    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                         AMERICA BUILDS: EXAMINING AMERICA'S
                         FREIGHT AND PASSENGER RAIL NETWORK

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

                                    (119-3)

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES,
                            AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

                                     OF THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                       TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                JANUARY 23, 2025

                                   __________

                           Printed for the use of the
                 Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

    [GRAPHICS 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
    59-680 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,
    Jerrold Nadler, New York               Vice Chairman
    Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Daniel Webster, Florida
    John Garamendi, California           Thomas Massie, Kentucky
    Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.,      Georgiaott Perry, Pennsylvania
    Andre Carson, Indiana                Brian Babin, Texas
    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        Pete Stauber, Minnesota
    Greg Stanton, Arizona                Tim Burchett, Tennessee
    Sharice Davids, Kansas               Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
    Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
    Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Troy E. Nehls, Texas
    Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Tracey Mann, Kansas
    Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Burgess Owens, Utah
    Patrick Ryan, New York               Eric Burlison, Missouri
    Val T. Hoyle, Oregon                 Mike Collins, Georgia
    Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio,           Mike Ezell, Mississippi
      Vice Ranking Member                Kevin Kiley, California
    Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan        Vince Fong, California
    Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Tony Wied, Wisconsin
    Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania Tom Barrett, Michigan
    Robert Garcia, California            Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska
    Nellie Pou, New Jersey               Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr.,
    Kristen McDonald Rivet, Michigan     Pennsylvania
    Laura Friedman, California           Jeff Hurd, Colorado
    Laura Gillen, New York               Jefferson Shreve, Indiana
    Shomari Figures, Alabama             Addison P. McDowell, North
                                         Carolina
                                         David J. Taylor, Ohio
                                         Brad Knott, North Carolina
                                         Kimberlyn King-Hinds,
                                           Northern Mariana Islands
                                         Mike Kennedy, Utah
                                         Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri
                                         Vacancy

         Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

     Daniel Webster, Florida, Chairman
    Dina Titus, Nevada, Ranking Member
    Andre Carson, Indiana                David Rouzer, North Carolina
    Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Mike Bost, Illinois
    Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Doug LaMalfa, California
    Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania,Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
      Vice Ranking Member                Pete Stauber, Minnesota
    Jerrold Nadler, New York             Tim Burchett, Tennessee
    Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
    Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Troy E. Nehls, Texas
    Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiaacey Mann, Kansas
    Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Burgess Owens, Utah
    Patrick Ryan, New York               Eric Burlison, Missouri
    Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio            Vince Fong, California
    Laura Friedman, California           Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska
    Mark DeSaulnier, California          Jefferson Shreve, Indiana
    Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) David J. Taylor, Ohio
                                         Mike Kennedy, Utah
                                         Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)

                                    CONTENTS

                                                                       Page

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

                     STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Hon. Daniel Webster, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Florida, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines,
      and Hazardous Materials, opening statement.....................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     2
    Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Nevada, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Railroads,
      Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, opening statement..........     3
        Prepared statement...........................................     4
    Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     7

                                   WITNESSES

    Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer, Association
      of American Railroads, oral statement..........................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    10
    Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line and Regional Railroad
      Association, oral statement....................................    17
        Prepared statement...........................................    19
    Joseph Daloisio III, Track Division Manager, Railroad
      Construction Company, Inc., and Chairman, National Railroad
      Construction and Maintenance Association, oral statement.......    30
        Prepared statement...........................................    32
    Jared Cassity, Deputy National Safety and Legislative Director,
      Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-
      Transportation Division (SMART-TD), oral statement.............    36
        Prepared statement...........................................    38

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Submissions for the Record by Hon. Daniel Webster:
        Statement of Rob Benedict, Vice President, Petrochemicals and
          Midstream, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers.....    85
        Statement of the Wabtec Corporation..........................    86
    Action Plan, ``An Action Plan for Rail Energy and Emissions
      Innovation,'' U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of
      Transportation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S.
      Department of Labor, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
      Development, December 2024, Submitted for the Record by Hon.
      Christopher R. Deluzio.........................................    89

                                    APPENDIX

    Questions to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive
      Officer, Association of American Railroads, from:
        Hon. Troy E. Nehls...........................................    91
        Hon. Christopher R. Deluzio..................................    92

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                January 17, 2025

        SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

        TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines,
    and Hazardous Materials
        FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and
    Hazardous Materials
        RE:      LSubcommittee Hearing on ``America Builds:
    Examining America's Freight and Passenger Rail Network''
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                   I. PURPOSE

        The Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous
    Materials will meet on Thursday, January 23, 2025, at 10:00
    a.m. ET in 2167 of the Rayburn House Office Building to receive
    testimony at a hearing entitled, ``America Builds: Examining
    America's Freight and Passenger Rail Network.'' The hearing
    will discuss passenger and freight issues and the state of the
    railroad industry, including potential legislative
    considerations for a surface reauthorization bill. At the
    hearing, Members will receive testimony from Ian Jefferies,
    President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Association of
    American Railroads; Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line
    and Regional Railroad Association; Joe Daloisio, Chairman,
    National Railroad Construction & Maintenance Association, and
    Jared Cassity, Alternate National Safety and Legislative
    Director, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation-Transportation
    Division (SMART-TD).

                                 II. BACKGROUND

        America's freight and intercity passenger railroad networks
    are essential for the movement of goods and people across the
    country. America's freight rail network consists of almost
    140,000 miles of track.\1\ Six Class I freight carriers and 603
    Class II and III (short line) railroads move roughly 1.6
    billion tons of goods each year.\2\ Amtrak is the Nation's
    primary passenger rail service and operates over roughly 21,000
    miles of track in 46 states, serving over 500 destinations.\3\
    In addition, there are approximately 30 commuter railroads in
    the United States, many operated by state or regional
    governmental authorities.\4\ The primary agency that oversees
    railroad safety and rail grant programs is the Federal Railroad
    Administration (FRA) within the Department of Transportation
    (DOT).\5\ Congress authorizes and appropriates funding for
    Federal discretionary grant programs to support freight and
    passenger rail service, some of which are described below.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Association of American Railroads, State Fact Sheets, available
    at https://www.aar.org/
    data-center/railroads-states/#::text=in%20Your%20State-
    ,Freight%20Rail%20in%20Your
    %20State,nearly%20140%2C000%20miles%20of%20track.
        \2\ Id.
        \3\ Amtrak, Amtrak Facts, available at https://www.amtrak.com/
    amtrak-facts#::text=
    With%2021%2C000%20route%20miles%20in,to%20more%20than%20500%20destinatio
    ns.
        \4\ American Public Transportation Association, How many commuter
    railroads are in the United States?, (Mar. 16, 2021), available at
    https://www.apta.com/faq-items/how-many-commuter-railroads-are-in-the-
    united-states/.
        \5\ Fed. Railroad Admin, About Us, available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/about-fra/about-fra.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       III. FEDERAL FUNDING FOR RAILROADS

    CONSOLIDATED RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (CRISI) GRANT
                        PROGRAM

        The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
    Improvements (CRISI) grant program was initially authorized in
    the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act in 2015
    (P.L. 114-94) and reauthorized in the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act (IIJA) (P.L. 117-58) in 2021.\6\ CRISI provides
    funding for privately and publicly-operated freight and
    intercity passenger rail projects, including those that
    ``improve railroad safety, efficiency, and reliability;
    mitigate congestion at both intercity passenger and freight
    rail chokepoints to support more efficient travel and goods
    movement . . . and lead to new or substantially improved
    Intercity Passenger Rail Transportation corridors.'' \7\
    Eligible applicants include individual states (and the District
    of Columbia), Federally-recognized Indian tribes, public
    agencies, Amtrak or other rail carriers providing intercity
    passenger rail transportation, and Class II and Class III
    freight railroads.\8\ The Federal cost share of a CRISI grant
    award cannot exceed 80 percent of the project cost, with the
    remaining funding comprising state/local government or private
    sector funding.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  22907.
        \7\ Notice of Funding Opportunity for the Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program, 87 Fed. Reg. 54278
    (Sept. 2, 2022), available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
    documents/2022/09/02/2022-19004/notice-of-funding-opportunity-for-the-
    consolidated-rail-infrastructure-and-safety-improvements.
        \8\ Id.
        \9\ United States Dep't of Transp., Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure & Safety Improvements (CRISI) Grant Program, available
    at https://www.transportation.gov/rural/grant-toolkit/consolidated-
    rail-infrastructure-safety-improvements-crisi-grant-program.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        IIJA funded CRISI at $5 billion over five years and
    subsequent annual appropriations bills have also included
    funding for this program.\10\ In September 2023, the FRA
    announced fiscal year (FY) 2022 CRISI awards totaling over $1.4
    billion for 70 projects, 10 of which fund intercity passenger
    rail projects.\11\ In October 2024, FRA announced FY 2023-2024
    awards totaling more than $2.4 billion for 122 projects.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  24911; see also Ben Goldman, Cong. Rsch. Serv.
    (IF11920), Passenger Rail Expansion in the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act (IIJA), (last updated Feb. 10, 2022), available at https:/
    /crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11920.
        \11\ United States Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin,
    Consolidated Rail Infrastructure Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program,
    (last updated Oct. 2, 2023), available at https://railroads.dot.gov/
    grants-loans/competitive-discretionary-grant-programs/consolidated-
    rail-infrastructure-and-safety-2.
        \12\ Press Release, United States Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad
    Admin, Investing in America: Biden-Harris Administration Announces $2.4
    Billion in New Rail Projects, (Oct. 29, 2024) available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/about-fra/communications/newsroom/press-releases/
    investing-america-biden-harris-administration-1.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AMTRAK GRANTS

        Amtrak receives annual grants from the Federal government.
    The FAST Act changed the authorization structure of Amtrak to
    provide appropriations based on service--Amtrak Northeast
    Corridor and Amtrak National Network grants--instead of two
    separate programs for operations and capital/debt service
    activities.\13\ In addition to annual appropriations grants,
    IIJA provides $22 billion in funding specifically to Amtrak in
    the form of advanced appropriations.\14\ The bill authorizes
    and appropriates over five years $102 billion for the FRA, and
    at least another $30 billion in discretionary multimodal grants
    for which freight rail, Amtrak, and other intercity passenger
    rail projects are eligible.\15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1662 at Sec. 11101.
        \14\ United States Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, 2022
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding Table, available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2022-02/
    Bipartisan%20Infrastructure%20Law%20Funding%20Table%20Jan2022.pdf.
        \15\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  6701 (noting the National Infrastructure
    Project Assistance, authorized at $5 billion and appropriated at $10
    billion over five years); see also 49 U.S.C. Sec.  6702 (noting the
    Local and Regional Project Assistance, authorized at $7.5 billion and
    appropriated at $7.5 billion over five years); see also 23 U.S.C. Sec.
    149; see also 49 U.S.C. Sec.  224, et seq.; see also 23 U.S.C. Sec.
    601, et seq. (describing two Federal loan programs that include this
    eligibility, Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing and
    Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FEDERAL-STATE PARTNERSHIP FOR INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL GRANT PROGRAM

        Sections 22106 and 22307 of IIJA authorize the Federal-
    State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail (FSP) Grant
    Program.\16\ Formerly the Federal State Partnership for States
    of Good Repair Grant program, this grant program was modified
    in the IIJA to not only provide funding for capital projects
    that reduce the state of good repair backlog, but that may also
    improve service performance and improve existing or establish
    new intercity passenger rail service, including privately
    operated passenger rail service.\17\ Eligible projects include
    projects to replace, rehabilitate, or repair infrastructure,
    equipment, or facilities used for providing intercity passenger
    rail service to bring assets into a state of good repair or to
    improve intercity passenger rail service performance; expand or
    establish new intercity passenger rail service; or for the
    planning, environmental review, and final design of an eligible
    project or group of projects.\18\ Eligible recipients include:
    an individual or group of states, including the District of
    Columbia, an Interstate Compact, a public agency or publicly
    chartered authority established by one or more states, a
    political subdivision of a state, Amtrak, a Federally
    recognized Indian Tribe or any combination of these
    entities.\19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Federal-State
    Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Grant Program, (last updated
    Nov. 6, 2023), available at https://railroads.dot.gov/federal-state-
    partnership-intercity-passenger.
        \17\ U.S. Dep't Of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Federal-State
    Partnership for State of Good Repair Grant Program (FY 2017-2021),
    available at https://railroads.dot.gov/grants-loans/federal-state-
    partnership-state-good-repair-grant-program-fy-2017-2021.
        \18\ Id.
        \19\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Because IIJA designated the majority of the advance
    appropriated funds for FSP for the Northeast Corridor and set
    out specific requirements for funding projects in this region,
    FRA issued two separate notices of funding opportunity (NOFO)
    to break out the Northeast Corridor funding from National
    Network funding.\20\ On November 6, 2023, FRA announced awards
    of $16.4 billion for 25 projects on the Northeast Corridor.\21\
    This amount, includes $7.4 billion in phased funding agreements
    authorized in the IIJA.\22\ On November 15, 2024, FRA announced
    an additional nearly $1.5 billion to 19 projects on the
    Northeast Corridor.\23\ On December 8, 2023, FRA announced $8.2
    billion for 10 projects on the National Network.\24\ On October
    1, 2024, FRA announced a NOFO for the National Network funding
    totaling over $1 billion.\25\ Applications were due in mid-
    December and are currently under review.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ Id.
        \21\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad
    Association, President Biden Advances Vision for World Class Passenger
    Rail with $16 Billion Investment in America's Busiest Corridor, (Nov.
    6, 2023), available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/
    files/2023-11/FRA%2011-23.pdf.
        \22\ Id.
        \23\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin,
    Investing in America: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Nearly $1.5
    Billion in Additional Upgrades to America's Busiest Rail Corridor,
    (Nov. 15, 2024) available at https://railroads.dot.gov/about-fra/
    communications/newsroom/press-releases/investing-america-biden-harris-
    administration-4.
        \24\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't Of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin,
    President Biden Announces $8.2 Billion in New Grants, (Dec. 8, 2023),
    available at https://railroads.dot.gov/about-fra/communications/
    newsroom/press-releases/president-biden-announces-82-billion-new-
    grants.
        \25\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin,
    Investing In America: Biden-Harris Administration Makes More Than $1
    Billion in Additional Funding Available to Support America's Passenger
    Rail Future, (Oct. 1, 2024), available at https://railroads.dot.gov/
    about-fra/communications/newsroom/press-releases/investing-america-
    biden-harris-administration-0.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RAILROAD CROSSING ELIMINATION (RCE) PROGRAM

        The IIJA authorized $600 million in annual advanced
    appropriations over five years (totaling $3 billion) to create
    a new RCE grant program to address safety concerns at highway-
    rail or pathway-rail grade crossings nationwide.\26\ The grant
    program applies to projects that would separate or close grade
    crossings; would relocate tracks, install or improve protective
    or preventive measures at crossings such as signs or signals;
    and fund planning and designs for eligible projects.\27\
    Eligible recipients include individual states, the District of
    Columbia, Puerto Rico, and other United States territories and
    possessions, Federally recognized Indian Tribes, local
    governments, public port authorities, metropolitan planning
    organizations, and a group of the entities listed.\28\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \26\ IIJA, Pub. L. No. 117-58, Sec. 22305, 135 Stat. 695.
        \27\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Program, (last updated Oct. 2, 2023), available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/grants-loans/competitive-discretionary-grant-
    programs/railroad-crossing-elimination-grant-program.
        \28\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In December 2023, FRA awarded over $570 million in FY 2022
    funds to eligible projects under the RCE program.\29\ IIJA
    stipulates that at least 20 percent of available grant funds
    ($114.6 million) are made available for rural and tribal land
    projects.\30\ Of this 20 percent set aside, five percent of the
    total funding is made available for projects in counties with
    20 or fewer residents per square mile.\31\ The Federal cost
    share for these grants is no more than 80 percent of total
    project costs.\32\ On January 10, 2025, FRA announced over $1.1
    billion for 123 rail projects to improve or study more than
    1,000 highway-rail crossings Nationwide.\33\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \29\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Railroad Crossing
    Elimination (RCE) Grant Program, (last updated Dec. 4, 2023), available
    at https://railroads.dot.gov/grants-loans/competitive-discretionary-
    grant-programs/railroad-crossing-elimination-grant-program.
        \30\ Id.
        \31\ Id.
        \32\ IIJA, supra note 26, at 135 Stat. 696.
        \33\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin,
    Investing in America: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Over $1.1
    Billion in New Rail Grants to Reduce Train-Vehicle Collisions and
    Blocked Crossings, (July 9, 2024), available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/about-fra/communications/newsroom/press-releases/
    biden-harris-administration-makes-more-11-0.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    RESTORATION AND ENHANCEMENT GRANTS

        The Restoration and Enhancement Grant program was
    authorized in Sections 11104 and 11303 of the FAST Act at $20
    million a year.\34\ IIJA authorized and advance appropriated
    $50 million each year over five years for the program, which
    provides operating assistance grants to initiate, restore, or
    enhance intercity rail passenger transportation for up to six
    corridors.\35\ Eligible applicants include states or their
    political subdivisions, groups of states, interstate compacts,
    public agencies or publicly chartered authorities established
    by one or more states, Amtrak or other intercity passenger rail
    carriers, rail carriers in partnership with any eligible
    government entities, or a combination.\36\ For FY 2018 through
    FY 2020, the Restoration and Enhancement grant program awarded
    over $22.4 million.\37\ On January 10, 2025, FRA announced over
    $146.3 million in grants for FY 2021 through FY 2024.\38\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \34\ Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, Pub. L. No. 114-
    94, 129 Stat. 1651.
        \35\ IIJA, supra note 26, at Sec.  22105.
        \36\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Restoration and
    Enhancement Grant Program, (last updated Oct. 2, 2023), available at
    https://railroads.dot.gov/grants-loans/competitive-discretionary-grant-
    programs/restoration-and-enhancement-grant-program.
        \37\ Id.
        \38\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Investing in America: Biden-Harris
    Administration Announces Over $1.1 Billion in New Rail Grants to Reduce
    Train-Vehicle Collisions and Blocked Railroad Crossings, (Jan. 10,
    2025) available at https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/
    investing-america-biden-harris-administration-announces-over-11-
    billion-new-rail.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CORRIDOR IDENTIFICATION AND DEVELOPMENT (CORRIDOR ID) PROGRAM

        IIJA created the Corridor ID Program for FRA to identify
    and assist in the planning of intercity passenger rail
    projects.\39\ The goal of the program is to help create and
    facilitate a pipeline of intercity passenger rail projects
    ready for implementation.\40\ Eligible applicants include
    Amtrak, states, groups of states, entities implementing
    interstate compacts, regional passenger rail authorities,
    regional planning organizations and other public entities.\41\
    The maximum award is $500,000 per project to facilitate
    planning and development.\42\ On December 8, 2023, the FRA
    announced the selection of 69 corridors across 44 states to
    drive future passenger rail expansion.\43\ The selections
    include 15 existing rail routes, add or extend service on 47
    new routes, and advance seven new high-speed rail projects.\44\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \39\ IIJA, supra note 26, at Sec.  22308 (Codified at 49 U.S.C.
    Sec.  25101).
        \40\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Corridor
    Identification and Development Program [hereinafter Corridor ID],
    available at https://railroads.dot.gov/corridor-ID-program.
        \41\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  25101(b).
        \42\ Corridor ID, supra note 40.
        \43\ Press Release, DOT, President Biden Announces $8.2 Billion in
    New Grants for High-Speed Rail and Pipeline of Projects Nationwide,
    (Dec. 8, 2023), available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/
    fra.dot.gov/files/2023-12/FRA%2013-23.pdf.
        \44\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    THE REBUILDING AMERICAN INFRASTRUCTURE WITH SUSTAINABILITY AND EQUITY
                        (RAISE) GRANT PROGRAM

        RAISE is a DOT discretionary grant program for surface
    transportation projects whose objectives include investing in
    projects that will have a significant regional or local impact,
    and support DOT strategic goals to improve safety, economic
    efficiency and global competitiveness, reduce disparities, and
    achieve environmental objectives.\45\ Eligible applicants
    include states, local governments, port authorities, and
    metropolitan planning organizations, among others.\46\ IIJA
    authorized advanced appropriations for RAISE grants of $1.5
    billion annually for FY 2022 to FY 2026.\47\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \45\ DOT, Off. of the Sec'y, Notice of Funding Opportunity for
    Fiscal Year 2024, Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
    Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grants, https://
    www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2023-11/
    RAISE%202024%20NOFO%2011.30.23_0.pdf [hereinafter RAISE Grants]; see
    also IIJA, supra note 26, at 135 Stat. 663.
        \46\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  25101(b)
        \47\ IIJA, supra note 26, at 135 Stat. 675.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In 2023, the RAISE program issued over $2.2 billion in
    awards for eligible projects, including at least eighteen
    grants for highway-railway grade separation projects and other
    rail projects.\48\ In June 2024, DOT announced roughly $1.8
    billion in RAISE grant awards, including over 15 freight and
    intercity passenger rail projects.\49\ On January 10, 2025, DOT
    announced awards of $1.32 billion, including over 10 freight
    and intercity rail projects.\50\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \48\ Press Release, DOT, Biden-Harris Administration Announces
    Funding for 162 Community-Led Infrastructure Projects as Part of the
    Investing in America Agenda, (June 28, 2023), available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/biden-harris-administration-
    announces-funding-162-community-led-infrastructure; see also DOT, Off.
    of the Sec'y, RAISE 2023 Fact Sheets, available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2023-06/
    RAISE%202023%20Fact%20Sheets_2.pdf.
        \49\ DOT, Raise Fact Sheet, available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-07/
    RAISE%202024%20Fact%20Sheets_0.pdf.
        \50\ U.S. Dep't Of Transp., Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
    Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grant Program, available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/RAISEgrants.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    THE NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT MULTIMODAL FREIGHT & HIGHWAY PROJECTS
                        PROGRAM (INFRA)

        The INFRA program was established by the FAST Act and
    awards competitive grants for multimodal freight and highway
    projects of National or regional significance to improve the
    safety, efficiency, and reliability of the movement of freight
    and people.\51\ Eligible applicants include states, local
    governments, tribal governments, and special purpose districts,
    among others.\52\ Among the eligible activities for INFRA
    grants are highway-railroad crossings or grade separation
    projects.\53\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \51\ DOT, The INFRA Grant Program, (last updated June 27, 2023),
    available at https://www.transportation.gov/grants/infra-grant-program
    [hereinafter INFRA Grants]; see also Fixing America's Surface
    Transportation (FAST) Act of 2015, Pub. L. No. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1332,
    Sec. 1105.
        \52\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., The Infra Grant Program, available at
    https://www.transportation.gov/grants/infra-grant-program.
        \53\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        IIJA authorized up to $10.8 billion for INFRA over the
    period of FY 2022 through FY 2026.\54\ In FY 2022, DOT awarded
    approximately $1.5 billion to freight and highway
    infrastructure projects.\55\ DOT consolidated the INFRA grant
    program into a single notice of funding opportunity with the
    National Infrastructure Project Assistance grants program
    (Mega) and the Rural Surface Transportation Grant program
    (Rural), described below.\56\ This combined NOFO is known as
    the Multimodal Project Discretionary Grant Opportunity (MPDG)
    and allows applicants to apply through one application and a
    common set of criteria.\57\ DOT issued a NOFO for the MPDG in
    June 2023, anticipating the MPDG will award between $5.45
    billion and $5.75 billion from FY 2023 and FY 2024 funding,
    including between $3 billion and $3.1 billion for INFRA.\58\ In
    October 2024, DOT announced $4.2 billion in funding from INFRA
    and the Mega grant program.\59\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \54\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
    Authorized Funding, available at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/
    dot.gov/files/2022-01/DOT_Infrastructure_
    Investment_and_Jobs_Act_Authorization_Table_%28IIJA%29.pdf; see
    Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Projects.
        \55\ Tom Ichniowski, US DOT Picks Winners for $1.5B in INFRA
    Grants, Engineering News Record, (Sept. 15, 2022), available at https:/
    /www.enr.com/articles/54806-us-dot-picks-winners-for-15b-in-infra-
    grants.
        \56\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, Competitive
    Discretionary Grant Programs, (last updated Dec. 11, 2023), available
    at https://railroads.dot.gov/grants-loans/competitive-discretionary-
    grant-programs/competitive-discretionary-grant-programs; see multimodal
    projects discretionary grant program.
        \57\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Off. of the Sec'y, NOFO for the DOT FY
    2023-2024 MPDG, (last updated June 26, 2023), available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2023-06/MPDG%20NOFO%202023-
    2024%20Final_0.pdf [hereinafter MPDG NOFO].
        \58\ Id.
        \59\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Investing in America: Biden-Harris
    Administration Announces More Than $4.2 Billion From the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law for Transformational, National Infrastructure
    Projects, available at https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/
    investing-america-biden-harris-administration-announces-more-42-
    billion-bipartisan.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                IV. FREIGHT RAIL

        Running almost 140,000 route miles, the nearly $80-billion
    National freight railroad industry hauls many types of freight,
    and provides ancillary benefits, including reduced fuel
    consumption, and lower greenhouse gas emissions when compared
    to other modes of transportation.\60\ It is also the source of
    a significant number of domestic jobs.\61\ Each year, freight
    rail companies invest an average of $23 billion in their
    networks.\62\ Freight rail's shipping tonnage has fallen from
    1.16 billion in 2019 to 1.113 billion in 2023, even as total
    shipping tonnage increased from 19.786 billion to 20.24 billion
    over the same time period.\63\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \60\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, The Freight Rail
    Network, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/rail-network-
    development/freight-rail-overview.
        \61\ Id.; See also Surface Transportation Board, Employment Data,
    available at https://www.stb.gov/reports-data/economic-data/employment-
    data/ and American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association, About,
    available at https://www.aslrra.org/about-us/industry-facts/.
        \62\ Association of American Railroads, Investments Fact Sheet,
    available at AAR-Investments-Fact-Sheet.pdf.
        \63\ Moving Goods in the United States, Weight of shipments by
    transportation mode, available at https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/
    Moving-Goods-in-the-United-States/bcyt-rqmu/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The industry is comprised of varying sized railroads
    measured by their annual operating revenues into three
    different classes. The largest freight railroads are the six
    Class Is [pronounced ``Ones''], which collectively provide
    long-haul operations in 44 states and D.C.\64\ The Class I
    freight railroads transport nearly 69 percent of United States
    freight mileage.\65\ The more than 600 short line and regional
    railroads operate 29 percent of the Nation's rail network and
    move approximately one-third of all United States rail
    freight.\66\ Short lines are a way rural shippers connect to
    the rest of the North American freight network--playing an
    important role in providing first-mile and last-mile service
    that extends the reach of the rail network to rural
    communities, manufacturers, farmers, and others.\67\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \64\ The six Class I railroads include Burlington Northern Santa Fe
    Railway (BNSF); Union Pacific Railroad (UP); Norfolk Southern Railway
    (NS); CSX Transportation; Canadian National Railway (CN); Canadian
    Pacific Railway Kansas City Southern (CPKC).
        \65\ Association of American Railroads, Overview of America`s
    Freight Railroads, at 1, available at https://www.aar.org/wp-content/
    uploads/2018/05/AAR-Overview-Americas-Freight-Railroads.pdf.
        \66\ American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association,
    Industry Facts, available at https://www.aslrra.org/about-us/industry-
    facts/.
        \67\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FREIGHT RAIL SAFETY

        Freight rail safety received renewed national attention
    following the February 3, 2023, derailment of a Norfolk
    Southern train in East Palestine, Ohio. After a thorough
    investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
    determined that the accident occurred due to a wheel bearing on
    a hopper car overheating, causing a wheel axle to separate,
    leading to a post-derailment fire due to the release of
    flammable liquid from a punctured tank car.\68\ In its final
    report, the NTSB made several recommendations to various
    entities, including DOT, FRA, and the freight rail industry
    that touched on a variety of issues, including defect detection
    technology, data collection on bearing failures, hazardous
    materials transport and guidance, and the use of audio and
    image recordings in locomotive cabs.\69\ These recommendations
    included seeking statutory changes, as needed from
    Congress.\70\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \68\ National Transportation Safety Board, Meeting of June 25,
    2024, at 1-2, available at https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/
    Documents/East%20Palestine%20Ohio%20Board%20Meeting
    %20Summary%20with%20Amendments.pdf.
        \69\ Id. at 3.
        \70\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FREIGHT RAIL TECHNOLOGY

        Freight railroads continue to expand the use of technology.
    For over thirty years, FRA supported the continued growth of
    automated track inspection technology through FRA's Automated
    Track Inspection Program (ATIP).\71\ ATIP aids in track safety
    inspections that visual inspections may miss. Specifically,
    ATIP ``helps America's railroads improve railroad quality and
    safety'' \72\ under statutes mandated by Congress. Information
    collected by ATIP is used by the government and the rail
    industry to improve railroad safety. Recognizing the ability of
    this technology to enhance safety, Class I freight railroads
    obtained FRA safety waiver approvals to test the combination of
    ATI technology and manual track inspections by gradually
    reducing manual visual inspections performed by rail workers
    required under a 1971 rulemaking.\73\ Waivers generally permit
    rail operators to reduce or replace the number of required
    visual inspections by workers when utilizing the technology in
    a manner prescribed in an FRA approved application.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \71\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., History of ATIP, available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/track/automated-track-inspection-program-atip/
    history-atip.
        \72\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., ATIP Overview, available at https://
    railroads.dot.gov/track/automated-track-inspection-program-atip/atip-
    overview.
        \73\ Chris Woodward, Why Is Biden Admin. Blocking Increased Rail
    Safety Program?, Inside Sources, (May 4, 2022), available at https://
    insidesources.com/why-is-biden-admin-blocking-increased-rail-safety-
    program/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               V. PASSENGER RAIL

    AMTRAK

        Amtrak operates a national passenger rail system, which
    includes the Northeast Corridor (NEC), long-distance routes,
    and state-supported routes.\74\ The network runs over 300
    trains per day through 500 stations in 46 states and
    Washington, D.C. extending roughly 21,000 miles Nationwide.\75\
    In 2024, the NEC accounted for approximately 43 percent of
    passenger trips, with state-routes and long-distance routes
    accounting for 44 percent and 13 percent of trips,
    respectively.\76\ In FY 2024, Amtrak carried a record 32.8
    million riders, which was an increase from approximately 28.6
    million riders in FY 2023, and brought in a total annual
    revenue of $3.6 billion against overall operational losses of
    $705 million and total losses of $1.750 billion.\77\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \74\ 49 U.S.C. Sec.  24102.
        \75\ Ben Goldman, Cong. Rsch. Serv. (R47260), Intercity Passenger
    Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs, (Mar. 23, 2023), available at https://
    crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R47260 [hereinafter Intercity
    Passenger Rail: Fed. Policy and Programs].
        \76\ Amtrak, FY24 Year End Ridership, [hereinafter FY24 Ridership],
    available at https://media.amtrak.com/2024/12/fy24-year-end-ridership/
    #::text=Amtrak%20achieved%20an%20all
    %2Dtime,in%20markets%20across%20the%20nation.
        \77\ Amtrak, September 2024 Monthly Performance Report, at 2,
    available at https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/
    english/public/documents/corporate/monthlyperformancereports/2024/
    Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-September-2024.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Most recently, Amtrak received nearly $126,000,000 out of
    the more than $1 billion in CRISI grants awarded for FY 2023-
    2024 including for safety fencing in Pennsylvania, workforce
    development training, and new sidings and crossover track in
    Arizona.\78\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \78\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, FY 2023-2024
    Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Grant
    Program: Project Summaries, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/
    elibrary/fy-2023-24-crisi-program-project-summaries.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Northeast Corridor Commission (Commission) was
    authorized by Congress in 2008 and is made up of 18 members,
    including representatives from each of the eight Northeast
    Corridor states, the District of Columbia, Amtrak, and DOT.\79\
    As required by IIJA, the Commission submits to Congress an
    annual Capital Improvement Plan for the Northeast Corridor.\80\
    The Commission's latest report, Connect NEC 2037, is a 15-year
    plan that details the sequencing of infrastructure investments
    and capital renewal projects to be made throughout the
    Northeast Corridor.\81\ The NEC Project Inventory, established
    by IIJA, is a pipeline of projects that will assist Commission
    Members and the public with long-term capital planning for the
    NEC.\82\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \79\ Northeast Corridor Commission, available at https://nec-
    commission.com/commission./
        \80\ IIJA, supra note 26, at Sec.  22301.
        \81\ Northeast Corridor Commission, CONNECT 2037 (Nov. 2023),
    available at https://nec-commission.com/connect-nec-2037/ [hereinafter
    CONNECT 2037].
        \82\ 2024 Northeast Corridor Project Inventory, available at
    https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2024-04/
    2024%20NEC%20Project%20Inventory.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Amtrak is obligated to address compliance with a 2020
    settlement with the Department of Justice related to the
    Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).\83\ The agreement
    establishes a 2030 deadline by which Amtrak must complete
    designs on 135 stations, complete construction at 90 of those
    stations, and have at least 45 more under construction to bring
    those stations into ADA compliance. Congress took additional
    action on this issue with passage and enactment of the Think
    Differently Transportation Act (P.L. No. 118-205), which
    mandates Amtrak include information on ADA compliance at all
    stations it serves in a required annual report to Congress.\84\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \83\ Press Release, Department of Justice, Amtrak Pays Over $2
    Million to Individuals in Disability Settlement, (Jan. 12, 2022),
    available at https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/amtrak-pays-over-2-million-
    individuals-disability-settlement.
        \84\ Think Differently Transportation Act, Pub. L. No. 118-205.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BRIGHTLINE FLORIDA AND BRIGHTLINE WEST

        Brightline Florida and Brightline West are two privately-
    owned and operated intercity passenger rail routes. Brightline
    Florida operates passenger rail service between Miami and
    Orlando, Florida. Brightline West is a proposed $12 billion
    high-speed rail route linking the Southern California city of
    Rancho Cucamonga, California and Las Vegas, Nevada.\85\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \85\ Press Release, Brightline, Making History: Brightline West
    Breaks Ground on America's First High-Speed Rail Project Connecting Las
    Vegas to Southern California, (Apr. 22, 2024), available at https://
    www.gobrightline.com/press-room/2024/brightline-west-breaks-ground-on-
    americas-first-high-speed-rail-project-connecting-las-vegas-to-
    southern-california.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Brightline Florida project has largely been financed
    with private and state and local dollars and incentives. It has
    received over $36 million in funding under the CRISI program to
    improve safety and another $33.8 million in R&E funding to
    increase the number of frequencies from five to seven
    roundtrips.\86\ In addition, certain Florida municipalities
    have applied for FRA funds to build stations to serve their
    communities.\87\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \86\ Press Release, Brightline, Brightline Receives USDOT CRISI
    Grant Award, (Sept. 29, 2023), available at https://
    www.gobrightline.com/press-room/2023/brightline-receives-usdot-crisi-
    grant-award.
        \87\ James Sparevo, Cocoa doesn't get $47M federal grant to build
    Brightline station, city to reapply, Click Orlando, (Nov. 8, 2024),
    available at https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2024/11/08/cocoa-
    doesnt-get-47m-federal-grant-to-build-brightline-station-city-to-
    reapply/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Brightline West is a private and publicly financed high-
    speed rail project. In December 2023, the Brightline West route
    received a $3 billion Federal-State Partnership for Intercity
    Passenger Rail grant and a $500,000 Corridor Identification and
    Development Grant award.\88\ DOT has also approved $2.5 billion
    in private activity bond authority.\89\ The system is expected
    to begin initial operations in 2028.\90\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \88\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., President Biden
    Announces $8.2 Billion in New Grants for High-Speed Rail and Pipeline
    of Projects Nationwide, (Dec. 8, 2023), available at https://
    www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/president-biden-announces-82-
    billion-new-grants-high-speed-rail-and-pipeline-projects; U.S. Dep't of
    Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, FY22 Corridor Identification and
    Development Program Selections, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/
    elibrary/fy22-CID-program-selections.
        \89\ Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Transp., U.S. Department of
    Transportation Approves $2.5 Billion in Private Activity Bonds
    Allocation for Brightline West Project, (Jan. 23, 2024) available at
    https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-department-
    transportation-approves-25-billion-private-activity-bonds-allocation.
    (Noting that this is in addition to $1 billion in private activity bond
    authority granted in 2020); see also Trains Staff, Brightline gets
    approval to sell up to $1 billion in debt for Orlando project, Trains
    (Aug. 10, 2022), available at https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/
    news-wire/brightline-gets-approval-to-sell-up-to-1-billion-in-debt-for-
    orlando-project/.
        \90\ Press Release, Brightline, Signed, Sealed and Delivered: $3
    Billion Grant Agreement for Brightline West Project Officially Signed,
    (Sept. 26, 2024), available at https://www.brightlinewest.com/media/
    press-releases/2024/signed-sealed-and-delivered-3-billion-grant-
    agreement-for-brightline-west-project-officially-signed.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL

