 
there is some interaction between the human and the driver to 
confirm that that driver is who they said they are, and that 
they have the appointment time that they are supposed to. Then 
they can go to a staging lot, where sometimes they have to get 
out of the truck, then take that paperwork into a desk, have 
that desk work checked, sometimes hand over their license, then 
come back to the truck and wait to be called. It is a paper-
based system that is, I believe, antiquated, and we could do a 
lot better. And there are, in fact, already technological 
solutions on offer in experimental trials to make this whole 
system contactless.
    So, I think that is a great notion. It should be a lot more 
like when we take a flight, and I just show my boarding pass on 
my phone, and a lot less like flights were 20 or 30 years ago, 
which is how some of our systems are currently working. So, 
that would be the first area of improvement.
    And the second lesson that I would like to take from 
airlines is one of the things I work on is scheduling 
algorithms. So, when you think about how do you schedule 
airplanes coming into an airport, well, they have a set time. 
But we also think about things like how much fuel is in the 
tank of the airplane in the sky, and we can prioritize them 
that way. We don't do the same thing with our drivers' hours of 
service available when we schedule them for their appointments, 
and I really think we should.
    So, those would be the two technological solutions I would 
certainly recommend.
    Ms. Titus. Well, thank you. I think we need to look into 
how we can promote that, and maybe the other two could send 
their answers to the committee because, unfortunately, I am out 
of time.
    Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Carbajal [presiding]. Thank you. Next, we will move on 
with Representative LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Well, thank you. I appreciate it. This is a 
very important topic in this hearing, and I am glad we are 
having it today.
    Many, many facets of our difficulties, especially in 
California--I appreciate Mr. Perry and Mr. Spear's conversation 
about that a while ago on AB5, and then the great idea of 
bringing it nationally with the PRO Act. If you want to talk 
about supply chain, and you want to talk about ability for 
owner-operators and the mom-and-pop outfits to be able to do 
what they want to do in competing, so it is an important 
conversation to continue to have.
    So, we see that our two largest ports in Los Angeles and 
Long Beach, they rank about number 328 and 333 out of 351 
total, in the world, on efficiency. We had a port slowdown--
almost a shutdown--back in 2014, 2015, when that helped bottle 
things up for California and the west coast. The contributing 
factor, as mentioned, on AB5, it is all in the name of 
protecting workers, but these workers don't belong to other 
companies, they are independents. So, it nearly wiped out all 
the independent contractors. So, it even slopped over into Uber 
and Lyft, and things like that, but it is extremely important 
in our trucking industry.
    And we also have the challenge with the California Air 
Resources Board just arbitrarily deciding trucks made before 
2011 we can't use anymore, even though they could be 
retrofitted and kept in good repair and do just fine. So, that 
took a whole bunch of trucks out of our ability to operate.
    So, can we talk, Ms. Reinke, about how those impacts are 
disrupting the supply chain from AB5, and from CARB? Can you 
emphasize that a little bit more from a previous comment?
    Ms. Reinke. Sure. So, there are about 250,000-plus trucking 
operations with 1 to 6 drivers as part of the total operation, 
which is about double what that was 10 years ago. So, if you 
think about that, that is a thriving industry, and it is 
something that our members certainly rely on, because that 
represents a vast majority of the trucking population.
    So, if you were to take them out of the equation, or alter 
their employment status, that could immediately reduce the 
capacity for truckdrivers that we can use, or that people that 
have a job--they may not want to be part of a larger employer, 
they may want to employ themselves. It is sort of the American 
Dream. They get to choose what they want to do. So, if that 
removes capacity, our members would be very, very concerned 
about it. And obviously, if it is replicated nationwide, then 
that is when it could be a company risk for our members.
    As for environmental regulations, our members, obviously, 
are very supportive of programs like EPA SmartWay, and things 
like that. But one of the proposed regulations from CARB would 
hold our brokers, who are not asset-based--we do not largely 
own trucks--responsible to be fleet owners and determine 
whether or not the trucks that are used are compliant with 
zero-emission goals by 2045. So, we only arrange 
transportation. We do not own the trucks. We are not implicated 
in the operation of trucks.
    So that would mean that our members would have to be 
involved. We think that that is a strong, strenuous overreach. 
It has not yet been fully regulated. We continue to petition 
CARB, so that we can have some more right-sized regulation in 
that space.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you.
    Mr. Spear, let me shift to you for a moment. When we are 
talking about how the drivers would feel about a vaccine 
mandate, what kind of reactions are you getting from them on 
that, just all of them required to get a vaccine to do 
business?
    Mr. Spear. Yes, and I want to be clear and qualify this, 
that this isn't about being pro- or anti-vax for us. We have 
been moving the vaccine, PPE, and test kits. So, this is 
something our industry is very forward-leaning on. But in our 
sample survey of our fleets, it came back as 37 percent of our 
drivers not only said no, but hell no.
    Now, let's just take a conservative number. Let's just say 
3.7 percent, not 37 percent, were to actually leave, rather 
than get the vaccine. That would be catastrophic. We are 
already short 80,000. That is going to inflate it to one-
quarter million.
    So, for us, we have tried to be very clear with the 
administration that, if you do this--I understand the logic 
behind it, but if you do this, these are the consequences. So, 
if you are trying to solve the supply chain problem, you are 
actually compounding it, and actually hurting the very problem 
that you are trying to fix on the vaccine side. So, be careful 
what you wish for here.
    I also don't think, Congressman, that OSHA has the 
jurisdiction to do this.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, the courts are seemingly holding that up, 
too. So, this whole mandate seems to be crumbling around them 
right now. It is out of line. Thank you.
    Mr. Cordero, let's touch quickly on the supply chain as 
something that should go both directions. As we see, about 
three-quarters of our containers are leaving the United States 
empty, are the figures we have. So, to me, it seems important 
both ways. You should have full containers if they are coming 
in; they should go out full. It is affecting our crops, 
affecting manufacturers, and economy. They are going to lose 
market share if they keep sending empties back.
    Could you touch upon what we could be doing better to fill 
the ships leaving with our products, instead of letting them go 
empty?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, that is a great question, though, 
Congressman. I think there has been a number of years that, not 
only the Federal Maritime Commission, but port authorities have 
advocated for a focus on increasing exports and, again, 
supporting our export advocates and the American farmer, the 
American shipper.
    So, what we could be doing, one way that we are looking at, 
is when we increase connectivity to the inland, and create more 
efficiencies, that benefits our American exports, particularly 
in California. We have a high number of grain [inaudible] 
products as well as the Midwest, of course----
    Mr. Carbajal. Mr. Cordero, if you could, sum that up real 
quick.
    Mr. Cordero. Sure. So, I think----
    Mr. Carbajal. Or put it in writing.
    Mr. Cordero. Yes, sure. So, on the empty issue, again, 
given the volume that we have, there is a big demand for 
empties, with regard to the containers going back to Asia. That 
has been problematic. Hopefully, again, as we continue to move 
forward, it may be transitory in nature, in terms of what we 
are looking for in terms of mid-year/next year. But that is an 
issue that, again, we are attempting to address with regard to 
the empty containers here.
    Mr. LaMalfa. All right, thank you. Thank you. It sounds 
like a trade issue here we need to be enforcing, as a country, 
better. Thank you for that.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Next, I will recognize 
Representative Payne.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Cordero, in New Jersey's 10th Congressional District I 
am proud to represent Port Newark and its terminal operators 
that help keep the world's supply chain moving. Port Newark 
Container Terminal recently completed a $500 million upgrade, 
increasing its cargo capacity by 80 percent, and cutting its 
turn times by 25 percent. The terminal operator plans to 
further expand its infrastructure to meet the growing needs of 
cargo shipping.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law 
this week invests $17 billion into port infrastructure. My 
question to you is, how would this funding help prevent future 
supply chain challenges?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, it is very important, and very critical. 
It is a step in the right direction. An example, in terms of 
the west coast here, is the rail connectivity. For the Port of 
Long Beach, we have had approximately $1.6 billion in the next 
10 years authorized by our commission for spending on rail, 
more specifically, on-dock rail.
    So, I think, again, the $17 billion referenced is welcome 
news for this industry with regard to what we need to do in 
investing in port infrastructure, and the same with New York 
and New Jersey. I mean, my good friend, Sam Ruda, the executive 
director there, as you have indicated, they have done a great 
job, in terms of investing in infrastructure. But again, it is 
far short, in terms of what we need to do, given decades of not 
investing in this industry.
    Mr. Payne. Thank you.
    And Mr. Jefferies, on Precision Scheduled Railroading, as 
chairman of the Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials 
Subcommittee, I joined Chairman DeFazio earlier this year in 
requesting a GAO study of Precision Scheduled Railroading, 
including how PSR and related assets and workforce reductions 
impact the ability to meet the changing market demands.
    The use of PSR is concerning to me, especially when it 
leaves freight railroads significantly understaffed in the 
middle of the worldwide supply chain crisis. Your testimony 
describes efforts to reopen closed terminals and hire workers. 
What other steps have the railroads taken in right-sizing their 
assets and workforces to meet the current market demands?
    Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for that question, Congressman. 
And the term Precision Scheduled Railroading gets thrown around 
a lot. I think it probably means a little something different 
to everybody who uses it.
    But you know, this year has certainly been unprecedented, 
when it comes to demand. And as evidence of that, in my opening 
statement I mentioned that, over the first 6 months of this 
year, railroads moved more intermodal goods than they have in 
any 6-month period in their history, using the employee base 
that they had on hand without significant disruptions.
    We are also seeing, when you compare 2019 to 2021, a slight 
uptick in industrial products movements, and that is in the 
face of a decrease in finished autos. Railroads moved 75 
percent of finished autos. Those volumes have dropped off quite 
a bit, given the semiconductor challenges that are facing that 
industry. So, we look forward to moving more of those soon.
    I also mentioned the fact that coming out of the west coast 
are two primary railroads--actually have significant capacity 
right now. We are prepared to take on significantly more 
international containers to get those to the center of the 
country.
    But you are absolutely right. There are areas where we are 
looking to hire additional employees. In many regions, we feel 
properly sourced for demand. The Chicago terminal, writ large, 
handled 11 percent increases in volumes year over year, 
maintaining a green level of fluidity throughout the month of 
October. But there are other areas where we are hiring across 
different crafts. And so, it is not a one-size-fits-all 
strategy. It is dependent on the characteristics of various 
regions.
    But I think the results we are seeing, not only to the 
operations based on our employees' dedication, are the results 
of decades of sustained private investment. We talk a lot about 
infrastructure investment. This industry is one that has put 
its money where its mouth is, quite literally, $25 billion a 
year annually back into our network. We have the highest rated 
infrastructure of any type in the country. And, we will keep at 
it.
    But we are up for the task, and we want additional----
    [Audio interruption.]
    Mr. Payne. OK, thank you. And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I now recognize Representative 
Balderson.
    Mr. Balderson. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and thank 
you all for being here today and participating in this 
important hearing. My first question is going to go to Mr. 
Spear.
    Mr. Spear, thank you for being here. I really appreciate 
that. And the DRIVE Safe Act, thank you for your kind words on 
that. I was a lead cosponsor on that and, as you know, it did 
pass in the bipartisan infrastructure bill.
    In your testimony you note the pandemic forced the 
temporary closures of State DMVs and truckdriver training 
schools, hurting the already fragile pipeline of new drivers 
entering the industry. Are State DMVs and training schools back 
and fully operational, or are you seeing any lingering issues 
caused by the pandemic?
    Mr. Spear. I appreciate the question, Congressman, and 
thank you for your leadership and support on that bill. I love 
seeing those provisions make it into that infrastructure 
package. And we have got more work to do, as you know, but I 
appreciate that.
    Yes, I mean, you are taking me back to some dark days. The 
early weeks of the pandemic, and everyone was trying to figure 
it out. Just be mindful that we had 3.5 million truckdrivers 
still getting in those cabs, moving, running lanes from Ohio up 
to New York, and restocking those shelves. Not just the milk, 
eggs, and bread, but I guess the 3 months' supply of TP that a 
few people in this country think they needed. But there was a 
driver to make sure it got back on the shelf.
    And so, there was a lot of impediments back then, the 
shutting of rest areas. So, to be compliant with rest breaks, 
you are now seeing trucks parked on shoulders. The shutting of 
the DMVs, certainly the medical certificates, the CDLs, CLPs, 
the renewals of those things we needed exemptions from for a 
period of time, while those DMVs were shuttered. We are 
starting to see that come back online.
    As far as training and schools, yes, that was very 
difficult, early on. I mean, it was nearly shuttered. And that 
was, obviously, a contributing factor from going from 61,500 
drivers short coming into the pandemic, now at 80,000. That 
backlog is now having to catch up. So, it just takes time. As 
we come out of the pandemic, you are starting to see us ramp up 
and address that. And hopefully, those numbers will begin to go 
down.
    But getting people in with those CDLs is going to be key, 
and the DMVs and the schools have a big role to play.
    Mr. Balderson. Thank you for that answer. I will follow up 
with you.
    I have spoken to your colleagues at the Ohio Trucking 
Association about the recruitment challenges they have had in 
getting young drivers through the certification process. A 
major hurdle that they have mentioned is the lack of financial 
assistance that is available to cover the cost of truckdriver 
training programs. In your opinion, how much of a factor is the 
cost of training programs in preventing interested folks from 
pursuing a career in the industry?
    Mr. Spear. Enough that we have got motor carriers paying 
the full boat in many instances. But that is not going to solve 
it. It may solve it for them, but it is not going to solve it 
for those that don't have truck driving schools of their own 
and can afford that.
    So, 80 percent-plus of our members are less than 20 trucks. 
Those folks don't have those luxuries. They have got to bring 
in from recruiting, or from those schools that they work with. 
So, it is an issue that I would say would be very beneficial to 
attracting more talent into the schools, if they were to 
qualify for grants, just like any other.
    So, we would welcome that. I think that makes it even more 
attractive to alleviate that burden, get the proper training in 
place, get them credentialed, and get them out there driving. 
So, the faster we can do that, and the easier we can make that 
process, the better.
    Mr. Balderson. OK, Mr. Spear, I am going to try to be a 
little brief on this one, because I know my time is getting 
short here. But during an Agriculture Committee hearing a few 
weeks ago, I was able to discuss some of the CDL and CPL 
waivers that previous administrations enacted at the onset of 
the pandemic, with your colleague, Jon Samson.
    Mr. Samson noted the immediate benefits of some of these 
waivers, allowing truckers to obtain CDLs more efficiently. Do 
you think it would be beneficial to extend these CDL waivers 
and some of the other declarations throughout the duration of 
the supply chain issues?
    Mr. Spear. I wouldn't go so far to say waivers, but 
certainly streamlining the system, and making credentialing 
across the board easier. If you get your testing done in one 
State, but you are domiciled, meaning you live full-time in 
another State, those States don't recognize the testing and 
credentialing, and there is a gap there between it that makes 
the burden fall on that potential driver. We need to make that 
easier, and there needs to be Federal leadership in making that 
happen. Working with DOT, the FMCSA will, hopefully, streamline 
that. But it is an impediment, and it is very impactful.
    So, what Jon Samson was citing is very accurate. I wouldn't 
just flat-out exempt--we need controls in there, we need to 
make sure they get the right training and credentialing. But, 
we are an interstate commerce-based business. So, as you are 
crossing State lines, the system has to accommodate that. And 
when it is just the State itself that is managing it, you get 
some channel conflict when you are crossing State lines. And 
having a little Federal leadership at DOT, engage on that, work 
with the State DOTs should help really alleviate that at the 
DMV level.
    Mr. Balderson. Thank you very much, Mr. Spear.
    I apologize, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. I now recognize the 
distinguished gentleman from California, Representative 
Lowenthal.
    Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would like 
to, before I ask my question, compliment you on how well you 
are conducting this hearing. I want to address my first 
question to Mr. Cordero.
    As you know, Mr. Cordero, I have supported changes to the 
PierPASS Traffic Mitigation Fee at the Port of Long Beach, as 
has also John Porcari, the Port Envoy. And I was glad to see 
the announcement that, from December 1st to January 31st, fees 
will incentivize the use of off-peak hours, incentivizing the 
fuller adoption of 24/7 operations to ease the backlogs, and 
reduce idling, and ease community impact.
    Mr. Cordero, can you speak to the importance of these kinds 
of measures, and to others which can help everyone in the 
supply chain scale up their efforts?
    Mr. Cordero. And thank you for your question, Congressman.
    Most definitively, we need to incentivize the industry to 
take certain measures. And the one that you are referencing, 
PierPASS, was set up for that incentive. That is, when you 
move, this year, 20 million TEU containers, you cannot compact 
that movement in ordinary business hours. So, what we are doing 
at this point is not only expanding gate hours, talking about a 
24/7 framework, but also making sure that our shippers, when 
they take advantage of those extended gate hours, there is no 
cost involved in that. And that is the reason for, again, this 
movement to have the PierPASS fee applicable to day gates and 
not night gates.
    So, this is one step of many that we need to take to, 
again, address the bottlenecks and congestion in the supply 
chain, which--again, the crisis has brought this forth, but 
this is an issue that has been, as you know, Congressman, a 
question at some of our major gateways, in terms of the turn 
time issue here, and what we need to do have to have greater 
fluidity for the truckdrivers.
    Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Cordero. I want to briefly 
touch, Mr. Cordero, on one additional critical issue for our 
community.
    As we know, the movement of goods has inevitable 
environmental consequences, particularly for frontline 
communities in the key corridors. I want to underscore that now 
is not the time to remove protections for those communities in 
the name of short-term efficiency.
    So, my question to you, Mr. Cordero, is what is the Port of 
Long Beach doing, and what more can we do here, in Congress, to 
make sure that goods are moving safely, efficiently, but 
without increasing the pollution to these communities?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, I think I can say that, both here in 
Long Beach and partnering with the Port of Los Angeles, our 
goal is to have zero emission from port operations, zero 
emissions in relation to trucks in 2035, and zero emissions in 
relation to cargo-handling equipment.
    So, currently, I think it is welcome news that the 
Infrastructure Act that we have referenced also creates funds 
for electrical infrastructure. This is something that is going 
to be very key, as we move forward to the next transition of 
what the truck community will look like. And I am talking about 
zero emission. This is not a vision anymore, it is an 
actuality.
    So, I think we need to get prepared for the necessary 
infrastructure that is required. I am talking about the EV 
infrastructure. It is going to create more efficiencies and, 
more importantly, for all urban setting ports across the 
Nation, friendlier, with regard to the impact of what these 
emissions are to our neighborhoods and communities.
    Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Cordero. I just want to 
remind you and the other panelists that besides the 
Infrastructure Act, the Build Back Better Act--which hopefully 
will be passed by Congress and signed by the President--also 
deals with the need for infrastructure that will reduce the 
impacts of climate change. And so, these are really a 
combination package.
    And with that I yield back to our esteemed chairman.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Representative Lowenthal. I will 
now recognize Representative Stauber.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Carbajal. We will move on to Representative Van Drew.
    Dr. Van Drew. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased that 
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure is finally 
holding this hearing on the American supply chain crisis.
    I have always advocated for a strong domestic supply chain. 
It has been clear, since this summer, that we are in a supply 
chain crisis, and that the situation has become worse due to 
the inaction of those in power.
    To our honorable witnesses, I thank you and the millions of 
American workers that you all represent. Workers make our 
country strong. I want to give American workers every tool 
possible to be successful for themselves, their families, and 
our great country of the United States of America. I wish that 
we were meeting under better circumstances.
    The United States is on the precipice of a dark American 
winter. Our country faces self-inflicted economic ruin, rising 
food prices, rising energy prices, rising housing prices, 
backed-up ports, unreliable product delivery, and an absolute 
labor shortage. This decaying economic environment is the 
direct result of liberal policies that have disincentivized 
business investment, flooding the economy with wasteful 
spending, and telling people not to go to work.
    These abysmal policies pale in comparison to the Biden 
vaccine mandate. I want to state unequivocally that the single 
greatest threat to economic security is the Biden vaccine 
mandate. This vaccine mandate is legally absurd, and 
existentially dangerous to our country of America. The rule 
being pushed by OSHA will force all businesses with over 100 
employees to require their staff to be vaccinated. If a worker 
refuses to get forcefully vaccinated, then the employer will be 
forced to fire them.
    To be clear, this vaccine mandate is illegal. This vaccine 
mandate is unconstitutional. This vaccine mandate is the single 
worst idea to emerge from a famously incompetent 
administration.
    The Biden vaccine mandate will result in nothing less than 
the total implosion of the American economy. If this mandate 
goes through, there will be unprecedented mass resignations--
truckers, pilots, rail workers, sailors, construction workers. 
We know, as a matter of fact, that the vaccine mandate will 
result in resignations, up to one-third of the transportation 
workforce, possibly. If this happens, it will begin a vicious 
cycle of supply chain collapse that will send the United States 
of America into economic depression. OSHA and the 
administration are sleepwalking towards economic cataclysm of 
which we have never seen before. It is truly baffling, and I 
personally pray that the courts will stop them, as I think they 
will.
    I think back to President Abraham Lincoln's Lyceum address: 
``If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author 
and finisher. As a nation of free men, we must live through all 
time, or die by suicide.'' This vaccine mandate reveals the 
hubris and detachment of this administration. The committee 
should use every tool at its disposal to prevent this impending 
catastrophe.
    I want to give our witnesses the opportunity to speak on 
the truth of this vaccine mandate, and what it will do to our 
country, and I direct my question to Chris Spear, president and 
chief executive officer of the American Trucking Associations.
    You testified before a Republican supply chain roundtable 
last month. Could you please explain the harsh reality of what 
the vaccine mandate will do to the American trucking workforce? 
Thank you.
    Mr. Spear. I appreciate that, Congressman. Now, again, as I 
said earlier, this is not an issue for us at ATA about pro-vax 
and anti-vax. It is a question of, if you do this, if you put 
this mandate in place, this is what is going to happen.
    So, what we did is we went out and surveyed our members, 
and the response we got was 37 percent of our driver force had 
indicated that they would not only leave, but they would 
definitely exit the workforce altogether, not just leave that 
carrier. So that is very problematic. Thirty-seven percent may 
be high. But even if you took 3.7 percent, it would be 
catastrophic. So, that is a measurable impact and added weight 
on the supply chain and our ability to come out of the COVID 
era. So, we are very, very concerned about that.
    I am also very concerned about the fact that it picks 
winners and losers. What is up with this 100 threshold? The 
President got up and said, ``I am doing this under my authority 
to protect the American people.'' OK, well, what about the 
people that work for an employer under 100? Does their health 
and safety not matter? Why are we picking winners and losers 
here? It is to avoid public comment. It is about speed. It is 
about getting this ETS on the street as quickly as possible.
    Now, I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer. But I know 
OSHA law. I know, in the 50 years of that agency, the only 
three times that it has been amended, I hand-wrote those for 
Senator Enzi, the late Senator from Wyoming. And I know they 
have overstepped their jurisdiction here. This is not an 
employment-based hazard. They do not have the jurisdiction to 
regulate this. And I am very confident in the sixth circuit, as 
of yesterday, that this is going to get bounced. So, they have 
overstepped their boundaries here. And for all the reasons 
cited, I don't think this is going to have an impact on the 
supply chain, because the courts are going to overturn it, and 
they should. They really should.
    We need to be forward leaning on the vaccine. We need to 
get people vaccinated. We are moving the vaccination.
    Mr. Carbajal. If you could, summarize, please.
    Mr. Spear. This is really an issue that we feel strongly 
about, and it is a distraction from what we need to be focused 
on with the supply chain.
    Dr. Van Drew. I yield back, and I thank you.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I will now recognize myself.
    First, I want to start out by thanking all the witnesses 
that are here today, and I will start with Mr. Cordero.
    Can you describe the nature of the working relationship you 
have had with the administration and the White House Supply 
Chain Disruptions Task Force?
    Have you found those discussions to be productive?
    And are you confident in the administration's efforts?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, thank you, Congressman.
    Number one, those efforts have been very productive. A case 
in point: one of the issues that we have here at our ports is 
the constraint on our terminals as to capacity. So, within a 
very short period, we have been able to address the loaded 
imports that have been at the containers for more than 9 days, 
and reduce that amount by almost 30 percent. What that does, it 
creates more capacity in our terminals.
    Obviously, we need to move the cargo. So, in that regard, I 
would have to say that the White House Envoy, John Porcari, has 
had a very good impact, in terms of his ability to get the 
stakeholders together to address this issue. That is, we need 
to roll up our sleeves. We are in a crisis, and we need to take 
measures to move the cargo.
    So, in that regard, again, I really appreciate the 
prioritization of this issue that is led by the White House, 
and we are doing all we can here, at the Nation's largest port 
complex, to again try to move towards transformational change 
of this supply chain.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I understand the Maritime 
Administration and the Federal Maritime Commission are working 
with stakeholders to improve data sharing and transparency 
within the supply chain. What role will the Port of Long Beach 
and other ports across the country play in this data sharing, 
Mr. Cordero?
    Mr. Cordero. Well, it would be a significant role. I think 
what we need to move to is an integrated platform, where, 
again, this industry moves forward and gets comfort in sharing 
data, again, to move forward the needle on visibility, and 
transparency on the movement of cargo. So, I think it is fair 
to say that every port authority is looking towards this 
digital transformation.
    For this committee, I would urge that if there is ever a 
time for opportunity to fund these kind of capabilities for our 
port authorities to move forward and exercise that leadership, 
it is now. Because again, we are falling behind with regard to 
what the rest of the world is doing, in terms of this 
technology.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Can the rest of the panel comment 
on how their respective industries will be contributing to the 
data sharing initiative, or how they will benefit?
    Mr. Jefferies. Well, I think across the supply chain we are 
all better served, and we have better data, both given the 
integration of the work we do between modes, but also with our 
customers, as well.
    The world has gotten used to the Amazonification of the 
economy. I know when my pizzamaker is putting pepperoni on the 
pizza that I have ordered. So, visibility, information sharing, 
of course, is key. There has got to be some smart boundaries 
around it, some smart structure around it. But at the end of 
the day, I think we are all better served working together, and 
with real-time, good information. So, conceptually, there is a 
lot to be done there.
    Ms. Reinke. And we are in agreement. As I said, data is the 
coin of the realm here. So, anything that can encourage 
collaboration and cut redtape so that we can communicate, and 
understand, and have visibility, I think we want to be part of 
and understand, be supportive of.
    Mr. Spear. Mr. Chairman, we would echo the same from Anne 
and Ian. Mario started with digital transformation. We like 
that concept. I think more transparency is good. It makes us 
all more informed. It also identifies exactly where the 
bottlenecks are. If we can measure them, we can remedy them.
    So, more transparency, it is a challenge. I mean, you are 
talking all these bottlenecks within the supply chain. We don't 
control all of them. Not any of us do control all of them. But 
seeing that panoramically is going to really provide some 
efficiencies, and that is really the wave of the future. If we 
can do that, I think it is going to make a difference.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
    Mr. Regan, this week the President, President Biden, signed 
the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and 
finally delivered on our promise to invest in our Nation's 
crumbling infrastructure. Included in the bill is $2.2 billion 
for the Port Infrastructure Development Program.Can you 
elaborate on how this investment in our Nation's ports could 
help alleviate congestion at our Nation's ports, and how we can 
make sure we are getting the greatest return on this 
investment?
    Mr. Regan. Yes, and thank you for that question. As the 
cargo volumes at ports have increased, the lack of 
comprehensive multimodal connectivity have contributed greatly 
to the congestion and delays. So, the Federal investment you 
referenced, the Port Infrastructure Development Plan, would be 
a huge boost to increasing that connectivity and that 
intermodal infrastructure of ports throughout the country.
    Multimodal port spending, you know, 67 percent of ports say 
that funding is the single largest obstacle to constructing 
essential freight rail connectors. In my written testimony and 
in my spoken testimony I mentioned how nearly half of U.S. 
ports state that better rail access could increase the 
throughput capacity by over 25 percent. So, this is vital to 
making sure that we are moving goods off of the ships, and then 
easily and quickly into the rest of the country. So, this is a 
really, really important part.
    And I would also note that, in the Build Back Better Act, 
there is an additional $5 billion of money for ports that is 
directly geared towards addressing the supply chain here.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. We will now move on to 
Representative Stauber.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you 
to all our witnesses for being here today. Many of you are on 
the front lines, trying to make the best of this crisis, and 
working against all odds, while sidestepping each roadblock 
this administration puts in your way. So, I say thank you.
    Before going into my questions, I want to first highlight 
some of President Biden and his administration's views on the 
supply chain crisis, which really shows how much he cares about 
the issue, and how seriously those in power are taking this.
    ``Most of the economic problems we are facing--inflation, 
supply chains, et cetera--are high-class problems.'' This was 
from Joe Biden's Chief of Staff.
    White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki mocked the supply 
chain issues, and laughed when asked about them, stating, ``The 
tragedy of the treadmill delayed.''
    Secretary Buttigieg said that our supply chain crisis was 
due to Biden and the administration being ``too good at their 
jobs.''
    President Biden himself said recently that ordinary 
Americans ``wouldn't even understand'' the supply chain.
    When asked if holiday gifts would arrive on time, White 
House Press Secretary Jen Psaki dismissively said--in 
quotations--``we are not the Postal Service.''
    When asked about higher costs at the grocery store, Jen 
Psaki said, ``The American people are not looking at cost-to-
cost comparisons from this year to 2 years ago.'' And I repeat 
that. Jen Psaki said, ``The American people are not looking at 
cost-to-cost comparisons from this year to 2 years ago.''
    I hate to be the wakeup call to this administration, and 
maybe even to some folks in this room, but not everyone is 
spending their Thanksgiving in the millionaire and billionaire 
playground of Nantucket, like many people are. There are real, 
ordinary Americans who are really suffering because of the 
supply chain and inflation crisis this administration has 
caused. Right now, there are families in Hibbing, Minnesota, in 
North Branch, Minnesota, in Park Rapids, Minnesota, even in the 
President's Scranton, Pennsylvania, and Delaware, who are still 
figuring out how to put Thanksgiving dinner on the table this 
year.
    So, my question is to Ms. Reinke.
    Can you please speak a little about what your industry is 
doing to fill in the gaps and support the supply chain, despite 
the President's policies?
    And in addition to that, can you also speak to how the 
Democrats' liability insurance increase--what I like to call 
the trucker tax--would impact the supply chain, Ms. Reinke?
    Ms. Reinke. Thank you, Congressman, for the question. I 
will answer your second question first.
    We are radical pragmatists. Our members are, literally, 
just looking to try to find ways to improve efficiencies for 
their customers and build capacity for the motor carriers and 
intermodal companies that we work with. So, if there is an 
implication, for example, raising the minimum insurance, we 
don't have a position on it, but if it affects the capacity of 
our motor carriers, if it cuts out smaller carriers who can't 
afford it, then that would be a concern for us.
    As for the first, what we are trying to do is, well, we are 
hiring like crazy, like all of us are. In fact, there have 
been, I think, the first half of the year, 9,000 new brokers 
who applied for a broker's license and registered for a bond. 
And that reflects the amount of freight that is going on.
    And what we are trying to do, in addition to hiring like 
crazy, is really invest and engage in technology. And I think I 
have mentioned that it is visibility throughout the 
transaction.
    So, what does that mean? That means having--at the 
beginning of the transaction, we have what are called load 
boards, which shows what the freight is, where the freight is, 
and how much one would charge if you take it.
    Then you have the transportation management systems, where 
you figure out, all right, what carriers are available, and 
what route can we take it.
    And then you have the visibility into where is that 
container going, what is the timing on it, and how is it going?
    And then the last thing is the automated back-end 
processes, where we can pay automatically the carriers at the 
end of the transaction.
    So that is where, really, our money and our attention and 
our time is focused on.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much.
    And Mr. Spear, do you have anything to add to that?
    Mr. Spear. Other than the fact that we really wanted to 
find efficiencies through collaboration. As you have seen, the 
transformation over the last 10, 15 years, we really are 
intermodal. We do rely on one another. There is a lot of 
collaboration between Mario and myself. We represent industries 
that have to work together.
    And so, finding bottlenecks, finding inefficiencies, it is 
in all of our best interests to alleviate those problems. So, 
any technology, any transparency is something that we are going 
to commit to working and ensuring going forward that we can see 
more and do more as a result.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you very much, and my time is up.
    I yield, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. We will move on and recognize 
Representative Malinowski.
    Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, a lot of 
commentary in this hearing about this situation, and I would 
start by saying what ought to be obvious, and that is that our 
inflation and supply chain problems are probably not the result 
of a bill that hasn't passed yet. They are probably not the 
result of an infrastructure bill that was just signed a couple 
of days ago.
    What we know is that we had a global pandemic, which 
resulted in massive economic downturns in the United States and 
all around the world. But then we did something that we have 
never done before: we actually helped the American people not 
just endure and survive this downturn, but to emerge from it 
with more household wealth than they did before they started. 
That is a success. That is something that we should all be 
proud of. And much of it was bipartisan. The legislation that 
helped our small businesses and families and workers stay 
afloat through the first year of the pandemic was supported by 
just about every single member of this committee.
    So, here is the situation. We have huge disruptions in 
production all around the world, workers not coming to work, 
workers sick, disruptions in transportation and bringing goods 
to market. But at the same time, the American people have more 
money to spend. And interestingly, they are spending it in 
different ways.
    So, for example, last year we saw a 32-percent increase in 
e-commerce, because people were staying home, rather than going 
to stores. They are ordering stuff online. And so, with all of 
those facts, I think it is fairly easy to understand how we got 
to where we are.
    And I wanted to ask the witnesses maybe to comment a little 
bit on that, and maybe starting with Mr. Cordero.
    In your testimony you brought out another remarkable fact, 
and that is that the Ports of L.A. and Long Beach, in the first 
10 months of this year, actually moved 17 percent more 
containers than they did in a similar period in 2018. And yet 
we have ships parked offshore. But we are actually moving more 
containers through the system. Could you say a little bit about 
why that is, what we know and what we don't know?
    Mr. Cordero. So, thank you, Congressman. So yes, the ports 
will have a record year for 2021 in container movement. And in 
part, there is, again, a myriad of factors as to why that is, 
in terms of what we have before us. But one of the things that 
you mentioned that is very key is how we have been able to 
continue the trajectory on the economy, in terms of the benefit 
of what we are seeing. And one of them is consumer spending.
    I think it is at a very high mark. E-commerce is a major 
factor, in terms of our spending habits. We could buy online 
24/7. So, I think the good news is the consumer demand that is 
driving this, and the business environment, and, again, whether 
it is production, raw materials, and durable goods, and so 
forth. So, I think, again, that the good news is it is a very 
good economy that we are seeing because of the policies that we 
have been putting in place here in the last couple of years.
    But the thing I really want to stress, and say to this 
committee again, just remember that in 2010 a major economist 
here in this industry forecasted that if we did not invest and 
do something, in terms of how we operate in the North American 
ports here in America, that in 2020 we would have some serious 
congestion issues. He was right on the money. And that is what 
I want to stress to this committee, that crisis set aside, we 
need to continue the prioritization of how important ports are 
to this----
    Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, and we have just--thanks to 
President Biden and a bipartisan majority in the House and 
Senate, thanks to those courageous Republicans who joined us, 
we just approved a major investment in our ports that will help 
in the long term.
    I don't have that much time left. I did want to ask Ms. 
Reinke about the question of visibility in the supply chain. 
Somebody mentioned to me a few days ago that we actually have 
very little idea of where all these containers are. There are 
20 million or so shipping containers around the world. But 
unlike aircraft and their passengers, there are no sensors on 
these containers. Is that correct?
    Would the system benefit from a greater investment in the 
technology that allows us to have perfect visibility of where 
everything is in the system, and should the United States be 
setting those standards?
    Ms. Reinke. I----
    Mr. Carbajal. Mr. Malinowski, you are out of time. I am 
going to ask if they could submit that answer----
    Ms. Reinke. Will do.
    Mr. Carbajal. Take that question for the record, and submit 
the response in writing, please.
    Mr. Malinowski. Thank you.
    Mr. Carbajal. With that, we will move on to Representative 
Guest. And Mr. Guest will be our last speaker, because we are 
going to have to recess due to votes.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    To Mr. Spear and Ms. Reinke, I want to talk about something 
that each of you mentioned in your written testimony, and that 
would be the impact that the PRO Act would have on our 
transportation market.
    Mr. Spear, you say--and I quote from your written 
testimony--``I would be remiss if I did not address a piece of 
legislation that would be extremely harmful to the trucking 
industry and hurt the very workers it purports to help: . . . 
H.R. 842. The PRO Act . . . includes a provision that would 
effectively bar the trucking industry from utilizing the 
independent contractor business model. . . . [t]he 
implementation of a restrictive national test to limit 
independent contractor status would jeopardize the livelihoods 
of over 350,000 owner-operators, destabilizing America's supply 
chain and irreparably harming the economy.''
    Ms. Reinke, you say there ``The PRO Act, which would change 
the way independent contractors are classified at the Federal 
level, would make this a national issue and have devastating 
effects on the transportation market.''
    Ms. Reinke, you also reference California Assembly Bill 5, 
which I believe is a precursor to the PRO Act, which you state 
there ``essentially bars independent contractors from operating 
in the state, will further exacerbate the supply chain 
situation by narrowing the pool of available drivers and 
companies.''
    And so, to Mr. Spear and Ms. Reinke, I would ask if you 
would take a few moments and expand on the effect that the PRO 
Act would have, assuming that it was passed and signed into 
law, what effect that would have on our current supply chain 
issues, and the economy as a whole?
    Mr. Spear. I will go quickly, so Anne can comment, as well, 
but I think the commentary that you cited from both of our 
testimonies certainly captures it.
    But to add a little bit more color, it is going to remove 
choice, as simple as that. People should have the choice to 
decide their professional paths. This would remove that, which 
is why it is before the Supreme Court now. I believe they are 
going to hear it, and hopefully they rule correctly, because we 
believe that people should have the right to choose to be an 
independent contractor, for whatever reason. If they want to be 
a seasonal worker, a part-time worker, have their own business 
on the side, that should be their choice.
    Forcing them to join a union, which is what this would do, 
is very destructive. It removes decades--since 1935, the 
National Labor Relations Act, the balance that has existed for 
decades between unions and employers--it would remove all that. 
It would remove State right-to-work laws. It is just really 
rewriting everything to channel people into unions, which is 
the point. We are just removing choice, and that is anti-
American, and we oppose it.
    I just think it would have added weight on the supply chain 
and make it even more difficult to resolve a lot of the issues 
that this panel has been testifying here today.
    Mr. Regan. Congressman, if I may jump in here, there has 
been a lot of dumping on the PRO Act, and I am a strong 
supporter of the PRO Act.
    Mr. Spear here references the balance between labor and 
management that has happened over the years. The balance has 
been inherently tilted against labor, against workers, and in 
favor of employment. And all of these various employment models 
that we have seen emerge over time have been in place 
specifically to undermine a worker's right to collectively 
bargain and undermine the worker's right to have more voice and 
more strength in the workplace.
    We are strong supporters of that, and the solution to our 
supply chain issues, and the solution to strengthening our 
economy is not going to be by driving a greater wedge between 
employment and the workers, by making sure that people can't 
earn better wages, and they cannot earn better benefits and 
retirement benefits. These are not going to be the solutions to 
our problem, and it is certainly not going to make a better, 
stronger economy for all Americans across the board. Thank you.
    Mr. Guest. Well, I would assume, Ms. Reinke, that you would 
take exception to those comments.
    Ms. Reinke. Yes. I mean, in the mode of being a radical 
pragmatist again, we are concerned it is going to completely 
remove capacity. I think Mr. Spear talked about removing 
choice. We are talking about removing capacity, meaning this is 
a highly successful industry. The owner-operator model, as I 
said, has doubled over the last 10 years.
    There is clearly a draw for people who want to own their 
own businesses, who want to have one to six trucks, who want to 
have that freedom and that liberty and that choice, as Mr. 
Spear said. So, if that is now taken away from them, are they 
just going to leave the marketplace? Are they going to leave 
the industry because they don't want to be someone else's 
employee? That is what we are concerned about.
    Mr. Regan. The PRO Act does not force anybody to join a 
union. It gives them more choice, and a more fair choice that 
has not existed for decades.
    Mr. Spear. We will let the courts decide, Greg.
    Mr. Guest. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Since they have called votes on 
the House floor, the committee shall stand in recess, subject 
to the call of the Chair. We will restart the hearing as soon 
as the last vote is over, I guess.
    [Recess.]
    Mr. Stanton [presiding]. The committee will reconvene at 
this time. I really want to thank the witnesses for their 
patience, as the Members had to go vote on the floor.
    Next up to question our witnesses is Congressmember Garcia 
from Illinois.
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, of 
course, a special thanks to Chairman DeFazio for holding this 
hearing, and I thank all the witnesses for appearing today.
    The supply chain problems we are currently experiencing 
have affected all Americans, including the district that I 
represent. The additional investment in the Build Back Better 
legislation, combined with the record infrastructure 
investments that Congress just passed, will unlock our supply 
chain, help American workers keep our economy growing, and 
lower inflation. That is why we need to pass the Build Back 
Better legislation.
    But I want to ask Mr. Regan if he would answer the 
following: Mr. Regan, many of my Republican colleagues, as you 
saw earlier, falsely accuse President Biden of causing the 
supply chain crisis, or ruining Christmas for Americans. What 
is your reaction to those statements from my friends across the 
aisle?
    Mr. Regan. Thank you for that question. There have been 
many times during this hearing where I have been a little 
frustrated by the characterization of all of this stuff.
    This supply chain crisis has, frankly, been 40 years in the 
making. We detailed earlier exactly how the systematic industry 
practices that have happened in both the trucking and rail 
industry have created this very inelastic system, where, the 
minute we had a surge in goods, we were completely incapable of 
being able to deal with it.
    Meanwhile, what President Biden has done with the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act--which, by the way, all 
of my fellow trade association members of this panel supported 
and hailed the passage of in their testimony--that would 
actually direct a huge amount of money directly into our supply 
chain crisis and start addressing the infrastructure needs to 
help solve this, moving forward.
    And I might add, many of the politicians that are talking 
today have no comments about the previous President, who not 
only talked a big game, but didn't even deliver a proposal to 
solve any of these issues, let alone actually deliver on the 
promise of delivering on real investment and real movement 
towards investing in our infrastructure.
    So when I see things like #emptyshelvesBiden alongside an 
out-of-context photo from the supermarket with empty shelves 
from an ice storm that was 2 years ago, or that Biden is 
ruining Christmas because some children may not get their 
ThinkFun Gravity Marble Maze under the tree, while overlooking 
the fact that there are 37 million Americans living in poverty 
who don't even know where they are going to get their next 
meal, I get very aggravated by that.
    It is extremely frustrating, because all they are doing 
with that type of commentary is exploiting a real crisis. And I 
hope that we can actually start talking about real solutions. 
And thankfully, I know that many of my colleagues on this panel 
are talking about that, are talking about issues in their 
industry, and their testimonies talk about the benefit that 
President Biden's investment in the IIJA is going to have in 
this situation. Thank you.
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you for sharing that, Mr. 
Regan. I want to turn to another subject, and that is railroad 
profits and job cuts. You note in your testimony that, since 
2014, Class I railroads have implemented Precision Scheduled 
Railroading, and cut their workforce by over 20 percent, if I 
heard you right, resulting in tens of thousands of job losses. 
At the same time, Class I railroads are reporting record 
profits in their most recent quarterly earnings.
    My first question on that is, in your opinion, is it fair 
to say that so many railroad workers are losing their jobs, 
while railroads are doing as well as they ever have?
    Mr. Regan. Yes. Certainly, by the profit margins, yes, they 
are doing as well as they ever have.
    And if you look at since 2010, the railroads have taken 
back an astonishing $191 billion on stock buybacks and 
dividends alone. Meanwhile, the workforce has shrunk by 20 
percent, just in 5 years, and we have seen a drastic reduction 
in the built-out infrastructure, on the physical infrastructure 
with the railroads. So, I think that there is a real cognitive 
dissonance between sort of what we are talking about, in terms 
of investing and rising to the occasion, versus what the 
practices have been for 5, 10 years.
    And, frankly, this is something we have been warning about 
for that amount of time. I think the first time I talked about 
this in front of the T&I Committee, it must have been 2 or 3 
years ago, but we started writing about it 5 or 6 years ago. 
This is not a new problem, it wasn't an unforeseen crisis that 
sort of came out of thin air.
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Well, thank you and----
    Mr. Jefferies. Mr. Garcia, can I comment on that, please? I 
know we only have a few----
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. I am not finished yet. I got 
about----
    Mr. Jefferies. OK.
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Let me ask you what Congress or 
agencies like the FRA or the STB can do to help counteract 
negative effects of PSR, and ensure a long-term, robust rail 
workforce?
    Mr. Regan. Well, certainly from the FRA perspective, I 
mean, we need to make sure that the operations are safe, and 
that is going to be the critical role for the FRA, is making 
sure that we continue to have safe freight rail operations, and 
that the reductions in workforce and the resulting operations 
changes are not creating an unsafe situation. So, the FRA is 
going to play a key role there.
    STB needs to make sure that the freight railroads are 
fulfilling their common carrier obligations that are statutory 
in nature, and they are going to make sure that they can 
properly regulate this industry.
    Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Well, thank you, and I leave it to 
the chair, because my time has run out.
    Mr. Jefferies. I think it is convenient I wasn't allowed to 
be able to respond there, but we will do that in the record. 
Thanks.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you so much. I will now recognize 
Congressmember Van Duyne for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Van Duyne. I am interested, Mr. Jefferies, in your 
comments. Would you please take 30 seconds to just finish what 
you were going to start, that you were prevented from saying?
    Mr. Jefferies. Sure, I would love to. We are a demand-based 
business. We hire based on the demands we are facing. And I 
think, as I said earlier this year, we moved more intermodal 
than we have in any 6-month period in history with the employee 
base we had. We kept the network fluid. We are investing $25 
billion of our own money back into our network every year, the 
result of the highest graded infrastructure of any 
infrastructure in this country. We are not seeking bailouts 
from the Government. We do support integrated infrastructure 
investment.
    And when it comes to safety, in 2020, we had record levels 
of several of our safety measurements: safest employee injury 
rate in the history of the industry last year, which exactly is 
what Greg is talking about, timeline-wise.
    So, the facts don't add up with these claims. And so, I 
think it is important to be able to rebut that. Thank you.
    Ms. Van Duyne. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
    During the last 11 months I have marveled at the resilience 
of countless small and medium-sized north Texas businesses, as 
they have worked through unprecedented and ever-changing 
problems to stay afloat. The stories I have heard in business 
roundtables and in tours across north Texas are not only a 
testament to the rugged spirit of our entrepreneurs, but also 
infuriating, as I have heard how the policies of our own 
Government are dragging these good people down. Small 
businesses across our region are adjusting business models, 
changing food menus, finding new suppliers, and doing 
everything they can to battle against the biggest threat to 
their operations, which is the President in the United States.
    Mr. Regan, I appreciate your comments on bashing the entire 
right side of the aisle on our lack of being able to put 
through a transportation bill. But I am also shocked that you 
would grab hold of what we just passed. I guess you are just a 
big fan of regulations, of supply chain woes. And while you 
think that the only thing that the supply chain is hurting is 
Tinkertoys are not being put under the Christmas tree, I would 
hope that you understand that we are also talking about 
lifesaving equipment, we are talking about medicine, we are 
talking about liquid oxygen that is actually providing people 
with a sustainable life. So, it is not just toys that we are 
talking about that are lacking in the supply chain, but other 
really important items.
    I have a question for Chris Spear, and thank you, Mr. 
Spear. I have listened to a lot of your testimony today, and 
you have been right on, and I want to thank you for your 
patience in dealing with what we have been doing for hours and 
hours, even though that was not on the agenda today.
    The Port of Los Angeles has been America's busiest port for 
the last 20 years, and it handles 20 percent of all the 
incoming cargo for the U.S. The Port of Long Beach is the 
second busiest container seaport in the U.S., handling an 
annual estimated trade value of $170 billion. We are witnessing 
crippling supply chain disruptions at these ports now, but I 
worry that California's extreme policies related to labor and 
climate will only exacerbate these problems, moving forward.
    So, the California Air Resources Board passed a rule that 
says all short-haul drayage vehicles in ports and rail yards 
must be zero emissions by 2035, and all commercial trucks sold 
in the State must be zero emissions in 2045. Given the cost and 
limited market availability of zero-emission trucks, as well as 
the operational challenges related to insufficient charging 
infrastructure for heavy-duty vehicles, I am concerned that the 
standards California is setting are unachievable and will cause 
further damage to the supply chain in our Nation's two business 
ports.
    Mr. Spear, do you share my concerns regarding these extreme 
policies and future challenges?
    Mr. Spear. Yes, thank you, Congresswoman, I think that what 
you are witnessing come out of CARB is a lack of stakeholder 
input. And it is clear it is not reflected in the .02 standard 
that they are proposing, the timeline for the electrification. 
It just cannot be met. It is just not possible to invent that 
kind of technology in that amount of time, and have it adopted 
by our members.
    Now, both are represented by the ATA, so I have had both 
perspectives. We have met with Gina McCarthy at the White 
House. We have had lengthy conversations with EPA Administrator 
Regan on this issue, to make certain that they understand that 
this is not being against the environment. We all want clean 
water, clean air, and we have been a participant in designing 
phase 1 and 2 of emissions.
    But on this third leg, this next phase, if they go with the 
CARB standard, .02, it is not possible. It is just simply not 
possible to meet it, and it is going to fail. And if it fails, 
then everybody looks bad. We can comply with .05, we have made 
that very clear to them. We can comply with timelines that are 
more reasonable to invent, adopt, and deploy that kind of 
equipment, nationally.
    But letting California--this is not the United States of 
California, this is the United States of America. And letting 
CARB in California dictate the terms and conditions of all 
manufacturing across this country--because they don't want 2 
lines of business, they want 1, and that is why we have it for 
50 States, not 1.
    So, this is really a reflection on where we are. And 
putting good regulations that are clear, and can be complied 
with, we favor that. We are fine, we are not anti-reg. We just 
want stuff that can be achieved. This is not.
    Ms. Van Duyne. I thank you, Mr. Spear, I appreciate you 
giving me that all on the record.
    I yield back my time.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. I now recognize 
Congressmember Auchincloss for 5 minutes.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Auchincloss. Thanks, Chair.
    Dr. Correll, my questions are for you, and about the 
truckdriver crisis, in particular. Your research suggests that 
the truckdriver crisis is not a headcount shortage, but rather 
an ``endemic undervaluing of our American truckdrivers' time.'' 
You discuss the retention problem, as well as staffing policies 
that ``de facto limit drivers to only 6.5 hours daily 
driving.'' Can you elaborate on those staffing policies?
    Mr. Correll. Sure. Thank you for your question. So, one of 
the things that I look at is what are the factors that 
contribute to drivers being underutilized, not getting as many 
hours per day driving as they would like to get. And I see that 
it has a lot to do with detention. So, how they are--how slowly 
they are processed at facilities.
    The key indicator, I think, of what makes processing go 
faster or slower is how the facility is staffed. So, when we 
look at how we can get more hours out of our existing 
population of drivers, I think it goes back to how are we 
processing them at the warehouses and distribution centers, and 
that is a staffing and planning question, in my mind.
    Mr. Auchincloss. And I want to touch also on data 
collection. You made recommendations for better governmental 
leadership in data collection. Would it also be helpful for the 
Federal Government to study staffing policies like the 
misclassification of drivers and poor treatment and pay that 
have been highlighted by the unions like the Teamsters that may 
be exacerbating current supply chain issues and hindering our 
competitiveness?
    Mr. Correll. I think so. I think my own experience is--I 
don't study data related to the legal organization of the 
truckdrivers in the datasets that I have, so that would be 
outside of what I previously studied. But I think any time that 
the Government could help us to organize a formalized study 
into the actual data of where the problems are, that is really 
what I am hoping to bring to this committee's conversation.
    One of the things that I have noticed is that, as I work 
with shippers and receivers and truckdrivers and say, ``All 
right, what is going on,'' it is almost like a Rorschach test, 
where people repeat back to you either the most recent bad 
thing that happened to them, or whatever their improvement 
hobbyhorse happens to be. And the real value of data collection 
is that we can all have those personal opinions, but we can 
weigh them against the greater aggregate datasets.
    And that is what I was hoping to bring to the community 
today. And I think, going forward, that is the tool we have to 
find the solutions that give us the most bang for the buck when 
you make those investments. So, I do think that would really 
help.
    Mr. Auchincloss. That reminds me of the aphorism that the 
plural of anecdote is not data.
    Mr. Correll. Excellent, excellent.
    Mr. Auchincloss. The final question for you is the Los 
Angeles Alliance for a New Economy submitted recommendations to 
the committee for steps Congress can take to address current 
supply chain and future supply chain chokepoints, and those 
included supporting the PRO Act, and protections for workers, 
and encouraging the use of unionized companies, or companies 
with labor peace agreements to expedite the clearing of 
backlogged containers. Do you have a point of view on whether 
these increased protections and investments in the workforce 
would allow there to be better staffing policies, and resolve 
some of the issues that you have raised?
    Mr. Correll. Could you describe the protections, just 
briefly, that I should comment on?
    Mr. Auchincloss. Those encompassed in the PRO Act, in 
particular.
    Mr. Correll. I am afraid I don't have a strong----
    Mr. Auchincloss. Basically, supporting the right to 
collective bargaining and protections in the workplace for 
union truckers.
    Mr. Correll. On that question--I have extolled all the good 
virtues of data. The bad side is that it is all necessarily 
historical. So I don't have, you know, going back to pre-1980, 
those are the comparisons that I think would be most helpful 
that I don't have.
    The notion that I would like to bring to this community, 
though, is that, when we think about the role of labor unions 
as giving drivers a voice in how they are managed, and how they 
are treated, historically those were very strong voices. And 
over time maybe they have lost some power, at least as I have 
read the situation. I have seen the rise of data collection as 
a way to amplify that voice. So, drivers and entrepreneurs in 
the driver community are creating datasets that measure how 
they are treated at facilities, and sharing that amongst one 
another, which is, in its own way, sort of a collective action, 
if you will.
    So, sort of my bottom line take on it is I don't have data 
to speak to the organized labor force, but I do see, within the 
driver community, an effort to use data to harmonize their 
opinions and share them to improve the way they are treated.
    Mr. Auchincloss. Well, Doctor, I appreciate your empirical 
approach to this question. It is very much in the keeping of 
MIT's rigor, so thank you.
    Mr. Correll. Thank you.
    Mr. Auchincloss. And Chair, I yield back my balance of my 
time.
    Mr. Stanton. I now recognize Congressmember Steel for 5 
minutes.
    Mrs. Steel. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, all the 
witnesses coming out today.
    We have a crisis happening at our ports. Hundreds of 
thousands of shipping containers are sitting off the coast of 
California. These containers are full of essential goods like 
medical supplies, auto parts, and other basic, everyday 
necessities. Congress cannot double down on failing economic 
policies that make life for American businesses and workers 
harder and more expensive.
    Additionally, this supply chain crisis has wreaked havoc on 
our environment. Myself, Congressman LaMalfa, and other Members 
of the California delegation will be sending a letter to 
Governor Newsom today, asking to declare a state of emergency 
at our ports and across the goods transportation and storage 
distribution chain. I would like to submit it for the record. 
It is a letter here, Mr. Chairman, so I am going to submit this 
today.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
 Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Gavin Newsom, Governor, State of 
 California, from Hon. Michelle Steel et al., Submitted for the Record 
                         by Hon. Michelle Steel
                     Congress of the United States,
                                  House of Representatives,
                                         Washington, DC 20515-0548,
                                                 November 17, 2021.
The Honorable Gavin Newsom,
Governor,
State of California, 1303 10th Street, Suite 1173, Sacramento, CA 
        95814.
    Dear Governor Newsom:
    Right now, hundreds of thousands of shipping containers are sitting 
off the coast of California. These containers are full of essential 
goods like medical supplies, auto parts, and other basic everyday 
necessities. A record number of cargo ships--more than 100--are still 
idling and anchored off the coast every day. The President's recent 
call for 24/7 operations at our ports to get these ships and cargo 
moving is a step in the right direction, but we are still faced with a 
massive crisis, with no sign of slowing.
    As Members of Congress, representing millions of Californians, we 
urge you to declare a State of Emergency at our ports and across the 
goods transportation and storage distribution chain. The Ports of Long 
Beach and Los Angeles are responsible for more than 40% of container 
imports in the United States, and 30% of exports. With record-high 
inflation affecting every single American, the continued backlog of 
goods, expected to last into 2022, is driving economic concerns and 
high prices.
    This backlog of ships is also creating an environmental hazard. 
Normal operations are responsible for more than 100 tons per day of 
smog and particulate-forming nitrogen oxides. But current operations 
are seeing five times the number of ships that are anchored and idling 
off the coast, vastly increasing pollution. We have a crisis on our 
hands the longer these ships idle off our shores.
    Unfortunately, California's own burdensome laws and regulations 
that restrict goods from moving to consumers, have contributed to this 
crisis. Your immediate action to suspend or eliminate the rules and 
regulations stopping goods from moving from our ports is critical to 
the safety and security of our economy and our state.
    Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) restricts the ability of Californians to work 
as independent contractors. This law creates a chilling effect for many 
of the supply chain industries and makes it more difficult for 
independently contracted drivers to operate, leading many to leave 
California. According to the Port of Long Beach, most truck chassis now 
come from Tennessee because of the favorable tax treatment they are 
given over those registered in California. Without enough truckers to 
come and unload, this cargo will continue to sit on these ships, just 
waiting to be delivered. It is time to end AB5 and allow for 
independent contractors to work freely within California.
    It is imperative to suspend the new and overburdensome Warehouse 
Indirect Source rule recently promulgated by the South Coast Air 
Quality Management (SCAQMD). This rule, and particularly the Warehouse 
Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program, places 
massive costs on local warehouses in potential mitigation fees and 
restricts the number of truck trips to and from warehouse facilities. 
Facilities that fail to meet these trucking requirements must pay 
``mitigation fees'' that SCAQMD estimates show could cost Southern 
California Warehouse Operators up to $1 billion per year. Restricting 
the number of trucks traveling to and from warehouses, and increasing 
the cost of doing so, only makes supply chain delays worse. It is time 
to waive these rules to help get essential and lifesaving supplies to 
those who need it.
    California Environmental Quality Act compliance and complex land 
use permitting rules are key contributors to the state's shortage of 
adequate warehouse and storage facilities. We urge you to expedite CEQA 
review and permitting processes for warehouses, storage facilities and 
other supply chain facilities essential for goods distribution.
    Americans rely on the efficient movement of goods through 
California's ports to feed and clothe their families. And American 
producers rely on that same goods movement to ship their products to 
consumers around the world. It is critical that supply chain 
restrictions created by the State of California be removed to resolve 
this crisis.
        Sincerely,
Michelle Steel,
  Member of Congress.
Doug LaMalfa,
  Member of Congress.
David G. Valadao,
  Member of Congress.
Ken Calvert,
  Member of Congress.
Jay Obernolte,
  Member of Congress.
Devin Nunes,
  Member of Congress.
Tom McClintock,
  Member of Congress.
Darrell Issa,
  Member of Congress.

