[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR-
TATION'S POLICIES AND PROGRAMS AND FIS-
CAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
(118-63)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 27, 2024
__________
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
58-381 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking Member
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,
District of Columbia Arkansas
Grace F. Napolitano, California Daniel Webster, Florida
Steve Cohen, Tennessee Thomas Massie, Kentucky
John Garamendi, California Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiaian Babin, Texas
Andre Carson, Indiana Garret Graves, Louisiana
Dina Titus, Nevada David Rouzer, North Carolina
Jared Huffman, California Mike Bost, Illinois
Julia Brownley, California Doug LaMalfa, California
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Mark DeSaulnier, California Brian J. Mast, Florida
Salud O. Carbajal, California Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Greg Stanton, Arizona, Puerto Rico
Vice Ranking Member Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Colin Z. Allred, Texas Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Sharice Davids, Kansas Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey,
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire Vice Chairman
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts Tracey Mann, Kansas
Marilyn Strickland, Washington Burgess Owens, Utah
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Patrick Ryan, New York Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Mary Sattler Peltola, Alaska Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Robert Menendez, New Jersey Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon Eric Burlison, Missouri
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan Brandon Williams, New York
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania Mike Collins, Georgia
Mike Ezell, Mississippi
John S. Duarte, California
Aaron Bean, Florida
Celeste Maloy, Utah
Kevin Kiley, California
Vince Fong, California
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 4
WITNESSES
Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S. Department
of Transportation, oral statement.............................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford:
Letter of May 15, 2024, to the Attorney General, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Dan Horvath, Senior Vice
President, Regulatory Affairs and Safety Policy, American
Trucking Associations...................................... 13
Letter of June 20, 2024, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Dan Horvath, Senior Vice
President, Regulatory Affairs and Safety Policy, American
Trucking Associations...................................... 15
Editorial entitled, ``Biden's LNG Export Pause Hits Ukraine:
Kyiv's Deal With a Major U.S. Supplier Faces a White House
Obstacle,'' by the Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal, June
21, 2024, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian Babin......... 29
Letter of June 25, 2024, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from the New Jersey Congressional
Delegation, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Robert Menendez... 92
Statement of the Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA),
Submitted for the Record by Hon. Rick Larsen................... 103
Letter of June 26, 2024, to Hon. Sam Graves, Chairman, and Hon.
Rick Larsen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates
for Highway and Auto Safety et al., Submitted for the Record by
Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton..................................... 105
APPENDIX
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation,
U.S. Department of Transportation, from:
Hon. Sam Graves.............................................. 109
Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford............................... 109
Hon. Scott Perry............................................. 112
Hon. Garret Graves........................................... 112
Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................ 114
Hon. Dusty Johnson........................................... 116
Hon. Jefferson Van Drew...................................... 119
Hon. Burgess Owens........................................... 121
Hon. Rudy Yakym III.......................................... 123
Hon. Derrick Van Orden....................................... 124
Hon. Marcus J. Molinaro...................................... 129
Hon. Mike Collins............................................ 131
Hon. Mike Ezell.............................................. 133
Hon. Rick Larsen............................................. 135
Hon. Steve Cohen............................................. 135
Hon. John Garamendi.......................................... 136
Hon. Dina Titus.............................................. 137
Hon. Mark DeSaulnier......................................... 137
Hon. Greg Stanton............................................ 138
Hon. Sharice Davids.......................................... 139
Hon. Chris Pappas............................................ 142
Hon. Marilyn Strickland...................................... 143
Hon. Troy A. Carter.......................................... 144
Hon. Robert Menendez......................................... 145
Hon. Hillary J. Scholten..................................... 146
Hon. Christopher R. Deluzio.................................. 146
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
June 21, 2024
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure
FROM: LStaff, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure
RE: LFull Committee Hearing on ``Oversight of the
Department of Transportation's Policies and Programs and Fiscal
Year 2025 Budget Request''
_______________________________________________________________________
I. PURPOSE
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will
meet on Thursday, June 27, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2167 of
the Rayburn House Office Building to receive testimony at a
hearing entitled, ``Oversight of the Department of
Transportation's Policies and Programs and Fiscal Year 2025
Budget Request.'' The hearing will provide Members an
opportunity to discuss all aspects of the United States
Department of Transportation (DOT), including policy decisions,
the fiscal year (FY) 2025 budget request, and program
implementation. At the hearing, Members will receive testimony
from DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg.
II. BACKGROUND
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pursuant to House Rule X(1)(r), the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure (Committee) authorizes
programs carried out by the following DOT modal administrations
and offices:
LFederal Aviation Administration (FAA);
LFederal Highway Administration (FHWA);
LFederal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA);
LNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA);
LFederal Transit Administration (FTA);
LFederal Railroad Administration (FRA);
LMaritime Administration (MARAD);
LPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA);
LGreat Lakes Saint Lawrence Seaway Development
Corporation (GLS);
LOffice of the Secretary (OST); and
LOffice of the Inspector General (OIG)
On December 15, 2020, President Biden nominated Pete
Buttigieg to be the Secretary of Transportation. The Senate
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation held a
confirmation hearing on the nomination on January 21, 2021.\1\
The Senate confirmed Secretary Buttigieg on February 2, 2021,
by a vote of 86-13.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consideration of the Nomination of Peter Buttigieg to be
Secretary of the United States Transp. Dep't: Hearing before the S.
Comm. on Commerce, Science, and Transp., 117th Cong. (Jan. 21, 2021).
\2\ See Sen. Roll Call Vote No. 11 (Feb. 2, 2021) (on the
Nomination of Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg, of Indiana, to be Sec'y
of Transp.; confirmed 86 yeas to 13 nays), available at https://
www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1171/
vote_117_1_00011.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. FY 2025 BUDGET REQUEST
The President's FY 2025 Budget requests $109.3 billion for
DOT, an increase of $1.7 billion, or 1.6 percent, compared to
FY 2024 enacted levels.\3\ In addition, DOT will receive $36.8
billion in advance supplemental funding from the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (P.L. 117-58), bringing DOT's
total FY 2025 budgetary resources to $146.2 billion.\4\ Of the
requested funding, the President's Budget proposes $21.8
billion for FAA, $62.8 billion for FHWA, $16.8 billion for FTA,
$3.2 billion for FRA, $1.3 billion for NHTSA, $965 million for
FMCSA, $860 million for MARAD, $401 million for PHMSA, $41
million for the GLS, $1.1 billion for OST, and $122 million for
the OIG.\5\ DOT's budget largely supports contract authority
programs funded from the Highway Trust Fund and Airport and
Airway Trust Fund, competitive grants, operations, and other
modal administration spending.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ DOT, FY 2025 Budget Highlights, (Mar. 11, 2024), available at
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-03/
DOT_Budget_Highlights_FY_2025_
508.pdf.
\4\ Id.
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. ANALYSIS OF SELECT DOT POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
IIJA
On November 15, 2021, the President signed IIJA into law,
representing the largest Federal investment in decades in the
United States' infrastructure.\6\ This legislation authorized
and appropriated a combined $1.2 trillion for infrastructure
programs over the five-year period from FY 2022 to FY 2026, to
sustain and modernize the Nation's infrastructure, including
roads, bridges, transit, railroads, ports, and airports, as
well as energy and broadband.\7\ Of the total funding
authorized and appropriated in IIJA, approximately $661 billion
is administered by DOT, for FY 2022 through FY 2026.\8\ This is
more than twice the amount of funds authorized in the previous
five-year authorization law.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, (2021), 135 Stat. 429 [hereinafter
IIJA].
\7\ FHWA, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, available at https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/ (last updated Mar. 20,
2023).
\8\ See DOT, IIJA, Authorized Funding FY 2022 to FY 2026, available
at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/
DOT_Infrastructure_Investment_and_
Jobs_Act_Authorization_Table_%28IIJA%29.pdf (Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure calculation).
\9\ Dep't of Transp., Off. of Inspector Gen., DOT Should Enhance
Its Fraud Risk Assessment Processes gor IJJA-Funded Surface Transp.
Programs, Rep. St2023023, (June 20, 2023) available at https://
www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/
DOT%20Fraud%20Risk%20Assessment_Final%20Report_06-20-23.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since IIJA's enactment, as of June 2, 2024, DOT has
announced $318 billion in IIJA formula funding and grant awards
to states, local governments, transit agencies, airports,
ports, and other project sponsors.\10\ FHWA has distributed
approximately $164.6 billion under the Federal-aid Highways
program and has announced another $29 billion in Highway
Infrastructure Programs grants.\11\ Analysis of FHWA data by
the American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA)
indicates that states have committed to use these formula funds
to support over 70,200 new projects, through March 31,
2024.\12\ Additionally, FTA has distributed approximately $43.1
billion in Transit Formula Grants funding and has announced
another $18.9 billion in transit grants. FRA has announced
nearly $36 billion in grants, FAA has announced $11.6 billion
in airport funding, and OST has announced approximately $9.5
billion in grants for various programs.\13\ See Appendix I for
additional information on budgetary resources by modal agency
provided by DOT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ DOT, Investment in Infrastructure and Jobs Act--Financial
Summary as of June 2, 2024, (June 18, 2024, 12:28 p.m.), (on file with
Comm.) [hereinafter IIJA Funding Table].
\11\ Id.
\12\ ARTBA, Highway Dashboard--IIJA, (last visited June 17, 2024),
available at https://www.artba.org/market-intelligence/highway-
dashboard-iija/.
\13\ IIJA Funding Table, supra note 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During a March 7, 2024, Full Committee hearing, the
Committee received testimony indicating that there have been
significant delays in the execution of grant agreements after
grants have been announced. Any increase in project costs prior
to grant agreement execution are absorbed by states,
localities, and other grant recipients.\14\ Additionally, some
witnesses suggested reforms to the grant making process,
including that DOT should provide greater consistency and
transparency in its processes for soliciting and awarding
grants.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Department of Transportation Discretionary Grants: Stakeholder
Perspectives: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure, 118th Cong. (Mar. 7, 2024) (statement of Jared W.
Perdue, P.E., Sec'y, Florida Dep't of Transp.).
\15\ Id. (statement of Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line
and Regional Railroad Ass'n).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA REAUTHORIZATION
On May 15, 2024, the House passed H.R. 3935, the Federal
Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 2024, by a vote
of 387 to 26.\16\ The bill was signed into law the following
day.\17\ This legislation provides critical aviation safety
enhancements, improves the flying public's travel experience,
ensures a robust general aviation sector, expands opportunities
for America's aviation workforce to grow, invests in
infrastructure at airports of all sizes, and sets clear
priorities for advancing the integration of new airspace
entrants.\18\ DOT and FAA are now largely responsible for
ensuring provisions of the law are effectively implemented in a
timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ H.R. 3935, 118th Cong., Roll Call Vote no. 200.
\17\ The Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of
2024, Pub. L. No. 118-63.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SELECT ONGOING NATIONAL SAFETY TRANSPORTATION BOARD (NTSB)
INVESTIGATIONS
FRANCIS SCOTT KEY BRIDGE
On March 26, 2024, the DALI, a Singapore-flagged cargo
vessel, collided with the Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland,
resulting in the collapse of center spans of the Key Bridge
into the Patapsco River and significant damage to the
vessel.\19\ Prior to the collision, the pilot aboard the vessel
issued a radio call that the DALI had lost power as it
approached the Key Bridge.\20\ In response, a Maryland
Transportation Authority (MDTA) police officer radioed two
police officers on either side of the Key Bridge, resulting in
the closure of all lanes with access to the Key Bridge and the
cessation of bridge traffic, saving countless lives.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ NTSB, Contact of Cargo Vessel Dali with Francis Scott Key
Bridge and Subsequent Bridge Collapse, (last visited May 2, 2024),
available at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA24MM031.aspx
[hereinafter NTSB Investigation Announcement].
\20\ @NTSB_Newsroom, Twitter, (Mar. 27, 2024, 9:14 PM), available
at https://twitter.com/NTSB_Newsroom/status/1773156557045276972/photo/
1.
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Within the Committee's jurisdiction, the initial Federal
response involved the United States Coast Guard, the National
Transportation Safety Board, the United States Army Corps of
Engineers, and FHWA. FHWA's actions fall under DOT's purview.
On March 28, 2024, FHWA received and approved an
application from the Maryland Department of Transportation
(MDOT) for $60 million in Emergency Relief (ER) funding.\22\
These ``quick release'' funds are intended to help with initial
emergency response and repair costs and may be released prior
to completion of detailed damage inspections and cost
estimates.\23\ According to FHWA, the $60 million represents
approximately five percent of the preliminary estimated project
cost of $1.2 billion.\24\ The Maryland Transportation Authority
(MDTA) has reportedly said the rebuild will cost between $1.7
billion and $1.9 billion, and the target for completion is fall
2028.\25\ MDTA released a request for proposals (RFP) for
design-build proposals for the rebuild project on May 31,
2024.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ FHWA, Biden-Harris Administration Announces $60 million for
Emergency Work in Wake of the Collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge
in Baltimore, (Mar. 28, 2024), available at https://highways.dot.gov/
newsroom/biden-harris-administration-announces-60-million-emergency-
work-wake-collapse-francis.
\23\ Id.
\24\ Email from FHWA to Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure, (Mar. 28, 2024, 4:32 p.m.), (on file with Comm.)
[hereinafter FHWA Mar. 28 Email].
\25\ Michael Laris and Erin Cox, Rebuilding Baltimore's Key Bridge
expected to cost up to $1.9 billion, Wash. Post, (May 2, 2024)
available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/05/02/
baltimore-key-bridge-rebuilding-cost/.
\26\ Press Release, MDTA, MDTA Invites Proposals for the Rebuilding
of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, (May 31, 2024), available at https://
www.keybridgerebuild.com/images/press_release/
Key_Rebuild_RFP_2024_5_31.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ER program receives funding from a permanent annual
authorization of $100 million in contract authority from the
Highway Trust Fund (HTF) and periodic supplemental
appropriations from the General Fund.\27\ From FY 1990 to FY
2023, Congress provided nearly $23 billion in supplemental
appropriations from the General Fund and HTF for the ER
program, in addition to the $100 million annual authorization
from the HTF.\28\ All supplemental appropriations have been
derived from the General Fund since FY 2005.\29\ IIJA amended
the period from 180 to 270 days after a disaster, during which
the Federal cost share would be provided at 100 percent for
``eligible emergency repairs to minimize damage, protect
facilities, or restore essential traffic.'' \30\ After that,
the Federal cost share payable is 90 percent or 80 percent,
depending on the classification of the project or total project
cost.\31\ For example, the Federal cost share for projects on
the Interstate System is 90 percent and is generally 80 percent
for other highways.\32\ Additionally, current law allows a 90
percent cost share for eligible repairs ``if the eligible
expenses incurred by the State due to natural disasters or
catastrophic failures in a Federal fiscal year exceeds the
annual apportionment of the State.'' \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See 23 U.S.C. Sec. 125.
\28\ FHWA March 28 Email, supra note 23.
\29\ Id.
\30\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429; see also 23 U.S.C.
Sec. 120(e).
\31\ Id.
\32\ Id.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite being located on Interstate 695, at the time of the
collapse the Key Bridge was not part of the Interstate Highway
System. While the bridge was shielded as I-695, it was part of
a larger segment that comprises Maryland State Route 695, which
includes sections not on the Interstate Highway system,
including the Key Bridge.\34\ According to FHWA, prior to its
collapse, the facility never received any Federal funding.\35\
The Key Bridge was historically a toll facility, but because it
did not receive Federal funds, it was never required to comply
with Federal requirements, including tolling requirements.
However, upon MDOT's receipt of ER funding, the facility was
considered ``Federalized,'' and became subject to all Title 23,
United States Code, requirements going forward.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ John Lloyd, Maryland.gov, MDOT SHA Roadway National Highway
System, (see segments), available at https://data-
maryland.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/maryland::mdot-sha-roadway-
national-highway-system-nhs/explore?location=39.209822%2C-
76.584433%2C12.00.
\35\ Email from FHWA to Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure, (Mar. 26, 2024, 3:49 p.m.), (on file with Comm.).
\36\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 19, 2024, MDOT submitted an application to
designate an 18.8-mile segment of MD-695, which includes the
Francis Scott Key Bridge, as part of the Interstate System, and
FHWA approved the application on April 29, 2024.\37\ The
Federal share for permanent repairs for this event under the ER
program under current law is 90 percent.\38\ On FHWA's most
recent report estimating unmet needs of the ER program, which
shows estimated remaining payments from the Federal Government
to a state for an event, not the total cost of each event, the
state of Maryland estimates the current Federal share of the
rebuild as of May 13, 2024, is $1.5 billion.\39\ Information
provided by FHWA indicates that the assessment for the Key
Bridge is still ongoing. FHWA's most recent report indicates
that there is a total unmet need for the ER program of $4.4
billion, with $886 million in available ER funding. This means
there is an estimated $3.5 billion ``backlog'' (ER funding
available minus unmet needs) in the ER program.\40\ However,
because ER is a reimbursable program the Federal Government
does not provide a state with lump sum payment, but rather a
state receives payment after making repairs and submitting
vouchers to FHWA for reimbursement of the Federal share.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Letter from Paul J. Wiedefeld, Sec'y, MDOT, to Ms. Valeriya
Remezova, Maryland Division Administrator, FHWA, (Apr. 19, 2024) (on
file with Comm.); Letter from the Hon. Shailen P. Bhatt, Administrator,
FHWA to Paul J. Wiedefeld, Sec'y, MDOT, (Apr. 29, 2024) (on file with
Comm.).
\38\ Email from FHWA to Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. and
Infrastructure, (May 20, 2024, 11:05 a.m.), (on file with Comm.).
\39\ Id.
\40\ Id.
\41\ FHWA, Emergency Relief (ER) and Program Administration: Steps
for Receiving Reimbursement of ER Expenses, (last visited May 2, 2024),
available at https://highways.dot.gov/fed-aid-essentials/videos/other-
programs/emergency-relief-er-and-program-administration-steps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCIDENT IN EAST PALESTINE, OHIO
On February 3, 2023, a Norfolk Southern Railway (NS)
freight train derailed 38 railcars in East Palestine, Ohio.\42\
The NTSB has been investigating the probable cause of the
derailment.\43\ The NTSB's preliminary report stated that 11 of
the 38 derailed tank cars carried hazardous materials. Fires
from these cars then damaged an additional 12 non-derailed
railcars. First responders implemented a one-mile evacuation
zone surrounding the derailment site that affected up to 2,000
residents.\44\ NTSB will hold its final board meeting on the
East Palestine derailment on June 25, 2024.\45\ During the
public meeting, NTSB board members will vote on the final
report, including probable cause and safety
recommendations.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ NTSB, Norfolk Southern Railway Train Derailment with
Subsequent Hazardous Material Release and Fires, (Feb. 3, 2024),
available at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/
RRD23MR005%20East%20Palestine%20OH%20Prelim.pdf.
\43\ NTSB, Norfolk Southern Railway Train Derailment with
Subsequent Hazardous Material Release and Fires, (last visited June 20,
2024), available at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/
RRD23MR005.aspx.
\44\ Id.
\45\ NTSB, NTSB Board Meeting on East Palestine, Ohio, Train
Derailment Set for June 25, (Feb. 7, 2024), available at https://
www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20240206.aspx.
\46\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. WITNESS
LThe Honorable Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, United
States Department of Transportation
APPENDIX I
[The additional information on budgetary resources by modal
agency provided by DOT is retained in committee files and is
available online at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/PW00/
20240627/117172/HHRG-118-PW00-20240627-SD003.pdf]
OVERSIGHT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
AND FISCAL YEAR 2025 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 27, 2024
House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m. in room
2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Sam Graves (Chairman
of the committee) presiding.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. The Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure will come to order.
I would ask unanimous consent that the chairman be
authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's
hearing.
And without objection, that is so ordered.
As a reminder, if Members insert a document into the
record, please also email it to [email protected].
At this point, I now recognize myself for the purposes of
an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SAM GRAVES OF MISSOURI, CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Graves of Missouri. I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary,
for being here today to discuss the Department of
Transportation's policies, programs, and fiscal year 2025
budget request.
Last month, the House approved the FAA Reauthorization Act
of 2024 by a very strong, bipartisan vote of 387 to 26, and the
President signed it into law the following day. This
legislation provides some critical aviation safety
enhancements. It improves the flying public's travel
experience, ensures a robust general aviation sector, and
expands opportunities for America's aviation workforce to grow.
It invests in infrastructure at airports of all sizes, and sets
some clear priorities for advancing integration of new airspace
entrants.
Congress gave the Federal Aviation Administration strong
and decisive direction to help ensure America's aviation system
maintains its gold standard, and I look forward to working with
you, Mr. Secretary, and the FAA to ensure that this law is
implemented in a timely and effective manner.
Now that the committee has completed its work on FAA
reauthorization and has passed legislation out of committee to
authorize the Coast Guard, reauthorize our Nation's pipeline
safety programs, and a WRDA bill, we must begin to contemplate
the next surface transportation bill.
We are more than halfway through the current authorization
of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which authorized
and appropriated nearly $661 billion for the Department of
Transportation, and I remain concerned about the slow pace at
which the Department is distributing IIJA funds. Despite having
received more than $364 billion since IIJA's enactment, DOT has
obligated a little more than half and outlaid only 27 percent
of the available funds.
We are not seeing the realization of project benefits that
were advertised following IIJA's enactment. Earlier this year,
we heard from witnesses who testified that delays in
distributing IIJA grant funds has caused costs to balloon,
ultimately forcing grant recipients to absorb the increased
costs or, unfortunately, in some cases, abandon the project
entirely.
We also, I think, have to consider ways to pay for those
infrastructure investments, which includes addressing--and we
are going to have to address--the Highway Trust Fund's funding
challenges. The Congressional Budget Office most recently
projected that the Highway Trust Fund is going to become
insolvent in fiscal year 2028, and is going to face a
cumulative shortfall of about $274 billion over the next
decade.
I think we must maintain the user pays principle, and find
some solutions for putting the Highway Trust Fund on a more
sustainable fiscal path. The Department could do its part by
more aggressively implementing the alternative funding pilot
program, which is currently way behind schedule.
But with that, I again very much want to thank you, Mr.
Secretary, for being here today, and I look forward to a very
productive hearing.
[Mr. Graves of Missouri's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves of Missouri, Chairman, Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Secretary Buttigieg, for being here today to discuss the
Department of Transportation's policies, programs, and fiscal year 2025
budget request.
Last month, the House approved the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
by a strong, bipartisan vote of 387-26, and the President signed the
bill into law the following day. This legislation provides critical
aviation safety enhancements, improves the flying public's travel
experience, ensures a robust general aviation sector, expands
opportunities for America's aviation workforce to grow, invests in
infrastructure at airports of all sizes, and sets clear priorities for
advancing the integration of new airspace entrants.
Congress gave the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) strong and
decisive direction to help ensure America's aviation system maintains
its gold standard, and I look forward to working with you, Secretary
Buttigieg, and the FAA to ensure this law is implemented in a timely
and effective manner. Now that the Committee has completed its work on
an FAA reauthorization, and has passed legislation out of Committee to
authorize the Coast Guard, reauthorize our nation's pipeline safety
programs, and a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), we must begin
to contemplate the next surface transportation bill.
We are more than halfway through the current authorization--the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which authorized and
appropriated nearly $661 billion for the Department of Transportation.
I remain concerned about the slow pace at which the Department is
distributing IIJA funds. Despite having received more than $364 billion
since IIJA's enactment, DOT has obligated a little more than half and
outlaid only 27 percent of available funds.
We're not seeing the realization of project benefits that were
advertised following IIJA's enactment. Earlier this year, we heard from
witnesses who testified that delays in distributing IIJA grant funding
has caused project costs to balloon, ultimately forcing grant
recipients to absorb the increased costs or abandon the project
entirely.
We must also consider ways to pay for our infrastructure
investments, including addressing the Highway Trust Fund's funding
challenges. The Congressional Budget Office's most recent budget
projections indicate that the Highway Trust Fund will become insolvent
in fiscal year 2028 and will face a cumulative shortfall of $274
billion in the next decade.
We must maintain the ``user pays'' principle and offer solutions
for putting the Highway Trust Fund on a more sustainable fiscal path.
The Department could help do its part by more aggressively implementing
the alternative funding pilot program which is currently way behind
schedule.
With that, I again want to thank the Secretary for being with us
today and I look forward to a productive hearing.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. And now I want to recognize Ranking
Member Larsen for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING
MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Graves, for
holding this hearing.
And welcome back, Mr. Secretary, to answer questions and
give us an update on DOT's progress, as well as your budget. We
have a large committee; we appreciate your time.
Today, we are going to hear about how Federal funds
provided by Congress and distributed by the DOT--how those
funds are building a cleaner and greener, safer, and more
accessible transportation system. The BIL provides record
funding for these infrastructure projects. States and local
governments, Tribes, transit agencies, rail, airports, ports,
travelers, and workers all benefit from this investment. Thanks
to the BIL, 57,000 projects are underway in every congressional
district across the country.
The pace of grantmaking has been impressive. DOT has
announced $318 billion in grants since the enactment of the
BIL, and the list is in the staff memo, I won't go through it
all, but there are a lot of dollars out there being spent right
now, creating jobs.
We are less than 3 years through a 5-year bill, which means
there is more to come. And just this week, the Department
announced over $1.8 billion in Rebuilding American
Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity, or RAISE, grants
for 148 projects across the country, including the Port of
Bellingham, to modernize its shipping terminal in my district,
and to the Tulalip Tribes to improve road safety on and near
their reservation. And this week, DOT is also announcing the
availability of the remainder of BIL culvert grant program
funds, which my home State of Washington will be watching with
great interest.
Federal investment in Washington State and across the
country means jobs--jobs with good wages, benefits, and working
conditions. And the impacts have been clear. In 2023, the
highway construction industry added 2,800 jobs per month--the
highest rate of job creation since the Bureau of Labor Stats
began tracking the data.
Congress directed investments in the BIL to reduce carbon
pollution and improve safety and equity outcomes to our
transportation system, as well, and I applaud the DOT's efforts
to implement these provisions to measure and reduce carbon
pollution from transportation resources and to improve highway
safety.
Yet transportation emissions continue to rise, and an
epidemic of fatalities and injuries continues to plague our
Nation's roads. Addressing these priorities will continue to be
a high priority for committee Democrats as we look forward to
the reauthorization.
On the FAA, as the chair noted, we passed a bill, had a
strong bipartisan vote in the House and in the Senate. The
legislation does a variety of things, including boosting
airport project funding, advancing our leadership in aviation
safety, and diversifying the aviation workforce. Provisions are
now in the hands of DOT and, of course, the FAA, and we are
eager to see the FAA turn these words into benefits for
communities and aviation workers.
Finally, I want to commend my fellow committee members,
including Representative Emilia Sykes and Representative Chris
Deluzio, who led the charge to improve railway safety. Rail
incidents and accidents continue to occur around the country,
endangering people and communities. In fact, in 2023, there
were approximately 1,500 train accidents. Just 2 days ago, the
NTSB released its findings from the Norfolk Southern derailment
in East Palestine and confirmed the urgent need to address rail
safety.
So, I urge this committee to take long overdue action on
rail safety so passengers and communities with rail in their
backyards have a level of safety oversight and protection
afforded to other modes of transportation.
We are going to hear a lot about many topics today, Mr.
Secretary, and we look forward to your answers. With that, I
will turn it back over to the chair, and we can get started on
your testimony and Member questions.
And with that, I yield back.
[Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen of Washington, Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chairman Graves, for holding this hearing.
And welcome back, Mr. Secretary, to answer questions and give us an
update on DOT's progress, as well as your budget. We are a large
Committee. We appreciate your time.
Today, we will hear how federal funds, provided by Congress and
distributed by DOT, are building cleaner, greener, safer and more
accessible transportation systems.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides record funding for these
infrastructure projects. States, local governments, Tribes, transit
agencies, railroads, airports, ports, travelers and workers all benefit
from this investment.
Thanks to the BIL, 57,000 projects are underway in every
Congressional district across the country.
The pace of grantmaking has been impressive. DOT has announced $318
billion in grants since enactment of the BIL. The list is in the staff
memo, so I won't go through it all, but there are a lot of dollars out
there right now being spent creating jobs.
We are less than three years through a five-year bill, which means
there is much more to come.
Just this week, the Department announced over $1.8 billion in
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity
(RAISE) grants for 148 projects across the country.
In my district, these funds will enable the Port of Bellingham to
modernize its shipping terminal and the Tulalip Tribes to improve
roadway safety on and near the reservation.
This week DOT also announced the availability of the remainder of
the BIL culvert grant program funds, which my home state of Washington
will be watching with interest.
Federal investment in Washington State and across the country means
jobs--jobs with good wages, benefits, and working conditions.
The impacts are clear. In 2023, the highway construction industry
added 2,800 jobs per month--the highest rate of job creation since the
Bureau of Labor Statistics began tracking this data.
Congress directed investments in the BIL to reduce carbon pollution
and improve safety and equity outcomes on our transportation systems,
as well.
I applaud DOT's efforts to implement these BIL provisions, to
measure and reduce carbon pollution from transportation sources, and to
improve highway safety.
Yet transportation emissions continue to rise, and an epidemic of
fatalities and injuries continues to plague our nation's roads.
Addressing these priorities will continue to be a high priority for
Committee Democrats as we look forward to the surface reauthorization
next Congress.
On the FAA, as the Chair noted, we passed a bill with a strong,
bipartisan vote in the House and in the Senate.
This Committee also led the way to enact the robust bipartisan FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024.
This legislation does a variety of things including boosting
airport project funding, advancing our leadership in aviation safety
and aerospace innovation and diversifying the aviation workforce. The
provisions are now in the hands of the DOT, and of course the FAA, and
we are eager to see the FAA turn these words into benefits for
communities and aviation workers.
Finally, I want to commend my fellow Committee Members, including
Rep. Emilia Sykes and Rep. Chris Deluzio, who have led the charge to
improve rail safety.
Rail incidents and accidents continue to occur around the country,
endangering people and communities. In 2023, there were approximately
1,500 train accidents.
Just two days ago, the NTSB released its findings from the Norfolk
Southern derailment in East Palestine and confirmed the urgent need to
address rail safety.
I urge the Committee to take long overdue action on rail safety so
that passengers and communities with rail in their backyards have a
level of safety oversight and protection afforded to other modes of
transportation.
We're going to hear a lot about many topics today, Mr. Secretary,
and we look forward to your answers. With that, I'll turn it back over
to the Chair, and we can get started on your testimony and Member
questions. I yield back.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. All right. I would ask unanimous
consent that the witness' full statement be included in the
record.
And without objection, that is so ordered.
I would ask unanimous consent that the record of today's
hearing remain open until such time as the witness has provided
answers to any questions that may be submitted to him in
writing.
Without objection, that is so ordered.
I would also ask unanimous consent that the record remain
open for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members or our witness to be included in today's
hearing record.
And without objection, that is so ordered.
So, with that, Mr. Secretary, again, welcome to the
committee, and you have 5 minutes.
TESTIMONY OF HON. PETE BUTTIGIEG, SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you very much, Chairman Graves,
Ranking Member Larsen, and all members of the committee. I want
to thank you for the opportunity to testify today and for your
continued partnership.
Before I begin, I do want to take a moment to remember
Representative Donald Payne, Jr. He was a pleasure to work
with. As you know, he was a constant champion for more
accessible and resilient transportation, and we will miss him.
Just 3 years ago, I was making the case for the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law in front of this committee, and now we are
in the middle of an infrastructure decade unlike anything this
country has seen since the Eisenhower administration. I am
proud to report that we are now supporting over 50,000
transportation projects in all 50 States, DC, Puerto Rico, and
all U.S. Territories. Our country has chosen to end decades of
underinvestment, and I would like to share a few examples of
what this new level of investment in infrastructure means to
the American people and economy.
I will start by mentioning the Brent Spence Bridge between
Kentucky and Ohio, one of 9,400 bridge projects nationwide.
Anyone who has traveled along I-71 and I-75 knows this bridge
is a critical thoroughfare. It is also one of the worst
trucking bottlenecks in the country. Improvements have been
talked about for years, and this administration is finally
acting to make them happen. Just last month, the project
cleared its comprehensive environmental review, and the
construction that will upgrade the existing bridge and break
ground on a new companion bridge will start soon.
When it comes to rail, we are modernizing and upgrading our
freight and passenger rail systems to make them safer. Across
every region of the country, we are building new tunnels,
expanding routes, and upgrading tracks. Through the Railroad
Crossing Elimination Program, a first-of-its-kind initiative
created by President Biden's infrastructure package, we are
improving or eliminating over 400 railroad crossings. In
addition to addressing the inconvenience of waiting for a train
to pass, these projects are creating safer crossings for
drivers and pedestrians.
We are also using our authority to make our freight rail
system safer. Earlier this year, we issued final rules to
require emergency escape breathing apparatus for trains
carrying hazardous materials and to establish minimum safety
requirements for traincrew size. We have conducted 7,500
focused inspections along high-hazard flammable train routes,
issued safety advisories, and developed a new rule to require
railroads to provide real-time information to first responders
when a hazmat incident occurs.
Turning to aviation, airports of all sizes are undergoing
major upgrades to meet the increasing number of people flying.
I have seen some of this work firsthand in recent months. I was
in Georgia in April to celebrate a construction milestone for
the new Terminal D at the Atlanta airport--done without major
service disruptions, which is important for the busiest airport
in the world.
In May, I got to see the work going on at Missoula Airport
in Montana, where they are updating an 80-plus-year-old
terminal to match current passenger capacity, and ultimately
offer more flights, recruit more airlines, and keep travel
costs down for passengers.
And under the leadership of FAA Administrator Mike
Whitaker, we have refocused the oversight of Boeing and will
continue to hold Boeing accountable as they carry out their
action plan and regain trust on safety and quality
improvements.
A little over 2 weeks ago, I joined leaders in Maryland to
mark the reopening of the Port of Baltimore. After the shocking
collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in late March, we
quickly released emergency funding to put toward rebuilding the
bridge. We have worked closely with county, local, and State
governments, as well as other partners to help mitigate the
impact on our supply chains while that critical port was
temporarily closed. And now, less than 100 days later, the Port
of Baltimore is once again open and fully operational.
Put simply, there is a lot of important work going on right
now making communities more accessible, creating good-paying
jobs across the country, and keeping our supply chains strong.
And our work has helped lower the number of traffic fatalities
on our roads for the past eight quarters, and continues to make
all of our transportation systems safer for everyone who uses
them.
There is much more to be done, and we need the continued
partnership of this committee and of the Congress to fully
realize the potential of this new infrastructure era.
I want to thank this committee for getting the FAA
reauthorization passed and to President Biden's desk. Thanks to
your bipartisan leadership, the FAA has vital resources that
will further modernize our aviation infrastructure and keep our
aviation system as the safest and most efficient in the world.
I am also pleased that this law protects the automatic
refunds rule, and supports other consumer protection work this
Department has fought so hard for, like getting rid of fees
that parents have had to pay to sit next to their young
children on a flight.
Yet this country needs similar bipartisan leadership when
it comes to rail safety. As I mentioned, the Department is
doing everything possible under our existing authority to
upgrade and modernize our rail infrastructure and make our
operations safer. We need to set even higher standards, and we
need Congress to pass the Railway Safety Act to make tracks,
cars, and working conditions safer for those who work on
freight rail, and to protect those who live in nearby
communities. And I know we can get it done, because the last
3\1/2\ years have been a testament to what is possible when our
Department works closely with this committee. With your
partnership, we can keep this momentum going, deliver good
projects for more communities, build and rebuild our
transportation systems to meet the 21st- and even 22nd-century
needs of Americans.
Thank you again, and I look forward to your questions.
[Secretary Buttigieg's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation,
U.S. Department of Transportation
Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, and all the Members of this
Committee: thank you for the opportunity to testify today--and for your
continued partnership.
Before I begin, I want to take a moment to remember Representative
Donald Payne, Jr. He was a pleasure to work with, and a constant
champion for more accessible and resilient transportation. He will be
greatly missed.
Just three short years ago, I was making the case for the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in front of this committee. Now we're in
the middle of an infrastructure decade unlike anything this country has
seen since the Eisenhower Administration. I'm proud to report that we
are now supporting more than 50,000 transportation projects in all 50
states, D.C., Puerto Rico and all U.S. territories.
Our country has chosen to end decades of underinvestment. And I
would like to share a few examples of what this new level of investment
in infrastructure means to the American people and economy.
I'll start with the Brent Spence Bridge between Kentucky and Ohio,
one of the 9,400 bridge projects nationwide. Anyone who's traveled
along I-71 and I-75 knows this bridge is a critical thoroughfare--it's
also one of the worst trucking bottlenecks in the country. Improvements
have been talked about for years, and this Administration is finally
making them happen. Just last month, the project cleared its
comprehensive environmental review and the construction that will
upgrade the existing bridge and break ground on a new, companion bridge
will start soon.
When it comes to rail, we're modernizing and upgrading our freight
and passenger rail systems to make them safer. Across every region of
this country, we're building new tunnels, expanding routes, and
upgrading tracks. Through the Railroad Crossing Elimination program--a
first-of-its-kind initiative created by President Biden's
infrastructure package--we're improving or eliminating over 400
railroad crossings. In addition to cutting the inconvenience of waiting
for a train to pass, these projects are creating safer crossing options
for drivers and pedestrians.
We're also using our authority to make our freight rail system
safer. Earlier this year we issued final rules to require emergency
escape breathing apparatuses for trains carrying hazardous materials,
and to establish minimum safety requirements for train crew size. We
have conducted 7,500 focused inspections along high-hazard flammable
train routes, issued safety advisories, and developed a new rule to
require railroads to provide real-time information to first responders
when a hazmat incident occurs.
Turning to aviation, airports of all sizes are undergoing major
upgrades to meet the increasing number of people flying. I've seen some
of this work first-hand in recent months. I was in Georgia in April to
celebrate a construction milestone for the new Terminal D at the
Atlanta Airport--done without major service disruptions, which is big
when you're the busiest airport in the world. In May, I got to see the
work going on at Missoula Airport in Montana, where they're updating an
80+ year old terminal to match current passenger capacity--and
ultimately offer more flights, recruit more airlines, and keep travel
costs down for passengers. And under the leadership of FAA
Administrator Mike Whitaker, we have refocused the oversight of
Boeing--and we will continue to hold Boeing accountable as they carry
out their action plan and regain trust on safety and quality
improvements.
A little over two weeks ago, I joined leaders in Maryland to
celebrate the reopening of the Port of Baltimore. After the shocking
collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in late March, we quickly
released emergency funding to put toward rebuilding the bridge. We
worked closely with county, local, and state governments, as well as
other partners, to help mitigate the impact on our supply chains while
this critical port was temporarily closed. And now, less than 100 days
later, the Port of Baltimore is once again fully open and fully
operational.
Put simply: there's a lot of important work going on right now. Our
work is making our communities more accessible. Our work is creating
good-paying jobs all across the country and keeping our supply chains
strong. And our work has helped lower the number of traffic fatalities
on our roads for the past two years and continues to make all of our
transportation systems safer for everyone who uses them.
There is much more to be done and we need the continued partnership
of this Committee and the Congress to fully realize the potential of
this new infrastructure era.
I want to thank this Committee for getting the FAA Reauthorization
passed and to President Biden's desk. Thanks to your bipartisan
leadership, the FAA has critical resources that will further modernize
our aviation infrastructure and keep our aviation system the safest and
most efficient in the world. I'm also pleased that this law protects
the automatic refunds rule and supports other consumer protection work
this Department has fought so hard for, like getting rid of fees
parents have had to pay to sit next to their young children on a
flight.
Yet this country needs similar bipartisan leadership when it comes
to rail safety. As I mentioned, this Department is doing everything
possible under our existing authority to upgrade and modernize our rail
infrastructure and make operations safer.
But we need to set even higher standards, and we need Congress to
pass the Railway Safety Act to make tracks, cars, and working
conditions safer for those who work on freight rail--and to protect
those who live in the surrounding communities.
And I know we can get it done, because the last 3.5 years have been
a testament to what's possible when our Department works closely with
this Committee.
With your partnership, we can keep this momentum going, we can
deliver good projects for more communities, and we can build and
rebuild our transportation systems to meet the 21st, and even 22nd,
century needs of Americans.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Before we begin with Members' questions, I do want to flag
that we anticipate two vote series today. The first one is
starting at 10:30, and the Secretary has a hard stop. So, what
I am asking is: Let's be respectful of the Secretary's time,
and try to keep our questions to 5 minutes. Stay underneath our
rules.
So, with that, I am going to turn to Ranking Member Larsen
for opening questions.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for
coming today, I appreciate it.
There is a lot of math out there in terms of how much you
spent, how much hasn't been spent, what is going on. By my
math, we are about 52.8 percent of the way in terms of timeline
to September 30, 2026. Also by my math, the DOT has distributed
about 48.1 percent of the dollars. So, pretty close. Not exact,
but pretty close. Almost half and half.
Can you talk a little bit about some of the challenges you
have had getting dollars out the door and what you have done to
address those challenges so communities can benefit from the
dollars in the BIL?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, yes. As you noted, we are
more or less right in the middle of the 5-year life of this
authorization, and depending on how you measure, but by the
most basic measure of funds flowing out, we made roughly half
of the funding available.
As you know, our funding works typically on a reimbursement
basis, which means not only do we have to announce an award,
but there needs to be an agreement making clear that Federal
requirements have been met for that project, and the project
sponsor needs to undertake it, and then the dollars can be
fully outlaid after obligation. But we have been trying to work
within that to try to create flexibility where appropriate,
with tools like pre-award authority, so that work can begin if,
again, appropriate, and if the right checks and balances are
there. We want to make sure that process is never a barrier to
things getting done.
There are a lot of challenges along the way: the complexity
of the projects, supply chain and workforce challenges, given
the enormous volume of work that we are doing. And while the
overall number, from the best data that I can gather, the
overall number of projects delivered now is on par with what we
would have seen at this point in a previous administration.
We really want to accelerate and compress the timelines,
especially the time between an award announcement and a grant
agreement. We have stood up teams that I personally engage with
and do a great deal of work under the hood to try to speed up
those processes.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Are there specific actions that
you can outline for us that you have taken with regards to that
process?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, I would point to the Center of
Excellence that we have established on project delivery. We
brought some of the best talent and some of the best data that
we have to try to get that done. We have used steps like
programmatic approaches and sometimes combined NOFOs in order
to have less redtape and fewer steps associated with the same
number of projects.
We have also undertaken a new level of technical assistance
with our grant sponsors, because often it is the first time
that they have done a Federal grant of this magnitude,
especially the rural and Tribal communities that we have been
working with.
And so, through both structured programs like the Thriving
Communities Program and just our running capacity for technical
assistance, we are standing side by side with our project
sponsors. The instructions I have given to our team is, even if
the delay in some Federal process is coming from the State or
the county or the city not yet being ready with something, we
should take ownership of that and we should take responsibility
for that and not just say, it is your problem, you fix it. We
are going to be side by side with you, helping you navigate
these processes, even while we are working to make them simpler
on the front end, which begins just with my quest to get NOFOs
below 100 pages, which was not the norm we inherited. But it is
just one small example of what we are trying to do to make this
a more user-friendly Federal grant process.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thanks. Moving to rail safety,
and now that the NTSB had their hearing Tuesday, the report is
out--I think we are being briefed tomorrow morning on the
report, if I am not mistaken, here on the committee--has the
Department looked at specific actions, legislative actions that
we need to take versus any regulatory actions that the
Department can take?
Secretary Buttigieg. We have undertaken a number of
regulatory actions, but, of course, are assessing the
recommendations that have been made public, even though they
haven't been formally transmitted yet to us as a Department, to
make sure that we are doing everything we can within our
existing regulatory authority to keep freight rail safe.
But the reality is, while we are going to keep doing
everything we can short of an act of Congress, it is going to
take an act of Congress to give us some of the tools that we
need. I would point to two things in particular that I think
are important that are contemplated in the bipartisan
legislation that has been put forward and that we urge this
committee and this Chamber to act on.
One has to do with increasing the statutory caps on fines
to put more teeth in our enforcement. Right now, they are
capped in the neighborhood of $220,000, which just isn't that
much to a multibillion-dollar corporation.
Another thing I would point to is the acceleration of the
adoption of DOT 117 tank cars, which the FAST Act set at 2029,
later than what the Department had planned on previous to that
congressional intervention. My understanding of the information
that has been made public by the NTSB is, if those tank cars
had been in use, what happened in East Palestine might not
have.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. All right, thank you.
I yield.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Mr. Crawford.
Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today. I want to
address something that we have talked about before, and that is
the Federal Highway Administration's proposed greenhouse gas
emissions performance measure to force State departments of
transportation and metropolitan planning organizations to cut
carbon emissions stemming from transportation on the National
Highway System.
You know that I have voiced my concerns about this in
opposition to this proposal, which demonstrably exceeds the
administration's authority. The policy was specifically
considered and disposed of during negotiation of the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The Federal Highway
Administration announced its final rule last November, despite
not having the authority to do so, and, as a result, 22 States
sued as part of 2 separate lawsuits. This spring, two Federal
courts found that the rule exceeds the Federal Highway's
statutory authority. Yet now we learn that you are going to
appeal that ruling.
Can you tell us why? Why are you squandering time and
resources to appeal a decision that has been adjudicated in
court?
And clearly, you had no authority to make that rule. So,
explain that, if you would.
Secretary Buttigieg. Sure. I am not going to comment on our
courtroom strategy. What I will say is that any----
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. I am not asking for that. I am
asking for the sense behind why you are challenging the ruling
when you clearly didn't have the authority.
Secretary Buttigieg. We don't believe that that is
accurate. And of course, we will comply with any and all
relevant court rulings. That is what we are doing in the
meantime.
Mr. Crawford. Let me ask you this. How much is this setting
you back? And by ``you,'' I mean the Department of
Transportation. And by ``Department of Transportation,'' I mean
the American taxpayer. How much is this costing?
Secretary Buttigieg. I haven't seen a costing in terms of
hours of work spent on this.
Mr. Crawford. That is a shame. You have got $661 billion to
the Department of Transportation in the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, $661 billion. And the things that we
should be focusing on, like for example, parking spaces for
truckdrivers----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I am glad you raised
that. As you probably know, we are building parking spaces for
truckdrivers----
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. I will get to that in a
minute, but instead of spending the money on parking spaces,
you are spending the money on appeals in the court system.
Secretary Buttigieg. The grant programs for parking spaces
don't come out of the same part of the budget as lawyers
working on appeals, Congressman.
Mr. Crawford. Do you really think it is a good allocation
of taxpayer resources to challenge a legal decision for which
you had no authority to make a rule on?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, anything we do----
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. You do?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. We think is a good
allocation of taxpayer resources, otherwise we wouldn't do it.
Mr. Crawford. Well, I guess the taxpayers probably feel
differently about it, because I hear about this all the time
from folks in my district that actually build the highways.
See, we are responsible for paying for the highways. You are
responsible for making sure they are getting done. But the
people who actually do the work, they have got a problem with
this.
Let me turn to another matter. Since I was first elected to
Congress, I have worked to improve the safety of our Nation's
roadways. The American public should remain confident that our
professional commercial motor vehicle drivers are operating
safely throughout the country. In 2011, I introduced the Safe
Roads Act, which was incorporated into MAP-21 and the creation
of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's national
Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse.
My Drug Free Commercial Driver Act, which was included in
the FAST Act, would allow hair testing for CMV drivers, which
is a much better way to ensure that habitual drug users are not
operating in safety critical roles. The Department of Health
and Human Services continues to fail to implement that
requirement, and I am going to continue to remind them to do
their job.
The Department of Justice just published a rulemaking
seeking to reclassify marijuana from a schedule I narcotic to
schedule III. Under current law, trucking and other safety
critical transportation workers are required to be tested for
certain drugs, including marijuana. Marijuana continues to be
the drug most frequently seen by CMV drivers in their testing
reported to FMCSA Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse. The
rescheduling and deregulation of marijuana will inevitably
cause the number of people driving impaired, while high, to
grow.
The American Trucking Associations has transmitted two
letters to your agency highlighting these concerns. I would ask
unanimous consent to submit those into the record.
[The information follows:]
Letter of May 15, 2024, to the Attorney General, U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, and U.S. Department of Transportation, from
Dan Horvath, Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Safety
Policy, American Trucking Associations, Submitted for the Record by
Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
May 15, 2024.
The Honorable Merrick Garland,
Office of the Attorney General,
U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Washington,
DC 20530.
The Honorable Xavier Becerra.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
200 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, DC 20201.
The Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E., Washington, DC 20590.
RE: Impact of Reported Marijuana Rescheduling on Public Safety and
Safety-Sensitive Industries
Dear Attorney General Garland, Secretary Becerra, and Secretary
Buttigieg:
On behalf of the American Trucking Associations (ATA), I write to
bring to your attention significant concerns about the reported
forthcoming regulatory action by the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration (DEA) to reschedule marijuana, or cannabis, from a
Schedule I to a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act
(CSA). Absent an explicit allowance for continued employer marijuana
testing of safety-sensitive workers, this change may have considerable
negative consequences for highway safety and safety-sensitive
industries.
While recent media reports surrounding DEA's potential
reclassification create many uncertainties, ATA is alarmed by the
possibility that certain industries could be prohibited from screening
for drug use by workers performing safety-sensitive roles. If the
trucking and broader transportation industries' ability to conduct drug
testing is restricted, the risk of impaired drivers operating on our
nation's roadways undetected would increase, endangering all who share
the road. As the largest national trade association representing the
interests of the trucking industry with more than 37,000 members, ATA
remains focused on maintaining workplace and roadway safety through
effective countermeasures like employer drug testing.
Recent news reports indicate DEA is seeking to reschedule marijuana
from its current Schedule I to a proposed Schedule III status as set
out by the CSA--effectively regrouping marijuana from the drug class
considered having the highest ``potential for abuse and the potential
to create severe psychological and/or physical dependence,'' alongside
drugs like heroin and LSD, to a category of drugs considered ``less
dangerous'' with low to moderate potential for abuse, such as ketamine
or codeine. Although this purported change would not outright legalize
marijuana at the federal level, it would largely deregulate marijuana
for medical use, create ambiguity and confusion around state-level
recreational marijuana legalization and use, and result in serious
safety impacts to safety-sensitive industries.
ATA recognizes that the implications of the policy change DEA is
reportedly considering cannot be fully understood in the absence of a
formal rule, and at this time, judgments on what and how this may occur
remain speculative. However, rescheduling marijuana could significantly
affect the Department of Transportation's (DOT) responsibility and
ability to ensure the safety of the national transportation network. As
outlined in 49 CFR Part 40, DOT is required to conduct workplace drug
and alcohol testing for federally regulated transportation industries.
DEA's potential regulatory action has serious ramifications because
it could altogether eliminate employers' ability to conduct and report
marijuana testing of DOT-designated ``safety-sensitive'' workers--
including commercial truck and bus drivers, pilots, train operators,
and other transportation workers--that are currently subject to DOT
drug and alcohol testing regulations. Current DOT drug and alcohol
testing requirements are governed--and therefore limited in their
testing authority--by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs, which
allow regulated employers to test only for those drugs listed in
Schedule I or II of the CSA.\1\ \2\ Therefore, without additional
action, deregulation or rescheduling of marijuana would have the likely
consequence of precluding testing for all professional drivers and
transportation workers as part of the DOT testing program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under current law, DOT must ``incorporate the Department of
Health and Human Services scientific and technical guidelines'' (i.e.,
the Mandatory Guidelines. 49 U.S.C. Sec. 31306(c)(2)) ``for
laboratories and testing procedures for controlled substances.'' See
also Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs,
88 Fed. Reg. 70,768, 70,780 (Oct. 12, 2023), which limits federally
mandated workplace drug testing authority to Schedule I and Schedule II
drugs.
