    [Senate Hearing 119-154]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-154

                        ON THE RIGHT TRACK: MODERNIZING
                             AMERICA'S RAIL NETWORK

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION,
                        FREIGHT, PIPELINES, AND SAFETY

                                     of the

                             COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                          SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION
                                   __________

                                 JUNE 18, 2025
                                   __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
                                Transportation,

                    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                    Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                    ______

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    61-521 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2025

           SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                           TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman
    JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,
    ROGER WICKER, Mississippi              Ranking
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
    MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan
    TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    TED BUDD, North Carolina             TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
    ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
    JOHN CURTIS, Utah                    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
    BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
    TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  ANDY KIM, New Jersey
    CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming              LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
                     Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director
               Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director
                         Liam McKenna, General Counsel
                       Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director
                     Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director
                         Jonathan Hale, General Counsel

                                     ------

        SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION, FREIGHT, PIPELINES,
                                AND SAFETY

    TODD YOUNG, Indiana, Chairman        GARY PETERS, Michigan, Ranking
    JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    ROGER WICKER, Mississippi            BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
    DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
    ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
    BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  ANDY KIM, New Jersey
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on June 18, 2025....................................     1
    Statement of Senator Todd........................................     1
    Statement of Senator Peters......................................     3
        Letter dated June 17, 2025 to Hon. Gary Peters and Hon. Todd
          Young from Robert A. McCraight, Mayor, City of Romulus.....     5
    Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     7
    Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    53
    Statement of Senator Moreno......................................    57
    Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    60
    Statement of Senator Kim.........................................    62
    Statement of Senator Markey......................................    66

                                   Witnesses

    Ian Jefferies, President and Chief Executive Officer, Association
      of American Railroads..........................................    10
        Prepared statement...........................................    11
    Peter Gilbertson, President and Chief Executive Officer,
      Anacostia Rail Holdings Company; and Mmber, American Short Line
      and Regional Railroad Association..............................    18
        Prepared statement...........................................    20
    Husein A. Cumber, Senior Advisor, Brightline Holdings, LLC.......    33
        Prepared statement...........................................    35
    Clarence E. Anthony, CEO and Executive Director, National League
      of Cities, and former Mayor of South Bay, Florida..............    40
        Prepared statement...........................................    41

                                    Appendix

    Anne C. Reinke, President and CEO, Intermodal Association of
      North America (IANA), prepared statement.......................    69
    Letter dated August 6, 2024 to Members of Congress from various
      organizations regarding regulation and deregulation............    71
    Letter Re: Manistee County Safer Southern Rail Route from Lisa
      Sagala, Manistee County, Michigan, Controller/Administrator....    74
    Letter dated June 17, 2025 to Senator Gary Peters from Justin
      Horvath, President/CEO, Shiawassee Economic Development
      Partnership....................................................    75
    Letter dated June 24, 2025 to Hon. Todd Young and Hon. Gary
      Peters from Michael E. Duggan, Mayor, City of Detroit..........    77
    Letter dated June 24, 2025 to Hon. Gary Peters from Amy O'Leary,
      CAE, Executive Director, Southeast Michigan Council of
      Governments....................................................    80
    Letter dated June 25, 2025 to Hon. Gary Peters from Peter
      Anastor, Director, Office of Rail, State of Michigan,
      Department of Transportation...................................    83
    Response to written questions submitted to Ian Jefferies by:
        Hon. Ted Cruz................................................    85
        Hon. Todd Young..............................................    85
        Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    85
        Hon. Gary Peters.............................................    86
        Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    88
    Response to written questions submitted to Peter Gilbertson by:
        Hon. Todd Young..............................................    88
        Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    89
        Hon. Gary Peters.............................................    91
    Response to written questions submitted to Husein A. Cumber by:
        Hon. Todd Young..............................................    94
        Hon. Gary Peters.............................................    94
        Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    96

                        ON THE RIGHT TRACK: MODERNIZING
                             AMERICA'S RAIL NETWORK

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 18, 2025

                                   U.S. Senate,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines,
                                                    and Safety,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in
    room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Todd Young
    [presiding], Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Young [presiding], Cruz, Moreno, Peters,
    Cantwell, Markey, Lujan, and Kim.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

        Senator Young. This meeting of the Subcommittee on Service
    Transportation, Freight, Pipelines, and Safety will come to
    order. Good morning, and welcome to this hearing where we will
    discuss an issue of national importance, the safety,
    innovation, and future of America's railways.
        As Congress looks toward the next Service Transportation
    Reauthorization, this hearing is a timely opportunity to
    examine the current state of our freight and passenger rail
    networks. Our rail networks are important to both our economy
    and to our national security as they move energy, goods, and
    people across the country.
        So I am excited today to consider policy and regulatory
    reforms that support a modern national rail policy,
    specifically ways to modernize our rail ecosystem with a focus
    on improving safety, boosting efficiency, fostering innovation,
    and ensuring this ecosystem can meet the demands of the present
    and the future.
        I would like to thank our witnesses for being here today
    and extend a special thanks to Mr. Gilbertson of Anacostia Rail
    Holdings Company for representing the state of Indiana through
    the Chicago South Shore and South Bend Railroad, and the
    Louisville and Indiana Railroad.
        As I mentioned, rail is the backbone of our transportation
    system and our economy. It connects communities, moves freight
    efficiently, and supports thousands of jobs. From small towns
    to major cities, rail keeps America moving.
        Our freight rail ecosystem is certainly among the most
    efficient in the world, but is not averse to an aging
    infrastructure and growing demand. So we should be pragmatic
    and examine how to make improvements.
        To meet the hands of the future, we must invest in adequate
    infrastructure, understand where bottlenecking hurts our supply
    chains and delays the transport of goods and consumers, and
    support the skilled workforce that powers our railroads. We
    must also examine how advancements in technology can address
    challenges we currently see. Technology is already making a
    difference.
        Systems like Positive Train Control, or PTC, are designed
    to prevent train to train collisions, over speed derailment,
    incursions into established work zones, and movements of trains
    through switches left in the wrong position.
        And now, new tools like AI powered track monitoring,
    automated inspections, and predictive maintenance offer even
    greater potential to prevent issues before becoming problems.
        Take, for example, inspection portals, which use high
    resolution machine vision and AI to complement manual detection
    work to understand where defects may exist. This technology is
    a prime example of how AI can help our workforce maintain rail
    cars with greater efficiency and potentially increase safety,
    while at the same time reducing constraints in delivery or
    service time.
        These advancements can increase reliability, reduce delays,
    save money, and increase safety for railroad workers and the
    public. Whether in freight or passenger rail, real-time data
    and proactive maintenance are keys to a resilient network. But
    innovation cannot flourish if outdated or duplicative
    regulations get in the way.
        Many existing rules are prohibitive to testing or deploying
    technology or can slow down safety upgrades and infrastructure
    improvements. A more agile, modern regulatory framework will
    help the rail industry innovate and adopt new technologies
    faster without compromising safety.
        At the same time, we can't lose sight of the needs of hard
    infrastructure. Replacing aging tracks, modernizing bridges,
    upgrading rail signal systems, and improving rail yards are
    foundational to both safety and economic competitiveness. These
    investments help goods move faster, more reliably, and at lower
    costs. Every year, rail crossings see devastating and
    oftentimes preventable accidents.
        Smarter warning systems, better barriers, and vehicle
    infrastructure communication can reduce risks and save lives.
    So, as we have this conversation, safety must remain our top
    priority. All of this is made possible by our rail workforce.
    Investing in training, modern safety protocols, and new
    technology ensures workers are prepared for the demands of a
    modern system.
        Their expertise is essential to safety and performance. Our
    approach must be all-encompassing to embrace new technologies,
    invest in critical infrastructure, empower the workforce, and
    modernize regulations, and we must work to encourage public-
    private partnerships to accomplish these goals.
        With more than 4,500 miles of freight and passenger rail,
    my state of Indiana plays a central role in national logistics.
    Projects like the South Shore Line and West Lake Corridor show
    how public-private partnerships can deliver big results,
    enhancing safety and regional connectivity.
        So the witnesses on today's panel are well suited to
    discuss each of these critical issues, and I look forward to a
    thoughtful conversation to help jumpstart our work to
    reauthorize service transportation programs.
        Thank you again for being here, and I now recognize my good
    friend and partner on this subcommittee, Ranking Member Peters,
    for his opening remarks.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

        Senator Peters. Well, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
    for that. And welcome to our four witnesses here to--before us
    today. We look forward to your testimony on how Congress can
    build on some previous investments that we made to strengthen
    our railroad system to ensure that we can safely and
    efficiently transport both goods and people.
        Americans rely on the U.S. rail network to safely move
    roughly 28 million passengers and 1.6 billion tons of goods
    each and every year. And no state better exemplifies the
    reality of and the opportunities for passenger and freight rail
    than my home state of Michigan.
        Michigan is home to roughly 3,900 miles of track, including
    more than 600 miles of State-owned rail lines managed by the
    Michigan Department of Transportation, as well as 29 private
    freight rail operators and companies. Michigan is also home to
    three Amtrak lines that operate throughout our state.
        And as home of the auto industry and the heart of American
    manufacturing, Michigan's freight rail network delivers cars,
    agricultural products, construction materials, and everyday
    goods all over our state, as well as across international
    borders. Michigan is also leading the way when it comes to
    passenger rail.
        The Michigan Department of Transportation has effectively
    taken advantage of resources that Congress provided to improve
    passenger rail service. This includes efforts to restore Amtrak
    service to the historic Michigan Central Station in downtown
    Detroit, and to expand that service across the Canadian border
    into Windsor in the coming years, a project that I am going to
    continue to fight for.
        Continued investment in passenger rail infrastructure and
    capacity is absolutely essential to realizing this vision and
    to improving the growing services across our national network.
    It must be a key priority for Congress and in the next Surface
    Transportation Reauthorization bill.
        But let's be clear, Michigan's rail infrastructure progress
    is largely thanks to the investments we made in the bipartisan
    infrastructure law. The bipartisan infrastructure law invested
    a historic $102 billion for rail infrastructure, including
    funding for the Federal-State partnership for Passenger Rail
    Grant Program and the Corridor ID Program, as well as the
    creation of critical new programs like the Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Grant Program.
        This funding has specifically allowed Michigan to conduct
    the analysis and the planning that they need to support future
    expansion of passenger rail on all three of our Amtrak lines,
    Wolverine, the Blue Water, and the Pierre Marquette.
        The Railroad Crossing Elimination Grant Program we created
    is also improving safety and efficiency across Michigan
    communities. It is helping the City of Monroe improve response
    times for emergency response, as well as ease traffic
    congestion. It is funding the elimination of a dangerous rail
    crossing in Trenton, Michigan.
        It is consolidating three railroad crossings at a key
    intersection on Lonyo and Central Street in Detroit to improve
    safety, mobility, and freight transportation throughout the
    region. And it is giving Manistee and Kalamazoo the runway they
    need to plan for the removal of harmful crossings that are
    causing issues for their residents.
        Michigan is certainly not alone. Communities across the
    country have benefited from increased resources to strengthen
    their rail infrastructure, but this work is far from over.
    Programs like Corridor ID and Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grants can only reach their full potential if we follow up with
    continued investment to ensure projects that are already
    underway are not abandoned midway.
        I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about
    the impact this investment is having on the ground and the
    importance of maintaining these programs for the rail network.
    And finally, we know that a fundamental part of strengthening
    our rail system is taking necessary steps to make it safer. We
    have seen that when railroad safety is compromised, entire
    communities suffer.
        We all witnessed that with the East Palestine train
    derailment in 2023, but there are many more close calls that
    don't make the news, and our communities are calling for action
    to prevent tragedy from impacting their residents.
        One such case is in Romulus, a city in Southeast Michigan
    that has seen multiple train derailments over the past 5 years.
    We received testimony for the record from Romulus Mayor Robert
    McCraight, and I would like to enter that into the record,
    without objection, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Young. Without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Peters. The testimony sheds light on his
    community's firsthand experience with derailments, where a
    first responder safety was put in jeopardy because they were
    not properly informed of hazmat cargo in the derailed cars. He
    is calling for Congressional action.
        And that is why last Congress I supported the Railway
    Safety Act, which addressed key concerns like first responder
    communication and preparation, wayside detection improvements,
    inspection standards, and two crew requirements, and much more.
    Last Congress, we also laid groundwork for bipartisan action to
    address concerns that emerged from East Palestine crash.
        And it is my hope that this committee will be able to act
    in the same bipartisan manner once again. I would like to take
    a moment to thank the Shiawassee Economic Development
    Partnership, the County of Manistee, and the other Michigan
    stakeholders reaching out to my office to share their
    perspective on the needs for their rail system.
        And I look forward to hearing from each and every one of
    you here today on how we can take steps to build on the
    bipartisan infrastructure law and ensure the safety of our
    national rail network. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Young. I know our Full Committee Chairman, Senator
    Cruz, wants to make every effort to be here. I believe he will
    be here later. But in the meanwhile, I will recognize Ranking
    Member Cantwell for an opening statement.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

        Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Chairman Young. And thank you
    to you and Senator Peters for having this important hearing
    today, and to our witnesses. I am glad that we are having such
    an important hearing at such an important time.
        In my state, rail is critical. 1.3 million people and over
    100 million tons of freight, over $30 billion travel by rail in
    Washington State every year. So as Congress begins to consider
    a Surface Transportation Reauthorization, we need to do three
    things. Increase rail investment, including rail crossing
    investment to move products quickly and safely.
        I like in your testimony, Mr. Anthony, how you say that
    safety starts with the Commerce Committee. I think your subhead
    is, rail safety starts and ends with the Commerce committee.
    Thank you for that. That is very important.
        And also, you had a subhead, rail safety impacts small
    cities disproportionately in clear trend lines of hazardous
    incidents. So again, shows you what is at stake when it comes
    to safety. Our poor, smaller towns just don't have the ability
    to respond, and East Palestine showed that. Strengthening
    safety requirements to prevent derailments, which have more
    than doubled in the State of Washington in the last decade.
        We have obviously had increase in traffic, but we have also
    had increase in derailment. And continue robust funding for
    passenger rail programs and Amtrak. I do like, Mr. Gilbert, in
    your testimony calling out the shortfall system. Obviously we
    need to continue to have improvements. These are the backbones
    of moving a lot of product, a lot of agriculture product to get
    to ports as well.
        So, ports in the State of Washington export over $19
    billion worth of agricultural products every year, $19 billion.
    Of this, $11 billion worth of those products such as soy, bean,
    wheat, corn come from other states. So, we are basically doing
    the work of getting this Midwest product to international
    destinations.
        That includes delivering product from Minnesota, Iowa,
    Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kansas, and Missouri, and
    I have got to believe Indiana, although it is not on here. But
    I have got to believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is something
    that we deliver.
        Due to our rail network, farmers in the Midwest and Ohio
    River Valley markets can get their products to Washington
    ports, onto the international markets in just three to five
    days. That is why we want to make sure that we don't see the
    congestion or the canceling. Thanks to the bipartisan
    infrastructure law, we made critical investments in the supply
    chain.
        We increased rail capacity at the Port of Kalama, one of
    the largest grain exporters on the West Coast, which will
    increase efficiency by 20 percent to 30 percent. And we are
    rehabilitating the Washington State Grain Train, which carries
    20 percent to 25 percent of Washington's wheat each year,
    allowing the line to move heavier cars at twice the speed.
        And the next bill must increase the investment in freight
    if we are going to keep U.S. products moving. Just this past
    week, we had a tragic reminder though about why rail safety is
    so important. In my hometown of Edmonds, Washington, a person
    was killed on the tracks, and I offer my condolences to the
    family and loved ones of that individual.
        As a result of this tragedy, the freight train stopped on
    the tracks for 2 hours, and you might think, well, what is
    that? Necessarily, for sure. But it just happened to also block
    the Edmonds ferry.
        So our crossing right there then stopped the ferry, a big
    part of our highway marine system, from delivering passengers
    unable to disembark for throwing off the ferry schedule. In
    fact, earlier this week, the Seattle Times ran a photo of ferry
    passengers climbing across the stopped train to get to the
    docks. So, it just shows you the complexity of the interface of
    at-grade crossings. This is so incredibly dangerous.
        And the people were just trying to get to dock or just
    enjoy the waterfront, not realizing how perilous this really
    was. That is why I created the $3 billion Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Program in the bipartisan infrastructure law, along
    with my colleague, Senator Blunt, to try to address these at-
    grade crossings and allow cities to not be as managed from a
    top-down DOT process but have this come from the bottom-up so
    communities could try to help themselves.
        I think the program has definitely been oversubscribed. The
    need for funding is great. Since 2021, FRA has received $4.5
    billion in eligible applications for the Grade Crossing
    Elimination Program. Nearly three times the funding that has
    been made available so far. So as we discuss the next Surface
    Transportation Authorization, ensuring this program is fully
    funded I think should be a priority.
        We must also do more to prevent trains carrying hazardous
    materials from derailing in our communities. And this is
    critically important to the state of Washington where we--where
    1.6 billion gallons of crude oil are transported by rail
    through our communities and across the state.
        In February, I wrote to Chairman Cruz on the second
    anniversary of East Palestine derailment, urging him to advance
    legislation to ensure that we have learned the lessons from
    this tragedy. The Rail Safety Act, which was authored by now
    Vice President Vance, and passed out of the Committee last
    Congress with bipartisan support, included important provisions
    that could have prevented the tragic disaster in East Palestine
    and will improve the safety of crude oil trains in the state of
    Washington.
        I think this should be part of the Surface Transportation
    Reauthorization. And finally, when it comes to Amtrak and the
    I-5 corridor, this service is critical to helping what we
    believe will be 750,000 fans visiting Seattle to move around
    the region at the 2026 FIFA World Cup. So, this issue is
    critically important. And thanks to Federal investment in
    passenger rail at Amtrak Cascades, we will get new passenger
    rail cars next year to improve the reliability of that
    experience.
        The next bill must also ensure Amtrak and states receive
    predictable funding so we can have the long term capital
    investments in passenger rail. So, I look forward to working
    with both of you, and with Chairman Cruz, in how Congress can
    support rail, freight, and passenger, and ensure safety in our
    cities and towns. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Cantwell. As the
    proud co-chair of the Senate Soccer Caucus, I have yet another
    value proposition to ensure rail safety here today. As if I
    didn't need more, because this is such an important hearing.
    So, Senator Cruz will be with us for questions.
        The show will go on. I would like to introduce our
    witnesses for today. Each of them brings deep knowledge and
    firsthand experience from the freight and passenger rail
    industries. Our first witness is Mr. Ian Jefferies, President
    and CEO of the Association of American Railroads. He brings
    over a decade of experience in transportation policy, including
    roles at Federal agencies and the Senate Commerce Committee.
        Our second witness is Mr. Peter Gilbertson, President and
    CEO of the Anacostia Rail Holdings Company, a holding company
    for short-line railroads, several of which are in the great
    state of Indiana. He is here on behalf of the American Short
    Line and Regional Railroad Association.
        Our third witness today is Mr. Husein Cumber, Senior
    Advisor of Brightline Holdings, where he supports the
    development of high-speed and inner-city passenger rail
    projects. Mr. Cumber brings years of experience in rail
    infrastructure, having held leadership roles in both the public
    and private sectors.
        Our final witness is Mr. Clarence Anthony. Mr. Anthony is
    the CEO and Executive Director of the National League of
    Cities, which represents and advocates for local governments at
    this Federal level. I will recognize Mr. Jefferies to deliver
    your opening statement. Mr. Jefferies, you are recognized for 5
    minutes.

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

        Mr. Jefferies. Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters,
    members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify today on modernizing the rail network.
        I am President and CEO of the Association of American
    Railroads, where we represent the Nation's major freight
    railroads. And I am honored to discuss the vital role our
    industry plays and policies that will drive progress. Freight
    rail is a cornerstone of the U.S. economy.
        Safe, efficient, and robustly funded, railways build,
    maintain, and invest in their own network to the tune of nearly
    $25 billion in annual investment. 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.
        Railroads today lead major industries in worker safety--
    safer than trucking, airlines, manufacturing, construction, and
    agriculture, just to name a few. And while the last decade has
    been the safest in our entire history with significant declines
    in train accidents and employee injuries, further progress is a
    necessity. Economically, freight rail supports nearly every
    single industry.
        Moving more than 1.6 billion tons of goods each year, that
    is 40 percent of long-haul freight. From agricultural products
    to automobiles, chemicals to consumer goods, railroads connect
    communities and businesses across the country and beyond.
    Railroads' efficiency saves businesses billions annually and
    enhances U.S. global competitiveness.
        With real rates falling 42 percent over the last four
    decades, we are an ally in the fight against inflation. As this
    committee begins to consider the next Surface Reauthorization
    Bill, we encourage Congress to prioritize policies to uphold
    our ability to invest in infrastructure, support innovation,
    and advance data driven safety improvements. Reauthorization is
    a key moment to modernize our safety framework.
        Various forms of inspection technology enable more
    frequent, precise monitoring that improves safety and
    efficiency across the network. Yet this industry is often still
    beholden to regulations published in the 1970s or even earlier.
    Congress has a great opportunity to embrace performance-based
    regulations that reward outcomes, not outdated processes.
        Technology is also redefining how rail integrates with
    global logistics. Real-time GPS, AI-driven scheduling,
    predictive analytics to increase customer visibility, reduce
    congestion, and improve service. But regulators must catch up.
    Outcome focused policy and streamlined waiver and pilot
    processes would help rail deliver a safe, efficient system that
    businesses and communities rely on.
        Additionally, programs such as the Railroad Crossing
    Elimination Grant Program are crucial to improve grade crossing
    safety and reducing community impacts. Multimodal programs like
    Infra and Mega are also improving freight flows throughout the
    country, not to mention rail specific programs like CRISI,
    which I know my colleague will get into more details on.
        And while robust funding is key, timely execution of
    dollars is just as important. Streamlining grant application,
    review, and award processes, paired with common sense
    permitting reforms, are critical in this reauthorization. And
    more broadly, Congress must address the insolvency of the
    highway trust fund. Estimates show that without legislative
    action, the trust fund will face insolvency by 2028,
    accumulating a $280 billion deficit by 2034. Clearly, the
    current gas tax model is insufficient and not sustainable, and
    such heavy subsidy requirements blow the competitive framework
    out of whack with our primary competitor.
        Modernizing to an equitable weight and, or distance-based
    user fee system or other models are sensible paths to consider
    for the future. And let's remember that lawmakers initiated
    this shift in the last transportation bill, but implementation
    at the DOT is stalled.
        Further, Congress must also reject calls to increase truck
    size and weight limits, which would only exacerbate funding
    gaps, degrade roads, and further increase congestion on our
    already clogged highways. Again, it is about the level of the
    playing field when it comes to competition.
        Working together, though, these policies will help
    railroads drive the economy forward, support safety, service,
    and innovation. Thank you, and I look forward to your questions
    today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Jefferies 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.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        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.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        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 2005 and 2024, the train accident rate
            decreased by 32 percent and the employee injury rate dropped by
            26 percent. Railroads today have lower employee injury rates
            than most other major industries, including trucking, airlines,
            agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and construction--even
            grocery stores. 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 move one ton of freight nearly 500 miles per gallon
            of fuel, making them three to four times more fuel efficient
            than trucks. This means 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 one
            of the highest grades of all American infrastructure.\2\
            Freight rail infrastructure is in better overall condition than
            ever before.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ See American Society of Civil Engineers, 2025 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 44 percent lower in 2024 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.

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

       Appealing Jobs. The approximately 150,000 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.

       Broad Economic Impact. Railroads drive $233.4 billion in
            total economic output. And for every $1 invested in rail
            transportation, an additional $2.50 is generated, which
            highlights the powerful ripple effect of railroads throughout
            the economy and across a multitude of sectors.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See Association of American Railroads, Rail Transportation and
    the U.S. Economy: Fueling Growth, Trade, and Opportunity (available at:
    https://www.aar.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/AAR-PE-Economic-Impact-
    Report-2025-FINAL.pdf).

       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.

       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. 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.
    2. Provide Robust Funding For and Streamline Safety-Enhancing Grant
            Programs
        Collisions at highway-rail crossings remain a serious safety
    concern. Since 2005, the grade crossing collision rate has gone down
    only 4 percent despite significant investments from both the railroads
    and our private sector partners over that same period. And according to
    the FRA, in 2024 the 2,252 grade crossing collisions were associated
    with more than 260 fatalities and 750 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.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        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 year, 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.
        Additionally, 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.
    3. 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.

        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.
    4. 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.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ 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.\5\ 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 multi-billion-dollar
    annual underpayment compared to the damage they cause.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ 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.
    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.\6\
    In addition, policymakers could convert to statute select executive
    orders on streamlining the permitting process, such as timeclocks,
    intermediate deadlines, and One Decision.\7\ Policymakers could also
    continue to streamline the ``Section 106'' historic preservation
    process for projects needed to enhance or maintain rail
    infrastructure.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ 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.
        \7\ ``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.
        \8\ 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.
    Truck Size and Weight Restrictions
        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 multi-billion-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.
    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.
    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.

