    [Senate Hearing 119-340]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-340

                          NOMINATIONS TO THE NATIONAL
                      TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD AND THE
                         SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                             COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                          SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                NOVEMBER 6, 2025

                                   __________

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

                       [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                                   ______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    63-178 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2026

           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
                       Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director
                     Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Hearing held on November 6, 2025.................................     1
    Statement of Senator Cruz........................................     1
        Letter dated November 6, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Chris Jahn, President and CEO, American
          Chemistry Council..........................................    89
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. John Thune, Hon. Chuck
          Schumer, Hon. Ted Cruz, Hon. Maria Cantwell, Hon. Todd
          Young and Hon. Gary Peters from John N. Ward, Executive
          Director, National Coal Transportation Association.........    90
        Letter dated October 31, 2025 to Hon. John Thune, Hon. Chuck
          Schumer, Hon. Ted Cruz, Hon. Maria Cantwell, Hon. Todd
          Young and Hon. Gary Peters from Ann Warner LLC,
          Spokesperson for FRCA......................................    91
        Letter dated October 27, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from First Officer Nick Silva, President, Allied
          Pilots Association.........................................    92
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz from Paul F.
          Titterton, EVP and President, Rail North America, GATX
          Corporation................................................    92
        Letter dated November 5, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz from Donald W.
          Ruhmann, Chief Aerospace Safety Officer, Senior Vice
          President, Global Aerospace Safety, The Boeing Company.....    93
        Letter dated October 29, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Captain Jody Reven, President, Southwest
          Airlines Pilots Association................................    94
        Letter dated October 28, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Christopher T. Sununu, President and CEO,
          Airlines For America.......................................    94
        Letter dated October 28, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from David Seymour, Chief Operating Officer,
          American Airlines..........................................    95
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz from Chuck
          Baker, President, American Short Line and Regional Railroad
          Association (ASLRRA).......................................    95
        Letter dated Oct. 30, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Hassan Shahidi, President and CEO, Flight
          Safety Foundation..........................................    96
        Letter dated October 27, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from First Officer Nick Silva, President, Allied
          Pilots Association.........................................    97
        Letter dated October 27, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Faye Malarkey Black, President and CEO,
          Regional Airline Association...............................    97
        Letter dated January 27, 2025 to Serio Gor from Brad A.
          Myers, EVP and Chief Operating Officer, Amsted Digital
          Solutions Inc., an Amsted Rail company.....................    98
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Capt. Dave Hunt, Vice President of Safety &
          Security, Southwest Airlines...............................    98
        Letter dated October 23, 2025 to whom it may concern from Bob
          Babcock, President/CEO, Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroads    99
        Letter dated October 28, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Sandra J. Dearden, President, Highroad
          Consulting, Ltd............................................    99
        Letter dated October 30, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Jack Isselmann, Senior Vice President,
          External Affairs and Communications; Past Chairman, Railway
          Supply Institute, The Greenbrier Companies.................   100
        Letter dated February 2, 2025 to Sergio Gor from Ross
          Corthell, Vice President--Transportation, Packaging
          Corporation of America.....................................   101
        Letter dated October 29, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz from Kevin
          Cook, President, Modern Rail Capital.......................   101
        Letter dated October 31, 2025 to Hon. John Thune, Hon. Chuck
          Schumer, Hon. Ted Cruz, Hon. Maria Cantwell, Hon. Todd
          Young and Hon. Gary Peters from Herman Haksteen, President,
          Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association..............   102
        Letter dated October 31, 2025 to Hon. John Thune, Hon. Chuck
          Schumer, Hon. Ted Cruz, Hon. Maria Cantwell, Hon. Todd
          Young and Hon. Gary Peters from E. Nancy O'Liddy, Executive
          Director, National Industrial Transportation League........   103
        Letter dated February 5, 2025 to Sergio Gor from Jeffrey T.
          Lytle......................................................   104
        Letter dated October 30, 2025 to Hon. Sam Brebbia and Hon.
          Ryan Cannon from Henry Posner III, Railroad Development
          Corporation................................................   105
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Jack L. Todd, Vice President, Public Affairs,
          Trinity Industries, Inc....................................   105
        Letter dated November 3, 2025 to Hon. Ted Cruz and Hon. Maria
          Cantwell from Agricultural Retailers Association, American
          Cotton Shippers Association, American Feed Industry
          Association, AmericanHort, American Malting Barley
          Association, American Seed Trade Association, American
          Soybean Association, International Fresh Produce
          Association, National Association of Wheat Growers,
          National Cotton Council, National Council of Farmer
          Cooperatives, National Grain and Feed Association, National
          Milk Producers Federation, North American Millers'
          Association, Pet Food Institute. The Fertilizer Institute,
          USA Rice, and U.S. Rice Producers Association..............   106
        Letter dated Letter to Sergio Gor from Rick Webb, Executive
          Chairman, Watco Companies, LLC.............................   107
    Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................     3
    Statement of Senator Sheehy......................................    75
        Letter dated October 30, 2025 to Hon. Patrick Fuchs, Hon.
          Michelle Schultz, and Hon. Karen Hedlund from United States
          Senators: John Hoeven, Amy Klobuchar, Tim Sheehy, Martin
          Heinrich, Bill Cassidy, M.D., Tina Smith, Steve Daines,
          Raphael Warnock, Roger Marshall, M.D., Patty Murray, M.
          Michael Rounds, Ruben Gallego, Roger F. Wicker, Tammy
          Baldwin, Jim Banks, Tammy Duckworth, Joni K. Ernst, and
          Richard J. Durbin..........................................    75
    Statement of Senator Baldwin.....................................    80
    Statement of Senator Moreno......................................    84

                                   Witnesses

    John F. DeLeeuw, Nominee to be a Member, National Transportation
      Safety Board...................................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................     8
        Biographical information.....................................     9
    Richard J. Kloster, Nominee to be a Member, Surface
      Transportation Board...........................................    15
        Prepared statement...........................................    17
        Biographical information.....................................    17
    Michelle A. Schultz, Nominee to Continue as a Member, Surface
      Transportation Board...........................................    38
        Prepared statement...........................................    39
        Biographical information.....................................    40

                                    Appendix

    Response to written questions submitted to John F. DeLeeuw by:
        Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   109
        Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................   110
        Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   111
    Response to written questions submitted to Richard Kloster by:
        Hon. Ted Cruz................................................   111
        Hon. Eric Schmitt............................................   111
        Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   112
        Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................   114
        Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   114
        Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester....................................   115
    Response to written questions submitted to Michelle Schultz by:
        Hon. Ted Cruz................................................   116
        Hon. Eric Schmitt............................................   118
        Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................   118
        Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................   120
        Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester....................................   121
        Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................   122

                          NOMINATIONS TO THE NATIONAL
                      TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD AND THE
                          SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2025

                                           U.S. Senate,
            Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m., in
    room SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Cruz [presiding], Moreno, Sheehy,
    Baldwin, Lujan, and Fetterman.

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

        The Chairman. Good morning. The Senate Committee on
    Commerce, Science, and Transportation will come to order.
        Today we will hear from three nominees: John DeLeeuw,
    nominee to serve as a Board Member of the National
    Transportation Safety Board; Richard Kloster, nominee to serve
    as a Member of the Surface Transportation Board; and Michelle
    Schultz, nominee to continue to serve as a Member of the
    Surface Transportation Board. Congratulations to each of you.
        Before I introduce the nominees, I want to spend a moment
    reflecting on the unprecedented impacts the continued
    government shutdown is having on Americans lives. Almost a
    month ago, CNN quoted a senior Democratic aide as saying that
    Senate Democrats would not reopen the Government short of
    quote, ``Planes falling out of the sky''. Given the tragic
    accident we saw this week, sadly, Senate Democrats seem to want
    to put that theory to test.
        Yesterday, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, and FAA
    Administrator, Bryan Bedford, announced that beginning tomorrow
    morning, there will be a 10 percent mandatory reduction in
    flights at 40 airports across the Nation. The safety data that
    the FAA relies on to keep the system safe was blinking red.
    There are too many key staffers calling out because they are
    not getting paid and having to save every penny and find ways
    to make ends meet.
        Tens of thousands of Americans will have their flights
    canceled every single day due entirely to Senate Democrats with
    a few notable exceptions, virtually all of whom have voted now
    14 times to keep the Government shutdown, and they have taken
    the Government and the Air Traffic Control system hostage.
        Air traffic controllers are unpaid, they are frustrated,
    and they are fatigued. A plane crashed in Louisville this week,
    and the NTSB investigators on scene are not getting paid. The
    impacts of this shutdown are real and becoming dangerous. And
    understand the reason there is a 10 percent reduction in
    flights is the FAA said they could not maintain the airspace
    safely at full load. That is the consequence of this shutdown,
    and the Schumer shutdown needs to end.
        It is the longest shutdown in the history of the United
    States of America. And enough is enough. Now is a time for
    responsible leadership.
        Now, I will turn to today's nominees. Let us begin with
    John DeLeeuw, a proud Texan of nearly 40 years. Mr. DeLeeuw is
    an accomplished safety professional and airline captain who
    began his aviation career in the Air Force flying C-130
    Hercules planes supporting combat missions in Desert Storm.
    After his military service, Mr. DeLeeuw joined American
    Airlines as a line captain and first officer in 1991. After 20-
    plus years of flying for American, he then led the airline
    safety initiatives for more than a decade. He also served as
    Chairman of the American Pilots Association's National Safety
    Committee, and he teaches aviation safety courses at the
    University of Southern California.
        As I have seen from the investigation into the flight--of
    the crash of the Flight 5342 near DCA, the NTSB needs
    knowledgeable and experienced members to keep our
    transportation system safe. Mr. DeLeeuw will draw on his
    extensive aviation safety background to investigate accidents
    and propose recommendations to prevent future harm. He is,
    without a doubt, one of the most decorated and qualified
    individuals to come before us. His resume is a perfect match
    for the NTSB.
        We are also joined today by NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer
    Homendy who is such a regular in this Committee that we may
    have to find her a seat on the dais. I appreciate her being
    here.
        As she said about Mr. DeLeeuw's nomination back in
    September: John has an extensive background in aviation safety
    and has worked alongside the NTSB for decades. He often uses
    lessons learned to improve safety throughout transportation,
    including oil, and pipelines, and maritime. John will be an
    excellent addition to the Board, if confirmed.
        Next, we have Richard Kloster to serve on the STB. Mr.
    Kloster is a seasoned railroad and transportation logistics
    professional with over four decades of private sector
    experience. He has worked for several railroads including the
    Chicago and Northwestern Transportation Company and the Indiana
    Railroad Company. Mr. Kloster also founded his own
    transportation consulting firm and served as a board member of
    the Railway Supply Institute. If confirmed, Mr. Kloster will
    use his extensive knowledge of the rail industry, as well as
    his experience working for railroads, suppliers, and shippers
    to advance the STB's economic oversight of freight railroads.
        Last, President Trump has renominated Michelle Schultz to
    continue to serve on the STB. Ms. Schultz decades of legal and
    transportation experience have served her well on the STB.
    Prior to joining STB in January 2021, she spent 14 years
    leading legislative affairs and legal strategy at the
    Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, the
    Nation's sixth largest public transportation system. As Vice
    Chairman of the STB, Ms. Schultz has prioritized engaging with
    stakeholders to improve freight rail service quality and
    efficiency at the agency. If confirmed, she will continue to be
    a diligent, thoughtful member of the STB, working to advance
    essential oversight of the railroads.
        But my Democrat colleagues have sought to delay and derail
    this hearing based on the President's exercise of his Article
    II power. The focus of today should be plain and simple,
    supporting transportation safety and rail competition. The
    three individuals before us have a breadth of knowledge in
    transportation safety and railroad operations and are well
    equipped to serve on the NTSB and the STB. I am eager to hear
    how each of you will approach your roles in ensuring the
    overall strength and safety of our country's transportation
    system.
        I now turn to Senator Lujan who is sitting in for Ranking
    Member Cantwell.

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

        Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as we
    get started today, I appreciate your remarks and opening. Just
    for anyone that is not aware across America, the majority of
    the House of Representatives is Republicans. Speaker of the
    House of Representatives is a Republican. The majority of the
    U.S. Senate is Republican. The majority leader of the U.S.
    Senate is a Republican. The President of the United States is a
    Republican. Republicans have the majority. They are in charge.
    With majorities and with the gavels comes responsibility. The
    good Senator from Texas is the Chair of this Committee because
    Republicans are in the majority.
        We had a Governor from the State of New Mexico, a cattle
    rancher, his name is Bruce King. And Bruce used to tell us when
    folks could not find some solution, he says, ``you know, you
    have got to lock people up in a barn, not let him out until
    they can come up with a solution to the problem''.
        My friend from Texas understands that. They have got good
    cattle ranches down there. They have got good barns down there.
    The President of the United States just finished jet setting
    around the world and he decided to come back and celebrate with
    a roaring 1920s party in Florida. Roaring 1920s. That was a
    difficult time in our Nation's history because those parties
    were about celebrating folks being broke, people not having
    food. And they had that party, and on, I do not know Tuesday,
    Wednesday--Wednesday I guess it was, the President had a
    breakfast at the White House, which is good, he should have
    more breakfasts, but he only invited Senate Republicans. And in
    that meeting what was reported is he told them shutdown is not
    good on Republicans. He knows they are in charge.
        I certainly hope the President will stick to his words when
    he said, ``it is incumbent upon the President of the United
    States to prevent shutdowns, to solve shutdowns''. And I
    certainly hope that even where there are differences that
    people come into a room and do the right thing because everyone
    wants this shutdown to end.
        I do not believe my Republican colleagues want to see
    insurance premiums across America double either. I really do
    not. They care about their constituents the way that I care
    about my constituents. And I am certainly hopeful that we will
    see some leadership now, bring some people together, get some
    breakfast. If they need some New Mexico chili to make it
    better, I will bring it. But we have got to make sure that
    people come together.
        So with that, Mr. Chairman, with my opening here, Captain
    DeLeeuw, Mr. Kloster, and Ms. Schultz, congratulations on your
    nominations and for taking time to be here today.
        And before I get to my questioning, I have to say I am
    deeply disturbed and frankly alarmed that the Committee is
    rushing ahead with this nomination to replace NTSB Vice Chair,
    Alvin Brown, who President Trump illegally removed earlier this
    year.
        Anyone that looks at the law, looks at the rules
    surrounding this, it is plain and simple. The facts are
    straightforward. The Senate unanimously confirmed Chair--Vice
    Chair Brown last year, and his term does not expire until the
    end of next year and the President removed him without
    complying with the law that Congress passed. Plain and simple.
        And now, folks are choosing to look the other way and
    advanced his replacement even though there is not a clear
    vacancy to fill under the law. As the Chair knows, last week my
    Democratic colleagues and I, we sent a letter conveying our
    strong opposition to proceeding with this hearing on Vice Chair
    Brown's replacement. Several colleagues on this Committee co-
    signed this.
        As we wrote in that letter, I believe rushing this process
    forward, particularly while there is active litigation over
    this very issue only emboldens the White House to ignore the
    law. And by withholding this hearing Republicans--or sorry--by
    holding this hearing, Republicans are just rubberstamping this
    behavior.
        So I will again urge my colleagues not to proceed with this
    NTSB nomination until the ongoing litigation is conclusively
    resolved on its merits.
        Some might say this is all inside baseball, too far removed
    from the day-to-day lives of Americans, but these are not just
    academic musings. The NTSB, like many other independent
    agencies, works every day to help Americans stay safe by
    seeking to unravel its independent status, inject uncertainty,
    and politicize the Board.
        The administration is undermining the NTSB's ability to
    formulate independent safety recommendations that save people's
    lives.
        So Captain DeLeeuw, I wish your nomination came under
    different circumstances because I acknowledge your significant
    experience. I imagine under any other time if there was an
    opening, you would probably get unanimous vote out of here, and
    off the floor, and everywhere else. Your credentials are clear.
    Your qualifications are absolutely clear. This is not about you
    at all, sir. At all. I applaud your service, and I applaud what
    you have done, what you have achieved.
        Now, that said, given your current employment with American
    Airlines, as you know, you will need to recuse yourself from
    working on the NTSB's pending investigation into the January
    29th DCA midair collision. Captain DeLeeuw, I hope you will
    make clear today that you understand the vital importance of an
    independent NTSB.
        And out of respect for that independence and the rule of
    law, I hope you will firmly commit to stepping aside if the
    court declares Mr. Brown's removal to be unlawful.
        In addition to the NTSB, we also have two nominees for
    Surface Transportation Board, Ms. Kloster, you will be joining
    the Board after a long career in the rail industry.
        And Ms. Schultz, you will be renominated a second term on
    the Board, the STB is another independent agency which plays a
    critical role in protecting business and consumers from unfair
    business practices that harm competition in the rail industry.
    If confirmed, you will be responsible for reviewing the largest
    rail merger in history between Union Pacific and Norfolk
    Southern.
        I would also point out that early this year, President
    Trump unlawfully removed STSB member Robert Primus without
    cause, in violation of the law. Mr. Primus is also actively
    challenging his removal in court.
        For the record, however, I will note that neither of
    today's STSB nominees would replace Mr. Primus, if confirmed.
    Nevertheless, the President's actions against Mr. Primus only
    underscores why we need to have your firm commitment that you
    will carry out your duties independent of improper political
    influence if confirmed.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Lujan. You know, I would
    note that witnesses in court are asked at the beginning of
    their testimony to swear to tell the truth, the whole truth,
    and nothing but the truth. And one of the most important
    elements of that is the second element, the whole truth.
        What Senator Lujan said is correct. It is true that
    Republicans have a majority in the House, a majority in the
    Senate, and a majority in the White House. Because the American
    people voted for Republicans in 2024, they voted for President
    Trump. They voted for a Republican majority in the Senate. They
    voted for a Republican majority in the House. The whole truth
    that Senator Lujan knows well, but that he omitted is under the
    Senate rules, funding for the Government cannot proceed in the
    Senate without 60 votes. Senator Lujan is very well aware of
    that.
        There are only 53 Republicans in the Senate. That means in
    order to fund the Government, at least seven Democrats have to
    vote to fund the Government. So the phrase, which is facile
    used, of well, Republicans control everything, you guys should
    fund it is said, deliberately playing on the fact that many
    people do not know you need 60 votes to proceed to fund the
    Government.
        And I would note Senator Lujan knows that in part because
    when Joe Biden was President--this is not a new situation--when
    Joe Biden was President 13 times, Senate Republicans joined
    with Democrats to pass a clean Continuing Resolution. We could
    have done the same thing. When Joe Biden was President, the
    Democrats did not have 60 votes. What differed is when Joe
    Biden was President, Republicans demonstrated responsibility.
    We did not shut the Government down.
        Every Democrat in this body, you can play video after video
    of them going on TV intoning, a government shutdown is
    irresponsible. It is reckless. It hurts Americans. They all
    know that. They have all said that repeatedly. By the way, we
    had this situation happen earlier this year. In March,
    Government funding expired. And what happened in March, a
    handful of Senate Democrats did the responsible thing and they
    joined with Republicans in keeping the Government open.
        But then a political problem developed which is Chuck
    Schumer, the Democrat leader in the Senate, almost lost his
    job. The extreme leftwing of the Democrat party got very, very
    angry that the Democrats allowed the Government to open. And
    Schumer is very afraid of being primaried from the left. The
    election results on Tuesday underscore the grave political
    peril Schumer sees from the extreme left in the party.
        So why are we in the longest shutdown in history? For one
    reason, for Senator Schumer and Senate Democrats to demonstrate
    to the extreme leftwing of their party that they really,
    really, really hate Donald Trump.
        Well, we got that point. Every Federal employee who has not
    gotten a paycheck got that point. We understand. Nobody will be
    confused that my Democrat colleagues are sleeping at night with
    a Donald Trump nightlight on the wall. We know their view.
    Senator Lujan said: We just need to find a path forward. We
    know the path forward. It is the exact same path forward that
    we took 13 times when Biden was President. The path forward is
    voting to fund the Government and passing a clean Continuing
    Resolution.
        The path forward is literally the turn of a wrist. When we
    vote on a Continuing Resolution, instead of doing this, rotate
    your wrist 180 degrees. That is how we open the Government. We
    have had three Senate Democrats show the courage to vote to
    keep the Government open. Senator Fetterman, a member of this
    Committee, has said quite candidly: This is a Democrat
    shutdown.
        For the sake of the TSA agents, for the sake of the air
    traffic controllers, for the sake of the flying public, let us
    not test that idiot Democrat staffer who told Politico, ``We
    will keep the shutdown going until planes start falling from
    the sky.'' That is not funny. And I do believe my colleagues on
    the Democrat side, they do not want to see that happen. But
    every day that they starve the system of the resources it
    needs, they increase the chances of a tragedy like that
    occurring.
        Mr. DeLeeuw, you are recognized for your opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF JOHN F. DeLEEUW, NOMINEE TO BE A MEMBER, NATIONAL
                      TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD

        Mr. DeLeeuw. Thank you, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member
    Cantwell, Senator Lujan, and members of the Committee, it is an
    honor to appear before you today as you consider my nomination
    to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board. I
    am immensely grateful to President Trump for nominating me as
    this is a lifelong dream.
        As a safety professional who has worked alongside the NTSB
    for nearly two decades, I cannot think of a greater privilege
    than to serve the public at the world's preeminent safety
    investigation agency, whose sole mission is to save lives.
        Before I begin, I would like to recognize some of my family
    and friends. Though they are not able to be with me today in
    person, my wife Kim is watching this hearing online with my
    mom, Ruby, in Tucson, Arizona. My son Peter and his wife
    Meredith have blessed Kim and me with two grandchildren, Mason
    and Mabel. My daughter Julia and her husband Peter recently
    welcomed into the world our grandson, Liam. My sister Jane and
    my brother Howard also deserve recognition for letting me be
    their big brother.
        I would also like to especially recognize my colleagues in
    the Safety Department at American Airlines who are also
    watching online and have provided me with incredible support
    and encouragement. It is a privilege to work with amazing
    safety professionals at American and throughout the industry.
        Special thanks to Cedric Wilson, David Seymour, and the
    entire American Airline's senior leadership team for their
    assistance and backing.
        There are three things I would like for you to know as you
    consider my nomination for the Board. First, I am passionate
    about safety. I was fortunate to serve our country as a pilot
    in the United States Air Force for seven and a half years. In
    that time, several of my fellow crew members were killed in the
    line of duty flying military aircraft. Many of these accidents
    could have been avoided and I was determined to learn from each
    of them. In some cases that meant changing a procedure. Other
    times it meant improving education and training, but the goal
    was always the same, to prevent a similar accident from
    happening.
        After serving in Desert Storm, I was hired as a pilot for
    American Airlines and I am currently a captain on the Boeing
    787 Dreamliner with over 19,000 flight hours. Today, I also
    serve as the American Airlines Managing Director of Safety and
    Efficiency. Seeking to fully immerse myself in safety, I
    volunteered my time and efforts with the Allied Pilots
    Association, which represents the pilots of American Airlines.
        Mr. Chairman, I ask that letter supporting my nomination
    from the Allied Pilots Association, the Southwest Airlines
    Pilots Association, and many others, be included in the hearing
    record.
        Second, the NTSB saves lives. As I mentioned, I worked
    closely with the NTSB for more than 15 years, and I have
    enormous respect for the Board members and staff. As the
    American Airlines party coordinator on NTSB investigations, I
    know firsthand the efforts and time the NTSB commits to
    accident investigations, family assistance, and safety
    recommendations. If confirmed, I will be a strong advocate for
    implementation of those recommendations.
        As Chairwoman Homendy often says, ``The investigation is
    only the first step. Real safety change occurs after
    recommendations are implemented and improvements are made''.
        Third, I believe there are opportunities to facilitate
    safety information sharing across the various modes of
    transportation and bring the different modes together to share
    lessons learned. A cross-model approach will further the NTSB's
    mission of preventing accidents and saving lives.
        One of the reasons I am here today is the tragic midair
    collision involving a U.S. Army helicopter and Flight 5342
    earlier this year. The accident site not far from where we are
    sitting today. It has been one of the most difficult situations
    I have faced in my entire career. I was in the Family
    Assistance Center within days of the accident. I saw firsthand
    the devastation, the tremendous loss, and the work that the
    NTSB did to bring every resource available to grieving
    families.
        I am confident the NTSB is doing the same thing right now
    in Louisville, Kentucky, as they investigate Tuesday's tragedy.
    I offer my sincere condolences to the victims and families of
    those impacted by this devastating event. It is our duty
    collectively to learn from each tragedy to draw knowledge to
    improve the safety of us all.
        If confirmed, I would consider it a great honor and
    privilege to serve my country once again. And I commit to
    working with this Committee to improve safety across all modes
    of transportation.
        Thank you again for this opportunity and I look forward to
    answering your questions.
        [The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
    DeLeeuw follow:]