\2\ 88 Fed. Reg. 70,768 (Oct. 12, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATA believes it is critical to the safety of our nation's traveling
public and all transportation industry members that any change in the
law must be accompanied by an explicit allowance for the testing of
marijuana use by DOT-regulated safety-sensitive groups. As of March
2024, marijuana represented around 60 percent of all positive employer
drug tests of regulated CMV drivers reported to the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) Drug and Alcohol
Clearinghouse.\3\ While ATA acknowledges the prevalence and increasing
societal acceptance of marijuana for medical and recreational purposes,
absent an impairment standard, testing for marijuana use by safety-
sensitive employees must remain in place. Just last year, the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released research showing that
marijuana and alcohol remain the most-detected drugs in impaired
driving crashes resulting in serious or fatal injuries.\4\ A separate
study published in the National Journal of Medicine revealed that
state-level marijuana legalization ``was associated with a 6.5%
increase in injury crash rates and a 2.3% increase in fatal crash
rates.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ FMCSA Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse February 2024 Monthly
Report, U.S. Department of Transportation. https://
clearinghouse.fmcsa.dot.gov/content/resources/Clearinghouse_
MonthlyReport_Feb2024.pdf.
\4\ National Transportation Safety Board, ``Alcohol, other drug,
and multiple drug use among drivers.'' https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/
safety-studies/Documents/SRR2202.pdf.
\5\ Charles M. Farmer, Samuel S. Monfort, and Amber N. Woods,
``Changes in Traffic Crash Rates after Legalization of Marijuana:
Results by Crash Severity,'' Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs
83, no. 4 (July 2022): 494-501, https://doi.org/10.15288/
jsad.2022.83.494.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last summer, a truck driver in Indiana fatally collided with a
series of vehicles, killing seven; the driver's toxicology report
ultimately showed marijuana in his system at the time of the crash.\6\
And just this year, in Buda, Texas, a cement truck driver who admitted
to ingesting marijuana the night prior--among other drugs in the
preceding hours--veered head-on into a school bus carrying pre-K
children, killing one child as well as the driver of another vehicle
and injuring nearly a dozen others.\7\ Rescheduling marijuana without
an explicit drug testing carveout for safety-sensitive workers could
ultimately lead to more devastating tragedies like these and add to the
ever-increasing death toll on our nation's roadways.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ ``Truck Driver Sentenced in Fatal Indiana Toll Road Crash for
Driving While on Marijuana,'' WVPE, September 5, 2023, https://
www.wvpe.org/wvpe-news/2023-09-05/truck-driver-sentenced-in-fatal-
indiana-toll-road-crash-for-driving-while-on-marijuana.
\7\ ``Texas school bus crash: Concrete truck driver admits to using
drugs before fatal crash, report says,'' Fox 4 KDFW, March 29, 2024,
https://www.fox4news.com/news/hays-cisd-bus-crash-jerry-hernandez-
cocaine-marijuana-use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, an accurate and reliable standard and test for determining
impairment--rather than intoxication--from marijuana consumption (like
the blood alcohol content measure used to detect alcohol impairment)
does not yet exist. While perceived intoxication may only last a few
hours, cognitive impairment from marijuana--impacting core motor
skills, coordination, perception, and peripheral vision that are
critical to safe, focused driving--has been found to last up to 24
hours in some instances.\8\ Thus, in the absence of an impairment
standard, it remains critically important that employers retain the
ability to test for marijuana use in safety-sensitive contexts like
trucking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Lauren Eadie et al., ``Duration of Neurocognitive Impairment
with Medical Cannabis Use: A Scoping Review,'' Frontiers in Psychiatry
12 (March 12, 2021), https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.638962.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we recognize the speculative nature of our concerns until the
DEA releases a formal rule, ATA believes that it is vitally important
that your agencies ensure an ongoing allowance for marijuana testing of
safety-sensitive workers to avoid deterioration of highway safety. If
this rulemaking is permitted to move forward without appropriate
regulatory review, oversight, and deliberation, ATA is concerned that
it will severely curtail the ability of motor carriers and other
employers of safety-sensitive positions to maintain a safe working
environment, threatening the safety of all road users.
Thank you for your consideration of an issue vital to safety and
for continuing to take steps toward reducing fatalities on our nation's
roadways. ATA welcomes the opportunity to answer any questions you may
have.
Sincerely,
Dan Horvath,
Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Safety Policy,
American Trucking Associations.
Letter of June 20, 2024, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, U.S. Department of
Transportation, from Dan Horvath, Senior Vice President, Regulatory
Affairs and Safety Policy, American Trucking Associations, Submitted
for the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
June 20, 2024.
The Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Ave. S.E., Washington, DC 20590.
Dear Secretary Buttigieg:
In light of the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) May 21st, 2024,
proposal to transfer marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug
under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), I write on behalf of the
American Trucking Associations (ATA) \1\ to request information
regarding whether the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) will
maintain the authority and means to conduct testing of marijuana use by
commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers and other safety-sensitive
transportation workers. As stressed in ATA's May 15th letter to DOJ,
DOT, and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), it is
critical for transportation safety that we maintain the scope and
scrutiny of testing that currently exists for individuals engaged in
safety-sensitive industries, including commercial trucking, bussing,
airlines, and rail. This is imperative given the current absence of a
proven impairment standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ATA is a united federation of motor carriers, state trucking
associations, and national trucking conferences created to promote and
protect the interests of the trucking industry, with more than 37,000
members. Directly and through its affiliated organizations, ATA
represents motor carriers in the United States encompassing every type
and class of motor carrier operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While ATA does not maintain a formal position on marijuana
legalization or the ongoing testing of non-safety sensitive employees
under HHS's Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs, we remain
concerned about the broad public health and safety consequences of
reclassification on the national highway system and its users. ATA
commends the DOT's focused efforts to combat drug- and alcohol-impaired
driving as part of its robust national roadway and transportation
system safety initiatives, specifically through effective programs like
its DOT Drug & Alcohol Testing Program and the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration's (FMCSA) Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse. Though
ATA understands that the process and content of DOJ's rulemaking falls
outside the purview of DOT, we believe DOT and ATA share the goals of
achieving zero highway fatalities and ensuring the commercial driving
workforce is qualified to safely operate on our nation's roadways.
Last year, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released
a study showing that marijuana and alcohol remain the most detected
drugs in impaired driving crashes resulting in serious or fatal
injuries.\2\ Similarly, researchers at the National Institute on
Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism found that, between 2000 and 2018, crash
deaths involving marijuana more than doubled, from 9% to 21.5%.\3\
Separate studies revealed that state-level marijuana legalization ``was
associated with a 6.5% increase in injury crash rates and a 2.3%
increase in fatal crash rates,'' \4\ while immediately following
Canada's 2018 legalization of marijuana, the country's emergency rooms
saw a 94% increase in the rate of marijuana-involved traffic
injuries.\5\ In light of such statistics, ATA is confident DOT shares
our urgency in preventing a dramatic increase in crashes and deaths
involving impaired driving.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Alcohol, Other Drug, and Multiple Drug Use among Drivers,''
The National Traffic Safety Board, January 12, 2023, https://
www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SRR2202.pdf.
\3\ Lira, Marlene C, et al. ``Trends in Cannabis Involvement and
Risk of Alcohol Involvement in Motor Vehicle Crash Fatalities in the
United States, 2000-2018,'' American Journal of Public Health, November
2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8630490/.
\4\ Farmer, Charles M, et al. ``Changes in Traffic Crash Rates
after Legalization of Marijuana: Results by Crash Severity,'' Journal
of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
35838426/.
\5\ Myran, Daniel T, et al., ``Cannabis-Involved Traffic Injury
Emergency Department Visits after Cannabis Legalization and
Commercialization,'' JAMA network open, September 5, 2023, https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10483310/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While ATA stresses the importance of continued marijuana testing
across all transportation modes, within the CMV industry alone,
marijuana continues to lead as the drug most frequently used by
drivers. As of May 2024, marijuana (D9-THCA) represented around 60
percent--150,647 total--of all positive employer drug tests of
regulated CMV drivers since the January 2020 implementation of the
FMCSA Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse. Given the ongoing prevalence of
marijuana use among commercial drivers and the preventability of
tragedies caused by marijuana-impaired driving, like those cited in our
May 15th, 2024 correspondence, ATA respectfully seeks additional
information on DOT's efforts to engage DOJ, HHS, and other federal
partners to ensure that any change in the law regarding the status and
legality of marijuana use is accompanied by an explicit allowance for
the testing of marijuana use by DOT-regulated safety-sensitive workers.
As you are aware, DOT is required by statute to rely on the HHS
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for
the certification of laboratories to carry out its DOT Drug and Alcohol
Testing Programs.\6\ ATA remains concerned about the ensuing impact
that rescheduling may have on HHS's laboratory certification process
and promulgation of testing procedures, specifically for marijuana.
While ATA recognizes that scientific and laboratory certification
processes intrinsic to employee drug testing fall outside DOT's scope,
we nevertheless urge you to work with HHS and relevant lawmakers to
ensure ongoing marijuana testing, guidance, and laboratory
certification for the DOT programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 31306(c)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The safety of our drivers and the motoring public is a chief
priority to ATA, and we again applaud the DOT's focus on drug- and
alcohol-impaired driving prevention and, more broadly, national
transportation system safety. Given the seemingly inevitable increase
in marijuana-impaired driving following a federal rescheduling, ATA is
committed to working with DOT and other stakeholders to prevent
marijuana-related crashes and fatalities.
Thank you for your consideration of this vital safety issue, and we
look forward to continued dialogue and partnership together in
addressing it.
Sincerely,
Dan Horvath,
Senior Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Safety Policy,
American Trucking Associations.
cc: The Honorable Polly Trottenberg, Deputy Secretary, U.S. Department
of Transportation
Sue Lawless, Acting Deputy Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration
Mr. Crawford. Mr. Secretary, I think it is safe to assume
that the number of all impaired drivers on our roadways would
increase with that ruling. Can you speak to what your
Department is doing to ensure that transportation workers in
safety-reliant positions can continue to be tested for
marijuana use if this proposal goes forward, and how your
Department plans to address transportation safety in light of
DOJ's rulemaking?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, yes. Any impaired driving,
be it alcohol, marijuana, or any other source of impairment is,
of course, a major safety concern.
Our understanding of the rescheduling of marijuana from
schedule I to schedule III is that it would not alter DOT's
marijuana testing requirements with respect to the regulated
community. For private individuals who are performing safety-
sensitive functions subject to drug testing, marijuana is
identified by name, not by reference to one of those classes.
So, even if it moves in its classification, we do not believe
that that would have a direct impact on that authority.
Likewise, I should mention for Federal employees, including
any DOT employees who have a security clearance or a safety-
sensitive position, we do not understand that to be changed--
any drug testing requirement relevant to that to be changed
based on the reclassification decision. But we are continuing
to evaluate any indirect impacts that it might have.
Mr. Crawford. Thanks. I yield back.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Congresswoman Napolitano.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Secretary Buttigieg, I reiterate the invitation for you to
visit the 31st Congressional District in California again.
But as you know, Los Angeles is preparing for the 2028
Olympics, representing the ninth time our Nation has hosted the
world's greatest sporting event. DOT is aware of the scale and
scope of games to be hosted by southern California in 2028.
What steps are you taking or do you envision taking to make
sure the mobility plan for the athletes, officials, and fans is
fully supported by DOT, sir?
Secretary Buttigieg. We are enthusiastic, of course, about
the Olympics coming to the United States. I have met with L.A.
28 leaders and leaders from the region. We want to make sure
that we are teaming up well with the Olympic Committee and the
city, everybody who is involved because, of course, one of the
most complex dimensions of running the Olympic Games is getting
people to where they need to be.
They have an ambitious vision for making newly borrowed
transit vehicles from around the country available. We are
working with them on that through our Federal Transit
Administration, and welcome opportunities to work with
Congress, too, to make sure the right resources are in place.
Mrs. Napolitano. Wonderful. I know that the last time the
Olympics were hosted in L.A., they talked about nighttime
driving of delivery trucks.
Secretary Buttigieg. I am sorry?
Mrs. Napolitano. Nighttime driving, the delivery trucks,
nighttime.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. Yes, we want to make sure that
that is available, as well. And we think the partnerships with
our Department and the technical assistance, including
experience gained from prior iterations, is going to be helpful
here.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
The BIL law, we approved funding and requirements for the
installation of protective shields in buses to prevent assault
on busdrivers. How has the provision been implemented?
And have there been obstacles to improving safety measures
for busdrivers from passengers? We hear they want more
protection now.
Secretary Buttigieg. We are very focused on making sure
that we support both transit worker safety and rider safety.
And in my discussions with operators and their representatives,
there is certainly an interest in the physical dimension of
that.
FTA has published a proposed general directive on actions
to mitigate the risk of assaults on transit workers. We have
also updated the National Public Transportation Safety Plan to
enhance the guidance on how to make sure that systems are
performing adequately and that we have some visibility on that.
We finalized a rule known as the PTASP, the Public
Transportation Agency Safety Plans regulation that has a number
of requirements, including performance targets, the advancement
of systems, as you mentioned, that can help protect riders and
workers, as well as things like de-escalation training, but
with a real focus on making sure that we protect workers and
riders. And we welcome further opportunities to do so,
partnering with this committee.
Mrs. Napolitano. Great, because we had a hearing here in
Washington years ago, and many of the drivers indicated they
were assaulted in various ways, and they want more protection.
Well, we passed some requirement, but is it enough? Has it been
enough? Are they requiring more now?
Secretary Buttigieg. I think it is safe to say that we have
raised the bar with the new rule. But part of what the rule is
doing is laying out standards or tools for the transit agencies
themselves to use.
So, we really need to maintain a partnership. We will keep
working to set not just a floor, but a set of best practices as
we can at the Federal level, but we really need to work agency
by agency, knowing that the needs are going to be different,
the conditions are going to be different. But the commitment is
absolutely the same, which is to make sure that anyone
operating one of these transit vehicles knows that they are
safe because they deserve a dignified as well as a safe
workplace. People count on them to get to where they are going;
they ought to be able to count on that basic level of safety.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much.
DOT recently provided an update to the Justice40
initiative. The Department has exceeded its goal of delivering
40 percent of the benefits of Federal investments to
disadvantaged communities. We applaud the agency for doing it,
ensuring the funds from BIL to communities that have been
historically neglected by the Federal Government. Can you
elaborate in 20 seconds or more the implementation?
How does the Department plan to build on the successes of
Justice40?
Secretary Buttigieg. To us, Justice40 is a way of keeping a
promise that the President has made that communities that were
overburdened and underserved, especially with regard to past
rounds of transportation investment, get their due. And that is
what led to that 40 percent commitment, that at least that many
of the investments going out to clean energy and transportation
would go to such communities.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, sir.
Secretary Buttigieg. Oh, are we out of time? OK.
Mrs. Napolitano. I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. I will be happy to share more in
writing.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I want to begin by giving credit where
credit is due. I want to thank you for visiting south-central
Pennsylvania, and providing some attention to that. And, of
course, you are probably aware, as you probably or likely
crossed the South Bridge across the Susquehanna River, we have
got a big construction project there, bipartisan support, and I
would just encourage your continued attention and support of
that.
I want to turn to the electric vehicle market, as you can
imagine. It seems to me that the industry is in a bit of a
tailspin, and the Government-funded EV bubble appears to be
deflating, even though we are subsidizing it to the tune of
billions of dollars. The fact of the matter is 98 percent of
all the cars on the road today are traditionally powered, 97
percent of the annual car purchases are traditionally powered.
I know you are likely to talk about the 7-percent share of
new car sales being EVs, but the truth of the matter is that it
belies the fact that three-quarters of those car sales are used
vehicles which aren't EVs. And the cost of those grows every
single day as EV costs go higher, driving the cost of
traditional vehicle sales higher.
The Energy Information Administration has found that the
U.S. share of electric vehicles dropped in Q1 of 2024, and the
context is tens of billions of dollars being showered down on
the industry, and still this is happening. We are literally
paying folks to produce the cars and sell the cars and buy the
cars. But the consumer sentiment continues to be moving away.
Now, according to McKinsey and Company, your former
employer, nearly half, 46 percent, of electric vehicle owners
are likely going back to traditional fuel vehicles. Consumer
Report found EVs to be associated with 79 percent more problems
than conventional vehicles. J.D. Power found customer
satisfaction declining across the board, especially regarding
level 2 charging, with roughly 20 percent of attempted charges
ending without success. I can't imagine going to the gas
station 20 percent of the time leaving empty. Cox Automotive
found that EV inventory is nearly twice that of the overall
market, and 3,500 car dealers, some of which visited me and I
represent, sent a letter begging you and the administration to
stop these mandates.
Now, recognizing that attempts to bribe the industry and
the public into EV adoption have literally failed at this
point--continued mandating CAFE standards, EPA tailpipe
standards that are de facto EV mandates, and ideological allies
in 12 States are seeking to ban the sale of non-EV cars--now,
we can talk about the proper role of Government. That would be
a great conversation, because I don't think that we have the
authority or should have the authority to limit what consumers
can buy in this regard or what they can own.
But clearly, Mr. Secretary, this isn't working. So, I am
wondering, is there some point--and if you have identified some
point--where you will stop, where the administration will stop,
where the Federal Government will stop this requirement, and
let the market decide, as opposed to the central planning model
and this dictatorial policy?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you. Given time is
limited, I will confine myself to addressing the factually
incorrect portions of what you have said, beginning with the
assertion that EV sales are going down. They are, in fact,
going up----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. Does that include the Government
sales, or----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Every single year----
Mr. Perry [continuing interruption]. Private sales?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Every single year----
Mr. Perry [continuing interruption]. Private sales or
Government----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. More Americans have
purchased EVs.
Mr. Perry [continuing interruption]. Sales, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Buttigieg. The entire market, overall----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. The Government is forced to buy
them, so, sales are going up. But private sector----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. No, private sales, too,
yes.
Mr. Perry. I would like those numbers.
Secretary Buttigieg. Sure, 1.2 million EVs were sold in the
U.S. in 2023.
Mr. Perry. How many Government and how many private?
Secretary Buttigieg. We will get you that breakout, but, as
you know, more private citizens buy EVs than Government
purchases.
Mr. Perry. No, I don't know that. I don't think----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Let me address the
second factual mistake in your remarks, which was that EV costs
are getting higher. They are in fact getting lower and,
according to J.D. Power, have now reached parity or are
slightly lower than----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. With or without subsidy----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. The equivalent gas-
powered car.
Mr. Perry [continuing interruption]. Mr. Secretary? With or
without----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. That does--yes, that
does include the subsidy. That is right. But the point is they
are going lower----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. But they are not, because we are
all buying----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Your statement that they
are going up is incorrect.
Mr. Perry. We are all paying for them.
Secretary Buttigieg. The third incorrect assertion you made
is that sales dropped in Q1. They did not drop compared to Q1
of the previous year. Of course, if you compare them to Q4,
they dropped because they always do, because car sales are
seasonal. But I would imagine most people are aware of that.
Mr. Perry. No, I am talking about----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. And fourth, I want to
address----
Mr. Perry [continuing]. In particular, EV Q4 to Q1, EV. Not
just overall car sales.
Secretary Buttigieg. Any car sales go down Q1 to Q4 because
more people buy cars in Q4. But what I am telling you is every
single year more Americans buy EVs than the year before. And
the word ``tailspin'' is just a bizarre word to use for a
growing sector of our economy.
We also think that, since that is the way that the market
is headed, we should not allow China to build on the advantage
that they developed during the Trump administration, not
because they are environmentalists, but because they understand
the economic power of trying to dominate the EV market. We want
those EVs to be made in America, and increasingly they are.
Mr. Perry. I am happy to have them made in America, Mr.
Secretary. What I am not happy about is the mandate. The
American people should be able to buy----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. That brings me to the
fourth and final thing----
Mr. Perry [continuing]. Any vehicle that they want.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. That I need
to challenge as being factually inaccurate, which is there is
no mandate. You can purchase a gas car if you want to pay gas
prices at the pump. But if you don't, you can purchase an EV
with our help.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. We are going to try to get one more
question in.
Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg, thank you for coming, Mr. Secretary. I
appreciate your coming and testifying, and it is always good to
see you and discuss America's needs and Memphis' needs, which
are America's needs, as you well know. Your Department and your
leadership have made tireless efforts and been instrumental in
advancing our infrastructure.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, we have had the
most significant investment in infrastructure in decades,
addressing critical needs in our roads, bridges, transit
systems, and more. I thank you and President Biden and those
that voted for this bill.
Several discretionary grant programs such as the Rebuilding
American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity
discretionary grant program, RAISE, important, just funded a
program, which I appreciate, in my district that completed the
Wolf River Greenway, a 26-mile pedestrian and bicycle path that
needed to be completed. And it is a great opportunity for
people to get exercise and get away from some communities and
get into better natural surroundings.
And we passed almost unanimously--not unanimously, but with
great bipartisan support--the FAA reauthorization. Those
improvements were needed yesterday, but we have got them now.
Let me ask you about the I-55 bridge. I know you have heard
from multiple stakeholders in my district about the bridge
investment program to replace the I-55 bridge. Only two bridges
cross the Mississippi River in Memphis, one of which you came
to Memphis to see, the I-40, when it was closed for several
months because of problems and basically caused by Arkansas not
inspecting it well, but now it is clear we need a new bridge.
This was built at a time when there were not--it was before the
Interstate Highway System, so, it didn't have any interstate
highway levels of protection and stats. And it was before we
had seismic vulnerabilities for older bridges.
The bridge investment program is very competitive, I
understand, but this is an important bridge for America. Can
you give me any idea of when the FHWA ratings will be shared
with applicants, and when funding might be announced?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. As you noted, I had an
opportunity to see for myself the critical importance of the I-
55 bridge, both for individuals and for America's supply
chains. And we are conscious that that bridge project has
approached the Department in the bridge investment program.
Right now, Federal Highway is going through its process
with a preliminary review and rating, and then a dialogue with
applicants that gives them an opportunity to supplement their
applications based on anything they have learned. We reached
out to Tennessee's DOT earlier this year to provide some of
that feedback and then continue that process.
I also want to note that any highly recommended or
recommended bridge project application that doesn't give an
award in the year when it comes in will be automatically
carried forward for consideration under the next fiscal year,
unless they opt out.
In terms of timing, we are working through it right now for
the 2023-2024 cycle, hoping to make a round of awards later on
this summer. And again, we are very conscious of the importance
of that particular opportunity for the community in the region.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Passenger rights has been an important part of my service
on this committee, and I know you have done a lot with it, and
I thank you for your recent rules on fee transparency and cash
refunds for flight cancellations. What do the implementation
timelines and enforcement of these rules look like?
Secretary Buttigieg. So, the rulemakings each have their
own clock, typically 6 months or less, to comply. Although I
will note that the refund provisions that were included in the
FAA reauthorization go into effect right away. And so, it is
simply a matter of us aligning the mechanisms to be able to do
so, which we are working to do promptly.
We are proud of our record on passenger protection. We know
there is always more work to do, as well. And so, we are
continuing rulemakings on topics like making sure that you
don't have to pay extra to sit next to your kid on a flight,
and looking into the issue of compensating passengers for
extreme delays, in addition to----
Mr. Cohen [interrupting]. Can you pay extra for not sitting
next to somebody else's kid?
[Laughter.]
Mr. Cohen. Let me ask you about the airplane seat sizes,
which is something I have worked on for many, many years,
trying to--they have gotten smaller and more crowded. There
were 26,000 comments about the discomfort of current seat
sizes. Given your recent efforts to improve the passenger
experience, nothing could be more important than a comfortable
seat. Can you assure us that seat width and pitch do not will
not get smaller?
Secretary Buttigieg. We continue to assess what our
authorities might be in this regard. I can certainly assure
you, as a frequent flier, that I have experienced the squeeze
you are describing. And, of course, in order for us to
undertake regulatory action, it would need to align with one of
our statutory authorities. FAA has looked into some of the
safety implications of that.
Mr. Cohen. Let me just ask you this. When they do the
study, they--last time they didn't have anybody over 60 or 65--
--
Secretary Buttigieg [interposing]. Yes.
Mr. Cohen [continuing]. And nobody under 18, nobody with a
disability, nobody with a dog. Can you make sure it looks like
the flying public? That was an absurd test they did.
Secretary Buttigieg. We are conscious of the limitations
under the study that was run before, and we will certainly hold
that in mind going into any future study or simulation.
Mr. Cohen. And my last--Safe Streets. Memphis was,
unfortunately, first in pedestrian deaths, and we need more
Safe Streets money. And we want to--I know you are dying to
ride the train from Memphis to Nashville to Atlanta, and I look
forward to doing it with you.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Secretary Buttigieg. Likewise, thank you.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. I knew the Cohen row of seats was
going to come up at some point in this hearing.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Graves of Missouri. With that, we do have a vote series
going on, and I apologize to you, Mr. Secretary, for this. They
obviously didn't consult us when it came to timing of the
votes.
But we will stand in recess until we finish, and hopefully
that will be sooner, rather than later.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. The committee stands in recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Westerman [presiding]. We are reconvening the
previously recessed hearing.
As a reminder, Members should limit their remarks to the
allotted 5 minutes. With that, I recognize myself for 5 minutes
of questions.
And Secretary Buttigieg, I am hearing from constituents
that they are concerned about a potential port strike across
the entire east and gulf coast ports if a contract agreement is
not reached by September 30. This will be devastating for
Arkansas businesses that rely on the ports to move their import
and exports to customers. We are 90 days out, and I have
learned that the negotiations have been called off. This is
alarming, and it is up to the Biden administration to bring the
parties back to the table to avert this economic catastrophe in
September. What are your plans to make sure a port strike
doesn't happen?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. Yes, this is something we
are monitoring closely, and our message to the parties is that
it is vital that they come together and arrive at a deal that
does right by port workers and allows port operations to flow.
We had a similar level of intense negotiations around the
west coast ports with ILWU. That came to a successful
conclusion. Our hope is that the same will take place with ILA,
and I am in frequent discussion with the acting Secretary of
Labor and other administration members on what we can do to
urge the parties----
Mr. Westerman [interrupting]. So, you are optimistic there
is not going to be a shutdown? Because people have to plan way
in advance for alternate routes and things. So----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Yes, yes, we can't
speak for the parties, but of course we are urging them to get
to a deal before that September 30 date.
Mr. Westerman. Good. So, earlier this year, the Federal
Highway Administration issued a proposed rule that would waive
Federal regulations governing the procurement and
administration of engineering and design services by local
governments. Now, I have heard serious concerns from
engineering companies about the potential impact of this
change, which could undermine the longstanding and successful
qualifications-based selection process that has been the
Federal standard for decades.
I appreciate the Department's interest in easing
administrative burdens on local governments that receive
Federal grants. But as a professional engineer--and I think
maybe the only one in Congress--I am concerned about the
potential drawbacks of this particular proposal. Studies have
shown that hiring most qualified engineering companies saves
time and money, and results in better projects and more
satisfied owners.
The QBS method also gives small and minority-owned firms an
even playing field to compete, based on their specific
proficiencies.
It is my understanding that more than 740 public comments
were filed in nearly unanimous opposition to the FHWA proposal.
Can you please ensure that the administration will carefully
consider the views of the engineering community and the
potential negative impact of the proposed rule on public safety
and project cost?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, I will take care to look into
that, and we want to make sure that anything we do that affects
the relationships with the engineering community is responsible
and conducive to good, effective, safe project delivery.
Mr. Westerman. And I want to shift gears a little bit and
talk about carbon emissions, carbon reductions. I know that is
something that you care about. And can you tell us what
percentage of the world's carbon emissions does the U.S.
produce?
Secretary Buttigieg. I think it is less than one-fifth,
depending on how you count it, of which the single biggest
economic sector is transportation.
Mr. Westerman. Right, so, the Government data says 13.49,
13.5 percent is from the U.S. And like you said, the biggest
sector is transportation. What is the percentage of that?
Secretary Buttigieg. I don't have that off the top of my
head, sorry.
Mr. Westerman. It is 29 percent. So, if we take 29 percent
of 13.5 percent, that gets us down to between 3 and 4 percent
of global emissions come from U.S. transportation. What
percentage of that is passenger cars and light-duty vehicles?
Secretary Buttigieg. So, I know it is one of the single
largest categories. I don't have a percentage breakout for you.
Mr. Westerman. It is about 57 percent of that. So, if we
take 57 percent of that second number, we are down around 2
percent. So, if every internal combustion engine vehicle in the
United States was magically converted to an EV overnight, what
would that say the potential to reduce global greenhouse gas
emissions would be?
Secretary Buttigieg. By that logic, Congressman, none of us
should ever vote. We are all doing our part to do something
about a global change, and I believe America should lead the
world.
Mr. Westerman. I disagree with you on that. We should vote
smartly. We should put smart policy in place. And last count,
we tried to find the number, over 120-and-some-odd billion
taxpayer dollars have been put in subsidies for EVs. Now, that
is if all the fuel going into these EVs came from noncarbon-
emitting sources. Do you know how much electricity in the
United States comes from noncarbon-emitting sources?
Secretary Buttigieg. Even if all of that electricity came
from fossil sources, it would still be cleaner because EV
engines are more efficient.
Mr. Westerman. I think you need to go back and look at
physics a little bit----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. OK, the physics,
Congressman, are that an EV engine is 90 percent efficient,
where even the best ICE engines are lucky to get to 40 percent.
Mr. Westerman. But the plant that made the energy is not 90
percent efficient. And internal combustion engines are 25 to 30
percent efficient, but you have got the efficiency of the
generating plant plus the losses in transmission. And don't try
to make the efficiency argument. The bottom line is----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Well, I am definitely
going to try to make the efficiency argument, because I think
it is important.
Mr. Westerman. Well, use good data if you are going to do
that.
Secretary Buttigieg. Sure. Well, the good data is that
between the regenerative braking and the 77 percent----
Mr. Westerman [interrupting]. Yes, you are talking about
once the energy is in the----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Efficiency you get before
that, you get to about 90 percent.
Mr. Westerman. Once the energy is in the EV. But the bottom
line is only 40 percent of energy in the United States comes
from noncarbon-emitting sources. So, that 2 percent--if you
could make every vehicle in the United States an EV overnight,
you would be less than 0.9 percent of the world's global
greenhouse gas emissions, and we are creating great turmoil and
change in our country with taxpayer dollars being spent
inefficiently.
I am all for EVs, but let the technology catch up, and
don't try to ban internal combustion engines at the rate that
you are doing.
I am out of time, and I yield back and recognize the
gentleman from California, Mr. Garamendi, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garamendi. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Boy, would I love to spend the next hour on that debate,
and get that information out there. I will point out that the
petroleum industry has been subsidized for the better part of
120 years, and continues to this day to have very, very
significant subsidies.
However, Mr. Buttigieg, Secretary, thank you so very much.
I am thinking back on the very first days of the Biden
administration, within a few months the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act became law. After 4 years, where the
previous President said we are going to do an infrastructure
bill, it never happened in the previous administration, but
during your tenure it did.
And thank you so very much for your very significant
leadership in making it happen, and also picking up a very,
very important part of an American policy, and that is: make it
in America, buy American. And I know that you have worked hard
on that throughout. It was one of the major pieces of the
legislation, and it is going into place.
However, all of that seemed to have been held in abeyance
by a waiver to a 1983 law that waived the Buy America
requirements for transportation. So, the good news is, you are
well into solving that problem. A couple of months ago,
actually about a year ago, several of us brought to your
attention this waiver, general waiver of the Buy America
requirements of the 1983 law. My understanding is that you have
a proposed rule out to terminate that waiver. And I understand
that the finalization may be in progress. Could you please
bring us up to date on that?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. Yes, Congressman, we are
very focused on making sure that we square the need for swift
and efficient project delivery with our administration's
commitment to make sure that, when we use American taxpayer
dollars, it is buying things that are using materials made in
America.
We recognize that that is a long game because we are
building for gaps in our manufacturing base that won't be
filled overnight. But we know that we have an opportunity here
to build those industries through both the demand and the rules
that we have.
Right now, DOT and the operating administrations are
working to provide guidance over the guidance that came out
from OMB to help specify any answers to questions that project
sponsors might have, knowing that there is a lot of complexity
to this.
To be clear, some waivers may be required, but they will be
limited, targeted, and conditional, and only offered when we
are confident that it is the right thing to do and still does
right by our overall goals to build American capacity.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you for that. Those of us that have
been on the Buy America train/road for the better part of our
careers are going to watch very closely about the breadth of
those waivers and the length of them. Short-term waivers,
perhaps necessary, but if they become long-term waivers then we
have accomplished nothing on the Buy America, make it in
America, and rebuilding our industry.
I want to thank you and the President for putting in place
an industrial policy for the United States. This is one piece
of it. There are a couple of other elements out there I want to
bring to your attention with regard to Buy America.
Now, Chairman DeFazio, when he was here, and Senator
Cornyn, and I, and others brought to the attention of all of us
that the China Railway Construction Corporation and BYD were
finding a way of bringing into the United States Chinese
rolling stock from Chinese Government-controlled companies.
That seems to have been abated. I urge you to watch carefully.
They are trying to get around that in many different ways.
Finally, the application of all of this to airports.
Waivers may apply to the airports. Watch carefully. The policy
of the President was to make it in America, buy America. You
and I and others will work diligently to see that that happens.
Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. You have my commitment to
work with you on that.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you.
I yield back.
Ms. Maloy [presiding]. The gentleman yields. Mr. Babin is
recognized for 5 minutes for questioning.
Dr. Babin. Thank you very much. Thank you for coming to the
Hill today, Mr. Secretary.
In 2023, the State of Texas received less than 2 percent of
all DOT Federal grant awards, despite having contributed over
10 percent of the funding to the Highway Trust Fund. Is the
Department of Transportation making any attempts to be more
equitable in their distribution of Federal grants across the
States?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, Congressman. We pay close
attention to the importance of geographic distribution as one
of the considerations in our competitive programs. Of course,
each program has its own criteria. Project proposals are
evaluated based on how they score against their criteria.
Certainly, a number of some of the most compelling projects
that we have been able to support have been in Texas. We
recently were able to award $25 million to the Port of Houston
Authority, for example, out of our reduction of truck emission
at port facilities program. This is over and above the formula
dollars.
But one other commitment we have is if a project comes in,
they don't quite make the cut because it is an extremely
competitive round, we will work with that project sponsor to
help them----
Dr. Babin [interposing]. Excellent.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Put their best foot
forward coming around next time.
Dr. Babin. Thank you. Why did DOT release Notices of
Funding Opportunity, or NOFOs, for Federal grants such as Mega,
Rural, and INFRA for fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2026,
while we are still in fiscal year 2024?
And should not these grants be awarded in their respective
fiscal years, rather than potentially circumventing a new
administration?
Secretary Buttigieg. The short answer is in order to cut
redtape. While there are some programs that are administered on
such a routine basis that it makes sense to have an annual
process and run it again every year, we think in other cases,
by folding in either multiple programs, multiple fiscal years,
or both, in the same way that a common application for college
means you don't have to fill your zip code in seven different
times, we can reduce the amount of bureaucracy for project
sponsors and the amount of processing work for our own team as
we are working through that.
Dr. Babin. What steps is U.S. DOT taking to address the
issue of grant agreements between U.S. DOT and Federal
discretionary grant awardees that are taking more than a year
to complete?
And how can we expedite these agreements to ensure a timely
disbursement of funding to the award recipients?
Secretary Buttigieg. This is a topic that I am very focused
on right now. Both in recent years and in the prior
administration, it was not always considered unusual for it to
take more than a year to get from an award announcement to a
grant agreement. We think compressing that amount of time is
part of what it will take to deliver projects more quickly.
Part of the challenge, of course, is that a grant agreement
can only certify that a project meets Federal requirements if
it is actually true. But I want to make sure we take some
responsibility for a project sponsor working through that
process, rather than just folding our arms and saying, we are
not going to sign off until you do everything on your own.
Dr. Babin. OK.
Secretary Buttigieg. So, I can assure you we talk about
this just about every week, and are taking a number of steps
that we think will help compress that process.
Dr. Babin. International freight movement continues to
increase at incredible rates. And in Texas, our State agencies,
including the Texas Department of Transportation and our
Department of Public Safety, are working with the autonomous
vehicle industry to make border crossings seamless, effective,
and efficient, while ensuring illegals are not coming across
the border.
What national support and funding enhancements,
specifically to the border region, will be proposed to
accommodate the increase in freight coming from Mexico into the
United States and passing through to Canada?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, as you note, there is a strong
and swiftly growing demand and flow of goods across that
border, and it is going to be more important than ever to make
sure it is safe and secure, and at the same time, that it flows
efficiently. Several of our grant awards have gone to
modernizing land ports of entry in ways that we think will help
them efficiently do so. And our Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration is very focused on making sure that inspection
capacities keep with the times.
We would certainly welcome an opportunity to work with
Congress on any authorities or resources that might help us
take advantage of those new technologies.
Dr. Babin. All right, and one last, final question. Perhaps
you read the editorial in last weekend's Wall Street Journal
entitled, ``Biden's LNG Export Pause Hits Ukraine.'' And I have
a copy of it here, which I would like to enter into the record,
Madam Chairman, that decried the Biden administration's
decision to block LNG exports to our allies. This article,
specifying Ukraine--and this would--seemingly plays right into
the hands of Vladimir Putin.
[The information follows:]
Editorial entitled, ``Biden's LNG Export Pause Hits Ukraine: Kyiv's
Deal With a Major U.S. Supplier Faces a White House Obstacle,'' by the
Editorial Board, Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2024, Submitted for the
Record by Hon. Brian Babin
Biden's LNG Export Pause Hits Ukraine
Kyiv's Deal With a Major U.S. Supplier Faces a White House Obstacle
by the Editorial Board
Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2024
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-dtek-lng-deal-biden-
administration-russia-energy-
e93c0f23?st=ogsoax16a9sujee&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Good news: Ukraine last week struck a major deal with a U.S.
liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplier to help wean Eastern Europe off
Russian natural gas. The bad news: Standing in the way of the deal's
success is President Biden.
Europe has diversified its energy supply since Russia's Ukraine
invasion, notably by importing more LNG from the U.S. But many
countries still depend on Russian gas that travels through a pipeline
that crosses Ukraine. A five-year transit agreement with Russia's
Gazprom expires at the end of this year, and Ukraine doesn't intend to
renew it.
The agreement's expiration has hastened the imperative for the
region to procure alternative supply. That's why Ukraine's largest
private energy company, DTEK, last week signed a deal with Virginia-
based Venture Global. DTEK would buy LNG from Venture Global's
Plaquemines facility ``to support near to medium term energy security
needs for Ukraine and the broader Eastern European region.''
Under the deal, DTEK will also be able to purchase up to two
million tonnes of gas each year--enough to heat about 28 million homes
for one month--from the company's CP2 facility that is underway. Yet
there's a big hitch: CP2 is ensnared in the Administration's moratorium
on new LNG export projects, which could continue if Mr. Biden wins re-
election.
In January Mr. Biden surrendered to an army of TikTokers by halting
permits for new LNG export projects, supposedly while the Energy
Department studies their environmental impact. DOE must approve permits
to export LNG to countries with which the U.S. doesn't have free-trade
agreements to ensure they are in the ``public interest.'' This includes
Europe and Ukraine.
You'd think the Administration would greenlight any project that
helps Europe and the rest of the world break their dependence on
Russian energy. Russia still accounts for about 15% of Europe's gas
supply. Last month Europe imported more gas from Russia than the U.S.
for the first time in nearly two years amid problems at a U.S. LNG
facility.
If Europeans can't get gas from the U.S., they will have to turn to
Russia. The same goes for other countries. CP2 could supply about 5% of
the world's LNG by 2026. It already has contracts with Germany and
Japan in addition to eastern Europe. Yet climate activists have made
stopping LNG exports a cause celebre. CP2 is their new Keystone XL
pipeline.
Biden officials have told allies not to worry, and that the
Administration's permitting pause won't have an immediate impact on
U.S. LNG exports. But worry is appropriate. The moratorium has caused
enormous political uncertainty about the future supply of U.S. gas. If
Mr. Biden wins re-election, will he spurn his progressive supporters by
approving CP2 and other LNG projects? Our guess is he'll make the
moratorium permanent.
Mr. Biden presents himself as a more reliable ally than Donald
Trump. But his LNG embargo shows that his overriding loyalty is to the
climate lobby.
Dr. Babin. Secretary Buttigieg, you have a responsibility
in your Department for the Deepwater Port Act, which would
improve our Nation's ability to export energy products around
the world. However, I understand that your Department is not
implementing the statutory deadlines and notices imposed by
last year's NDAA, and is not having regular or any in-person
meetings with applicants so they can possibly understand the
agency's concern. I have heard so much runaround, and I would
just like to know what the truth is, if you can.
Secretary Buttigieg. I could assure you our Maritime
Administration team works diligently on applications that come
through. They are not subject to the restrictions that were
cited in that article that are more on the Department of Energy
side.
We would be happy to provide you an update on the status of
some of the pending applications.
Dr. Babin. That would be great, thank you.
And I yield back, out of time.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Ms. Titus is recognized
for 5 minutes for questions.
Ms. Titus. Thank you very much.
Mr. Secretary, it is nice to see you again. And thank you
for your patience and waiting for us to come back to vote. It
was great to have you in District 1 as we announced the speed
train to California. That is going to create a lot of good
union jobs, and it is going to be funded right out of that
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. So, thank you for working with
us on that.
You have heard from many of my colleagues--and I agree with
them--that Boeing's safety track record is a problem. In fact,
I saw a cartoon in the paper the other day that said that the
airlines were giving extra mileage points if you would sit in
the exit row and hold the door on during the flight. That is
not the image that we want to project, because we have always
been the leader in safety.
But another safety issue that I wish you would address is
the number of air traffic controllers. I have heard you say
that it is a problem, we have a real shortage, there is a
hiring target of 2,000 in the fiscal year 2025. I worked with
Mr. Yakym on an amendment to the FAA bill to do maximum hiring
through the FAA Academy. Could you talk about those deadlines,
and if there is anything we need to do to help the Academy with
resources or changes that will help us to try to catch up to
this shortage?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for your attention to this
issue. We share that concern.
Over many, many years, the number of air traffic
controllers qualified and working has gone down. The good news
is that has finally stabilized and begun to go up a little bit.
But the problem is, we need it to go up much more quickly. In
order to do that, we have requested, as you mentioned, funding
to hire 2,000 in the coming fiscal year. We would welcome your
support for that funding.
We have also worked to increase what we call the force
multiplier of CTI, Collegiate Training Initiative, that can
work alongside--never at the expense of, but alongside--our
excellent facility in Oklahoma City to help get more
controllers qualified quickly. And I am certainly eager to
continue working with you both to implement all the provisions
of the FAA reauthorization and just to make sure that the
funding and the recruiting stays on pace.
Ms. Titus. I was going to ask you about the recruiting. How
have you beefed that up? Where do you recruit? Whom do you
recruit?
Secretary Buttigieg. So, we get a remarkable number of
applicants every time we open a cycle, and we are encouraging
people from all walks of life to consider a career that can be
rewarding and lucrative. It is very rigorous, though, and not
everybody who comes through the door even makes it through the
first few steps.
Of course, that rigor is a good thing, and I should assure
you none of the measures we are taking involve reducing that
high bar of qualification. But we do want to make sure we
support those applicants and help them meet those high bars so
that they can have a great career, and we can have the numbers
we need in our air traffic control workforce.
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you for that. If I can shift gears a
little bit to the drone industry, domestic drone industry and
the rulemaking that has occurred in the past for the line of
sight issue, you had 90 experts who submitted a report saying
we need to do this, and they made some recommendations to the
FAA. A rule was put forward. I worked with Mr. Graves, who
chaired the Aviation Subcommittee, hoping to get something by
September. Can you tell us kind of how that process is going?
Will you meet the deadline? Are there any problems we need to
address?
Secretary Buttigieg. We certainly understand the importance
of that rulemaking. There is complexity in this, the novelty of
this issue. We also see the growth of these drones, and we know
there is going to be more and more of them entering the
national airspace. So, I know the team is hard at work at that.
I will try to get you more of----
Ms. Titus [interposing]. Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. An update, and we are
conscious of the reauthorization provision creating a timeframe
for that work to get completed.
Ms. Titus. I just don't want to see us fall further and
further behind other places: Europe, Australia.
Secretary Buttigieg. Understood.
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you. If you will let me know, I
appreciate it.
Secretary Buttigieg. Will do. Thank you.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields back. Mr. Graves is
recognized for 5 minutes for questioning.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. It is nice to see
you again. I want to raise three things with you.
Number one, an issue you and I have talked about both at
hearings and otherwise, just concerns about the impact of the
IIJA when considering things like inflation, supply chain, and
construction costs. As a matter of fact, an analysis by the
Federal Highway Administration shows that for when the Biden
administration came in until now, we have seen about a 69-
percent increase in the cost of construction. And at home, that
is on the lower end of what we have seen. We have seen projects
come in substantially higher.
I think when you add in the regulatory agenda of the
administration, you are seeing delays. And as you know, the
burn rate of the IIJA dollars is not really appropriate. It is
not as fast as I know you would like to see it. It is not as
fast as I would like to see it. And I think the regulatory
agenda, by heaping all of these new regulations, particularly
in an environmental space, is slowing things down.
So, I want to read a quote from our former Democratic
Governor, who just left office in January. He said, ``We are
slated to receive $6 billion from that act,'' meaning the IIJA,
``over 5 years for traditional infrastructure-related surface
transportation, and that is going to be very helpful. But we
also have to manage expectations. Of that $6 billion, $5
billion we were going to get anyway. So, the additional funding
is about $200 million a year. Again, that is very helpful. But
there are a lot of people who think that the $6 billion is on
top of the base funding. It is not. And in exchange for the
$200 million we are going to get each year, our match
obligation is going to be going up by about $50 million.''
And so, again, the Governor of Louisiana, former Governor
of Louisiana, was saying $200 million a year. You have an
inflation rate, again, adding 69 percent in there. You do the
math, that means that Louisiana is actually getting behind, not
getting ahead in terms of the legislation, which I know is not
an objective that you or I would like to see.
Secondly, I have raised with you a number of times the
criteria that we have concerns with, where you came in and
unilaterally, without statutory action, said that in all of
your grants, you are going to consider climate change, racial
equity, environmental justice, and enhancing union
opportunities, criteria that I have concerns with because of
the lack of metrics or specificity.
And so, translating that into impacts on the State that I
represent, Louisiana, according to an analysis by Politico, we
are one of the fifth worst States per capita--one of the fifth
worst States per capita--in terms of receiving funding under
the legislation, concerning because a bridge program that
former Congressman Sean Patrick Maloney and I wrote is in there
that we thought was actually going to help our State;
concerning because some of the PROTECT Act programs that we
also were involved in drafting are in there, Louisiana got
zero--zero--out of that one, which is designed for adaptation
and resiliency.
So, I am very, very concerned about what I tell people in
Louisiana when folks look at IIJA and expecting it to be
positive, whenever the inflation rate results in it actually
not being helpful, the regulations are making it difficult to
actually execute--which I know aren't all your issue, other
agencies are giving you environmental obligations--and then, at
the end of the day, when our home State is one of the fifth
worst performers in the country in terms of a per capita
receipt, it is very, very concerning.
Then the last thing, if--in the 90 seconds I am giving you,
if you could, just give us a little bit of advice on your
thoughts on how we address this growing deficiency in the
Highway Trust Fund, with the user fee being a static 1993
figure.
Secretary Buttigieg. I will do my best to cover that in a
short amount of time. I will start with a point of agreement,
which is I think the environment we have with cost escalation
just increases the pressure to get projects delivered quickly,
get grant agreements signed quickly, and really improve on the
pace that, I should note, is a pace that we inherited, where it
is just considered typical to take a year or two. Now,
sometimes a project isn't ready to go, but we want to help them
get ready to go.
I do think that suggesting that the cost escalation can be
attributed to the administration's measures flies in the face
of the data showing commensurate cost escalations in every
developed economy in this sector, although maybe we could
unpack that to see, within a more granular level, how it is
affecting your particular region.
I certainly want to work with project sponsors in Louisiana
to build on the successes that have happened with Lake Charles,
I-10, Lake Calcasieu, the natural gas distribution
infrastructure, $10 million that came to your district, and the
areas where they have been--some ferries and other areas where
Louisiana has been successful. We want every State to succeed
as much as possible in getting those projects done that might
not have happened otherwise.
I won't claim to have a magic solution on the Highway Trust
Fund, but I join you in being concerned about it. I think by
the time of the 2026 vote on a future--or potential vote on a
future reauthorization, that question will really come to a
head, and Congress will need to decide whether the user pays
principle is the future, or whether to continue turning to
other sources of funding to fund our roads.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Before I yield back, I just want
to commend you. I saw your 3-mile time on the race that you did
recently. It looks like your running is getting a good bit
better, and I just want to congratulate you.
Secretary Buttigieg. I appreciate you. I was huffing and
puffing there, but we made it.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Carbajal is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Buttigieg, I understand that the U.S. Department
of Transportation has announced that $520 million is available
for cycle 1 Charging and Fueling Infrastructure, CFI. This is
for applications that are highly recommended or recommended.
In my district on the central coast of California, the
Santa Barbara County Association of Governments is spearheading
a $20 million grant application that would fund the
installation of 21 direct-current DC fast-charging stations
along the U.S. 101. SBCAG's application has been listed as
recommended. When should applicants start hearing from your
Department regarding the outcome of their applications?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question. We are
hard at work on the CFI program, which is a companion to the
NEVI program. Already, 47 awards have been made, amounting to
$623 million. And, of course, future rounds will bring future
awards.
We would be happy to get more information to your office
about a timeline. I know that we had our latest Notice of
Funding Opportunity out on May 30. Part of what we are trying
to do with those rolling applications is to get quicker answers
to our project sponsors, because we know how important these
facilities, especially those DCFC--DC fast-charging--facilities
that are challenging sometimes for the private sector to do on
their own. We know how important those are to communities like
those that you serve.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. I want to pivot to another issue
of importance to my district that was brought to my attention
by the county of San Luis Obispo. For decades, the Federal
Government has required commercial service airports to use
flourine firefighting foams that contain PFAS. The recently
passed FAA reauthorization bill includes a provision that I
helped write for a new grant program that gives airports $350
million over the next 5 years to assist in their transition
from aqueous film-forming foam, AFFF, to fluorine-free foam,
F3, or foams that don't contain PFAS. What is the FAA doing now
to help airports in their transition to these new foams?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you for your attention to
this issue. We know this is not just an environmental and
safety concern, but also an economic concern for airports.
FAA has done a lot of technical work, found that
performance standard in partnership with DoD, that does not
require the use of PFAS. And now that that new standard has
been put forward, there is a transition plan--an aircraft
firefighting foam transition plan--published roughly a year ago
with stakeholders from the DoD to firefighters to environmental
groups.
We will continue to work closely with our airport partners,
helping them identify best practices, helping them prepare for
this transition and, to the extent resources are an issue for
them, welcome further opportunities to work with you on making
sure they have what they need.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Last year, OMB finally, after 2
years of uncertainty, clarified the Buy America provisions
established in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that did not
apply to construction materials such as aggregate and asphalt
binder. This would have put significant restrictions on supply
chains for aggregate and asphalt binder. Will the
administration continue to pursue new Buy America provisions?