        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Mr. Jefferies. Mr.
    Gilbertson, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                STATEMENT OF PETER GILBERTSON, PRESIDENT
         AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ANACOSTIA RAIL HOLDINGS
                COMPANY; AND MEMBER, AMERICAN SHORT LINE
                   AND REGIONAL RAILROAD ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Gilbertson. Thank you, Chairman Young. and thank you
    Senator Peters and Moreno. It is--happy to be here. I am Peter
    Gilbertson, President and CEO of Anacostia Rail Holdings. We
    operate six short line railroads in seven states, including
    Indiana, and Minnesota, and Illinois.
        I am appearing on behalf of the American Short Line and
    Regional Railroad Association which represents 603 Class II and
    III railroads. Together, these railroads operate 50,000 miles
    of track, or about 30 percent of the national network. They
    operate in 49 states. And the one that we don't operate in is
    Hawaii. We would be interested in operating in there if there
    is any opportunity.
        We are the industry's growth engine. Short lines are
    entrepreneurial small businesses. The typical short line
    employs about 30 people, operates about 80 miles, and earns
    about $8 million in annual revenue. Our significance, though,
    is not our size, but who and where we serve. We serve rural
    America. We serve ports. We serve defense facilities. We serve
    underserved areas.
        We are the first and last mile in many cases. In this role,
    we face some unique challenges, aging infrastructure, limited
    revenue, complex regulatory requirements, constrained access to
    capital.
        My written testimony covers three areas that address these
    challenges, continued and robust, predictable Federal
    infrastructure financing, regulatory reform that is data and
    risk driven and not prescriptive, and then finally support for
    innovation and new technologies through streamlined testing,
    waivers, and investment. Most short lines operate over track
    that was headed for abandonment before their time. And because
    of that, they understandably receive little or no capital
    investment.
        So there is a lot of deferred maintenance in the network we
    operate. We have to invest on average about 30 percent of our
    annual revenue in maintaining and rehabilitating our
    infrastructure, which makes short lines one of the most capital
    intensive industries in the country.
        The CRISI program of the USDOT FRA is the only Federal
    program that allows direct access to capital for short line
    infrastructure improvements. It has been very successful. Of
    the 240 CRISI awards made to date, over $2.7 billion has gone
    to projects benefiting short lines. In the 2023, 2024 round,
    short lines received 81 out of 122 awards.
        These were matched by private investment, non-Federal
    investment, from 20 percent to 80 percent of the total project
    cost. So this leverages funds into the infrastructure of the
    United States beyond just the Federal investment. We encourage
    you to extend the program on the next Surface Transportation
    Reauthorization, and my testimony makes several recommendations
    to improve the program.
        Two are particularly important. One is advanced
    appropriations, because it permits us to plan. Second, while we
    commend the FRA staff for processing these things, there has
    been delays between the announcement of the grant and the
    actual funding of the program. And the process actually
    includes a grant agreement as part of the application.
        So we think there is opportunities to substantially shorten
    that period. Safety is the next thing I want to touch on. It is
    a fundamental value to us. Our employees and the communities we
    serve are crucial to us, and it is a fundamentally value. But
    we believe FRA could take some specific actions to reduce the
    regulatory burden.
        My colleague has addressed some of these things, but I will
    give an example. The FRA signal and employee dispatcher
    certification regulations had cost benefit ratios of 8 to 1,
    and 3 to 1, respectively. In other words, the cost exceeded
    benefits, and this was by FRA's own calculations.
        This is the kind of thing that we think we can have a more
    creative approach to our safety objectives. Finally, we have an
    old industry here. It is 150 years old, and we must embrace
    innovation. There are significant opportunities to improve what
    we are doing in technology. And I will give you one example
    that I think is germane, both to CRISI, but also some of the
    technology that is occurring.
        We, one of our railroads, Louisville and Indiana, between
    Indianapolis and Louisville, Kentucky, has been developing,
    with the assistance of CRISI and our own funds, an app that
    permits us to talk to first responders and show first
    responders if there is a grade crossing incident, exactly where
    it is occurring, so that there isn't confusion about responding
    quickly.
        Once we complete that and we are very close to that, we
    will share that with other railroads in the United States. This
    is an example of--and obviously, we are not developing the app.
    We are working with others to develop it. But it is the kind of
    entrepreneurship I think you see in short lines.
        There is a problem. Let's step up and try to fix it. And
    the Federal funds have been crucial to that. So, I thank you
    for the opportunity to speak and look forward to any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Gilbertson follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Peter Gilbertson, President and Chief Executive
      Officer, Anacostia Rail Holdings Company and Member, American Short
                     Line and Regional Railroad Association
    Introduction
        Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee:

        Thank you for the opportunity to testify as you examine ways to
    modernize our freight and passenger rail networks. My name is Peter
    Gilbertson, President and CEO of Anacostia Rail Holdings and a member
    of the American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA).
    Our company operates six short line railroads, employing over 400
    people and connecting 300 customers in 270 communities in six states.
    Our railroads serve rural areas as well as the three largest cities in
    the United States. We serve military facilities and ports. We are proud
    to help retain and grow manufacturing and agriculture in the U.S. We
    are an industry leader in innovation.
        I'm here today to speak for the over 600 small business railroads
    that form the backbone of freight rail in rural and small-town America.
    Together, these railroads operate 30 percent of the national network,
    providing &first- and last-mile service to over 10,000 shippers.
        This testimony centers on three pillars critical to modernizing and
    sustaining America's short line freight railroads:

      1.  Robust and predictable Federal infrastructure funding, especially
            through the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
            Improvements (CRISI) grant program.

      2.  Regulatory reform that is data-and risk-driven, not prescriptive.

      3.  Support for innovation and new technologies, through streamlined
            testing, waivers, and investment.

        These themes are interwoven with a simple truth: if short lines
    succeed, America's supply chain is stronger, safer, and more resilient.
    The Short Line Freight Railroad Industry

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        As you will note from the map above, almost every Member of this
    Subcommittee has one or more short lines operating in their state, and
    in many cases these short lines are one of the significant businesses
    in their towns. More importantly, small railroads help retain and
    attract jobs of their customers.
        But despite their critical role, short lines face steep economic
    and regulatory challenges. Most operate on infrastructure that is
    decades old and must overcome disproportionately high capital costs
    with limited revenue. That is why strong Congressional support--for
    targeted infrastructure programs like CRISI, for smart regulatory
    reform, and for flexible policies that foster innovation--is essential.
    Without it, the small railroads that power America's heartland risk
    falling behind in meeting the demands of a modern economy.
    The CRISI Program: A Cornerstone of Short Line Growth and Viability
        Short lines were born out of necessity after the Staggers Rail Act
    of 1980, which transferred neglected large Class I branch lines that
    were otherwise headed for abandonment to local operators who believed
    in their potential. Since then, short lines have proven to be
    resilient, entrepreneurial businesses that reinvest heavily--up to one-
    third of revenue annually--into maintenance and upgrades.
    Rehabilitating and operating these lines are enormously capital-
    intensive. As an example, Anacostia has invested over $30 million into
    our infrastructure for routine maintenance--and that does not include
    major infrastructure projects.
        The CRISI program, created in 2015, is the only Federal program
    that allows direct access to capital for short line infrastructure
    improvements. Anacostia Rail Holdings has received CRISI grants for
    several projects, including:

      1.  FRA CRISI FY 2018 PTC
        New York & Atlantic Railway (NYA) positive train control (PTC)
            Implementation Project
        $1,011,118
        This project involved the installation of PTC onboard 10 NYA
            locomotives as well as support training and testing for its
            operations on rail lines shared with the Long Island Railroad
            in Long Island, NY.
      2.  FRA CRISI FY 2018 PTC
        Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad (CSS) PTC Implementation
            Project
        $720,000
        This project also supported PTC installation, testing, and training
            as well as interoperability between CSS and the Northern
            Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD). CSS and NICTD
            share a joint freight-commuter corridor from Chicago, IL, to
            South Bend, IN.
      3.  FRA CRISI FY 2018
        Developing and Implementing a Mobile Device Emergency Responder
            Access Application for the Louisville & Indiana Railroad
            Company (LIRC)
        $335,361
        This project supports the development of a geographic information
            system mobile application for the Louisville and Indiana
            Railroad Company with software, linking railroad dispatch and
            first responders, aiding communication, and response during
            railroad incidents. The project is in cooperation with ASLRRA
            and the Short Line Safety Institute (SLSI) and when complete
            the mobile application will be made available to other
            railroads.
      4.  FRA CRISI FY 2018
        Chicago South Shore & South Bend Rail Rehabilitation and Safety
            Improvement Project
        $2,831,705
        This project involved upgrading a line between Michigan City and La
            Porte, Indiana by replacing 100-year-old, 90-pound rail track
            with 115-pound rail. Also included was the upgrade of an
            existing rail crossing north of Highway 35 in Michigan City,
            ensuring compatibility with the new track.
      5.  FRA CRISI FY 2018
        New York & Atlantic Track Realignment and Rehabilitation Project
        $368,679
        The project involved construction of 650 feet of new track on an
            improved alignment and connection to reduce the severity of a
            curve in Fresh Pond, Queens, New York.
      6.  FRA CRISI FY 2022
        Louisville & Indiana Railroad Company Safety, Sustainability, and
            Alternative Energy Project
        $2,685,600
        The project included final design and construction activities for
            various track-related improvements, upgrades to certain grade
            crossings, and solar panel installation at certain rail
            facilities. LIRC and the Indiana Department of Transportation
            provided a 52 percent non-Federal match.
      7.  FRA CRISI FY 2023-2024
        Louisville & Indiana Railroad Clagg Bridge Lift Span Operations
            Project
        $6,492,000
        The project will complete sheave, trunnion, and bearing replacement
            on the Fourteenth Street Bridge over the Ohio River, connecting
            Louisville, Kentucky, and Clarksville, Indiana. Replacement of
            these assemblies has become necessary due to the age of the
            existing components and to replace a failing piece of
            equipment. The bridge is over 100 years old. This project is
            expected to increase the lifespan of the existing structure by
            a minimum of 50 years. The bridge is used by both LIRC and CSX
            and both companies are contributing funding.

        For each project, Anacostia railroads contributed at least 20
    percent of the total project costs. These projects, along with many
    others nationwide, yield six key benefits:

      1.  Addressing Critical Infrastructure Needs--CRISI enables critical
            projects, such as bridge replacements, or track upgrades that
            remove bottlenecks and allow carriage of industry-standard
            286,000-pound railcars, improving interoperability and
            competitiveness.

      2.  Improving Safety--Rail safety directly benefits from sound
            infrastructure. CRISI funds replace worn-out crossties and
            steel rails, reducing the risk of derailments and making rail
            service safer for employees and communities alike.

      3.  Creating and Sustaining Jobs--Short line rehabilitation projects
            are labor-intensive and rely on local contractors. These
            projects support good-paying jobs in rural communities and
            generate long-term employment through freight rail service
            expansion and improvement.

      4.  Enhancing Environmental Outcomes--For healthy communities, rail
            is the most fuel-efficient mode of freight transport. CRISI-
            funded upgrades facilitate modal shift from truck to rail,
            which reduces highway congestion and air pollution.

      5.  Promoting Economic Development--CRISI investments enable service
            to new and growing businesses and attract additional shippers
            and manufacturers to the community.

      6.  Improving Service for Customers--Even small improvements--such as
            a short stretch of new track or the elimination of a chronic
            derailment risk--can make an enormous difference in the
            transportation costs and competitiveness of shippers. Reshoring
            of manufacturing to the U.S. requires a strong rail freight
            network.

        Of the 240 CRISI awards made to date, over $2.7 billion has gone to
    projects benefiting short lines. In the most recent combined FY23-24
    round, short lines received 81 out of 122 awards--over $1.2 billion in
    funding. These awards were matched by local and private investments
    ranging from 20 percent to as much as 80 percent, demonstrating that
    CRISI leverages public dollars effectively and attracts private capital
    that otherwise would not be invested.
        Additional examples of short line projects that CRISI has
    supported, and the project's impact are attached to this testimony in
    an Addendum.
    The Importance of Predictable and Robust Funding
        The advance appropriations provided for CRISI through the previous
    surface transportation law--$1 billion annually through FY 2026--have
    been transformational. Predictable funding allows small businesses to
    plan ahead, secure match funding, and complete upfront engineering work
    required for competitive applications. Without advance appropriations,
    many short lines would be unable to pursue these grants due to the
    uncertainty and high upfront costs involved, and CRISI funds would be
    less effectively spent.
        The merit-based approach for awarding CRISI grant funds has proven
    to be accessible to short lines. Over the life of the program, and
    across Administrations, this approach has resulted in a generally
    equitable national distribution of funding while providing the U.S.
    Department of Transportation with important flexibility to address a
    very diverse array of types and scale of freight rail investment needs.
        It is essential that the next surface transportation
    reauthorization not only extends CRISI but also preserves the advance
    appropriations structure. Without it, Federal investment becomes less
    effective, fewer projects move forward, and the communities that rely
    on short lines are left behind.
    CRISI Grant Award Process Recommendations
        The CRISI program has proven to be powerful, effective, and broadly
    supported on a bipartisan basis. However, there are clear opportunities
    to improve the grant process. Delays between award announcements and
    actual construction, as well as obstacles to making necessary project
    adjustments as conditions evolve, significantly reduce the
    effectiveness of CRISI funding--not just for railroads like ours, but
    for the shippers and communities that rely on us.
        Short lines are ready to get to work. By the time we apply for
    CRISI grants, we have already invested limited financial resources--
    along with substantial personnel resources--just to be able to compete
    effectively for funding.
        Our shippers, who rely on us for critical access to domestic and
    international markets, are eager to see safer, more efficient rail
    service become a reality. Delays in grant funding delay the hoped-for
    improvements and business opportunities.
        And the communities we serve--where local expertise is often
    employed to conduct these projects--are waiting to realize the economic
    benefits that come with upgraded infrastructure: new business
    investment, expanded manufacturing, and job creation.
        To maximize the impact of the CRISI program, we must address these
    systemic delays. Streamlining implementation and allowing for greater
    flexibility in project management will ensure that Federal dollars
    translate more quickly and effectively into real-world benefits.
        Here are our recommendations on how the CRISI program can be
    further improved, and made even more impactful:

       Protect CRISI's Ability to Bolster the Freight Rail
            Network--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 that provide passenger rail applicants
            with funding levels that dwarf CRISI. Moreover, some short line
            CRISI projects benefit passenger rail.

       Speed--CRISI projects should move from announcement to
            obligation to completion faster than they currently do.
            Currently, CRISI some projects are delayed by 12-18 months.
            Most short line projects are quite simple in the context of
            infrastructure investments. Compressing the timeline 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.

       Encourage the use of pre-award authority (PAA)--More
            extensive use of PAA would allow CRISI grant awards for small
            railroad infrastructure projects to move more quickly and
            efficiently. PAA authorizes grant recipients to begin their
            projects immediately at their own risk rather than being stuck
            in limbo during the often-lengthy Federal approval process,
            including environmental and historic reviews. Nearly all short
            line projects that receive CRISI awards are found to create no
            significant impacts on the environment that would require
            mitigation as a condition of award. The agency should consider
            more routinely authorizing PAA for non-ground disturbing
            elements of short line project scope such as for engineering
            analyses, locomotive investments, and acquisition of
            construction materials like crossties and rail. Prompt
            acquisition of materials can be a particularly useful step to
            mitigate project cost inflation risk. Delays in completing
            engineering and design work correspondingly delay entry into
            the construction phase of a project.

       Increase Transparency across the Grant Lifecycle to Enable
            Benchmarking and Process Improvement--Congress could require
            that FRA file regular standardized reports on the status of
            processing grants to the transportation authorizing and
            appropriating committees. These reports could document the
            status of major common milestones from award notification
            through grant obligation to project closeout. This data will
            help stakeholders understand how long it takes the agency to
            move through the process for each award to achieve grant
            obligation and begin work. It will also create some beneficial
            pressure encouraging the agency to innovate to move the process
            faster.

       Optimize grant application processes and program
            accessibility--FRA should consider a mechanism to share basic
            data on the pool of applications received each cycle with
            ASLRRA for analysis. This high-level information (such as
            applicant, requested award and total project cost) is publicly
            shared for DOT grant programs like RAISE/BUILD that have only
            public applicants, but not for CRISI. ASLRRA could work
            directly with FRA under an information sharing agreement to
            enable better analysis of what parts of the short line
            population are either not applying for CRISI grants or not
            applying successfully. Such collaboration could help the agency
            and the association to work together better to improve outreach
            to ensure the CRISI program is broadly accessible, especially
            to the smallest railroads.

       Improve Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) and the
            application review process--Past NOFOs included requirements
            beyond those in the program statute in the section on
            ``administrative and national policy requirements.'' These
            requirements caused confusion among applicants as to how their
            applications would be reviewed and what project implementation
            steps they would need to take. FRA should carefully review
            these requirements as they revise their standard NOFO text and
            strike requirements conditioning grant agreement execution on
            policies that are not required by the grant program statute.

       Improve Elements of the NEPA Process--Railroads are an
            environmentally friendly way to move goods. We encourage
            efforts to ensure 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. Systematically bundling and front-loading projects
            that are likely to be CEs for expedited and early review and
            approval is an approach that could speed up the overall
            processing of awards. ASLRRA looks forward to the updating of
            regulatory and policy frameworks at DOT that should reduce the
            delay risk of NEPA and other statutorily required reviews,
            particularly those made in accordance with recent Supreme Court
            decisions.

       Grant Adjustment Request Form Process--The Grant Adjustment
            Request Form (GARF) process is a procedure used by grant
            recipients to request changes to the terms of a grant. These
            changes might include things like:

         Budget modifications  (e.g., moving funds between
                categories)

         Time extensions for completing the project.

         Scope changes to alter what the grant is funding.

         Key personnel changes or other administrative updates

        We recommend continuing effort at streamlining the steps, improving
            communication, and aligning requirements with real-world
            project conditions. We are encouraged by DOT's recent efforts
            to develop grant agreements with the flexibility to enable
            minor adjustments within projects such that GARFs are less
            frequently needed.

       Coordinate Section 106 Reviews--FRA can reduce delays by
            coordinating with DOT's Office of the Secretary of
            Transportation (OST) and the White House to expedite the
            Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's acceptance of the
            final Section 106 exemption of railroad rights-of-way (ROW)
            from review under Section 106 of the National Historic
            Preservation Act. Unnecessary Section 106 reviews can introduce
            serious delays into the grant obligation process.
    Continued Federal Support for Grade Crossing Safety Issues
        Continue to fund Operation Lifesaver (OLI), Section 130, and the
    Rail Crossing Elimination (RCE) program to protect the public. By far
    the most significant concerns with rail safety are related to
    interactions with the public at grade crossing accidents and trespasser
    issues. Operation Lifesaver is an industry- and government-supported
    effort which 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. We recommend that Congress
    continue to fund the OLI, RCE, and Section 130 programs at robust and
    guaranteed levels.
    Short Line Safety Institute
        Safety culture has been identified as a top priority for the short
    line and regional railroad industry.
        The goal of the Short Line Safety Institute (SLSI) and its programs
    is for the short line and regional railroad industry to perform at an
    increasingly high level of safety because of a focus not only on
    compliance, but on safety culture, defined as the shared values,
    actions, and behaviors that demonstrate a commitment to safety over
    competing goals and demands.
        With congressional funding, SLSI functions to (a) conduct on-site
    assessments of safety culture, and (b) provide safety education and
    training for managers and employees of short line and regional
    railroads as well as tourist, historic, commuter and passenger
    railroads. Our company has an ongoing commitment to avail itself of the
    services of SLSI--because it works.
        We urge Congress to continue Federal support for SLSI. SLSI helps
    build a stronger, more sustainable safety culture through safety
    culture assessments, training, and education--including the safe
    transportation of energy products and hazardous materials--outreach
    activities, and research.
    Transformational Regulatory Change
        While changes to the specific regulatory actions in the sections
    above would provide meaningful regulatory relief to short line
    railroads, in accordance with EO 14192, there is another,
    transformational regulatory approach that DOT should consider--the Risk
    Reduction Program Congressional mandate, which provides the foundation
    for regulatory reform and innovation.
        In 2008, Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation to issue
    a regulation requiring certain railroads to develop a Risk Reduction
    Program (RRP).\1\ Pursuant to the statute, each railroad's RRP must
    systematically evaluate safety risks on the railroad's system and
    create a plan to manage those risks to reduce the consequences and
    rates of railroad accidents, incidents, injuries, and fatalities.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008, Public Law 110-432, 122
    Stat. 4854 (Oct. 16, 2008); codified at 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20156.
        \2\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20156(a)(1)(A).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In its RRP, a railroad is to conduct a risk-based hazard analysis
    to identify and analyze factors that affect railroad safety, including:
    operating rules and practices, infrastructure, equipment, employee
    staffing levels and schedules, management structure, and employee
    training.\3\ Further, Congress mandated that each railroad's RRP
    include a technology implementation plan and a fatigue management
    plan.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20156(c).
        \4\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20156(d)(2).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The RRP statutory mandate is an alternative, comprehensive approach
    to managing railroad safety. By systematically and comprehensively
    evaluating all safety risks to the railroad, a railroad will reduce
    risk and improve safety, including through the use of new technology
    not yet contemplated or allowed by existing regulations. Following this
    risk-based and analytical approach renders the prescriptive regulations
    currently in the Code of Federal Regulations as redundant, costly, and
    completely unnecessary. In short, such a risk-based approach provides
    an alternative, safety-enhancing and cost-efficient means for railroads
    to comply with FRA safety requirements.
        FRA issued comprehensive regulations mandating RRPs for certain
    railroads on February 18, 2020.\5\ Industry comments filed in
    connection with that rulemaking encouraged FRA to build on the RRP
    approach as an alternative means to compliance with FRA safety
    regulations, allowing risk-based analysis to supplant prescription
    regulatory programs.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ 85 Fed. Reg. 9,262 (Feb. 18, 2020).
        \6\ See Supplemental Comments of the Association of American
    Railroads, Docket No. FRA-2009-0038. Oct. 31, 2018.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In those comments, the rail industry proposed changes to the
    existing RRP regulations that would provide a railroad with a pathway
    of proposing the basis and timeline for implementing technology or
    processes that would provide a superior mitigation of hazards and the
    identified resulting risks in lieu of specifically-identified Federal
    railroad safety standard requirements. Subsequently, FRA approval of an
    RRP plan would operate as an exemption or waiver of the identified
    regulations.\7\ While ASLRRA has outstanding concerns regarding some
    nuances of the current RRP regulations, overall, ASLRRA is supportive
    of the RRP, especially in light of the industry comments, as an
    alternative to the existing prescriptive and costly Federal regulations
    and encourages FRA to consider such an approach.\8\ Congress should
    support changes to the RRP to facilitate that concept.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ Id. at 4.
        \8\ See ASLRRA's joint comments with the National Railroad
    Construction and Maintenance Association at Docket No. FRA-2021-0035-
    0004.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This proposed transformational change would also address the
    numerous instances in FRA safety regulations where the agency has taken
    a performance-based directive in a Congressional mandate and expanded
    it to a very prescriptive end product. While there are numerous
    examples here that could be cited, short line railroads are
    particularly impacted by the Training, Qualification, and Oversight for
    Safety-Related Railroad Employees rule at 49 C.F.R. Part 243. This rule
    takes the statutory mandate from the Rail Safety Improvement Act of
    2008, codified at 49 U.S.C. Sec. 20162 to establish minimum training
    standards for safety-related railroad employees and expands it into
    cumbersome, unwieldy regulations that places extremely prescriptive and
    unnecessary burdens on small businesses.\9\ These types of regulations
    do not improve safety and serve merely to add burden to and require
    additional resources from FRA. FRA can reduce unnecessary regulatory
    burden on the rail industry and itself by deploying the RRP rule as an
    alternative to the prescriptive regulations that exceed statutory
    mandate.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ An example would be the regulatory requirement for three-year
    refresher training at 49 C.F.R. Sec. 243.201(e), which is not required
    in the statute nor proven to serve a safety purpose.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Innovation in Railroad Technology
        As our Nation works to modernize infrastructure and strengthen
    supply chains, the more than a century old freight rail industry in
    fact stands at the forefront of innovation.
        Advances in rail technology are driving safer, more efficient, and
    more sustainable transportation solutions. From automated track
    inspection to predictive maintenance and low-emission locomotives,
    these innovations are not only enhancing operations but also supporting
    broader national goals--reducing emissions, driving economic growth,
    improving safety, and connecting communities. Continued investment and
    regulatory flexibility are essential to unlock the full potential of
    these technologies and ensure that America's rail network remains a
    global leader in 21st-century transportation.
        Congress can help railroads test and deploy new technologies by
    streamlining waiver acquisition. Railroads have shown their commitment
    to developing, testing, and deploying new technologies that improve
    safety and enhance fluidity of the supply chain of their operations.
    Policymakers should offer industries--including freight rail--
    operational and regulatory flexibility to encourage further innovation.
    This needed flexibility could cover everything from technologies and
    procedures to increase fuel efficiency to new technologies that require
    extensive testing and research. Flexibility and streamlining are
    necessary to empower the rail industry to explore these options. For
    example, policymakers should consider streamlining waiver review
    timelines, encouraging pilot programs, and establishing performance-
    based thresholds.
        As with most industries, the promise of technology in the rail
    industry is significant, especially since today's rail industry data
    systems and customer tools can be at times considered antiquated and
    disparate across the industry.
        One example of promising technical innovation is RailPulse.
    RailPulse is an industrywide telemetry platform that brings real-time
    data and digital visibility to North America's freight rail fleet.
    Founded in 2020 by a coalition of rail industry partners, including
    small railroad firms Iowa Interstate, Genesee & Wyoming and Watco--to
    create a vendor-neutral, open-architecture telematics ecosystem.
    Development of the platform was aided by a $7.9M FY 2020 CRISI grant to
    help develop the railcar onboard GPS sensor system to provide real-time
    information on railcar movements and condition to shippers, car owners,
    and railroads.
        The official RailPulse platform launch occurred on September 3,
    2024, following pilot programs and platform development and in February
    2025, Anacostia joined this consortium. This technology has allowed
    industry to address shipment and railcar visibility, offer enhanced
    safety, improve the shipper experience, lower operational costs and
    more. We believe this type of public-private partnership should
    continue.
        Additionally, in February, two of ASLRRA's members, the Heart of
    Georgia Railroad and Georgia Central Railway, received approval from
    FRA to begin the field operational testing of a system for
    transportation of freight containers on autonomous rail bogies,
    developed by Parallel Systems. The program aims to evaluate the
    effectiveness of the system, show that it can safely run alongside
    conventional equipment, and demonstrate the short-haul movement of
    intermodal containers.
        With regards to improving the efficiency and emissions of
    locomotives, Anacostia and several other ASLRRA members are currently
    deeply engaged in several studies and demonstration projects that will
    help introduce more innovations to our industry, including
    demonstrating options for battery-electric locomotives and use of
    alternative fuels. These efforts are largely limited to yard activities
    and short haul efforts, as at-scale long-distance, heavy-haul efforts
    are not yet feasible. We ask that Congress continue to partner with our
    industry to advance innovative locomotive propulsion technologies,
    while at the same time not mandating the use of technologies that are
    not yet mature, or readily (commercially) or affordably available.
    Technology Advancing Employee Training: Learning Management System Uses
            Modern Technologies to Train Remotely
        Short lines are using technology for employee safety training and
    utilizing new training methods such as virtual reality and simulation.
    In the FY 2020 CRISI cycle, the Iowa Northern Railway Company (IANR)
    received a $5.4M grant to provide for the development and deployment of
    computer-based training courses delivered via a Learning Management
    System (LMS) as well as in-person training courses offered at the
    IANR's Training Center, located in Waterloo, Iowa, at the small
    railroad's location, or another remote location. This allows short
    lines to provide training when and where it is needed, rather than
    sending employees to offsite training, or pausing operations to
    facilitate training.
        The LMS is an online platform/hub, accessible 24-7 to deliver and
    track industry-specific training and assessments, including cutting-
    edge virtual reality and interactive online coursework, employee OJT
    and instructor-led training recordings.
        In addition to the LMS platform, a Mobile Technical Training Center
    equipped with two FRA Type II locomotive simulators plus classroom
    space for six students and an instructor, and can deliver personalized,
    instructor-led seminars and locomotive simulator training on location
    anywhere in the continental US. The simulators feature dozens of
    generic profiles to match all types of railroad topography can run
    engineers on simulations that closely resemble railroad's territory,
    enabling railroads to meet a wide range of training & regulatory
    requirements, including basic train handling, positive train control,
    distributed power operations, Part 240 annual check rides, and
    certification skill performance evaluations.
        As of June 2025, nearly 1,100 employees from 24 short line
    railroads are actively receiving training via the LMS, while more than
    150 employees from 19 railroads in 12 states have participated in
    locomotive simulator and mobile classroom training delivered via the
    mobile technical training center.
    Deploying Digital Onboard Systems to Monitor Locomotives
        Short lines are welcoming and deploying technologies that will
    allow for proactive maintenance, and operational/scheduling
    adjustments. In the FY 2023/2024 CRISI Grant Cycle, ASLRRA was awarded
    $20.5 million in CRISI funding to support the installation of digital
    on-board systems on over 600 short line locomotives all around the
    country. Most short lines are equipped with older locomotives, acquired
    second-hand, sometimes 50 years old or even more. These on-board
    systems will enable these locomotives to be equipped with state-of-the-
    art features like location tracking, condition health and energy use
    monitoring, and safety features like forward and rear-facing cameras
    and event recorders. The cloud back-ends for these systems will enable
    short line workers and managers to run their trains with many of the
    same operational awareness and analytics features previously only
    available to the large Class I railroads. We are pleased to note that
    FRA is proceeding expeditiously with the review and approval process
    for this grant.
        Allowing exploration of emerging technologies and investing in
    innovation for short line railroads isn't just about modernization,
    it's about keeping freight moving efficiently, safely, and sustainably
    in the face of 21st-century challenges. It's a strategic necessity for
    a resilient transportation system.
    Conclusion
        In conclusion, short lines are high-impact investments in
    underserved areas. They are job creators, safety multipliers, and
    sustainability drivers. But to remain viable and competitive, we need:

      1.  Reliable, accessible infrastructure funding, with CRISI at its
            core.

      2.  A modern regulatory approach rooted in performance, not outdated
            prescriptions.

      3.  Flexibility to innovate, test, and deploy new technologies--
            safely and efficiently.

        Congress's continued support of CRISI, Operation Lifesaver, Section
    130, and the Rail Crossing Elimination program is essential to our
    success. Just as critical is the adoption of a regulatory mindset that
    prioritizes outcomes over paperwork and embraces innovation as a path
    to safety.
        Investing in short lines is more than a rail policy--it's an
    economic policy, a safety policy, and a supply chain policy.
        Thank you for your leadership and for supporting the short lines
    and the communities we serve. I look forward to your questions.

                                    APPENDIX

                   Short Line Railroad CRISI Project Examples

    Louisville & Indiana Railroad Clagg Bridge Lift Span Operations Project

    Awardee:                 Louisville & Indiana Railroad Company (LIRC)
    CRISI Grant:             $6,492,000
    Local Match:             $6,492,000 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $12,984,000
    Senator/State:           Senators Todd Young (R-IN) and Jim Banks (R-
                              IN), Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Rand
                              Paul (R-KY)

        This project will complete sheave, trunnion, and bearing
    replacements on the Fourteenth Street Bridge over the Ohio River,
    connecting Louisville, Kentucky, and Clarksville, Indiana at
    Replacement of these assemblies has become necessary due to the age of
    the existing components and to replace a failing piece of equipment.
    The bridge is over 100 years old, and this project will increase the
    lifespan of the existing structure by a minimum of 50 years.

        ``Ports of Indiana is fully supportive of the project and is
    confident that it will have a dramatic impact on improving the long-
    term safety and efficiency of the railroad's operation. As a statewide
    port authority, Ports of Indiana depends on robust infrastructure
    connections by rail, road, river, and the Great Lakes. LIRC provides
    critical rail service to our Jeffersonville port and many other
    industries in the area. LIRC's operations are vital to Indiana's
    economy, and we strongly support its effort to secure funding for this
    important project.''--Jody Peacock, Chief Executive Officer, Ports of
    Indiana

    Chicago South Shore & South Bend Rail Rehabilitation and Safety
     Improvement Project

    Awardee:                 Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad (CSS)
    CRISI Grant:             $2,831,705
    Local Match:             $707,926 (20 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $3,539,631
    Senator/State:           Senators Todd Young (R-IN) and Jim Banks (R-IN)

        This project replaced 7.5 miles of 90-pound rail with 115-pound
    rail on the Kingsbury Industrial Lead, improving safety associated with
    the heavier rail, and increasing train speed on a 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.

    Booneville Bridge Project

    Awardee:                 Iowa Interstate Railroad (IAIS)
    CRISI Grant:             $3,470,500
    Local Match:             $3,470,500 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $6,941,000
    Senator/State:           Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Joni Ernst
                              (R-IA)

        This project replaces the 118-year-old Booneville Bridge over the
    Raccoon River, approximately 15 miles west of Des Moines. This bridge
    carries over 42,000 carloads per year on the Class II Iowa Interstate
    Railroad's (IAIS) Council Bluffs, Iowa, to Chicago, Illinois service.
    The bridge was in danger of being put out of service in the near future
    under previous conditions, which would have resulted 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. A video of the completed
    project is available here.

        ``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

    IAIS Continuous Welded Rail Upgrade

    Awardee:                 Iowa Interstate Railroad (IAIS)
    CRISI Grant:             $5,579,357
    Local Match:             $6,291,615 (53 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $11,870,972
    Senators/State:          Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Joni Ernst
                              (R-IA)

        This 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, Iowa. 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.

    Infrastructure Enhancement Program for Lake State Railway's Huron
     Subdivision

    Awardee:                 Lake State Railway (LSRC)
    CRISI Grant:             $7,875,770
    Local Match:             $8,197,230 (51 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $16,073,000
    Senators/State:          Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Elissa Slotkin
                              (D-MI)

        This project rehabilitated 30.3 miles of track with 115-pound
    continuous welded rail, tie and turnout renewal and crossing
    rehabilitation. It allowed for elimination of 23.8 miles of excepted
    track which resulted in increased speed from 10 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 286,000-pound railcars required by LSRC
    customers and Class I railroad interchange partners. The elimination of
    the aging and lighter 85-pound 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.

    South Carolina Piedmont Freight Rail Service Improvement Program

    Awardee:                 Lancaster & Chester Railroad (L&C)
    CRISI Grant:             $8,752,185
    Local Match              $4,712,715 (35 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $13,465,900
    Senators/State:          Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Tim Scott (R-
                              SC)

        This project provided funding for the acquisition of three EPA Tier
    4 locomotives, the rehabilitation of 46 miles of track and one bridge
    upgrade to allow for the handling of 286,000-pound railcars. The
    project increased track speed from 10 mph to 25 mph, gave customers the
    ability to utilize 286,000-pound 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, South Carolina

    NDW Safety Upgrade in Opportunity Zones Project

    Awardee:                 Napoleon, Defiance & Western (NDW)
    Grantee:                 Ohio Rail Development Corporation
    CRISI Grant:             $4,112,452
    Local Match:             $4,112,452 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $8,224,904
    Senators/States:         Senators Todd Young (R-IN) and Jim Banks (R-IN-
                              03), Senators Bernie Moreno (R-OH) and Jon
                              Husted (R-OH)

        This project upgraded approximately 10 miles of 80-pound rail with
    132 to 136-pound 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. A video overview of the project may be viewed here.

        ``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

    Velocity Enhanced Rail Transportation Project

    Awardee:                 Nebraska Kansas Colorado Railway (NKCR)
    CRISI Grant:             $4,505,542
    Local Match:             $4,505,542 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $9,011,084
    Senators/State:          Senators Michael Bennet (D-CO) and John
                              Hickenlooper (D-CO)

        This 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 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
    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)

    Transportation Investments for Employment and Safety (TIES1)

    Awardee:                 OmniTRAX Holdings Combined Short Lines
    CRISI Grant:             $37,364,504
    Local Match:             $9,341,126 (20 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $46,705,630
    Senators/State:          Jon Ossoff (D-GA) and Raphael Warnock (D-GA)

        This 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 percent, saving $11
    million 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 eliminates the need for 16
    subsequent tie spot replacement mobilizations, saving $43 million.

        ``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

    Rural Economic Preservation Through Rail Replacement

    Awardee:                 Red River Valley & Western Railroad
    CRISI Grant:             $6,704,544
    Local Match              $2,915,234 (30.3 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $9,620,778
    Senators/State:          Senators John Hoeven (R-ND) and Kevin Cramer (R-
                              ND)

        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 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 shifts 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 Railway's Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety
     Improvement

    Awardee:                 Sierra Northern Railroad (SERA)
    CRISI Grant:             $17,415,000
    Local Match              $18,300,000 (51.3 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $35,700,000
    Senator/State:           Senators Alex Padilla (D-CA) and Adam Schiff (D-
                              CA)

        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 percent. The
    increased throughput has enabled SERA to:

       Quadruple carload business

       Add new customers, such as a new grain shipper

       Reduce derailments

       Provide 30 new railroad jobs in the area

       Improve grade crossings and increased speed led to less time
            blocking the motoring public

       Took an estimated 5,000 trucks of propane off local highways
            in year one

        A video overview of project is available here. [https://
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j8ulXpa1A0]

        ``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 to 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

    Harwood Interchange Improvement Project

    Awardee:                 Texas, Gonzales & Northern Railway (TXGN)
    CRISI Grant:             $2,223,768
    Local Match:             $2,223,768 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $4,447,536
    Senator/State:           Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Ted Cruz (R-TX)

        This 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 with concrete culverts
    enhanced drainage. 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 rain 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 one 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 percent
    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

    Joint Elimination--Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvement

    Awardee:                 Twin Cities & Western Railroad Company (TCWR)
    CRISI Grant:             $2,000,839
    Local Match              $2,000,839 (50 percent)
    Total Project Cost:      $4,001,678
    Senators/State:          Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Tina Smith (D-
                              MN)

        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 crosstie replacement from 20,000
    required in 2019, to 17,000 by 2021.

        For customers, the improved quality of the rail has 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 percent across the 3
    miles, and a further reduction in tie replacement needs of 30 percent,
    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 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 improvements 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-06)

        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Gilbertson. Mr. Cumber, you
    are now recognized for 5 minutes.

         STATEMENT OF HUSEIN A. CUMBER, SENIOR ADVISOR,
                   BRIGHTLINE HOLDINGS, LLC

        Mr. Cumber. Thank you, Chairman Young, Ranking Member
    Peters, Senator Moreno, and other members of the Subcommittee.
        As Senior Advisor of Brightline Holdings, and one of the
    people who developed the vision for this company, I am honored
    to be here to highlight the achievements of Brightline Florida
    and Brightline West, discuss the future of passenger rail
    service, identify challenges facing the development of
    additional passenger rail systems in America, and share some
    potential solutions.
        Brightline Florida is the only private passenger rail
    system in the country constructed in the last 100 years.
    Building upon important lessons from Florida, we are now
    developing Brightline West, which will connect Southern
    California and Las Vegas. Brightline Florida started it as an
    idea in 2011.
        As we looked at successful passenger rail systems globally,
    it became clear that a 250 to 300 mile corridor was the ideal
    length. This distance connects city pairs that what we call are
    too far to drive, but too close to fly. To date, we have
    invested more than $6 billion of private capital in Brightline
    Florida.
        Our six stations will soon be joined by two new stations in
    communities where local elected officials have recognized the
    advantage of being connected to our rail system. Our Florida
    system also includes 10 American made train sets. Looking back
    over our history, we now recognize lessons learned from several
    challenges that all projects of this scale must overcome to be
    successful.
        First, privately developed intercity passenger rail
    projects would benefit from being directly eligible for USDOT
    and Federal Railroad Administration discretionary grants. The
    industry also would benefit from a more streamlined
    discretionary grant process. Two, cost-effective access to
    right of way is essential. Third, completion of environmental
    approvals in a timely manner.
        And fourth, access to low cost debt is required to build
    greenfield, first of its kind projects. The Senate Commerce
    Committee has recognized that all modes of transportation need
    to be supported through discretionary grant programs. Effective
    grant oversight requires direct engagement with the entity
    implementing a project. The CRISI Grant Program is the only one
    that allows private companies to apply for Federal funding as a
    prime recipient.
        Under other FRA and USDOT grant programs, private companies
    can still receive funds but must do so through a public
    intermediary. In this scenario, the public entity passes
    through the funds and reporting obligations.
        This unnecessary additional layer can compromise the
    effectiveness of USDOT monitoring, reporting, and audit
    procedures. Many public entities will simply refuse to sit
    between USDOT and a private company implementing a major
    greenfield project like high speed rail.
        At minimum, the Fed-State Partnership Program's applicant
    eligibility language should match that of the CRISI program. In
    an ideal scenario, all USDOT discretionary grant programs
    should have their applicant eligibility language harmonized.
        Additionally, the Subcommittee should look at consolidating
    some or all of the FRA discretionary grant programs into a
    combined calendar. This consolidation would streamline the
    entire FRA grant process by eliminating the need to
    continuously issue notice of funding opportunities, review
    grant submissions, and negotiate grant agreements continuously
    throughout the year.
        The use of existing transportation corridors is fundamental
    to our business thesis. Reexamination of the permitting and
    approval process is an opportunity for improvement. Two changes
    that would create a more efficient process are first to provide
    additional NEPA delegation authority to states for passenger
    rail projects. And two, to provide USDOT clear authority for
    issuing categorical exclusions for infrastructure projects that
    are constructed in an existing transportation corridor.
        Accessing significant capital to support the cost and the
    lengthy construction schedule of new infrastructure projects
    remains a key challenge. We successfully utilized the private
    activity bond market as our primary capital source, and it
    proved to be successful. Increase in the private activity bond
    cap in the Transportation Reauth bill from $30 billion to $45
    billion is necessary, not just for rail projects, but managed
    lanes and other surface transportation projects.
        In addition to private activity bonds, the Railroad
    Rehabilitation Infrastructure Financing Program has tremendous
    potential to unlock private sector capital for infrastructure.
    There should be a process whereby RIF is more streamlined if an
    equal amount of the capital stack includes private sector
    equity and debt from qualified financial institutions.
        I would be remiss if I did not reinforce the importance of
    maintaining, if not increasing, the funding levels for rail
    discretionary grant programs. I want to end by inviting you all
    to come to Florida and take a ride to see what we have built.
        I am proud of the more than 600 teammates at Brightline
    Florida that have built a product that is leading a passenger
    rail renaissance in America. Thank you, and I look forward to
    your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Cumber follows:]

            Prepared Statement of Husein A. Cumber, Senior Advisor,
                            Brightline Holdings, LLC
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the
    Subcommittee. As Senior Advisor of Brightline Holdings, LLC and one of
    the people who developed the vision for this company in mid-2011, I am
    honored to be here to highlight the achievements of Brightline Florida
    and Brightline West, discuss the future of passenger rail service in
    the U.S., identify challenges facing the development of additional
    high-speed and intercity passenger rail systems in America, and
    potential solutions.
        One of the biggest challenges of any infrastructure project is
    putting together the necessary rights-of-way. In my prior role as an
    executive at Florida East Coast Railway, we granted a perpetual
    passenger rail easement to a sister company that could then develop or
    sell rights for future commuter and intercity passenger rail systems.
    This sister company ultimately became Brightline Florida and initially
    owned the access rights to operate passenger rail from downtown Miami
    to Cocoa, Florida (a location proximate to Kennedy Space Center and
    Port Canaveral), but was missing right-of-way between Cocoa and Orlando
    International Airport to complete the system. These two locations are
    connected by a state transportation corridor. In 2012, Governor Rick
    Scott and the Florida Department of Transportation entered into a lease
    agreement with Brightline Florida to complete the 235-mile corridor.
    Hence, Brightline Florida was born overcoming a major challenge--a
    continuous right-of-way.
        Over the past decade, Brightline Florida has been the only private
    passenger rail system in the country to construct and operate a modern,
    consumer-focused service that connects cities with characteristics
    essential for successful rail operations. Building upon important
    lessons from Florida, we are now developing Brightline West, which will
    connect Southern California and Las Vegas.
        Both projects represent a model where the private sector plays a
    lead role in establishing a blueprint for how our Nation can build
    intercity passenger rail, while at the same time stimulating a new
    industrial base that will reverberate across the country, driving
    economic growth, creating jobs, and setting a new standard for
    passenger rail travel in America.
        As mentioned earlier, Brightline Florida started as an idea in
    2011. As we looked at successful passenger rail systems globally it
    became clear that a 250-to 300-mile corridor was the ideal length. This
    distance connects city pairs that are too far to drive but too close to
    fly. In the U.S., with the notable exception of the Northeast
    Corridor's Acela service introduced in 2000, this model was discussed
    but never implemented until Brightline Florida. Miami to Orlando
    presented the perfect opportunity to introduce rail service in a region
    of the country that was experiencing a positive population shift, but
    continued to be challenged with a congested transportation system. With
    the benefit of a head start afforded by the perpetual passenger rail
    easement, we set a new bar for innovation in passenger rail
    transportation.
        To date, we have invested more than $6 billion of private capital
    across the 235 miles from Miami to Orlando. Our initial stations are
    located in Miami, Aventura, Fort Lauderdale, Boca Raton, West Palm
    Beach and Orlando International Airport and will soon be joined by
    stations in Martin County and Cocoa. Our Florida system also includes
    two vehicle maintenance facilities, ten American-made trainsets, and
    employs more than 600 teammates. We represent an alternative to driving
    on Interstate 95, which is one of the most congested roadways in the
    country, especially in South Florida.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://siteselection.com/congestion-capitals/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In September 2023, we opened our newest station at the Orlando
    International Airport and began offering daily, hourly service between
    South Florida and Central Florida. In 2024, our first full year of
    service between our terminal stations, we carried nearly 3 million
    passengers. Our ridership continues to grow, with record monthly
    ridership occurring throughout 2025, and we expect to eventually carry
    over 600,000 monthly passengers as the business reaches its full
    potential.
        Looking back over our history, we now recognize lessons learned
    from several challenges that all projects of this scale must overcome
    to be successful.

      1.  Privately developed intercity passenger rail projects would
            benefit from being directly eligible for USDOT and Federal
            Railroad Administration (FRA) discretionary grants. The
            industry at large would benefit from a more streamlined
            discretionary grant program.

      2.  Cost-effective access to right-of-way is essential.

      3.  Completion of environmental approvals in a timely manner to meet
            the demands of early financial investors is critical.

      4.  Access to low-cost debt is required to build a financially
            sustainable business model for greenfield, first-of-its-kind
            projects.

      5.  Shifting people out of their car-centric mindset requires
            redefining the passenger rail experience in the U.S.