        Prepared Statement of John F. DeLeeuw, Nominee to be a Member,
                      National Transportation Safety Board
        Thank you, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of
    the Committee. It's an honor to appear before you today as you consider
    my nomination to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety
    Board (NTSB). I am immensely grateful to President Trump for nominating
    me as this is a lifelong dream. As a safety professional who has worked
    alongside the NTSB for nearly two decades, I cannot think of a greater
    privilege than to serve the public at the world's pre-eminent safety
    investigation agency whose sole mission is to save lives.
        Before I begin, I would like to recognize some of my family and
    friends. Though they aren't able to be with me today in person, my
    wife, Kim, is watching this hearing online with my mom, Ruby, in
    Tucson, Arizona. My son, Peter, and his wife, Meredith, have blessed
    Kim and me with two grandchildren--Mason and Mabel. My daughter, Julia,
    and her husband, Peter, recently welcomed into the world our grandson,
    Liam. My sister, Jane, and my brother, Howard, deserve recognition for
    letting me be their big brother.
        I would also like to recognize my colleagues in the Safety
    department at American Airlines who are also watching online and have
    provided me with incredible support and encouragement. It is a
    privilege to work with amazing safety professionals at American and
    throughout the transportation industry. Special thanks to Cedric
    Wilson, David Seymour, and the entire American Airlines leadership
    team, for their support.
        There are three things I would like for you to know as you consider
    my nomination for the Board.
        I am passionate about safety. I was fortunate to serve our country
    as a pilot in the United States Air Force for seven and a half years.
    In that time, several of my fellow crew members were killed in the line
    of duty flying military aircraft. Many of these accidents could have
    been avoided, and I was determined to learn from each of them. In some
    cases, that meant changing a procedure. Other times, it meant improving
    education and training, but the goal was always the same: To prevent a
    similar accident from happening--to protect my fellow pilots and the
    public.
        After serving in Desert Storm, I was hired as a pilot for American
    Airlines, and am currently a Captain on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, with
    over 19,000 flight hours. Working with my fellow team members to safely
    fly people and goods around the world has been rewarding and
    fulfilling. The connections we enable and the commerce we ensure are
    powerful reminders of the criticality of the aviation system. For me,
    however, my sole focus is safely flying the passengers who put their
    trust in me to get them to their destination.
        Seeking to fully immerse myself in safety issues, I volunteered my
    time and efforts years ago with the Allied Pilots Association, which
    represents the pilots of American Airlines. I was eventually offered
    the opportunity to serve as a manager in the American Airlines
    Corporate Safety department where I am currently the Managing Director
    of Safety and Efficiency. The teams I lead and support are fully
    engaged with our robust and industry-leading safety management system.
        Second, the NTSB saves lives. As I mentioned, I have worked closely
    with the NTSB for more than 15 years and have enormous respect for the
    NTSB Board Members and staff. As the American Airlines Party
    Coordinator on NTSB investigations, I know firsthand the efforts and
    time the NTSB commits to accident investigations, family assistance and
    safety recommendations. As a result of the Board's investigations and
    safety studies, since 1967, it has issued 15,686 safety recommendations
    to more than 2,500 recipients, focused on preventing accidents from
    reoccurring. Eighty-three percent of all recommendations are ``closed-
    acceptable,'' but many others remain open. If confirmed, I will be a
    strong advocate for implementation of those recommendations. As
    Chairwoman Homendy often says, the investigation is only the first
    step. Real safety change occurs after recommendations are implemented--
    after improvements are made.
        Third, I believe we can continue to improve and enhance safety
    through partnerships and sharing of best practices across the differing
    modes of transportation. Airline operators often say that we are fierce
    competitors, but we do not compete on safety. I believe that approach
    can be industry and modal agnostic. There are opportunities to
    facilitate safety information sharing across the various modes of
    transportation and bring the different modes together to share lessons
    learned. A cross-modal approach will further the NTSB's mission of
    preventing accidents and saving lives.
        Lastly, I have observed Members of Congress spend their time
    meeting with families struck by tragedy and moving legislation that
    makes significant strides in safety, often closing longstanding NTSB
    recommendations that were issued in response to these and other
    accidents. Thank you for your safety leadership and thank you to the
    NTSB Board Members and staff for your expertise and steadfast
    commitment to safety, and for your advocacy and guidance over the
    years.
        One of the reasons I am here today is the tragic mid-air collision
    involving a U.S. Army helicopter and Flight 5342 earlier this year--the
    accident site not far from where we sit. It's been one of the most
    difficult situations I have faced in my entire career. I was in the
    family assistance center within days of the accident. I saw firsthand
    the devastation, the tremendous loss, and the work that the NTSB did to
    bring every resource available to grieving families. I want to
    acknowledge the Transportation Disaster Assistance team and the
    families and loved ones of the 67 people lost on January 29th and all
    families who have lost loved ones in other transportation accidents--it
    is our duty, collectively, to learn from each tragedy, to draw
    knowledge to improve the safety of us all.
        If confirmed, I would consider it a great honor and privilege to
    serve my country once again and commit to working with this Committee
    to improve safety across all modes of transportation.
        Thank you again for this opportunity, and I look forward to
    answering your questions.
                                     ______

                          a. biographical information
        1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): John
    Ferdinand DeLeeuw.
        2. Position to which nominated: Member, National Transportation
    Safety Board.
        3. Date of Nomination: September 10, 2025.
        4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

            Residence: Information not released to the public.
            Office: Information not provided.

        5. Date and Place of Birth: Information not provided.
        6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
    spouse (if married) or domestic partner, and the names and ages of your
    children (including stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).

            Kim Elise DeLeeuw, retired (spouse); Peter Michael DeLeeuw, age
            35; Julia DeLeeuw Thayer, age 32.

        7. List all college and graduate schools attended, whether or not
    you were granted a degree by the institution. Provide the name of the
    institution, the dates attended, the degree received, and the date of
    the degree.

            University of Arizona, 1979-1983
            Bachelor of Science, Business Administration, June 1983

            University of Arkansas, 1987-1989
            Masters in Business Administration, June 1989

        8. List all post-undergraduate employment, including the job title,
    name of employer, and inclusive dates of employment, and highlight all
    management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
    the position for which you are nominated.

            United States Air Force, Pilot, 1984-1985

            United States Air Force, C-130E and C-130 H Evaluator and
            Instructor Pilot, 1985-1991

            American Airlines, Line Captain and First Officer, 1991 to
            present

            American Airlines, Senior Manager of Flight Safety, 2010-2015

            American Airlines, Managing Director, Safety and Efficiency,
            2022 to present

            University of Southern California, Instructor, Aviation Safety
            & Security Program, 2013 to present

        9. Attach a copy of your resume.
        Attached
        10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
    service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
    than those listed above after 18 years of age.

            United States Air Force, Pilot, 1984-1985
            United States Air Force, C-130E and C-130 H Evaluator and
            Instructor Pilot, 1985-1991

        11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
    partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
    corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
    educational, or other institution.

            Allied Pilots Association, Chair, National Safety Committee,
            2018-2022

            Board Member, American Airlines Federal Credit Union, 2011 to
            present

            Vice President of Safety, OPES Solutions Group, 2017 to present

            Partner, Flight Data Monitoring at JH Consulting, 2021 to
            present

        12. List all memberships you have had after 18 years of age or
    currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational,
    political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religiously
    affiliated organization, private club, or other membership organization
    (You do not have to list your religious affiliation or membership in a
    religious house of worship or institution). Include dates of membership
    and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note
    whether any such club or organization restricts membership on the basis
    of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.

            Member, Allied Pilots Association, 1991-2022 (see #11)

            Member, Lions Club, 2008-2012

            Member, Parent Teachers Association, Grapevine Middle School,
            2003-2006

        13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
    (elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
    campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
    personally liable for that debt. No.
        14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
    rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
    election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
    position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
    compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
    identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
    of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities. None.
        15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
    organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
    entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.

            American Airlines PAC, $2000
            Allied Pilots Association PAC, $500

        16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
    society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
    for outstanding service or achievements.

            University of Southern California, Certificate, Aviation
            Safety, 2012

            Chairman's Safety Award, American Airlines, 2015

            Chairman's Safety Award, American Airlines 2017

        17. List all books, articles, columns, letters to the editor,
    Internet blog postings, or other publications you have authored,
    individually or with others. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    publication when available.

            Article, American Airlines' Safety Pre-Flight, 2014 (link
            unavailable; subject was on the importance of following
            standard operating procedures)

        18. List all speeches, panel discussions, and presentations (e.g.,
    PowerPoint) that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
    which you have been nominated. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    speech or presentation when available. None.
        19. List all public statements you have made during the past ten
    years, including statements in news articles and radio and podcasts and
    television appearances, which are on topics relevant to the position
    for which you have been nominated, including dates. Include a link to
    each statement when possible. If a link is not available, provide a
    digital copy of the statement when available.

            Pipeliners Podcast, Episode 226, What Pipeliners Can Learn From
            Aviation Safety, April 5, 2022
            https://share.google/puHP7Swc2JIrqHeEy

            ASAP TechOps/ASAP Podcast, Episode 4, Collaboration of the
            Association and the APA with Captain John DeLeeuw, November
            2020
            https://share.google/FavPUBle9fKjTokEZ

        20. List all digital platforms (including social media and other
    digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
    an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
    name or an alias. Include the full name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'',
    including the complete URL and username with hyperlinks, you have used
    on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account is active,
    deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if possible. None.
        21. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
    orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
    governmental capacity and specify the date, committee, and subject
    matter of each testimony. None.
        22. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
    operational objectives of the department/agency/commission/corporation
    to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment
    experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment
    to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish
    to serve in that position?
        I have dedicated my entire career to safety, first serving in the
    United States Air Force as a pilot, instructor, and evaluator on the C-
    130. I then served as a Senior Manager for Flight Safety for American
    Airlines, as well as Chief Accident Investigator. Today, I serve as
    American Airlines' Managing Director for Safety and Efficiency. In
    these roles, I have been responsible for safety data systems such as
    Flight Operations Quality Assurance (FOQA), Aviation Safety Action
    Program (ASAP), and Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA) as integral
    elements within American Airlines' Safety Management System. I also act
    as AA's liaison with the NTSB, FAA, and DOW (Department of War) and
    serve as AA's Party Coordinator for NTSB accident investigations.
    Additionally, I teach aviation safety at the University of Southern
    California.
        Throughout my time at American Airlines, I have developed a close
    and collaborative working relationship with NTSB Board Members and
    staff. The NTSB has a critical safety mission. It would be a tremendous
    honor and privilege to serve as a Board Member and work with my
    colleagues on the Board to improve safety in all modes of
    transportation.
        23. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
    ensure that the department/agency/commission/corporation has proper
    management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in
    managing a large organization?
        If confirmed, my responsibilities, would be to serve as Board
    Member of the NTSB. Its mission is to investigate accident and
    incidents in all modes of transportation; issue safety recommendations
    and advocate for implementation of those recommendations; conduct
    safety studies to address a myriad of transportation safety issues;
    provide assistance to families and victims of transportation accidents;
    and review appeals of enforcement actions and certificate denials of
    the Federal Aviation Administration and United States Coast Guard.
        If confirmed, I will abide by the legislative mandate of the NTSB
    and exercise proper management and accounting controls, in coordination
    with the Chairwoman and Board Members, to regularly evaluate and ensure
    the effectiveness and accountability of the agency. This includes
    overseeing development and implementation of the budget, expenditure of
    appropriations provided by Congress, and meeting all requests and
    deadlines set by Congress and Committees of jurisdiction.
        24. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
    department/agency/commission/corporation, and why?

      1.  Implementation of safety recommendations. As of October 1, 2025,
            the NTSB has investigated over 153,000 aviation accidents and
            incidents in the U.S., supported over 8,500 foreign
            investigations, and investigated thousands of surface
            transportation accidents and events. As a result of these
            investigations and safety studies, the NTSB has issued 15,686
            safety recommendations to over 2,500 recipients, focused on
            preventing accidents from reoccurring; 83 percent of all
            recommendations are ``closed-acceptable,'' but many others
            remain open. Board Members have a responsibility to advocate
            for implementation of those recommendations after issuance of
            the final investigation report. The investigation is only the
            first step; real safety change occurs after recommendations are
            implemented.

      2.  Hiring and training of personnel. About 25 percent of NTSB's
            staff is retirement eligible. Staffing is down to 415 from a
            high of 445 which has an impact on the timeliness of
            investigations. I will work with the Chairwoman and other Board
            Members and staff to increase staff resources, provide critical
            training, and improve the timeliness of accident
            investigations.

      3.  Improve safety through partnerships. I believe there are
            opportunities to facilitate safety information sharing across
            the various modes of transportation and bring the different
            modes together to share lessons to be learned, as well as best
            practices in safety, with the goal of preventing accidents and
            save lives.
                       b. potential conflicts of interest
        1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
    agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
    clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
    accounts, such as a 401(k) or pension plan.
        I do not have any financial arrangements, deferred compensation
    agreement, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
    clients, or customers. Because I will have a defined benefit pension
    plan and 401(k) with American Airlines, I will not participate
    personally and substantially in any particular matter that to my
    knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the ability or
    willingness of American Airlines to make this payment to me, unless I
    first obtain a written waiver, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 208(b)(1),
    or qualify for a regulatory exemption, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section
    208(b)(2).
        2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
    to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
    association, or other organization during your appointment? If so,
    please explain. No.
        3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
    relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
    the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
    resolve each potential conflict of interest.
        In connection with my nomination process, I have consulted with the
    Office of Government Ethics and the NTSB's DAEO to identify potential
    conflicts of interest. These commitments constitute my ethics agreement
    as identified in the ethics regulations. I am not aware of any other
    potential conflicts of interest.
        4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
    transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
    yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
    any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
    position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
    each potential conflict of interest.
        In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with
    the Office of Government Ethics and the NTSB's DAEO to identify
    potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest
    will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement
    that I have entered into with the NTSB's DAEO and that has been
    provided to this Committee.
        5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest and explain
    how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
        In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with
    the Office of Government Ethics and the NTSB's DAEO to identify
    potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest
    will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement
    that I have entered into with the NTSB's DAEO and that has been
    provided to this Committee.
        6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
    names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
    purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
    modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
    execution of law or public policy. None.
                                c. legal matters
        1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
    professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
    complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
    Counsel, an Inspector General, professional association, disciplinary
    committee, or other professional group? If yes:

      a.  Provide the name of the court, agency, association, committee, or
            group;

      b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action was issued or initiated;

      c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action;

      d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
            complaint, or personnel action.

        No
        2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
    any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
    State, county, municipal, or foreign government entity, other than for
    a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No.
        3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
    an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
    proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
    explain. No.
        4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
    contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
    offense? If so, please explain. No.
        5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
    assault, sexual harassment, or discrimination on the basis of sex,
    race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
        6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
    favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
    connection with your nomination. No.
                         d. relationship with committee
        1. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation complies with deadlines for information set by
    congressional committees, and that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation endeavors to timely comply with requests for information
    from individual Members of Congress, including requests from members in
    the minority? Yes.
        2. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation does whatever it can to protect congressional witnesses and
    whistleblowers from reprisal for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
        3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
    witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
    firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
        4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
    constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
    reasonably requested to do so? Yes
                                     ______

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

      Addendum to the questionnaire submitted to the Senate Committee on
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 119th Congress by John DeLeeuw.
        Upon further review, I have identified additional items that are
    responsive to questions A.8, A.15, A.18, A.19, E.1, and E.2 on the
    Committee's questionnaire. They are:

       A.8

         The dates listed on questionnaire are in error for
                employment at the University of Southern California. The
                corrected response is:

                      University of Southern California, Instructor,
                    Aviation Safety & Security Program, 2010-present

       A.15

         The response as submitted was incorrect. The corrected
                response is:

         2019, Allied Pilots Association Political Action
                Committee, $112

         2023, American Airlines Inc. Political Action
                Committee, $1,000

       A.18

         The following panel should be added:

                      Panel, 3/4/2020, NTSB Most Wanted Roundtable,
                    Pipeline Safety Management Systems (the panel was
                    cancelled; however, the agenda is still viewable on
                    NTSB's website).

       A.19

         The following items should be added:

                      9/30/2019, Article, Southwest pilots see
                    February or March return of Boeing Max, AP

                      9/30/2019, Article, Southwest Airline pilots'
                    union says Boeing 737 Max jets may not return to the
                    skies until `February or March' after the airline
                    grounded its fleet of planes earlier this year when to
                    crashes killed 346 people, Daily Mail UK

                      10/1/2019, Article, American Airlines to fly 2
                    737 Max planes to Oklahoma this week, Dallas Business
                    Journal

                      10/8/2019, Article, Checklists come into focus
                    as pace-setter for 737 Max return, The Air Current

                      11/21/2019, Article, Boeing's fix tames the
                    `tiger' in the 737 MAX flight controls, says experts
                    and critics, Seattle Times

                      11/24/2020, Podcast, S3E10--Tell Me Why: ``We
                    made improvements not just for American, but for the
                    industry as a whole.''

                      12/3/2020, Article, Allied Pilots Association:
                    `Line Pilot Input' Was Key in Returning Boeing 737 MAX
                    to Service, Targeted News Service (on file with Comm.)

                      12/5/2020, Article, Post-crash recovery: How one
                    airline plans to restore confidence in the Boeing 737
                    MAX, CNN

                      12/7/2020, Article, Flying the Boeing 737 MAX
                    Again, Aviation Week

                      4/16/2024, Article, American Airlines Extends
                    Use of CEFA Aviation's EFB Flight Replay to More than
                    15,000 Pilots, CEF

        Senator Sheehy [presiding]. Thank you. Mr. Kloster, you are
    recognized for your opening statement.

       STATEMENT OF RICHARD J. KLOSTER, NOMINEE TO BE A MEMBER,
                      SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

        Mr. Kloster. Thank you, Senator. I would like to begin with
    saying thank you to Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and
    all the distinguished members of the Senate Commerce, Science,
    and Transportation Committee.
        I am honored to appear before you today as you consider my
    nomination to be a member of the Surface Transportation Board.
    I am also grateful to President Trump for his nomination.
        I spent my whole career working in the rail industry. It
    began at a Wisconsin rail yard during the third week of October
    in 1980. For those of you who do not remember, that was the
    same week that the Staggers Rail Act was signed into law. I was
    a young--I was young, just out of college, did not know, really
    know what a railroad was all about.
        I remember telling my dad I was going to work for the
    railroad. He was a soft-spoken World War II veteran farmer from
    South Dakota, but he was so proud and would not stop talking
    about all the family members who had worked for the railroads.
    There were a lot of stories I had no idea. But to me, it was
    still just a job, something I needed since I was soon getting
    married to the love of my life.
        As for the new job, the scale, the grandeur, and the
    importance of the railroad to the country had not yet been
    impressed on me. That would come later. The rail industry, for
    its part, had lost its way and was in disarray. It was the
    Staggers Act that provided a lifeline for what people at the
    time were calling a dying industry. It would take some time,
    but a rail renaissance would emerge, as would my love for the
    industry.
        My time with the first Class I railroad would lead to
    working for a regional railroad and then a short line railroad,
    both of which were Class I spin-offs that were made possible by
    the Staggers Act. During this time, my knowledge and experience
    of railroad commercial, operational, and strategic matters
    would grow immensely.
        After some time off from graduate school, I moved over to
    the rail industry supply chain working for the largest rail car
    lessor in the industry. This is where my understanding of all
    the different facets of equipment supply to the industry would
    emerge, covering the complete ecosystem, from builders, to
    lessors, to shops, to component suppliers, and others.
        Then finally, about 17 years ago I started a successful
    strategic consulting firm specializing in the railroad and rail
    equipment sectors. These last 17 years have allowed me to
    expand and round out my knowledge even more, adding M&A,
    financial, regulatory, technical, and other expertise.
        So when I look back on these 45 years, I see both me and
    the rail industry starting a new life together, beginning a new
    journey, one that I had no idea at the time I would embark on,
    but I am so glad I did.
        When I look back over this time and I see the incredible
    changes and growth that have transpired in both me and the rail
    industry, and I would not change a thing, which brings me back
    to the last thing.
        Why am I here today? I am here today to serve my country
    and the broader industry that has given me so much. The
    shippers, the railroads, and the supply chain. So I hope you
    will have me and allow me to serve and dedicate myself to
    advancing the mission of the Surface Transportation Board.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. And I look
    forward to answering any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr.
    Kloster follow:]

       Prepared Statement of Richard J. Kloster, Nominee to be a Member,
                          Surface Transportation Board
        I would like to begin with saying thank you to Chairman Cruz,
    Ranking Member Cantwell, and all the distinguished Members of the
    Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. I am honored to appear
    before you today as you consider my nomination to be a Member of the
    Surface Transportation Board (``Board''). I am also grateful to
    President Trump for his nomination.
        I've spent my whole career working in the rail industry. It began
    at a Wisconsin rail yard during the third week of October of 1980. For
    those who don't remember, that was the same week the Staggers Rail Act
    was signed into law.
        I was young, just out of college, and didn't really know what a
    railroad was all about. I remember telling my dad that I was going to
    work for the railroad. He was a softspoken WW2 veteran farmer from
    South Dakota, but he was so proud and wouldn't stop talking about all
    the family members that had worked for the railroad. There were a lot
    of stories. I had no idea.
        But to me, it still was just a job. Something I needed since I was
    soon getting married to the love of my life. As for my new job, the
    scale, the grandeur, and the importance of the railroad hadn't yet been
    impressed on me. That would come later.
        The rail industry, for its part, had lost its way and was in
    disarray. It was The Staggers Act that provided a lifeline for what
    people at the time were calling a dying industry. it would take some
    time, but a rail renaissance would emerge. As would my love for the
    industry.
        My time with that first Class I railroad would lead to working for
    a regional railroad, and then a shortline railroad. Both of which were
    Class I spinoffs that were made possible by The Staggers Act. During
    this time my knowledge and experience of railroad commercial,
    operational and strategic matters would grow immensely.
        After some time off for graduate school, I moved over to the rail
    supply chain, working for the largest railcar lessor in the industry.
    This is where my understanding of all the different facets of equipment
    supply to the industry would emerge, covering the complete eco-system
    from builders, to lessors, to shops, component suppliers, and others.
        Then finally, about 17 years ago, I started a successful strategic
    consulting firm specializing in the railroad and rail equipment
    sectors. These last 17 years have allowed me to expand and round out my
    knowledge even more, adding M&A, financial, regulatory, technical, and
    other expertise.
        So, when I look back 45 years ago, I see both me and the rail
    industry starting a new life together. Beginning a new journey. One I
    had no idea at the time I would embark on but glad I did. And I look
    back over this time, I see all the incredible changes and growth that
    have transpired in both me and the rail industry. I wouldn't change a
    thing.
        Which brings me back to one last thing, why am I here today? I am
    here today to serve my country and the broader industry that has given
    me so much. . .the shippers, the railroads, and the supply chain. So, I
    hope you will have me and allow me to serve and dedicate myself to
    advancing the mission of the Surface Transportation Board.
        Thank you for your time and consideration, and I look forward to
    answering any questions that you may have.
                                     ______

                          a. biographical information
        1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used):

            Richard James Kloster (Dick).

        2. Position to which nominated: Board Member.
        3. Date of Nomination: September 10, 2025.
        4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

            Residence: Information not released to the public.
            Office: Information not provided.

        5. Date and Place of Birth: Information not provided.
        6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
    spouse (if married) or domestic partner, and the names and ages of your
    children (including stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).

            Wife--Constance Doone Kloster, not employed
            Son--Andrew R. Kloster, age 41; Daughter--Allyson R. Kloster,
            age 38; Daughter--Madelyn D. Kloster, age 34

        7. List all college and graduate schools attended, whether or not
    you were granted a degree by the institution. Provide the name of the
    institution, the dates attended, the degree received, and the date of
    the degree.

      1.  William Rainey Harper College, Palatine, IL, September 1976-May
            1977, no degree/transferred

      2.  Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, August 1977-August
            1980, BS Business, December 13, 1980

      3.  University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, August 1985-May 1986, MS
            Marketing, May 17, 1986

        8. List all post-undergraduate employment, including the job title,
    name of employer, and inclusive dates of employment, and highlight all
    management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
    the position for which you are nominated.

       1.  Chicago & Northwestern Transportation Co.--October 1980 to
            August 1985
           Damage Prevention Auditor--October 1980 to August
                1981
           Assistant Pricing Manager, Automotive--August 1981
                to January 1982
           Pricing Manager, Paper & Forest Products--January
                1982 to April 1982
           Pricing Manager, Chemicals & Fertilizers--April 1982
                to December 1982
           Market Manager, Industrial Chemicals--December 1982
                to August 1985

       2.  University of Alabama
           Graduate Research Assistant--August 1985 to August
                1986

       3.  Chicago Central & Pacific Railroad Company
           Asst. Vice President, Marketing & Sales--August 1986
                to June 1987

       4.  Indiana Rail Road Company
           VP Marketing, Sales, Corporate Development--July
                1987 to April 1989

       5.  Chicago & Northwestern Transportation Co.
           Director, Food Products Business Unit--April 1989 to
                February 1991

       6.  General Electric, GE Capital Railcar Services--February 1991 to
            July 2007
           Senior Portfolio Manager--February 1991 to January
                2001
           Vice President, Market Segment Leader, Railroads--
                January 2001 to March 2003
           Vice President, Business and Market Intelligence--
                March 2003 to July 2007

       7.  Advanced Equipment Rail Solutions, Inc.
           President and Founder--July 2007 to October 2012

       8.  FTR Intel/FTR Consulting Group (Freight Transportation Research
            Associates)
           Principle & Senior Consultant (Rail)--January 2008
                to November 2019

       9.  AllTranstek, LLC
           Senior Vice President and Chief Commercial Officer--
                October 2012 to November 2019

      10.  Integrity Rail Partners, Inc.
           President and Founder--November 2019 to Present

        9. Attach a copy of your resume.
       See Appendix A
        10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
    service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
    than those listed above after 18 years of age. None.
        11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
    partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
    corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
    educational, or other institution.