And if so, does the administration plan to allow for
waivers on manufactured products?
Secretary Buttigieg. We are continuing to work to try to
ensure that project delivery is kept swift and affordable while
meeting our Buy America commitments. The new guidance, we hope,
is helpful to our project sponsors, but we know that sometimes
it needs interpretation, and we want to make sure that we
provide further guidance as needed.
The Federal Highway, FAA, FTA, and FRA rules for iron and
steel manufactured products have not changed, but we continue
to be ready to work on whether it is waivers or policy guidance
to help make sure our project sponsors understand what is
required.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, one of the FAA's
most successful and cost-effective Government-industry
partnerships for taxpayers is the FAA Contract Tower Program.
There are 264 airports in the program, including the SLO County
Airport in my district. This critical air traffic safety
program supports general aviation operations, DoD flight
training operations and military readiness, commercial air
service, and flight schools across the country. What assurances
can you give us that contract towers will remain a high
priority for DOT and FAA?
Secretary Buttigieg. These are certainly an important part
of our National Aviation System. There is currently a total of
263 contract towers in the program. I would note, as one
indication of the importance we place on them, that the
President's fiscal 2025 budget request seeks $256 million to
fund that program. It includes measures to try to cover the
cost of growth that has taken place. Vendor contract prices
have escalated about 22 percent from 2020 to December last
year. We are continuing to work to help them keep up.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. LaMalfa is recognized
for 5 minutes for questioning.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary, thank you for appearing with us here today once
again. I appreciate it.
Secretary Buttigieg. Good morning.
Mr. LaMalfa. Let's see. So, on electric vehicles and the
chargers, in the infrastructure bill a while back, there was
$7\1/2\ billion put forth for that, $5 billion that was
allocated to States individually to build their own networks
with that seed money. So, the report I have is that since then,
we have seen an intense amount of money go out, but we have
only accomplished approximately seven charging stations spread
amongst four States. So, we have this term ``investment'' that
doesn't seem to be hitting much of a goal, as people are still
frustrated with the--the electric vehicle owners we have still
seem to have a lot of challenges finding what they need in
order to go more than 30 miles from home, for example.
And then the nature of the EV stations themselves are--they
are exempted from the Buy America provisions. So, we are buying
these components from China and other overseas. So, that is
disturbing, because we should be building it here when we are,
and we would have the ability--which leads to a couple more
questions--but Secretary, with--my understanding, there is
another $1.3 billion that was added to that initial $7.5
billion. Why are we doubling down on more when the performance
so far has been basically only seven stations?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, so, to be clear, there are
186,000 public chargers across the United States. That is about
double what it was when President Biden arrived. Most of those
have been put in by the private sector, but we believe that
public-sector involvement is necessary to build out the rest of
the network, hence the NEVI program that you referred to.
That program is intended to install tens of thousands of
chargers in the second half of this decade, and we have already
had 38 of the States that we are providing funding to release
their solicitations for the program. We are even going to see
the first few hundred of those chargers installed this year. As
you mentioned, there is even a tiny handful that are up and
running today. But I want to emphasize our expectations have
been that the peak year for installation would be 2027 or 2028,
because this is a totally new program for the States.
I do want to emphasize also that this charging program is
subject to Build America, Buy America provisions. There is
flexibility in that to recognize the fact that we are standing
up what is effectively a new industry in the United States. But
we are committed to making sure that that new American industry
is home grown, is creating jobs right here on U.S. soil. And as
the States work toward their procurement, we think we are going
to really see that demand signal lead to a burgeoning of that
industry here in the United States of America.
Mr. LaMalfa. The difficulty of the Buy American is that we
don't seem to be able to produce in this country. Well, the
mined raw materials have to come from somewhere else, and then
the manufacturing pretty much stays in those other areas. And
so, we are not doing well at Buy American on what comes from
the mines, as well as the finished product, so----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Well, that is a big
part of what we are changing through the President's
initiatives. DOE now estimates with the new awards, for
example, for producing a domestic battery supply chain, that we
will have enough graphite to support 47 percent of the U.S.
demand domestically.
We are also working on partnerships with friendly countries
so that when we do need to turn abroad for materials or
refinement, we are not necessarily turning to places like
China.
And increasingly, recycling will be important because
some----
Mr. LaMalfa [interrupting]. Well, let me drill down on
that.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Of these materials live
indefinitely.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you. Let me drill down on that. Would
you be part of a group of voices that would say we need to mine
these products in this country, instead of somewhere else?
Secretary Buttigieg. I certainly would prefer that they be
sourced domestically.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK, thank you. On the EVs themselves now, we
are seeing that there seems to be a turning around of attitude
on that. Like, Ford Motor Company, they lost $4\1/2\ billion on
them. They are bringing down the price of their electric pickup
quite a bit, which--that is probably going to be a loser for
them, I don't know. And they are letting their dealers off the
hook from having to install hundreds of thousands of dollars'
worth of infrastructure to be EV dealerships.
So, it is--you see a retraction of that, as well as 7 out
of 10 Americans said they do not want to buy an EV because it
takes--the charging isn't there, the battery technology. And
then current EV owners, half of them are considering switching
back to gas vehicles. So, shouldn't we be tailoring it to
people that want them--it seemed like 10 or 15 percent--instead
of forcing people up to, you know, a complete ban by 2035 like
California is talking?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, one of the reasons that we have
not forced anyone to purchase any particular vehicle is we want
this to be led by consumers making choices, and consumers are
choosing EVs more every single year than they did the previous
year. And I think that reflects the fact that, as the prices
come down, more and more Americans decide it is the right
answer for them.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields back. The Chair recognizes
Mr. Garcia for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking
Member, and thank you, Secretary Buttigieg, for being here
today.
From the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act in 2021 to today, there has been an immense amount of
investment and steady--sometimes slow--progress towards our
infrastructure goals for the country. As we look to fiscal year
2025, I am hopeful that we can build on this progress and
continue to make transportation safer, equitable and cleaner.
Chicagoland is home to the Nation's largest rail network.
All the Class I railroads, as you know, traverse through
Chicago, and my district has countless rail grade crossings,
rail yards, and rail workers. As such, rail safety is a huge
priority for my constituents. And with the recently released
NTSB report on the East Palestine derailment, it is a reminder
that we must continue to press this issue.
Secretary Buttigieg, I know that rail safety has been a
focus for DOT in recent years, but there is yet to be
comprehensive rail safety changes at the Federal level. In
addition to the recommendations for more inspections,
infrastructure improvements, and better emergency plans, what
is being done to ensure that rail workers aren't put in harm's
way?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question. As you
noted, this is a central focus for us. We have sought to do
everything that we can do, short of an act of Congress, in
order to enhance rail safety.
Two recent measures I would point to that we think are
particularly important is our rule on minimum crew size. Most
Americans would probably be shocked to discover that, until we
acted, there was no rule saying that you had to have more than
one person, even on a 2-mile-long train. And the Class I rail
corporations seemed to prefer it that way. We thought it was
very important to do this.
We also recently finalized a rule requiring emergency
escape breathing apparatus to be available for traincrews and
other employees as they are transporting hazardous materials,
and cleared up the information railroads need to provide to
community first responders about hazardous materials.
But we urgently need legislation from this Chamber and the
Senate in order to raise the bar and give us more capabilities.
A lot of people in this Chamber had a lot to say about rail
safety 1\1/2\ years ago, in the wake of East Palestine. I hope
that they will end their silence on this topic now, and join
you and others in insisting that there be action. Because with
the NTSB report now complete, there is really, in my view, no
remaining excuse for inaction when we need that legislation.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, and I am going to try to
do two more questions, so, brevity would be appreciated.
How is the FRA encouraging participation in its
Confidential Close Call Reporting System?
And what can we do to get more rail lines to participate?
Secretary Buttigieg. In short, there has been a lot of
phone calls, a lot of letters, and a lot of pressure to urge
the rails, the Class I railroads, to honor their commitment to
join that system. So far, we have brought Norfolk Southern on
board with a pilot covering approximately 1,000 of their
employees at several sites, and BNSF in April agreed to join,
as well, with an agreement covering about 650 of their
employees represented by the Dispatchers Association.
But we would like to see participation at 100 percent, and
would welcome opportunities to work with you to drive that up.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you. The fiscal cliff that
transit agencies are facing nationwide, our local Metropolitan
Agency for Planning, also known as CMAP, has developed a
visionary plan for action. Transit, as you know, is a
fundamental cog that keeps communities like mine moving.
Cutting service would have disproportionate impacts on those
who rely on it.
Secretary, what is U.S. DOT--how are you supporting
metropolitan planning organizations to rethink public transit
and commuter rail systems as the funding cliff approaches?
Secretary Buttigieg. Transit is so important to so many
Americans. It provided 7.1 billion trips in 2023, and we have
got to make sure they can stay ahead of these looming fiscal
challenges.
In addition to engaging MPOs, as you mentioned, I also want
to note that the President's 2025 budget proposes flexibilities
that would allow transit agencies to use urbanized area formula
funds and flex funds for operating expenses. We think that that
flexibility may be helpful for certain agencies as they try to
bridge that gap.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you very much.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Bost for 5 minutes.
Mr. Bost. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, with the higher demand of goods and
services, many of the industries rely on freight trucks to
deliver goods and services to customers. The administration has
focused a lot on rail transit and aviation within the budget
request, but continues to leave out some important things
involving truckdrivers, specifically truck parking.
Now, while rail is vital and the rural areas of this Nation
rely on the delivery of those trucks, we have also seen an
increase in the amount of women that are now driving, thank
heaven. While the industry continues to grow, all of these
trucks are struggling to find places to rest while trying to
abide by the Federal hours-of-service requirements.
My legislation, the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act,
addresses a shortfall on the truck parking to allow safe places
for our drivers to take a break from the long road without
fearing accidents, assaults, or robberies.
Now, I am asking--and I asked about this topic last year,
and was told that the administration was working on the truck
parking, and I was upset to see the budget request did not
include anything regarding truck parking. What are you planning
to do to address this issue? Because this issue came out--the
first study was in 2002, how bad it is that we need truck
parking.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, first of all, let me applaud
your attention to the issue of truck parking, and make clear
that we are applying not just words, but dollars and cents to
this issue.
We have been able to fund projects in Wyoming, Tennessee,
Florida, and other locations to support truckdrivers. So, I can
assure you, even if it doesn't have its own line item, it is
something that we consider important for a number of programs
like INFRA, and also are urging our State partners to consider
this as a use of their Federal formula dollars, and are
encouraging them to remember that they have that flexibility.
I spent some time just last week with truckdrivers,
including a number of women truckdrivers who we are pleased to
see coming into that career. It remains as vital a career as
ever. And we have got to make sure that we are supporting the
drivers we count on in every way. We are taking a number of
measures, including dealing with predatory leasing and towing,
and encouraging veterans to get their costs paid for training.
But I certainly agree with you that parking is probably the
number-one issue we hear when we talk to drivers, and we are
working on it.
Mr. Bost. If we can shift gears on my next question, the
Attorney General is initiating a rulemaking--I think this was
brought up by Representative Crawford earlier in the day--to
change marijuana from a schedule I to a schedule III controlled
substance act.
As a truckdriver myself that grew up in the trucking
business--my brother is still in the trucking business--I know
it is difficult to hire and make sure that our drivers are
safe. As a matter of fact, it is a real difficult part of
hiring right now because of the drug testing. But part of the
safety includes knowing the driver could pass that drug test.
It is not something that we want to stop.
So, I want to ask you about the--I want to--since the--
DOJ's actions will stop marijuana testing of DoD-regulated
safety-sensitive employees--now, let me tell you who all this
includes--including schoolbus drivers, airline pilots, train
engineers, subway and public bus operators, ferry operators,
truckdrivers, pipeline operators, FAA air traffic controllers,
will you commit to ensure that DOT will continue to test for
marijuana, as it currently is permitted to do, even if it moves
to a schedule III drug?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, our commitment to that testing
continues, regardless of the schedule. And we believe our
authorities are intact, too, because they don't call for
testing by reference to where marijuana sits in its
classification, but rather it is specifically named. So,
whether we are talking about the regulated community, those
drivers you were talking about, or whether we are talking about
our own personnel, somebody with a security clearance or
somebody in a tower, our understanding--at this time--is that
nothing about that reclassification would change our practices.
Mr. Bost. Then here is the problem. Well, just so you know,
1980s is when DOT did the result--and the result of the
program, that the accidents were caused by people using
marijuana and the problems that occurred.
If we don't stay with that program--and the thing that is
difficult about that is, right now, when we have a driver
shortage, you can have a beer on Sunday and you are not
impaired to drive on Monday. Now, you can smoke a joint on
Friday. You may not be impaired, but it is going to show up in
that test, and it will show up for 30 days.
Something has got to be figured out as far as that's
concerned if we are going to continue down this path, because
it makes it very difficult, as a truck owner and a business
owner, to find the employees that aren't spending their time
smoking dope in their parents' basement and are more concerned
about having a job. We have got to figure this out, and I hope
that you will continue to work on that to make sure that not
only is it safe, but that we can also have drivers, and figure
out how we are going to do this if we are going to continue
down this path.
Secretary Buttigieg. Agreed.
Mr. Bost. Thank you.
I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Pappas is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Pappas. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And Mr. Secretary, welcome back to the committee. I
appreciate your thoughtfulness and how much time and how
accessible you always are to this committee. So, it is great to
have you back.
And it is always a good time to talk about how the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is working for our districts. I
see that in New Hampshire. We are set to receive about $1.4
billion in State formula funds for highways and bridges over 5
years, which represents a significant increase over what we
could count on in previous years. And already, about $850
million has been announced for New Hampshire roads, bridges,
roadway safety, and other major federally funded projects.
So, Secretary Buttigieg, as you know, Federal law allows
States like New Hampshire to use toll credits to cover local
match requirements for federally funded projects. But since
States could historically only use toll credits for projects
within the State where credits were accrued, many States left
extra toll credits on the table. That is why I have advocated
for legislation, the Toll Credit Marketplace Act, provisions of
which were included in the Infrastructure Law, which will
develop a Federal marketplace for toll credits which will allow
States to sell any excess credits to cover the match required
for federally funded projects. I think it is a commonsense
change.
We discussed this last year when you were before our
committee. I am wondering if you can update us on any progress
with the Toll Credits Exchange Pilot Program that is
anticipated to roll out soon.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. And first let me associate
myself with your enthusiasm for what the Infrastructure Law has
brought. And most recently, congratulations to your district on
the Rockingham Planning Commission successfully receiving that
Seacoast Greenway Hampton Marsh trail funding.
With regard to the Toll Credit Marketplace program, we
recognize the importance of the value of an innovative program
like that that you worked to create. And I know that they are
looking to use their toll credits in new ways. I can report to
you that the Federal Highway Administration has made a lot of
progress on that. As you know, any time you stand up a novel
program it leads to a lot of work that goes on in the
background, which we are working through.
But the focus right now has been developing the right
program procedures, including the application and the selection
process, making that as transparent and as rigorous as
possible. And we will continue to keep you updated on the team
working expeditiously to get it stood up and ready to use.
Mr. Pappas. Well, I appreciate that. I know my State has
itself hundreds of millions of dollars of unused toll credits
that are on the table, and I know other States are eager to be
able to deploy these resources to make the necessary
investments that will improve roadway safety and improve our
economy.
Now, my State is at a decided disadvantage when it comes to
formula funding distribution. And since coming to Congress, I
have worked to evaluate current funding structures to ensure
States like mine get the adequate support that they need, and
that it is distributed in an equitable fashion.
The calculations used to come up with the formula are, I
believe, grossly outdated. For example, a State like Rhode
Island, with half the roadway mileage of my State, received 30
percent more funding in fiscal year 2024. Vermont, which has
about half the population of my State, and fewer Federal miles,
received nearly 23 percent more in Federal highway funds than
New Hampshire did in fiscal year 2024. There are other States
that are treated, I believe, inequitably by the formula,
including Texas.
I am wondering if you will conduct a study or provide any
information for our committee as we think about the future of
highway funding in terms of the formula, and areas where we can
look to make it more balanced and equitable for States like
mine.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. We would certainly stand
ready to provide any information, data analysis, or technical
assistance requested as Congress contemplates future changes to
the formula.
As you know, we work to implement the formula as provided
by Congress, but certainly hear loud and clear from many States
who have found that the formula is not consistent with their
expectations, based on their needs, and I am happy to do
anything we can to make sure that Congress' deliberations about
that are well informed.
Mr. Pappas. I appreciate that.
Drunk and impaired driving traffic deaths have increased by
33 percent in the last 5 years. Even as vehicles are getting
safer, crashes, injuries, and fatalities are still on the rise.
In the United States, someone is killed or injured in a drunk
driving crash every 39 minutes, and an average drunk driver has
driven drunk nearly 80 times before their first arrest.
Currently, only 24 States and the District of Columbia,
including my State, require ignition interlock devices to be
installed in the vehicles of first-time offenders. Studies have
shown that the use of these interlocks reduce recidivism by up
to 70 percent in first-time, repeat, and high-risk offenders.
That is why I have introduced legislation on this, and I am
wondering if you can comment on ignition interlock systems and
the role that they can play in terms of roadway safety.
Secretary Buttigieg. We certainly recognize the promise and
the potential of these interlock systems, given, as you noted,
the proportion of highway fatalities and road injuries and
fatalities that are associated with impairment.
NHTSA has been working to help research, develop, and test
solutions, including ignition interlock programs and the driver
alcohol detection system for safety. A lot goes into that and,
of course, we need to make sure that anything that goes out
into the field is ready to meet the high bar we are going to
set for it.
I would note that there was an advance notice of proposed
rulemaking put out in December to gather more information on
technology and research in this regard, and we will be working
through that ANPRM and continue to keep you apprized of
progress there.
Mr. Pappas. Thanks. We look forward to more information.
I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Johnson is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, of course, there are always going to be a
certain number of things you and I disagree on, but I have to
start with a compliment. In a town where so many folks, both in
my party and your own, seem to peddle fear and anger, some of
them almost exclusively, you bring a far more professional and
respectful approach to your work. And the communication that I
get from you and your team, I think, helps all of us be better.
So, thank you with that.
As you know, sir, we have a tremendous amount of flooding
in my State and surrounding States. It is just devastating to
watch people, friends of mine who--their home, everything, all
the physical possessions that they own, washed away by these
floodwaters.
As you know, during disasters, the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration has the ability to waive some rules,
things like weight limits, hours of service so that impacted
communities can get help more quickly. I have got some concerns
that a recently finalized rule by FMCSA is going to make it
more difficult for Governors to access those flexibilities. I
just wanted to gauge any thoughts you would have on that
promulgation.
Secretary Buttigieg. Let me certainly, first of all, tell
you that our heart goes out to those we saw impacted by recent
storms in your State, Iowa, and other communities, and would
agree that it has been important to have flexibility on things
like hours of service in the context of those disasters.
Now that you have raised this, I want to become more
familiar with some of the areas of overlap or concern where
more recent rulemakings could diminish flexibility on that,
because we certainly leaned into that at many moments, notably
including the Baltimore bridge collapse, to try to provide some
relief.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. And I think we have got to--
and listen, I get it. A lot of these independent and quasi-
independent agencies, it is not like they work for the Cabinet
Secretary. It is not like a memo comes out and they salute,
and--it is more complicated than that. They need to make their
decisions based on an evidentiary record. Clearly, these
decisions need to be abiding. They need to go to court and
defend them. That is what is so surprising about this.
I mean, the previous flexibility, the waiver authority for
Governors, allowed them a 30-day period. This is going to
shorten it to 14. Keep in mind, the evidentiary record before
the administration is that there hasn't been any particular
abuse that they identified, and that there is no evidence that
there has been a degradation of public safety because of a 30-
day waiver period. And so, to the extent we should have good
decisions based on good data, I am grateful for your commitment
to dive in and better understand that situation.
Let's go to permitting. This has been a consistent area of
agreement that you and I have shared as you have appeared
before the committee. I think, in the couple of years you and I
have been talking about this, we have made some progress. Let's
be honest, it is modest progress. It is still, as you have
talked about in your comments in the past, far, far more
difficult to get a project sited in this country than it is in
most every other developed nation. This is not an area of
American excellence.
I have had some success in working with my colleagues to
advance a digital NEPA review, gotten that language in the
aviation bill yesterday, on the water resources bill. I wanted
to just touch base with you, sir, and see if your shop has been
able to make any progress, particularly in the area of digital
NEPA review and processing.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. I share your sense of
urgency and interest here, and I would not challenge your
assessment that, while there has been progress, it has been
modest.
We have taken a number of steps to try to make the NEPA and
permitting process more efficient. We have expanded a liaison
program that can provide targeted assistance to project
sponsors who would benefit from that. We have been doing more
with programmatic agreements so that, if multiple projects have
similar characteristics, they can travel together, and we think
they can cut some of the redtape that way.
Specifically to your question about web-based, digital, or
sometimes e-NEPA is the term of art, we certainly see a lot of
potential here. There is too much literal paperwork in the
paperwork.
One thing we have done to try to embrace that is a $750,000
Modernizing NEPA Challenge, knowing that some of the best ideas
probably won't come from the building, but will come from
around the country. That just launched in April, but we are
looking forward to seeing the different ideas that come back
from project sponsors there.
And of course, we are working to maximize the use of
categorical exclusions, which just bring a lot less of that
process with them.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. I do think categorical
exclusions are a ripe area. I mean, we obviously make use of a
lot of them, but I think there is so much more ``there'' there.
My closing comment, Mr. Secretary, would be at some point,
you are just going to have a brainstorm--and maybe as you drift
off to sleep or you are eating your Cheerios in the morning--of
an idea that might be a little politically dangerous. It might
upset people on your team or on my team, because let's get it--
I mean, we both get it: the siting of large projects in this
country is fraught with tremendous emotion and political peril.
If you are looking for partners to advance your big, dangerous,
but important idea, this committee is ready to work with you.
Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg. I appreciate that and welcome that.
Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Auchincloss is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I will
associate myself with my friend from South Dakota, both in his
offer of partnership and his compliments to your
professionalism and responsiveness in your role.
And I also want to say that your work in implementing the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has been critical, and I will
commend the Biden administration's efforts to quickly allocate
the funds to our communities, as well, for maximum impact. I am
seeing the difference in the suburbs of Boston, in the ability
of people to connect to jobs and services and improve standards
of living.
As Congress begins to think about the next surface transit
reauthorization, I want to examine what additional tools
Congress should be considering to finance transportation
projects, and to move away from an Eisenhower-era, car-centric
infrastructure system towards one that is focused on mobility,
holistically defined.
While the recent reversal of New York's congestion pricing
plan is extremely disappointing, it has nothing to say about
the actual policy of congestion pricing itself. Congestion
pricing allows cities to accurately reflect the cost of having
cars in dense areas. Strong Towns has pointed out that this is
not just a reflection of the negative externalities of air
pollution, traffic, and emissions, but also allows cities to
price in the space that vehicles take up. Manhattan has limited
space for car traffic, and it should be allowed to reflect that
scarcity through tolls, and then use those revenues to fund
things like transit and walkability improvements.
Mr. Secretary, should Congress consider provisions in the
next surface transportation reauthorization that would allow
for additional flexibility for communities to price the
externalities of driving as they see fit, including through
congestion pricing and tolling?
Secretary Buttigieg. I believe those flexibilities would be
welcomed in communities around the country. As you noted, many
of the true costs of the status quo are not reflected in the
traditional models that we have. There may be a range of ways
to take that on board through different forms, all of which we
would like to be able to support to the extent statute allows
us to.
Mr. Auchincloss. Would you also encourage us to consider
looking at the way that we fund highways versus transit, and to
say the amount of Federal dollars that are matched for
highways, being something like 80 to 20 versus transit at 50 to
50, and excluding operating costs?
Secretary Buttigieg. I recognize and respect that a lot of
this will probably be hashed out in the coming years as we move
toward the next authorization, but I certainly welcome any
readiness to have a more holistic approach to pricing both the
benefits and the costs associated with developing any mode of
transportation, knowing that we have inherited a model where
sometimes, instead of a range of options, people were presented
with one option, which was a car.
Mr. Auchincloss. Another way that Congress can finance
better transportation operations and capital projects is by
restoring employers' deductibility of transportation fringe
benefits. I am preparing bipartisan legislation that would make
it cheaper and easier for businesses, especially small
businesses, to offer transit benefits to their employees. This
will help increase ridership, encourage commuters to shift
transportation modes towards public transit and away from cars,
and will do so without further subsidizing parking.
Mr. Secretary, can you speak to the importance of
incentivizing transit use through our tax code and how the
private sector can encourage commuters to use public transit?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, to your prior point about
externalities, there are so many benefits in terms of safety,
congestion, affordability when people have an opportunity to
use transit.
I would also note one of the things that we undertook
toward the end of my tenure as mayor of my hometown of South
Bend was a pilot covering those costs for employees. And
employers reported back to us that the benefits in terms of
less absenteeism and overtime from providing that kind of
certainty through subsidy for workers' transportation costs was
something that they wanted to double down on.
I believe that much of this particular authority rests with
Treasury, but we would consult with them and certainly be eager
to consult with you on how to expand access to transportation
and transit benefits for employees across the country.
Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you. And I would just note that
making owning a car an option rather than a requirement for
younger people is an important way to reduce costs, right? You
take a car, and you drive it off the lot, and it loses one-
third of its value, and it is really a depreciating asset ever
after. Whereas, you take that same amount of money and you can
invest it, you can use it to invest in yourself. It is a way to
build wealth. And at a time when people are really struggling
with cost of living, making cars one of many options for them
to get around, I think, is an important way to take some of
that steam off.
And I will yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Nehls is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Good to see you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Buttigieg. Good afternoon.
Mr. Nehls. Sixteen months since East Palestine. Obviously,
the NTSB report came out the other day. I have been placing
close attention to it, as I am the chair of the Railroads,
Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee here, and I
believe that she produced a very detailed report. And some of
her findings, quite honestly, are very disturbing.
One of the areas is the post-derailment actions. And when
the American people saw this big bloom, this cloud above their
city, the decision to vent and burn--and that procedure,
according to the report, it appeared that Norfolk Southern made
that decision. Apparently, they were able to--I don't want to
say convince--get the incident commander to agree with that.
The report appears that the NTSB said that--and Norfolk
Southern compromised the integrity of that decision to vent and
burn the tank cars by not communicating expertise and
dissenting opinions. The justification, according to the
report, is polymerization, which is that chemical reaction that
could cause the explosion.
So, a point is that they said we have to do the vent and
burn because we feel this thing could blow up. What are your
thoughts on that? How would we--how would incident commanders
allow them to do that when we had dissenting opinions?
Secretary Buttigieg. One of the most troubling things in
that report, I agree, was the finding that the vent and--the
polymerization that was feared by those who thought that by
undertaking that vent and burn action, they were preventing an
explosion might not have actually occurred, meaning that the
vent and burn did not have to happen.
So, certainly, while that will go to different parts of the
decision chain than those that our Department is directly
involved with, we want to closely follow how NTSB's
recommendations are taken on board, both in terms of how they
apply to a railroad and how they apply to anybody in that
incident command.
Mr. Nehls. Sure, and I can understand it was in a rural
area, first responders, many of them volunteers driving to
incidents in their pickup truck with bunker gear in the back.
Maybe the--I don't want to say the skill set wasn't there, but
they just didn't--if a derailment like that would have happened
in the city of Houston or Boston or someplace, I don't think
you would have burned it. You would have had a massive showing
of logistical support with hazmat teams, this and that.
But hey, in your testimony, I am concerned about the
Railroad Crossing Elimination Program. We know we have about
700-plus deaths a year as it relates to rail. And your
testimony says it is improving, or eliminating 400 rail
crossings. In IIJA, it is $500 million. My friend, I don't
think that is enough. We need to do more.
I mean, if that is a safety issue, we need to do more. What
do you think we should do with that program?
Secretary Buttigieg. If you would like to propose growing
that program----
Mr. Nehls [interposing]. I will.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. We would love to work
with you on it.
Mr. Nehls. I will.
Secretary Buttigieg. It is--we have had our chance to go
out to some of the first projects----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. We are going to do it.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Funding there. We
announced it in North Dakota. The enthusiasm----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. We are going to do it.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. In communities is
extraordinary. And I think it has so far been very well
received.
Mr. Nehls. How about the AskRail? What do you think about
the AskRail? The report says they didn't know what was in the
cars. They didn't--the first responders didn't know the
chemicals, they didn't know the consist in the cars. But the
actual consist was up in the locomotive, but they didn't get it
for a couple of hours. So, here, these first responders are out
there trying to figure out what the hell is in these cars, and
they didn't have it.
Now, the AskRail, I think, is a good thing. I think all
Class I's use it. But we have to do something to make sure that
we have the connectivity with cell service in these rural
areas, because the AskRail app will be combat ineffective if we
don't have it.
One of the colleagues mentioned about the close call
reporting system. I support it. I think it is a good idea. How
do you think that--quickly, how do you think that will improve
safety in our rail industry?
Secretary Buttigieg. We think it creates one more
opportunity to flag safety issues. We are glad to have a
handful of participants but we really believe it ought to be
everybody. And----
Mr. Nehls [interposing]. I agree.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Whether that is done by
some kind of requirement through Congress or whether we all
just continue pushing the Class I's, I really hope we can get
them----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. Automated track inspection.
Obviously, a lot of technology out there. I don't think a lot
of people know about it. How can we--this is the tough sell.
How do we get labor and the railroads together on the same page
as it relates to these technologies? ATI is a great thing. I
mean, it could do a lot.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, I think----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. How do----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. I think a lot of the best
technologies in the history of our economy have a track record
of creating and expanding jobs, even if they change some of the
aspects of what those jobs are like. But our posture is that
any----
Mr. Nehls [interposing]. Sure.
Secretary Buttigieg. And to be clear, we support and
sometimes even ourselves use ATI. We just haven't seen the data
that allows us to be confident that you can remove the human
factor.
Mr. Nehls. Sure. One quick thing.
Secretary Buttigieg. We think it needs to be alongside----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. Do you support two-man crew?
Secretary Buttigieg. We do.
Mr. Nehls. OK, last one, the tank cars, the DOT-111s, the
105s, 117s--I don't know if anybody understands that, but we
want to phase those out, right, the 111s by 2029. I think we
can do it quicker. I think we can do it quicker. I would like
to move that up, and I will do everything I can to do that.
Secretary Buttigieg. That is great news, and one of the
provisions we are most excited about in the pending bipartisan
legislation.
Mr. Nehls. All right. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mrs. Sykes is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Ranking
Member Larsen, for holding this hearing, and, of course,
Secretary Buttigieg, for your testimony. I am certainly going
to piggyback a little bit off of my colleague and continue to
talk about rail safety.
As you know, the East Palestine train derailment happened
just next door to my district, and we have been very much
involved and engaged. Since we have heard from the NTSB, we
have penned a letter to this committee, including to Chairman
Nehls, to hold a hearing on rail safety. I have signed that
letter with my colleague, Nikema Williams from Georgia, who is
also very interested in making sure that we are holding
corporate actors accountable and protecting the safety and
security of people across the Nation.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your efforts in
supporting bipartisan rail safety provisions in many of the
things that we just heard about.
I also want to say thank you for visiting Ohio's 13th
District, the best district, of course, in the Nation, as we
all say, to highlight some of the local efforts to create
workforce development opportunities, expand apprenticeships,
and invest in infrastructure to lower costs. And none of these
would be possible without the historic legislation like the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the implementation work that
you have done. We are very grateful for those funds that have
made it to our communities, and a lot of people have gotten
great jobs, union jobs, especially, that pay well and are safe.
But one thing that we didn't get to do in the district
during your visit this week was visit our crown jewel, which we
call the Akron-Canton Airport, which is CAK. They have received
over $3 million in funding, and this airport was established
during World War II, and served as a vital asset for economic
development in the community, and generated over $1 billion in
the area and over 4,000 jobs.
However, even with this type of activity and ridership,
passenger rides, it has not protected this airport from threats
faced by other small to mid-sized regional airports. So, for
example, CAK has seen major airlines consolidate their routes
to Cleveland Hopkins, in part because CAK is designated within
the Cleveland airport as one market based on the Department of
Transportation, and this designation has unfairly excluded CAK
from the list of airports that require maximum air service
levels, and limits their ability to optimize their role as a
key promoter of economic development. And this directly impacts
my constituents because these were their jobs that now have
moved.
So, Mr. Secretary, how can airports like Akron-Canton
distinguish itself as a unique, standalone market when some of
the decisions by agencies don't allow them to do so?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, first, let me thank you for
welcoming us to the district. It was a very informative and
inspiring visit. And also let me thank you for your work on
rail safety legislation that we are very hopeful gets quick
action and results in this Chamber.
Having been the mayor of a city that had a small airport
that was within driving distance of a big airport but meant a
lot to our community, I certainly understand and sympathize
with the aspirations of Akron-Canton, and want to make sure
that airport gets the support that it needs and deserves. I
know that we have been in dialogue with the airport about
planned upgrades for the air traffic control tower there, but
also understand that there is a level of market pressure that
is affecting the region.
While some of the ways that these radii are set up may be
pursuant to statute, to the extent there is any flexibility we
would welcome opportunities to work with you on that so that it
really makes sense for the region, for the market, and for a
community or a facility like Akron-Canton.
Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We have felt the
downside of the consolidations, and larger airlines, going way
back to US Air, American Airlines, when we had Northwest,
Delta, even with full flights, loyal customers, and large
populations based close to our airport and really a segment of
our rural communities really preferring this route, it has been
very, very impactful.
And so, again, we just want to work with you on that very
specific need in our community. We do not want to see this
airport go away. It would negatively impact not just northeast
Ohio, my district, but the entire eastern region of the State
that certainly needs a lot of love.
But with that, Mr. Secretary, I promised you when you were
in the district that we were going to be very positive and give
you good vibes, because I do know that this can be tough,
sitting in meetings for several hours. And I am going to yield
back my final 13 seconds so you can take a breath.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you, Representative.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields. Mr. Mann is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Mann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here again today. I
represent 60 primarily rural counties in central-western
Kansas, a little bit of eastern, as well. In Kansas, we know
full well that it is imperative that our highways and roads are
drivable, that commercial and cargo aviation are able to
efficiently operate, and that our railroads are able to deliver
goods and provide the transportation that we all need. A
handful of questions, Mr. Secretary.
America, as you know, we have 5,000 commercial-grade
airports, but only 500 of these airports are currently served
by commercial services. Around the country, we have seen a
steady decline in air services, with more than 150 communities
losing air service in the last 20 years. In rural Kansas, this
issue is all too real. FAA Administrator Whitaker has
emphasized the need for regional aircraft with a capacity
between 9 and 50 seats to better serve these smaller
communities, and mentioned plans to prioritize manufacturing
efforts for such aircraft.
How do you envision new-generation regional aircraft
helping to restore regional air service?
And what plans does DOT have to accelerate the production
of smaller regional aircraft in the country?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thanks for the question, and I
certainly can relate to the perspective of a community served
by a small airport, wondering whether there is a future for
commercial air service there.
And part of what I think is compelling about the FAA's most
recent work is how it might be able to open up new
opportunities in that kind of sandwiched category between one
size of aircraft and the next that is a step up. Of course, our
primary imperative has to do with safety. That will guide
everything that the FAA does. But we also want to make sure we
are paying attention to the economic dimensions of that, to the
extent that we are permitted to do that through some of the
authorities that we have on the OST of the house.
And we make sure that our team works alongside the FAA
safety folks because we have seen what EAS has done and can do
for support of air service to small communities and rural
areas. But we also see there is much more need than has been
supported by the resources that we have.
Mr. Mann. And we got to keep delivering aircraft in the
certain size that is going to make these smaller airports
continue to be viable, as I see it.
The next question, Mr. Secretary, in my mind, it's
imperative that we maintain our Nation's highways and roads so
our economies and supply chains can thrive. I think we all
agree on that. As has been mentioned earlier today, electric
batteries are far heavier than car batteries. And no doubt
these heavier vehicles are going to lead to more wear and tear
on our roads quicker than gas-powered cars.
Has the DOT considered how its electric vehicle mandates
might impact our roads, or offered any thoughts on how these
vehicles will pay their fair share when it comes to
contributing to the Highway Trust Fund?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, if the DOT were ever to
contemplate an electric vehicle mandate, we would do so. Since
we have not, I wouldn't phrase it that way. But that is not to
take away from the fact that we are conscious of the fact that
the increasing use of EVs comes with increasingly heavy
vehicles.
By the way, so has consumer choice evolving more toward
SUVs and trucks, relative to what you would have seen 10, 20,
30 years ago, whether we are talking about combustion or EVs.
And this brings me to one of my favorite, though admittedly
unfashionable, topics, which is pavement durability.
I would encourage you to, if you get the opportunity, to
visit our Turner-Fairbank facility operated by the Federal
Highway Administration not too far from where we are sitting
here. And I was able to see a test bed we have there, where
there are 12 seemingly identical strips of asphalt next to each
other. But if you dig beneath the surface, literally, what you
would find is different makeup, different composite, different
stacking, and about 300 sensors that are helping beam real-time
information about how they weather the different conditions
they are subject to.
In terms of the other side of your question about funding,
we are conscious that as we move toward an increasingly
electric future, the gas tax model will not be sufficient to
capture the principle of user pays, nor has it been sufficient
for some time just to keep pace with demand.
I think by the time of the next reauthorization, Congress
and the country really will face a choice about whether to
remain committed to the user pays principle, in which case
there will have to be some revenue source that can equitably
collect from EVs the same way that, if you have a gas car, you
are paying a gas tax, or be willing to set aside that
principle, which in a way is happening de facto with the
portion of the Highway Trust Fund that is being gapped with
general fund dollars coming from Congress.
But I don't think that is a considered decision. I think it
is just a measure Congress has had to undertake in order to
make ends meet.
Mr. Mann. Right, yes. Thank you.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields back. Ms. Scholten is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Scholten. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for taking the time to be here
today. This must be the regional air service portion of the
hearing.
So, the Department of Transportation's EAS program, of
course, plays such a vital role in ensuring communities have
access to air travel provided by certified air carriers. I am
fortunate to have two great airports in my district.
The one I want to ask about today is Muskegon County
Airport, MKG. Their EAS provider has not met the needs of the
community with documented poor operational reliability,
widespread concerns regarding the customer experience, and
failure to meet the terms of its contract. To quantify this
poor performance, MKG--their current EAS provider's actual
completion rate sits below 70 percent; 68 percent of those
completed flights were delayed significantly.
Due to a lack of confidence across Muskegon, at the end of
2023, MKG requested a change in its EAS provider, which I fully
support. Despite the Muskegon County commissioners and my
support for a new EAS provider, as well as a nonobjection
letter from the current provider, the Department has yet to
complete its contract to ensure that folks can access reliable,
quality flights in and out of this vital part of the lakeshore.
Does the Department's EAS and Domestic Analysis Division
have the resources that it needs to address these contract
changes? We obviously can't do it without the Department's
sign-off. If not, can you speak to where these delays might be
coming in?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you. I know that we have a
small and hard-working team seeking to keep up with the demand
for processing of all of these EAS applications and
developments. So, I will commit to learning more about the
Muskegon application and anything that can be done to move it
along.
As far as resources, we, again, have a small but mighty
team. They do a great job with the resources that they have,
but we would welcome opportunities not just in terms of the
administrative side, but just more generally, to make sure that
EAS is robust so that it can meet the needs of these smaller
communities that need and deserve good commercial air service.
Ms. Scholten. Thank you. I appreciate your attention to
that matter.
On to my next question. We are both proud Michiganders now,
and we know that Michigan put the world on wheels, and we are
going to keep it moving forward. A big way in which we do that
is through the trucking industry. Close to one-quarter of a
million jobs in Michigan are--the trucking industry supports
one-quarter of a million jobs, and 1 out of every 15 jobs is
considered a trucking job in the State of Michigan. These
individuals work long hours, risk their safety to ensure supply
chains run smoothly.
Unfortunately, an ongoing shortage of safe and accessible
truck parking throughout the country threatens the safety of
all drivers. I know we touched on this earlier in the hearing,
as well. It is incumbent on us here in Congress to fix this,
which is why I am such a proud cosponsor of my colleague Mr.
Bost's Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act, which advanced out
of committee this past year.
Mr. Secretary, I understand that while some IIJA dollars
were directed towards truck parking funds, these funds were not
specifically dedicated for that use, leaving State
transportation departments to choose between pursuing truck
parking and critical infrastructure projects. Given these
pressing needs, how is the Department planning to address this
gap and provide the necessary resources to keep truckers and
everyday drivers safe?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, let me first applaud your
attention to the issue of truck parking. It is, far and away,
the number-one thing we hear whenever I am with drivers and
trucking organizations.
As you noted, we have a number of projects going on across
the country, but none of them come from a program or a fund
that is dedicated for that purpose. So, whether it is a
scenario like you described, where a State is making tough
choices about what to prioritize, or our own discretionary
grantmaking processes, where I am very keen to make sure we
support truck parking, but that is competing with every other
worthy cause coming in, it would be different if there were
specific, dedicated funding for that. And we would welcome
working with you on that bipartisan legislation to make sure
that there are more resources than before going to this clear
and mounting need, which, by the way, is not just a convenience
issue for drivers, but really a safety issue for everybody.
Ms. Scholten. It absolutely is for the drivers and
pedestrians, the truckdrivers themselves, others who encounter
them. We will absolutely continue doing everything we can in
Congress to allocate that funding. But of course, the
Department of Transportation has the ability to specifically
designate that, as well, and I just want to thank you for your
attention there.
I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlelady yields back, and the gentleman
from the great State of Utah, Mr. Owens, is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Owens. Thank you. Thank you so much.
And Mr. Secretary, thanks for being here. I am going to
start off with something very Utah-specific, and thank you for
the collaboration we have right now with the Federal.
The State of Utah is the fastest growing State in the Union
over the past decade, with over 80 percent of our population
along a 100-mile stretch of I-15 between the Wasatch Mountain
Range and the Great Salt Lake, Utah now is also preparing to
host for the 2034 Winter Olympic Games. With the growth, it is
imperative to have a safe, efficient, and reliable public
transportation system to maintain the high quality that we now
have in this region.
Projects like the double tracking of Utah's FrontRunner
commuter rail systems are key to addressing traffic congestion,
air quality, and affordable housing. The double tracking system
is projected to double the ridership and double the frequency
of trains. The State of Utah has provided over $400 million to
this project, and is now seeking a collaborative Federal
partnership to complete this critically important regional
project.
The project is now currently in a developmental stage with
FTA's Capital Investment Grant, and I am pleased to see that
this project was listed on the President's most recent budget
request. Can you affirm the administration's commitment to
continuing working with Utah to get the FrontRunner's strategic
double tracking project approved into the engineering phase
this year?
Secretary Buttigieg. Absolutely. FTA has allocated $494
million to date in CIG funding for this. We have worked closely
with Utah's DOT, and we applaud their attention to growing
transit needs in, as you mentioned, a very fast-growing area
that is really going to require and benefit from those kinds of
investments.
With every major project, there are challenges to be met.
We want to meet those challenges together. And we anticipate an
entry into engineering pending, of course, various requirements
that have to be met. But we anticipate that in the year ahead,
and would love to be able to celebrate this entering into
revenue service.
Mr. Owens. Well, thank you for that. And I will just say
this. Utah is the most innovative. We come under budget, we
balance our budget. So, continue to use us as an example for
the rest of the country. I think we will all be well served.
So, thanks so much for that.
We will switch topics real quickly. I am concerned whenever
Government solutions become highlighted more than the free
market. And I fear that we are repeating a mistake that we made
in the past when we led a worldwide blind eye to man's
inhumanity to man. We are talking about back in the day, when
something as simple as the cotton gin was a game changer. Now,
before the cotton gin, slavery was just not a profitable
venture. It was too labor intensive. It could not scale. The
cotton gin allowed it to scale unlimited, as long as it had
pickers, and those pickers were slaves. It took 72 years and
over 600,000 lives to change that trajectory.
My concern right now is EVs are dependent on Congo, the
cobalt that is produced in these mines. The U.N. has come up
with a report that over 40,000 children as young as 6 years old
are being used in these mines. I will call that slave labor
because children do not want to do that on their own. And my
concern again is that we are out of sight, out of mind. We
allow man's natural avarice or greed to put in place our goals,
as opposed to the--what might be getting to make that happen.
So, here is my question: How does the administration
justify the use of taxpayers' subsidy for this type of
environment in which so many children are being used for labor?
Secretary Buttigieg. In order to save American lives. But
to be clear, we do not tolerate child labor or forced labor----
Mr. Owens [interrupting]. Just real quickly, you said in
order to save American lives?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. There is no justification for, of
course, for child labor or forced labor. But if you are asking
the justification for our enthusiasm for EVs, it is to save
American lives and in order to prevent forced labor or child
labor from going into any of our supply chains.
Cobalt is one of the 159 products listed by the Department
of Labor as an area of concern----
Mr. Owens [interrupting]. Mr. Secretary, I need you to just
answer that question, because I am having a little trouble
digesting that. You are saying to build EVs and using child
labor is saving American lives?
Secretary Buttigieg. No, of course not. Nobody is saying
that anything brought into the United States should include
forced labor or child labor. This is one of the reasons why we
have acted to reduce the extent to which cobalt is included. As
a matter of fact, we believe that 80 percent less cobalt is now
going into today's EV batteries, and we are encouraged to see
developments that might drive that even lower.
But if you want to know why we believe it is important to
adopt electric vehicles, part of the reason has to do with the
29,000 American----
Mr. Owens [interrupting]. Could I----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Gas-associated pollution
every year----
Mr. Owens [continuing interruption]. Could I make a real--I
am sorry, and I apologize, I ran out of time. I am so sorry for
that. I just want to say this. We are now representing what the
cotton gin represented back 200 years ago. We are the impetus.
We are allowing this to be scaled, China and the United States.
We need to let the free market work, so innovation come in. We
will figure out a much better way of doing it. And Americans
will decide whether they want to buy not on subsidy, but based
on all the areas, all these factors that factor into developing
this industry.
With that I yield back. And I am sorry I ran out of time
there.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Foushee is recognized
for 5 minutes--Mrs. Foushee, sorry.
Mrs. Foushee. Thank you to the chairman and the ranking
member for holding this hearing today.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here. We realize
your time is valuable, and I am sure I can speak for my
colleagues that we appreciate your appearing before the
committee today to speak about the important work that the
Department of Transportation is doing across the country.
As I brought up in our Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous
Materials Subcommittee hearing earlier this month, 2023 was a
remarkable year for North Carolina passenger rail. Amtrak
ridership in the State saw a staggering year-over-year increase
of 33.7 percent. We received a number of Corridor ID grants to
further build out seven different rail corridors throughout the
State, and North Carolina's S-Line project was awarded over $1
billion via the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity
Passenger Rail to help us design and build a high-performance
passenger rail line connecting North Carolina and Virginia.
So, from your vantage point at DOT, can you speak to the
ways in which the investments from BIL have spurred the growth
and development of passenger rail in regions of the country
like the Southeast Corridor, where communities have
historically lacked access to passenger rail as a legitimate
transportation alternative?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you. I am enthusiastic
about the creation of opportunity for passenger rail, and
seeing how that has benefited the North Carolina and the
Southeast corridor is, I think, a prime example of how the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is allowing us to transform our
Nation's rail network.
Amtrak set a record for ridership last year in North
Carolina, surpassed 1 million riders for the first time, which
also brings it all the way back and on track to exceed all of
the pre-COVID numbers that we had seen. And as you mentioned,
that billion-dollar grant to develop a new passenger rail route
between Raleigh and Richmond, we think, is going to bring
enormous opportunity.
I want to emphasize that we think that is just the
beginning of the corridor development we can do both with
conventional, and in the future, we think, high-speed rail
opportunities--because we don't see any reason why Americans
should have any less access to excellent passenger rail than
people living in any other developed country.
Mrs. Foushee. And I am sure you are aware passenger and
freight railroads have recently begun testing AI-enhanced
camera portal technologies for railcar inspections. And while
this technology has the potential to increase the effectiveness
of inspections and the overall level of safety in our rail
system, I am concerned that railroads won't be utilizing
properly trained personnel to review the data these AI-enhanced
technologies generate.
In the rail industry, there are qualified mechanical
inspectors whose sole jobs are to make sure railcars are
inspected and safe when departing a rail yard. It is imperative
that AI-enhanced technology be tested by these inspectors, and
that the results of the AI-facilitated inspections be reported
to qualified inspectors to ensure that appropriate corrective
actions are being taken when safety defects in railcars are
identified.
Can you speak generally about how the Department is
reviewing and evaluating new rail technology like this, in
light of the DOT's innovation principles?
And more specifically, can you commit to having DOT review
the use of this technology in rail yards to ensure that
qualified mechanical inspectors are being appropriately
utilized to review the data that is being produced?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. Yes, we are committed to
ensuring we maintain the high standards that our Department
enforces for the expert-led inspection and quality assurance
that keeps our railroads safe. There are certainly any number
of new technologies that can help with that. We welcome the
development of new technologies, but we don't view that as a
replacement for what we now have, given the data that we have
seen, nor do we think it represents an excuse to lower our
standard when it comes to what we expect of our railroads.
So, we will continue to support and evaluate research on
different forms of technology for things like track inspection
and other safety and quality control functions, but there is no
substitute for the human expertise that has gone in so many
ways toward keeping our railroads safe. And we will continue to
work with those who have spent their lives on this important
domain of rail safety as we look to the future.
Mrs. Foushee. Agreed. Thank you.
I yield back, Ms. Chairman.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields back. Mr. Yakym is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
And Mr. Secretary, it is good to see you again. I want to
discuss two IIJA programs, the National Electric Vehicle
Infrastructure, or NEVI, and the Charging and Fueling
Infrastructure, or CFI programs.
As you know, NEVI was funded at $5\1/2\ billion and CFI at
$2\1/2\ billion. After 2\1/2\ years, it appears that just the
ninth NEVI-funded EV charging station was brought online this
month in Pennsylvania. A few weeks ago, I asked FHWA
Administrator Bhatt how many NEVI funding charging stations he
expects to have brought online in 2024. He said he expects it
to be in the ``hundreds to thousands range'' brought online
this year. Do you agree with his estimate?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. The bulk of the NEVI chargers
will be installed in 2027 and 2028, but I have been impressed
to see that some of them will actually come online this year,
2024, and a few of them have even already been installed.
Mr. Yakym. So, you do expect hundreds, if not thousands----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Yes, I think the
first----
Mr. Yakym [continuing]. By the end of this year.
Secretary Buttigieg. Right. Like I said, 2027, 2028 is when
you are going to see most of the installations, but I expect
the first few hundred to come online this year.
Mr. Yakym. OK, thank you. Let's turn our attention to CFI.
That $2\1/2\ billion program has brought in zero charging
stations online in the last 2\1/2\ years because the first
grants were only announced in January of 2024. Now, I am happy
to report that one of those recipients is the Michiana Area
Council of Governments, or MACOG, as I know you are familiar
with in your old stomping grounds, but I think their experience
is perhaps emblematic of why NEVI and CFI have fallen a bit
flat on their face out of the blocks, because 5 months after
the announcement, MACOG still doesn't have a fully executed
grant agreement, and of course, no work can start until that is
in place.
Mr. Secretary, of the 47 CFI awards announced in January of
2024, how many grant agreements have been finalized?