        Given my experience guiding both Brightline Florida and Brightline
    West from initial concept, it is clear that this Subcommittee can make
    significant impacts during the upcoming transportation reauthorization
    process.
    Building on Existing USDOT and FRA Grant Programs
        The U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation has
    recognized that all modes of transportation need to be supported
    through discretionary grant programs. Effective grant oversight
    requires direct engagement with the entity implementing a project.
    Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) is the
    only grant program that allows private companies to apply for Federal
    funding as a prime recipient (i.e., without a public sector partner).
    This direct eligibility for CRISI funding comes with a relationship of
    direct oversight from the FRA. Under other FRA and USDOT grant
    programs, private companies can still receive funds but must do so
    through an intermediary: a public entity that serves as the primary
    applicant. In this scenario, the public entity passes through the funds
    and reporting obligations. This unnecessary, additional layer can
    compromise the effectiveness of USDOT monitoring, reporting, and audit
    procedures, in addition to increasing project risk, cost, and delays.
        Many public entities will simply refuse to sit between USDOT and a
    private company implementing a major greenfield project like high-speed
    rail. At minimum, the Federal-State Partnership for Intercity Passenger
    Rail (FSP) grant program's applicant eligibility language should match
    that of the CRISI program. In an ideal scenario, all USDOT
    discretionary grant programs should have their applicant eligibility
    language harmonized. Making this change will allow future intercity
    passenger rail projects to be implemented without putting elected
    officials in the difficult political situation of having their state
    DOTs or other public agencies take on unnecessary risk.
        Additionally, the Subcommittee should look at consolidating some or
    all of the FRA discretionary grant programs into a combined calendar.
    This consolidation would streamline the entire FRA grant process by
    eliminating the need to continually issue Notice of Funding
    Opportunities (NOFO), review grant submissions, and negotiate grant
    agreements continuously throughout the year. The goal should be to get
    infrastructure dollars to grant recipients as quickly as possible so
    the funds can be spent. This goal is hard to achieve when the FRA must
    oversee multiple grant programs every year on different schedules. This
    change to the grant programs would also reduce the human and financial
    capital needed to apply for discretionary grants. For example, issue
    all the NOFOs in the first quarter, review the grant applications in
    the second quarter, make all grant announcements in the third quarter
    and negotiate grant agreements in the fourth quarter.
    Utilization of Existing Transportation Corridors
        The use of existing transportation corridors is fundamental to our
    business thesis. I mentioned how the first major challenge for any
    infrastructure project is putting together a right-of-way. The
    utilization of existing transportation corridors is a common-sense
    approach to assembling an end-to-end corridor. Assembling a greenfield
    right-of-way is simply too difficult, can take too long, and cost too
    much, typically requiring eminent domain. This process can create
    headwinds from the start and engender negative perceptions among the
    very people you want to convince to be your future customers.
        Leveraging existing infrastructure dramatically reduces land
    acquisition costs, minimizes environmental impacts, and accelerates
    construction and development timelines. Moreover, many governmental
    entities maintain control of extensive transportation corridors across
    the country. The cooperation of public and private sectors to leverage
    these assets facilitated a significant breakthrough for us and has
    become one of our most important lessons learned.
        In fact, Brightline West's alignment is almost entirely within the
    median of Interstate 15. This configuration is the result of
    cooperation among the Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT),
    Caltrans, the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority and the
    Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management. Agreements
    reached through this cooperation created the approximately 220-mile
    rail corridor. These public entities recognized the advantage of using
    a highway corridor, first opened to traffic in the 1960s, as an
    opportunity to introduce the first true high speed rail system in
    America.
    Permitting and Approvals
        In Florida, we built our system in two phases. Initially we
    developed a 67-mile segment from Miami to West Palm Beach and then
    followed that with an additional 168-mile segment to Orlando four years
    later.
        We made this a two-step process because of two real time
    challenges: (1) the complexities of the environmental approval process,
    and (2) the ability to raise the capital required for the development
    and construction phases.
        Our first 67 miles existed entirely within an active freight
    railroad corridor allowing us to expedite the required environmental
    process. In the end, we received a Finding of No Significant Impact.
    However, because the Cocoa to Central Florida segment ran along the
    state highway system and was new rail construction, this segment
    required a more extensive, multi-year environmental process despite
    being an active transportation corridor.
        While the South Florida system had ``independent utility,'' the
    extension to Orlando was needed to guarantee long-term financial
    success for Brightline Florida. We were faced with the difficult
    decision of whether to delay advancing construction on the entire
    system for a protracted and unpredictable period while the
    environmental process for the Orlando segment progressed or take a more
    proactive posture and build the first operating segment immediately
    upon approval, and then extend the system once the second environmental
    process was completed.
        To be sure, efficiencies in the environmental process represent
    enormous opportunities for time and cost savings that can change the
    course of the viability of these kinds of infrastructure investments.
    It is vital for moving passenger rail projects forward that this
    Subcommittee, working with colleagues on the Senate Committee on
    Environment and Public Works, develop a more efficient environmental
    approval process. Two changes that would create a more efficient
    process are (1) to provide additional NEPA delegation authority to
    states for passenger rail projects, and (2) to provide USDOT clear
    authority for issuing Categorical Exclusions for infrastructure
    projects that are constructed in an existing transportation corridor.
    Access to Capital
        Accessing significant capital to support the cost and the lengthy
    construction schedule of new infrastructure projects remains a key
    challenge. As a privately funded project, and the first of its kind in
    over a century, Brightline Florida had to finance the project in
    increments as opposed to fully capitalizing the company upfront. This
    was a strategy based on necessity rather than cost-efficiency. We
    successfully utilized the Private Activity Bond market as our primary
    capital source, and it proved to be successful. The availability and
    lower cost of tax-exempt debt was essential to our ability to succeed.
        In addition to Private Activity Bonds, the Railroad Rehabilitation
    and Infrastructure Financing (RRIF) program has tremendous potential to
    unlock private sector capital for major infrastructure projects. RRIF
    today can fund up to 100 percent of a project's cost. There should be a
    process whereby the RRIF loan process is more streamlined if an equal
    amount of the capital stack includes private sector equity and debt
    from qualified financial institutions. We look forward to working with
    the Subcommittee during the transportation reauthorization process to
    improve the RRIF loan program.
    Customer Focus
        Our ultimate success is due to our teammates delivering an
    experience that resonates with modern travelers. Our customer
    satisfaction ratings show that people are embracing the product. On
    time performance and train frequency have been key metrics in our ramp-
    up period. And through data-driven marketing strategies, including
    social media and partnerships across multiple verticals such as
    airlines, hotels, sports and entertainment, real estate, fintech, and
    cruise lines, Brightline has built strong consumer engagement.
        Brightline Florida is a success and provides a roadmap for the
    future. That future is Brightline West, America's first true high-speed
    rail system.
        Let me emphasize that point. Today, the United States has ZERO
    miles of true high-speed rail, which is commonly defined as systems
    traveling over 186 mph. By comparison, China has approximately 29,000
    miles of high-speed rail, making it by far the world's largest network.
    Japan has about 1,800 miles of high-speed rail, primarily through its
    Shinkansen system which began operation in 1964 and Europe's network
    totals roughly 7,500 miles across 11 linked countries.
        Brightline West will connect Las Vegas and Southern California with
    the first passenger train in the country operating at over 200 miles
    per hour. This all-electric rail service will include a flagship
    station in Las Vegas, with additional California stations in Apple
    Valley, Hesperia, and Rancho Cucamonga. Trains will take passengers
    from Las Vegas to Southern California in approximately 2 hours, twice
    as fast as the normal drive-time. The Southern California station will
    connect to Los Angeles' Metrolink service, creating a network for
    seamless rail connectivity into LA's Union Station.
        Today, nearly 50 million annual trips occur between Los Angeles and
    Las Vegas--over 85 percent of them by car--a trip which is
    unpredictable, unreliable, and challenged by congestion.
        Brightline West expects to serve nearly 9 million one-way
    passengers annually. As noted, this project, which is in the final
    stages of contracting, has fully assembled right-of way, and full
    environmental clearance. The project has a four-year construction
    timeline.
        The project is one of the largest in the Nation and will be
    constructed entirely as a Buy America initiative, built and operated by
    union labor. In 2023 we announced a landmark partnership with 13 rail
    unions representing more than 160,000 railroad workers in the United
    States. This agreement represents a historic milestone establishing a
    commitment for the use of highly skilled union labor to operate our
    business. In addition, the State Building and Construction Trades
    Council of California (SBCTC), and the Southern Nevada Building Trades
    Union signed an agreement with our team to ensure their participation
    in the project's construction.
        Independent economic studies estimate that the project will create
    35,000 indirect jobs and 10,000 direct jobs during construction.
        The trains will be manufactured by Siemens Mobility in a new
    purpose-built factory. This facility alone will create 300 new jobs and
    is a tremendous example of the economic impact that will be felt all
    around the country as the ripple effect of a new supply chain will
    include more than 120 vendors from 28 states.
        For Brightline West, the introduction of new high-speed technology
    and an entirely new infrastructure base comes with higher capital costs
    than our Florida system and is therefore proud to be supported with
    Federal grant assistance to offset some of the upfront capital costs of
    the project. This Federal grant will be supported by private activity
    bonds, debt, and additional private equity.
        As for what can be done to continue to encourage growth in this
    sector, let me return to the challenges discussed earlier.
        Re-examination of the permitting and approval process is an
    opportunity for improvement. We would encourage this Subcommittee and
    the FRA to identify ways to streamline and reduce the amount of time
    and investment it takes to proceed within existing laws and regulatory
    frameworks. Simply put, the environmental process takes too long, costs
    too much, and involves a series of hurdles and a wide range of
    approvals at every level of government. While we appreciate the
    diligence of officials in protecting the public, we must refine the
    process for this industry to thrive. Ensuring a robust environmental
    process does not have to come at the expense of efficiency. The process
    can be both efficient and sufficient to ensure the public is protected.
        Massive investments needed for high-speed rail projects require
    cost-efficient, long-term capital, and there are ways this subcommittee
    may be able to assist with overcoming this challenge. Continued support
    of Private Activity Bonds is critical to the capital needs of these
    projects. Private Activity Bonds attract private lenders willing to
    accept lower rates on bonds because of their tax-exempt status and
    those lower rates reduce the cost of capital to the developer. The
    savings on interest expense can be redirected into hard assets. Any
    deferred tax revenue is made up many times over as the invested money
    is put to work in the economy. We have proven the markets are receptive
    to these investments, and future projects will need access to lower
    debt costs from this program.
        Previously, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law increased the Private
    Activity Bond volume cap from $15 billion to $30 billion.
    Unfortunately, the USDOT has nearly reached that cap necessitating an
    increase to the cap of up to $45 billion. While this issue falls under
    the jurisdiction of the Senate Finance Committee, this Subcommittee and
    its staff can effectively advocate to increase the surface
    transportation Private Activity Bond volume cap.
    LIABILITY CHALLENGE FACING THE PASSENGER RAIL INDUSTRY
        One of the biggest challenges currently facing the passenger rail
    industry is the proposed increase in the amount of the limitation (or
    cap) on rail passenger liability which was initially enacted as part of
    the 1997 Amtrak Reform and Accountability Act. This cap was
    incorporated into the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (``FAST
    Act''), the five-year surface transportation bill, in December 2015.
    The cap increased from $200 million (the original cap in 1997) to
    approximately $295 million. The cap was also indexed to inflation and
    is to be adjusted every five years.
        The index methodology ensures that the aggregate allowable awards
    to all rail passengers, against all defendants, for all claims,
    including punitive damages, arising from a single accident or incident
    is based on current dollars adjusted for inflation. Today the cap is
    $323,000,000. The cap is scheduled to be adjusted again in the first
    quarter of 2026. With the consumer price index as the sole determinant
    of the adjustment, it is anticipated there will be a very significant
    increase in the cap. The cap is likely to rise to approximately $400
    million.
        There is a time-frame mandated in law that provides for an
    adjustment to the Federal cap on liability and, historically, the time
    frame for the increase to become effective was 30 days from the date
    the law was amended. The 30-day period is insufficient for all
    passenger railroads nationwide to secure additional coverage. The
    industry is asking for a legislative change that will adjust the
    effective date from 30 to up to 365 days. It will also reduce the
    review period from every five years to every four years, thus
    maintaining a five-year cycle for the adjustment.
        The process of securing all liability insurance coverage is quite
    complex and requires a period far more than 30 days to complete. It is
    customarily a process that requires a minimum of six months. Currently
    all passenger rail agencies, including Amtrak and Brightline, are
    required, due to the availability of coverage, to procure the majority
    of their coverage from overseas insurers. There is no single insurance
    company that is willing to fully insure a passenger railroad for a
    potentially catastrophic event.
        Passenger rail systems like Brightline have renewal dates spread
    across the calendar, so everyone is not seeking coverage
    simultaneously. The proposed increase in the passenger liability cap,
    and the 30-day implementation date, will create a set of circumstances
    that will be very detrimental to passenger railroads and only benefit
    the excess rail liability insurers. Passenger railroads will be
    beholden to the pricing and terms set forth by the insurers.
        There should also be a conversation about resetting the cap since
    it has not been adjusted since positive train control was mandated by
    the U.S. Congress. This technology has had a significant positive
    effect on safety across the rail system. The safety benefits should be
    reflected in the cap being adjusted downward. This would be a one-time
    reduction, then the adjustment would continue every five years as
    mandated today.
    At Minimum Maintain Discretionary Grant Funding Levels for Rail
        I would be remiss if I did not reinforce the importance of
    maintaining, if not increasing, the funding levels for rail
    discretionary grant programs. I have already mentioned reasons why
    through the Brightline examples. I want to also mention my involvement
    with Transtar, the short line rail network that was a former subsidiary
    of U.S. Steel and continues to provide freight rail service to many of
    their plants. Given the news this past week regarding the Trump
    Administration facilitating a final agreement between U.S. Steel and
    Nippon Steel, our attention will now focus on ensuring that the
    necessary rail infrastructure exists to support the direct foreign
    investments that will be made in steel plants across America. Transtar
    stands ready to meet the needs of America's steel industry and the FRA
    discretionary grant programs will be vital to making sure that our
    short line railroads are in a state of good repair.
        The importance of the timing of today's hearing is not lost on
    anyone in the passenger and freight rail industry. The current
    transportation reauthorization bill ends on September 30, 2026. I am
    hopeful that this hearing will lay the groundwork for a bipartisanship
    spirit that will lead to an infrastructure bill by the time the current
    bill expires. Because, simply put, infrastructure built today is
    cheaper than infrastructure built tomorrow.
        To conclude, I invite you all to come to Florida and take a ride to
    see what we have built! I am proud of the more than 600 teammates at
    Brightline Florida that have built a product that is leading a
    passenger rail renaissance in America. They have redefined train
    travel. And each one of them is up to the challenge of unlocking the
    full potential of high-speed rail in America.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Cumber. I think you will have
    many takers in visiting Florida among those listening. Mr.
    Anthony, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

          STATEMENT OF CLARENCE E. ANTHONY, CEO AND EXECUTIVE
           DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES, AND FORMER
           MAYOR OF SOUTH BAY, FLORIDA

        Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Chairman Young, Ranking Member, and
    members of the Committee. I am here today on behalf of the
    Nation's more than 12,000 cities, towns, and villages that have
    tracks running through their neighborhoods and their downtowns.
        I would like to begin today by putting safety first and
    thanking this committee for your leadership on safety programs
    in the IIJA that are saving American lives every day. The new
    Rail Crossing Elimination Grants and the Safe Streets Grants,
    both championed in this committee, are being put to work in
    communities of every size in America, and the results are
    clear.
        Traffic deaths and rail incidents are finally trending
    down. So let's keep up these essential safety efforts in the
    reauthorization ahead of us. The National League of Cities
    believes national rail investments are on track, but we need to
    keep up the momentum.
        This means investing in the corridors we serve today and
    identified in the Corridor ID Program. With the certainty of
    advanced appropriations, capital investment in passenger rail
    service in the U.S. is showing great gains. Amtrak had its best
    year yet in 2024, with more capital projects, customers, and
    record revenue than ever before, and they are on track to do
    the same in 2025.
        However, not everything is on track. More than 4,000 trains
    have derailed since 2020, with nearly 70 percent of derailments
    happening inside cities, particularly small cities. The 2023
    Norfolk Southern train derailment in East Palestine Ohio was a
    jarring reminder for all cities and towns about how quickly a
    train coming through can derail with hazardous materials on
    board, harming both their towns and the economic potential for
    years to come.
        The Norfolk derailment is not unprecedented. It follows a
    trend of hazardous material derailments in Drafton, Fort Worth,
    Maryville, and Paulsboro and--among others. Experts have made
    it clear that derailments are preventable with good
    maintenance, safety standards, and of course, technology.
        Congress is the only level of Government--full and
    unquestionable authority to establish the rail safety
    improvements needed for American communities, emergency
    responders, rail workers, and of course, rail customers. We are
    deeply appreciative of everything that this committee has done
    to set safety performance far higher.
        City leaders that have dealt with the derailments echo one
    common message, no other community should have to go through
    this preventable disaster. And with safety inspections,
    investments incentives, Congress could make our communities
    safer and make railroads more profitable by keeping the trains
    on the tracks where they belong.
        So, in order to show that we are partners, we made eight
    recommendations. One, adopt and fund expert NTSB's
    recommendation on rail safety. Two, invest in Rail Crossing
    Elimination Program to improve the flow of rail traffic and
    local transportation traffic so that these are not blocked--the
    crossings aren't.
        Three, provide long term rail funding certainty through
    advanced appropriations or other means that keep the momentum
    for the Corridor ID Program going, which has many great
    projects we want to move.
        Four, lower the cost of rail infrastructure material and
    structure through innovation and experimentation funding,
    because the cost of rail infrastructure has doubled in the last
    couple of years. Five, modernize safety data and blocked
    crossing reporting. Six, support safety information flow
    between the railroads, city leadership, and of course, our
    local first responders.
        Seven, establish an FRA liaison for railroads and
    communities. And finally, and most importantly, maintain and
    modernize rail inspections. We need to recognize that
    technology can support inspections, but it cannot safely
    supplant them. And so, thank you on behalf of the National
    League of Cities and the 12,000 cities in America. We are here
    to partner.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Anthony follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Clarence E. Anthony, CEO and Executive Director,
       National League of Cities, and former Mayor of South Bay, Florida
        Good morning, Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, and Members of
    the Committee.

        On behalf of the more than 19,000 cities, towns, and villages
    across America, I want to put safety first and will begin my remarks by
    thanking this Committee for their leadership in supporting critical
    safety improvements that are saving the lives of our family, friends
    and neighbors in America's communities. The new Rail Crossing
    Elimination (RCE) program and the Safe Streets and Roads for All (Safe
    Streets) program have been embraced by communities of every size in
    every state, and the results are clear--the U.S. Department of
    Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reports
    we are in the 11th consecutive quarterly decrease in traffic fatalities
    and the Federal Railroad Administration reports some slight progress on
    total rail accidents/incidents in the last few years (2017: 11,990 vs.
    2024: 10,255). Together, we must continue to build on the safety focus
    across our transportation networks and embrace a wholistic safe system
    approach.
    National Rail Investments are On Track and Showing Promise
        Local governments are proud to partner with the Federal government
    through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to tackle the
    Nation's infrastructure backlog from the ground up and contribute to
    the rebuilding that is happening across the country right now. We
    appreciate the opportunity to testify today about how rail investments
    in the next surface transportation reauthorization can serve our
    country in the years to come.
        The U.S. has made tremendous progress on forward-looking passenger
    rail investments and improvements for the safe and efficient movement
    of freight rail through the IIJA, and we encourage Congress to build on
    that momentum by growing critical safety programs like the Rail
    Crossing Elimination program and investments in core rail passenger
    programs. Tremendous proposals came together across the country for the
    Corridor Identification and Development (Corridor ID) program to map
    out a pipeline of passenger rail projects ready for build out. With
    continued investment and longer term funding certainty provided by
    advance appropriations in the IIJA, passenger rail service in the U.S.
    is showing great gains and is absolutely on the right track.
        Amtrak had its best year yet in 2024 with more customers and
    generated more revenue than ever before, while also making record-
    setting capital investment and setting eighteen ridership records at
    the route level. Amtrak carried a record 32.8 million intercity
    passengers (up 15 percent from FY 23, and above the pre-COVID-19 peak),
    generating $3.6 billion in operating revenue (up 7 percent from FY 23)
    and invested nearly $4.5 billion in critically-important capital
    projects (up 55 percent from FY 23, and 178 percent above the pre-
    pandemic peak) for rail infrastructure programs, major procurements of
    new train equipment, and overdue upgrades to stations. We are also
    seeing a boon with new and more frequent services like the new Chicago
    to-Twin Cities Borealis in partnership with the Minnesota, Wisconsin,
    and Illinois Departments of Transportation. The train makes stops in a
    variety of small cities, including Columbus, Portage, Wisconsin Dells,
    Tomah and others that are seeing the direct benefits of what a train
    stopping by their city can do in addition to the destination cities of
    St. Paul, Minneapolis, Milwaukee, and Chicago. The results for this
    Fiscal Year (FY25) are looking even brighter with record breaking
    ridership and revenue forecasts as well as NextGen Acela trains on the
    way in addition to new ``Mardi Gras'' services from New Orleans to
    Mobile this summer.
    Majority of U.S. Communities Have Rail Tracks and Want Safe Operations
        Cities of all sizes across the U.S. want to ensure that rail is run
    successfully in our country. More than 12,000 out of the more than
    19,000 cities, towns and villages across the country are impacted by
    our Nation's trains coming through neighborhoods and downtowns and
    crossing over the 3 million miles of roads that local governments own
    and maintain. We are the hosts to many of the 500 Amtrak stations
    across 46 states and are served by both existing and expanding service
    options like those from Brightline. We recognize the importance of
    Congress' role in supporting a modern rail transportation system and
    the service it provides to our country. However, we also know there is
    more Congress can do to keep rail moving without harming the
    communities it is supposed to serve.
    Rail Safety Impacts Small Cities Disproportionately in Clear Trend Line
            of Hazardous Incidents
        Unfortunately, more than 4,000 trains have derailed since 2020 with
    nearly 70 percent of derailments happening in cities. Small cities are
    disproportionately affected by rail accidents: Cities with fewer than
    1,000 residents have an average of 12.9 accidents as compared to 3.1
    for cities between 1,000 and 10,000 and less than 1 for cities over
    50,000. The Norfolk Southern train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio,
    was a jarring reminder for all local governments of how quickly any one
    of these rail incidents in their backyards can dissolve the economic
    potential of the communities they represent and serve. While an
    incident can quickly fade into the background of the news cycle, this
    Committee's oversight of the derailment and environmental contamination
    in East Palestine, Ohio, is essential to holding the spotlight on
    safety because while the Norfolk Southern derailment was substantial,
    it is not unprecedented. Here are a few derailments of note with
    hazardous materials involved:

       In 2020, in Draffin, Kentucky, a CSX train derailed three
            locomotives, one buffer car, and four tank cars toward the
            rain-swollen Russell Fork river, submerging the cab. Two DOT-
            111 tank cars were breached and released about 38,400 gallons
            of denatured ethanol, which in combination with about 11,300
            gallons of released locomotive diesel fuel ignited into a post-
            accident pool fire. Crewmembers were trapped in the train fire,
            swam to safety, and were transported by ambulance to a local
            hospital for treatment. Local police advised occupants of 6 to
            10 nearby homes to evacuate.

       In 2019, in Fort Worth, TX, a Union Pacific Railroad train
            derailed near East Berry Street and South Riverside Drive,
            triggered a massive fire fueled by more than 100,000 gallons of
            ethanol from the tanker cars. Several homes were evacuated and
            three horses were killed when flames spread to a nearby stable.
            Of the 24 tanker cars that had the potential to create a deadly
            fire fueled by up to 672,000 gallons of flammable liquid, only
            nine leaked some of their ethanol cargo, including the four
            cars that witnesses saw burning. The National Transportation
            Safety Board used the incident to compare the crash and fire
            effects of the newer DOT-117 tanker cars compared to the DOT-
            111 phased for retirement and were involved in the East
            Palestine derailment.

       In 2015, in Maryville, TN, ahead of the Independence Day
            holiday, a 57-car CSX train carrying 27 cars of hazardous,
            flammable and toxic substances derailed and caught fire,
            prompting the evacuation of thousands of people within a two-
            mile radius. About 5,000 people in the area were evacuated, and
            197 people were injured with 87 treated at hospitals including
            ten first responders. The cities of Alcoa and Mayville
            emergency response expenses alone exceeded $225,000 in addition
            to Blount County's larger emergency response.

       In 2012, in Paulsboro, NJ, near Philadelphia, PA, a Conrail
            train transporting the chemical vinyl chloride derailed while
            crossing a bridge that collapsed over Mantua Creek. Seven cars
            derailed, four rail cars fell into the creek, breaching one
            tank and releasing approximately 23,000 gallons of vinyl
            chloride. Local, state, and Federal emergency personnel
            responded on scene. Almost 700 people were evacuated, and
            nearby schools were ordered to immediately take shelter and
            seal off their buildings. Not including the train crew and
            emergency responders, 28 residents sought medical attention for
            possible exposure to vinyl chloride. A decade after the
            incident, the impact to the community remains clear to city
            leaders--``A lot of houses became vacant, rundown, crime,
            filth, you name it, all because of [the spill] . . . there were
            plans already before the train wreck to open all of these
            stores that you see now and they came to a halt.''

        Experts have made it clear that derailments are preventable with
    good maintenance, safety standards and technology. Congress must set
    the safety performance bar or continue to watch community after
    community bear the economic consequences of train derailments. Rail
    remains important to our country, but its operation should never be at
    the expense of these communities.
    Rail Safety Starts and Ends with the Commerce Committee
        Despite railroads running fewer yet longer trains with steady
    levels of hazardous materials, derailments have not substantially
    decreased. Therefore, any train that derails is more likely to be
    carrying hazardous materials that are highly explosive, increasing the
    risk to the communities they pass through. Cities that have had
    derailments keep echoing a common message--no other community should
    have to go through these preventable disasters, and with safety
    protocol like inspections and investment incentives for maintenance,
    Congress could make our communities safer and make railroads more
    profitable by keeping the trains on the tracks where they belong.
        Unlike other modes of transportation, Congress is the only level of
    government with full and unquestioned authority to establish the safety
    improvements that are needed and to ensure the safety of the rail
    system for American communities, emergency first responders, rail
    workers, and railroad customers. Each Senator on this Commerce
    Committee holds tremendous power to prevent future safety incidents and
    ensure the success of America's railroads operating in our communities.
    Last Congress under the leadership of Vice President Vance and a
    bipartisan group of members of this Committee, the Railway Safety Act
    was advanced, and that unfinished business remains for the upcoming
    transportation reauthorization in the coming months.
    Local Government's Rail Policy Recommendations to Congress
        To advance the safety and efficiency of the Nation's rail system in
    coordination with road and pedestrian systems, we request the following
    rail priorities be included in the surface transportation
    reauthorization:

       Adopt and Fund Expert Recommendations on Rail Safety: The
            National Safety Transportation Board has provided expert
            analysis and recommendations to Congress on the East Palestine
            derailment and many other important and revealing rail safety
            incidents that should be followed to ensure we respond to the
            safety gaps exposed and that we make the most of taxpayer
            investment to have independent safety analysis. Notably, this
            includes vent-and-burn and bearing failure research, retiring
            DOT-111 tank cars as soon as possible, maintenance for
            equipment, communication and preparation for emergency
            responders to be able to confirm the contents and consist of
            the train, and much more. Many of these solutions are found in
            bipartisan rail safety legislation before the Committee and the
            House.

       Invest in Rail Crossing Improvements Across the Nation: The
            Rail Crossing Elimination (RCE) program has proven incredibly
            valuable for communities to work directly with railroads to
            complete rail improvement projects and improve the flow of rail
            traffic and local transportation traffic at crossings and
            should be prioritized in a limited funding environment.
            Planning eligibility is an essential part of the RCE program to
            develop viable capital projects. Eligibility should also be
            clarified to ensure that pedestrian access bridges and bridge
            modifications can be included in these grants. Notably, the
            Safe Streets program could also include pedestrian rail
            crossing eligibility or a Safe Crossings program could be
            established to upgrade more of the 200,000+ rail crossings
            particularly where there are schools or busy pedestrian areas
            nearby experiencing too many close calls and deaths.

            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

       Provide Long-Term Rail Funding Certainty: Almost all other
            modes of transportation benefit from the long-term budgeting
            certainty of Federal Trust Funds--the Highway Trust Fund,
            Airports Trust Fund, Harbors Trust Fund, and Waterways Trust
            Fund, but rail does not have access to a Federal trust fund.
            However, in the IIJA, Congress used advance appropriations to
            provide multiyear certainty for passenger and freight rail
            projects in a similar manner to a Federal trust fund. NLC
            supports creation of a rail trust fund, allowance of rail in an
            existing trust fund, or continued use of advance appropriations
            that can ensure multi-year rail investment that aligns with the
            necessary capital construction demands of infrastructure
            projects. We also encourage Congress to not waste the
            investment momentum of the Corridor Identification and
            Development program, especially in areas where highways alone
            cannot meet demand and ease congestion and where additional
            investment can realize more frequent and extended service
            connections for the heart of the country.