        In 1996, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA)
    was created as an independent state entity charged with
    planning, building, and operating a high-speed train system
    within the state.\91\ In 2008, California voters approved
    Proposition 1A, which authorized the state to sell $9.95
    billion in general obligation bonds with the bulk of the
    funding going to the California High Speed Rail (CAHSR)
    project.\92\ Phase 1 of the project will connect Los Angeles/
    Anaheim to San Francisco, with Phase 2 extending north to
    Sacramento and south to San Diego.\93\ The route plan includes
    fifteen stations and trains traveling at speeds of up to 220
    miles per hour.\94\ According to the 2008 Business Plan for the
    project, Phase 1 was expected to cost roughly $33 billion, with
    an estimated completion date of 2020.\95\ Construction began on
    the project in 2015 with a groundbreaking in Fresno,
    California.\96\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \91\ High Speed Rail Act, Cal. Sen. B. 1420 (1996-1997), Chapter
    796 (Cal. Stat. 1996), available at http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/95-
    96/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1420_bill_960924_
    chaptered.html.
        \92\ California High Speed Rail Authority, 2024 Business Plan, at 3
    [hereinafter 2024 Business Plan], available at https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-
    content/uploads/2024/05/2024-Business-Plan-FINAL.pdf.
        \93\ Id.
        \94\ Id.
        \95\ See California High Speed Rail Authority, 2008 Business Plan,
    at 19, available at https://hsr.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/docs/about/
    business_plans/BPlan_2008_FullRpt.pdf; see also Ralph Vartabedian, How
    California's Bullet Train Went Off the Rails, The New York Times (Oct.
    9, 2022), [hereinafter Times Article] available at https://
    www.nytimes.com/2022/10/09/us/california-high-speed-rail-politics.html.
        \96\ California High Speed Rail Authority, About California High
    Speed Rail, available at https://hsr.ca.gov/about/high-speed-rail-
    authority/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While the Phase 1 plan still intends to connect Los
    Angeles/Anaheim and San Francisco, the project is now currently
    limited to a segment linking the central valley cities of
    Merced and Bakersfield to be constructed at a cost of $38
    billion. The full Phase I system will be constructed later at
    an estimated cost of up to $128 billion.\97\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \97\ California High Speed Rail Authority, Funding the Program,
    available at https://hsr.ca.gov/about/high-speed-rail-business-plans/
    2024-business-plan/chapter-3/#::text=High%2Dspeed
    %20rail%20is%20the,highway%20and%20air%20passenger%20capacity.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The project received $3.07 billion through the FY2022-23
    Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail
    grant.\98\ It also received nearly $90 million in funding
    through the Rail Crossing Elimination Program, and a nearly
    $202 million FY22 Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
    Improvement Program grant to remove at-grade crossings with
    Union Pacific and BNSF railroads.\99\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \98\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, FY22-23 Federal-
    State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Program Selections, at
    1, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/2023-
    12/FY22-23%20FSP%20%28National%29%20Project%20Summaries-Map.pdf.
        \99\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin., Railroad Crossing
    Elimination (RCE) Grant Program FY 2023-2024 SELECTIONS: Project
    Summaries, at 3, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/
    fra.dot.gov/files/2025-01/FY23-24%20RCE%20Project%20Selections.pdf.;
    U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, FY 2022 Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure and Safety Improvement Program Selections: Project
    Summaries, at 2, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/
    fra.dot.gov/files/2023-09/FY%202022%20CRISI%20Program%20Selections%20-
    %20Project%20Summaries.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OTHER PASSENGER RAIL PROJECTS

        In December 2023, the FRA announced 10 selections for
    projects to facilitate the development of intercity and high-
    speed rail corridors in nine states.\100\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \100\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Fed. Railroad Admin, President Biden
    Announces $8.2 Billion in New Grants for High-Speed Rail and Pipeline
    of Projects Nationwide, available at https://railroads.dot.gov/sites/
    fra.dot.gov/files/2023-12/FRA%2013-23.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                 VI. WITNESSES

         LMr. Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive
    Officer, Association of American Railroads
         LMr. Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line
    and Regional Railroad Association
         LMr. Joe Daloisio, Chairman, National Railroad
    Construction & Maintenance Association
         LMr. Jared Cassity, Alternate National Safety and
    Legislative Director, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation-
    Transportation Division (SMART-TD)

     AMERICA BUILDS: EXAMINING AMERICA'S FREIGHT AND PASSENGER RAIL NETWORK

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, JANUARY 23, 2025

                      House of Representatives,
    Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous
                                             Materials,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in Room
    2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Daniel Webster
    (Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The Subcommittee on Railroads,
    Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials will come to order.
        I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to
    declare a recess at any time during today's hearing. I also ask
    unanimous consent that the Members not on the subcommittee be
    permitted to sit on the subcommittee and ask questions.
        So ordered.
        As a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document into
    the record, please also email it to DocumentsTI@mail.house.gov.
        I now recognize myself for the purposes of an opening
    statement for 5 minutes.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL WEBSTER OF FLORIDA, CHAIRMAN,
     SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Since the early 19th century, when
    trains first began operating, railroads have played an
    essential role in shaping the Nation's history and development.
    As America grew more dependent on railroads for commerce and
    transportation, rail became the very first industry to be
    regulated by the Federal Government under the Interstate
    Commerce Act of 1887. Railroads remain an integral part of our
    Nation's infrastructure, and our modern economic survival and
    well-being rely on dependable rail service.
        America's freight rail network is widely considered the
    largest, safest, and most efficient system in the world.
    Spanning nearly 140,000 miles of track, this essential network
    annually moves over 1.6 billion tons of goods that Americans
    rely upon to survive.
        The modern success of freight railroads largely traces back
    to the passage of the Staggers Act of 1980, which deregulated
    the industry and allowed for unprecedented growth. In the time
    since Staggers was signed into law, moving goods by freight
    rail has become cheaper, more efficient, and safer. Ensuring
    that the industry continues to grow without excessive and
    unnecessary Government burdens is a key consideration that
    should be factored into any action toward freight rail taken by
    Congress or the executive branch.
        While this hearing will focus on America's freight rail
    network, it will also touch on improving and constructively
    growing intercity passenger rail to best serve America's needs.
    Passenger rail works best where demand is high, competition and
    private sector involvement are ample, and a dependence on
    Government support is low.
        Amtrak must look at improving and maintaining its existing
    network, weaning it off Government support, and providing
    competitive, reliable, and safe service to attract riders.
    Amtrak should serve as an appealing option for travel, not a
    replacement for vehicles and airplanes, which remain the
    overwhelming preference for Americans.
        As you know, the current surface transportation
    authorization expires this Congress, and this committee has
    begun assessing the Nation's infrastructure needs. The
    committee's work on surface reauthorization legislation will
    require us to be both principled and pragmatic. Building and
    supporting America's rail network involves cutting redtape,
    improving safety through technology and improving innovation,
    encouraging private sector involvement and competition, and
    decreasing dependence on Government funding and control.
        So, with that, I would like to introduce our witnesses that
    are joining us today: Ian Jefferies, president and CEO of
    Association of American Railroads; Chuck Baker, president,
    American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association; Joe
    Daloisio--is that it? Okay--chairman of the National Railroad
    Construction and Maintenance Association; and Jared Cassity,
    alternate national safety and legislative director, SMART-TD.
        [Mr. Webster of Florida's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Daniel Webster, a Representative in Congress
      from the State of Florida, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Railroads,
                       Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
        Since the early 19th century, when trains first began operating,
    railroads have played an essential role in shaping our nation's history
    and development. As America grew more dependent on railroads for
    commerce and transportation, rail became the very first industry to be
    regulated by the federal government under the Interstate Commerce Act
    of 1887. Railroads remain an integral part of our nation's
    infrastructure, and our modern economic survival and well-being rely on
    dependable rail service.
        America's freight rail network is widely considered the largest,
    safest, and most cost-efficient in the world. Spanning nearly 140,000
    miles of track, this essential network annually moves over 1.6 billion
    tons of goods that Americans rely upon to survive.
        The modern success of freight railroads largely traces back to the
    passage of the Staggers Act of 1980, which deregulated the industry and
    allowed for unprecedented growth.
        In the time since Staggers was signed into law, moving goods by
    freight rail has become cheaper, more efficient, and safer. Ensuring
    that the industry continues to grow without excessive and unnecessary
    government burdens is a key consideration that should be factored into
    any actions toward freight rail taken by Congress, or the Executive
    Branch.
        While this hearing will focus on America's freight rail network, it
    will also touch upon improving and constructively growing intercity
    passenger rail to best serve America's needs. Passenger rail works best
    where demand is high, competition and private sector involvement are
    ample, and a dependence on government support is low.
        For Amtrak, we must look at improving and maintaining its existing
    network, weaning it off government support, and providing competitive,
    reliable, and safe service to attract riders. Amtrak should serve as an
    appealing option for travel, not as a replacement for vehicles and
    airplanes, which remain the overwhelming preference for Americans.
        As you know, the current surface transportation authorization
    expires this Congress, and discussions have begun assessing the
    nation's infrastructure needs. The Committee's work on surface
    reauthorization legislation will require us to be both principled and
    pragmatic. Building and supporting America's rail network involves
    cutting red tape, improving safety through technology and innovation,
    encouraging private sector involvement and competition, and decreasing
    dependence on government funding and control.
        Today's witnesses will be able to provide us important insights
    into stakeholder views on these topics, and I look forward to their
    testimony.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Now, I recognize Ranking Member
    Titus for 5 minutes, and it is great to be back together, and
    we will see what happens.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DINA TITUS OF NEVADA, RANKING MEMBER,
     SUBCOMMITTEE ON RAILROADS, PIPELINES, AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

        Ms. Titus. Well, thank you, Chairman Webster. It is a
    pleasure to be working with you again now on trains, before on
    economic development.
        I look forward to working with you and the other members of
    the subcommittee to make progress on matters related to
    railroads, pipelines, and hazardous materials. There is a lot
    of work to be done, such as completing pipeline and rail safety
    legislation and preparing for the surface transportation
    reauthorization, so we can be sure to find a way to maintain
    ongoing investments for rail and pipeline safety projects. We
    don't want them to get lost in the highway shuffle.
        Las Vegas is my district, and it was founded as a rail stop
    initially. And, right now, right through my district, right
    through downtown Las Vegas, we have a number of trains every
    day carrying all kinds of things. Now, also, we are at the
    forefront of high-speed passenger rail, that is with the
    Brightline, and that is going to be very exciting. It is a 218-
    mile route that has tremendous potential for economic
    development all across the Southwest, not just in Nevada. And
    it is going to create thousands of good-paying union jobs.
        Brightline West is going to provide intercity passenger
    rail service between Las Vegas and Los Angeles and some stops
    in between. And it is going to turn what is a 4-hour drive on a
    good day into a reliable 2-hour ride. It is fully electrified,
    and it will reduce emissions. It will relieve traffic, and it
    is going to provide travelers a safe and more fun way to get to
    their destination, which we hope is Las Vegas.
        Now Brightline was the first high-speed rail project to
    reach the first of its kind memorandum of understanding with
    all 13 rail unions. They all use rail labor and operation and
    maintenance, and this is quite an accomplishment. All told, it
    is one of the most exciting passenger rail projects in the
    country in a long time.
        I was proud to support investments in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law that made this public-private partnership a
    reality. The project was awarded $3 billion in Federal-State
    Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail Grants. That is a
    mouthful. But it is going to also include $9 billion in private
    investment.
        In addition to Brightline, as I mentioned, we also see a
    number of freight shipments that move by rail right through the
    district, and these include hazardous materials. And I continue
    to have concerns about those, as trains get longer and longer.
    So, not only do we need to be mindful of train length, but I
    want to be sure that our workers and first responders know
    exactly what is moving on those trains.
        Congress required the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
    Safety Administration to develop guidelines for the trains to
    inform first responders in real time after an accident occurs
    so they know what they are dealing with. I am pleased that the
    previous administration was able to get this requirement
    finalized. That was in June 2024. And I urge its continued
    implementation so first responders have the information they
    need when they respond, and the communities around there are
    also prepared to deal with rail incidents.
        Lastly, I would like to see this committee pass rail safety
    legislation. I am glad that the previous administration
    finalized the two-person crew requirement. I have long
    advocated for that. And I was pleased to hear that the DOT
    nominee, Mr. Duffy, indicated his support for that requirement
    during his confirmation hearing last week. So I hope we can
    hold him to that and work with the new administration to get
    rail safety legislation that contains a number of important
    safety improvements across the finish line during this
    Congress.
        So I thank our witnesses who are here today for their time
    and look forward to hearing their information.
        And, with that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        [Ms. Titus' prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress
         from the State of Nevada, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
                 Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials
        Thank you, Chairman Webster for holding this hearing today.
        I look forward to working with you and the other members on this
    Subcommittee to make progress on matters related to railroads,
    pipelines and hazardous materials.
        There is much work to be done, such as completing pipeline and rail
    safety legislation and preparing for the surface transportation
    reauthorization so we can find a way to maintain ongoing investments
    for rail and pipeline safety projects.
        Las Vegas was founded with the arrival of rail and now we are at
    the forefront of high-speed passenger rail with the construction of the
    Brightline West project. This 218-mile route has tremendous potential
    for economic development in Southern Nevada and will create thousands
    of good-paying union jobs.
        Brightline West will provide an intercity passenger rail service
    between Las Vegas and the Los Angeles area, turning what is a four-hour
    drive on a good day into a reliable, two-hour ride. The fully
    electrified passenger rail will reduce emissions, relieve traffic
    congestion and provide travelers a safer way to get to their
    destination.
        Brightline West was the first High Speed Rail Project to reach a
    first-of-its-kind Memorandum of Understanding with all 13 rail unions
    to use rail labor in its operation and maintenance. It is one of the
    most exciting passenger rail projects being built in the country, and,
    more importantly, it has broad bipartisan support.
        I was proud to support investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law that are making this public-private partnership a reality. The
    project has been awarded $3 billion in Federal-State Partnership for
    Intercity Passenger Rail Grants and will include $9 billion in private
    investment.
        Las Vegas also sees a significant amount of freight shipments move
    by rail through the district, including hazardous materials which I
    continue to have concerns with as trains get longer. Not only do we
    need to be mindful of train length, but I also want to make sure our
    workers and first responders know exactly what is moving on these
    trains.
        Congress required the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
    Administration to develop guidelines for the railroads to inform first
    responders in real time after an accident occurs. I am pleased the
    previous Administration was able to get this requirement finalized in
    June 2024, and I urge its continued implementation so first responders
    have the information they need to respond to potential rail incidents.
        Lastly, I want to see this Committee pass rail safety legislation.
    I am glad the previous Administration finalized a two-person crew
    requirement, which I have long advocated for. I am encouraged to see
    DOT nominee Sean Duffy indicate his support for the requirement during
    his confirmation hearing last week, and I hope to work with the new
    Administration to get rail safety legislation that contains numerous
    important safety improvements across the finish line this Congress.
        I thank our witnesses for their time today. I look forward to
    hearing from you all. And with that, I yield back.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you.
        I now recognize Mr. Larsen, the ranking member of the full
    committee. He is recognized for 5 minutes.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING
         MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

        Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Webster and
    Ranking Member Titus for holding today's hearing. I am glad we
    are following yesterday's hearing on building highways, roads,
    and bridges with this hearing on rail because the
    infrastructure bill has helped create 1.6 million construction
    and manufacturing jobs across the country. These jobs with good
    wages and benefits and working conditions are driving the low
    4.1 percent unemployment rate while modernizing our
    infrastructure, including our rail infrastructure.
        As I said in yesterday's hearing, this is why it makes it
    hard to understand how, on the first day in office, the
    administration signed an Executive order to halt this progress,
    putting millions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of jobs, and
    thousands of projects at risk with one section of one of the
    Executive orders.
        Halting the flow of benefits from these appropriations
    already approved by Congress is a strange way to launch the
    golden age of infrastructure. Instead, we need to be working on
    a bipartisan basis to continue these investments in all modes,
    in particular, as we discuss today, rail. Let's keep it going.
        The BIL provided transformational funding for passenger
    rail, as, for instance, for the first time since the founding
    of Amtrak, intercity passenger rail has guaranteed funding: 5
    years of advanced appropriations that allows Amtrak to address
    decades of deferred maintenance and begin construction on long
    delayed capital projects.
        Before the BIL, Amtrak would have to wait until Congress
    completed the annual appropriations process to find out its
    capital and operating budget. That is no way to run a railroad.
    The BIL has invested nearly $53 billion for 594 projects to
    improve rail safety and expand passenger rail travel
    nationwide.
        In my State, the Cascadia Ultra-High-Speed Ground
    Transportation project recently advanced to phase 2 of the
    Corridor Identification and Development Program. It will
    connect communities throughout the Pacific Northwest, to
    include Vancouver, BC, Seattle, and Portland. It will connect
    workers in my district to jobs. It will increase access to
    housing. It will offer greater ways for almost 10 million
    people to get around the Northwest.
        Similarly, the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity
    Passenger Rail is matching billions of dollars in State and
    private investment in passenger rail improvements. These
    investments include the Brightline West, as Ranking Member
    Titus noted, and the Southeast Corridor improvements in North
    Carolina and Virginia.
        We have a need for guaranteed funding for rail. Public
    investment is vital to building a truly national intercity
    passenger rail system.
        Last week, the FRA released a report in support of
    additional long-distance service that incorporates feedback
    from 50,000 stakeholder and public comments. Amtrak will need
    new equipment and, in some cases, new stations to address these
    service improvements.
        We also have an obligation to ensure rail travel remains
    safe, safe for people and safe for goods and safe for
    communities. So I welcome Secretary Duffy's commitment to
    safety as the highest priority for the Department of
    Transportation. I look forward to working with him to reduce
    accidents and to save lives.
        Unfortunately, Class I freight rail accident and incident
    rates have not significantly improved over the last 10 years.
    In my State, there were 202 train accidents, 192 grade crossing
    incidents, and 21 railroad right-of-way trespasser fatalities
    over the last 5 years, including a BNSF derailment that spilled
    over 3,000 gallons of diesel fuel on the Swinomish Indian
    Reservation in March of 2023.
        One major cause of incidents is longer trains, and last
    fall, the National Academies of Sciences published a report
    detailing the risks posed by long trains, defined as those
    longer than 7,500 feet. These trains, especially trains made of
    several different types of railcars, are subject to in-train
    forces that can make it challenging for an engineer to control.
    I know communities in my district--and I am certain around the
    country--express concerns with longer and longer trains, citing
    derailments.
        We are working on a few of those issues in my district,
    including a recent Railroad Crossing Elimination Grant in
    Everett, Washington. These types of grants are available
    through the FRA and available to any Member of Congress'
    district to apply for. And I encourage you all to consider
    that.
        I just want to end by saying that I know everyone on this
    committee wants to ensure freight rail remains a safe way to
    transport goods across the country. I look forward to working
    with all of you to achieve that goal. I am committed to
    building on the successes of the investments in the BIL and
    ensuring this committee can say that America builds rail at
    hearings for many years to come.
        I want to thank the witnesses for being here, and look
    forward to the discussion. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        [Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
        from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chairman Webster and Ranking Member Titus, for holding
    today's hearing.
        I am glad we are following yesterday's hearing on building
    highways, roads and bridges with this hearing on rail.
        The BIL has helped create 1.6 million construction and
    manufacturing jobs across the country.
        These jobs with good wages, benefits and working conditions are
    driving the low, 4.1 percent unemployment rate while modernizing our
    infrastructure, including our rail infrastructure.
        As I said in yesterday's hearing, this makes it hard to understand
    how on his first day in office, the Administration issued an Executive
    Order to halt this progress, to put millions of dollars, hundreds of
    thousands of jobs and thousands of projects at risk.
        Halting the flow of benefits from these appropriations already
    approved by Congress is a strange way to launch the golden age of
    infrastructure. Instead, we should be working on a bipartisan basis to
    continue investments in all modes--in particular, as we will discuss
    today, rail. Let's keep it going.
        The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) provided transformational
    funding for passenger rail.
        For the first time since the founding of Amtrak, intercity
    passenger rail has guaranteed funding: five years of advanced
    appropriations that allows Amtrak to address decades of deferred
    maintenance and begin construction on long-delayed capital projects.
        Before the BIL, Amtrak would have to wait until Congress completed
    the annual appropriations process to find out its capital and operating
    budget. That is no way to run a railroad.
        The BIL has invested nearly $53 billion for 594 projects to improve
    rail safety and expand passenger rail travel nationwide.
        In my state, Cascadia Ultra-High-Speed Ground Transportation
    project recently advanced to Phase Two of the Corridor Identification
    and Development program.
        Cascadia will connect people and communities, increase economic
    competitiveness and improve the quality of life across the Pacific
    Northwest with high-speed rail between Vancouver, B.C., Seattle, and
    Portland, Oregon. It will connect workers in my district to good jobs,
    increase access to housing and offer greater mobility for almost ten
    million people.
        Similarly, the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger
    Rail is matching billions of dollars in state and private investment in
    passenger rail improvements.
        These investments include the Brightline West project as Ranking
    Member Titus' noted and Southeast Corridor improvements in North
    Carolina and Virginia.
        We have a need for guaranteed funding for rail. Public investment
    is vital to building a truly national intercity passenger rail system.
    Every passenger rail system in the world depends on some form of public
    investment to run smoothly.
        Last week, the Federal Railroad Administration released a report in
    support of additional long-distance service that incorporates feedback
    from 50,000 stakeholder and public comments. Amtrak will need new
    equipment, and in some cases new stations, to address these service
    improvements.
        We also have an obligation to ensure that rail travel remains safe
    for people and goods, and safe for communities. I welcome Secretary-
    Designate Duffy's commitment to safety as the highest priority for the
    Department of Transportation, and I look forward to working with him to
    reduce accidents and save lives.
        Unfortunately, Class One freight railroad accident and incident
    rates have not significantly improved over the last 10 years.
        In my state, there were 202 train accidents, 192 grade crossing
    incidents and 21 railroad right-of-way trespasser fatalities over the
    last five years, including a Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)
    derailment that spilled over 3,000 gallons of diesel fuel on the
    Swinomish Indian Reservation in March 2023.
        One major cause of incidents is longer trains. Last fall, the
    National Academies of Sciences published a report detailing the risks
    posed by long trains--defined as those longer than 7,500 feet.
        These trains, especially trains made up of several different types
    of rail car, are subject to in-train forces that can make it
    challenging for an engineer to control.
        I know communities in my district and around the country express
    concerns with longer and longer trains--citing derailments.
        We're working on a few of those issues in my district, including
    the recent Railroad Crossing Elimination grant in Everett, Washington.
    These types of grants are available through the FRA and available for
    any community in Member of Congress' districts to apply for, and I
    encourage all of you to consider that.
        Every member on this Committee wants to ensure that freight rail
    remains a safe way to transport goods across the country, and I look
    forward to working with my colleagues to achieve that goal.
        I am committed to building on the successes of the investments in
    the BIL and ensuring this Committee can say ``America Builds Rail'' at
    hearings for many years to come.
        Thank you to the witnesses for being here, and I look forward to
    the discussion.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Briefly, I would like to take a
    moment to explain our lighting system in front of you. Green
    means go; you can talk. Yellow means slow it down, and red
    means stop. So that is when you conclude your remarks.
        I ask unanimous consent that the full statements of the
    witnesses be included in the record.
        Without objection, show that ordered.
        I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
    remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided
    answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in
    writing.
        Without objection, show that ordered.
        I ask unanimous consent that the record remain open for 15
    days for additional comments or information submitted by
    Members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's
    hearing.
        Without objection, show that ordered.
        As your written testimony has been made part of the record,
    the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks to 5
    minutes.
        And, with that, Mr. Jefferies, you are recognized.

       TESTIMONY OF IAN JEFFERIES, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
       OFFICER, ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS; CHUCK BAKER,
         PRESIDENT, AMERICAN SHORT LINE AND REGIONAL RAILROAD
       ASSOCIATION; JOSEPH DALOISIO III, TRACK DIVISION MANAGER,
      RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., AND CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL
     RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION; AND JARED
    CASSITY, DEPUTY NATIONAL SAFETY AND LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, SHEET
      METAL, AIR, RAIL AND TRANSPORTATION WORKERS-TRANSPORTATION
                          DIVISION (SMART-TD)

       TESTIMONY OF IAN JEFFERIES, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
               OFFICER, ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN RAILROADS

        Mr. Jefferies. Chairman Webster, Ranking Member Titus,
    members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify today on the topic of surface transportation
    reauthorization. My name is Ian Jefferies, and I serve as the
    president and CEO of the Association of American Railroads,
    where we represent the Nation's major freight railroads.
        I am honored today to discuss the vital role railroads play
    for our Nation and the policies needed to support continued
    success. Railroads are a cornerstone of the U.S. economy.
    Operating a network of over 140,000 miles, freight rail is
    exceptionally safe, economically vital, and privately funded.
    Unlike other transportation modes, freight railroads build,
    maintain, and invest in their infrastructure almost entirely
    without Federal funding.
        Since 1980, the industry has invested more than $690
    billion in private capital, over $1.1 trillion in today's
    dollars, into maintaining and improving our network. That
    equates to an impressive $23 billion per year, or $442 million
    per week, every week, every year. This level of self-
    sufficiency is unmatched in the transportation sector and
    ensures that railroads remain a reliable backbone in the supply
    chain.
        It also tracks one to one with safety, which is at the
    heart of everything we do.
        The last decade has been the safest in rail history. Last
    year was safer than the year before and the year before that.
    Significant declines in train accidents, employee injuries, and
    grade crossing installations are the result.
        Led by an unwavering employee commitment, railroads today
    lead major industries in worker safety, safer than trucking,
    safer than airlines, safer than manufacturing, construction,
    and agriculture--just to name a few.
        Yet our work in this space is never finished. Economically,
    freight rail supports nearly every industry, moving 1.5 billion
    tons of goods each year. That is 40 percent of all long-haul
    freights. From ag products to automobiles, chemicals to
    consumer goods, railroads connect communities and businesses,
    the country, and beyond. Railroads' efficiency saves businesses
    billions annually and enhances U.S. global competitiveness.
    With rail rates 42 percent below where they were in 1980, we
    are an ally in the ever-present fight against inflation.
        And our environmental impact is another advantage. Freight
    rail is three to four times more fuel efficient than our
    trucking partners. We reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to
    75 percent comparatively. As the demand for transportation
    grows, railroads are well positioned to meet continuing
    challenges.
        And it makes good business sense to be more efficient, as
    fuel is the second largest cost of our operations.
        As this committee begins to consider the next surface
    transportation bill, we encourage Congress to prioritize
    policies that uphold our ability to invest in infrastructure,
    support innovation, and advance data-driven safety
    improvements. We urge outcomes-based regulation to enable
    further deployment of next-generation technologies. Automated
    track inspections, for example, can improve safety outcomes but
    have been hindered by outdated requirements that mandate manual
    inspections. A nimbler regulatory approach would allow
    railroads to innovate while advancing rigorous safety
    standards.
        Policies should be geared to meet specific challenges. If a
    policy cannot be said what problem it is solving, then I
    question its validity.
        Additionally, Congress should address the insolvency of the
    Highway Trust Fund. The CBO projects that, without legislative
    action, the Highway Trust Fund will face insolvency by 2028,
    accumulating a $280 billion deficit by 2034--only increasing in
    reliance on general fund transfers, like the $118 billion
    provided under the IIJA.
        Reauthorization must also reject calls to increase truck
    size and weight limits, which would exacerbate these funding
    gaps, degrade roads, further increase congestion on our already
    clogged highways, and further create a competitive imbalance
    against our largest competitor.
        Additionally, programs, such as the Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Grant Program, are crucial in collaborating with
    our public partners to improve grade crossing safety and reduce
    accidents. Commonsense permitting reforms can also put dollars
    to work more quickly.
        Freight railroads will continue supporting the economy and
    driving growth through investment and innovation. We look
    forward to working with this committee to ensure the policies
    enacted in the reauthorization enable the freight rail industry
    to drive safety, efficiency, and economic growth for years to
    come.
        Thank you. And I look forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Jefferies' prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive
                   Officer, Association of American Railroads
        On behalf of the members of the Association of American Railroads
    (AAR), thank you for the opportunity to discuss the reauthorization of
    federal surface transportation legislation. AAR freight railroad
    members account for some 84 percent of U.S. freight railroad mileage,
    93 percent employees, and 97 percent of revenue. The major freight
    railroads in Canada and Mexico are AAR members, as are Amtrak and
    several commuter rail systems.
        For those who may be less familiar with the AAR, we've been around
    for 90 years, though our predecessors date back to the early days of
    railroading in the 19th century. We advocate for policies that promote
    the economic and operational health of the freight rail industry and
    that allow railroads to better serve their customers, the communities
    in which they operate, and the broader economy.
        AAR's members are committed to working cooperatively with their
    employees, their customers, policymakers, and others to help railroads
    meet the freight transportation needs of our country safely and
    efficiently.
              America Benefits Greatly When Freight Moves by Rail
        America's freight rail network is the best in the world, spanning
    more than 135,000 route-miles.\1\ By linking businesses to each other
    domestically and abroad, freight railroads have played an essential
    role in America's economic development for nearly 200 years.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Route-miles refers to the length of a single rail route even if
    the track is double or triple-tracked in some sections. Including
    parallel tracks, rail yards, and sidings adds tens of thousands of
    miles to the rail mileage total.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      North America's Freight Rail Network

        Freight railroads remain indispensable today, serving nearly every
    industrial, wholesale, retail, and resource-based sector of our
    economy. They carry enormous amounts of corn, wheat, soybeans, and
    other farm products; fertilizers, plastic resins, and a vast array of
    other chemicals; coal to generate electricity; cement, sand, and
    crushed stone to build our highways; lumber and drywall to build our
    homes; animal feed, canned goods, corn syrup, frozen chickens, beer,
    and countless other food products; steel and other metal products;
    newsprint and other paper products; autos and auto parts; iron ore for
    steelmaking; wind turbines; airplane fuselages; machinery and other
    industrial equipment; and much more.
        Meanwhile, rail intermodal--the transport of shipping containers
    and truck trailers on railroad flatcars--has grown tremendously over
    the past 30 years. Today, just about everything found on a retailer's
    shelves may have traveled on an intermodal train. Large amounts of
    industrial goods, such as auto parts, are transported by intermodal
    trains as well.
        Each year, railroads move more than 1.5 billion tons of freight and
    28 million carloads and intermodal units nearly 1,000 miles on average
    per shipment, underscoring their critical role in the U.S. economy.
    However, freight railroads contribute to our nation in many other ways
    and help explain why supporting freight rail is sound public policy:
          Safety. Safety is the top priority for railroads, and the
    industry is steadfast in its commitment to reducing accident frequency
    and severity and enhancing safety measures. While any train accident is
    one too many, data from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA)
    indicate moving freight by rail is extremely safe. Between 2000 and
    2023, the train accident rate decreased by 24% and the employee injury
    rate dropped by 49%. Railroads today have lower employee injury rates
    than most other major industries, including trucking, airlines,
    agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and construction--even grocery
    stores. The grade crossing collision rate in 2023 was down 37 percent
    from 2000. By these and other measures, the past decade has been the
    safest in rail history thanks to continuous improvements through
    investments in technology, infrastructure and training.

          The Environment. Moving freight by rail meaningfully
    reduces greenhouse gas emissions while helping the economy. On average,
    railroads are three to four times more fuel efficient than trucks,
    meaning that moving freight by rail instead of truck reduces greenhouse
    gas emissions by up to 75 percent.

          Re-Investments. Unlike trucks, barges, and airlines,
    America's privately-owned freight railroads operate overwhelmingly on
    infrastructure they own, build, maintain, and pay for themselves. From
    1980 to 2024, America's freight railroads spent more than $830 billion
    ($1.3 trillion in today's dollars) of their own funds on capital
    expenditures and upkeep expenses related to locomotives, freight cars,
    tracks, bridges, tunnels and other infrastructure and equipment.
    ``Crumbling'' might describe some U.S. infrastructure, but not freight
    rail. The American Society of Civil Engineers has consistently
    recognized these achievements, awarding rail the highest grade of all
    American infrastructure.\2\ Freight rail infrastructure is in better
    overall condition than ever before.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See American Society of Civil Engineers, 2023 Report Card for
    America's Infrastructure (available at: https://
    infrastructurereportcard.org/).

          Affordability. The affordability of freight rail saves
    rail customers billions of dollars each year, enhances the global
    competitiveness of U.S. products, and helps American consumers. Average
    rail rates (measured by inflation-adjusted revenue per ton-mile) were
    42 percent lower in 2023 than in 1981. Millions of Americans work in
    industries that are more competitive in the tough global economy thanks
    to the affordability and productivity of America's freight railroads.
    Changes in rail rates over time compare extremely favorably to changes
    in the prices of goods we buy every day.

          Appealing Jobs. The approximately 140,000 freight rail
    employees are among America's most highly compensated workers. In 2023,
    the average U.S. Class I freight rail employee earned wages of $112,600
    and fringe benefits of $36,300, for total compensation of $149,000. By
    contrast, the average wage per full-time equivalent U.S. employee in
    2023 was $80,300 (71 percent of the rail figure) and average total
    compensation was $97,200 (65 percent of the rail figure). Finally, the
    median tenure of railroad employees is 13 years, compared to 3.9 years
    for private sector workers.

          Fighting Highway Congestion. Because a single train can
    replace several hundred trucks, railroads reduce highway gridlock and
    the need to spend taxpayer dollars on highways.

          International Trade. Without railroads, American firms
    and consumers would be unable to participate in the global economy
    anywhere near as fully as they do today.