    Mrs. Steel. So, my question is, Mr. Cordero, that I just 
recently toured the port with Darin Wright and other members of 
your team, and I learned a lot. According to your testimony, 
24/7 operations will help to mitigate the current surge. But I 
heard at the port it was only two shifts that they were 
working. When are they are going to start working for three 
shifts for 24/7? That is what President Biden asked for, and it 
seems like the port is still not doing it. So that is just 
really a simple question. When, Mr. Cordero?
    [No response.]
    Mrs. Steel. I guess I don't see him here.
    Mr. Stanton. Mr. Cordero, is he still on?
    [Pause.]
    Voice. No, he is gone.
    Mr. Stanton. I am sorry, Congressmember Steel, he had to 
leave. So, I apologize. So, we will ask him to submit answers 
for the record, in written answers.
    Mrs. Steel. So yes, I am going to just ask that--these are 
the questions that--I am going to do written ones, but if 
warehouse facilities are at capacity, how can drivers make 
deliveries?
    Do you think it was smart for cities to impose a moratorium 
on new warehouses and truck facilities?
    I need these answers from him later, so I am going to 
submit this.
    And then, Ms. Reinke, you mentioned, specifically, the 
regulations from my home State of California promulgated 
through the California Air Resources Board. What, at the 
Federal level, can we do to rein in these regulations?
    Ms. Reinke. Well, as you know, California has a waiver, and 
so they can act without--sort of under their own authority. 
Certainly, the Federal Government could remove that waiver. 
That is one option.
    But another, I think, really, is to try to right-size 
regulations. And we want to work with the California Air 
Resources Board to understand--we understand being 
aspirational, but we also want to be pragmatic and practical. 
If this renders capacity scarce, or if it removes business 
opportunities from our members and they want to leave 
California, that doesn't actually help the State, either.
    So, if we can have a discussion with the State folks, and 
there is an understanding and a mutual appreciation of that, I 
think that will go a long way.
    Mrs. Steel. OK, I appreciate that.
    And then my third question is, Mr. Spear, you mentioned 
that there is currently a provision in the PRO Act that would 
effectively bar the trucking industry from utilizing the 
independent contractor business model. Can you expand how a 
similar provision in California affected this vital industry? 
Because we have AB5 passed, and it has been implemented since 
2019.
    Mr. Spear. Yes, absolutely, Congresswoman. It is 
essentially the same. It is codifying that, which is the same 
issue, AB5, that is now being considered by the Supreme Court, 
which just recently asked the Solicitor General to comment, 
which is a good indicator that they are looking at taking it 
up. So, I firmly believe that is the place to have this 
decided, and we need to make certain that these laws take into 
account all occupations, and the freedom of choice. And 
independent contractors would be robbed that right, if this 
were to proceed under AB5 or the PRO Act.
    So, we want to preserve that. They choose that occupation 
for a number of reasons. Let's let them have that right. If 
they want to join a union, that is their decision, too. 
Maintaining that balance is very, very important. That is what 
I am referring to that has been preserved for multiple decades, 
since the 1935 National Labor Relations Act. So, I firmly 
believe that is the way it should be, and we shouldn't mess 
with it.
    Mrs. Steel. Thank you very much.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you. I now recognize Congressmember 
Bourdeaux for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Bourdeaux. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 
hearing today.
    We have all seen, firsthand, the negative implications of 
the ongoing supply chain challenges on public trust and on the 
economy. It is clear from today's testimony that more work 
needs to be done to ensure that, in the long term, we have a 
supply chain that is resilient, and can be flexible to global 
incidents.
    In October I introduced the bipartisan Supply CHAIN Act, 
H.R. 5479, with Representatives Kinzinger and Robin Kelly, 
which would establish an Office of Supply Chain Resiliency and 
Crisis Response within the Department of Commerce to monitor 
supply chains of critical goods and materials, and plan for and 
respond to supply chain distributions.
    It is clear from everyone's testimony today that it is 
going to take all of us to fix our supply chain and make it 
resilient over the long term. My bill would encourage 
partnerships and collaboration between the Federal Government, 
industry, labor organizations, and State and local governments.
    My question is for Mr. Regan.
    Can you speak to the importance of a coordinated response 
to the supply chain challenges?
    Why is it important for labor organizations to be included 
in these conversations?
    And how could the Federal Government, using an office like 
this, help build better coordination across the different 
actors who are involved in supply chain decisions?
    Mr. Regan. Thank you for that question. I think it is 
vitally important that we have a comprehensive approach to all 
this, that takes in all the various industries and factions or 
factors of our supply chain. And I think you see many of the 
people testifying today would argue the exact same thing. I 
mean, we need to be coordinating here across trucking, rail, 
maritime ports, warehouses to make sure that we are that we are 
addressing this problem systematically, and not just piecemeal.
    And I think labor is an important voice in all that, and it 
is something I said in my testimony, where our members are the 
ones on the ground. They see, in realtime, where the 
chokepoints are, where the backlogs are, where the processes 
that aren't quite working are contributing to the problems--are 
really playing a huge role. So, I think it needs to be a 
comprehensive conversation with business and labor. And 
together, I do believe we can find some very meaningful changes 
to this, to solve this problem for the long term.
    Ms. Bourdeaux. Thank you so much. I yield back.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. I now recognize 
Congressmember Fitzpatrick for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is 
for Mr. Regan.
    Mr. Regan, thank you for being here with us today. 
Incentives are a powerful force in attracting people to jobs, 
and we need men and women working now, more than ever. Mr. 
Regan, do you think that better incentives in freight rail and 
trucking jobs would help to solve the supply chain crisis?
    And if so, what kind of incentives do you find to be most 
effective?
    Mr. Regan. Yes, and thank you so much for the question, 
Congressman.
    Certainly. I think one of the reasons we are seeing people 
leave the workforce or not being attracted to these industries 
is because the compensation is just not there for what is, 
admittedly, very difficult and very hard work. So, I think job 
stability, better safety protections on the workplace, higher 
wages and benefits, all of these are important parts of making 
sure that we build and retain a skilled workforce in these 
industries.
    Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, sir.
    Secondly, there has been a lot of talk about the PRO Act 
today. Obviously, as you are aware, sir, I am a proud original 
cosponsor of it. Mr. Regan, do you think there would be more 
employment stability in many supply chain jobs if the PRO Act 
became law?
    And if so, how could that stability help to end the current 
supply chain crisis?
    Mr. Regan. Yes. And again, thank you for your cosponsorship 
and your leadership on this issue. It has always been 
refreshing to hear you talk about this one.
    One of the things that the PRO Act does is--I think what is 
really important--is properly classify the relationship between 
employers and employees. Part of that important relationship 
means that you have an opportunity to obtain things like 
retirement benefits, healthcare, better salaries, the right to 
collectively bargain, not necessarily forcing someone to join a 
union, but giving them a greater opportunity to join a union, 
if they choose to do so.
    When you do that--and we have seen this across many 
industries--wages for all people, whether union or nonunion, 
they go up whenever we are able to see improvements in the 
employment standards. You see that on the aviation side, 
frankly, where we have a very, very high union density, and 
still very highly profitable private airlines, where the 
standards across the board are increased because of the high 
union density we have there. And that is the reason why you see 
increasing numbers of people choosing to join unions in that 
industry.
    I would argue that labor is not an enemy. We don't want to 
drive away business. In fact, we want to work with our 
employers to create stronger businesses, and grow our economy, 
and create more jobs. And we can do that, especially when we 
are able to have a seat at the table, and we are not just 
operating on unfair labor standards or labor practices, which 
have been in existence for years now.
    Mr. Fitzpatrick. Thank you, Mr. Regan.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. I now recognize 
Congressmember Wilson for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, for 
today's hearing. I am so proud to be one of the five Democratic 
cosponsors of the historic Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act, and I am just so proud to do that.
    Mr. Regan, how will this infrastructure investment in IIJA, 
like the $2.2 billion provided for the Port Infrastructure 
Development Program, be critical in preventing supply chain 
problems in the future?
    As chair of the Florida Ports Caucus, I am proud of this 
accomplishment.
    Mr. Regan. Thank you, Congresswoman. And yes, thank you for 
your leadership on this issue.
    As I have mentioned earlier, multimodal connectivity has 
been a sustained problem, and one of the reasons why we--that 
it--we have contributed to congestion and delay in our freight 
systems.
    Sixty-seven percent of ports say that funding is the single 
largest obstacle to constructing essential freight rail 
connectors at the ports, and nearly half of all U.S. ports say 
that better rail access would increase the throughput capacity 
by 25 percent. This investment, the direct investment through 
this $2.2 billion, would help address that issue, give more 
ports access to the type of facilities they need to be more 
responsive to the increase in freight, and be better able to 
move the freight off the ports and into the rest of the 
country. So, thank you very much.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you.
    Ms. Reinke, I know the supply chain workforce has 
significantly decreased in recent years. Do you have any 
recommendations on ways to increase the workforce?
    Ms. Reinke. Congresswoman, thank you for the question. Yes, 
we have had trouble, as all of our industries have, 
necessarily, of attracting people into the workforce.
    One of the things that we are looking at is, are there 
programs at universities that can, like MIT's, make logistics 
and transportation jobs more understandable to new recruits, 
people who are just coming out of school? We would love to 
attract them. That is a number-one issue for our members, is 
recruiting people into the workforce for really high-quality, 
great jobs.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you.
    Mr. Jefferies, with the IIJA now enacted, how will the 
significant investment in our Nation's railroads help the 
industry tackle the current supply chain challenges?
    Mr. Jefferies. Well, thank you for that, Congresswoman.
    I think it is important to remind everybody again that, by 
and large, freight rail is privately financed, privately 
invested. But you are absolutely right, that we need a fully 
invested, integrated supply chain.
    And so, my colleague, Mr. Regan, mentioned those intermodal 
connectors at ports. We think those are huge opportunities for 
investment, huge opportunities to get more goods moving by rail 
out of the ports. And, quite frankly, the supply chain and the 
integrated infrastructure network won't work unless we are 
fully investing across both the private and the public side of 
it.
    So, we support the legislation. We think there is a lot of 
great opportunities to put dollars to work and make real 
progress here.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Spear, how will the IIJA's investment in the highway 
system and workforce development, which was just signed by 
President Biden, help the trucking industry fix these issues?
    Mr. Spear. Well, that is huge, Congresswoman, absolutely 
huge. We are talking a 38-percent increase each year in road 
and bridge funding. That is historic. It has never happened 
before, so that is very profound. It is something we have 
waited for a long time to get. That is our shop floor. That is 
where we get the job done all across the country and in every 
congressional district, including yours. So, we are thrilled 
about that.
    And it is also going to allow States to plan. So, no more 
of this patch every year. They can now plan big-ticket projects 
1, 2, 3, 4 years out, with the certainty that they are going to 
get the money. So, you are going to see major bottlenecks and 
congestion in your State go down, and a lot more movement of 
freight and getting customers and--food and so on, on the 
shelves much quicker. So, these are all good things.
    And I go along with what Ian and Greg said about those 
intermodal connectors at the ports. Those are a big deal, 70 
percent of those in the country are local and State 
jurisdiction. The money has got to get down there. Because if 
you look at the heat maps on where the congestion is, it is in 
those corridors. So, this is really going to go a long way, 
through the IIJA, to get that money where it is needed most, 
and alleviate that congestion.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you so much.
    Mr. Cordero, how can we ensure that the workers are 
properly supported, so this framework can have a strong 
foundation to succeed?
    And what role can the Federal Government play?
    [No response.]
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Mr. Cordero?
    Mr. Garamendi [presiding]. Mr. Cordero, you are up.
    Voice. He had to leave.
    Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Cordero has left, and your time has 
expired. But it was a very good question.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Garamendi. I now recognize Mr. Stanton--excuse me, Mr. 
Mast for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mast. That is OK.
    Mr. Garamendi. It is your turn.
    Mr. Mast. I understand. I also had a question for Mr. 
Cordero, the port director for Long Beach, which allows for 
about 40 percent of those containers to come into our country.
    He is not here, so I guess I would rather make a little bit 
of a statement on that, because I can't ask him a question. And 
it would simply be an advice that those shippers overseas, 
given the difficulty that it can be to manifest ships once they 
have left their point of origin with CBP and other agencies, 
that they highly consider moving some of those vessels towards 
Florida.
    Florida, as of today, has capacity for about 4 million 
containers right now, can move ships that contain up to 14,000 
TEUs. And I want to say I believe it is real-time information 
that the Port of Long Beach has a backlog of about 111 
containerships as of today. So, I would make that 
recommendation for those looking to depart Asia, to consider 
moving to the ports of Florida: Miami, Port Everglades, Tampa, 
Jacksonville, Palm Beach, the ports there.
    [To Mr. Garamendi:] You consider that a shameless plug, 
don't you?
    My colleague next to me is laughing about this.
    I think it is important to consider that, when you look at 
that backlog of what is going on there. But because Mr. Cordero 
isn't here, I will just touch on a couple of other things, 
because they are likely coming to a head this Friday, with what 
is known--or what is labeled as--Build Back Better. And I would 
ask a couple of open-ended questions to the remainder of our 
panelists.
    Do any of our panelists see 80,000 IRS workers as a part of 
improving or fixing our broken supply chain?
    [No response.]
    Mr. Mast. Or maybe I could ask it another way. Do any of 
you panelists believe that those 80,000 additional IRS workers 
are going to be there to help expedite refunds to individuals 
and businesses and others, or are they there to help collect?
    Mr. Regan. Congressman, I can't speak to what the IRS 
employees will be doing, but I do know that there is $5 billion 
in there directly that will be spent on addressing the supply 
chain issue, and that is not going to be going through the IRS, 
that is going to be going through appropriate port funding 
channels.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you for speaking up, Mr. Regan. Of that $5 
billion, would you say that the $200 million going to Speaker 
Pelosi's Presidio Park would be part of that $5 billion that 
you are adding up, or is that something different?
    Mr. Regan. I am restricting my comments to the money that 
will address the supply chain, which is, again, the subject of 
this hearing.
    Mr. Mast. So, it would be fair to say those $200 million in 
that program would not be addressing the supply chain. That 
would be a fair thing to say, Mr. Regan, in your opinion?
    Mr. Regan. I am not going to comment on any of the other 
aspects of the bill. I will say that there is $5 billion in 
there to address supply chain problems at our ports.
    Mr. Mast. This $200 million for the park, does that help 
the supply chain?
    Mr. Regan. Again, I am not going to comment on the $200 
million on the park.
    Mr. Mast. This is the kind of stuff that pisses people off 
around the United States of America. They know perfectly well 
that $200 million to Pelosi's park doesn't do a thing to help 
build back better, or help America's supply chain, or 
Thanksgiving, or Christmas, or any business or corporation, or 
anybody that wants to get a good or anything else from A to B. 
And you are sitting here, pretending as though you don't have 
an answer to it. You really just don't want to answer the 
question. People are not ignorant to that fact. But----
    Mr. Regan. Sir, with all due respect, that is a large bill, 
and we support the bill. There is also really significant money 
for transit in that bill, and transit training operations, 
which we support.
    As you know, there are a lot of priorities, including 
environmental issues. There is a lot of issues in there for 
different aspects of our economy that, frankly, many of the 
people in the majority believe we need to address. So, all of 
those are not going to address supply chain. Your question was 
about whether that specific one would address supply chain. No, 
and neither would the transit money.
    But right now, the subject of this hearing is supply chain, 
and there is $5 billion that will go through the Department of 
Commerce specifically to address a supply chain crisis.
    Mr. Mast. I appreciate you addressing my question directly. 
It took a couple of minutes, but I appreciate you doing it, 
nonetheless. In that I will note this: I did not hear in 
anybody's testimony--I only have a few seconds remaining--I did 
not note in anybody's testimony anybody quoting Transportation 
Secretary Pete Buttigieg saying that the reason that we have 
these supply chain issues is because the President has 
successfully guided the economy out of the teeth of a 
terrifying recession. I didn't hear that in anybody's 
testimony.
    And in that my time is expired, and I thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Mast.
    Mr. Stanton, you have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Until the 
COVID pandemic, most people gave little thought to the various 
levels of the supply chain that got the goods they needed and 
wanted delivered to their homes or near a store.
    Today the supply chains, the bottlenecks, the increased 
prices, are the topics of many conversations in Arizona and 
throughout the country. Everyone--shippers, transporters, 
workers, businesses, and consumers--is feeling the impacts 
caused by a disruption unlike anything we have seen in recent 
times. Cargo ships docked off the coast of California, a 
traffic jam waiting for the chance to unload, has become a 
common sight, along with ports packed with containers. Each 
level of supply chain has been affected.
    Those businesses fortunate enough to receive the goods they 
have ordered, they have had no choice but to adjust accordingly 
to account for the delays in shipping and associated storage 
costs that have increased dramatically. Bottom-line: consumers 
are feeling the impacts of prices straining already tight 
budgets many families are facing.
    There is not just one cause of this disruption, it is a 
perfect storm, a global pandemic that shut down factories that 
produced goods for the U.S. market, a further reduction in the 
number of seagoing routes and vessels to deliver cargo, and a 
surge in consumer spending on durable goods that caused a spike 
in shipping demand, among other causes, as well.
    The short-term challenge is untangling the stranglehold 
this disruption currently has on the supply chain. But at the 
same time, we can't take our focus off of long-term solutions 
to secure the supply chain and ensure its resiliency, going 
forward.
    I did have a series of questions for Mr. Cordero. 
Unfortunately, he was not able to stay for the hearing. I will 
ask that those questions be answered in writing for the record.
    But I will ask a question for Mr. Regan. I know he has 
answered similar questions previously, but please take the time 
to answer it again.
    What steps do you believe industry should be taking to 
provide better resiliency in the supply chain?
    Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question. Frankly, I think 
investing in the workforce is going to be a critical part of 
that. We need to expand capacity, and that means making sure 
that we have the personnel to be able to do that, as well. I 
think that is true in every aspect of the supply chain.
    Also, building out in their physical infrastructure. And I 
know the Government is going to make a very large investment to 
help with some of that. But making sure that we have the 
equipment that we need so that we can expand the workforce and 
do it safely is going to be really important here.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you. And I have a little bit of 
additional time, so I will open up that same question to any of 
the other members of the panel. What steps should industry be 
taking to provide better resiliency in the supply chain?
    Mr. Spear. Well, I think, Congressman, the collaboration we 
have been alluding to throughout this hearing is very important 
amongst the modes. And you have seen this transformation over 
the last 10, 15 years, where we do collaborate more.
    Ian and I have been going back and forth, in terms of the 
relationship between trucking and rail. It has grown stronger, 
as a result of the integration of the supply chain, and we are 
one of rail's biggest customers now. We are a partner.
    We also really need a lot more transparency across all 
modes. And I think, as we referred in the previous commentary 
about digital transformation, that will really be key, in terms 
of better visibility on where the chokepoints are, better 
coordination, better throughput. Even if we don't have the 
workforce that we need, increasing turns, for instance, is 
going to elevate an increased capacity, and you don't need more 
drivers to do that.
    So, these efficiencies really are measurable, and they will 
also help alleviate the driver shortage. So, these are all 
things that I think are key amongst that collaboration.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you, Mr. Spear. Any of the other 
witnesses want to give advice on that question?
    Mr. Jefferies. Yes, I----
    Mr. Stanton. What can we be doing to better provide 
resiliency, please?
    Mr. Jefferies. I think just sustained investment is key. We 
didn't get here overnight. And in order to work out long-term 
solutions--freight demand is only going to continue to grow in 
this country. I know we are seeing unprecedented demand right 
now on the international space, in particular, but freight 
demand is going to continue to grow.
    Between maximizing the use of the infrastructure we have 
with sustained investments, utilizing technology to make that 
use more efficient, increasing safety; obviously, dedication to 
having well-skilled, well-trained employee bases in our 
respective sectors--it is an all-of-the-above strategy that 
requires a lot of coordination. And absolutely, visibility and 
information sharing across the supply chain is the link to keep 
all this together.
    Ms. Reinke. Congressman, if I could, I will just go back 
to----
    Mr. Stanton. Please.
    Ms. Reinke [continuing]. The three I's that I said at the 
beginning of my testimony, which is investment, innovation, and 
interaction amongst all the modes and stakeholders in the 
supply chain.
    I think all of us are doubling our efforts to invest as 
much as we can, to innovate as much as we can, and you can see 
how well I think we are collaborating across on this panel.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you for those outstanding answers. I 
will yield back.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Stanton.
    Mr. Graves, you are up next. You have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First of all, I want to thank all of you for your endurance 
today. I know this hearing is going on very long, and I also 
know that you all have covered a lot of topics. I have had to 
jump in and out today, so I hope that you haven't covered these 
questions. But I am curious. All of the attention has been on 
the backlog at the ports on the west coast. Mr. Correll earlier 
in his testimony was talking about digitizing, or sort of 
bringing technology to the transportation industry.
    Ms. Reinke, I am curious. Why is it--or are there 
opportunities to bring other ports into the fold to help 
relieve some of the congestion that we are seeing on the west 
coast?
    Ms. Reinke. Yes, thank you, Congressman Graves, I 
appreciate that question.
    Sure. I think there are a lot of competitive ports all 
across the east and west coast, and Congressman Mast just 
touted a few in the State of Florida a few minutes ago, yes.
    But if it is coming from Asia, typically it would just add 
on costs to have it go further than California. So, it is not 
that it is not an option. In fact, many beneficial cargo owners 
and many of the retailers that we have talked about are already 
doing that, just to get out of the congestion of the west coast 
ports. But it just tacks on a little bit more expense, which 
ends up getting passed on to the consumer.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Sure. But there is, obviously, 
expense with the backlog, as well.
    And I appreciate Mr. Mast bringing it up. Florida does have 
a couple of cute little ports, but we have 5 of the top 15 
ports in America, which I think is important to bring up.
    And while we are talking to you, I do want to apologize 
about Mr. Davis earlier in the hearing. I know that he was 
talking about something over your shoulder, and because it 
looked like he was really struggling with substantive 
questions, I was trying to give him some ideas, but he didn't 
take the call.
    But let me jump back in. So, could you talk a little bit 
again--I know that some of you all covered this earlier--about 
some of the issues about the chassis and the containers, and 
just kind of the adaptability of those, how that is further 
complicating the supply chain issues that we are experiencing?
    And also, I have heard folks bring up this dwell issue, as 
well, where containers are sitting out kind of longer before 
they are cycling back into the system.
    Mr. Jefferies. Is that for anybody?
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Yes, sure, yes.
    Mr. Jefferies. All right. Well, Congressman, that--I mean, 
you are hitting the nail on the head. And my gosh, that is 
probably an hour-long answer from all of us. We will try to 
condense into about 30 seconds. But----
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Now, of course, you are talking 
about Rodney Davis being----
    Mr. Jefferies. Yes, right.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. OK, just wanted to----
    Mr. Jefferies. No, that is more of a--you know, it would 
take longer than that.
    What happens--and I will just speak from the rail 
experience, and what we were seeing August timeframe in some of 
the large, intermodal yards in the central part of the 
country--is you had volumes coming in from the west coast at a 
rate that were exceeding the ability of containers to be taken 
out of the yards.
    In other words, you are only able to get so much out of the 
yard, and that what is coming in is overwhelming that. And at 
one time, 1 railroad had over 20 trains of intermodal parked 
outside of the Chicago terminal.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Wow.
    Mr. Jefferies. And that is an equipment issue, because it 
is a misplaced equipment issue. One, those are containers that 
are just sitting there. Two, those are locomotives that are 
stranded assets that should be going back, taking empty 
containers back to the west coast, picking up more goods, 
bringing it back. And that just starts to back up the entire 
system.
    On the chassis side, if you go to Chicagoland right now 
around all the yards, every single warehouse has a for-hire 
sign. But also, you see containers sitting on chassis in the 
parking lots because the warehouses are full. And so, again, 
those are chassis that aren't getting their turns in and coming 
back for more pickups. They are sitting there, not being used. 
And so that has a very quick reverberating effect throughout 
the entire supply chain.
    And I am sure Chris could tell you the same type of 
situation. It affects all of us.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Yes, actually, Mr. Spear, I would 
love to jump in--maybe a little bit different question for you. 
I saw where the Ports of L.A. and Long Beach announced a fee to 
be charged to ocean carriers for containers that dwell on 
property for more than--I think it is 9 days for ocean, and 
maybe 6 for rail, something like that. Can you talk a little 
bit about how that may influence what we are seeing in supply 
chain challenges right now?
    Mr. Spear. Well, it is just not going to influence it, 
because it is not going to make it any more efficient. 
Penalizing people, when we know what the problem is--and Ian 
just perfectly outlined it--it is turn time. It is getting more 
space, the ability to stack more.
    They were limiting it to two in California. They had to 
lift that local ordinance, so you could double the stack, just 
because we didn't have enough yard space to put all the empties 
and the full containers.
    So, we need more room, moving more inland. And positioning 
in open space next to rail, next to us, where we can have more 
capability to move the containers is really critical. And you 
can do a lot of that with efficiency, and it will help address 
and alleviate the driver shortage, because if you can improve 
turn times, you are moving more throughput. And that is, 
obviously, a tremendous benefit, very measurable.
    So, getting those inefficiencies out of that chokepoint are 
absolutely essential. I think we are all pretty well aligned on 
that.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. And thank----
    Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Spear, thank you very much.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thanks again, all of you----
    Mr. Garamendi. Your time has expired, Mr. Graves. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Garamendi. I recognize Mr. Garamendi for his 5 minutes.
    There is going to be a lot of discussion about this 
problem. We have already spent several hours at it, and I am 
not sure we have come to a solution, because it is a 
multifaceted problem. It extends all across the Nation. It also 
extends from the fact that we, basically, were all at a stop 
sign for a year or so. Suddenly, the light turned green, and 
everybody hit the accelerator, and we are now all jammed up at 
the next stoplight.
    So, what can we do? There are some things that can be done 
to address the known problems. Certainly, the transportation 
bill that we have already discussed in this committee and was 
signed by the President a couple of days ago--that bill will, 
undoubtedly, provide solutions for the future, but not 
immediate.
    There are some things that we can do to deal with the 
underlying problems that we have, a tremendous imbalance in 
trade. And one of the things is to better utilize a Government 
agency that, basically, has been without the power to address 
some of the problems, but not all of them, and that would be 
the Federal Maritime Commission. It has been around for a long 
time. Its purpose in law, as established over many decades, is 
to make sure that there is a fair balance of power within the 
shippers from the United States and the importers into the 
United States, and that the ocean shipping companies, carriers, 
are involved in a way that is fair.
    However, unfortunately, the Federal Maritime Commission 
does not have the power to really enforce. It can do some 
studies, but it can't enforce, and can't deal with the problem 
of demurrage charges, which I was told by an importer of 
Christmas trees and wreaths and the like, $4 million a day 
because his containers containing those Christmas goods are at 
the bottom of the stack of the four-high containers, and he is 
being charged, in his view--and I would say in my view--
unfairly.
    Nor from the exporters of rice, prunes, almonds, wine from 
California, who cannot get an empty container because the empty 
containers are--when they are available, are immediately put 
back on the ocean carriers' ships, so that they can go back to 
the Western Pacific--China, principally--and receive perhaps 
several times--maybe 10 times more fee than if that ship, if 
that container were available for the California exporters.
    To deal with this, Congressman Dusty Johnson of South 
Dakota and I have introduced a bill called the Ocean Shipping 
Reform Act, H.R. 4996. It deals with this by providing a 
mechanism in which the Federal Maritime Commission can operate 
to create a fair playing field.
    Importing into the United States is not a right, but it is 
an opportunity, and it has to be an opportunity that is fair 
both to the importers and the exporters, and one in which the 
ocean carriers are acting responsibly.
    So, the Ocean Shipping Reform Act--and this is a question 
for Ms. Reinke--and I thank the Transportation Intermediaries 
Association for their endorsement of this legislation, this 
bipartisan legislation, which we think will soon be bicameral. 
The bill does empower the Federal Maritime Commission to set 
rules for marketplace competition and fairness, to ensure that 
trade with countries in Asia and the Pacific region is 
reciprocal, and that foreign-flagged ocean carriers provide 
reasonable opportunities for American exporters willing to pay 
for a privilege.
    Ms. Reinke, we thank you for your support of the bill. And 
if you would care to comment on it, I would appreciate it.
    Ms. Reinke. Well, thank you, Congressman. Your staff and 
the staff of Congressman Johnson did such a tremendous job 
explaining the legislation and having our members understand 
it. It was so compelling, we sort of endorsed it there, on the 
spot. So, we appreciate that.
    The fact is these shipping laws haven't been modernized in 
20 years. You are looking to establish a fair playing field. 
That is really, I think, all anyone would ask. We appreciate 
your attention to that issue and, hopefully, that can really 
unlock some of the congestion and some of the problems that we 
are seeing in the ports. So, we appreciate it.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much for your response. We 
hope to move this bill expeditiously before the Christmas 
holidays. It may not solve the problem, but it will certainly 
be a wakeup call, or a slap across the bow of the ocean 
carriers and those that are operating in an unfair way, that 
the reform is coming.
    With that I yield back my remaining time and turn to Mr. 
Johnson.
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would 
start by associating myself with your comments on the Ocean 
Shipping Reform Act. I am proud to lead it with you. Your 
leadership has been critically important. We built a lot of 
momentum, 200 national groups have endorsed this piece of 
legislation, dozens of our colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle have signed on as cosponsors. And I, like you, share your 
optimism for building progress toward this, even before the end 
of the year, and continuing to move this forward. So, well 
said, Mr. Garamendi.
    And then, Mr. Chair, secondly, I would like to ask 
unanimous consent to insert a statement from the Shippers 
Coalition into the record. I believe your staff already has a 
copy, sir.
    Mr. Garamendi. Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
    Statement of the Shippers Coalition, Submitted for the Record by
                   Hon. Dusty Johnson of South Dakota
    The pervasiveness of our supply chain issues has been widely 
reported and impacts all links in the chain between producers and end 
customers. One critical segment of the supply chain that must be 
addressed is the shipment of goods over the road via trucking. As the 
supply chain challenges continue to persist, one solution that could 
immediately allow goods to be moved quicker in a safe and 
environmentally friendly manner is increasing the gross vehicle weight 
limit (GVW) on Federal Interstates.
    Currently, many shippers reaching the current 80,000-pound weight 
limit before the truck is full and are forced to send trucks out that 
are only three fourths of the way full, requiring companies to send 
more trucks out than what otherwise is necessary to meet the current 
demand. This situation adds to roadway congestion, contributes to 
slowdowns in the supply chain, and leads to an unnecessary increase in 
carbon emissions.
    Companies across the United States have already proven that they 
can implement this safely. A provision of the CARES Act allowed states 
to issue permits allowing trucks to operate above federal weight limits 
on Interstates during the COVID-19 crisis to provide much-needed 
supplies to families and communities. While this waiver authority was 
only available for 120 days, companies across the US were able to take 
advantage of this provision and found an increase in efficiency and a 
reduction in carbon dioxide emissions with no increased safety risk 
when they were able to fill trucks to a higher capacity.
    Underscoring all of this is safety. The companies who took 
advantaged of the waiver authority had no additional safety concerns or 
additional reportable accidents as a result of the additional payload. 
One company that was able to take advantage of this waiver was able to 
put an additional 4,500 pounds on each truckload, which equated to a 
reduction in total truckloads in one state by 10%. This company was 
able to deliver an additional 1.8 million bottles in the same number of 
shipments and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 68,000 pounds. A 
second company was able to increase its vehicle capacity by an average 
of 2,786 pounds per shipment. This reduced shipments by 600, the miles 
traveled by 51,472 miles, and CO2 emissions by 165,000 pounds, just 
because of the increased capacity of the vehicles. A third company 
saved 2.78 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) or 6,121 
pounds of carbon dioxide, reduced the need for 54.6 trucks to move the 
same amount of material, saved 272 gallons of diesel, and saved 1,576 
miles of driving. A fourth company conducted outreach to a group of its 
small- and medium-sized (SME) carriers and found that none reported an 
increase in reportable accidents, and one carrier reported that 
approximately 23 percent of their loads were over 80,000-pounds. If the 
GVW limit was increased to 91,000-pounds on six axles, we would see 
these benefits across the industry and the easing of some of the 
current constraints on the supply chain.
    Congress should enact a common-sense pilot program that would 
modestly increase GVW limits on Federal Interstates to 91,000-pounds on 
six axles.