       Lower the Cost of Rail Infrastructure Materials and
            Structures: The costs for rail crossing infrastructure
            improvements have increased by double even before the recent
            inflation spike along with often volatile railroad project
            expenses. Congress should provide innovation and
            experimentation funding for new and lower cost materials to be
            tested and incorporated into the rail section of the Manual on
            Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) by encouraging states
            to use Section 130 program funds or providing additional funds
            for this purpose. Additionally, FRA should be empowered with
            investment tools for encouraging innovative technology in rail
            on a range of warning devices and crossing designs that use
            human factors science for limiting pedestrian and rail
            interaction including quick-build pedestrian bridge structures
            or real-time redirection information like communities in New
            Haven, IN, and Hattiesburg, MS, are using.

       Modernize Safety Data and Blocked Crossing Reporting: The
            Bureau of Transportation Statistics, FRA, FHWA and NHTSA should
            be tasked to integrate all Federal and state rail crossing and
            road safety data and planning efforts into publicly available
            safety dashboards that solicit public input and allow for
            improved Congressional oversight and research on transportation
            safety. Because blocked crossings create safety incidents,
            train operators should be required to provide FRA a
            standardized report for all stoppages exceeding an hour in
            length or alternatively, empower states to collect crossing
            data and enforce blocked crossing incidents as they would on
            any other mode of transportation. All rail data that is
            collected in a standardized manner should be able to be
            utilized by Federal agencies to inform safety and regulations
            without exception. All entities operating rail that accept
            Federal funding should be contributing safety and operational
            data as requested from USDOT.

       Support safety information flow between railroads, city
            leadership, and local first responders: We urge Congress to
            ensure that mandated communication flow makes it to the first
            responder on the scene, not only to the state office, and that
            official emergency communications channels used for other
            incidents be utilized in addition to any supplementary tools
            like phone apps. The proximity, switching and storage of
            railroad cars containing volatile and hazardous materials in
            and through urban and residential neighborhoods remains a core
            concern, and it has become clear that the current list may not
            be capturing all the hazardous materials moving on our
            railways. We agree that updating the list of substances to more
            accurately reflect a full understanding of what is being moved
            through communities is needed as well as ensuring that
            communication between railroads, states, local officials, and
            first responders is clear and efficient.

       Establish an FRA liaison for railroads and communities:
            Railroads are businesses operating in America's communities,
            and local governments expect all railroads to be good neighbors
            to the communities they reside in by answering local government
            questions promptly, hosting emergency contact information for
            incidents and issues, reviewing blocked crossing and safety
            data annually with communities upon request, and partnering
            with communities to utilize Federal grants to eliminate blocked
            crossings and congestion points in regions. However, a lack of
            responsiveness and oversight has led to long-standing issues in
            communities. FRA should be able to convene discussions with
            railroads on behalf of communities and regularly report back to
            Congress how convenings result in outcomes and proposed action
            plans to resolve issues in their states and districts.

       Maintain and Modernize Rail Inspections: The safety of the
            rail system is built on regular inspections by qualified
            personnel that can be better supported by transportation
            technology such as sensors, but they cannot replace the visual
            inspections of the humans that do these inspections. Self-
            certification on safety can lead to dangerous outcomes as this
            Committee knows from recent aviation issues. While all
            processes can be modernized and reliable data can inform risk
            and therefore inspections, it is of vital safety importance
            that the frequency of these visual inspections and the
            qualifications of the workers doing the inspections are not
            reduced. Any changes should be carefully considered and
            reviewed by independent expert and not done through waivers of
            current regulations.
    Infrastructure Investments Pay for Themselves
        While the 119th Congress will make many tough national budget
    decisions, reducing infrastructure investment from IIJA levels would be
    a $1 trillion dollar economic mistake. The American Society of Civil
    Engineer's 2024 ``Bridging the Gap'' economic scenario analysis
    compares the outcomes of continuing to invest at IIJA levels versus
    snapping back to prior FAST Act levels, and there is a clear
    difference:

       as much as $1 trillion-dollar gross economic output lost
            from major U.S. job sectors (e.g., healthcare, manufacturing,
            professional services),

       237,000 American jobs at stake, and

       $550 billion in disposable income for American families
            lost.

        When it comes to Congress making a return on the American
    taxpayers' investment, IIJA-level infrastructure investments can
    deliver nearly $700 every year in savings for American families over
    the next twenty years by continuing a robust program across multiple
    essential infrastructure types like transportation, water and energy.
        Much like our government deficit, we should not let an unreasonable
    infrastructure deficit grow unchecked and harm our country's future.
    Cities and towns urge Congress to embrace the positive economic impact
    of keeping infrastructure funding at IIJA's levels as the Committee
    negotiates the topline goals of the next package. This is the level of
    funding the American economy requires and the American people deserve.
        NLC thanks Congress for their continued attention to rail safety
    improvements through the IIJA's historic investment. We ask for your
    continued oversight and leadership to act on these recommendations
    which can improve safety in thousands of communities, and local
    governments look forward to discussing these issues with your
    Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee, and
    I look forward to your questions.

                                    APPENDIX

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Young. Well, thank you to Mr. Anthony and to all
    our witnesses for those opening statements. Very thoughtful. As
    I mentioned in my own opening statement, technology is already
    making a big difference in the way we approach safety in the
    rail ecosystem.
        But I do believe that emerging technologies like artificial
    intelligence and machine learning hold the potential to
    drastically improve our rail ecosystem by increasing safety and
    efficiency, probably in a number of ways that none of us can
    predict at this point. But this hearing, I think, is a great
    opportunity as we prepare our work on Surface Reauthorization
    to improve upon opportunities for the greater voluntary
    deployment of emerging technology.
        Mr. Jefferies, thanks for your testimony again. You
    mentioned a few applications of technology, but I wanted to dig
    in a little deeper on how exactly you have seen technology like
    automated track inspection, something we have discussed, or
    anything else that is improving safety and efficiency. Can you
    shine a light onto this for us?
        Mr. Jefferies. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for the
    question. And I think you heard some version of that same theme
    throughout all the witnesses. So, that is a good sign. But
    dialing into autonomous track inspection in particular.
        So, right now--and I mentioned, you know, our regulatory
    structure has been around for a long time, and we have got a
    lot of 1970s era regulations. We have got regulations from the
    steam engine era that we are operating under.
        But when it comes to track inspection, we have a very--and
    most of our inspection protocols are very manually focused
    protocol about how and when to inspect our tracks that
    generally requires a segment of a line to be shut down and
    individuals to walk the track using the naked eye looking for
    potential flaws.
        And that was the best way to do that when the regulations
    were established some time ago. Well, as with every other
    industry, this industry has continued to evolve and develop new
    technology and innovate and find new better ways to do things.
    And so, the principal characteristics of ATI are that one, you
    can affix an autonomous track inspection tool to a revenue
    service train, so you are not taking that line out of service.
        You are continuously inspecting the line as you are moving
    through revenue service, so you are covering more ground, you
    are doing it more frequently, and you are do it at a higher
    level of sophistication. In early pilot programs at the FRA, 90
    percent improvement in defect detection occurred using ATI
    versus the naked eye. That shouldn't be surprising to any of
    us, but that is the fact.
        And so, our thesis with using ATI as the example is let's
    continue to build the datasets appropriate to prove out--we
    think we have proven it out--but let's take sequential steps to
    further prove out that using ATI in lieu or in addition to a
    manual inspection will result in a higher level of safety.
        And as that is proven out by the data, then there should be
    a smooth, predictable, objective process for rolling that new,
    better way of doing things into the regulation to meet a
    regulatory requirement, and we think that is through an
    outcomes based approach.
        So, tell me the performance standard you want to meet, and
    allow me to figure out the best way to meet that or exceed
    that, and we should all get the outcome we are looking for.
    Thank you.
        Senator Young. Sort of a fundamental regulatory principle
    that many of us have tried to embrace. Don't be prescriptive,
    but instead rely on people's creativity and technology and
    thoughtfulness, who are frankly more connected to these
    challenges than sometimes people in Washington are, to come up
    with a solution.
        Mr. Gilbertson, Mr. Cumber, do either of you have anything
    to add as it relates to this technology question?
        Mr. Gilbertson. I just mentioned the interplay between, for
    example, the CRISI program and technology. I mentioned this
    app, but another good example is Rail Pulse. Rail Pulse is a
    consortium of large and small railroads, and it provides a tag
    on rail cars that provide both safety and customer information
    to the user.
        And we just joined the consortium. It again was seeded by a
    CRISI grant several years ago. And I think that the part that
    appealed to FRA was, again, both customer value and safety
    improvement. We just bought, Senator, 100 new rail cars to
    serve the steel industry in Indiana.
        We are tagging all those cars with this new technology. And
    it is a quantum leap in, where is that car located? We know
    exactly where it is located. So these are the kinds of things
    that I think are out there. And again, there is an interplay
    between the funding and the technology.
        Senator Young. Yes. Mr. Cumber.
        Mr. Cumber. Two short examples, Mr. Chairman. So with
    respect to Brightline and what we are doing, one area where
    evolving regulatory thinking could help is current regulations
    for broken rail detection are emerging as a roadblock for
    higher speed trains.
        So for example, European high speed rail networks depend on
    preventative measures to address the risk of broken rail
    conditions. And the preventative message--measures include an
    inspection track, an inspection vehicle that checks the track
    every morning before service starts.
        And so, what you are doing is preventing a broken rail
    condition by using high resolution cameras that monitor and
    detect rail flaws before they can grow in significance. The
    current U.S. regulations require the installation of track
    circuits to identify when a broken rail condition has happened.
        But we need to change the regulatory thinking and look at
    ways on how we make sure we are preventing the broken rail
    condition from actually happening, not monitoring when it
    actually happens. Second very quickly is, I am on the board of
    Parallel Systems, which is the first company that has designed
    an autonomous battery electric rail vehicle that can travel up
    to 500 miles.
        We got the first waiver from the Federal Railroad
    Administration, started the pilot in Georgia two weeks ago. And
    for more than a year, we struggled to get permission from the
    FRA to test the vehicle because of antiquated regulations that
    require self-powered vehicles to have bathrooms and
    windshields.
        And so, this is where technology is leaped ahead of the
    regulations in statute. And so----
        Senator Young. You don't think a self-powered vehicle needs
    a windshield?
        Mr. Cumber. Self powered rail car, right. And so, but what
    is interesting about these cars is they are designed to be able
    to monitor wheel bearing temperatures 30 times per second. They
    can stop much quickly than other rail cars. And so, you see
    here the regulation and the legislative regulations having to
    catch up to technology in this reauth process.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you. Great examples, and we will
    look forward to working with you to try and come up with some
    better outcomes when you interact with FRA in the future. Mr.
    Peters.
        Senator Peters. Thank you again for each of your testimony.
    And one thing that occurred in each of your testimonies is you
    discussed the importance of the down payment that the
    bipartisan infrastructure law made in our rail infrastructure.
    But what I also heard is that the job is clearly not done yet.
        The bill certainly provided certainty by giving advanced
    appropriations to key rail programs like CRISI--Mr. Gilbertson,
    you mentioned that in particular in your testimony--and the
    Rail Crossing Elimination Program.
        This means that in--that for the last few years, these
    programs have not been reliant on yearly appropriations
    process, and I am very concerned about the funding cliff that
    we are approaching with these programs when the BIL expires
    next year.
        Without advanced appropriations, the only way to avoid a
    huge funding cliff is for our rail network for the yearly
    appropriations budget plus up rail infrastructure funding by
    the billions. That will be difficult in our current budgetary
    environment to do that.
        So if I could hear briefly from each of you--from each
    member of this panel, what do you believe are the major
    consequences if Congress allows rail infrastructure funding to
    basically run off this cliff? What are the downsides that we
    need to know about? Mr. Jefferies, you want to start, and we
    will work down the panel.
        Mr. Jefferies. Absolutely, thanks. So certainly, you know
    from talking to us many times, we are very proud of all the
    private investment we put into the network. At the same time,
    we do many a major project with states, communities,
    municipalities, partnering with them to do projects that
    probably otherwise wouldn't be done.
        And these are projects of national significance, regional
    significance, increased freight flows, increased safety. And
    so, the primary source for the public entities to tap into is
    the Grade Crossing Elimination Program. It is Infra. It is
    Mega. On the short lines, primarily, it is CRISI.
        And so, my concern if you let those programs be dormant or
    stagnate is that there is going to be a lot of missed
    opportunities to partner with public agencies throughout the
    entire country--you have seen how oversubscribed these programs
    are--to do projects that otherwise may not get done that will
    have real benefits to cities and towns across the U.S., and the
    movement of freight, goods, and people.
        Senator Peters. Very good. Mr. Gilbertson.
        Mr. Gilbertson. I would just echo that and say that the
    advance appropriations are really critical. There is a planning
    function, particularly for small carriers, where you have a
    work window that is defined by climate sometimes. I mean, we
    have 4 months where we can do the work.
        If you miss that cycle, you miss a year. Similarly, there
    is often lining up non-Federal partners. That includes the
    private entity, but also public entities in some cases. And
    again, anything that adds to the complexity of that may mean it
    doesn't happen at all.
        Senator Peters. Very good. Mr. Cumber.
        Mr. Cumber. Thank you, Senator Peters. I would mention two
    things. Number one, infrastructure built today is cheaper than
    infrastructure built tomorrow. And so, any delay in being able
    to fund these programs and get the work done, not only causes
    the delay, but rises the cost for them in the future.
        Second, with respect to Brightline, both ourselves, the
    State DOT, the local communities have tapped into these
    programs for safety programs. And we look at safety from an
    engineering, education, and an enforcement standpoint. And so,
    law enforcement have been using these grants to warn and blitz
    grade crossings. We have all talked about the impact of grade
    crossing safety.
        They have used these grants to go above and beyond the
    Federal Railroad Administration regulations for crossing safety
    improvements. And they have also used these grants from an
    education standpoint for public service announcements, et
    cetera.
        And so, my fear is if you pull back on funding, you would
    also see an increase in safety incidents.
        Senator Peters. All right, we have a real concern. Mr.
    Anthony, the last word.
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, absolutely. We need certainty funding. It
    helps the local communities and the rail industries to be able
    to plan. It helps us to be to look in ways to create the new
    workforce and what is needed in the communities, towns, and
    villages, especially rural and small communities.
        It also is important to note that all types of the
    infrastructure programs that we have has a trust fund or other
    long term funding commitments. And if we had that mechanism
    long term for rail industry development and community
    engagement, and local leadership involvement, I think we could
    plan better as a nation.
        Senator Peters. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Peters. Chairman Cruz, you
    are recognized.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

        Senator Cruz. Thank you very much and thank you to the
    Chairman for hosting this hearing. Thanks to the witnesses for
    being here. Mr. Jefferies, let me start with you. Does AAR have
    any recommendations for this committee to stop freight theft?
    For example, would requiring DOT and DOJ to better coordinate
    when they receive information on freight theft help tackle this
    problem?
        Mr. Jefferies. We absolutely have recommendations, and this
    is an issue that plagues not only the railroads, but the entire
    supply chain. And it is not going away. It is only getting
    bigger. Our adversaries are very organized criminal
    enterprises, strategically hitting high value cargo.
        So first of all, thank you to you for your support on the
    Combating Organized Retail Crime Act. Thank you to others on
    the Committee as well. We have got very good bipartisan
    support. That bill does three things. It increases information
    sharing across Government. It creates investigatory motivation
    with the feds.
        And then it really pushes for some enforcement, because
    oftentimes we arrest people, and they are right back out on the
    street. Information, as you mentioned, information sharing is
    key.
        Coordination, DOT, DOJ, I would throw DHS in there as well
    because they are kind of at the tip of the spear with a lot of
    that. Absolutely, we support it. Thank you for your support,
    and we want to keep working with this committee to address this
    problem.
        Senator Cruz. Excellent. Very helpful. Mr. Gilbertson, the
    Department of Transportation under Biden added both DEI and
    climate change related criteria to the grant approval process,
    which Congress did not include in the authorizing statutes.
        For example, the Biden DOT thought of the Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure Safety Improvement, or CRISI grant, as a program
    to ``explicitly address climate change, gender equity, and
    racial equity,'' and scored applications based on how well the
    applicant met these criteria. In fact, the Biden DOT required
    applicants to address ``equity'' as a condition of receiving
    construction funds.
        Mr. Gilbertson, are you aware of the challenges short line
    railroads faced when applying for grants requiring such
    criteria, criteria that were unrelated to the merits of the
    actual project?
        Mr. Gilbertson. Senator, I previously mentioned that the
    CRISI grant approval process has been unnecessary long in our
    opinion. I am not aware of the internal decisionmaking of how
    FRA has weighted these factors, but as a matter of policy, we
    would ask that the FRA limit its evaluation to the statutory
    criteria.
        Senator Cruz. Asking that the Government follow the law
    seems a pretty reasonable request from American citizens, and
    one would--I for one am grateful we now have an Administration
    willing to follow the law instead of the preceding
    Administration. Mr. Cumber, you talked about the acquisition of
    right of way as a major challenge to expanding Brightline in
    Florida.
        Brightline West is taking a creative approach by working
    with the State Departments of Transportation to build track
    along existing right of way. If Congress wanted to incentivize
    greater competition in the inner-city passenger rail sector,
    what should we be thinking about regarding right of way
    acquisition? Get your microphone.
        Mr. Cumber. Great question, Chairman Cruz. There are a
    couple ideas that we have. The first is using the categorical
    exclusions to allow projects to move forward when they are in
    existing transportation corridors would significantly reduce
    the time it would take to implement projects.
        A normal kind of arc of a project is if you think about 3
    years of predevelopment work, 5 years to construct, 3 years to
    get to stabilization, any extra time it takes to get that
    environmental process completed makes the project sometimes not
    financially feasible.
        Second, when it comes to the grant programs, our view is
    give the private sector the eligibility to apply for all the
    different USDOT and FRA grant programs. And I said that in my
    oral testimony. We just want all passenger models to be treated
    equally. Amtrak can compete.
        State sponsored systems can compete. Privately operated
    systems can complete. And if we have a level playing field, we
    think the benefits of getting competition into the passenger
    rail industry will happen.
        Senator Cruz. And let me follow up. What could Congress do
    to help facilitate more private sector participation to promote
    competition in inner city passenger rail in this country? And
    Mr. Jefferies, I am interested in your thoughts on this as
    well. But Mr. Cumber.
        Mr. Cumber. So, you know, I strongly believe obviously
    competition makes everyone better. And there is an association
    out there that--it is the Association for Innovative Passenger
    Rail Operations, and what they have been pushing for is when
    long distance systems are being contemplated using Federal
    funds, that they would have to be competed as opposed to Amtrak
    being the default operator. And that is something that I think
    in the reauthorization process the Committee could consider.
        Senator Cruz. Mr. Jefferies.
        Mr. Jefferies. Yes, I think competition is good on that
    front. I also think getting all the stakeholders together
    before you launch on a project is really helpful because
    oftentimes it involves a state, a municipality, a private
    entity, a host railroad perhaps. And getting everybody together
    before you roll out on new passenger projects results in a
    better outcome at the end of the day.
        Senator Cruz. Thank you.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Cruz. Ranking
    Member Cantwell, you are now recognized for questions.
        Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gilbertson,
    these infrastructure investments are critical for competition
    for our many different agriculture products that we grow and
    export.
        As I mentioned in my earlier statement, a lot of it comes
    from the Midwest to Asia through our ports. Port of Longview
    and Kalama, Vancouver exported 9 million tons of corn, 8 metric
    tons of wheat, 7 million metric tons of soybeans.
        Again, $6 billion, so we wanted to get there. These--how do
    investments in the rail crossing and short line help improve
    that competitiveness for farmers? And what happens if we lose
    the billion dollars of investments that we have made so far?
        Mr. Gilbertson. Well, the short lines are critical to that
    agricultural supply chain. And as you know, the state-of-the-
    art is a grain car that will hold 100 tons, a 286,000 pound
    car. And some of the early--some of the short line spin-offs
    could not handle a car of that weight.
        So that essentially precluded these railroads from
    participating in that supply chain. We have an example of our
    Northern Lines Railway, which is in Minnesota, originates grain
    shuttle trains that go to the Pacific Northwest ports.
        And that infrastructure had to be improved to handle those
    heavier cars. Had we not done that, we would not be a
    participant in that business to your ports.
        Senator Cantwell. So, if we didn't have the $1 billion, we
    would be less competitive?
        Mr. Gilbertson. Correct.
        Senator Cantwell. OK. I mean, I could be advocating that we
    should double the number, because that is--I see some nods in
    the audience. Because that's how much the competition is, and
    that is what we have to do to get product to their destination.
        And so, I am a big fan of increasing infrastructure
    investment. That is one of the reasons I am happy that we are
    having this hearing because we know what we have delivered so
    far. We know that it helped. But yet we are in this environment
    where we are challenged.
        Tariffs, cost on infrastructure, all that makes it--so
    let's at least get the infrastructure investment right. Mr.
    Anthony, we have one city, Washougal, which is one of the
    busiest BNSF lines in the Nation. Over 30 trains transporting
    50 percent of all rail freight that moves through the state of
    Washington basically bottlenecked in this town.
        And because of that, literally traffic was backing up on
    highway 14. It was just ridiculous. So, we ended up getting
    money to improve that, and these improvements have made things
    a lot better. But we know that we have a demand for this at-
    grade crossing problem.
        And what do you think we should do to increase--I mean, I
    think you could basically increase it three times, and probably
    still have a very good economic impact. I don't know what other
    people say about this. Everybody is affected by it.
        Mr. Anthony. Well, first of all, I guess that is a good
    problem to have in some ways for some communities, but it has
    to be planned and coordinated with the local governments within
    the region.
        As it relates to the safety concerns that we would have on
    that is engaging the community to make sure that the first
    responders and the medical professionals and the families that
    are trying to take their kids to school, that they don't have
    two to three, four hours blocked intersections, which really
    has impacted the lives of residents in and out of the region.
        The stories that we are hearing of residents crawling
    through trains to get to their jobs, having to go two miles to
    another medical facility because they can't get to the existing
    one. So all local government is saying is that we want to
    partner with the rail industry to make sure that the artificial
    intelligence and other information that they are using to plan
    includes access and information loaded in that system from
    local communities. So I--we want say----
        Senator Cantwell. Do you support more money for--?
        Mr. Anthony. 100 percent.
        Senator Cantwell. OK. I just wanted to clarify that
    because----
        Mr. Anthony. 100 percent.
        Senator Cantwell. I need you to----
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, we support more money.
        Senator Cantwell. I mean, I have talked about this issue so
    long in my state that someone visiting one of my neighbors
    stopped me on the street and said, do you know what happens in
    California? I said, no, what? And they said, literally, the
    trucks can't deliver the product to the port, and they are
    outside, the train is blocking. Literally, people will get out
    of their truck and walk to go put their timecard in to show
    that they showed up on time and then walk all the way back and
    get back in their truck.
        So this is--you know, beyond this community problem, this
    is about us being very competitive. We worry about this because
    we have Prince Rupert, Vancouver, British Columbia, and
    somebody can make another choice. So this is about making this
    investment.
        So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do like--I just will say for
    the record, I like your comments on full understanding of what
    is being moved through the communities. That requirement of
    communication between city leadership, and railroads, and first
    responders is critical. So, thank for that testimony.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. Senator Moreno,
    recognized.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. BERNIE MORENO,
                        U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO

        Senator Moreno. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So Mr. Jefferies,
    you talked about modernization. We will go back to that.
    Obviously, it is a theme that we are hearing over and over
    again this hearing. You said the regulations were mostly
    designed in the 1970s, is that correct?
        Mr. Jefferies. At least, in some cases, if not before and
    since. But, you know, we are a legacy industry with legacy
    regulations.
        Senator Moreno. Gotcha. So we haven't really done much in
    Congress in that period of time?
        Mr. Jefferies. I think Congress has done and has tried to
    do a lot of things. A lot of it has been around funding. You
    know, the challenge is I think you often try to regulate for
    the current condition.
        And so, for example, you know, I talked about autonomous
    track inspection. That is today's technology. But I would be
    hesitant to say, oh, let's say that you have to use ATI to do
    track inspections because that locks you into today's practice.
        So that is why we are focused on outcomes based, not inputs
    based. Where do we want to go, and let's continue to evolve how
    we can best get there.
        Senator Moreno. Actually, it would seem like we may be
    overdue for some regulatory changes since the 70s was a decent
    period of time ago. You talked about the Highway Trust Fund.
    Just comment for the record for the people watching, how does
    that interplay with rail service?
        Mr. Jefferies. Sure. So, our biggest partner, also our
    biggest competitor, is the commercial trucking industry. And we
    have actually worked closer together than we ever did, but we
    are also highly competitive in certain markets.
        And so, as you have heard me say, we are very proud of the
    fact that we invest almost entirely on our own dime back into
    our network, where truckers operate over infrastructure paid
    for by the Highway Trust Fund.
        And that is all well and good when, you know, those fees
    cover the cost of the highways themselves, but what we have
    seen is more and more and more shortfalls so that General Fund
    transfers are required to fund the highway network.
        And when that happens, that is a subsidy to what our
    competitors are paying into the infrastructure they operate.
    And so, all we are looking for is a competitive playing field
    where each side puts in the appropriate amount of cash over the
    infrastructure that it operates.
        Senator Moreno. That makes a lot of sense. So for example,
    if the Highway Trust Fund were to run out of money, which it
    seems like that is something we have been talking about for a
    long time, that is problematic, obviously, right,
    understandably----
        Mr. Jefferies. Absolutely.
        Senator Moreno. Right. So if you have vehicles on the road
    that are not paying gas tax at all, that is a problem.
        Mr. Jefferies. Yes.
        Senator Moreno. So, if you were to create legislation or
    Federal policy that bans internal combustion engine cars, would
    that increase the Federal Highway Trust Fund or decrease?
        Mr. Jefferies. I think that would be problematic to say the
    least.
        Senator Moreno. That would be problematic. Well, the
    previous Administration wanted to ban ICE cars of as of 2035.
    Fortunately, we were able to get rid of that through a
    Congressional review act a couple weeks ago. Huge deal.
        We no longer have EV mandates. Would it make sense though
    if we could raise money into the fund to say, hey, we are going
    to charge maybe a $500 one-time fee for battery electric
    vehicles since they are paying zero gas taxes? Would that be
    not only good for the industry, but just fair for people who
    are paying gas tax versus people who aren't?
        Mr. Jefferies. I think whether it is autos, or trucks, or
    any other form of transportation used in the highways, we think
    it is appropriate that they pay for the infrastructure wear and
    tear they cause.
        Senator Moreno. Gotcha. Well, hoping that in the big
    beautiful bill we can put in a $500 one-time fee for battery
    electric vehicles, $250 for hybrids, or raise over $12 billion
    over the budget window and start addressing some of that
    shortfall.
        So, I urge my colleagues to consider making that happen. I
    guess--question to you Mr. Gilbertson. In your mind, what is
    holding back innovation in your industry? What is the main
    impediment to innovation?
        Mr. Gilbertson. Senator, it is a good question. I am not
    sure there is a clear answer. I mean, there is a financial
    component to it. There is a regulatory component. And there is
    innovation occurring, as I mentioned. It is powerful. It not
    only improves safety, it improves our offering to our customer.
    And we absolutely need to do it. When you know the delivery
    minute of your pizza, but we can't tell you the delivery day of
    a rail car, we have a problem.
        Senator Moreno. I am very aware. When I was in the retail
    automotive business, we would of course always be delayed by
    the cars that were sold. And the cars that we didn't want
    arrived immediately and on time. So, question for you, Mr.
    Cumber. I want to emphasize, there is clearly a difference
    between freight--and the Government doesn't own any freight
    trains, correct?
        Mr. Cumber. Not that I am aware of.
        Senator Moreno. Gotcha. OK. Thank God we lose hundreds of
    billions of dollars there. But we do own--we are responsible to
    fund Amtrak, correct?
        Mr. Cumber. Correct.
        Senator Moreno. So I grew up in South Florida, so you don't
    have to ask me to visit. Although this time of year it is
    insanely hot, even by D.C. standards. But if I were to go from
    Miami to Orlando, I have two choices for rail. I can go on
    Amtrak or go on Brightline. What is the average speed that you
    travel between Miami and Orlando?
        Mr. Cumber. Our trains go about 110 miles an hour.
        Senator Moreno. And what is the average speed of Amtrak?
        Mr. Cumber. I believe it is somewhere in the 40 to 50 mile
    per hour.
        Senator Moreno. Gotcha. So you can get to Miami or Orlando
    in about 3 hours with Brightline, seven and a half hours on
    Amtrak.
        Mr. Cumber. And if I could add one more thing to that. I
    believe Amtrak runs twice a day. We run 36 trains, one-way
    trains between Miami and Orlando. So the frequency is a big
    difference too.
        Senator Moreno. Gotcha. I know I am over time, so I am
    going to cut to the chase of my line of questioning, but if you
    look at the stations, the modern cabin, I am not trying to do a
    commercial for Brightline, but it is night and day. It reminds
    me of a Russian car from the 70s versus a modern vehicle today.
        Why are we even in this business? Why are subsidizing or
    owning passenger rail in America when we have absolutely--we
    are terrible at it. The Government is objectively really,
    really bad at running that. If we had Government airlines, holy
    lord, can you imagine what that would look like?
        Why don't we just get out of that business completely, let
    the private sector run it? Is that something that--I would ask
    all four of you just to quickly comment. Does that seem like a
    reasonable approach to just say we have given it the freshman
    try, like we have, I don't know, 60, 70, 80 years.
        It has not worked. We have lost hundreds of billions of
    dollars, and objectively provide terrible service. Going 40
    miles an hour from Miami to Orlando is insane. Nobody wants to
    answer that question.
        [Laughter.]
        Mr. Anthony. Well, Senator, I will just say I am from South
    Florida, too. I am from Belle Glade, Palm Beach County,
    Florida, and I have ridden Brightline. I think a public-private
    partnership, local leaders are not opposed to that. They just
    want partners. And I would be very open to our members
    considering that.
        Mr. Jefferies. I would just add that, you know, it probably
    depends on the situation, right, because--and what the
    motivation is. Is it a public service or is it a private
    enterprise? And in certain parts of the country, where Mr.
    Husain is operating, for example, and I bet he wants to expand
    to other areas, there is lots of opportunity for private
    enterprise to thrive.
        Congress has made the decision that it also wants to
    provide other services that are going to be inherently money
    losing. And as long as that is the point of view, then that
    service needs to be provided as well. So it is probably not an
    either/or. It is probably a situational situation.
        Senator Moreno. Yes. The only thing I would say is that
    providing air travel is also a public service, but there is no
    Government-owned airline for good reason. So with that
    Chairman, I am over my time, but thank you for giving me the
    opportunity.
        Senator Young. Thank you, Senator. Senator Lujan, you are
    recognized for questions.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

        Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Jefferies, as
    you may be aware, I have pushed for robust funding and support
    for Amtrak to improve and expand our Nation's long distance
    rail network. I have heard story after story about horrific
    tragedies that should have been able to be prevented, delays,
    cancelations.
        Now, in 2023, the Southwest Chief had the second lowest on
    time performance rate of all the long distance routes, getting
    customers to their destinations on time only 34 percent of the
    time. And in 2024, we saw modest improvement to 45 percent. As
    you know, this is not just an issue for us in New Mexico, my
    colleagues in Kansas, and in other states. It is generally
    Senator Moran that will pull us all in to have conversations
    about the Southwest Chief as well.
        Many Amtrak routes like the Southwest Chief suffer poor on-
    time performance in part because they operate primarily on
    tracks owned and dispatched by freight railroads. Multiple
    members of AAR, including Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific,
    have been the focus of Federal investigations due to their role
    in Amtrak's poor on time performance.
        My question is, how is AAR pushing its members to ensure
    Amtrak has preference over freight transportation as required
    by law?
        Mr. Jefferies. Thank you for that question. And there are
    many aspects to it. So, you know, Congress some time back
    required that the DOT create regulations defining on-time
    performance. And the DOT did that a few years ago.
        And following that, the host railroads and Amtrak got
    together and said, OK, given that this is the world we are
    operating under, let's figure out the schedules that make
    sense, because some of those schedules hadn't been updated for
    decades. And so, almost every route has now an agreed upon
    schedule so that the host and Amtrak can at least--are
    operating from the same terms of what is on time, what is not.
        And while we have seen a lot of progress in a lot of areas,
    I just got a presentation from the Amtrak president last week,
    certainly long distance routes and the Southwest Chief in
    particular, we haven't seen the progress that, you know, we
    have seen in the State-supported routes, for example. It is
    incumbent that we provide the appropriate level of preference.
        Now, preference means that--you know, I think there is
    different points of view. Preference, in our view, means
    reasonably providing Amtrak preference to move ahead. So
    pulling over trains to allow for Amtrak to proceed. What it
    doesn't mean is kind of a Cadillac motorcade where everything
    is cleared out and everything stops while the Amtrak train
    moves forward. So there is a balancing act there.
        We are not where we want to be, not where we need to be,
    especially with long distance. So, the work continues. I am
    encouraged by the trend lines going in the right direction. Not
    nearly as steep, as I know folks like yourself and Mr. Moran
    and others would like to see, and certainly aware of that. So
    we have got to keep working.
        There is probably some infrastructure investment required
    in certain areas to build out additional sitings, et cetera,
    especially in rural areas that have single lines to allow for
    trains to get out of the way. But we have got more work to do,
    and we will keep working it.
        Senator Lujan. Appreciate that. Mr. Anthony, last year, a
    BNSF railways freight train derailed near Manuelito, New Mexico
    near Navajo tribal lands. Two of the train cars caught fire,
    which caused the evacuation of nearby families.
        However, authorities were significantly delayed in alerting
    nearby Navajo members. In your written testimony, you mentioned
    a need for improvement in information sharing between
    railroads, city leadership, local first responders, and I would
    add tribal authorities to the list.
        Can you speak more about specific initiatives that could
    help get information out faster to those impacted?
        Mr. Anthony. Thank you, Senator, for that question. We
    truly believe that local government, the first responders, the
    medical professionals, should be as a part of the communication
    plan for the railroad industry. We think that as apps are
    developed, as AI is utilized, local leaders need to be at the
    table.
        What we are seeing, though, is again where communities are
    being economically impacted in a negative way because sometimes
    two to six hours of a blockage has caused families not to be
    able to get to work and medical responders not to be able to
    support the lives of those in that community.
        And so, we are saying that it has to start with local
    communication, local engagement, because communities are being
    economically destroyed because many of the rail systems aren't
    communicating with them--and tribal communities.
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate that, sir. Mr. Cumber, I
    appreciate the work your company has done to expand railways to
    multiple communities in Florida, Nevada, and California.
        However, I do have a concern that rapid expansion is done
    sometimes at the expense of safety. On average, Brightline has
    more than 11 times the incidents of Amtrak, and over 4 times as
    many that led to injury or death.
        What is your company doing to improve safety on your
    railroads, and what promises can you make to this committee
    going forward?
        Mr. Cumber. Thank you for that question, Senator. So safety
    is and always will be the number one priority for Brightline.
    Trespassing activity has been the root cause of each and every
    incident along our corridor.
        Our Florida project has 331 active grade crossings, and we
    are in the process of making improvements to every single one
    of those crossings. Both the State DOT, and local communities,
    and ourselves, and the Federal Railroad Administration have
    come together where there will be $65 million in improvements
    made over the next 2 years at those crossings.
        That is possible because of the grant programs that this
    committee has created where we have been able to partner and
    make those improvements. I will tell you our Brightline West
    project will have zero grade crossings because we are in the
    median of the highway.
        And so, any future project that Brightline looks at, we are
    going to first be looking at right of way options to create
    sealed corridors instead of having corridors where there would
    be a significant number of grade crossings.
        The other thing that is important to mention is, I am not
    going to sit here and say that the initiatives that we have
    come up with raised medians, you know, exit gates, delineators
    in the highway are the final solution. We need to work together
    to find new ideas. And we at Brightline have an open door
    policy that we will meet with any company that has a technology
    or physical solution to stop trespassers from coming into the
    corridor.
        And I want to commend the Federal Railroad Administration,
    and our State DOT in Florida, who have said that if we find
    programs that we can pilot in the corridor, they will partner
    with us to fund those.
        And so, you know, I want to make that very clear that for,
    you know, people that are even watching this, we have an open
    door policy that, you now, that technology is one of the
    solutions, but there is also probably some physical solutions
    out there as well.
        Senator Lujan. Appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Young. Senator Kim, you are recognized for
    questions.

                      STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY KIM,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

        Senator Kim. Thank you, Chair. Mr. Anthony, I just want to
    pick off where my colleague left off. You talked about some of
    the problems that come with, you know, delays and other
    challenges--workers not being able to get to work. I mean, we
    have a lot of problems with that in New Jersey.
        You know, a lot of difficulties on that front. And I think
    just in general with the Northeast Corridor, I just wanted to
    ask you, do you agree that the Northeast Corridor is critical
    for our Nation's economic strength and security?
        Mr. Anthony. Yes.
        Senator Kim. Now, I guess I would just like to think
    through, what are the types of steps that we need to do to be
    able to further ensure that? And one of the things that we
    tried to do here in Congress was through the bipartisan
    infrastructure law. And I guess, I just wanted to ask you to
    share how that law supported much needed updates to the
    Northeast Corridor and why those investments are crucial for
    our rail system?
        Mr. Anthony. Well, for local communities to be able to have
    a rail stop in their community, it means a lot. It means more
    jobs, more innovation, more money in the communities for
    investment and reinvestment. Small businesses prosper because
    of a hub being created and a stop in that community.
        But it also means in some ways that they need to be more
    engaged in the planning and the stop--in the rail stop in their
    communities. And that is what we are fighting for as local
    leaders. It is just making sure that we do recognize that it is
    important, but it also has to be planned and developed within
    our community, and we need that support.
        Senator Kim. And have it thought through with a sense of
    strategy, right. A sense of coordination and purpose. Do you
    feel like the bipartisan infrastructure law was successful in
    trying to start that process for another generation of changes?
        Mr. Anthony. We do. We do think that, and we have been very
    supportive with USDOT to make sure that it is implemented
    effectively in communities.
        Senator Kim. But clearly not--you know, clearly the work is
    not done though, right. Like there is more that we need to
    continue on to. And in particular, I just wanted to ask, you
    know, we have tried to engage in advanced appropriations
    through the bipartisan infrastructure law for entities like
    Amtrak to supercharge our capital investments like state of
    good repairs. Are those the types of things that you are hoping
    that we are continuing forward to be able to help support some
    of these advancements?
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, we need continued funding.
        Senator Kim. When I think through the challenges that we
    face, for instance, in New Jersey, and we were entering into
    hurricane season, we have had a lot of disruptions in the past
    when it comes to transit and whatnot due to the storms.
        And you know, across this country, we have a lot of
    different issues that are out there. How important is it for us
    to think through climate resilience when it comes to what comes
    next for a strong and effective rail system, Mr. Anthony?
        Mr. Anthony. I think sustainability, climate resistance has
    to be considered as a part of any plan for rail investment and
    rail development. And our local communities are working with
    the rail industry to be able to bring those types of issues
    into the conversation.
        Senator Kim. Mr. Jefferies, do you agree with that? I mean,
    when we are trying to think through how to be able to move this
    forward, I am trying to think through how are we prioritizing
    the need for that resilience, especially when we worry about
    disasters and other types of means.
        Mr. Jefferies. Sure. From the freight perspective, you
    know, one of the things we are most proud of is following a
    hurricane, for example, we are often the first mode that is
    back up and running. But we are investing across the network in
    particularly sensitive areas.
        Think about, you know, Louisiana Basin, for example, to
    raise tracks, literally, increase the amount of bowels so
    tracks are higher off the ground, so when we do experience
    flooding events, we are allowed to continue to provide service
    to customers and communities in which we operate.
        And that is a long term project. When you are thinking
    about the NEC, New York in particular, obviously those
    infrastructure challenges are a completely different animal.
    But as you make these generational investments to replace
    Portal Bridge, for example, to build in the new tunnels, that
    has got to be a consideration, right.
        You have got to have a more robust product out there that
    allows the passenger side to continue to operate in rough
    conditions, or get back online more quickly, and have that
    infrastructure hardened, especially the electronic side of it
    all so that it doesn't get knocked out for an extended period
    of time.
        Senator Kim. Yes. I mean, that has been part of what we
    were thinking about with the Gateway Project and others, trying
    to make sure this is resilient given what we said about the
    critical nature. Mr. Jefferies, are there other types besides
    raising the rails and other type of resilient steps you think
    we need to be prioritizing as we are thinking about it here in
    the Senate?
        Mr. Jefferies. I mean, I think about it as operational
    resilience and infrastructure resilience. So operationally, you
    know, the better information we have as far as weather events,
    et cetera, the better we can plan and pre-position assets. We
    are certainly not the airline industry.
        It takes more than one night to reposition things, but we
    can take steps in advance. Get, you know, our assets out of
    harm's way so that we can bring them back in shortly after. On
    the investment side, you know, it is really about, I think,
    partnering with communities to ensure what their needs are, and
    identifying those high impact projects, and making sure you
    reduce the amount of time or the amount negative impact so that
    we can continue to serve communities.
        Because it is immediately during and after major weather
    events that communities are in the most need, and often the
    rail is the best way to get in there, so we want to make sure
    we can continue to do that.
        Senator Kim. Great, thank you. And with that, I will yield
    back.
        Senator Young. I will welcome a second round of questions
    for those members that want to ask them. I have one theme I
    would like to pick up on, and that is overly prescriptive
    rules, outdated rules, things that inhibit innovation and
    operational capacity.
        If I were to give you 30 seconds, Mr. Jefferies and Mr.
    Gilbertson and Cumber, you may have thoughts along these lines
    as well. But 30 seconds, are there any specific or outdated
    rules or regulations you would just like to underscore the
    importance of revisiting or potentially even eliminating to
    facilitate more innovation in the industry?
        Mr. Jefferies. Well, we hit on track. Signal inspections,
    locomotive inspections, break inspections, the list goes on.
    That is basically every aspect of our operations which is done
    in a backward looking, manual way. And there should be nothing
    controversial about looking forward in a regulatory structure.
        Again, we are talking about outcomes based regulations that
    advance safety in a data driven way. That should be very
    straightforward. And so, we are looking across the regulatory
    spectrum. And the way to do this--if you give me one second,
    the way to do this is by effective pilot and waiver programs
    that are judged clearly and transparently, allow you to build
    data sets.
        Last Administration, we weren't even getting programs
    rejected. We just weren't getting answers. So much so that we
    had to go to court to get an answer on six different requests,
    and then they were promptly granted. We didn't even have to
    litigate because it was politically motivated. It was not a
    safety issue. Thank you.
        Senator Young. Obviously unacceptable. Mr. Gilbertson
        Mr. Gilbertson. I would just echo the waiver process is
    crucial. It permits us to experiment in a narrow defined, data
    defined way. If it works, let's share that information. If it
    doesn't, we are not changing the system.
        Senator Young. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Cumber, do you feel like
    you have anything to add here? Yes, sir.
        Mr. Cumber. The other thing I would add is the waiver
    process that everyone has mentioned, I think there needs to be
    clear timelines behind it. And right now when a waiver is
    requested from FRA, there is no prescribed timeline as to when
    it needs to be decided.
        Senator Young. Thank you. Mr. Anthony.
        Mr. Anthony. I would say we are supportive of streamlining
    the process for infrastructure projects as long as it does not
    neglect the environmental impacts.
        Senator Young. Excellent. Mr. Moreno--Senator.
        Senator Moreno. So just quick, quick final round of
    questions. I think it bridges, Mr. Chairman, to what I think we
    can have as our next hearing. So Mr. Cumber, you get--
    obviously, I am going to give you an obvious question.
    Passenger rail, no matter how well it is done, no matter robust
    the private sector creates, you are not going to solve the
    problem of everybody being able to get from point A to point B
    where they need to go, correct?
        Mr. Cumber. Correct.
        Senator Moreno. So there is this great business called the
    automobile business that allows you to do that. So Mr. Anthony,
    I am going to go back to you because you are the one person
    that is looking at more of a wider aperture here because for
    you, I think you would agree that the big priority has got to
    be you got to connect jobs and people. Really important. Do you
    agree? Want to expand on that?
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, I do think that is very important, and
    that is why we think there should be a connection to the
    transit systems, whether it is the airport, whether it is rail,
    whether its Brightline.
        And that mid-connection is important because it is used for
    families to be able to have quicker access to their kids,
    schools, travel. So we are very supportive of that because it
    does create job and opportunities for communities.
        Senator Moreno. But a good old-fashioned automobile is what
    really allows you to go from point A to point B very
    efficiently. And if you look like in cities like Cleveland or
    Columbus or Cincinnati, where there is massive teen
    unemployment, being able to have an affordable way to get to
    work is really important because you don't always know where
    the jobs are going to be.
        Sometimes they end up being in the suburbs and there is no
    mass transit connection. And there is massive disparities when
    somebody has got to take four or five busses or a train to get
    from point A to point B, to get to work. Like something
    happens. They show up late. They end up being fired. I mean,
    those are problems that you see every day, right.
        So one of the things that I am concerned about, Mr.
    Chairman, this is where I was getting to, is in the last 4
    years, the average price of an automobile went up $8,000--
    $8,000. The average price for a car is now $50,000. There is
    virtually no new cars sold that are less than $25,000.
        The average used car is now in the $20s. I used to be in
    the car business, and we would have a part of our website that
    says, cars that you can buy under $10 grand, which are the cars
    that those teenagers need to get into the workforce. That
    doesn't--there is no such--it is gone. There is not even cars
    under $20,000 that are reasonable to get.
        And I think, Mr. Chairman, one of the things I am getting
    to hear is I would urge you to have--let's have a hearing to
    talk about what we can do here in the Federal Government to
    stimulate an ecosystem that allows this country to go back to
    be able to make affordable automobiles for working Americans
    and for families.
        Because if you look at the average car payment--Mr.
    Anthony, I will have you end with this. How many people do you
    know that are working Americans that can afford a $650 a month
    car payment?
        Mr. Anthony. Wow, that is pretty high, Senator. I can't
    give you a number on that.
        Senator Moreno. Pretty low, right?
        Mr. Anthony. Pretty low, yes.
        Senator Moreno. So, we are excluding a huge portion of the
    population from affordable transportation and urge us to have a
    hearing on that, what we can do. And it is--I will give you the
    headlines, it is over regulation by the Federal Government,
    obscenely stupid mandates, features on automobiles that are
    totally unnecessary that is driving up the price of cars.
        You know, there has been a lot of talk about this
    bipartisan infrastructure law that passed. In that law, there
    is a detection device that is going to be required on
    automobiles to detect whether you are impaired. I don't even
    drink.
        Why in the heck am I paying for a detection device in my
    automobile to see if I drank alcohol? That adds enormous cost
    to the price of automobiles. So we really, I would just urge
    you again, I don't think if I have made my case clear, that we
    should have a hearing on the price of automobiles.
        Senator Young. I thank you Senator Moreno. And I would say
    I too have been in the automobile business. In fact, I am very
    much in it right now because I have four teenage children and I
    feel deeply in the auto business, so I have every incentive to
    make sure that we adopt the most--the smartest policies for
    middle class families when it comes to this.
        And thanks so much for your leadership on this issues.
    Senator Markey is recognized to ask questions.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

        Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. And I
    am glad this committee is kicking off its Surface
    Transportation Reauthorization process with a hearing about
    rail. The bipartisan infrastructure law provided a down payment
    on modernizing our rail system.
        This law has helped jumpstart exciting projects across the
    country, including the long held dream of West-East rail across
    Massachusetts. But this work is only just leaving the station.
    We must continue to invest in rail to advance many of these
    critical projects.
        Mr. Anthony, do you agree that the next Surface
    Transportation bill should continue the infrastructure law's
    significant long term funding for rail?
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, sir.
        Senator Markey. Thank you. Do you agree that pulling back
    on rail funding could discourage communities from launching
    future ambitious rail projects due to concerns that Federal
    support is unreliable?
        Mr. Anthony. Yes, sir.
        Senator Markey. So as we make these transformative
    investments in our rail system, it is crucial that we invest in
    rail electrification. Mr. Cumber, your company is currently
    building a high speed electrified rail line between Southern
    California and Las Vegas. What are the specific benefits of an
    electrified rail line for this project?
        Mr. Cumber. Thank you, Senator, for that question. So there
    is definitely a need for electrified trains in the U.S., and it
    is for several reasons. Number one, for the system that we are
    building at Brightline West, you need the acceleration. They
    are a lighter weight so you can get to the 200 mile per hour
    speeds.
        You have the horsepower and torque as well and you can take
    larger grades. And so, when you are going through geography
    like the Cohoan Pass, you would not be able to do that with a
    diesel train or a hydrogen powered train.
        Senator Markey. Yes. So, higher speeds, faster
    acceleration, better torque to traverse difficult terrain. It
    also cleans our air and eliminates emissions and delivers a
    better rail system overall. And that is why I am soon going to
    be reintroducing my All Aboard Act, which would invest over
    $200 billion over 5 years in America's rail network.
        The bill would build on the infrastructure law by providing
    billions to build and operate high speed rail, expanding
    existing passenger rail service and improving rail safety. And
    we would also invest in electrifying the highest traffic
    corridors of our Nation.
        The All Aboard Act sends the message that our investment in
    rail is picking up speed, not hitting the brakes. And I look
    forward to working with the Committee on this issue during the
    reauthorization process.
        So, let's turn to workers who keep our trains running. Mr.
    Cumber, although Brightline has an excellent relationship with
    its 13 rail unions out West, in Florida, Brightline's
    operations have been starkly different. In Florida, Brightline
    has aggressively sought to overturn a successful organizing
    drive by its operation workers under the Railway Labor Act.
        Brightline argues that it is not subject to the Railways
    Labor Act and therefore its workers cannot organize under the
    law. That is unacceptable. Under Federal law, any company that
    accepts a grant from the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and
    Safety Improvement Program is subject to the Railway Labor Act.
        Mr. Cumber, did Brightline accept that grant for its
    Florida line from the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and
    Safety Improvements bill?
        Mr. Cumber. Thank you, Senator. So, yes, we did. And I want
    to be very clear that Brightline fully supports the right of
    our teammates to seek union representation. We simply believe
    in this case that the National Mediation Board did not have
    jurisdiction here, and that the carrier at Brightline floor is
    not a carrier subject to the RLA.
        So those activities should have been conducted under the
    auspices of the National Labor Relations Board. I want it be
    clear that this is a jurisdictional dispute. This is not a
    dispute on whether we want our employees to have the ability to
    organize.
        Senator Markey. Well, you know, as you know, most recently,
    the National Mediation Board, which mediates disputes between
    railroads and their workers, ruled in favor of the workers.
        And from my perspective, that should be the end of the
    matter. I understand that you are trying to make this into a
    procedural issue, but there has been a substantive decision
    against you, you know, on behalf of the workers. And what you
    are doing is actually prolonging this progress--this process.
    And I just want to make the point that I just disagree with
    you.
        And in terms of having devices in automobiles to detect
    alcohol, it is really intended for safety purposes. 40,000
    people died in auto accidents last year, and many of them are
    younger people.
        And when that--who just are kind of getting introduced to
    driving and to alcohol. And the fact that these cars would then
    be protected against the accidents that sometimes occur I think
    is a good thing and I don't think that we should be repealing
    that kind of a protection.
        And I just wanted to put that up because I was a part of
    the team that put that regulation on the books. So, let me just
    turn back to you, Mr. Chairman, with thanks.
        Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Markey, for those
    questions. And I want to thank all of our witnesses for your
    important testimony today. I think the members have learned a
    lot. And my hope is that we might stay in touch as we work on
    this important reauthorization legislation.
        So, we will look forward to further counsel from you and
    others in your organization. Senators will have until close of
    business on Wednesday, June 25, to submit questions for the
    record. Witnesses will have until the end of the day on
    Wednesday, July 9 to respond to those questions.
        This concludes today's hearing. This committee stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:44 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