          Passenger rail. Freight railroads provide a crucial
    foundation for passenger rail. More than 70 percent of the miles
    traveled by Amtrak trains are on tracks owned by other railroads--
    mainly freight railroads. In addition, approximately half of America's
    commuter railroads operate at least partially on right-of-way owned by
    freight railroads.
            Looking Ahead to Surface Transportation Reauthorization
        The rail industry respectfully suggests that a series of
    overarching principles should guide surface transportation
    reauthorization. Adherence to these principles would enhance our
    nation's ability to transport people and goods safely, efficiently, and
    cost-effectively.
    1. Restore the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to a True User-Based System
        The United States has historically relied on a user-pays system to
    fund investments in highway infrastructure. Unfortunately, revenues
    into the HTF have failed to keep pace with spending needs. According to
    the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), balances in both the highway and
    transit accounts of the HTF will be exhausted in 2028. The CBO says
    that if the taxes that are currently credited to the trust fund
    remained in place and if funding for highway and transit programs
    increased annually at the rate of inflation, the shortfalls accumulated
    in the HTF highway and transit accounts from 2024 to 2033 would total
    $241 billion.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Testimony of Chad Shirley, Principal Analyst Microeconomic
    Studies Division, Congressional Budget Office, Before the U.S. House of
    Representatives Subcommittee on Highways and Transit, Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure, October 18, 2023.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This shortfall has previously been covered by transfers from the
    general fund, but general fund transfers to the HTF distort the freight
    transportation marketplace in favor of trucking and put other
    transportation modes at an unfair competitive disadvantage. This is
    especially problematic for railroads, which build, maintain, and pay
    for their own infrastructure.
        Studies indicate that trucks cause the overwhelming majority of the
    damage to our nation's roads and bridges as compared to other vehicles,
    and the fuel taxes and other fees heavy trucks pay do not come close to
    covering the costs of that damage.\4\ The taxes and fees trucks pay to
    help maintain our nation's roads and bridges have not been
    substantially changed since 1993, resulting in a multibillion-dollar
    annual underpayment compared to the damage they cause.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Congress should require that the Federal Highway Administration
    finalize the highway cost allocation study required in the last surface
    transportation reauthorization. This would provide needed precision
    regarding the damage to our nation's roadways caused by each highway
    user class.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Congress should remedy this modal inequity by either increasing the
    fuel tax or imposing a vehicle-miles traveled fee or a weight-distance
    fee for motor carriers. An appropriate user fee would be self-
    sustaining; would not increase taxes or fees for non-highway
    transportation modes; and would create a competitive tax environment
    across modes.
        On a related note, Congress should reject calls to increase federal
    truck size and weight limits until, at a minimum, trucks pay the full
    cost of the damage they cause to our roads and bridges. The
    multibillion-dollar annual underpayment would become even greater if
    truck length and weight limits were increased. Raising truck size and
    weight limits would also artificially shift freight from rail to truck.
    Given rail's inherent environmental advantages and the many other
    benefits of moving freight by rail, imposing artificial impediments to
    rail, such as increasing federal truck size and weight limits, is not
    sound policy.
    2. Improve Safety by Allowing Railroads to Innovate and Deploy Safety
            Technologies
        New technologies are changing transportation. For example,
    widespread efforts are underway today to develop autonomous motor
    vehicles, including autonomous trucks that would compete directly with
    railroads. Autonomous vehicle technologies and other technologies
    impacting transportation vary in their stage of development, presenting
    challenges and opportunities that railroads must be able to address.
        This means railroads must themselves look to new technologies to
    make their operations safer and more efficient. The use of technology
    to improve safety and efficiency is nothing new for railroads, but it's
    taken on a new urgency as transportation markets have evolved.
        The further use of emerging technologies to enhance rail safety and
    operations, however, will be needlessly stunted if regulators at the
    FRA and elsewhere in DOT fail to embrace technological change, or if
    they lock in existing technologies and processes so that new
    innovations and new technologies that could improve safety and improve
    efficiency are stifled.
        For example, automated track inspection can improve detection of
    defects and dramatically reduce response time leading to fewer track-
    related accidents. Safety data collected from automated track
    inspection programs clearly support further deployment of this
    important technology. Unfortunately, due to the existing regulatory
    framework, the railroad industry is prevented from using the optimal
    combination of automated track inspections and manual inspections that
    would yield significant safety benefits.
        As a result, this regulatory framework creates disincentives for
    the development and use of emerging technologies that would ultimately
    enhance rail safety and efficiency. Railroads will continue to develop
    and implement new technologies, but achieving maximum benefit will
    require regulatory flexibility that allows railroads to find what works
    best and encourages railroads to keep investing in those technologies.
    3. Provide Robust Funding For and Streamline Safety-Enhancing Grant
            Programs
        Collisions at highway-rail crossings are a serious safety concern.
    According to the FRA, in 2023 the nearly 2,200 grade crossing
    collisions were associated with more than 240 fatalities and 770
    injuries. These accidents can also involve significant property damage,
    clean-up costs, and costs associated with motorist and train delays
    while the accident is investigated and cleared. We should also remember
    the forgotten victims of grade crossing accidents: train crews, who are
    usually helpless (and blameless) in terms of preventing an accident but
    who have a front and center view of the tragedy and must live forever
    with its memory. Grade crossing incidents typically arise from factors
    outside railroad control, and highway-rail crossing warning devices are
    there for the benefit of motorists, not trains. Nevertheless, railroads
    are committed to reducing the frequency of crossing incidents.

        Section 130 of the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation
    Assistance Act of 1987, provides HTF money to states and local
    governments to eliminate or reduce hazards at highway-rail crossings.
    The Section 130 program has been retained under subsequent legislation.
    Most recently, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
    allocates $245 million in Section 130 funds each year through 2026 for
    installing new and upgraded warning devices and for improving grade
    crossing surfaces. The program has helped prevent tens of thousands of
    fatalities and injuries associated with crossing accidents. Section 130
    funding should continue at current or higher levels.
        The safest grade crossing is the crossing that is not there. That's
    why the elimination of grade crossings yields the biggest safety
    benefit, and why railroads strongly support the Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Grant Program (RCE). This competitive grant program, run by
    the FRA and created by the IIJA, provides more than $500 million per
    year through 2026 to local and state governments and other public
    entities for grade separation or closure, track relocation, and the
    improvement or installation of grade crossing warning devices. Earlier
    this month, the FRA announced the most recent RCE grants, which total
    more than $1.1 billion and will fund 123 projects associated with more
    than 1,000 grade crossings nationwide. Railroads commend policymakers
    for creating and funding this important program and respectfully
    suggest the program should be expanded to further improve grade
    crossing safety.
    4. Support Funding Public Entities Partnering with Host Freight
            Railroads
        The freight rail industry supports funding for grant programs that
    enable the public sector, including state and local governments, to
    partner with freight railroads and others to advance projects of mutual
    interest that improve the overall fluidity of supply chains, reduce
    highway and port congestion, improve safety, facilitate passenger rail,
    and improve the quality of life for communities. To that end, the
    following U.S. DOT programs should continue to be authorized at
    existing or increased levels:
          The Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) grant
    program. INFRA funds projects that address significant challenges in
    U.S. transportation infrastructure, particularly highways, bridges,
    railroads, and ports. INFRA encourages the use of private investments,
    state and local funding, and innovative financing to maximize the
    impact of federal dollars. INFRA prioritizes projects that demonstrate
    a significant regional or national impact, alignment with national and
    economic priorities, and readiness for implementation.

          The National Infrastructure Project Assistance grant
    program. Often referred to as the ``Mega'' grant program, this federal
    initiative is designed to support transformational infrastructure
    projects that have significant national or regional impact and are too
    large or complex to be funded by other federal programs alone. Examples
    include large highway expansions, major bridge replacements, and
    multimodal freight and passenger transportation projects. Mega grants
    prioritize projects that combine federal support with state, local, and
    private sector funding, ensuring a shared commitment.

          The Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
    Sustainability and Equity program. Formerly known as TIGER
    (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) and later
    BUILD (Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development), RAISE is
    a discretionary funding initiative that provides competitive grants to
    support infrastructure projects with a focus on sustainability, equity,
    and innovation. By prioritizing projects that align with national and
    local priorities, RAISE contributes to the development of modern,
    resilient, and equitable transportation infrastructure across the
    country.

          The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
    Improvements (CRISI) program. CRISI grants are designed to enhance the
    safety, efficiency, and reliability of U.S. freight and passenger rail
    systems. Program goals include improving safety through projects that
    improve rail infrastructure and reduce accidents and fatalities;
    modernizing aging rail infrastructure to enhance reliability and
    capacity; supporting efficient goods movement; and bolstering local and
    regional economies. Emphasis is placed on projects that provide public
    benefits, particularly in rural areas and for smaller railroads.

          Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger Rail
    (FSP) grant program. This program focuses on ensuring the safety,
    reliability, and efficiency of passenger rail by funding projects that
    bring rail assets to a state of good repair. Eligible projects include
    replacing or rehabilitating deteriorating infrastructure, such as
    tracks, bridges, tunnels, or signal systems; modernizing rail equipment
    or facilities to improve safety and efficiency; and addressing deferred
    maintenance. The program typically requires state or local governments
    or other non-federal entities to contribute matching funds.

        These essential programs are partnerships that solve critical
    transportation challenges by combining federal and non-federal
    resources for specific projects. Without these partnerships, many
    projects that promise substantial public benefits (such as reduced
    highway congestion or increased rail capacity for use by passenger
    trains) in addition to private benefits (such as enabling faster
    freight trains) are likely to be delayed or never started because none
    of the involved parties can justify the full investment needed to
    complete them by themselves.
    5. Streamline the Environmental Permitting Process
        While efforts to cut red tape associated with infrastructure
    project approval and construction have borne some fruit in recent
    years, more can still be done to fast-track routine rail construction
    projects without ignoring environmental or historical preservation
    concerns.
        For example, policymakers could codify that, for rail projects
    whose purpose is to replace existing infrastructure on existing
    operating railroad right-of-way, a categorical exclusion and a finding
    of no significant impact are the only NEPA documentations necessary.\5\
    In addition, policymakers could convert to statute select executive
    orders on streamlining the permitting process, such as timeclocks,
    intermediate deadlines, and One Decision.\6\ Policymakers could also
    continue to streamline the ``Section 106'' historic preservation
    process for projects needed to enhance or maintain rail
    infrastructure.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal
    agencies to assess the environmental impacts of their proposed actions
    before making decisions. A categorical exclusion is a category of
    actions determined not to have significant environmental impacts,
    allowing them to bypass detailed reviews like Environmental Assessments
    (EA) or Environmental Impact Statements (EIS). A finding of no
    significant impact (FONSI) is a determination that a proposed project,
    based on an EA, will not significantly impact the environment,
    eliminating the need for a more detailed EIS. A FONSI ensures
    environmental oversight while allowing projects with minimal impacts to
    proceed efficiently.
        \6\ ``One Decision'' in the context of permitting for large
    projects refers to a streamlined approach where a designated lead
    agency coordinates all necessary reviews and approvals from multiple
    entities to deliver a single, consolidated decision within a clear
    timeframe. This method reduces duplication, ensures regulatory
    certainty, and accelerates project timelines by aligning agency efforts
    and eliminating conflicting requirements.
        \7\ Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires
    federal agencies to assess the impact of their projects on historic
    properties. Streamlining this process means making the review and
    consultation more efficient, potentially speeding up decisions without
    sacrificing protections for historic sites.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        These approaches to environmental review would expedite projects
    that would enhance supply chain fluidity while ensuring comprehensive
    and effective environmental reviews are maintained. The environment
    would still be protected, while supply chains would benefit from
    greater efficiency and more environmentally friendly performance.
    6. Oppose Policies that Harm Railroads' Ability to Operate Safely and
            Efficiently
        Railroads respectfully urge members of this committee and other
    policymakers to reject policy riders to surface transportation
    legislation that would hinder railroads' ability to operate safely and
    efficiently.
                Minimum Crew Size
        For example, policymakers should oppose proposals mandating two
    crew members in freight locomotive cabs. There is no quantitative
    evidence that a two-person crew mandate would enhance safety. Moreover,
    a two-person mandate could stifle the adoption of new technologies that
    would enhance safety. Railroads aren't seeking the ability to impose
    one-person crews haphazardly or unilaterally. Rather, they seek
    flexibility to continue to work with rail labor under the existing
    collective bargaining framework--as they have for decades--to identify
    when conditions allow a reduction in the number of crewmembers without
    jeopardizing safety.
                Technology Mandates
        Likewise, technology mandates should be avoided. Flexible,
    technology-driven solutions are preferable to rigid regulatory
    requirements. For example, advances in on-board monitoring systems and
    automated data collection are likely to be just as effective, or more
    so, in detecting potential problems without the need for fixed wayside
    detectors at prescribed distances. Regulatory flexibility regarding
    technology allows for better allocation of resources, focusing on
    specific track conditions and areas with higher risks instead of
    adherence to arbitrary rules. More broadly, any new operational
    restrictions should be science-based and data-driven, designed to
    correct a specific problem, and incorporate solutions to address that
    deficiency as efficiently as possible. Otherwise, the nation's freight
    supply chain would be needlessly weakened.
                Access to Railroad Rights-of-Way
        Legislative or regulatory actions aimed at granting access to
    railroad rights of way to non-railroad entities, such as
    telecommunications companies, must be carefully proscribed. Safety must
    be the top priority. Railroads must have sufficient time and
    information to process applications for access, and railroads should be
    given fair and complete reimbursement, including reimbursement of any
    out-of-pocket costs associated with facilitating that access and work
    associated with it. To prevent a hodgepodge of conflicting state
    requirements, laws governing access to the right-of-way should be
    uniform across the country. Finally, the U.S. DOT, not the FCC nor any
    state or local entities, must be the primary overseer of these
    agreements.
                Marijuana Reclassification
        Finally, as the Drug Enforcement Agency continues to analyze a
    proposal to reschedule marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III
    drug, Congress should ensure that employers whose employees conduct
    safety-sensitive activities each day, like the railroads, maintain the
    ability to drug test employees for marijuana usage and treat positive
    tests as proof of unacceptable employee conduct.
                                  Cargo Theft
        In recent years, the freight rail network has seen a sharp increase
    in incidents of theft, with criminals targeting high-value goods such
    as electronics and consumer products, and unintentionally impact food
    and medicine shipments. These thefts have become more organized and
    sophisticated, with the total costs for the freight rail industry
    anticipated to exceed $100 million annually for 2024. While these
    criminals have targeted nearly every mode, the disruptions to freight
    rail operations are acutely felt, as incidents can involve damage to
    rail equipment that forces trains to stop, thereby resulting in costly
    delays in service that ripple across the interconnected network.
        This growing threat requires urgent attention, and while it may not
    neatly fit within the scope of traditional surface transportation
    reauthorization, federal resources must be allocated to address the
    problem. A dedicated federal response is crucial to disrupting these
    criminal elements, supporting ongoing enforcement efforts, and
    protecting the integrity of the freight rail system. This intervention
    must be paired with timely, efficient, and effective prosecutions at
    the federal, state, and local levels of the individuals and
    organizations committing the thefts. Without federal intervention,
    industry's vulnerability to theft will continue to escalate,
    undermining the efficiency of the broader supply chain and costing
    stakeholders and consumers significantly.
                                   Conclusion
        America's freight railroads are a vital national resource. With
    highway congestion becoming more acute and with public pressure growing
    to combat climate change, conserve fuel, and promote safety, railroads
    are well positioned to take on a larger role in meeting these
    challenges, given their substantial advantages in these areas over
    other transportation modes. Demands for use of freight-owned track by
    passenger trains are mounting and will probably continue to grow. And,
    of course, as our economy evolves, railroads will continue to be called
    upon to make additional investments in their networks to provide the
    efficient, reliable, and cost-effective freight transportation service
    that their customers, and our nation, need to prosper.
        For that to happen, members of this committee and others must craft
    appropriate policies. Freight railroads stand ready to work with you to
    ensure that our nation's transportation needs are met in a responsible,
    environmentally sound, and safe manner.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Baker, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF CHUCK BAKER, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN SHORT LINE AND
                     REGIONAL RAILROAD ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Baker. Thank you. Good morning, I am Chuck Baker,
    president of the American Short Line and Regional Railroad
    Association, representing the Nation's 600 small Class II and
    III freight railroads. Short lines are the first and last miles
    of the freight rail network. We move industrial, agricultural,
    and energy products between ports, factories, and farms, and
    the larger Class I railroads, which connect us to the national
    and global markets.
        Short lines used to be the unprofitable branch lines of the
    larger railroads. Following partial deregulation, rather than
    abandon those lines, the Class I's sold those lines to local
    entrepreneurs. Those newly minted short lines didn't have much
    traffic and weren't in great shape, but the local folks who
    took over these lines were eager to make a go of it. They ran
    efficiently, focused on getting just one more new customer or
    carload, and bent over backwards to serve their existing
    customers, and it worked.
        Today, short lines are critical in your communities and
    ensure that the goods your constituents rely upon to get to
    their homes and businesses safely and affordably. We now manage
    50,000 miles of track, which is one-third of the freight rail
    network, and touch one-fifth of all carloads but only account
    for about 6 percent of the industry's total revenue. So short
    lines are small businesses, but we have a large impact on the
    U.S. economy.
        We operate in 49 States, support 478,000 jobs, and produce
    $56 billion in value added to the economy.
        For decades, members of this subcommittee have supported
    policies that allow short lines to survive and thrive. Almost
    every one of you has a short line in your district. Chairman
    Webster has two with the Florida Central and Florida Midland.
    Congressman Garcia has nine. Congressman Westerman, who is not
    here at the moment, he has 15. That is the most of anybody in
    Congress. Congressman Begich in Alaska is one of the States
    where short lines are the entire freight rail network in the
    State.
        The title of this hearing is ``America Builds,'' and short
    lines are indeed eager to build. The next surface
    transportation reauthorization bill will have a long-term
    impact on the country. Our top priority in that bill is robust
    funding for the CRISI Program. It is the only Federal program
    that short lines are directly eligible for, and it has been
    transformational: 240 short line CRISI grants have been
    awarded. These are bridge rehabilitations, tie changeouts, and
    rail replacement projects that simply would not have been
    possible without CRISI.
        With March approaching, to use a college basketball
    analogy, CRISI helps get projects off of the bubble and into
    the big dance. Because of CRISI, short line railroads are safer
    and customers are better served. Small towns and rural
    communities have new jobs. The air is cleaner. Streets are less
    congested, and taxpayers are on the hook for less highway
    maintenance.
        My testimony provides a lengthy list of completed CRISI
    projects with specific statements of support. Here is one
    example: the plant manager of the wood panel processing
    facility in northeastern Michigan said, ``Lake State Railway's
    service has allowed our operation to be cost-competitive
    despite our remote location. CRISI has allowed us to load
    286,000-pound railcars, reducing our cost and helping to ensure
    our long-term success.''
        Beyond robust funding, CRISI also needs advance
    appropriations to continue to be most effective. For long-term
    infrastructure investments, certainty and predictability are
    crucial. To make CRISI even more effective, we need to speed up
    the process and shorten the time from announcement to
    obligation. Good options include batch processing of NEPA
    categorical exclusions, more aggressive use of pre-award
    authority, or simply setting deadlines. This program can move
    faster with no real additional risk, and that would be good for
    getting America to build.
        On the safety and regulatory front, I would ask that the
    committee keep the big picture in mind. Rail is the safest mode
    of surface transportation, and the industry is already highly
    regulated. Any new regulations should be focused on solving
    actual safety problems and be practical for short line
    railroads to implement.
        For short lines, the biggest derailment risk comes from
    broken rail and wide gauge. And the best way to fix that is
    simply to invest in the track, and that is what CRISI already
    does. For railroads in general, the biggest safety risk comes
    from grade crossing and trespasser accidents. The Section 130
    Program and the Rail Crossing Elimination Program address those
    issues, as does support for Operation Lifesaver.
        Finally, I ask the Congress not increase the size and
    weight of trucks on our Nation's already overcrowded, under
    maintained, and excessively dangerous highway system. We are
    joined by a broad coalition of cities, counties, police, first
    responders, labor organizations, and highway safety groups in
    that request. For railroads, trucks are direct competition.
    They already don't pay their fair share of highway maintenance,
    and making them bigger would make that problem worse. It would
    shift freight from rail to truck, and we would end up with not
    only bigger trucks, but more of them, too.
        Thank you.
        [Mr. Baker's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Chuck Baker, President, American Short Line and
                         Regional Railroad Association
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify to this subcommittee as
    you examine America's freight rail network and discuss the future of
    rail infrastructure funding in America and how America builds.
        My name is Chuck Baker, and I am the President of the American
    Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA). Our association
    represents over 600 Class II and Class III small business freight
    railroads across the nation. These railroads, commonly referred to as
    short line railroads, are the essential ``first-mile, last-mile'' lines
    of the freight rail network.
                               Industry Overview
        The short line industry is a great American success story. It is a
    story about entrepreneurs taking financial risks to purchase and
    preserve 50,000 miles of rail line, most of which was headed for
    abandonment; about keeping rural and small-town shippers connected to
    the national railroad network; about small businesses investing a huge
    portion of their revenue to improve the efficiency and safety of aging
    railroad infrastructure. For decades, the Members of this Subcommittee
    have devoted the time and effort needed to understand our industry and
    have been the leading congressional advocates for public policies that
    have allowed short lines to do what they do best. We are truly grateful
    for that effort and look forward to continuing opportunities such as
    this hearing today to participate in your deliberations.
        For those new to this Subcommittee let me briefly describe our
    industry. Short lines are small businesses: the typical short line
    employs about 30 people, operates about 80 route miles, and earns about
    $8 million in annual revenue. Our significance is not our size but who
    and where short lines serve. For large areas of rural and small-town
    America short lines are the only connection to the national rail
    network, or as we call it, the first mile/last mile in the freight rail
    supply chain. As any short line shipper will tell you, ``You can't get
    there from here without short line service.''
        The short line industry as we know it is the product of the
    Staggers Act of 1980, which made the sale of light-density branch lines
    from Class I railroads to local entrepreneurs possible, thankfully
    avoiding the abandonment of those lines and the ripping up of their
    track for scrap. These lines were spun off by the Class 1 network for a
    reason: they weren't profitable, were burdened with decades of daunting
    deferred maintenance, and had a declining customer base.
        To bring these businesses back from the brink, small railroads had
    to be scrappy and smart and make a huge commitment to their local
    communities. They would knock on every door they could find, bend over
    backwards for every existing and possibly new customer, put family
    members to work, find used locomotives, and look for assistance when
    possible. They invest up to a third of their annual revenues back into
    maintaining and upgrading that infrastructure that they often inherited
    in tough conditions, making short line railroading one of the most
    capital-intensive industries in the country.
        That investment combined with the flexibility and customer-focused
    service that new local ownership provided allowed short lines to revive
    these marginal lines, turning them into small but thriving enterprises
    that preserve service for more than 10,000 customers and local jobs for
    thousands of employees. America's 600 short line railroads now manage
    one-third of the national freight rail network and touch in origination
    or destination one-fifth of all carloads moving on that national
    network. Together, short lines operate in 49 states, are tied to
    478,000 jobs nationwide, $26.1 billion in labor income and $56.2
    billion in economic value-add \1\--providing a service that over 10,000
    businesses and countless farmers and agricultural co-ops nationwide
    rely upon to receive their raw materials and get their products to
    market.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Section 45G Tax Credit and the Economic Contribution of the
    Short Line Railroad Industry, prepared by PWC for ASLRRA (2018).

        As you will note from the map above, almost every Member of this
    Subcommittee has one or more short lines operating in their district,
    and in many cases these short lines are one of the significant
    businesses in their town. I am particularly pleased to note that
    Congressman Westerman has 15 short lines in his district, more than any
    other Congressman in the country. He has visited many of these
    properties and is well acquainted with short line operations and
    economics. For those who want to learn more about short lines, he's
    your guy.
        The next Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill will impact
    railroad transportation for years to come and I am grateful for today's
    opportunity to share policy priorities that are top of mind for the
    short line industry. I believe these priorities will help America build
    and we are very eager to do our part.
     Surface Transportation Reauthorization Priorities for the Short Line
                                 Rail Industry
    1. Short Lines and Transportation Grant Programs
                Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
                        Program
        In 2015 Congress created the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and
    Safety Improvements Program (CRISI) to invest in projects that improve
    railroad safety, efficiency and reliability for both freight rail and
    intercity passenger rail. Unlike other federal rail infrastructure
    grant programs that only provide eligibility for public applicants,
    Congress made short line railroads directly eligible applicants for
    CRISI. This was hugely beneficial for the program and for short lines
    because it streamlined the application process, made for better
    alignment between available project funding and project outcomes, and
    allowed short lines to better compete with well-funded larger entities
    with more publicly prominent projects. The result is that short lines
    have become one of the major classes of grant awards in the CRISI
    program. Since the program was enacted, some 240 CRISI grants have been
    awarded that benefited short lines, totaling over $2.7 billion. In the
    most recent round of CRISI awards short lines garnered 81 of the 122
    projects awarded totaling $1.29 billion, about half of the $2.48
    billion in total awarded funds.
        Significantly, these federal funds were typically matched anywhere
    from 20% to 80% by local and private sector funds--drawing in non-
    federal monies that otherwise would not have been forthcoming for these
    improvements. It is worth noting that virtually every one of these
    short line CRISI applications received one or more letters of support
    from individual Members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans,
    including most of you. It is a welcome bipartisan development in an era
    of increasingly intense partisanship.
        CRISI grants provide six important benefits for short line
    railroads and for the communities and customers they serve.
        1)  Tackling the Biggest Problems--As a college basketball fan if I
    might be permitted a March Madness reference, CRISI projects are most
    often those ``on the bubble''--on the cusp of making the cut but not
    quite there. Railroad rehabilitation is extraordinarily expensive and
    the most needed projects are on the bubble because short line revenues
    are often not sufficient to complete the job. Again, there is a reason
    these lines became short lines in the first place. For instance,
    replacing lightweight jointed rail with new heavier welded rail costs
    hundreds of thousands of dollars per mile and there are limited
    operating and safety benefits if only a few miles a year can be
    completed. Bridges are especially important bubble projects. Short
    lines operate over many of the oldest railroad bridges in the country,
    some built over a century ago. Replacing or repairing a bridge, be it a
    highway or railroad bridge, is an expensive proposition. The federal
    and state governments spend huge sums of public money on highway
    bridges, but short line railroads have never had access to that kind of
    public money. Today CRISI is providing short lines the last dollars
    needed to get important projects off the bubble. These types of
    projects can be transformational for the future of a short line the
    communities and customers it serves and just simply wouldn't be
    possible without CRISI.

        2)  Safety--Every dollar invested in improving rail infrastructure
    is a dollar invested in rail safety. Better tie conditions, newer rail,
    and rehabilitated bridges reduce derailments, making rail
    transportation safer for short line employees and for the communities
    they serve. For short lines, the biggest causes of derailments are
    simply worn-out track, i.e., broken rail and wide gauge. The best way
    to address that is simply to invest in the track, which is exactly what
    CRISI funds do. It's not complicated, it's not controversial, and it
    works.

        3)  Jobs--Short line railroads are small businesses that hire
    outside contractors for most capital investment projects, making CRISI
    an engine for job creation, which is particularly impactful in the
    rural and small-town areas we serve. Whether these are short line jobs
    or contractor jobs, they are good blue-collar family-wage American jobs
    that can never be taken overseas. Upon project completion, better rail
    leads to better more efficient transportation service, attracting new
    volume and new customers to rail, creating additional new jobs. It's a
    virtuous circle.

        4)  Environment--The environmental advantages of moving freight by
    rail are well documented. Upgrading track and bridges to handle the
    industry-standard 286,000-pound cars, building new sidings and yards to
    meet increasing customer demand, and reducing bottlenecks that create
    inefficiencies all contribute to diverting truck loads to railcar
    loads. That diversion reduces harmful emissions due to rail's inherent
    fuel efficiency advantages. CRISI can also provide funds for upgrading
    old locomotives to allow short lines to get even cleaner than we
    already are--this is particularly helpful in communities with
    significant residential development close to rail yards, and short
    lines are committed to being good neighbors in their communities.

        5)  Economic Development--Funding economic development in rural
    areas is a challenge. Existing businesses are relatively small, and
    transportation infrastructure is often inadequate. Short lines are
    using CRISI grants to expand capacity, improve rail connections to
    existing industries, and develop industrial parks that can attract
    additional businesses to the area. South Carolina's Lancaster and
    Chester Railroad's 2021 CRISI rehabilitation project elicited what is
    an oft-repeated refrain from an economic development official in their
    area: ``Over the last 11 years, Chester County has attracted over $3
    billion in new industrial development creating almost 4,000 new jobs.
    This opportunity is a direct result of having the L&C railroad as our
    partner.''

        6)  Improving Service to Customers--Short line shippers are the
    ultimate beneficiaries of improved railroad service. There are
    thousands of those shippers, the majority of which operate their
    businesses in rural and small-town America where efficient and reliable
    transportation is the life blood of their business. A short line
    railroad is often their only connection to the national railroad system
    and CRISI grants are making those short lines a more efficient and
    competitive part of their transportation supply chain.

        Attached to my testimony is a CRISI Project Addendum that provides
    a brief description of completed short line CRISI projects, including
    project costs, scope, and benefits. This is a work in progress as we
    endeavor to collect this information as each short line completes a
    project and we will continue to forward the updated list to the
    Subcommittee as the information is compiled.
        As you will note, these are not splashy high-profile projects that
    capture public attention. Few Americans know what continuous welded
    rail is and why it is so important in reducing derailments, or why
    short lines can't interchange traffic with Class I railroads if the
    track can't handle 286,000-pound railcars. But these are real benefits
    that create the foundation for preserving and growing short line
    railroad service. Likewise, the benefits garnered by shippers may not
    appear extraordinary. Increasing carload volume by 25 carloads a year,
    getting 500 feet of new track to handle a longer train, reducing
    freight transit times by 5 hours, eliminating a derailment--these are
    not eye-popping numbers but are the things that lower a shipper's
    transportation costs and that is the foundation of success for these
    small businesses.
                       Support for Advance Appropriations
        CRISI is critical to upgrading short line infrastructure and
    enabling major projects. To do that effectively, to help America build,
    funding must be both robust and predictable.
        Current CRISI funding levels are $1 billion per year in advance
    appropriations through Fiscal Year 2026, with up to an additional $1
    billion per year possible through discretionary appropriations.
    Maintaining or expanding these funding levels is a top priority for
    short lines.
        The advance appropriations provided in the current surface
    transportation reauthorization bill created funding stability and
    predictability that has been particularly important for the short line
    community and rail shippers nationwide.
        Short lines are small businesses with limited human and financial
    resources. The grant application process is time consuming and, to be
    competitive, requires significant up-front investment by applicants.
    For example, for more complex projects, costly engineering work must be
    conducted to assemble a competitive project scope and budget that can
    demonstrate project readiness. Short lines must also marshal committed
    matching funds of at least 20%, but often up to 50% to be competitive
    with larger applicants. The annual appropriations process is always
    uncertain and that uncertainty makes it difficult for applicants to
    start those upfront activities until they know if there will be
    adequate resources for which to compete. If the program maintains
    funding stability as provided by advance appropriations, these small
    businesses can take steps to set aside these resources over time that
    they must provide to compete for and receive the federal funds. In
    short, advance appropriations allows the federal investment to be much
    more effective and meaningful. If the next surface transportation
    reauthorization bill were to authorize CRISI but not provide any
    advance or guaranteed appropriations, that would be a step backwards.
          Protect CRISI's Ability to Bolster the Freight Rail Network
        Congress has been eager to collaborate and work in a bipartisan way
    to strengthen CRISI and other programs important to short lines, and we
    are appreciative of the commitment. We believe these programs can be
    further improved.
        ASLRRA discourages set-asides within CRISI for passenger rail
    projects or expansions of the program to include major new eligible
    applicants such as commuter railroads. With so many challenges facing
    our freight supply chain, short lines need to remain viable competitors
    for these limited funds. While we have no opposition to passenger rail,
    there are other federal grant programs which provide passenger rail
    applicants with funding levels that dwarf CRISI.
        Likewise, commuter rail already has access to substantial, well-
    established, and dedicated funding programs administered through the
    Federal Transit Administration, such as formula funding and the Capital
    Investment Grant program. Commuter entities are also eligible for
    department-wide competitive grant programs, like Mega and RAISE.
        By contrast, CRISI is essentially the only federal grant program
    for which short lines are a viable competitor. We also note that short
    line projects provide an excellent bang for the federal buck and tend
    to produce meaningful results quickly with comparatively modest federal
    investment. Short lines can take small federal investments and start
    building right away.
    Speed
        Simply put, CRISI projects need to move from announcement to
    obligation to completion faster than they currently do. For almost all
    short line projects, most of which are quite simple in the context of
    infrastructure investments, this would result in better outcomes for
    the public, for short lines, for communities, and for shippers with no
    additional risk, and would help avoid the significant cost escalation
    associated with delay.
        Whether it be through batch processing of NEPA categorical
    exclusions, more aggressive use of pre-award authority to allow
    projects to get going immediately upon award, the blunt instrument of
    just setting deadlines for agency processing, or all of the above,
    Congress can and should insist that this process move faster. In our
    experience, FRA agency staff would similarly agree that the process
    should move faster, but nevertheless in the real world the process
    remains unnecessarily slow. It may be unrealistic to expect government
    to move at the speed of business, but let's give it a shot.
    Increase Transparency across the Grant Lifecycle to Enable Benchmarking
            and Process Improvement
        Congress could require that FRA file regular reports on the status
    of processing grants, from award notification through obligation to
    closeout, to the transportation authorizing and appropriating
    committees. This data would be important to help stakeholders
    understand how long it takes the agency to move through the process for
    each award to achieve grant obligation and begin work and would create
    pressure to move the process faster. This has been required
    intermittently in appropriations legislation, but the agency has not
    regularly provided timely reporting. This could include key milestones
    of approval of pre-award authority, if applicable, and approval of the
    environmental decision document for the project. This could begin
    immediately through administrative action, followed by Congressional
    action to make the requirement enduring. As Peter Drucker's famous
    business saying goes, ``What gets measured gets managed,'' and this
    process would encourage quicker and more consistent grant processing.
    Prohibit Agencies from Integrating Policy Requirements into Grant
            Programs with No Basis in Law
        Congress could prohibit U.S. DOT from establishing policy
    requirements that are not in law as conditions for grant awardees to
    achieve obligation. DOT NOFOs now routinely integrate ``Administrative
    and National Policy Requirements'' that can impose costly and
    burdensome requirements on grant recipients. Most of these have no
    basis in law and can condition achieving grant obligation on
    satisfaction of the requirements. This step could be taken immediately
    through administrative action, followed by Congressional action to make
    the requirement broad and enduring.
    Improve Elements of the National Environmental Policy Act Process
        Short lines are an environmentally friendly way to move goods. We
    encourage efforts to ensure National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
    requirements reflect this sustainable way to move freight and do not
    undermine it.
        Specifically, we believe there could be room within USDOT's NEPA
    implementing regulations to expand definitions of selected categorical
    exclusions (CEs) without risking significant environmental impacts.
        One area is for bridge rehabilitation projects and for construction
    of smaller railroad facilities. The definitions for these CEs have some
    fixed elements--such as ground coverage and watercourse definitions--
    that could be adjusted to grant the agency more discretion and
    flexibility to make its class of action determination. The definitions
    built into these CEs have arbitrary elements that can force certain
    projects into costlier and more time-consuming environmental
    assessments than are justified by the environmental impacts of the
    project. We encourage USDOT and FRA to explore their regulations in
    this area and seek to increase their flexibility.
        We appreciate the efforts of USDOT, and especially FRA, to continue
    to standardize their NEPA review procedures and to improve the guidance
    and documentation they provide to grant applicants.
        Clarification of guidance documentation is helpful, as is the
    provision of clearer guidance on analyses and permitting requirements
    associated with different environmental impact areas. Examples of
    environmental impact area analyses products or awarded permits can be
    especially helpful to applicants and awardees that are new to NEPA.
    NEPA compliance is a complex topic. The provision of better information
    to applicants on exactly what needs to be done and when during pre- and
    post-award period can reduce delays in getting to grant agreement.
    FRA's grant and environmental specialists have done extensive outreach
    to the short line community on NEPA topics, including through
    participation in ASLRRA conferences and webinars, reaching many
    hundreds of short line railroads. We greatly appreciate these outreach
    efforts and look forward to continuing educational collaboration and
    dialogue with FRA on these topics under the new Administration.
    2. Modal Equity With Trucks
        Railroads compete fiercely with trucks to move America's freight,
    which is as it should be. In our view, there would be tremendous public
    policy benefits to the country if more freight would move by rail:
    safety, as rail is 3-20x safer than trucking depending on what is being
    measured; congestion reduction, as one train can keep hundreds of
    trucks off the road; taxpayer savings, as heavy trucks produce a
    disproportionate share of highway damage; and environmental benefits as
    railroads are widely recognized as the cleanest way to move freight
    over land.
        Given that, public policies that support freight rail make sense
    for Congress to consider. But at the very least, we ask that Congress
    not drive policy the other direction and further shift freight to
    trucks.
                Highway Trust Fund--Restore the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to
                        a true user-based system.
        Since 2008, the Highway Trust Fund has received a stunning $275
    billion from the U.S. Treasury's general fund to cover shortfalls.
    That's more than a quarter of a trillion dollars. This is a gigantic
    subsidy to our biggest competitor.
        Congress should require that the FHWA finalize the cost allocation
    study required in the last reauthorization. This will give needed
    insight into the damage to our nation's roadways caused by each user
    class. Congress should then devise and implement a user fee for the HTF
    that accounts for proportional damages caused by different weights of
    vehicles.
                Truck Size and Weight--Do Not Make the Problem Worse
        The existing 80,000-pound trucks on our interstate system already
    don't cover the full cost of their infrastructure damage. Increasing
    the size and weight of those trucks would make the problem worse and
    have negative consequences for both the short line railroad industry
    and the public. It would shift freight from rail to trucks, resulting
    in more trucks on our nation's highways, more congestion and wear and
    tear, more pollution, and more deadly crashes. There were already more
    than 40,000 fatalities on U.S. roads last year--that's already far, far
    too many without adding bigger and heavier trucks into the mix.
        As noted above, small railroads are largely privately-owned, and
    they reinvest 25% to 33% of their annual revenue maintaining and
    improving their capital-intensive infrastructure. Trucks enjoy the
    inherent advantage of operating over publicly subsidized highways,
    while underpaying for the damage to roads and bridges they cause. This
    problem would be further exacerbated by heavier and longer trucks,
    which cause significantly more damage to public infrastructure. All of
    this occurs as fuel taxes and user fees have consistently proven
    insufficient to fully fund the HTF, and general fund taxpayer dollars
    are increasingly applied to road projects. Consequently, as taxpayers
    we are not only paying for our own infrastructure, but also that of our
    competition.
        Public opinion polls have also shown year-after-year that the
    public does not feel safe with larger trucks on the highways. One poll
    conducted by the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks found that 7 in 10
    respondents were opposed to increases in length and weight. The Truck
    Safety Coalition publishes a record of decades of polling on the topic,
    with some polls showing up to 88% of Americans opposed to bigger and
    heavier trucks on the highways.
        The short line industry is part of a broad coalition of cities,
    counties, municipalities, first responders, labor organizations, and
    highway safety groups. Together, we have repeatedly urged Congress to
    refrain from wholesale or incremental changes disguised as pilot
    projects and waivers to truck size and weight, and we renew that call
    today.
    3. Rail Safety Regulations
        As any new regulations are considered for what is already a highly
    regulated industry, we urge that they be focused on solving actual
    safety problems and be practical for small business short line
    railroads to implement. Further, we encourage Congress to be aware of
    unintended consequences to broader transportation safety--when
    regulations increase the cost of freight railroading or degrade freight
    rail service, they risk shifting freight traffic from the largely
    privately funded and safer rail network to the largely publicly funded
    and less safe highway network. Short lines can only thrive if our
    mostly small business entrepreneurs are given the flexibility and
    discretion to run their railroads in a manner that is safe, customer-
    focused, and still cost-effective. And as noted previously, for short
    lines the biggest risks of derailment come from worn out track and the
    best way to address that is simply to invest in the track, which is
    exactly what CRISI does.
    4. Continued Federal Support for Grade Crossing and Trespasser Safety
            Issues
        By far, the most significant areas of rail safety related to
    interactions with the public are grade crossing accidents and
    trespasser issues. An industry and government-supported effort,
    Operation Lifesaver, focuses on educating the public both about the
    importance of staying off railroad tracks and the need for passenger
    and commercial vehicle drivers to exercise caution at grade crossings.
    The federal government has been an important participant in these
    efforts, largely through the FHWA Railway-Highway Crossings Program,
    known widely as the ``Section 130'' Program. This program significantly
    improves grade crossing safety by providing funding to improve grade
    crossing protection equipment. More recently, the Rail Crossing
    Elimination program has also been successful in providing options for
    communities to close unnecessary crossings.
                                   Conclusion
        As I indicated at the outset, it was provisions of the 1980
    Staggers Act that created the potential to create short line railroads
    as an alternative to rail line abandonment. No current Member of the
    House of Representatives was in office in 1980 so there is little
    institutional memory of how economically damaging railroad abandonment
    was for communities across the country, and how vociferously Members of
    Congress opposed every abandonment in their district because it severed
    a vital transportation link for the communities and businesses they
    represented. A search of the term ``rail line abandonment'' in the pre-
    1980 Congressional Record would return countless House Floor speeches
    detailing the harm and urging the then Interstate Commerce Commission,
    now the Surface Transportation Board, to oppose abandonment petitions.
    Today, abandoning a rail line is a rarity and it is taken for granted
    that the 50,000 miles of light density rail no longer operated by the
    Class I railroads are securely in place.
        But the fact is short lines still face challenging economics that
    jeopardize that security. They operate over aging infrastructure which
    received little or no capital investment from its previous owners and
    which requires investing between 25% and 33% of revenues to maintain
    track and bridges required to handle modern freight cars, remove
    bottlenecks, increase capacity and improve safety. Even still it is
    estimated that there is a backlog of more than $12 billion of
    improvements still to be completed, a heavy lift for an industry that
    earns just 6% of the revenue of the total U.S. freight railroad
    industry. The programs and policies discussed above have played a very
    important role in the short line industry's ability to meet these
    challenges and we urge that they be continued as you write the
    country's next surface transportation bill.
        Thank you for your time and consideration.
                                   __________

                                    Addendum

              Short Line Railroad Completed CRISI Project Examples
    Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad (CSS)
    FRA Project Name: Chicago South Shore & South Bend Rail Rehabilitation
    and Safety Improvement Project
    CRISI Grant:        $2,831,705
    Local Match:        $707,926 (20%)
    Total Project Cost:   $3,539,631
    Member/District:    Rep. Rudy Yakym (IN-02), Rep. Frank Mrvan (IN-01)

        The project replaced 7.5 miles of 90-lb rail with 115-pound rail on
    Kingsbury Industrial Lead, improving safety associated with the heavier
    rail, and increasing train speed on new section of track to improve car
    cycle times for customers.
        ``The CRISI project being done by CSS shows a commitment to safety
    and the growth of CSS customers located between Michigan City and
    Kingsbury. My company truly appreciates the project to help our company
    grow.'' David Gelwicks, President--Hickman Williams Co.