    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Very good. And then, finally, 
I have got a question for Mr. Spear.
    Mr. Spear, I appreciated your mention of the DRIVE Safe Act 
pilot program, which, as has been mentioned a number of times 
today, would allow safe drivers under 21 who are accustomed to 
driving intrastate to also drive interstate, across State 
lines. And as you note, 49 States already allow these drivers 
to go out and help our economy run, driving. And if you can 
drive all over South Dakota, why can't you drive from South 
Dakota over the State line into Iowa?
    I am not sure that has ever made sense to me, and that is 
why I led 80 of my colleagues in urging the administration to 
implement this program. And of course, as you know, sir, I 
appreciate ATA's support of our efforts.
    Beyond that, of course, I am committed to pursuing any 
avenue to try to make our system run more efficiently, and to 
make better use of these great driving resources, these great 
trucking resources. And that is why I was quite surprised and 
more than a little concerned to read of some of the purported 
inefficiencies detailed in Mr. Correll's testimony. And so, Mr. 
Spear, I just wanted to give you an opportunity to add your 
analysis and your thoughts related to that MIT study and 
report.
    Mr. Spear. I appreciate that, Congressman. And just at the 
outset, I want to echo and support--ATA supports the bill that 
you and Congressman Garamendi have introduced on ocean shipping 
reform. It is an outstanding piece of legislation, so I commend 
you both for your leadership on that, and on the DRIVE Safe 
Act.
    And to your question, I have looked at that study and, 
quite candidly, there is a difference between academia and 
reality, and I am not bashing academia, and certainly not going 
to bash Dr. Correll or MIT. It is an outstanding school.
    But my world is in the reality, and the people that I deal 
with are real, hard-working people, and they choose different 
lines of work within our industry, which is extraordinarily 
diverse. We are talking 1 in 18 jobs in the U.S. is trucking-
related, and the top job in 29 States is a truckdriver. So, 
this is a powerhouse, in terms of moving freight. We move, in 
trucks, 72.5 percent of the domestic freight in this country, 
so no small task.
    So, when we talk about underutilization, I don't honestly 
know what the heck that means, because there are over 6 million 
people in this country that have a CDL. That doesn't mean they 
are an active driver. They could be retired. They could be 
part-time--you know, my safety policy vice president has a CDL. 
He doesn't drive, but he is counted in that number.
    So, you really have to dig deep, and diversify the various 
segments within our industry to understand what is working, 
what is not, why they come back into the workforce, why they 
leave, the type of segment that they want to drive for, whether 
it be long haul or short haul where they are home at night 
every night with their families.
    So, this is a very diverse question that is not easily 
answered, and you really have to spend some time, Congressman, 
with real people, like in your district, to understand the ins 
and outs, and why they make the choices they do. So, I just 
really struggle to see how that could be captured in one 
report.
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Well, and I think a lot of 
that is well said----
    Mr. Correll. Congressman, may I reply?
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota [continuing]. I mean, I would 
note that Mr. Correll's analysis indicated that increasing the 
amount of actual drive time on any given day by the people who 
are currently driving, the 1.8 million, not the 6 million, 
would be equivalent to adding 80,000 drivers. Well, if that is 
even close to true, that could be a powerful part of the 
solution.
    And so I would just say to you, Mr. Spear, Mr. Correll, 
anybody else, if there are things that our Federal Government 
or that State governments are doing that makes it harder for 
drivers to dedicate their time during their day to actually 
moving freight, you have just got to let us know, because it 
just won't be a Republican passion, it won't just be a 
Democratic passion. You will find nearly every member of this 
committee committed to finding safe ways to get safe drivers 
driving more.
    By all means, let's get new drivers in the industry. But 
let's better utilize these unbelievably talented professionals.
    Mr. Spear. And I appreciate that, and I think we have got 
to----
    Mr. Correll. I agree on the point of underutilization, but 
I am afraid Mr. Spear has mischaracterized our study in his 
comments.
    Mr. Garamendi. Well, thank you very much.
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Mr.----
    Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Johnson?
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota [continuing]. The question----
    Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Johnson?
    Mr. Spear. Just to be fair, if I could very quickly respond 
to it.
    Mr. Garamendi. Excuse me, gentlemen. You have had your 
chance, and you may have your chance again, because Mr. 
Johnson's time has expired. I will leave the two of you. We 
will get you your common telephone numbers, and you can 
complete that debate.
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon, I yield 5 minutes to you.
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You mentioned 
a few minutes ago the situation with the Federal Maritime 
Commission, and I agree in some of the points you made. But I 
understand that, under Commissioner Rebecca Dye, she led the 
industry--stood up voluntary working groups to help address 
poor performance and tried to come up with commonsense 
solutions to improve efficiencies. And I think that is 
something the committee should promote to allow the private 
sector and labor unions to come up with a lot of those 
solutions.
    And I say this because, as Puerto Rico, many people know, 
we depend on the port industry. We depend on everything being 
shipped to Puerto Rico. And right now, we have been facing, 
from August to now, a lot of strikes in one of the ports from 
the international shipments going to the island. So, we do 
know, firsthand, how issues like automation and efficiencies 
are important.
    And in that sense--I know Mr. Cordero is not with us 
anymore, but I do have some questions, and I will begin with 
Mr. Spear.
    Mr. Spear, I appreciate your testimony highlighting the 
need for workforce development. And to address workforce 
development and increase safety, I have introduced H.R. 1967, 
which will allow Puerto Rico to issue commercial driver's 
licenses to truckdrivers in Puerto Rico. And it will require 
drivers to increase their skills while operating a motor 
carrier and give anyone moving to or from Puerto Rico a license 
that they could use anywhere in the country.
    I asked your organization to review this legislation for 
their support, but I haven't received an answer yet, either 
way. So, can you give a response to my office?
    Mr. Spear. I absolutely will get you a response to your 
office expeditiously.
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. And because I serve in this 
committee, and we have experienced what happened in Puerto Rico 
with the devastation of hurricanes and, of course, earthquakes 
last year, the infrastructure network was devastated. And we 
know how important and critical roads and bridges are for those 
connections and port operations, as well.
    The American Society of Civil Engineers decided that Puerto 
Rico needed more than $3 billion to bring our network just to 
good repair. And you say that you advocate for $5 billion in 
annual funding to address bottlenecks. And I assume that this 
is to ensure competitive, but efficient use of those funds in 
the whole Nation.
    My concern at this time is how we get--you know, we 
approved the infrastructure bill a few days ago, the President 
signed it, but there are still a lot of areas that we can 
improve with the proper information, using technology. And one 
of those is having and getting real-time port metrics that can 
help the industry to schedule accordingly, to make the whole 
system efficient as possible. One of those is using technology.
    And my question to you is, do you agree that using real-
time reporting from ports to know--we were discussing a few 
minutes ago the problem with chassis in several ports. There 
would be a shortage in the Port of Los Angeles, but a surplus 
in the Port of Long Beach, and we have got the same situations. 
We have many surpluses of those chassis, as well. Can you share 
your comments on that?
    Mr. Spear. Congresswoman, who is the question posed to?
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon. To you and to Ms. Reinke.
    Mr. Spear. OK, yes, that is fine. Yes, I think, as we have 
been discussing, making certain that we have more technology 
that provides that transparency is really a good investment in 
innovation and transparency and efficiencies. And these are all 
things that intermodals need to coordinate on and ensure 
happen, going forward. So, I think there is quite a bit of 
improvements that could be made to really alleviate some of the 
pressures we are seeing from shortages in talent.
    So, I think, if you can offset that with technology, that 
is a good solution.
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, and I will also submit some 
questions for the record, but I would love to have Mr. 
Jefferies tell me if there are any deregulatory actions that 
could alleviate the burden on freight railroads.
    Mr. Jefferies. Well, I think I would say more regulatory 
modernization is the goal. Let's really think about how we can 
utilize technology to maximize safety, maximize efficiency. And 
it should be a cooperative effort.
    Sometimes there is a knee-jerk reaction against deploying 
new technologies and building datasets to demonstrate that 
there is a safety improvement, but it is something that we 
should all be working towards the same end, and that is safety, 
that is efficiency, that is service. And so, let's look at ways 
to modernize the regulatory paradigm that really enables us to 
thrive with technology. Thank you.
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, my time expired.
    Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
    That ends the questions by the Members, but it doesn't end 
the comment that the chair of the committee wants to make with 
regard to the witnesses.
    Mr. Cordero from Long Beach, Mr. Spear with the American 
Trucking Associations, Mr. Jefferies from the Association of 
American Railroads, and Ms. Reinke, Mr. Correll, and Mr. Regan, 
all of you have been at this for 5 hours, and we owe you a debt 
of gratitude for the information that you have delivered to the 
committee. The committee takes this issue extremely seriously, 
and we will be looking for short-term and long-term solutions.
    And with that, I would like to ask unanimous consent that 
the record of today's hearing remain open until such time as 
our witnesses have provided answers to any questions that may 
have been submitted to them in writing.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 
for 15 days for any additional comments and information 
submitted by the Members or witnesses to be included in the 
record of today's hearing.
    Without objection so ordered.
    With that, the committee stands adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 3:18 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]