Secretary Buttigieg. I doubt that it has been possible to
do grant agreements on most of them that quickly. It is not
typical, especially on a brandnew program, to do them on
anything close to a 5-month timeframe. I am impatient to do
them, but I just want to make sure nobody moves the goalpost
here for a program that we expect will do the bulk of its work
in the second half of this decade.
Mr. Yakym. But do you know how many have been completed? Is
it zero? Is it five? Is it 10? Is it half----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I would have to pull
that, but I would not expect any of them to be done yet.
Mr. Yakym. OK, I mean, it is a little bit disappointing
that you wouldn't know the answer, because I did give your
staff a heads-up that we would be asking that question here.
I do believe that slow grant agreements certainly seem to
be a hallmark of the Biden administration's what seems to be
kind of the build nothing ever agenda. A most recent report on
IIJA RAISE grants shows that only 118 of the 415 grant
agreements have been executed, which certainly is at a time of
high inflation, and these delays certainly serve to bust
budgets and put projects in jeopardy.
So, when would you expect all 47 of the original grant
agreements to be executed?
Secretary Buttigieg. We can only certify a grant agreement
if it actually meets Federal requirements. So, I can't
guarantee on behalf of any project sponsor when they will be
ready. What I can guarantee is that we will work with them to
get ready, but we can only certify that something meets Federal
law if it is actually true.
I also respectfully think you are mistaken to characterize
this timing as delayed, especially given that it is the same
general time to grant agreement as we saw in the previous
administration. That is not to say I don't want it to be
faster, I just want to make sure we are being honest about
the----
Mr. Yakym [interrupting]. What should the target be----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Patterns that we have
inherited when it comes to how long it takes to get from an
award announcement to a grant agreement, especially when we are
talking about a novel program.
Mr. Yakym. What do you believe the general target should be
for new grant agreements to be put in place?
Secretary Buttigieg. So, again, it really depends on what
kind of project. For example, if MACOG were to come to us, they
said they want to do an interchange, they are hoping to get it
to construction by 2027, we may recognize that if they are not
ready to have the pieces in place for a grant agreement until
2026, that might be workable. Whereas, for another program,
where they want to be running in the next construction season,
we are going to want them to turn that quickly.
But it is extremely rare--and I mean extremely rare--for
any project to lapse past the obligation deadline set by
Congress.
Mr. Yakym. Thank you. The most recent quarterly NEVI update
showed that there are now 183,000 publicly available charging
ports. How many of those were built by the Federal Government?
Secretary Buttigieg. Those were built by the private
sector.
Mr. Yakym. Yes, so, there are--so, with those being built
by the private sector and the most recent NEVI quarterly report
showing that we have got 37 charging ports out of 183,000 built
by the Government, do you believe that there is still an
appropriate role for the Federal Government to play here, given
the fact that the private sector is doing so well in building
these charging ports?
Shouldn't the Federal Government pull back and just get out
of the business?
Secretary Buttigieg. No, we think it is really important to
fill in some of the gaps in areas that won't pencil for the
private sector.
Look, the vast majority of EV charging takes place at home.
But having those public chargers out there is going to be
important. And it has been very clear from our research that
the private sector alone won't reach some of the areas, whether
we are talking about low-income areas, rural areas that are
spread out, they just don't pencil. That is why Congress
created this program, which is designed to create tens of
thousands of chargers in the second half of this decade. But I
am pleased to see the very first handful of them already
online.
Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
And Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Deluzio is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Deluzio. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, good to see you here today. I will start
with a bit of thanks. I was very excited to hear the Department
and you, Mr. Secretary, select Sharpsburg in my district for a
competitive RAISE grant, $25 million. I know you heard from me
and the Department heard from me on this, a big deal for my
region, a big deal for Sharpsburg. So, thank you.
Turning to rail safety, which I am sure is no surprise, I
have been very encouraged today to hear colleagues on both
sides of the aisle express support for rail safety, for some
commonsense measures to make freight rail safer to protect
communities like mine. I appreciated your and the
administration's strong support of the Railway Safety Act. I
was very encouraged to hear subcommittee Chair Nehls express
some support there. I look forward to working with him and
others to get something done.
It has been more than a year since the East Palestine
derailment and Norfolk Southern's train. My constituents, many
within the evacuation zone, infected--affected, excuse me--in
their homes, farms. Certainly, our neighbors in Ohio bear much
of the cost of this, as well. Many are still dealing with the
uncertainty around the safety of their air, their soil, their
animals, water. We have got the NTSB findings now. I know we
have had some discussion here today. Chair Homendy has talked
about at length the main cause, of course, being overheated
wheel bearing and faulty detectors on the tracks.
What shocked me--and we have heard some reports of this
before the findings--was Norfolk Southern and its contractors
withholding information from first responders, the incident
commander on the ground, specifically information from the
manufacturer of the chemicals, who was telling Norfolk Southern
and its contractors that, in fact, they were not at risk of
explosion, those cars. The cars were more modern, and thus able
to withstand what had happened and, in fact, were cooling.
That information was not conveyed to the folks on the
ground. They were pressured, in my opinion, to authorize the
vent and burn, which sent a toxic fireball over the sky of my
constituents and our neighbors in Ohio, imperiling their
health. I find it unacceptable. It didn't need to happen. And I
think the question is, why? It seems to me the railroad wanted
to get the trains moving again, putting their profit, their
lust for profit above the safety of my constituents.
So, I ask a very simple question, Mr. Secretary, to start:
Do you trust the railroads to regulate themselves?
Secretary Buttigieg. Absolutely not.
Mr. Deluzio. Me neither. I think what we saw in this
derailment and in conduct thereafter is they cannot be trusted.
I think we have a bipartisan path forward.
I think what also reinforces that need for us to take bold
action here is what Chair Homendy said about the railroad
interfering with the investigation, which she said was an
unprecedented and reprehensible way. I think it speaks to a
lack of commitment to public safety, a thirst for profit that
is unending.
And of course, some in Congress have said that, well, we
have to wait for the final NTSB findings to act. We have those.
I think that excuse is gone. I am--again, I am excited to see
that there are folks here in both parties who want to work
together to get this done.
The Railway Safety Act, as you know, I think may be the
only piece of legislation that Joe Biden and Donald Trump agree
about. This ought to be an easy thing for this committee to
work on.
You mentioned two legislative actions specifically from the
findings, one being caps on fines the railroads pay. Currently,
I think it is around $225,000. The Railway Safety Act increases
that tremendously to 1 percent of railroad's annual operating
income. So, the bill addresses that point.
And then another piece, which you have mentioned, I heard
Chairman Nehls also expressed support about, increasing or
accelerating the upgrade timeline for tank cars. We have these
provisions. We can get this done. I would urge my colleagues to
support me in doing that.
I will give you a chance, Mr. Secretary. Plenty of things
you and the Department are doing around rail safety, but you
need help from Congress. What else do you need us to do?
Secretary Buttigieg. We need this legislation. Look, we are
doing everything we can, short of an act of Congress, but we
are urgently calling for Congress to act because legislation
like the legislation you have put forward will give our
Department a stronger hand to hold railroads accountable and to
keep our railroads safe.
We are talking about an extremely--some would say
ridiculously--profitable industry. They have the means to
operate more safely. But unless a law requires it of them, it
will not happen. And I believe the provisions that we have
talked about like the increased fines, acceleration of the
adoption of stronger tank cars, as well as measures that would
enhance the handling and the flow of information about
hazardous materials are going to save lives. And the moment
Congress gets that action through this Chamber and the Senate,
where, of course, the committee in the Senate has already heard
it, we will get to work right away implementing that.
Mr. Deluzio. Very good. We will do our best here, sir. I
encourage my colleagues to join me on this.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Kean is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, it is good to see you. Thank you for being
here today.
This hearing could not have come at a better time, at least
for my constituents in New Jersey. Mr. Secretary, as you know,
during this past week, the Northeast Corridor, particularly
between New York Penn Station and Newark, saw major delays due
to its myriad of issues, some related to power challenges,
potentially outdated infrastructure, and system failures. Not
only have these major delays and cancellations become all too
regular, but now constant, with 16 such incidents within the
last 6 weeks alone.
Just last week, I wrote to Amtrak CEO Stephen Gardner
requesting information and remedies for recent delays and
cancellations. Today, I was informed that Amtrak and New Jersey
Transit have reached an agreement to investigate these issues,
and I am reviewing that agreement now.
Additionally, I, along with my colleagues in the New Jersey
delegation, sent you a letter this week requesting an
investigation into the failures along the affected section of
the Northeast Corridor. And I hope that my colleagues and I
will receive a response soon because these regular delays
prevent working parents from attending their children's
sporting events and missing cherished family dinners. I look
forward to working with you and your team on fixing these
important issues.
Mr. Secretary, the commuter railroads that operate up and
down the Northeast Corridor--New Jersey Transit, Long Island
Rail Road, and Metro-North, SEPTA in Philadelphia, and others
all have board of directors meetings that are open to the
public so that the public can see the decisions that affect
them are being made, and so, they can give their input to
leaders directly. Still, Amtrak's board meetings are not open
to the public. Mr. Secretary, would you support Amtrak becoming
like the other railroads and holding open public meetings?
Secretary Buttigieg. I haven't had a chance to evaluate
what effect that would have on Amtrak's governance. Obviously,
they operate by different requirements than a Government entity
because of their quasi-government role, but I certainly agree
that a high level of transparency is important in how a
corporation of that public importance conducts its business.
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Could you please investigate that
and get back to me directly in writing what your opinions are
on that?
Because I think it is very important, and I agree with you,
the more transparency for everybody involved in this,
especially those people who are subject to any decisions of any
board of directors needs to be public. Thank you.
Increased funding for Amtrak has allowed the agency to hire
a significant number of employees in the last few years. How
many employees has Amtrak hired for key operational functions
such as flagging, track and tie repair, and electric traction
repair?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am sorry, the question is?
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Yes, how many employees has Amtrak
hired for key operational functions such as flagging, track and
tie repair, and electric traction repair?
Secretary Buttigieg. I don't have a tabulation of hires by
employee category handy, but I would be happy to request one
from Amtrak on your behalf if you would have trouble getting
that.
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you. How is U.S. DOT ensuring
that Amtrak is investing in positions that actually do improve
day-to-day operations?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, ultimately, it is a question of
performance, and we want to make sure that Amtrak is meeting
the performance marks that are expected of them, whether we are
talking about on-time performance, maintenance issues, or their
fiscal condition.
We have certainly seen a lot of improvement on the fiscal
side, in terms of them moving their operating numbers closer to
break even or into the black pre-COVID, and would encourage
them to continue that work. But also in very specific ways we
fund--mainly on the capital side--their operations in order to
make--or their growth in order to make sure they have the
equipment they need.
I was concerned to see the recent mark from the House cut
funding for Amtrak. I think they are working with resources
that are sometimes spread thin, but working toward a very
important mission.
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. As you know, I support Amtrak and
continued service, and we need to have more stops, as we have
discussed in the past, in Trenton, as well as in Metropark and
throughout the entire Northeast Corridor in New Jersey.
How specifically do you ensure that Amtrak's internal
processes prioritize day-to-day operations from the top down?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, it is certainly something that
we communicate in our engagements with Amtrak, the desire for a
focus on results for the end user. I know they are balancing a
lot of competing priorities in terms of their capital needs,
operations and maintenance, and their vision for the future.
But we know that one of the biggest obstacles to Amtrak's
reliability has been underinvestment. And we believe that the
historic investment we are making through the President's
infrastructure package is helping them to get ahead of that.
Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Ms. Norton is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Secretary, we have recently seen overall
traffic fatalities start to decrease, but fatalities of
vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists
continue to rise. Under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act, Congress required States to complete vulnerable road user
safety assessments. The law also required States with high
rates of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities to dedicate a
portion of their highway safety funds to stopping these
needless deaths.
What is the Department learning from the implementation of
these provisions, and what else is needed to reduce pedestrian
and bicyclist fatalities?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thank you for the question. Like
you, we have been heartened to see improvements in the overall
numbers of roadway fatalities over the last eight quarters in
the U.S., but we continue to see very troubling patterns in
terms of pedestrian and cyclist injuries and fatalities, or
vulnerable road users.
Part of what we have been able to do about it is through
our Safe Streets and Roads for All program to help communities,
including those undertaking the assessments you have described,
implement plans that better protect vulnerable road users from
exposure to traffic.
I fear sometimes that media or other accounts of things
like bike lanes treat them as ornamental, when they are really
about life safety. And whether we are talking about bike lanes,
lighting, signage, or other measures, many of the things that
we are now able to fund in hundreds of communities across the
country are, we believe, contributing toward a safer
environment for pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable
road users to go about their commute, their trip, whatever they
are doing, without harm.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Secretary, last fall, the Department issued
guidance on how two loan programs, TIFIA and RRIF, can be used
to support transit-oriented development, including conversions
of unused office space to new housing, which is particularly
needed in the District of Columbia, which I represent. Has the
Department authorized any Federal funds for office conversion
projects, and how can we get more funds out the door?
Secretary Buttigieg. We have got a number of those in the
pipeline, and our first transit-oriented development loan was
closed in April, the Mount Vernon Washington Library Commons
project, which is now under construction. We are very hopeful
that this program will lead to support for those conversions
you were describing.
Post-COVID commuting patterns are changed, and the mix of
what different cities require in terms of housing versus
commercial square footage is different. We want to make sure we
are helping them make use of opportunities to do those
conversions, knowing the housing crunch that so many
communities face. We can't predict a definite timeline for when
some of the other applicants will be ready, but we are working
through a number of applications as we speak. We would be happy
to keep you apprised of the development of that new pipeline in
the TOD funding.
Ms. Norton. I want to discuss the importance of
strengthening consumer protection in transportation.
This past April, the Department issued a final rule
requiring aircraft carriers to provide automatic refunds when
airlines cancel or significantly change their flights. I
recently introduced the Household Goods Shipping Consumer
Protection Act with Representative Ezell to give the Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration more authority to protect
consumers from fraud in the interstate transportation of
household goods.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration receives
thousands of complaints every year from Americans who are
victims of fraud in the shipment of household goods, and my
bill would grant the agency the authority to reimburse States
for enforcing Federal consumer protection laws related to the
transportation of household goods, and to assess civil
penalties against unregistered shippers and against entities
that hold consumer personal goods.
What other steps is the Department taking to strengthen
consumer protection in transportation, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Buttigieg. We see how fraud in the movement of
goods has created just gut-wrenching stories from people who
are vulnerable when somebody else has possession of their goods
during a move. So, FMCSA has increased its efforts to combat
external fraud relating to commercial motor vehicle and driver
operations.
Legislation such as what you have led on introducing, could
give FMCSA the explicit authority needed to assess civil
penalties for violations of commercial regulations, withhold
registration from applicants who have failed to provide the
right verification demonstrating that they are legitimate, and
allow us to expand our household goods program by engaging
States as force multipliers. So, we welcome this, and
appreciate your work on it.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, I yield back.
Mr. Burlison [presiding]. Thank you. The Chair now
recognizes himself for 5 minutes.
Secretary Buttigieg, you have recently--just earlier today,
you have answered a lot of questions related to the slow
implementation of the EV charging stations. And one of the
conversations that you had, I thought, was concerning, and I
want to kind of touch upon it, was the statement that this push
towards electric vehicles, even though there is a cost of slave
labor, and that we are seeing--and it is not just cobalt. We
have got lithium and other items that are being supplied by--90
percent of it is coming from China, so, we are empowering
someone who is an aggressor to the United States, and yet you
are saying that it's fine, so long as we are saving lives in
America.
Secretary Buttigieg. That is not an accurate
characterization of what I have said.
We wish you would have supported us in moving more of this
onshore, so it would be produced in America. But the
legislation did pass. And to take graphite alone, we are going
to be able to supply, we estimate, 47 percent of it
domestically.
Nobody believes in allowing any product that doesn't meet
labor standards to be imported to the United States. And if you
would like to work with us on making sure any of the 159----
Mr. Burlison [interrupting]. So, let's----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Items of concern to
include cobalt----
Mr. Burlison [continuing interruption]. Let's talk about--
--
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Will be better enforced,
we welcome that.
Mr. Burlison [continuing interruption]. Your view that it
saves lives.
Secretary Buttigieg. We believe that preventing harmful
pollution--well, we don't believe, it is a fact that preventing
harmful pollution in the U.S. will save lives.
Mr. Burlison. Have you done any calculations--given the
current rate of fires that occur, and these fires, as reports
indicate, take hundreds of thousands of liters of water to
extinguish when an electric vehicle catches fire, do you have
any research that indicates how many people might die from some
of these fires?
Secretary Buttigieg. I haven't seen a projection of that. I
am sure you are aware that flammable liquids are also a safety
concern. And either way, we work to make sure that they are
handled in a safe fashion.
Mr. Burlison. We are not seeing the reports of vehicles,
like an epidemic of regular gasoline vehicles catching fire----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. You're not?
Mr. Burlison [continuing]. Across the United States.
Secretary Buttigieg. You have never heard of gasoline fires
in vehicles?
Mr. Burlison. Does it take 150,000 liters of water to put
out?
Secretary Buttigieg. Are you familiar with what happened to
the I-95 bridge? Let me assure you that the use of flammable
liquids to propel hundreds of millions of vehicles includes
hazards.
Let me also make you aware that the American Chemical
Society estimates that 9,700 Americans a year die from the
pollution associated with passenger vehicle use in this
country.
Mr. Burlison. Let me ask this question. There have been
reports of individuals who have been locked in an electric
vehicle. There was a recent story. Renee Sanchez found her 20-
month-old granddaughter stuck in an electric vehicle in the
heat. The battery had died, and they couldn't get the child
out. They had to call and get firefighters to come break the
glass in order to get the child out.
Just recently, last year, Secretary Granholm had an
embarrassing incident where she had a PR tour that went south.
It was promoting electric vehicles and that push, driving
across the country in electric vehicles. Apparently, she had an
advance team that was in a gas-powered vehicle. That advance
team occupied the charging station, the one charging station
that a family needed, causing that--who had an infant--that
family to have to call 911 so that they could make sure that
they were able to provide some kind of care for their infant
child in that heat.
Secretary Buttigieg. I imagine you are aware that the
number of publicly available chargers has nearly doubled since
we took office, and we are investing to fill in the gaps. Now,
80 percent-plus of charging happens at home, but for the rest
of it, that is where those public chargers are so important.
Mr. Burlison. But do you see my point----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. But we have just never
been the kind of country that holds on to old technology
because we are working on problems with the new technology.
Mr. Burlison. Do you see my point that the American people
are seeing what is happening, and they have serious concerns?
And yet we are pushing ever more in this direction. And I don't
know that we are actually taking into consideration the human
costs that these are also bringing with them: the potential for
batteries to die, people to be stranded in places without air
conditioning, without support.
And I would think that your administration would want to
have those facts, as well, how many people might die because of
fires occurring from these batteries.
Secretary Buttigieg. A battery dying is a problem, just
like running out of gas is a problem, which is why we are
investing in addressing that. I have just never thought of that
as an excuse to hang on to dirty and expensive fuels and old
technology.
Mr. Burlison. Well, the American people disagree. They do--
--
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Well, no, the American
people disagree with you because every year----
Mr. Burlison [continuing]. They are not buying----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. They are
buying more EVs.
Mr. Burlison. No, the Government is buying----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Why do you think they
are buying more EVs every year than before?
Mr. Burlison. Because it was--present the numbers, because
every----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Sure, 1.2 million
vehicles were purchased last year, and every single quarter----
Mr. Burlison [interrupting]. And how many of them were
Government?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Every--how is that?
Mr. Burlison. How many of them were purchased by the
Government?
Secretary Buttigieg. Approximately 0.5 percent.
Mr. Burlison. Of--so, of the number, you are saying that--
--
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Of the EVs, about 0.5
percent were purchased by the Federal Government.
Mr. Burlison. The only reason why people are buying them is
because of the subsidy.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, the subsidy makes it more
affordable and helps people buy them. That is true.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you. My time has expired. I recognize
Mr. Johnson from Georgia.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, great to
see you. And you arrive at my doorstep on a high, as far as
electric vehicles are concerned. I want you to continue on this
streak that you are on right now, explaining why it is
important that our economy lead in terms of adopting new forms
of clean, renewable energy, automobiles representing a big part
of that.
I want to open the floor to you to kind of talk about why
we are heading in this direction, why it is important that we
continue to do so.
Secretary Buttigieg. I appreciate the question, and I want
to emphasize part of why I care so much about this is that I
grew up in northern Indiana, the industrial Midwest, and the
home of what had been the Studebaker car company, which went
out of business 20 years before I was born, and that meant that
I grew up surrounded by crumbling and decaying factories that
were a consequence of our automotive economy and our part of
the Midwest not keeping up with the most recent and necessary
processes and technologies. So, I know what is at stake,
economically, for our country in terms of the importance of us
leading the EV market, instead of finding excuses to hold on to
dirty and expensive fuels and old technology for as long as
humanly possible.
I also appreciate the opportunity to return to one of the
important dimensions of the exchange I was just having with
Representative Burlison, which is life safety. ACS data
suggests that 29,000 deaths per year are attributable to human-
caused domestic omissions, including 7,700 from truck use and
9,700 from passenger vehicle use. We have a chance to change
that. And if there is any problem, safety or otherwise, with
any new technology, that is not an excuse to stop pursuing new
technology, it is an imperative to make sure that that new
technology unfolds well, unfolds safely, and that is what our
Department has been doing for as long as it has existed.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Yes, our EV technology is world-
leading at this point, but it is subject to being overshadowed
by what is taking place in other nations. Can you talk about
that?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, China has invested hugely in its
EV capabilities. I don't believe that is because the Chinese
Communist Party is enthusiastic about the environment. I
believe it is because they perceive the economic and strategic
benefits of trying to dominate that market, which is one of the
reasons why the Biden administration is protecting the U.S.
market with appropriate tariffs on that unfairly subsidized
Chinese industry.
We face fierce competition from around the world, just as
we did in the first chapter of the automotive industry, but we
are determined as an administration--and I am determined as a
child of the industrial Midwest--to make sure that America
leads the way in the EV revolution, just as we led the way the
first time around in the arrival of automobiles a little over
100 years ago.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. The Biden administration has been
responsible for creating 16 million-plus new jobs during this
3\1/2\ years in office. Can you tell us about job growth that
is associated with the EV industry?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, we have seen EV battery and
manufacturing facilities rise across the country. Of course, in
Georgia; in my home State, both my new home State of Michigan
that I married into and my State where I grew up of Indiana,
and whether we are talking about the battery side or the
manufacturing side, we know that we have got the opportunity to
create new, good-paying jobs.
Part of what was at stake in the UAW strike and the
historic contract that those workers earned was to make sure
that that EV economy continues to create not just large numbers
of jobs, but good-paying jobs. And that is part of why the
President was so proud to be with those auto workers as they
sought that great opportunity.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. The first time a President has been
on a picket line.
Secretary Buttigieg. That is true, yes, sir.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And I will note that the union
movement has just exploded since the Biden administration came
into office.
Secretary Buttigieg. It has been an extraordinary time for
American workers, historic contracts in many sectors,
including, of course, transportation and manufacturing.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. Let me ask you this
question. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority and
the Georgia Department of Transportation applied for the
Department of Transportation's Mega grant program for their
Georgia 400 Express Lanes project. This project will combine
the Georgia Department of Transportation's express lanes and
dedicated bus rapid transit lanes to significantly improve
congestion and transit access to over 120,000 jobs within a
mile radius of the 5 stations.
Can you discuss the strategic timing and expected outcomes
of the Mega grant awarded to support this initiative?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. We are working through
those Mega grant applications through the course of this year.
I certainly recognize the enthusiasm around this project, and I
can commit to you I will make sure it gets every fair
consideration, and I will become more familiar with the
specific project.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy [presiding]. The gentleman yields. Ms. Chavez-
DeRemer is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, the last time you were before this
committee, we discussed the shortsighted--in my opinion and
many others--tolling plans in Oregon. Since then, Oregon
Governor Tina Kotek, thankfully, has shelved those plans to
toll our Oregon commuters.
Another flawed tolling plan was also recently suspended in
New York City, when Governor Kathy Hochul announced that she
would pause the congestion pricing for commuters in Manhattan,
a plan that a few of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
on this very committee opposed.
Mr. Secretary, do you think the suspension of these tolling
plans is indicative of a larger trend?
And to follow up with that, the general public seems to me,
and I think to many others. they have finally have had enough
of paying these exorbitant prices. And as former mayors--and we
discussed that earlier--we care about what is happening on the
ground in our districts, and that is where we get the feedback.
So, can you answer those questions for me?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, of course, we take care to
respect the role that State and local governments have in
making decisions that are in their jurisdiction, and often
these tolling calls are among them.
I also recognize that States and local jurisdictions face a
lot of challenges in funding roads, bridges, other things that
are needed.
Where we come in is to make sure that any measure that is
taken meets any Federal requirements if it is a Federal road,
but also that we provide funding to help so that there is the
capital in place that--now, I want to be clear, I am not saying
it is a substitute for local or State funding. In fact, the
more State or local communities ready to step up, often the
more we can do in turn. But we do want to make sure we move out
of the era that we lived in back when I was mayor, when it
sounded like the answer too often from the Federal Government
was you are on your own to find a way to fund this project.
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer. OK. So, if--our Governors are
concerned--I just mentioned two of them--with the pricetags of
these large-scale infrastructure projects during the time of
high inflation, and we are seeing that today. And so, I think
it is a good idea.
And with the chairwoman sitting behind me from Utah, we are
talking about permitting reform. And Congresswoman Maloy and I
have a new bill, the Full Responsibility and Expedited
Enforcement, or the FREE, Act. This legislation aims to
streamline the Federal permitting process by introducing a
permit by rule system. Permit by rule is an approach where
preset standards are established for permit issuance, allowing
for automatic approval once these standards are met by the
applicant. This method reduces wait times, minimizes
bureaucratic delays, and focuses on compliance enforcement,
rather than lengthy initial reviews of the permit application.
The reconstruction of significant infrastructure, like the
Francis Scott Key Bridge, requires coordinated efforts between
the Federal and State agencies. Permit by rule can enhance this
coordination and lead to more efficient uses of resources and
faster completion.
Another large infrastructure project my constituents are
all too familiar with is the I-5 bridge replacement, which is
slated to begin construction in late 2025, but not completed as
a project until 2033, 8 years. I can't help but imagine that if
permit by rule were to be implemented to at least some portions
of the project, that Oregonians and Washingtonians would be
able to traverse the Columbia River much sooner.
So, with that said, Mr. Secretary, how are the Federal and
State agencies collaborating to ensure a smooth permitting
process for bridge reconstruction?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, we want to make sure that the
permitting process is not an obstacle to project delivery----
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer [interrupting]. But it is.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. And we have undertaken a
number of measures to help with that. That has included
programmatic agreements, so that you can batch projects if they
might travel together because they have certain things in
common. Just digitizing the NEPA process we find could add a
lot of value.
We have launched a Modernizing NEPA Challenge, and we are
promoting more of those kind of web-based approaches, and we
are maximizing the use of categorical exclusions. Now,
admittedly, that won't apply in a project as large and complex
as the IBR. We understand that.
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer. But do you think that implementing the
permit by rule, which, again, would provide the clear
standards, expedite permit issuance, serve as a model for
future infrastructure projects to enhance that interagency
coordination and reduce those permitting delays, I mean, that
seems to be the problem, and it costs money.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, I am interested in anything that
can reduce unnecessary delays. So, I would welcome a chance to
see more about the text of your proposal and how it might be
put to work.
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer. OK. Well, a smaller scale project,
installing the EV chargers. There was some conversation, but it
was recently reported that despite the administration's
commitment to install half a million chargers by 2030, only 8
have been installed since the IIJA was enacted 2 years ago.
Mr. Secretary, installing an EV charger can't be that hard
if the funding is already allocated. And if the projects were
to receive categorical exclusion designation under NEPA, would
permit by rule help alleviate delayed construction of the
chargers as well?
Secretary Buttigieg. Without knowing the particulars of the
structure of the program you are describing, it is certainly
possible that anything that simplifies environmental processes
could lead to a faster project delivery.
Mrs. Chavez-DeRemer. Well, I like the world of
possibilities, for sure, so, I look forward to working with
your office on this, Congresswoman Maloy and I, and further
discussing the permit by rule on both the small and the large
capacities.
And with that, I will yield back my time. Thank you, Mr.
Secretary.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields--and thank you for the
plug of my bill--and the Chair recognizes Mr. Huffman for 5
minutes.
Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And Mr. Secretary, welcome back to the committee. You are
breaking good news in incredible ways to communities all over
this country because of the legislation we passed in the last
Congress, and because of your good work implementing it, so,
thank you for that.
But some of the questions that you have had from across the
aisle have been, frankly, just casting about wildly to malign
electric vehicles. And I was surprised to hear the suggestion
that EV battery fires are somehow a great risk to public
health, but no discussion of the fossil fuel infrastructure and
vehicles and other fossil fuel aspects that are exploding and
burning and harming and killing people every day in this
country.
Could you just sort of speak to the relative threat to
human life, safety, and public health as between EV batteries
and all of the fossil fuel vehicles, tankers, trucks,
pipelines, and refineries that are going boom seemingly every
day somewhere in America?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, it would certainly be absurd to
dismiss the danger and damage that has been associated with
flammable liquids being used to propel our vehicles over the
course of the last 100 years. Of course, there is a framework
of regulation to try to minimize that danger and harm, just as
we are building a framework of regulation to make sure that any
harm or risk associated with electric or any other propulsion--
hydrogen, you name it--is appropriately managed. We just don't
view any of those risks as an excuse to stick to dirty and
expensive fuels and older technology that, again, as we have
been shown in sometimes shocking fashion, can lead to the
destruction of property and life in incidents, not to mention
the destruction of property and life being documented as a
consequence of the pollution.
Mr. Huffman. Well said. My colleague from Pennsylvania, Mr.
Perry, kind of broke the fact-check machine with some of his
attacks on electric vehicles. He stated that the cost of
electric vehicles is going up. Just for the record, Mr.
Secretary, I believe that is false. Can you tell us what the
cost of electric vehicles is doing these days?
Secretary Buttigieg. The cost of electric vehicles is going
down, and we have even seen research indicating that, if you
look at apples to apples--which can be a little challenging,
but the basic determination when you compare an EV to a
comparable internal combustion engine, according to J.D. Power,
is about $53,600 for an EV; $54,400, on average, for the gas
vehicle. That is before you account for the $2,000 or so a year
that an EV owner can save in fuel costs, and the $6,000 or so
in lifetime lower maintenance and repair costs, simply because
an EV tends to have fewer moving parts.
Mr. Huffman. Right. According to my just quick Google
search just now, new EV prices are down year over year 18
percent, which is much more than for non-EVs over the same year
over year period. And for used EVs, the prices are down even
more, a 27-percent decline in price year over year. So, is that
consistent with your understanding of where we are headed on
prices?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, and I think it is intuitive if
you consider how new EV technology is relative to internal
combustion technology.
In other words, any improvements we see in cost today on an
ICE engine or after 100 years of refinement, whereas the stage
we are at with EVs might be better compared to where we were
when internal combustion got as far as the Model T. More work
will happen that will make them more efficient, and it is not
surprising that that cost curve is moving down faster for EVs
than for ICE cars right now.
Mr. Huffman. My colleague also suggested the Federal
Government was buying the majority of EVs in America. You
thankfully put that in--I think there is a math problem over
there because it was 0.5 percent, according to----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. That is the most recent
data that I have seen.
Mr. Huffman. Yes, pretty far from a majority.
On the issue of why bother--because my colleague from
Arkansas pointed out that if we electrified our transportation
system overnight here in the United States, it would still be
only about 1 percent of global emissions--my understanding is
that, while U.S. emissions are overall declining, the
transportation sector is still going the wrong way. Could you
just expand on the sort of ``why bother'' argument that has
been suggested today?
Secretary Buttigieg. I think any time there is a national
effort, or certainly a human effort that is going to require a
lot of different people to hit their marks in order to succeed,
that should motivate us to go above and beyond, not to sit on
our hands. America has never been the kind of country that
waited for other countries to solve a problem. And I believe we
need to lead in this regard. As we do, again, we will see not
only climate benefits, but a benefit in terms of those deaths
from particulate matter that I mentioned earlier.
Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and just to close
with an invitation to my district in Humboldt County, where you
awarded a $426 million INFRA grant to modernize a port that
will support the floating offshore wind industry. We would love
to show you that incredible project. It certainly puts a light
on the notion that this administration has a build nothing ever
agenda.
And with that, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Collins for 5 minutes.
Mr. Collins. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. I kind of want to take a
tour around the transportation industry here for my 5 minutes,
but I think everybody is kind of focused on EVs, so, we are
going to kind of start in that direction first.
There is a 400-plus-billion-dollar backlog in highway
repair right now. We got congested interstates, and a lot of
that is not due to road maintenance or accidents, it is just
congestion. And we don't even have a diesel engine that will
beat the 2027 certifications. There is a clear push to EVs on
class 8 tractors from this administration, and that is just
among a lot of things: rising costs of equipment, truck
parking--we hear it here--workforce issues, cargo theft, fraud,
just freight fraud in general. What is the game plan with EV
tractors? Because they weigh more than the diesel-equipped
class 8 tractors do, and you are going to have to have more
trucks on the road just to move the same amount of freight that
you do with a diesel engine as you do with an EV.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, trucking is a little different
from the personal vehicle and light-duty side, but we are
seeing alternative fuels emerge on the trucking side too. The
electric is more for lower distance routes than over the road.
Hydrogen has also shown a lot of promise when it comes to those
over the road routes, but----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. Yes, but I just----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. It is not electrifying--
--
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. That is what I just said. The
EPA has structured it where we don't even have an engine for
2027.
The majority of the talk again here today has been about
EVs, and that is what you have been talking about. I am part of
that dirty gas-burning diesel people that you talk about. I am
in the trucking industry. So, what is the game plan? Because
for every six loads that you haul with an EV truck, you are
going to have to have another truck to put in there. Do you
know how much an EV class 8 tractor weighs?
Secretary Buttigieg. Not offhand, no.
Mr. Collins. 32,000 pounds. Do you know how much a class 8
diesel tractor weighs, decked out with everything?
Secretary Buttigieg. Less.
Mr. Collins. 17,000.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes.
Mr. Collins. There is a big discrepancy there.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes.
Mr. Collins. The roads don't even handle the additional
weight. We had one of your people in here not too long ago, and
they said they were going to increase the weights that we could
carry on the roads. If the roads can handle that, why don't you
do it now so that we can get the congestion off the roads with
the diesel engines that we do have out there?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, we are certainly working on
developing solutions for pavement durability to make sure, as
they come under increased pressure, whether it is from traffic,
weather, or anything else, that they last longer than----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. I don't----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. They used to.
Mr. Collins [continuing interruption]. Think you have a
solution, EV-wise, really, in reality, for----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I would say----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. Class 8 trucks----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. I would
certainly say the development of the technology on the trucking
side is less advanced and, I think, less likely to lend itself
to a single technology than on the light-duty side.
Mr. Collins. All right, I am burning time. Let's move on to
the aviation side of this thing.
You plan to propose a European-style compensation scheme of
sorts for flights that are delayed or canceled. Congress has
already passed legislation to make airlines refund passengers.
The cancellation in 2023 was lower by one point some percent
than it has been in decades. How do you think the rule--this
rule, when it addresses circumstances that are uncontrollable,
like when the Government's at fault or when traffic controllers
are at fault, is the Government going to pay?
Secretary Buttigieg. First of all, thanks for acknowledging
the cancellations are down on our watch.
When it comes to rules for holding companies accountable,
that is----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. Well, I don't think the
cancellations are necessarily due to you. It could be due to
the industry----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Well, I would like to
believe that we helped, given the----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. Yes, I know----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Work that we did----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. We all want to take the credit
where we can.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Both to press industry
and to make sure----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. But that is OK. What----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. That FAA was able to
adopt new GPS technologies----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. I am sorry to interrupt you.
So, should the----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. To more efficiently use
the airspace.
Mr. Collins. So, should the Government pay when they are at
fault?
Secretary Buttigieg. Charging the taxpayer for a delay
doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Mr. Collins. Well, you talk like it is your funds. I mean,
this is the Department of Transportation. Tell me. You want to
make the airlines pay when it is their fault. When it is your
fault, should you step up and pay?
Secretary Buttigieg. Again, I don't understand why you
would charge the taxpayer for a problem the way you charge a
for-profit company if they fail to live up to the regulations
of how they take care of customers.
Mr. Collins. But you are charging anyone that is at fault.
You said who is at fault should pay.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes. If it isn't weather, if it is
controllable by the airline----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. If----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Then the airline ought to
deal with it----
Mr. Collins [continuing interruption]. If it is----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. If it is controllable by
the FAA, then we come to Congress for help dealing with it.
Mr. Collins. If it is covered by the Government, then you
should step up and pay. That is right.
Secretary Buttigieg. You mean the--you expect the taxpayer
to pay who?
Mr. Collins. I expect the people at fault to. And if you
are going to demand that, you should demand it of yourself to
be better.
Secretary Buttigieg. So, you don't think we should fine any
companies unless we also fine taxpayers?
Mr. Collins. But I think we both can agree. Don't you think
that, either way, that the person that is going to pay for all
this is going to be the person buying the airline ticket?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, that is interesting. So, those
arguments have been raised any time we have tried to hold
airlines accountable. But what we have seen is there are
countries that do this, right, that say if an airline sticks
you----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. I realize that, but----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. With an unreasonable
delay, you get some money for that. I am not saying--we haven't
drawn any conclusions----
Mr. Collins [continuing interruption]. I know that, I
understand that----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. From the U.S. version,
but----
Mr. Collins. [continuing interruption]. There is one other
thing that I wanted to comment on real quick, and I have got to
comment on these rail issues because, the Boeing CEO, he was
hammered for not prioritizing safety over DEI initiatives.
Norfolk Southern, in their annual shareholders report, said
that they were going to focus on DEI initiatives over anything
else, and that is what led to that accident. They weren't
hiring people who were qualified to put grease----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I have never seen a
single shred of data or evidence----
Mr. Collins. I have got the annual----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Associating
what happened and somehow----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. I have got the----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Trying to
blame that on women and minorities I think really is not
consistent with----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. That is not my----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. What the
NTSB found.
Mr. Collins. Here is my question, if you will give me a
second, but we are out of time. But here is my question for
you----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Blaming women and
minorities is not----
Mr. Collins [continuing]. What does the Department of
Transportation----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Consistent
with what the NTSB found.
Mr. Collins [continuing]. Prioritize more, DEI initiatives
or safety and maintenance on America's highways?
Secretary Buttigieg. The top priority of this Department is
and has always been safety.
Mr. Collins. How many employees do you have right now that
are full-time back in the office 5 days a week?
Secretary Buttigieg. I can tell you that about 75 percent
of our work-hours are performed on site. Of course, we have a
lot of workers who are----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. Not work-hours. How many
employees do you have full-time back in the office today?
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman's time has expired.
Secretary Buttigieg. So, all worker--in terms of 100
percent? I would have to pull that. But all workers----
Ms. Maloy [interrupting]. The gentleman's time has expired.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Are expected to work in
person, unless they are telework eligible, depending on the
remote work arrangement.
Ms. Maloy. The time has expired.
Mr. Collins. OK, thank you. I appreciate it.
Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
Mr. Collins. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Ms. Hoyle is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you for being here, Mr. Secretary. You may recall I
represent the southwest coast of Oregon, and I want to thank
President Biden, the Department of Transportation, and yourself
personally for the work you have done to explore the viability
of different Federal investment options for the public-private
partnership for the Port of Coos Bay intermodal project.
This project is continuing to move forward. We still need
Federal investment, specifically in channel dredging, so U.S.
companies don't have to rely on Canadian ports to move products
to middle America. The Canadians are putting billions of
dollars and allowing foreign interests to put billions of
dollars into their ports, and we have the ability to make sure
American farmers and manufacturers have reliable access to
international markets, while also bringing back thousands of
middle-class jobs to a region that had been economically robust
prior to the shutdown of timber harvests and our Federal
forests. We can be an economic engine again.
And first I just want to say thank you to the
administration; thank you to you personally.
But for my question, this week, the National Transportation
Safety Board adopted its final report on East Palestine, the
Ohio derailment, and Federal track safety regulations require
railroads to conduct various track safety inspections, which
include visual inspections at specified minimal intervals done
by human beings.
Now, railroads are increasingly using a technology, as you
know--you have spoken about it here today--called automatic
track inspections, or ATI, that uses a machine to detect track
geometry defects. Now, in order to use ATI track inspection
machines, there are no requirements for railroads to waive or
suspend Federal rail safety regulations. But railroads have
been seeking to waive the required visual track inspections
that are done by rail workers.
So, I think that we do better when we have labor at the
table to figure out how we can use this technology best with a
combination of both new technology like ATI and visual human
inspection, as human traffic inspectors look for 23 possible
types of track defects, while ATI machines can only detect 6
types of track defects.
So, a couple of questions are, can you confirm that there
are no Federal Railroad Administration regulations that
prohibit railroads from running ATI technology as much as they
want, without reducing human track inspections, and do you
agree or disagree that visual track inspections plus ATI is a
safer approach than just using ATI?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, and I appreciate your clarifying
question, because I think sometimes it has been suggested that
if we don't provide a waiver we are preventing somebody from
using ATI. Railroads are more than welcome to use this
technology. We are just saying it has got to be used in
combination with visual inspections. We think of it as a sort
of belt and suspenders approach, enhancing the success of the
human inspection regime with new capabilities that these
technologies may be able to deliver.
So, we will continue to work with the railroads on test
programs that assess the effectiveness of that autonomous track
geometry measurement in combination with visual inspections.
But we also believe it is important to do both.
Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Thank you. And with that, I would like
to invite you to come to the southwest coast, to come visit the
Port of Coos Bay to see all the work that we are doing. And
again, I cannot tell you what it means to the people of the
south coast to have hope that we will have jobs again so that
we don't have to ship our kids to somewhere else for them to
have a really good middle-class life. Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg. Understood. I hope we get the chance.
Thank you.
Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. I yield the remainder of my time.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields. Mr. Ezell is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today, and I
thank you for what all you have been doing to help deliver some
needed resources in my district in south Mississippi. I've got
several questions I want for us to try to get through today.
So, I normally talk kind of slow, so, I will try to pick it up
a little bit. So, let's me and you see if we can't get through
this without us dragging it out too much.
So, firstly, your agency is very important to the projects
in my district. Starting with the two ports in the district,
the Port of Gulfport and the Port of Pascagoula, my hometown,
both have a vital role in supply chain in our Nation's economy.
I am aware that the Notices of Funding Opportunity for the
PIDP, it stated the Secretary may give priority to providing
funding to strategic seaports in support of national security
requirements, as required by the 2024 National Defense
Authorization Act.
How will DOT evaluate and prioritize the critical need for
the strategic seaport to support our military when ranking
these grant applications?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question.
Our Maritime Administration works closely with our military
partners, and seeks to gain understanding of the strategic
significance of various ports when they are applying for
funding. Not the only criterion, but certainly one that, to the
extent statute calls for it, we consider.
Mr. Ezell. OK, very good. It was also brought to my
attention there is a high record amount of obligation funds
available through the U.S. Department of Transportation. States
like Mississippi benefit greatly from the additional funds.
However, requiring State DOTs to obligate millions of funds in
1 month is just nearly impossible.
Mr. Secretary, what steps can be put in place to help
streamline this process and allow ample time for the State DOTs
to obligate these funds?
Secretary Buttigieg. We are certainly aware of the pressure
that the State DOTs feel when that August redistribution comes
around, and we want to make sure that we have as much
flexibility as possible.
I will note that the President's budget for 2025 for
Federal Highway does have some provisions that would help, we
believe, make that easier, more flexible, reduce that pressure.
And we would welcome working with you in a little more detail
on that, because we know that it is a very intense exercise on
top of the work the DOTs are already doing.
Mr. Ezell. OK, thank you. Additionally, can you explain why
you requested almost half of what you requested in fiscal year
2024 for fiscal year 2025 for the CRISI grants?
Secretary Buttigieg. So, CRISI is an excellent, popular,
oversubscribed, and important program. We are proud of the work
we have been able to do with CRISI.
We are also trying to color within the lines of the top-
line limits provided by the Fiscal Responsibility Act, but are
hopeful that there will continue to be adequate funding to do
projects. We always get more applications than we can say yes
to.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you. As we get ready for the hurricane
season, it is crucial that U.S. Department of Transportation,
along with other relevant State and Federal agencies,
coordinate to prepare for the season. Can you tell me what you
have been able to do to help coordinate with Mississippi so
that we can get ready for hurricane season?
Secretary Buttigieg. I was just in Mississippi a few days
ago, a different part of the State up in the Delta, but I got a
sense of how that is already on everybody's mind there.
Mr. Ezell. Yes.
Secretary Buttigieg. We are mindful at our Department, too,
of the opportunity to work with State DOTs and anybody else we
need to coordinate with. We do that through our Transportation
Operations Center and the emergency support function assigned
to us by statute, and we stand ready to help. We hope it is a
hurricane season everybody can get through without incident,
but we know what we are up against, and we will be there to
help.
Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much. And the last one: Several
members of my district have expressed concerns over your
agency's goal to achieve zero emissions on their electric
vehicles, mainly the--like the public transport and those kinds
of things. Does U.S. DOT plan to mandate a forced phase-in over
time of electric vehicles, or will the agency continue to allow
transit systems to determine what type of alternative fuel
technologies works best for them?
Secretary Buttigieg. Our approach has been to create
options and to provide economic support. Whether we are talking
about personal EVs or whether we are talking about those low-
emission buses that we are buying for a lot of transit
agencies, we know that it is not a one-size-fits-all and we
want to work with those transit agencies on answers that make
sense for them.
Mr. Ezell. Very good, and we yield back with 22 seconds.
Thank you.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Allred for 5 minutes.
Mr. Allred. Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for joining us again. I
appreciate your patience today. I want to thank you for your
continued support in getting the IIJA funding out of DC and
into our communities.
This legislation has had a significant impact in north
Texas, and will continue to shape our community for years to
come. In fact, you just mentioned low-emission buses. In June
of last year, DART, the Dallas Area Rapid Transit agency,
received a $103 million Federal transit grant to help us
modernize our bus fleet. In March of this year, the Southern
Gateway Park and Klyde Warren Park and other north Texas
projects received $80 million in funding from U.S. DOT, thanks
to grants as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law or the
IIJA.
But one project that you and I have discussed several times
in this setting that I would like to highlight is Amtrak's
partnership with Texas Central to develop a high-speed rail
connecting Dallas and Houston, two of the largest metropolitan
areas in Texas and the country. In December of 2023, the
project was awarded a $500,000 grant as part of the Corridor ID
program funded through the IIJA. And this now public-private
partnership, I think, is a great example of this
administration's and our commitment to environmentally
sustainable transportation while simultaneously supporting
economic growth.
And so, you talked a little bit about this when you were
last in Dallas on TV. But here could you just mention a little
bit about how serious your agency is and you are about high-
speed rail in Texas?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. We are enthusiastic about
the potential. And the funding that comes with this Corridor ID
designation is both direct funding for planning activities and
a signal of the potential that we see.
When you look across the geography of the United States,
the best candidates for high-speed rail service are geographies
where you have two major metropolitan areas that are fairly
close to each other, but really a short flight that borders on
the realm of impracticality or a long drive that also borders
on the realm of impracticality. And creating that third option
of a good, high-speed ride can, we think, unlock enormous
economic potential and, even for the people who don't use it,
bring benefits in the form of reduced congestion on those
roadways and those airports.
So, we look forward to seeing this proposal continue to
develop, and I would be surprised if it did not lead to more
applications for support as the vision continues to take shape.
Mr. Allred. I think that is right. And you mentioned, of
course, reducing congestion. I have made that drive many times
from Dallas and Houston. It is not an easy drive. The flight is
not always the most convenient option. To me this would just
spur so much economic growth, and it is a commonsense idea.
But there is also the technology involved in it that I just
wanted to briefly discuss, which is--I think it is the
Shinkansen bullet train, which is made in Japan. It is the
world's safest transportation technology, really, in many ways,
operating without a fatality since 1964. Can you speak about
your experience with this technology? And I understand that you
might have had a chance to ride on one of these.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, I had the privilege of riding on
the Shinkansen train in Japan when I was attending the G7
meetings hosted by Japan last year for transportation ministers
and my counterparts. It was an extraordinary experience,
especially sitting up in that cab, where I had an opportunity
to observe the operator, and seeing the operations center
behind the scenes where they conduct those safe and efficient
operations.
It is rare for them to be more than a few seconds at
variance from their published schedule. And as you mentioned,
in a technology and a train going back to the 1960s, they have
an unbelievable safety record, too. I think any American who
sees that comes home and says, ``Why can't we have something
like this?'' and I think that is the kind of quality and the
kind of efficiency that we should aspire to here in the U.S.
Mr. Allred. I am convinced that if we get one of these
lines in Texas, we will get more. We are a perfect candidate
for this.
And really quickly, in the last 30 seconds I have here, I
just want to commend you, as the father of two small kids--I
know your growing family--and to highlight the fact that
passengers will no longer have to pay more to sit next to their
kids on flights. To me, this is just common sense, but it is
the kind of thing that really can make an impact in people's
lives, and I think it is an example of your leadership.
And at some point in our next discussion, I would love to
talk to you about our air traffic controllers and how this FAA
bill is going to help us restore that workforce. But with that,
I will yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Duarte is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Duarte. Hello, Secretary. Thank you for joining us here
today. The last time we were here, we talked about two things.
One was the high-speed rail project in my district, which is
the California high-speed rail project, the $128 billion high-
speed rail project that was a State initiative that will move
from Merced, a city of 60,000, down to Bakersfield, a city of
approximately 350,000, I believe.
Are those the type of metropolitan centers that you were
just meaning to describe when you talked about the best
candidates for high-speed rail?
Secretary Buttigieg. On their own and in a vacuum, it is
unlikely that they would generate that justification. But of
course, that Merced-to-Bakersfield segment represents a step
toward connecting two of the largest economic areas in the
United States.
Mr. Duarte. So, after we have spent $128 billion going over
flat land between Merced and Bakersfield, we will then think
about how we are going to get through the mountains and the
urban areas of Los Angeles and the bay area to then finish the
high-speed rail project someday in the distant, distant future?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, the Bakersfield-to-Merced
segment comes first. And yes, as I understand it, the vision of
the project sponsors is ultimately to fully connect all the
way----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. You can't----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Through to the downtowns
of those two regions.
Mr. Duarte. Are you capable of recognizing a hopeless
boondoggle? Because that is what we are discussing right now.
Secretary Buttigieg. I have seen a lot of the most
compelling and ambitious human projects characterized as
hopeless boondoggles during the time that they were taking
shape, and I am not surprised, for a project that represents
the first movement in the United States of America toward this
kind of technology, that it has proven to present a lot of
challenges for those first movers.
Mr. Duarte. Thank you. Let's move on to something even more
important, in my opinion.
Representative Owens, a good friend of mine, earlier
discussed the electric vehicle trade, the proxy imperialism
that American taxpayers are sponsoring in the Congo in the
pursuit of cobalt. I don't know, I guess God shined on us today
because, just walking in the atrium of Rayburn Office Building
here, we have a Congolese delegation talk about economic
development in Congo.