       Advanced Rail Equipment Solutions, Inc.--President and CEO

       Integrity Rail Partners, Inc.--President and CEO

        12. List all memberships you have had after 18 years of age or
    currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational,
    political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religiously
    affiliated organization, private club, or other membership organization
    (You do not have to list your religious affiliation or membership in a
    religious house of worship or institution). Include dates of membership
    and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note
    whether any such club or organization restricts membership on the basis
    of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.

       National Industrial Transportation League (NITL)--no
            membership restrictions

       General Member, 1998-2025

       Board Member, 2005-2007, 2012-2025

       Executive Board Member & Treasurer 2021-2025

       Railway Supply Institute (RSI)--no membership restrictions

       General Member, 1992-2025

       Board Member, 2019-2021

       Schaumburg Athletic Association (SAA)--no membership
            restrictions

       Board Member, 2004-2009

        13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
    (elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
    campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
    personally liable for that debt.
       I have never been a candidate for or held any public office.
        14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
    rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
    election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
    position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
    compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
    identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
    of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
       None.
        15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
    organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
    entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.
       None.
        16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
    society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
    for outstanding service or achievements.
       None.
        17. List all books, articles, columns, letters to the editor,
    Internet blog postings, or other publications you have authored,
    individually or with others. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    publication when available.
       See a list of article links in Appendix B
        18. List all speeches, panel discussions, and presentations (e.g.,
    PowerPoint) that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
    which you have been nominated. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    speech or presentation when available.
       See a list of presentations in Appendix C
        19. List all public statements you have made during the past ten
    years, including statements in news articles and radio and podcasts and
    television appearances, which are on topics relevant to the position
    for which you have been nominated, including dates. Include a link to
    each statement when possible. If a link is not available, provide a
    digital copy of the statement when available.
       See a list of article links in Appendix D
        20. List all digital platforms (including social media and other
    digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
    an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
    name or an alias. Include the full name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'',
    including the complete URL and username with hyperlinks, you have used
    on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account is active,
    deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if possible.

       LinkedIn--Richard Kloster, active account

       www.linkedin.com/in/richard-kloster-45b1bb4

        21. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
    orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
    governmental capacity and specify the date, committee, and subject
    matter of each testimony.
       I have never testified before Congress.
        22. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
    operational objectives of the department/agency/commission/corporation
    to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment
    experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment
    to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish
    to serve in that position?
        I have spent my whole career working in the rail industry, having
    started with a railroad the second week of October 1980, the same week
    the Staggers Rail Act was enacted. Over the past 45 years, I have spent
    significant time working in, and with, all three sectors of the
    industry--the railroads, the supply chain, and the customer base,
    shippers.
        This experience has allowed me to gain a deep understanding of
    ``railroading'', from all stakeholder perspectives, Class 1's,
    shortlines, shippers, intermodal, rail suppliers, equipment and repair,
    financial/investors, and others. Importantly, I offer a neutral,
    trusted perspective that connects commercial and technical areas. My
    work has been relied upon across the industry valued by all major
    stakeholder groups.
        I have a passion for the U.S. rail industry and the American
    economy, and a strong drive to help ensure the industry is robust, and
    equipped to adapt changing times, so that it can continue to be the
    backbone of American industry.
        23. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
    ensure that the department/agency/commission/corporation has proper
    management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in
    managing a large organization?
        The agency is tasked with ensuring the U.S. rail industry remains
    healthy, strong and competitive, to the benefit of the broader
    ecosystem, encompassing all stakeholders. However, to do this the STB
    must operate as a cohesive unit, led by its Chairman and supported by
    the other Board members and the staff. The Board must be able to
    execute its duties fairly and justly, with wisdom gained through
    experience. It is my hope and goal to bring my diverse, 45-year
    experience in the rail industry to help strengthen the Board's
    understanding of the industry it serves so as to strengthen its
    decision-making.
        Over my career I have worked for large and small companies, as well
    as having started two small businesses, where I have always had
    managerial responsibilities. I pride myself as being a person who seeks
    out input from everyone in the organization.
        I have managed large teams that focused on technical (engineering,
    inspections) and regulatory compliance (Federal Railroad
    Administration, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration,
    Association of American Railroads), as well as operational aspects of
    rail equipment and rail operations. I have also managed staff
    responsible for accounting and financial controls at different
    organizations including portfolio, operational, maintenance,
    commercial, budget and profit and loss responsibilities.
        If confirmed, I am committed to learning about all the elements of
    compliance with Federal law, including best practices set by the Office
    of Management and Budget, the Government Accountability Office, and
    others, at the operational level, and ensuring the STB stays on track.
        24. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
    department/agency/commission/corporation, and why?
        The STB handles hundreds of proceedings every year, some routine,
    but others very significant. However, all are just as important to one
    petitioner as it is to another. Moving all cases through the process
    has been a challenge in the past but should be a top goal of the Board,
    in terms of speed, timeliness and transparency of the process. If
    confirmed, my goal will be to contribute to the progress made by the
    new Chairman.
        Some cases are very specific, affecting only the participants,
    while others will have lasting effects for the industry as a whole. In
    my mind, these decisions with long lasting impacts are the most
    critical and must me addressed with fairness, accountability, and
    adherence to law. Doing this requires the utmost due diligence in an
    open and transparent manner, involving input and debate from a broad
    set of stakeholders. If confirmed, this would be my approach. I would
    rely on my deep background and network in the industry to ensure sound
    and just decisions.
        Making good decisions requires good input. The more knowledge and
    information you acquire, the better positioned you are to make sound
    decisions, while still balancing preparation with timely action. The
    STB is strong in this area, but there is always room for improvement.
    One of my goals would be to draw on my unique experience to enhance the
    agency's capabilities and ensure it obtains and understands the
    information necessary for effective decision-making.
                       b. potential conflicts of interest
        1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
    agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
    clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
    accounts, such as a 40l(k) or pension plan.
        I have no existing financial arrangements or deferred compensation
    agreements. If confirmed, my consulting firm, Integrity Rail Partners,
    Inc., will become dormant and I will cease to have any future business
    relations with any business associates, clients, or customers.
        I have 40l(k) rollover accounts from two former employers, GE
    Railcar Services (GE) and Rescar Inc. I also have a pension from GE
    Railcar Services (GE). These are listed in Section E.1.
        2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
    to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
    association, or other organization during your appointment? If so,
    please explain.
        I am the sole owner of my consulting firm, which does business as
    Integrity Rail Partners, Inc. If confirmed, my consulting firm will
    cease engaging in any business, including client engagements,
    consistent with my OGE Ethics Agreement.
        3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
    relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
    the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
    resolve each potential conflict of interest.
        If confirmed, Integrity Rail Partners, Inc. will remain dormant and
    will not advertise, during my appointment to the position of Board
    Member. I will not perform any services for the firm, except that I
    will comply with any court orders or subpoenas and any requirements
    involving legal filings, taxes, and fees that are necessary to maintain
    the firm while it is in an inactive status. As a Board Member, I will
    not participate personally and substantially in any particular matter
    that to my knowledge has a direct and predictable effect on the
    financial interests of Integrity Rail Partners, Inc. All amounts owed
    to me by any of my clients will be fixed before I assume the duties of
    the position of Board Member, and I will not participate personally and
    substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a
    direct and predictable effect on the ability or willingness of any of
    these clients to pay these amounts.
        4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
    transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
    yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
    any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
    position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
    each potential conflict of interest.
        I am not aware that I hold any financial interest that would raise
    a possible conflict of interest. However, in my Ethics Agreement, I
    have pledged that I will not participate personally and substantially
    in any particular matter in which I know that I have a financial
    interest directly and predictably affected by the matter, or in which I
    know that a person whose interests are imputed to me has a financial
    interest directly and predictably affected by the particular matter,
    unless I first obtain a written waiver, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
    Sec. 208(b)(l). I understand that the interests of the following
    persons are imputed to me:

         Any spouse or minor child of mine;

         Any general partner of a partnership in which I am a
                limited or general partner;

         Any organization in which I serve as an officer,
                director, trustee, general partner, or employee, even if
                uncompensated; and

         Any person or organization with which I am negotiating
                or have an arrangement concerning prospective employment.

        Additionally, I have been advised that the duties of the position
    of Board Member may involve particular matters affecting the financial
    interests of Commtrex. The agency has determined that it is not
    necessary at this time for me to divest my interest in this entity
    because the likelihood that my duties will involve any such matter is
    remote. Accordingly, I will not participate personally and
    substantially in any particular matter that to my knowledge has a
    direct and predictable effect on the financial interests of Commtrex,
    unless I first obtain a written waiver, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
    Sec. 208(b)(l).
        5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest and explain
    how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest. None.
        6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
    names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
    purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
    modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
    execution of law or public policy. None.
                                c. legal matters
        1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
    professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
    complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
    Counsel, an Inspector General, professional association, disciplinary
    committee, or other professional group? If yes:

      a.  Provide the name of the court, agency, association, committee, or
            group;

      b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action was issued or initiated;

      c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action;

      d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
            complaint, or personnel action.
        No.
        2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
    any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
    State, county, municipal, or foreign government entity, other than for
    a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No.
        3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
    an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
    proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
    explain. No.
        4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
    contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
    offense? If so, please explain. No.
        5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
    assault, sexual harassment, or discrimination on the basis of sex,
    race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
        6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
    favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
    connection with your nomination.
        I have nothing relevant to disclose.
                         d. relationship with committee
        1. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation complies with deadlines for information set by
    congressional committees, and that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation endeavors to timely comply with requests for information
    from individual Members of Congress, including requests from members in
    the minority? Yes.
        2. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation does whatever it can to protect congressional witnesses and
    whistleblowers from reprisal for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
        3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
    witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
    firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
        4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
    constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
    reasonably requested to do so? Yes.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Appendix B--Progressive Railroading Magazine Articles
    2025 July--``The future of the rail-car supply chain? It's all about
    the freight''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/The-future-
    of-the-rail-car-supply-cbain-Its-all-about-the-freight-mdasb-by-
    Richard-Kloster--74860

    2025 February--``On the eve of a new renaissance?--commentary by
    Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/
    news/On-the-eve-of-a-new-renaissance-mdash-commentary-by-Richard-
    Kloster--73848

    2024 December--``Rail-Car Outlook '25: Definitely not 'Back to the
    Future' anytime soon--forecast by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/news/Rail-
    Car-Outlook-25-Definitely-not-Back-to-the-Future-anytime-soon-mdash-
    forecast-by-Richard-Kloster--73444

    2024 July--``If I were King of the Rail-car Fleet--commentary by
    Richard Kloster''
       No link available, see the article at the end of this report

    2024 February--``Actions and Words: How will car supply affect the
    `Pivot to Growth?'--commentary by Richard Kloster''
       No link available, see the article at the end of this report

    2023 December--``Rail-car outlook '24: Dick Kloster's annual forecast''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanica1/article/Rail-car-
    outlook-24-Dick-Klosters-annua1-forecast--70825

    2023 July--``Death and Taxes: How regulations and inflation are
    impacting tank car maintenance''
       No link available, see the article at the end of this report

    2023 February--``The Paradigm Shift: How rail-car supply and ownership
    has changed over time--commentary by Richard Kloster''
       No link available, see the article below

    2022 December--``Rail-car outlook: Richard Kloster's 2023 delivery
    projection''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Rail-car-
    outlook-Richard-Klosters-2023-delivery-proiection--68134

    2022 July--``A funny thing happened on the way to the scrap yard--
    commentary by Richard Kloster''
       No link available, see the article below

    2022 February--``The Tails That Wag the Dog: The three fleets that have
    been depressing fleet utilization--commentary by Richard Kloster''
       No link available, see the article below

    2021 December--``What will the rail equipment market look like in
    2022?''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/What-will-
    the-rail-equipment-market-look-like-in-2022--65378

    2021 August--``Rail-car market update: What about Bob (I mean rail
    cars)?''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Rail-car-
    market-update-What-about-Bob-I-mean-rail-cars--64248

    2020 December--``What will the rail-car equipment market look like in
    2021? (commentary by Richard Kloster)''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/What-will-
    the-rail-car-equipment-market-look-like-in-2021-commentary-by-Richard-
    Kloster--62197

    2020 February--``A case for the 'hope for the best' contingent: rail
    equipment market commentary by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/A-case-for-
    the-hope-for-the-best-contingent-rail-equipment-market-commentary-by-
    Richard-Kloster--59677

    2019 December--``Rail-car Outlook 2020--analysis by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Rail-car-
    Outlook-2020-analysis-by-Richard-Kloster--59245

    2019 August--``The plight of box cars--analysis by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/The-plight-
    of-box-cars-analysis-by-Richard-Kloster--58261

    2019 February--``PSR and the rail car: Commentary by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/PSR-and-the-
    rail-car-Commentary-by-Richard-Kloster--56697

    2018 December--``Outlook 2019: Rail-car forecast by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article.aspx?id=56257

    2018 July--``What if they never discovered oil in North Dakota?--by
    Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/What-if-they-
    never-discovered-oil-in-North-Dakota-by-Richard-Kloster--55040

    2018 February--``Commentary: Rail-car lessees need to know the new
    lease accounting standards''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Commentary-
    Rail-car-lessees-need-to-know-the-new-lease-accounting-standards--53872

    2017 December--``Outlook 2018: Rail-car forecast by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/article/
    Outlook-2018-Rail-car-forecast-by-Richard-Kloster--53418

    2017 August--``Rail-car outlook: Where did the momentum go?--analysis
    by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Rail-car-
    outlook-Where-did-the-momentum-go-mdash-analysis-by-Richard-Kloster--
    52368

    2017 February--``Commentary: If things are so bad in the rail-car
    leasing industry, why are so many jumping in?'
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Commentary-
    If-things-are-so-bad-in-the-rail-car-leasing-industry-why-are-so-many-
    jumping-in--50788

    2016 December--``Outlook 2017: Rail-car forecast by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Outlook-2017-
    Rail-car-forecast-by-Richard-Kloster--50304

    2016 July--``Rule change could help ease box-car supply problem--
    commentary by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/Rule-change-
    could-help-ease-box-car-supply-problem-commentary-by-Richard-Kloster--
    48746

    2016 April--``Tank cars: The year of the shipper--commentary by Richard
    Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/fank-cars-
    The-year-of-the-shipper-commentary-by-Richard-Kloster--47892

    2016 March--``AllTranstek tackles imploding tank car legend on
    MythBusters TV show''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/AllTranstek-
    tackles-imploding-tank-car-legend-on-MythBusters-TV-show--47621

    2015 December--``Outlook 2016: Rail-car forecast by Richard Kloster''
    https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rail_industry_trends/article/
    Outlook-20l6-Rail-car-forecast-by-Richard-Kloster--46701
                                     ______

    2024 July--``If I were King of the Rail-car Fleet''
    If I were King of the Railcar Fleet
    The problem with Per Diem Leasing

                               By Richard Kloster

        Per diem leasing has outlived its usefulness. By about 20 years.
    There, can't believe I said it.
        I spent ten years managing a huge boxcar fleet, so I learned a
    thing or two about per diem leasing, and I never thought I'd say this,
    but if I were King of the Railcar Fleet my first act would be to outlaw
    per diem leasing.
        Per diem leasing used to be an extremely useful tool for railroads
    to secure equipment. It was created in the 1970s by Itel Corporation to
    provide leased equipment to cash-strapped shortline railroads. This was
    during a time of extreme equipment shortages, and the inability or
    unwillingness of Class 1 railroads to invest in additional equipment.
    Consequently, tens of thousands of desperately needed cars were built,
    many of them boxcars.
        Fast forward to the 1990s when the industry adopted a new car hire
    compensation scheme. Deprescription, as it was called, is a market-
    based system that set railroad car hire rates based on supply and
    demand, replacing the ``prescribed'' system. This new system was
    laudable--who would object to a market-based system, as long as certain
    ``guardrails'' were implemented to protect against abusive tactics.
        However, like every new set of rules, there are those that will try
    to find a loophole to use for their own benefit. In this case the
    loophole is the default rate. More specifically, how the default rate
    is set for cars built after 1992. The default rate is the key part in
    deprescription since it sets the rate that is charged in the absence of
    a negotiated rate. Sounds fine, right? But how is the default rate set?
        It is the ``lowest positive negotiated rate from the prior
    quarter''. The issue here is, all it takes to tip the scales in a car
    hire rate negotiation is for ONE ``car user'' and ONE ``car owner'',
    both of which are railroads, to negotiate an extremely low rate for ONE
    car.
        The result is that one single car governs the rate for all the
    ensuing car builds of a specific car type. This has applied to tens of
    thousands of new cars built over the last 32 years, with some of the
    rates as low as $0.17 per hour, far from economically viable for a car
    owner, even at a car cost of 20 years ago.
        This is a major reason why leasing companies today avoid investing
    in new boxcars.
        So why outlaw per diem leasing? I think per diem is a crutch that
    has lost its relevance. It didn't use to be this way but now it is.
        Boxcars shippers rely almost exclusively on the railroads for car
    supply and have been spoiled over the years because of the huge fleet
    they drew from. That is not the case today. However, unlike other
    industries that use covered hoppers and tank cars, most boxcar users
    never had to figure out how to include ownership or fixed rate leasing
    into their rail transportation business models. Covered hopper users
    have a robust car supply of owned, fixed leased, and railroad supplied
    at their disposal that is not facing the retirement cliff that boxcar
    users are facing now.
        Pooling is always cited as the reason shipper ownership or fixed
    rate leasing doesn't work for boxcars, that the railroads need to
    control the cars to raise overall utilization. However, grain covered
    hopper pools have been in place since the 1990s with shipper owned and
    leased cars placed into railroad managed pools. Why hasn't this been
    done in the boxcar market? My belief is it's the lack of a historic
    shipper boxcar fleet, which goes back to the overreliance of per diem
    leasing and railroad supply. Boxcar shippers have never been pushed to
    develop their own ownership/fixed leasing strategies.
        Yes, there are always exceptions, but I'm talking about the overall
    fleet and its decline over the last twenty years. There just haven't
    been enough ``exceptions'' to make the rule and overcome the lack of
    investment.
        The point is that unless boxcar users reevaluate their aversion to
    fixed rate leasing or ownership, they will be left with only two paths
    forward. A declining fleet and/or a one-supplier market for car supply,
    TTX.
        Providing car supply to shippers, the true customers, is the reason
    railcars exist. The manner in which they are financed, owned and
    supplied is a detail, an economically important one, but subservient to
    providing basic car supply. Unless boxcar shippers want to lose this
    rail transportation option, they will have to develop new car supply
    funding strategies.
        Times have changed. New strategies are needed. So, if I were the
    King of the Railcar Fleet, I would take the away the crutch that per
    diem leasing has become, to force parties to face up to the realities
    of the present, and put all players--railroads, shippers and lessors--
    on equal footing. Off with Per Diem's head!
        Note: The Railway Supply Institute has petitioned the Surface
    Transportation Board to review the current rules for setting
    compensation to boxcar owners. More on the petition can be found here:
    https://www.rsiweb.org/addressing-the-boxcar-cliff-an-inflection-point-
    we-cant-afford-to-miss/
                                     ______

    2024 February--``Actions and Words: How will car supply affect the
    'Pivot to Growth?' ''
    February 2024 Fleet & Leasing Issue
    Actions and Words
    How will car supply affect the 'Pivot to Growth?'

                               By Richard Kloster

        I've told this story a million times. I joined the industry
    straight out of college and got a job with the CNW working in a yard in
    Wisconsin. I lasted one Wisconsin winter and was about to quit. I had
    another job lined up but with a pay cut--that's how much I didn't like
    being cold.
        Anyway, when I told my boss I was resigning, she asked me what I
    was going to do. So, I told her. Her response? ``If you can find a
    [expletive deleted] job like that today, you can find a [expletive
    deleted] job like that in three months. Give me three months.'' A month
    later, I had a marketing and pricing job in Chicago.
        This was in the early days of deregulation. Short lines were being
    created left and right. The Class Is were starting to merge and
    consolidate, but competition was still alive and well. Every piece of
    business was important-unless it didn't contribute economically. There
    were trains to fill and cars to load. The shackles of regulation were
    off. The time to grow was here.
        Today, we hear Class Is talk about the ``Pivot to Growth.'' It
    sounds great and I hope it works, but it's too early to see any real
    measurable, systemic results. After all, it took the railroads almost
    15 years after deregulation to rationalize and become ``profitable.''
        But why is a rail-car guy going down railroad memory lane?
        Because I've seen both sides of the coin. And I see some
    similarities, and contrasts, between the post-deregulation period and
    the current environment we're in, as it relates to rail cars. Back
    then, car supply wasn't a problem. We had too many of most car types--
    even though a lot were old and busted, we still had enough.
        Today, in many fleets, we don't have enough. Reinvestment in new
    cars over time has not been sufficient, and has resulted in a lot of
    smaller, declining fleets of poor-quality cars. This indifference or
    reluctance to invest in rail cars is often claimed to be due to
    declining freight, meaning, ``If I don't have the load, I don't need
    the car.''
        But what about the reverse? ``If I don't have the car, I'm not
    going to get the load.'' People always assume it's a one-directional
    paradigm. Lower freight volume causes the fleet to decline. But it's
    not always true, not by a long shot. It's often a two-way street.
        While some rail fleets have declined due to freight issues, others
    have not. The box-car fleet is the perfect example.
        Much of the box-car freight that was diverted to intermodal or
    truck was done so over 20 years ago. This is why the fleet fell from
    550,000 cars in 1980 (deregulation) to today's 115,000 cars. Since
    then, the freight that remains in box cars wants to move in box cars.
    Sure, there are exceptions, but most of the lost box-car freight has
    been due to the declining supply of box cars, which has been caused by
    the lack of reinvestment. Or a lack of service. Either way, not because
    the shipper wanted to. Because they had to. Ask any shipper.
        There are many other examples of this supply-driven freight
    decline. I point this out because if the railroads want to pivot to
    growth and generate more freight, they're going to need to address car
    supply, and in many fleets, upgrade and add more cars. Which means
    they're going to have to reconsider their attitudes and strategies
    toward car supply.
        Some say rail shipments are a leading indicator of the economy. I
    think that's true. But I also think that new car builds, fleet sizes
    and the quality of the fleets are leading indicators of the commitment
    that railroads have to their long-term growth prospects. Rail cars have
    long lives, and you'll need them for a long time.
        So, if you're going to buy a new one, you had better have
    confidence in your business plans. If you don't, then you probably
    maintain the status quo. Either way, your actions will speak louder
    than your words.
                                     ______

    2023 July--``Death and Taxes: How regulations and inflation are
    impacting tank car maintenance''
    Death and Taxes
    How regulations and inflation are impacting tank car maintenance

                               By Richard Kloster

        Death and taxes. You can't avoid them. For the tank car fleet, it's
    regulations and inflation that have been pushing the cost of owning and
    maintaining a tank car to new levels.
        Regulations are like a Roach Motel or Hotel California. They check
    in but they never check out. And they always increase the operating
    costs of owning a tank car. The same is true for freight cars. However,
    the regulatory burden is much lower for freight cars, and the pace of
    change is slower.
        The regulatory burden for tank cars is continuously in flux but
    change comes in bunches, sometime triggered by events, sometimes due to
    industry efforts to improve the quality and safety of tank cars, most
    of which are used to haul hazardous materials. The industry is
    currently dealing with the potential for new or revised regulations in
    the aftermath of the Palestine, OH derailment, which comes ten years
    after the Lac-Megantic derailment, and the resulting regulatory changes
    included in the 2015 Fast Act.
        However, probably the most significant regulatory change affecting
    tank cars came with the introduction of HM-201, and the expanded HM-
    216B, requiring tank car owners to Qualify, or Requalify, their tank
    car every ten years or less.
        The impact on maintenance costs and practices has been significant.
    Prior to HM-201 it was every 20 years, and the requirements were much
    less robust and costly. Most tank car went to shop when they need to--
    for repairs, change of service, lease return, reassignment, etc. These
    were mostly one-off, single car shopping events, with specific scopes
    of work. Preventative maintenance was done on some cars but was
    generally an exception.
        Today, much of the tank car's general maintenance is performed when
    the car is at the shop for a qualification event. This benefits the car
    owner economically by reducing overall fleet transportation expenses,
    allows owners to ``bundle'' volume and manage the shopping as a project
    verses a series of one-offs, and also perform more ``true''
    preventative maintenance.
        However, the overall cost burden is higher due to the additional
    regulatory compliance requirements. Depending on how a car owner
    manages fleet maintenance over time determines whether they experience
    a net benefit from a cost perspective, or not.
        The other factor driving rising maintenance costs is inflation,
    however, there are several types of inflation that are at play. The
    first is the effect that the general rate of inflation in the economy
    is having on the cost components of maintenance. This includes labor,
    components, and materials.
        Private repair shops set their own labor rates, but they move in
    concert with the published AAR Labor Rate, which lags the economy some
    but has risen shapely over the past two years. The second is interest
    rates, which at some point will abate but not in the near term.
        The other two are industry and market based, namely concentration
    and demand. The shops that perform tank car maintenance are
    concentrated among a few large operators. Several are affiliated with
    large leasing companies and builders with their own fleets to maintain.
    Two companies operate large shop networks. The remaining tank car
    certified shops are independent companies with one or two locations.
    However, they tend to operate regionally. In the end, a fleet owner can
    find themselves with fewer options than they thought.
        Compounding this is the demand for tank car repair, and this
    relates back to Qualifications, which are now driving the market. The
    industry is currently in the largest qualification cycle ever and will
    not peak until 2024 and 2025. With tank car ownership concentrated with
    a small number of very large fleets--five lessors own 65 percent of the
    total fleet--shop space is at a premium. Owners are booking shop space
    into late 2024 to secure capacity.
        The combined effect of shop concentration, high demand, and lower
    industry capacity--several shops have been shut down in the last couple
    of years--has tightened tank car maintenance supply.
        The net result of regulatory changes and inflationary forces both
    increase tank car maintenance costs. Combined with limitations on the
    supply of maintenance services and the current shopping practices of
    tank car owners, these forces have created a market environment that
    has shifted the balance of power toward the shop operators, resulting
    in higher costs going forward for the foreseeable future.
        Death and Truces. While we can't avoid death, we can mitigate
    taxes, or in the world of tank cars, rising maintenance costs. However,
    doing this requires a sound understanding of the current and future
    environment, as well as implementing strategies to lessen the future
    cost burden of owning a tank car.
                                     ______