    Iowa Interstate Railroad (IAIS)
    Project Name: Booneville Bridge Project
    CRISI Grant:        $3,470,500
    Local Match:        $3,470,500 (50%)
    Total Project Cost:   $6,941,000
    Member/District:    Rep. Zach Nunn (IA-03)

        The project replaced the 118-year-old Booneville Bridge over the
    Raccoon River, located approximately 15 miles west of Des Moines. The
    bridge carries over 42,000 carloads per year on the Class II Iowa
    Interstate Railroad's (IAIS) Council Bluffs, Iowa, to Chicago, Ill.,
    service. The bridge was in danger of being put out of service in the
    near future under previous conditions, which would result in costly and
    inefficient rerouting of traffic and economic disruption in Nebraska,
    Iowa, Illinois, and points beyond. The new bridge will be able to
    withstand increasingly common flooding events.
        ``The majority of the 8,000 carloads we ship go over that bridge
    and if that infrastructure was out, it would have a multi-million
    impact on the efficiency and cost-competitiveness of our business.''
    Nick Bowdish, CEO Elite Octane
        Video of Completed Project--here [https://www.youtube.com/
    watch?v=PZbq7d1VPD8].

    Iowa Interstate Railroad (IAIS)
    Project Name: IAIS Continuous Welded Rail Upgrade
    CRISI Grant:        $5,579,357
    Local Match:        $6,291,615 (53%)
    Total Project Cost:   $11,870,972
    Member/District:    Rep. Zach Nunn (IA-03), Rep. Randy Feenstra (IA-04)

        The project is a capstone project to complete the replacement of
    jointed rail with modern continuous welded rail (CWR) on the IAIS
    between Council Bluffs and Des Moines, IA. The upgrade will replace the
    last 18.95 miles of jointed rail with CWR and allow for track speeds of
    40 to 49 mph. As freight traffic grows on IAIS, the remaining 1950s-era
    Rock Island Railroad legacy jointed rail decreases the reliability and
    resiliency of the line by requiring slower speeds. Jointed rail has the
    propensity to have joint failures during Iowa's harsh winters creating
    hazards for maintenance of way employees and train crews. Replacing
    jointed rail will increase safety, lower maintenance costs, increase
    rail resiliency, and improve system and service performance by
    increasing train speeds. The project will allow IAIS to meet future
    freight demand for Nebraska, Iowa, and Illinois farmers, manufacturers,
    and ethanol refineries.
        ``Jointed rail on the IAIS mainline creates higher maintenance
    costs and leads to slower operating speeds and lower efficiency between
    Omaha and Des Moines for rail customers like my company. Replacing this
    rail will lead to a more resilient railroad which is important for the
    Iowa economy, and for the success of our business. Our business has
    made a sizeable investment in an ethanol plant where its viability is
    solely dependent on the long-term sustainability of the Iowa Interstate
    Railroad.'' Ryan Pellett, C.E.O., JD & Co.

    Lake State Railway (LSRC)
    FRA Project Name: Infrastructure Enhancement Program for Lake State
    Railway's Huron Subdivision
    CRISI Grant:        $7,875,770
    Local Match:        $8,197,230 (51%)
    Total Project Cost:   $16,073,000
    Member/District:    Rep. Jack Bergman (MI-01)

        The project rehabilitated 30.3 miles of track with 115-lb.
    continuous welded rail, tie and turnout renewal and crossing
    rehabilitation. This project allowed for elimination of 23.8 miles of
    excepted track which resulted in increased speed from 10 mph to 25 mph
    and the upgrade of 6 miles from 25 mph to 40 mph. These improvements
    allowed for the full use of the heavier 286-lb. railcars required by
    LSRC customers and Class I railroad interchange partners. The
    elimination of the aging and lighter 85-lb rail enhanced safety along
    the entire segment.
        ``Lake State Railway's service to our facility has allowed our
    operation to be cost competitive despite our remote location in
    relation to the majority of our customers and suppliers. The CRISI
    grant has allowed us to increase the railcar load capacity associated
    with the heavier 286-lb railcars, reducing our cost and helping ensure
    our long-term success.'' Jim Spens, Plant Manager Panel Processing,
    Inc.

    Lancaster & Chester Railroad (L&C)
    FRA Project Name: South Carolina Piedmont Freight Rail Service
    Improvement Program
    CRISI Grant:        $8,752,185
    Local Match:        $4,712,715 (35%)
    Total Project Cost:   $13,465,900
    Member/District:    Rep. Ralph Norman (SC-05)

        The project provided funding for the acquisition of three Tier IV
    locomotives, the rehabilitation of 46 miles and one bridge upgrade to
    allow for the handling of 286-lb. railcars. The project increased track
    speed from10 mph to 25 mph, gave customers the ability to utilize 286-
    lb railcars and decreased locomotive emissions. The upgraded track
    resulted in the railroad attracting three new customers to the line.
        ``Over the last 11 years, Chester County has attracted over $3
    billion in new industrial development creating almost 4,000 new jobs.
    This massive amount of opportunity is a direct result of having the
    short line L&C railroad as our partner.'' Alex Oliphant, City Council
    Member, Chester County, SC

    Napoleon, Defiance & Western (NDW)
    Project Name: NDW Safety Upgrade in Opportunity Zones Project
    Grantee:            Ohio Rail Development Corporation
    CRISI Grant:        $4,112,452
    Local Match:        $4,112,452 (50%)
    Total Project Cost:   $8,224,904
    Member/District:     Rep. Martin Stutzman (IN-03), Rep. Bob Latta (OH-
    05), Rep. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)

        The project upgraded approximately 10 miles of 80-lb. rail with 132
    to 136-lb. rail, and replaced approximately 29,000 ties on 29 miles of
    rail between Woodburn, Indiana and Defiance, Ohio. The project was
    required to reduce the number of derailments previously occurring on
    this segment.
        ``The NDW provides transportation for our tomato paste from
    California to our facility saving us a lot of time and money versus
    going over the road. The rehabilitation also offers us new
    opportunities to move more materials by rail.''--Gavin Serrao,
    Cambell's Soup Logistics Manager, Napoleon, OH
        ``This has been a railroad that's needed a lot of investment for a
    long time. Every State DOT knows there are these railroads that can be
    so much more for the local economy than they are now and NDW brought
    the professionalism, the expertise, and the financial resources to make
    this project possible.'' Matt Dietrich, Ex. Dir. Ohio Rail Development
    Commission
        Video overview of project--here [https://youtu.be/IwFm_a_KWs4].

    Nebraska Kansas Colorado Railway (NKCR)
    Project Name: Velocity Enhanced Rail Transportation Project
    CRISI Grant:        $4,505,542
    Local Match:        $4,505,542 (50%)
    Total Project Cost:   $9,011,084
    Member/District:    Rep. Lauren Boebert (CO-04), Rep. Adrian Smith (NE-
    03)

        The project installed approximately 42,595 ties, 15,990 tons of
    ballast, and resurfaced 562,848 track feet on the NKCR in western
    Nebraska and eastern Colorado. The project allows for removal of slow
    orders on approximately 106.6 miles of track and restores efficient
    operating speeds over most of the line. The improvements reduced
    overall trip times along the corridor by a minimum of four hours and
    reduced operating costs by reducing locomotive utilization and allowing
    for crews to make a round-trip along the line within one day.
        ``The Velocity project will be a major rehabilitation of the
    freight rail line from Sterling, CO, to Wallace, NE, focused on
    removing slow orders where track conditions force trains to slow to a
    crawl. This line is the only rail connection for many agricultural
    customers in western Nebraska and eastern Colorado.'' U.S. Senator Deb
    Fischer (R-NE)

    OmniTRAX Holdings Combined Short Lines
    Project Name: Transportation Investments for Employment and Safety
    (TIES1)
    CRISI Grant:        $37,364,504
    Local Match:        $9,341,126 (20%)
    Total Project Cost:   $46,705,630
    Member/District:    Rep. Sanford Bishop (GA-02)

        The project replaced approximately 1,000 railroad ties per mile on
    135 high-density track miles on three OmniTRAX short line railroads--
    Illinois Railway, Alabama & Tennessee River Railway, and Georgia &
    Florida Railway, which will help sustain current FRA track safety
    standards and maintain current timetable speeds. The project is
    estimated to reduce track-related accidents by 67%, saving $11MM in
    losses, reduce locomotive utilization by 186,000 hours, eliminate 27
    tons of NOx, 1 ton of PM2.5 and 4.5 tons of SO2. The project will
    eliminate the need for 16 subsequent tie spot replacement mobilizations
    saving $43MM.
        ``Covia Holdings is a major supplier of elemental raw materials
    used in a variety of industries, including glass production and housing
    construction. The majority of shipments to Covia's customers throughout
    the U.S. are handled by railroads such as those managed by OmniTrax
    Rail Holdings. Covia supports the TIES Project [and] reasonably
    believes that TIES will improve safety on the Illinois Railway (IR) by
    replacing a simple yet essential element of safe railroad
    infrastructure: the wooden railroad tie. The IR's ability to service
    Covia's plants, uninterrupted, in Illinois is fundamental to Covia's
    daily operations.'' Russell Montgomery, EVP/COO, Covia Holdings LLC

    Red River Valley & Western Railroad
    FRA Project Name: Rural Economic Preservation Through Rail Replacement
    CRISI Grant:        $6,704,544
    Local Match:        $2,915,234 (30.3%)
    Total Project Cost:   $9,620,778
    Member/District:    Rep. Julie Fedorchak, At Large

        The Red River Valley & Western serves the southeast corner of the
    state of North Dakota, linking numerous rural agricultural shippers
    with the national rail system. The project replaced 14.5 miles of old
    jointed rail with continuous welded rail on between Independence and
    Oakes, North Dakota.
        The project has resulted in a safer, dependable rail system that
    will maintain economic competitiveness for current shippers, and
    provides the capacity to meet the anticipated future demand with
    climate change pushing the grain industry and growing conditions
    northward.
        ``North Dakota is heavily reliant on railroads for the shipment of
    bulk commodities from our rural communities to their distant final
    destinations. A large portion of the grains produced in North Dakota
    are shipped over 1,200 miles by rail to Pacific Northwest port
    facilities at Seattle and Portland. North Dakota is therefore keenly
    interested in a safe, efficient, and reliable railroad network to
    provide value to the thousands of tons of bulk agricultural and energy
    products produced each year in our state. Preserving this vital rail
    network is essential for the economic development and sustainment in
    the rural communities served by short lines.'' Commissioners Fedorchak,
    Kroshus, and Christmann, North Dakota Public Service Commission

    Sierra Northern Railroad (SERA)
    FRA Project Name: Sierra Northern Railway's Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure and Safety Improvement
    CRISI Grant:        $17,415,000
    Local Match:        $18,300,000 (51.3%)
    Total Project Cost:   $35,700,000
    Member/District:    Rep. Tom McClintock (CA-05)

        Sierra Northern Railway (SERA) was challenged to add and manage
    current customers along the 55-mile-long Oakdale Division excepted
    track, built in 1897, servicing Riverbank, California in the Central
    Valley to Standard, California in the Sierra Nevada foothills. As
    excepted track, freight could move at no more than 10 mph along the
    route, taking 5 hours to transport freight from one end to the other.
    The project included replacing 20 miles of track with 115-pound rail,
    90,000 railroad ties, and rehabilitating ten grade crossings.
        The CRISI Grant transformed the operation, adding a 116-acre
    transload site for building manifest unit trans without causing
    gridlock along the active line, and improving delivery time from end to
    end by 250%. The increased throughput has enabled SERA to:
          Quadrupled carload business
          Add new customers--such as a new grainload shipper
          Reduce derailments
          Provided 30 new railroad jobs in the area
          Improved grade crossings and increase speed led to less
    time blocking motoring public
          Took an estimated 5,000 trucks of propane off local
    highways in year one

        ``The project began in 2019, and was completed a year and a half
    later. It has achieved everything we had anticipated, and more for the
    region. It has allowed the Sierra Northern dramatically increase
    carloads by better serving current customers, and by attracting new
    business to rail. We are especially proud of how this project has
    served our local community--taking trucks off the road, especially on
    narrow mountain roads, reducing time spent at railroad crossings, and
    providing more well-paying railroad jobs in our region.'' Ken Beard,
    President, Sierra Northern Railway

    Texas, Gonzales & Northern Railway (TXGN)
    FRA Project Name: Harwood Interchange Improvement Project
    CRISI Grant:        $2,223,768
    Local Match:        $2,223,768 (50%)
    Total Project Cost:   $4,447,536
    Member/District:    Rep. Michael Cloud (TX-27)

        The project extended the siding at the interchange with the Union
    Pacific Railroad (UP) to 9,000 feet. The construction project included
    installing welded rail, steel ties, new modern power switches and the
    replacement of two aging wooden trestles enhanced drainage. With
    concrete culverts. The purpose of the project was to enhance capacity,
    improve service, enhance safe operations and help relieve highway
    congestion by moving shipments from truck to rail.
        The project has allowed TXGN to accommodate UP's Unit Train traffic
    simultaneously with our carload traffic which allowed for double
    capacity at interchange and a more fluid handoff with UP. Prior to the
    CRISI project completion UP could deliver only 1 of those trains while
    then waiting on TXGN to clear the interchange before a second train
    could arrive. The increased operating capacity has saved customers up
    to 24 hours of transit time. The expanded capacity has allowed TXGN to
    attract two new storage customers and annual carloads have increased
    from 3,726 in the year prior to the project to 4,634 carloads in the
    first year following project completion, a 24% increase. Most recently
    TXGN attracted a new major company that has just announced that they
    are building a new facility on the TXGN and will increase carloads by
    700 annually.
        Livestock Nutrition Center (LNC) is a leading feed manufacturing
    and grain handling company with facilities in 5 southwestern states,
    including a facility on the TXGN.
        ``The TXGN CRISI Grant Interchange Project has been a game-changer
    for our operations at Livestock Nutrition Center. By enabling the
    seamless handling of Unit Trains, this project has significantly
    improved the efficiency of our railcar traffic and opened the door for
    potential Unit Train movements into TXGN Railway. Without the
    enhancements brought by this project, we wouldn't have the opportunity
    to consider expanding our location. This improvement has not only
    reduced turnaround times for our railcars, improving utilization and
    operational efficiency, but it has also positioned us to better serve
    our customers and explore new growth opportunities. We are truly
    grateful for the partnership with TXGN Railway and the commitment they
    have shown to helping businesses like ours thrive.'' Maurice Janda,
    Fulfillment Manager, LNC

    Twin Cities & Western Railroad Company (TCWR)
    FRA Project Name: Joint Elimination--Rail Infrastructure and Safety
    Improvement
    CRISI Grant:        $2,000,839
    Local Match:        $2,000,839 (50%)
    Total Project Cost:   $4,001,678
    Member/District:     Michelle Fischbach (MN-7), Tom Emmer (MN-6), Kelly
    Morrison (MN-3)

        The Twin Cities & Western Railroad upgraded 1.3 miles of track with
    slow orders--a local speed restriction imposed that is slower than the
    track's normal speed limit due to deficient track--to high-speed welded
    rail. The replacement resulted in significantly improved safety, as
    measured by decreased year-over-year rail defects found via ultrasonic
    tests from 106 defects in 2017 to 48 defects in 2020 (after project).
    The upgraded rail also reduced annual tie replacement from 20,000
    required in 2019, to 17,000 by 2021.
        For customers, the improved quality of the rail contributed to a
    decrease in shipping time, decreases in delays due to mainline
    derailments, and maintaining efficient pricing due to decreased
    maintenance costs.
        Subsequent CRISI grants in FY 20 and FY 21 replaced rail on an
    additional 2 and 1 miles of track respectively, leading to an overall
    reduction in point-to-point shipping time of 56% across the 3 miles,
    and a further reduction in tie replacement needs of 30%, to 12,000 ties
    per year.
        ``The Twin Cities & Western Railroad is a vital east-west railway
    that carries over 30,000 freight cars annually throughout the south-
    central and western Minnesota. Its rail lines are essential to the
    local and regional economy, connecting countless businesses and farmers
    to their commercial needs. Not only would these improvement ensure that
    our railways are safer and more reliable, but they would also minimize
    transportation costs for businesses, enhance Minnesota's economic
    competitiveness, support the regional supply chain and reduce the need
    for future maintenance and repairs. Completing these updates would
    support the needs of countless Minnesotans by improving and modernizing
    the regional rail network.'' Senator Amy Klobuchar, Unites States
    Senator, Minnesota
        ``Rail is one of the primary arteries of Minnesota commerce. This
    investment in the Twin Cities & Western Railroad Company will increase
    service, while also ensuring the safety of all those who live in
    communities along these vital transportation routes.'' Representative
    Tom Emmer, MN-6

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you.
        Now, Mr. Daloisio.

       TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH DALOISIO III, TRACK DIVISION MANAGER,
      RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., AND CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL
           RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Daloisio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,
    Chairman Webster, Ranking Member Titus, and members of this
    esteemed subcommittee. My name is Joe Daloisio. I am track
    division manager at a company called Railroad Construction
    Company, or RCC. And I currently serve as chairman of the board
    of the National Railroad Construction and Maintenance
    Association, or NRC.
        Let me first begin by congratulating Chairman Graves for
    another term as chairman of this vital committee. I would also
    like to congratulate Chairman Webster and Ranking Member Titus
    for your new positions on this important committee.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Could you move the mic just a
    little closer?
        Mr. Daloisio. Sure. The NRC is an association that advances
    the mutual interests of railway contractors and suppliers who
    construct, maintain, and supply both freight and passenger
    railroads. I happen to be a third-generation railroader. My
    grandfather, Joe, Sr., built railroad track as a track foreman
    for the Erie Railroad and later established the company I work
    for in 1926. My father, Joe, Jr., served in the Army Corps of
    Engineers, who began building American infrastructure towards
    the end of the Korean War.
        Multiple generations of my family, including aunts, uncles,
    cousins, all follow along this path. Building rail and building
    America quite literally runs in my blood. As I like to say, we
    are not just in this industry; we are this industry, and I view
    this industry as a family.
        My company, RCC, has a rich legacy of providing
    comprehensive track services on the eastern coast of the United
    States. But RCC is just one company within the NRC. Our member
    companies generate more than 100,000 jobs nationwide, supplying
    building and maintaining freight, passenger, and industrial
    rail networks. Our members are also mostly small businesses. So
    we focus on safely delivering quality goods and services for
    our railroad customers, while also doing so in an efficient and
    cost-effective manner.
        NRC members perform every type of rail infrastructure work
    and serve every type of railway owner, including Class I's,
    short lines, and regional railroads, and intercity passenger
    rail systems.
        In 2024, contractors played an invaluable role in helping
    railroads and industrial shippers in the Southeastern United
    States respond to damages from Hurricanes Helene and Milton,
    and we expect that helping tradition to continue throughout
    2025 and beyond.
        As this committee begins the process of reauthorizing
    surface transportation programs, the NRC offers the following
    recommendations that we suggest will help America build. More
    detailed information is in my written testimony. We would like
    to seek to provide robust funding for our core rail grant
    programs. The IIJA made many substantial impacts to our
    industry, including unprecedented levels of funding to rail
    programs. Spending on infrastructure, especially rail
    infrastructure, is truly a sound investment that pays dividends
    to our economy, supply chain, and transportation networks.
        The NRC supports funding at existing or increased levels
    for rail grant programs that improve efficiency, safety, and
    environmentally friendly freight and passenger rail
    transportation. In particular, the CRISI grant program is a
    vital source of funding of the industry to address key safety
    improvement projects.
        Cutting redtape. The IIJA provided unprecedented levels of
    funding for key rail discretionary grant programs, which had
    been critical to improving both the freight supply chain as
    well as enhancing passenger rail in the U.S. However, the speed
    at which agreements have been executed has been too slow. We
    encourage Congress and the new administration to deliver grant
    funding in a responsible but more expedient manner.
        Support increased competition. The NRC strongly supports
    increased opportunities for contracting out and competition
    within these programs to stretch Federal funds further. This is
    not an attempt to take work from in-house labor forces. Rather,
    it is intended to help the industry as a whole perform more
    work more efficiently. Oftentimes our members are able to find
    the most efficient ideas and methods to deliver projects for
    less cost without compromising safety.
        Separately but related, there have been attempts in past
    reauthorization bills to insert language that provides
    restrictions around the definitions of a rail carrier that are
    excessive, unnecessary, and attempt to fix a problem that
    doesn't exist. These provisions would increase cost and reduce
    flexibility and would make it hard to initiate or expand
    passenger systems.
        We focus on safety. It is imperative to allow railroads and
    rail contractors and suppliers to initiate and deploy safety
    technologies. We urge Congress to use data-driven solutions
    that would effectively increase the safety of the rail network
    and avoid policy changes that would place unnecessary and
    excessive mandates on the rail industry that would not enhance
    rail safety.
        The NRC supports maintaining existing Federal truck size
    and weight maximums to help ensure safety on our roads and to
    control damage trucks cause on our highway infrastructure.
        Finally, the NRC has long supported safety in the industry,
    but numerous FRA regulations have not been data driven, have
    had tenuous safety benefits despite being pitched as safety
    sensitive, and have been cumbersome to implement. Many times
    this has placed undue paperwork on small businesses.
        Though this seems to be a top priority for every surface
    transportation reauthorization bill, the unfortunate reality is
    that the permitting process for rail projects still moves way
    too slow.
        The NRC supports efforts to speed up Federal permitting and
    review processes in order to deliver critical infrastructure
    projects without delays on a reasonable timeline.
        Thank you for this opportunity to share my perspectives
    today, and I look forward to any questions. Thank you.
        [Mr. Daloisio's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Joseph Daloisio III, Track Division Manager,
     Railroad Construction Company, Inc., and Chairman, National Railroad
                    Construction and Maintenance Association
                                  Introduction
        Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Titus, and Members of
    this esteemed subcommittee. My name is Joe Daloisio and I am Track
    Division Manager at Railroad Construction Company (RCC) and I currently
    serve as the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the National
    Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association (the ``NRC'').
        The NRC is an association that advances the mutual interests of
    railway contractors and suppliers who construct, maintain, and supply
    both freight and passenger railroads. Founded in 1978, the NRC connects
    members with other railway industry professionals and government
    legislators and policymakers. Together we work to create a positive
    business climate and to make railway construction and maintenance safer
    and more efficient.
        Although NRC members often compete against each other, our
    collaboration furthers the railway construction industry and benefits
    American freight, transit and commuter rail lines, our member
    contractors and suppliers, the general public, and our own professional
    growth.
        I am a third-generation railroader. My grandfather, Joe Sr., built
    railroad track as a track gang foreman on the Erie Railroad and later
    established RCC. My father, Joe Jr., served in the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers and began helping America build infrastructure towards the
    end of the Korean War. Multiple generations of my family, including
    aunts, uncles, and cousins all followed along the same path. Building
    rail and building America quite literally runs in my blood. As I like
    to say, we are not just in this industry, we are this industry!
        I also wanted to thank my fellow witnesses today who we work
    closely and in collaboration with on a daily basis. Our concerns are
    the railroads' concerns. When they move more volume and have increased
    traffic, it directly drives the size and spending of their rail capital
    programs, which in turn increases opportunities for our member
    companies. Our members are also mostly small businesses so we focus on
    safely delivering quality goods and services for our railroad
    customers, while also doing so in an efficient and cost effective
    manner.
        I am honored to join this distinguished panel today and to provide
    our perspective on the important topic of building America's freight
    and passenger rail network. We appreciate this subcommittee hitting the
    ground running by holding this crucial hearing right out of the gate.
    Railroad Construction Company (RCC)
        Let me first begin by congratulating Chairman Graves for another
    term as Chairman of this vital committee. I would also like to
    congratulate the Chairman and Ranking Member Titus for your new
    positions on this important subcommittee. And finally, I would like to
    congratulate Rep. Nellie Pou, who represents our headquarters in
    Paterson, New Jersey, for getting appointed to serve on this critical
    committee.
        Established in 1926, RCC has a rich legacy of providing
    comprehensive track services on the east coast of the United States. We
    have evolved into a leading general contractor that excels in heavy
    civil, track, and facility construction. From excavation and grading to
    utility installation, bridges, roadways, and at our core, railroad
    track services, we continue to uphold the highest level of excellence.
    NRC and the Rail Contracting Industry
        While RCC is just one company within the NRC, our member companies
    generate more than 100,000 jobs nationwide supplying, building and
    maintaining freight, public transit and industrial rail networks.
        As I mentioned in my opening, I serve as the Chairman of the NRC.
    The NRC is a U.S. trade association that represents nearly 400
    companies in the rail contracting and rail supply industry, with
    employees in all 50 states. Most NRC member companies are small family
    owned, multi-generational businesses with operations, manufacturing
    facilities, and offices located all across the United States.

        NRC\\ members perform every type of rail infrastructure work--from
    design and engineering to basic construction and maintenance to highly
    specialized and custom design-build jobs. This work includes building
    new tracks, repairing and maintaining existing track, laying and
    replacing rail, welding and grinding, surfacing, ballast distribution,
    tie insertion and removal, grade crossings, signal systems, switches
    and turnouts, bridge deck replacement and maintenance, track design,
    crane rail, inspection services, emergency maintenance, and more.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Source: US DOT National Transportation Atlas Database, July
    2020 revision
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The freight railroad industry has grown dramatically since the
    partial de-regulation of the Staggers Act in 1980. The prevalence of
    rail transit systems throughout the country have also increased
    dramatically over the last generation resulting in increased
    urbanization and density. The size of the rail construction and
    maintenance contractor and supplier community has grown in proportion.
    More than 500 independent rail contracting companies in the United
    States perform more than $10 billion worth of rail infrastructure
    construction and maintenance work every year.
        In 2024, contractors played an invaluable role in helping railroads
    and industrial shippers in the southeastern United States respond to
    damage from Hurricanes Helene and Milton. We expect this trend to
    continue into 2025 and beyond.
        In addition to the contracting community, in 2020, the rail supply
    industry directly employed almost 240,000 workers, who directly
    contributed $27.7 billion of value-added economic activity across the
    United States.\2\ Rail suppliers also deliver secondary benefits that
    other modes of transportation cannot, such as reductions in road
    congestion, highway fatalities, fuel consumption, greenhouse gases,
    cost of logistics, and public infrastructure maintenance costs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Rail Supply Industry: Manufacturing and Services Keeping the
    American Economy on Track. January 2023. www.remsa.org/files/
    RailSupplyIndustry_EconomicImpactStudy.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        NRC members serve every type of railway owner, including Class 1,
    short line and regional railroads, industrial track owners, the U.S.
    military, port facilities and terminals, and rail transit agencies
    operating light rail, streetcars, subways, metro, commuter rail
    operations, and intercity passenger rail systems.
        In addition to my role on the NRC Board, RCC is also a proud and
    active member of the American Short Line and Regional Railroad
    Association (ASLRRA), the Association of General Contractors (AGC), the
    Moles, the Beavers, and other construction industry associations.
        Finally, of note, NRC collaborates on an industry grassroots
    program that brings Members of Congress out to our member company
    facilities and job sites, so we can help further educate Congress on
    the work that our members do. These visits give Members of Congress a
    firsthand look at the impact our members have in their community, on
    rail safety, and on the local economy. We encourage all Members of this
    subcommittee to come visit and see how our member contractors and
    suppliers are positively impacting your districts.
                          Recommendations to Congress
        As Congress, and particularly this committee, begins the process of
    reauthorizing surface transportation programs, the NRC offers the
    following recommendations that we suggest will help America build:
    1. Provide Robust Funding for Core Rail Grant Programs
        The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) made many
    substantial impacts to our industry including unprecedented levels of
    funding to rail programs. This has no doubt been a boon to rail
    contractors and suppliers and has also allowed railroads to enhance
    safety as well as decrease the backlog of their state of good repair.
    Spending on infrastructure, especially rail infrastructure, is truly a
    sound investment that pays dividends to our economy, supply chain, and
    our transportation network.
        A strong rail infrastructure is critical to the vitality of our
    nation's economy. The NRC supports funding at existing or increased
    levels for rail grant programs that improve efficiencies, safety and
    environmentally friendly freight and passenger rail transportation.
    These funds will also help stimulate additional infrastructure
    investment by states, localities, and private sector partners.
        The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
    (CRISI) grant program, in particular, is a vital source of funding for
    the industry to address key safety improvement projects.
        In addition to CRISI, other critical grant programs at USDOT should
    be provided with as robust funding as possible in the next
    reauthorization bill, including FRA Rail Crossing Elimination,
    passenger rail funding through the Federal-State Partnership and Amtrak
    grants, INFRA, Mega, RAISE, Rural Surface Transportation, and MARAD
    Port Infrastructure Development Program.
    2. Cut Red Tape
        The IIJA provided unprecedented levels of funding for key rail
    discretionary grant programs which has been key in improving both the
    freight supply chain as well as enhancing passenger rail in the U.S.
    However, the speed at which grant agreements have been executed has
    been way too slow. By the time the construction phase begins, a number
    of variables, most notably the increase in costs, jeopardizes the
    successful execution of these important projects. We encourage Congress
    and the new Administration to deliver grant funding in a responsible
    but more expedient manner.
    3. Support Increased Competition
        Competitive Bidding. The NRC strongly supports increased
    opportunities for contracting out and competition within these programs
    to stretch federal funds further. Increased flexibility for railroads
    and commuter rail agencies to contract out work will benefit the
    industry. This is not an attempt to take work from in-house labor
    forces, rather it is intended to help the industry as a whole perform
    more work more efficiently. Often times our members are able to find
    the most innovative ideas and methods to deliver projects for less cost
    without compromising safety. Our member companies are both specialized
    in and incentivized to accomplish this on a daily basis. Therefore, we
    would like to strongly urge that all rail construction and maintenance
    work performed with federal assistance be competitively bid out to the
    independent railroad construction industry, to the fullest extent
    possible, to ensure the most efficient use of taxpayer dollars.
        Railroad contractors have a long and well-documented history of
    safely providing quality services at competitive prices. We have
    learned how to do more with less, and the efficiency and competence we
    bring to this task will be a big benefit as we all search for ways to
    improve America's transportation infrastructure and stretch available
    capital dollars as far as possible.
        Rail Carrier Definition. There have been attempts in past
    reauthorization bills to insert language that provides restrictions
    around the definition of a rail carrier that are excessive,
    unnecessary, and attempt to fix a problem that does not exist. These
    are attempts by certain stakeholders to restrict competition and
    legislate a permanent mandate that only certain laborers perform
    certain types of rail-related work. These provisions would increase
    costs and reduce flexibility for states, transit agencies, and commuter
    and passenger rail authorities, and would make it harder to initiate or
    expand passenger rail service. There is not a good reason to use the
    law in this way to mandate that certain laborers do certain types of
    work forever, especially since this would make new intercity rail
    services harder and more expensive to start up, when we already have
    limited resources and limited labor pools. These provisions are not pro
    passenger rail, they are just labor protection for an already stretched
    collective labor force. We would recommend inclusion of language
    clarifying that States who sponsor, but do not operate intercity
    passenger rail services, are not classified as railroads, nor are they
    railroad carriers.
    4. Focus on Safety
        It is imperative to allow railroads and rail contractors and
    suppliers to innovate and deploy safety technologies. We urge Congress
    to use data-driven solutions that would effectively increase the safety
    of the rail network and avoid policy changes that would place
    unnecessary or excessive mandates on the rail industry that would not
    enhance rail safety.
        In the wake of the February 2023 derailment incident in East
    Palestine, Ohio, numerous legislative proposals have been floated that
    have no relationship to the derailment, no relevance to safety, and are
    unrealistic to implement.
        In addition, the speed at which both the government and the
    railroads adopt new technologies and the speed at which technology-
    related projects are funded have a negative impact on the growth of our
    businesses and the industry. Our member companies exist to help the
    railroads move people and goods more safely and efficiently, but we
    will not grow quick enough if technology adoption and project phases do
    not move faster.
        Truck Size and Weight. The NRC supports maintaining existing
    federal truck size and weight maximums to help ensure safety on our
    roads and to control the damage trucks cause to our highway
    infrastructure.
        FRA Regulations. The NRC has long supported safety in the industry,
    but numerous FRA regulations have not been data-driven, have had
    tenuous safety benefits despite being pitched as safety-sensitive, and
    have been cumbersome to implement. Many times, this has placed undue
    paperwork burdens on small businesses including our member companies.
    Congress and FRA should thoroughly examine existing regulations to
    ensure they are reasonable and practical to implement.
        In addition, FRA should avoid mandates and more rapidly embrace and
    allow for readily available technologies that would enhance safety.
    Some examples include automated track inspection, newer AI integrated
    technologies, technologies and methods that allow for better roadway
    worker protection, etc.
    5. Workforce Development
        As an industry we are all struggling to attract and retain a good
    workforce. Railroads and their partners must understand their rail
    programs and needs and communicate them better than ever because the
    labor pool is becoming more expensive and harder to attract and retain.
    We welcome any initiatives to further educate and recruit workers into
    the rail industry. The NRC has worked diligently with veterans groups,
    trade schools, colleges and universities in this area and we would
    embrace additional collaboration in this effort.
    6. Permitting Reform
        Though this seems to be a top priority for every surface
    transportation reauthorization bill the unfortunate reality is that the
    permitting process for rail projects still moves way too slow. The NRC
    supports efforts to speed up the federal permitting and review
    processes in order to deliver critical infrastructure projects without
    delays and on reasonable timeframes. NEPA and other processes involving
    multiple federal agencies and levels of government still cause too many
    delays and unnecessary duplication which prevents many worthy projects
    from getting the green light.
        The project delivery process must be reformed by significantly
    shortening the time it takes to complete reviews and obtain permits.
    Projects must be designed, approved and built as quickly as possible if
    we are to meet the huge transportation capacity challenges facing us.
    It takes too long to deliver projects, and the waste due to delay in
    the form of administrative and planning costs, inflation, and lost
    opportunities for alternative use of the capital, hinder us from
    achieving our capacity expansion goals.
        The expediting of transportation projects can be accomplished while
    retaining all current environmental safeguards.
    7. Build America and Buy America
        Though NRC members are not direct recipients of federal funds,
    historically NRC members are interested in requirements regarding the
    American production of materials used in supply and construction. We
    appreciate any efforts to ensure that these mandates come with the
    recognition that they may be exceedingly difficult to satisfy, and thus
    the waiver process should be fair and efficient.
                                    Closing
        Thank you for the opportunity to share our perspective today on
    surface transportation reauthorization and building America's freight
    and passenger rail network. I look forward to answering any questions
    you may have.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you.
        Mr. Cassity, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