So, I got a quote from Abraham Leno, who was sitting in
here a few a little while ago, but his schedule does not permit
for him to be here right now. Nonetheless, I would encourage
you to speak to him on your way through there today. Let me
quote Abraham Leno. He actually provided me a quote that I will
read verbatim: ``Children are working in situations with
exposure to chemicals like mercury, and going into mines with
no safety regulations or oversight. Beyond the daily tragedy,
Congo is losing the productive labor force of the future and
people who would contribute to a brighter future with a
stronger civil society.''
I have read the book--or at least audio-booked, I will
admit--``Cobalt Red.'' As you pursue these electric vehicle
technologies, this--you call it technology, but technology, in
my book, makes lives better. I don't see electric vehicles
making lives tremendously better here in the United States.
They are crushing lives around the world. We have got slave
trade in Congo----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I just don't----
Mr. Duarte [continuing]. You have got slave labor----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. I just can't
accept that that is a necessary consequence----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. Then don't accept it.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Of newer technology.
Mr. Duarte. Don't accept it. If you feel a glow driving an
electric vehicle here today in America, go ahead and feel that.
There are children in mines being crushed. There are families
being broken. There are warlords forcing these people into
slavery around the world. Provide that----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. And I trust anyone
serious about confronting that----
Mr. Duarte [continuing]. Provide that glow, or whatever you
feel driving an electric vehicle today----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Will join us
in enforcing our protections against forced and child labor.
Mr. Duarte. You--that is your value system, I can
appreciate it.
Secretary Buttigieg. I must also say that I am puzzled to
find people who have shown----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. If you want to support world
slavery, and you----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. No interest in dealing
with forced and child labor in any other product suddenly
become concerned about it.
Mr. Duarte. You are forcing child labor in the Congo.
Secretary Buttigieg. No.
Mr. Duarte. It is documented. It has been known for
decades. You want to talk about reparations? Your party wants
to talk about proxy imperialism in our history? We are
practicing imperialism today through the Chinese Communist
government going in to extract the minerals necessary----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. We are competing with
the Chinese Communist government to build this on U.S. soil.
Mr. Duarte [continuing]. You are----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. And we wish we would
have your help on that.
Mr. Duarte. You are subsidizing the Chinese Government
today with your EV----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. We are subsidizing the
American auto industry.
Mr. Duarte. You are subsidizing--you are not going to tell
me you believe--go ahead. Tell me you believe that the majority
of batteries produced for American EVs that are receiving
Federal subsidies today are being produced with constituents
and components sourced in America and are slavery free.
Secretary Buttigieg. What I can tell you is that today's
EV----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. No, that is a very simple
statement. Do you believe the constituent components in
American electric vehicles being subsidized by our Government
today are slavery free?
Secretary Buttigieg. Here is what I can tell you. Eighty
percent less cobalt is going into today's EV batteries. Most of
the cobalt that is used comes as a byproduct from nickel and
copper mining and major battery makers----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. So, you don't want to end
slavery.
Secretary Buttigieg. Could you please let me finish the
sentence?
Mr. Duarte. No, you are not finishing. I asked you about
slavery, you are telling me about constituents in other
components. Just answer the question I actually asked, which
is: Do you believe the electric vehicles being produced and
subsidized by American taxpayers today are slavery-free, fair-
trade vehicles?
Secretary Buttigieg. I should certainly hope that they are.
And if there is any specific evidence of any violation of any
provision to prevent forced and child labor of any product, any
of the 159 products listed----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. Will you speak to our friends
from the Congo----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. We will work on that.
Mr. Duarte [continuing interruption]. After----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Now, what I would also--
look, we can do one of----
Mr. Duarte [continuing interruption]. Will you speak to our
friends from the Congo out here in the atrium on your way out?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am just astonished that people who
have shown zero interest----
Mr. Duarte [continuing interruption]. Will you----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. In confronting forced or
child labor on any of the other 158 products listed are
suddenly terribly concerned about it on this one product----
Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. We are subsidizing this with
American taxpayer----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Which we can actually do
without that much cobalt.
Mr. Duarte. This isn't just about unfair competition, this
is about subsidizing child labor through American policy.
Secretary Buttigieg. Then why didn't you vote for the
provision to move it onto U.S. soil?
Ms. Maloy. The time has expired. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Mr. Duarte. Thank you, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Moulton is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Moulton. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman.
Mr. Secretary, good to see you. Thank you very much for
joining us here today. I would actually like to start exactly
where my colleague began, with California high-speed rail. I
understand the project is over budget. It is not a model for
project completion. I understand there is a lot of frustration
with its starting in the middle, as opposed to starting at the
end. But I have one very simple question for you.
To meet 2050 travel demand in California, will it cost less
taxpayer dollars or more taxpayer dollars to meet that with
high-speed rail or by expanding highways and airports?
Secretary Buttigieg. In my estimation, a highway and
airport-only approach would cost more.
Mr. Moulton. There is a lot of documentation and studies
that show that, too. So, I agree with my colleague that this
should be run more efficiently. I also think taxpayer dollars
should get a good return on investment, a better return than
they are getting today. And at the end of the day, we need to
solve these transportation problems efficiently and in a 21st-
century way that uses taxpayer dollars more efficiently than
just building more airports and highways where people can still
sit on tarmac in thunderstorms, fight traffic on ever-congested
highways, as opposed to going 200 miles per hour or 220 miles
per hour like the rest of the world. So, I hope we can pursue
that more vigorously.
Right now, of course, if you want to build an interstate
highway, you get a ton of money from the Federal Government. If
you want to build an airport, you get a ton of money from the
Federal Government. We have a Highway Trust Fund. We have an
Airport Trust Fund. We don't have any rail trust fund
whatsoever. There is not even just a simple level playing field
so that the famous American free market can make these business
decisions about which mode is best, because I am sure there are
places where high-speed rail doesn't make sense, it would cost
more to solve certain transportation problems. But in places
where you get a better ROI, we should be choosing high-speed
rail. That is not an option really for States today.
What can we do to ensure proper Federal funding to at least
level the playing field so that transportation planners can
just say let's make an honest, business-based decision about
how to solve this congestion problem?
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you for the question. I think
the key is to make sure we build on what we can demonstrate
with the funding that we have now. What came in the IIJA was a
step change in our ability to support passenger rail but, as
you know, nowhere near what it will take to build a fully
built-out U.S. high-speed rail network.
I also am convinced, though, that when Americans experience
high-speed rail and revenue service on U.S. soil, there will be
no going back. It is part of why it is so important to
effectively deliver those projects now underway, California and
Brightline----
Mr. Moulton [interrupting]. Well, I have made this point to
you since before you were sworn in. It is proven
internationally. A ton of resistance to building the first
high-speed rail line in Spain, tentacles for Madrid. All the
provinces said as soon as Barcelona got their line, every other
province wanted one, too. And the Spanish Government has made
business-based decisions about where high-speed rail makes
sense. They now have a national network. I think we need to
look at that very carefully.
Now, while this hearing was happening, there was a 20-car
Canadian national derailment outside of Chicago, including some
hazmat cars in Madison, Illinois. It is clear that we can make
more progress on freight rail safety, and I think we need some
bipartisan legislation that will not take us back to the 1950s,
but move us forward, push the industry forward to hopefully not
only improve safety, but improve reliability and service, as
well.
How do we develop freight rail legislation that doesn't
just push more traffic onto trucks? Because we want our
railways to be safer, but we don't want them to not be used.
Because even in the horrific derailment in East Palestine,
exactly zero people were killed. Every week on the highways,
people die in hazmat accidents because that traffic is on
trucks and not on trains.
Secretary Buttigieg. You make an incredibly important
point, which is that, pound for pound, rail transport is safer
and less polluting than alternatives. Of course, trucks play a
vitally important role, but in terms of making sure that we
fully use our rail networks, there is a benefit to that many
times over in congestion, air quality, emissions, and safety.
So, that means we have to do, I think, a couple of things.
First of all, ensure the safety of freight rail. And I
think that the bipartisan legislation being considered in this
Chamber would help with that.
And secondly, I think that the companies need to invest in
capacity. Unfortunately, under the so-called Precision
Scheduled Railroading approach, leaders of those Class I
freight railroads are under pressure to extract as much value
as they can out of their railroads without really investing in
capacity.
Mr. Moulton. Yes, I agree with you, Mr. Secretary. I am
almost out of time. I just want to extend this point to
passenger rail, as well. When we spend billions of dollars
subsidizing people to get into more cars, as an inevitable
result of the EV policy, then we are going to have more
congestion on our highways. We are going to have a lot of
silent traffic jams, but they are still going to be traffic
jams. We have got to level the playing field, and make sure
Americans have the choices and the freedom to travel at 200
miles per hour, like the rest of the world.
Thank you, I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Bean is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good
afternoon to you. Good afternoon, Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee.
And good afternoon, Secretary, it is great to see you. The
Biden administration is on a mission to force consumers to buy
electric vehicles that they clearly don't want.
Secretary Buttigieg. No, we are not.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Of the 282 million--well, let me tell
you, Mr. Secretary, you are, because the Biden administration
is spending billions, billions in subsidies to force consumers
to make these decisions. Two hundred and eighty-two million
vehicles are on the roads today, 1 percent are electric. And
they are only buying them because we are bribing consumers with
$7,500 to purchase that vehicle. They sit on the lots far
longer on the dealership lots than their traditional
counterparts.
And now, knowing that these cars are built with slave
labor, is there a time that you will say, you know what, this
is just too expensive, this is just too expensive, we want to
rethink this policy. Is there ever a time that you are going to
say that it is too expensive?
Secretary Buttigieg. If you think this is expensive, wait
until you find out how much oil and gas subsidies you have been
supporting.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Are you aware----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Also, wait until you find
out the economic impact that some economists have put at $15
million every hour or every day, trillions of dollars every
year, from allowing the environmental conditions in this
country and the planet to worsen. We are making sure that there
is support----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. Mr. Secretary, that is
not what consumers are saying.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. For a home-grown----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. Consumers
are saying this. They are saying 46 percent--McKinsey and
Company, a consumer survey company, did a survey of consumers,
46 percent, that bought these electric vehicles----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Having worked at
McKinsey, I've got to tell you, it is not----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing]. They don't want them.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Specialists
and----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing]. They don't want them, Mr.
Secretary.
Secretary Buttigieg. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Are you are aware of that? Are you
aware of it?
Secretary Buttigieg. With all due respect to my former
colleagues at McKinsey, their study is an outlier, and even
that one----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. One of the things they
said----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Does not show that a
majority of the----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. Well, here
is the thing. Let's just talk about it. Let's talk about it,
because----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. It would be great if I
could finish my sentence.
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. One-third of
them said they can't charge----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Why do you think more
Americans buy EVs every year than the year before?
Mr. Bean of Florida. Hold on, Mr. Secretary. I got a good
question for you.
Secretary Buttigieg. OK.
Mr. Bean of Florida. And I want you to hear me, because 40
of those--the percentage, one-third said they can't charge
their vehicle. We gave you some money, billions of dollars, to
build some charging stations.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, and that is going out to the
States to build the chargers.
Mr. Bean of Florida. How is that coming along?
Secretary Buttigieg. It is coming along great. We are going
to beat our goals of 500,000 chargers by 2030. And the reason
why is because most of the States now have their money, and
they are getting ready to do the procurement----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. What is the tally right
now, though?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. And put those chargers
in.
Mr. Bean of Florida. I am keeping--last time--last month it
was seven charging stations.
Secretary Buttigieg. 186,000 public charging stations are
available. The publicly supported chargers----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. How many----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Can go in, the second----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. How many
have we built? How many have you built?
Secretary Buttigieg. Those are coming later. That was
always the plan.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Is it over seven?
Secretary Buttigieg. What is that?
Mr. Bean of Florida. Is it over seven?
Secretary Buttigieg. They are coming later.
Mr. Bean of Florida. So, it is not over seven. I am going
to put you down at not over seven right now.
Secretary Buttigieg. 2027, 2028 is when they are supposed
to be built----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. And here is----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. But here is the other
thing----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. Here is the
big question. Here is the other big question for you.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Are you conscious that 80
percent of EV charging happens at home?
Mr. Bean of Florida. Wait a minute, I've got more
questions. We got to go fast, Mr. Secretary. How are we going
to fund roads if electric vehicles aren't paying into the gas
tax to build roads? We know they are heavier. They do more
damage to the roads. What is the plan? Do we have a plan? How
are we going to build those roads?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, we are working with Congress on
how to make sure the Highway Trust Fund has adequate sources of
revenue, knowing that receipts from the gas tax have been
declining for some time.
Mr. Bean of Florida. OK, hold on.
Secretary Buttigieg. I don't think that is an excuse to
stick with----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. Hold on.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. The dirty and expensive
fuels of the past.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Hold on, Mr. Secretary. Let me put you
down. I got to put you down--no plan yet. Let me put that down.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, actually, you should put down
something else on your little paper there, which is we are----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. So, when we build
roads----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Funding pilots to do
vehicle-miles traveled.
Mr. Bean of Florida. When we build roads, we use----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. So, did you put that
down?
Mr. Bean of Florida. When we----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Did you put
that down?
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing]. When we build roads----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Would you be
so kind as to put that down on my behalf?
Mr. Bean of Florida. I got you, I am putting it down right
now, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Buttigieg. I appreciate it.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Listen, when we build roads, we use
aggregates and other----
Secretary Buttigieg [interposing]. We do.
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing]. Rocks and materials. One
of the companies that has part of their headquarters in
Jacksonville, Florida, is Vulcan. Two years ago, Mexico took
over their aggregate plant. They just walked in. The government
walked in, took their plant, hasn't compensated them at all.
And since that time, aggregate and building roads and building
anything in America has gone up. Is that on your radar screen
of how we can get this plant back, or get American assets that
were taken over by Mexico? Is that on your radar screen? Are
you aware?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am not familiar with this plant, but
I would love to learn more. Pavement is actually one of my
unfashionable passions. I think that if we do better with
pavement durability and sourcing----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. OK, just know that----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. We are going to do better
on our highway----
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing interruption]. Mexico--if
anybody is listening, Mexico took over a company, an American
company, without compensation.
And I got one more question, and hopefully we can bring it
in for a landing, and that is turbulence. Everybody who knows
me knows I am scared of two things, clowns and turbulence. You
said turbulence is caused by climate change. I want to give you
a chance. Do you believe that?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, the science----
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. And here is the thing.
It is just you and I, you don't have----
Secretary Buttigieg [interposing]. Yes.
Mr. Bean of Florida [continuing]. It is just you and I. You
can tell me. You can tell me honestly.
Secretary Buttigieg. Sure. So, scientists believe that
turbulence, especially of the wind-shear variety, has increased
as a consequence of climate change.
Mr. Bean of Florida [interrupting]. Listen----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Are you aware of that?
Mr. Bean of Florida. Your National Transportation Safety
Board said calling it climate change-caused turbulence is
hogwash. I wish we could have--I love chatting with you.
Secretary Buttigieg. I would be happy to send you the
study.
Mr. Bean of Florida. Mr. Secretary, I love chatting with
you, and I regret that I am out of time. Thanks for coming.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Good afternoon.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Stanton is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Secretary Buttigieg, for being here today. Mayor
Pete, you know that there is no better investment than public
infrastructure. In the 3 years since the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law was signed, our country, especially Arizona,
has benefited. In fact, just last week, Valley Metro received
over $15 million to expand the streetcar system from the city
of Tempe into the city of Mesa. And in January, Arizona
received a $95 million INFRA grant to widen Interstate 10. And
that investment directly benefits the Gila River Indian
Community, helping fulfill the administration's goal to direct
40 percent of infrastructure dollars to historically
disadvantaged communities.
And I know you agree the success of the 22 federally
recognized Tribes is critical to all of Arizona, just like
Tribal communities all across the United States of America. You
know we have not kept up our treaty obligations to our Tribal
partners, especially in underinvestment in infrastructure. And
this administration wants equity in transportation investments,
I applaud that.
What are you and DOT doing specifically to channel
investment to our Tribes and Tribal communities?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thanks for the question. Every
time I am in Indian country, I see the extraordinary need and
the demand that those Tribal governments face, maintaining
often extraordinarily extensive road networks with shockingly
little by way of funding. It is one of the reasons we have
worked to increase support for Tribal as well as rural
communities, and we have been pleased to see a lot of success
in terms of some of the competitive grant processes, including,
as you mentioned, the Gila River Indian Community. I am really
excited about what we can do with them on I-10.
We now have an Assistant Secretary-level office for
supporting Tribal communities, all 574 of them, and specific
programs, including our Tribal Technical Assistance Program, to
help make sure that these communities can succeed not just in
winning those grants, but also in delivering them, because we
know it can be a real challenge after you get the good news, to
see those processes through.
Mr. Stanton. That is great. Mr. Secretary, you and I have
both heard so many horror stories about the air travel
experience for passengers with disabilities, particularly
people who utilize mobility devices. This committee has worked
hard on this issue on the recently passed FAA reauthorization,
including a couple of bills that I authored to make the travel
experience better. You have made this a priority, as well. Why
is this important, and what more work do we have to do to
support passengers with disabilities?
Secretary Buttigieg. When you talk to passengers with
disabilities, particularly wheelchair users, you hear so many
stories of the experiences that they have had that reflect,
really, a lack of access to safe and dignified air travel. So,
we have issued a final rule that is requiring airlines to make
lavatories on new, single-aisle aircraft large enough for
passengers with wheelchairs after hearing stories of passengers
who either dehydrate themselves or just don't fly at all
because they don't have access to an accessible bathroom.
And in March, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking
for new requirements on training and practices, making it clear
that damaging or delaying wheelchairs is a violation that can
be met with penalties. Some wheelchair users have told me that
arriving in a destination without a wheelchair is like arriving
without your legs. And it doesn't just ruin your trip, but if
an airline takes forever to fix it, that affects you long after
you have returned home.
So, we are going to continue to work with advocates, and we
are going to take a tough line on any violations here, because
it really is just unacceptable for passengers to go through
what some passengers tell us about.
Mr. Stanton. I very much look forward to working with you
on that, because it stops job opportunities and so many other
ways that it impacts the lives of people with disabilities who
are talented and deserve to have the passenger experience
improved.
As mayor of Phoenix, I proposed and asked voters to approve
the single largest transportation infrastructure plan in
Arizona history, the first of its kind and scope, to expand
public transit, including our light rail system, and modernize
our roadways. They did, by an overwhelming margin. This year,
the people of Maricopa County will decide again with Prop 479,
a proposed dedicated half-cent sales tax extension to fund
critical transportation.
Mr. Secretary, as communities across the country vie for
competitive Federal funding, explain why it is important for
States and localities to have their own dedicated
transportation funding source to be competitive for those
grants.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, I appreciate the question
because, with the historic funding available through the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, I don't want anybody to get the
idea that that means States or local governments shouldn't do
much. The reality is, the more you can put together on a State
or local basis, the more you can unlock on the Federal side,
and the better partner we can be. So, we applaud cities and
States that are taking the initiative to fund their
infrastructure needs, knowing that we have a wind at their back
in the form of the programs and grants we have.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Kiley is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Kiley. Good afternoon, Mr. Secretary. You have
testified today on the topic of EVs that there is no mandate.
You have said that we have not forced anyone to purchase any
particular vehicle. You have testified that you want power to
be in the hands of consumers. Is that a fair characterization
of your testimony?
Secretary Buttigieg. That we don't have an EV mandate? That
is correct.
Mr. Kiley. That is correct. OK. So, I am of a similar view.
I don't think that we--I am all for EVs. I have a lot of
constituents who buy them, and I think that you are right, that
there will be an increasing adoption of them going forward.
However, I support the right of consumers to make their own
choice. So, it sounds like we are on the same page there. So,
do you, like me, then oppose California's effort to take that
choice away from consumers by banning gas-powered vehicles?
Secretary Buttigieg. We respect that States can make their
own decisions about State policies. But at a Federal level, our
approach has to do with economic incentives and support for
chargers, not any kind of mandate coming out of the DOT on what
technology you are supposed to buy for your vehicle.
Mr. Kiley. Sure. But you have said you support giving
choice to consumers. Now you have said you support giving
choice to States. But those two are conflicting, because the
State is taking that right away from consumers. So, why is it
that you side with giving the State the choice, as opposed to
giving the consumer the choice?
Secretary Buttigieg. Because this is Federal policy. I make
Federal policy, and our Federal policy is to support consumer
choice. But look, sometimes our Federal policy is a floor, and
States decide to go above and beyond that.
Mr. Kiley. Sure. But as you are aware, the Federal
Government has actually given California the authority to issue
that ban through a waiver under the Clean Air Act. So, do you
support the conferral of that waiver?
Secretary Buttigieg. I think that is on the EPA side of the
House, so, I want to make sure that I am conscious of the----
Mr. Kiley [interposing]. I understand.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Jurisdictional
differences. But--and I am not informed enough on EPA's
processes to weigh in on their policy choices.
What I will say again is that, at the Federal level in the
Biden-Harris administration, our strategy with regard to EVs is
to make sure there are more chargers out there, and to make
them more affordable.
Mr. Kiley. Sure, but I just want to--I am trying to parse
out your position, because on the one hand you say you favor
giving consumers choice, and yet on the other hand you seem to
be standing behind an administration policy that is enabling
the biggest State in the country to take that choice away. So,
which is it?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am talking about Federal policy when
I talk about not----
Mr. Kiley [interrupting]. And Federal policy is enabling
this choice that now California is also bringing 18 other
States along with.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, enabling, not requiring.
Mr. Kiley. So, do you support legislation to take that
waiver away?
Secretary Buttigieg. You mean Federal legislation to
preempt the ability of States to make their own decisions?
Mr. Kiley. No, no, no.
Secretary Buttigieg. As a general rule, no.
Mr. Kiley. That is not correct. It is a special authority
that has been granted to the States to make that decision. So,
you are supporting granting special authority to ban gas-
powered vehicles, correct?
Secretary Buttigieg. States may seek waivers. And if they
qualify under the law, we will consider them. Again, I don't
want to get into the weeds of something that another agency is
doing because I am not privy to all----
Mr. Kiley [interrupting]. But you are the Secretary of
Transportation, and this is a massive question of
transportation policy. So, I was just wondering if you had a
view, yes or no.
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes, I mean, look, there are many
cases where States have led the way by going above and beyond a
Federal floor.
Mr. Kiley. Sure. Let's turn to high-speed rail for a
moment. Your administration has given--or your Department has
given $3.1 billion to this project recently. Is that correct?
Secretary Buttigieg. That is correct.
Mr. Kiley. And the Governor of California said this show of
support from the Biden-Harris administration is a vote of
confidence in today's vision for that project. Do you agree
with that statement from Governor Newsom, that you have--your
confidence in the current vision for California high-speed
rail?
Secretary Buttigieg. We don't approve awards for any
project if we are not confident in the integrity of the
application----
Mr. Kiley [interposing]. Sure.
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. And the ability of the
project sponsor to meet whatever is required for them through
the application process----
Mr. Kiley [interrupting]. But you are aware that the
project has been a nightmare in California, correct?
Secretary Buttigieg. It is kind of a subjective question.
What I am aware of is it is creating a lot of good-paying jobs,
it has taken a long time, and it is a good investment.
Mr. Kiley. Well, this is actually the term the New York
Times used in an article, ``How California's Bullet Train Went
Off the Rails.'' It called it a multibillion-dollar nightmare.
The L.A. Times reported it is $100 billion short in funding
right now, and the New York Times also said that it is not on
track to be finished this century, that it is not on track to
be finished this century. Do you disagree?
Secretary Buttigieg. I would be surprised if it took until
the end of this century to deliver quality, high-speed rail in
California. So, I suppose in that respect----
Mr. Kiley [interrupting]. When do you think it will be
finished?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. I disagree. I didn't hear
you, sorry.
Mr. Kiley. When do you think it will be finished?
Secretary Buttigieg. I have seen projections for when the
Merced-to-Bakersfield segment will come online. We are looking
to the next decade, for sure, for the bulk of the revenue
service.
Mr. Kiley. OK, but you earlier stated, in response to my
colleague from California's questions, that the sort of funding
is predicated on it ultimately going from L.A. to San
Francisco. So, I am asking, when do you think that will be
completed?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am not going to get ahead of the
high-speed rail authority there on their latest projections for
when future stages----
Mr. Kiley [interrupting]. Well, no, you----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Could be completed.
Mr. Kiley. You have already gotten there. You have given
them $3.1 billion. So, certainly you have some thought as to
when----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. For the Bakersfield-to-
Merced segment.
Mr. Kiley [continuing]. This might actually be of some
benefit to California consumers.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, obviously, the moment it is in
revenue service it is a benefit to some California consumers.
Mr. Kiley. Right. So, do you think it will be before the
century?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes.
Mr. Kiley. Do you think it will be before the mid-century?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes.
Mr. Kiley. You do? OK, so, when? What is your best estimate
for when we will have operational, high-speed rail for----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I am not going to
estimate a year for the San Francisco-to-L.A. corridor.
Mr. Kiley. OK. Do you think that the technology will still
be state of the art by the time it is complete?
Secretary Buttigieg. I think the technology will be a lot
better than what Americans are accustomed to today.
Mr. Kiley. Thank you, I yield back.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. The Chair recognizes Mr.
Menendez for 5 minutes.
Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Secretary Buttigieg, thank you for being here today and all
the important work that the Department of Transportation
carries out every day.
While we appreciate everything the Department is doing to
facilitate the historic Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
and improve transportation across the country, our constituents
are dealing with serious issues during their day-to-day
commutes. Several times over the past month, NJ Transit riders
have experienced significant delays during their daily
commutes. These delays have left commuters stranded for hours,
impacting their ability to work, travel, and see loved ones.
Over the course of the last 6 weeks, Amtrak disruptions
have caused delays for NJ Transit riders over 20 times,
including serious incidents last week that resulted in
cancellations and suspension of service along the Northeast
Corridor. Amtrak cites overhead wire and other infrastructure
issues as the sources of these delays.
This week, I, along with Representative Mikie Sherrill, led
the New Jersey delegation in sending you a letter, here,
highlighting our concerns with persistent delays in Amtrak's
failure to adequately address these issues.
Madam Chair, I ask for unanimous consent to submit this
letter for the record.
Ms. Maloy. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Letter of June 25, 2024, to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from the New Jersey Congressional
Delegation, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Robert Menendez
Congress of the United States,
House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20515,
June 25, 2024.
The Honorable Pete Buttigieg,
Secretary,
U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., Washington, DC 20590.
Dear Secretary Buttigieg:
Families across New Jersey count on accessible, efficient public
transportation to get to work on time, be home for their children's
soccer games, and make their lives more affordable and convenient. As
the most densely populated state in the nation, New Jersey in
particular has a unique reliance on public transportation and our
passenger rail system to move our economy and communities forward.
Given the centrality of Amtrak and NJ TRANSIT to these crucial goals
and our long-running support in Congress for key investments in our
region's railway network, we have been shocked and deeply concerned by
the recent breakdown in Amtrak rail operations along the Northeast
Corridor and the resulting many hours of delays for tens of thousands
of New Jersey commuters.
Over the past week, our offices have been inundated with outreach
from our constituents regarding dramatic delays in their Amtrak and NJ
TRANSIT commutes that have greatly impacted their ability to work,
travel, and see loved ones. On Thursday, June 20, Amtrak service along
the entirety of the Northeast Corridor in New Jersey, particularly
between Manhattan and Philadelphia, was suspended due to power issues
as a result of malfunctioning circuit breakers on Amtrak tracks,
alongside a brush fire in Secaucus that led to additional issues. Since
some 60 percent of NJ TRANSIT's nearly 700 daily trains must use the
Northeast Corridor for some or all of their trips--and 80 percent of NJ
TRANSIT passenger rail trips touch the Northeast Corridor--all NJ
TRANSIT service into and out of New York Penn Station was also
suspended for the afternoon. More than 130 NJ TRANSIT trains were
canceled or delayed, and thousands of New Jerseyans were stuck far from
home for hours and were unable to have dinner with their families on
Thursday night, as a result of these avoidable errors by Amtrak.
Again, on the morning of Friday, June 21, NJ TRANSIT customers were
trapped in a commuting nightmare as service was suspended in and out of
New York Penn Station due to Amtrak power problems. Many commuters
undoubtedly gave up in disgust, either working from home, if they
could, or climbing into their cars and fighting highway traffic, adding
to our serious regional air pollution.
Unfortunately, these are not isolated incidents. Not counting the
chaos last Thursday and Friday, Amtrak disruptions have created serious
delays for NJ TRANSIT customers no less than 19 times over the past six
weeks. These serious issues are occurring nowhere else on the 11 rail
lines that NJ TRANSIT owns and maintains, only on Amtrak's Northeast
Corridor.
This is especially frustrating for New Jersey citizens and their
elected representatives, as NJ TRANSIT is merely a tenant on Amtrak's
Northeast Corridor; NJ TRANSIT neither owns nor maintains the Corridor.
Amtrak does, and Amtrak's troubles leave NJ TRANSIT in an impossible
position--unable to direct repairs on Amtrak property and unable to
provide proper, reliable service to paying customers who depend on
them. This is seriously undermining the quality of life for New
Jerseyans and their families, and if it continues it will threaten the
state's economic health.
Needless to say, this situation is completely unacceptable.
As Amtrak works to address the underlying infrastructure problems
that led to these delays, we therefore ask that the Department of
Transportation conduct a thorough investigation into what led to the
breakdowns along the Northeast Corridor route and what additional
capital projects need to be completed to fix any structural
deficiencies, and to present its findings to Members of Congress. We
also ask that the Department provide information as to how it and
Amtrak are planning to adapt to a greater frequency of extreme heat
waves throughout the Northeast region, which likely played a role in
last week's significant delays, and better communicate and coordinate
with operators on Amtrak's lines, including NJ TRANSIT, in real time as
issues arise. As these types of weather events are only expected to
increase in frequency going forward, it is critical that Amtrak, NJ
TRANSIT, and the Department of Transportation work together to ensure
that these transportation breakdowns don't happen again and that we are
better prepared in case major circuit breaker malfunctions or other
issues occur.
Additionally, we urge Amtrak to immediately prioritize replacement
of catenary wires and other critical infrastructure upgrades such as
signals and track using the funds allocated through the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law. These federal investments were made to ensure
reliable train service and must be utilized promptly to prevent further
severe disruptions along the Northeast Corridor.
Thank you for your attention to this critical matter that has
greatly impacted families and businesses all throughout New Jersey. We
have been proud to support significant new investments in public rail
transportation throughout our region, including the Gateway program,
but the breakdowns that we've seen last week and over the past month-
plus are incredibly disruptive and only serve to deter families in our
districts from taking the train in the first place. We look forward to
working with you to resolve these issues and ensure that Amtrak and NJ
TRANSIT emerge far stronger from this crisis.
Sincerely,
Mikie Sherrill,
Member of Congress.
Robert J. Menendez,
Member of Congress.
Frank Pallone, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Josh Gottheimer,
Member of Congress.
Thomas H. Kean, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Andy Kim,
Member of Congress.
Donald Norcross,
Member of Congress.
Bill Pascrell, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Christopher H. Smith,
Member of Congress.
Jefferson Van Drew,
Member of Congress.
Bonnie Watson Coleman,
Member of Congress.
cc: Coalition for the Northeast Corridor
Mr. Menendez. Thank you.
We make several requests in the letter, including asking
the Department to conduct a thorough investigation to what led
to the breakdowns along the Northeast Corridor route.
I want to just put this in human terms. We both have young
families. Imagine leaving for work and assuming that you will
be able to get back to your children relying on public
transportation. We want to relieve congestion, we want people
to use mass transit. Imagine walking out your door and not
knowing when you will be able to get back home. So, in your
words, please, what is the Department doing to partner with
Amtrak to ensure that breakdowns like this never happen again?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, we know that commuters on NJ
Transit have been subject to infuriating delays, as you have
described, and FRA personnel are involved on the ground,
assessing what took place and trying to get an understanding of
the causes of what appears to be physical damage to NJ Transit
cars operating--for some of their trip, at least--on Amtrak
resources.
I am aware that earlier today, Amtrak and NJ Transit
announced a joint action plan. I haven't had a chance to review
that. But one thing I will also direct FRA to do is to support
in any way that they can that process, whether it is technical
assistance, assessment.
And of course, more broadly, we are working to support both
NJ Transit and Amtrak with the capital funding they need. Too
soon to know exactly which issues have contributed to this, but
I think it is safe to expect that, more broadly, reliability
depends on good state of repair. State of good repair is better
served by the infrastructure funding that we are getting to
them.
Mr. Menendez. Absolutely, and I appreciate your support. I
am just asking to treat this like the crisis that it is,
because we are hearing from our residents every single day who
don't want to go to work, who don't want to travel, who are
worried about what childcare looks like because they are not
sure--there is no reliability. And it is a crisis for so many
residents. I am asking you to treat it as such.
Mr. Secretary, how can we ensure that Amtrak and other rail
line owners are making infrastructure improvements and upgrades
that result in better service?
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, partly what we can do is
directly help. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act gives
us unprecedented resources to help the various infrastructure
owners. Sometimes it is Amtrak that New Jersey Transit counts
on, sometimes it is a Class I freight railer that Amtrak counts
on.
I also believe the Surface Transportation Board's work of
stepped up enforcement and attention to the legal
responsibility that host railroads have to allow passenger rail
to take priority is an important part of this, and we welcome
the attention that the STB is paying to that. And anything else
we can do to support those processes is certainly something of
great interest to us because on-time performance and
reliability is vital for the reasons you just went through in
terms of people's daily lives.
Mr. Menendez. I appreciate that. And on this topic, lastly,
can you describe how the Department tracks and monitors Amtrak
spending, including how Amtrak allocates its funding to state
of good repair versus other initiatives?
Secretary Buttigieg. I know that the Department receives
extensive documentation from Amtrak. I wouldn't be in a
position, off the cuff, to characterize some of the breakdowns
that appear there, but given Amtrak's unique kind of quasi-
public structure, it is subject to a lot of requirements around
transparency.
And of course, we get the challenge they face in balancing
operations and maintenance personnel and their capital needs.
Our ability to support them is mostly, of course, on the
capital side, but we are also a stakeholder just in the sense
that a lot of funding through our Department or from our
Department goes to Amtrak to help them meet those needs.
Mr. Menendez. I appreciate it, because this is why I
appreciate the Gateway Program and all these long-term projects
that are so critically important to the region. It is the day-
to-day issues that matter to our residents and I know matter to
you. So, I appreciate your partnership. I appreciate you
putting the full weight of the Department behind this issue,
and we work on this in a collaborative fashion so we can get it
done.
With that, I yield back.
Thank you so much, again.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Molinaro is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Molinaro. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I want to commend the
Department's advancement in aviation for those with physical
disabilities, in fact, making some strides. And we appreciate
that, of course. Within the FAA reauthorization, we put some
emphasis. I would ask for equal consideration for those with
intellectual and developmental disabilities. We are simply not
making adequate progress in any area of mass transportation
when it comes to those that are neurodivergent, which gets me
to my first question.
A year ago, we spoke about Amtrak's, what I will say,
deplorable adherence to the ADA standards. They were given 20
years to advance access to their intercity rail. They are
currently, all these years later--from 1990, the adoption of
ADA to today, only 30 percent of the 385 stations have met that
ADA compliance. A year ago--and again, I know the plate is
full, but a year ago, we talked briefly about what the
Department could do to advance and pressure Amtrak to make
commitments and meet those benchmarks. Could you at least
advise what can and has the Department done to put pressure on
Amtrak to meet those expectations?
Secretary Buttigieg. I know this has been a topic of
discussion with FRA and Amtrak and also, of course, is in scope
for what we have since been able to do a lot on more broadly in
our transit and transportation systems, which is the ASAP
funding that is helping us to retrofit old stations. But the
need is enormous.
So, there are really two ways to come at this. One is
support for capital improvements that are needed to get this
done, but the other also is the enforcement side of the house.
And so, we do have a title VI capabilities any time there is a
more specific----
Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. Has the----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Civil rights-related----
Mr. Molinaro [continuing interruption]. How often does the
Department take action using the enforcement mechanism as it
relates to ADA compliance at Amtrak?
Secretary Buttigieg. I would have to go back and pull that
data.
Mr. Molinaro. It would be helpful, because I suspect--and
this is not just your administration, but prior administrations
have allowed far too much leeway. And quite frankly, this
population is just being unmet. And it truly is a disgrace and
a violation of their own civil rights, if not simply an
acknowledgment that there is lack of access.
Similarly, I have a concern as it relates to New York
State's abandonment of congestion pricing. I know one of my
colleagues may have mentioned it earlier. I will be candid with
you. I think in New York State, congestion pricing actually
causes a greater pain for those who can afford it least, in
particular those who are forced to commute into the city of New
York for employment. Did the Governor of the State of New York
provide prior notice to the Department of Transportation that,
in fact, the State would abandon congestion pricing?
Secretary Buttigieg. I did get a call from the Governor
that she was planning to take that step.
Mr. Molinaro. Was that 24, 36, 48 hours before the
announcement?
Secretary Buttigieg. I don't recall what day it was, but it
was that same week.
Mr. Molinaro. It was almost immediately prior to that
announcement.
Subsequent to her announcement, the DOT offered some
additional approval of congestion pricing, knowing that, in
fact, the State had abandoned it. Is it your understanding that
the State's abandonment is temporary or permanent?
Secretary Buttigieg. We don't know. That is up to the
State. But what we know is we have certain responsibilities to
process information and approvals and permits unless we are
formally notified to do otherwise. So, the environmental
assessment process continued, but the next step would be for
the State to sign on the VPPP agreement. That has not taken
place yet.
Mr. Molinaro. So, is it some expectation that the--so, the
State can now simply temporarily withhold signature
indefinitely?
Secretary Buttigieg. Effectively, yes, the State would
either----
Mr. Molinaro [interrupting]. ``Yes,'' it can be indefinite?
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Proceed or would not
proceed.
Mr. Molinaro. But it--so, it is your--but it is fair for
the State simply to, having gone through this process, to now
just abandon it entirely? They can do that?
Secretary Buttigieg. In terms of compliance with the
environmental assessment, they have met their marks, and we
have met ours.
Mr. Molinaro. How many Federal dollars do you think have
been committed to assisting either in the environmental review
stage or planning stage, or even capital to the implementation
of congestion pricing in the city of New York?
Secretary Buttigieg. I can tell you it was a complex and
thorough-going process. I am not sure I would be able to
compute how many person-hours went into it.
Mr. Molinaro. I think it is important for the American
taxpayers, the New York taxpayers, to know how much has already
been committed and how much is going to be set aside because of
the State's abandonment.
It is clear to most of us in New York--and again, I have my
reservations about it to begin with--that the Governor of New
York made a political decision. That political decision has now
left the taxpayers of the State of New York with a fairly
significant budget hole. And as it relates to the first line of
questioning, it also leaves those who don't have access to mass
transportation and mass transit in and around the city of New
York still sitting on the sidelines. And I do think that the
Department ought to take some punitive action to recapture
those dollars and at least hold States like New York
accountable for wasting them.
I am out of time. But Mr. Secretary, I would appreciate
some update on enforcement, at least as it relates to ADA
compliance at Amtrak.
Secretary Buttigieg. I will try to get that to you.
Mr. Molinaro. I appreciate your time. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mrs. Peltola is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Peltola. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon, Secretary Buttigieg. It is good to see you
again. Before I start my questions I really want to thank you
sincerely for coming to Alaska in August. It was great to have
you in our State, seeing our complex challenges and amazing
opportunities.
Alaska is enormous. If we were our own country, we would be
the 18th largest country in the world. We are a very big State,
and a lot of logistics and transportation issues are on the top
of our mind. We are all really aware of when the next barge is
coming in, when the next jet is coming in. So, I really want to
thank you for all the work that you do.
One of my top priorities, one of the top priorities for the
Alaska delegation, is the FAA Reauthorization Act, and we
worked really hard to get exemptions to the deadline for the
low-lead avgas for Alaska. There are a number of issues. We
wanted to get an extension for Alaska into the FAA
reauthorization. We have serious concerns about the pace of
this proposed transition to potentially an inadequately proven
alternative, its potential impacts on aviation safety in
Alaska, as well as the logistical challenges for distributing a
replacement fuel across Alaska and its many remote communities
in terms of bulk fuel storage.
Since you are here today, I just wanted to underscore my
concern and ask you if you would be willing to commit to
working with my office and my constituents on this important
issue. Eighty-two percent of Alaska is only accessible by air,
and about 75 percent of those communities don't have a runway
long enough for a jet or larger aircraft. So, that avgas is
really important for Alaska's aviation community, and I just
wanted to acknowledge that now.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. You mentioned my recent
visit to Alaska. And certainly, one of the things that you come
away with is just being astonished by the scale of the State
and the proportion of communities that don't have road access
where aviation is, literally, the only way to have access
there. And so, we are very conscious that these general
aviation aircraft are something that Alaska residents rely on
for their basic daily needs. And you have my commitment that
FAA's work on this transition will take that into account, and
I will certainly welcome opportunities to work with you on how
best to live up to that commitment.
Mrs. Peltola. OK, excellent.
My second question is during the pandemic, there was a real
national awareness about the importance of onshoring critical
minerals. And this was discussed a little bit ago, particularly
where rare earth minerals, which play a critical role in our
modern economy and national security--responsibly developing
rare earth minerals here at home in the United States and
especially in Alaska is a priority of mine.
However, along with what is an often extremely burdensome
regulatory process, which was also mentioned a little bit ago,
transportation is one of the key challenges companies often
encounter in getting resources from point A to point B, and I
was hoping you would be able to talk a little bit about
opportunities you see for rail to help advance the United
States efforts to onshore or produce these rare earth minerals
domestically.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you. Yes, certainly, part of the
rationale for good rail investment is the relevance of those
supply chains that are shifting. And if we want to make sure
that more of the materials that we have increased demand for
here in the U.S. are sourced domestically, especially given
these strategic and human rights concerns associated with some
of the other countries vying to produce them, then we have got
to make sure we have the infrastructure to support that
process. And that is certainly part of what could qualify
something, for example, to be convincing in an application for
discretionary funding to improve rail assets.
Mrs. Peltola. OK. Another topic, hot topic, has been
electric cars. And there are communities in Alaska where it
makes sense to have electric cars. I think Juneau is a really
good example of high usage of electric cars. However, when the
majority of our communities are creating electricity with
diesel that we ship in by barge, it doesn't make sense to be
pushing electric cars. And it is also in communities where it
is very cold and it is hard to keep a battery alive. So, my
other request is that you keep outlier States like Alaska in
mind when these blanket rules or proposed rules are issued.
And lastly, I really want to thank you for your
responsiveness. You helped Alaska a great deal with the Port of
Alaska, the Port of Anchorage issue. Your MARAD folks were
really accommodating, and I just appreciate the level of
response that we get from you and your Department.
Secretary Buttigieg. Well, thanks. And likewise, we
appreciated the opportunity to work with you and your team on
that.
Mrs. Peltola. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Maloy. The gentlewoman yields. Mr. Van Drew is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Dr. Van Drew. Thanks for being here, Secretary. The Biden
administration is aggressively pushing to industrialize the
east coast, as you know, with offshore wind. As Secretary, you
have facilitated over $200 million in Maritime Administration
grants for wind ports. And honestly, few people support
offshore wind as strongly as you do.
I want to be clear: I support clean energy. I support solar
energy. I support nuclear energy. They are safe, they are
economically viable. And offshore wind, in my opinion, is
neither. Offshore wind negatively impacts transportation safety
under this committee's jurisdiction--and that is why I ask you
about it, I am not asking you an energy question--including
maritime navigation and aviation.
Offshore wind interferes with radar systems. This includes
maritime navigation radar and air traffic radar. And this is
not me just saying this. A recent study found that Mid-Atlantic
wind farms interfere with 36 different land-based radar
systems. This interference diminishes safety at sea and in the
air. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which you are very
familiar with, determined that offshore wind increases--again,
it is not me saying this, it is them--the risk of maritime
collisions, the risk of injury, and even the risk of death at
sea.
Your own FAA is now reviewing the impact of offshore wind
projects on major airports, including New York's JFK Airport
and, in my district, the Atlantic City Airport. In both cases,
offshore wind interferes with airport flightpaths. Somehow,
these projects have already been approved by the Federal
Government, despite the aviation safety conflicts that exist. I
have a simple question, and I appreciate a yes or a no.
Can you commit to me that the DOT and the FAA, through the
Federal environmental review process, will block offshore wind
turbines from being built in areas if found that they will
threaten air traffic safety in those areas? Would that be----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. Well, the FAA will
never permit an unsafe condition.
Dr. Van Drew. So, you would help to make sure that that was
blocked?
Secretary Buttigieg. If there was no alternative, and it
was going to be unsafe, then the FAA wouldn't be able to
support it.
Dr. Van Drew. I just wanted you on the record on that. In
my opinion, these conflicts prove that safety evaluation is
incomplete to this day, and that--and again, not just me
saying--and that offshore wind is moving ahead, in my sense,
prematurely.
The GAO office, the Government Accountability Office, is
currently conducting a comprehensive study of the impacts of
offshore wind. We requested that. It includes a major focus on
safety impacts. It looks at the environment, the economy,
national security, utility costs, noise, natural disaster
resilience, not all of which falls under your bailiwick, but
some of it does. We must understand the breadth of the impacts
of offshore wind. It is a permanent industrialization of our
ocean.
Should we wait--all I am asking here is for the GAO study
to be completed. That is not a Republican study. It is not my
study. It is the Government Accountability Office, totally
nonpartisan. Shouldn't we wait until their safety analysis is
done before we go ahead and build offshore wind, yes or no?
Secretary Buttigieg. I can only weigh in on the
transportation side of the house, but we will not proceed with
anything we think harms safety. And if GAO or anybody else
produced data or analysis that would affect a safety decision
about transportation, we would want to know it.
Dr. Van Drew. So, we are building those projects now.
Shouldn't we wait until they come back and say whether they are
safe or unsafe? A purely objective, nonpolitical, nonpartisan
viewpoint.
Secretary Buttigieg. As a general rule, we don't terminate
economic development because research is underway. But when
research is completed, we include that in our future work.
Dr. Van Drew. Well, the shame of that is--and was alluded
to before--if we go ahead and are in the middle of doing these
projects and find that there are safety issues where they are
being placed, now we have spent huge amounts--and I mean huge
amounts--of taxpayer dollars, and we find out that we shouldn't
move forward. Either way, we are going to move forward, and it
will be unsafe or we wouldn't move forward and spent a ton of
money that we shouldn't have spent.
And by the way, with offshore wind, everybody pays more.
The Government, huge, multibillion-dollar subsidies. Taxpayers
pay more for that reason. Families pay more because the utility
rates are going to increase radically. See, the difference with
solar panels is when you use solar panels, it decreases the
cost to the family for their energy source. When you do wind,
their costs and residential utility rates are going to go way
up. These developers and--also are foreign countries. Now, all
of that doesn't fall under you. I realize that. But the safety
issues do. They are enormously expensive, and the subsidies are
great.
Do you support--OK, I have a last question--do you support
the offshore wind financing strategy of increasing utility
rates?
Secretary Buttigieg. We support options for the American
people when it comes to energy. Again, from a transportation
perspective, that is mostly making sure there is adequate port
facilities.
Dr. Van Drew. I have more questions. I would like to ask
unanimous consent to put them in the record.
Ms. Maloy. Where----
Dr. Van Drew [interrupting]. No, I just want them in the
record.
Ms. Maloy. Without objection, without objection.
Dr. Van Drew. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. Mr. Van Orden is
recognized for 5 minutes, but we have got 8 minutes to vote,
so, keep it brisk.
Mr. Van Orden. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Please pull up that image, get it on the screen.
[Slide]
Mr. Van Orden. Here it is. We have done this before, Mr.
Secretary.
Are you aware that 70 percent of the world's cobalt is
produced in the Democratic Republic of the Congo?
Secretary Buttigieg. Yes.
Mr. Van Orden. Are you aware that 4.3 percent of every
electric car battery is comprised of cobalt?
Secretary Buttigieg. What I can tell you is that today's EV
batteries use 80 percent less cobalt and, in fact, most of
the----
Mr. Van Orden [interrupting]. Mr. Secretary, please----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Cobalt now comes as a
byproduct of----
Mr. Van Orden [continuing interruption]. Mr. Secretary----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing]. Nickel and copper mining.
Mr. Van Orden. Mr. Secretary----
Secretary Buttigieg [interrupting]. I am also concerned
about the cynical----
Mr. Van Orden [continuing]. I have never----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. Exploitation
of images of child labor, when the reality is that anybody
concerned about that could be teaming up with us to make sure
that there is compliance on forced and child labor----
Mr. Van Orden [continuing]. Mr. Secretary----
Secretary Buttigieg [continuing interruption]. For any of
the products that might entail them.
Mr. Van Orden. I am going to remind you of something that
apparently you have forgotten. I am a member of a co-equal
branch of Government, and will be respected, and you will not
interrupt me in my house.
Secretary Buttigieg. Then I would ask you not to interrupt
me either, Congressman.
Mr. Van Orden. Very well. Are you aware that 4.3 percent of
all electric batteries are comprised of cobalt?
Secretary Buttigieg. Again, I don't know the recency of
that data, but I can tell you the cobalt composition is going
down.
Mr. Van Orden. It is accurate. Are you aware that 15 to 30
percent of all of the cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic
of the Congo are artesian mines?
Secretary Buttigieg. I believe you.
Mr. Van Orden. That is correct. Are you aware that
approximately 40 to 255,000 cobalt miners in the Democratic
Republic of the Congo are children working in slave conditions?
Secretary Buttigieg. I am certainly aware of horrific
conditions around the world in the extraction and mining
industries of many minerals, including cobalt.
Mr. Van Orden. The last time you were here, I asked you a
very specific question: How many of these children do you
estimate will have to die to make the goal of electrifying 50
percent of the fleet by 2030 electric? This was your response:
``We have better data on how many children will die if we allow
climate change to increase unimpeded.'' That tells me that you
actually do have data on how many children will die from mining
cobalt if you are able to tell me that you have more data on
how many children will be dying from climate change.
So, I would like an answer to my question: How many
children are going to have to die in those conditions to meet
the artificial goal of 2030 of electrifying half of the fleet?
Secretary Buttigieg. None, if you will work with us to make
sure that anything imported is conforming to our requirements
around forced and child labor.
Mr. Van Orden. Until that is able to take place, how many
children are going to have to continue to work in slave
conditions in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to make sure
that we can meet the artificial goal of 50 percent of the fleet
being electrified by 2030?
Secretary Buttigieg. None is the only acceptable answer.
Mr. Van Orden. That is excellent. And guess what, sir?
[Slide]
Mr. Van Orden. This is H.R. 8495, put in by my friend, Mr.
Duarte from California. It is an EV fair trade bill. I am going
to ask you publicly now, and I will send this to your office.
If you will support this bill--you and me are six and seven. I
know you got little kids. I have nine grandkids. I am going to
have 11 by the end of the summer. I don't ever want your
children to be exposed to any of this. I don't want my
grandchildren to be exposed to any of this. And I don't think
you do, either, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Buttigieg. If this legislation represents a
serious effort to ensure compliance with forced and child labor
requirements and make sure that none of that finds its way into
products used in America, then I would be very interested to
work on that.
Mr. Van Orden. I will send it to you because it is laser-
focused on that very specific issue. So, what I heard from this
from you, Mr. Secretary, is that you do understand that there
are children working in these horrific conditions, and we
acknowledge this, and we acknowledge the fact that what is
driving that--those conditions with these African children--and
some of their folks are right across the way--what is driving
these children, these African children, to work in slave
conditions is our want and consumption of cobalt. That is
factual.