    2023 February--``The Paradigm Shift: How rail-car supply and ownership
    has changed over time--commentary by Richard Kloster''
    The Paradigm Shift
    How rail-car supply and ownership has changed over time

                               By Richard Kloster

        Rail-car supply has been around for as long as we've had railroads.
    There's a reason we call rail shipments carloads. Because if you don't
    have the car, you won't get the load.
        In the beginning, all cars were owned and supplied by the railroads
    and even built. Leasing companies emerged before the turn of the last
    century, primarily for tank cars. However, in 1980, the year the
    railroad industry was deregulated, around 80 percent of the 2 million
    rail cars were owned by the railroads. Today, the railroad ownership
    share is down to 17 percent, while the leasing company share is up to
    55 percent. TIX and the shippers own the remaining 10 percent and 18
    percent, respectively.
        The reason for this huge ownership shift is fairly simple. The
    railroad industry is the most capex-intensive industry there is, and
    the financial community, operating lessors and banks have developed a
    huge appetite for hard, long-lived assets--which the railroads have
    been more than happy to hand off this capex category to.
        However, what's important to understand is how this paradigm shift
    happened from a historical and strategic context-and most important,
    what the implications are for the future.
        To better understand the evolution of rail-car reinvest, break the
    last 42-year timeline into quarters:
        1st quarter: Post-deregulation. Very few new cars were built.
    Everyone was rightsizing their fleets, not growing them. This was a
    period of heavy consolidation among the lessors and builders.
        2nd Quarter: Remerged build cycle. In the mid-1990s, when new car
    demand returned, builders were builders and lessors were lessors. The
    lessors competed to secure a new car lease order from a lessee. The
    winning lessor then released an RFP to the builders and selected one.
    Burgeoning new car demand attracted many new leasing companies. While
    two builders had effective leasing businesses, the others did not,
    which limited their market to selling cars instead of leasing them.
    This was the same model that existed for decades prior to deregulation.
        Implication: The builders were at a competitive disadvantage,
    lessors were playing one builder off another, order books and
    production schedules were unpredictable, and margins were depressed.
    Advantage: Lessors.
        3rd Quarter: Emergence of the builder that leases. Starting in the
    early 2000s, builders realized there was power in holding the new car
    lease order. By securing the new car lease order themselves, they
    avoided the lessor's RFP process and increased the value of the car by
    adding new margins to the historical new car build margin, namely a
    margin for attaching a lease to the new car and a management fee. While
    all the builders created leasing operations, some were more significant
    than others. Implication: The balance of power evened out. Some
    builders created partnerships with large, well-funded investors; began
    building a leased fleet portfolio's; increased their customer bases;
    and expanded their design portfolio. Advantage: Even.
        4th Quarter: Emergence of the builder-lessor. By the 2010s, the
    builders were fully competitive with the lessors. Attractive new car
    leases rates helped builders secure an increasing market share. The
    builders and their partners began increasing their participation in the
    secondary market. Implication: Many lessors dropped out of the new car
    market and refocused their growth plans to the secondary market,
    leaving more available orders to the builders and larger lessors, who
    had large enough volumes to aggerate and secure favorable terms for new
    cars. Advantage: Builder-lessors.
        The future: Going forward, the balance of power is likely to
    oscillate between these two groups. This evolution of the builders and
    the reordering of how typical lessors grow their fleet has redefined
    the two groups' roles, but most of the implications are positive for
    the supply chain. While market demand will still set the prices for new
    cars of all types, the builders are now more effectively able to manage
    their production schedules and control their costs, which improves
    margins. The secondary market has grown and now includes much more
    attractive and younger equipment, which allows lessors not originating
    their own new car leases to still add new(er) cars into their fleet
    growth plans.
        On the downside, while component prices, steel costs and interest
    rates have increased, builder consolidation that has concentrated
    capacity has also contributed to a higher lease rate environment.
    Which, depending on your perspective, is either a positive or a
    negative.
        Overall, the paradigm shift is largely complete--and like all
    things, subject to change.
                                     ______

    2022 July--``A funny thing happened on the way to the scrap yard-
    commentary by Richard Kloster''
    A funny thing happened on the way to the scrap yard
    August 2022

                               By Richard Kloster

        Understanding the retirement market shouldn't be that difficult.
    Railcars are built new. They spend their long lives moving freight.
    They get broken and then fixed. At some point a car gets too old, or
    the repair cost gets too high, and the decision is made to retire and
    scrap the car. Hopefully after a long and profitable life for the car
    owner.
        Back in the day when the railroads owned most of the railcars,
    circa the 1980s post-Staggers era, surplus cars were parked in a south-
    40s yard and forgotten. At least until someone decided to clean out the
    yard once or twice a decade. The cost of storing surplus cars was
    minimal and likely not even measured.
        Not so today. The fleet used to be 80 percent owned by the
    railroads--back in the day. Today the fleet is 55 percent owned by the
    private leasing companies, 65 percent if you include TIX. Shippers own
    another 18 percent. That's 73 percent (TTX excluded) of the fleet owned
    by companies that don't have a south-40s yard to shove their surplus
    cars into. These car owners have to pay to store their cars, and that
    isn't cheap.
        Since the 2nd half of 2019, scrap steel prices have almost
    quadrupled, and with this, an increase the retirement pace of old
    railcars, some of which are not even that old. Again, back in the day,
    a scrap railcar was worth $3,000 to $5,000 per car. Today, scrap values
    are 3-4 times that.
        Another back in the day comparison is the age profile of the fleet.
    Back than the fleet had gone through some heavy build cycles in the
    1970s which resulted in a relatively young fleet. Today's fleet has a
    significant number of fleet segments that are very large and challenged
    and steering retirement right in the face. To name a few, 4750 cuf
    grain CH, 70-ton boxcars, aggregate cars, mill gondolas, several GP
    tank car segments, bulkhead flatcars--and the list goes on.
        The rule-of-thumb long-term retirement rate most often quoted is
    40,000 car per year. This is as a good a planning assumption to use as
    any. However, it's still an average. Sometimes we have more, sometime
    less, but to maintain the average, low periods must be offset by high
    periods.
        From 2000-2007, retirements averaged 42,000 per year. During 2008-
    2010, the Great Recession years, retirements jumped to a 79,000
    average, before falling to 36,000 per year from 2011-2019. However,
    over the last two years, the ``Covid'' years, retirements have average
    53,000.
        Which brings us to 2022. This year's retirement rate started at a
    strong pace, a continuation of 2020-2021, but in March, railcar scrap
    rates fell dramatically with scrap yards struggling to find cars to
    cut.
        Why? Freight volumes are still soft. Storage costs are high. Steel
    prices are high. Scrap cars should be flying to the scrap yards. But
    they're not. Again, why? Because railcar demand has improved
    considerably.
        But not because carload volumes have improved, they haven't.
    Instead, rail network fluidity has worsened, and fleet productivity has
    suffered. This has forced more cars onto the network to relieve the
    pressure. A year ago, cars were leaving the storage yards for the scrap
    yard. Today they're leaving the storage yard to go back into service.
        So, what's the outlook for fleet retirements? Last decade was below
    the long-term retirement average and the old fleets will run out life.
    Next decade retirements will play catch up and are projected to exceed
    last decade by 20-25 percent.
        But current lull in scrapping will not last. At some point this
    year or next, the rail fluidity problems will correct themselves. When
    they do these older, less desirable cars--and some younger ones--will
    again find themselves surplus, and the march to the scrap yard will
    begin again. Father Time waits for no man, or rail car.
                                     ______

    2022 February--``The Tails That Wag the Dog: The three fleets that have
    been depressing fleet utilization--commentary by Richard Kloster''
    The Tails That Wag the Dog
    The three fleets that have been depressing fleet utilization

                               By Richard Kloster

        While rail freight volumes fell sharply in early 2020 with the
    breakout of the pandemic, they had already been trending downward for
    much of 2019. Consequently, the number of stored cars exploded to
    levels last seen during the Great Recession. Most people, when asked
    about their thoughts on what it will take to bring down the high
    storage volume and improve fleet utilization will say, ``Traffic
    volumes needs to improve'', and they would be right, for the most part.
    This is a normal demand-side response. Freight cures a lot of Fleet
    sins.
        However, in today's market there are three supply-side actors that
    have had an over-weighted negative effect on the storage numbers, and
    market, as well as on fleet utilization. Those three actors are small
    cube covered hoppers, coal gondolas & hoppers, and large general-
    purpose DOT 111 tank cars. If you strip these three fleets out of the
    storage numbers, the overall fleet utilization and storage statistics
    look much more respectable, with many in normalized market ranges.
        So, what's in store for these three bad actors? And how long before
    they these three get corrected? Let's start with the coal cars. The
    coal car fleet was built up over several decades for all the right
    reasons, but cheap gas prices have fundamentally changed the market for
    these cars forever. The freight declines severally outpaced the fleet
    and suddenly surplus cars were shoved into storage. This started ten
    years ago but it's only been in the last five years that car owners
    have made a serious supply-side attempt to bring balance to the coal
    car fleets scrapping over 45,000 cars and shrinking the fleet by almost
    25 percent. Today, while availability is still plentiful, lease rates
    have finned up and returns are not negative. Another three years and
    this fleet could start looking attractive again. Maybe even to invest
    in? We will see.
        Small cube gravity covered hoppers used to be called cement cars,
    but now we call them sand cars. This fleet was stable until the
    industry seriously overbuilt the fleet to meet frac sand car demand.
    However, then oil drillers figured out how to use cheaper and closer
    brown sand. What started out as right reasons to build new cars, turned
    into wrong reasons, which then resulted in a lot of red ink and huge
    stored surpluses, some even in grass fields, ``up on blocks'' . . .
    literally. Almost immediately car owners began looking for alternative
    uses, and several years later, the fleet metrics have begun to improve.
    The surplus is still large but is coming down. Availability is high but
    homes are being found and cars are coming out of storage. Some cars are
    going back into frac sand service as is, others are having their gates
    changed out for cement, and many are being rebodied and converted into
    other types of hoppers, both covered and open top cars for a variety of
    other commodity services.
        The large general purpose tank car fleet has a similar history as
    the small cube CH fleet. A stable fleet segment that was overbuilt to
    support a new market, and to make matters worse, had new regulatory
    demands enacted that obsoleted a whole class of younger tank cars.
    Again, car owners immediately began looking for alternative uses and
    have found quite a few . . . retrofits conversions, other commodity
    uses, Mexico placements, etc. However, one additional element, unique
    to tank cars, has helped tighten this fleet faster than the other two
    fleets . . . tank car requalification. Total requalification costs
    typically range from $12-15,000 and must be done within ten-year
    intervals. While there is still a large surplus of these cars, with a
    lot of remaining life, that could go back into service, car owners are
    reluctant to invest in requalifying a car that still has an unknown
    future only to put on a shorter-term lease. This has created a
    disconnect between real availability vs. perceived supply.
        While finding alternative uses for these surplus fleets helps
    stabilize the market and generate revenue for the car owners, much of
    the heavy lifting in balancing out these fleets will fall on simply
    retiring and scrapping cars there are just too many cars of for
    today's, and tomorrow's, demand. Supply side discipline. The fleet
    needs to stop being wagged by it tails, and instead, go in for a good
    grooming. Which I think we're in the middle of.
                                     ______

             Appendix C--Public Presentations, Speeches and Panels
    2025
        1. 20250519 National Coal Transportation Association (NCTA), San
    Antonio, TX--``Railcar 101: Understanding the North American Fleet''
    2024
        2. 240430 National Association of Rail Shippers (NARS), Chicago,
    IL--``Railcar Market Outlook''
        3. 240521 National Coal Transportation Association (NCTA),
    Chattanooga, TN--``Railcar Market Update''
        4. 240606 Progressive Railroading Magazine, webinar--``Rail Car
    Counts Mid-Year Update Webcast''
        5. 240821 Metal Service Center Institute (MSCI) webinar--``Freight
    Rail Car Outlook: New rail car deliveries, retirements, and fleet
    projections''
    2023
        6. 230502 Railway Supply Institute (RSI) Webinar--``RSI ARCI
    Webinar: Railcar Market Update''
        7. 230911 Metal Service Center Institute Economic Summit (MSCI),
    Schaumburg, IL--``Freight Rail Car Outlook: New rail car deliveries,
    retirements, and fleet projections''
        8. 231115 RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    2022
        9. 221114 RailTrends, New York, NY--``RailcarMarket Outlook''
    2021
        10. 210414 Commtrex Webinar--``Railcar Market Update''
        11. 210415 SEARS Spring Meeting--``Railcar Market Update''
        12. 210607 ASLRRA, Kansas City, MO--``Railcar Market Update''
        13. 210622 ASLRRA, Louisville, KY--``Railcar Market Update''
    2020
        14. 201119 RailTrends, Webinar--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    2019
        15. 03-12-19, American Railcar Institute (ARCI), Chicago, IL--
    Presentation no longer available
        16. 07-21-19, Minnesota Regional RR Assoc, Brainerd, MN--
    Presentation no longer available
        17. 09-10-19, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        18. 11-08-19, Stephens Investor Conference, Nashville, TN--
    Participated in a three person panel (no presentation required)
    discussing current trends in the rail freight and rail equipment
    markets
        19. 11-20-19, RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    2018
        20. 02-26-18, Frac Sand, Houston, TX--Presentation no longer
    available
        21. 09-11-18, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks, No
    presentations
        22. 10-02-18, SWARS, Dallas, TX--``MythBusters Tank Car
    Implosion''--Presentation no longer available; Video: https://
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBq5uapC-e0
        23. 11-11-18, Stephens Investor Conference, New York, NY--
    Participated in a three person panel (no presentation required)
    discussing current trends in the rail freight and rail equipment
    markets; No presentations
        24. 11-28-18, RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    Presentation no longer available
    2017
        25. 02-10-2017 Railway Supply Group, Chicago, IL--Presentation no
    longer available
        26. 02-22-07, Argus Asphalt Summit, Miami, FL--Presentation no
    longer available
        27. 02-26-17 EFLA, Houston, TX--Presentation no longer available
        28. 04-11-17, Infonex Hydrocarbon Transport, Calgary, AB--
    Presentation no longer available
        29. 05-16-17, PFITC, Rosemont, IL--Presentation no longer available
        30. 05-23-17, National Association of Rail Shippers, San Francisco,
    CA--Presentation no longer available
        31. 08-02-17, RSTAC, Washington, DC--Presentation no longer
    available
        32. 09-13-17, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        33. 11-11-17, Stephens Investor Conference, New York, NY--
    Participated in a three person panel (no presentation required)
    discussing current trends in the rail freight and rail equipment
    markets; No presentations
        34. 11-30-17, RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    Presentation no longer available
    2016
        35. 01-14-16, MARS, Oakbrook, IL--Presentation no longer available
        36. 02-11-16, ExpoRail, Acapulco, MX--Presentation no longer
    available
        37. 02-23-16 EFLA, Scottsdale, AZ--Presentation no longer available
        38. 03-02-16, Argus Americas Asphalt Summit, Miami, FL--
    Presentation no longer available
        39. 04-12-16, Infonex Hydrocarbon by Rail, Calgary, AB--
    Presentation no longer available
        40. 05-09-16, PFITC & P66, Atlanta, GA--Presentation no longer
    available
        41. 07-13-16, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB),
    Washington, DC--I participated in a roundtable discussion of the new
    regulations for the rail shipment of flammable liquids in tank car (no
    presentations but the session was video recorded)
       https://safetycompass.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/roundtable-
            review-part-1-the-latest-on-rail-tank-car-safety/
        42. 09-14-16, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        43. 11-07-16, Stephens Investor Conference, New York, NY--
    Participated in a three person panel (no presentation required)
    discussing current trends in the rail freight and rail equipment
    markets; No presentations
        44. 11-16-16, RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    Presentation no longer available
    2015
        45. 04-14-15, InfoNex CBR, Calgary, AB--Presentation no longer
    available
        46. 06-01-15, Argus Petro Transp Summit, Houston, TX--Presentation
    no longer available
        47. 06-03-15, PFITC, Lake Forest, IL--Presentation no longer
    available
        48. 09-15-15, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        49. 10-07-15, SWARS, Dallas, TX--Presentation no longer available
        50. 11-10-15, Stephens Investor Conference, New York, NY--
    Participated in a three person panel (no presentation required)
    discussing current trends in the rail freight and rail equipment
    markets; No presentations
        51. 11-18-15, RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    Presentation no longer available
    2014
        52. 04-07-14 InfoNex CBR, Calgary, AB--Presentation no longer
    available
        53. 06-24-14 Petrochem Tank Car, Houston, TX--Presentation no
    longer available
        54. 06-24-14 Shale Rail, Houston, TX--Presentation no longer
    available
        55. 09-09-14 FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        56. 09-16-14 Infonex CBR, Denver, CO--Presentation no longer
    available
        57. 11-20-14 RailTrends, New York, NY--``Railcar Market Outlook''
    Presentation no longer available
        58. 12-04-14 Infocast, Los Angeles, CA--Presentation no longer
    available
    2013
        59. 03-06-2013 Argus Americas Asphalt Summit, Houston, TX--
    Presentation no longer available
        60. 06-05-13 Argus N. Amer Crude Transportation Summit, Houston,
    TX--Presentation no longer available
        61. 09-24-13 FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
        62. 10-24-2013 Michigan State University, Chicago, IL--Presentation
    no longer available
    2012
        63. 02-12-12 Michigan State University, Chicago, IL--Presentation
    no longer available
        64. 03-04-12 REF, La Quinta, CA--Presentation no longer available
        65. 07-24-12 Proppants Summit, Denver, CO--Presentation no longer
    available
        66. 09-18-12 FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks, no
    presentations
        67. 10-04-12 SWARS, The Woodlands, TX--Presentation no longer
    available
    2011
        68. 03-06-11, REF, La Qunita, CA--Presentation no longer available
        69. 03-29-11, SEARS, Savannah, GA--Presentation no longer available
        70. 06-08-11, ASLRRA, Milwaukee, WI--Presentation no longer
    available
        71. 09-13-11, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
    2010
        72. 01-26-10, Northwestern University, Transportation Center,
    Sandhouse Gang, Evanston, IL--Presentation no longer available
        73. 03-07-10, Rail Equipment Finance Conference, La Qunita, CA--
    Presentation no longer available
        74. 05-24-10, DTE, Denver, CO--Presentation no longer available
        75. 05-26-10, Paper & Forest Products Transportation Committee
    (PFPTC)/National Association of Rail Shippers (NARS), Washington, DC--
    Presentation no longer available
        76. 09-14-10, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--Moderated multiple panels
    discussing rail freight and rail equipment markets and outlooks; No
    presentations
    2009
        77. 03-01-09, REF, La Qunita, CA--``The Market Outlook for Covered
    Hoppers'', Presentation no longer available
        78. 05-26-09, National Association of Rail Shippers, Chicago, IL,
    ``Rail Equipment Market Outlook'', Presentation no longer available
        79. 08-25-09, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--``The Outlook for Rail Freight
    and Equipment'', Presentation no longer available
    2007
        80. 08-27-07, FTR, Indianapolis, IN--``The Outlook for Rail Freight
    and Equipment'', Presentation no longer available
    2006
        81. 04-06-2006, North American Rail Mechanical Operations Seminar,
    ``A Cooperative Approach to Change''
        82. 05-06-2006, North America Rail Shippers Association Annual
    Meeting, ``Shaping Our Destiny Through Collaboration''
        83. 07-27-2006, Informa Economics--Transportation and Logistics
    Roundtable, ``Railcar Availability and Leasing Developments''
    2005
        84. 05-25-2005, Paper and Forest Industry Transportation Committee
    Meeting, ``Rail Industry and Equipment Outlook for the Forest Products
    Industry''
        85. 08-22-05, 2005, AAR Damage Prevention & Freight Claim
    Conference, ``Observations about Today's Boxcar Fleet''
        86. 09-07-2005, FTR Associates' 2005 Freight Transportation
    Conference, ``America's Freight Transportation through 2009''
        87. 11-10-2005, Association of Car Accounting and Car Service
    Officers' Annual Meeting, ``Today's North American Rail Car Fleet What
    is it Today? Some Implications and Consequences for the Future''
    2004
        88. 04-16-2004, Paper and Forest Industry Transportation Committee,
    ``Outlook for the Boxcar Fleet''
    2003
        89. 03-02-2003, TAPP! Paper Workshop, ``GE Rail's Paper Quality
    Boxcar Survey''
    2002
        90. 08-26-2002, American Shortline & Regional Railroad Association,
    Central/Pacific Region, ``The GE Boxcar Fleet and Deprescription''
        91. 09-30-2002, American Shortline & Regional Railroad Association,
    Southern Region, ``The GE Boxcar Fleet and Deprescription''
        92. 10-14-2002, American Shortline & Regional Railroad Association,
    Eastern Region, ``The GE Boxcar Fleet and Deprescription''
    1996
        93. February 1996, Wisconsin Pulp & Paper Manufactures
    Association--``An Overview of the Boxcar Fleet and Railcar Leasing'',
    Presentation no longer available
                                     ______

                 Appendix D--Articles where interviewed/quoted
    2025
        1. https://www.railwayage.com/news/a-wolfe-at-stbs-door-will-he-
    make-entry/ (July 30, 2025--not directly quoted)

        2. https://www.railwayage.com/news/kloster-schultz-chosen-for-stb-
    by-potus-47/ (September 11, 2025--not interviewed for this article but
    includes a quote from him from July, citing the ``A Wolfe. . .''
    article--quote is not in that prior article)
    2024
        3. https://www.progressiverailroading.com/rai1Prime/details/Survey-
    says-Caveats-abound-but-rail-finance-and-leasing-execs-expect-a-
    slightly-better-year--71195 (early 2024)

        4. https://www.railwayage.com/financeleasing/there-will-be-hell-to-
    pay/?RAchan
    nel=home (June 25, 2024--not quoted but providing data from Integrity
    Rail Partners)
    2023 (none found)
    2022 (none found)
    2021 (none found)
    2020
        5. https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/76560-2/ (June
    26, 2020
    --not direct quote)
    2019 (none found)
    2018
        6. https://tlimagazine.com/news/alltranstek-llc/ (June 25, 2018)
    2017
        7. https://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news/2017/10/31/american-
    railcar-indu
    stries-hit-by-lower-demand-as.html (October 31, 2017--not directly
    quoted)
    2016
        8. https://www.lohud.com/story/news/2016/07/13/oil-trains-using-
    fewer-older-tank-cars-official-says/87052990/ (July 13, 2016--Article
    about NTSB roundtable mentioned below near end of this document)

        9. https://www.progressiverailroading.com/mechanical/article/
    AllTranstek-tackles-imploding-tank-car-legend-on-MythBusters-TV-show--
    4762l (March 2016)
    2015
        10. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/shortage-of-railroad-boxcars-
    has-ship
    pers-fuming-2015-06-21 (June 21, 2015)
    Earlier than 2015
        11. https://www.ttnews.com/articles/icahn-tank-car-maker-joins-
    industry-defying-oils-decline (November 6, 2014)

        12. https://www.logisticsmgmt.com/article/
    cn_announces_plan_to_acquire_new_
    freight_cars_and_containers (September 13, 2012)
                                     ______

    Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 119th Congress by Richard James
                                    Kloster
        I would like to submit clarifications for the following three
    questions identified by the Committee. They are:

       A.4--Please clarify if the address listed is Mr. Kloster's
            residence or place of employment, or both. Provide a supplement
            as appropriate.