                       Submissions for the Record

                              ----------                              

 Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair and Hon. 
      Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates for Highway 
   and Auto Safety, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
                                                 November 17, 2021.
The Honorable Peter DeFazio, Chair,
The Honorable Sam Graves, Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves:
    Thank you for your leadership in holding today's hearing, 
``Industry and Labor Perspectives: A Further Look at North American 
Supply Chain Challenges.'' We respectfully request that this letter 
from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates) be included in 
the hearing record.
                              Introduction
    Advocates is a coalition of public health, safety, law enforcement, 
and consumer organizations, insurers and insurance agents that promotes 
highway and auto safety through the adoption of federal and state laws, 
policies and regulations. Advocates is unique both in its board 
composition and its mission of advancing safer vehicles, safer 
motorists and road users, and safer roadway environments.
    While our nation is facing numerous COVID-19 related challenges 
regarding the supply chain and movement of goods, we also have 
experienced a major surge in motor vehicle crash fatalities. Alarming 
estimates recently released by the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA) indicate that crash fatalities have spiked to 
more than 20,000 in the first half of 2021, representing a nearly 20 
percent increase over the same time period the previous year. This is 
the highest number of fatalities recorded during the first half of the 
year since 2006 and the highest half-year increase identified by the 
Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ All statistics are from the United States Department of 
Transportation unless noted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Every year over 500,000 truck crashes occur on our roads. They 
result in deaths, injuries, lost productivity, closed roadways, 
unfunded costs, expenditure of time and resources of first responders 
as well as their endangerment, damage to infrastructure such as roads, 
bridges and safety barriers, fuel consumption of delayed vehicles, and 
increased emissions. Fatal truck crashes also continue to occur at a 
disturbingly high rate. In 2020, nearly 5,000 people were killed in 
crashes involving a large truck. Since 2009, the number of fatalities 
in large truck crashes has increased by 45 percent. Additionally, 
159,000 people were injured in crashes involving a large truck in 2019, 
and injuries of large truck occupants increased by 18 percent over the 
prior year. In fatal two-vehicle crashes between a large truck and a 
passenger motor vehicle, 97 percent of the fatalities were occupants of 
the passenger vehicle.\2\ The cost to society from crashes involving 
commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) was estimated to be $143 billion in 
2018, the latest year for which data is available.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Large Trucks (Apr. 
2021). See: https://www.iihs.org/topics/large-trucks.
    \3\ 2019 Pocket Guide to large Truck and Bus Statistics, FMCSA, 
Jan. 2020, RRA-19-012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While concerns about sparsely stocked shelves for the holidays are 
understandable, remembering the lesson George Bailey learned in the 
Christmas classic ``It's a Wonderful Life'' that each life is 
irreplaceable and its absence has many tragic ripple effects must be 
paramount. Safety provisions in the Investing in a New Vision for the 
Environment and Surface Transportation (INVEST) in America Act led by 
this Committee, some of which were included in the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) signed into law this week, will 
eradicate dangers on our nation's roadways. We urge you to continue 
your leadership, commitment and efforts to end the massive motor 
vehicle crash death and injury toll and to reject any action that 
further endangers truck drivers and all road users.
Weakening Truck Safety Protections Will Needlessly Endanger Drivers and 
                               the Public
    In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Administration 
has provided temporary exemptions from certain truck safety rules. 
Advocates has continued to assert that any exemptions must be narrowly 
tailored in time and scope with appropriate safeguards to protect truck 
drivers as well as everyone sharing the roads with them including 
construction workers, road maintenance crews, first responders and law 
enforcement officers whose ``offices'' are also the roads. We have 
strongly opposed enshrining temporary exemptions into statute and urge 
transparency about their use by making any related data available to 
the public.
    Further, current issues involving the nation's supply chain have 
highlighted problems that the trucking industry has not effectively 
addressed for decades including high turnover rates and poor working 
conditions. As noted in a recent segment on the television news show 
``60 Minutes,'' the problems facing our nation's supply chain are 
complex with the pandemic highlighting glaring deficiencies in 
America's infrastructure. Correspondent Bill Whitaker explained, 
``There is a lot of finger-pointing. The truckers blame the terminals. 
The terminals blame the shippers. The retailers blame the truckers and 
the shippers.'' \4\ Degradation of truck safety regulations will not 
solve these issues. We urge the Committee to reject the following 
special interest proposals that will jeopardize all road users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ 60 Minutes, Packed ports and empty shelves: Inside the issues 
behind the U.S. supply chain crisis (Nov. 14, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ``Teen Truckers'' pose a major safety threat. Some segments of the 
trucking industry have been pushing to allow teenagers to operate CMVs 
in interstate commerce for at least 20 years, often relying on their 
own forecasts for the number of drivers needed, projections that have 
consistently failed to materialize.\5\ Seeking to attach this effort to 
current discussions on the supply chain is a facade that Congress 
should not accept and certainly not use as the basis for drastic policy 
changes to well established federal law. This ``band-aid'' solution 
will not resolve the myriad of self-inflicted ``wounds'' underlying the 
driver retention issue but rather will result in more ``blood'' shed on 
our roadways.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ FMCSA Document ID: 2000-84100-0782. American Trucking 
Associations, Truck Driver Shortage Analysis 2015 (Oct. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The trucking industry is facing a driver retention crisis, not a 
driver shortage. In fact, a March 2019 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
(BLS) analysis found that ``the labor market for truck drivers works 
about as well as the labor markets for other blue-collar occupations'' 
and ``a deeper look [at the truck industry labor market] does not find 
evidence of a secular shortage.'' \6\ Rather, industry data shows 
driver turnover at some carriers is near 90 percent.\7\ As U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Pete Buttigieg recently 
noted, such a high rate of turnover is indicative that there are some 
real issues with the quality of the job of driving a truck.\8\ In 
addition, states issue more than 450,000 new commercial driver licenses 
(CDLs) each year demonstrating that there are candidates to fill 
vacancies.\9\ Instead of proposing initiatives that will degrade public 
safety, the industry should be focused on addressing the retention 
issues through improved, safe working conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
Is the U.S. labor market for truck drivers broken? (Mar. 2019).
    \7\ American Trucking Associations, Fourth Quarter Truck Driver 
Turnover Rate Shows Muddled Picture (Mar. 12, 2021).
    \8\ See: https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/transportation-
secretary-buttigieg-on-supply-chain-issues-worker-shortage-125851717987 
(Nov. 10, 2021).
    \9\ Greg Rosalsky, Is There Really A Truck Driver Shortage?, 
National Public Radio (May 25, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Younger drivers are demonstrated to be less safe. The Insurance 
Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), citing numerous studies, has 
stated that ``age is a strong risk factor for truck crash 
involvement.'' \10\ In fact, age is the most important factor in the 
high rate of involvement of younger CMV drivers in fatal crashes. The 
general pattern of over-involvement in fatal crashes for younger CMV 
drivers dominates all other factors. Studies of young CMV drivers show 
that as the age of the driver decreases, large truck fatal crash 
involvement rates increase.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Comments to the 
docket, FMCSA-2000-8410-0515; citing Christie, R. and Fabre, J. 1999. 
Potential for fast-tracking heavy vehicle drivers. Melbourne, 
Australia: National Road Transport Commission; Blower, D. 1996. The 
accident experience of younger truck drivers. Ann Arbor, MI: University 
of Michigan Transportation Research Institute; Frith, W.J. 1994. A 
case-control study of heavy vehicle drivers' working time and safety. 
Proceedings of the 17th Australian Road Research Board Conference, 17-
30. Queensland, Australia: Australian Road Research Board; Stein, H.S. 
and Jones, I.S. (1988).
    \11\ Campbell, K. L., Fatal Accident Involvement Rates By Driver 
Age For Large Trucks, Accid. Anal. & Prev. Vol 23, No. 4, pp. 287-295 
(1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CMV drivers under the age of 19 are four times more likely to be 
involved in fatal crashes, as compared to CMV drivers who are 21 years 
of age and older, and CMV drivers ages 19-20 are six times more likely 
to be involved in fatal crashes (compared to CMV drivers 21 years and 
older).\12\ This plain-truth reality is not surprising given that 
generally younger drivers are more likely to be involved in fatal 
crashes because they lack driving experience and skills, and tend to 
take greater risks. Development of the brain region vital to decision 
making, specifically the pre-frontal cortex, may not be fully reached 
until one's mid-20s.\13\ While proponents of younger truck drivers have 
justified this misguided policy proposal by citing state laws that 
allow them to operate intrastate, expanding the operations of these 
dangerous drivers extends existing safety problems while introducing 
additional safety considerations such as unfamiliar terrain and weather 
conditions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Campbell, K. L., Fatal Accident Involvement Rates By Driver 
Age For Large Trucks, Accid. Anal. & Prev. Vol 23, No. 4, pp. 287-295 
(1991).
    \13\ Arian, M, et al., Maturation of the adolescent brain, 
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment (Apr. 3, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Diverse stakeholders including safety groups, law enforcement, 
public health and consumer organizations, truck drivers, labor unions, 
some trucking companies, and truck crash victims and survivors oppose 
efforts to lower the age to operate CMVs in interstate commerce. 
Additionally, the public has rejected lowering the minimum age for 
interstate truck and bus drivers with 62 percent of respondents in 
opposition, according to a 2020 public opinion poll conducted by 
Engine's Caravan Survey.\14\ Furthermore, in 2001, a petition was filed 
with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to lower 
the age at which a person could obtain a CDL to operate in interstate 
commerce from 21 to 18 as part of a pilot program. The FMCSA declined 
to lower the minimum age for an unrestricted CDL because the agency 
could not conclude that the safety performance of younger drivers was 
on par with, or even close to, that of older CMV drivers. In comments 
to the docket for the petition, the public strongly rejected the idea 
with 96 percent of individuals who responded opposing the proposal 
along with 88 percent of the truck drivers and 86 percent of the motor 
carriers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Engine's Caravan Survey Public Opinion Poll (2020).
    \15\ Young Commercial Driver Pilot Training Program, Notice of 
denial of petition to initiate a pilot program, 68 FR 34467, 34469 
(June 9, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Relatedly, Advocates strongly opposes the Developing Responsible 
Individuals for a Vibrant Economy, ``DRIVE-Safe,'' Act (S. 659/H.R. 
1745) and ``teen trucker'' pilot programs. While at first glance some 
provisions may seem to be pro-safety, the adverse could result. 
Specifically, certain technologies, such as active braking collision 
mitigation systems and speed limiters, are only required during the 
scant probationary period. The result is a teen driver would initially 
learn to drive in a truck fitted with this technology acting to curb 
some dangerous outcomes but after the probationary period, she/he/they 
could get behind the wheel of a truck without any of the safety 
technology and its benefits. The teen driver is then at a deficit 
lacking experience in safely operating trucks without the technology. 
As a noted aside, we welcome the confirmation that the recommended 
technology, for which Advocates has been pushing to be standard 
equipment for many years including submitting a petition to NHTSA to do 
so, provides safety benefits and hope the proponents of the bill will 
join our efforts to accelerate the adoption of proven safety 
technologies in all trucks.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ 80 F.R. 62487 (Oct. 16, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, the training proposals in this bill are woefully 
inadequate. The first probationary period only consists of 80 hours of 
behind-the-wheel training which can be completed in a little over one 
work week while abiding by hours of service (HOS) requirements. 
Further, the 160 hours of driving time in the second probationary 
period can be covered in an additional two weeks. In comparison, the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requires pilots working for 
passenger airlines to have approximately 1,500 hours of flight time. 
These paltry training requirements also pale in comparison to other 
less dangerous jobs. For example, Oregon requires a licensed 
electrician to have 576 hours of classroom training and 8,000 hours of 
experience as an apprentice, and Missouri requires at least 4,000 hours 
of experience as a certified journeyman plumber before applying for a 
master plumber's license.
    Additionally, the qualifications for a teen truck driver passing 
the probationary periods are left entirely to the discretion of the 
employer who is incentivized to get the driver on the road as soon as 
possible. No standard tests or evaluations given by an independent 
party are required. Furthermore, a teen truck driver who is involved in 
a crash or is given a citation for a moving violation during the 
probationary periods is not disqualified from continuing to operate a 
truck.
    Industry representatives have also argued that members of the 
military who are of teenage years are permitted to be at the helm of a 
naval aircraft carrier and thus, should be allowed to operate a truck 
in interstate commerce. This assertion is an apples to oranges 
comparison. First, a young person at the helm would have had a 
significant amount of naval training that would include at least eight 
weeks of intensive boot camp and six weeks of boatswains mate school. 
In sharp contrast, the DRIVE-Safe Act requires a potential teen truck 
driver to undergo approximately three weeks of behind-the-wheel 
training. Second, a young person on an aircraft carrier would be under 
the supervision and direction of a Captain. Not only are orders such as 
turning a vessel directed by the Captain, but the Captain's decision to 
instruct such a maneuver would be supported by a chain of command of 
officers and enlisted men and women involved in navigation of the ship 
through radar, sonar and numerous other functions. Moreover, trucks are 
not equipped with highly sophisticated radar and other navigational 
systems, are not staffed with specialists to monitor each system, and 
do not have the movements of the driver directed by a team of support 
staff constantly overseeing operations. Third and fourth, ships operate 
most often in open waters and at speeds not exceeding 30 knots (less 
than 35 miles per hour), which stands in stark contrast to densely 
traveled highways and roads where trucks can operate at speeds up to 80 
mph. The cartoon below similarly captures this type of comparison.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ Broadside.net, Jeff Bacon, 2014.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    Allowing teenagers to drive trucks in interstate commerce will 
worsen and expand the major problems with truck driver working 
conditions from inside state lines to the entire nation.
    Improving working conditions to ensure experienced drivers stay on 
the job, rather than tapping into an unsafe pool of teenage drivers to 
fill the void, will ideally lead to healthier and more fulfilled 
drivers as well as attract new applicants. In sum, attempts to pull 
teenagers from high school hallways onto high speed highways should be 
rejected by Congress.
    Driver fatigue is a well-known and documented CMV safety problem. 
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has repeatedly cited 
fatigue as a major contributor to truck crashes. Currently, truck 
drivers are permitted to drive up to 11 hours per day for a total of 77 
hours per week. These grueling hours can lead to cumulative fatigue and 
devastating safety consequences. Self-reports of fatigue, which almost 
always underestimate the problem, find that fatigue in truck operations 
is a significant issue. In a 2006 driver survey prepared for FMCSA, 
``65 percent [of drivers] reported that they often or sometimes felt 
drowsy while driving'' and almost half (47.6 percent) of drivers said 
they had fallen asleep while driving in the previous year.\18\ 
Expanding the hours truck drivers can drive in an attempt to move more 
goods puts truck drivers, their loads and everyone on the roads with 
them at risk.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ 75 FR 82170 (Dec. 29, 2010), citing Dinges, D.F. & Maislin, 
G., ``Truck Driver Fatigue Management Survey,'' May 2006. FMCSA-2004-
19608-3968.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In March 2020, FMCSA issued an emergency declaration that exempts 
drivers providing direct assistance for relief efforts related to the 
pandemic.\19\ The declaration was extended by the agency in May 2021 
and again in August 2021 and is currently set to expire November 30, 
2021.\20\ Advocates has called for the agency to be transparent about 
the use of this exemption by making any related data available to the 
public.\21\ To date, the agency has not responded or posted any data on 
its website. It is essential to ensure this process intended to provide 
narrow flexibility does not result in enhanced risks and danger.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ FMCSA, Extension and Amendment of Emergency Declaration 2020-
002 (Aug. 31, 2021).
    \20\ Id.
    \21\ Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, Statement on Extension 
of Emergency Declaration and Exemptions from Certain Truck Safety 
Regulations (Sep. 2, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One of the most effective tools to help prevent driver fatigue is 
the use of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) to record drivers' HOS. 
Paper logs are frequently referred to as ``comic books'' throughout the 
industry because of the ease in falsifying actual driving and work 
time. The FMCSA estimated that requiring ELDs will save 26 lives, 
prevent over 500 injuries and avoid over 1,800 crashes annually. The 
U.S. DOT also estimated the annualized net benefits of adopting ELDs to 
be over $1 billion.\22\ Congress, recognizing the benefits of ELDs, 
mandated their use as part of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st 
Century (MAP-21) Act.\23\ In 2015, the FMCSA delivered on this 
Congressional directive and issued a rule requiring the use of ELDs 
which went into effect in December 2017.\24\ FMCSA reports that since 
the implementation of the ELD rule, the percentage of driver 
inspections with an HOS violation has decreased significantly.\25\ 
Despite this compelling evidence, broad support and an established 
final rule, some continue to object to the use of this technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ 80 FR 78292 (Dec. 16, 2015).
    \23\ Pub. L. 112-141 (2012).
    \24\ 80 FR 78292 (Dec. 16, 2015).
    \25\ FMCSA, Electronic Logging Devices: Improving Safety Through 
Technology, See: https://eld.fmcsa.dot.gov/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is important to note that the ELD rule did not change the 
underlying HOS rules. Yet, a barrage of legislative and regulatory 
proposals continues to target these regulations. For instance, truck 
drivers hauling livestock or insects are currently exempted from having 
to use ELDs pursuant to provisions tucked into the Fiscal Year 2021 
Further Consolidated Appropriations Act.\26\ In addition, the IIJA 
expands the HOS exemption provided to these carriers to a 150 air-mile 
radius from the final destination (the current exemption is for a 150 
air-mile radius from the source).\27\ Allowing certain haulers to skirt 
the ELD rules jeopardizes the safety of the animals in transport, truck 
drivers and everyone on the roads with them. It also complicates 
enforcement efforts. Section 4306 of the INVEST in America Act advanced 
by this Committee required FMCSA to determine the impact all HOS 
exemptions have on public safety. Unfortunately, this prudent provision 
was not included in the IIJA.\28\ We hope this Committee will revisit 
this measure in the future to inform needed reforms to the HOS 
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ Pub. L. 116-260 (2020).
    \27\ H.R. 3684, 117th Congress 1st Sess, (2021).
    \28\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Additionally, in 2016, the FMCSA published an Advanced Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) requesting information regarding the 
potential benefits of regulatory action to address the safety risks 
posed by CMV drivers who are afflicted with obstructive sleep apnea 
(OSA).\29\ Compelling and consistent research has revealed that drivers 
afflicted with OSA that is not properly treated are more prone to 
fatigue and have a higher crash rate than the general driver 
population. In fact, the FAA considers OSA to be a disqualifying 
condition unless properly treated.\30\ Yet, in August of 2017 the FMCSA 
withdrew the OSA rulemaking without providing any credible analysis or 
reasoning for such an ill-advised course of action.\31\ Advocates was 
pleased that Section 4308 of the INVEST in America Act advanced by this 
Committee addressed this critical safety issue, although such language 
was not included in the IIJA.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ 81 FR 12642 (Mar. 10, 2016).
    \30\ Id.
    \31\ 82 FR 37038 (Aug. 8, 2017).
    \32\ H.R. 3684, 117th Congress 1st Sess, (2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Overweight trucks disproportionately damage America's crumbling 
infrastructure and threaten public safety. While certain special 
interests are advocating to suspend federal limits on the weight and 
size of CMVs in response to the current supply chain issues, these laws 
are essential to protecting truck drivers, the traveling public, and 
our nation's roads and bridges.
    According to the 2021 Infrastructure Report Card from the American 
Society of Civil Engineers, America's roads receive a grade of ``D'' 
and our bridges were given a ``C''.\33\ Nearly 40 percent of our 
615,000 bridges in the National Bridge Inventory are 50 years or older, 
and one out of 11 is structurally deficient.\34\ The U.S. DOT 
Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study found that introducing double 
33-foot trailer trucks, known as ``Double 33s,'' would be projected to 
result in 2,478 bridges requiring strengthening or replacement at an 
estimated one-time cost of $1.1 billion.\35\ This figure does not even 
account for the additional, subsequent maintenance costs which will 
result from longer, heavier trucks. In fact, increasing the weight of a 
heavy truck by only 10 percent increases bridge damage by 33 
percent.\36\ The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that 
the investment backlog for bridges, to address all cost-beneficial 
bridge needs, is $123.1 billion.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ 2021 Infrastructure Report Card--Bridges, American Society of 
Civil Engineers (ASCE); 2021 Infrastructure Report Card--Roads, ASCE.
    \34\ 2021 Infrastructure Report Card--Bridges (ASCE).
    \35\ Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study: Bridge 
Structure Comparative Analysis Technical Report, FHWA, June 2015.
    \36\ Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge network Costs, NCHRP Report 
495, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2003.
    \37\ 2015 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: 
Conditions and Performance, Chapter 7, p. 7-34, FHWA, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Raising truck weight or size limits could result in an increased 
prevalence and severity of crashes. Longer trucks come with operational 
difficulties such as requiring more time to pass, having larger blind 
spots, crossing into adjacent lanes, swinging into opposing lanes on 
curves and turns, and taking a longer distance to adequately brake. In 
fact, double trailer trucks have an 11 percent higher fatal crash rate 
than single trailer trucks.\38\ Overweight trucks also pose serious 
safety risk. Not surprisingly, trucks heavier than 80,000 pounds have a 
greater number of brake violations, which are a major reason for out-
of-service violations.\39\ According to a North Carolina study by IIHS, 
trucks with out-of-service violations are 362 percent more likely to be 
involved in a crash.\40\ This is also troubling considering that 
tractor-trailers moving at 60 miles per hour are required to stop in 
310 feet--the length of a football field--once the brakes are 
applied.\41\ Actual stopping distances are often much longer due to 
driver response time before braking and the common problem that truck 
brakes are often not in adequate working condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\ An Analysis of Truck Size and Weight: Phase I--Safety, 
Multimodal Transportation & Infrastructure Consortium, November 2013; 
Memorandum from J. Matthews, Rahall Appalachian Transportation 
Institute, Sep. 29, 2014.
    \39\ Roadside Inspections, Vehicle Violations: All Trucks Roadside 
Inspections, Vehicle Violations (2019--Calendar), FMCSA.
    \40\ Teoh E, Carter D, Smith S and McCartt A, Crash risk factors 
for interstate large trucks in North Carolina, Journal of Safety 
Research (2017).
    \41\ Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49 Part 571 Section 
121: Standard No. 121 Air brake systems (FMVSS 121).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There is overwhelming opposition to any increases to truck size and 
weight limits. The public, local government officials, safety, consumer 
and public health groups, law enforcement, first responders, truck 
drivers and labor representatives, families of truck crash victims and 
survivors, and even Congress on a bipartisan level have all rejected 
attempts to increase truck size and weight. Also, the technical reports 
released in June 2015 from the U.S. DOT Comprehensive Truck Size and 
Weight Study concluded there is a ``profound'' lack of data from which 
to quantify the safety impact of larger or heavier trucks and 
consequently recommended that no changes in the relevant truck size and 
weight laws and regulations be considered until data limitations are 
overcome.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\ Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Federal 
Highway Administration (June 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Considering Congress recently enacted, and this week President 
Biden signed into law, the IIJA which invests billions of dollars to 
improve and make safer our nation's roads and bridges, any increase to 
federal truck size and weight limits will undermine this objective, 
worsen safety problems, and divert rail traffic from privately owned 
freight railroads to our already overburdened public highways. Despite 
claims to the contrary, bigger trucks will not result in fewer trucks. 
Following every past increase to federal truck size and weight limits, 
the number of trucks on our roads has gone up. Since 1982, when 
Congress last increased the gross vehicle weight limit, truck 
registrations have more than doubled.\43\ The U.S. DOT study also 
addressed this meritless assertion and found that any potential mileage 
efficiencies from the use of heavier trucks would be offset in just one 
year.\44\ Congress should oppose any increases to federal truck size 
and weight limits, including mandating double 33 feet trailers, pilot 
programs and state or industry specific exemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\ 2017 Annual Report.
    \44\ Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Federal 
Highway Administration (June 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While autonomous technology could offer the promise of 
significantly reducing crashes involving CMVs in the future, it is far 
from ready to be deployed safely on our nation's roads and therefore is 
not a viable option to address America's supply chain issues. The 
advent of this technology must not be used as a pretext to eviscerate 
essential safety regulations administered by the FMCSA. The public 
safety protections provided by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Regulations (FMCSRs) become no less important or applicable simply 
because a CMV has been equipped with an autonomous driving system 
(ADS). In fact, additional substantial public safety concerns are 
presented by autonomous commercial motor vehicles (ACMVs).
    Autonomous technology is still in its relative infancy as evidenced 
by fatal and serious crashes involving passenger motor vehicles 
equipped with automated driving systems of varying levels. If those 
incidents had involved ACMVs, the results could have been even more 
catastrophic, and the death and injury toll could have been much worse. 
Some of the most pressing safety shortcomings associated with 
autonomous vehicle (AV) technology, which include the ADS properly 
detecting and reacting to all other road users, driver engagement and 
cybersecurity, are exponentially amplified by the greater mass and 
force of an ACMV. As such, it is imperative that ACMVs be subject to 
comprehensive regulations, including having a licensed driver behind 
the wheel for the foreseeable future.
    Advocates and numerous stakeholders have developed the ``AV 
Tenets,'' policy positions which should be a foundational part of any 
AV legislation.\45\ The AV Tenets have four main, commonsense 
categories including: 1) prioritizing safety of all road users; 2) 
guaranteeing accessibility and equity; 3) preserving consumer and 
worker rights; and, 4) ensuring local control and sustainable 
transportation. While the AV Tenets were developed for application to 
vehicles under 10,000 pounds, many of the principles also could apply 
to larger commercial vehicles. Requiring that ACMVs meet safety 
standards, including for cybersecurity, and that operations are subject 
to adequate oversight must be a minimum starting point for their 
potential deployment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ See: https://saferoads.org/autonomous-vehicle-tenets/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Conclusion
    Truck crashes continue to occur at an astonishingly high rate. The 
complex issues facing our nation's supply chain will not be solved by 
advancing reckless proposals that imperil truck drivers and the public 
and damage America's aging infrastructure. Furthermore, risky driving 
behavior such as speeding, impairment, and lack of seat belt use are 
up, according to recent U.S. DOT projections, leading to more deadly 
conditions for everyone on and around roads. Yet, the unending assault 
on essential federal regulations that protect public safety continues. 
Drastically cutting back truck safety protections under the guise of 
providing ``flexibility'' will result in preventable fatalities. 
Instead, we urge this Committee to advance policies and proven 
solutions that will improve safety and working conditions to curb the 
high rates of driver turnover. Nearly 5,000 people killed and 150,000 
injured in truck crashes annually cannot continue to be accepted as a 
societal norm or a cost of moving goods on our nation's roads.
        Sincerely,
                                           Catherine Chase,
                  President, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety.

cc: Members of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                                 
 Statement of Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line and Regional 
Railroad Association, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
                              Introduction
    As president of the American Short Line and Regional Railroad 
Association (ASLRRA), the trade association representing the nation's 
600 Class II and III railroads, I submit this testimony for inclusion 
in the record of this committee's hearing.
    We appreciate the committee's focus on supply chain challenges 
confronting the country and our North American neighbors. ASLRRA's 
short line freight railroad members operate 24/7/365 in this ever-
changing and complex, increasingly demanding economic environment. 
Throughout the pandemic--and just as we did before the pandemic--our 
members have provided service to customers from coast to coast, 
ensuring that businesses in small towns and rural communities that 
might otherwise be cut off from the freight rail network have the 
access they need to the global supply chain. As challenges to the 
economy have mounted, our members have acted as critical ``shock 
absorbers'' for the freight network, blunting the impact of supply 
chain headaches through our flexible, friendly, and customized service. 
We are proud of the service our members provide, especially during 
these times, and we are eager to share our insight, perspective and 
suggestions with this panel.
The country's short line freight rail industry is a vital part of North 
                        American's supply chain
    ASLRRA's members are class II and class III railroads, all of which 
are classified as small businesses.\1\ Our members are critical links 
in the nation's freight supply chain and all are vital engines of 
economic activity. Together, our members are tied to 478,000 jobs 
nationwide, $26.1 billion in labor income and $56.2 billion in economic 
value-add--providing a service that 10,000 businesses nationwide rely 
upon to get goods and products to market.\2\ Our members are also 
environmental stewards, providing a sustainable, low-carbon logistics 
option that is more environmentally friendly than competing forms of 
surface transportation. Freight railroads are an incredibly green way 
to move goods. Railroads account for only 0.5 percent of total U.S. 
greenhouse gas emissions, according to EPA data, and just 1.9 percent 
of transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions. On average, U.S. 
freight railroads move one ton of freight 480 miles on a single gallon 
of diesel fuel. Altogether, short line service keeps 31.8 million heavy 
trucks off highways and public roads, preventing costly wear and tear, 
relieving congestion, and reducing the number of deadly crashes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ According to the Surface Transportation Board, a Class II 
railroad has annual revenues between $40,400,000 and $900,000,000; a 
Class III railroad has revenues below $40,400,000.
    \2\ The Section 45G Tax Credit and the Economic Contribution of the 
Short Line Railroad Industry, prepared by PWC for ASLRRA (2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Short line railroads are especially integral in providing first- 
and last-mile service, functioning frequently as the first and/or often 
final link between suppliers and customers who require critical goods 
and freight. Our members provide this connection in many key industries 
critical to our country's economic health, including the manufacturing, 
agricultural, mining and chemical sectors.
       Avoid any effort to increase the size and weight of trucks
    ASLRRA cautions against any action by USDOT or other policymakers 
that could lead to an increase in truck size and weights. Bigger and 
longer trucks will divert more freight to our roadways and lead to 
greater wear and tear on already worn-out roads, worse roadway 
congestion, more air pollution and truck GHG emissions, and a litany of 
dangerous conditions affecting all roadway users. One train can take 
hundreds of truckloads off our nation's highways. Supply chain 
disruption should not be an excuse to allow more dangerous and unstable 
trucks on our roads. Moreover, some types of configurations of bigger 
trucks--like twin 33s--actually exacerbate supply chain bottlenecks, 
introducing greater inefficiencies to intermodal freight traffic, as 
railcars would be able to carry fewer overall trailers--meaning longer 
wait times for goods and freight carried by rail.

               Current efficiency with 28-foot trailers:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                  Diminished efficiency with twin 33s:
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


   Avoid any regulatory efforts that further exacerbate supply chain 
                                problems
    ASLRRA cautions USDOT and Congress against any efforts that would 
make the supply chain problem even worse. USDOT should forego 
proceeding with efforts like crew size requirements that could force 
our members to make tough economic choices and sacrifice other 
activities they are eager to undertake, like hiring more employees for 
functions where they actually need more staff or neglecting to make 
investments in upgrades and improvements that allow more efficient 
movement of goods and freight. Ill-conceived regulatory efforts--
especially those that aren't backed up by safety data--are misguided 
and exacerbate problems instead of creating solutions. USDOT 
requirements for increased crew size on privately-owned and maintained 
freight rail would be unfair, unhelpful for both safety and the supply 
chain, and at complete odds with other USDOT efforts to develop and 
incentivize driverless trucks (and on publicly-funded infrastructure, 
no less).
    Likewise, ASLRRA cautions USDOT and Congress against any action 
that blocks, stifles or thwarts the advent or use of technology that 
promotes safer operational practices and the efficient use of track and 
rail infrastructure. Preventing railroads from harnessing the power of 
such critical technology could add bottlenecks to our freight network 
and impede the movement of important goods and supplies.
 Advance important funding opportunities that help short line freight 
                               railroads
    Short line railroading is one of the most capital-intensive 
industries in the country. Short lines invest on average 25 percent to 
33 percent of their annual revenues in maintaining and rehabilitating 
their infrastructure. Short lines are also often the custodians of 
expensive bridges and tunnels that were originally built by much larger 
railroads years earlier and are now reaching the end of their useful 
lives. Federal funding opportunities like the Consolidated Rail 
Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant program provide 
short lines with an opportunity to meet these challenges. As the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is implemented and its 
critical resources are made available, we encourage the administration 
to prioritize for funding the many freight rail projects that reduce 
supply chain bottlenecks. These projects also have enormous 
environmental benefits and are often the biggest ``bang for the buck'' 
available in surface transportation.
    Ensuring critical resources are made available through CRISI and 
other important USDOT grant efforts (like the Rebuilding American 
Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE), Infrastructure 
for Rebuilding America (INFRA), and Railroad Crossing Elimination grant 
programs, among others) will allow our members to make congestion-
reducing investments in track upgrades, for example upgrades through 
CRISI to support industry-standard 286,000-lb railcars, so they can 
provide more shipping solutions for customers and bring greater 
efficiency to the network.
                               Conclusion
    We appreciate the committee's close attention to our statement, and 
we welcome future opportunities to work together on this matter.

                                 
Statement of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division of 
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Submitted for the Record by 
                         Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
  Railroads Want To Risk Safety & Take Track Inspectors off the Tracks
    Class I railroads want to eliminate human track inspectors and 
replace them with an unproven approach to track inspection--risking 
derailments and the safety of railroad workers and the public.
    Track inspection professionals have been keeping American railroad 
infrastructure safe for over 150 years. The Federal Railroad 
Administration (FRA) has rules setting how frequently railroads must 
have track inspectors conduct visual track inspections. 49 CFR 
Sec. 213.233.
    In testimony before the House Transportation & Infrastructure 
Committee on November 17, 2021, the President and CEO of the 
Association of American Railroads (AAR) whined that the FRA does not 
automatically approve waivers of track inspection safety rules that set 
the required frequency of human track inspections.
    On October 29, 2021, a group of Republican Senators wrote to FRA 
Deputy Administrator Amit Bose urging the FRA to rubber-stamp approvals 
of these safety waiver requests.
    The AAR characterizes the FRA's review of railroad safety waivers 
as ``stifling innovation'' and preventing the railroads from 
implementing new technology, but this is not true.
    There is absolutely nothing in the FRA regulations keeping the 
railroads from using track geometry cars to conduct automated track 
inspections as frequently as the railroads would like. On Amtrak's 
class 6-8 tracks, track geometry cars are already used at the same 
frequencies the railroads want without FRA safety waivers. But Amtrak 
is adhering to the existing required schedule for human track 
inspections.
    The waivers of FRA safety rules being sought after by the railroads 
would take human track inspectors off the tracks while the railroads 
replace them with new machines that are first being tested and only 
check a portion of the safety factors inspected by a human inspector.
    What we currently know is that automated track inspections cannot 
find all defects required by FRA rules. Track geometry defects make up 
approximately 25 percent of the total defects inspected by human track 
inspectors. Taking human track inspectors off the tracks leaves 75 
percent of track defects unmonitored and puts us all at risk. 
Additionally, human track inspectors must make ``immediate 
remediation'' of the deficiencies they find. The machines cannot do 
that.
    Rail labor supports the expanded use of these track geometry cars 
to assist experienced human track inspection professionals. Still, the 
waivers submitted to FRA indicate that the railroads want to cut human 
track inspections by up to 80 percent below current levels while 
sorting out whether the new technology works for the defects it does 
check, even though there are defects these machines are unable to 
detect. The AAR's assertion that the FRA or rail labor prevents more 
significant deployment of these machines is false.
    Railroads can add all the new technology they want without FRA 
safety waivers. Railroads put lives at risk by taking human track 
inspectors off the track while testing new machines that are not even 
designed to evaluate all the defects assessed by inspectors.

                                 
 Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair and Hon. 
      Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
   Infrastructure, from Jessica Durrum, Ports Project Director, Los 
 Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, Submitted for the Record by Hon. 
                            Peter A. DeFazio
                                                 November 17, 2021.
The Honorable Peter DeFazio,
Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, United States House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, United States House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.