           Prepared Statement of Anne C. Reinke, President and CEO,
                 Intermodal Association of North America (IANA)
        On behalf of the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA),
    thank you Subcommittee Chair Young, Ranking Member Peters, and
    Subcommittee Members for convening this hearing to discuss
    opportunities to improve programs and regulations impacting the rail
    industry under the next surface transportation reauthorization.
        As the only transportation trade association that represents the
    combined interests of intermodal freight providers and customers, IANA
    represents more than 1,000 corporate members, including railroads,
    ocean carriers, ports, intermodal truckers and over-the-road highway
    carriers, intermodal marketing and logistic companies, and suppliers to
    the industry. IANA's associate (non-voting) members include shippers
    (defined as the beneficial owners of the freight to be shipped),
    academic institutions, government entities, and non-profit trade
    associations.
        Unlike single transportation modes, intermodal freight supply
    chains are comprised of distinct service providers that work in concert
    to complete intermodal movements. Each link is a vital component of the
    overall intermodal supply chain and must operate safely, seamlessly,
    and efficiently to uphold systemwide performance and productivity
    levels. Railroad operators are a critical service provider in the
    interconnected intermodal supply chain. The intermodal industry moves
    approximately 18 million containers by rail annually.
        Recognizing the broad range of issues under the Subcommittee's
    jurisdiction, IANA looks forward to working with you to advance a
    surface transportation authorization law that increases intermodal
    supply chain efficiency, promotes safety and innovation within the
    industry, and fosters economic growth and competitiveness.
    Regulatory Approach
        Intermodal allows beneficial cargo owners to utilize the best and
    highest use of each mode. Rail, for example, offers an environmentally
    superior long-distance movement, capable of moving one ton of freight
    nearly 500 miles on a single gallon of diesel fuel. Rail also boasts an
    impressive safety record that continues improving year-after-year.
        While rail customers view fuel efficiency and safety as
    ``benefits,'' railroads view them as achievements resulting from
    decades of private investment, innovation, and workforce development.
    These achievements are only possible through a regulatory framework
    that allows railroads to focus financial and personnel resources on key
    infrastructure upgrades and emerging technologies.
        Any changes to the regulations governing rail, and likewise any
    mode, must be founded in credible research rather than assumption. At a
    minimum, this research must: 1) show that new regulations would yield a
    safety improvement; and 2) contemplate downstream consequences of said
    regulation (for example, the consequences of a regulation aimed at
    reducing rail-related emissions might include forcing a shift away from
    rail to a less fuel-efficient mode).
        While I recognize this Committee is responsible for Federal rail
    policy, individual states continue to threaten overall network fluidity
    with proposals such as the California Air Resources Board (CARB) In-Use
    Locomotive Regulation. The regulation proposes unrealistic phase-out
    dates for current diesel configurations and jeopardizes interstate
    freight rail operations. While CARB withdrew its authorization request
    to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) earlier this year, I
    urge continued vigilance against state laws and regulations that
    threaten national freight efficiency and interstate commerce.
        Rail safety continues to improve due to a high level of private
    investment, a well-trained workforce, and a commitment to ongoing
    research and development. Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) data
    shows that the railroad accident rate declined by 33 percent between
    2005 and 2024. New burdens on the railroad industry that are not
    directly linked to safety improvements will adversely impact the
    industry's ability to make critical investments in safety technologies
    as well as other innovations necessary to remain competitive and to
    address customer needs.
    Network Resilience
        The supply chain has been challenged by a number of events in
    recent memory. COVID-19, the collapse of the Baltimore's Francis Scott
    Key Bridge, and severe weather events have all caused supply chain
    disruption as shippers, equipment suppliers, and logistics managers
    work to reroute freight with little-to-no advance warning. Despite
    these challenges, intermodal freight has proven its resiliency by
    leveraging the strengths of rail, road, and water transport. The
    industry was able to remain nimble and keep critical goods moving in
    each instance, minimizing the cost and level of disruption.
        While it's unclear what the next catastrophic event may be, in all
    likelihood disruption is on the horizon. Railroads will continue
    investing and innovating to prepare their infrastructure for these
    events. We encourage Federal coordination to convene various supply
    chain stakeholders and coordinate a high-level response to supply chain
    disruptions. The U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of
    Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy (Freight Office) has
    played a critical role in such coordination, particularly when time is
    of the essence to quickly identify alternative routes and prevent
    further disruptions. IANA has been a longstanding supporter of this
    office and encourages Congress to provide the necessary resources for
    the Freight Office to continue its important work.
    Federal Funding
        Intermodal freight projects are complex and there are limited
    Federal programs available to support these critical supply chain
    projects. IANA urges Congress to increase the availability of funding
    for intermodal freight infrastructure in the forthcoming
    reauthorization, and of relevance to this hearing, those that provide
    for investment in freight rail infrastructure. The Consolidated Rail
    Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Program (CRISI) and Railroad
    Crossing Elimination Grant Program (RCE) are essential programs for
    freight rail and its surrounding communities. While not rail specific,
    the Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight and Highway Projects
    program (INFRA), National Infrastructure Project Assistance grants
    program (Mega), and the Freight Formula Program include eligibility for
    projects that strengthen rail infrastructure and minimize the impact of
    nationally and regionally significant freight movement on local
    communities. These programs all encourage public private partnerships
    and demonstrate a Federal interest in boosting the competitiveness of
    U.S. freight in foreign markets.
        IANA recommends improvements to competitive grant programs that
    reduce application burdens, expedite grant agreements, and streamline
    funding delivery. Congress could implement requirements such as
    limiting the page length of notices of funding opportunity; requiring
    USDOT to maintain a public dashboard of funding opportunity timelines;
    and, ensuring USDOT publishes a template grant agreement at the time of
    award notice.
        Decreasing project delivery timelines is critical to maximizing
    investments. We urge Congress to legislate permanent, bipartisan
    solutions that provide consistency and clarity to the complex process
    of permitting infrastructure projects. Once legislated, strong
    Congressional oversight is needed to ensure that Federal agencies
    implement these policies and that they are consistent with
    Congressional intent.
    Cargo Theft
        In recent years, instances of organized cargo theft and fraud have
    increased at an alarming rate. All modes, including rail, are
    vulnerable and targeted. I applaud the Committee's commitment to
    addressing the problem by holding a hearing on February 27, 2025 (Grand
    Theft Cargo: Examining the Costly Threat to Consumers and the U.S.
    Supply Chain) and also by approving the Household Goods Shipping
    Consumer Protection Act (S. 337), a bipartisan proposal led by Senators
    Deb Fischer (R-NE) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL).
        These crimes impose significant financial burdens that ripple
    through our supply chains and economy. Impacts include cargo loss,
    equipment damage, increased insurance costs, and delivery delays.
    American households pay the price.
        While industry can deter criminals, it is law enforcement's
    responsibility to identify and charge them with crimes. It is likely
    that theft, fraud, and cyber-security attacks aimed at freight
    transportation will require a host of solutions, and we applaud
    Congress for its dedication to identifying bipartisan approaches, such
    as the Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act as well as the
    Combating Organized Retail Crime Act (S. 2853). Both bills would make
    meaningful changes at the Federal level to identify, prosecute, and
    deter cargo theft. A coordinated, national response is needed to
    address this growing threat by improving enforcement capabilities and
    fostering increased collaboration across relevant federal, state, and
    local agencies.
        America's economic competitiveness depends on a modern, efficient,
    and resilient intermodal rail system. IANA stands ready to work with
    Congress to support targeted investments, smart policy reforms, and
    collaborative initiatives that modernize rail infrastructure and
    position the intermodal freight network for long-term success.
        Thank you for your leadership on this important issue, and for the
    opportunity to share our perspective. We look forward to working with
    you and would welcome the opportunity to further engage with your
    offices. If you or your staff have any questions, please do not
    hesitate to contact me at areinke@intermodal.org or 301-982-3400.
                                     ______

                    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

          Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
                                 Ian Jefferies
        Question. We've heard cited on several occasions that there have
    been more than 4,000 trains that have derailed since 2020. This number
    sounds very high. What is the context for many of these derailments?
    For example, how many of these are very low speed derailments that
    occur within railyards?
        Answer. A single accident is one too many, and railroads are
    committed to reducing the total number. When discussing derailments, it
    is imperative that policymakers understand the types that occur.
    Approximately 74 percent of derailments are low-speed yard derailments
    occurring at average speeds below 6 mph. The overall derailment rate
    per million train miles has dropped 39 percent over the past 20 years
    (since 2005) and 17 percent year-over from 2023 to 2024. The mainline
    derailment rate has dropped 49 percent since 2005 and 6 percent year
    over from 2023 to 2024, while the yard derailment rate has dropped 34
    percent and 21 percent over those two same respective time periods.
    Railroads continue to invest in technology, infrastructure, and our
    workforce to ensure that day-to-day operations are as safe as possible.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to
                                 Ian Jefferies
    Track Safety
        Question. With rail traffic increasing and new high-speed services
    coming online, there's growing attention on the safety of areas along
    the right-of-way, especially outside of traditional highway-rail
    crossings. Many railroads are exploring innovative technologies and
    community partnerships to reduce risks in these areas.
        What can Congress do to help support railroads and their partners
    as they work to implement effective safety measures away from
    crossings?
        Answer. Reducing the frequency of grade crossing incidents remains
    a focus for the freight rail industry. Since 2005, the grade crossing
    collision rate has gone down only 4 percent despite significant
    investments from both the railroads and our private sector partners
    over that same period. Nevertheless, railroads are committed to
    reducing the frequency of crossing incidents.
        Congress has recognized the need for additional investments towards
    this goal and has created several grant programs for public entities to
    partner with railroads to reduce the frequency of these incidents.
    Programs such as the Railway-Highway Crossings (Section 130) Program,
    the Railroad Crossing Elimination Grant Program, and the Multimodal
    Discretionary Grant Programs are all Federal programs that can be used
    to either upgrade or eliminate grade crossings that pose unacceptable
    risks to the traveling public. AAR supports the reauthorization and
    continued support of these programs.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
                                 Ian Jefferies
        Permitting Reform. I frequently hear from constituents about slow
    permitting processes, which cause delays and add costs. You mentioned
    in your testimony that ``more can be done to fast-track routine rail
    construction projects without ignoring environmental or historical
    preservation concerns.''

        Question 1. Please expand on how permitting can be streamlined
    while protecting these other considerations.
        Answer. AAR supports numerous economy-wide permitting reform items
    such as:

       creating enforceable deadlines under NEPA that would allow
            for more a more transparent and predictable permitting process,

       modifying section 401 of the Clean Water Act to set
            timelines for water quality certifications by states and
            prohibiting states from requesting that project sponsors
            withdraw applications to restart timelines, and

       codifying a statutory definition of ``Waters of the U.S.''
            that mirrors the jurisdictional boundaries identified by the
            U.S. Supreme Court in Sackett II.

        In addition to these items, there are several opportunities for
    Congress to advance rail-specific reforms.

       First, Congress could codify the recent Supreme Court
            decision in the Seven Counties Infrastructure Coalition v.
            Eagle County, Colorado case, in which the Court ruled 8-0 that
            Federal agencies are not required to analyze the environmental
            impacts of projects they have no authority over. This is
            especially important for the freight rail industry since, as
            common carriers, our members have no ability to choose which
            commodities they move along their lines; as such, they should
            not be held accountable for the upstream and downstream impacts
            that those commodities may have.

       Second, Congress should ensure that Advisory Council on
            Historic Preservation follows congressional intent by adhering
            to section 11504 of the FAST Act, which directed ACHP to issue
            a final exemption from Section 106 requirements (historic
            preservation reviews) for railroad rights-of-way that is
            consistent with the exemption issued for interstate highways.

        Supply Chain & Rural Businesses. Rail plays a critical role in
    connecting small towns and rural areas to ports and larger markets. In
    your testimony, you discussed how ``freight railroads remain
    indispensable today'' across nearly every sector of our economy,
    especially agriculture.

        Question 1. How can Federal investment in rail strengthen our
    Nation's supply chain infrastructure and support rural economies?
        Answer. The freight rail industry connects rural business to the
    broader economy, both domestically and overseas. Whether the railroads
    are picking up new products from a manufacturer or delivering finished
    goods to a distribution center to then be transported to local stores,
    our industry is critical to connecting all facets of the economy
    together. That is why our industry supports funding for grant programs
    that enable public sector entities to partner with freight railroads to
    advance projects of mutual interest that improve the overall fluidity
    of the supply chain, reduce freight congestion, improve safety,
    facilitate passenger rail service, and improve the quality of life for
    communities that neighbors rail lines and yards. Investments in the
    Multimodal Project Discretionary Grants Program under the Department of
    Transportation allow for the creation of large infrastructure projects
    that may otherwise lack the resources. In addition to having benefits
    that are felt nationally, these projects are often located in rural
    areas and yield significant benefits to those communities.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to
                                 Ian Jefferies
        Question 1. As I noted in my opening remarks, communities in
    Michigan have had firsthand experience with hazmat train derailments,
    where first responders not only didn't have access to a record of what
    was on the train, but train crew had to wait hours to relay which cars
    were carrying hazardous material. I have been encouraged that many rail
    companies have taken it upon themselves to adopt better systems for
    alerting first responders to potentially hazardous conditions. And that
    the Railway Safety Act that passed out of this committee with
    bipartisan support last Congress required such notification as a
    baseline safety practice. Would you support such a baseline
    requirement?
        Answer. AAR supports first responders having access to the
    information they need to respond to incidents in a timely fashion. We
    must also take steps to ensure that sensitive information that could be
    misused by nefarious actors, such as information on the commodities
    that are moving in any given train, are given appropriate protections.
    In 2014, America's Class I railroads, Amtrak, the International
    Association of Fire Chiefs, Railinc and the AAR created the AskRail
    app. As a backup to the train's consist and conductor, the app provides
    first responders immediate access to accurate, timely data about what
    type of hazardous materials a railcar is carrying so first responders
    can make an informed decision about how to respond to a rail emergency.
    Today, more than 2.3 million first responders have access to AskRail.
    Freight railroads are working directly with emergency communication
    centers to enhance coverage and information access for first
    responders. AskRail enables first responders to receive timely
    information when a rail-related incident occurs involving hazmat.
    Additionally, each state's fusion center receives a periodic report
    from the railroads detailing the types of commodities that move through
    the state so that they can be trained to respond to incidents involving
    those commodities.

        Question 2. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, communities
    across Michigan have begun to address their blocked and dangerous
    railroad crossings by making use of the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program that Congress created as part of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law. And while improvements to railroad crossings are an
    eligible use of CRISI funding, we've seen that this new dedicated
    funding for crossings has finally begun to move the needle on this
    problem in our communities. However, there are thousands of railroad
    crossings still in need of upgrades that remain unfunded, and
    communities in Michigan like Manistee and Kalamazoo will need
    additional resources to carry out the plans that they're currently
    working on. With that, I have a yes or no question for the whole panel.
    Do you believe Congress must maintain the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program as a dedicated funding stream to address railroad
    crossing issues in the next Surface Transportation Reauthorization
    Bill?
        Answer. The freight rail industry strongly supports the Railroad
    Crossing Elimination Grant Program, and it is our hope that Congress
    continues to support this program both in reauthorizing the program
    beyond its forthcoming expiration and continuing to provide robust
    funding during the annual appropriations process.

        Question 3. As our witnesses know, as manufacturing booms in
    America so does the need for increased rail service. I have heard from
    stakeholders in rural Michigan and the Upper Peninsula in particular
    about the desire for increased rail connections to major rail lines,
    which would remove a lot of trucks from small and less safe rural
    roads. Given the backlog of rail maintenance being discussed in this
    hearing, I know the initiation and construction of new railroad and
    service corridors is challenging. Do you anticipate expanding rail
    lines in the coming years? And how do you think Congress can best
    support or incentivize new freight service, especially in rural areas?
        Answer. Plans to expand freight service are driven by market
    decisions, and the Class I's work to develop new business opportunities
    all the time. While I cannot speculate about the possibility of
    expansion into any specific market, the railroads will continue to seek
    out new business opportunities. To make those future business ventures
    commercially viable, Congress should ensure that a balanced regulatory
    framework exists that promotes growth. Additionally, reforming the
    environmental permitting process would alleviate some of the years-long
    processes that unnecessarily delay the creation of new infrastructure
    projects. Finally, Congress should ensure modal parity between rail and
    trucking by restoring the Highway Trust Fund to solvency via a user-fee
    model that accounts for weight differentials between passenger vehicles
    and semi-trucks.

        Question 4. Mr. Jefferies, Michigan manufacturers and automakers
    rely on freight rail to move products across this country--and over
    borders into Canada and Mexico. I have heard from Michigan businesses
    about the chaos and uncertainty created by these policies. How have
    constantly changing tariffs impacted the freight rail business? Have
    your members and their clients been provided with certainty regarding
    implementation of some of these more complex tariffs?
        Answer. Railroads depend upon the timely movement of goods across
    land borders and through ports of entry. Nearly 40 percent of rail
    traffic is associated with imports and exports. Over the past few
    months, the railroads have allocated both personnel and locomotives to
    best respond to changing market conditions. Certainty in both
    regulations and freight traffic patterns based on international trade
    agreements is therefore critical for the railroads so they are able to
    properly deploy resources when and where they are needed most. The
    freight rail industry is taking lessons learned during the COVID-19
    supply chain disruptions to better prepare for future uncertainties,
    including those potentially caused by market reactions to fluctuating
    tariff rates.

        Question 5. One of the top issues plaguing passenger rail is on-
    time performance. In Michigan, Amtrak lines originating in Chicago
    especially struggle to break 70 percent on time performance. Amtrak has
    identified one of the major causes of these delays as freight companies
    are not living up to their statutory duty to ensure on-time passenger
    service.

        a. Mr. Jefferies, what steps are freight railroads taking to
    improve on time performance?

        b. How can stakeholders better work together to improve outcomes?

        c. Do you agree that the Surface Transportation Board has the
    authority to step in if rail companies aren't holding up their end of
    the bargain?
        Answer. America is connected by the most efficient, affordable, and
    environmentally responsible freight rail system in the world, a system
    overwhelmingly built and maintained by the freight railroads
    themselves. This system provides the foundation for most passenger
    rail. America can and should have both safe, effective passenger
    railroads and a safe, productive, freight rail system. To achieve that
    outcome, early and consistent coordination and cooperation between host
    railroads and passenger railroads can lead to better outcomes for
    everyone involved on all topics, including both new service as well as
    the performance of existing service. It is also worth noting that the
    reasons why a particular train on a particular route on a particular
    day is delayed can be quite varied--from schedules being out-of-date to
    weather events--and is a fact-specific analysis. This is why Congress
    gave the Surface Transportation Board the ability to resolve disputes
    regarding preference and on-time performance on a case-by-case basis.
    Regardless, the railroads will continue to work with the passenger
    railroad partners to improve service wherever possible.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
                                 Ian Jefferies
    Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program
        Question 1. Chicago is a national hub for freight rail. One out of
    every four freight trains in the U.S. passes through Chicago--which is
    about 500 freight trains every day--and the city has more tracks
    radiating in more directions than any other city in North America.
    However, bottlenecks in Chicago cause delays in the shipment of goods
    across the country. That is why freight rail companies, Amtrak, Metra,
    the State of Illinois and the City of Chicago are partnering on the
    Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program, or
    ``CREATE,'' which is unclogging the rail network by building crucial
    underpasses and overpasses, and upgrading tracks, switches and signals.

        A. Mr. Jefferies, how important is continued Federal investment in
    CREATE to our national freight rail network and our Nation's economy?
        Answer. CREATE represents one of the most successful public private
    partnerships in the history of railroading. Through significant
    investments by federal, state and local public partners, freight
    railroads, Amtrak, and METRA, CREATE has improved the efficiency and
    safety of freight movements through Chicago over the last 20 years.
        To date, CREATE has seen $1.6 billion in investments over the last
    20 years--$1 billion spent and $1.6 billion pending. Of that
    investment, the Federal government has provided $1.05 billion in
    grants, the State of Illinois has provided $704 million, and Cook
    County and the City of Chicago have provided $246 million. Railroads
    have provided $575 million. CREATE partners have put that money to good
    use: 35 projects are completed, 21 in process, and 14 projects
    remaining.
        Given the size and scope of these collaborative projects, Federal
    grant funding has been critical to CREATE's success. Most recently, in
    2024, CREATE was awarded three major Federal grants to start work on
    the next phase of the 75th St. Corridor Improvement Project, which will
    begin the process of untangling the largest freight chokepoint in the
    Chicago region. That funding included $291.2 million through the
    Multimodal Discretionary Grant Program ($209.9 million in Mega grants
    and $81.3 million in INFRA grants) and $43 million from the Grade
    Crossing Elimination Program.
        Continued Federal investments in CREATE are critical to continue
    addressing the safety and efficiency issues the partnership was
    designed to fix. These large, complex infrastructure problems require
    large investments of Federal money to address as quickly as possible.
    Railroads remain committed to working with our partners in CREATE to
    see these projects through and support our public partners' efforts to
    secure robust Federal funding going forward. Railroads are also
    committed to funding additional projects in the Chicago area outside of
    CREATE, totaling an average of $500 million per year to improve safety
    and keep the supply chain moving.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to
                                Peter Gilbertson
    Track Safety
        Question. With rail traffic increasing and new high-speed services
    coming online, there's growing attention on the safety of areas along
    the right-of-way, especially outside of traditional highway-rail
    crossings. Many railroads are exploring innovative technologies and
    community partnerships to reduce risks in these areas.
        What can Congress do to help support railroads and their partners
    as they work to implement effective safety measures away from
    crossings?
        Answer. Safety must extend beyond the crossing gates. As rail
    traffic increases and new services--including high-speed rail--come
    online, it's critical to address risks along the entire right-of-way,
    especially in areas where the public may not expect to encounter
    trains.
        Many railroads are investing in new technologies like drone
    surveillance, thermal imaging, geofencing, and AI-enabled trespasser
    detection systems, as well as working with local governments and
    community groups to promote awareness and improve physical barriers.
    But to scale these solutions, railroads and their partners need
    support.
        Congress can help by:

      1.  Creating or expanding grant programs that fund non-crossing
            safety initiatives, including advanced detection technology,
            fencing, and public education campaigns, such as Operation
            Lifesaver.

      2.  Encouraging FRA to work with railroads and communities to
            identify high-risk corridors and develop coordinated risk
            mitigation strategies.

      3.  Supporting research, pilots, and data-sharing for innovative
            right-of-way safety technologies.

      4.  Providing flexibility in existing safety and infrastructure
            programs to allow funds to be used for trespass prevention and
            right-of-way improvements, not just traditional crossing
            upgrades.

        Ultimately, keeping communities safe in the rail environment
    requires a modern, proactive, and well-funded approach--and Congress
    plays a vital role in enabling that.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
                                Peter Gilbertson
        Permitting & Grant Process Reform. You mentioned in your testimony
    that CRISI projects can be delayed by more than 12 months and that
    there are potential opportunities to improve the grant process.