       A.11--Mr. Kloster's OGE 278e and Ethic Agreement indicates
            that he consults with Gerson Lehrman Group, Inc., AlphaSights
            Ltd., Capvision Pro Corporation, and Guidepoint Global LLC.
            These are also listed under E.2 of the questionnaire. Please
            clarify this and provide a supplement as necessary.

        Yes, I am supplementing my response to A.11 with these four
            companies for whom I was a consultant.

       A.18--We received the presentation slides that Mr. Kloster
            provided, but please provide a link to each presentation where
            available as well. Please provide a supplement as necessary.

        All of these events have been double checked and on-line links to
            the presentations are NOT available for any of them.

        The undersigned certifies that the information contained in the
    public addendum is true and correct.

    /s/ Richard J. Kloster Date: October 27, 2025

        Mr. Sheehy. Thank you, Mr. Kloster.
        Ms. Schultz, you are recognized for your opening statement.

      STATEMENT OF MICHELLE A. SCHULTZ, NOMINEE TO CONTINUE AS A
                  MEMBER, SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD

        Ms. Schultz. Thank you, Senator Cruz, Ranking Member
    Cantwell, Senator Lujan, and distinguished Members of the
    Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I am honored
    to appear before you today as you consider my nomination for a
    second term as a Member of the Surface Transportation Board. I
    am also grateful to President Trump for his continued
    confidence in me through this renomination.
        I wish to begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to the
    people who have supported me throughout my professional life.
    First and foremost, I thank my late parents, Ron and Bonnie
    Albright, whose example instilled in me the belief that hard
    work and integrity are the true measure of success. That
    principle guides me in everything I do. I would also like to
    acknowledge my brother, Dave; my sister-in-law, Heather, and my
    nephews Carson and Zach. Though they are not here today, their
    love and support are profoundly meaningful to me.
        Joining me today are my two daughters, Sophia and Ella
    Schultz, who are my greatest inspiration. Having them here
    today means the world to me. Last, I would like to thank my
    fellow Board Members, Chairman Fuchs, and Member Hedlund, for
    joining me today, and for their continued collegiality and
    dedication to our shared mission.
        For nearly five years, I have had the honor and privilege
    of serving on the Surface Transportation Board. From the
    beginning, I recognized the Board's critical role as the
    economic regulator of the freight rail industry and its
    responsibility for resolving service issues involving freight
    rail carriers and interstate passenger rail entities along with
    certain limited jurisdictional matters. While that remains true
    today, my time on the Board has deepened my appreciation for
    the complexity and significance of its work.
        By listening to stakeholders, reviewing the evidentiary
    record, and applying the law, I have gained a fuller
    understanding of how the Board's decisions affect American
    consumers, the supply chain, and ultimately the Nation's
    economy.
        During this time, I have worked closely with my colleagues
    and dedicated staff of the Board to ensure that the Nation's
    rail network operates efficiently and reliably. As a member, I
    have had the opportunity to navigate a wide range of complex
    and consequential challenges that reflect the evolving demands
    on our freight and passenger rail systems. These include:
    mergers, abandonments, service reliability issues, rail line
    construction applications, restoration of rail service, data
    modernization, on-time performance oversight, and rate review
    processes.
        In every matter that comes before the Board, I am guided by
    several core principles, the evidentiary record, the governing
    law, and the policy objectives set forth by Congress in the
    rail transportation policy. I am deeply aware of the impact
    that Board decisions have on the parties who appear before us
    and on the broader public.
        I take seriously the trust placed in me by Congress and the
    President. And I approach each case with fairness,
    impartiality, and a steadfast commitment to applying the law on
    its merits, always mindful of what best serves the long-term
    health and vitality of the National Rail Network.
        If confirmed, I will continue this approach and remain
    committed to advancing the Board's mission. I look forward to
    continuing to work collaboratively with industry stakeholders,
    my fellow members, and this Committee to address the important
    issues that come before the Board.
        Thank you for your time and consideration, and I look
    forward to answering any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement and biographical information of Ms.
    Schultz follow:]

      Prepared Statement of Michelle A. Schultz, Nominee to Continue as a
                      Member, Surface Transportation Board
        Thank you, Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and
    distinguished Members of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation
    Committee. I am honored to appear before you today as you consider my
    nomination for a second term as a Member of the Surface Transportation
    Board (``Board''). I am also grateful to President Trump for his
    continued confidence in me through this renomination.
        I wish to begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to the people
    who have supported me throughout my professional life. First and
    foremost, I thank my late parents, Ron and Bonnie Albright, whose
    example instilled in me the belief that hard work and integrity are the
    true measure of success. That principle guides me in everything I do. I
    would also like to acknowledge my brother Dave Albright, my sister-in-
    law Heather, and my nephews, Carson and Zach. Though they are not here
    today, their love and support are profoundly meaningful. Joining me
    today are my two daughters, Sophia and Ella Schultz, who are my
    greatest inspiration. Having them here today means the world to me.
    Lastly, I would like to thank my fellow Board Members, Chairman Fuchs
    and Member Hedlund, for joining me today and for their continued
    collegiality and dedication to our shared mission.
        For nearly five years, I have had the honor and privilege of
    serving on the Surface Transportation Board. From the beginning, I
    recognized the Board's critical role as the economic regulator of the
    freight rail industry and its responsibility for resolving service
    issues involving freight rail carriers and interstate passenger rail
    entities, along with certain limited jurisdictional matters. While that
    remains true today, my time on the Board has deepened my appreciation
    for the complexity and significance of its work. By listening to
    stakeholders, reviewing the evidentiary record, and applying the law, I
    have gained a fuller understanding of how the Board's decisions affect
    American consumers, the supply chain and ultimately, the Nation's
    economy.
        During this time, I have worked closely with my colleagues and the
    dedicated staff of the Board to ensure that our Nation's freight rail
    network operates efficiently and reliably. As a Member, I have had the
    opportunity to navigate a wide range of complex and consequential
    challenges that reflect the evolving demands on our freight and
    passenger rail systems. These include mergers, abandonments, service
    reliability issues, rail line construction applications, restoration of
    rail service, data modernization, on-time performance oversight, and
    rate review processes.
        In every matter that comes before the Board, I am guided by several
    core principles: the evidentiary record, the governing law, and the
    policy objectives set forth by Congress in the Rail Transportation
    Policy. I am deeply aware of the impact that Board decisions have on
    the parties who appear before us and on the broader public. I take
    seriously the trust placed in me by Congress and the President, and I
    approach each case with fairness, impartiality, and a steadfast
    commitment to applying the law on its merits--always mindful of what
    best serves the long-term health and vitality of the national rail
    network.
        If confirmed, I will continue this approach and remain committed to
    advancing the Board's mission. I look forward to continuing to work
    collaboratively with industry stakeholders, my fellow Members, and this
    Committee to address the important issues that come before the Board.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to
    answering any questions you may have.
                                     ______

                          a. biographical information
        1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used):

            Michelle Albright Schultz (2003 to present)
            Michelle Mummert Albright

        2. Position to which nominated: Member--Surface Transportation
    Board.
        3. Date of Nomination: September 10, 2025.
        4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses):

            Residence: Information not released to the public.
            Office: Information not provided.

        5. Date and Place of Birth: Information not provided.
        6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your
    spouse (if married) or domestic partner, and the names and ages of your
    children (including stepchildren and children by a previous marriage).

            James D. Schultz (Separated. July 2021. Divorced, September
            2025)
            Executive Vice President, Global Legal and Public Policy
            Scientific Games

        7. List all college and graduate schools attended, whether or not
    you were granted a degree by the institution. Provide the name of the
    institution, the dates attended, the degree received, and the date of
    the degree.

            Pennsylvania State University, BA English--1990-1994

            University of Manchester, Spring 1994 (Study abroad)

            Widener University School of Law, JD--1995-1998

            University of Pennsylvania, MGA--2006-2008

        8. List all post-undergraduate employment, including the job title,
    name of employer, and inclusive dates of employment, and highlight all
    management-level jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to
    the position for which you are nominated.

            Hanover Concrete Company, Treasurer (8/98-12/99)

            Superior Court of Pennsylvania-Law Clerk (1/00-6/00)

            United States Bankruptcy Court-Law Clerk (7/00-1/02)

            White and Williams LLP--Associate (1/02-8/06)

            Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (8/06-1/21)
                    Manager, Legislative Affairs
                    Director, Legislative Affairs
                    Deputy General Counsel

            Surface Transportation Board (1/21 to Present)

            Management positions include serving as the Treasurer of
            Hanover Concrete Co. 1/96-12/99); Director of Legislative
            Affairs (10/10-12/13); Deputy General Counsel (1/14 to 1/21);
            and Vice Chairman of the Surface Transportation Board (2/21-2/
            22, 1/25 to present).

        9. Attach a copy of your resume.
        Please see attached.
        10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time
    service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other
    than those listed above after 18 years of age.
        Not applicable.
        11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee,
    partner, proprietor, agent, representative, or consultant of any
    corporation, company, firm, partnership, or other business, enterprise,
    educational, or other institution.

            Passive Member--Tamarack Four LLC
            I did not hold any other positions.

        12. List all memberships you have had after 18 years of age or
    currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational,
    political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religiously
    affiliated organization, private club, or other membership organization
    (You do not have to list your religious affiliation or membership in a
    religious house of worship or institution). Include dates of membership
    and any positions you have held with any organization. Please note
    whether any such club or organization restricts membership on the basis
    of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.

            The Union League of Philadelphia. The club does not restrict
            membership on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national
            origin, age, or handicap.
            March 2015-July 2021.

        13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office
    (elected, non-elected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any
    campaign has any outstanding debt, the amount, and whether you are
    personally liable for that debt. No.
        14. List all memberships and offices held with and services
    rendered to, whether compensated or not, any political party or
    election committee within the past ten years. If you have held a paid
    position or served in a formal or official advisory position (whether
    compensated or not) in a political campaign within the past ten years,
    identify the particulars of the campaign, including the candidate, year
    of the campaign, and your title and responsibilities.
        Not applicable.
        15. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign
    organization, political party, political action committee, or similar
    entity of $200 or more for the past ten years.
    2015
            Pennsylvania Future Fund $1000.00 (February)

            Williams for Mayor $1000.00 (March)

            Keystone Alliance $1000.00 (April)

            Kevin Dougherty for Pennsylvania $1000.00 (May)

            Chris Christie for President $2700.00 (December)

            Friends of Pat Toomey $1000.00 (January)

            Friends of Bill Shuster $1000.00 (April)

            Keystone Alliance $1000.00 (April)

            Friends of Pat Toomey $1000.00 (May)

            Friends of Alex Charlton $1000.00 (October)

            Friends of Alex Charlton $1000.00 (November)
    2017
            Not applicable.
    2018
            Cozen O'Connor Pac $3100.00 (Various dates-January through
            June)

            Friends of Ken Lawrence $500.00 (May)

            Republican Party of Pennsylvania $2810.05 (August)

            McGarrigle for Senate $500.00 (August)

            Cozen O'Connor PAC $3100.00 (October)
    2019
            Cozen O'Connor PAC $400.00 (January)

            Brian Fitzpatrick for Congress $1000.00 (February)
    2020-2025
            Not applicable.

        16. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary
    society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition
    for outstanding service or achievements.
        Not applicable.
        17. List all books, articles, columns, letters to the editor,
    Internet blog postings, or other publications you have authored,
    individually or with others. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    publication when available.
        Not applicable.
        18. List all speeches, panel discussions, and presentations (e.g.,
    PowerPoint) that you have given on topics relevant to the position for
    which you have been nominated. Include a link to each publication when
    possible. If a link is not available, provide a digital copy of the
    speech or presentation when available.

            Southwest Association of Rail Shippers (SWARS)
            September 30, 2021--Fort Worth, TX (Attached)

            Association of Transportation Law Professionals Transportation
            Forum (ATLP)
            November 8, 2021--Virtual (Panel Discussion--Not applicable)

            Transportation Elevator & Grain Merchants Association 2022
            Annual Meeting (TEGMA)
            January 27, 2022--Phoenix, AZ (Panel Discussion--Not
            applicable)

            Northeast Association of Rail Shippers (NEARS)
            April 7, 2022--Baltimore, MD (Attached)

            Association of Transportation Law Professionals--Transportation
            Forum (ATLP)
            November 2, 2022--Washington, D.C. (Panel Discussion--Not
            applicable)

            National Grain & Feed Association Annual Convention (NGFA)
            March 21, 2023--Palm Springs, CA (Attached)

            Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries
            April 19, 2023--Nashville, TN (Q&A--Not applicable)

            Wolfe Research--Global Transportation Conference
            May 24, 2023--New York, New York (Attached)

            Association of Transportation Law Professionals Annual
            Conference (ATLP)
            June 27, 2023--Toronto, Canada (Q&A--Not applicable)

            The Fertilizer Institute Conference--(TFI)
            November 14, 2023--New Orleans, LA (Panel Discussion--Not
            applicable)

            Soybean & Grain Transportation Conference (SSGA)
            March 14, 2024--Toledo, OH (Attached)

            American Petroleum Institute (API)
            June 4, 2024--Washington, DC (Q&A--Not applicable)

            Association of Transportation Law Professionals Annual
            Conference (ATLP)
            June 24, 2024--Denver, CO (Panel Discussion--Not applicable)

            MEGA Supply Chain Societies of Delaware Valley Meeting
            October 10, 2024--Gwynedd Valley, PA (Attached)

            Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association (PRFBA)
            October 23, 2024--Virtual (Attached)

            RailTrends
            November 14, 2023--New York, New York (Attached)

            Association of Transportation Law Professionals Transportation
            Forum (ATLP)
            December 5, 2024--Washington, D.C. (Panel Discussion--Not
            applicable)

            Northeast Association of Rail Shippers (NEARS)
            September 19, 2025--Groton, CT (Q&A--Not applicable)

        19. List all public statements you have made during the past ten
    years, including statements in news articles and radio and podcasts and
    television appearances, which are on topics relevant to the position
    for which you have been nominated, including dates. Include a link to
    each statement when possible. If a link is not available, provide a
    digital copy of the statement when available.
        Not applicable.
        20. List all digital platforms (including social media and other
    digital content sites) on which you currently or have formerly operated
    an account, regardless of whether or not the account was held in your
    name or an alias. Include the full name of an ``alias'' or ``handle'',
    including the complete URL and username with hyperlinks, you have used
    on each of the named platforms. Indicate whether the account is active,
    deleted, or dormant. Include a link to each account if possible.

            Linkedin: Michelle Schultz

            Linkedin.com/in/michelle-schultz-47801aa

            Facebook: Michelle Albright Schultz
            www.facebook.com/michelle.a.schultz.5
            @michellealbrightschultz

            Instagram: Michelle Albright Schultz
            Michelleschultz7495

            X: @mich_albright

            Tiktok: M Sl295
            @user691737152

            Wikipedia: Michelle A. Schultz
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_A._Schultz

        21. Please identify each instance in which you have testified
    orally or in writing before Congress in a governmental or non-
    governmental capacity and specify the date, committee, and subject
    matter of each testimony.
        I testified before the Committee on Commerce, Science and
    Transportation of the United States Senate on April 11, 2018, regarding
    my nomination to the Surface Transportation Board.
        I testified before the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, the Subcommittee on
    Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials on May 12, 2022.
        22. Given the current mission, major programs, and major
    operational objectives of the department/agency/commission/corporation
    to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment
    experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment
    to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish
    to serve in that position?
        During my service on the Surface Transportation Board (``STB'')
    over the past five years, I have had the privilege of contributing to
    the Board's critical work overseeing our Nation's freight rail network.
    In this role, I have participated in decisions and rulemakings
    addressing service reliability, competition, rate disputes, and
    regulatory compliance always recognizing the need to balance the needs
    of shippers, carriers, and the broader public. This work has allowed me
    to apply my legal training and transportation policy background on a
    national scale, helping to ensure a fair, transparent, and efficient
    regulatory environment.
        Prior to my appointment, I worked for the Southeastern Pennsylvania
    Transportation Authority (``SEPTA'') for over 12 years. During that
    time, I became well versed in how railroads operate, how they interact
    with each other, and the challenges associated with those interactions.
    At SEPTA, I handled legislative, regulatory and compliance issues at
    the local, state and Federal levels, including matters related to the
    construction and reconstruction of commuter rail lines. Earlier in my
    career, I served as a law clerk for both the Superior Court of
    Pennsylvania and the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern
    District of Pennsylvania. Additionally, I was an attorney at a law firm
    in Philadelphia. My practice focused on creditor's rights and
    commercial litigation.
        I am seeking reappointment to the STB because I remain committed to
    serving the public through fair and balanced oversight of the Nation's
    freight rail network and other surface transportation. Our nation's
    economy and communities depend on a strong, reliable network and I
    believe the combination of my regulatory experience, legal expertise,
    and practical transportation knowledge enables me to continue
    contributing meaningfully to the Board's mission.
        23. What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to
    ensure that the department/agency/commission/corporation has proper
    management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in
    managing a large organization?
        As a Member of the Surface Transportation Board, it will continue
    to be incumbent upon me and my colleagues to issue decisions in a
    timely manner. With regard to the financial business and management of
    the STB, I believe Members are responsible for ensuring that proper
    management and accounting controls are in place and functioning
    effectively by ensuring that agency expenditures comply with
    appropriations law and are used only for authorized purposes; by
    following Office of Management and Budget guidance; and by meeting all
    statutory and congressional reporting requirements.
        The STB is annually audited by an independent audit firm, subject
    to the Department of Transportation's Office of Inspector General's
    oversight and in accordance with the Generally Accepted Government
    Auditing Standards. My responsibilities would also include continuing
    to implement the recommendations made by the independent audit firm.
        24. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the
    department/agency/commission/corporation, and why?
        I believe the top three challenges facing the agency are as
    follows:

            Continued Reform of Agency Process

            As part of Chairman Fuchs' broader initiative to enhance agency
            efficiency, transparency and accountability, I was asked by him
            to hold informal listening sessions with the practitioners who
            routinely appear before the Board. The goal of the sessions was
            to identify practical ways to streamline the Board's processes
            and procedures, particularly those impacting litigants and
            parties in matters before the Board.

            Over several days, I met with around 20 practitioners who
            provided more than 100 specific ideas for process improvements.
            The insight that was provided was incredibly helpful and a
            perspective that could only be provided by those who were
            routinely filing matters before the Board. Following the review
            and feedback, I submitted five initial recommendations to
            Chairman Fuchs which focused on actionable steps to streamline
            procedures such as enhancing case management and reducing
            administrative burdens.

            At this time, proactive steps have been taken to advance all
            five initiatives. I believe in the coming years, the Board
            should consider more of the ideas and implement them. While all
            of the suggestions address process reform, many of the
            suggestions would require rulemaking proceedings.

            Concluding Regulatory and Adjudicatory Proceedings

            In the past, the Surface Transportation Board has experienced a
            backlog on its docket. During the listening sessions I led in
            May 2025 with legal practitioners who routinely appear before
            the Board, a reoccurring comment was the impact that these
            delays have on stakeholders who have pending matters before the
            Board. Those stakeholders include Class I railroads, shippers,
            passenger rail operators, local governments, and landowners.
            These entities can face significant operational, financial and
            strategic consequences from delays in adjudicatory matters and
            rulemakings. In the past, some of these proceedings have
            languished for years due to backlogs. Delays force parties to
            incur ongoing legal, consulting, and compliance costs without
            resolution. They can also delay capital investments which stall
            growth and lead to costlier alternatives like increased
            reliance on trucking.

            In January 2025, Chairman Fuchs began ongoing efforts to
            address case backlogs as a priority for the agency to promote
            transparency and accountability. Under his leadership, Chairman
            Fuchs has implemented a reorganization of the agency to
            streamline the internal review process of the Board. This
            effort, along with process reform, has led to the agency
            substantially increasing the speed of decisions. I believe it
            is incumbent upon the Board to continue prioritizing any
            outstanding matters as well as continuing to issue decisions in
            a timely manner.

            Conducting Thorough Agency Analysis and Oversight

            Stakeholders provided positive feedback following the May
            listening sessions. Many indicated that it was the first time
            the Board has asked for this kind of insight and constructive
            criticism. Based upon this feedback, the Board should consider
            offering bi-annual reviews to create a regular, transparent
            forum for stakeholders to assess the STB's processes and
            provide actionable feedback on areas for improvement. This
            initiative would enhance accountability by systematically
            evaluating the Board's performance and holding the SIB
            accountable to its mission of accountability and fair
            regulation. Regular engagement would also ensure that diverse
            perspectives from small shippers to Class I railroads are
            incorporated, building upon the collaborative model of the 2025
            listening sessions. Bi-annual reviews would establish a
            consistent feedback loop and would allow the SIB to adapt to
            evolving industry needs and regulatory challenges.
                       b. potential conflicts of interest
        1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation
    agreements, and other continuing dealings with business associates,
    clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement
    accounts, such as a 401(k) or pension plan.
        I have no existing financial arrangements or deferred compensation
    agreements or dealings with business associates, clients, or customers.
    I participate in Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
    (SEPTA) Defined Contribution Plan. While I will continue to participate
    in this defined contribution plan, SEPTA ceased making contributions
    upon my separation. I also participate in SEPTA's defined benefit plan,
    where I will receive a defined pension starting at age 62. These are
    listed in Section E. 1.
        2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal,
    to maintain employment, affiliation, or practice with any business,
    association, or other organization during your appointment? If so,
    please explain. No.
        3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other
    relationships which could involve potential conflicts of interest in
    the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will
    resolve each potential conflict of interest.
        I was employed by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation
    Authority from 2006 until 2021. Upon confirmation of my first term as a
    Member of the STB, I entered into an Ethics Agreement and agreed not to
    participate personally and substantially in any particular matter where
    SEPTA was a party for a period of one year after my resignation from
    SEPTA. This time period has now passed, and I do not have any other
    potential conflicts of interest.
        4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial
    transaction which you have had during the last ten years, whether for
    yourself, on behalf of a client, or acting as an agent, that could in
    any way constitute or result in a possible conflict of interest in the
    position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you will resolve
    each potential conflict of interest.
        I am not aware that I hold any financial interest that would raise
    a possible conflict of interest. However, in my Ethics Agreement, I
    have pledged that I will not participate personally and substantially
    in any particular matter in which I know that I have a financial
    interest directly and predictably affected by the matter, or in which I
    know that a person whose interests are imputed to me has a financial
    interest directly and predictably affected by the particular matter,
    unless I first obtain a written waiver, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
    Sec. 208(b)(l). I understand that the interests of the following
    persons are imputed to me:

       Any spouse or minor child of mine;

       Any general partner of a partnership in which I am a limited
            or general partner;

       Any organization in which I serve as an officer, director,
            trustee, general partner, or employee, even if uncompensated;
            and

       Any person or organization with which I am negotiating or
            have an arrangement concerning prospective employment.

        5. Identify any other potential conflicts of interest and explain
    how you will resolve each potential conflict of interest.
        I do not have any other potential conflicts of interest.
        6. Describe any activity during the past ten years, including the
    names of clients represented, in which you have been engaged for the
    purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or
    modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and
    execution of law or public policy.
        I have not engaged in influencing the passage, defeat or
    modification of legislation during the past ten years.
                                c. legal matters
        1. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics,
    professional misconduct, or retaliation by, or been the subject of a
    complaint to, any court, administrative agency, the Office of Special
    Counsel, an Inspector General, professional association, disciplinary
    committee, or other professional group? If yes:

      a.  Provide the name of the court, agency, association, committee, or
            group;

      b.  Provide the date the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action was issued or initiated;

      c.  Describe the citation, disciplinary action, complaint, or
            personnel action;

      d.  Provide the results of the citation, disciplinary action,
            complaint, or personnel action.