Re: Public Comments for November 17, 2021 Full Committee Hearing On: 
``Industry and Labor Perspectives: A Further Look at North American 
Supply Chain Challenges''

    Dear Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the 
Committee:
    On behalf of the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE), I 
appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments and recommendations 
for consideration in today's House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee hearing on supply chain challenges. LAANE is a non-profit 
organization dedicated to helping build a new economy rooted in good 
jobs, thriving communities, and a healthy environment. Over the past 15 
years, we have worked in coalition with labor and community partners to 
transform the port trucking industry to become more sustainable and 
equitable. As we outline below, the root cause of the poverty and 
pollution we have been tackling at the ports is also at the root of the 
current supply chain bottleneck: an industry-wide, unlawful model of 
driver misclassification. Our path out of this crisis must begin with 
ending this illegal practice and bringing the port trucking industry 
into compliance to ensure an efficient and functional system of port 
operations.
 I. Background: The port drayage industry's systemic misclassification 
          of drivers is at the root of the supply chain crisis
    The Ports of LA and Long Beach are pivotal to global trade and the 
United States economy. Known together as the San Pedro Bay Ports, they 
are by far the largest port complex in the US, handling about 40% of 
all containerized cargo coming into the United States. The goods that 
comes through the San Pedro Bay Ports reach every Congressional 
district in the nation.
    The significance of these ports is not just due to the capacity of 
the port terminals themselves, but also to the vast goods movement 
infrastructure in Southern California. The ports are a key engine of 
the regional economy, with one in nine jobs in Los Angeles County 
connected to the San Pedro Bay Port Complex.\1\ Indeed, recent coverage 
of the current global logjam has reported on how difficult it has been 
for shippers to divert cargo to other ports because they fall short in 
trucking, rail, and warehousing capacity.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Port of Los Angeles, Facts and Figures--Trade Volume
    \2\ Wall Street Journal, Shippers Find New Supply-Chain Hurdles at 
Alternate Ports, Paul Berger, 10/24/2021
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misclassification: An unlawful and inefficient model creating a 
        chokepoint
    While the current goods movement crisis is fueled by compounding 
failures all along the supply chain, it is being exacerbated by an 
inefficient and fractured port drayage system. The rampant and unlawful 
misclassification at the ports has created an unaccountable, 
exploitative, and fragmented structure that hinders industry-wide 
efforts to create an efficient, predictable, and rational system at the 
ports.
    The vast majority of the workforce of over 12,000 drivers at the 
San Pedro Bay Ports are Latino men, the majority of whom are 
immigrants.\3\ While they were lauded as essential workers during the 
pandemic, the industry has treated them as expendable, denying them 
critical protections and their basic rights as employees by 
misclassifying them as ``independent contractors.'' Perversely, the 
majority of companies at the ports continue to unlawfully misclassify 
their drivers and pretend they are somehow each independent businesses 
rather than employees, when the legal system has overwhelmingly found 
that port drivers are in fact employees and therefore are due rights as 
such.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Port of Los Angeles, 2021 Port Truck Driver Survey, Pg.3, 
August 29, 2021
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Over the past decade, every federal and state government agency and 
court that has investigated port trucking companies has repeatedly and 
resoundingly found port truck drivers were not true independent 
contractors, but rather employees--from the US Department of Labor, to 
the National Labor Relations Board, to state and federal district and 
appeals courts, to almost 500 decisions from the California Labor 
Commissioner's Office alone. Yet notwithstanding these uniform 
findings, the vast majority of port trucking companies continue to 
violate the law with impunity, denying their drivers basic employee 
rights, including wage and hour protections such as minimum wage and 
paid sick leave; unemployment, disability, and workers compensation 
insurance; occupational health and safety protections; and the right to 
organize a union with their coworkers. Major logistics corporations XPO 
and Universal Logistics own port trucking subsidiaries that have 
received multiple final court judgments for misclassification and wage 
theft, yet continue to operate outside of the law.
    Any appearance of a ``driver shortage'' is really a shortage of 
good jobs. Misclassification in port trucking has been extensively 
documented as modern-day indentured servitude,\4\ and the industry is 
notorious for unlawfully forcing drivers to shoulder truck costs and to 
work long hours without meal and rest breaks and other basic employee 
protections, including Covid protections. Further, by misclassifying 
drivers and paying them by the load, trucking companies get away with 
offloading the costs of long wait times and traffic congestion onto 
drivers' backs, eliminating any incentive for trucking companies or 
cargo owners to push for a more efficient system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ USA Today, Rigged--Forced into debt, Worked past exhaustion. 
Left with nothing, Brett Murphy, June 16, 2017
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to having a devastating impact on drivers and their 
families, the industry's misclassification of drivers has negative 
effects all along the supply chain and beyond, outlined as follows:
      The current misclassification-based drayage system is 
chaotic and unpredictable. In testimony delivered to the California 
Joint Assembly and Senate Ports and Good Movement Select Committee 
hearing on November 3, 2021, Port of Los Angeles Executive Director 
Gene Seroka reported that 30% of all truck appointments at the port 
terminals go unfilled, a figure that goes up to 50% on the weekends. 
With a more rational system based on an employee workforce, employers 
could coordinate driver schedules and provide direction to employees to 
ensure that appointments are met, and could provide backup labor if 
drivers are stuck in lines beyond their control and unable to make 
appointments. An employee-based model would also ensure that drivers 
receive fair compensation, including hourly pay for all hours waiting 
in line to pick up a container, a night differential for working the 
night shift, and overtime wages.
         The lack of accountability in the port drayage sector has also 
led to a highly fragmented market, with over 1,200 trucking companies 
registered to do business at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, 
of which 800 are in active service.\5\ This is grossly inefficient, 
given that just 50 of those companies move about half of all 
containers. A more manageable universe of companies would further 
contribute to a more rational system of drayage where appointment 
systems can work, which would in turn lead to a much more rational 
system of terminal operation itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Port of Los Angeles Clean Truck Program Gate Move Analysis, 
September 2021
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      By misclassifying drivers, the industry also hurts the 
public because companies that misclassify are not paying or deducting 
payroll taxes, depriving Social Security and state unemployment and 
disability insurance funds of sorely needed contributions. A recent 
analysis by the California Department of Labor Standards Enforcement 
found that misclassification costs the state of California $7 billion 
annually.\6\ An earlier study by the Government Accounting Office found 
that the Federal government is shortchanged by at least $2.6 billion 
annually by companies that misclassify their workers.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Misclassification, The ABC Test, and Employee Status, Lynn 
Rhinehart, Celine McNicholas, Margaret Poydock, and Ihna Mangundayao, 
June 16, 2021
    \7\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Companies that operate outside of the law by 
misclassifying are also undercutting law-abiding businesses, creating 
unfair competition for companies that do pay their taxes and follow 
labor and employment laws. Trucking companies that misclassify their 
drivers undercut compliant operators by at least 30%, profit margins in 
the industry are narrow, at about 8%. So while misclassification is 
illegal, as a port trucking company owner testified in a 2018 hearing 
at the Port of Long Beach, this model persists because ``It is cheaper 
to cheat.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Long Beach City Council, Tidelands and Harbor Committee 
meeting, May 31, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``driver shortage'' is really a shortage of decent work
    Rather than seek to address the glaring dysfunction in the port 
trucking industry--an illegal business model--the industry has instead 
chosen to dust off its perennial claims of a driver shortage. Here we 
take a closer look at key indicators of driver retention and supply, 
which again point to a fundamental issue with the industry, not the 
number of drivers available to work. A 2019 Bureau of Labor Statistics 
report examining the industry's claim of a driver shortage found a 94% 
\9\ turnover rate in large Truckload Carriers and nearly 80% in smaller 
Truckload Carriers, using data collected by the American Trucking 
Association. Such astronomically high turnover rates point to a problem 
with working conditions. Indeed, other segments of the trucking sector 
which have higher unionization rates had much lower turnover rate of 
11.7%,\10\ pointing to the value of job quality in retaining drivers in 
the industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Monthly Labor Review, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Is the U.S. 
labor market for truck drivers broken?, March 2019, Stephen V. Burks & 
Kristen Monaco
    \10\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Focusing in on California, the epicenter of the current backlogs, 
the trucking industry's claims of a dire shortage of truck drivers do 
not hold up under further examination of data. According to a recent 
article by Time magazine there are over 640,000 California residents 
with Class A & B Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDLs), but there are only 
140,000 truck transportation jobs in California.\11\ Shifting focus to 
port drayage drivers in the San Pedro Bay Ports, data compiled for the 
Clean Truck Program clearly show an excess of registered trucks 
eligible to call upon the ports (the closest proxy for port drivers in 
publicly available data). In the most recently released data, the ports 
report there are 19,878 \12\ trucks with access to port terminals in 
the Port of Long Beach and 18,374 \13\ with access to the Port of Los 
Angeles. Of those, there are 14,727 and 13,352 active trucks--those 
that make at least one trip to port terminals a month--at the Port of 
Long Beach and Los Angeles respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ Time Magazine, The Truck Driver Shortage Doesn't Exist. Saying 
There Is One Makes Conditions Worse for Drivers, Alana Semuels, 
November 12, 2021
    \12\ Port of Long Beach--Clean Trucks Program Monthly Container 
Truck Move Analysis September 2021
    \13\ Port of Los Angeles Clean Truck Program (CTP)--Gate Move 
Analysis, September 2021: Adjusted Engine Year
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With over four times as many licensed truck drivers in the state 
than available trucking jobs, and with a surplus of at least 25% of 
trucks with access to port terminals that are not calling on the ports, 
it is clear that there is no real shortage of drivers available to move 
goods. Again, the shortage is one of decent, dignified working 
conditions, combined with a lack of a rational, efficient system in 
which drivers can perform their jobs.
    The trucking industry's push to lower the CDL age as one of the 
solutions to the current cargo problem, will not help move any 
containers before the holidays and may actually make the situation 
worse. The recent infrastructure bill signed by President Biden 
includes millions for new truck driver training and there are already 
countless driver training programs in existence. But as shown above the 
number of people with CDLs does not mean there will be a job to place 
them in. This conclusion that the problem is not a lack of drivers 
willing to do the job, but rather an inefficient system, has been 
echoed in many recent reports, from a union driver,\14\ to a non-union 
trucking company owner in Oakland.\15\ Flooding the market with new, 
inexperienced drivers will only add to port congestion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Medium, ``I'm A Twenty Year Truck Driver, I Will Tell You Why 
America's ``Shipping Crisis'' Will Not End'', Ryan Johnson, October 26, 
2021
    \15\ Commercial Carrier Journal, ``Unenforced emissions regs 
absolutely' constraining drayage market'', Tom Quimby, Nov 12, 2021
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     II. The Solution: Rationalize port drayage by ending systemic 
                   misclassification of port drivers
    The port drayage system as it operates today is not a rational nor 
an efficient system, as has been clearly demonstrated over the past 
several months. In a recent Port of Los Angeles Harbor Commission 
meeting, Commissioner Diane Middleton recently offered the following 
analysis of the causes of the congestion plaguing the ports and what 
it's going to take to end the chaos:

        ``When we look at the two other critical parts of the supply 
        chain, truckers and warehouse workers, there is a tremendous 
        breakdown there. Everyone understands it. The legislature did 
        their job in trying to pass laws that protect warehouse workers 
        and truckers. I believe this situation is never going to change 
        until these workers are unionized, and they have someone who 
        can collectively bargain around wages, hours and working 
        conditions. It will bring what I call, rationalization, to the 
        system.'' \16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Diane Middleton, ``1. Resolution No. ____--Approve Temporary 
Order To Amend Port Of Los Angeles Tariff No. 4, Section Twenty-Five, 
Container Excess Dwell Fee,'' Port of Los Angeles Board of Harbor 
Commissioners, October 29, 2021, video, 41:05, https://
www.portoflosangeles.org/commission/agenda-archive-and-videos

    To rationalize this system, we must first rein in misclassification 
with all the policy tools at our disposal, starting with vigorous 
enforcement. In the absence of accountability, good high-road trucking 
companies who properly classify their drivers as employees have no 
incentive to do business in the ports of LA and Long Beach as they can 
be so easily undercut by those that operate outside the law and make 
money off the backs of workers, taxpayers and law-abiding companies.
    While trucking companies must be held accountable and come into 
compliance with federal, state, and local labor, employment, and tax 
laws, there will always be a race to the bottom as long as there are 
low-road companies that can undercut those who follow the law. To raise 
the floor and transform the industry, the powerful players at the top 
of the supply chain--the Beneficial Cargo Owners--must also be held 
accountable for the abuses in their supply chains. The real economic 
employers that benefit from this whole system are the retailers and 
brands who contract with trucking companies and they have the resources 
and the power to dictate the terms of those contracts.
                    III. Recommended policy actions
    Below, we outline key actions that Congress, the Biden 
Administration, and key agencies can take to alleviate the congestion 
at the ports, namely promoting good jobs and preventing further system 
failures by ending the illegal business model which relies on 
misclassification and exploitation
      Congress and the President must take immediate measures 
during this crisis, through full use of Congressional action and 
Executive Orders, to create a more rational, efficient, and accountable 
port drayage system, including by:
        Securing land to store containers and incentivizing the 
use of unionized companies or companies with labor peace agreements to 
expedite the clearing of backlogged containers without labor 
disruptions or strikes impeding this critical work.
        Addressing the race to the bottom in trucking spurred 
by so-called deregulation and legislation like the FAAAA. Trucking 
companies have perverted the intent behind these laws and have 
advocated for broad preemptive powers which prevent states and 
localities from addressing critical labor and employment issues. 
Stymying the ability of local and state governments to raise standards 
to create a more efficient and accountable system at the ports has led 
to the systemic misclassification driving the current crisis.
        Incentivizing Beneficial Cargo Owners to only use 
companies that properly classify their port drivers as employees, that 
require decent labor standards--including living wages and good health 
insurance--and that require labor peace agreements from their 
contractors to avoid labor unrest throughout their supply chains.
        Ensuring that federal contracts can address the current 
crisis and do not finance or enrich law-breaking companies by requiring 
that any recipients or contractors only use law-abiding port trucking 
companies that properly classify drivers as employees and that have 
union contracts or other labor peace agreements which will prevent 
labor unrest throughout their supply chains at this critical time.
      The DOL, the IRS, other key agencies, and even state 
governments can develop a program to audit port trucking companies, 
requiring immediate reclassification or cessation of operations by all 
trucking companies it finds to be engaging in misclassification, and 
recovering unpaid FICA and payroll taxes.
      Call upon Beneficial Cargo Owners--retailers and brands--
to develop and enforce a Code of Conduct that demands strict compliance 
with state and federal law, that prohibits misclassification, that 
requires decent labor standards, including living wages and good health 
insurance, and that requires labor peace agreements or union contracts 
to avoid labor unrest throughout their supply chains.
      Vigorously support organizing rights and the PRO Act to 
remove barriers for drivers who are striving to exercise their employee 
rights and improve their working conditions.

    Thank you for your consideration.
        Sincerely,
                                            Jessica Durrum,
    Ports Project Director, Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy.

                                 
 Letter of December 1, 2021, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair and Hon. 
      Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
       Infrastructure, from Robyn M. Boerstling, Vice President, 
   Infrastructure, Innovation, and Human Resources Policy, National 
  Association of Manufacturers, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Sam 
                                 Graves
                                                  December 1, 2021.
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio,
Chairman,
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
Hon. Sam Graves,
Ranking Member,
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves,
    The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), the largest 
manufacturing association in the United States representing 
manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 states, 
appreciates the Committee's focus on addressing national supply chain 
shortcomings by holding the recent hearing entitled, ``Industry and 
Labor Perspectives: A Further Look at North American Supply Chain 
Challenges''.
    NAM membership is comprised of businesses operating in all areas of 
the national supply chain, utilizing all modes of shipping 
transportation, and duly affected by any challenges that arise, 
especially those causing systematic impacts. Throughout the COVID-19 
pandemic manufacturers have risen to the challenge of safely operating 
industrial facilities to meet the needs of America's consumers and 
communities and fulfilling varied essential services. As the strain on 
our nation's supply chain persists across multimodal operations and 
across industries, NAM members have experienced firsthand the real-time 
impacts of cost increases and time delays. Manufacturers in the United 
States possess a unique perspective on all surface, water and air-based 
goods shipments and support appropriate federal actions and policies 
aimed at lessening existing constraints and preventing further supply 
chain disruptions.
    For many years, the NAM has strongly advocated for increased 
federal investment into the nation's infrastructure. In order to 
maintain global competitiveness, our roads, bridges, waterways, 
airports and related systems must be built and maintained for the 
century ahead. No global economic power can compete on the world stage 
if products cannot efficiently be moved to market and transported to 
and from international launch points. The recently enacted 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will provide historic funding 
for American infrastructure and create economic growth opportunity 
without implementing new undue tax burdens on the manufacturing base 
that is our national economic engine. With a combination of opportunity 
for private investment and direct injection of federal funding into 
vital and long-overdue projects, this initiative will build the 
infrastructure our nation desperately needs to achieve historic 
economic prosperity, create sustainable and resilient national systems, 
and ensure long-term growth for American industry. Additionally, by 
securing long-term solvency for our nation's surface transportation 
systems, businesses that rely heavily on the trains, trucks and other 
forms of surface shipping would gain the secure outlook needed for 
advanced planning and strategic growth.
    As the administration develops new programs to utilize this 
funding, the NAM strongly encourages continued engagement with 
congressional partners and the industrial partners who will build, 
repair and maintain the national infrastructure systems highlighted in 
the law. Specifically, as both short- and long-term port and supply 
chain remedies are considered, pursuing projects that allow local ports 
and terminal operators appropriate flexibility in meeting local demands 
should be a paramount focus. Technological upgrades for shipping data 
management and logistical operations for onsite container and truck 
movements at America's ports should also be considered an effective use 
of IIJA port funding. Further, truck congestion on the surface side 
operations of ports could be alleviated if additional trailer and 
container parking and storage were available at or nearby existing port 
locations. IIJA funding can make a targeted impact on trucking 
congestion at ports if applied towards the creation or expansion of 
additional parking facilities and physical space for intermodal 
transfer and container storage use.
    The most visible inflection point for current supply chain 
constraints has been at American ports. As the U.S. economy began to 
rebound from COVID-19, it quickly became apparent that our existing 
supply chain was not impervious to global facility shutdowns, worker 
shortages and other ancillary impacts resulting from a once-in-a-
century pandemic. The nation's manufacturing and industrial base now 
faces historically higher shipping costs, unpredictable delivery delays 
for essential components and heretofore unseen limitations on cargo 
space availability for ocean going freight. The NAM would further 
encourage congressional efforts to enact programs that incentivize, 
train and license heavy-duty commercial vehicle drivers. Current 
federal law prohibits the interstate movement of goods by commercial 
driver's license (CDL) holders under the age of 21. Along with 
additional industry advocates, the NAM has called for passage of the 
DRIVE Safe Act, which would authorize appropriate federal approval for 
training and apprenticeship programs to allow for the legal operation 
of commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce by under-21 CDL 
holders. By activating this existing pool of trained and licensed 
drivers, the federal government could quickly alleviate some of the 
systematic burden caused by a nationwide truck driver shortage.
    An additional step available to enhance operations at the Port of 
LA and other heavy volume domestic ocean ports includes wider 
introduction of innovative data logistics management systems. The 
digitization of industrial processes has led to advanced manufacturing 
procedures that enhance competitive productivity. As Congress and the 
administration review opportunities for federal investment to 
reinvigorate port operations, advanced data management has the 
potential to utilize innovative logistics to identify bottlenecks, 
streamline container and chassis delivery and transition antiquated 
infrastructure for a modern shipping landscape.
    The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), which is tasked with 
jurisdictional oversight of operations and operators at American ports, 
also has a slate of proactive options that could be exercised to ease 
shipping burdens for the industrial sector. While existing authorities 
would allow the assessment of fees on international ocean carriers 
operating practices that adversely affect the U.S., the threat of 
action has historically brought disparate parties to a consensus on 
fairly adjudicating disputes. NAM members are frustrated with empty 
shipping containers taking up usable cargo space on ocean-bound 
outgoing ships, often times in place of contracted container space for 
U.S. produced goods. While this practice may financially benefit the 
carriers' bottom line, it disadvantages key sectors of the U.S. 
economy. The NAM would encourage the FMC to utilize any necessary and 
appropriate levies or authorized abilities to ensure operators and 
carriers at U.S. ports do not unfairly select cargo loads that run 
counter to contractual obligations or domestic interests. Should 
congressional action be necessary to empower the FMC with more specific 
instructions, we would encourage consideration of such efforts on 
behalf of manufacturers in the U.S.
    The current status of the domestic supply chain presents daunting 
challenges and threatens the continued economic revival of 
manufacturers in the United States who have successfully responded to 
the COVID-19 pandemic. Manufacturers know the immense capabilities of 
American ingenuity and the recommendations included here are few of the 
many steps that the NAM hopes congressional leaders will consider to 
ease cost burdens, reduce shipping timetables and allocate resources 
for more efficient industrial goods transportation. The NAM has 
recently enlisted members to participate in a Ports and Ocean Shipping 
Task Force, dedicated to productive engagement with policymakers and to 
serve as a forum for industrial best practices and anecdotal dialogue. 
We invite Members from the Committee to join the Task Force for an 
upcoming meeting and look forward to continuing a solutions-oriented 
conversation to rectify national supply chain challenges.
        Sincerely,
                                       Robyn M. Boerstling,
   Vice President, Infrastructure, Innovation, and Human Resources 
                                                            Policy,
                             National Association of Manufacturers.

                                 
  Letter of September 13, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. Dusty 
 Johnson from Accustom Brokerage, LLC et al., Submitted for the Record 
                         by Hon. John Garamendi
                                                September 13, 2021.
The Honorable John Garamendi,
U.S. House of Representatives,
2368 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Dusty Johnson,
U.S. House of Representatives,
1714 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Representatives Garamendi and Johnson,
    On behalf of the undersigned companies and trade associations 
representing U.S. importers, exporters, transportation providers and 
other supply chain stakeholders, we are writing to express our strong 
support for the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 (OSRA21) (HR 4996) 
which you have introduced. We believe the reforms included in OSRA21 
will help address longstanding, systemic supply chain and port 
disruption issues which have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 
pandemic.
    The ongoing supply chain challenges that face the nation's 
exporters and importers are having a significant effect on their 
economic recovery during the pandemic. While the supply chain has been 
stretched from end-to-end, there are systemic issues that need to be 
addressed in the maritime cargo sphere. For many years, the issue of 
detention and demurrage has been a problem leading to significant cost 
increases for cargo owners and truckers, many times due to issues 
beyond their control. We certainly welcomed the Interpretive Rule on 
Detention and Demurrage as published by the Federal Maritime 
Commission, but we need more than just ``guidance'' that is not being 
followed by ocean carriers nor marine terminals, leading to hundreds of 
millions of dollars in unfair penalties against US shippers and their 
transportation partners. The legislation will seek to formalize this 
rule and truly define the parameters for these charges.
    Foreign markets are critical to American businesses, particularly 
US farmers and ranchers, with more than 20% of agricultural production 
going abroad. Problems obtaining ocean containers of any kind combined 
with difficulty securing vessel space at fair and reasonable prices, 
are jeopardizing livelihoods and economic recovery. The attention given 
these unreasonable practices and the reforms proposed in OSRA21 are 
critical to reversing those challenges facing not only US exporters but 
also US businesses that rely on imports.
    The legislation will also seek to update key provisions of the 
Ocean Shipping Reform Act, which hasn't been updated in over two 
decades. The maritime transportation system has changed significantly 
during those decades. While some maritime transportation system changes 
have been a positive for the industry overall, we need to ensure the 
regulations remain applicable to today's reality. With the creation of 
the carrier alliances, contraction of the number of carriers in the 
market, changes to chassis management and others, we believe the time 
is right for these important reforms.
    We thank you for your strong leadership on this issue to ensure 
that the ongoing supply chain disruption and port congestion issues are 
addressed. This will help ensure U.S. competitiveness and continued 
economic recovery. We look forward to working with you to ensure 
passage of this important legislation.
        Sincerely,
Company Signatures:
Accustom Brokerage, LLC.
Akzo Nobel.
Associated Bag.
BassTech International.
BBT Logistics, Inc.
Best Transportation.
Bio-Vet, Inc.
Briggs & Riley Travelware, LLC.
BubbleBum USA LLC.
Byer California.
Cap America, Inc.
Carbochem Inc.
Dalakar Hill LLC.
Delka Trucking, Inc.
Delta Cycle Corp.
ElliptiGO, Inc.
Epstone Inc. T/A Artistic Tile.
Everlast Sports Mfg Inc.
Hapco Inc.
Hatco Corporation.
HCS International.
Hercules Enterprises LLC.
Highline United LLC.
ICE Robotics.
InUSA Manufacturing LLC.
It luggage USA, Ltd.
J Way Company.
Ju Ju Be Intl.
Kontoor Brands, Inc.
Levatoy, LLC.
Loftex Home LLC.
Luggage Shop of Lubbock.
Luraco Technologies.
M.E. Dey & Co. Inc.
Mobile Edge LLC.
MTI, INC. PA.
Multiax America Inc.
Nouryon.
Outdoor Gear, Inc.
Regal Lager, Inc.
Renfro Brands LLC.
Schuster Products, LLC.
Setlog Corp.
SGP Inc.
Signify North America Corporation.
Star Children's Dress Co.
Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc.
Synergies Worldwide Ltd.
T.G.S. Logistics, Inc.
Town & Country Living.
Transways Motor Express Co., Inc.
Uncommon Carrier, Inc.
United State Luggage, LLC.
UPS.
Wausau Chemical Corporation.
Wenko Inc.
WEST END Express.
Xenith.
Zero Halliburton, Inc.

Trade Association Signatures:
Accessories Council.
Agriculture Transportation Coalition.
Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.
ALTI.
American Apparel & Footwear Association.
American Association of Exporters and Importers.
American Chemistry Council.
American Coatings Association.
American Home Furnishings Alliance.
American Lighting Association.
American Pyrotechnics Association.
American Seed Trade Association.
American Spice Trade Association.
American Trucking Associations.
Association of Bi-State Motor Carriers.
Association of Food Industries.
Auto Care Association.
Automotive Body Parts Association (ABPA).
CAWA--Representing the Automotive Parts Industry.
Color Pigments Manufacturers Association.
Columbia River Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association.
Consumer Brands Association.
Consumer Technology Association.
Council of Fashion Designers of America (CFDA).
Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of Northern California.
Customs Brokers & International Freight Forwarders Association of 
Washington State.
Dairy Farmers of America.
Distilled Spirits Council of the U.S.
Experiential Designers & Producers Association.
Footwear Distributors & Retailers of America (FDRA).
Fragrance Creators Association.
Freight Management Association of Canada.
Game Manufacturers Association.
Green Coffee Association.
Greeting Card Association.
Halloween & Costume Association.
Harbor Trucking Association.
Home Fashion Products Association.
Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc.
Intermodal Motor Carriers Conference.
International Association of Movers (IAM).
International Association of Refrigerated Warehouses.
International Bottled Water Association.
International Housewares Association.
International Warehouse Logistics Association.
International Wood Products Association.
ISSA--The Worldwide Cleaning Industry Association.
Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA).
Leather and Hide Council of America.
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce.
Los Angeles Customs Brokers & Freight Forwarders Association.
Meat Import Council of America.
Michigan Chemistry Council.
Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association.
Motorcycle Industry Council.
NASSTRAC.
National Association of Chemical Distributors.
National Association of Music Merchants.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association.
National Fisheries Institute.
National Foreign Trade Council.
National Industrial Transportation League.
National Marine Manufacturers Association.
National Milk Producers Federation.
National Pork Producers Council.
National Retail Federation.
National Ski & Snowboard Retailers Association.
National Sporting Goods Association.
New Jersey Motor Truck Association.
North American Association of Food Equipment Manufacturers (NAFEM).
North American Home Furnishings Association.
North American Meat Institute.
Outdoor Industry Association.
Pacific Coast Council of Customs Brokers and Freight Forwarders Assns. 
Inc.
Personal Care Products Council.
Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council.
Plumbing Manufacturers International.
Promotional Products Association International (PPAI).
Recreational Off Highway Vehicle Association.
Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA).
San Diego Customs Brokers Association.
Specialty Vehicle Institute of America.
Sports & Fitness Industry Association (SFIA).
The Can Manufacturers Institute.
The Fertilizer Institute.
The Foreign Trade Association (FTA).
The Hardwood Federation.
The Toy Association.
Travel Goods Association.
U.S. Dairy Export Council.
U.S. Fashion Industry Association.
United Natural Products Alliance.
Wisconsin Credit Assn.

CC:  The Honorable Peter DeFazio, Chairman, Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure
     The Honorable Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure
     The Honorable Salud O. Carbajal, Chairman, Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation
     The Honorable Bob Gibbs, Ranking Member, Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Coast Guard and 
Maritime Transportation

                                 
Letter of August 9, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. Dusty Johnson 
from the Agriculture Transportation Coalition et al., Submitted for the 
                     Record by Hon. John Garamendi
                                                    August 9, 2021.
Representative John Garamendi,
Representative Dusty Johnson,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Congressmen Garamendi and Johnson;
    The US agriculture and forest products industry strongly endorses 
your legislation, the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 ``OSRA21''. The 
undersigned companies and associations believe the Act's provisions 
addressing unreasonable detention and demurrage charges, export cargo 
bookings, and other carrier practices, are essential to allow US 
agriculture to remain competitive in global markets.
    The transportation crisis for US agriculture and forest products is 
becoming increasingly dire each month. There is nothing we produce in 
agriculture and forest products in this country, that cannot be sourced 
in some other country. If we cannot deliver, affordably and dependably, 
our foreign customers will find alternatives to our exports. Our survey 
suggests that on average 22% of US agriculture foreign sales cannot be 
completed due to ocean carrier rates, declining to carry export cargo, 
unreasonable demurrage and detention charges, and other practices.
    Over 150 Members of Congress have written urging prompt Federal 
initiative. The House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
hearing, President Biden's Executive Order 14036, and Secretary of US 
Department of Transportation Buttigieg's recent port Roundtable all 
confirm that current law and regulation are insufficient to protect the 
ocean shipping interests of US exporters and importers.
    We strongly support provisions in your bill to gain reasonable and 
fair ocean carrier practices consistent with the Federal Maritime 
Commission's excellent Interpretive Rule on Demurrage and Detention--
which unfortunately has gone unheeded for over two years. It imposes 
upon carriers the obligation to self-police compliance with that Rule. 
In addition, the bill obligates ocean carriers to carry export cargo, 
to the extent they can do so safely. It addresses carrier practices 
limiting efficient use of containers, chassis and other equipment.
    We greatly appreciate your engagement with the agriculture 
community nationwide, to develop this proposed Act. As it proceeds 
through the legislative process, we look forward to working with you to 
advance and strengthen the bill.
        Sincerely,
Agriculture Transportation Coalition.
Agricultural & Food Transporters Conference, ATA.
Allbright Cotton.
Allied Potato.
Almond Alliance of California.
American Chemistry Council.
American Comodity Company.
American Cotton Shippers Association.
American Farm Bureau Federation.
American Feed Industry Association.
American Pulse Association.
American Seed Trade Association.
American Trucking Associations.
Anderson Northwest.
Border Valley Trading.
CA Walnut Commission.
California Citrus Mutual.
California Cotton Ginners and Growers Association.
California Fresh Fruit Association.
California Table Grape Commission.
California Walnuts.
Capay Canyon Ranch.
Columbia Grain.
Columbia Seeds.
Consumer Brands Association.
Corn Refiners Association.
Cotton Warehouse Association of America.
Dairy Farmers of America.
Diamond E Transport.
Double River Forwarding, LLC.
Eckenberg Farms.
El Toro Export, LLC.
Excel International, LLC.
Fig Garden Packing, Inc.
Foodlinx.
Grower Direct Nut Co.
Hardwood Federation.
Humble Solutions Inc.
Inland Empire Milling Co.
Intermodal Motor Carrier Conference, ATA.
International Dairy Foods Association.
International Paper.
Leather and Hide Council of America.
Lindsey Forwarders, Inc.
Meat Import Council of America.
National Assn. of State Departments of Agriculture.
National Chicken Council.
National Cotton Council.
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.
National Hay Association.
National Milk Producers Federation.
National Oilseed Processors Association.
National Onion Association.
National Pork Producers Council.
North American Meat Institute.
North American Renderers Association.
Oregon Potato Commission.
Pandol.
Pacific Coast Council Customs Brokers & Freight Forwarders.
   Washington State Assn.
   Columbia River Assn.
   Northern California Assn.
   Los Angeles Assn.
   San Diego Assn.
Pet Food Institute.
Puris.
Quality Trading CO, LLC.
Ray-Mont Logistics.
Saddle Butte Ag, Inc.
SB&B Foods, LLC.
Smith Seed Services.
Southern States Forwarding, Inc.
Specialty Soya and Grains Alliance.
Sun Pacific Marketing.
Sunsweet.
The Fertilizer Institute.
The Gombos Company, LLC.
USA Dry Pea and Lentil Council.
U.S. Dairy Export Council.
U.S. Dry Bean Council.
U.S. Forage Export Council.
U.S. Pea and Lentil Trade Association.
U.S. Meat Export Federation.
United Fresh Produce Association.
US Nisshin Shokai.
Ward Rugh, Inc.
WeFARM Organics.
Western Agricultural Processors Association.
Western Growers Association.
Williams Clarke Company, Inc.
Wine and Spirits Shippers Associa- tion.

                                 
  Letter of September 24, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. Dusty 
Johnson from Jacob Cassady, Director, Government Relations, Association 
      of Home Appliance Manufacturers, Submitted for the Record by
                          Hon. John Garamendi
                                                September 24, 2021.
The Honorable John Garamendi,
U.S. House of Representatives,
2368 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Dusty Johnson,
U.S. House of Representatives,
1714 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Representatives Garamendi and Johnson,
    The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM) is writing 
to express our support for the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 
(OSRA21), which you have introduced. We believe the reforms included in 
OSRA21 will help address serious and significant supply chain and port 
disruption issues.
    AHAM represents manufacturers of major, portable and floor care 
home appliances, and suppliers to the industry. AHAM's membership 
includes over 150 companies throughout the world. In the U.S., AHAM 
members support more than one million jobs, have a $198 billion 
economic impact, and produce more than 95% of the household appliances 
shipped for sale. The home appliance industry, through its products and 
innovation, is essential to consumer lifestyle, health, safety and 
convenience. Home appliances also are a success story in terms of 
energy efficiency and environmental protection. The purchase of new 
appliances often represents the most effective choice a consumer can 
make to reduce home energy use and costs.
    OSRA21 would update key provisions of the Ocean Shipping Reform 
Act, which has not been updated in over two decades. The maritime 
transportation system has changed significantly during those decades 
and with the creation of the carrier alliances, we believe the time is 
right for these important legislative reforms.
    We thank you for your leadership on this issue to help address the 
supply chain disruption and port congestion problems.
        Sincerely,
                                             Jacob Cassady,
     Director, Government Relations, Association of Home Appliance 
                                                     Manufacturers.

                                 
Letter of November 17, 2021, to Hon. Peter DeFazio, Chair and Hon. Sam 
Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 
from Gary Shapiro, President and CEO, Consumer Technology Association, 
            Submitted for the Record by Hon. John Garamendi
                                                 November 17, 2021.
The Honorable Peter DeFazio,
Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, 2134 Rayburn House Office Building, 
        Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, 1135 Longworth House Office Building, 
        Washington, DC 20515.
    Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves,
    As our nation's largest technology trade association, the Consumer 
Technology Association (CTA)  agrees we need robust and resilient 
supply chains to protect consumers and ensure American innovation, 
economic success and global competitiveness.
    CTA has supported ongoing efforts across the federal government to 
address supply chain challenges facing the U.S., including President 
Biden's comprehensive approach to reviewing the U.S. supply chain 
initiated earlier this year.
    CTA has also published its own studies and analyses to help 
policymakers and industry stakeholders understand how companies and 
consumers rely on global supply chains and what can be done to solve 
these problems.\1\ While the causes of the current supply chain crises 
are multiple and complex, Congress can take three actions now to 
alleviate the strain on American businesses and consumers:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://shop.cta.tech/collections/research/products/coping-
with-crisis-sme-supply-chain-issues-in-the-pandemic-era
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    First, pass the bipartisan Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 (H.R. 
4996). While American manufacturers, distributors and retailers work 
nonstop to rebound from the pandemic and ensure the availability of 
goods for their customers at reasonable prices, the global shipping 
industry has been taking advantage of these efforts by exploiting 
supply chain challenges for a profit. As documented by 60 Minutes 
Sunday, shippers have raised prices for global shipping and exploited 
port delays by imposing exorbitant fees for time that containers spend 
waiting to be unloaded, even when those containers cannot yet access 
the port. This has left American businesses, workers and consumers to 
suffer through higher costs for goods.
    As detailed in this week's New York Times front-page story, 
shippers have been refusing to load containers with U.S. agricultural 
goods and other products, preferring to quickly return across the ocean 
for the more lucrative Asia-U.S. route. As a result, more than 80% of 
the 434,000 containers exported out of the port of Los Angeles in 
September were empty.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/14/business/economy/farm-
exports-supply-chain-ports.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The bipartisan Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 2021 would reduce the 
shipping industry from imposing these exploitative penalties. The bill 
would also require shippers to act in the public interest and make it 
more difficult for them to refuse cargo from American exporters. This 
is the time to pass the Ocean Shipping Reform Act and end shipper 
misbehavior.
    Second, suspend or eliminate outright the ocean shippers' antitrust 
exemption. The ocean shipping industry has consolidated significantly 
over the past 20 years, with the ten largest carriers--all of which are 
foreign-owned--controlling more than 80 percent of the market.\3\ This 
tiny but powerful group has seized on the crisis as a chance to 
significantly raise prices for global shipping: a container that pre-
pandemic cost $2,500 to ship currently costs $25,000 or more.\4\ As 
American consumers and businesses struggle, foreign shippers are 
posting record profits.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/
2021/07/09/fact-sheet-executive-order-on-promoting-competition-in-the-
american-economy/
    \4\ https://www.reuters.com/business/china-us-container-shipping-
rates-sail-past-20000-record-2021-08-05/
    \5\ https://qz.com/2060904/ports-are-a-mess-but-shipping-company-
profits-are-at-record-highs/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite these abuses, U.S. regulators, businesses and consumers are 
largely powerless because the shipping industry enjoys the U.S.'s 
oldest surviving statutory antitrust exemption. This exemption dates to 
1916, and the U.S. Department of Justice has consistently called for 
its elimination over the past 20 years.\6\ Ocean carriers have taken 
advantage of their antitrust exemption and the COVID-19 pandemic by 
charging exorbitant fees that are passed on to millions of Americans. 
This is an absurd injustice benefitting non-U.S. carriers and hurting 
the American public. Ending this anachronistic antitrust exemption is 
an obvious and pro-consumer solution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/attachments/us-submissions-
oecd-2010-present-other-
international-competition-fora/
competition_enforcement_and_regulatory_alternatives_us_
submission.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Third, prioritize sensible automation of American ports. Our port 
speed and efficiency lags our international competitors. Not a single 
American port is listed in this year's top 50 Container Port 
Performance Index. The ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach were among 
the most inefficient in the world, ranking 328 and 333 respectively.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ https://timesofsandiego.com/business/2021/10/20/study-finds-
ports-of-los-angeles-and-long-beach-among-the-worlds-least-efficient/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One big reason for this inefficiency is that unlike other global 
ports, U.S. ports have generally refrained from using new automation 
technology, including cranes, container routing and materials handling 
innovations. A McKinsey & Co. study found that automating ports could 
boost productivity by up to 35%.\8\ While some oppose automation for 
fear of its impact on labor, implementation of modern technologies 
could be paired with effective initiatives assisting maritime 
professionals in the transition to specialized positions requiring 
high-level mechanical and logistical skills.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/travel-logistics-and-
infrastructure/our-insights/the-future-of-automated-ports
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Our port backlog is not an aberration, it is a warning sign. 
Demands on U.S. ports will continue to increase: by 2040, container 
traffic at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach could reach 41.1 
million 20-foot equivalent units, up from 17.3 million units last 
year.\9\ Without a commitment to automation technologies, our present 
port disruptions will only persist and worsen--leaving America to fall 
further behind our international competitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ https://www.joc.com/port-news/us-ports/long-beach-port-studies-
expansion-handle-growth_20160407.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The supply chain crisis is a serious threat to America's economy 
and our global leadership. Avoiding empty store shelves and fighting 
price inflation will require Congress to think creatively, take bold 
measures and go toe-to-toe with powerful interests. We look forward to 
working with this Committee on effective solutions.
        Sincerely,
                                              Gary Shapiro,
                President and CEO, Consumer Technology Association.