Secretary Buttigieg. Which is why we are trying to cut the
use of cobalt, right? Because really, we have--in my view, we
have four options: stop using batteries, have batteries that
don't use cobalt, source cobalt from somewhere that doesn't
have the conditions of the DRC, or have better conditions in
the DRC. And I think it is a combination of the last three that
is more realistic than stopping using batteries.
Mr. Van Orden. I understand that. So, we do know and we are
acknowledging publicly that this is taking place, and that we
can work collectively to stop this because this is terrible.
And no one who has a soul can look at those pictures and say
that having an artificial date of 2030 established for 50
percent of our fleet to be electrified is worth a single child
working in slavery.
Secretary Buttigieg. No one here, to the best of my
knowledge, accepts those kinds of conditions in any product.
And I hope you are equally serious about the other 158 products
that have been identified as being vulnerable to child or
forced labor abroad.
Mr. Van Orden. Mr. Secretary, I am deadly serious about
that, and I am amazed that you and I found common accord, and I
appreciate it.
Secretary Buttigieg. Wonders never cease, Congressman.
Mr. Van Orden. With that, I yield back.
Secretary Buttigieg. Thank you.
Ms. Maloy. The gentleman yields. I recognize myself for one
really quick minute.
Mr. Secretary, this morning, in response to my colleague,
Mr. Crawford, you said ``Anything we do we think is a good
allocation of taxpayer resources, otherwise we wouldn't do
it.'' I am not sure I agree with that. But as a member of the
legislative branch with the responsibility to control the purse
strings, I want to help you make that more true. So, I want to
just really quickly ask for your cooperation.
My colleague, Ms. Chavez-DeRemer, talked about the FREE
Act, and permit by rule, and how we could make these projects
move faster. The first thing it does is ask the administration
to identify places where permit by rule would be appropriate.
Will you work with us on identifying some of those so that we
can shorten up this time period and make it more cost effective
for taxpayers?
Secretary Buttigieg. I would be happy to.
Ms. Maloy. OK. Well, in that case, I yield back. Are there
any further questions from any members of the committee who
have not been recognized?
Seeing none, that concludes our hearing for today. I would
like to thank the witness for his testimony.
The committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:46 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]
Submissions for the Record
----------
Statement of the Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA),
Submitted for the Record by Hon. Rick Larsen
Dear Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen:
The Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA) is an industry-
backed coalition of member companies spanning the entire electric
vehicle (EV) supply chain, including vehicle manufacturers, charging
infrastructure manufacturers and network operators, battery
manufacturers and recyclers, electricity providers, and critical
minerals producers, among others.
ZETA would like to thank the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure for the opportunity to submit a statement for the record
for the hearing on the Department of Transportation's FY 2025 budget
request on June 27, 2024. In response, ZETA offers our perspective on
some of the topics raised during the hearing.
Current and Future Demand Trends
EV sales are at record highs, and are projected to grow even more
in the coming years.\1\ The average price of a long-range EV recently
fell below that of the average new vehicle in the United States, before
any purchase incentives are included.\2\ EV technology and
manufacturing capabilities are maturing rapidly and will drive down
costs even further for consumers in the coming years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The Slowdown in US Electric Vehicle Sales Looks More Like a
Blip,'' Bloomberg, May 28, 2024, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/
articles/2024-05-28/the-slowdown-in-us-electric-vehicle-sales-looks-
more-like-a-blip
\2\ ``Long-Range EVs Now Cost Less Than the Average New Car in the
US'', Bloomberg, June 7, 2024, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/
2024-06-07/long-range-evs-now-cost-less-than-the-average-us-new-car
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To incentivize greater domestic investment in this developing
sector, the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act expanded certain tax
credit eligibility for EV manufacturers, among other recipients. The
public-private partnerships supported by these federal investments have
generated huge economic impacts, including $177 billion of private
investment in the EV supply chain,\3\ approximately 200,000 estimated
direct and 800,000 indirect jobs,\4\ and 408 new or expanded
facilities.\5\ The continued growth of this industry will provide
ongoing economic benefits to the United States and expanded employment
opportunities over time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ `EV Jobs Hub.' BlueGreen Alliance Foundation, (2024) https://
evjobs.bgafoundation.org/
\4\ Opening Statement for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee ``Hearing to Examine Federal Electric Vehicle Incentives
Including the Government's Role in Fostering Reliable and Resilient
Electric Vehicle Supply Chains,'' U.S. Deputy Secretary of Treasury
Adewale Adeyemo, (January 11, 2024) https://www.energy.senate.gov/
services/files/AA567D87-DA99-4E39-A97F-C02CA2BE6E93
\5\ `EV Jobs Hub.' BlueGreen Alliance Foundation, (2024) https://
evjobs.bgafoundation.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regulations
Operating under its longstanding authority under Sec. 202 of the
Clean Air Act, EPA recently finalized new emissions standards for
light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicles.\6\\,\ \7\ The standards will
take effect beginning with Model Year 2027 new vehicles and will
preserve consumer choice while significantly reducing tailpipe
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 89 Fed. Reg. 27842 (April 18, 2024)
\7\ 89 Fed. Reg. 29440 (April 22, 2024)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final rules are not mandates to sell EVs but represent a
technology-neutral effort to reduce tailpipe emissions on a fleetwide
basis. Automakers can achieve emissions reductions through a
combination of various technologies, including more efficient and
lower-emission internal combustion engine (ICE) cars. Nothing in these
regulations forces the purchase of any given technology or vehicle
type.
The rules include compliance flexibilities for automakers while
providing regulatory certainty for the entire EV supply chain. These
rules also support the supply chain's ability to smoothly scale and
remain globally competitive. After thorough engagement with industry
and other stakeholders, the publication of the final rules was met with
overwhelming support across the automotive industry, including the
Alliance for Automotive Innovation, GM, Ford, and Stellantis, who
recognized that the rules respect consumer choice.
Responsibly-Sourced Supply Chains
ZETA shares the Committee's deep concerns about the use of
unethical labor practices in the mining of certain battery materials,
including cobalt, in foreign nations such as the Democratic Republic of
the Congo (DRC). The problem of so-called ``conflict minerals'' and
their use across advanced technological sectors is a complex one, and
the EV industry is working rapidly to do its part, building up fully
sustainable and responsibly sourced supply chains as quickly as
possible. Automakers are intently focused on scaling up production in
the U.S. and allied nations, as well as innovating on battery
technology to minimize percentages of conflict minerals.
While the presence of forced labor in U.S. supply chains is guarded
against by existing statutes--such as the Section 307 of the Tariff Act
of 1930 (19 U.S.C. Sec. 1307), the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-317), and the Uyghur Forced
Labor Prevention Act (Public Law No. 117-78)--there is more work to be
done. In order to further reduce the risk of unethical labor practices
abroad as much as possible, ZETA urges Congress to consider ways to
support domestic mining of battery minerals, which would not only
decrease reliance on opaque supply chains, but also create mining jobs
at home.
EVs and the Highway Trust Fund (HTF)
It is critical to note that HTF shortfalls are due in large part to
longstanding policy decisions that predate the recent wide-scale
deployment of EVs, including a lack of updates to the gas tax, even
index for inflation, since 1992. Discussions around sustainable support
for the HTF must be part of a nuanced approach to the long-term
solvency of the HTF. We urge the Committee to consider any future
changes to the funding structure of the HTF in a holistic, thoughtful,
and fair manner.
Fire Safety
Safety is paramount as more lithium-ion batteries enter the
marketplace. While concerns have been raised regarding the perceived
risk of ignition and explosion, EV fires are rare--in fact,
observational data examined by the National Transportation Safety Board
found that EVs are less likely to catch fire than ICE vehicles.\8\ As a
result, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has
stated that it ``does not believe that electric vehicles present a
greater risk of post-crash fire than gasoline-powered vehicles.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ ``Safety Risks to Emergency Responders from Lithium-Ion Battery
Fires in Electric Vehicles,'' National Transportation Safety Board,
November 13, 2020. https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/
Documents/SR2001.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All EVs must meet the same Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards
(FMVSS) used by gas-powered vehicles. In addition, the EV industry has
adopted extensive safety and testing standards to better test and
scrutinize battery products, ensuring that they are adequately designed
to shut down when a collision or short circuit is detected. As part of
its ongoing work to protect the safety of drivers, NHTSA recently
sought feedback on its proposal to update FMVSS battery testing
standards.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 89 Fed. Reg. 26704 (April 15, 2024)
Letter of June 26, 2024, to Hon. Sam Graves, Chairman, and Hon. Rick
Larsen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates for Highway
and Auto Safety et al., Submitted for the Record by Hon. Eleanor Holmes
Norton
June 26, 2024.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Chair,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Rick Larsen,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
Dear Chair Graves and Ranking Member Larsen:
We respectfully request that this letter be considered during
tomorrow's Committee hearing, Oversight of the Department of
Transportation's Policies and Programs and Fiscal Year 2025 Budget
Request. Eliminating the preventable physical, emotional, and economic
toll of motor vehicle crashes is a commitment shared by our
organizations. To accomplish this safety priority, adequate resources
for the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and its agencies,
including funds and staff for the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA, ``Agency''), are vital.
According to NHTSA, traffic fatalities and injuries remain at
historically high levels. In 2022, an average of 116 people were killed
every day on roads in the U.S., totaling just over 42,500
fatalities.\i\ An additional 2.38 million people were injured.\ii\ This
is a 29 percent increase in deaths in just a decade.\iii\ Early
projections for 2023 traffic fatalities remain at a similar level;
nearly 41,000 people are estimated to have died that year.\iv\
Approximately 7,522 pedestrians and 1,105 bicyclists were killed in
2022, representing a one percent and 13 percent increase respectively,
from 2021.\v\ In 2022, 6,218 motorcyclists were killed, accounting for
15 percent of all traffic fatalities.\vi\ This is the highest number of
motorcyclists killed since at least 1975.\vii\ Additionally, in 2022,
nearly 6,000 people were killed in crashes involving a large
truck.\viii\ Since 2009, the number of fatalities in large truck
involved crashes has increased by 76 percent.\ix\ More than 160,600
people were injured in crashes involving a large truck in 2022, a
nearly four percent increase over 2021.\x\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\i\ Overview of Motor Vehicle Traffic Crashes in 2022, NHTSA, Apr.
2024, DOT HS 813 560. (Overview 2022).
\ii\ Overview 2022.
\iii\ Traffic Safety Facts 2021: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle
Crash Data, NHTSA, Dec. 2023, DOT HS 813 527, (Annual Report 2021); and
Overview 2022; [comparing 2013 to 2022].
\iv\ Traffic Safety Facts: Crash Stats, Early Estimate of Motor
Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2023, NHTSA, Apr. 2024, DOT HS 813 561.
\v\ Overview 2022.
\vi\ NHTSA, Motorcycle Safety, Overview, available at: https://
www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/
motorcycles#: :text=Overview,killed%20since%20at%20least%201975.
\vii\ Id.
\viii\ Traffic Safety Facts: Research Note Overview of Motor
Vehicle Traffic Crashes in 2022, NHTSA, April 2024, DOT HS 813 560.
\ix\ Id. and Traffic Safety Facts 2021: A Compilations of Motor
Vehicle Crash Data, NHTSA, Dec. 2023, DOT HS 813 527. Note, the 76
percent figure represents the overall change in the number of
fatalities in large truck involved crashes from 2009 to 2022. However,
between 2015 and 2016 there was a change in data collection at U.S. DOT
that could affect this calculation. From 2009 to 2015 the number of
fatalities in truck involved crashes increased by 21 percent and
between 2016 to 2022, it increased by 27 percent.
\x\ Traffic Safety Facts: Research Note Overview of Motor Vehicle
Traffic Crashes in 2022, NHTSA, April 2024, DOT HS 813 560.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Several leading behavioral issues continue to be leading factors in
traffic fatalities including alcohol-impairment, speeding and lack of
restraint use.\xi\ Driver distraction is also known to be a principal
cause of motor vehicle crashes.\xii\ In 2022, alcohol-involved crashes
claimed the lives of 13,524 people, speeding-related traffic crashes
killed 12,151 people, and 11,302 people killed in crashes did not
buckle up, when restraint use was known.\xiii\ Additionally, in 2021,
the most recent year for which data is available according to the Non-
Traffic Surveillance (NTS) system, an estimated 3,990 people were
killed in non-traffic motor vehicle crashes, an increase of 26 percent
from 2020.\xiv\ And, since 1990, at least 1,086 children have died in
hot cars.\xv\ This dangerous road epidemic is predicated on dangerous
roadway design (See 2024 Dangerous by Design report [https://
smartgrowthamerica.org/dangerous-by-design/]). These issues are
persistent, and the solutions are known and available, yet remain
underused, underfunded or are not required as standard equipment in
vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xi\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2024, April).
Overview of motor vehicle traffic crashes in 2022 (Traffic Safety Facts
Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 813 560). National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration.
\xii\ Blincoe, L., Miller, T., Wang, J.-S., Swedler, D., Coughlin,
T., Lawrence, B., Guo, F., Klauer, S., & Dingus, T. (2023, February).
The economic and societal impact of motor vehicle crashes, 2019
(Revised) (Report No. DOT HS 813 403).
\xiii\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2024, April).
Overview of motor vehicle traffic crashes in 2022 (Traffic Safety Facts
Research Note. Report No. DOT HS 813 560). National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration.
\xiv\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2024, April).
NonTraffic Surveillance: Fatality and injury statistics in non-traffic
crashes in 2021 (Report No. DOT HS 813 539). National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration.
\xv\ Child Hot Car Dangers Fact Sheet, Kids and Car Safety,
available here: https://www.kidsandcars.org/document_center/download/
hot-cars/Heatstroke-fact-sheet.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roadway crashes also impose a tremendous cost burden on society. In
2019, crashes, injuries, and fatalities imposed a financial burden of
nearly $1.4 trillion in total costs to society--$340 billion of which
are direct economic costs, equivalent to a ``crash tax'' of $1,035 on
every person living in the U.S.\xvi\ Distracted driving crashes
accounted for $98 billion of the economic costs.\xvii\ In 2018, crashes
alone cost employers $72.2 billion.\xviii\ When adjusted solely for
inflation, the amount is nearly $90 billion in 2024 Sufficient funding
and resources for NHTSA can be the catalyst for implementing effective
safety countermeasures to prevent crashes, save lives, reduce injuries,
and contain costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xvi\ The Economic and Societal Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes,
2019, NHTSA, Dec. 2022, DOT HS 813 403.
\xvii\ Blincoe, L., Miller, T., Wang, J.-S., Swedler, D., Coughlin,
T., Lawrence, B., Guo, F., Klauer, S., & Dingus, T. (2023, February).
The economic and societal impact of motor vehicle crashes, 2019
(Revised) (Report No. DOT HS 813 403).
\xviii\ Cost of Motor Vehicle Crashes to Employers 2019, Network of
Employers for Traffic Safety, March 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While traffic fatalities continue to be a public health crisis, the
funding for NHTSA's lifesaving mission has fallen woefully short for
more than four decades as costs and statutory responsibilities have
increased. While 95 percent of transportation-related fatalities
involve motor vehicles, NHTSA historically receives only one percent of
the overall U.S. DOT budget.\xix\ Despite persistently high crash
deaths and injuries, increasingly complex vehicle technology and
related issues, consistently high numbers of vehicle safety recalls,
overdue motor vehicle and motor carrier safety rules mandated by
Congress, and more requirements, the NHTSA's actual spending for
vehicle safety programs has dramatically declined based on inflation,
as illustrated by the chart below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xix\ U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, Transportation Statistics Annual Report 2023 (Washington,
DC: 2023). https://doi.org/10.21949/1529944
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Over 40 Years NHTSA's Vehicle Safety Budget Shrinks While Program
Needs Escalate: Comparison of NHTSA's Safety Budget 1977 vs. 2024
\xx\\,\ \xxi\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xx\ FY2025 Budget Highlights, Secretary of Transportation Pete
Buttigieg, U.S. Department of Transportation. Available here: https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-03/
DOT_Budget_Highlights_FY_2025_508.pdf; and Public Law 94-387, August
14, 1976, Available here: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-
90/pdf/STATUTE-90-Pg1171.pdf#page=8
\xxi\ National Center for Statistics and Analysis. (2023,
December). Traffic safety facts 2021: A compilation of motor vehicle
traffic crash data (Report No. DOT HS 813 527). National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The above table clearly demonstrates the disparity in funding for
vehicle safety which should be increased at a rate commensurate
with State and Community Grant funding.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
We were pleased that the recently enacted Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2024 (Pub. L. 118-42) fully funded the safety
improvements in the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58) including for roadway infrastructure
improvements consistent with the Safe System Approach (SSA) which are
shown to prevent or mitigate crashes and interactions between road
users. Further, we are encouraged by the Administration's FY 2025
budget proposal for the U.S. DOT which provides an $82.6 million
increase in funding for NHTSA.\xxii\ This boost will help the agency
address the shortfall in spending power detailed in the chart above and
serve as a good ``down payment'' on the Agency's work related to
vehicle safety rulemaking, enforcement, research and analysis which has
a high payoff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xxii\ FY2025 Budget Highlights, Secretary of Transportation Pete
Buttigieg, U.S. Department of Transportation. Available here: https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-03/
DOT_Budget_Highlights_FY_2025_508.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As we elapse the halfway point between the enactment of the IIJA
and the end of its five-year span, a majority of the directives to
NHTSA to establish performance standards for critical vehicle safety
technology are overdue or unfulfilled. Moreover, the Agency is
responsible for a range of initiatives aimed at reducing risky driving
decisions such as speeding, and distracted, drunk, drugged, and drowsy
driving, improving occupant protection, and bolstering the safety of
vulnerable road users, among others. The Section 402 Highway Safety
Program and Section 405 National Priority Safety Program, in
combination with state adoption of essential traffic safety laws, can
assist these ongoing efforts. Additionally, the Agency's Operations and
Research (O&R) budget is crucial to important activities related to
data collection, consumer information, and identification of vehicle
safety defects. All these safety objectives can and should be realized
by an adequately funded budget.
Our nation is at a transformative time in transportation with the
rapid development and deployment of lifesaving vehicle safety
technologies. The issuance of standards, as mandated by Congress in the
IIJA, for proven vehicle safety technology, including advanced driver
assistance systems (ADAS) and advanced impaired driving prevention
technology, will be game-changing. History has proven this approach to
be valuable. It is estimated that Federal Motor Vehicle Safety
Standards administered by NHTSA are responsible for saving at least
600,000 lives between 1960 and 2012.\xxiii\ It is also incumbent upon
NHTSA to exert leadership and strong oversight as vehicles are equipped
with automated driving features, including the issuance of safety
standards for the technologies and systems that are responsible for the
driving task as well as cybersecurity, and to ensure data transparency.
The Agency's ability to effectively protect the public and minimize
potential safety risks necessitates additional funding and resources,
including for hiring staff with essential skills and expertise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xxiii\ Lives Saved by Vehicle Safety Technologies and Associated
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards, 1960 to 2012, DOT HS 812 069
(NHTSA, 2015); See also, NHTSA AV Policy, Executive Summary, p. 5
endnote 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Committee plays a critical role in our efforts to curb
highways deaths and injuries, and their enduringly high numbers demand
decisive action. Adequate funding and staff resources for the U.S. DOT
and its safety agencies are necessary to ensure timely implementation
of the safety requirements of the IIJA and address the urgent need to
advance additional proven and cost-effective solutions to prevent
crashes and save lives.
Sincerely,
Catherine Chase,
President, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety.
Jill Ingrassia,
Executive Director, AAA Advocacy & Communications.
Georges C. Benjamin, MD,
Executive Director, American Public Health Association.
Michael Brooks,
Executive Director, Center for Auto Safety.
Jack Gillis,
Consumer Federation of America.
Rosemary Shahan,
President, Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety.
Jonathan Adkins,
CEO, Governors Highway Safety Association.
Janette Fennell,
Founder and President, Kids and Car Safety.
Lorraine Martin,
President & CEO, National Safety Council.
Daphne and Steve Izer,
Founders & Co-Chairs, Parents Against Tired Truckers (P.A.T.T.).
Russell Swift,
Co-Chair, Parents Against Tired Truckers (P.A.T.T.) and Board Member,
Truck Safety Coalition.
Torine Creppy,
President, Safe Kids Worldwide.
Stephen Hargarten, MD, MPH,
Founding President, Society for the Advancement of Violence and
Injury Research.
Andrew McGuire,
Executive Director, Trauma Foundation.
Tami Friedrich,
President, Truck Safety Coalition and Board Member, Citizens for
Reliable and Safe Highways.
cc: Members of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure
Appendix
----------
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Sam Graves
Question 1. Secretary Buttigieg, Beyond Visual Line of Sight
(BVLOS) drone operations present numerous operational and economic
advantages. In the drone delivery space, BVLOS operations offer a cost-
effective alternative to traditional delivery methods, most notably in
their ability to expedite transportation of both consumer goods and
medical materials. These benefits promise to drive economic growth and
innovation, expand connectivity, and keep America at the forefront of a
rapidly evolving global drone market.
Can you commit to prioritizing the BVLOS rulemaking to meet the
statutory deadlines set forth in Section 930 of the FAA Reauthorization
Act of 2024?
Answer. The FAA is working to publish the notice of proposed
rulemaking, ``Normalizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line
of Sight Operations,'' which is expected to expedite the introduction
of BVLOS operations In the meantime, the FAA has streamlined approval
processes for BVLOS operations approved through waivers or exemptions
and is working to exercise the flexibility provided in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 to enable more scalable BVLOS operations in
advance of rulemaking.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
Question 1. 49 U.S.C. 5323(r) states that recipients of Federal
transit financial assistance ``may not deny reasonable access for a
private intercity or charter transportation operator to Federally
funded public transportation facilities.'' Earlier this year, a
representative of the American Bus Association shared that
noncompliance with this provision is widespread, and that many bus
operators across the country are being denied access to intermodal
facilities that receive funds from your Department.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Rural Transportation Challenges: Stakeholder Perspectives
before the Subcomm. on Highways and Transit of the H. Comm. on Transp.
and Infrastructure, 118th Cong. (Mar. 21, 2024) (statement of Jeff
Greteman), available at https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
03-21-2024_ht_hearing_-_jeff_greteman_-_testimony.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 1.a. What is being done to ensure that this rule is being
followed? And how does DOT enforce this law and resolve disagreements
between Federal grant award recipients and private bus operators?
Answer. A limited number of situations over the past year have been
brought to the agency's attention through intercity or charter
operators. Upon receiving such a concern, FTA's first step is to engage
with the recipient to ensure the recipient has analyzed whether the
facility has capacity to accommodate the private providers, which is
stipulated in the statute; the law requires accommodation only if there
is capacity. FTA generally does not intervene in local decisions about
the recipient's use of a facility and/or determination if there is
extra space to allow a private provider to use the facility. Rather,
FTA attempts to facilitate resolution between recipients and private
providers.
Question 1.b. Does DOT have a process in place to monitor or record
instances of access to Federally funded transit facilities being
delayed, denied, or otherwise offered under unreasonable conditions to
private bus operators?
Answer. In the few instances where FTA has received complaints
about a denial of access, FTA has engaged with the recipients to
understand the basis for the denial.
Question 2. 49 U.S.C. 5323(d), Condition on Charter Bus Service,
prevents public transit agencies from providing charter trips outside
their regularly scheduled services in competition with private
motorcoach operators.\2\ This provision was initially codified in law
as part of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 (P.L.88-364).\3\
On June 10, 2024, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) issued a
Dear Colleague letter to transit agencies across the country providing
``advice, reminders, and considerations to keep in mind'' in
preparation for the upcoming 2026 World Cup and 2028 Olympic and
Paralympic Games, both being held in the United States.\4\ While
acknowledging that transit agencies must abide by the aforementioned
charter regulations, the document included various suggestions about
how public transit agencies could serve these large events without
involving the private sector. Is the FTA fully committed to enforcing
the provisions in 49 U.S.C. 5323(d) that have been law for half a
century?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 5323.
\3\ Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, Pub. L. No. 88-365, 78
Stat. 302.
\4\ Dear colleague letter from Veronica Vanterpool, Acting
Administrator, FTA, (Jun 10, 2024), available at https://
www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/2024-06/Dear-Colleague-
Letter.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. Yes.
Question 2.a. Does FTA intend to provide additional regulatory
guidance, or ``advice, reminders, and considerations,'' related to the
charter bus service rules in preparation for other large scale national
events?
Answer. The FTA is always prepared to provide additional guidance
to its recipients as necessary. The most recent Dear Colleague letter,
dated June 10, 2024, is just one example of FTA's proactive efforts to
provide guidance in many different areas as needed.
Question 2.b. Is FTA considering changes to the way that the
charter bus service rules are presently being enforced or have been
enforced for the preceding fifty years?
Answer. FTA's charter rule is currently scheduled for review and
administrative changes on the Unified Agenda, but FTA is not
considering any changes regarding how the charter rule has been
enforced since its last substantive change in 2008.
Question 3. In June, Coach USA, the largest privately owned bus
company in the United States, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.\5\
Greyhound Lines, the largest intercity bus service in North America,
has terminated routes or otherwise cut back service in major cities
across the United States in recent months in order to decrease
costs.\6\ Private bus service, especially those that serve smaller and
rural areas, is a vital part of the national transportation network.
What is your current assessment of the commercial bus industry and is
the Department considering policies or efforts to sustain this mode of
public transportation?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Nathaniel Meyersohn, Greyhound Bus Stops are Valuable Assets.
Here's Who's Cashing in on them, CNN, (Dec. 18, 2024), available at
https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/17/business/greyhound-buses-transportation-
cities/index.html.
\6\ Isabelle Stanley, Greyhound Bus Network in Crisis as Scores of
Stations Close Across the Country, Threatening Transport Options for 60
million People who Rely on Intercity Coaches, Daily Mail, (Dec. 17,
2023), available at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12873931/
Greyhound-bus-network-crisis-scores-stations-close-country-threatening-
transport-options-60-million-people-rely-intercity-coaches.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. FTA agrees that intercity bus service provides a critical
connection for people in rural and urban areas alike to the services
and places that are important to them. FTA is able to support the
intercity bus industry through its grant programs. Intermodal
facilities that serve intercity bus are eligible under the Buses and
Bus Facilities competitive grant program as long as those facilities
also serve public transportation. FTA's Formula Grants for Rural Areas
program requires that a state provide 15% of their rural formula funds
for intercity bus projects unless they certify that the intercity bus
needs of the state have been met, which means that in FY24 around $140
million was available from that program for intercity bus projects.
Question 4. Last fall, the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
held a hearing on ``The Future of Automated Commercial Motor Vehicles:
Impacts on Society, the Supply Chain, and U.S. Economic Leadership.''
Testimony was received on efforts the autonomous vehicle trucking
sector is taking to improve safety on our roadways. In preparation for
deployment, the AV trucking industry has developed a flashing light-
based system mounted to the cab as a solution to the currently required
triangles or flares hand-placed behind a truck when stopped or pulled
to the side of the highway. This light-based system would provide
immediate and effective notice to approaching motorists, and studies
found it to be equally or more effective in enabling road users to
recognize and react to the stopped truck when compared to traditional
warning devices.
Under FMCSA's regulations (49 CFR 381.320), the agency attempts to
make a decision on applications within six months, yet this narrow
exemption application for the AV trucking industry has been pending for
17 months.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation; Exemption
Application From Waymo LLC, and Aurora Operations, Inc., 88 Fed. Reg.
13489 (Mar. 3, 2023), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2023/03/03/2023-04385/parts-and-accessories-necessary-for-
safe-operation-exemption-application-from-waymo-llc-and-aurora.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 26, 2024, in response to a question for the record
submitted after my subcommittee's December 13, 2023, hearing, the FMCSA
stated that it is ``currently reviewing and considering numerous public
comments received in response to the Federal Register notice.''
Considering the amount of time that has passed compared to the
typical timeline, what is the reason for the delay on this petition?
Please also provide the committee a specific timeline in which you
expect to issue a decision.
Answer. Petitions of a complex or novel nature sometimes require
additional internal consultation and time to thoroughly review and
consider the petition, the comments submitted, and whether the
exemption, if granted, would likely achieve a level of safety
equivalent to, or greater than, the level of safety achieved by the
regulation. On March 3, 2023, FMCSA published a Federal Register
notice, 88 FR 13489 (clarified, and comment period extended, March 9,
2023, 88 FR 14665) announcing that it received an application from
Waymo LLC, and Aurora Operations, Inc. for a 5-year exemption from the
warning device placement requirements of 49 CFR 392.22(b) and use of a
warning device that does not meet the steady-burning lamp requirement
of 49 CFR 393.25(e). The exemption seeks to allow all motor carriers
that operate Level 4 autonomous commercial motor vehicles (CMV) to use
a warning device for stopped vehicles that is not currently authorized
in 49 CFR 393.95(f).
The Secretary of Transportation may only grant an exemption from a
regulation if the Secretary finds such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption. FMCSA has completed its review
of the exemption application, the public comments, and cited
documentation submitted in response to the Federal Register notice. The
Agency continues to diligently work through its analysis and final
written decision on the exemption application.
Question 5. I appreciate the productive discussion regarding the
Department's authority to ensure that the testing for safety sensitive
transportation positions will continue, regardless of the
Administration's proposal to reclassify marijuana from Schedule I to
Schedule III. I appreciate your stating:
``Our commitment to testing continues regardless of the
schedule . . . we believe our authorities are intact because
they don't call for testing by reference to where marijuana
sits in its classification. So whether we're talking about the
regulated community--truck drivers--or our own personnel, such
as an air traffic controller, our understanding is that nothing
about that reclassification would change.''
Please share with the Committee the basis for that understanding.
Answer. The basis for the Department's understanding is the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991, which gives the Secretary
the authority to test for any controlled substance under section 102(6)
of the Controlled Substance Act (21 U.S.C. 802(6)) whose use the
Secretary has determined has a risk to transportation safety.
Question 6. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is
key to DOT's ability to conduct drug testing of its own employees and
to regulate safety-sensitive employees in the transportation
industries. What steps has the DOT taken to coordinate with HHS
regarding the potential rescheduling of marijuana to Schedule III and
its impact on the HHS-certified laboratories that conduct marijuana
drug testing on both the DOT-regulated public and DOT's own employees?
Answer. DOT has actively engaged with HHS and the White House
regarding the impact of rescheduling on DOT's drug testing programs.
These discussions are ongoing, and DOT will provide a more detailed
response after these discussions conclude.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Scott Perry
Question 1. The Lancaster Airport (LNS) announced it will begin
offering non-stop flights to Orlando beginning on October 8, 2024. Will
this expansion in service result in LNS losing its essential air
service subsidies?
Answer. No. Air service currently operating from Lancaster Airport
(LNS) to Orlando International Airport (MCO) does not satisfy the
community's essential air service (EAS) requirements per federal law,
so Lancaster airport's existing EAS subsidies are not impacted. Under
49 U.S.C. Sec. 41732, ``basic EAS'' requires, among other things, two
daily round trips, 6 days a week (12 round trips per week) to a medium
or large hub airport less than 650 miles from the eligible place. As
announced by Breeze Airways, the air carrier will offer only two round
trips per week between LNS and MCO, and the distance from LNS to MCO is
855 miles. Accordingly, the service will not meet the basic EAS
requirements related to frequencies or distance to the hub airport.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Garret Graves
Question 1. Section 912 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
requires the Office of the Secretary to, not later than 270 days after
enactment, establish a Department of Transportation program to provide
competitive grants to state, local and tribal governments to use small
drones to help address the backlog in critical infrastructure
inspections in the United States. This language enjoyed bipartisan
support in both the House and Senate and will help make critical
infrastructure inspections safer for workers and more efficient for the
users of the critical infrastructure. What steps has the USDOT taken to
establish the Drone Infrastructure Inspection Grant (DIIG) program and
will you commit to this Committee to meet or exceed the statutory
deadline to establish the DIIG program?
Answer. Infrastructure inspection using safe and reliable,
domestically produced drones presents a way to better ensure the safety
and stability of the national infrastructure and to enable economic
benefits of drones. These inspections can and do happen across the
country today under 14 CFR Part 107 line of sight operations. Even the
Department uses drones to inspect critical highway infrastructure. The
Department appreciates Congress' support in developing this capability
through provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (Pub. L. 118-
63, May 16, 2024) that would enable the FAA to inspect its own
infrastructure and manage a grant program for state governments to
establish their own drone inspection programs. While this new program
introduces important requirements, it has not yet received
appropriations sufficient to fully implement them. We look forward to
collaborating with Congress to ensure that adequate funding is secured
for all new programs mandated by the Reauthorization. The Department is
fully committed to meeting the legislative requirements for this and
all provisions of the FAA Reauthorization. We are currently developing
a management strategy that will allow us to implement the
infrastructure inspection program to the best of our ability, despite
competing priorities and financial constraints.
Question 2. The absence of a unified framework for BVLOS operations
in the U.S. is stalling the growth of the domestic drone industry.
Despite recommendations from an expert committee over two years ago,
urging the FAA to establish regulations for safe BVLOS operations, no
draft rule has been issued. The FAA Reauthorization Act, passed with
broad bipartisan support, requires the FAA to propose its draft BVLOS
rule by September. Considering the prolonged delay, what actions are
the DOT and FAA taking to meet this deadline and provide a draft rule
by September 15th?
Answer. The FAA is working to publish the notice of proposed
rulemaking, ``Normalizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line
of Sight Operations,'' which is expected to expedite the introduction
of BVLOS operations. In the meantime, the FAA has streamlined approval
processes for BVLOS operations approved through waivers or exemptions
and is working to exercise the flexibility provided in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 to enable more scalable BVLOS operations in
advance of rulemaking.
Question 3. Mr. Secretary, you have a responsibility in ensuring
MARAD administers the Deepwater Port Act program, which authorizes
permits for ports from which to export LNG to our allies but MARAD has
failed to meet statutory deadlines) and notices imposed by last year's
NDAA. Additionally, DOT has not held any regular or any in-person
meetings with applicants so that they can possibly understand the
agency's concerns. It is a mistake for MARAD to delay approval for port
applications over a misguided position that the Administration's
moratorium on LNG export means they cannot approve port applications.
Secretary Granholm has indicated that a moratorium will be short-lived
and ``in the rearview mirror'' by next year. Congress' interest in this
provision is clear--so what is the problem?
Answer. MARAD has conducted timely approvals as part of the
deepwater port application process. Processing a Deepwater Port License
involves coordination among multiple state and federal agencies, and
MARAD and all of these agencies strive to meet all established
statutory timeframes. MARAD meets regularly with applicants who have an
application under review when it is appropriate and pertaining to the
deepwater port license application. Applicants who have questions about
the environmental review portion of the application may also schedule a
meeting with the U.S. Coast Guard. This step within the process
involves the explicit engagement of resources to perform this phase of
the licensing process. The environmental review is one of the most
critical and technical parts of the processing of the deepwater
application. The Deepwater Port Act at 33 U.S. Code Sec. 1503 (c)(3)
lists the conditions for issuance of a deepwater port license where a
national interest determination is made independent of any
determination by the Department of Energy.
Question 4. The recently enacted FAA Reauthorization Act increased
the authorized funding level for FAA's workforce grant programs for
pilots and maintenance technicians from $15,000,000 to $20,000,000 per
year. Congress has been providing funding for these grants since Fiscal
Year 2022. Given the significant pilot workforce shortage in the United
States, how does DOT plan to engage other federal agencies and key
industry stakeholders to ensure that there is an adequate pipeline of
young men and women seeking these professional positions in aviation?
Answer. The FAA is performing outreach for the Aviation Workforce
Development grant program. This outreach provides information to key
stakeholders and industry on the overall grant program. The 2024 FAA
Reauthorization expanded the eligible applicant pool to include
501(c)(3) organizations and Tribal and territorial governments. The FAA
is providing technical assistance to educate applicants on the
application process to improve the quality of applications that consist
of grassroots initiatives and projects that create pipelines for young
people to pursue aviation careers. Consideration may be given to
applicants who would serve populations that are underrepresented in the
aviation industry, including in economically disadvantaged geographic
areas and rural communities, address the workforce needs of rural and
regional airports, and aviation programs at a minority serving
institution.
Question 5. One of the emerging innovations in aviation is growth
of the advanced air mobility industry--utilizing electric vehicle
takeoff and landing aircraft to move people and cargo from point to
point in urban and rural settings. The FAA Reauthorization Act extended
the Advanced Air Mobility Infrastructure pilot until 2026. How soon
will we see eVTOL aircraft operating in the National Airspace System
transporting people and cargo to key communities? What are the most
promising applications for these aircraft? What changes or additions to
the FAA's workforce will be needed to manage these aircraft in the NAS?
Answer. The FAA is actively working with several companies to
review and establish certification requirements for several powered-
lift models, some of which are eVTOL aircraft. On March 8, 2024, the
FAA published the final special class airworthiness criteria for the
Joby Model JAS4-1 powered-lift aircraft, and on May 24, 2024, the FAA
published the final special class airworthiness criteria for the Archer
Model M0001 powered-lift aircraft.
In order to mitigate safety gaps that exist due to the absence of
operational regulations specifically applicable to powered-lift, in
October 2024, the FAA published an advance copy of a final Special
Federal Aviation Regulation, ``Integration of Powered Lift: Pilot
Certification and Operations; Miscellaneous Amendments Related to
Rotorcraft and Airplanes.'' This final rule will be published in the
Federal Register in November 2024 and provides alternate eligibility
requirements to safely certificate initial groups of powered-lift
pilots, and identifies the operating rules that apply to powered-lift
on a temporary basis.
The most promising applications will be the transportation of
people and cargo in addition to the future potential for the
transportation of medical supplies. AAM has the potential to provide
new levels of accessibility, convenience, and connectivity for people
and cargo--and localize aviation in new ways, providing a series of
benefits: enhanced mobility for the traveling and shipping public,
improvements to environmental sustainability through the
electrification of aviation, quieter operations with less impact to
those living near aviation infrastructure, increased connectivity to
the existing legacy aviation system in the United States, new jobs, and
lower costs. Future use cases for AAM include more dynamic emergency
response capabilities, rapid transportation of goods from cargo
terminals, on demand shuttle services better connecting urban areas to
large airports, and regional air service to areas without existing
rapid or reliable transportation links.
The FAA is working through its research and development labs along
with industry applicants to understand what changes to the workforce
are needed to manage these aircraft.
Question 6. Secretary Buttigieg, as AAM aircraft get certified for
operation, it is critical that the FAA establish a clear, achievable
path for civilians to acquire a powered-lift certificate. How is DOT
coordinating with the FAA to ensure the necessary pilot rules are in
place to establish an AAM pilot workforce?
Answer. In October 2024, the FAA published the Notice of an advance
copy of a final Special Federal Aviation Regulation, ``Integration of
Powered-Lift: Pilot Certification and Operations; Miscellaneous
Amendments Related to Rotorcraft and Airplanes''. In this final rule
which will be published in the Federal Register in November 2024, the
FAA provides alternate eligibility requirements to safely certificate
initial groups of powered-lift pilots, as well as determine which
operating rules to apply to powered-lift aircraft on a temporary basis
to enable the FAA to gather additional information and determine the
most appropriate permanent rulemaking path for these aircraft.
Although the FAA has existing regulations in 14 CFR Part 61 for
training and certificating powered-lift flight instructors and pilots,
those regulations do not adequately address the unique challenges of
introducing a new category of aircraft to civil operations. To maintain
a level of safety commensurate with that expected for airplanes and
helicopters, the FAA has finalized new requirements for pilots to hold
type ratings for each powered-lift they fly and also finalized
qualification requirements for powered-lift pilots serving in 14 CFR
Part 135. To address the obstacles to airman certification in existing
regulations, the FAA proposed alternatives to certain requirements in
Part 61 to facilitate the training and certification of the initial
cadre of powered-lift instructors and powered-lift pilots.
Question 7. Part 121 and Part 135 air carriers are legally required
to meet a statutory definition of being a ``citizen of the United
States'' (49 U.S.C. Sec. 40102(a)(15)) to limit foreign ownership and
control over this critical American industry. What resources does the
Department devote to enforcing compliance with the U.S. citizenship
requirement for air carriers? What can the Committee and the aviation
industry expect as to how swiftly and aggressively the Department will
investigate credible allegations that an air carrier is operating in
violation of the U.S. citizenship requirement? What can the Committee
and the aviation industry expect as to what enforcement tools the
Department will use to stop an air carrier that the Department has
determined is operating in violation of the U.S. citizenship
requirement?
Answer. The Department is committed to ensuring air carriers comply
with U.S. citizenship requirements. For new applicants, the Department
reviews applications for compliance before granting economic authority.
For existing carriers, it conducts detailed reviews upon complaints or
during fitness evaluations. If a carrier fails to meet citizenship
requirements, the Department may suspend, revoke, or modify its
certificates or impose penalties. The Department uses various tools,
including investigations and penalties, to address compliance issues.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon
Question 1. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your call yesterday and
your well wishes, and I would like to take this opportunity to draw
your attention to issues in Puerto Rico transportation and ask
questions related to projects located in Puerto Rico. Late last week,
my office received notice of the approval of over $21 million for the
Wharf D Reconstruction and Resiliency Project in San Juan through the
RAISE Program. I understand these funds will be used for much needed
activities in the Puerto Nuevo Docks, promoting economic activity at
our ports. This is a very welcome announcement, and I would like to
make sure we all understand the next steps. Could you please inform us
what are those next steps and the anticipated completion date of the
project?
Answer. In July 2024, the Department hosted a welcome webinar for
all FY 2024 RAISE grant recipients and emailed each recipient their
partially prepopulated grant agreement. The next step is for the Port
Authority of Puerto Rico to fulfill federal requirements prior to
executing the grant agreement. The Port Authority has estimated
construction would begin in July 2025 and be completed in June 2027.
Question 2. Related also to ports, I'd like to take the opportunity
to request that the Department consider supporting more safety related
projects, such as the fire suppression infrastructure at the Port of
San Juan which currently does not meet Coast Guard standards due to
inadequate water pressure. Requiring the port users to fund these types
of projects means such costs get passed onto the people and communities
of Puerto Rico. These types of safety related projects are
infrastructure improvements and should be given more consideration in
programs like the Port Infrastructure Development Program.
Answer. The extent to which a project advances safety is an
important part of the statutory criteria reviewers consider when
evaluating each project. In the past, we have awarded funding to
projects that advance this key criterion, including projects in Puerto
Rico. Most recently, for example, the Port Authority of Puerto Rico
received a RAISE grant for its Wharf C Reconstruction and Resiliency
Enhancement Project. This $25 million award funds needed improvements
to Wharf C, including replacing the wharf's concrete platform and
making related utility improvements, including rehabilitating the
port's existing fire protection system.
Question 3. Secretary Buttigieg, as you know, Puerto Rico has two
non-contiguous island municipalities on the Eastern coast of the main
Island, Vieques and Culebra, with a combined population of close to
10,000 inhabitants. In addition to residents, both municipalities host
students and employees who travel to and from Vieques and Culebra to
work. They all share the need for reliable and efficient ferry
services.
Recently, the Puerto Rico government announced their plans to
improve services using federal dollars to design and purchase 4 new
vessels and build a new ferry terminal in Vieques. I would like to
emphasize the importance of completing this work. Could you please
provide us a status of these projects and when do you anticipate their
completion?
Answer. Following the sinking of the passenger vessel Culebra II
after Hurricane Irma, the FTA awarded Emergency Relief funding of
$23,035,000 in fiscal year (FY) 2020 for the acquisition of a new
passenger vessel with cargo capabilities. This improvement was directly
in response to the needs of the citizens of Vieques and Culebra. The
new vessel is in the final phase of construction, currently in the
water for testing, and its construction is expected to be completed in
December 2024 or earlier.
Additionally, the FTA is in the process of approving two grants
totaling $44 million to fund three more cargo-passenger vessels for the
Maritime Transport Authority (MTA)'s Island Service to the two non-
contiguous island municipalities. These vessels are also under
construction; two of them are expected to be completed by 2025, and the
completion of the third vessel is expected in early 2026.
Further projects are underway to rehabilitate the Mosquito Ferry
Terminal in Vieques. Funds for this project and the additional vessels
have been programmed through the Puerto Rican Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program (STIP). We are assisting MTA in developing their
grant applications.
Question 4. Mr. Secretary, the Integrated Transportation Authority
in Puerto Rico is currently undergoing a payment modernization project
that will change how transportation fees are collected for popular
public transportation modes, including Tren Urbano and our network of
buses known as AMA. I understand the transition could take up to 6
months total and cost about $20 million in federal funds. Could you
please provide us with the status of this project and when do you
anticipate completion?
Answer. The Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority
(PRHTA) is in the process of implementing a modernized Automatic Fare
Collection (AFC) System for the Tren Urbano (TU) heavy rail system, bus
systems [including Metropolitan Bus Authority (MBA), Metrobus, Tu
Conexion, and Metro Urbano], and Metro-Ferry system. The modernized AFC
system includes modern gates, ticket vending machines (TVMs), and
alternative payment methods such as debit, credit, and mobile
application payment, among other improvements. Federal investment is
approximately twenty-two million dollars ($22M), distributed among six
(6) FTA awards.
The AFC project is expected to go live by December 11, 2024. As of
August 29, the overall project status is:
TU system gates and TVM installation at approximately
98%.
Routers and validators are installed on approximately 99%
of buses. Cash-only operation to commence in late August 2024.
PRHTA is working with the AFC system vendor and third-
party ferry system operator to integrate the respective fare systems.
PRHTA continues to negotiate with a qualified merchant
processor and obtain banking industry certification for payment
processing. Completion is expected within the next 60 days.
Equity analysis associated with the changes in fare
collection method was completed on May 31, 2024.
After December 2024, PRHTA expects to continue public
outreach with ``hands-on'' demonstrations and educational material
distribution, among other efforts.
The project ``ribbon cutting'' is expected on December
18, 2024.
Question 5. Secretary Buttigieg, as you know, Puerto Rico residents
rely on DOT field offices for technical assistance and other tasks to
receive approval or funding for their projects. Can you please share
with us a breakdown of staffing levels for DOT in PR, including any
vacancies and what are the Department's plans to fill these vacancies?
Answer. DOT has 246 permanent federal employees located in Puerto
Rico. As of June 2024, DOT has 12 vacancies (technicians, civil
engineers, and safety inspectors) in Puerto Rico with plans to use on-
the-spot hiring authority and/or tailored recruitment activities to
fill the positions. In addition, relocation incentives will be used for
individuals willing to locate to Puerto Rico.
Question 6. Congress and the Administration have enabled special
considerations to take into account empowerment zones and strategic
seaports that apply for federal grant awards. While these
considerations have helped increase the competitiveness for ports in
Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii, I'd like to request you consider ways
to further address the needs of ports in these non-contiguous areas
that provide such essential services.
Answer. The Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) announcing the
availability of discretionary grant funding for the FY 2024 Port
Infrastructure Development Program includes a number of provisions that
help address the needs of ports in non-contiguous states and
territories. For example, as provided for in Section 3513 of the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024, large projects
in non-contiguous states and territories do not need to meet the cost
effectiveness determination that applies to similarly-sized projects in
the continental United States. Small projects in non-contiguous states
and territories are also exempt from this requirement because of a
further statutory provision. In addition, the NOFO asks applicants to
identify whether their projects are in Historically Disadvantaged
Communities, a designation that, based on the results of previous
application cycles, applies to the vast majority of projects submitted
by ports in Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii. Finally, we are hosting or
engaging in focused outreach activities to improve the competitiveness
of applications received from ports in Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii.
On November 15, 2024, the Maritime Administration announced its FY24
Port Infrastructure Development Grants and Puerto Rico Ports Authority
received a grant totaling $53,526,756.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Dusty Johnson
Question 1. Secretary Buttigieg, it is critical as a country that
we ensure that taxpayer dollars are not spent on technology
manufactured by Chinese military companies or introduces cybersecurity
risks to our critical infrastructure. One such technology of concern is
Chinese light detection and ranging (LiDAR) sensors, which collect
real-time 3-D measurements of U.S. critical infrastructure, geography,
and human behaviors. Chinese LiDAR is increasingly installed across our
transportation infrastructure to automate traffic lights, monitor crowd
flows at major transit hubs, control drawbridges, and more.
In January 2024, the Department of Defense named the leading
Chinese LiDAR manufacturer [https://media.defense.gov/2024/Jan/31/
2003384819/-1/-1/0/1260H-LIST.PDF], Hesai, a ``Chinese Military
Company'' operating in the United States.
A May 2024 Congressional Research Service report [https://
crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12473] found that Chinese
firms were developing LiDAR sensors for ``Smart Cities'' applications
that China could use ``to acquire sensitive information or exquisite
mapping of U.S. infrastructure'' or ``introduce malware via a software
update and degrade the performance of systems using the technology.''
Chinese LiDAR companies have flooded the U.S. market with heavily
subsidized LiDAR sensors targeting sales to state and local governments
for applications using federal funds. This is similar to the playbook
we saw with drones--creating an unfair playing field that threatens
domestic LiDAR manufacturing capacity and puts our security at risk.
Question 1.a. What can the Department do today under its existing
authorities to prevent further federal spending on technology
manufactured by Chinese military companies, such as LiDAR sensors?
Answer. The Department is certainly aware of these national
security concerns. We are aware that LiDAR is an increasingly essential
element of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Automated
Driving System (ADS) systems, that China holds approximately 60% of the
global market for automotive LiDAR, and that LiDAR is increasingly
being used to collect detailed information for infrastructure planning,
design, construction and maintenance. We also note that China has
proposed a technology export ban on LiDAR from China.
The Department does not set procurement rules or guidance outside
of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) or of requirements
contained in legislation. The Department implements all requirements of
the FAR and of guidance and direction provided by cognizant Departments
and Agencies (e.g., Department of Commerce/ Bureau of Industry and
Security regulations, Federal Communications Commission ban on certain
equipment authorizations, FY19 National Defense Authorization Act
Section 889). The Department's implementation of such guidance is
limited to Federal contracts and covered subcontractors; the Department
has no authority to prohibit the operation, procurement, or contracting
for LiDAR equipment beyond Federally-owned or -contracted assets and
cannot issue such prohibition to recipients of Federal financial
assistance (grants) or to the private sector.
Further, the Department is aware of and engaged with Department of
Commerce/Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) on BIS's advance notice
of proposed rulemaking, ``Securing the Information and Communications
Technology and Services Supply Chain: Connected Vehicles'' (89 FR
15066; March 1, 2024). BIS sought public comment on issues and
questions related to transactions involving information and
communications technology and services (ICTS) that are designed,
developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons owned by, controlled
by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of foreign countries or
foreign nongovernment persons identified in the Department's
regulations, pursuant to the Executive Order (E.O.) entitled ``Securing
the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply
Chain,'' and that are integral to connected vehicles (CVs), including
LiDAR technologies. The Department will implement any BIS determination
of technologies and market participants that may be most appropriate
for regulation pursuant to the E.O.
Question 1.b. Given the risks that Chinese LiDAR sensors pose to
U.S. national security, does the Department of Transportation support
Congress enacting legislation to prohibit taxpayer spending through the
Department's various grant and formula funding programs on Chinese
LiDAR sensors that pose national security risks identified by the
Department of Defense and the Congressional Research Service?
Answer. The Department will work to implement any legislation that
Congress may enact.