        TESTIMONY OF JARED CASSITY, DEPUTY NATIONAL SAFETY AND
    LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, SHEET METAL, AIR, RAIL AND TRANSPORTATION
               WORKERS-TRANSPORTATION DIVISION (SMART-TD)

        Mr. Cassity. Yes, sir.
        Thank you, Chair Webster, Ranking Member Titus, and members
    of the subcommittee for the opportunity to testify this morning
    on the current state of America's freight and passenger rail
    network. As deputy national safety and legislative director,
    the chief safety officer for SMART-TD, I speak on behalf of the
    men and women of the rail industry who are committed to
    ensuring a safe, efficient, and robust transportation system
    for our Nation.
        I have had no greater pleasure in my career than the
    opportunity to represent the single most significant factor of
    what sets our railroad industry apart from the rest of the
    world, and that is the American railroad worker. It is because
    of their efforts and their dedication that the rail industry
    has been able to achieve so many improvements over the last
    couple of decades, but there is still much work that needs to
    be done.
        Currently, we are enjoying some of the most robust funding
    in Amtrak's history. So it should be no surprise that 2024 was
    a record year for ridership. Not only were more people able to
    enjoy the benefits of rail travel, but rural communities were
    better equipped to directly connect their citizens with the
    rest of the country. This means better access to work and
    medical care with fewer cars on roads and the highways. But,
    like every other passenger rail service on the planet, Amtrak
    cannot survive on farebox revenue alone, which is why adequate
    funding is so important.
        But it is not just funding that is needed on Amtrak; it is
    legislative and regulatory support to protect the workers and
    riders from violent assailants. Almost daily, a train,
    platform, or customer service worker is threatened verbally or
    physically while simply trying to perform the functions of
    their job. It is not uncommon for conductors to be cussed out,
    spit on, punched, or worse. But even more troubling is the
    limitations on responding law enforcement officers to do
    anything about it.
        Unlike aviation, rail lacks sufficient statutes to handle
    bad actors accordingly. More often than not, an assaulter, once
    detained, is forced to disembark the train in which the assault
    took place, but because arrest is not permissible, they are
    permitted to just wait on the platform and then board the next
    train--expanding the threat and not limiting it.
        Our members' main priority when they are at work is to
    perform the functions of their jobs to the best of their
    ability day in and day out. They want to get to where they are
    going safely, without incident, and then back home to their
    families the same way they went to work. They take pride in
    safely moving passengers and freight, and they are proud to see
    a job well done. I think this is why there is so much internal
    conflict in the rail space today, because workers are being
    asked to do more with less, resulting in diminished service and
    deficient safety processes and protocols.
        Training in the freight rail side of the industry has
    become abysmal in the majority of Class I railroads. While some
    positive changes have been made on at least one major railroad,
    the reality is that carriers are more focused on the shortest
    path rather than the most efficient one.
        Serious and concerning reductions in training timelines are
    now present, and they are having an adverse impact, not just on
    safety but also on the attraction and retention of the railroad
    workforce. Trains are growing longer, heavier, and more
    burdensome on neighborhoods and communities. Conductors and
    engineers are being asked to do more with less. The onboard
    technologies are not wholly reliable, while others, like
    wayside detectors, are still seemingly flipped on and off like
    a switch.
        Train accident and incident frequency continues to creep
    up, despite fewer trains on the system, an indicator of the
    dangers of long trains. And yard accidents are becoming a
    serious concern.
        The answer does not lie simply in new technology and
    waivers from critical safe rulemaking and/or regulations. It
    lies in a steadfast commitment to achieving the safest course.
    Technology is not safer simply because it is technological. It
    is people that make the difference.
        President Trump acknowledged this truth in his support of
    the International Longshoremen's Association's fight against
    automation. Labor should not be viewed as adversaries; we are
    the key to success. After all, it is a two-person crew that has
    brought about the safest and richest era ever in railroading
    history. It is the carmen and electricians best qualified to
    perform the required inspections that produce the best results.
    And it is all of the craft workers that drive the truest
    pursuit to achieving the safest course.
        To close, I want to align my comment with the President's
    recent statements about the need for a transparent Government.
    The only way to gather, analyze, and interpret data, or to
    introduce new innovations is to do so transparently and
    inclusively, with all stakeholders having a seat at the table
    and an equal voice in the process. After all, it is the workers
    that are best suited to speak to the truths and realities of
    the impacts or potential effects of the consistency of the data
    and the technology desired and being developed.
        Innovation should absolutely be considered but not for the
    sake of safety. There is no one better suited to drive every
    conversation and every effort toward safety than labor. Our
    mission is simple, and it does not waver. Safety will always
    lead the way. We stand ready to work with you and your offices
    to get us there. Again, I thank you for the opportunity.
        [Mr. Cassity's prepared statement follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Jared Cassity, Deputy National Safety and
        Legislative Director, Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation
                   Workers-Transportation Division (SMART-TD)
        Chairman Webster, Ranking Member Titus, and Honorable Members of
    the Subcommittee,
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the current state
    of America's freight and passenger rail network. As Deputy National
    Safety and Legislative Department Director for SMART-TD and head of
    SMART-TD's National Safety Team, which collaborates with the National
    Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) in investigating rail disasters and
    incidents, I speak on behalf of the men and women of the rail industry
    who are committed to ensuring a safe, efficient, and robust
    transportation system for our nation.
        I have had no greater pleasure in my career than the opportunity to
    represent the single most significant factor of what sets our railroad
    industry above the rest--and that is the American railroad worker. It
    is because of their efforts and their dedication that the rail industry
    has been able to achieve so many improvements over the last couple of
    decades, but there is still much work that needs to be done.
        As we look to the future, the continued investment in passenger
    rail throughout the United States is not only a critical step forward
    in addressing transportation needs but also an investment in our
    economy, our workforce, and our future. Over the past few years, the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (IIJA) has laid a foundational framework
    for this transformation by granting five years of advanced
    appropriations for passenger rail development. This funding has played
    a pivotal role in accelerating the progress of intercity passenger rail
    and has brought us closer than ever to realizing the vision of a high-
    speed rail network that can compete with the best in the world.
        Unfortunately, there is no passenger rail line in operation today--
    anywhere in the world--that came into existence or continues to operate
    successfully based solely on fare box revenue. These systems are, first
    and foremost, investments in the infrastructure of nations and in their
    economic growth. Without the necessary funding to ensure their
    development, construction, and maintenance, passenger rail will not be
    able to reach its full potential in the U.S., nor will it be able to
    sustain current levels of service.
        The importance of continued government commitment cannot be
    overstated. Maintaining, operating, and expanding our passenger rail
    network is a complex and large-scale endeavor that requires public
    investment to guarantee success. President Trump has long been
    recognized as a builder of big things--projects that are ambitious,
    transformative, and capable of changing the future of our country.
    Reinvigorating our national passenger rail system and igniting possible
    high-speed rail partners is a project that is perfectly tailored to his
    capabilities and expertise. These projects offer an unprecedented
    opportunity to create jobs, stimulate economic growth, and enhance our
    nation's competitiveness in the global economy.
        We know that investments in rail will generate significant benefits
    for the American people. First and foremost, it will create a vast
    number of good-paying union jobs in the building and maintaining of the
    necessary infrastructure. These jobs will not only help to construct
    the rail network but will also support the daily operation of an
    expanded rail industry, bringing economic prosperity to communities
    across the nation. By connecting more cities, regions, and markets,
    especially rural, passenger rail has the potential to provide greater
    accessibility to opportunities, reduce congestion in other forms of
    transportation, and lower the carbon footprint of travel.
        Moreover, adequately funding our passenger rail systems will create
    a competitive market that will directly challenge the air and auto
    industries. This competition will drive innovation, lower prices, and
    improve services for all travelers. Additionally, this expansion will
    profoundly impact American manufacturing, including the production of
    rail cars, locomotives, and other critical components, helping
    revitalize American industry and ensure our nation remains globally
    competitive.
        The expansion of passenger rail across the United States has the
    potential to usher in a transportation renaissance not seen since the
    establishment of the Interstate Highway System under President Dwight
    D. Eisenhower. Just as that investment transformed our nation's
    mobility; passenger rail can be the catalyst for a new era of economic
    growth, environmental sustainability, and national connectivity.
        At this moment, the rail industry is ready to make this vision a
    reality. Rail labor is committed to ensuring that the employees and
    communities involved in this monumental effort are safeguarded
    throughout the process. We are prepared to work together with all
    stakeholders to build a safe and sustainable passenger rail network
    that benefits all Americans.
        To achieve the goals of national interconnectivity and economic
    revitalization, we must ensure long-term, guaranteed funding for the
    development of high-speed rail and the continued modernization of our
    passenger rail network. The future of passenger rail in the United
    States depends on it, and I urge the members of this subcommittee to
    support a legislative and financial framework that guarantees the
    success of this transformative initiative.
        In addition to the infrastructure needed to make freight and
    passenger rail a success in this country, I would like to focus on the
    equally important workforce development component.
        One of the most significant opportunities we have to improve the
    rail systems in this country is the development of a robust, well-
    trained workforce. However, expanding our rail systems without
    addressing the holes in the current training programs offered by the
    rail carriers is a missed opportunity that could increase the risk to
    workers and the communities we serve.
        The railroads have made some significant improvements to their
    infrastructure, but if we are serious about the future of rail
    transportation, it is time we commit to ensuring that our workforce is
    properly trained, supported, and capable of meeting the growing demands
    of the system and the future.
        Currently, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) is responsible
    for approving initial training and ongoing education programs for
    certified railroad workers. However, little specificity is required
    within those programs, which results in a lack of safety standards and
    deficiencies within the rail network. Additionally, the regulations are
    written so that rail carriers are free to make significant reductions
    to their programs without any meaningful consideration or oversight.
    This has resulted in sub-par training programs prioritizing operational
    needs over a safe work environment.
        This gap in training oversight is a disservice to our members and
    the American public. Inadequate training programs that focus only on
    meeting the bare minimum federal standards do not equip railroad
    workers with the skills necessary to operate safely in a rapidly
    evolving industry. It is time we recognize that proper safety is rooted
    in the quality and depth of training, not just ticking boxes to fulfill
    regulatory requirements.
        At the same time, expanding and improving the rail system presents
    an opportunity to incentivize rail carriers to do the right thing by
    their workforce. With the federal government investing heavily in the
    expansion of rail infrastructure, including through the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law and other programs, there is a clear opportunity to
    require carriers to invest in high-quality training programs for their
    workers. The federal government has the power to link funding and new
    market opportunities to the implementation of robust training and
    safety programs. Given the financial influence that Congress and the
    Administration hold, there is no reason why the rail industry should
    not be compelled to improve its training practices, with clear
    incentives tied to safety outcomes.
        The rail labor community has been actively working to fill the gaps
    left by rail corporations in terms of training. For example, SMART-TD
    recently secured a grant of over $600,000 from the FRA's Consolidated
    Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) program. Combined
    with matching funds, this allows us to invest in training programs that
    supplement deficiencies in the carriers' programs. A critical gap we've
    identified is the lack of formal training for conductors and engineers
    who are tasked with overseeing On-the-Job Training (OJT) for new hires.
    Too often, these seasoned workers are placed in the role of a trainer
    without receiving any training on how to be effective educators. They
    are given no checklists of skills to guide their trainees or even a say
    in whether they want to assume this responsibility. The result is too
    often poor training provided by reluctant coaches who are not equipped
    with the tools necessary to develop new railroaders into safety-
    conscious, skilled workers.
        For example, on most Class I carriers, it is not uncommon to see a
    conductor working on their first day as a promoted conductor (having
    never worked alone) and being required to train an on-the-job trainee.
        SMART-TD is working to develop a comprehensive training curriculum
    for conductors and engineers focused on improving OJT practices and
    ensuring that new hires receive consistent, high-quality instruction.
    We are also pursuing the development of online training tools and are
    actively seeking partnerships with railroads to expand the reach of
    these training programs. Our hope is to coordinate these federally
    funded efforts with those of our brothers and sisters in the Railroad
    Signalmen Union, who have also received a CRISI grant. By pooling our
    resources, we can maximize the return on investment in safety and
    training programs and better protect both railroad workers and the
    communities we serve.
        One of the programs SMART-TD is investing in is our workforce
    development grant, which is intended to spearhead de-escalation
    training for our members in passenger and commuter rail operations.
    Again, we can invest in expanding rail service, but if the crews
    providing that passenger service are not equipped to maintain civility
    on the trains, it will not be successful in the long term. With transit
    violence on the rise in recent years, it is of the utmost importance to
    offer these frontline employees the training necessary to keep
    themselves and the passengers they will serve safe.
        Currently, our Amtrak members do not receive significant de-
    escalation training. As we push to expand passenger and high-speed rail
    to the forefront of American everyday life, this cannot be the accepted
    standard.
        This SMART-TD project is an example of federal dollars (in this
    case, a CRISI grant) being used by labor organizations to bring about
    mutual benefit for members as well as the general public. It is also an
    example of a project that would benefit from a long-term commitment of
    federal support. Safety on our nation's rails and throughout transit is
    a problem that can no longer be ignored. With federal assistance, our
    labor organization is perfectly situated to address it effectively
    through partnering with the federal government.
        This brings me to my final point: the critical state of rail safety
    in the U.S. Each year, there are approximately 1,000 train derailments
    in this country. That's nearly three derailments every day. Every one
    of these incidents signifies a breakdown in the system and the
    potential to cause catastrophic harm to rail workers, the communities
    we travel through, and the environment. The derailment of a Norfolk
    Southern train in East Palestine, Ohio, on February 3, 2023, is a
    tragic example of what can happen when safety is compromised and the
    consequences of poor safety oversight are ignored. Two years later, the
    situation has little improved, and the rail industry continues to face
    the consequences of decades of underinvestment in safety.
        Despite the growing body of evidence pointing to systemic safety
    issues within the rail industry, legislative efforts to address these
    problems have been stalled. Both the Vance/Brown Rail Safety Act of
    2023 and the Rail Safety Enhancement Act of 2024 were introduced in
    both the House and Senate during the 118th Congress. As we hold this
    hearing today, neither have been given the opportunity to receive a
    floor vote in either chamber of Congress. These bills address key
    concerns, including the need for more substantial safety standards,
    more thorough safety inspections of locomotives and rail cars, and more
    accountability for rail companies. These efforts must be given the
    chance to move forward because the current state of rail safety is
    simply unacceptable.
        The rail industry has become dangerously unchecked, driven by Wall
    Street metrics at the expense of safety. Trains have grown longer,
    heavier, and more complex, while rail workers are pushed to move
    freight faster, with fewer resources and less training. If we continue
    down this path, the inevitable result will be catastrophic for both our
    workers and the American economy.
        This is especially true considering the ever-expanding reduction in
    inspections and inspection times, the intermittent use of technology
    safety devices (like wayside detectors and camera systems), and the
    unjustified and pervasive desire of railroads to reduce onboard crew
    size on the majority of this nation's freight trains.
        One of the most significant pieces of the puzzle to achieving true
    safety in the rail industry is the data that isn't collected. Every
    single day, accidents are prevented in this country because of the
    presence of a two-person crew, yet no reports or data are collected to
    measure those successes. If we were to collect them, it would reveal
    why the advent of the two-person crew has brought about the safest and
    wealthiest era in railroading history. Data is important, but it does
    not tell the whole story unless it is pulled from the whole story. To
    this point, we know that two-person crews present the safest method of
    freight train operations because the data tell us so, but because there
    is no meaningful or applicable American data to support a reduction,
    then the suggestion to make such a reduction can only equate to risk.
        Sharp shooting data to fulfill a narrative or business plan is an
    unfortunate reality in the railroad industry. It is easy to say ``data-
    based decisions,'' but how does one determine the appropriate data is
    actually being considered? This is why it is critical that the
    government maintain transparency and accountability in the waiver and
    rulemaking process. We cannot accept that technology is safer simply
    because it is technological, nor should we accept information as fact-
    based without hearing from the people most affected by these types of
    program developments and operational changes. The American people
    depend on us to get it right, and, rightfully, the only way to do so is
    with all stakeholders having a seat at the table.
        I urge this committee and the whole of the 119th Congress to
    recognize that the safety of rail workers and the communities we serve
    must be prioritized. The railroads can no longer be allowed to act as
    their own regulatory authority. It is time to restore oversight,
    strengthen training, and ensure that the safety of the American people
    is put ahead of corporate profits.
        In conclusion, it is clear that a multifaceted approach is needed
    to address the rail industry's shortcomings. This includes robust,
    federally backed workforce development, enforceable safety regulations,
    and a commitment to building a safe and sustainable world-class
    passenger rail system for the future.
        I am confident that, with the leadership on this committee and
    President Trump's support, we can make this vision a reality and
    provide the resources and safeguards necessary to protect our workers
    and our communities.
        Thank you for your time and for considering the critical role of
    long-term investment in high-speed rail in America's transportation
    future.