        No.
        2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by
    any Federal, State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal,
    State, county, municipal, or foreign government entity, other than for
    a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain. No.
        3. Have you or any business or nonprofit of which you are or were
    an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency
    proceeding, criminal proceeding, or civil litigation? If so, please
    explain. No.
        4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo
    contendere) of any criminal violation other than a minor traffic
    offense? If so, please explain. No.
        5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual
    assault, sexual harassment, or discrimination on the basis of sex,
    race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please explain. No.
        6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information,
    favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in
    connection with your nomination.
        It has been an extraordinary honor and privilege to serve on the
    Surface Transportation Board. I am profoundly grateful to President
    Trump for his nominations and trust in my ability to serve. I would
    also like to extend my sincere gratitude to the Senate Commerce
    Committee for their thoughtful consideration of my nomination. If
    granted the opportunity to continue, I am fully committed to supporting
    the stakeholders who depend on our Nation's surface transportation
    system by delivering diligent and equitable oversight of the
    transportation network that is vital to our Nation's economy and our
    communities.
                         d. relationship with committee
        1. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation complies with deadlines for information set by
    congressional committees, and that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation endeavors to timely comply with requests for information
    from individual Members of Congress, including requests from members in
    the minority? Yes.
        2. Will you ensure that your department/agency/commission/
    corporation does whatever it can to protect congressional witnesses and
    whistleblowers from reprisal for their testimony and disclosures? Yes.
        3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested
    witnesses, including technical experts and career employees, with
    firsthand knowledge of matters of interest to the Committee? Yes.
        4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly
    constituted committee of the Congress on such occasions as you may be
    reasonably requested to do so? Yes.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

      Addendum to the questionnaire submitted to the Senate Committee on
       Commerce, Science and Transportation, 119th Congress by Michelle
                               Albright Schultz.
        Upon further review, I have identified 17 additional submissions
    that are responsive to the Committee's questionnaire. They are as
    follows:
        It is:
        A.Q11, In my Senate Questionnaire from my 2019 nomination I
    included the following:

      a.  General Partner--Tamarack Four

      b.  Officer (Treasurer)--Gettysburg Concrete Company

        A.Q15, please include the following political contribution:
        2016: $1,000, Democratic Party Joshua Shapiro for Attorney General
        A.16--In the Senate Questionnaire I submitted for my 2019
    nomination, I listed the Stephen B. Sweeney Award from the University
    of Pennsylvania for commitment to local government and public service.
    I did not include it in the submission to the 119th Congress because it
    was issued in 2010 which was outside of the ten year period. Q19,
    please include the following public statements made within the last ten
    years:

      a.  6/11/2025, Article, STB Looks to Streamline Operations. Railway
            Age

      b.  6/1/2025, STB Press Release, STB Gathers More Than 100 Ideas From
            Legal Practitioners to Streamline Board Processes

      c.  5/1/2025, STB Press Release, Vice Chairman Michelle Schultz to
            Hold Listening Sessions on Legal Processes and Procedures

      d.  11/18/2024, Article, Railroads have turned the corner on service
            and resiliency, analysts say FreightWaves

      e.  12/3/2024, Article, STB misses its own deadline for issuing
            decision on CN's acquisition of Iowa Northern, TrainsPro

      f.  5/10/2024, STB Press Release, STB Chairman Martin Oberman Retires

      g.  3/24/2023, Article, STB's Michelle Schultz addresses recent rail
            challenges. World-Grain

      h.  8/15/2023, Article, STB decides against BNSF's request to stay
            coal order, FreightWaves

      i.  9/14/2023, Article, Viewpoint: The market, not the regulators,
            should set freight rail prices, FreightWaves

      j.  6/26/2023, Article, STB orders BNSF to send more coal trains to
            Montana mine, FreightWaves

      k.  1/22/2021, STB Press Release, Surface Transportation Board
            Members Thank Ann Begeman, Congratulate Martin Oberman as
            Chairmanship Changes Hands

      l.  7/11/2019, Article Senate Committee Approves STB Nominee Michelle
            Schultz, Transport Topics

      m.  4/11/2018. Article, Senate Considers Presidential Nominees for
            Surface Transportation Board, Transport Topics
                                     ______

        Thank you for the introduction. It's so great to be here with all
    of you this afternoon in New York.
        When I look at what we are facing in the rail industry, I am
    reminded of a quote from Paulo Coelho, the author of the Alchemist:

            ``When we least expect it, life sets us a challenge to test our
            courage and willingness to change; at such a moment, there is
            no point in pretending that nothing has happened or in saying
            that we are not yet ready. The challenge will not wait.''

        The last few years have brought unprecedented challenges to the
    Nation's economy, our supply chain and the freight rail network. I am
    certain that everyone in this room has been following these challenges
    very closely. Supply chain disruptions have increased transportation
    costs for U.S. rail shippers in virtually every sector and industry.
    And while I know that unreliable service has cost rail shippers
    millions of dollars in lost profit, perhaps now just might be the time
    that these challenges are transformed into opportunities for change and
    for growth in the rail industry. Let me explain. ___
        We all know that at the beginning of last year service was bad and
    getting worse. Velocity was down. ___ Terminal dwell and dwell at orgin
    was up for some railroads by double digits. And trains holding due to
    crew issues were also substantially up. We heard from many stakeholders
    about just how bad the service had gotten. The National Grain and Feed
    Association recounted how one of its members had to spend $3 million on
    secondary freight to keep animals fed, and another had to stop selling
    feed because a loaded train sat at origin for one week because of a
    lack of crew. In April, 2022, the Board held a two-day hearing on
    freight rail service challenges and heard from various industries and
    public officials including the Secretary of Transportation as well as
    executives from the Class I carriers. Not only did we hear in great
    detail about the extraordinary service disruptions, but also about the
    challenges associated with a rail labor shortage, which by the way,
    were pointed to by labor and the carriers themselves.
        Immediately following the hearing, we issued an order requiring the
    reporting of service metrics and head counts. In the months that
    followed, we carefully monitored the bi-weekly reports and we started
    to see improvements across the network. During this time, Members of
    the Board met with the CEOs of the Class I carriers who shared their
    plans on service recovery and their plans to attract and retain rail
    labor during what we know was one of the tightest labor markets we have
    experienced in decades. Just a few weeks ago, the Board extended its
    temporary reporting period for all Class 1 carriers through the end of
    this year. And in that decision, the Board recognized that CSX met most
    of its service improvement targets and reduced CSX's reporting
    requirements.
        As if the post-pandemic recovery did not present enough of a
    challenge, six months ago, the rail carriers and the unions were
    engaged in a labor dispute that posed a threat of bringing our freight
    rail network to a grinding halt. This would have cost our economy
    upwards of at least $1 billion per day and could have driven prices
    even higher for many consumer goods. And while the Board had no role in
    the negotiations, many of us held our breath along with the rest of the
    nation, until early December when the President signed a bill that
    imposed a settlement between labor and the carriers.
        During the months leading up to the settlement, we became aware
    that Union Pacific was planning to reduce the number of cars on their
    network. Let me take a minute to walk through the issue. In order to
    reduce the number of cars, UP reached out to the customers that they
    believed had an excess number of cars on their system. UP then asked
    those customers to remove a certain number of cars within seven days.
    If a customer could not achieve UP's goal, a congestion embargo would
    be put in place unless the customer sought a permit. By the first week
    of December 2022, UP had put more than 1000 embargos in place for the
    year, and there were 141 active embargoes, all due to congestion. By
    way of comparison, in 2017, UP had implemented only 27. So in the
    second week of December, the Board conducted a two-day hearing with UP
    regarding the substantial increase in their use of embargoes as a
    method of reducing rail traffic congestion. As of April, 2023, UP
    discontinued its Pipeline Inventory Management Program and reduced
    their use of congestion-related embargos by 50 percent compared to last
    year. And while I applaud UP in its reduction, in my view, it's not
    enough because I understand the extreme difficulties that being
    embargoed places on a shipper. They have to assign manpower to deal
    with the issue, choose which shipments to reduce or delay, decide which
    receivers are going to be told that they aren't getting their shipment,
    and then try to move some traffic by truck, if they can. It just
    injects so much unnecessary difficulty and uncertainty as well as
    increased cost. And that's why I hope that UP's goal will be to achieve
    the industry standard.
        At this point many of you may be wondering how do any of these
    circumstances lead to growth and transformation? Service disruptions?
    The threat of a national rail shutdown? Embargos? How could any of
    these circumstances lead to positive changes of any kind on the
    network?
        Last year, I met with each of the Class I CEOs but two
    conversations in the latter part of the year stood out from all the
    others. Those were the meetings that I had with CEO Joe Hinrichs of CSX
    and CEO Alan Shaw of Norfolk Southern. As some of the other CEO's
    acknowledged, service was improving but was still not where they wanted
    it to be. But here's how these two meetings differed--both Joe and Alan
    talked about how they wanted to focus more on resiliency, taking a more
    customer-centric focus. It was also important to them to capture more
    freight volumes from truck and to improve their relationship with their
    employees. But perhaps most surprising to me, they were no longer going
    to focus exclusively on operating ratio and instead they talked about
    their goal to pivot toward growth. At the conclusion of both meetings,
    I found myself surprisingly in agreement with their goals and I hoped
    they would be successful--success in all of these areas would mean that
    these carriers would greatly improve in their ability to deliver
    predictable, reliable service to their customers and afford their
    customers the ability to ship more volume by rail instead of truck.
        But at the same time, I also had to wonder, was this just a message
    that was being delivered behind closed doors to a regulator that they
    knew had been receiving a high number of complaints about rail service?
    Haven't the Carriers made promises of improved service in the past
    while at the same time promising their investors that they would reach
    an even lower operating ratio by reducing expenses--which often means
    cutting headcounts? How was this time any different?
        Here, they were saying the opposite. They would not be identifying
    an OR goal and would be focusing on ``resiliency'' by actually
    increasing headcounts and improving retention. I would also say that
    what made this message different is that it was not just delivered to
    me but was also delivered publicly and directly to their investors. And
    what everyone knows is that resiliency is not just good for shippers,
    it's also good for the carriers as we watched this play out during the
    pandemic. There's a saying that comes to mind--luck is what happens
    when preparation meets opportunity. In order to take advantage of the
    surge in demand, grow their volumes, and provide predictable service,
    carriers needed to be prepared for it, and they were not.
        And while no one could have predicted the pandemic or the national
    labor shortage that followed, what this experience has now shown is
    resiliency matters. ___ And the Carriers are making positive changes.
    Headcounts are increasing. According to our Office of Economics, total
    employment for the carriers is up by over 5 percent from last--with two
    Carriers--CSX and CPKC, now having reached pre-pandemic headcounts. And
    in recent weeks, all 6 of the Class I's have reached agreements
    awarding sick leave to some of their employees. I believe these
    agreements will further improve the quality of life for employees and
    most likely lead to a higher rate of retention and better resiliency.
        And just to give some more credit where it's due, let me talk for a
    moment about CN which held its investor day just a little over three
    weeks ago. Like Norfolk Southern and CSX, CN is focused on growth,
    customer service and resiliency. CEO Tracy Robinson and COO Ed Harris
    stated that CN is focused on the ``right operating model'' and that
    ``the Plan is Sacred.'' CN is committed to starting their trains on
    time, improving velocity and retaining its work force. CN went so far
    as to say ``that they are done cutting heads and that the way railroads
    make money is to keep things moving.'' Although CN was questioned
    extensively about its plans to increase capital expenditures, it is my
    hope that CN will be successful in its new operating model. If they
    are--they might better match the needs of shippers who routinely tell
    me that they want to ship more volume by rail.
        One of the other reasons I am optimistic about the near future in
    the rail industry is the promise of what improved technology could do
    to benefit railroad-shipper relationships as well. When I first joined
    the Board two years ago, I was talking to a fellow Board Member and I
    was absolutely blown away to learn that you cannot track railcars as
    well as you can track an Amazon package. And today, I am still not sure
    about what is holding the industry back. But I do believe technology
    that would provide transparency might resolve a lot of the issues that
    rail customers are complaining about.
        In my meetings with shippers, there are three main complaints that
    I hear about. First, they would like to ship more volume by rail.
    Second, they would like to have better communication with their
    Carriers about delayed shipments and the location of their rail cars.
    And third, and by far the most frequent complaint I hear about is the
    lack of predictable service. I think improved technology and better
    transparency on the network could give shippers at least part of what
    they are asking for--more knowledge about where their shipments are and
    when they will arrive.
        Now I would like to spend a minute talking about the important and
    often difficult issue of regulation. The Surface Transportation Board
    is directed by Congress to follow the principles set forth in the Rail
    Transportation Policy enacted by Congress. While some of these
    principles are often viewed as competing, one such principle to quote
    ``is to minimize the need for Federal regulatory control over the rail
    transportation system and to require fair and expeditious regulatory
    decisions when regulation is required.'' End quote. I call attention to
    this policy in particular because the plain words of the statute
    require the Board to implement regulations ``when they are required.''
    I believe when ``regulations are required'' is a viewpoint that differs
    greatly. To me, the role of the Board is to determine two things:
    whether there are issues that rise to the level of the need for
    regulatory action and whether the issue can be solved by regulation. In
    order to make that determination, the Board must consider both the
    principles of the Rail Transportation Policy as well as carefully
    consider any potential unintended consequences of the proposed
    regulatory solution. After input and comment from the industry, the
    Board must then consider whether the benefits of the proposed
    regulatory solution will outweigh any unintended harm.
        If CSX, Norfolk Southern, and CN are successful in achieving their
    goals, they could accomplish more to improve service than any
    regulation that is implemented by the Board. At the end of the day,
    what shippers deserve is dependable service that is delivered with a
    customer-centric focus. And while opinions may differ, my own view is
    that the Carriers themselves will do a much better job of voluntarily
    achieving this goal across their networks than perhaps any changes that
    can be put into place through regulation. This is not to say that there
    are not circumstances that warrant regulation. It is just to say that
    in my view, the Carriers are in the best position to make operational
    decisions on how to meet the needs of their customers. And while
    regulations may correct certain issues, at the end of the day, only the
    Carriers themselves can deliver a good service product that meets the
    needs of their customers.
        And so, again, it is my sincere hope that CSX, Norfolk Southern,
    and CN can successfully achieve the goals they've outlined not just for
    the sake of their customers but for the industry as a whole. If they
    are successful, this could result in higher headcounts, the ability to
    meet more of their customers' needs as well as better fluidity on the
    network. And most importantly, if CSX, Norfolk Southern, and CN are
    successful, perhaps this would inspire some other Carriers to pivot
    toward growth as well. Improving the freight rail network and shipping
    more volume of freight by rail will not only better meet the needs of
    the carrier's customers, it will improve the Nation's economy and
    reduce costs for every U.S. consumer.
        I believe these remain challenging times on the freight rail
    network but I can't help but be optimistic about the future. There are
    a lot of opportunities for rail service to improve. Rail carriers, at
    least some of them, are showing that they have the courage and
    willingness to change their operating models with a goal to improve
    service, become more reliable, and grow volumes. The winds, I think,
    are shifting, and so I think we might see in these difficult times the
    beginnings of a great and much needed transformation in the rail
    industry.
        I look forward to our continued conversation and thank all of you
    for your continued interest in the state of the freight rail network.
    Introduction
        First, I want to thank the sponsors of the Mega Meeting for having
    me speak tonight: the Institute for Supply Management, the Southeastern
    Pennsylvania Alliance Chapter of ASCM, the Council of Supply Chain
    Management Professionals, the Traffic Clubs of Philadelphia and the
    Lehigh Valley, and the Warehousing Education and Research Council.
    Also, in particular, I want to thank Paul Delp of Lansdale Warehouse
    Company for reaching out to me and asking me to speak. Paul served on
    the STB's Railroad Shipper Transportation Advisory Council for 6 years.
    Paul--thank you for your service and for your willingness to share your
    insight with the Members of the Board.
        Before I begin, I want to get a couple of preliminary items out of
    the way: First, nothing that I say tonight represents the views of the
    Surface Transportation Board or any of the other members. And second, I
    am unfortunately prohibited from discussing any pending proceedings
    before the Board or matters that are currently in litigation or on
    appeal.
        With that out of the way, can I just say, what a time to be giving
    this speech. I feel like the supply chain is often an afterthought--
    something that just works, and when it's working, people don't think
    about how the journey their new car, or stove, or whatever else is that
    they purchased, got to them. Which port did it come in through? Was it
    put on a truck, or shipped by rail? Who made those decisions? That is,
    of course, until the something goes wrong. And it is never good when
    the supply chain is in the news, is it? When it is, its never because
    of how smoothly things are moving.
        And speaking of times when the supply chain is in the news -as you
    all know, earlier this month we had a brief longshoreman strike on the
    East and Gulf Coasts. That certainly affected traffic flows here, but
    it also affected traffic flows on the West Coast. Union Pacific said
    that its container volumes were up 40 percent year over year in
    September as shippers diverted traffic in anticipation of the strike.
    BNSF also noted increase in volumes and both railroads had contingency
    plans in place to deal with the increase in traffic. I am extremely
    grateful that the strike has ended and the ports are back on line--with
    regard to this region, in August, I had the opportunity to tour the
    Port of Philadelphia and was hosted by Dominic O'Brien. During the
    tour, I was able to hear and experience first hand how vital the Port
    is to this region and its economic growth. It affects which companies
    locate here and who does business here. For example, Ikea, after
    encountering delays at the Port of New York and New Jersey, decided to
    run everything through Philadelphia. To turn this back to rail, good
    rail service at the Port means that containers can move efficiently and
    reliably which gives the Port the ability to move more goods. Growth in
    rail capacity enables growth at the Port and ultimately leads to
    economic growth for the Greater Philadelphia region.
        And so now, I would take a moment to talk about the role of the
    Surface Transportation Board in the economy, including a little bit of
    background on the Board for anyone who isn't familiar with us. I'd also
    like to highlight a few recent issues that the Board has dealt with,
    including the hearing on growth in the freight rail industry we held
    just last month. And I'd like to talk about what I see as the current
    outlook for the Board, as well as for rail service generally. In a room
    full of supply chain professionals, I know that all of you know even
    better than I do how interconnected the supply chain is. As I said
    before, I do not speak for the Board, and I don't speak for my
    colleagues on the Board. But I hope that you'll gain insight from
    hearing at least one Member's thoughts on the role of the Board in the
    supply chain and how the growth of freight rail is a rising tide that
    lifts all boats.
    II. The Role of the Board
        And so what is the role of the Board? The Surface Transportation
    Board was created in 1996 to take over many of the functions of the
    Interstate Commerce Commission. It is an independent agency, and
    although we have several areas of responsibility, our primary role
    involves economic regulation of the freight rail industry. We hear
    cases brought by shippers challenging rates, and we have jurisdiction
    over railroad practices and service. We also review rail mergers, rail
    construction, and abandonment of railroads. In some regards the rail
    industry has been deregulated, but there is still a place and a need
    for regulation since many shippers do not have options when it comes to
    which railroad they use or whether they can use another mode of
    transportation at all. I am a big believer in competition, and so I
    want competition and the market to drive railroads' business decisions,
    not government regulations. But where there is a market failure or
    there is insufficient competition, that is the core area of where the
    Board should regulate.
        In a sense, our role is often as a backstop. When the rail network
    is not working, there can be significant consequences, both for the
    network as a whole and for an individual shipper. In either situation,
    the effects can reverberate from the shipper to the receiver, and to
    other consumers. And so while it is always my hope that railroads run
    their networks efficiently and provide good service to shippers, there
    are times when challenges occur and the Board is called upon to
    intervene.
    III. Recent Board Issues
        And now I would like to turn to some recent Board issues. The STB
    is a small agency, but a busy one. And while I have not agreed with all
    of the Board's actions over the last few years, I think that overall we
    have had a positive impact on our small part of the supply chain.
    First, in 2022, rail service had reached a crisis point. The Board held
    a hearing and imposed new temporary reporting requirements related to
    service and employment levels. They say sunshine is the best
    disinfectant, and I think that requiring the Big Four railroads--Union
    Pacific, BNSF, CSX, and Norfolk Southern--to identify service and
    employment targets and regularly report metrics played a small part in
    helping to end that crisis. Today, while there are still pockets of
    difficulties, as there always are, the rail network is running fluidly.
    As noted by one of the panelists at the recent growth hearing, not only
    are volumes up this year, but train speeds are up, and dwell is down.
    In short, more freight is moving while service continues to improve.
    CPKC MERGER:
        One of the most significant transactions that has ever been handled
    by the Board took place just last year when the Board approved the
    largest rail merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern
    to become CPKC. The merger created the first railroad to span the
    United States, Canada, and Mexico, and the Board found that the merger
    would enhance competition and support the growth of the freight rail
    network.
    RECIPROCAL SWITCHING:
        And earlier this year, the Board created a new rule which had been
    under consideration for quite some time. This rule was EP 711 and
    commonly referred to as reciprocal switching. Reciprocal switching
    gives certain shippers in terminal areas who have access to a single
    railroad the opportunity to get rail service from an alternate
    railroad. If the shipper's host railroad falls below certain metrics,
    the shipper then has the opportunity to come to the Board to seek a
    reciprocal switch.
    IV. The Growth Hearing, the State of the Rail Network, and Importance
            of Freight Rail
        And that brings me to September's hearing on growth in the freight
    rail industry. Not to put too fine a point on it, but a healthy and
    growing freight rail industry benefits everyone--even if you ship
    nothing by rail, and a lot of shippers do have the choice to ship by
    truck instead. But moving shipments from truck to rail benefits
    everyone. Rail is cheaper. It is better for the environment. It takes
    trucks off the road, which decreases wear and tear on public
    infrastructure and even saves lives.
        While several parties at the growth hearing had valid criticisms
    for past or current practices of the railroads, something that I must
    underscore is that the United States freight rail network remains the
    best in the world. It is a phenomenal resource, even when it's not
    running optimally. This benefits the supply chain, which can take
    advantage of the private investments that railroads have made into the
    network, and it benefits the economy, as it offers a fuel-efficient,
    cost-efficient option for shippers to move their goods. But despite the
    clear benefits of rail, many shippers who could ship by rail choose to
    ship by truck. The hearing got into several reasons for this preference
    for truck, but two big issues from shippers was a lack of reliability
    and communication from the railroads.
        Shippers often see rail as less reliable than truck, and it is
    easier to figure out where a truck is and when it will arrive at its
    destination than it is with a railcar. Both of these are valid points,
    and issues that the Class I railroads can and must address. And it
    really gets to what my chief concern always is in my role--rail
    service. Poor service impacts shippers and it impacts the national
    economy. But I have said, and I will say it again, regulations cannot
    provide good service. Carriers are the only ones with that power. So I
    want to give railroads room to run and operate the way that they want.
    They should be able to innovate, shift resources, and do what they
    think is best for their business. The same is true for shippers. And
    carriers, like shippers, are in the best position to know what
    resources they need to compete and perform well.
        That being said, we've seen what happens when service suffers, and
    that is that, understandably, there are calls for increased regulation
    of the rail industry. And I will be the first to say, increased
    regulation is not something I want, and it is not something that
    Congress wanted when it created the Board. The Surface Transportation
    Board is directed to follow the principles set forth in the Rail
    Transportation Policy enacted by Congress. While some of these
    principles are often viewed as competing, one such principle is to
    quote ``minimize the need for Federal regulatory control over the rail
    transportation system and to require fair and expeditious regulatory
    decisions when regulation is required.'' I call attention to this
    policy in particular because the plain words of the statute require the
    Board to implement regulations ``when they are required.'' I believe
    when ``regulations are required'' is a viewpoint that differs greatly.
    To me, the role of the Board is to determine two things: whether there
    are issues that rise to the level of the need for regulatory action and
    whether the issue can be solved by regulation. In order to make that
    determination, the Board must consider both the principles of the Rail
    Transportation Policy as well as carefully consider any potential
    unintended consequences of the proposed regulatory solution. After
    input and comment from the industry, the Board must then consider
    whether the benefits of the proposed regulatory solution will outweigh
    any unintended harm.
        At the end of the day, what shippers deserve is dependable service
    that is delivered with a customer-centric focus. And while opinions may
    differ, my own view is that the Carriers themselves will do a much
    better job of voluntarily achieving this goal across their networks
    than perhaps any changes that can be put into place through regulation.
    This is not to say that there are not circumstances that warrant
    regulation. It is just to say that in my view, the Carriers are in the
    best position to make operational decisions on how to meet the needs of
    their customers. They can make improvements faster and without the
    negative consequences of increased regulation, and so, ideally, they
    will continue to improve and make increased regulation by the Board
    unnecessary.
        But I think the freight rail industry is poised to move forward,
    and the Philadelphia region is already seeing the benefits. The rail
    industry is starting to turn a little bit and become more customer
    oriented, seeking to grow its volumes rather than focus on increasing
    prices or cutting costs. The East Coast's two major railroads, CSX and
    Norfolk Southern, are two of the railroads that are really leading the
    charge in terms of changing the way they do business. Both railroads
    are focusing on resiliency and customer service. I think their quick
    actions after the Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore are evidence of
    that. When I asked CSX and NS about their response to the Key Bridge
    collapse at the recent growth hearing, let me tell you what they said.
    The CEO of CSX, Joe Heinrichs said that two things really helped--
    first, operations and sales within CSX worked well together to come up
    with solutions quickly. But he also said that it was the improved
    relationship with labor that allowed CSX to go to the union and the
    next day get approval to transfer employees. Without sufficient
    employees, and without a strong working relationship between labor and
    management, these types of quick actions are just not going to happen.
    And Ed Elkins from NS talked about the importance of fluidity and
    having capacity for resiliency that you can apply when things go wrong
    because there's always something that is going to go wrong. Ed also
    talked about the importance of trust with employees, customers, and
    even the ship operators. He indicated that things are going to go
    wrong, and the true test is how well the railroad is able to bounce
    back to normal operations. As both of these railroads serve
    Philadelphia, including the Port of Philadelphia, the benefits to the
    region are clear if CSX and NS are able to continue to improve service
    and their resiliency.
        And while there is certainly room for improvement in the rail
    industry, there is also a lot to be optimistic about. Carriers are
    creating new partnerships with trucking companies to provide service
    that is more competitive with truck, such as BNSF's Quantum service in
    partnership with J.B. Hunt. Norfolk Southern has created a new
    department seeking to fuel customer growth and make rail easier to use,
    and it is working more closely with short lines to improve interchange.
    These are just a couple of examples of how the Class I railroads are
    changing their operations in order to drive growth. And I would be
    remiss if I did not mention the railroads efforts over the past couple
    of years to enter into paid sick leave agreements with their labor
    unions, which help retain and attract employees, because you can't have
    growth without employees. I hope to see more of approaches like these
    in the future, because I think that rail has a bright future,
    especially if carriers provide the type of reliable service that their
    customers deserve.
    V. Rail Customer and Public Assistance Program
        Before I close, I have to plug the Board's Rail Customer and Public
    Assistance Program. You can find information about the program on the
    Board's website under the ``Resources'' tab. If you're a shipper and
    are having service issues or some other issue that you think the Board
    can help with, they are a great first call. Agency staff who work in
    the program are highly knowledgeable, and they can help with anything
    from giving you some information over the phone to informal mediation.
    And if you are having an issue and would just like to talk to someone,
    they will not reveal your identity to the railroad or other party
    without your consent. Again, it's informal, so they can't give you any
    binding guidance, but they are able to solve a lot of issues quicker,
    on an informal basis, before the issue ever gets to the Board itself.
    VI. Closing
        In closing, I would like to reiterate that the United States has
    the most extensive freight rail network in the world. The value of that
    resource cannot be overstated, and freight railroads are vital to
    shippers and the U.S. economy. 40 percent of long-distance freight in
    the U.S. moves by rail. At the end of the day, what I care about is
    service. While the Board should do what it can to ensure the fluidity
    of the network, the Board cannot provide service through regulation.
    Only the carriers can do that. So if the network is running smoothly
    and carriers are meeting the needs of shippers by providing reliable
    service, that makes my job a whole lot easier, and it avoids the
    negative consequences of additional regulations, which, while well-
    intentioned, can instead stifle the same growth in the rail industry
    that we all want to see.
        Thank you all for the opportunity to be here tonight and for the
    important role that all of you serve in keeping our supply chain and
    the Nation's economy moving.
                                     ______