        Question 1. What can be done to make sure that these funds get out
    the door faster, so projects aren't stalling?
        Answer. CRISI Grant Award Process Recommendations--
        The CRISI program has proven to be powerful, effective, and broadly
    supported on a bipartisan basis. However, there are clear opportunities
    to improve the grant process. Delays between award announcements and
    actual construction, as well as obstacles to making necessary project
    adjustments as conditions evolve, significantly reduce the
    effectiveness of CRISI funding--not just for railroads like ours, but
    for the shippers and communities that rely on us.
        Short lines are ready to get to work. By the time they apply for
    CRISI grants, they have already invested limited financial resources--
    along with substantial personnel resources--just to be able to compete
    effectively for funding. Further, the CRISI application itself requires
    a draft Grant Agreement attachment that details the budget, the task
    descriptions and the time for the project.
        Shippers, who rely on short lines for critical access to domestic
    and international markets, are eager to see safer, more efficient rail
    service become a reality. Delays in grant funding delay the hoped-for
    improvements and business opportunities.
        In addition, the communities we serve--where local expertise is
    often employed to undertake these projects--are waiting to realize the
    economic benefits that come with upgraded infrastructure: new business
    investment, expanded manufacturing, and job creation.
        To maximize the impact of the CRISI program, we must address these
    systemic delays. Streamlining implementation and allowing for greater
    flexibility in project management will ensure that Federal dollars
    translate more quickly and effectively into real-world benefits. Our
    recommendations include:

       Improved Speed--CRISI projects should move from announcement
            to obligation to completion faster than they currently do.
            Currently, CRISI some projects are delayed by 12-18 months.
            Most short line projects are quite simple in the context of
            infrastructure investments. Compressing the timeline 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.

       Encourage the use of pre-award authority (PAA)--More
            extensive use of PAA would allow CRISI grant awards for small
            railroad infrastructure projects to move more quickly and
            efficiently. PAA authorizes grant recipients to begin their
            projects immediately at their own risk rather than being stuck
            in limbo during the often-lengthy Federal approval process,
            including environmental and historic reviews. Nearly all short
            line projects that receive CRISI awards are found to create no
            significant impacts on the environment that would require
            mitigation as a condition of award. The agency should consider
            more routinely authorizing PAA for non-ground disturbing
            elements of short line project scope such as for engineering
            analyses, locomotive investments, and acquisition of
            construction materials like crossties and rail. Prompt
            acquisition of materials can be a particularly useful step to
            mitigate project cost inflation risk. Delays in completing
            engineering and design work correspondingly delay entry into
            the construction phase of a project.

        Question 2. How can the Federal government improve the permitting
    process?
        Answer. The short line industry believes that there are several
    ways to improve the permitting process. Recommendations include the
    following:

      1.  Improve Elements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
            Process--Railroads are an environmentally friendly way to move
            goods. The short line industry encourages efforts to ensure
            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. Systematically
            bundling and front-loading projects that are likely to be CEs
            for expedited and early review and approval is an approach that
            could speed up the overall processing of awards. ASLRRA looks
            forward to the updating of regulatory and policy frameworks at
            DOT that should reduce the delay risk of NEPA and other
            statutorily required reviews, particularly those made in
            accordance with recent Supreme Court decisions.

      2.  Grant Adjustment Request Form Process--The Grant Adjustment
            Request Form (GARF) process is a procedure used by grant
            recipients to request changes to the terms of a grant. These
            changes might include things like:

          1.  Budget modifications  (e.g., moving funds between categories)

          2.  Time extensions for completing the project.

          3.  Scope changes to alter what the grant is funding.

          4.  Key personnel changes or other administrative updates

          We recommend continuing effort at streamlining the steps,
            improving communication, and aligning requirements with real-
            world project conditions. We are encouraged by DOT's recent
            efforts to develop grant agreements with the flexibility to
            enable minor adjustments within projects such that GARFs are
            less frequently needed.

      3.  Coordinate Section 106 Reviews--FRA can reduce delays by
            coordinating with DOT's Office of the Secretary of
            Transportation (OST) and the White House to expedite the
            Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's acceptance of the
            final Section 106 exemption of railroad rights-of-way (ROW)
            from review under Section 106 of the National Historic
            Preservation Act. Unnecessary Section 106 reviews can introduce
            serious delays into the grant obligation process.

        Supply Chain & Rural Businesses. Rail plays a critical role in
    connecting small towns and rural areas to ports and larger markets. You
    mentioned in your testimony that short lines ``provide first-and last-
    mile service to over 10,000 shippers.''

        Question 1. How do investments in our rail infrastructure, like the
    CRISI grant, help retain and grow businesses and jobs in rural areas,
    especially the manufacturing and agriculture industries?
        Answer. Many short lines were born out of necessity after the
    Staggers Rail Act of 1980, which transferred neglected large Class I
    branch lines that were otherwise headed for abandonment to local
    operators who believed in their potential. Since then, short lines have
    proven to be resilient, entrepreneurial businesses that reinvest
    heavily--up to one-third of revenue annually--into maintenance and
    upgrades. Rehabilitating and operating these lines are enormously
    capital-intensive. The CRISI grant program, created in 2015, is the
    only Federal program that allows direct access to capital for short
    line infrastructure improvements.
        The CRISI grant program has yielded six key benefits for the short
    line industry and shippers:

      1.  Addressing Critical Infrastructure Needs--CRISI enables critical
            projects, such as bridge replacements, or track upgrades that
            remove bottlenecks and allow carriage of industry-standard
            286,000-pound railcars, improving interoperability and
            competitiveness.

      2.  Improving Safety--Rail safety directly benefits from sound
            infrastructure. CRISI funds replace worn-out crossties and
            steel rails, reducing the risk of derailments and making rail
            service safer for employees and communities alike.

      3.  Creating and Sustaining Jobs--Short line rehabilitation projects
            are labor-intensive and rely on local contractors. These
            projects support good-paying jobs in rural communities and
            generate long-term employment through freight rail service
            expansion and improvement.

      4.  Enhancing Environmental Outcomes--Rail is the most fuel-efficient
            mode of freight transport. CRISI-funded upgrades facilitate
            modal shift from truck to rail, which reduces highway
            congestion and air pollution.

      5.  Promoting Economic Development--CRISI investments enable service
            to new and growing businesses and attract additional shippers
            and manufacturers to the community.

      6.  Improving Service for Customers--Even small improvements--such as
            a short stretch of new track or the elimination of a chronic
            derailment risk--can make an enormous difference in the
            transportation costs and competitiveness of shippers. Reshoring
            of manufacturing to the U.S. requires a strong rail freight
            network.

        Of the 240 CRISI awards made to date, over $2.7 billion has gone to
    projects benefiting short lines. In the most recent combined FY23-24
    round, short lines received 81 out of 122 awards--over $1.2 billion in
    funding. These awards were matched by local and private investments
    ranging from 20 percent to as much as 80 percent, demonstrating that
    CRISI leverages public dollars effectively and attracts private capital
    that otherwise would not be invested.
    The Importance of Predictable and Robust Funding
        The advance appropriations provided for CRISI through the previous
    surface transportation law--$1 billion annually through FY 2026--have
    been transformational. Predictable funding allows small businesses to
    plan ahead, secure match funding, and complete upfront engineering work
    required for competitive applications. Without advance appropriations,
    many short lines would be unable to pursue these grants due to the
    uncertainty and high upfront costs involved, and CRISI funds would be
    less effectively spent.
        The merit-based approach for awarding CRISI grant funds has proven
    to be accessible to short lines. Over the life of the program, and
    across Administrations, this approach has resulted in a generally
    equitable national distribution of funding while providing the U.S.
    Department of Transportation with important flexibility to address a
    very diverse array of types and scale of freight rail investment needs.
        It is essential that the next surface transportation
    reauthorization not only extends CRISI but also preserves the advance
    appropriations structure. Without it, Federal investment becomes less
    effective, fewer projects move forward, and the communities that rely
    on short lines are left behind.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to
                                Peter Gilbertson
        Question 1. As I noted in my opening remarks, communities in
    Michigan have had firsthand experience with hazmat train derailments,
    where first responders not only didn't have access to a record of what
    was on the train, but train crew had to wait hours to relay which cars
    were carrying hazardous material. I have been encouraged that many rail
    companies have taken it upon themselves to adopt better systems for
    alerting first responders to potentially hazardous conditions. And that
    the Railway Safety Act that passed out of this committee with
    bipartisan support last Congress required such notification as a
    baseline safety practice. Would you support such a baseline
    requirement?
        Answer. Yes, I support the principle of ensuring that first
    responders have timely, accurate access to information about hazardous
    materials. As I mentioned in my oral testimony on June 18th, Anacostia
    is working with the state of Indiana, using a CRISI grant, to develop a
    Rail Response application that will allow railroads to share geospatial
    incident data with first responders in real time through a web or
    mobile interface. This kind of innovation can significantly improve
    response times and public safety.
        That said, it's important to recognize that many short line
    railroads--who often operate on tight margins--may need support to
    implement these kinds of systems. That's why we intend to make the Rail
    Response app available to other short lines at nominal cost once it's
    complete. A well-designed baseline requirement that allows for flexible
    compliance paths and recognizes the resource constraints of smaller
    operators could help ensure safety without creating undue burdens.

        Question 2. We have heard in testimonies about the need to speed up
    and streamline the Federal Railroad Administration's grant disbursement
    process. I strongly agree. That is why I have been concerned by the F-
    R-A Administrator Nominee's testimony that F-R-A should focus less on
    grant administration. F-R-A's first and most important mission is
    safety. As all of our witnesses know, however, effective investment in
    rail infrastructure is absolutely central to safety. Mr. Gilbertson, do
    you agree that we must ensure that the Federal Railroad Administration
    has sufficient staff to carry out the high volume of CRISI and other
    infrastructure grants, and that massive personnel cuts may slow the
    process further? What other steps do you believe F-R-A can take to
    speed the process from grant announcement to obligation?
        Answer 2a. The success of the CRISI program and other federally
    funded infrastructure initiatives depends not just on the availability
    of funding, but also on the FRA's capacity to administer those programs
    effectively and efficiently.
        The volume and complexity of grant applications--especially with
    the historic level of investment made possible by the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law--requires a well-staffed, well-resourced FRA.
    Without sufficient personnel, we risk significant delays in analyzing
    applications and in processing grant agreements with those selected.
    That's especially problematic for rural and short line projects, where
    delays increase costs and can jeopardize local matching funds.
        Answer 2b. The CRISI program has proven to be powerful, effective,
    and broadly supported on a bipartisan basis. However, there are clear
    opportunities to improve the grant process. Delays between award
    announcements and actual construction, as well as obstacles to making
    necessary project adjustments as conditions evolve, significantly
    reduce the effectiveness of CRISI funding--not just for railroads like
    ours, but for the shippers and communities that rely on us.
        Short lines are ready to get to work. By the time they apply for
    CRISI grants, they have already invested limited financial resources--
    along with substantial personnel resources--just to be able to compete
    effectively for funding.
        Shippers, who rely on short lines for critical access to domestic
    and international markets, are eager to see a safer, more efficient
    rail service become a reality. Delays in grant funding delay the hoped-
    for improvements and business opportunities.
        In addition, the communities we serve--where local expertise is
    often employed to conduct these projects--are waiting to realize the
    economic benefits that come with upgraded infrastructure: new business
    investment, expanded manufacturing, and job creation.
        To maximize the impact of the CRISI program, we must address these
    systemic delays. Streamlining implementation and allowing for greater
    flexibility in project management will ensure that Federal dollars
    translate more quickly and effectively into real-world benefits. Our
    recommendations include:

       Improved Speed--CRISI projects should move from announcement
            to obligation to completion faster than they currently do.
            Currently, it takes FRA 12 to 18 months to complete a grant
            agreement. Most short line projects are quite simple in the
            context of infrastructure investments. Compressing the timeline
            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.

       Encourage the use of pre-award authority (PAA)--More
            extensive use of PAA would allow CRISI grant awards for small
            railroad infrastructure projects to move more quickly and
            efficiently. PAA authorizes grant recipients to begin their
            projects immediately at their own risk rather than being stuck
            in limbo during the lengthy Federal approval process, including
            environmental and historic reviews. Nearly all short line
            projects that receive CRISI awards are found to create no
            significant impacts on the environment that would require
            mitigation as a condition of award. The agency should consider
            more routinely authorizing PAA for non-ground disturbing
            elements of short line project scope such as for engineering
            analyses, locomotive investments, and acquisition of
            construction materials like crossties and rail. Prompt
            acquisition of materials can be a particularly useful step to
            mitigate project cost inflation risk. Delays in completing
            engineering and design work correspondingly delay entry into
            the construction phase of a project.

       Improve Elements of the National Environmental Policy Act
            (NEPA) Process--Railroads are an environmentally friendly way
            to move goods. The short line industry encourages efforts to
            ensure 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.
            Systematically bundling and front-loading projects that are
            likely to be CEs for expedited and early review and approval is
            an approach that could speed up the overall processing of
            awards. ASLRRA looks forward to the updating of regulatory and
            policy frameworks at DOT that should reduce the delay risk of
            NEPA and other statutorily required reviews, particularly those
            made in accordance with recent Supreme Court decisions.

       Grant Adjustment Request Form Process--The Grant Adjustment
            Request Form (GARF) process is a procedure used by grant
            recipients to request changes to the terms of a grant. These
            changes might include things like:

         Budget modifications (e.g., moving funds between
                categories)

         Time extensions for completing the project.

         Scope changes to alter what the grant is funding.

         Key personnel changes or other administrative updates

        We recommend continuing effort at streamlining the steps, improving
            communication, and aligning requirements with real-world
            project conditions. We are encouraged by DOT's recent efforts
            to develop grant agreements with the flexibility to enable
            minor adjustments within projects such that GARFs are less
            frequently needed.

       Coordinate Section 106 Reviews--FRA can reduce delays by
            coordinating with DOT's Office of the Secretary of
            Transportation (OST) and the White House to expedite the
            Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's acceptance of the
            final Section 106 exemption of railroad rights-of-way (ROW)
            from review under Section 106 of the National Historic
            Preservation Act. Unnecessary Section 106 reviews can introduce
            serious delays into the grant obligation process.

        Question 3. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, communities
    across Michigan have begun to address their blocked and dangerous
    railroad crossings by making use of the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program that Congress created as part of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law. And while improvements to railroad crossings are an
    eligible use of CRISI funding, we've seen that this new dedicated
    funding for crossings has finally begun to move the needle on this
    problem in our communities. However, there are thousands of railroad
    crossings still in need of upgrades that remain unfunded, and
    communities in Michigan like Manistee and Kalamazoo will need
    additional resources to carry out the plans that they're currently
    working on. With that, I have a yes or no question for the whole panel.
    Do you believe Congress must maintain the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program as a dedicated funding stream to address railroad
    crossing issues in the next Surface Transportation Reauthorization
    Bill?
        Answer. Yes. The short line industry highly recommends that
    Congress continue to fund Operation Lifesaver (OLI), Section 130, and
    the Rail Crossing Elimination (RCE) program to protect the public. By
    far the most significant concerns with rail safety are related to
    interactions with the public at grade crossing accidents and trespasser
    issues. Operation Lifesaver is an industry-and government-supported
    effort which 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. We recommend that Congress
    continue to fund the OLI, RCE, and Section 130 programs at robust and
    guaranteed levels.

        Question 4. I am proud of the progress Congress has made over the
    past few years to boost American manufacturing--through the Chips aund
    Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act, and more. As our witnesses
    know, as manufacturing booms in America so does the need for increased
    rail service. I have heard from stakeholders in rural Michigan and the
    Upper Peninsula in particular about the desire for increased rail
    connections to major rail lines, which would remove a lot of trucks
    from small and less safe rural roads. Given the backlog of rail
    maintenance being discussed in this hearing, I know the initiation and
    construction of new railroad and service corridors is challenging. Do
    you anticipate expanding rail lines in the coming years? And how do you
    think Congress can best support or incentivize new freight service,
    especially in rural areas?
        Answer. Yes, we do anticipate expanding rail lines and service in
    the coming years, particularly where it helps connect rural industries
    and communities to national and global markets. But doing so requires
    strategic investment and strong public-private partnerships. Many rural
    areas are underserved by freight rail, even though they produce a
    significant share of the country's agricultural, energy, and
    manufacturing goods.
        Congress can play a critical role by:

      1.  Expanding funding for programs like the CRISI grant program,
            which helps upgrade infrastructure, restore dormant lines, and
            extend short line service into areas that no longer have viable
            rail access.

      2.  Providing more flexible match requirements for rural or
            economically distressed regions, where local funding is often
            limited but the need is high.

      3.  Streamlining permitting and regulatory reviews so that rail
            projects can move forward efficiently--without unnecessary
            delays.

      4.  Supporting first-and last-mile connectivity projects, which are
            often the missing link in bringing new freight service to rural
            communities.

      5.  Maintaining the Surface Transportation Board's (STB) expedited
            regulatory review process for line sale transactions. There
            remain many areas in rural America where the economics of
            operating light density rail lines are better suited for local
            short line railroads than their current Class I owners. The
            ability to complete these transactions without undue regulatory
            delay or unnecessary economic restrictions is critical to
            maintaining rural connections to the national railroad network.

        With the right Federal support, the short line rail industry can
    deliver cost-effective, lower-emission transportation solutions that
    help rural America thrive.
                                     ______

         Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to
                                Husein A. Cumber
    Track Safety
        Question. With rail traffic increasing and new high-speed services
    coming online, there's growing attention on the safety of areas along
    the right-of-way, especially outside of traditional highway-rail
    crossings. Many railroads are exploring innovative technologies and
    community partnerships to reduce risks in these areas.
        What can Congress do to help support railroads and their partners
    as they work to implement effective safety measures away from
    crossings?
        A range of new technology is emerging to discourage, detect or
    prevent trespassing along the railroad right-of-way. For example,
    lidar, which uses reflected light to detect objects with high
    precision, is a particularly promising technology for use on the
    wayside (along the tracks) and onboard (on the front of the
    locomotive). However, currently railroads are discouraged from adopting
    new technologies because of the potential liability that they would
    assume in doing so. The voluntary adoption of any new technological
    system that expands a railroad's ability to detect and deter
    trespassers increases the risk of trespasser negligence claims against
    the railroad arising from any system downtime or deficiencies, or any
    delay or failure to immediately react to the information provided.
        A similar legal hypothesis has limited the expansion of traditional
    chain-link fences on railroad corridors. Because fences are often cut,
    knocked down, or otherwise vandalized, the obligation to maintain and
    repair hundreds of miles of fence, and the potential for claims of
    negligence if that obligation is not met, is broadly understood to have
    limited the use of fencing along railroad rights-of-way. The lack of
    common-sense liability protections for railroads that invest in public
    safety infrastructure is curbing the expansion of promising safety
    technology.
        Congress should support the adoption of new trespassing protection
    technologies and pass liability protections for railroads that
    implement trespass prevention efforts so that the railroads do not
    expose themselves to untenable additional risk in their efforts to
    mitigate behavior that is itself inherently illegal. Such liability
    protections would likely result in the rapid deployment of trespass
    prevention technology, ranging from fences to cutting-edge sensing
    technology, and significantly increase public safety around railroad
    tracks.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Gary Peters to
                                Husein A. Cumber
        Question 1. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, communities
    across Michigan have begun to address their blocked and dangerous
    railroad crossings by making use of the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program that Congress created as part of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law. And while improvements to railroad crossings are an
    eligible use of CRISI funding, we've seen that this new dedicated
    funding for crossings has finally begun to move the needle on this
    problem in our communities. However, there are thousands of railroad
    crossings still in need of upgrades that remain unfunded, and
    communities in Michigan like Manistee and Kalamazoo will need
    additional resources to carry out the plans that they're currently
    working on. With that, I have a yes or no question for the whole panel.
    Do you believe Congress must maintain the Railroad Crossing Elimination
    Grant Program as a dedicated funding stream to address railroad
    crossing issues in the next Surface Transportation Reauthorization
    Bill?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. My understanding is that Brightline's business model
    aims to provide passenger rail service in certain medium-range
    corridors without subsidies for operation--like what you have between
    Miami and Orlando and what you're building with Brightline West. Do you
    agree that the privatization model would not be financially feasible
    across the national rail network outside of certain high traffic
    corridors?
        Answer. I do agree with that assessment. The Brightline business
    model is focused on corridors that are ``too long to drive and too
    short to fly'' and that connect city-pairs that are major populations
    centers.

        Question 3. Mr. Cumber, you addressed Brightline's safety record at
    the hearing. When these collisions and accidents happen, what resources
    do you make available to workers on the train dealing with this
    traumatic experience?
        Answer. Brightline's robust employee support program is laid out in
    its FRA-approved Critical Incident Stress Plan, which meets the
    requirements of 49 CFR 272.
        Beyond the requirements of 49 CFR 272, Brightline's employee
    support begins by providing new hire engineers and conductors with one-
    on-one meetings with the company's mental health counselor. This
    conversation enables the employee to establish a relationship with the
    counselor early on and allows the counselor to assess the employee's
    unique needs and establish appropriate coping strategies. Once a
    baseline is established, the counselor can work with employees to
    develop best practices for handling stress and trauma so that they are
    more prepared and resilient in the unfortunate event that they are
    involved in a critical incident during their railroad career.
        After a critical incident has occurred, Brightline takes the
    following steps to ensure its transportation employees are provided
    with adequate time to process and recover:

      1.  Reminds involved employees of the options available to them
            following a covered event

      2.  Offers employees the ability to be relieved of their duties at
            the scene of an incident

      3.  Provides transportation for those employees to their crew base

      4.  Offers counseling and support services

      5.  Offers three paid days off

      6.  Provides check-in phone calls from supervisors and other company
            representatives

        Question 4. Mr. Cumber, your written testimony discusses Brightline
    West's positive connections with unionized labor. However, in January,
    onboard service workers at Brightline Florida voted to join the Transit
    Workers Union. Following that choice, Brightline sued the National
    Mediation Board to overturn the election, claiming that these workers
    have no right to organize as a railroad union. My question is twofold--

        a. Why do you believe that Brightline is not subject to the Railway
    Labor Act?

        b. And also, will Brightline continue to oppose any unionization of
    its Florida branch?
        Answer. Brightline fully supports the right of our teammates to
    seek union representation. However, Brightline believes that the
    National Mediation Board (NMB) does not have jurisdiction in this
    instance.
        Brightline's challenge to the jurisdiction of the NMB is pending in
    Federal Court in Florida.
        The Railway Labor Act only applies to rail carriers who are also
    subject to the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
    Brightline operates solely within the State of Florida and is not part
    of the interstate rail network. Brightline is not subject to the STB's
    jurisdiction by virtue of a December 2012 decision.
        This is a jurisdictional dispute. Not a dispute about whether we
    want our employees to have the ability to organize.
                                     ______

      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to
                                Husein A. Cumber
    Question Topic: Rail Connectivity to Airports and Convention Centers
        Question 1. As demand for air travel expands, better ground
    transportation connections will be critical. Enplanements at American
    airports are expected to grow from nearly 945 million in 2023 to 1.4
    billion in 2040 and 1.7 billion in 2050. An estimated $19.3 billion is
    needed to improve access to and from our airports over the next five
    years alone. That is why Senator Blackburn and I introduced the
    bipartisan, bicameral Don't Miss Your Flight Act, which would create an
    incentive to invest in surface transportation improvements into and out
    of public airports.

        A. Mr. Cumber, based on Brightline's experience with its station at
    Orlando International Airport, how important is rail-to-airport
    connectivity, and would you recommend better rail-to-airport
    connectivity at other airports across the country?
        Answer. Let me first commend you and Senator Blackburn for
    introducing the Don't Miss Your Flight Act. Any resources focused on
    alleviating congestion in our transportation system is critical for our
    growing economy. Connecting to Orlando International Airport is
    beneficial to both Brightline and the airport.

      1.  Orlando is a sprawling city with no single central location. For
            example, there is the theme park region, college area,
            downtown, and the convention center area. The only location
            that acts as a central transportation hub is Orlando
            International Airport. Therefore, it made sense to connect to
            the airport and tie into an existing distribution network for
            our passengers.

      2.  For the airport, our station becomes the hub of a new 120-gate
            terminal. This major investment was announced right after our
            decision to locate at the airport.

      3.  The airport is governed by a board that decades ago set a vision
            for having an intercity passenger rail system connected into
            the terminal. The board protected a rail corridor. Without this
            foresight, it would have been cost prohibitive for Brightline
            to put a station in the middle of the airport.

      4.  Orlando International Airport has direct flights to almost every
            major city in the world. Floridians can now use Brightline to
            connect to a major airport hub and connect non-stop to their
            end destination.

        Having direct rail connections to major airports has a ridership
    benefit for the rail system but also provides new market opportunities
    for airlines.
        For these reasons, dedicated funding to improve or create better
    rail-to-airport connectivity is important.

        B. Do you agree that we need to invest in improved surface
    transportation connections to airports to keep up with growing airline
    passenger demand?
        Answer. This past week, the Transportation Security Administration
    reported a record-breaking 18.5 million travelers from July 1 to July
    7. This is a remarkable comeback from just five years ago when the U.S.
    was dealing with the pandemic. It also shows that Americans will
    continue to bounce back and travel by air after tragic events. Our
    surface transportation system must keep up with how people are moving-
    and want to move-and including better highway, rail, and transit
    connections are all important.

        C. When improving rail-to-airport connectivity, how helpful do you
    believe it would be to connect convention centers to airports via rail?
        Answer. Connecting Orlando International Airport to the Orange
    County Convention Center (and theme parks) is the next expansion phase
    for Brightline Florida. This connectivity will provide visitors with a
    transportation alternative to already congested highway systems. In
    many regions of the country, like Chicago, providing a direct
    connection between airports and convention centers would provide time
    and cost-efficient connectivity to visitors.

                                      [all]