[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 [email protected] 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]