                                 
   Letter of October 4, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. Dusty 
 Johnson from Steve DeHaan, President and CEO, International Warehouse 
 Logistics Association, Submitted for the Record by Hon. John Garamendi
                                                   October 4, 2021.
The Honorable John Garamendi,
U.S. House of Representatives,
2368 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Dusty Johnson,
U.S. House of Representatives,
1714 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Representatives Garamendi and Johnson:
    On behalf of the International Warehouse Logistics Association 
(IWLA), I am writing to thank you for sponsoring H.R.4996, the Ocean 
Shipping Reform Act of 2021 (OSRA21). If passed, your legislation would 
bring much needed reform to demurrage and detention issues and crack 
down on the unfair business practices utilized by some ocean carriers.
    Founded in 1891, IWLA is the trade association representing 
warehouse-based third-party logistics (3PL) providers across North 
America. IWLA's member companies and partners provide a range of 
services, including warehousing; fulfillment; reverse logistics; 
transportation; freight-forwarding and brokerage services; inventory 
and supply chain management; and a broad range of manufacturing and 
value-added services. Member companies range in size from 10,000 square 
foot single city warehouses to international companies with more than 
25 million square feet of warehouse space.
    OSRA21 would require ocean carriers to certify that any detention 
and demurrage charges comply with federal regulations or face 
penalties, to adhere to minimum service standards that meet the public 
interest, and to report each calendar quarter on the total import/
export tonnage and twenty-foot equivalent units (loaded/empty) per 
vessel that make port in the U.S. to the Federal Maritime Commission 
(FMC). The legislation would also shift the burden of proof regarding 
the reasonableness of detention and demurrage charges from the invoiced 
party to the ocean carrier and prohibit carriers from unreasonably 
declining opportunities for U.S. exports as determined by the FMC.
    These provisions are necessary to address the significant fines 
cargo owners and truckers often incur due to port disruption issues 
beyond their control. OSRA21 will increase federal oversight of 
maritime shipping at U.S. ports, allowing the FMC to initiate 
investigations of ocean carriers' business practices and apply 
enforcement measures where appropriate. IWLA welcomes these and other 
carrier/cargo reforms introduced by the OSRA21.
    We thank you for your attention to these critical supply chain 
issues and for sponsoring this important legislation. IWLA stands ready 
to assist in advancing OSRA21 in Congress. If you have questions about 
IWLA or the positions stated within, please contact Patrick O'Connor, 
IWLA's Washington Representative.
        Sincerely,
                                              Steve DeHaan,
  President and CEO, International Warehouse Logistics Association.

                                 
 Statement of Eric R. Byer, President and CEO, National Association of 
 Chemical Distributors, Submitted for the Record by Hon. John Garamendi
    Thank you for holding this hearing on the severe supply chain 
challenges facing a wide range of industries and consumers across the 
United States (U.S.). It is vital that Congress address these ongoing 
issues head-on by consulting with the most impacted critical industries 
and exploring innovative solutions to alleviate the current supply 
chain challenges.
    National Association of Chemical Distributors (NACD) is a trade 
association of chemical distributors and their supply-chain partners, 
whose member companies process, formulate, blend, re-package, 
warehouse, transport, and market chemical products for over 750,000 
customers. NACD members supply products that are necessary for water 
treatment, food preservation, agricultural processes, pharmaceutical 
and vaccine production, as well as products needed to manufacture 
firefighting materials, sanitation products, and more.
    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has deemed the 
chemical sector as one of 16 critical infrastructure sectors whose 
assets, systems, and networks are considered so vital to the U.S. that 
their incapacitation or destruction would have a debilitating effect on 
U.S. security, national economic security, and national public health 
or safety. Despite the DHS designation, the supply chain disruptions 
this committee is examining today have put immense pressure on chemical 
distributors throughout the pandemic.
    Currently, chemical products such as glycerin, citric acid, sodium 
chlorite, sulfamic acid, among other materials, are struggling to move 
through the supply chain quickly enough to meet basic demand. This 
situation continues to deteriorate, and it is putting Americans in 
jeopardy of having insufficient access to clean water, inadequate 
medical supplies, limited food production and preservation 
capabilities, and more. As the U.S. continues to deal with the impacts 
of the COVID-19 pandemic, security of this supply chain is more 
important than ever.
    Because many chemical products are no longer made domestically, 
NACD members must source these chemicals from overseas manufacturers. 
They depend on reliable ocean transportation to bring these materials 
into the U.S. and deliver them on time so they can supply their 
customers who require these critical ingredients for vital functions. 
Recently, NACD members have faced severe delays, skyrocketing costs, 
and outright order rejections from ocean shipping carriers. 
Specifically, regarding instances of carriers' refusal to ship certain 
products, NACD members are finding it increasingly difficult to source 
carriers that are willing to transport hazardous materials that have 
satisfied all U.S. requirements for maritime shipping to ensure the 
safety and security of the container.
    The issue of NACD members having extreme difficulty finding 
carriers that will transport hazardous materials is of great concern. 
These chemical products are vital to national security, including 
chemicals used to support essential infrastructure operations and are 
necessary components of life saving medical treatments. Many ocean 
carriers have refused to transport hazardous materials that are 
required for water treatment, power generation, sanitation, and 
pharmaceutical production.
    Furthermore, those that are willing to transport these chemicals 
have continuously increased the costs associated with doing so.
    To understand the impact this shipping crisis has had on our member 
companies, we've conducted ongoing surveys. Our most recent survey 
found:
      84.5% companies out of stock of at least some imported 
product;
      82.1% of respondents reporting average delays of eleven 
or more days;
      72.6% reporting being charged additional premiums by 
carriers beyond tariffs and contract rates;
      89.3% of respondents reported losses and half of those 
are above $100,000, and;
      166% rise in shipping costs in the last three months.

    Without intervention, the chemicals that our national 
infrastructure relies on are at risk of running out. The products NACD 
member companies import are an important part of the American economy 
and a critical component of American manufacturing, and for over a 
year, ocean carriers have made importing increasingly difficult.
    One solution NACD encourages this Committee to advance is the 
bipartisan Ocean Shipping Reform Act (H.R.4996), introduced by 
Representatives Garamendi (CA) and Johnson (SD). This bill would be the 
first major update to federal law on global shipping since 1998 and 
aims to address the unfair playing field in which ocean shippers have 
been forced to operate. NACD is proud to join hundreds of other trade 
associations and companies representing a wide range of importers, 
exporters, and other supply chain stakeholders in supporting this 
legislation.
    NACD was pleased that the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) 
convened the inaugural National Shipper Advisory Committee, and that 
Brian Bumpass of NACD member, Brenntag North America, Inc., was 
selected as the Committee's Chair. NACD has called for the FMC to take 
concrete action to protect American importers, exporters, and consumers 
from ongoing unfair and deceptive shipping practices. We hope that this 
Committee will be a resource for FMC to better understand the impact 
that excessive rates, fines, and fees are having on importers, 
exporters, other supply chain partners, and American consumers.
    Finally, as a short-term solution to alleviating the severe 
congestion at U.S. ports, NACD urges Congress to promote better 
communication among ocean carriers, all ports capable of unloading 
ships, and the federal government. It has become clear that a lack of 
communication between these parties has further stymied the efforts to 
relieve port congestion. Smaller scale ports throughout the U.S. that 
possess the capabilities necessary to unload many of cargo ships 
anchored across the U.S. are not being fully utilized for various 
reason. These reasons include the aforementioned lack of communication 
between the parties involved, as well as the absence of U.S. Custom and 
Border Protection (CBP) agents at smaller ports that are needed to 
oversee the imports. NACD encourages CBP to dispatch agents to these 
smaller, under-utilized ports to help ease some congestion at larger 
ports.
    NACD appreciates the attention of this Committee to this issue, and 
we encourage you to ensure that the voice of critical infrastructure 
sectors like the chemical industry are part of the conversation. We 
stand ready to work with you to ensure the continued supply of goods 
that are critical to national security and economic prosperity.

                                 
   Letter of October 4, 2021, to Hon. John Garamendi and Hon. Dusty 
   Johnson from Anne Reinke, President and Chief Executive Officer, 
 Transportation Intermediaries Association, Submitted for the Record by
                          Hon. John Garamendi
                                                   October 4, 2021.
The Honorable John Garamendi,
U.S. House of Representatives,
2368 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Dusty Johnson,
U.S. House of Representatives,
1714 Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Congressmen Garamendi and Johnson:
    On behalf of the more than 1,800 member companies of the 
Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA) to voice our support 
for your legislation, H.R. 4996, the ``Ocean Shipping Reform Act.''
    As you know, H.R. 4996 would finally empower the Federal Maritime 
Commission (FMC) to crack down on aggressive retaliatory practices and 
``unjust and unreasonable demurrage and detention rules and 
practices,'' by directing the FMC to initiate a series of rulemakings.
    TIA members have felt the pressure of delayed port times, container 
shortages, overbearing demurrage and detention charges, and foreign 
ocean carriers that do not play fair. While the bill is not a cure-all, 
this is a great first step, as it is the first major update to our 
ocean shipping laws since 2001.
    TIA is the professional organization of the $214 billion third-
party logistics industry. With over 1,800-member companies, TIA is the 
only organization exclusively representing transportation 
intermediaries of all disciplines doing business in domestic and 
international commerce.
    We support and applaud your efforts to establish this new level of 
oversight at the ports and in the shipping community. If you have any 
questions about TIA or our position on H.R. 4996, please do not 
hesitate to contact me or my Vice-President of Government Affairs, 
Chris Burroughs.
        Sincerely,
                                               Anne Reinke,
        President & CEO, Transportation Intermediaries Association.


                                Appendix

                              ----------                              


    Question from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to Mario Cordero, Executive 
Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of 
                            Port Authorities

    Question 1. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. Everyone who is involved in the supply chain plays a 
responsibility in correcting the challenges we see today.
    The current supply chain crisis has had many contributing factors, 
but it essentially comes down to a single cause--the COVID-19 pandemic. 
The contributing factors are the surge of cargo, high number of 
unscheduled vessel calls, a supply chain workforce impacted by COVID-
19, and workplace accommodations throughout the supply chain that can 
limit capacity.
    We must remember that congestion is not unique to the San Pedro Bay 
port complex. Many of the supply chain challenges we are witnessing 
were already occurring prior to the pandemic, but are now magnified due 
to our high cargo volumes.
    Socio-economic factors, which caused the surge in cargo, should be 
examined from a policy perspective. The Port of Long Beach is committed 
to working closely with port stakeholders to find solutions and to 
facilitate the smooth, reliable and prompt movement of cargo through 
the port complex.

 Questions from Hon. Sam Graves to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, 
   Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
                              Authorities

    Question 1. Mr. Cordero, while this is more of an on-the-horizon 
issue, the contract between West Coast terminals and the longshoreman 
is due to expire next year. In the past, these negotiations have been 
complicated and at times led to contentious situations that gridlocked 
ports. Given this--
    a.  What are some of the key issues you foresee in the next labor 
contract discussions?
    Answer. As you know, the talks are held between representatives of 
the International Longshore and Warehouse Union for labor and the 
Pacific Maritime Association for management. The port authorities are 
not part of the discussions. Generally, past negotiations have centered 
on wages, benefits--including health care--and various other issues 
such as automation.

    b.  Should we be worried about these negotiations affecting port 
operations?
    Answer. I am hopeful that we will see a collaborative process that 
will not materially affect port operations during this time when 
everyone wants to catch up with the cargo volume.

    c.  What role will the debate about increased automation have on 
these contract negotiations?
    Answer. We know that automation is a topic that comes up in the 
negotiations, and it is the proper venue for discussions on the 
subject. A very small percentage of the nation's terminals are 
automated and labor and management is likely to negotiate regarding the 
effect of automation on the workforce.

    Question 2. What effect will the proposed 24/7 port operations at 
Southern California ports have given that--
    a.  The California Air Resources Board environmental requirements 
would limit hours a truck can access the ports?
    Answer. The Port of Long Beach has the most aggressive 
environmental measures in the nation, and 24-7 operations should not 
negatively contribute to air emissions.
    Expanding the hours of ports diverts truck moves to night time, 
mitigating roadway congestion and idling, thus reducing emissions. 
Having 24-7 operations across the supply chain would disperse truck and 
train activity across the 24-7 cycle, reducing congestion on roadways, 
tracks and key inland points such as warehouses and distribution 
centers.

    b.  And that there is a lack of chassis for truckers to move goods 
away from the port?
    Answer. The chassis shortage has resulted in reduced efficiency of 
operations--so the Port is working hard on increased container fluidity 
which can free up chassis. Too many chassis can sit idle when the 
container they carry has no place to be taken to, and can't be moved on 
to the next node in the supply chain.

 Question from Hon. Andre Carson to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, 
   Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
                              Authorities

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. First, we would favor the increased use of ``short-haul'' 
rail which would allow the port complex to see import containers moved 
quickly to an ``inland port,'' thus creating more capacity at seaports. 
These inland depots could also be used to take on containers that are 
occupying chassis, thus freeing up more equipment to move containers 
out of the port by truck.
    Second, increased use of on-dock rail--where cargo moves to and 
from marine terminals solely by train--is a necessary part of 
sustainably handling increasing capacity demands. We know from our own 
region that grade separations and special rail corridors--like the 
Alameda Corridor--can dramatically reduce the problem of roadways being 
blocked by trains. We work together as a region to identify and support 
such projects with one voice--whether they are close to the port or 
not. These types of projects are absolutely a priority.

    Questions from Hon. Michelle Steel to Mario Cordero, Executive 
Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of 
                            Port Authorities

    Question 1. I recently toured the Port with Darin Wright and other 
members of your team. According to your testimony; 24-7 operations will 
help mitigate the current surge. If warehouse facilities are at 
capacity, how can drivers make deliveries?
    Answer. We truly appreciate that you came out to see our operations 
first-hand and we welcome members of the Committee to come and tour our 
port complex any time.
    The framework for 24-7 supply chain operations that President Biden 
has supported will help to bring more links into the 24-7 operational 
camp. We need the whole supply chain to participate in expanded hours 
of operation, and that is the direction we are moving in.
    There are varying degrees of warehouse capacity issues--and we rely 
on the importers to work with their supply chain partners to better 
manage their inventory and operations. Many import customers are also 
reporting that they ``could not get their goods fast enough.''

    Question 2. When will the port move to 3 shifts to truly be open 
24/7? I was told you are currently at two shifts.
    Answer. One of our six container terminals in September 2021 moved 
to 24-hour operations for four nights a week. And we are speaking with 
all of our terminals to consider doing the same.
    The terminals are interested, but are cautious about the return of 
investment on the costs.
    However, we do have a growing consensus that a 24-7 supply chain 
would be a solution to the level of cargo demand we are seeing. The 
situation is evolving, and we expect to see more links in the supply 
chain to find the means to move cargo around the clock.
    A truck can pick up a container at 4 a.m. at the Port of Long Beach 
today, but until the distribution centers and other supply chain nodes 
are open at that time, it's going to be challenging to handle the 
volumes of cargo we are seeing now and expect to see in the future.

    Question 3. Do you think it was smart for cities to impose a 
moratorium on new warehouses and truck facilities?
    Answer. The various jurisdictions that have adopted temporary 
moratoriums--Chino and Colton in the Inland region of Southern 
California come to mind--should be given time to consider these 
developments and if they are right for their communities. Each proposed 
development must make a case for itself as to its worth to and respect 
for the community. The Port of Long Beach is not immune to this issue. 
As an industrial use, we must always make our case to our neighbors and 
the larger community about our commitment to reducing our impacts and 
to benefiting the region as a whole.

    Question 4. As Chairman of the American Association of Port 
Authorities, please provide detailed recommendations on the how the 
Federal Government can partner with America's major seaports to create 
an integrated data sharing and standardization platform to increase 
visibility in the supply chain, in order to alleviate the 
inefficiencies in the current system and set up usable and measurable 
metrics that will move our ports into the 21st century.
    Answer. The Port of Long Beach is currently developing a cloud-
based Supply Chain Information Highway that aims to create a repository 
of curated data from all sources so that supply chain partners can come 
and obtain data needed to improve their cargo visibility. The Supply 
Chain Information Highway will be a trustworthy, transparent and non-
revenue-generating platform that could be rolled out to all ports in 
the U.S. Once we have had the chance to implement the system, we will 
certainly consider the means for widening its reach. We feel it has 
potential to go coast to coast.

    Question 5. According to the Administration about 100,000 empty 
containers sit idle at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles, which 
is having a negative impact on the U.S. supply chain. Please provide 
specific details on the actions the Port of Long Beach is employing to 
facilitate a quicker and more efficient return of empty containers to 
overseas ports.
    Answer. With the support of our ocean carriers and their sweeper 
vessels, we are evacuating empty containers from our terminals. Empty 
containers as of Dec. 16 accounted for 36% of all containers on 
terminals. This is down from 45% just a couple of weeks prior.
    By evacuating empty containers from the terminals, we are making 
space for more inbound containers. We are not out of the woods yet, but 
we are making meaningful progress.
    With the continued collaboration from our industry partners, the 
support from our government partners, and the focus on near-term 
solutions, we expect to continue to see progress in the months ahead.
    The Port has also allocated 100 acres of land as a buffer to store 
containers and alleviate capacity pressure at the terminals.

    Question 6. Please provide your recommendations on what needs to be 
done--legislatively or through regulatory actions (state and federal) 
to encourage foreign-owned ocean carriers to take ownership of their 
role in accepting and evacuating the tens of thousands of empty 
containers that clog the LA/Long Beach ports and the region. These 
empty containers and the lack of action by foreign owned carriers are a 
lead contributor to a shortage of land space and chassis.
    Answer. While we have had success in working with our ocean 
carriers to have them deploy sweeper vessels to retrieve empty 
containers, one thing that could be considered is to require carriers 
to submit plans about how they will manage container inventory (in/out/
empties) and matching chassis capacity when they establish contracts 
with terminals.

    Question 7. Please explain and provide insight into how the Port of 
Long Beach will use the infrastructure funds from the IIJA to maximize 
the effect on freight fluidity, for example intermodal connectors, 
modernization, on-dock projects, and so forth.
    Answer. We're prepared with several on-dock rail projects in the 
pipeline to make our case for funding from the IIJA. These rail 
projects all will create physical capacity that will allow the Port to 
meet the future supply chain challenges. Some of the funds could also 
be allocated for the digital infrastructure so that physical facilities 
could be utilized more efficiently based on the analytics the digital 
platforms could provide.

    Question 8. Do you agree that since many foreign-owned ocean 
carriers have already indicated they will plan to pass the new LA/LB 
dwell fees along to shippers/BCOs, that these fees are simply a 
``double dip'' on existing demurrage fee structures, to which cargo is 
already subject? And, were the dwell fees and the coordinated action to 
develop them discussed with the Federal Maritime Commission?
    Answer. Not so from the Port's perspective. The demurrage rule was 
established to provide reasonable time for container delivery. The 
Container Dwell Fee is a mechanism created during a challenging time to 
provide another layer of motivation to push containers out of the 
terminals. It is temporary in nature and for a specific circumstance. 
The Port does not intend for the fee to be passed-through but has no 
jurisdiction over ocean carriers on this matter.

 Question from Hon. Steve Cohen to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, 
   Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
                              Authorities

    Question 1. I understand that dwell time of intermodal equipment--
the time between picking up equipment and returning it--is impacting 
the supply chain. Can you explain what that means to cargo fluidity and 
tell us what actions are being taken to reduce dwell time?
    Answer. We are working closely with our chassis providers and BCOs 
to find the means to reduce detention time and get equipment back to 
work in moving containers. At the Port we've opened up 100 acres to 
allow for additional cargo storage, which frees up chassis. We are also 
looking for areas outside the harbor district where the two ports could 
facilitate the opening of additional container storage.

    Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to Mario Cordero, 
   Executive Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American 
                    Association of Port Authorities

    Question 1. Mr. Cordero, if we have been experiencing a bottleneck 
at the Port of Long Beach, why has the port not moved to 24/7 
operations already? What is preventing the port from addressing the 
backlog?
    Answer. One of our six container terminals in September moved to 
24-hour operations for four days a week. And we are speaking with all 
of our terminals to consider doing the same. These terminals are 
publicly owned but privately operated, so any change in operation 
schedules requires negotiation between parties. For 24-7 operations to 
be effective, all nodes in the supply chain must be cooperative. Even 
if a truck picks up a container in the middle of the night, if 
distribution centers are not open at the same time, there is no effect 
on the backlog.
    The terminals are interested, but are cautious about the return of 
investment on the costs. However, we do have a growing consensus that a 
24-7 supply chain would be a solution to the level of cargo demand we 
are seeing. The situation is evolving, and we expect to see more links 
in the supply chain to find the means to move cargo around the clock.
    We have taken several measures to reduce the backlog:
      We have repurposed more than a hundred acres of vacant 
land in the port for container storage.
      All of our terminals have expanded their hours of 
operation throughout the week and added some weekend shifts.
      Our new container dwell fee at the San Pedro Bay 
continues to have an impact. Long-dwelling cargo containers are down by 
47 percent at the San Pedro Bay ports complex since the fee was 
announced in late October.
      By moving these containers out of the terminals, we are 
creating the capacity the terminals need to bring those ships at anchor 
to berth.

    Question 2. Mr. Cordero, Puerto Rico, being an island, has 3.2 
million people that are reliant on infrastructure that ensures the 
highest levels of port performance and efficiencies, reliable maritime 
and air service, for people to get everything from mail to medicine.
    The Port of San Juan is the Top 25 busiest ports in American 
according the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) for containers 
with 1.39 million T. E. U. containers arriving annually for a 
population that would be the 30th largest state by population according 
to the 2020 Census.
    In your testimony, you note that the Department of Transportation 
will open $240 million through the Port Infrastructure Development 
Program within 45 days and an additional $475 million within 90 days. 
How can we ensure that this funding will be spread out at ports across 
the country?
    Answer. We do expect that this Administration will seek to deploy 
the funding fairly. The Port of Long Beach this year will handle more 
than 9 million TEUs with cargo reaching every corner of the nation. 
Together with our neighbor the Port of Los Angeles, that figure is 20 
million TEUs. No port complex in this hemisphere has such capacity that 
services the entire nation.
    Traditionally, the San Pedro Bay ports have not received a share of 
funding to match their impact on the U.S.
    That said, we do understand the needs of ports around the country, 
and we join the industry in being in favor of routine and regular 
funding of port infrastructure, not just a one-time funding measure. 
The Port Infrastructure Development Program also has a restriction, 
already in law, that no more than 15% of grant funds may go to any one 
state, so there are protections in place to ensure funds are 
distributed across the nation.

    Question 3. Mr. Cordero, during your tenure as Chairman of the 
Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), the FMC under Commissioner Rebecca 
Dye took the lead to stand up an industry lead, voluntary, working 
groups to help address port performance and tried to come up with 
common sense solutions to improve efficiencies. Do you think this is 
something the committee should authorize so that the private sector and 
labor unions come up with industry and union driven solutions?
    Answer. Yes, the industry has many diverse participants who could 
offer a wealth of expertise and experience to the conversation.

    Question 4. What kind of funding would it take to bring automation 
to the Port of Long Beach?
    Answer. We're not looking for automation funding at this time.

    a.  To other major ports?
    Answer. That would depend on those ports' needs and what the needs 
of their communities are.

    Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to Mario Cordero, Executive 
Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of 
                            Port Authorities

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. At the Port of Long Beach we have one of the most 
aggressive capital improvement programs in the nation to address all 
the needs as you have stated--cargo growth, sustainability and climate 
change adaptation. We feel that our projects and programs are examples 
of how ports can meet the challenges of the future. We always seem to 
demonstrate the economic benefits of projects for the safe, efficient 
and reliable movement of cargo.

Question from Hon. John Garamendi to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, 
   Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
                              Authorities

    Question 1. Reportedly, some 40 percent of determination and 
demurrage fees invoiced to shippers are either partially refund or 
reduced. Mr. Cordero, do you agree that seemingly high refund or 
reduction rate indicates a fundamental problem with how ocean carriers 
and their involving agents are billing for detention and demurrage?
    Answer. Possibly. However, each ocean carrier and terminal operator 
operates differently. The Port does not have visibility as to the bases 
of these transactions. There are also many operational issues that 
might result in the adjustments to the invoices.

Questions from Hon. Seth Moulton to Mario Cordero, Executive Director, 
   Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of Port 
                              Authorities

    Question 1. Mr. Cordero, how has the partnership between Union 
Pacific and the port authorities of California and Utah expedited 
getting containers out of the Port of Long Beach? Are there any lessons 
we can draw from this example to improve the movement of goods in the 
U.S. even after we emerge from our current challenges?
    Answer. The Port has been engaging in intensive conversation with 
UIPA on utilizing Salt Lake City as a mid-way point between the Port 
and Midwest. In the short- and long-run, it is a good solution to help 
alleviate terminal capacity constraints in Southern California. The 
Port is also interested in establishing additional discussions with 
other inland cities.

    Questions from Hon. Nikema Williams to Mario Cordero, Executive 
Director, Port of Long Beach, on behalf of the American Association of 
                            Port Authorities

    Question 1. Let's get down to what this hearing is truly about: 
It's about that tired parent on a grocery run seeing empty shelves 
where their weekly necessities used to be; It's about my son, Carter, 
ordering something on Amazon with his tooth fairy money and not getting 
it for weeks and weeks; It's about a growing family looking for the new 
car they need and not finding anything on the lots; It's about the many 
constituents who I've talked to who are in the restaurant business and 
can't get paper supplies for the to-go orders; and it's about those, 
including myself, not getting the simplest things, like mild sauce at 
Taco Bell!
    Plain and simple, we're having issues getting products to the 
people because we've underinvested for too long in transportation and 
infrastructure. Luckily, y'all, infrastructure week is finally here.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law Monday 
by President Biden will start to address these types of problems for my 
constituents, including by sending $8 million immediately to the Port 
of Savannah.
    a.  Mr. Cordero, help connect the dots for us: How does investing 
in something like a port help my constituents get their goods, for 
example, something as simple as a mild sauce from Taco Bell? How 
exactly can this investment be used to make goods move more 
efficiently?
    Answer. The supply chain is a very diversified entity. While some 
of the items you are thinking of may be domestically produced, it could 
be that components, ingredients, and bottles/boxes/containers could be 
sourced overseas. Investing in the ports, especially the Port of Long 
Beach, will help ensure that critical components or finished products 
could be transported quickly to consumers. So any one product--such as 
sauce made by the Southern California-headquartered Taco Bell--could 
have several points of origin. Investing in seaports is a means of 
making the supply chain healthier.

    b.  The pandemic has created bottlenecks everywhere from our ports 
to our airports. In my district, Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta Airport and 
Delta Airlines have been hard hit by decreased passenger traffic. But 
as I've heard from NCR, a Fortune 500 company in my district, the 
impact of this issue extends to the supply chain, too. Mr. Cordero, how 
has reduced air passenger travel impacted the space available to 
transport materials and goods? As more passengers fly again, can 
growing freight space ease the supply chain crunch that some of the 
companies in my district are facing?
    Answer. There is a direct correlation between air cargo capacity 
and the current supply chain challenges in the ocean transportation 
sector. The suspended flights reduced the cargo-carrying capacity even 
in the passenger aircrafts. Many users of that mode of transportation 
sought capacity instead in container vessels. Some fast-moving 
electronic goods are now moving instead in the ocean transportation 
routes and are caught in the backlog. Resumption of cargo and passenger 
flights will alleviate a part of the challenge.

Question from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. The global supply chain is an incredibly dynamic, complex 
system. We've seen how one ship grounded in a canal halfway around the 
world can unleash a torrent of downstream effects felt directly by the 
American consumer. As the most central and critical link in that supply 
chain, the trucking industry understands that complexity well. Any time 
the supply chain is pressured, our members feel it in one form or 
another.
    That's why we know that correcting our current supply chain 
challenges requires a multi-faceted approach--not one bound by the 
pursuit of a single solution, but rather a commitment from all 
stakeholders on working together to ensure our economy's freight needs 
are always met. The federal government can play a constructive role 
here, as should the private sector--but with a shared understanding 
that not all modes are the same. Operations differ. One-size-fits-all 
policy prescriptions can often have unintended consequences that make 
bad situations worse. That's especially true when dealing with systems 
as complex as the supply chain.
    We see the recently-passed H.R.4996 as a strong example of how 
government and private sector can work together to correct supply chain 
challenges. This legislation passed a divided Congress with 
overwhelming bipartisan support, and we hope the Senate quickly follows 
the House's lead. The bill was written with informed input from supply 
chain stakeholders who regularly experience the inequities that 
hamstring our port systems. Too often, mega, foreign-owned ocean 
carriers abuse the system to line their own pockets at the expense of 
small American trucking companies and broader supply chain efficiency.
    Informed policymaking is critical. We encourage all members of the 
Committee to visit a trucking company back in their home districts. 
Seeing the daily operations of motor carriers is fundamental to 
understanding how our industry works. Solutions cut from white boards 
in graduate school lecture halls will fall woefully short of rising to 
the challenge of this current moment. Meeting those people on the 
ground is a necessity. It's there that you'll get to know the 7.8 
million dedicated, hard-working Americans who move our economy forward.

   Question from Hon. Sam Graves to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. Mr. Spear, various data and analysis has been presented 
to the Committee by other witnesses regarding truck driver shortages, 
in particular Mr. David Correll. However, I am concerned that this data 
and analysis may not provide the whole picture and narrowly targets 
under-utilization despite multi-faceted issues. Could you address some 
of the inefficiencies detailed in Mr. Correll's testimony and elaborate 
on how ATA views the multi-faceted nature of the truck driver shortage 
and share any analysis you have conducted?
    Answer. While ATA appreciates a diverse set of opinions when 
formulating solutions to the national truck driver shortage, we take 
issue with both the methodology underpinning Dr. Correll's research as 
well as the validity of his conclusions. In fact, Congress and the 
American people would be ill-advised to take policy or practical action 
based on Dr. Correll's hearing suggestions, which misrepresented a vast 
and diverse industry.
    In sum, Dr. Correll posited that the national truck driver shortage 
can be boiled down to an issue of driver ``under-utilization,'' in 
which the existing driver workforce is not getting enough work. In 
other words, he argues the solution is not to increase the headcount of 
drivers but to instead squeeze more out of current workforce, citing 
driver detention as a leading source of wasted time and productivity. 
While we appreciate greater attention being drawn to driver detention 
at shipper facilities and agree that reducing detention time is key to 
increasing supply-chain efficiency, singling out this issue as a means 
to remedy the long-term driver shortage is problematic on multiple 
fronts and grossly oversimplifies the complexity of the issue. It also 
suffers from a complete lack of practicality based on the academic 
nature of his observations, which he himself notes are based on 
anecdotal data from only two carriers, and a basic mathematical issue.
    As I detailed in my testimony, the driver shortage is a multi-
faceted challenge with myriad contributing factors, many of which 
revolve around lifestyle preferences. Take for instance driver 
compensation: Long-haul earnings are up 24.3% since the beginning of 
2019, increasing at a rate nearly five times their historical average. 
Yet, the driver shortage grew over that same time period, from 61,500 
to 80,000. When drivers earn more per mile, many choose to drive less--
opting to spend more time at home than on the road. Data in the 
aggregate confirms this fact: In the 1990s, the average miles per truck 
per year were approximately 125,000; today, they are down approximately 
to 100,000. Basic math from that premise alone would require 20% more 
drivers today for the exact same level of capacity as available during 
the 1990s--and the freight demands have substantially grown over that 
period.
    This of course undercuts Dr. Correll's central thesis that the 
driver shortage can be remedied through better ``utilization'' of 
drivers' time. In his testimony, he identifies weekends as a dearth of 
productivity, with long-haul drivers doing most of their driving on 
weekdays. There's a simple explanation for that: drivers want to be 
home on the weekend, spending time with their families, attending 
church services or their kids' little league games and dance recitals--
just like the rest of us. Strategies that aim to squeeze more out of 
the current driver workforce or increase their working hours threaten 
to exacerbate the truck driver shortage or reduce safety, not remedy 
the supply-chain difficulties.
    As Dr. Correll acknowledged on the record during the hearing, the 
data underpinning all of his conclusions stems from analysis of roughly 
``4,000 over the road truck drivers employed by one mid-sized and one 
large national carrier in snapshots from 2016 to 2020,'' as well as 
unspecified transactional data provided by shippers and brokers. 
Incredibly, his conclusions about the entire trucking industry are 
based on a sample size that covers two out of 1.2 million trucking 
fleets in the U.S., 0.2% of the drivers nationwide (using the Census 
Bureau estimate of 1.8 million for-hire over-the-road truck drivers he 
cites later in his testimony), and 0.1% of commercial driver's license 
holders nationwide. It is also worth noting in this context that Dr. 
Correll fails to reference that over 90% of motor carriers in the 
United States have less than 10 trucks meaning that his two carrier 
sample is completely unrepresentative.
    Furthermore, there's no indication that Dr. Correll considered the 
varying operations that exist across private fleets, lengths of haul, 
and categories of freight. Detention times differ widely depending on 
industry sector, and conflating refrigerated transportation, 
agricultural haulers, fuel haulers, flatbed haulers, less-than-
truckload operations, specialized delivery, and white-glove last-mile 
services neglects the diversity, depth and breadth of the trucking 
industry. For example, detention is a far more prevalent issue for 
drayage and dry-van, truckload carriers; yet the driver shortage 
persists across all industry sectors.
    To calculate the amount of time per day that drivers are ``under-
utilized,'' Dr. Correll performs simple long division over cherry-
picked elements of Federal hours-of-service (HOS) regulations. The 11-
hour maximum driving time that Mr. Correll cites is only available to a 
very limited number of drivers under specific circumstances (e.g., 
adverse weather conditions), which he does not acknowledge in any 
detail. In reality, hours-of-service rules for drivers are capped at 60 
hours of on-duty time over seven consecutive days (8.5 hours a day) or 
70 hours of on-duty time over eight consecutive days (8.75 hours a day) 
if the motor carrier operates vehicles every day of the week. (Most 
drivers are likely up against their 60/70 hour duty clock even if they 
are working 5 days a week. The HOS clock counts ``on-duty and driving'' 
time, so even sitting at a shipper ``underutilized'' counts towards 
this time. Meaning, simply working 7-days a week is not an option, 
unless they're going to work far less each day on average.)
    If we accept at face value Dr. Correll's estimation that drivers 
spend 6.5 hours per working day driving their vehicles, and factor in 
standard contractual terms between shippers and carriers of two hours 
for loading and unloading, then the arithmetic reveals drivers are 
already operating at, essentially, peak efficiency given the federal 
HOS cap of 8.5 hours per day over seven consecutive days. 
(Theoretically, if a driver worked M-F at the maximum 14 hours each 
day, they could take 34 hours off to reset their clock to 0 and go back 
to work on the next Monday for another 14 hours. Very few drivers would 
want to work the maximum allowable duty time over an extended period 
even if motor carriers provided that option.) Never mind that 2021 
freight volumes are already higher than they were at any point in his 
2016-2020 study period.
    It is unsurprising that Dr. Correll overlooked these factors given 
his acknowledgment that he has negligible real-world experience at 
trucking terminals, rail head, ports, shipper docks, distribution 
centers, and other facility critical to supply chain operations and 
driver productivity. While perhaps not disqualifying as a subject 
matter witness, Dr. Correll's lack of first-hand knowledge of the 
trucking industry's integral role throughout the supply chain certainly 
warrants concern about the validity of his conclusions.
    The purpose of hearings we believe is to impart information to the 
Congress to consider for better understanding and addressing public 
policy issues like the current supply-chain problems. Relying on Dr. 
Correll's data and conclusions to produce any sort of response, and 
particularly his narrow and isolated academic ideas of the government 
measuring efficiency metrics across the supply chain and somehow 
enforcing improvement requirements more efficiently than the market, 
will not work in the long or short term. Those who deny the obvious 
fact that the industry needs more drivers immediately and for the 
foreseeable future are doing the country a disservice and ignoring 
real-world facts--and in some instances engaging in fiction to advance 
parochial interests. The House of Representatives' Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee deserves better.
    The American Trucking Associations is committed to enhancing driver 
productivity and well-being, and we look forward to working with you, 
Congress, and the Biden Administration on responsible, data-driven 
legislation that would expand opportunities for all Americans.