Question 2. Secretary Buttigieg, in December 2023, FMCSA made
effective a rule that narrows the scope of automatic regulatory relief
when an emergency has been declared. The rule reduced automatic
regulatory relief to 14 days, as opposed to the current standard of 30
days. Your agency admitted in its final rule it had ``no specific
quantitative evidence that the current emergency exemption rules have
led to a degradation of safety.'' \1\ I have concerns that shortening
the automatic emergency window restricts Governors' ability to respond
during stressful and often time-sensitive disasters, and unnecessarily
limits the ability of truckers to respond to emergencies. This is
especially true when responding to disasters that require long-term
recovery, such as the devastating flooding South Dakota and surrounding
states encountered in June 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Clarification to the Applicability of Emergency Exemptions, 88
Fed. Reg. 70897 (Oct. 13, 2023), available at https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/10/13/2023-22538/clarification-
to-the-applicability-of-emergency-exemptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When asked about the data justification for this regulatory change
in past inquiries, your administration responded that the 14-day period
will allow sufficient time for States to request that FMCSA extend the
initial relief period, and that the Agency has an ``excellent'' track
record of issuing emergency exemptions very quickly in response to
disasters. This explanation did not address the core concern for lack
of an evidentiary record for the change.
Question 2.a. What specifically prompted FMCSA to reduce the
automatic regulatory relief time period from 30 to 14 days, if no
quantitative evidence called for the change?
Answer. FMCSA reduced both the scope of the automatic regulatory
relief and the duration to provide safety guardrails when there is a
state emergency declaration. FMCSA proposed taking this action because
the Agency believes that most direct assistance to emergencies
necessitates relief only from the hours-of-service requirements, and
that the need for relief generally ends within 5 days. Therefore, FMCSA
initially proposed a 5-day period. However, as noted in the preamble of
the final rule, FMCSA acknowledged there may be circumstances that
result in the need for more time for responders to complete their
emergency relief efforts. In certain cases, coordination efforts
between the State and FMCSA may take longer than a 5-day exemption
period would allow. Therefore, in the final rule, FMCSA revised the
duration of the automatic regulatory relief triggered by a regional
declaration of emergency to 14 days.
The emergency exemption is intended to facilitate direct assistance
incident to the immediate restoration of essential services or
essential supplies and not for transportation related to long-term
rehabilitation of damaged physical infrastructure or routine commercial
deliveries after the initial threat to life and property has passed.
FMCSA believes the 14-day time limit represents an important safety
guardrail and does not believe it will result in a delay in providing
relief to interstate motor carriers providing direct assistance in
response to emergencies. In those cases where an extension of a
declaration is necessary, FMCSA is still able to grant an extension
either on its own initiative or by request.
FMCSA is currently preparing responses to several petitions for
reconsideration of the final rule asking FMCSA to reconsider the 14-day
provision.
Question 2.b. Is there data showing the 30-day limit posed a safety
risk? Is there data showing 14 days reduces said risk?
Answer. FMCSA does not have a quantitative analysis comparing the
risk of a 30-day limit to a 14-day limit. However, as noted in the
final rule, the Agency believes decreasing the period to 14 days
reduces the safety risks associated with the automatic regulatory
relief provided with the initial emergency declaration by significantly
reducing the amount of time drivers operate outside of the hours-of-
service regulations.
Question 2.c. During my line of questioning, we discussed the need
for greater flexibility for Governors in times of need. Do you have
concerns the FMCSA's rule may do the opposite?
Answer. The 2023 final rule does not limit Governors' ability to
make emergency declarations to support the delivery of critical
supplies and the restoration of vital services to their constituents
following an emergency. FMCSA's emergency exemption rule is intended to
facilitate direct assistance incident to the immediate restoration of
essential services or essential supplies and not for transportation
related to long-term rehabilitation of damaged physical infrastructure
or routine commercial deliveries after the initial threat to life and
property has passed. FMCSA believes the new time limit represents an
important safety guardrail and does not delay relief to interstate
motor carriers providing direct assistance in response to emergencies.
In those cases where an extension of a declaration is necessary, FMCSA
is able to grant an extension either on its own initiative or by
request. In fact, the final rule made it even easier for states to seek
relief by providing one centralized email inbox address for making
extension requests, as opposed to directing states to one of several
FMCSA field offices.
Requests from states to FMCSA that the Agency issue its own initial
emergency exemption (when the State for various reasons prefers that
FMCSA rather than State do so) ordinarily come into FMCSA within hours
of the event, or even, in the case of approaching storms, a few days
before any damage begins to occur. States have rarely if ever needed
more than a day or two--a week at the most--to submit a request to
FMCSA for an emergency exemption.
And in every case, on many scores of occasions over the past 20
years, FMCSA has issued its responsive declaration within a few days,
often within hours. Most recently, on July 8, 2024, Governor Noem of
South Dakota transmitted an extension request for an emergency
exemption at 4:30 pm on the 14th day of an exemption triggered by her
emergency declaration, and FMCSA issued the extension prior to the
exemption's 11:59 p.m. expiration that evening. See https://
www.fmcsa.dot.gov/emergency/wsc-south-dakota-extension-emergency-
declaration-no-2024-004.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Jefferson Van Drew
Question 1. Secretary Buttigieg, as you've said publicly there is
an ongoing and longstanding shortage of air traffic controllers. The
FAA's request to increase the annual controller hiring target to 2,000
for FY25, with plans for additional increases in future years, is a
step in the right direction. The FAA's efforts to establish the
Enhanced-CTI program to bolster the ranks of new controller trainees is
also a welcome development.
However, much work remains, and this will be a long-term effort to
resolve the air traffic controller staffing shortage. I understand that
the FAA, in a recent briefing to aviation stakeholders, indicated it
plans to reduce the controller hiring targets in FY27 and FY28 after
planned increases in FY25 and FY26. However, the recently enacted
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2024
requires the FAA to set annual hiring controller targets at the maximum
number able to be trained at the FAA Academy through FY28, and to study
and implement an expansion of the Academy's capacity.
Question 1.a. As you have noted, solving the ongoing shortage of
air traffic controllers is a priority for DOT and FAA. Will DOT and FAA
commit to complying with the ATC maximum hiring provisions through FY28
as the law now requires?
Answer. Ensuring that the FAA returns to healthy staffing levels
remains among my top priorities. The FAA exceeded its goal of hiring
1,800 air traffic controllers in 2024, with a final total of 1,811 for
Fiscal Year 2024. As the largest number of hires in nearly a decade,
this marks important progress in the FAA's work to reverse the decades-
long air traffic controller staffing level decline. The 2024 Controller
Workforce Plan released in April included facility-specific staffing
targets from both the Staffing Standards process and the Collaborative
Resource Workgroup process. We are committed to completing a study
comparing these two staffing models and methodologies, and implementing
the model selected by the FAA Administrator as outlined in section 437
of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.
We regularly monitor and assess our current staffing and attrition
levels and publish our staffing needs and outlook annually in the
Controller Workforce Plan. We are planning hiring efforts to exceed
controller attrition due to retirements, promotions, or other losses.
Our hiring needs for FY27 and FY28 will depend on the impact of the
work we are doing today to outpace attrition.
Question 1.b. Regarding the FAA Training Academy and getting more
controllers hired and trained, what key factors may you need to review?
Do you anticipate any major challenges to expanding training capacity,
and what is a realistic timeline for these actions?
Answer. With higher FY25 CWP training requirements, the FAA has
been executing a plan to increase overall air traffic training capacity
at the Academy by 30% for FY25. This increase supports both Initial
Qualification Training (IQT) for new hire students (Track 1), and Non-
Job-Jeopardy (NJJ) field students that circle back to the FAA Academy
for initial qualification training. This capacity expansion is on track
to meet FY25's hiring goals, which represent an increase over the FY24
hiring goal.
As instructors are key to the success of this effort, the FAA
expects to continue to utilize both FAA employees and contract
instructors. Accordingly, the FAA is currently working with a
contractor to ensure that instructor availability is commensurate with
the FY25 increase in training demand and releasing Certified
Professional Controllers from the field for the FAA Academy instructor
requirements.
Question 2. The FAA's budget request included a new proposal for a
Facility Replacement and Radar Modernization (FRRM) program, totaling
an extra $1 billion above base appropriations for FY25 and $8 billion
total over the next five years. Many aviation industry stakeholders and
observers have expressed concerns about the FAA's continued reliance on
aging equipment and facilities. I share those concerns.
Question 2.a. First, would you please explain why the FAA made this
new request, and why it's important to fix this aging FAA
infrastructure?
Answer. The FAA shoulders the crucial responsibility of overseeing
the infrastructure of a vast network of nearly 350 air traffic control
towers (ATCT) and terminal radar approach control (TRACON) facilities,
in addition to managing 21 air route traffic control centers (ARTCC).
Re-capitalization is necessary to sustain safe and efficient National
Airspace System (NAS) operations in the decades to come. A failure to
replace facilities and modernize radar networks in a timely manner will
degrade FAA's capacity to keep pace with the aviation economy and
undermine opportunities to improve safety.
Facilities: The FAA confronts a pressing challenge--aging
buildings. Air traffic control facilities have structural deficiencies
and chronic issues that cannot be resolved through maintenance or
sustainment work. These issues include water leaks, mold, tower cab
window condensation, deterioration due to old designs, and general
disrepair. Drivers for replacement include material degradation;
deficiencies in building codes compliance; and poor insulation and
energy efficiency. As the age of these facilities continues to rise,
these types of issues will grow exponentially. Air traffic controllers
must have safe and secure towers to effectively manage and ensure the
safety of air traffic. Replacement of these structures will provide the
new standard in construction, health, safety, and operational
efficiency.
Many of the FAA's facilities are large and complex, often requiring
expensive and lengthy replacement efforts. Due to their size, costs are
typically spread out across multiple fiscal years and the instability
of annual appropriations can make it difficult to commit funding to
such projects. By proposing a new stream of funding over the next five
years, the FAA's proposal offers an opportunity to replace at least 20
of these aging facilities.
Radar Systems: The FAA's plan also focuses on the timely and
strategic modernization of surveillance radars. Airports use these
radars to detect and display the presence and position of aircraft in
the terminal area as well as the airspace around airports. The aging
radars pose a significant challenge for air traffic management. As
these radar systems age, they are more prone to technological
obsolescence, making it increasingly difficult to maintain their
performance and integrate them with modern aviation infrastructure. The
potential for increased downtime due to repairs can negatively impact
airport operations and compromise the efficiency of air traffic
control. Moreover, aging radar systems struggle to keep pace with the
growing demands of air travel and evolving regulatory standards. To
address these challenges, this plan invests in the replacement of
radars opting for new technologies that offer improved performance,
enhanced reliability, and compatibility with the latest air traffic
management initiatives.
The FAA maintains 618 radar systems across the nation. These
systems, deployed across many decades, are a critical tool used by air
traffic controllers to safely and efficiently manage air traffic.
Modern aviation could not exist without these radar systems. In
addition to the re-capitalization of air traffic control facilities
discussed above, this proposal will allow the FAA to replace and
modernize 60 percent of its radars by 2031.
FAA radar systems provide safety critical information to air
traffic controllers, including an aircraft's position and identity as
well as weather information. FAA radar systems provide a backup to
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast information, providing
essential information in the event of Global Positioning System (GPS)
degradation. This information is also essential for homeland security
and national defense missions. As FAA radar systems exceed their
intended lifespan, outages increase in frequency and duration, and
service restoration becomes more difficult as antiquated components
become increasingly difficult to obtain. The absence of critical
aircraft position and identity information increases the risk of
airborne collision and results in increased separation requirements,
reducing operational efficiency.
Question 2.b. The FAA reauthorization bill includes a provision
that allows the FAA to submit an ``unfunded priorities'' list to
Congress and to DOT for ATC system Facility & Equipment needs that were
not included in the President's budget. Will you allow FAA to use this
authority?
Answer. Yes, the FAA provides the ``unfunded priorities'' list, as
required by section 213 of the reauthorization law.
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 includes a requirement that the
FAA Administrator notify the Secretary of Transportation, the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives,
and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate on any unfunded capital investment needs of the air traffic
control system that the President did not include in the annual budget
request. The FAA Administrator will provide a summary description of
the unfunded capital investment need(s); the objective to be achieved
if the unfunded capital investment need is funded in whole or in part;
the additional amount of funds recommended in connection with each
objective; the budget line item program and budget line item number
associated with each capital investment need (as applicable); and the
statutory requirement associated with such unfunded capital investment
need (as applicable). Finally, the briefing will present the unfunded
capital investment need(s) in overall urgency of priority.
Question 3. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 included a
provision to require the FAA to equip all of its towers with Tower
Simulation Systems (TSS) technology. TSS systems--ranging from
permanent large systems to mobile ``suitcase'' systems--allow
controllers and controller trainees to conduct realistic training
scenarios that are not easily replicated in day-to-day operations such
as severe weather events, runway closures, and in-flight emergencies.
This training is important for both new controllers and experienced
controllers who must undergo recurrent training.
From what I understand, TSS technology is cost-effective and has
reduced training time by 27%, but it is currently present at only about
70 of the 263 FAA-operated towers. The FAA's budget request asks for
about $5 million to upgrade TSS capabilities, add network connectivity,
and provide additional simulators to expand the program.
Could you please elaborate on how FAA is using TSS to enhance
controller training, and why expanding the program would be beneficial
to ATC operations? And please provide the Committee with updated budget
estimates to install TSS at every FAA tower, along with making all of
the necessary system and network updates moving forward?
Answer. The TSS provides an immersive environment where new hire
trainees can learn and practice their decision-making skills and
current air traffic control procedures in a controlled environment. It
gives the trainee an opportunity to work traffic and practice scenarios
that they might see when they become a controller at an ATC facility. A
reduction in time to certification allows the FAA to get a new hire out
to the field faster so that they can then certify at their assigned
facility. The TSS is a valuable tool for ATC operations and overall
safety in the National Airspace System because it allows a Certified
Professional Controller (CPC) to complete refresher training and
practice their skills in the same controlled environment. It also
allows the CPC to practice emergency procedures. Expanding the TSS
footprint allows us to supply all ATC facilities with vital training
equipment, so CPCs are prepared to respond to safety-related procedures
as well as maintain their certification without concern of travel or
significant time away from their position to do so.
The FAA must complete its due diligence before procuring any
additional simulators. We want to ensure that we have accounted for all
considerations, including control tower space constraints before we
begin deployment. For FY 2025, $5.1 million is requested to add
capabilities to the TSSs to reduce overall maintenance costs and
acquire additional simulators to expand the program's current
footprint.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Burgess Owens
Question 1. Mr. Buttigieg, what are your department's plans to
prevent a potential strike at the East and Gulf Coast ports on
September 30 and if the strike does occur, what steps will be taken to
mitigate the harm to the American consumer?
Answer. Along with our partners at the Department of Labor and in
the White House, we engaged with both parties to bring them to the
table and reach a tentative agreement on wages that ended the strike
after less than 72 hours. We're carefully monitoring the continuing
negotiations between the International Longshoremen's Association and
the United States Maritime Alliance. We know how important the supply
chain is to keep our economy productive and prices low. We support the
collective bargaining process and encourage the parties to continue to
bargain.
Question 2. Mr. Buttigieg, USDOT recently updated the estimate of
August Redistribution of unused federal highway dollars to $8.7
billion. This is a huge amount of dollars being asked of the state DOTs
to obligate, due to the slow-spending competitive grant programs
administered by the department. What kind of flexibility are you
providing to make sure that states have the tools necessary to handle
this ask? And what are you doing about this in the longer term to avoid
what seems like a fire drill each summer?
Answer. FHWA engaged in early and consistent outreach to states on
August Redistribution to help them plan for another large
redistribution in FY 2024. In May 2024, FHWA notified states of their
share of an updated estimate of $8.7 billion for the FY 2024 August
Redistribution for planning purposes.
FHWA has taken steps to speed up project delivery and is working to
reduce the time it takes to process grant agreements from award
announcement to obligation, including obligation of discretionary grant
funds that are subject to obligation limitation. This will lower the
amount of obligation limitation redistributed each fiscal year. FHWA
Division Offices collaborated with State DOTs to identify potential
projects, obligate discretionary grant funding, and utilize planning
and programming flexibilities. Additionally, FHWA worked closely with
FTA to determine transit capital activities that were ready for
obligation as an option of transferring funds to FTA for eligible
transit projects and coordinated with FTA to transfer funding late into
September to provide maximum flexibility. For FY 2024, states requested
approximately $9 billion of additional formula obligation limitation
under August Redistribution, an amount that exceeded the amount of
obligation limitation returned for redistribution. On August 27, 2024,
FHWA successfully redistributed approximately $8.7 billion in
obligation limitation to the states. The formal process for the next
August Redistribution will commence in July 2025.
Additionally, the FY 2025 President's Budget request proposes
legislative language to address this annual statutory issue. If
enacted, the legislative proposal would have an immediate impact on the
FY 2025 August Redistribution by lowering the amount estimated to be
redistributed by approximately $3.2 billion. This legislative proposal
would also have a beneficial impact to the FY 2026 obligation
limitation distribution, providing states with more of their formula
obligation limitation up front.
Further, the FY 2025 President's Budget proposes to repurpose $800
million in unobligated balances from the Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program to fund the National
Infrastructure Project Assistance grant program (Mega) and the local
and regional project assistance grant program (Rebuilding American
Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity, or RAISE). The
repurposing proposal would have a positive impact on the August
Redistribution process by redirecting the carryover of TIFIA funding to
Mega and RAISE, which would reduce the amount available for August
Redistribution and thus alleviate some of the burden on the states. The
Department is happy to work with Congress on how we can address August
Redistribution.
Question 3. Mr. Buttigieg, as you know, there is considerable
concern within the transportation stakeholder community regarding
USDOT's proposal to discontinue the long-standing waiver of Buy America
requirements for manufactured products. Manufacturers, state
departments of transportation and local governments are all struggling
with how the elimination of the current waiver can be implemented
without significant project delays, cancellations or cost increases.
Is USDOT willing to have a multi-year transition process for the
implementation of Buy America requirements for manufactured products?
And is USDOT also willing to consider an expanded use of targeted
waivers of Buy America requirements for products that cannot be
reasonably sourced domestically?
Answer. On March 12, 2024, FHWA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to discontinue its longstanding general waiver of Buy
America requirements for manufactured products and establish standards
for applying the agency's statutory Buy America requirements to
manufactured products. The public comment period closed on May 13,
2024. A final rule was submitted to OMB on October 7, 2024.
FHWA also acknowledged in the preamble to the NPRM that ``there may
be some products that are not currently produced in the United States
and, for various reasons, might not be able to be produced in the
United States in the near future. For such products, FHWA intends to
consider whether it should propose any targeted waivers, with these
waivers providing a timeline to encourage manufacturers to ramp up
domestic production. To that end, FHWA is concurrently publishing a
Request for Information (RFI), seeking specific and detailed
information on what products are not and cannot be produced in the
United States in the near future. Based on information received, FHWA
intends to propose time-limited and targeted waivers covering such
products, if it determines it would be appropriate to do so.''
Through the NPRM, FHWA also sought comment on whether a
``transition period is needed for its proposed standards for
manufactured products to allow contracting agencies, contractors, and
manufacturers time to create appropriate systems and processes, as well
as train staff on compliance with the proposed standards. The FHWA
specifically seeks comment on the minimum time required for these
purposes and, accordingly, the effective date for the proposed Buy
America requirements for manufactured products.''
FHWA will consider the information received through the RFI and
comments received as it determines its next steps regarding any
potential targeted, time-limited waivers for specific products.
Question 4. Mr. Buttigieg, recently, the Highways and Transit
Subcommittee heard testimony about labor supply challenges in the
industry. Transit workforce development is critical to keeping the
nations' investment in transit viable. In my state, the Utah Transit
Authority has created a program called Bilingual Bridges, an English as
a Second Language (ESL) pilot partnership with the Utah State Board of
Education, Granite School District, and the Utah Department of
Workforce Services. This program, which has now graduated two classes
with ESL certificates, is a paid, integrated ESL and job skills
training course lasting between 8 and 12 weeks, which prepares
participants to work at UTA while learning English. Can you please
share how your Department will help agencies fund and supervise
training programs such as this?
Answer. FTA provides flexibility to transit agencies to use various
FTA funding sources for their unique workforce training needs,
including those related to ESL training. There are four main sources of
funds FTA recipients may use for workforce development activities.
Recipients can use FTA's Technical Assistance and Workforce Development
Program (49 U.S.C. Sec. 5314), FTA's Urbanized Area Program (49 U.S.C.
Sec. 5307), FTA's State of Good Repair Program (49 U.S.C. Sec. 5337),
and FTA's Bus and Bus Facilities Program (49 U.S.C. Sec. 5339). There
are specific provisions related to each of these programs and FTA would
be happy to share more details if needed on these various funding
opportunities.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Rudy Yakym III
Question 1. As you well know, there is a longstanding, acute
shortage of air traffic controllers. The FAA's request to increase the
annual controller hiring target to 2,000 for FY25, with plans for
additional increases in future years, is a step in the right direction,
as are its efforts to establish the Enhanced-CTI program.
However, much work remains. I am troubled by reports that the FAA,
in a recent briefing to aviation stakeholders, indicated it plans to
reduce controller hiring targets in FY27 and FY28 after planned
increases in FY25 and FY26. This contravenes the recent FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024, which requires the FAA to set annual
hiring controller targets at the maximum number able to be trained at
the FAA Academy through FY28.
Question 1.a. Will DOT and FAA commit to complying with the ATC
maximum hiring provisions through FY28 as the law now requires?
Answer. Ensuring that the FAA returns to healthy staffing levels
remains among my top priorities. The FAA exceeded its goal of hiring
1,800 air traffic controllers in 2024, with a final total of 1,811 for
Fiscal Year 2024. As the largest number of hires in nearly a decade,
this marks important progress in the FAA's work to reverse the decades-
long air traffic controller staffing level decline. The 2024 Controller
Workforce Plan released in April included facility-specific staffing
targets from both the Staffing Standards process and the Collaborative
Resource Workgroup process. We are committed to completing a study
comparing these two staffing models and methodologies, and implementing
the model selected by the FAA Administrator as outlined in section 437
of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.
We regularly monitor and assess our current staffing and attrition
levels and publish our staffing needs and outlook annually in the
Controller Workforce Plan. We are planning hiring efforts to exceed
controller attrition due to retirements, promotions, or other losses.
Our hiring needs for FY27 and FY28 will depend on the impact of the
work we are doing today to outpace attrition.
Question 1.b. Do you anticipate any major challenges to expanding
the FAA Training Academy's training capacity, and what is a realistic
timeline for these actions?
Answer. With higher FY25 CWP training requirements, the FAA has
been executing a plan to increase overall air traffic training capacity
at the Academy by 30% for FY25. This increase supports both Initial
Qualification Training (IQT) for new hire students (Track 1), and Non-
Job-Jeopardy (NJJ) field students that circle back to the FAA Academy
for initial qualification training. This capacity expansion is on track
to meet FY25's hiring goals, which represent an increase over FY24's
hiring goal.
As instructors are key to the success of this effort, the FAA
expects to continue to utilize both FAA employees and contract
instructors. Accordingly, the FAA is currently working with a
contractor to ensure that instructor availability is commensurate with
the FY25 increase in training demand and releasing Certified
Professional Controllers from the field for the FAA Academy instructor
requirements.
Question 2. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 required that the
FAA put forward its draft Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) rule for
by mid-September. Given the delays that have occurred and the impact a
BVLOS rule would have by unlocking innovation and driving economic
activity, can you commit today that DOT and FAA will prioritize meeting
this legally-mandated deadline and put forward a draft BVLOS rule by
September 15, 2024?
Answer. The FAA is working to publish the notice of proposed
rulemaking, ``Normalizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line
of Sight Operations,'' which is expected to expedite the introduction
of BVLOS operations. In the meantime, the FAA has streamlined approval
processes for BVLOS operations approved through waivers or exemptions
and is working to exercise the flexibility provided in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 to enable more scalable BVLOS operations in
advance of rulemaking.
Question 3. Drone technology is increasingly used for inspecting
critical transportation infrastructure, such as bridges, tunnels, and
highways, due to its ability to enhance worker safety and improve
productivity. Given the recent authorization of the Drone
Infrastructure Inspection Grant program in the FAA Reauthorization Act
of 2024, how do you plan to prioritize the use of drone operations in
areas such as infrastructure inspections? Additionally, could you
provide insight into the funding strategies and measures you will carry
out to ensure that these advancements in technology translate into
tangible safety benefits for workers involved in these critical
inspection and maintenance activities?
Answer. Infrastructure inspection using safe and reliable,
domestically produced drones presents a way to better ensure the safety
and stability of the national infrastructure and to enable economic
benefits of drones. These inspections can and do happen across the
country today under 14 CFR Part 107 line of sight operations. The
Department uses drones to inspect critical highway infrastructure. The
Department appreciates Congress' support in developing this capability
through provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (Pub. L. 118-
63, May 16, 2024) that would enable the FAA to inspect its own
infrastructure and manage a grant program for state governments to
establish their own drone inspection programs. While this new program
introduces important requirements, it has not yet received
appropriations sufficient to fully implement them. We look forward to
collaborating with Congress to ensure that adequate funding is secured
for all new programs mandated by the Reauthorization. The Department is
fully committed to meeting the legislative requirements for this and
all provisions of the FAA Reauthorization. We are currently developing
a management strategy that will allow us to implement the
infrastructure inspection program to the best of our ability, despite
competing priorities and financial constraints.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Derrick Van Orden
Question 1. Assaults on transit workers are at an all-time high.
While some of the discourse about crime on public transit is
exaggerated, the threat to workers is very real. The perception of
public safety on public transit is one of the main reasons passengers
have been slow to return to public transit. Until this issue is solved,
transit agencies will continue to struggle with farebox revenue. The
FTA has acknowledged the importance of this issue through in its
General Directive on Preventing Assaults.
Question 1.a. Secretary Buttigieg, what is the timeline for action
on the general directive and further rulemakings to protect workers and
riders from assault?
Answer. DOT and FTA are committed to ensuring the safety of transit
workers nationwide who are responsible for moving millions of Americans
to their jobs, schools, and other daily activities. Everyone deserves a
safe workplace, including and especially the frontline transit workers.
FTA issued General Directive 24-1 on September 25, 2024. The General
Directive, the first one to be issued by FTA, will require more than
700 transit agencies nationwide to take action to protect frontline
transit workers from the risk of assaults. It requires each transit
agency to do the following:
Conduct a risk assessment of assaults on the agency's
transit workforce, using the Safety Management System processes
outlined in its Agency Safety Plan.
If a transit agency has determined it has an unacceptable
level of risk of assaults on transit workers, it must identify
strategies to mitigate that risk and improve transit worker safety.
Every transit agency serving a large, urbanized area
(with a population of 200,000 or more) must comply with Public
Transportation Agency Safety Plans (PTASP) requirements to involve the
joint labor-management Safety Committee when identifying safety risk
mitigations and strategies.
Finally, each transit agency must provide information to
FTA within 90 days on the risk level identified in its system, how it
is mitigating those risks, and how it is monitoring the safety risk
associated with assaults on transit workers.
Transit agencies are required to respond to the General Directive
by December 26, 2024. The General Directive builds upon previous steps
by the Biden-Harris Administration to strengthen transit worker safety.
FTA intends to use information submitted to it pursuant to the
General Directive and other FTA initiatives to inform future FTA
actions, including rulemakings such as the planned Transit Worker and
Public Safety rule. In 2025, FTA anticipates publishing a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which will propose establishing minimum
baseline standards and risk-based requirements to address transit
worker and public safety, including but not limited to Fixing America's
Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act) (Pub. L. 114-94, Dec. 4, 2015)
section 3022 requirements.
Question 1.b. What effects does the perception of violence onboard
public transportation have across transit systems (ridership, worker
retention and recruitment, security costs, etc.)?
Answer. While crime rates are down across the country, FTA believes
that transit riders deserve to feel safe as they travel around their
communities, and transit workers deserve a safe workplace. That is part
of why FTA requires at least 1 percent of all urban transit formula
funding be spent on security for transit systems. In addition, the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law requires at least .75 percent of all
urban transit formula funding to be set aside for safety, which
includes efforts to prevent assaults on transit workers.
FTA is currently funding research through the Transit Cooperative
Research Program (TCRP) on Improving Transit Customer Perception of
Personal Security. The project will document the current practices
transit systems use to improve customer perception of personal
security, including the strategies that are being used to increase
customer perception of security on transit; whether the strategies are
successful; how these strategies are communicated to the public; and
the associated change in customers' perceptions. FTA recently published
a new Transit Customer Assault Prevention webpage for transit agencies
to provide more resources to help prevent and address crime in their
systems, which includes research on the factors contributing to
customer assault events, trends in assault data, and mitigations.
FTA is also working with agencies nationwide to promote best
practices that have been shown to reduce crime in and around transit
facilities, including increased security personnel, non-uniformed
ambassadors and other active measures to protect the riding public and
individuals in need of supportive social services. FTA also continues
to work to protect transit workers through landmark rulemaking recently
finalized to implement the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). That
regulation, the Public Transportation Agency Safety Plans final rule,
gives transit workers more of a voice in the safety and security of
themselves, their passengers and the systems they operate.
To help ensure the continued safety of our nation's public transit
systems, FTA launched the Enhanced Transit Safety and Crime Prevention
Initiative to provide information and resources to help transit
agencies address and prevent crime on their systems and protect transit
workers and riders. FTA resources can be used by transit agencies to
prevent and address crime in their systems and protect transit workers
and riders. Certain agencies can also use these resources for overtime
pay for enhanced security personnel presence and mental health and
crisis intervention specialists.
Question 2. Prior to beginning a journey, each freight rail car
connected to a train is required to undergo an inspection. Car
inspectors are often required to perform this 100+ point inspection in
less than 60 seconds for each car for trains that extend for as long as
3 miles. Railroads have recently begun testing AI alternatives to
quickly test rail cars in motion as a substitute for the traditional
inspection process.
Secretary Buttigieg, how are you reviewing new rail technology like
this in light of the Department's Innovation Principles?
Answer. DOT and FRA are committed to implementing the Department's
Innovation Principles, and technology plays a key role, as do workers.
Following the Norfolk Southern derailment in East Palestine, OH, on
February 3, 2023, I called on Norfolk Southern and the entire freight
railroad industry to act immediately to deploy new inspection
technologies without seeking permission to abandon human inspections.
Requests have been framed by industry to set up a false choice between
technology and human oversight. We need both to keep our nation's
railroads safe.
FRA has a long history of working with railroads and the supply
industry to develop, test, verify, and validate technology solutions,
as well as addressing comments from labor organizations, other
stakeholders, and the public when evaluating technology for approval to
operate. Importantly, in some situations and depending on the new
technology, FRA may not have a role in its implementation. An often-
overlooked aspect of introducing new technology is ensuring that
railroad employees are properly trained to safely use new technology.
In addition, FRA encourages the railroads to engage with rail labor
organizations at different stages in the development of technology to
leverage the knowledge and experience of the workers and obtain their
support for implementation.
In some situations, FRA's Office of Railroad Safety provides
assistance in the development of new technology and in navigating the
regulatory requirements for implementation in the form of attending
design reviews, providing subject matter expertise, observing testing,
and if necessary, approving or disapproving a railroad's request for
use of new technology in revenue operations. FRA's support in the
industry's successful implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC), a
development and implementation process covering more than a dozen
years, is an example of this coordination and cooperation. The agency
plans to leverage these existing processes to assist in the
introduction of new technology, including those based on AI, to enable
their safe introduction into the system.
Question 3. CRISI grants help short line railroads repair and
rehabilitate worn-out track and rail infrastructure--the leading cause
of derailments on short line railroads. Short line freight railroads
operate nearly 50,000 miles of the national freight rail network and
have been successfully competing for these resources since the program
was created in 2015's FAST Act (but first funded in 2017), making their
rail network safer--and their supply chain more efficient.
Secretary Buttigieg, can you discuss the importance of ensuring
CRISI funds are made available to be used to help short line freight
railroads invest in safety upgrades?
Answer. FRA's Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
Improvements (CRISI) grant program is unique in that it can provide
direct assistance to help both small and large communities invest in
rail safety and capital projects for stronger supply chains, can
directly support short line railroads, and make major investments in
intercity passenger rail. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
significantly increased the amount of funding available in CRISI,
including $1 billion in advance appropriations each year, and expanded
project eligibilities within the program. In response to the Fiscal
Year (FY) 2023/2024 notice of funding opportunity, FRA reviewed 271
eligible applications from 48 states and the District of Columbia,
requesting $ 7,397,542,372. In October 2024, FRA awarded $2.5 billion
in FY23/24 CRISI funding to 122 rail improvement projects in 41 states
and the District of Columbia. Over 40 percent of this funding flowed to
rural communities, and over $1.3 billion was awarded to projects that
improve freight and short line railroad infrastructure, representing
over 50 percent of all awards. DOT values our short line partners and
their continued participation in the CRISI Program.
Question 4. As we've seen travelers return to our nation's airports
at record levels this summer, the signs of strain on the National
Airspace System seem more apparent in the form of traveler delays and
disruptions, safety incidents, and the imposition of ``voluntary''
limits on slots to key airports. I know that travelers from my state of
Wisconsin have been directly impacted by these issues. Air traffic
controller workforce issues have contributed to this strain, as FAA
Administrator Whitaker noted in his remarks when he met with NATCA in
February.
Question 4.a. Secretary Buttigieg, can you provide an update on the
status of controller hiring and training initiatives?
Answer. We continue to work on several initiatives to increase our
hiring pipeline and bolster training throughput. The FAA has a robust
hiring process in place to ensure that the best candidates are selected
and placed at facilities with the greatest need. We've taken the
following actions to recruit, train, and hire the best candidates for
ATC positions:
Revised our Academy placement process for Academy
graduates offering more locations to reduce the need for controller
transfers.
Revised the Previous Experience Public Notice
Announcement to provide greater flexibility to applicants departing the
military.
Revised the Tier 2 Medical/Minnesota Multi-Phase
Personality Inventory (MMPI) Retest Process, resulting in both cost
savings and an increase in applicants.
Invested in En Route and Tower simulation technology,
adding an additional En Route lab at the FAA Academy, and modernization
of our Tower Simulation System across the National Airspace System.
Successfully launched the Enhanced Air Traffic Collegiate
Training Initiative (E-CTI), which will not only increase our hiring
input but also will bolster throughput. To date, 32 schools have
applied and three have successfully completed the certification
process.
In FY 2024, the FAA hired 1,811 new controllers, surpassing the
year's goal of 1,800 and the 1,514 controllers hired in FY 2023. For FY
2025, the FAA has increased its hiring goal to 2,000 air traffic
controllers.
Question 4.b. Can you also provide an estimate of when you expect
these initiatives to eliminate the need for voluntary slot restrictions
and address safety and delay concerns?
Answer. The Slot Administration program office continues to monitor
these initiatives and manage slot usage waivers according to their
progress. Effective on October 27, 2024, staffing-related relief will
continue via the extended Limited Waiver of the Slot Usage Requirement,
originally published on September 20, 2023, through the Winter 2024/
2025 Slot season and until the end of the Summer 2025 Slot Season on
October 25, 2025.
The FAA expects increased delays and cancellations in the New York
region to exceed those experienced over Summer 2022 and Winter 2022/
2023 if a waiver similar to the one that has been in effect for the
Summer 2023, Winter 2023/2024, and Summer 2024 season is not in place
for the Winter 2024/2025 and Summer 2025 scheduling season to allow
carriers to reduce schedules without penalties for non-use of slots or
previously approved operating times.
Reducing schedules will improve the alignment between scheduled
operations and actual operations, will help prevent unnecessary delays,
will help optimize the efficient use of the airports' resources, and
will help deliver passengers to their destinations more reliably and on
time.
Question 5. Secretary Buttigieg, as you've said publicly there is
an ongoing and longstanding shortage of air traffic controllers. The
FAA's request to increase the annual controller hiring target to 2,000
for FY25, with plans for additional increases in future years, is a
step in the right direction. The FAA's efforts to establish the
Enhanced-CTI program to bolster the ranks of new controller trainees is
also a welcome development.
However, much work remains, and this will be a long-term effort to
resolve the air traffic controller staffing shortage. I understand that
the FAA, in a recent briefing to aviation stakeholders, indicated it
plans to reduce the controller hiring targets in FY27 and FY28 after
planned increases in FY25 and FY26. However, the recently enacted
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2024
requires the FAA to set annual hiring controller targets at the maximum
number able to be trained at the FAA Academy through FY28, and to study
and implement an expansion of the Academy's capacity.
Question 5.a. As you have noted, solving the ongoing shortage of
air traffic controller is a priority for DOT and FAA. Will DOT and FAA
commit to complying with the ATC maximum hiring provisions through FY28
as the law now requires?
Answer. Ensuring that the FAA returns to healthy staffing levels
remains among my top priorities. The 2024 Controller Workforce Plan
released in April included facility-specific staffing targets from both
the Staffing Standards process and the Collaborative Resource Workgroup
process. We are committed to completing a study comparing these two
staffing models and methodologies, and implementing the model selected
by the FAA Administrator as outlined in section 437 of the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024.
In FY 2024, the FAA hired 1,811 new controllers, surpassing the
year's goal of 1,800 and the 1,514 controllers hired in FY 2023. For FY
2025, the FAA has increased its hiring goal to 2,000 air traffic
controllers.
We regularly monitor and assess our current staffing and attrition
levels and publish our staffing needs and outlook annually in the
Controller Workforce Plan. We are planning hiring efforts to exceed
controller attrition due to retirements, promotions, or other losses.
Our hiring needs for FY27 and FY28 will depend on the impact of the
work we are doing today to outpace attrition.
Question 5.b. Regarding the FAA Training Academy and getting more
controllers hired and trained, what key factors may you need to review?
Do you anticipate any major challenges to expanding training capacity,
and what is a realistic timeline for these actions?
Answer. With higher FY25 CWP training requirements, the FAA is
executing a plan to increase overall air traffic training capacity at
the Academy by 30% for FY25. This increase supports both Initial
Qualification Training (IQT) for new hire students (Track 1), and Non-
Job-Jeopardy (NJJ) field students that circle back to the FAA Academy
for initial qualification training.
As instructors are key to the success of this effort, the FAA
expects to continue to utilize both FAA employees and contract
instructors. Accordingly, the FAA is currently working with a
contractor to ensure that instructor availability is commensurate with
the FY25 increase in training demand.
Question 6. Earlier this year an asphalt producer from my state--
The Walbec Group--testified before the House T&I Committee regarding
the Administration's Buy America rulemaking at FHWA and the long-
delayed acknowledgment of Buy America exemptions for construction
materials, like asphalt binder and aggregate. Unfortunately, it took 2+
years of IIJA implementation before this bipartisan provision was
finally affirmed at OMB.
Can you provide more detail as to how you anticipate this
Administration utilizing evolving Buy America rulemakings in the future
and how your agency will provide industry partners, like construction
material producers, certainty and clarity on this critical procurement
process?
Answer. With regard to the products that you cite, the Office of
Management and Budget has consistently acknowledged the exclusion of
certain types of materials from being considered construction materials
under the Build America, Buy America Act (BABA), as enacted by
Congress, in both its initial and final implementation guidance. DOT is
following that guidance in applying the BABA requirements to its
financial assistance programs for infrastructure. The Federal Highway
Administration has also posted guidance Q&As on its website describing
the application of the BABA requirements to the Federal-aid Highway
Program, including standards for construction materials.
Question 7. The IIJA provided for significant investment in rural
surface transportation infrastructure across the country through the
Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program.
How is DOT supporting small and rural communities to ensure they
have the resources necessary to take advantage of these funding
opportunities?
Answer. The Department is committed to supporting the unique
transportation needs of small and Tribal communities by investing in
rural America through discretionary grant programs. Since 2022, we have
awarded $11.5 billion in new discretionary grants to rebuild and
modernize rural roads, bridges, transit, ports, and airports--which is
twice as much discretionary funding awarded to rural applicants than in
the previous 4 years combined. For example, the Department has awarded
$900 million to 30 projects across 26 states under the Rural Surface
Transportation Grant (Rural) program. We made significant strides to
streamline the application process by combining the Notice of Funding
Opportunity (NOFO) for the Rural program with the INFRA and Mega
programs, which gives these rural projects the best opportunity to
compete for all available funding, and simplifying the evaluation
criteria for Rural program applicants seeking less than $25 million.
In addition, the Department offers technical assistance and
resources to support project planning, development, and funding and
financing strategies so that new and prior applicants are successful in
delivering transformative infrastructure projects. Since 2022, DOT has
awarded nearly $1.5 billion to first-time rural and Tribal
discretionary grant applicants.
The Thriving Communities Program, funded in FY2022 and
FY2023 appropriation bills, funds Capacity Builders who provide no-cost
technical assistance to help state, local, Tribal, and territorial
governments better access federal funding for projects in their
communities. Over 680 letters of interest have been submitted by
communities requesting support through the program. A total of 176
communities are currently being supported, of which two-thirds are
rural. As of August 2024, 62 percent of our FY22 Thriving Communities
that had never received a DOT grant became first time awardees. Between
RAISE and SS4A alone, Thriving Communities have received over $71
million dollars to support critical transportation infrastructure and
safety projects in communities across the country, including Douglas
(AZ), Wrangell (AK), York (AL), Rexburg (ID), and the First Tennessee
RPO. Thriving Communities has also coordinated with federal partners
for site visits to rural and tribal communities, including Standing
Rock Indian Reservation (ND and SD), Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe (WA),
and Upper Kanawha Valley (WV).
The Rural and Tribal Assistance Pilot Program funds
communities seeking early-stage support in developing projects in rural
and Tribal communities. DOT received over 400 applications requesting
more than $127 million in response to the first NOFO. The 2024 NOFO
will be out this summer and will provide $27 million ($2 million from
BIL and $25 million from FY 2024 appropriations).
Within the Office of the Under Secretary for
Transportation Policy, the Rural Opportunities to Use Transportation
for Economic Success (ROUTES) Initiative prioritizes the needs of rural
America by supporting rural transportation policy and equitable access
for rural and Tribal communities that face challenges relating to
transportation safety, mobility, and economic development. ROUTES
develops user-friendly tools and information, aggregates DOT resources,
and provides technical assistance to better connect rural project
sponsors with the funding, financing, and outreach resources available.
For instance, the Rural Grant Applicant Toolkit for Competitive Federal
Transportation Funding helps rural applicants understand the federal
grant process and the opportunities that are available to support rural
transportation projects. The ROUTES Initiative also partners with
USDA's Rural Partners Network and DOE's Interagency Working Group on
Coal & Power Plant Communities & Economic Revitalization to support
rural communities in need of targeted technical assistance.
Question 8. The 2024 FAA Reauthorization Act contains provisions
related to high-speed and high-altitude flight. These are designed to
ensure that the FAA is ready to regulate and integrate supersonic and
hypersonic aircraft into our airspace when the time comes. The bill
also aims to maintain U.S. leadership in aviation. President Biden's
National Aeronautics and Space Technology Priorities highlights
hypersonic transportation as a priority. The State Department, together
with key allies including Canada, the UK, the EU countries, and Japan,
issued a joint statement in December 2023 calling on ICAO to prioritize
and expedite higher airspace operations in its work program.
How does the Department plan to accomplish this critical work, meet
the deadlines, and ensure that the United States leads the world in
high-speed and high-altitude aviation?
Answer. The FAA recognizes the numerous challenges associated with
high-speed and high-altitude flight airspace provisions, including
noise considerations, emissions, unique aircraft design challenges
associated with high-speed flight, and other certification and
operational considerations. The FAA works across multiple agencies such
as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, directly engages
with international aviation authorities, and participates in standards
development organization meetings to support aircraft certification to
ensure this critical work is well-coordinated and comprehensive. We
will continue to work in partnership with aircraft manufacturers
currently designing and testing prototype supersonic aircraft and
engine technologies to identify drivers of new airworthiness
requirements unique to such aircraft.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Marcus J. Molinaro
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, I understand that SAI's structure allows
for such capabilities. Can you work with the FAA to ensure that safety
alerts are a required capability for SAI as that new surface
surveillance system is installed at airports throughout the country?
Answer. The establishment of the SAI program was in response to
last spring's (2023) Safety Call to Action to reduce runway incursions.
In a matter of months, the FAA released a solicitation to industry and
awarded contracts to three separate solution providers, and 90 days
after those contracts were awarded, the service was operational at four
airports. The FAA is now focusing its efforts to deploy SAI
capabilities as quickly as possible. The FAA has not assessed what
additional surface safety capabilities might be required following the
deployment of SAI. Surface safety alerting can be beneficial but can
have detrimental safety impacts if not appropriately designed and
implemented. Following the deployment of the SAI capability, surface
safety alerting may be considered as a future capability.
Question 2. Mr. Secretary, would SAI be improved if FAA required
that the new surveillance system also utilize automated safety alerts
to continuously scan the situation at that airport, identify issues,
and generate audible and visual alerts to the controllers when a
dangerous scenario is about to occur?
Answer. Automatic surface safety alerting can be beneficial but can
have detrimental safety impacts if not appropriately designed and
implemented. Following the deployment of the SAI capability, surface
safety alerting may be considered as a future capability. If the FAA
decides to require safety alerting in the SAI systems, the FAA first
must develop requirements to determine the safety alert capabilities
which must be analyzed for safety risk, developed, tested, and
implemented.
Question 3. If the FAA used safety alert for all of its surface
surveillance technology, wouldn't this simplify controller training and
standardize operations while ensuring the same level of safety at all
airports around the country?
Answer. The current surface safety alerting capabilities are
specific to the Airport Surface Detection System, Model X (ASDE-X) and
ADS-B Airport Surface Surveillance Capability (ASSC) surface
surveillance systems in use at 44 airports today. These systems have
design features that are not commensurate with SAI. To the extent
standardization could be implemented to simplify operations and
training, that will be pursued (similar to the way the SAI user
interface was standardized with the interface of the existing surface
surveillance systems). Before safety alerts could be added, the FAA
must develop requirements to determine the safety alert capabilities
which must be analyzed for safety risk, developed, tested, and
implemented.
Question 4. Can't the safety alerting capabilities from ASDE-X and
ASSC, that the FAA invested in and refined for the last two decades, be
leveraged and used for SAI?
Answer. If the FAA determines that safety alerting is appropriate
to be added into SAI, the alerting behavior of the safety alerting
capabilities from ASDE-X and ASSC could be leveraged and used for SAI
to the extent that they are applicable to specifics of the SAI system
design. The specific safety alert capability of ASDE-X and ASSC is
unique to those specific system designs. For example, SAI does not
provide a surface surveillance radar detection capability, which would
need to be considered in leveraging the reuse of existing safety
alerting capabilities.
Question 5. Mr. Secretary, would you agree that safety alerts in
the control tower of potentially dangerous situations are an essential
layer of ensuring airport surface safety?
Answer. SAI being deployed today will improve safety, providing
surface situational awareness where such capabilities do not exist.
Getting SAI deployed to additional control towers is the current
priority to provide a foundational safety improvement to more locations
in the National Airspace System. The FAA has not assessed what
additional surface safety capabilities might be required following the
deployment of SAI. Surface safety alerting can be beneficial but can
have detrimental safety impacts if not appropriately designed and
implemented. Following the deployment of the SAI capability, surface
safety alerting may be considered as a future capability.
Question 6. Advanced Air Mobility promises to bring safe and
efficient operations and economic growth in American communities
through the certification and use of powered-lift aircraft. The future
of these operations hinges on FAA's development of the `powered-lift
SFAR.' It is critical that this rulemaking process thoroughly 1)
incorporates the collective responses received from the NPRM last
August, 2) addresses the provisions of Sec. 955 of FAA Reauthorization,
and 3) aligns with the ICAO standards the FAA already supports. Mr.
Secretary, can you assure me that these 3 factors will be fully and
comprehensively considered in the final powered-lift SFAR?
Answer. In October 2024, the FAA published an advance copy of the
final Special Federal Aviation Regulation, ``Integration of Powered-
Lift: Pilot Certification and Operations; Miscellaneous Amendments
Related to Rotorcraft and Airplanes.'' This final rule, promulgated in
accordance with the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act,
addresses the requirements of section 955 of the FAA Reauthorization
Act of 2024. Further, it is FAA policy to conform to International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices
(SARP) to the maximum extent possible. In the final rule, the FAA
explained that its approach conforms with ICAO SARPs to the maximum
extent practicable and provides an equivalent level of safety that
meets or exceeds the ICAO standards. This includes leveraging the ICAO-
accepted definition of powered-lift and working with ICAO in the
Advanced Air Mobility Study Group to ensure the regulatory gaps are
identified and addressed in future ICAO Annexes.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Mike Collins
Question 1. Passed as Section 514 of the Frank LoBiondo Coast Guard
Authorization Act of 2018 and signed into law in December 2018, the
National Timing Resilience and Security Act (Timing Act) requires the
Secretary of Transportation to deploy a ground-based GPS backup timing
system that would utilize existing but dormant Coast Guard
communications towers through a public-private partnership (P3) within
two years of enactment. The legislation was consistent with a January
2021 study conducted by the Department that recommended the
implementation of three key technologies to address GPS
vulnerabilities: low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, regional beacons,
and a nationwide enhanced long-range navigation (eLORAN) service.
Despite three years of appropriations from Congress to support this
initiative, recent test beds have not included a ground-based system.
This is concerning, given the critical importance of this backup system
for national security and infrastructure resilience.
Could you please provide an update on the Department's plans to
fully implement this legislation? Specifically, what steps are being
taken to expedite the deployment of the ground-based GPS backup timing
system, and what is the projected timeline for its completion?
Answer. Under 49 U.S.C. 312 (Timing Act), the Secretary of
Transportation is required to ``provide for the establishment,
sustainment, and operation of a resilient, and reliable alternative
timing system'' subject to the availability of appropriations. The
Department of Transportation has not received appropriations
specifically directed to or sufficient for such activity. However, the
Department has ensured that the priority goal of availability of a
resilient alternate timing system for use by critical infrastructure
owners and operators in the face of increasing jamming and spoofing
operations against civil positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT)
sources, most notably GPS, has been maintained in all complementary PNT
activities. The team has focused on implementing EO 13905,
Strengthening National Resilience Through Responsible Use of
Positioning, Navigation, and Timing Services, and Space Policy
Directive 7, The United States Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and
Timing Policy (SPD-7). The former focuses on engaging the public and
private sectors to identify and promote the responsible use of PNT
services, rather than on system development; the latter on sustainment
of GPS and GPS augmentations.
In pursuit of the EO/SPD goals and the Timing Act-recognized need
for alternative timing sources, the DOT Volpe National Transportation
Systems Center in 2020 conducted field demonstrations of candidate PNT
technologies that could offer complementary service in the event of GPS
disruptions, including terrestrial PNT technologies. The purpose of the
demonstrations was to gather information on PNT technologies at a high
technology readiness level (TRL) that can work in the absence of GPS.
Resilient timing scenarios were among the technology demonstrations
measured and analyzed. The culmination of the demonstration program was
the 2021 Report to Congress, Complementary PNT and GPS Backup
Technologies Demonstration Report. The report cited the Timing Act,
along with the FY17 and 18 National Defense Authorization Acts, as
guiding requirements for the demonstrations.
As a result of this technology demonstration, DOT determined
that:1) no single solution or the provision of a back-up or
Complementary PNT service can meet the diversity of critical
infrastructure application requirements, and 2) it would be
inefficient, anti-competitive, and potentially harmful to the existing
market for back-up/complementary PNT services for the federal
government to procure or otherwise fund a specific solution for non-
federal users. This determination has guided the Department's
implementation of further complementary PNT activities, and not
including systems development.
