[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 [email protected].
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]