        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you very much.
        I will now turn to questions from the panel. I recognize
    myself for 5 minutes. My first question goes both to Mr.
    Jefferies and Mr. Baker.
        The purpose of safety regulations should be to achieve a
    safety outcome in the most efficient means possible. Most FRA
    regulations are prescriptive in their approach. How could the
    industry benefit from a more performance-based approach to
    establish standards while also allowing operators flexibility
    in how the standards are achieved? I will start with Mr.
    Jefferies.
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
        So we are a 200-plus-year-old industry and the original
    federally regulated industry. And we've got the Code of Federal
    Regulations to support that. We still have regulations on the
    books from the steam engine era that are 50 years old. And what
    that does, what that results in when they aren't updated, when
    they don't evolve with the railroad, with the evolution of
    technology and innovation is to lock you into perhaps a
    backwards-looking operating practice that may or may not result
    in the highest level of safety.
        And, when you think about regulations, I think we would all
    agree you should be thinking about the outcomes that you are
    seeking, the safety outcome you are seeking versus the input
    you are providing. And so, when you have a performance-based
    regulation, when you have an outcomes-based regulation, you set
    a standard, and you allow for multiple ways to achieve that
    standard, also allowing for new developments in technology, new
    developments in innovation, new operating practices that can
    achieve, if not exceed, that standard. So not locking in
    current technology or current operating practice is key, in our
    opinion, in order to advance safety down the road into the
    future.
        Mr. Baker. I would add, Mr. Chairman, that the difference
    between short lines and Class I's I think illustrates your
    point: A regulation that would work for a 20,000-person Fortune
    500 company with 13 different unions probably makes no sense
    for a 5-person company with 1 locomotive and maybe 1 union.
        And so I think common sense would tell you, in that
    scenario, that a performance-based, outcome-based regulation
    would make more sense than a prescriptive Government telling
    you exactly how to do it.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Anyone else want to comment on
    that?
        Yes, Mr. Cassity.
        Mr. Cassity. Chairman Webster, thank you for the question.
    What I will add is labor supports the idea of performance-based
    regulations inasmuch as that what we are doing or trying to
    achieve is done safely. We do have a lot of regulations that
    look backward, but that speaks to the fact that how we achieve
    the level of safety we have today is that regulations made sure
    we have the guidelines and protocols to get us there.
        And so, when we consider innovation, please rest assured
    that labor supports new technology and innovation to help us
    work safer. But we need to make sure that the umbrella is not
    too big so that, when the new technologies are being developed,
    that there is not too much freedom because the impact could be
    great on the American public. These are new ideas and new
    things. So we need to make sure that we have the right
    processes in place.
        And, when I said in my testimony that labor stands ready to
    work, it is vitally important that we play a role in these
    technologies and innovations because we are the ones that are
    most impacted by it. And we are also the ones best suited to
    protect the public and how it can impact them. So, when we look
    forward to a new process for regulations, safety has got to
    lead the way. We cannot accept technology is safer simply
    because it is technological. We have to make sure we are doing
    what is right.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Can each of you or one or all of
    you describe the importance of permitting reform for building
    and maintaining robust and safe rail infrastructure networks?
    You want to take that one?
        Mr. Baker. I would be happy to. It is a cliche, but it is
    very true in this case: Time is money. Permitting reform--when
    projects are delayed--and CRISI projects are a great example--
    when they are delayed, costs go up, and scope gets reduced. So
    getting it done faster just means more gets done and the
    communities and shippers feel the benefits sooner.
        So, for most short line projects, CRISI projects, they are
    really quite simple. They typically involve track rehab in an
    existing right-of-way. It is obvious from day one that a
    project like that is going to have no significant environmental
    impact, and yet still we somehow frequently spend a year or
    more in sort of an elaborate box-checking exercise when
    everyone knows the outcome, and I would say, let's just get to
    it.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. That is the end of my time. So I
    recognize Ms. Titus for questions.
        Ms. Titus. We will hear a lot about safety today, and
    certainly it is a priority.
        Mr. Cassity, you said transportation workers are the
    backbone of our infrastructure system, and I certainly agree
    with that. We need to be sure that they can perform their
    duties in a knowledgeable way, in a safe way, in a way that
    benefits themselves as well as their communities.
        I understand that SMART participated in nine National
    Transportation Safety Board investigations last year. And I
    would just ask you, with all this emphasis on safety, why are
    conductors still getting hurt on the job? Do you notice
    patterns? Is there anything that we can do about it that might
    be helpful?
        Mr. Cassity. Thank you for the question, Ranking Member
    Titus. That is a loaded question. Why are our members still
    getting hurt on the job is a multitude of reasoning. I would
    start with training. When I hired on with the railroad--I come
    from the craft that--those who may not know that I started as a
    conductor on CSX Transportation and was promoted to a
    locomotive engineer in 2008.
        Our training was robust, and it was quite different. In
    fact, I actually had to pay almost $6,000 just to hire on with
    the railroad to transition that to what we are looking at today
    where you get a bonus for taking the job. But the point I am
    trying to make is that the emphasis was on training. We had to
    go through a regimented process in a school of roughly 6 weeks.
    And we had roughly 6 months of training.
        The way the training programs work in the regulatory world
    is that the railroads are required to develop programs and
    submit those programs to FRA. But there is so much freedom in
    the training programs the way that they are approved that they
    are able to make adjustments or slash timelines without any
    oversight whatsoever. And what we are seeing now today is
    training that is being rushed through at astronomical levels.
    In some cases, in 6 weeks, you see people from hire to working
    as a conductor, and so that is the single greatest factor.
        There is not an incident anywhere in this country that we
    have had the opportunity to investigate with the NTSB that
    training did not have a role in that. When you look at some of
    the practices and the efficiencies and the pressures, the
    external pressures that are being put on workers, then you have
    a recipe for disaster.
        So there are a lot of things that we can improve, but to
    make the answer short, we have got to get back to taking on
    training--not focusing on regulatory minimums and only doing
    what is required by the regulation, but actually owning safety
    and making sure that our folks are comfortable in their own
    skin when they are at work and aware of what is going on and
    what changes have been made and how to do the job effectively
    and efficiently.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you very much. I think we should look at
    that as we move forward. I appreciate that.
        Mr. Jefferies, I have just been in this position a short
    time, and I have already had a number of Members talk to me
    about blocked crossings and long trains and the problems that
    they cause in their communities. I understand that this
    committee was told last year that they shouldn't act on any
    legislation until the report came out of the National Academies
    of Sciences on the problem of long trains that was mandated by
    the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Has that report come out?
        Mr. Jefferies. I believe it may have, yes.
        Ms. Titus. I think it came out September 17th.
        Mr. Jefferies. Okay.
        Ms. Titus. So I would just ask you, what is in that report
    that says that we now can act on or should act on to address
    this problem of long trains and blocked crossings?
        Mr. Jefferies. So I thank you for the question, Ranking
    Member. If I could quickly hit on Mr. Cassity's comments before
    I get into this question: 2023 was actually the industry's all-
    time low in employee injuries, the rate of injuries, in the
    entire industry's history for Class I's. For 2024, we are still
    closing out that data. Through 10 months, it is slightly lower
    than 2023. Always more work to be done. Rigorous training is
    absolutely key, but I just wanted to include that data point.
        When it comes to trains and train makeup and train length,
    the median train length of a Class I train right now, meaning
    50 percentile, is about 5,000 feet, and about 90 percent are
    shorter than 10,000 feet, and 99 percent are shorter than
    14,000 feet. And train makeup is a subject of commodity mix. It
    is a subject of what the infrastructure capacity is. And trains
    are built to be managed based on what the capacity of both the
    commodities being moved and the length of the train. And I can
    tell you, in looking at the train accident rate, as we have
    seen in certain areas, trains grow a bit longer depending on
    commodity mix, largely driven by the decrease in coal, increase
    in intermodal----
        Ms. Titus [interrupting]. Let's get to the report.
        Mr. Jefferies [continuing]. We have seen the rate decrease
    from 2022 through 2023 through the first 10 months of 2024. And
    so we continue to operate trains in a safe manner regardless of
    length and commodity mix.
        Ms. Titus. I appreciate that, but my question was about the
    report, what it said that Congress can now act on, since this
    information has come out about these long trains and blocked
    crossings. I could just briefly say that Congress should
    empower regulatory agencies to address challenges by requiring
    railroads to put cars together in the safest configuration,
    ensuring crews are trained, authorizing the FRA to obtain and
    publicly share data on blocked crossings, and imposing
    financial penalties of sufficient magnitude to ensure the
    crossings don't remain blocked. And I think this is something
    we need to look at as we move forward with this
    reauthorization.
        Thank you. And I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentlelady yields back.
        Mr. LaMalfa you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate it.
        And thanks to our panelists. And I am going to have a
    couple of questions for Mr. Jefferies and Mr. Baker to start up
    with. And it is going to be based on our old pals CARB in
    California, California Air Resources Board. As you know, they
    submitted in 2023 a petition to EPA to be granted yet another
    waiver under the Clean Air Act to set its own standards for
    locomotives called the In-Use Locomotive Regulation. It would
    require by 2030--not loud enough? Part of it is me. I am kind
    of broken too, so anyway.
        So, by 2030, only locomotive engines made 2008 or newer are
    available in California under that reg. So it could be that
    that reg, that request would violate the Clean Air Act, which
    explicitly prohibits States from setting their own standards
    whenever we use locomotive engines but also isn't
    technologically feasible at this point.
        Now CARB has seen the light and withdrawn for now its
    waiver application to EPA for the in-use locomotive reg. So,
    gentlemen, please tell this committee what the economic impact
    of the railroad issue would have been if EPA had gone through
    with this rule, and how would any cost increases basically hit
    the consumers? So, first, Mr. Jefferies for a moment and then
    Mr. Baker.
        Mr. Jefferies. So what the impact of the rule would have
    been? Well, I can tell you for the two Class I railroads
    located in California, BNSF and Union Pacific, the annual cost
    would have been $800 million per year, so $1.6 billion
    collectively. And I know that the short lines have reported
    that at least 25 percent of their companies would be put out of
    business. We are gratified that CARB withdrew its request to
    EPA. The request was unlawful, not only under the Clean Air Act
    but also under ICCTA, the Interstate Commerce Committee
    Termination Act. Certainly the overarching goals of the
    regulation were laudable, to move to further decrease
    emissions, and that is something railroads continue to work on
    to this day.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Well, you are working as technology improves,
    not heavy-handed mandates.
        Mr. Baker.
        Mr. Baker. Yes, sir. We were extraordinarily concerned
    about that waiver. You would not have thought that CARB could
    come up with a waiver that the last EPA wouldn't have approved,
    but they seem to have found one. And so we were pleased when it
    was finally withdrawn. It would have been completely
    catastrophic for the short line railroad industry.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Tell me, Mr. Baker, there is a quote out there
    saying that CARB acknowledges that a percentage of short lines,
    they know they would go out of business.
        Mr. Baker. Yes, even CARB's own rule, they said, if short
    line railroads can't pass on these costs to their customers,
    which most couldn't, they would just go out of business. And
    they just left that in there as, like, well, that is an okay
    result. And we obviously found that pretty horrifying, and
    their shippers found that horrifying and the communities.
        Mr. LaMalfa. It is very important in my area of ag
    products, moving rice or other things in the area or wood from
    the mill, being able to get it to the mainline in a timely
    manner. And it is just over. It is amazing.
        So tell me about this, gentlemen, if President Trump has
    come out on the side of not allowing this mandate to come
    forward, but what if we have a change politically, and should
    we have a change of the laws to make certain that CARB doesn't
    have the ability to get waivers in the future and then just
    keep some continuity in the industry?
        Mr. Jefferies. I would say absolutely. Again, we think it
    is what CARB tried to do with locomotive regulations was in
    conflict with two existing laws, but apparently that needs
    further clarification.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Yes.
        Mr. Jefferies, you touched on at-grade crossing. And I have
    great concern with that because, in rural areas, that is about
    it. And my understanding from a previous hearing, and if I am
    remembering correctly, is that to make an at-grade crossing
    into a split crossing is about $40 million, at least in my
    high-cost State of California. So what do you see in that at-
    grade elimination program? For every one that goes out, are we
    going to put one in that is a split grade, or are we going to
    see a bunch eliminated? Because we have this mess of high-speed
    rail going through the Central Valley that is going to cut off
    a lot of farms and access. So touch on that, please.
        Mr. Jefferies. So I think grade crossing elimination is
    absolutely key in certain situations. Certainly, it doesn't
    apply everywhere, but I think, in areas anywhere you have a
    grade crossing, an at-grade crossing, driver education is
    important so that folks know to ``see track, think trains and
    look for trains that might be oncoming.'' Having appropriate
    safety equipment at the crossing, again, is a key safety
    attribute. But there is no one-size-fits-all. The important
    thing, though, is that folks understand that, when road and
    rail connects, the drivers need to assume there is a train
    coming and verify that that is not happening before trying to
    get across the track.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, I mean, if we have got lights and signals
    and arms and all this stuff. So, after a point, it becomes the
    Darwin awards or something.
        So, anyway, I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Carson.
        Mr. Carson. Thank you, Chairman.
        One of the many Executive orders this week froze hiring and
    infrastructure funding. Considering that many infrastructure
    projects really get started in the spring, as you all know,
    this timing was anything but good. In fact, the Federal Highway
    Administration had to shut down all payments because of this
    very poorly drafted Executive order.
        Last evening, I, along with my team, heard from the
    metropolitan planning organization, our local one, and they are
    very concerned about the damage this will do to infrastructure
    projects that are underway or at least soon to start. Do any of
    you have concerns about this new funding freeze damaging your
    priority objectives? And, if so, please tell us how these
    Executive orders will effectively hurt your progress.
        Mr. Baker. I would agree, Congressman, the Executive order
    was not real well worded. I think the initial 1-day reaction
    was a blanket pause across all of DOT on all disbursements. I
    do think that the clarification memo posted on the White House
    website last night clarified that it was really only meant to
    deal with what they are calling Green New Deal projects and EV
    mandates. So I think, in reality, after 36 hours of extreme
    concern, I don't think really many rail projects at all will be
    affected, but it was probably a lesson in being careful with
    words that get posted to the Federal Register in Executive
    orders.
        Mr. Carson. To that point, while we are there, Mr. Baker,
    you know very well that the great Hoosier State, Indiana, is
    the home to many very thriving short line railroads, which
    helps us live up to the Hoosier nickname, the Crossroads of
    America.
        What is working well now in terms of short lines and your
    customers? And what are the challenges ahead for this very
    unique sector? And how can this committee help your efforts
    effectively?
        Mr. Baker. Yes, sir. There are a lot of short lines in all
    of Indiana. I believe there are four in your district alone.
    The Napoleon, Defiance & Western is a great example. Ten years
    ago, there was a viral--at least viral for the world of freight
    railroading--a viral video showing a train moving down that
    track at about 5 miles an hour, and it was wavy, and it was
    messy, and it was called the worst railroad in America, and it
    probably was.
        That railroad has now received a CRISI grant. It has
    upgraded its infrastructure. It has doubled its customer base.
    It is moving faster and moving safer. It is good for the
    community. It is good for the State. It is good for the
    shippers. It is a fabulous success story, and that is
    replicated in multiple places in Indiana. And, again, at the
    risk of harping over and over on the same point, the CRISI
    grant is a huge help for short line railroads. It can be
    transformational. And it just lets railroads like Napoleon,
    Defiance & Western in Indiana do projects that otherwise
    wouldn't be possible.
        Mr. Carson. Thank you, Chairman.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Nehls, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Nehls. Well, I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman.
        I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the freight and
    passenger rail network. As we gear up for the surface
    reauthorization, I have several priorities that I will be
    advocating for and that I believe will increase safety.
        Mr. Jefferies, I want to commend you for your comments on
    the Railroad Crossing Elimination Grant Program. I do believe
    we are of one mind, one mind that the safest crossing is the
    crossing that is not there. I believe labor supports it as
    well.
        I would like to say, hey, good to see you Greg, good to see
    you, Jared.
        As we work on surface reauthorization and specifically the
    rail title, I will most assuredly be advocating for that
    program and another one to modernize the tank fleet with 21st-
    century telematics. The Telematics Grant Program that I
    authored in the Railway Safety Enhancement Act will give
    shippers and tank car owners vital information about their
    assets' health and information about where their products are
    in the rail network. I believe this information is the property
    of the tank car owners and must be shared with the operators in
    real time as their goods are moving along the rail network.
        Mr. Jefferies, the FCC's allocation for the 900 megahertz
    spectrum is a valuable opportunity for the railroads to enhance
    safety, reliability, and operational efficiency. Will the Class
    I railroads commit to comply with the FCC order on spectrum by
    September of this year? I think they want to know by September
    of 2025. Will you do that?
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for the question. And you are spot
    on with our shared views on rail crossing elimination, and
    thank you for your support on that. Yes, we will comply. I have
    talked to our internal experts, and we are on schedule to
    comply. Be happy to bring in those experts to sit down with you
    and your team in more detail. But that process is in place, and
    we are moving forward.
        Mr. Nehls. And will you commit to promptly inform the FCC
    and members of this committee if there are any issues with
    compliance?
        Mr. Jefferies. Absolutely.
        Mr. Nehls. Once the railroads are done moving to the A-
    block within the 900 band, can you share what the railroad
    industry's plans are to further develop that spectrum to show a
    continued commitment to safety and what the timeframe the
    industry will need to achieve that?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, certainly, that is what we are
    developing right now. And, when you look at spectrum use and
    what we have been able to build out along our network, through
    our PTC network, we have got a 54,000-mile 5G network now,
    moving on to tighter bands of spectrum, that will open up more
    capacity, allow to us to really take kind of the wireless
    backbone to new heights.
        Mr. Nehls. Okay. I am going to have followup questions for
    the record on this topic, and I expect them to be answered. I
    would like to pivot to a discussion about C3RS. Mr. Jefferies,
    what changes do railroads recommend to the Confidential Close
    Call Reporting System, which is at C3RS, to get more of the
    Class I railroads to enroll in the program? Because, if you
    remember, you sent a letter saying all the Class I's would
    enroll in this after East Palestine.
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for that. And it is a good
    discussion to have again.
        So two of the Class I's have signed up to the program. We
    have long held views that edits need to be made to the program.
    When folks think about the ability to report concerns
    confidentially--first and foremost, every railroad has a system
    like that in place.
        Mr. Nehls. Sure.
        Mr. Jefferies. And following the aviation----
        Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. Let's just--Mr. Jefferies, hate
    to cut you off, but let's get it done. I have 1 minute left.
        Mr. Jefferies. Okay.
        Mr. Nehls. I believe you testified before the Senate
    Commerce Committee in March of 2023. Then-Senator Vance asked
    if 30 seconds was enough time to perform car inspections, to
    which you replied, quote, ``Thirty seconds doesn't seem like a
    long enough time to do an indepth inspection.''
        Should there be a minimum time requirement for carmen to do
    inspections? And if not, what do you recommend?
        Mr. Jefferies. So I would say there is no one-size-fits-
    all. There are myriad inspections that occur. And while 30
    seconds may not be a lot, there may be zero time required if it
    is an autonomous inspection.
        Mr. Nehls. All right. Fair enough.
        Let the record reflect that Vice President Vance introduced
    legislation to mandate two-person crew size. That was endorsed
    by President Trump. Incoming Secretary Duffy, who just moved
    out of Commerce Committee by a vote of 28 to zero, confirmed he
    would not pull back the two-man work rule.
        As a member of this committee, I support that rule. The
    idea that Republicans will do whatever Big Business wants and
    will not take into account the needs of the working men, it is
    outdated. I will just say, that dog doesn't hunt.
        With that, I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Moulton.
        Mr. Moulton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I just want to begin with a word of appreciation for
    the comments from my colleague from Texas, who has been a real
    partner on working to find good solutions for rail safety, rail
    safety solutions that take the industry forward, not backward,
    and improve safety for all, and make the point to all of
    America that rail is a far safer way to transport things,
    especially hazmat, than trucks. And that point seems to be lost
    on a lot of people.
        Mr. Chairman, in your opening remarks, you talked about
    improving safety through technology and innovation. That is
    what we are talking about. When the industry comes back to us
    and says you just want to install defect detectors, a 1960s
    technology, when you have the opportunity to put in telematics
    so that every engineer on every train knows the instantaneous
    bearing temperature of every wheel and can immediately respond
    to a problem--and, oh, by the way, it is not so bad that the
    customers also know where their cars are for the first time in
    history. That is about taking the industry forward, not back.
        Now, Mr. Chairman, I would be remiss if I didn't also
    mention that you talked about decreasing dependence on
    Government funding for railroads. It is interesting that you
    don't talk about decreasing dependence on Government funding
    for highways or airlines. We have subsidized highways and
    airlines to the tune of billions and billions--hundreds of
    billions of dollars over the decades.
        It is interesting that the freight railroad system is asked
    to compete against this heavily subsidized alternative. Freight
    railroads are really the only transportation system in America
    that funds its own infrastructure through the private sector,
    right?
        Now, President Trump has instituted this new Department of
    Government Efficiency. I think the idea is that the Government
    should invest in efficiency and perhaps not subsidize
    inefficiency.
        So, if the only transportation system efficient enough to
    pay for its own infrastructure is freight rail, then why do we
    continue spending billions and billions and billions of
    taxpayer dollars every year subsidizing highways and truckers?
    Shouldn't we be investing in efficiency?
        Does that make sense to you, Mr. Jefferies?
        Mr. Jefferies. One hundred percent.
        Mr. Moulton. You also mentioned, Mr. Chairman, that Amtrak
    should be off Government support, but you didn't mention that
    our highways should be off Government support or that our
    airlines should be off Government support. It is an interesting
    contrast.
        Mr. Cassity, you mentioned high-speed rail in your opening
    comments, or your testimony. It is interesting that America is
    the only developed country in the world not investing in high-
    speed rail--the only developed country in the entire world. I
    would challenge anyone here to think of another developed
    country that is not investing in high-speed rail. We are just
    barely starting.
        Now, is that because there is some vast high-speed-rail
    conspiracy that has infected every other country on Earth and
    just hasn't hit the United States yet? Or does it actually make
    sense--make economic sense to invest in high-speed rail?
        Mr. Cassity. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
        It absolutely makes sense to invest in high-speed rail. We
    fall short in comparison to the other countries, and one of the
    most advantageous opportunities we have is to expand the rail
    system in this country, and high-speed rail is that
    opportunity. And we fully support and are on board to see more
    rail for the citizens of this country.
        And so, we need to capitalize on that, we need to accept
    that. There are no conspiracies out there, as far as I am
    aware, of high-speed rail.
        The one hurdle we do have is that, for some reason, in this
    country, people hear ``railroads'' and they think of ancient
    technology or ancient methods of transportation. And we have to
    get outside of that box and make sure that we are talking to
    folks and letting them know what rail can do for them and how
    we can make their lives better.
        Mr. Moulton. Rail is a more efficient use of taxpayer
    dollars. It is a more efficient way to simply transport goods.
    One single train can take 150 to 300 trucks off the highway.
    That is good for everybody who uses our highways--truckers,
    passenger cars.
        We know that tens of thousands of Americans die on our
    highways every year. Railroads are far safer. They are also
    better for the environment. I mean, the benefits go on. So
    let's invest in efficiency.
        Mr. Jefferies, why does the rail industry have a reputation
    for being stodgy and old-fashioned and doing things like Mr.
    Nehls and I described, investing in old-fashioned technology
    rather than growing for the future?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, I would beg to differ, not
    surprisingly.
        Look, we are a 200-year-old industry, we are a legacy
    industry, but I can assure you, we are not your grandfather's
    railroad, we are not your father's railroad, and tomorrow's
    railroad is not going to be our railroad. And innovation and
    technology are that path forward.
        You talked about using detectors from the 1960s. That is
    why we are developing inspection portals, machine visioning,
    acoustic bearing detectors, autonomous track inspection
    technology. All of that should be encouraged, because there is
    a positive safety outcome.
        Mr. Moulton. I have lost my time. But let's hope you do
    enough of that that it actually becomes the reputation of the
    industry. That----
        Mr. Jefferies [interposing]. I am with you on that. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Moulton [continuing]. Is the opportunity before us.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Owens, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Owens. Thank you. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman and
    Ranking Member Titus. Thank you for holding this hearing today
    as the committee prepares for the surface transportation
    reauthorization. And, of course, I thank our guests.
        I am thrilled to be a new member of this subcommittee. Utah
    boasts a rich rail history, from hosting the completion of the
    transcontinental railroad at the Golden Spike Ceremony in 1869
    to our vision of a statewide inland port. Our goal is to be the
    crossroads of the West, as we serve as a vital hub for freight
    exchange across the country.
        The rail industry is one I deeply admire. In my position as
    vice chair of a subcommittee over on the Committee on Education
    and Workforce, I applaud America's freight rails in using their
    own funds on capital expenditures and upkeep expenses. While
    much of our country's infrastructure lags behind, modern
    standards and needed upgrades to freight rail is at the tip of
    the spear in its innovation.
        With an average compensation of over $149,000 and a median
    tenure of railroad employees of 13 years, this industry
    continues to be the place where people want to work, enjoy
    working, and supporting a family without a large amount of
    student debt. As a member of the Education and Workforce
    Committee, I look forward to working with you to better connect
    America's great talent to this essential industry.
        Mr. Jefferies, from the workforce perspective, what does
    your industry do differently? And how can other industries
    struggling with stagnant wages, employment and retention, and
    low morale learn from the railroads?
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for the question.
        And you hit the nail on the head. Our employees--as Mr.
    Cassity made the point, our employees are the key reason that
    we are able to serve America's communities and customers so
    well and do it at such a high level of safety. And they deserve
    our thanks every day.
        And you are right that the average tenure for a rail
    employee is almost four times that of other industries. And so
    we are very proud of that, and we want to keep our folks--keep
    them online. And that is why we have fourth-generation
    railroaders working on our teams.
        So I would put a few different pieces together.
        One, we have worked very hard over the past few years to
    build a positive momentum with our employees, whether that is
    scheduling agreements that provide a more predictable schedule
    for our operating crafts to better plan their lives; whether it
    is negotiating out paid sick benefits, of which over 93 percent
    of our employees now have; or whether it is getting a jump on
    collective bargaining so that our employees don't have to wait
    several years before they get their additional pay increases.
        And I am very pleased that, while the latest round of
    bargaining started just this past November, we already have
    five national agreements fully ratified, in place. So the
    employees of those five unions know what their salary increases
    are going to be for the next 5 years, they know their
    healthcare is going to be almost half that--the cost of their
    healthcare is going to cost almost half that of the general
    population, and they know that they are going to get additional
    days off early in their careers. Not to mention additional
    deals that have been done on a railroad-by-railroad basis to
    lock in agreements as well.
        And so it is about listening to the employees. It is about
    understanding what their priorities are. Again, we have a new
    generation of railroaders coming onto the railroad that have
    different priorities, different desires from what they want to
    see. And a lot of that is about work-life balance and,
    understandably, being able to plan your life and schedule your
    life and be home for planned events.
        And so that is a continuing effort, but I think that is a
    priority you hear from our executive level day in and day out,
    and that resonates, and we are seeing progress there.
        Mr. Owens. I just want to make a point. I mentioned earlier
    that the median tenure of a railroad employee is 13 years. The
    private sector is 3. So there is something that you are doing
    right, for sure.
        I want to add just one other question before we let you go.
    The efforts to cut redtape associated with--has been successful
    in recent years. What more can be done to fast-track routine
    maintenance and replacement construction projects without
    ignoring environmental or historic preservation concerns?
        Mr. Jefferies.
        Mr. Jefferies. So, quickly, a couple different things.
        One, Congress has already taken a huge step--in fact, taken
    it twice--when it directed the Advisory Council on Historic
    Preservation to provide the same categorical exclusions to rail
    properties as it does highway properties when replacing old
    assets. However, the ACHP has continued to ignore Congress'
    direction. So they need another reminder.
        Two, when replacing existing assets, same infrastructure,
    whether it is rail, whether it is bridges, one, limited
    reviews, of course, but also looking at the impact of that
    project. Some of the things we have seen also look at the
    impacts of the commodities that move over that project once
    complete, commodities we have a common-carrier obligation to
    move. To us, that is not part of an appropriate environmental
    review. We should be talking about the project itself with set
    timelines and shot clocks.
        Mr. Owens. Okay.
        I just want to wrap up by saying, Mr. Cassity, we are going
    to do our best in Education and Workforce to prepare some of
    the greatest kids in our country for a great industry. So just
    know, we are on top of that. We are going to make sure we
    address it in a big way.
        Thank you so much.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mrs. Foushee.
        Mrs. Foushee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
    Titus, for holding this hearing.
        And thank you to the witnesses for being with us today.
        Mr. Jefferies, are railroads currently using artificial
    intelligence to perform safety inspections? And if so, are they
    doing so in a wholly automated way, or are these AI programs
    being monitored by or used in conjunction with railroad safety
    inspectors?
        Mr. Jefferies. So the short answer is, yes, AI is being
    deployed.
        And when you think about what happens every day on the
    network, whether it is via detectors, sensors, other
    information, we gather an immense amount of data about not only
    the operations, the safety, but the service of our network.
        And so, the more data we continue to gather, we can use AI,
    through predictive analytics, to determine when a product might
    begin to show wear and tear based on historical performance.
    Or, in a service standpoint, we might be able to further
    calibrate delivery windows so that our customers can better
    have a sense of when we are going to arrive, plan their
    workday, have their employees ready. And so there are myriad
    ways.
        But, certainly, there is always a human element to that.
    So, for example, if an inspection portal identifies a potential
    flaw in a train as it runs through it, that is when you have
    the employee then take a look at that and determine exactly
    what is going on and then, if there is a need to fix it, have
    the employee go out and fix it.
        So I would say we are very much in the embryonic stage of
    how AI might be able to be deployed, but we are certainly using
    it as a way to really conduct indepth analysis to what is a
    gargantuan amount of data we pull and will continue to pull.
        Mrs. Foushee. And, secondly, I am curious what standards,
    if any, AAR has in place or is planning to put in place
    regarding the use of artificial intelligence in railway safety,
    building on what you just said.
        Mr. Jefferies. So, not only at the AAR but, also, we have
    an IT company called Railinc, located in Cary, North Carolina,
    and I would say we are figuring out that path forward now.
        Right now, AI, like I said, we are in the embryonic stages,
    and as we mature our practices at the industry level, there is
    always an opportunity to compare best practices and determine
    maybe what the best use of information may be or how to best
    address any issues identified by technology might be.
        And so, AI-specific, we don't have any sort of specific
    standard in place, but I would talk more about how technology
    plays into inspections, repairs, car repairs, et cetera.
    Absolutely, we do.
        Mrs. Foushee. Thank you.
        Mr. Cassity, we just had a near-shutdown of some of our
    Nation's ports due to disagreement between labor and management
    over increased automation.
        From your perspective with SMART-TD, in what ways do you
    see the freight railroads seeking to automate their safety
    work?
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. Thank you for the question,
    Congresswoman.
        So AI is becoming a unique challenge in that, one, it is
    needed and it has its purpose, but, two, it also is one of
    those things that we have to make sure happens in the light of
    day.
        And so, to speak to your direct question about the
    longshoremen, ways that we can see AI, obviously, there is an
    appetite or a growing desire for the railroads to eliminate
    onboard crew staff on the locomotives and the trains that are
    being operated. When you look at the technologies being
    developed and the tasks that they are equipped to do and the
    way that the railroads are approaching it, you can see the
    writing on the wall for automation.
        Very quickly, as an example, CSX recently put out a letter
    to their training mentors that they are encouraged to reduce
    training time where PTC is present, simply because they feel as
    though it relieves some of the pressures put on the conductor.
    And that is not true. When we are talking about artificial
    intelligence, it is deployed in the railroad.
        And to Mr. Jefferies' point, we do have these car portals,
    we do have track inspection, but it is not being communicated
    to the people that need it most, and that is the workers.
        And I will give you two very quick examples. In Lexington,
    Kentucky, a few weeks ago, we had a derailment. Technology that
    was deployed on a locomotive that is there through AI to scan
    the track identified a defect in the rail and said, basically,
    there was a wide gauge that was about to happen. And that
    defect went unacted on for 5 days. And then, sure enough, a
    derailment occurred on that exact point of that railroad where
    the AI detected it.
        To the flip side of that, when you talk about car portals,
    in Nebraska, we had a train with a broken wheel. It was a
    system train that went back and forth. There were at least five
    times that train and that particular car with the broken wheel
    went through the car portal, and it was identified--we have the
    pictures--but it wasn't acted upon on the railroad until the
    actual wheel failed and we had a derailment that we went to it.
        So, when we develop new technologies and we have
    innovation, we have to make sure, to Congressman Nehls' point
    and Congressman Moulton's point, that the information is going
    to where it needs to go, not just to a back room or a closet
    where it is hidden in the dark, but to the employees who hold
    that responsibility and hold that accountability to make sure
    that they stay safe, that the public stays safe, and that we
    are doing the right thing.
        AI is important, but it has to be done in the light of day.
        Mrs. Foushee. Thank you for that.
        Mr. Chairman, that is my time. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentlelady yields back.
        Mr. Burlison, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Baker, you didn't mention my district, so I will say,
    in southwest Missouri, there are 315 miles of track that is
    owned or operated by short line and regional rail. And you
    emphasized in your testimony that these are small businesses. I
    mean, it is thrown out that these are big corporations, but,
    no, these are small businesses. And I think small businesses
    are the backbone of the American economy and vital to every
    State, including the State of Missouri.
        That being said, if you had to rank in order the most
    egregious, the most burdensome and ridiculous regulations that
    your industry faces, what are the top three?
        Mr. Baker. Well, first of all, I apologize for not
    mentioning your district. I would have loved to, but I have
    found Congress is very strict about the 5-minute rule.
        Mr. Burlison. You are welcome to come to southwest
    Missouri. It is beautiful.
        Mr. Baker. I will happily accept that invitation. I would
    love to join. Maybe combine it with a visit to the chairman's
    district also.
        Mr. Burlison. Sounds good.
        Mr. Baker. Boy, the most egregious?
        I will say, one, which is really more kind of redtape than
    a regulation, but on the CRISI grants, when they come, there
    are recipients of the grants who just ask for permission to use
    pre-award authority. That is basically to spend their own money
    at risk before the grant gets finalized just so they can get
    things going: buy materials, for instance, hire engineers, hire
    contractors, start the work. And it is very difficult to even
    get authority for pre-award approval from the FRA. For the life
    of me, I cannot figure out why that is anything other than an
    easy ``yes'' almost instantaneously.
        That is one.
        Dispatcher certifications. Dispatcher and signalmen
    certifications is a new rule that is coming that I believe is a
    textbook example of solving a problem that just doesn't exist.
    There is no data, no reason to believe that we have dispatchers
    or signalmen who are untrained or undertrained or causing
    accidents because of a lack of training. We find the
    certifications to be----
        Mr. Burlison [interrupting]. I mean, it seems that you are
    employing these individuals, and if they are not doing a good
    job or they are not safe, then they are not going to have that
    job, right?
        Mr. Baker. That is right. And there is perfect alignment of
    incentives. It is not like there is some world where we
    wouldn't want our own employees to be trained to do the job.
        Mr. Burlison. Well, anybody that understands licensure laws
    and certification laws understands it is all about reducing the
    number of people that are eligible to work, right, so you can
    drive up labor costs. This is what happens in the healthcare
    system. Every work, labor-related industry that wants to impose
    Government certification requirements is just about reducing
    the labor pool.
        Mr. Baker. The--yes.
        Mr. Burlison. I wanted to ask, I believe, Mr. Jefferies: In
    your testimony, you highlighted the importance of Congress to
    oppose policies that harm the railroads' ability to operate
    safely and efficiently, such as requiring a two-person crew in
    freight locomotive cabs. Which, there has been zero
    quantitative evidence that a two-person-crew mandate would
    actually enhance safety.
        So could you highlight, what is the impact and the effect
    in the industry that this two-person rule has?
        Mr. Jefferies. So, as I mentioned at the outset, locking in
    current operating practice in perpetuity, in our view, is never
    a good idea in industries that continue to evolve, whether it
    is the rail industry or any other industry.
        And your point is spot-on; there is absolutely no data to
    show that that regulation advances safety. In 2016, the Obama
    administration, in its preamble to the NPRM it put out,
    acknowledged as much. In 2019, when the Trump administration
    withdrew it, they acknowledged as much. In 2020, on the
    campaign trail, President Biden made a campaign promise that he
    was going to put the rule back out. He did. Still a lack of
    data. Technology has only continued to advance. PTC has only
    continued to advance.
        Our view is that, look, train consist has always been a
    matter for collective bargaining between us and our employees.
    That is where it should be. There is no data to support another
    outcome. And we think locking in current operating practice is
    counterintuitive to the continued progress of the industry,
    especially when--especially when one of the core priorities
    identified by our employees is establishing more of a work-life
    balance.
        And when we can create a scenario when an employee works a
    scheduled shift, goes home to bed in their home every night,
    then we believe there are opportunities to continue to have
    that conversation with our unions to see if there are
    agreements that can be met in certain situations.
        Mr. Burlison. Thank you.
        My time has expired. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Deluzio.
        Mr. Deluzio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And good morning, gentlemen.
        I want to start on a place, I think, around safety where we
    agree in industry--Mr. Jefferies, you represent the big Class I
    railroads; Mr. Baker, the short line railroads--Railroad
    Crossing Elimination Program.
        And for folks at home, it is a pretty important program
    that can fund safety improvements at rail crossings.
        I will talk about my district in western Pennsylvania.
    Nearly half of my constituents live within 1 mile of the
    tracks. Ninety-five percent or so live within 5 miles. I hear
    from local government all the time about concerns and safety
    issues around crossings. Cheswick, in my district, home to a
    crossing with the second highest accident rate in the Northeast
    United States. McKees Rocks, in my district, fifth worst rate
    in Pennsylvania.
        So I see you both nodding.
        Mr. Jefferies, I will start with you. You agree this
    program is important and can help improve safety for the big
    railroads?
        And, Mr. Baker, I will ask you the same question about your
    railroads.
        Mr. Jefferies. One hundred percent. We supported it in the
    development of the IIJA, and we look forward to supporting it
    in the next reauthorization effort.
        Mr. Deluzio. Very good.
        Mr. Baker?
        Mr. Baker. The program works. I think we only all wish
    there could be more of it. The biggest challenge with grade
    separations is just they are quite expensive.
        Mr. Deluzio. It is not hypothetical in my district or, I
    assume, many of my colleagues'. This really is a risk to our
    communities. I hear from so many local officials about this
    problem. We need to make sure we continue to fund this in a
    real way.
        Now, maybe where we aren't going to agree so much are
    broader rail safety efforts that have been quite bipartisan. I
    commend Mr. Nehls from Texas, Mr. Moulton, Mrs. Sykes, Mr.
    Rulli, who represents East Palestine. I represent the western
    Pennsylvanians also impacted by the terrible derailment in East
    Palestine with Norfolk Southern almost 2 years ago. And yet we
    still have not had Congress take any action on rail safety.
        That is unacceptable to me and my constituents. I have
    heard Mr. Rulli talk about his constituents in East Palestine.
    I have heard it from Vice President Vance, President Trump. I
    heard it from the prior administration. They support these rail
    safety efforts, and yet nothing has happened. I don't accept
    that.
        And I guess a simple part of this is whether we are going
    to trust the rail industry to regulate themselves.
        So, Mr. Cassity, let me start with you. You represent men
    and women who work in this industry, who work to keep the
    trains moving, moving safely and efficiently. Mr. Cassity, do
    you trust the railroads to regulate themselves?
        Mr. Cassity. Unfortunately, I do not. They make a lot of
    unilateral changes quite regularly that are the outcome of
    external pressures, whether that be Wall Street or scheduling
    or whatever that may be. And they find ways to capitulate to
    those pressures which unfortunately end up cutting corners that
    affect our people.
        When you look at long trains, when you look at the
    scheduling, when you look at attendance policies, all of these
    things have impacts on the workforce and ultimately the
    service.
        A two-person crew, if they had their way--Mr. Jefferies
    just said it--they don't feel the need to keep the conductor.
    But if we remove the conductor off the cab of the locomotive,
    we do have a history that shows two-person crews and the
    conductor deliver a level of safety. To remove that person, you
    are going to equate to risk; you are going to bring a new risk
    into it.
        And so we have to make sure that we have guidelines and
    guardrails that we are doing the right things, because they are
    going to have impacts on the American public.
        And when you look at attendance policies--just an example.
    Last week, I believe it was, maybe two, BNSF decided to cut and
    slash their attendance policy without any conversation or
    consideration. Work-life balance is being used up here as
    though it is a gift, but it is not a gift; it is a hammer over
    our workers' head.
        And so we have to make sure that we are doing the right
    things for the workers and, in turn, do the right things for
    the American public.
        We want and need the railroads to succeed; please don't get
    me wrong. Rich railroads work well for our membership.
    Successful railroads work well for our membership. We need them
    to do the right thing. But, unfortunately, we cannot trust them
    to do that, because there are pressures that they capitulate
    to, and we can't account for that.
        Mr. Deluzio. Well, Mr. Cassity, you made a point about
    railroads succeeding being good for your members and being good
    for our country, right? We have to move goods safely and
    quickly. I am not willing to use my constituents as collateral
    damage in the way of profits, we have to move things on the
    rails safely.
        And, to the point of trusting the railroads to regulate
    themselves, in the year after the derailment, the Class I
    railroads' derailment rate increased.
        I will read you a quote about those figures. Quote, ``These
    figures show the railroad industry's safety standards are
    getting worse. We can reverse the trend by passing the Railroad
    Safety Act immediately.'' That was Senator Vance, who is now
    our Vice President.
        Let's pass the legislation and protect my community,
    protect communities like ours all over the country.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Fong, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Fong. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I wanted to ask a few questions of Mr. Jefferies and Mr.
    Baker.
        I certainly share your perspective. It was important that
    CARB withdrew their petition to implement an unworkable in-use
    locomotive rule, and I think that is important for our supply
    chain.
        I did want to ask if there were other State or Federal
    policies that are going to hinder rail operations in California
    specifically.
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, thank you for the question.
        And if I could just comment quickly, the 2023 derailment
    rate was significantly lower than 2022, and in the first 10
    months of 2024, it was lower than 2023--2.77 incidents per
    million train-miles. That is not good enough; it should be
    zero. But progress continues to be made on that front. And I
    just wanted to make sure the record reflected that.
        And thank you for your support on CARB's misguided efforts.
    You were a leader in the efforts in calling out the, while
    noble in the pursuit, the complete unrealistic attempt and
    illegal attempt for CARB to do what it did.
        Look, at the end of the day, California, and CARB in
    particular, they seem to be a model for bureaucratic overreach
    time and time again. And our concern, especially when it is the
    rail industry, if CARB acts and they are allowed to act, that
    is not a State regulation. It is effectively a Federal
    regulation because we are a nationwide, interconnected network.
        Now, fortunately, that is why the STB, Surface
    Transportation Board, has strong, strong, strong preemption
    authority. And that was the second law that CARB was violating
    trying to regulate this.
        But I would be happy to sit down with your team and get
    into more specifics on individual regs, but thank you for your
    support on the loco emissions piece.
        Mr. Fong. Thank you.
        Mr. Baker. I would say that the CARB rule was so egregious
    and so, kind of, terrifying for the short line industry, about
    essentially threatening to put us out of business, we are,
    again, thrilled that it was withdrawn and appreciate your
    support in particular on helping with that.
        I do think that Congress would be wise to consider taking a
    look at the Clean Air Act and the authority that is given to
    CARB and changing--at least limiting that in scope so that, at
    least on industries that are clearly meant to be regulated at
    the Federal level, not the State level, like railroads, that we
    can't revisit this nightmare the next time they have an
    administration that might be willing to approve such a waiver.
        Mr. Fong. Absolutely.
        Certainly, we all know that rail is a key component of the
    supply chain. That is not only in California but across the
    country. Certainly, that is part of our concern about CARB's
    rule.
        I did want to ask, how can freight rail infrastructure be
    expanded or optimized to accommodate the increasing demand and
    supply chains and capacity? And, of course, what are the key
    rail corridors in California that can be improved? How can we
    expand rail capacity at the ports to create some coordination
    to reduce congestion and improve the flow of goods?
        Mr. Jefferies. So one of the common themes we have heard, I
    think, is, through sensible permitting reform, to let dollars
    get put to work more quickly in a more efficient way. And that
    is really just about setting timelines, recognizing what should
    be preexisting categorical exclusions, and avoiding unnecessary
    costs through inflationary delay.
        In our ports, we have seen significant efforts to increase
    information-sharing among the supply-chain stakeholders. That
    is key.
        The Barstow Intermodal Gateway in southern California, a
    massive investment occurring. Getting that approved so it can
    be built quickly. Get those containers out of the southern
    California basin quickly, let them be built into trains and
    dispersed throughout the country out in a big, open space--key.
    There are other massive projects like that.
        And, really, the Surface Transportation Board, who I
    mentioned before, exercising its permitting--or, excuse me, its
    preemption authority over both rail projects and our customers'
    projects.
        Mr. Fong. Mr. Baker.
        Mr. Baker. I would add, again, at the risk of harping on
    it, the CRISI Program is extraordinarily effective at investing
    in short line infrastructure, including in California. The
    Sierra Northern recently received one for building out a big
    rail loading yard.
        And so further support of programs like that and having it
    move faster, I think, will accomplish exactly what you are
    looking for.
        Mr. Fong. I appreciate that.
        I think my time is running out, but I appreciate the work
    that is being done in the rail industry to move our products
    and our goods across the country and get them from the ports
    and to our homes and businesses and farms.
        So thank you, and I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Garcia, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
    Member, to our witnesses here today.
        I represent Chicago, the Nation's busiest freight hub. One
    of every four U.S. freight trains passes through Chicago. That
    is about 500 freight trains and 800 passenger and commuter
    trains every day.
        I was glad to see that the Chicago Region Environmental and
    Transportation Efficiency Program, better known as CREATE,
    received two important grants from U.S. DOT. Nearly $300
    million will go to improvements on a 3-mile elevated rail
    corridor on Chicago's South Side, and another $43 million will
    be invested in building a grade separation along 65th Street
    and Harlem Avenue, across the street from my district.
        Together, this funding will help relieve congestion along
    Chicago's rail network, improve supply-chain efficiency, and
    make communities safer as well. This is made possible through
    the collaboration between public sector and Class I railroads.
        Mr. Jefferies, can you speak about how important programs
    like CREATE are for our national rail and freight network?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, thank you for that question. And it
    was great to see you at the event in December on the South Side
    of Chicago.
        It is critically important, and CREATE is the model program
    for the rest of the country. And we often get approached from
    other communities of, ``Hey, we want to do a CREATE,'' and we
    explain the commitment from not only the freight railroads but
    the commuter railroads, Amtrak, the city, the county, the
    State, the U.S. DOT, and how we have all worked together to
    identify a discrete set of very large projects that different
    parties benefit from at different times but everyone has skin
    in the game, everyone has maintained the commitment. Absolutely
    critically important. And we are thrilled with the outcome of
    last fall's awards.
        And I will just give you a quick example. Our leader of
    CREATE in Chicago was invited to southern California to talk
    about the CREATE program. And he said it dawned on him that the
    close to 100 officials who were there representing local
    governments, it was probably the first time they had been in a
    room together. And so the amount of coordination in Chicagoland
    is to be applauded and something we are very proud of.
        Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Yes. Let's keep it going, by all
    means.
        Mr. Cassity, changing gears, I appreciate you mentioning
    high-speed rail in your testimony.
        Thousands of miles of railroad tracks crisscross Chicago,
    making rail essential to supporting a robust economy in the
    Midwest. It supports thousands of good-paying union jobs. It
    connects small towns to big cities. It connects people to
    schools and jobs and connects businesses to commodities as
    well.
        That is why high-speed rail is an exciting prospect for the
    Midwest. Not only would it spur economic development, it would
    lower carbon emissions and create thousands of good jobs. A
    commission in Illinois is currently studying the Chicago-to-St.
    Louis route and will produce a statewide plan.
        Can you address how transformational a high-speed rail
    system in the Midwest would be? And what role can the Federal
    Government play to support development plans for high-speed
    rail?
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. Thank you for the question.
        High-speed rail would be absolutely transformational for
    the rail industry and for all the reasons that you addressed. I
    mean, the efficiency and the effectiveness and the benefits for
    the American public are exponential and hard to be quantified
    in such a short statement like this.
        But for the rail workers as well, to know that we would
    have the opportunity to see the economy and the infrastructure
    grow is something that we haven't seen for a long time.
        That is why Brightline West is so encouraging. Because the
    more we look at transportation in our country, the more we
    recognize that the highway system isn't doing what it is
    supposed to be doing anymore, that it is too crowded, that it
    is not efficient the way it should be. High-speed rail gives us
    the opportunity to alleviate a lot of those pressures.
        But we need the Government's help to encourage those
    construction projects, we need the Government's help to fund
    those projects, and we need the Government's buy-in on the rail
    industry to make sure that we are expanding that.
        Kind of like what has been talked about already this
    morning, is that, for whatever reason--and I know Mr. Jefferies
    talked about ``this isn't your granddad's railroad,'' but the
    public view, when they see the railroad system, we have been in
    the background for so long that they don't view it as the next
    step. For some reason, aviation gets this ``whatever'' put on
    it to make it seem as though that is the ultimate future. But
    the ultimate future doesn't have to be there. We have
    opportunities in the rail space to take people where they are
    not easily able to go: smaller routes, longer routes, faster
    routes.
        High-speed rail is absolutely critical in development for
    our country. And we just need the Government's buy-in and we
    need financial support and support across the board.
        Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Begich, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Begich. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        My first question is to Mr. Baker.
        So, Mr. Baker, you noted in your testimony that 100 percent
    of Alaska's rail is short line rail. Alaskans have long sought
    a rail connection that would tie Alaska to the rest of the
    North American rail network. In your view, what steps should we
    consider to support such a connection?
        Mr. Baker. That is a fabulous question. I mean, the current
    route of connecting is quite elaborate and involves ferries and
    is not, sort of, realistic for where I think you would like to
    take the State and the country.
        A project like that is really--is really a Mega grant. And
    so I think it would be important for Congress to continue grant
    programs like INFRA and RAISE and Mega that really contemplate
    some of these maybe not quite moonshot but big-deal
    infrastructure programs.
        There are a lot of short line projects, including some on
    the existing Alaska Railroad infrastructure, where $5 million
    or $10 million or $20 million can really move the dial. And we
    do a lot of those, and we are very proud of that.
        A project like you are talking about is, sort of,
    exponentially more than that. And I do think that the country
    and the people of the country have appetite for that sort of
    thing. And the project you are talking about is a great
    example. I would be thrilled to support it.
        Mr. Begich. Thank you.
        This is a question for Mr. Jefferies.
        Mr. Jefferies, in your testimony, you mentioned that, in
    real terms, inflation-adjusted real terms, costs of moving
    freight on rail have declined by 42 percent since 1980.
        Do you have any information--and, if not, could you at some
    future time provide this committee with information--on what
    has happened to the cost of new rail construction over that
    same period of time? Has that also trended down or has that
    gone up in real terms?
        Mr. Jefferies. I wish. Unfortunately, no, it hasn't, due to
    cost of materials, due to inflationary pressures, as every
    other industry has seen.
        And if I could be so bold, I would expect my colleague, Mr.
    Daloisio, can comment on it a little more sophisticatedly than
    I might be able to.
        Mr. Daloisio. No, definitely. Thank you, Congressman. Thank
    you, Ian.
        So material pricing has gone up, labor pricing has gone up,
    equipment pricing--everything has gone up almost exponentially.
        And we talked earlier about the grant time process, about
    these grants. So, a lot of times, contractors and our
    consulting engineer members are involved in the initial stages
    of putting together budget pricing for some of these grants,
    and we do that with good faith, hoping that they are going to
    escalate maybe a year out, and then we get a call 3 years later
    that, hey, the grant got approved and the price now is one-