        Good afternoon, everyone. It's great to be here, and thank you for
    giving me the opportunity to update you on what's going on at the
    Board. Before I begin, I'd like to have someone else come up here with
    me. [Gabe Meyer is here today representing the Board's Rail Customer
    and Public Assistance Program, and I just want Gabe to introduce
    himself, so you can put a face to the name, and he'll tell you a little
    bit about the program and where you can find him if you'd like to
    discuss anything.]
                            FIRST YEAR AT THE BOARD.
        When I joined the Board, I knew the issues pending before the Board
    were complex and challenging. What I didn't know was just how complex
    and how challenging they are. And so I am grateful to have the
    opportunity to serve with such a great group of people and to serve at
    time when it is permissible to speak with a fellow Board Member about
    pending issues.
        But really, I find our conversations to be invaluable--especially
    when they involve issues where I am not in agreement with a fellow
    Member. Having the opportunity to speak with another Member provides me
    with the ``why'' behind their position and allows me to have a better
    understanding of their opposing view. In some instances, I have even
    been enlightened to the point of agreeing with their position, and on
    limited occasions, I know that sharing my view has been persuasive as
    well.
        I would also be remiss if I did not point out the invaluable role
    that the Board's career professionals have also had in my transition as
    well the help they have given to me with my learning curve. My
    observation is that the Board is very fortunate to have a small but
    highly talented group of professionals whose dedication to their work
    is evident in everything they do. In my short time on the Board, there
    has not been a question that they have not been able to answer off the
    top of their heads, and I believe the quality of our decisions speak
    for themselves. Lastly, I would like to take a moment to recognize the
    important role that my attorney advisor, Mike Small, has had in my time
    as a Board member.
                    IMPORTANCE OF HEARING FROM STAKEHOLDERS.
        I've been a member of the STB for a little over a year now, and
    I've had the opportunity to meet with many different groups, including
    railroads, shipper groups, and individual shippers. I have made these
    meetings a priority, because, and let me stress this, these meetings
    are extremely important to me. It's one thing to read a brief or a
    comment that sets forth a problem that stakeholders are having, and
    another thing entirely to hear from you directly and have you explain
    to me in conversation what you are experiencing in the field. I can't
    emphasize enough how helpful these meetings are to me--to have the
    opportunity to ask questions and to hear your perspectives. And so, at
    least for me, as long as we are not discussing a pending matter, if
    anyone here today wants to present a challenge, explain it, and
    describe what you think the solution is, my door is wide open. Even if
    the Board is hearing completely different proposals from other
    stakeholders, I still want your suggestions, because you're the
    industry experts. More input can only make the Board's decisions
    better.
                 ROLE AT THE BOARD AND REGULATORY PERSPECTIVE.
        Each of us Board Members brings difference strengths and
    backgrounds to the Board, which play a role in how each of us reaches
    our decisions. In my meetings with stakeholders, I have often been
    asked about my views, my leanings, or how I make decisions. Just to
    give you a sense about my perspective: I try to approach issues first
    from a question of, ``What did Congress ask the Board to do?'' I look
    at statutes, and legislative intent, and especially the Rail
    Transportation Policy set out by Congress. Now, I don't know how many
    of you have looked at the Rail Transportation Policy, but it sets out
    fifteen often-competing policy priorities to guide the Board's
    decisions. The Rail Transportation Policy, or RTP as we call it,
    directs the Board to minimize the need for Federal regulatory control--
    but also requires the Board not to minimize it too much, and to still
    provide some regulatory control. Where there isn't effective
    competition, the RTP asks us to make sure rates aren't too high--but we
    should also make sure they aren't too low either. Congress carved a
    narrow path for the Board to walk, and shippers and railroads are often
    pitted against each other on either side.
        And yet, even though railroads and shippers are often at odds, in
    the long run, shippers, railroads, and the Board are, I think, in
    agreement. In one meeting I had with a shipper, they talked at some
    length about recurring problems with missed switches. But during that
    same conversation, the shipper emphasized the importance of a strong
    freight rail network, and how important it was for the shipping
    community that railroads are healthy. Even though shippers and
    railroads agree on this in principle, there is strong disagreement on
    how best to maintain and improve the health and strength of our freight
    rail network. But when I make decisions, and when I meet with
    stakeholders, the health and strength of the freight rail network is
    always my ultimate goal.
                     IMPORTANCE OF PROCEEDING WITH CAUTION.
        I guess if I could sum up my regulatory perspective in a word, it
    would be ``cautious.'' I've learned a few lessons both during the
    pandemic and during my time at the Board about how interconnected
    things are, how supply chain issues affect us all, and how many
    intersecting problems there are right now in the supply chain. In my
    meetings with stakeholders, both on the railroad and shipper sides,
    I've had a lot of productive and enlightening discussions about the
    issues affecting the rail network, and I cannot thank enough the people
    and organizations I've met with for lending me their expertise as I try
    to stay informed about the state of the network. I really see that as
    one of the most important aspects of my job, because whenever the Board
    considers regulatory action, I do not take this responsibility lightly,
    nor do I want us to do so in a vacuum.
        Over just the past year, I think one of the words that I heard most
    was ``shortage.'' Chassis shortage. Rail labor shortage. Driver
    shortage. Warehouse labor shortage. Container shortage. Lumber
    shortage. Semiconductor shortage. I think the only thing that was not
    in shortage was consumer demand, but even that shifted. From my
    conversations, it sounds like the port and intermodal issues are likely
    to be with us for some time.
        As I hear about all of these problems, I try to focus on two
    things. First, what can the Board do to help? I say can because at
    least some of the issues that are affecting the network may originate
    elsewhere along the supply chain, and therefore it's simply not an area
    where the Board has any power to regulate. Not only should the Board
    try to regulate within its area of expertise, but it should also
    regulate within its statutory mandate.
        Second, what should the Board do to help? Part of the issue with
    regulations is that once they are on the books, it is very difficult to
    remove them. And as the Board looks to solve issues that we see in the
    network, I want to ensure that the solutions we impose match the
    problems that we are trying to solve. If a problem is temporary, the
    solution should be temporary. And if a problem can be resolved by the
    market, we should first see if the market will provide that solution.
    However--and I think this is clear from the pending Board proceedings--
    the Board will take action when it believes it is in the best interest
    of the rail network as a whole.
        On that point, I'd like to express my deep concern regarding issues
    raised in recent letters to the Board from the National Grain and Feed
    Association, Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Secretary
    of Agriculture Tom Vilsack, and SMART-TD. The NGFA letter alleges
    widespread service issues affecting grain shippers and receivers,
    including NGFA members unable to purchase grain because they have
    loaded trains waiting to be moved out by the railroad, mills being shut
    down due to running out of grain, and livestock producers having
    difficulty keeping their animals fed. Senator Capito's letter alleges
    that railcar shortages have resulted in coal shipment cancellations or
    delays. The Board takes these matters seriously, and we are looking at
    how to move forward to learn more about the issues shippers are
    experiencing and what the Board can and should do to address the issues
    raised. It is my hope that the Board, shippers, and railroads can work
    together to resolve these service issues.
                              OVERVIEW OF DOCKET.
        It is an incredibly busy time right now at the Board. As you may be
    aware, there are several high profile matters that are currently
    pending--all of which I, unfortunately, cannot discuss with you because
    we are not permitted to discuss pending proceedings. But I can give you
    a broad overview of what the Board is working on.
                                    MERGERS.
        First, of course, the Board has two large mergers pending before
    it, one of which is a major merger of two Class I railroads. It is the
    first time in 20 years that the Board has reviewed a merger of that
    size. The first involves CSX's acquisition of Pan Am Railways, which
    would extend CSX's network in New England. The Board held a two-day
    hearing in January, and, by statute, our decision on the merger will be
    issued later this month. The second involves Canadian Pacific's
    acquisition of Kansas City Southern, which would create a single
    railroad that extends from Canada, through the U.S., and into Mexico.
    We are squarely in the middle of the procedural schedule in that
    proceeding, although the procedural schedule is currently suspended
    pending the resolution of a data inconsistency, and for more
    information on that, I would direct you to our March 16th decision.
                                  RULEMAKINGS.
        The Board has several rulemaking proceedings before it right now,
    some initiated by the Board, and some initiated by stakeholders. I'm
    not going to go through all of them, but to highlight a few:

       We have a rulemaking proceeding in which the Board has
            proposed new reciprocal switching regulations. The Board held a
            hearing in the proceeding last month, and we are having
            meetings with stakeholders for the next two weeks.

       We have a rulemaking proceeding to consider a new procedure
            for challenging the reasonableness of rates in smaller cases,
            in which the Board would decide a case by selecting either the
            shipper's or the railroad's final offer.

       There's another proposal from several Class I railroads to
            create an arbitration program to resolve small rate disputes.
            Reply comments regarding the arbitration proposal and the
            Board's proposed final offer rate review program are due by
            April 15th.

       The Board has a proposal pending to revoke the class
            exemptions for certain commodities.

       We have a proceeding in which we invited comments regarding
            first-mile/last-mile service, and whether there are additional
            metrics that the Board should be looking at to assess that
            service.

       Finally, we also have a proposal from several organizations
            to create regulations authorizing private railcar owners to
            assess, essentially, demurrage charges when a Class I railroad
            holds on to a private railcar beyond a reasonable time. Last
            week, the Board issued a decision asking for comments on the
            proposal, and for comments on several questions that the Board
            had. Initial comments on that are due by the end of June.
                                  OTHER CASES.
        I'd say that's a pretty full plate, but beyond the mergers and
    rulemakings, the Board has other cases before it that could have large
    effects on the industry or the network. For example, we have a
    proceeding raising questions about the nature of railroads' common
    carrier obligations. We have another proceeding regarding whether
    Amtrak can start service between New Orleans and Mobile, and we are
    smack in the middle of a hearing in that case right now.
                          PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CRUCIAL.
        Clearly, the issues before the Board are wide-ranging, and in
    several proceedings, any action that we take could have large effects
    on the industry or the network. As we consider multiple high-profile
    and consequential rulemakings, difficulties continue to plague many
    parts of the supply chain, both here and abroad. I do not want to
    impose a more-or-less permanent solution to what turns out to be a
    temporary problem. I wouldn't want to saddle either shippers or
    railroads with regulations that turn out to be unnecessary.
        Because regulations are often in place for many years and come with
    associated costs, I believe it is incumbent upon the Board to proceed
    cautiously with any action that could have an effect on the rail
    network. One way the Board can proceed with caution is to make sure
    that the Board seeks input from the very people who best know the
    network--the stakeholders. If there's one thing I've learned in the
    dozens and dozens of meetings I've had with shippers and railroads and
    other organizations, it's how much I don't know. I both value and
    depend upon the insight and experience from people like the ones in
    this room who are literally on the network on daily basis, to tell me
    what works and what doesn't and how we could make it better. So, if
    there is something that the Board is doing that sounds like a good idea
    or bad idea, I hope you'll tell us what you think.
        And with that, I'd be happy to take any questions if you have any.
                                     ______

        Thank you for the introduction. It's so great to be here with all
    of you this afternoon in Palm Springs.
        When I look at what we are facing in the rail industry, I am
    reminded of a quote from Winston Churchill:

            ``The pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity. The
            optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.''

        The last few years have brought unprecedented challenges to the
    Nation's economy, our supply chain and the freight rail network. I know
    that almost everyone in this room has first-hand experience with these
    challenges--in fact, I've had the opportunity to speak with some of you
    directly. And while I know that unreliable service has cost rail
    shippers millions of dollars in lost profit, perhaps now just might be
    the time that these challenges are transformed into opportunities for
    change and for growth in the rail industry. Let me explain. ____
        We all know that at the beginning of last year service was bad and
    getting worse.
        Velocity was down. ____ Terminal dwell and dwell at orgin was up
    for some railroads by double digits. And trains holding due to crew
    issues were also substantially up. We heard from many stakeholders
    about just how bad the service had gotten. This organization recounted
    how one member had to spend $3 million on secondary freight to keep
    animals fed, and another had to stop selling feed because a loaded
    train sat at origin for one week because of a lack of crew. Then in
    April, 2022, the Board held a two-day hearing on freight rail service
    challenges and heard from various industries and public officials
    including your President Michael Seyfert, the Secretary of
    Transportation as well as executives from the Class I carriers. Not
    only did we hear in great detail about the extraordinary service
    disruptions, but also about the challenges associated with a rail labor
    shortage, which by the way, were pointed to by labor and the carriers
    themselves.
        Immediately following the hearing, we issued an order requiring the
    reporting of service metrics and head counts. In the months that
    followed, we carefully monitored the bi-weekly reports and I am happy
    to say that we have started to see improvements across the network. We
    are also seeing a reduction in service complaints. During this time,
    Members of the Board met with the CEOs of the Class I carriers who
    shared their plans on service recovery and their plans to attract and
    retain rail labor during what we know was one of the tightest labor
    markets we have experienced in decades.
        As if the post-pandemic recovery did not present enough of a
    challenge, six months ago, the rail carriers and the unions were
    engaged in a labor dispute that posed a threat of bringing our freight
    rail network to a grinding halt. This would have cost our economy
    upwards of at least $1 billion per day and could have driven prices
    even higher for many consumer goods. And while the Board had no role in
    the negotiations, many of us held our breath along with the rest of the
    nation, until early December when the President signed a bill that
    imposed a settlement between labor and the carriers.
        During the months leading up to the settlement, we became aware
    that Union Pacific was planning to reduce the number of cars on their
    network. Let me take a minute to walk through the issue. In order to
    reduce the number of cars, UP reached out to the customers that they
    believed had an excess number of cars on their system. UP then asked
    those customers to remove a certain number of cars within seven days.
    If a customer could not achieve UP's goal, a congestion embargo would
    be put in place unless the customer sought a permit. By the first week
    of December 2022, UP had put more than 1000 embargos in place for the
    year, and there were 141 active embargoes, all due to congestion. By
    way of comparison, in 2017, UP had implemented only 27. So in the
    second week of December, the Board conducted a two-day hearing with UP
    regarding the substantial increase in their use of embargoes as a
    method of reducing rail traffic congestion. As of now, UP made several
    changes to their Inventory Management Program and has reduced
    congestion-related embargos by cutting them in half. Most recently,
    I've been told that if UP continues at their current pace, they'll be
    able to reduce their use of embargoes by 70 percent compared to last
    year. And while I applaud UP in its reduction, in my view, it's not
    enough because I understand the extreme difficulties that being
    embargoed places on a shipper. You've got to assign manpower to deal
    with the issue, choose which shipments to reduce or delay, decide which
    receivers are going to be told that they aren't getting their shipment,
    and then try to move some traffic by truck, if you can. It just injects
    so much unnecessary difficulty and uncertainty as well as increased
    cost. And that's why I hope that UP's goal will be to achieve the
    industry standard.
        At this point many of you may be wondering how do any of these
    circumstances lead to growth and transformation? Service disruptions?
    The threat of a national rail shutdown? Embargos? How could any of
    these circumstances lead to positive changes of any kind on the
    network?
        Last year, I met with each of the Class I CEOs but two
    conversations in the latter part of the year stood out from all the
    others. Those were the meetings that I had with CEO Joe Hinrichs of CSX
    and CEO Alan Shaw of Norfuk Southern. As some of the other CEO's
    acknowledged, service was improving but was still not where they wanted
    it to be. But here's how these two meetings differed--both Joe and Alan
    talked about how they wanted to focus more on resiliency, taking a more
    customer-centric focus. It was also important to them capture more
    freight volumes from truck and to improve their relationship with their
    employees. But perhaps most surprising to me, they were no longer going
    to focus exclusively on operating ratio and instead they talked about
    their goal to pivot toward growth. At the conclusion of both meetings,
    I found myself surprisingly in agreement with their goals and I hoped
    they would be successful for reasons I am sure many of you would agree
    with--success in all of these areas would mean that these carriers
    would greatly improve in their ability to deliver predictable, reliable
    service to their customers and afford their customers the ability to
    ship more volume by rail instead of truck.
        But at the same time, I also had to wonder, was this just a message
    that was being delivered behind closed doors to a regulator that they
    knew had been receiving a high number of complaints about rail service?
    Haven't the Carriers made promises of improved service in the past
    while at the same time promising their investors that they would reach
    an even lower operating ratio by reducing expenses--which often means
    cutting headcounts? How was this time any different?
        Here, they were saying the opposite. They would not be identifying
    an OR goal and would be focusing on ``resiliency'' by actually
    increasing headcounts and improving retention. I would also say that
    what made this message different is that it was not just delivered to
    me but was also delivered publicly and directly to their investors. For
    CSX, it was presented during their Quarterly Earnings call in mid-
    January while Norfuk Southern's took place during its investor day in
    early December. And what everyone in this room knows is that resiliency
    is not just good for shippers, it's also good for the carriers as we
    watched this play out during the pandemic. There's a saying that comes
    to mind--luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. In
    order to take advantage of the surge in demand, grow their volumes, and
    provide predictable service, carriers needed to be prepared for it, and
    they were not.
        And while no one could have predicted the pandemic or the national
    labor shortage that followed, what this experience has now shown is
    resiliency matters. And the Carriers are making positive changes.
    Headcounts are increasing. According to our Office of Economics, total
    employment for the carriers is up by over 5 percent from last year. And
    in recent weeks, 5 of the 7 Class I's have reached agreements awarding
    sick leave, that I believe will further improve the quality of life for
    employees and most likely lead to a higher rate of employee retention
    and better resiliency.
        And just to give some more credit where it's due, let me again talk
    for a moment about UP. They have not been doing great over the past
    year, but I do think they are coming to the realization that something
    must change. Just last week, I learned that they recently finished up a
    pilot program for employee scheduling, with the goal of providing
    employees with certainty on when they would be working, and when they
    would have days off. Something which I believe everyone can see the
    value in. Being able to schedule time off in advance is something that
    rail labor has been asking for. And I don't know if UP will expand the
    program or try it elsewhere, but I have to give them credit for trying.
    For recognizing that their employees are dissatisfied and for trying
    something new to improve their quality of life. By the way, this will
    also have the likely benefit of improving service for shippers. During
    the pilot program, UP said there were fewer, unscheduled employee call
    outs.
        In terms of challenges to the rail industry, there is none more
    widely known than the unfortunate derailment in East Palesteen, Ohio.
    As a result of the derailment, the Department of Transportation has
    reintroduced proposed rail safety regulations; Members of Congress
    introduced the Railway Safety Act of 2023; NS announced a six-point
    plan to immediately improve safety; and the Association of American
    Railroads reported on immediate steps the Class I railroads are taking
    to prevent similar accidents in the future.
        It goes without saying that no one wants derailments to happen. The
    FRA is the primary agency responsible for safety regulation in the rail
    industry, but while the Board doesn't regulate safety per se, we
    certainly consider safety when we act, and it is something that all of
    us--regulators, carriers, and shippers should be concerned about. And
    it is my hope that once the NTSB issues its final report, we can see
    what lessons can be learned and what can be done in the future to try
    to prevent an accident like this one from ever happening again.
        Let me now turn back to an area that is under the Board's purview--
    service. One of the other reasons I am optimistic about the near future
    in the rail industry is the promise of what improved technology could
    do to benefit railroad-shipper relationships as well. When I first
    joined the Board two years ago, I was talking to a fellow Board Member
    and I was absolutely blown away to learn that you cannot track railcars
    as well as you can track an Amazon package. And today, I am still not
    sure about what is holding the industry back. But I do believe
    technology that would provide transparency might resolve a lot of the
    issues that rail customers are complaining about.
        In my meetings with shippers, there are three main complaints that
    I hear about. First, they would like to ship more volume by rail.
    Second, they would like to have better communication with their
    Carriers about delayed shipments and the location of their rail cars.
    And third, and by far the most frequent complaint I hear about is the
    lack of predictable service. I think improved technology and better
    transparency on the network could give shippers at least part of what
    they are asking for--more knowledge about where their shipments are and
    when they will arrive.
        Now I would like to spend a minute talking about the important and
    often difficult issue of regulation. The Surface Transportation Board
    is directed by Congress to follow the principles set forth in the Rail
    Transportation Policy enacted by Congress. While some of these
    principles are often viewed as competing, one such principle to quote
    ``is to minimize the need for Federal regulatory control over the rail
    transportation system and to require fair and expeditious regulatory
    decisions when regulation is required.'' End quote. I call attention to
    this policy in particular because the plain words of the statute
    require the Board to implement regulations ``when they are required.''
    I believe when ``regulations are required'' is a viewpoint that differs
    greatly. To me, the role of the Board is to determine two things:
    whether there are issues that rise to the level of the need for
    regulatory action and whether the issue can be solved by regulation. In
    order to make that determination, the Board must consider both the
    principles of the Rail Transportation Policy as well as carefully
    consider any potential unintended consequences of the proposed
    regulatory solution. After input and comment from the industry, the
    Board must then consider whether the benefits of the proposed
    regulatory solution will outweigh any unintended harm.
        If CSX and Norfuk Southern are successful in achieving their goals,
    they could accomplish more to improve service than any regulation that
    is implemented by the Board. At the end of the day, what shippers
    deserve is dependable service that is delivered with a customer-centric
    focus. And while opinions may differ, my own view is that the Carriers
    themselves will do a much better job of voluntarily achieving this goal
    across their networks than perhaps any changes that can be put into
    place through regulation. This is not to say that there are not
    circumstances that warrant regulation. It is just to say that in my
    view, the Carriers are in the best position to make operational
    decisions on how to meet the needs of their customers. And while
    regulations may correct certain issues, at the end of the day, only the
    Carriers themselves can deliver a good service product that meets the
    needs of their customers.
        And so, again, it is my sincere hope that CSX and Norfuk Southern
    can successfully achieve the goals they've outlined not just for the
    sake of their customers but for the industry as a whole. Carriers seem
    to be under intense pressure from short term investors to focus on cost
    cutting and to reduce their operating ratios. A pivot to growth would
    most likely result in the loss of some short-term investors in exchange
    for higher profitability in the long term. If they are successful, this
    could result in higher headcounts, the ability to meet more of their
    customers' needs as well as better fluidity on the network. And most
    importantly, if CSX and Norfuk Southern are successful, perhaps this
    would inspire some other Carriers to pivot toward growth as well. In
    the meantime, I would still like to hear from you and get your
    perspective on how things are going on the network. I know that you are
    the industry experts and I very much value your perspective and I know
    my colleagues do as well.
        These are difficult times, yet like Winston Churchill, I too see
    opportunity in every difficulty and can't help but be optimistic about
    the future. There are a lot of opportunities for rail service to
    improve. Rail carriers, at least some of them, see opportunities to
    improve service, become more reliable, and grow volumes. The winds, I
    think, are shifting, and so I think we might see in these difficult
    times the beginnings of a great and much needed transformation in the
    rail industry.
        I look forward to our continued conversation and thank all of you
    for the contributions you make to continuing to improve the freight
    rail network. And with that I welcome any questions you might have for
    me this afternoon.
                                     ______