The Department has continued to undertake efforts to further
identify potential technical solutions and/or services that would ``to
the maximum extent practicable'' satisfy the requirements set forth in
49 U.S.C. 312(b)(2) for an alternative timing system. In 2023, DOT
published a Complementary PNT Action Plan to drive CPNT adoption across
the Nation's transportation system and within other critical
infrastructure sectors. The plan describes actions that the DOT is
pursuing over the next several years, including engaging PNT
stakeholders; monitoring and supporting the development of CPNT
specifications and standards; establishing and instrumenting field test
ranges for CPNT testing and evaluation; and creating a Federal PNT
Services Clearinghouse. Taken together with efforts of other Federal
partners, these initiatives will continue to strengthen the resilience
of the Nation's PNT-dependent systems, resulting in safer, more secure
critical infrastructure.
In February 2024, DOT issued a solicitation seeking proposals from
vendors with operationally ready CPNT services interested in fielding
those services for test and evaluation in the Rapid Phase of the Field
Trial and Test Range Development Program. DOT received 29 proposals,
more proposals than could be funded under Simplified Acquisition
Procedure guidelines. On June 18, 2024, DOT awarded contracts to nine
Complementary PNT technology vendors (https://www.transportation.gov/
pnt) in response to the Rapid Phase of the DOT Complementary PNT (CPNT)
Action Plan (https://www.transportation.gov/pnt/complementary-pnt-
action-plan).
Awarded through the DOT Volpe Center and totaling over $7.2
million, these awards provide funding for instrumentation, testing, and
evaluation of CPNT technologies at field test ranges in conjunction
with critical infrastructure owners and operators. The technologies
selected comprise a diversity of Complementary PNT technologies,
including terrestrial timing capabilities. The four categories of CPNT
contracts awarded are: Time Over Fiber, Terrestrial Radiofrequency
(RF), Low Earth Orbit (LEO), and Map Matching/Map Tracking. The CPNT
technologies will be fielded within six months after award at a diverse
set of test range models (Federal Government-Hosted, Critical
Infrastructure, and Vendor-Fielded).
DOT recognizes the quality of the proposals received and intends to
move expeditiously to issue a Complementary PNT Rapid Phase II
solicitation to expand the set of Complementary PNT technologies to be
evaluated.
Question 2. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 sets out the long-
term framework for developing hypersonic aviation in the United States.
China and other countries have developed an early lead in hypersonic
technology. So, successful development of a U.S. hypersonic industry
has broad implications for our country beyond transportation. The
Department of Transportation has a leading role here. How will the
Department apply lessons learned from other new technologies like
drones to avoid the delays and challenges they faced to ensure that the
United States can lead in this field?
Answer. The FAA is focused on continuous improvement and will
utilize the lessons learned from the certification of drones and their
integration into the National Airspace System, as well as from the
certification and operations of other aircraft, to ensure we remain the
worldwide leader in aviation, including hypersonic technology. To do
this, the FAA will leverage and strengthen our international
partnerships, directly engage with other international aviation
authorities, and participate in standards development organizations as
we continue to use performance-based standards to support aircraft
certification. We also plan to partner directly with the Department of
Defense, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and U.S.
manufacturers to proactively identify and inform the development of new
airworthiness requirements for hypersonic flight-enabling technologies
intended for civil aviation operations.
Question 3. Advanced Air Mobility promises to bring safe and
efficient operations and economic growth in American communities
through the certification and use of powered-lift aircraft. The future
of these operations hinges on FAA's development of the `powered-lift
SFAR.' It is critical that this rulemaking process thoroughly 1)
incorporates the collective responses received from the NPRM last
August 2) addresses the provisions of Sec. 955 of FAA Reauthorization,
and 3) aligns with the ICAO standards the FAA already supports. Mr.
Secretary, can you assure me that these 3 factors will be fully and
comprehensively considered in the final powered-lift SFAR?
Answer. In October 2024, the FAA published an advance copy of the
final rule, ``Integration of Powered-Lift: Pilot Certification and
Operations; Miscellaneous Amendments Related to Rotorcraft and
Airplanes.'' This final rule, promulgated in accordance with the
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, addresses the
requirements of section 955 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.
Further, it is FAA policy to conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Standards and Recommended Practices (SARP) to the
maximum extent possible. In the final rule, the FAA explained that its
approach conforms with the ICAO SARPs to the maximum extent practicable
and provides an equivalent level of safety that meets or exceeds the
ICAO standards. This includes leveraging the ICAO-accepted definition
of powered-lift and working with ICAO in the Advanced Air Mobility
Study Group to ensure the regulatory gaps are identified and addressed
in future ICAO Annexes.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Mike Ezell
Question 1. Recently I introduced H.R. 8505 along with
Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton to address the rampant fraud in the
supply chain that is costing stakeholders and consumers likely over a
billion dollars annually. While the Department of Transportation has
jurisdiction over this issue, there are antiquated internal systems and
procedures at the Department of Transportation that inhibit progress.
What strategy does the Department have in place to address rampant
fraud in the supply chain?
Answer. Though criminal actions are outside FMCSA's regulatory
authority, it is collaborating with other Federal agencies that may
have sufficient authority and investigatory resources to pursue freight
theft and fraud cases where possible. For example, because FMCSA lacks
criminal authority, it is required to refer suspected crimes such as
fraud to the Department's Office of Inspector General for further
investigation and potential criminal prosecution. FMCSA has been
actively working with the Office of Inspector General, as well as other
federal agencies, to identify ways to leverage resources to better
address fraudulent activity.
FMCSA formed an internal workgroup specifically targeted to work on
issues involving broker oversight (including steps to address unlawful
brokering) and compliance which FMCSA believes will assist in
preventing fraud in motor carrier transportation.
To address potential vulnerabilities in its Information Technology
systems, FMCSA continues its work on modernizing its registration
systems to improve the security of those systems. This is expected to
significantly increase the ability of FMCSA to thoroughly verify the
identity of registrants and the legitimacy of the businesses of motor
carriers and brokers being registered. This will greatly aid FMCSA and
the Department in closing pathways that criminal entities currently use
to obtain operating authority and/or unlawfully use the identity of
legitimate carriers and brokers for freight fraud and theft purposes.
Question 2. What steps have you taken to improve infrastructure at
land ports of entry to accommodate 21st-century trade across our
nation's northern and southern borders?
Answer. DOT continues to cooperate with the Department of Homeland
Security, the General Services Administration, the Department of State,
and others to plan coordinated infrastructure investments and
operations. This includes investments at 26 land ports of entry (LPOEs)
which received funding via the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and
support of the interagency Presidential Permitting process.
The FHWA continues to co-chair the Joint Working Committee on
Transportation Planning with the Government of Mexico, which drives the
creation of ``Border Master Plans'' that U.S. southern border states
developed in partnership with their Mexican state counterparts. These
plans help U.S. states anticipate their use of Title 23, United States
Code funding for future road infrastructure leading to LPOEs.
Similarly, FHWA continues to co-chair the Transportation Border Working
Group with the Government of Canada and leads the development of a
Border Infrastructure Improvement Plan (BIIP). The BIIP helps U.S.
states and Canadian provinces better understand current volume of
operations across borders and plan for future requirements.
The Department also continues to use its discretionary grant
programs to advance its LPOE improvement goals. For example, on the
FY24 INFRA Grant awards, DOT awarded $25 million to support repairs to
the Alaska Highway, a corridor in the Canadian Yukon Territory leading
to Alaska's primary LPOE with Canada. In FY22, DOT awarded the largest
INFRA grant that year--worth $150 million--to the San Diego Association
of Governments to fund construction of the new Otay Mesa East LPOE.
This LPOE will reduce wait times and allow more commercial vehicles to
transit the U.S.-Mexico border with positive economic impacts for the
region.
DOT is also providing technical assistance support to 4 LPOEs
through our Thriving Communities Program. This includes helping these
communities access federal funds for critical transportation projects
in Douglas and San Luis, AZ; Brownsville, TX; and Sumas, WA, and to
strengthen coordination with other federal agencies to support related
investments needed in housing, economic development, and other types of
infrastructure.
Question 3. Following your answers in committee, can you further
elaborate on the following:
Question 3.a. How the DOT evaluates and prioritizes the critical
need for strategic seaports to support our military when ranking PIDP
applications;
Answer. The Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) announcing the
availability of discretionary grant funding for the FY 2024 Port
Infrastructure Development Program adds a definition of ``strategic
seaport'' and clarifies, as provided in Section 3514 of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024, that the Department may
give priority to projects at strategic seaports in support of national
security requirements. As provided for in the NOFO, we will consider
the status of an applicant as a strategic seaport and the extent to
which the project proposed by the applicant supports national security
requirements in making PIDP grants.
Question 3.b. What you have done to coordinate with the state of
Mississippi's agencies to prepare for the upcoming hurricane season;
Answer. To prepare for this hurricane season, DOT's Regional
Emergency Transportation Representative (RETREP) for Region IV, which
includes Mississippi, has taken several key steps. We conducted
comprehensive Transportation training for our Regional Emergency
Transportation Cadre (RET-C) in June and July to ensure their readiness
for deployment. These highly trained experts are ready to be activated
during incidents. We are also coordinating with Mississippi state staff
to update our contact list and discuss further collaboration.
Additionally, we will continue utilizing established coordination calls
to maintain real-time communication with Mississippi, and other states.
Question 3.c. If DOT plans to mandate a forced phase in overtime of
electric vehicles or continue to allow transit systems to determine
what type of alternative fuel technologies work best for them;
Answer. Local transit agencies identify and determine the type of
propulsion system that best meets an agency's and community's needs.
Question 3.d. Why you requested half of what you requested in FY
2024 for FY 2025 CRISI grants; and
Answer. The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 set government-wide
discretionary budget caps for Fiscal Years 2024 and 2025. The target
for FY 2024 was approximately equal to FY 2023, and the FY 2025 target
was 1 percent higher than FY 2024. In order to maintain investments in
the Department's critical safety mission and ensure implementation of
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) was not hindered, the FY 2025
President's Budget makes reductions to discretionary grant programs
that also receive funding under the BIL, including CRISI. The
Department found that our appropriations committees made similar trade-
offs in meeting the caps required for FY 2024 and the initial markups
for the FY 2025 appropriations process.
The FY 2025 President's Budget requests $250 million for CRISI
compared to the FY 2024 President's Budget request for $510 million.
The proposed reduction in FY 2025 should not be misconstrued as a lack
of support for CRISI--or other highly successful and oversubscribed
programs that also saw reduced requests--but rather a necessary trade-
off under challenging budget conditions. The $250 million request for
FY 2025 is also in addition to the $1 billion advance appropriation
provided to CRISI under BIL, bringing the total proposed FY 2025 CRISI
resources to $1.25 billion.
Question 3.e. What steps you are putting in place to assist state
DOTs to allow ample time to obligate funds during the August
redistribution.
Answer. FHWA engaged in early and consistent outreach to states on
August Redistribution to help them plan for another large
redistribution in FY 2024. In May 2024, FHWA notified states of their
share of an updated estimate of $8.7 billion for the FY 2024 August
Redistribution for planning purposes.
FHWA has taken steps to speed up project delivery and is working to
reduce the time it takes to process grant agreements from award
announcement to obligation, including obligation of discretionary grant
funds that are subject to obligation limitation. This will lower the
amount of obligation limitation redistributed each fiscal year. FHWA
Division Offices collaborated with State DOTs to identify potential
projects, obligate discretionary grant funding, and utilize planning
and programming flexibilities. Additionally, FHWA worked closely with
FTA to determine transit capital activities that were ready for
obligation as an option of transferring funds to FTA for eligible
transit projects and coordinated with FTA to transfer funding late into
September to provide maximum flexibility. For FY 2024, states requested
approximately $9 billion of additional formula obligation limitation
under August Redistribution, an amount that exceeded the amount of
obligation limitation returned for redistribution. On August 27, 2024,
FHWA successfully redistributed approximately $8.7 billion in
obligation limitation to the states. The formal process for the next
August Redistribution will commence in July 2025.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Rick Larsen
Question 1. Secretary Buttigieg, USDOT has played an essential
leadership role in the development of sustainable aviation fuels
through the SAF Grand Challenge. However, just as important is the
development of sustainable maritime fuels, which need a whole of
government approach to not only push forward on implementation but also
to identify which of several zero-emission fuel alternatives will
emerge as the leading option. How does USDOT see its role in a parallel
``grand challenge'' effort on sustainable maritime fuels?
Answer. Recognizing the maritime sector is comprised of various
vessel sizes and engine requirements, multiple low carbon fuels and
technologies will be required to meet decarbonization goals. For
example, fuels that may work for a tugboat may not necessarily work for
a large oceangoing vessel. Fuel research/development is primarily being
conducted by the Department of Energy (DOE). At DOT, the Maritime
Administration (MARAD) supports such research through the Maritime
Environmental and Technical Assistance (META) program. Under META,
MARAD has been partnering with the DOE and National Laboratories to
test and demonstrate a range of low carbon, alternative fuels for
various maritime vessel applications. Tangentially, along with
identifying what fuels work for specific applications, other challenges
need to be addressed such as the availability of marine engines
designed to use low carbon fuels, ample supply of low carbon fuels, and
sufficient infrastructure. In addition to research, MARAD's META
program supports policy efforts such as the DOE-led Mission Innovation:
Zero Emission Shipping Mission, multiple green corridor efforts, and
representatives from the META program serve on the U.S. Delegation to
the International Maritime Organization.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Steve Cohen
Question 1. The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA) requires the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) to finalize a rule for the Honoring Abbas Family Legacy to
Terminate Drunk Driving (HALT) Act by November of this year that would
require technology that would passively detect illegal impairment, a
provision that when implemented could save 10,000 lives per year.
Is NHTSA on track to complete that rule by the deadline?
Answer. NHTSA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
for Advanced Impaired Driving Prevention Technology on January 5, 2024,
and received more than 18,000 public comments. NHTSA is currently
reviewing these comments. If the agency is unable to meet the
rulemaking deadline, NHTSA will submit a report to Congress explaining
(among other things) the reasons for not issuing a final rule, as
required by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
NHTSA continues to evaluate technologies and their potential to
detect alcohol-based driving impairment. Significant progress has been
made on the development of vehicle systems to passively detect
impairment, but they are not yet equipped on vehicles offered for sale
to the public. Further, these technologies are not expected to be
introduced into the new vehicle fleet until 2025 or after. NHTSA plans
to evaluate the effectiveness of in-vehicle production systems,
including potential unintended consequences, and develop minimum
performance standards and test procedures pursuant to requirements of
the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, prior to issuing a final rule.
Question 2. In its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM),
NHTSA stated the need for personal privacy considerations that monitor
driver behavior or condition.
What additional information can you share that will ensure advanced
impaired driving prevention technology will stop drunk driving,
potentially saving 10,000 lives every year, while also protecting the
privacy and data of individuals?
Answer. NHTSA continues to consider the significant safety
potential for impaired driving prevention technology to passively and
accurately detect drunk driving, while also avoiding unintended safety
consequences and protecting the privacy and data of individuals. NHTSA
received more than 18,000 public comments to the Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking for Advanced Impaired Driving Prevention
Technology, published on January 5, 2024. The Agency is currently
evaluating those comments, including those focused on privacy.
Question 3. Some individuals have incorrectly stated that the
rulemaking would require vehicles to have a ``kill switch'' that would
allow law enforcement or third-party actors to remotely disable
vehicles. The language in the bipartisan IIJA specifically directs for
the vehicle to prevent movement if ``illegal impairment'' of a driver
is detected.
Is it NHTSA's intent to include in the final rulemaking a
technology that would allow for such a kill switch?
Answer. Section 24220 of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)
directs NHTSA to issue a final rule establishing an FMVSS that requires
new passenger vehicles to have ``advanced drunk and impaired driving
prevention technology.'' IIJA defines this as technology that can
passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to
accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired and/or
passively and accurately detect whether the blood alcohol concentration
of a driver is above the figure specified in section 163(a) of title
23, United States Code (U.S.C.), and prevent or limit motor vehicle
operation if such a detection is made. NHTSA is evaluating the public
comments received in response to the Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, published on January 5, 2024, and will issue a proposal
that will be open to public comment before a rule is finalized.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. John Garamendi
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, I also want to draw your attention to
yet another outdated general waiver of ``Buy America'' requirements in
your Department. Since 1978, Congress has required that all steel
products used in projects funded by the Federal Highway Administration
be sourced domestically, when available in sufficient quantity and of
satisfactory quality. However, the Federal Highway Administration
waived ``Buy America'' requirements for ferry boat equipment and
machinery made from steel in 1994.
Will you commit to examine this 1994 waiver of ``Buy America''
requirements for public ferry systems and consider repealing it?
Answer. DOT and FHWA are committed to reviewing all of our existing
general waivers, as required by section 70914(d) of the Build America,
Buy America Act (BABA). Consistent with the direction provided by
Congress in the BABA statute, we intend to review product-specific
general applicability waivers, including the FHWA waiver for ferryboat
parts that you mention, and determine what, if any, action is required.
Question 2. In 2019, I worked with former Chairman DeFazio, Senator
John Cornyn (R-TX), and others to shut out Chinese state-controlled
enterprises that make rolling stock in mainland China and then
reassemble knock-down kits in the United States from federal transit
funding. With the China Railway Construction Corporation (CRCC) and BYD
bus maker now banned from receiving Federal Transit Administration
dollars, I was concerned those Chinese rolling stock manufacturers
could pivot to selling their low-quality railcars and buses to
federally funded airport improvement projects. The bipartisan FAA
Reauthorization signed into law by President Biden this past May
included my ``Airport Infrastructure Vehicle Security Act'' (H.R.2912)
with Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA14). This applied the stronger
``Buy America'' requirements for federal transit funding to rolling
stock procured with federal airport improvement grants.
Mr. Secretary, will you ensure that the FAA fully enforces these
stronger ``Buy America'' requirements for rolling stock, so that
federally funded buses and trams at U.S. airports are made in the
United States by skilled American workers and not by Chinese state-
controlled enterprises?
Answer. The Department takes its oversight role in the
implementation of transportation laws seriously, and is currently
working on executing the bipartisan FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
that was signed into law this May. FAA is committed to enforcing the
Airport Infrastructure Vehicle Security Act requirements for rolling
stock that you cite.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Dina Titus
Question 1. The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern
Nevada is my district's public transit agency. It serves over 2.3
million residents and operates the 14th busiest bus system in the
United States, transporting over 50 million passengers last year. In
order to enhance rider safety, they have adopted AI technologies
including for quickly detecting high-risk traffic incidents and
integrating transit feeds for proactive service adjustments.
Considering advancements in AI, does DOT have plans to support
investments in similar technological solutions nationwide to increase
rider safety and security?
Answer. On August 9, 2023, FTA announced a grant for $500,000 under
a cooperative agreement with the University of South Florida for a
research project to help transit agencies address transit worker and
rider assaults. The project will identify public safety risks for
transit workers and riders, determine the most effective mitigation
strategies to minimize those risks, and promote the implementation of
those strategies. FTA also continues to assess the utility of AI to
address worker safety such as monitoring real-time video at transit
stations. This will continue to be an area of research inquiry.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Mark DeSaulnier
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law, my bill the Clean Corridors Act was passed and established the
Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Grant Program. Can you share more
on its implementation and how else we can support the expansion of
electric vehicle charging across the country?
Answer. On March 14, 2023, FHWA announced its Round 1 Notice of
Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure
(CFI) Discretionary Grant Program. This round of funding from fiscal
years 2022 and 2023 was made available to strategically deploy electric
vehicle (EV) charging and other alternative fueling infrastructure
projects in publicly accessible locations in urban and rural
communities, as well as along designated Alternative Fuel Corridors
(AFCs). On January 11, 2024, FHWA announced $623 million in grants
under the CFI Program to help build out an EV charging network across
the U.S., which will create American jobs and ensure more drivers can
charge their EVs where they live, work, and shop. The awards will fund
47 EV charging and alternative-fueling infrastructure projects in 22
States and Puerto Rico, including construction of approximately 7,500
EV charging ports. On August 27, 2024, FHWA announced $521 million in
additional grants under the first round NOFO to fund the deployment of
more than 9,200 EV charging ports across 29 States.
On May 30, 2024, FHWA released its Round 2 NOFO for the CFI Program
to solicit applications. In addition, funds under the National Electric
Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program 10 percent set-aside will
also be awarded under this NOFO. The NOFO released on May 30, 2024,
also announced FHWA's intention to make additional awards for
applications submitted under the Round 1 NOFO. Round 2 applications
were due by September 11, 2024, and they are currently under review.
Collectively, the NOFO issued on May 30, 2024, represents the largest
single grant funding opportunity for EV charging in the nation's
history, making up to $1.3 billion available for projects that will
accelerate public and private investment in clean transportation.
Question 2.a. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation
Reduction Act also provided significant funding for renewable energy
and fuel. This is expected to lead to a significant increase in jobs in
clean energy in the next decade. How can we further support this
funding to ensure the workforce gets the help they need to transition
towards these new and expanding industry fields?
Answer. DOT has prioritized the creation of good jobs and workforce
training opportunities in all of our funding vehicles. For the vast
majority of programs, including those that are funding clean energy
projects, applicants are asked to address how they are training their
project workforce. As examples, DOT has also made it clear how FHWA
formula funds can be used for workforce development, as well as CRISI
grants and FTA low/no bus facilities programs. DOT has taken an
expansive view of workforce development that includes transportation,
childcare, and other supportive services that workers need during
training. Transportation agencies are taking advantage of these
opportunities.
Several states, including California, Maryland, and Pennsylvania,
have announced new ways to use FHWA funding for workforce development.
Each year more funding has been spent from CRISI grants on workforce
development. The FTA low/no bus and bus facilities program has heavily
encouraged applicants to take full advantage of the 5 percent set
aside, leading to $140 million dedicated to workforce development in
this program alone.
Question 2.b. In particular, I have heard that due to the mass
layoffs and early retirements during the Trump Administration, many
agencies are still understaffed. How can we help support these
agencies, in addition to understaffing at the state and local levels,
that might slow rollout of funding or implementation of new policy
programs?
Answer. Since the passing of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the
Department of Transportation has steadily increased its hiring and
onboard strength, with over 5,600 employees hired in Fiscal Year (FY)
2024. In fact, at the end of FY 2024 DOT had more than 57,000
employees, the most it has had in over 10 years. At the Operating
Administration (OA) level, all OAs saw an increase in the number of
employees onboard in FY 2024 as compared to FY 2023.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Greg Stanton
Question 1. Secretary Buttigieg, section 912 of the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 requires the Office of the Secretary to,
not later than 270 days after enactment, establish a Department of
Transportation program to provide competitive grants to state, local
and tribal governments to use small drones to help address the backlog
in critical infrastructure inspections in the United States.
This language enjoyed bipartisan support in both the House and
Senate and will help make critical infrastructure inspections safer for
workers and more efficient for the users of the critical
infrastructure.
What steps has the USDOT taken to establish the Drone
Infrastructure Inspection Grant (DIIG) program and will you commit to
this Committee to meet or exceed the statutory deadline to establish
the DIIG program?
Answer. Infrastructure inspection using safe and reliable,
domestically produced drones presents a way to better ensure the safety
and stability of the national infrastructure and to enable economic
benefits of drones. These inspections can and do happen across the
country today under 14 CFR Part 107 line of sight operations. The
Department has Part 107 licensed pilots using drones to inspect
critical highway infrastructure. The Department appreciates Congress'
support in developing this capability through provisions in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 (Pub. L. 118-63, May 16, 2024) that would
enable the FAA to inspect its own infrastructure and a manage grant
program for state governments to establish their own drone inspection
programs. While this new program introduces important requirements, it
has not yet received appropriations sufficient to fully implement them.
We look forward to collaborating with Congress to ensure that adequate
funding is secured for all new programs mandated by the
Reauthorization. The Department is fully committed to meeting the
legislative requirements for this and all provisions of the FAA
Reauthorization. We are currently developing a management strategy that
will allow us to implement the infrastructure inspection program to the
best of our ability, despite competing priorities and financial
constraints.
Question 2. Mr. Secretary, I advanced two Arizonans, including a
tribal member, to serve on the working group for covered resources
created by my ROCKS Act.
Included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) was bipartisan
legislation, the ROCKS Act, I led that establishes a working group at
DOT to examine and draft policies to ensure we have sustainable access
to construction materials. My home state of Arizona has led the way in
enacting such policies that keep prices low and ensure more sustainable
options are available as we work to build the infrastructure funded by
the BIL.
I understand the list of individuals to serve on the group is
pending your review. When can we expect the members of this group to be
named?
Answer. FHWA published a notice in the Federal Register soliciting
membership to the Working Group on January 9, 2024. The deadline for
nominations was March 11, 2024. We are currently reviewing the
nominations in accordance with section 11526 of the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, the Federal Advisory Committee Act (chapter 10 of
title 5, United States Code), and the published notice. We expect to
announce the membership in the near future.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Sharice Davids
Question 1. I want to commend you on your recent budget proposal
which contained $8 billion over 5 years in additional guaranteed Trust
Fund spending for Federal Aviation Administration facilities and
equipment. As you know, other programs, like surface Transportation
Contract Authority, the Harbor Maintenance Fund and the Airport
Improvement Program already have this authority. Can you describe why
this proposal is critical to maintain and upgrading the Federal
Aviation Administration's aging facilities?
Answer. The FAA shoulders the crucial responsibility of overseeing
the infrastructure of a vast network of nearly 350 air traffic control
towers (ATCT) and terminal radar approach control (TRACON) facilities,
in addition to managing 21 air route traffic control centers (ARTCC).
Re-capitalization is necessary to sustain safe and efficient National
Airspace System (NAS) operations in the decades to come. A failure to
replace facilities and modernize radar networks in a timely manner will
degrade FAA's capacity to keep pace with the aviation economy and
undermine opportunities to improve safety.
Facilities: The FAA confronts a pressing challenge--aging
buildings. Air traffic control facilities have chronic issues that
cannot be resolved through maintenance or sustainment work. These
issues include water leaks, mold, tower cab window condensation,
deterioration due to old designs, and general disrepair. Drivers for
replacement include material degradation; deficiencies in building code
compliance; and poor insulation and energy efficiency. As the age of
these facilities continues to rise, these types of issues will grow
exponentially. Air traffic controllers must have safe and secure towers
to effectively manage and ensure the safety of air traffic. Replacement
of these structures will provide the new standard in construction,
health, safety, and operational efficiency.
Many of the FAA's facilities are large and complex, often requiring
expensive and lengthy replacement efforts. Due to their size, costs are
typically spread out across multiple fiscal years and the instability
of annual appropriations can make it difficult to commit funding to
such projects. By proposing a new stream of funding over the next five
years, the FAA's proposal offers an opportunity to replace at least 20
of these aging facilities.
Radar Systems: The FAA's plan also focuses on the timely and
strategic modernization of surveillance radars. Airports use these
radars to detect and display the presence and position of aircraft in
the terminal area as well as the airspace around airports. The aging
radars pose a significant challenge for air traffic management. As
these radar systems age, they are more prone to technological
obsolescence, making it increasingly difficult to maintain their
performance and integrate them with modern aviation infrastructure. The
potential for increased downtime due to repairs can negatively impact
airport operations and compromise the efficiency of air traffic
control. Moreover, aging radar systems struggle to keep pace with the
growing demands of air travel and evolving regulatory standards. To
address these challenges, this plan invests in the replacement of
radars opting for new technologies that offer improved performance,
enhanced reliability, and compatibility with the latest air traffic
management initiatives.
The FAA maintains 618 radar systems across the nation. These
systems, deployed across many decades, are a critical tool used by air
traffic controllers to safely and efficiently manage air traffic.
Modern aviation could not exist without these radar systems. In
addition to the re-capitalization of air traffic control facilities
discussed above, this proposal will allow the FAA to replace and
modernize 60 percent of its radars by 2031.
FAA radar systems provide safety critical information to air
traffic controllers, including an aircraft's position and identity as
well as weather information. FAA radar systems provide a backup to
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast information, providing
essential information in the event of Global Positioning System (GPS)
degradation. This information is also essential for homeland security
and national defense missions. As FAA radar systems exceed their
intended lifespan, outages increase in frequency and duration, and
service restoration becomes more difficult as antiquated components
become increasingly difficult to obtain. The absence of critical
aircraft position and identity information increases the risk of
airborne collision and results in increased separation requirements,
reducing operational efficiency.
Question 2. One of FAA's most successful and cost-effective
government/industry partnerships for taxpayers is the FAA Contract
Tower Program. There are 264 airports in the program, including New
Century AirCenter and Johnson County Executive Airport in my district.
This critical air traffic safety program supports general aviation
operations, U.S. Department of Defense flight training operations and
military readiness, commercial air service, and flight schools across
the country. Contract towers continue to get high marks from the U.S.
Department of Transportation Inspector General and aviation users and
have strong bipartisan support. It's also important to note that
contract towers account for approximately one third of all tower
operations and about 70 percent of contract controllers are veterans.
Question 2.a. Can you describe the what priority contract towers
have for the U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation
Administration going forward?
Answer. The FAA remains committed to ensuring the continued success
of the Contract Tower Program. The FAA will continue to work with
stakeholders to strengthen communication and enhance transparency to
achieve mutual benefits.
Question 2.b. Staffing shortages also continue to be a challenge
throughout the industry, including contract towers. What measures can
we in government, the Federal Aviation Administration, and the industry
undertake to address staffing challenges at these towers in a
collaborative way?
Answer. Air traffic controller staffing shortages are at the
forefront of discussions in the FAA. The FAA exceeded its goal of
hiring 1,800 air traffic controllers in 2024, with a final total of
1,811 for Fiscal Year 2024. As the largest number of hires in nearly a
decade, this marks important progress in the FAA's work to reverse the
decades-long air traffic controller staffing level decline.
Staffing remains a priority for the FAA, and we are actively
working on ways to sustain it to maintain the safety of the operation.
The FAA has met with industry leaders to discuss possible solutions and
is committed to exploring all available options to ensure the continued
success of the FAA Contract Tower Program.
With the launch of the Enhanced Air Traffic Collegiate Training
Initiative (E-CTI), the FAA instituted changes to FAA Order JO7210.3,
which allows Federal Contract Towers (FCTs) to hire individuals who
have graduated with an E-CTI endorsement. This is a new hiring pathway
for FCTs that currently only hire controllers with previous experience
in the FAA or military. E-CTI graduates are trainees with no previous
experience, thus FCTs will need to provide more robust field
qualification training in accordance with FAA Order JO3120.4.
Question 3.a. As you are likely aware, I have worked for years,
along with other members of the House, to expedite the installation of
new and updated navaid systems throughout the National Airspace. Can
you please provide an update on the Federal Aviation Administration's
schedule for deploying these devices?
Answer. The FAA deploys new and updated navigation aid systems such
as the Instrument Landing System (ILS) and Medium Intensity Approach
Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR). The FAA
has been able to utilize a combination of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
and Landing and Lighting Portfolio funding to greatly increase the
amount of installation projects under the ILS Program and MALSR Service
Life Extension Program (SLEP) compared to previous years.
For ILS installations, there are currently 20 active projects
planned to be completed by 2030, with 7 projects expected to be
completed in the rest of CY2024.
For installations under the MALSR SLEP, there are currently 20
active projects planned to be completed by 2030, with 7 projects
expected to be completed in the rest of CY2024.
Question 3.b. As you may be aware, the Professional Aviation Safety
Specialists have a proposed pilot program for deploying these systems
in 18 months. To your knowledge, is the Federal Aviation Administration
considering this proposal?
Answer. The FAA is considering the Professional Aviation Safety
Specialists' (PASS) proposal. The FAA's Program Management Organization
and Technical Operations are coordinating with PASS regarding the
proposed pilot program.
Question 3.c. Can you share with the committee why you have
confidence in the Department's current plan, and why you believe that
these systems, which are already functionally obsolete, will be able to
reliably provide a safety-critical service when they are 100 years old?
Answer. There are no Instrument Landing System (ILS) systems in the
NAS anywhere near 100 years old. The FAA acknowledges the aging
navigation aid infrastructure; however, the agency has a navigation
strategy designed to replace the older systems first with the existing
ILS Contract. The FAA has begun to replace systems with modern ILS-420
technology.
The FAA also acknowledges the aging Medium Intensity Approach
Lighting System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR)
infrastructure, which is being addressed through the MALSR Service Life
Extension Program (SLEP) to replace obsolete components. The FAA is
prioritizing MALSR configurations for the SLEP that are experiencing
the greatest obsolescence and cost impact on the NAS.
Question 4. As you are likely aware, cargo theft is increasingly an
issue throughout the supply chain, especially for trucking and rail
shippers. The average cost of each stolen shipment can exceed $280,000,
but these thefts result in millions of dollars in financial losses to
large and small manufacturers, retailers and shippers, both in lost
product and the intentional and unintentional sale of stolen goods
through legitimate markets.
Question 4.a. To what extend is the U.S. Department of
Transportation aware of these increased rates of theft across the
transportation supply chain network?
Answer. The Department has heard from concerned rail and truck
shippers that increasing rates of theft are impacting their operations
and resulting in increased costs, both in terms of lost goods and
reduced efficiency from having to modify their operations in response.
Question 4.b. Can you elaborate on how the Department is
coordinating with relevant agencies and affected stakeholders to ensure
continued cargo theft doesn't continue to affect consumer costs?
Answer. Though criminal actions are outside FMCSA's regulatory
authority, it is collaborating with other Federal agencies that may
have sufficient authority and investigatory resources to pursue freight
theft and fraud cases where possible. For example, because FMCSA lacks
criminal authority, it is required to refer suspected crimes such as
fraud to the Department's Office of Inspector General for further
investigation and potential criminal prosecution. FMCSA has been
actively working with the Office of Inspector General, as well as other
federal agencies, to identify ways to leverage resources to better
address fraudulent activity.
FMCSA formed an internal workgroup specifically targeted to work on
issues involving broker oversight (including steps to address unlawful
brokering) and compliance which FMCSA believes will assist in
preventing fraud in motor carrier transportation.
To address potential vulnerabilities in its Information Technology
systems, FMCSA continues its work on modernizing its registration
systems to improve the security of those systems. This is expected to
significantly increase the ability of FMCSA to thoroughly verify the
identity of registrants and the legitimacy of the businesses of motor
carriers and brokers being registered. This will greatly aid FMCSA and
the Department in closing pathways that criminal entities currently use
to obtain operating authority and/or unlawfully use the identity of
legitimate carriers and brokers for freight fraud and theft purposes.
Question 5.a. As you may be aware, the U.S. is hosting games as a
part of the FIFA 2026 World Cup. To what extent is the U.S. Department
of Transportation involved in the coordination with U.S. host cities in
preparation for the influx of visitors our country will host?
Answer. DOT is actively working with Federal partners and
stakeholders as part of the White House-led whole-of-government effort
to coordinate successful ``Global Sports'' events like the World Cup.
The Department is interested in doing all we can to make sure that
America's hosting is smooth and successful. DOT has formed an internal
working group to better coordinate among our operating administrations
and is participating in regular meetings with FIFA and host city
organizers to coordinate on international, intercity, and intracity
transportation.
Question 5.b. To what extent, if any, have local partners
communicated potential needs to the Department?
Answer. During meetings with FIFA and host cities in 2024, DOT has
heard from organizers and local stakeholders about their priorities and
plans for delivering a successful World Cup. In July 2024, DOT
organized three regional convenings between DOT, FIFA, and the 11 U.S.
cities that FIFA has grouped into the West, Central, and East North
American regions for the 2026 World Cup. Some host cities have
requested and held individual meetings with DOT to discuss their
potential needs and priorities. Through all of these engagements, DOT
has been offering regular coordination, technical assistance for
federal projects, and referral to existing DOT discretionary grants and
formula funding sources.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Chris Pappas
Question 1. There were more than 160,000 large truck crashes
nationwide in 2022, with more than 5,000 of these occurring in my state
of New Hampshire. We know that one of the leading causes of large truck
crashes is driver fatigue, yet truckers are often forced to continue
driving beyond their allowed hours of service or park in unsafe
locations along the highway due to a shortage of safe and accessible
truck parking. In fact, 70% of drivers report having been forced to
violate federal hours of service rules due to the lack of truck
parking.
Increasing access to truck parking would support workforce
recruitment and retention and improve supply chain connectivity while
making our roadways safer. While I understand that the Federal Highway
Administration is seeking to conduct its third nationwide Jason's Law
truck parking survey to evaluate truck parking options, how else is the
Department planning to address the shortage of truck parking
nationwide?
Answer. FHWA released the Truck Parking Development Handbook in
September 2022 to help states and localities consider truck parking
needs and to design safe truck parking projects that will benefit
drivers and local communities. DOT also convened a meeting of the
National Coalition on Truck Parking in the fall of 2022 to highlight
these opportunities and best practices in truck parking. FHWA convened
another meeting of the National Coalition on Truck Parking in December
2023. The workshop focused on DOT modal commitments towards reducing
our Nation's truck parking shortage and improving safety. DOT continues
to raise the need for public investment in truck parking and has
supported it by selecting truck parking projects for discretionary
funding.
FHWA also continues to facilitate truck parking workshops for
states, State Freight Advisory Committees, metropolitan planning
organizations, and corridor coalitions across the country to support
collaboration on solutions to address truck parking issues. FHWA has a
free National Highway Institute Truck Parking Training Course (FHWA-
NHI-139014 \1\) available. The course is designed for a broad range of
stakeholders, including planners, managers, and analysts within a
public sector transportation agency such as a State DOT or
metropolitan/regional planning organization as well as locally elected
administrators, economic development officials and terminal operators
such as air cargo and marine ports. Others who may benefit from the
course include private sector personnel (e.g., truck stop operators,
private industry truck stop operators, motor carriers and state
trucking associations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/course-
search?tab=0&key=truck%20parking&sf=0&course_
no=139014
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy and FHWA
are coordinating on the review and approval of State Freight Plans,
which now must include analysis of truck parking needs as required
under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. FHWA guidance makes clear that
National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) and other Federal-aid highway
program funds can be used for truck parking projects. However, states,
in collaboration with State Freight Advisory Committees (where they
have been stood up), decide whether to use NHFP funding for truck
parking or any other eligible project.
Question 2. While the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
authorized grants to support truck parking projects, these funds aren't
exclusively dedicated to that purpose. States are now forced to make
difficult choices between truck parking and critical infrastructure
projects.
How else can the Department support states looking to submit
applications for truck parking grants to increase their likelihood of
success?
Answer. FHWA coordinates with FMCSA, MARAD, FRA, the Office of
Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy, and the Office of the
Secretary to promote the use of Federal-aid highway funding and
discretionary grant funding for public sector applicants to develop
truck parking projects. Guidance on eligible funding was released in
September 2022, widely distributed, and posted to the FHWA website
through a memorandum on the Eligibility of Title 23 and Title 49
Federal Funds for Commercial Motor Vehicle Parking.\2\ The Department
encourages states to develop a plan outlining existing safety risks
around the shortage of truck parking and identifying strategies to
improve commercial driver safety through the expansion of truck parking
facilities in their State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/infrastructure/truck_parking/
title23fundscmv/title23_
49_funds_cmv.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DOT Navigator \3\ is another new resource to help communities
understand the best ways to apply for grants, and to plan for and
deliver transformative infrastructure projects and services, and the
DOT Discretionary Grants Dashboard \4\ helps communities identify
discretionary grant opportunities that can aid in meeting their
transportation infrastructure needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.transportation.gov/dot-navigator
\4\ https://www.transportation.gov/grants/dashboard
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FMCSA has a Grants Resource Center \5\ to search for trainings,
guidance, tools, and more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/Grants/ResourceCenter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOT and its modal administrations take every opportunity to
publicize the use of grants for truck parking projects and to
demonstrate how states and other recipients are using these funds for
truck parking to encourage others who may be interested to replicate or
make use of the grants as well. For example, FMCSA funds truck parking
information systems and research through its HP-CMV and HP-ITD grants
and has been working with recipients like states and universities to
highlight the projects for other states and stakeholders via forums
such as the Transportation Research Board, the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials, HP-ITD Program Manager
Meetings, the National Coalition on Truck Parking, and other meetings.
This has helped demonstrate to other states, for example, how to use
the funding for truck parking successfully.
Question 3. Thank you for your comments during last month's hearing
on the End DWI Act and the importance of ignition interlock devices.
These public safety devices currently must be authorized by state law
and are required by 24 states and the District of Columbia to prevent
repeat offenders. NHTSA and the CDC recognize ignition interlocks as
one of the most effective countermeasures to prevent impaired driving.
As you know, this technology is distinct from the Advanced Impaired
Driving Technology that the DOT recently completed a federal rulemaking
on.
With the knowledge that the rulemaking process for the Advanced
Impaired Driving Technology is still ongoing, does DOT plan to address
this urgent safety issue in the short term by utilizing ignition
interlock devices?
Answer. Currently, ignition interlock devices are after-market
devices installed in a motor vehicle to prevent a driver from operating
the vehicle if the driver has been drinking. While NHTSA's existing
authorities preclude regulation of after-market devices, to date, all
states have enacted legislation that either require or permit courts to
order the use of breath alcohol ignition interlock devices for
individuals convicted of driving under the influence.
NHTSA conducted research into performance-based interlocks designed
to prevent a drunk driver from starting the vehicle. To assist states
in their administration of interlock programs, NHTSA published
guidelines that include model specifications for interlock devices.
NHTSA has also published an ignition interlock toolkit, a program guide
on key features for ignition interlock programs, and various case
studies and evaluation reports.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Marilyn Strickland
Question 1. I appreciate that the Department of Transportation
earlier this year designated Cascadia under its Corridor ID program to
support the project's development. At the time of the award, Federal
Railroad Administrator Bose said this program would provide the
necessary tools to advance the project. Since the beginning of the
year, the Washington State Department of Transportation and the Federal
Railroad Administration have been working collaboratively towards an
award for project planning development. The Washington State Department
of Transportation is ready to move into Step 2 of the program, however,
reaching agreement on the scope of work and funding amount is taking
too long.
Can you give me your commitment to work with me to make sure my
state receives the support it needs from the Federal Railroad
Administration and the Department of Transportation to ensure the
project can continue to move forward?
Answer. Yes. The U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal
Railroad Administration have been, and are committed to continuing,
working with the Washington State Department of Transportation at both
the staff and senior leadership levels towards advancing this important
project into Step 2 of the program, which is completion of the Service
Development Plan (SDP). Upon successful completion of a SDP and
dependent on funding availability, corridor sponsors may then enter
into grant agreements for environmental review and preliminary
engineering for projects identified in the corridor's SDP.
Question 2. In the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development
Senate Appropriations Report Language, there was language about
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) asking the Federal Highway
Administration to provide guidance on (1) TDM strategies are eligible
for Federal-aid highway funds, (2) ways to develop best practices, and
(3) additional technical assistance to State Department of
Transportation, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and local
governments to incentivize the use of TDM.
Will the Department of Transportation use its authority to act on
this report language regarding TDM?
Answer. DOT is advancing the development of guidance, planning,
case studies, and research in the application and design of active
transportation and demand management (ATDM) approaches. In addition,
FHWA's ATDM program provides lessons learned, standards, and best
practices on key underlying ATDM planning, evaluation, analysis
techniques and design elements that serve as a foundation for ATDM
implementation. FHWA also provides technical assistance to make aware
and inform State and local planning and transportation entities about
various TDM strategies that may address safety and mobility performance
when evaluating transportation improvements.
Questions to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Troy A. Carter
Question 1. Mr. Secretary, I want to thank you for the historic
infrastructure investments made in southeast Louisiana from the
Department of Transportation through programs funded by the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, including:
$300 million to the Port of New Orleans for construction
of a new container terminal
$178 million award to re-establish passenger rail from
New Orleans toMobile for the first time since Hurricane Katrina damaged
the line nearly 20years ago
Over $100 million total to the New Orleans Regional
Transit Authority to construct a new downtown transit center, a new
passenger ferry terminal, andnew electric buses and charging
infrastructure, and
Over $20 million to design and construct train stations
in Baton Rouge and Gonzales to advance passenger rail in south
Louisiana.
These investments, among many other Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
funded projects, will be transformational for my district in helping us
reduce our air pollution, increase our resilience to the impacts of the
climate crisis, and create good-paying clean energy jobs.
I also want to commend you and the Department of Transportation for
your transparency, including keeping a public calendar of upcoming
funding opportunities and reviewing proposals and providing feedback to
applicants after funding decisions are made.
I mentioned earlier that the Port of New Orleans was awarded $300
million to support the construction of a new state-of-the-art container
terminal. Recently, however, it has been brought to my attention there
are concerns regarding cost increases due to proposed tariffs on ship-
to-shore cranes and other cargo handling equipment.
While I fully support the Administration's efforts to incentivize
and create a domestic manufacturing base for cargo handling equipment--
which is currently either non-existent or very limited--a new tariff,
if implemented improperly could have a substantial negative impact on
ports' abilities to meet growing cargo demand at their terminals.
Mr. Secretary, will your department work with me and this Committee
to study the effects proposed tariffs would have on equipment critical
for delivering goods through our ports?
Answer. DOT supports the Administration's efforts to curb unfair
trade practices in China in strategic industries such as the
manufacturing of Ship-to-Shore cranes. We will assist the Committee and
Port community as best we can while industry adjusts to any tariff
impacts.
Question 2. Another project of significance for my region is the
West Bank Rail Realignment project, which will add a new connecting
segment to an existing freight rail line, shortening the total length
of the corridor and moving freight train traffic from the existing
corridor, in the middle of residential Gretna, Louisiana. Local
officials have tried to relocate these tracks for nearly two decades,
and the situation is more dire now that LNG development in neighboring
Plaquemines Parish will increase train traffic through the area.
Question 2.a. Though the City of Gretna and its public and private
partners have identified matching funds, this project needs a strong
federal commitment to ensure its completion. Can you commit the
Department to continue to work with the City of Gretna to find funding
to make this project a reality?
Answer. In April 2023, FRA's Deputy Administrator personally
visited the site in Gretna with FRA staff to learn more about the
project.
FRA and DOT staff are available to assist potential and past
applicants who may seek funding under FRA or DOT grant programs. Prior
to publication of a NOFO, FRA and DOT staff are available to meet with
potential applicants, upon request, to provide technical assistance on
project and program eligibility. Due to the demand for federal funding
under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, some worthy projects may not
be selected. If an applicant is not selected for funding under a NOFO
for a FRA or DOT discretionary grant, the applicant may request a
debrief after selections are announced. During a requested debrief, the
applicant will have the opportunity to learn how they may improve their
application for a future NOFO.
I would also direct applicants to the Department's DOT Navigator
tool; a resource to help communities understand not only how to apply
for grants, but also which grant opportunities best fit their needs.
The DOT Discretionary Grants Dashboard also provides an overview of the
Department's grant opportunities, as well as other federal grant
programs that may be of interest to rural communities.
Question 2.b. The City of Gretna and their partners have applied
for several different DOT programs, including INFRA, CRISI, and
Reconnecting Communities without success. They currently have a CRISI
grant pending with FRA. What other funding opportunities should they
pursue for this project? Do you have any advice for the project to get
over the finish line utilizing federal funds?
Answer. See response above.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Robert Menendez
Question 1. The ability for drone operators to conduct beyond
visual line of sight (``BVLOS'') operations holds promise in addressing
critical challenges, such as reducing traffic congestion and lowering
carbon emissions. In the bipartisan FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024,
which was signed into law May 16, 2024, Congress provided direction to
the FAA to publish a draft BVLOS rule within 4 months of enactment and
a final rule 16 months thereafter. Working with my colleague Rep. Rudy
Yakym in introducing H.R. 3459, the Increasing Competitiveness for
American Drones Act, we successfully advocated for the inclusion of
language addressing BVLOS in the FAA bill and I have been a strong
proponent of the FAA making this rulemaking a priority. Can you provide
an update on the status of the BVLOS rule and any challenges you
anticipate in being able to meet the Congressionally-mandated deadline?
Answer. The FAA is working to publish the notice of proposed
rulemaking, ``Normalizing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Beyond Visual Line
of Sight Operations,'' which is expected to expedite the introduction
of BVLOS operations. In the meantime, the FAA has streamlined approval
processes for BVLOS operations approved through waivers or exemptions
and is working to exercise the flexibility provided in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 to enable more scalable BVLOS operations in
advance of rulemaking.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Hillary J. Scholten
Question 1. As you know, Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
regulations require that transit agencies conduct alcohol and drug
testing for their vehicle operators. Those regulations also task
agencies to use facilities certified by the Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) for oral testing. However, HHS has yet to certify
a single facility for such testing. Can you provide an update on when
HHS will certify facilities for alcohol and drug testing? Many agencies
in states where marijuana use is legal--including Michigan--are
struggling to oversee the timely and accurate testing of their
employees, exacerbating the labor shortage in the transit industry.
Thanks in advance for your thoughtful response.
Answer. Like with the other DOT operating administrations (FMCSA,
FAA, FRA, PHMSA), FTA-regulated employers are required to utilize HHS-
certified laboratories to comply with DOT's drug testing regulations.
DOT defers to HHS on providing an update on the certification of
laboratories to administer oral fluid testing protocols. However,
please be assured that HHS-certified urine drug testing laboratories
are providing timely and accurate testing and results to DOT-regulated
employers and that HHS is actively working with laboratories to bring
oral fluid testing online.
Question to Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary of Transportation, U.S.
Department of Transportation, from Hon. Christopher R. Deluzio
Question 1. One of the best ways to prevent derailments is with
inspections, like those done by the IBEW workers in Western
Pennsylvania. What is the Department of Transportation and the Federal
Railroad Administration doing to ensure that the Class I railroads are
properly inspecting and maintaining locomotives and rail cars?
Answer. Railroads are required to operate trains in compliance with
Federal safety standards, and are expected to have inspection, testing,
and maintenance programs to ensure compliance with those standards. FRA
monitors railroads for compliance with Federal safety requirements and
pursues enforcement action as necessary to ensure compliance. FRA's
enforcement tools include civil penalties, special notices for repairs
to remove cars from service, and orders directing compliance with any
or all of the safety standards covering railroad or hazardous materials
transportation safety.
FRA continues to push railroads to improve railroad safety through
its traditional enforcement and oversight activities. In the form of
inspection and audits, FRA conducts assessments of railroads' safety
culture, as well as systemwide audits of railroad operations and
focused inspections of equipment and infrastructure as appropriate,
including identifying any deficiencies in railroads' inspection,
testing, and maintenance programs.
In October 2024, FRA published a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) that seeks to enhance railroad track safety by requiring certain
railroads to supplement visual inspections by operating a Track
Geometry Measurement System (TGMS) at specified minimum frequencies on
certain types of track. TGMS technology, developed through an FRA-led
research effort in collaboration with the rail industry, has been
proven to quickly and accurately detect small changes in track
geometry, and this proposed rulemaking will codify a standard for TGMS
inspection frequencies to ensure that railroads live up to their safety
responsibilities, now and in the future.
Among other measures, FRA also issues Safety Advisories making
recommendations to the railroad industry, as well as more-immediate
safety bulletins that describe circumstances and facts related to
recent accidents/incidents that can be shared throughout the industry
at job briefings and safety stand-downs. In evaluating the railroads'
response to these recommendations, FRA speaks with railroad employees
to learn if the railroads have responded effectively, and FRA will take
additional action if deemed necessary.
[all]