    third of what it should be.
        So, yes, to answer your question, everything is--we see
    that continually going up.
        Mr. Begich. Then this is a question for anyone who might
    have an answer to it. Do you have any suggestions on how we can
    drive down the cost of new rail construction?
        Mr. Jefferies. Not to hit on the same theme, but I would
    say, getting projects approved more quickly to allow the money
    to be put in the ground more quickly. Not to circumvent any
    appropriate reviews, but let's just put some certainty into the
    process so that the money you have now is used and you don't
    need twice as much 10 years from now when the project is
    approved.
        Mr. Daloisio. Just to chime in there, so I think, with new
    technologies, especially on the contracting side, whether it is
    new tools, new equipment that is helping us be more efficient
    and be able to build track faster, I mean, that definitely is a
    way to lower the costs.
        Mr. Begich. Very good.
        And does anyone here today know how the Tier 1 network was
    originally financed? Was it Government grants? Was it private
    money?
        Mr. Jefferies. The ultimate public-private partnership.
        Mr. Begich. Okay.
        I think it is fantastic that we are hearing about high-
    speed rail, rail that goes 200 miles an hour. It is great for
    passengers. There is a lot of innovation on the freight side.
        Let's connect Alaska to the North American rail network so
    that we can be a part of this same success story.
        Thank you, and I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Cohen, you are recognized.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Thank you.
        The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as
    the IIJA, also known as the bipartisan infrastructure bill,
    also known as the Biden infrastructure bill--I would prefer to
    call it the Biden-Cohen bill--has provided an unprecedented
    opportunity to modernize our rail system, strengthen our
    economy, and improve connectivity for millions of Americans.
        One program I would like to highlight is the Corridor
    Identification and Development, also known as the Corridor ID
    Program, which has awarded $500,000 to study the feasibility of
    a passenger rail corridor connecting Memphis to Nashville and
    then on to Chattanooga and to Atlanta.
        This Sunbelt-Atlantic Connector will connect major
    population centers, fostering economic growth and reducing
    traffic congestion in our region. Tennesseeans and Georgians
    alike are eager for the eventual completion of this project. I
    am hopeful it can move to the next phase expeditiously.
        I also remain committed to enhancing the passenger
    experience on Amtrak. Mr. Garcia didn't mention the Amtrak
    service that goes through Memphis into New Orleans. When I was
    a kid, I rode the Panama Limited and the City of New Orleans,
    and we went up to Chicago quite a few times, and down to New
    Orleans as well.
        We had great food on some of those, particularly the Panama
    Limited. They had the best service, a Pullman train. But they
    had big, thick steaks and big, thick French toast, and they
    don't have that anymore.
        So I have introduced two bills, the Train FOOD Act and the
    Train EATS Act, which aim to restore and improve onboard dining
    services on long-distance routes. I think it would improve the
    experience and the ridership.
        When reauthorizing surface transportation programs for
    Amtrak, we must not neglect the passenger experience. Quality
    dining service is essential to attracting and retaining riders
    and making rail travel an enjoyable alternative to driving or
    flying.
        Finally, I want to address a pressing issue in America and
    in Memphis: cargo theft. Unfortunately, sadly, Memphis, which
    has a large logistics hub in cargo, has seen cargo theft spike
    alarmingly in recent years, posing threats to businesses and
    supply chains. Addressing this problem is not just a local
    concern; it is a national concern.
        And I believe Mr. Jefferies, but even more so Mr. Baker,
    discussed trucks and your competition with trucks. Obviously,
    you don't like trucks. Trucks have 80 percent of the cargo
    theft, so you like that.
        But it is a great problem in Memphis. We are trying to deal
    with it, and we need more solutions.
        Mr. Jefferies, the FBI has developed a task force composed
    of members of the U.S. Marshals Service, Memphis Police, and
    Shelby County Sheriff's Office. What additional areas of
    collaboration could be established between freight railroads,
    law enforcement, and other stakeholders to enhance preemptive
    measures and effectively combat cargo theft on trains?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, thank you for highlighting that. And
    that is a priority of ours, is making headway, because not only
    is it an issue in Memphis, it is an issue across several parts
    of the country and, frankly, the epitome of interstate crime.
    It is a Federal issue that we need Federal attention to.
        And one of the most frustrating things we have seen is that
    arrests are made and prosecutions don't occur. And that is why
    we are advocating, and hopefully this task force will draw some
    attention to getting some resources behind prosecutions and
    putting folks behind bars and moving up the chain. Because this
    is absolutely an organized effort, a sophisticated effort. And
    railroads are investing on their own to increase deterrence,
    increase monitoring and vigilance, but it is going to take
    everybody working together, because the problem is not going
    away.
        And we will look forward to partnering with you on this.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you. I know, in the 1880s, when Jesse and
    Frank were doing their job on the trains, the trains jumped
    into it and hired the Pinkertons. So you need to get the 21st-
    century Pinkertons on this.
        Mr. Baker. And if I may, Congressman, we certainly view
    trucks as our big competitors, but we would absolutely view--we
    are on the same page as them on cargo theft issues. We would
    not wish theft on even our harshest competitors.
        Mr. Cohen. But if you had a choice.
        Mr. Baker. Please stay away from the trains. Yes.
        Mr. Cohen. Right.
        Mr. Jefferies, this corridor I talked about, Memphis on to
    Atlanta, could do a lot to improve congestion and the
    environment as well, reducing emissions.
        How can freight railroad partners work with passenger rail
    projects to advance these climate goals and equitable
    development?
        Mr. Jefferies. So, when we have seen these projects work
    well, of which there are numerous examples around the country,
    all stakeholders get together at the front end and sit down and
    talk about desired outcomes--and so that is the municipality,
    that is the State, that is the passenger entity, that is the
    affected freight railroad--and talk about, okay, what do we
    want to achieve, what capacity is necessary, what investment is
    necessary to ensure that capacity, and who is going to pay for
    it?
        And so----
        Mr. Cohen [interrupting]. I have 4 seconds, and I wanted to
    ask Mr. Cassity something.
        You talked about the ultimate future and where we should
    look at transportation. Elon says it is Mars. Should we be
    putting all of that money into planting a flag on Mars, or
    should we maybe do it somewhere like Memphis?
        Mr. Cassity. Thank you for the question.
        I mean, I am intrigued by the thought of going to Mars, but
    the reality is, when we are talking about investments and
    taxpayer money, the investment is here in the country. And the
    biggest benefit is moving them to where they need to go, safely
    and efficiently.
        And there is no better opportunity than the railroad
    system. And high-speed rail, in my opinion, is the greatest
    opportunity for funding to do something meaningful for the
    people of America, to make an impact on the economy and the
    infrastructure as a whole.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you. Unless you are Ralph Kramden's wife,
    you are not going to the Moon.
        I yield back the balance of my time.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields.
        Mr. Kennedy, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Dr. Kennedy of Utah. Thank you, Chair Webster and Ranking
    Member Titus. I appreciate you convening this committee.
        And thanks to the witnesses. You have been here for a
    while, and I appreciate your willingness to elucidate these
    important issues.
        Uinta Basin Railway is an important project in Utah's Third
    District, and my district is home to the Uinta Basin, with its
    major oil fields. There are several crude-by-rail projects in
    the works in my district, and that is one of them. And it is an
    opportunity for us to reduce truck traffic on dangerous roads--
    these are mountain roads with terrible weather sometimes--and
    move that crude oil out of the basin and move goods into the
    basin.
        So, with that in mind, Mr. Baker, I was interested in your
    take on this. What are some of the major regulatory issues that
    face the railroad industry generally as it relates to American
    energy? And what steps can we take to enhance energy dominance
    in the United States of America, in Utah and my congressional
    district specifically?
        Mr. Baker. The Uinta Basin project is very exciting. It
    would be served by a short line railroad which would then
    connect to Union Pacific and connect it to the world.
        There was a big regulatory threat to that particular
    project. As you know, the Surface Transportation Board approved
    it with its environmental analysis. It was an extremely
    exhaustive and, I thought, impressive analysis. And then a
    court overturned it and said that they didn't properly consider
    essentially the downstream effects of how the oil would be
    used, which is--Ian referenced a similar issue earlier today.
        That was just reargued in front of the Supreme Court, and I
    think the outcome is heading in a direction that makes sense,
    where the reviews will now be limited--and this is to answer
    your question. The important outcome is that reviews be limited
    to the actual project, rather than sort of a holistic view of
    how every commodity is going to be used. Because, if we do
    that, then we will never build anything.
        And there are, frankly, not a lot of brandnew rail lines
    that get built in this country. The Uinta Basin one is an
    exciting one. I am sure Mr. Daloisio's members would be very
    excited to get to work building it. And we are excited to get
    to work moving it. And the folks in Uinta Basin are excited to
    get to work selling it.
        And, probably most importantly, this stuff already moves,
    like you said, on trucks on dangerous mountain roads. Moving it
    by rail is a better outcome for literally everybody.
        Dr. Kennedy of Utah. Thank you.
        And, with that, Mr. Daloisio, would you tell us what that
    would mean, if you were able to participate--you and those that
    you represent were able to participate in building that
    railway?
        Mr. Daloisio. Thank you, Congressman. I am sorry. Could you
    please repeat that?
        Dr. Kennedy of Utah. What would that mean to you, if we
    could--you and your industry--if we could actually start to
    build that railway that we are seeking to build there in my
    district?
        Mr. Daloisio. Thank you.
        Well, it means a lot. I mean, our member companies are
    all--a lot of them are small, family-owned companies. A lot of
    them are larger companies. But to get those funds to be able to
    give those projects and get involved--I mean, all that money
    that is spent to get those companies out there, get the
    workforce on the ground, get their equipment on the ground,
    start laying material, that all trickles down to feed their
    families. I mean, it is so vital.
        I mean, we have so many members all across this country
    that are just itching to build more track. We just need help to
    be able to do that and do it safely and start to get those
    trains on them and get them moving.
        Dr. Kennedy of Utah. Well, we are itching to help you
    accomplish that goal, because it would be outstanding for us.
        Mr. Jefferies, I had a question for you along these lines.
    Efforts to cut redtape associated with these infrastructure
    projects' approval and construction have been successful in
    recent years, but what more can still be done to fast-track
    routine maintenance and replacement construction projects
    without ignoring environmental or historical preservation
    concerns?
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for the question.
        So, two things.
        One--and Congress has already told the Advisory Council on
    Historic Preservation to do this--provide the same categorical
    exclusions to replacement of historic assets as you do
    highways. Again, Congress has spoken twice on this. The
    independent agency has not yet acted. So maybe the third time's
    the charm.
        And then you kind of gave me the answer with your question.
    For routine maintenance, routine replacement, again,
    categorical exclusions that limit the actual construction,
    versus that which flows over it, versus other extraneous
    activities.
        Dr. Kennedy of Utah. Thank you for those responses.
        And, once again, thank you, all of you, for being here with
    us.
        And, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Johnson, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
    you, Madam Ranking Member, for hosting this critical hearing
    today.
        And thank you to the witnesses for your time and for your
    testimony.
        The United States leads the world with the most extensive
    rail transport network, spanning approximately 160,000 miles.
    Many of our communities, especially in regions like my home
    State of Georgia, started with a railroad stop. Entire towns
    were built around these vital pieces of infrastructure because
    we understand their importance. Yet, today, it operates without
    consistent long-term funding required to maintain and expand
    this essential infrastructure.
        As we all know, climate change is one of the greatest
    challenges of our time, and rail emerges as a transformative
    solution. Our system provides the safest, most energy-efficient
    and environmentally sustainable mode of transportation. By
    alleviating traffic congestion and reducing reliance on fossil
    fuels, rail plays a vital role in creating a cleaner future.
    Its ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions far surpasses
    road and air transport.
        Without the security of long-term funding, however, it is a
    challenge to build on the progress achieved from long ago and
    through President Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        Mr. Cassity, expanding and modernizing our rail network to
    reach more communities with improved service means creating
    good-paying jobs, fostering domestic manufacturing, and
    ensuring our infrastructure meets the demands of the 21st
    century.
        This effort requires significant investments in projects
    all across the country, with funding such as the $52.79 billion
    allocated by the Federal Railroad Administration for 594 safety
    rail improvement projects.
        Can you explain what it would mean for communities if
    Federal funding like this was not available?
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
        I knew at one point I was going to get some sort of
    economical question, and I want to remind everybody, I am a
    locomotive engineer. So I am going to take my biggest swing
    here.
        But railroading is an industry worth investing in. We are
    absolutely critical to moving forward with everything that we
    do, whether it is passenger or freight. There was discussion
    about the Uinta Basin. We, as laborers, support the notion that
    there is no safer or better way to move commodities on the
    planet Earth than through our rail system.
        And so everything that we depend on in our day-to-day
    lives--food in the stores, the technology in Best Buy or
    wherever else you may go--odds are that has touched a train at
    some point. And so, if we don't fund the railroad
    systematically, we stand to lose a lot of the benefits we have
    in our daily lives.
        And on the flip side of that, we also stand the opportunity
    to not have the safest work environment that we should have.
    Funding allows us to do all of the right things and to expand
    in a world where we need expansion so that we can make things
    easier to get to so that we can have products more readily
    available and, hopefully, frankly, cheaper to buy.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. And you create more economic
    development----
        Mr. Cassity [interrupting]. You create more----
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia [continuing]. And more jobs.
        Mr. Cassity. Absolutely. You create more jobs. You have
    more workers. You have more good-paying jobs. And, in turn, it
    recycles, and all of the good benefits of that pay out to
    everybody.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, thank you.
        It has been said at this hearing, Mr. Cassity, that the
    number of derailments has gone down over the last few years.
    But, according to the Federal Railroad Administration data, the
    number of derailments has increased year over year in 2021,
    2022, and 2023.
        Mr. Cassity, as Congress and the new administration prepare
    for the new surface transportation bill, what key protections
    should be prioritized to enhance rail safety for workers and
    passengers?
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. There is a lot. And, basically, I will
    start with the Railroad Safety Enhancement Act that Congressman
    Nehls introduced last year. It hit a lot of those priorities
    that we need to do to make sure that safety is heading down the
    right path.
        The data in this industry obviously can be interpreted
    differently. Clearly, Mr. Jefferies and myself are of different
    opinions on where we are at with the derailment rate or
    frequency in this country. But we need to take a real look at
    what is going on and not accept that we are increasing or we
    are running flat. We are not doing enough to stop these
    accidents.
        To Ranking Member Titus' point earlier, our organization
    personally went on nine investigations with the National
    Transportation Safety Board. All of those are indicative of the
    fact that we need to do more with safety in the rail space. We
    need to take a look at the crew staffing, we need to take a
    look at long trains, we need to take a look at technology, we
    need to take a look at detectors.
        We need to do a lot of things to make sure the innovation
    is welcome in the industry but it is done so in a way that
    others have the ability to make an input that is in the
    interest of all stakeholders, but then we put the proper
    guidelines where we need to to ensure that minimum level of
    safety, but allow them to do the development they need to do in
    the interest of workers, in the interest of public.
        But we can collaborate on that. We have to collaborate on
    that. And I do think that is our challenge going forward.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
        And I appreciate the grace of the chair. And I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Stauber, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Mr. Cassity, I have to correct you. You said you are just a
    railroad engineer. No, you are more than that. You are an
    expert. That is why you are here today. That is why you are
    sharing your vision of a safer, more reliable railroad.
        So please accept my correction. You are more than just a
    railroad engineer. And we appreciate you all.
        Mr. Jefferies, I had some comments here prepared. You
    talked about some very important things on NEPA reforms and
    railroad construction and fixing.
        Why do you have to wait 7 to 9, 11 years for the Government
    to put forth their okay for you to move forward with
    construction? That is all money and all time that is
    unnecessary.
        And so I am going to encourage you, as this next Congress
    gets going, we are going to look at NEPA reviews.
        And you said something that I totally agree with. We are
    not cutting corners. We are going to keep the same
    environmental standards, same labor standards on these
    projects. We care about the environment, too.
        And so I think you all can have a strong voice in those
    reviews. So please be present, and we may ask you to be a
    witness and such.
        And I will go to the mining issue for just one moment. It
    takes on average 29 years to open a mine in the United States
    of America. Canada and Australia and others, 2 to 3 years.
        Come on, we can do better than that. And I ask for your
    professional voices during that time.
        You also talked about prosecutions and arrests. So being a
    former law enforcement officer, that is one of the things that
    frustrated me the most, and it still frustrates the American
    law enforcement community.
        You could have your railroad police arrest these organized
    criminals and they get a slap on the hand, even if that. And
    they are out the next night doing the same thing to your
    railcars, stealing the products off there. And so if we don't
    have prosecutions, it is going to continue and continue and
    continue.
        I hope and I trust that this new administration, they are
    going to crack down on rail thefts, because it is getting big
    and you all know that. I mean, you are adding more railroad
    police, et cetera.
        But I want to stand with you on the prosecutions, because
    when we don't prosecute that, guess who pays more for the end
    product? We, the American people. And so I am absolutely with
    you on that.
        I want to say something that I think is really important.
        So I came from the county government in St. Louis County in
    northern Minnesota. So when we had issues with railroad
    crossing or safety, the community and the rail professionals
    always were there to help us out, to make sure that that
    crossing was the safest it can be.
        I want to just tell you that I understand safety is your
    first, second, and third priority, not only for the public, but
    for the passengers, et cetera. So I have been on this committee
    since day one and we are all almost on the same page. And when
    we do that, we can move mountains.
        And I think that as we continue in this Congress, let's
    have that discussion, because I think rail is a huge part of
    our mode of transportation, amongst others. I mean, we have
    room for the aviation community, certainly aviation. We have
    room for using our ships and ports, et cetera. Certainly we can
    do that.
        I would be remiss if I didn't say that Duluth, Minnesota,
    has the most inland port in the country.
        With that being said, so we also, when we look at passenger
    safety, crew safety, et cetera, we are also, I think, where we
    can up it a little bit is training for our first responders
    across the Nation. Because if there is an incident, it is
    oftentimes in the rural communities where those first
    responders are the first ones there.
        We have to really get really good at notifying and
    preparing and training for our rural first responders, and that
    includes our Native American communities, because we are going
    through a lot of Tribal lands too. We need to make sure that we
    prepare them so that in case there is an incident, that we are
    well prepared and that we can reduce the harm.
        And so I, for a legislator like me, I am looking for all of
    you for that expertise, advice, so when we talk about rail
    safety, when we need to put legislation, that you are at the
    table.
        I really appreciate the expertise in this panel, and thank
    you for your time for coming this afternoon.
        And, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Ryan, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am excited to join
    this subcommittee for the first time.
        And thank you to the ranking member as well.
        Thank you to our witnesses for now many hours of your time
    this morning.
        I proudly represent the Hudson Valley region, which is
    north of New York City, a significant amount of railroad
    traffic, both of freight and passenger, including 123 miles of
    CSX-run freight on the west side of the Hudson River.
        Many areas and crossings specifically in my district, as
    has been discussed, desperately need safety enhancements and
    investment and redesigns, from traffic signal upgrades to
    prevent congestion backups, roadway redesigns, and enhanced
    warning systems, even basic signage, which we are lacking at
    many of these crossings.
        For example, the town of Saugerties in my district, which
    is an entirely ungated crossing, lacks any warning lights. And
    in 2017, a constituent, riding in a taxi, was killed when her
    taxi driver missed a stop sign and drove right into the path of
    an oncoming train. A simple fix like warning signage would have
    helped avoid this tragic incident.
        CSX operates, as I said, trains throughout many densely
    populated urban areas in my district, including the city of
    Kingston, my hometown, which has 35, on average, freight trains
    a day running through the heart of a pretty busy city, carrying
    a lot of things, but including waste, petroleum, industrial
    chemicals, and other potentially harmful substances.
        We greatly appreciate the role CSX plays in our economy, as
    has been discussed here, but it has been a repeated point of
    challenge--I was also in county government, like my colleague
    said--to get cooperation from CSX to really work with us on
    that.
        So I will continue to focus on that. In fact, in the town
    of Ulster last year a constituent of mine was struck and killed
    by a CSX train due to a lack of any pedestrian crossing
    signage.
        So I want to work in good faith, in a bipartisan way, to
    figure out how to address things like this.
        In an encouraging sign, and you mentioned this in your
    testimony, Mr. Jefferies, your written testimony, the city of
    Port Jervis, also in my district, just received one of the
    Railroad Crossing Elimination, RCE, Grants thanks to funding
    from the bipartisan infrastructure legislation.
        This was another very problematic intersection where a few
    years ago someone was struck and killed, and this funding will
    be a game changer to help address that.
        So my first question is to you, Mr. Jefferies, just to ask
    on that point of the RCE grants and other similar grants. Can
    you talk about the value of that? And I would ask your help to
    work at a local, tactical level in a constructive way to speed
    up all of these.
        Mr. Jefferies. Absolutely. Thank you for the question.
        So pedestrian and motor vehicle accidents at crossings are
    the toughest safety challenge we continue to face. We have seen
    dramatic decreases in every other type of accident. And so that
    starts, first of all, with every opportunity eliminating the
    crossing.
        And so with the grant you referred to, that is huge. And
    while we wish we had endless sources of funds to separate all
    high-impact crossings, that the reality is we don't.
        And so, secondary, we have got to have the best safety
    equipment there, warning devices, through the Section 130
    Program. Driver education, public education through partners
    such as Operation Lifesaver, who, if you haven't done any work
    with them, would certainly love to get you involved with that.
    Making the public aware when you see tracks, think trains. It
    is a commonsense statement, but not something that is always
    reality.
        And I would love to work with you and your office to
    continue, one, to prioritize the two programs I mentioned, and,
    two, look for ways to further educate the public and get that
    out there, because it is an immensely avoidable tragedy that
    happens too often and something that we are invested in making
    further progress on.
        Mr. Ryan. I appreciate that. And I think as we enter this
    new administration and the new moment we are in, I think it is
    very important to note grants like the RCE grants and other
    lifesaving funding in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law should
    not be politicized.
        And I hope--and many of you said this in both your spoken
    testimony and written--that we can at least agree that
    maintaining, if not bolstering funding to those programs
    benefits everyone, including the industry, so that they are not
    having to invest fully on their own in that regard.
        I am an Irish Catholic. I am going to do the best with your
    name, sir. I know. I apologize. Mr. Daloisio.
        Mr. Daloisio. No, that was pretty good.
        Mr. Ryan. All right, all right. I apologize.
        In terms of your membership and yourself and your
    experience, what are the challenges that you all have faced in
    actually installing and driving through projects? Say we have
    funding, how do we drive through--oh, I am sorry, I apologize.
    I got too excited.
        I am going to have to yield back, and would love to follow
    up with all of you on followup questions.
        Mr. Daloisio. I appreciate that, and please feel free.
    Afterwards I will give you my information. I am happy to talk
    to you. We are actually neighbors. I live in northern New
    Jersey, so I am not far from you.
        Mr. Ryan. I am sorry to hear you are from New Jersey.
        Mr. Daloisio. Yes, I know.
        Mr. Ryan. Thank you.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Mann, you are recognized.
        Mr. Mann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        A lot different from New Jersey, I am from Kansas. But New
    Jersey, Kansas, California all rely on rail. And I appreciate
    you all and what you do.
        In my State, we have 4,600 miles of rail track. It runs the
    gamut. My district is the western two-thirds of Kansas, except
    for the counties around Wichita. And so we need good rail
    networks, Class I's and short line, to get our ag products out
    of fields, out of packing plants, and to the mouths that are
    going to feed them. So I appreciate you all and what you do.
        As you all know, this committee is beginning to work on the
    next surface transportation reauthorization, which is a big
    thing that we are going to focus on this year.
        A pretty high-level question, but for you, Mr. Jefferies.
    Can you highlight the areas that you think we should be
    targeting for improvements to ensure that goods, people, or ag
    products are moved safe and in an efficient manner? How would
    you like--there are going to be limited resources, but in your
    view, how should we be targeting those funds?
        Mr. Jefferies. So I would say there are a few different
    things.
        One is maintaining these grant programs that do have such
    strong bipartisan support in allowing our public partners and
    our short lines to receive those funds on a merit-based basis
    to invest to create and expand capacity to serve customers like
    all the good folks in your community.
        Two, I would say you can make those programs run better,
    either by Congress or the administration, by getting dollars
    out the door more quickly. We talked about delays. By
    permitting reforms, allowing projects and money to be put to
    work more quickly.
        And then, on the operational side, creating a more
    outcomes-based regulatory environment. And I know there are
    differing views on this, but I think there is a lot of common
    ground about how do we achieve the best safety outcome in a way
    that allows for innovation, frees up the network, allows goods
    to continue to move, takes people out of risky situations.
        And at the end of the day, promoting American
    competitiveness in a way that encourages investment, encourages
    goods to move, encourages products to move out of your State to
    other States and to other countries, at the end of the day.
        So we are not looking for funds primarily, but the Highway
    Trust Fund sure is, and that needs to be fixed in a dramatic
    way.
        Mr. Mann. That is right. Yes. Our whole transportation
    network, as we know it, is interconnected, which is important
    to this committee.
        Next question is for you, Mr. Baker.
        Kansas is served by 14 short line and regional railroads.
    We have 2,000 miles of track. Short lines play a vital role in
    the network.
        In your opinion, what are the biggest barriers that our
    short line operators are facing right now?
        Mr. Baker. The biggest barrier short lines face is a lack
    of funds. And it goes back to the origin story. The reason
    there are so many short line railroads in Kansas is, if you go
    back a couple of generations, those were the unprofitable,
    unloved, kind of marginal branch lines of larger railroads.
        Luckily, rather than being abandoned, they got sold to
    short lines. And those folks are hustling, scrapping, knocking
    on every door, working every day to try to keep those railroads
    in existence and let them survive and thrive.
        And it is largely working, but we need help. We are not,
    like the Class I's, totally self-sufficient. We are not too
    proud to say we do need Congress' help. Blessedly, Congress has
    long been very supportive of short lines, particularly folks
    from Kansas. Now-Senator Moran has been a longtime, very
    aggressive supporter of short lines, and you have been, too.
        The CRISI Program, again, is the single most important
    program under this committee's jurisdiction that really matters
    to short lines. The Nebraska, Kansas, and Colorado Railway, the
    South Kansas and Oklahoma Railroad, they have both benefited
    from CRISI grants and short lines. And there is more to come,
    as long as we can keep that program going.
        Mr. Mann. Yes, which is incredibly important to support
    because when short lines don't function well, we can't get our
    ag products to the mouths that feed it. And it is going to
    cause food inflation because you can't move these fields. You
    can move the products if they grow and that matters.
        I think about our family's farm 130 years ago. If you go
    back on the abstracts, our homeplace used to be owned by the
    railroad, that the Federal Government gave it to the railroad.
        We and many other people settling Kansas purchased that,
    and that is what the railroad used to continue to fund,
    building more track. And so literally, the railroads were
    instrumental in us building western Kansas, building the
    Midwest, really the western part of this country. So we need to
    keep supporting you guys.
        Thanks for being here. I appreciate we are having this
    hearing.
        And I yield back the balance of my time. Thanks.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mrs. Sykes, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, as well as
    the ranking member, for holding this hearing today, kicking us
    off for this rail subcommittee hearing.
        As you all know, on February 3, 2023, a Norfolk Southern
    train carrying hazardous materials derailed in East Palestine,
    Ohio. To prevent a potential explosion, a controlled burn was
    also ignited, spewing these chemicals into the air and sparking
    health concerns for Ohioans and Pennsylvanians alike.
        What occurred in the 2 years following, no one should have
    had to deal with the horror and the fallout of such a
    disastrous derailment, which has impacted this community and
    continues to impact this community.
        So one of the things that I did after being a Member of
    Congress for less than a month was introduce a bill with my
    colleagues, a bipartisan bill from Democrats and Republicans in
    Ohio, the RAIL Act, which was a piece of legislation to address
    the needs of the community.
        And we heard from folks in East Palestine, Ohio, we heard
    from labor unions, we heard from stakeholders. And we put this
    bill together, hoping that we could address the issue of rail
    safety.
        And one of those provisions specifically came from our
    Governor, Mike DeWine, which was around the temperature
    threshold requirements for safety placards, because what we
    found in the subsequent report was the first responders went
    looking for the placards, but they had melted, and they had no
    idea what they were dealing with.
        And I bring that up because the work that many of us have
    done, you heard from my colleague from Pennsylvania, our
    colleague from Texas, who have been trying to figure out a
    solution to this issue, yet we have no solution to this issue.
    And people in East Palestine are still wondering why Congress
    refused to act.
        We heard a lot of criticism of the former President not
    showing up. The current President did show up. We still have no
    legislation that addresses the needs of the people, not only in
    East Palestine, Ohio, but all across the country who have been
    subjected to train derailments and had their lives turned
    upside down.
        And I will briefly share a story, because I was speaking to
    a law school class earlier this week and they were asking me
    about the RAIL Act. And one of the students asked, ``Well, with
    the fact that we now have a Vice President Vance who was the
    co-lead for the Railway Safety Act, do you think that we will
    see train safety in the future?''
        And my response was no. And they waited for me to say
    something else. But my response was no, because after ruining
    these people's lives in East Palestine and constantly begging
    for hearings, having two or three or four or five different
    versions of the bill trying to find a solution that would
    ultimately address the needs of everyone, we still have
    nothing.
        And as my colleague from Pennsylvania said, I find that to
    be wholly unacceptable. It is unacceptable to have not done
    anything for the people of East Palestine, Ohio, and all across
    this country who are concerned.
        And so I was going to ask you, Mr. Jefferies, what could we
    do? What would you be okay with? But my colleague had already
    asked and you have answered the question, so now I know.
        But I am going to ask Mr. Cassity, what are some of the
    things that you would suggest that we could do?
        Because at this point, I just want you all to be on the
    record as expressing solutions that we can hear, that we can
    put to paper, and then we can implement and keep our community
    safe.
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. Thank you for the question,
    Congresswoman.
        East Palestine brought to light a lot of failures within
    the system of railroading, and defect detectors are kind of at
    the center point of that. And the purpose of the defect
    defector, it is a wayside detector. It lets you know if there
    are defects in the cars or the train, if there are trending
    indicators, to give a heads-up that something might be going
    wrong.
        Now, like in a car when you have wheel bearings, if those
    bearings start to seize, the temperature, obviously you have
    metal on metal, friction takes place, and you have temperature
    that rises.
        Historically, at least from when I hired on in 2005, these
    defect detectors gave you audible warnings. When you hit one or
    when you started to go over one, it gave you an introduction--
    CSX milepost, blah, blah, blah, defect detector--just to let
    you know it is on. And then as you went over, if there is a
    defect, it would sound an audible alarm, and then it would give
    you a closing announcement saying: CSX defect or milepost,
    blah, blah, blah, this is what the issues are.
        Somewhere along the way we lost the priority of those
    communications. And defect detectors started turning off the
    entrance alarm, so you didn't know if they were working or they
    weren't working.
        And then somewhere else along the way and the next step in
    the transition is that railroaders decided that they didn't
    want to give the operating crew that information about the
    defects, that they were better suited to determine whether
    there was a defect, it should be appropriate, it should be
    reported, or not.
        And then we get into the temperature thresholds like you
    addressed. There should be a standard on those thresholds.
    There should be a point at where we need to say: Hey, look, you
    have got to be notified of it.
        But to Congressman Moulton's point earlier too, there is no
    reason we shouldn't be in a place where technology doesn't
    exist that is providing real-time information to the crew in
    the cab of the locomotive because that is who needs that
    information. We are not going to keep operating a train when we
    know there is a problem behind us.
        Now, we are the ones that are responsible for its
    operation. We are the ones whose lives are at stake. And we are
    the ones that want to make sure that we get the job done the
    way we are supposed to.
        If there is any one thing in East Palestine that we can
    fix, it is making sure that the defect detectors are
    communicating, that they are relaying the information to the
    crew, to the people that have to have it in real time, and
    getting those things done. But the Rail Safety Act, the Rail
    Safety Enhancement Act, did approach a lot of those issues.
        Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
        I know we are out of time, but I am on this committee to
    make sure that we figure out these solutions and implement
    them. And I look forward to working with everyone in order to
    do that.
        Thank you for letting us go over, Mr. Chair. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentlelady yields back.
        Mr. Burchett, you are recognized.
        Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Speaker.
        Mr. Jefferies, what priorities or revisions would you like
    to see in the surface transportation reauthorization
    legislation?
        Mr. Jefferies. To name a few, fix the Highway Trust Fund.
    Our competitors have gotten and are on pace to get over $300
    billion in public subsidy for the infrastructure they operate
    over----
        Mr. Burchett [interrupting]. How would you suggest we fix
    it?
        Mr. Jefferies. The VMT with the weight variance on it.
    Their initial pilot program is out there. It is very eminently
    doable right now and it is the most equitable way to do it.
        Two, no truck size and weight increases.
        Three, maintain multimodal competitive grant programs for
    our public partners and our short line colleagues.
        Four, create an outcomes-, regulation-based paradigm that
    focuses on safety outcomes versus inputs, to name a few.
        Mr. Burchett. All right.
        Mr. Jefferies. Permitting reforms, sensible permitting
    reform.
        Mr. Burchett. Sir, we are Government, we are not in the
    business of fixing things. We are in the business of making it
    worse.
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, you asked.
        Mr. Burchett. But I appreciate that. We will work on that.
        The Highway Trust Fund, tell me how it impacts the rail
    industry.
        Mr. Jefferies. As I mentioned, freight railroads, Class I
    railroads, we pay for almost 100 percent of our own funding of
    our infrastructure to the tune of, when you account for
    inflation, $1.1 trillion of private funding since 1980.
        And we compete strongly against our trucking partners. They
    are partners, they are also competitors, and they operate over
    a public highway system that is woefully underfunded by the
    user fee structure, and all that leads to is a competitive
    imbalance.
        Look, I have heard the ATA advocate for paying more into
    the system. I have heard countless stakeholders advocate for
    paying more into the system. We haven't had a change since
    1993. Think about how much inflation has occurred and how much
    less the dollar is worth now.
        Mr. Burchett. I hear it every day, every day.
        I had a question about new technologies, but I believe Mr.
    Cassity addressed some of those with the bearing indicators. I
    have packed a few of those Timken bearings in my life, big and
    small. It is something everybody ought to do at some point.
        Have the Federal regulations slowed the implementation of
    these technologies, Mr. Jefferies? A simple yes or no.
        Mr. Jefferies. Yes.
        Mr. Burchett. Thank you.
        Mr. Baker, how has the short line rail industry utilized
    the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
    grants?
        Mr. Baker. Yes, sir. CRISI allows us to do projects that we
    just simply couldn't afford.
        Mr. Burchett. And what is your biggest barrier for that,
    with that?
        Mr. Baker. The biggest challenge going forward is: Will
    CRISI continue to exist? Because the need exists. And so we
    need to make sure in the next surface reauth bill that the
    program continues with advance appropriations.
        Once the grant has been given, the biggest barrier is just
    how slow it is to get from--the award date is incredibly
    exciting and everyone is happy and there is a press release and
    a press conference, and then the next couple of years is sort
    of a painful slog of getting it--actually getting money in the
    ground and ties and rail. And it just really doesn't need to be
    that slow.
        Mr. Burchett. Okay. And that is how you think we should
    improve that, is to make it faster?
        Mr. Baker. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Burchett. All right. Don't call me sir, it is just Tim.
    You will get nowhere showing me any respect in Washington, sir,
    I can assure you.
        Mr. Baker. Noted.
        Mr. Burchett. Thank you.
        Let me ask you one more question, Mr. Baker. You have been
    very helpful.
        Has the bureaucratic redtape interfered with short lines'
    ability to build? And how can Congress remove those barriers? I
    don't need the lawyer answer, I need the ``me and you sitting
    here talking'' answer.
        Mr. Baker. The answer is yes, the redtape has slowed the
    process of building. And there are simple things--and I am not
    even a lawyer, so I won't give the lawyer answer. But----
        Mr. Burchett [interrupting]. You work for a living, you
    choose not to steal, is what you are telling me.
        Mr. Baker. Things such as permit by rule, where if it is
    obviously----
        Mr. Burchett [interposing]. Yes.
        Mr. Baker [continuing]. A rehabilitation in an existing
    right-of-way. The answer is obvious. There is going to be no
    significant environmental impact. It is going to get a
    categorical exclusion. There is no reason that process needs to
    take months or years. That should be essentially instantaneous.
        Mr. Burchett. All right.
        Mr. Baker. Also pre-award authority. Let us spend our own
    money at risk and then we can get the project going. And then,
    if you want to spend a few months arguing over paperwork, it is
    not as painful, because at least we are making progress.
        Mr. Burchett. Would either of you two gentlemen like to add
    anything to that in the next 12 seconds?
        Mr. Daloisio. I would just like to add that I agree. I
    spoke a little bit earlier about sometimes the process is like
    as a contractor we want to give our partners those budget
    prices. Sometimes years later they get the funding, and now
    that budget price we gave 3 years ago, really it doesn't pay
    for the project anymore. So we have to go for change orders and
    things of that nature. So the timing really is an important
    thing.
        Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Chairman, I would like to say for the record that I
    have an intern with me named Emma Grace from Nashville,
    Tennessee, and she is wonderful. We hear a lot of bad things
    about what is going on with our young people in this country,
    and around a young person like that it makes me feel a whole
    lot better about where our country is headed.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Ms. Friedman, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Friedman. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        We have heard a lot about the importance of rail
    investments on farms and on freight, and that is wonderful and
    true. And we have also heard about the need to find ways of
    really funding our rail infrastructure, both for safety and for
    economic development. And I want to bring up another facet of
    this that is very important to my district, which is housing.
        I represent Los Angeles. As you know, we have been
    devastated by recent wildfires that have left maybe 12,000
    people or more homeless. That is running straight into an
    existing housing crisis in Los Angeles that already had tens of
    thousands of people homeless in our community and many others
    facing severe overcrowding and thousands of people who can't
    afford their rent because of the housing shortage driving up
    the price of rent.
        To me, it has been obvious for many years working on
    transportation issues that we are not going to solve our
    housing crisis in Los Angeles or many parts of our country
    without figuring out mobility. Because the first thing that
    neighbors always say when anyone wants to add new housing in
    Los Angeles and in many parts of the country is that they are
    concerned about the impact on parking and traffic congestion,
    which makes sense because we don't always give people other
    options for good mobility.
        And that means that for us to fix housing we have to fix
    transit and better invest in transit. And rail, of course,
    plays a huge role in that, in getting people to and from work,
    which sometimes in Los Angeles can mean traveling many miles
    because people are priced out or are working in areas where
    they can't find housing.
        So that is the lens that I am looking at transportation
    investments through, that it is not just about moving freight,
    it is not just about moving maybe from region to region, but
    also solving our housing crisis, which makes it even more
    important.
        Now, the FTA's Pilot Program for Transit-Oriented
    Development, or TOD, Planning, helps to create communities that
    are walkable and bikeable and more connected, and the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided a 38-percent increase
    for TOD programs.
        But transportation costs are still one of the highest
    consumer costs that we see. And in 2023, L.A. area households
    spent 16 percent of their budget on average on transportation,
    totaling almost $15,000 a year.
        And for people who are transit dependent, people who can't
    afford a car or for a variety of reasons can't have a car, we
    actually give them a pretty miserable experience because we
    don't invest enough in transit, partially because our formulas
    from the Federal Government don't reflect the real need.
        So I am wondering--and I guess I am going to direct this to
    Mr. Cassity but it really can be any of you--how can the
    Federal Government be a better partner? I know that, of course,
    funding is a part of it. But I am looking for ways to help
    support rail, rail expansion, upgrading rail, faster headways.
        And so is there something I should be looking at, certain
    programs that I should be fighting for, or policy changes that
    I can help push forward to help with transit in Los Angeles and
    across the country?
        Mr. Cassity. Sure. Thank you for the question,
    Congresswoman. I wish I was better equipped to really speak to
    this and the funding nature of it.
        What I will say, one, I want it to be understood that labor
    is fully on board with helping to rebuild the L.A. community.
    And anything that we can do to encourage the growth or new
    introduction of transit and rail, we are 100 percent on board.
        The one critique I would offer about Government and its
    role and how we do that is just having an open communication
    and an honest conversation about what we can do to make things
    better, especially in the rail space.
        Safety for us is not a partisan issue. It should not be
    ``us versus them.'' It is simply one of those things that we
    must accept and we must drive towards.
        Improving communities is one of those things that we have
    got to be talking about real-world solutions that are doable
    and then not worrying about what party might do what. We have
    just got to get down to the fact that, hey, we need to do what
    is right for the American public. We need to do what is right,
    make sure they have the opportunity to get to work.
        And I know this effect all too well. I will be really
    honest here. I lived in the Huntington, West Virginia, area for
    the last 15 years. When I was elected to this position and
    moved here, never was I smacked so hard in the face about the
    difficulties of transportation than living in Washington, DC.
        And I understand the realities and the challenges. So I
    can't necessarily recommend the fundamentals. But what I can
    tell you is that Congress has got to step in. You have got to
    figure out how to work together and just realize this is
    something we need desperately, to make sure we get it done and
    then let it roll. And we are fully on board to make sure we get
    over the finish line with that.
        Mr. Jefferies. I would just add--well, first and foremost,
    my condolences to the entire L.A. community. I have family who
    has lost a home, friends, no doubt you do as well, and an
    absolute tragedy.
        I think a lot of it comes down to southern California is
    another one of those parts of the country that has so many
    different governments. And we talked about a program earlier in
    Chicago called the CREATE Program, where the city, county,
    State, freight rail, passenger rail, commuter rail have all
    worked together to talk about investments to be made to free up
    capacity to create more service.
        And I think there was a real opportunity there to
    coordinate and identify shared priorities that will have the
    biggest impact for the whole community versus community by
    community.
        And so I would encourage you to take a look at that program
    and how we might be able to work to be part of that sort of
    establishment moving down the road.
        Mr. Baker. I would also note we have talked about the
    Highway Trust Fund a few times. And Ian and I tend to approach
    that from the concept of freight and freight rail competing
    against trucks. But I think our transit friends would have a
    similar vantage point on rail transit or even bus transit
    versus roads.
        And the reality is L.A. is very different than perhaps a
    rural area. In a rural area perhaps the money is best used to
    expand the county road. But in L.A., New York, Chicago you
    cannot build your way out of traffic congestion by more roads.
    It doesn't work. You need to invest more in rail transit.
        Ms. Friedman. Thank you so much. I yield.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentlelady yields back.
        Mr. Taylor, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Chairman Webster and Ranking Member
    Titus, for holding this meeting.
        And thank you, witnesses, for being here with us today. I
    appreciate it very much.
        As it stands, Ohio has 44 operating railroads and over
    5,000 miles of track, making Ohio the third largest rail
    infrastructure State in the Nation. Manufacturing, steel,
    agriculture, and international trade all depend on railways to
    connect Ohio products with national and global markets.
        As one of two Ohioans serving on the Transportation and
    Infrastructure rail subcommittee, ensuring rail safety after
    the incident in East Palestine is one of my top priorities.
        Mr. Daloisio, in your testimony you mentioned how railroads
    across the country following East Palestine created and
    implemented new safety measures to ensure derailments like this
    didn't occur again.
        Can you go into further detail about specific safety
    measures that the National Railroad Construction and
    Maintenance Association has taken to this point?
        Mr. Daloisio. Thank you, Congressman.
        So our association of contractors and engineers and
    suppliers, they are constantly looking at new technologies,
    like these hot box detectors, like signaling information, data
    processing things.
        Our contractors are constantly looking at safer and better
    and more efficient ways to fix the tracks and also to work with
    the railroad, the operating railroads.
        I mean, our association, we started, we have a robust
    safety committee which talks constantly about safer railroads,
    safer way to do things, safer procedures.
        While we don't get into the actual operations of the
    trains, our contractor members help our Class I and our short
    line partners in making things safer.
        So when it's insulation [inaudible] detectors or whatever
    new technology comes out there, we are definitely on board to
    try to help them and support them and be a sounding board for
    them to try to advance some of these technologies.
        Mr. Taylor. Thank you.
        Mr. Jefferies, we have heard conflicting statements over
    the course of today about derailment statistics over the last 3
    years.
        Would you mind sharing some of the underpinnings of your
    testimony earlier that the rate of derailments is going down
    over the last few years?
        Mr. Jefferies. Sure. I would be glad to. And just to add on
    to my colleague's comments, freight rail has taken a number of
    steps as well. Increased the number of wayside detection,
    whether it is hot box, whether it is acoustic bearing, whether
    it is machine inspection portals, whether it is reducing
    absolute threshold on bearing increases, whether it is
    establishing new trending algorithms for troubling trends and
    increasing temperatures on bearings, or whether it is making
    sure first responders have real-time information; 2.3 million
    first responders now have access to our real-time app.
        Shifting to the safety numbers. So we saw in 2023 the
    employee injury rate was at the industry's all-time low. We are
    a 200-year-old industry. All-time low. Final 2024 numbers
    haven't come in yet. We are neck and neck with that, slightly
    below, but that is through 10 months. So hopefully the last 2
    months of the year will bear that out. Of course, any number
    above zero, we have got a lot more work to do.
        On the derailment rate, rate is the key measure, rate. In
    2023, the rate was 3.46 incidents per million train-miles. So
    far in 2024, the number is 2.77 per million train-miles. Again,
    that is above zero. That is not acceptable. We have got a lot
    more work to do.
        But the vast majority of those incidents occur within the
    yard or on industry track, not on the mainline, the mainline
    being the interstate highway of the rail network.
        That does not diminish those incidents. They can absolutely
    result in tragedy, and do. And so we have got to minimize those
    in-yard incidents. We have seen a significant downtick there.
    Those incidents also largely include a wheel coming off a rail
    during the switch. So we cannot equate all derailments.
        Mr. Taylor. Thank you for that.
        Many short line railroads across Ohio and the United States
    operate on decades-old or century-old existing infrastructure.
    I support investing in infrastructure, but we also have to be
    mindful of the deficit.
        Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements--
    or CRISI--grant programs seem to be transformative in repairing
    outdated infrastructure without wasting taxpayer dollars.
        What is the biggest barrier for short line operators when
    they consider or apply for a CRISI grant at this time?
        Mr. Baker. Right. Well, I appreciate the underpinning of
    the question. Short lines, we take a lot of pride in the fact
    they are very, very lean, there is almost no bureaucracy. If a
    short line gets $10, $12, even $5 million from the FRA in a
    CRISI grant, that money goes right into the track. There is not
    a big engineering study, there are not layers of management to
    process it through. So we feel very happy that we can deliver
    Government a good bang for the buck.
        The delays, from announcement to obligation, that is really
    the biggest hurdle to overcome, and then, of course, just
    making sure that the program continues to exist, because we
    have a lot more to go in Ohio. We have made great progress, but
    there is a lot more to do.
        Mr. Taylor. Thank you again, Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        Mr. Nadler, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
        Let me start by thanking Chairman Webster and Ranking
    Member Titus for holding this hearing and the witnesses for
    appearing.
        Before I go into my questions, I want to express my concern
    again about President Trump's hastily and poorly drafted
    Executive order that froze a substantial portion of critical
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding. Despite the White House
    drafting memos and OMB trying to clarify, States are still
    being told that their approved funding for bridges and highways
    is on pause.
        I remain concerned that the White House triggered an
    entirely avoidable crisis, and I urge the White House to
    finally clean up this mess.
        Mr. Jefferies, your testimony underscored the many
    advantages of rail freight compared to trucking, particularly
    in terms of safety, efficiency, and infrastructure
    sustainability. Studies suggest that increasing truck size and
    weight limits could divert as much as 20 percent of freight
    from rail to roads.
        Could you elaborate on the potential consequences of such a
    shift for the communities we serve, including the strain on the
    Nation's road and bridge infrastructure?
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for the question. Welcome back to
    the committee. And thank you for your longstanding championship
    of this issue.
        The impact would be immense, to put it lightly. We already
    have a Highway Trust Fund that is underfunded by hundreds of
    billions of dollars. We have long since abandoned the user pays
    fee. Our trucking partners operate over infrastructure of which
    most estimates say they pay, max, 60 percent to cover the cost
    of the infrastructure damage.
        Increasing truck weights would only exacerbate
    infrastructure damage, exacerbate congestion. That is more
    trucks moving up and down the I-95 corridor, the I-81 corridor,
    which every time I am on it, I feel like I am the only car
    driving on it. Increase emissions.
        It is not good for customers, consumers, communities. It is
    not good for, frankly, society.
        And at the end of day, from my perspective--and, oh, by the
    way, I know we have had our differences today, but this is an
    issue I guarantee you every single one of us sees eye to eye on
    and supports. So at least there are a few things out there.
        But from my perspective, look, we are just looking for a
    level playing field here. We pay for our infrastructure and we
    expect our competitors to pay for their infrastructure and then
    let the chips fall where they may.
        But when you are subsidizing infrastructure to the tune of
    hundreds of billions of dollars, that just flips the scale on
    its side and pushes freight where it is going to go to the
    cheapest level, which is going to be the highways if it is
    allowed to increase weights at, in addition to that level of
    subsidy.
        Mr. Nadler. Does everybody on the panel in fact agree with
    Mr. Jefferies on this?
        Mr. Baker. I do, for sure.
        I would also note there is a huge safety concern, which you
    all have pointed out. There are 40,000 people dead last year on
    the Interstate Highway System. We are used to that as a country
    because it happens every year, for decades, but that is a
    horrifying number. And the fact that anybody could look at that
    scenario and say what we ought to do is add bigger and heavier
    and more trucks to that, I just don't think that makes a lot of
    sense.
        Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
        Mr. Jefferies, your testimony also mentioned the disparity
    in funding between rail and trucking. What policy changes could
    Congress implement to address this imbalance while ensuring a
    fair and competitive freight transportation market?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, first of all, don't make any changes
    to truck size and weight. And second of all, we have to get
    ahold of how the highways are funded. It has got to be done by
    the user.
        And I would just say it is not just the folks on this panel
    that share our concerns. It is truckdrivers. There are a lot of
    trucking companies. To my knowledge, the ATA is not advocating
    for this. This is a select group of shippers advocating for
    this.
        And so we believe the citizens don't support it. So we
    believe the vast majority of this country opposes any sort of
    change.
        Mr. Nadler. Thank you.
        Finally, your testimony highlighted the importance of
    programs like the Infrastructure for Rebuilding America, which
    I was proud to help create a decade ago, and the Mega Grant
    Program. These initiatives have been instrumental in addressing
    critical infrastructure challenges nationwide.
        They also represent vital funding opportunities for
    transformative projects like the Cross-Harbor Freight Tunnel
    project, which has the potential to significantly divert
    freight from trucks to rail, enabling the more efficient
    movement of millions of tons of goods each year through New
    York and New Jersey.
        Mr. Jefferies, in your view, what steps can Congress take
    to improve these grant programs to support even more
    transformative projects, particularly in high-need areas?
        Mr. Jefferies. I will be quick.
        Keep funding them, get the money out quicker, and make sure
    that distributions and awards are merit based.
        And finally, one application, one central application for
    all these different programs so that folks don't have to
    reinvent the wheel every time they are applying for funding
    from a different program.
        But fully support.
        Mr. Nadler. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. The gentleman yields back.
        And I don't see anybody else who hasn't been recognized. So
    I thank the witnesses. Thank you for coming, staying until the
    end, giving us great, direct answers on all kinds of issues.
        And with that, the meeting is--yes, go ahead.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you.
        I just heard several mentions of cargo theft. We have been
    working on retail theft, and that is much more than stealing a
    candy bar now. I suspect there is some overlap between these
    circles that are involved in this. Maybe we need to put a
    roundtable together with some of the stakeholders and look at
    how we can do a concerted effort on this issue.
        Mr. Jefferies. We would be happy to.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Now, no one else is asking to be
    recognized, so the meeting stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:46 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                           Submissions for the Record