  Question from Hon. Andre Carson to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. The trucking industry works closely with our railroad 
partners to move America's freight. While the vast majority of truck 
shipments are not rail competitive, intermodal truck-rail deliveries 
play an important role in the supply chain, notably the movement of 
containers. Congress can help to strengthen intermodal freight supply 
chains by investing in roads that connect intermodal terminals to the 
National Highway System. Although these arteries serve critical 
national needs, too many are poorly maintained or highly congested.

 Question from Hon. Michelle Steel to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. Please explain in more detail how the how the 
restrictive appointment systems and constraints on return of empty 
containers imposed by terminal operators and ocean carriers in LA/LB 
have made it so challenging for dray drivers to effectively move 
containers and to make a living doing so. Do you have recommendations 
or solutions that would fix these problems?
    Answer. The appointment system and inability to return containers 
goes to the heart of the difficulties faced by drayage drivers at the 
ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The lack of available empty return 
locations means that motor carrier yards are full of containers 
awaiting returns. Despite the inability to return them, many of these 
containers are racking up detention charges as ocean carrier billing 
systems automatically generate invoices as soon as free days expire 
regardless of whether a return location is available. Further, these 
containers often are sitting on chassis meaning these chassis are not 
available to pick up new imports arriving at the ports. The lack of 
chassis is another key contributor to the slowdown. Finally, the lack 
of integrated appointment systems brings unneeded complexities for 
motor carriers working across the various terminals in the port system. 
There are 12 container terminals combined in the two ports which use at 
least 6 different appointment IT systems. The lack of integration 
between terminals creates complications and significant reductions in 
efficiencies as information cannot be shared among terminals. 
Integrating information systems between ports and marine terminals 
would allow motor carriers and other supply chain partners to better 
allocate equipment and personnel to where they can be put to best use.

Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. The congestion at our nation's ports has put a premium on 
space. One of the key issues facing motor carriers is the lack of 
available locations for empty returns which are both occupying space in 
truck yards and sitting on the chassis that are badly-needed to pick up 
newly-arrived containers. We are working with ports and marine terminal 
operators to help them use all available resources to maximize their 
available space in order to solve this growing problem.

Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to Chris Spear, President 
      and Chief Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, the 
last surface bill that was enacted prior to the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, which was just signed this week, contained a 
section on Port Metrics to help reduce areas of bottlenecks.
    Currently the Bureau of Transportation Statistics reports monthly 
on the number of 20-foot equivalents at the Nation's 10 largest ports. 
However, this reporting does not give any information on the efficiency 
of the port itself.
    It does not tell us whether or not labor is moving as efficiently 
as it could day over day, it doesn't tell us if there are issues with 
scales and gate times, it doesn't tell us if trucks are waiting longer 
than normal or if there aren't any berths available, it doesn't tell us 
how many crane lifts occur. These are all factors that affect port 
efficiency.
    a.  Mr. Spear, do you think it will help your members if gate wait 
and turn times are reported in real time so truck operators are able to 
better plan their pickup and drop off times to better utilize their 
hours-of-service?
    Answer. One of the major deficiencies in our intermodal supply 
chain is the lack of real time data visibility and standardization. 
Without the ability to have a global understanding of cargo 
information, motor carriers are unable to operate in the most effective 
and efficient manner. Maritime cargo does not just arrive overnight. 
There is a long lead time and better integration of information between 
marine terminals, ocean carriers and shippers would allow for better 
planning regarding when cargo is arriving and how to handle it. Gate 
wait and listed turn times also provide an example of how this lack of 
real time information can hinder container movement. While most ports 
provide information regarding turn times, they are often measured from 
the time trucks enter the terminal gate despite the fact that wait time 
outside the gate can be considerable. Providing better data regarding 
the actual wait times for motor carriers would allow companies to have 
a better understanding of real time activity in order to better 
allocate resources.

    b.  What additional information are we missing from ports activity 
reporting that would help shippers and carriers be able to make the 
most informed decisions to help reduce bottlenecks and improve 
efficiencies?
    Answer. Real time data visibility and standardization are what's 
needed most. If the trucking industry is able to secure this 
information real-time, it will help improve intermodal transportation.

    Question 2. Mr. Spear, I appreciate your testimony highlighting the 
need for workforce development. To address workforce development and 
increased safety, I have introduced H.R. 1967, which would allow Puerto 
Rico to issue Commercial Driver's Licenses to truck drivers in Puerto 
Rico. It would require drivers to increase their skills while operating 
a motor carrier and give anyone moving to or from Puerto Rico a license 
that they could use anywhere in the country.
    a.  I've asked ATA to review this legislation for their support 
which I have yet to receive an answer. As the President and CEO, can 
you commit to providing a response to my office?
    Answer. ATA supports the provisions outlined in H.R. 1967, and has 
communicated this support to Congressional staff. We believe that 
aligning Puerto Rico's Commercial Drivers' License standards with U.S. 
standards, as outlined in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, 
would both increase safety standards and streamline the issuance of 
Puerto Rico-issued licenses.

    Question 3. Mr. Spear, because I have served on this committee and 
I have experienced what it's like to represent Puerto Rico during and 
after the devastation of Hurricanes Irma and Maria which devastated the 
whole infrastructure network of the island, I have learned how critical 
good roads and bridges, port connections, and port operations are to 
the movement of freight. According to the American Society of Civil 
Engineers, Puerto Rico's roads, bridges, and ports need more than $3.85 
billion to bring our network to a state of good repair.
    In your testimony you advocate for $5 billion in annual funding to 
address bottlenecks. Is this adequate to ensure that the transportation 
of goods is competitive but efficient for consumers?
    Answer. Based on various studies, highway investment needs to at 
least double to address current maintenance and capacity backlogs and 
prevent further system deterioration over at least the next two 
decades. If this increase in resources does not materialize--and IIJA, 
while representing a significant increase, did not provide the 
necessary funding boost--then federal investment must be directed 
toward projects that are likely to provide the best return on 
investment. In that regard, a $5 billion annual set-aside for highway 
freight bottlenecks is the best approach. These bottlenecks 
disproportionately increase the cost of moving freight, and most of 
them also have significant passenger vehicle traffic.

    Question 4. What can this committee do to help the trucking 
industry shift toward alternative fuel powered vehicles?
    Answer. The highest hurdles to overcome to expedite the 
introduction of alternative-fueled vehicles into the trucking sector 
are the availability of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and fuel cell 
electric vehicles (FCEVs) across all truck classes and the build-out of 
robust fueling infrastructures. Hydrogen fuel cell technology 
development, while lagging behind that of BEVs, will likely play a 
critical role for long-range freight hauling needs. Manufacturers are 
already ramping up production of BEV trucks and we expect that 
trajectory to steadily increase. Fleets need the assurance of having 
these new fuels available prior to making their purchasing decisions. 
The nation's diesel fueling infrastructure had seventy-five years to 
mature yet EV charging and hydrogen fueling locations are being pressed 
not only to supplant fossil fuel use, but to do so with brevity. To 
advance this unprecedented task will require far more tax breaks and 
financial incentives for both private and public alternative fueling 
locations. Likewise, these fueling sites will falter without vehicles 
demanding their product. BEVs and FCEVs can cost several-fold more than 
conventional diesel trucks. Until the costs of these next-generation 
alternative-fueled vehicles become cost competitive with their diesel 
counterparts, fleets will need on-going tax credits and financial 
incentives to fulfill the nation's decarbonization aims for the 
transport sector.
    Trucking companies are also facing major challenges related to 
equipment availability and delays as a result of the global 
semiconductor chip shortage, which is slowing the delivery of newer, 
cleaner power units and trailers. Congressional action to address the 
chip shortage is an important near-term step that will make more 
efficient and environmentally-friendly equipment available to our 
nation's fleets.

    Question 5. Mr. Spear, aside from the voluntary vehicles miles 
traveled (VMT) program in the bill, how does the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act address funding infrastructure projects and the 
long term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund?
    Answer. Unfortunately, the IIJA did not address the long-term 
solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. The revenue measures are temporary 
in nature and it is likely that by the time IIJA expires, the HTF will 
once more face insolvency. While a replacement for the fuel tax as the 
primary revenue source for the HTF must be found, this will likely take 
at least a decade. In the meantime, ATA believes that increasing the 
fuel tax rate is the best way to provide a predictable, stable source 
of revenue for the HTF.

Questions from Hon. Sharice Davids to Chris Spear, President and Chief 
           Executive Officer, American Trucking Associations

    Question 1. We've heard a lot in the news about issues with the 
supply chain, and I'm glad we've got folks from different perspectives 
joining us here today to talk about solutions.
    Because if we can address some of the supply chain issues and ease 
the consumer prices we are seeing, we can address rising costs for 
families across the country.
    One solution I've been focused on, through my work on this 
committee and the Small Business Committee, is workforce development 
and training.
    To start, I was an original cosponsor on a bill, the Promoting 
Women in Trucking Workforce Act, to expand and encourage women to join 
the trucking workforce. Currently, women only make up 24 percent of all 
transportation and warehousing jobs.
    I've also been working with local community colleges in my 
district, including my alma mater Johnson County Community College, to 
promote their commercial drivers license programs. I just announced a 
grant is going to that program that will allow 12 veterans to receive 
scholarships and get their CDL.
    Mr. Spear, what can we do to work with you all to encourage a more 
diverse group of folks to enter the workforce? Do you think that could 
begin to alleviate supply chain blocks or accelerate supply chain 
successes?
    Answer. First, thank you for your tenacious leadership and 
collaboration on the Promoting Women in Trucking Workforce Act, a bill 
that will support women pursuing careers in the trucking industry. 
Implementation of measures such as the Promoting Women in Trucking 
Workforce Act and the Promoting Service in Transportation Act, both of 
which were included in the bipartisan infrastructure law, will help the 
industry increase our workforce's diversity and attract the next 
generation of talent. I strongly believe that bringing in new drivers 
and supply chain workers, and providing them with the training they 
need to operate safely and productively, is a critical step in 
addressing the current supply chain challenges and ensuring a more 
resilient economy for the future. ATA looks forward to working with 
Congress and the Department of Transportation to roll out those 
programs and welcome a diverse new generation of Americans into 
fulfilling transportation careers.
    Now that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has been 
enacted, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation must 
establish the apprenticeship pilot program described in Sec. 23022 of 
the bill before January 14, 2022. Once implemented, the apprenticeship 
pilot program will provide qualified 18- to 20-year-olds with a pathway 
to a family-sustaining career in the trucking industry with a median 
pay of $54,585, plus health and retirement benefits. The pilot program 
represents an opportunity for emerging members of the American 
workforce who have already obtained a commercial driver's license in 
their state to develop the skills and abilities necessary to achieve a 
stable career path as an interstate truck driver. Many members of 
underserved communities have never been exposed to the career 
opportunities that exist within the trucking industry, and the 
apprenticeship program can be leveraged as a way to motivate new and 
different members of the workforce toward positive and lasting career 
opportunities in trucking that do not require the kind of debt that 
accompanies much of higher education.

    Question 2. I also want to think ahead, because current supply 
chain issues are, of course, complicated by pent-up demand and other 
pandemic factors. I've heard the supply chain problems we're 
experiencing now described as a chain of dominoes falling into each 
other. But I think there's an opportunity here to boost American 
industry and labor while combating rising costs long-term.
    We've been dependent on materials made in other countries for far 
too long, and I think it's important that we use this as an opportunity 
to invest in our economy, supply chains, and workforce, so we can lower 
costs for working folks and avoid this supply chain crunch happening 
again in the future.
    We cannot just reset our dominoes--we need to stop the chain 
reaction before it even begins.
    An example would be the strong Buy America provisions in the 
infrastructure bill we just passed, or continuing to boost 
semiconductor and other critical material manufacturing here at home.
    What policies do you see as critical to help businesses and 
workforce ensure that our supply chain both recovers now--and is 
prepared to address future issues and cost pressures?
    Answer. Congress and the Administration can help address the driver 
shortage by removing obsolete regulatory barriers and incentivizing 
states to streamline the credentialing process while also providing a 
meaningful investment in training the next generation of drivers and 
mechanics through the various workforce funding streams. Likewise, 
speedy implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
would best ensure a vibrant and diverse workforce that can support 
ongoing American economic growth. More specifically, the Administration 
may want to prioritize the provisions in the IIJA regarding the 
commonsense apprenticeship program to train 18-20 year olds to drive in 
interstate commerce, the Promoting Service in Transportation Act 
provisions for DOT to advertise transportation jobs like truck driver 
as a quality career path, and most importantly rapid deployment of the 
funds to update infrastructure. Those three provisions are all 
critically important to bolstering the resiliency of our supply chain 
for the trucking industry. Similarly, reliable and predictable funding 
going forward to maintain our nation's roads and bridges will yield 
fewer bottlenecks and points of congestion, making our supply chains 
more agile and efficient.

  Question from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to Ian Jefferies, President and 
       Chief Executive Officer, Association of American Railroads

    Question 1. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. The smooth functioning of rail terminals depends on supply 
chain partners maintaining a consistent flow of freight out of 
facilities to make room for other freight coming in. Unfortunately, in 
recent months, many rail customers have been unable to effectively 
process this flow of traffic, especially intermodal containers. When 
containers coming in (``in-gates'') exceed containers going out (``out-
gates''), uncollected containers pile up, creating severe problems that 
reverberate throughout the supply chain. When these and other related 
problems become entrenched, it becomes extraordinarily difficult to 
``reset'' the system to its normal level of throughput and reliability.
    However, just as no one actor is to blame for the nation's supply 
chain challenges, nor is any one entity responsible for fixing these 
problems. Freight supply chains are complex systems driven by the 
decisions, actions, and capacity of a wide variety of global and 
domestic actors, including steamship lines; truckers; railroads; 
pipelines; ports; drayage providers; owners of truck chassis, shipping 
containers, and warehouses; as well as manufacturers, wholesalers, and 
retailers of goods. All stakeholders must do their part to maintain a 
consistent flow of freight at every step of the process, avoid 
bottlenecks, and ensure that freight is delivered safely, efficiently, 
and when expected.
    America's freight railroads are doing their part--through 
significant investments in their private infrastructure and equipment, 
development and implementation of innovative technologies, and 
operational enhancements--to maintain network fluidity and ensure 
sufficient capacity to deliver the goods upon which our economy 
depends. Railroads have and will continue to operate 24/7 and are also 
partnering with their supply chain partners and customers to find 
constructive ways to modify their operations and maintain network 
fluidity. Railroads have also made a variety of online tools, apps, and 
other technologies available to provide their customers with full 
visibility regarding shipments' journeys over rail networks.
    Policymakers can assist in these efforts by removing impediments to 
effective solutions and encouraging the use of innovative technologies 
to enhance safety and operational effectiveness. Congress should work 
to ensure:
      the STB maintains a balanced economic regulatory system 
and rejects unwise rail regulations, such as forced switching;
      the FRA incorporates a performance-based regulatory 
framework and fosters innovation and testing of emerging technologies 
that improve the safety and efficiency of rail operations, such as 
automated track inspection;
      the FRA avoids imposing regulations that are not 
supported by current data and would stifle the incorporation of new 
safety technologies, such as a two-person crew mandate; and
      environmental regulations do not function to inhibit the 
expansion, development, or construction of rail facilities that would 
meet supply chain needs and our customers' freight transportation 
demand. These regulations should still allow for careful, thorough 
consideration of the environmental impacts of proposed projects but in 
a time-limited manner that does not cause unnecessary delay. Railroads 
appreciate that Congress included project permitting provisions in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, such as One Federal Decision, 
which consolidates decision-making and expedites deadlines, and the 
Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs Act, which makes the Federal 
Permitting Improvement Steering Council permanent and establishes a 
goal of two years for reviews.

    Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to Ian Jefferies, 
    President and Chief Executive Officer, Association of American 
                               Railroads

    Question 1. Mr. Jefferies, according to the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency and the Texas Transportation Institute's 2019 Urban 
Mobility Report, it's reported that trucks waste 3.3 billion gallons of 
fuel annually due to highway congestion resulting in moving freight by 
rail being on average 3 to 4 times more fuel efficient than trucks.
    On top of new, more efficient locomotives and anti-idling 
technologies, how can the infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
funding be leveraged to utilize the most efficient modes of 
transportation to move freight while reducing greenhouse gasses in and 
out of ports?
    Answer. Railroads have invested more than $740 billion of private 
capital into improving and maintaining their networks since 1980--$25 
billion annually in recent years. These investments will ensure that 
adequate freight rail capacity exists to meet America's current and 
future freight transportation needs, and the American Society of Civil 
Engineers has recognized the importance of these investments by 
awarding rail the highest grade of all American infrastructure in its 
last two report cards. During recent supply chain challenges and 
fluctuating demand associated with the pandemic, these investments 
helped railroads to successfully meet the needs of American businesses 
and consumers and move unprecedented amounts of intermodal freight 
during the last 3 months of 2020 and the first 6 of 2021. These 
investments will also allow for railroads to remain nimble in the 
future, and railroads today have additional capacity to handle even 
more traffic.
    Railroads thank Congress for enacting the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act (IIJA). This bipartisan legislation will modernize the 
nation's public infrastructure and further the efficiency of our 
freight transportation systems and supply chains. By authorizing and 
making significant investments through the Infrastructure for 
Rebuilding America (INFRA), Rebuilding American Infrastructure with 
Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) (Local and Regional Project 
Assistance), National Infrastructure Project Assistance, Port 
Infrastructure Development, Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety 
Improvements (CRISI), and Railroad Crossing Elimination grant programs, 
projects will be constructed that increase the fluidity of our supply 
chains, such as improving first and last mile intermodal connections; 
advancing projects of national and regional significance, including 
multimodal connection infrastructure projects; and enabling the public 
sector to partner with industry on mutually beneficial projects, such 
as the CREATE program in Chicago.
    Furthermore, IIJA also includes a number of programs focused on the 
development and demonstration of alternative fuels and transportation 
technologies, including the Industrial Emissions Demonstration Projects 
program, Clean Hydrogen Research and Development program, Advanced 
Energy Manufacturing and Recycling grant program, Electric Drive 
Vehicle Battery Recycling and Second-Life Applications program, 
Additional Clean Hydrogen programs, Railroad Research and Development 
program, and the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Infrastructure. 
These programs include rail-related eligibilities, and AAR looks 
forward to partnering with the Departments of Transportation and Energy 
to further research and develop technologies that fuel locomotives with 
alternatives to traditional diesel fuel and that are essential to 
advancing innovation and helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in 
transportation.

    Question 2. Can we build enough highways to meet demand, or should 
shippers better utilize existing freight networks to reduce congestion 
on the country's roadways?
    Answer. The nation's freight transportation demand was recently 
forecasted by the Federal Highway Administration to increase by 37 
percent over the next 20 years. Given the expense associated with 
highway construction and maintenance, it is not realistic to think that 
our nation's interstate highway system can absorb that growing demand.
    Railroads have worked diligently to ensure they have sufficient 
capacity to meet the nation's current and future growing freight 
transportation demand. America's freight rail network is the best in 
the world, spanning close to 140,000 route-miles. ``Crumbling'' might 
describe some U.S. infrastructure, but not freight rail. As previously 
noted, the American Society of Civil Engineers has recognized this and 
awarded rail the highest grade of all American infrastructure in its 
last two report cards. Freight rail infrastructure is in better overall 
condition today than ever before. Additionally, because a single train 
can replace several hundred trucks, utilizing railroads reduces highway 
gridlock and the demand on tax dollars to repair our nation's roads and 
bridges.
    Without railroads, it would be significantly more expensive for 
American firms and consumers to participate in the global economy. The 
affordability of freight rail saves rail customers billions of dollars 
each year, enhances the global competitiveness of U.S. products, and 
helps American consumers. Average rail rates (measured by inflation-
adjusted revenue per ton-mile) were 44 percent lower in 2020 than in 
1981. Millions of Americans work in industries that are more 
competitive in the tough global economy thanks to the affordability and 
productivity of America's freight railroads.

    Question 3. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, the 
last surface bill that was enacted prior to the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, which was just signed this week, contained a 
section on Port Metrics to help reduce areas of bottlenecks.
    Currently the Bureau of Transportation Statistics reports monthly 
on the number of 20-foot equivalents at the Nation's 10 largest ports. 
However, this reporting does not give any information on the efficiency 
of the port itself.
    It does not tell us whether or not labor is moving as efficiently 
as it could day over day, it doesn't tell us if there are issues with 
scales and gate times, it doesn't tell us if trucks are waiting longer 
than normal or if there aren't any berths available, it doesn't tell us 
how many crane lifts occur. These are all factors that affect port 
efficiency.
    a.  Mr. Jefferies--do you think similar information on loading 
times for rail would also be beneficial to scheduling rail operations?
    b.  What additional information are we missing from ports activity 
reporting that would help shippers and carriers be able to make the 
most informed decisions to help reduce bottlenecks and improve 
efficiencies?
    Answer. Railroads serving ports are in regular, often daily, 
contact with port administrators, steamship lines, drayage companies, 
and warehousing operators on or near port facilities. Railroads have 
complex information and data collection systems that already provide 
the information needed to identify issues and operate efficiently. 
Requiring railroads and other supply chain partners to substantially 
change their systems could result in widespread operational problems.
    Railroads understand that effective data sharing is crucial to 
well-functioning rail networks and supply chains. To that end, 
railroads already make available a variety of online tools, apps, and 
other technologies that provide their customers and representatives 
with visibility regarding their shipments' journeys over rail networks. 
For example, these tools provide rail customers on many railroads the 
ability to trace individual shipments in real time and let customers 
know when containers have been removed from railcars and are ready to 
be picked up, where those individual containers are located within rail 
facilities, and how long containers have been sitting after the 
customer has been notified. These tools allow rail customers to more 
efficiently prioritize retrieval of containers and minimize time spent 
in rail facilities. Railroads also provide network and facility 
updates, service advisories, and maintenance overviews to customers. 
All of these efforts help to ensure the efficient movement of goods on 
the network.
    Finally, AAR publicly releases aggregated data on a weekly basis 
about the commodities and intermodal volume that move by rail 
throughout the United States, Canada, and Mexico. This publication 
includes detailed information at the commodity level and provides 
needed insight into rail traffic levels for supply chain partners, rail 
customers, and governmental entities.

 Question from Hon. Andre Carson to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief 
          Executive Officer, Association of American Railroads

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. Railroad operational teams work closely with community 
leaders, government partners, first responders, and the public to 
manage and mitigate the impact of grade crossings. The causes of 
occupied crossings are numerous and can span from unplanned events, 
such as weather-related track blockages or the presence of trespassers 
near rail tracks, to those associated with rail operations, such as 
temporary blockages as railcars are dropped off or picked up at a rail 
customer facility or safety tests or crew changes are performed as 
required by regulation.
    By listening to feedback from communities--and working directly 
with first responders--railroads identify and determine how best to 
manage certain crossings. At every crossing, there is a sign posted 
containing an emergency phone number and an identification number so 
callers can immediately communicate issues with the railroads. 
Additionally, railroads are partnering with technology companies to 
develop digital signs that let the public know when a train is 
occupying a crossing so they can choose another route in advance.
    There is no one-size-fits-all approach to managing the more than 
200,000 grade crossings nationwide. Railroad operational teams deploy a 
range of strategies, depending on the circumstances, to minimize the 
frequency of occupied crossings and keep rail and vehicle traffic 
safely moving through these intersections, including modifying train 
and crew work schedules and railcar-switching practices and operations 
and extending and constructing new sidings.
    Railroads also spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year to 
maintain crossings and enhance sidings, develop public service 
campaigns and educational resources addressing grade crossing safety, 
and invest in new technologies. Ultimately, the most effective way to 
prevent crossing impacts is to reduce the number of crossings along the 
rail network. Railroads work with local road authorities, private 
property owners, and the U.S. Department of Transportation to identify 
crossings that can be consolidated, upgraded, or closed. Furthermore, 
as business and residential development continues, railroads work with 
local planning authorities to help carefully plan new infrastructure 
developments to limit community interaction with railroad activities 
while allowing the continued operation of the railroad corridor. 
Additionally, railroads partner with local and state governments to 
improve alternate access for roadway users, such as new grade 
separations.
    Railroads applaud Congress for providing a total of $845 million 
per year through the Section 130 and Railroad Crossing Elimination 
programs for projects to eliminate hazards at grade crossings in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Additionally, railroads thank 
Congress for including needed reforms to the Section 130 program, such 
as enabling replacement of functionally obsolete warning devices and 
increasing permissible incentive payment amounts for closing crossings. 
These changes and funding levels will be impactful for undertaking 
important grade crossing safety and improvement projects.

  Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to Ian Jefferies, President and 
       Chief Executive Officer, Association of American Railroads

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. The interplay of many different factors determine which 
ports and routes are used for supply chains. These factors include: 
time sensitivity of the freight being carried; inventory carrying 
costs; capital costs of new vessels; fuel costs; time in transit; port 
fees; inland transportation costs; the speed by which containers are 
able to be moved inland; environmental considerations; efficiency of 
port operations; and availability of warehouse space. Taken together, 
these factors determine which ports offer shippers the best value. 
Ultimately though, railroads do not decide which port a steamship will 
use; rather railroads strive to offer safe, efficient, cost-effective 
service regardless of the port chosen.

Question from Hon. Sharice Davids to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief 
          Executive Officer, Association of American Railroads

    Question 1. I also want to think ahead, because current supply 
chain issues are, of course, complicated by pent-up demand and other 
pandemic factors. I've heard the supply chain problems we're 
experiencing now described as a chain of dominoes falling into each 
other. But I think there's an opportunity here to boost American 
industry and labor while combating rising costs long-term.
    We've been dependent on materials made in other countries for far 
too long, and I think it's important that we use this as an opportunity 
to invest in our economy, supply chains, and workforce, so we can lower 
costs for working folks and avoid this supply chain crunch happening 
again in the future.
    We cannot just reset our dominoes--we need to stop the chain 
reaction before it even begins.
    An example would be the strong Buy America provisions in the 
infrastructure bill we just passed, or continuing to boost 
semiconductor and other critical material manufacturing here at home.
    What policies do you see as critical to help businesses and 
workforce ensure that our supply chain both recovers now--and is 
prepared to address future issues and cost pressures?
    Answer. Congress should first and foremost be commended for 
enacting the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). This 
bipartisan legislation will modernize the nation's public 
infrastructure and further the efficiency of our freight transportation 
systems and supply chains. By authorizing and making significant 
investments through the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA), 
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity 
(RAISE) (Local and Regional Project Assistance), National 
Infrastructure Project Assistance, Port Infrastructure Development, 
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI), and 
Railroad Crossing Elimination grant programs, projects will be 
constructed that increase the fluidity of our supply chains, such as 
improving first and last mile intermodal connections; advancing 
projects of national and regional significance, including multimodal 
connection infrastructure projects; and enabling the public sector to 
partner with industry on mutually beneficial projects, such as the 
CREATE program in Chicago.
    Policymakers can further assist in resolving our nation's supply 
chain challenges by removing impediments to effective solutions and 
encouraging the use of innovative technologies to enhance safety and 
operational effectiveness. Congress should work to ensure:
      the STB maintains a balanced economic regulatory system 
and rejects unwise rail regulations, such as forced switching;
      the FRA incorporates a performance-based regulatory 
framework and fosters innovation and testing of emerging technologies 
that improve the safety and efficiency of rail operations, such as 
automated track inspection;
      the FRA avoids imposing regulations that are not 
supported by current data and would stifle the incorporation of new 
safety technologies, such as a two-person crew mandate; and
      environmental regulations do not function to inhibit the 
expansion, development, or construction of rail facilities that would 
meet supply chain needs and our customers' freight transportation 
demand. These regulations should still allow for careful, thorough 
consideration of the environmental impacts of proposed projects but in 
a time-limited manner that does not cause unnecessary delay. Railroads 
appreciate that Congress included project permitting provisions in the 
IIJA, such as One Federal Decision, which consolidates decision-making 
and expedites deadlines, and the Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs 
Act, which makes the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council 
permanent and establishes a goal of two years for reviews.

    Finally, policymakers should restore the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) 
to a user-pays system. The United States has historically relied upon a 
user-pays system to fund investments in public road and bridge 
infrastructure. Unfortunately, revenues into the HTF have failed to 
keep pace with investment needs, requiring general fund transfers of 
$275 billion to cover the shortfall through FY 2026. General fund 
transfers to the HTF distort the freight transportation market in favor 
of the commercial trucking industry and put other modes, including 
railroads, at a competitive disadvantage. This is especially 
problematic for railroads which build, maintain, and pay for their own 
private infrastructure. Railroads commend Congress though for including 
in IIJA both a highway cost allocation study, which will help Congress 
better ensure different highway users, including commercial motor 
vehicles, cover their fair share of costs to maintain our nation's 
roads and bridges, as well as a national motor vehicle per-mile user 
fee pilot. Both of these programs will be essential to restoring and 
maintaining the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. Until 
commercial trucks pay the full cost of the damage they cause to our 
roads and bridges, policymakers should also reject calls to increase 
federal truck size and weight limits.

Questions from Hon. Seth Moulton to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief 
          Executive Officer, Association of American Railroads

    Question 1. Mr. Jefferies, the railroads have faced significant 
challenges this year, many outside of their control. We have certainly 
seen them adapt to help ease the current supply chain disruptions. 
During this time, how have the Class I railroads adapted their 
operating models to meet current conditions? What has been successful?
    Answer. Freight supply chains are complex systems driven by global 
and domestic stakeholders. While operations are constantly facing 
pressures, unprecedented events have arisen in the past 18 months that 
have led to significant supply chain dislocations. America's freight 
railroads are doing their part though--through significant investments 
in their private infrastructure and equipment, development and 
implementation of innovative technologies, cooperation with their 
customers and supply chain partners, and operational enhancements--to 
ensure that supply chains remain fluid and that they are able to meet 
present and future freight transportation demand.
    First, railroads have and will continue to operate 24/7 and would 
welcome freight transportation customers and other supply chain 
partners to do the same. Substantial supply chain capacity could be 
generated immediately from this change, and this would permit 
transportation providers to ``catch up'' when backups occur. Railroads 
appreciate that some supply chain participants have recently taken 
steps in this direction.
    Second, railroads are collaborating with their customers and other 
supply chain partners to find constructive ways to modify their 
operations and maintain network fluidity. Some of these changes 
include:
      Increasing coordination between railroads to better 
manage the flow of traffic and with the trucking industry to take 
shipments as soon as warehousing capacity is available;
      Offering incentives to customers for weekend or off-hour 
in-gating at facilities near ports and for out-gating a container when 
they in-gate a container at other facilities;
      Re-routing traffic away from busier terminals to less 
crowded terminals;
      Reopening closed terminals to create additional storage 
capacity;
      Increasing available storage capacity and staging space 
in and outside of terminals;
      Creating additional railroad-to-railroad interchanges to 
limit demand on truck drayage; and
      Mounting containers onto any chassis brought in to help 
reduce dead-miles for truckers.

    Third, railroads typically make available a variety of online 
tools, apps, and other technologies that provide their customers with 
full visibility regarding shipments' journeys over rail networks. This 
allows for customers to trace shipments in real time, more efficiently 
prioritize retrieval of containers, and minimize time spent in rail 
facilities.
    Fourth, railroads can incentivize customers to pick up freight in a 
timely manner through charging progressively higher storage fees after 
a reasonable initial period of ``free time.'' These fees help railroads 
maintain service reliability, efficient use of rail capacity and 
assets, and fluidity on the rail network. And ultimately storage fees 
function to ensure railroads can do what they are in business to do--
move goods.
    Finally, thanks to consistent private investments in infrastructure 
and equipment and technology and operational enhancements, railroads 
are confident they have the people, equipment, and capacity to manage 
the network at current and increased traffic levels, serve their 
customers' needs, and help the nation's economy recover from the 
pandemic and current supply chain disruptions. Railroads are also 
recalling workers who were furloughed during the pandemic, hiring new 
train operating employees in key markets to handle increased and 
unpredictable shipping demand, and providing bonuses to workers who 
provide new hire referrals.
    The successes of these practices were shown in a report recently 
released by the Northwestern University Transportation Center which 
found that railroads showed significant agility to respond during rises 
in intermodal traffic throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Question 2. Mr. Jefferies, nearly all of the Class I railroads 
deploy Precision Schedule Railroading. Has Precision Scheduled 
Railroading contributed to the effects we feel today from supply chain 
disruptions, labor shortages, and increased e-commerce?
    Answer. The term ``precision scheduled railroading'' does not have 
a one-size-fits-all meaning. Each railroad has its own unique service 
area, customers, and challenges that demand their own operational 
plans. Generally speaking, however, the goal is to improve asset 
utilization and productivity in the safest, most efficient manner and 
deliver a better customer experience through more reliable operations.
    By continually re-examining and focusing on improving their 
operating practices, railroads have created a more resilient rail 
network that is better able to adapt to market changes. While no one 
could have predicted the last two years, the decisions and investments 
made by railroads have helped them to remain nimble in the face of 
supply chain challenges and meet wildly fluctuating demand. In the last 
3 months of 2020 and the first 6 of 2021, railroads successfully moved 
unprecedented amounts of intermodal freight. During this time, 
railroads were handling close to 300,000 containers and trailers per 
week, levels that no one expected when the pandemic began. 
Additionally, the success of these operational plans is shown in that 
railroads today have capacity to handle even more traffic.