                                  ----------

         Statement of Rob Benedict, Vice President, Petrochemicals and
     Midstream, American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, Submitted for
                       the Record by Hon. Daniel Webster
        The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) is a trade
    association representing high-tech American refiners and petrochemical
    manufacturers. AFPM members produce and deliver the fuels and
    petrochemicals that make modern life possible and enable people and the
    U.S. economy to thrive.
        On behalf of the AFPM, we want to thank you for your leadership
    ensuring our United States freight rail system remains competitive and
    operates efficiently, ensuring economic prosperity.
        Railroads are an integral part of our nation's infrastructure, and
    all stakeholders benefit from a healthy, competitive, and dependable
    freight rail system. The economic contributions and planned growth
    associated with the refining and petrochemical industries are dependent
    on the ability to move products and feedstocks reliably and efficiently
    to, and from, their facilities. Refineries and petrochemical
    manufacturers rely on a healthy rail network as a vital part of their
    supply chains and in turn our industry's growth strategy. Annually in
    the United States, over 2.3 million carloads of our members' feedstocks
    and products are transported by rail.
        We appreciate the attention the subcommittee's hearing brought to
    important rail issues and railroad's role in a thriving economy. AFPM
    members were disappointed the witness list failed to include a key
    stakeholder rail customer and shippers. Rail shippers have important
    perspectives on the state of the freight rail network and these views
    were absent from the hearing. With that absence, key perspectives were
    raised on critical rail service issues, rail competition and rail
    safety from only the invited witness's perspective, and thus only
    provided one, unchecked side of the story. AFPM urges the subcommittee
    to include rail shippers in future hearings to obtain a balanced,
    comprehensive hearing record.
        While AFPM members support many of the points made by the witnesses
    regarding infrastructure investments, permitting reform, rail
    inspections and the need for innovation, we would like to provide the
    following rail shipper perspective on two important topics covered at
    the hearing.
                Improving Rail Safety is a Shared Responsibility
        Rail safety is a shared responsibility that includes railroads,
    rail shippers, emergency responders and the regulatory agencies
    responsible for oversight. AFPM members prioritize the safety of our
    people, communities, and products above everything else, and that
    includes the safety of our products in transit.\1\ As rail shippers, we
    control the tank cars we own and lease up to the point when we hand
    them over to the railroads. To date, shippers have replaced nearly
    110,000 tank cars on the tracks with new or retrofitted cars,
    substantially reducing the probability of tank car breaches in the
    event of a derailment.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See AFPM Blog: Transporting fuels and chemicals by rail: What
    AFPM members do to keep rail shipments safe.
        \2\ These massive investments by shippers have resulted in
    significant rail safety improvements. According to the Association of
    American Railroads, since 2013 the U.S. flammable liquid fleet has
    realized a 60 to 80% reduction in Conditional Probability of Release, a
    common measure of tank car puncture resistance as a result of fleet
    upgrades. See Tank Car Resource Center--Progress.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The primary goal of rail safety policy is to reduce or eliminate
    the risk of derailments in the first place. To this end, Wayside
    detectors and telematics are valuable diagnostic tools for the rail
    industry that can help prevent derailments. Wayside detectors collect
    information on the health of passing rail cars, transmit that data back
    to railroad personnel who then can identify rail safety issues and
    potentially mitigate issues and prevent derailments. Similarly, rail
    telematics can provide information on the health and location of tank
    car assets to the shippers that own them.
        Installing more Wayside detectors across freight rail routes that
    frequently transport hazardous materials would improve the frequency of
    real-time data transmissions, enhance safety warning systems by helping
    to identify escalating problems early, enable immediate response
    measures, and prevent derailments.
        Currently, the frequency and placements of wayside detectors is not
    regulated by the United States Department of Transportation (US DOT).
    In addition, the protocols related to when a wayside detector reading
    would require action from a train crew (such as additional inspection,
    reducing train speed or even stopping a train) are left to rail
    industry developed standards. More wayside detectors and clear
    protocols to identify potential dangers would also enhance safety
    warning systems by helping to identify escalating problems early and
    hopefully the prevention of rail incidents.
        To this end, AFPM supports efforts to establish requirements for
    the installation, maintenance, and placement of wayside defect
    detectors. Similarly, AFPM is open to further researching the role
    telematics can play in improving safety.
              Reduced Rail Competition Has Harmed Rail Efficiency
        During the hearing the Staggers Act of 1980 was referenced, and it
    was noted that freight rail transportation has become ``cheaper and
    more efficient.'' The rail industry has made significant improvements,
    particularly in safety, since 1980. From a rail shipper perspective
    today, the consolidation within the rail industry, particularly over
    the past 15 years, has decreased competition, led to increased shipper
    costs, and had negative impacts on the rail network.
        Rail shippers, including AFPM member companies, face escalating
    rates, service challenges, a lack of competitive options, and
    ineffective means to resolve commercial disputes with railroads. With
    limited competition, freight rail rates continue to increase whereas
    railroad costs have remained relatively flat. Approximately 75% of
    refiners and petrochemical manufacturers are only served by a single
    railroad (i.e., are captive) and thus have been negatively impacted by
    the lack of competitive rail service for far too long.
        Further, the widespread introduction of Precision Scheduled
    Railroading--a railroad operational method focused on maximum asset
    utilization and reduction of operating ratios--exacerbated rail
    competition issues and has caused a shift in railroads' focus from
    serving rail customers to maximizing profits.
        To this end, when considering rail policies, AFPM asks Congress to
    consider reforms that promote greater access to competitive rail
    services wherever possible, reform the outdated policies of dispute
    resolution processes and the definition of the common carrier
    obligation, and equip the surface transportation board with more data
    to identify rail network issues prior to them becoming an emergency.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See AFPM Blog: Freight Rail in America: Can a Market Be `Free'
    if There's Almost No Competition?
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AFPM thanks the subcommittee for its time and consideration of all
    stakeholder viewpoints. AFPM shares Congress's goal of ensuring the
    safe and efficient flow of commerce on our nation's rail system and
    looks forward to continued collaboration. AFPM and our members
    appreciate your consideration of perspectives and urge you to include
    rail shippers in future discussions on freight rail topics.

        Statement of the Wabtec Corporation, Submitted for the Record by
                              Hon. Daniel Webster
                                  Introduction
        Wabtec Corporation submits this statement for the record to the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on
    Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials to provide insight into
    the company's role in rail technology, innovation, and safety. Wabtec
    is the leading provider of advanced technologies that improve rail
    safety and efficiency, building on our 150-year legacy of innovation to
    design and manufacture the most competitive locomotives, digital
    technologies that support a safer and more efficient rail network, and
    rolling stock components for passenger and freight rail fleets.
        Wabtec is a rail technology partner that works with a broad range
    of stakeholders--both private and public--to advance safety,
    efficiency, and the long-term competitiveness of the freight and
    passenger rail sectors. As the industry continues to evolve, federal
    investment in infrastructure and technology remains vital to ensuring
    the competitiveness of U.S. rail manufacturing and the continued
    modernization of rail operations. Public-private partnerships, such as
    the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI)
    program and other federal initiatives, provide essential funding that
    enables rail operators to adopt next-generation technologies, enhance
    safety, and improve operational performance. Continued support for
    these programs is critical to Wabtec's ability to innovate, expand
    domestic manufacturing, and contribute to a stronger, more resilient
    rail network and national economy.
                       Wabtec's Legacy and Global Impact
        Wabtec's history is deeply rooted in innovation, dating back to its
    founding in 1869 by George Westinghouse. The development of the air
    brake system revolutionized rail safety and efficiency, and the company
    has maintained its leadership in the industry by continually
    introducing advanced rail technologies. Today, Wabtec operates in over
    50 countries with a workforce of 29,500 employees, including 12,000 in
    the United States. The company primarily serves the global freight rail
    and passenger transit industries, including locomotives, braking
    systems, digital solutions, and propulsion technologies that enhance
    the performance of rail networks worldwide.
        As a global leader, Wabtec's impact extends beyond manufacturing
    and technology development. The company plays a key role in advancing
    rail infrastructure through strategic partnerships, acquisitions, and
    investment in emerging technologies. Wabtec's commitment to research
    and development ensures that the rail industry continues to evolve to
    meet the needs of modern transportation.
        Beyond North America, Wabtec has a significant presence in Europe,
    Asia, Africa, South America, and Australia. This international
    footprint enables Wabtec to leverage global best practices and
    collaborate with rail operators worldwide to drive advancements in
    transportation systems and rail networks. Despite increasing
    competition from foreign manufacturers, Wabtec remains a leader in
    locomotive and transit solutions by investing in proprietary technology
    and maintaining strong partnerships with international rail
    authorities. In an era where global rail infrastructure is rapidly
    evolving, Wabtec continues to provide innovative solutions that keep it
    at the forefront of the industry.
                            Locomotive Technologies
        Freight and passenger rail operators across North America rely on
    Wabtec locomotives to deliver a safe and reliable operation for their
    customers. Continuing to invest in new and modernized locomotives,
    along with the development of a portfolio of alternative fuel
    capabilities to meet a variety of operator needs, will be vital to the
    continued competitiveness of freight rail relative to other modes.
          Freight Locomotives: Wabtec's Tier 4 locomotives
    represent the most advanced, fuel-efficient, diesel-electric
    locomotives available today. These locomotives meet the Environmental
    Protection Agency's (EPA) stringent Tier 4 emissions standards, which
    require a 76% reduction in nitrogen oxide (NOx) and a 70% reduction in
    particulate matter (PM) emissions, compared to previous generations.
    With over 1,000 Tier 4 locomotives in operation, Wabtec continues to
    set the standard for sustainable rail transportation. Railroads
    adopting these locomotives benefit from improved fuel efficiency, lower
    maintenance costs, and a reduced environmental footprint.

          Locomotive Modernization Programs: Wabtec modernizes
    aging locomotive fleets to extend their operational life while
    incorporating the latest efficiency and safety enhancements. These
    efforts have resulted in up to 30% improvement in fuel efficiency and a
    more than 50% increase in haulage ability.

          Hybrid and Alternative Fuel Technologies: Wabtec is
    investing in hybrid-electric and alternative fuel technologies to
    support a range of next-generation propulsion technologies. The
    development of fuel-agnostic, battery-electric and hydrogen internal
    combustion engine locomotives represents a significant step toward
    implementing innovative technology solutions and increasing energy
    efficiency within the rail sector.
     Leadership in Positive Train Control (PTC) and Wayside Safety Systems
        Wabtec is at the forefront of rail safety through its leadership in
    Positive Train Control implementation. A federal requirement, PTC is
    designed to prevent train-to-train collisions, over-speed derailments,
    and unauthorized train movements. Since the passage of the Rail Safety
    Improvement Act of 2008, Wabtec has deployed PTC solutions on more than
    24,000 locomotives across North America, significantly enhancing safety
    and operational efficiency.
        In addition to PTC, Wabtec is a pioneer in the inspection and
    monitoring of rail assets to improve safety through our KinetiX
    Inspection Technologies portfolio. These wayside systems evaluate the
    condition of key railcar components, including wheels, brakes,
    bearings, and pantographs, delivering a detailed overview of the
    train's overall health. Integrating machine vision, laser scanning,
    remote sensing with acoustic and thermal technology, load monitoring,
    and AI-driven analytics, the technology sets the standard for
    automating inspection processes, enhancing asset availability and life,
    significantly reducing operational costs and service disruptions.
           Advancements in Rail Technology and Digital Infrastructure
        Wabtec is driving innovation in rail technology through the
    development of digital solutions that enhance visibility, optimize
    train operations, and enable real-time decision-making. These
    advancements improve network capacity, reduce congestion, and support
    precision scheduling, leading to a more efficient and resilient
    transportation system.
        Wabtec's artificial intelligence capabilities facilitate predictive
    maintenance, minimizing unplanned downtime and improving asset
    utilization. By integrating AI-driven diagnostics with real-time
    monitoring, the company helps railroads reduce mechanical failures and
    increase train reliability. For example, our Railcar Telematics
    portfolio includes state-of-the-art sensors that turn freight cars into
    smart connected assets that allow operators and shippers to see the GPS
    location of freight and better manage the safety and maintenance of the
    fleet.
        Wabtec's Trip Optimizer is a smart cruise control system for trains
    that is certified by the U.S. EPA to deliver 10% fuel savings. By
    taking into account the terrain, train make-up, speed restrictions, and
    operating conditions, it calculates an optimum speed profile and can
    automatically control the locomotive throttle and dynamic brakes to
    reduce fuel burn and provide efficient train handling onboard
    locomotives. The system is installed on over 11,000 locomotives
    globally and has saved more than 400 million gallons of fuel, cutting
    carbon emissions by over 500,000 tons annually. Based on the typical
    price for No. 2 diesel fuel, Wabtec has saved customers hundreds of
    millions of dollars in fuel expenses.
        Similarly, Movement Planner is a real-time planning solution that
    optimizes train scheduling, improving network throughput while reducing
    congestion and energy use. By leveraging predictive analytics and AI-
    enhanced decision-making, Movement Planner enables freight and
    passenger trains to operate more efficiently within existing
    infrastructure.
                                  CRISI Grants
        The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements
    (CRISI) program is a critical funding mechanism that supports rail
    safety, efficiency, and infrastructure modernization across the United
    States. This program plays an essential role in enabling short line and
    regional railroads to make necessary investments in modern rail
    technologies, safety enhancements, and operational improvements.
        Short line and regional railroads, which provide crucial first- and
    last-mile connectivity for freight shipments, often lack the financial
    resources needed to upgrade their aging fleets and infrastructure.
    CRISI grants bridge this gap by providing the investments necessary to
    acquire advanced locomotive technologies, implement digital safety
    solutions, and improve fuel efficiency.
        Wabtec has actively supported CRISI grant applications for various
    railroads, assisting them in securing federal investments for
    innovative rail technology acquisitions. As a result, rail operators
    have been able to invest in innovative technology that enhances safety
    and operational performance. The ability of railroads to access CRISI
    funding directly impacts their capacity to improve network efficiency
    and reliability and ensure compliance with evolving safety standards.
        Continued investment in the CRISI program is essential for
    fostering a more resilient and competitive rail network. By supporting
    smaller railroads in adopting cutting-edge solutions, these investments
    contribute to the overall strength of the U.S. transportation
    infrastructure while promoting sustainable rail operations. Wabtec
    remains committed to collaborating with rail partners and policymakers
    to maximize the impact of the CRISI program and advance the future of
    rail technology.
                 Wabtec's Work with Transit Agencies and Amtrak
        Funding for passenger rail and transit allows operators to make
    critical investments in infrastructure and systems that enable safer
    and more efficient travel throughout the country. Wabtec supplies many
    of the critical components and systems to deliver safe and reliable
    service to passengers, such as locomotive maintenance, PTC,
    dispatching, and components for the fleet like brakes, doors, HVAC, and
    pantographs. Wabtec offers Amtrak and transit agencies proven
    technologies that have been deployed in the United States and globally
    because they deliver a return on investment for funding partners.
    Wabtec's team members manufacture these technologies and components for
    passenger rail in several locations across the country, including in
    South Carolina, upstate New York, and western Pennsylvania.
                          Advancing the Future of Rail
        Wabtec remains dedicated to delivering innovative transportation
    solutions that support a safe, efficient, and sustainable rail network.
    Wabtec looks forward to continued collaboration with Congress, transit
    agencies, Amtrak, and freight rail operators to drive technological
    advancements and strengthen rail infrastructure. Ongoing investment in
    research and development will ensure that the rail industry remains a
    cornerstone of the U.S. transportation system, driving economic growth
    through advanced manufacturing, job creation, and the expansion of
    efficient transportation networks that strengthen supply chains,
    commerce, and the travel experience.
        Wabtec appreciates the opportunity to submit this testimony and
    looks forward to working with the Committee to support the future of
    rail transportation in the United States.

          Action Plan, ``An Action Plan for Rail Energy and Emissions
          Innovation,'' U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Department of
     Transportation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department
        of Labor, and U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,
     December 2024, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Christopher R. Deluzio
        The 158-page action plan is retained in committee files and is
    available online at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2024-12/
    doe-eere-modal-reports_rail-energy-emissions-action-plan.pdf

                                    Appendix

                                  ----------

      Questions to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer,
           Association of American Railroads, from Hon. Troy E. Nehls

        Question 1. You have stated that the railroads will meet the
    September 2025 move-off date for the legacy 900 MHz network, as agreed
    upon by the AAR and the FCC. However, to date, the AAR has not
    communicated to the FCC how the railroads plan to accomplish this
    transition. Please provide a detailed explanation of how each AAR
    member railroad is addressing this task, including the specific
    technologies being implemented.
        Answer. During the 5-year transition period, which encompassed a
    global pandemic and significant supply chain challenges, the railroad
    industry has been diligently progressing towards the completion of its
    900 MHz transition in a manner consistent with the requirements of the
    FCC's 2020 Order. AAR members will meet their deadline of removing six
    legacy channel pairs from its 900 MHz license (WPSF894) on or before
    September 14, 2025. AAR has conveyed this information to the FCC on
    multiple occasions, including most recently in a letter submitted to
    the agency on February 2, 2025.
        Exiting the legacy 900 MHz channels has been a significant effort,
    requiring the clearing of six legacy paired channels from approximately
    9,500 radio locations along nearly 140,000 miles of track spread out
    across the contiguous United States. As of March 10, 2025, the rail
    industry has cleared over 75% of those 9,500 radio locations, with the
    remaining facilities on track to be cleared from legacy frequency use
    on or before the September 14, 2025 deadline.
        Railroad expenses for this transition were initially estimated at
    $70 million, but total industry costs are expected to exceed $110
    million upon completion. Of this amount, approximately $41 million will
    be spent solely on the clearing effort to accommodate the new paired 3
    MHz broadband segment over the five-year transition period. Post-
    transition, additional time, funding, and effort will be required for
    the development and deployment of next-generation rail-safety
    applications and technology.

        Question 2. The agreement between the AAR and the FCC requires a
    substantial build-out of the A Block of the 900 MHz spectrum by April
    2026. To date, to the best of my knowledge, the AAR has not
    communicated to any stakeholders, including the FCC and this committee,
    how the railroads intend to meet this requirement. Please provide a
    detailed description of how each Class I railroad plans to accomplish
    this build-out, including the intended timelines.
        Answer. The rail industry has used and will continue to use its 900
    MHz license to support both legacy and future train safety applications
    in a manner consistent with its FCC license authorization. How the
    railroads will continue to utilize their post-transition license will
    vary by railroad depending on their needs, including:
        1.  Continued support of legacy operations retuned during the
    transition effort,
        2.  Capacity needs of other railroad frequency bands on an interim
    transition basis, and
        3.  Future rail-safety applications and deployments.

        Currently, the rail industry utilizes its 900 MHz spectrum for
    centralized train control (CTC), Advanced Train Control Systems (ATCS),
    communications at interlockings, and remote monitoring, among other
    critical rail safety applications. The industry continues to evaluate
    and seeks to develop new technologies to enhance rail safety.

        Question 3. Moving to the A Block of the 900 MHz spectrum presents
    a unique opportunity for railroads to enhance both safety and
    operational efficiency. Please provide a detailed explanation of the
    specific safety and operational use cases the railroads aim to address
    by transitioning operations to the A Block. Additionally, describe the
    specific technologies and applications that will be implemented to
    leverage the additional capacity provided by the A Block. How do these
    technologies and applications integrate with existing railroad
    operating systems such as Centralized Traffic Control (CTC), Advanced
    Train Control Management Systems (ATCMS), Positive Train Control (PTC),
    and others?
        Answer. The railroad industry has made significant time and
    financial investments in rail safety innovation, exploring new
    technologies and waveforms to enhance spectral efficiency, address
    network capacity constraints across its narrowband assets, interconnect
    or federate application-specific deployments, and support new safety
    applications. By the end of 2024, AAR had already invested more than $2
    million in testing and adapting the recently developed, open IEEE
    802.16t standard to meet the unique operational requirements of the
    freight rail industry. Further research into the 802.16t protocol is
    planned for 2025 and 2026 to evaluate its applicability to railroad
    operations and overall industry needs. However, the railroads' spectrum
    use is not necessarily tied to--or contingent upon--the railroad
    industry's potential adoption of specific technology or protocols. As
    noted in the answer to Question 2, railroads continue to utilize and
    expand their 900 MHz narrowband channels for critical operations,
    including centralized train control (CTC), Advanced Train Control
    Systems (ATCS), communications at interlockings, and remote monitoring,
    among other critical rail safety applications.

      Questions to Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer,
      Association of American Railroads, from Hon. Christopher R. Deluzio

        Question 1.a. What investments or actions are the Class 1 railroads
    planning to take to reduce their air pollution and greenhouse gas
    emissions?
        Question 1.b. What investments or actions have the Class 1
    railroads made towards electrification and achieving zero emissions?
        Answer to 1.a. and 1.b. Railroads have deployed new technologies,
    invested in next-generation locomotives, and modernized the existing
    locomotive fleet all with the aim of reducing emissions. Examples of
    these efforts include:
          Initiated extensive research and development efforts
    aimed at developing more environmentally friendly locomotives,
    including those powered by both batteries and hydrogen;
          Introduced pioneering technologies, such as highly
    advanced fuel management systems;
          Modernized thousands of locomotives in the existing fleet
    to improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions;
          Installed idling-reduction technologies, such as stop-
    start systems, and expanded the use of distributed power to reduce fuel
    consumption;
          Introduced zero-emission equipment such as cranes to rail
    yards; and
          Adopted approved targets with the Science Based Target
    Initiative.

        Question 2. Furthermore, how many locomotives do the Class Is
    currently have in operation and how many meet Tier 4 emissions
    standards?
        Answer. As of 2023, 6.7% of the Class I locomotive fleet is Tier 4,
    over 1,700 locomotives in total.

                                            [all]