    Question 3. Mr. Jefferies, one challenge in our supply chain is the 
availability of truck drivers. What role could our railroads play in 
moving more freight if the decreased supply of truck drivers persists? 
What would it take to achieve a modal shift that, for instance, reduces 
the demand for long-haul trucking?
    Answer. The freight transportation market in the United States 
today is intensely competitive. Railroads know they must continue to 
earn their customers' business and are constantly working to further 
increase productivity, reduce costs, invest in their networks, and 
improve service. For railroads, furthering the industry's 
competitiveness takes many forms, including:
      Maintaining a focus on safety. The past decade has been 
the safest in rail history, and railroads continue to work diligently 
to identify new technologies, operational enhancements, trainings, and 
other ways to further improve their safety record.
      Recognizing capacity is key. The U.S. freight rail 
network is in its best condition ever. Railroads have invested more 
than $740 billion in capital expenditures and maintenance on their 
networks since 1980--$25 billion annually in recent years. These 
investments will help ensure our nation's freight rail infrastructure 
remains world-class and that adequate freight rail capacity exists to 
meet America's current and future freight transportation needs. As 
previously mentioned, the decisions and investments made by railroads 
have helped them to remain nimble in the face of supply chain 
challenges and meet wildly fluctuating demand. In the last 3 months of 
2020 and the first 6 of 2021, railroads successfully moved 
unprecedented amounts of intermodal freight. Additionally, railroads 
today have capacity to handle even more traffic.
      Focusing on customer service. Railroads know their 
customers face intensely competitive global markets that increasingly 
demand faster, more reliable, and cost-effective service. In response, 
railroads are continually launching new customer service initiatives 
and working with rail suppliers, trucking companies, and other 
businesses to improve their service.
      Enhancing sustainability and addressing climate change. 
Freight rail is well ahead of other modes of transportation when it 
comes to limiting greenhouse gas emissions. Freight railroads today 
account for only 1.9 percent of the transportation-related greenhouse 
gas emissions, while accounting for 40 percent or more of long-distance 
freight volume. U.S. railroads, on average can move 1 ton of freight 
over 480 miles on a single gallon of gas, and moving freight by train 
instead of truck reduces greenhouse gas emissions by up to 75 percent. 
Today's railroads are partnering with the Departments of Transportation 
and Energy to further research and development into technologies that 
fuel locomotives with alternatives to traditional diesel fuel and will 
continue to leverage technology and modernize operations to that 
further increase fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions 
associated with their operations.

    Policymakers can help ensure railroads are able to meet current and 
future growing freight transportation demand by rejecting harmful 
policies and encouraging the use of innovative technologies to enhance 
safety and efficiency. Congress should work to ensure:
      the STB maintains a balanced economic regulatory system 
and rejects unwise rail regulations, such as forced switching;
      the FRA incorporates a performance-based regulatory 
framework and fosters innovation and testing of emerging technologies 
that improve the safety and efficiency of rail operations, such as 
automated track inspection;
      the FRA avoids imposing regulations that are not 
supported by current data and would stifle the adoption of new 
technologies, such as a two-person crew mandate; and
      environmental regulations do not function to inhibit the 
expansion, development, or construction of rail facilities that would 
meet supply chain needs and our customers' freight transportation 
demand. These regulations should still allow for careful, thorough 
consideration of the environmental impacts of proposed projects but in 
a time-limited manner that does not cause unnecessary delay. Railroads 
appreciate that Congress included project permitting provisions in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), such as One Federal 
Decision, which consolidates decision-making and expedites deadlines, 
and the Federal Permitting Reform and Jobs Act, which makes the Federal 
Permitting Improvement Steering Council permanent and establishes a 
goal of two years for reviews.

    Finally, policymakers should restore the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) 
to a user-pays system. The United States has historically relied upon a 
user-pays system to fund investments in public road and bridge 
infrastructure. Unfortunately, revenues into the HTF have failed to 
keep pace with investment needs, requiring general fund transfers of 
$275 billion to cover the shortfall through FY 2026. General fund 
transfers to the HTF distort the freight transportation market in favor 
of the commercial trucking industry and put other modes, including 
railroads, at a competitive disadvantage. This is especially 
problematic for railroads which build, maintain, and pay for their own 
private infrastructure. Railroads commend Congress though for including 
in IIJA both a highway cost allocation study, which will help Congress 
better ensure different highway users, including commercial motor 
vehicles, cover their fair share of costs to maintain our nation's 
roads and bridges, as well as a national motor vehicle per-mile user 
fee pilot. Both of these programs will be essential to restoring and 
maintaining the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. Until 
commercial trucks pay the full cost of the damage they cause to our 
roads and bridges, policymakers should also reject calls to increase 
federal truck size and weight limits.

    Question 4. Mr. Jefferies, there is an example of this modal shift 
right now. As you know, Union Pacific has partnered with the port 
authorities of California and Utah to move more freight destined for 
the intermountain west by rail. Are there larger lessons we can draw 
from this example with regard to how we might use the funding in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to strengthen our supply chain? 
Are there particular infrastructure investments, perhaps in ports or 
railyards, that would be needed to increase the volume of freight moved 
by rail in the U.S.?
    Answer. Policymakers can help to strengthen supply chains by 
implementing programs that improve first and last mile connections 
where freight is handed off from one mode to another--for example, at 
ports from ships to railroads or trucks, or from railroads to trucks at 
intermodal terminals. Improving these connections would lead to 
especially large increases in efficiency and fluidity and forge a 
stronger, more effective total transportation system.
    Thankfully, Congress has already enacted IIJA which authorizes and 
provides significant funding for the Infrastructure for Rebuilding 
America (INFRA), Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability 
and Equity (RAISE) (Local and Regional Project Assistance), National 
Infrastructure Project Assistance, Port Infrastructure Development, 
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI), and 
Railroad Crossing Elimination grant programs. The projects awarded 
grants under these programs will modernize the nation's public 
infrastructure and further the efficiency of our freight transportation 
systems and supply chains, including through improving first and last 
mile intermodal connections; advancing projects of national and 
regional significance, such as multimodal connection infrastructure 
projects; and enabling the public sector to partner with industry on 
mutually beneficial projects, such as the CREATE program in Chicago.

Question from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the question, ultimately, I 
think everyone involved in the supply chain has a role to play in 
alleviating the supply chain crisis. Each player plays an integral role 
in making sure that products are moving safely and efficiently 
throughout the supply chain. As we discussed at the hearing, this is 
not the problem of one single issue or party, but a perfect storm of 
conditions and shortage of several key areas caused directly by a 
global pandemic. As I mentioned in my opening statement, we can correct 
the congestion in the supply chain through the three ``I''s: 
investment, innovation and interaction among the supply chain 
stakeholders. We all have a role to play, from federal and state 
government (deploying investment through the ``BIF'' and encouraging 
investment through right-sized regulatory regimes), industry and labor. 
The only way to get through this crisis is to work together in 
collaboration to alleviate issues in the supply chain. You are seeing 
that today and we believe the light at the end of the tunnel is ahead 
of us.

   Question from Hon. Sam Graves to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. Ms. Reinke, can you elaborate on the current conditions 
of detention time and how brokers handle these delays?
    Answer. In December 2017, with the implementation of the Electronic 
Logging Device (ELD) mandate by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration (FMCSA), in an instant, time leapfrogged mileage for 
rate valuations. Shippers and 3PLs began buying the driver's time, not 
the mileage. The industry continues to move in this direction now that 
the ELDs are tracking the drivers' hours-of-service (HOS) by the minute 
and capturing excess time they spend on loading and unloading. Although 
carriers and logistics companies' providers have the technology and 
data to capture and bill their customers for detention, preventing it 
altogether is a more desirable outcome by having 3PLs work with 
shippers to set realistic and accurate appointment times.
    One of the most utilized technologies to track detention time is 
geofencing, which is a common method to automatically record arrival 
and departure times to identify detention events for billing. 
Geofencing is a mobile feature and back-office management system to 
create a virtual perimeter around a location to detect assets crossing 
certain boundaries.
    Furthermore, a lot of shippers will require their brokers and 
carriers to utilize freight visibility platforms and will not pay 
detention charges to the broker or carrier unless there is an exchange 
of data via these platforms.
    When truck capacity was tight in 2018, motor carriers and 3PLs were 
able to be more selective of the customers they worked with. Some were 
focused on building scorecards to measure and rank their customers to 
create the best network and book of business. TIA members work with 
shippers regularly to make sure carriers are paid for the time they are 
delayed. TIA wants our members and our members' customers to be brokers 
and shippers of choice.

  Question from Hon. Andre Carson to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. Congressman Carson, as you note, freight rail is an 
essential and critical part of the supply chain; using rail can 
mitigate road congestion and remove backlogs from ports. The freight 
railroads have seen enormous demand, and consequently, considerable 
disruption during the pandemic. As a result, it is critically important 
to their success to have a regulatory environment that encourages 
investment; without their private investment in their infrastructure, 
the supply chain writ large suffers. As you also note, the freight rail 
industry has adopted an operational model of ``Precision Scheduled 
Railroading'' that emphasizes longer trains and fewer stops. The number 
of crewmen has not changed in several decades; should it do so, the 
matter will likely be determined through collective bargaining. Longer 
trains can block crossings and impact communities if the train 
operations are congested or there is a disruption to the system. The 
railroads and the communities should have an open dialogue to resolve 
these issues and the railroads should commit to doing whatever they can 
to keep the trains moving.

 Question from Hon. Michelle Steel to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. Can you enumerate and share further details of some of 
the challenges in ocean shipping that your members (and/or their 
customers) have experienced during the current disruption, that would 
be addressed/alleviated by elements of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act of 
2021?
    Answer. Thank you, Congresswoman Steel for the question. It's a 
fair question, our members and indirectly their customers have felt 
extended times for final delivery of freight. This is happening a lot 
of the time at the port to warehouse sector of the supply chain. 
Whether it be bottlenecks, traffic conditions, or labor shortages, our 
ports are not running at their peak efficiency. This is very 
frustrating for both the carrier on-site, the broker working behind the 
scenes, and our customer who is feeling the pressure from the entity 
that is expecting freight quickly and smoothly.
    TIA is proud to support the efforts of Congressmen Garamendi and 
Johnson in their efforts to get our supply chain back to full 
effectiveness. Our members have felt firsthand the outrageous demurrage 
and detention fees that all too often appear as revenue generators, not 
an incentivizing method to help keep freight and containers moving. The 
legislation would direct FMC to determine what unreasonable Demurrage 
and Detention fees are setting a standard for these tactics.
    Secondly, our members work closely with carriers of all types and 
modes like air freight, rail, highway CMV's and ocean carriers. Because 
there are such few ocean carriers available to move freight, they have 
gained a lot of market control of the mobility and movement of freight. 
By further banning retaliatory practices of ocean carriers against 
shippers Congress is effectively evening the playing field and allowing 
a shipper who has every right to file a complaint to continue to 
effectively move their product.
    Lastly, the legislation would add two new stakeholders that are 
eligible to join the National Shipper Advisory Committee, Customs 
Brokers and Freight Forwarders.

Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. Thank you, Congressman Lynch, for the excellent question. 
Essentially as the travel agents of freight in the supply chain, our 
members utilize the latest technology advances to efficiently move 
freight throughout the supply chain. A part of this is to work with the 
ports to ensure that the latest technological advances are implemented, 
including freight visibility platforms, so that all parties have real-
time visibility of where the freight is. I think TIA would agree with 
you that the U.S. ports are far behind other nations, but as we know 
the U.S. is the greatest nation in the world and will overcome these 
challenges to ensure that our infrastructure including ports is world 
class. TIA members also work with the ports to ensure the latest 
technology and automation is utilized and implemented. As the brokerage 
industry continues to advance through technology, our ports must 
continue to meet those needs by advancing as well. In terms of 
utilizing local ports and redirecting, this can be tricky, but our 
members are a pragmatic group of business leaders and always looking 
ways to alleviate the crisis where necessary and utilizing local ports 
instead of LA-Long Beach has been an option. I was speaking with a 
member recently who indicated that they redirected a ship from LA-Long 
Beach to Norfolk, VA and trucked the load back to Washington State its 
end destination.

Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to Anne Reinke, President 
 and Chief Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. Ms. Reinke, I have raised the issue of port metrics 
with Mr. Jefferies and Mr. Spear, however, I'd like to get your 
viewpoint on how getting real-time port metrics can help your industry 
schedule accordingly to make the whole system be as efficient as 
possible.
    In your testimony you said brokers can utilize their relationships, 
but what if they could also utilize technology from real-time reporting 
from ports? What if they knew there was a chassis shortage at the Port 
of Los Angeles but a surplus as the Port of Long Beach, or if Seattle 
Tacoma had berths available with a rail connection south, while 
California ports were experiencing a backlog? Could this information be 
helpful for your clients making better business choices and to help 
alleviate bottlenecks in the transportation network?
    Question 2. Ms. Reinke, do you think we'd be in the position we are 
in today with the port backlogs and bottlenecks if we would have a 
real-time data and automation?
    a.  How do we get labor involved in the process to ensure they are 
willing participants? Labor is a critical component to a working port, 
however, if they're not operating at an efficient level, should we look 
to automation?
    b.  Would it be beneficial to have a case study for automation at a 
port of a decent size, such as the Port of San Juan?
    Answers to questions 1, 2, 2.a., & 2.b.. Thank you, Representative 
Gonzalez-Colon, TIA is happy to report that there are already 
technology solutions being utilized in the supply chain and at ports 
that can give all stakeholders visibility in real-time to the status of 
the freight. TIA has several members in the supply chain that offer 
these solutions for brokers, shippers and carriers. The issue is 
adoption from all parties involved. As you keenly pointed out labor is 
a major issue and one of the top issues in the supply chain right now, 
as the nation has a serious labor shortage throughout the supply chain. 
At TIA we agree that automation might be an answer to this shortage, as 
our members have over the last 15 years or so began automating the 
entire logistics and freight brokerage industry. This would include 
sourcing a load, to freight visibility, and the payment of the end 
carrier. From our Association's perspective technology is the litmus 
test for those entities that will continue to innovate and prosper and 
those that will not. A case study of a port, like that of the one in 
San Juan, would have huge benefits to get a sense of where we as a 
nation currently stand. As the brokerage industry continues to advance 
through technology, our ports must continue to meet those needs by 
advancing as well. In discussing with ports many of them are already in 
the process of this and looking to take that next step in terms of 
automation. I think the future is bright in this aspect.

 Question from Hon. Sharice Davids to Anne Reinke, President and Chief 
      Executive Officer, Transportation Intermediaries Association

    Question 1. I also want to think ahead, because current supply 
chain issues are, of course, complicated by pent-up demand and other 
pandemic factors. I've heard the supply chain problems we're 
experiencing now described as a chain of dominoes falling into each 
other. But I think there's an opportunity here to boost American 
industry and labor while combating rising costs long-term.
    We've been dependent on materials made in other countries for far 
too long, and I think it's important that we use this as an opportunity 
to invest in our economy, supply chains, and workforce, so we can lower 
costs for working folks and avoid this supply chain crunch happening 
again in the future.
    We cannot just reset our dominoes--we need to stop the chain 
reaction before it even begins.
    An example would be the strong Buy America provisions in the 
infrastructure bill we just passed, or continuing to boost 
semiconductor and other critical material manufacturing here at home.
    What policies do you see as critical to help businesses and 
workforce ensure that our supply chain both recovers now--and is 
prepared to address future issues and cost pressures?
    Answer. Congresswoman Davids, thank you for the thoughtful 
question. From TIA's perspective, I would like to focus on two topics: 
industry collaboration and technology. TIA members are the industry 
leaders in terms of technology and are constantly developing and 
implementing the latest cutting edge technology products. We as a 
nation need to continue to allow these companies to innovate and 
advance and enhance our nation's infrastructure projects and needs. 
This includes adopting policies that give companies the freedom to 
innovate if it is not at the expense of safety. Secondly, I would look 
at industry collaboration: all the industry stakeholders in the supply 
chain work hard and each of them play an integral role in moving goods 
throughout the supply chain. There are several policies areas that many 
industry stakeholders agree (for example, expanding truck parking) and 
Congress needs to work with all stakeholders to find areas of common 
support and to work to advance those initiatives. Lastly, we believe 
that the motor carrier selection standard legislation is critical to 
enhance safety and amplify capacity. Thank you, Congresswoman for your 
support for the legislation last year. As you saw in the legislation, 
with no federal selection standard and 90% of carriers unrated. 
Resolving this issue will ensure that the safest carriers, regardless 
of size, are rated and are eligible for selection. We hope you will 
support H.R. 3042 in this Congress.

    Question from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to David HC Correll, Ph.D., 
Research Scientist and Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 
                Center for Transportation and Logistics

    Question 1. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. I am afraid my research does not lead me to identify any 
single actor here. If we start by grouping the relevant actors, I would 
propose four very broad groups: (1) end customers; (2) shippers; (3) 
carriers and (4) regulators. I would also propose two ways to apportion 
responsibility for correcting our supply chain challenges: (A) which 
group is most responsible for causing the supply challenges; and (B) 
which group is most capable to correct the supply chain challenges?
    Starting with responsibility criteria (A) which group is most 
responsible for causing the supply chain challenges: I think groups one 
through four have all contributed to the problem. My own data and 
analysis does not allow me to measure the comparative scale of each 
group's causation and therefore assign greatest responsibility. The 
focus of my own research zooms in narrowly on the role that shippers 
play in detaining truck drivers and thereby reducing their utilization. 
I do believe that this is a real problem; but I don't think it is what 
caused our current supply chain challenges. In fact, the problem of 
long detention time, sadly, long precedes our current supply chain 
challenges. I believe that the issue of truck driver detention 
exacerbates our current supply chain challenges, but cannot be said to 
have caused them. Moving on to responsibility criteria (B) which group 
is most capable to correct the supply chain challenges; I think that 
each of the four groups has a role to play. While my own research 
efforts identify how shippers could make better use of truck drivers 
time, I similarly hesitate to say that fixing this is the highest 
priority when addressing our supply chain challenges.
    I apologize for my wishy-washy answer here; but I want to be fully 
honest to the truth as I see it and admit to what I do not know. I 
think everyone in my four groups has a role to play here. We are all 
responsible for doing our part to motivate and enable ourselves, and 
each other, to improve this situation.

   Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to David HC Correll, 
  Ph.D., Research Scientist and Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of 
           Technology Center for Transportation and Logistics

    Question 1. Dr. Correll, how can Congress and appropriate agencies 
accurately capture data on detention and working conditions for truck 
drivers?
    a.  Additionally, should Congress want to study these metrics, 
which institutions or entities could handle a study to stand up a 
portal for this information?
    b.  How do we get industry stakeholders from all aspects of the 
transportation system involved in the development? How could we 
incentivize ports and labor to participate?
    Answer. I think the first step is to set up a unique identifier for 
what I would call all the ``nodes'' in the American domestic supply 
chain. By nodes, I mean all the delivery points (like warehouses, 
distribution centers, mixing centers, fulfillment centers, rail yards, 
stores, etc.) No such unique identifier currently exists, and this 
makes it difficult for trucking companies to compare notes and 
measurements of their detention experiences at different facilities. I 
believe this is an appropriate job for the federal government because: 
(1) it is imperative that the operators of these nodes feel compelled 
to register, which only the government could reliably compel; and (2) 
data collection must be nationwide, which only the federal government 
could compel. This would, in effect, be similar to the unique 
identifying system for American employers, the Employer Identification 
Number (EIN) system.
    Should Congress want to interpret the data collected from these 
facilities, I would recommend standing up a Supply Chain Information 
Administration within the Department of Transportation, or the 
Department of Commerce, similar in nature to the Energy Information 
Administration (EIA) that exists within the US Department of Energy. 
With a dedicated and properly staffed and equipped team, this new 
Supply Chain Information Administration could work similarly to the EIA 
to collect and report on the latest trends in America's supply chain 
competitiveness. Personally, I worked at the EIA for roughly 2 years 
and was proud to be part of its mission to help keep America energy 
secure. A newly formed Supply Chain Information Administration could do 
similar work with the mission to keep America supply chain competitive.
    I think that involvement from ports and labor would come from 
making the argument to each side that the new Supply Chain Information 
Administration represents an honest broker seeking to provide unbiased 
and aggregated data that enables better decision making on both sides. 
This would, of course, need to be presented as not only a punishment of 
high average truck driver detention times, but also a celebration of 
low average truck detention times. I would propose that the new Supply 
Chain Information Administration award letter grades based on every 
registered supply chain node's average truck detention time. This would 
be similar to the sanitation letter grades awarded by State Departments 
of Health to restaurants. To my mind, labor's participation follows 
naturally as the effort itself shines a spotlight on issues of concern 
to them. This would also unlock market solutions to the truck driver 
detention and retention problems, as carriers could build Supply Chain 
Information Administration letter grades into their pricing models for 
servicing different customers.

 Question from Hon. Andre Carson to David HC Correll, Ph.D., Research 
 Scientist and Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center 
                    for Transportation and Logistics

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. I am afraid I have not personally conducted research into 
the rail sector, so I cannot offer expert opinion here. However, I do 
believe that American rail roads have an important part to play here. 
When we think about the choice between moving freight by truck vs 
moving freight by rail, we know that rail is often more cost effective, 
and also environmentally friendly. These two things were true even 
before our current supply chains problems. As we look for ways to 
unclog America's freight arteries, these benefits stand in even sharper 
relief. However, where rail loses to truck conveyance is in what 
academics call `place utility'--that is, a train can only drop off at a 
rail yard, but a truck can come right to your door.
    To my mind then, integration of rail and truck conveyance--often 
referred to as `inter-modal' freight transportation--offers strong 
potential and merits further study and perhaps even investment. One of 
the things that makes trucking a hard job is leaving one's home and 
family for weeks at a time to cross the country. But, trains can make 
these same trips with far fewer people per ton-mile. And they can often 
do it more cheaply and more sustainably. Harmonized intermodal systems 
that make greater use of rail to criss-cross the country, covering the 
``middle miles'' of a freight trip by rail, and the ``last miles'' of a 
freight trip by truck would, I believe, reduce some of the stress on 
our scarce and valuable American truck driver workforce, and thereby 
unclog our roads and strengthen our supply chains.

    Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to David HC Correll, Ph.D., 
Research Scientist and Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 
                Center for Transportation and Logistics

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. I'm afraid that I am personally doing very little. In my 
position as a research scientist, I have very little influence over the 
procurement decisions of shippers, or the routing decisions of 
carriers. However, I think that perhaps one of the solutions that I've 
offered as part of this testimony--investing in data collection at all 
of America's supply chain nodes, including the ports--would enable data 
collection at the ports, which I believe would be essential to the 
important modernization efforts referenced in this question. There is 
an old adage, `you can't manage what you can't measure'. From an 
academic research perspective, I would be honored to help measure 
performance at our American ports.

Question from Hon. Sharice Davids to David HC Correll, Ph.D., Research 
 Scientist and Lecturer, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center 
                    for Transportation and Logistics

    Question 1. I also want to think ahead, because current supply 
chain issues are, of course, complicated by pent-up demand and other 
pandemic factors. I've heard the supply chain problems we're 
experiencing now described as a chain of dominoes falling into each 
other. But I think there's an opportunity here to boost American 
industry and labor while combating rising costs long-term.
    We've been dependent on materials made in other countries for far 
too long, and I think it's important that we use this as an opportunity 
to invest in our economy, supply chains, and workforce, so we can lower 
costs for working folks and avoid this supply chain crunch happening 
again in the future.
    We cannot just reset our dominoes--we need to stop the chain 
reaction before it even begins.
    An example would be the strong Buy America provisions in the 
infrastructure bill we just passed, or continuing to boost 
semiconductor and other critical material manufacturing here at home.
    What policies do you see as critical to help businesses and 
workforce ensure that our supply chain both recovers now--and is 
prepared to address future issues and cost pressures?
    Answer. Thank you for this question. I am especially struck by the 
dominoes analogy here. The overall global flow of trade is an issue 
outside of my scope of research. However, I see your point that trade 
imbalances contribute to some of the log jams we see at our ports, 
particularly as regards the imbalance between inbound and outbound 
ships and shipping containers. Broadly speaking, efforts to incentivize 
the development of domestic production capacity makes sense to me as a 
solution here. I must note that the details of its implementation are 
outside of my own research experience.
    However, to my mind, it is helpful to identify what is, and what is 
not, within America's scope of influence of here. I think that 
comparatively lower international labor costs, comparatively looser 
international environmental regulations, and different countries' 
customs/tariffs policies will all almost always continue to incentivize 
more globalized supply chains. And these factors are all, perhaps, 
outside of America's direct sphere of influence. However, domestic 
freight transportation and logistics costs also play an important role 
in the cost of producing goods and delivering them to American 
customers. And these factors are directly within America's sphere of 
influence. If we can make the supply chain and logistics cost of 
servicing our American consumers cheaper, I think that we stand our 
strongest chance of incentivizing more local and domestic production. 
From my perspective, these are the policies that are most important to 
building stronger American supply chains.

 Questions from Hon. Peter A. DeFazio to Gregory R. Regan, President, 
               Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. One of the significant issues facing the current supply 
chain challenges is whether we have enough staff across the industries 
represented here today--at our ports, driving trucks, or maintaining 
and operating the railroads. I appreciated your testimony highlighting 
that we don't have a shortage of Americans who are ready and willing to 
work but that these private companies, who have made considerable 
profits, will need to pay their people more, provide safe working 
conditions and better benefits. I am very concerned with the number of 
employees the railroads have let go over the last couple of years in 
order to satisfy Wall Street with the implementation of Precision 
Scheduled Railroading to increase their operating ratios and the 
detrimental impact that has to rail service. Surprisingly, the 
Association of American Railroads testimony didn't reference the 
October drop in intermodal rail volumes, the signing bonuses they've 
been paying to attract workers, or the compressed training they've 
offered for conductors that tragically may have resulted in more than 
one employee losing a limb. What is driving the managers of these 
railroads to make these decisions?
    Answer. These managers are operating railroads with a singular 
factor in mind--lowering operating ratios, which are operating expenses 
as a percentage of revenue, considered to be the standard metric for 
railroad profitability, in order to satisfy their hedge fund investors. 
While we strongly support the ability of railroads to turn a profit, 
which in turn should lead to job creation and good wages, the Class I 
railroads of today have become so myopically focused on producing stock 
returns that metrics like safety have become an afterthought.

    Question 2. Who is responsible for correcting our supply chain 
challenges?
    Answer. It is clear that the private sector has a major role to 
play in course correction. As we noted in our testimony, it was always 
likely that such a dramatic spike in volumes would cause disruptions, 
but it is also true that actions taken by the private sector that 
reduced flexibility and slack in the supply chain have worsened the 
problem. Railroads, trucking companies, and others must examine how 
their operating models were incongruent with responsiveness, and make 
structural changes to avoid similar circumstances in the future.
    There may be also be roles for the federal government to ensure 
that such structural changes take place. For example, the 
administration has already begun to take steps to address issues of 
worker misclassification under labor law that have been used to deny 
truck drivers and other the benefits of an employer-employee 
relationship. From a rail perspective, we support providing the Surface 
Transportation Board with additional tools and authorities. Recently, 
Senator Baldwin introduced an amendment to the National Defense 
Authorization Act that would direct the STB to develop new standards 
concerning the fulfillment of railroad's common carrier obligations, 
including the consideration of the reductions in workforce and 
infrastructure maintenance on service quality, and we highly support 
the adoption of a proposal like this.

   Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to Gregory R. Regan, 
          President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. Mr. Regan, is it within Congress' authority to ask 
ports that receive Federal funding or are subject to Federal 
jurisdiction, transportation stakeholders, and labor unions to report 
their productivity at ports?
    Answer. Congress currently collects much of this data through the 
Port Performance Freight Statistics Program, 49 USC 6314.

    Question 2. Mr. Regan, what are the major concerns that a labor 
union would use to argue against making productivity metrics available 
to the public through a real-time data portal to improve efficiencies 
across the whole network and increase transparency?
    Answer. In prior Congresses, bad faith efforts to undermine 
collective bargaining have masqueraded as purported productivity 
metrics. Labor is more than willing to discuss how data improvements 
could be deployed to reduce inefficiencies and make the freight network 
operate more cohesively, but we will continue to strongly oppose any 
effort which attacks collective bargaining rights and the collective 
bargaining process.

    Question from Hon. Andre Carson to Gregory R. Regan, President, 
               Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. Role of Rail (and Blocked Crossings)--After seeing so 
much congestion at ports, I'd like to get your thoughts on what 
positive role rail might play in strengthening our supply chain? Not 
just in terms of more efficient movement of goods and materials, but 
improving our human infrastructure too. Precision railroading sounds 
impressive, but it just seems counter-intuitive to plan for longer 
trains but smaller crew size. Our transportation systems are only as 
strong as our people, our workers. And in a place like Indiana, the 
Crossroads of America, we must also address the congestion on the roads 
that unfortunately results when downtown and critical streets are 
blocked by painfully long freight trains. How can these disruptions be 
improved as we're working to strengthen our supply chains?
    Answer. Rail offers boundless opportunities for improving the 
nation's supply chains. At its best, rail offers a mode of freight 
transportation that is safe, environmentally friendly, and can sustain 
thousands of good middle class jobs. As mentioned in our testimony, 
ports and harbors across the country are clear about the untapped 
potential of greater investment in on-dock rail, as the IIJA provides 
for through the Port Infrastructure Development Program.
    However, as you correctly note, Precision Scheduled Railroading, 
and the use of increasingly longer trains that strangle communities is 
not the answer. In order to address disruptions, the FRA must take 
action to address many of the safety concerns that PSR presents. The 
IIJA also contains a study on the safety issues presented by train 
length, and we look forward to those findings an d FRA's response. The 
Surface Transportation Board should examine its authorities as an 
economic regulator to police bad behavior by the railroads, including 
whether or not current Class I operating models are fulfilling 
statutory common carrier obligations.

  Question from Hon. Stephen F. Lynch to Gregory R. Regan, President, 
               Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. While ports are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy, 
outdated infrastructure and the COVID-19 pandemic have strained their 
capacity and jeopardized global supply chains. According to the 2021 
Report Card for America's Infrastructure Report issued by the American 
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), in 2018, America's ports supported 
more than 30 million jobs and approximately 26% of our nation's GDP. 
Federal, State and Local governments have invested millions of dollars 
in our regional ports to serve the global shipping industry. However, 
the ASCE report card warns that ports face extensive challenges 
modernizing infrastructure and maintaining essential facilities under 
threat from sea level rise and other climate challenges.
    a.  What are you doing to push the industry to utilize these 
regional gateways to address the supply congestion at the nation's 
largest ports?
    Answer. After years of neglect compared to other federal 
transportation expenditures, TTD has long worked in tandem with 
industry partners to promote increased federal investment specifically 
targeted to our nation's ports and harbors. Since the program was 
revitalized with our support, the past two appropriations bills have 
contained $230M and $280M under the Port Infrastructure Development 
Program, which will be furthered buttressed by historic port 
investments in the IIJA. These investments will create increased 
throughput and efficiency at ports, particularly though the development 
of necessary infrastructure projects like the expansion of on-dock rail 
services. TTD also supports the inclusion of a new program in the Build 
Back Better package which will fund port projects that reduce air 
pollution, greening our ports and combating climate change while 
increasing efficiency.
    TTD has also supported efforts to make better use of smaller ports 
and harbors to decrease congestion at our largest ports. As mentioned 
in our testimony, we encourage the further development of ``short sea 
shipping'' through the Marine Highway program. Short sea shipping is 
the use of commercial vessels for the carriage of commodities along 
American's seacoasts and inland waterways, potentially to allow for the 
transfer of goods from vessels at large ports, to smaller vessels that 
will call at smaller ports and inland harbors. This methods of 
transportation can reduce congestion, while creating additional jobs in 
the maritime, shipbuilding and longshore sectors. However, the growth 
of this sector is somewhat inhibited by the current application of the 
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
    Cargo entering the U.S. through a seaport is subject to the Harbor 
Maintenance Tax (HMT). If that same cargo is moved via a commercial 
vessel, it is then taxed a second time under the HMT when it arrives at 
the next port. However, if that cargo is transported by rail or truck 
to another U.S. destination, it avoids a duplicative HMT charge. This 
inequitable double taxation creates a significant economic disadvantage 
for shippers to use what could be a viable transportation option. In 
2020, Representatives Brian Higgins (D-NY) and Mike Kelly (R-PA) 
introduced H.R. 5351, which would resolve this issue, and we encourage 
Congress to revisit this proposal.

   Question from Hon. Sharice Davids to Gregory R. Regan, President, 
               Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. I also want to think ahead, because current supply 
chain issues are, of course, complicated by pent-up demand and other 
pandemic factors. I've heard the supply chain problems we're 
experiencing now described as a chain of dominoes falling into each 
other. But I think there's an opportunity here to boost American 
industry and labor while combating rising costs long-term.
    We've been dependent on materials made in other countries for far 
too long, and I think it's important that we use this as an opportunity 
to invest in our economy, supply chains, and workforce, so we can lower 
costs for working folks and avoid this supply chain crunch happening 
again in the future.
    We cannot just reset our dominoes--we need to stop the chain 
reaction before it even begins.
    An example would be the strong Buy America provisions in the 
infrastructure bill we just passed, or continuing to boost 
semiconductor and other critical material manufacturing here at home.
    What policies do you see as critical to help businesses and 
workforce ensure that our supply chain both recovers now--and is 
prepared to address future issues and cost pressures?
    Answer. TTD is strongly supportive of initiatives, including the 
Buy America language referenced here, that will allow us to strengthen 
domestic supply chains and respond more nimbly in the event of a 
crisis. For example, increased domestic manufacture of critical freight 
transportation items like chassis can help to avoid shortages like 
those that we've experienced over the last few months, and increase our 
self-reliance on domestic industry.
    In the immediate term, our options to end the ongoing congestion 
challenges are limited, though we applaud the efforts that the 
administration has taken that have been helpful, including working with 
terminal operators to keep ports open and incentivizing off-peak 
service, allowing for flexibility in certain unspent federal funds, and 
promoting government-wide cooperation. However, many of the changes 
that will be required to ensure that we don't continue to end up in 
similar crises require structural changes to industries and their 
governing rules and regulations. As discussed in our testimony, TTD 
believes strongly that additional safety and economic oversight of the 
freight railroad industry, including at the Surface Transportation 
Board, can result in industries that are more resilient and have 
increased long-term viability.

    Question from Hon. Seth Moulton to Gregory R. Regan, President, 
               Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

    Question 1. Mr. Regan, the Transportation Trades Department (TTD) 
and other rail unions have raised concerns about Precision Scheduled 
Railroading (PSR), including that congestion issues in the supply chain 
could strain limited network capacity. Do you believe PSR has impacted 
our current supply chain challenges? Can you paint the picture of how 
this has unfolded on the ground and provide examples of some of the 
freight rail challenges we are facing now that have been exacerbated by 
PSR?
    Answer. PSR has unequivocally worsened supply chain issues. While 
the railroads will claim that they are a ``demand industry'' and that 
they have right-sized themselves for this purpose, evidence doesn't 
support this. In a just a few years, Class I railroads eliminated a 
fifth of the entire workforce. Carriers bragged in their financial 
filings about how much of their equipment, including locomotives, they 
were able to eliminate or mothball. Any claims of running at full 
capacity during the crisis must be viewed through this lens of 
intentional diminishment of service and capability. A healthy industry 
would have had the slack in its network to respond and to allocate 
resources quickly, and in a way that lessened the supply chain crunch. 
Railroads have made sure they don't have that ability. While running 
lean was good for shareholder returns, it continues to be bad for 
nation as a whole.

                                   [all]