    I. Introduction
        Good afternoon, and thank you for inviting me to speak today.
        A couple of preliminary items to get out of the way: Nothing that I
    say tonight represents the views of the Surface Transportation Board or
    any of the other members. And I am somewhat constrained in what I can
    say about matters pending either before the Board or in litigation on
    appeal.
        With that out of the way, can I just say, what a time to be giving
    this speech. I feel like the supply chain is often an afterthought--
    something that just works, and when it's working, people don't think
    about how the journey their new car, or stove, or whatever else got to
    them. Which port did it come in through? Was it put on a truck, or
    shipped by rail and put back on a truck again? Who made those
    decisions? That is, of course, until the something goes wrong. And it
    is never good when the supply chain is in the news, is it? Not much
    reporting going on about how the freight network is moving fluidly.
        As you all know, earlier this month we had a longshoreman strike on
    the East and Gulf Coasts. That certainly affected traffic flows on the
    East Coast, but it also affected traffic flows on the West Coast. Union
    Pacific said that its container volumes were up 40 percent year over
    year in September as shippers diverted traffic in anticipation of the
    strike. BNSF also noted the increase in volumes in anticipation of the
    strike, and both railroads had contingency plans in place to deal with
    the increase in traffic. I am extremely grateful that the strike has
    ended and the ports are back on line, but it was just another reminder
    of how interconnected the freight network is.
        Ann helpfully provided me with a few of the issues that you all are
    interested in, and while there are some that I either can't or
    shouldn't talk about, I'll address what I can.
    II. Background
        But first, a little bit about my background for those of you who
    don't know me. Prior to working at the Board, I worked for 14 years
    with the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, the
    commuter railroad that serves the Philadelphia area. My most recent
    role with SEPTA was deputy general counsel, and in that role I
    represented the agency before the FRA and the Pennsylvania Public
    Utility Commission; served as lead counsel on a major railroad
    reconstruction project; and served as lead counsel on real estate
    transactions and contract negotiations. Prior to that role, I served as
    the Director of Legislative Affairs for SEPTA, leading a team to
    advocate for SEPTA at the local, state, and Federal level, and
    reviewing legislation and regulations at all levels to determine their
    impact on SEPTA.
        Earlier in my career, I was in private practice with a focus on
    bankruptcy law and commercial litigation, and I served as a law clerk
    for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    and a law clerk for the late Vincent A. Cirillo, President Judge
    Emeritus of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
    III. Issues of Interest
        So that's a little bit about me and my background, which in case it
    is not clear, did not include freight rail. That is just one of the
    many reasons I appreciate PRFBA and its members for being such vocal
    participants in Board proceedings--most recently with Dave Burchett's
    testimony at last month's growth hearing--and for always being
    available to meet with the Board. Your input is vital, and I always
    appreciate hearing from you about issues on the network and what you
    see as possible solutions. Even when there is disagreement, you help us
    to see every side of the issue, and I think that makes our decisions
    better.
    A. Two-Two Split and Priorities as a Republican Member
        I was asked about my thoughts on operating under a 2-2 split Board,
    which we have been since May, and about my priorities and objectives as
    a Republican Board Member. First things first, even though there is a
    2-2 split, I feel very comfortable saying that I and all of my
    colleagues, regardless of affiliation, are always concerned about
    service. We have an election coming up, and, eventually, I would expect
    that 2-2 split to resolve one way or another, and whoever is Chairman
    under the next president will at some point have a majority. But the
    four of us will remain on the Board for some time, so regardless of the
    election, I do not expect our focus on service to change.
        As for my priorities, I would say the timeliness of Board decisions
    is a priority. And please know, this is not a criticism of Board staff,
    or Board leadership. Since I joined the Board, it seems like we have
    not had a second to breathe, bouncing between crises, big cases, and
    complex rulemakings. We had the service crisis, the CSX-Pan Am merger,
    days-long hearing in the Amtrak Gulf Coast matter, Canadian Pacific's
    merger with Kansas City Southern, and major rulemakings including
    arbitration, final offer rate review, emergency service regulations,
    and reciprocal switching.
        I think now is the right time to deal with the many issues that are
    already on the Board's plate. We have several petitions for rulemaking
    pending and a number of cases awaiting decision. And I think it is
    incumbent on the Board to decide those cases in a timely fashion. The
    Board is a small agency with a limited bandwidth, and I think there
    needs to be a recognition, both from the me and my colleagues as well
    as outside stakeholders, that there are tradeoffs.
        When we focus on one thing, that often means taking our focus off
    something else. Couple that with decisions where Congress has mandated
    that we issue a decision within a certain number of days, and I think
    it is clear that the Board must be judicious in its use of resources.
    B. Expectations for Reciprocal Switching; applying it to contract and
            exempt traffic.
        I mentioned reciprocal switching a moment ago, and I know that is
    an issue that is very much on your minds. I am restricted in what I can
    say since that remains on appeal. Regarding Board support for
    legislation, I think that is really a question for the Chairman, and
    that issue, along with the related question of whether the Board will
    be advancing a reauthorization proposal, are two areas where the
    election may play a role in what direction the Board goes. Not only
    might we have a new chairman, we will be dealing with a new
    administration and a new Congress, so we will have to see where we are
    at that point.
    C. Does the Board have authority to address contracts?
        I was asked whether the Board has authority to address contracts. I
    think the statute, Section 10709, is pretty clear that Board authority
    over contracts is greatly restricted. But in case this issue comes
    before the Board in the future, I'm going to have to decline to speak
    further on that.
    D. Clarifying the Common Carrier Obligation.
        Another question you raised was about clarifying the common carrier
    obligation. That is a big one. I have some complex thoughts on that
    one. I mean, on the one hand, I am a big, big proponent of clarity in
    Board decisions. That is always something I strive for, and I think
    something the Board should strive for. Clarity makes our orders
    clearer, and it helps reduce litigation and disagreement in the future
    over what a given Board decision means. That being said, right now the
    Board decides alleged violations of the common carrier obligation on a
    case by case basis, and that fact specific approach, while slow, has
    its benefits. The most obvious one is that the Board can really tailor
    the remedy, if one is needed, to the facts at hand.
        My worry about clarifying the common carrier obligation in a
    broader way is the possibility of unintended consequences, sweeping
    conduct or service failures that, while unfortunate, should not be
    classified as violating the common carrier obligation.
        So I guess I should say that while I prefer the case-by-case
    approach, any clarification of the common carrier obligation must be
    done carefully, with ample opportunity for input from stakeholders. I
    would not want to set forth a clearer standard and have that be the
    wrong standard.
    E. Continued service concerns.
        I was also asked to address general, continued service concerns,
    which I think is a good opportunity to talk about September's hearing
    on growth in the freight rail industry. Not to put too fine a point on
    it, but a healthy and growing freight rail industry benefits everyone--
    even if you ship nothing by rail, and a lot of shippers do have the
    choice to ship by truck instead. But moving shipments from truck to
    rail benefits everyone. Rail is cheaper. It is better for the
    environment. It takes trucks off the road, which decreases wear and
    tear on public infrastructure and even saves lives.
        While several parties at the growth hearing had valid criticisms
    for past or current practices of the railroads, something that I must
    underscore is that the United States freight rail network remains the
    best in the world. It is a phenomenal resource, even when it's not
    running optimally. This benefits the supply chain, which can take
    advantage of the private investments that railroads have made into the
    network, and it benefits the economy, as it offers a fuel-efficient,
    cost-efficient option for shippers to move their goods. But despite the
    clear benefits of rail, many shippers who could ship by rail choose to
    ship by truck. The hearing got into several reasons for this preference
    for truck, but two big issues from shippers was a lack of reliability
    and communication from the railroads.
        Shippers often see rail as less reliable than truck, and it is
    easier to figure out where a truck is and when it will arrive at its
    destination than it is with a railcar. Both of these are valid points,
    and issues that the Class I railroads can and must address. And it
    really gets to what my chief concern always is as a regulator--service.
    Poor service impacts shippers and it impacts the national economy. But
    I have said, and I will say it again, regulations cannot provide good
    service. Carriers are the only ones with that power. So I want to give
    railroads room to run and operate the way that they want. They should
    be able to innovate, shift resources, and do what they think is best
    for their business. The same is true for shippers. And carriers, like
    shippers, are in the best position to know what resources they need to
    compete and perform well.
        At the end of the day, what shippers deserve is dependable service
    that is delivered with a customer-centric focus. And while opinions may
    differ, my own view is that the Carriers themselves will do a much
    better job of voluntarily achieving this goal across their networks
    than perhaps any changes that can be put into place through regulation.
    This is not to say that there are not circumstances that warrant
    regulation. It is just to say that in my view, the Carriers are in the
    best position to make operational decisions on how to meet the needs of
    their customers.
        They can make improvements faster and without the negative
    consequences of increased regulation, and so, ideally, they will
    continue to improve and make increased regulation by the Board
    unnecessary.
        But I think the freight rail industry is poised to move forward.
    The rail industry is starting to turn a little bit and become more
    customer oriented, seeking to grow its volumes rather than focus on
    increasing prices or cutting costs. CSX and Norfolk Southern are two of
    the railroads that are really leading the charge in terms of changing
    the way they do business. Both railroads are focusing on resiliency and
    customer service. I think their quick actions after the Key Bridge
    collapse in Baltimore are evidence of that. When I asked CSX and NS
    about their response to the Key Bridge collapse at the growth hearing,
    in case you didn't attend or watch their testimony, let me tell you
    what they said. Joe Hinrichs said that two things really helped--first,
    operations and sales within CSX worked well together to come up with
    solutions quickly. But he also said, and I think this is part of
    resiliency, that it was the improved relationship with labor that
    allowed CSX to quickly reroute trains from Baltimore to Newport News,
    because CSX was able to go to the union and the next day get approval
    to transfer employees to provide that new service. Without sufficient
    employees, and without a strong working relationship between labor and
    management, that is just not going to happen. And Ed Elkins from NS
    talked about the importance of fluidity and having capacity for
    resiliency that you can apply when things go wrong because there's
    always something going wrong somewhere. Ed also talked about the
    importance of trust with employees, customers, and even the ship
    operators, that NS would be able to deliver on what they said they were
    going to do. Things are going to go wrong, and the true test is how
    well the railroad is able to bounce back to normal operations.
        There is certainly room for improvement in the rail industry, but
    there is also a lot to be optimistic about. Carriers are creating new
    partnerships with trucking companies to provide service that is more
    competitive with truck, such as BNSF's Quantum service in partnership
    with J.B. Hunt. Norfolk Southern has created a new department seeking
    to fuel customer growth and make rail easier to use, and it is working
    more closely with short lines to improve interchange. These are just a
    couple of examples of how the Class I railroads are changing their
    operations in order to drive growth. And I would be remiss if I did not
    mention the railroads efforts over the past couple of years to enter
    into paid sick leave agreements with their labor unions, which help
    retain and attract employees, because you can't have growth without
    employees. Are things perfect? No. But I think when we see these
    innovations, we are seeing carriers trying to be responsive to shippers
    needs and to grow their networks by providing a better service product.
    I hope to see more of approaches like these in the future, because I
    think that rail has a bright future, especially if carriers provide the
    type of reliable service that their customers deserve.
    IV. Rail Customer and Public Assistance Program
        Before I close, I have to plug the Board's Rail Customer and Public
    Assistance Program. You can find information about the program on the
    Board's website under the ``Resources'' tab. If you're a shipper and
    are having service issues or some other issue that you think the Board
    can help with, they are a great first call. Agency staff who work in
    the program are highly knowledgeable, and they can help with anything
    from giving you some information over the phone to informal mediation.
    And if you are having an issue and would just like to talk to someone,
    they will not reveal your identity to the railroad or other party
    without your consent. Again, it's informal, so they can't give you any
    binding guidance, but they are able to solve a lot of issues quicker,
    on an informal basis, before the issue ever gets to the Board itself.
        I'm happy to take any questions you might have.
                                     ______

        Good afternoon! It is truly an honor to be here with all of the
    leaders of the rail industry as well as my colleagues--Vice Chairman
    Hedlund and Member Fuchs. I would like to take a moment to thank Tony
    Hatch for inviting us. Having the opportunity to be in this room and to
    hear the views of so many of the industry leaders is invaluable. I
    would also like to say that I am very appreciative of the opportunity
    to share some of my views as a Member of the Surface Transportation
    Board.
        Since I started at the Board in January 2021, it has not been the
    smoothest time for the rail industry. As everyone in this room knows,
    the pandemic was a world event that had unforeseen effects on the
    supply chain. And the recovery for U.S. railroads, as well as for
    almost every other industry in the nation, was a difficult one. Since
    the recovery, carriers have had to contend with numerous events
    affecting trade flows--foreign conflicts, the Key Bridge collapse, rail
    negotiations, last month's port strike, foreign embargoes and I am sure
    I'm leaving things out. But I think what we've seen is that carriers
    have, in fact, become more resilient at dealing with both expected and
    unexpected disruptions. This is not the same rail industry that we had
    post-pandemic.
        Carriers have taken active steps to improve their businesses and,
    in doing so, strengthen the supply chain. I'd like to commend the
    railroads, first and foremost, on improvements they have made in their
    relationships with labor through paid leave agreements and efforts to
    improve work life balance. Carriers have also invested billions of
    dollars in capital improvements over the past couple of years, despite
    volumes being down. And they have invested in new technologies that can
    increase the efficiency and safety of their operations. Investment in
    the network and expansion of capacity is going to pay dividends as
    volumes return. But I think the most monumental, positive change I have
    seen in the rail industry, is the acknowledgment over the past couple
    years that carriers need to improve their service product to become
    competitive with truck. We've seen a greater emphasis on service, and
    we've seen carriers become more customer-centric. They have offered new
    service products, improved communication with customers, and even
    partnered with truck to offer faster, more on-time service. Changes
    like these, which improve the reliability of the rail network and the
    strength of the supply chain overall, make my job as a regulator a lot
    easier.
        I have also been giving thought to the Board's role in the supply
    chain, and what we as a Board can do to strengthen the network. I think
    one of those ways is through Federal preemption. Regulations have
    costs, and preemption prevents carriers from being subject to a
    patchwork of regulations, which not only increase compliance costs for
    carriers but would also be detrimental to rail service for shippers.
        In addition to preemption, another way the Board can strengthen the
    network is to manage our docket more efficiently. Part of our role is
    to administer decisions in a timely fashion, and we can do better on
    that. Please note, this is not a criticism of Board staff or my
    colleagues. Since I joined the Board, the demand on the docket has been
    extraordinarily high, both with cases filed with the Board and with
    discretionary matters that the Board has taken up. Those have
    contributed to longer time periods to issue decisions, and there has
    been little if any time to review our internal processes. Going
    forward, the Board should make it a priority to look into our internal
    processes and streamline them so that we can issue decisions in a more
    timely manner.
        I am cognizant that lengthy decisional timelines increase
    litigation and other costs, and they also inject uncertainty into
    industry decisions. The question becomes not ``what will the Board
    decide,'' but ``when, or if, will the Board decide it.'' And I would
    like the Board, myself included, to keep in mind that delayed decisions
    increase costs for railroads and shippers alike and even hinder
    investments. When parties come to the Board, it is because they have an
    issue that they were not able to solve themselves. The Board is not
    their first choice, and nobody enjoys unnecessary litigation. . .except
    maybe the attorneys. But, once a matter is before us, we have a duty,
    sometimes statutory and sometimes simply as a matter of good
    government, to decide the matter efficiently.
        I think it's also important for the Board to continue to engage
    with stakeholders. We already do that, whether at the staff level
    through OPAGAC, or at the Board level, our through our advisory
    committees. Maintaining those lines of communication with carriers,
    shippers, and industry groups is important and even in my short time on
    the Board I have seen those lines of communication resolve issues
    before becoming a multi-year case. My apologies to the lawyers on those
    missed legal fees. But in all seriousness, communicating with
    stakeholders ensures that the Board has context and perspective when
    considering whether to take regulatory action, and I think that is very
    important for the members and the Board as a whole.
        In closing, I'd like to address a question that has been asked of
    me--what is the long-term role of the Board? I think the week-to-week
    or month-to-month role of the Board may vary, but ultimately, it is to
    ensure the fluidity of the network. Sometimes, this means stepping in,
    where carriers or shippers bring disagreements to the Board. Other
    times, it could mean stepping back and allowing carriers to innovate
    and invest in each of their networks. Either way, the Board should
    always be guided by the long-term, sustainable health and growth of the
    network, and I think the Board, or any agency for that matter, should
    be wary of actions that could operate to hinder that growth absent
    extremely compelling reasons.
        Thank you all for the opportunity to talk with you this afternoon
    and for the important role that you serve in keeping the freight rail
    network and nation's economy moving.
                                     ______

        Good morning, it's great to be here with all of you in Toledo.
    Before I begin, I would like to thank your Executive Director, Eric
    Wenberg for inviting me to your conference. These conferences always
    provide wonderful opportunities to talk with the folks who are out
    there and interacting with the freight rail network on a daily basis
    and it is from these informal conversations that I often learn the
    most. So, thank you Eric as well as those that I had an opportunity to
    meet last evening.
        Just in case anyone here isn't familiar with what the Surface
    Transportation Board does, I wanted to begin this morning with a brief
    overview and highlight some of the Board's recent matters as well as a
    couple of pending items.
                                 BOARD OVERVIEW
        The Board is an independent Federal agency tasked with the economic
    regulation of various modes of surface transportation. However, our
    primary area of responsibility is freight railroads. We hear cases
    brought by shippers challenging rates, and we have jurisdiction over
    railroad practices and service. We also review rail mergers, rail
    construction, and abandonment of railroads. Although the rail industry
    has been deregulated in many ways, there is still a place and a need
    for regulation since many shippers do not have options when it comes to
    which railroad, they use or whether they can use another mode of
    transportation at all. I am a big believer in competition, and so I
    want competition and the market to drive railroads' business decisions,
    not government regulations. But where there is a market failure or
    there is insufficient competition, that is the area I think the Board
    should regulate.
                          RECENT MATTERS FOR THE BOARD
        I'd like to take a moment to talk about the recent matters that
    have kept the Board very busy over the last couple of years. In early
    2022, it was clear that there was a service crisis in the rail
    industry. Velocity was down. Terminal dwell and dwell at origin were up
    for some railroads by double digits. And trains holding due to crew
    issues were also up substantially. We heard from many stakeholders
    about just how bad the service had gotten. The National Grain and Feed
    Association recounted how one of its members had to spend $3 million on
    secondary freight to keep animals fed, and another had to stop selling
    feed when a loaded train sat at origin for one week because of a lack
    of crew. In April 2022, the Board held a two-day hearing on freight
    rail service challenges and heard from various industries and public
    officials including the Secretary of Transportation as well as
    executives from the Class 1 carriers. Not only did we hear in great
    detail about the extraordinary service disruptions, but also about the
    challenges associated with a rail labor shortage, which by the way,
    were pointed to by labor and the carriers themselves.
        Immediately following the hearing, we issued an order requiring the
    reporting of service metrics and head counts. In the months that
    followed, we carefully monitored the bi-weekly reports and we started
    to see improvements across the network. We also saw a reduction in
    service complaints. And Members of the Board met with the CEOs of the
    Class 1 carriers who shared their plans on service recovery and their
    plans to attract and retain rail labor during what we now know was one
    of the tightest labor markets we have experienced in decades.
        As if the post-pandemic recovery did not present enough of a
    challenge, 2022 also saw the rail carriers and the unions engaged in a
    labor dispute that posed a threat of bringing our freight rail network
    to a grinding halt. This would have cost our economy upwards of at
    least $1 billion per day and could have driven prices even higher for
    many consumer goods. And while the Board had no role in the
    negotiations, many of us held our breath along with the rest of the
    nation, until early December when the President signed a bill that
    imposed a settlement between labor and the carriers.
        Also in 2022, the Board conducted an 11-day-long hearing regarding
    restarting Amtrak service on the Gulf Coast. That proceeding is now in
    abeyance pending settlement, but the Board recently held an additional
    hearing in the matter to inquire about the status of the settlement
    discussions.
        And, of course, no discussion of the Board's recent activities
    would be complete without mentioning the merger between two Class 1
    railroads, Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern. The Board
    approved that merger, subject to a number of conditions, in March of
    last year after review of an extensive record. That decision is
    currently on appeal.
                        ON THE BOARD'S AGENDA RIGHT NOW
        That brings me to a couple of things on the Board's agenda right
    now. In January 2024, the Board extended part of our temporary
    reporting requirements for carriers that arose out of the service
    crisis hearing that I mentioned earlier. Ultimately, the Board required
    carriers to report certain service and employment metrics through the
    end of 2024. Again, because there is a petition for reconsideration
    pending, I can only speak about this case in a limited fashion. The
    Board extended the employment reporting requirements while
    discontinuing reporting on service metrics. Through the end of the
    year, railroads will have to report monthly on headcounts, and a few
    railroads will also have to provide additional information about
    trainee classes and hiring goals.
        Another priority for the Board, which will come as no surprise to
    anyone who has heard Chairman Oberman speak is reciprocal switching.
    Last fall, the Board issued a notice of proposed rulemaking and
    requested comment on many issues contained within. In short, this
    proposed rule would establish standardized metrics. If carriers provide
    service that falls below the metrics, certain shippers who are served
    by a single carrier in terminal areas would be eligible to receive
    service from an alternative carrier. The comments and replies are in,
    and the Board is considering them. Again, because this is pending, I am
    not able to talk about this proceeding in any greater detail but what I
    can say is it is something that the Board is very focused on.
                         THE STATE OF THE RAIL NETWORK
        I would also like to talk for a moment about the state of the rail
    network today. But first, I will need to talk about where we were by
    way of comparison.
        At the beginning of the pandemic, volume on the rail network
    dropped to astonishingly low levels. Faced with extraordinary
    uncertainty, the rail carriers, like the airlines and many other
    industries, responded by furloughing employees. Once volume returned,
    the carriers expected that they could bring their employees back. What
    they experienced was, they could not. I find it hard to fault them for
    that given the unprecedented nature of the pandemic and how it affected
    economies and industries across the globe. But that lack of employees
    contributed to the service crisis. Since then, railroads have increased
    their headcounts. In January 2024, headcounts were up by 9 percent from
    their lowest point during the service crisis in 2022 while Train and
    Engine employment has risen 15 percent during that same time. And
    service has improved. While there are still pockets of service
    challenges on the network, I am hearing a lot fewer complaints from
    shippers now than I was in 2022 or even since last year. The biggest
    concern I hear from shippers now is this: service is fine, but volumes
    are down. How will the railroads perform when volumes return? And yes,
    volumes are down and have been down for some time. Last quarter,
    carloadings for the Big 4 railroads were over 12 percent lower than
    they were in the fourth quarter of 2021. That is a big reason that the
    Board extended railroad reporting of employment metrics through the end
    of the year, so that we have that extra visibility into headcounts when
    volumes do return. Because when they do, Carriers will need to have
    resiliency in their workforce to meet that increased demand.
        And so, as a regulator, what I care about most is service. Poor
    service impacts shippers and it impacts the Nation's economy. But as I
    have said before, regulations cannot provide shippers with a good
    service product. Only the Carriers themselves can do that. And I
    believe they should be able to innovate, shift resources, and do what
    they think is best for their business. The same is true for shippers.
    And carriers, like shippers, are in the best position to know what
    resources they need to compete and to perform well.
                    GOOD SERVICE AVOIDS INCREASED REGULATION
        That being said, we've seen what happens when service suffers, and
    that is that there are calls for increased regulation of the rail
    industry. And I will be the first to say, increased regulation is not
    something that I believe is in the best interest of the network, and it
    is not something that Congress wanted when it created the Board. The
    Surface Transportation Board is directed to follow the principles set
    forth in the Rail Transportation Policy enacted by Congress. While some
    of these principles are often viewed as competing, one such principle
    is to ``minimize the need for Federal regulatory control over the rail
    transportation system and to require fair and expeditious regulatory
    decisions when regulation is required.'' I call attention to this
    policy because the plain words of the statute require the Board to
    implement regulations ``when they are required.'' Shippers, Carriers
    and Members of the Board all hold different views on when ``regulations
    are required.'' To me, the role of the Board is to determine two
    things: whether there are issues that rise to the level of the need for
    regulatory action and whether the issue can be solved by regulation. In
    order to make that determination, the Board must consider both the
    principles of the Rail Transportation Policy as well as carefully
    consider any potential unintended consequences of the proposed
    regulatory solution. After input and comment from the industry, the
    Board must then consider whether the benefits of the proposed
    regulatory solution will outweigh any unintended harm.
        At the end of the day, what shippers deserve is dependable service
    that is delivered with a customer-centric focus. And while opinions may
    differ, my own view is that the Carriers themselves will do a much
    better job of voluntarily achieving this goal across their networks
    than perhaps any changes that can be put into place through regulation.
    While I believe there are circumstances that warrant regulation, I also
    believe the Carriers are in the best position to make operational
    decisions on how to meet the needs of their customers.
                              THE ROLE OF SHIPPERS
        And I know that so far, I've had a lot to say about the carriers,
    but it goes without saying that everyone in this room knows that
    shippers serve a vital role to the freight rail network as well.
    carriers can't do their job well without open and effective
    communication with shippers. So I have to commend all of you for being
    out there interacting with your carriers on a frequent basis, because
    the carriers can't really know what they are doing well, or poorly,
    without your feedback. Certainly, there are times when the Board is
    asked to get involved when there is either a breakdown in communication
    or a dispute between a shipper and a railroad. But generally speaking,
    those cases are and should be the exception, not the rule. Service is
    doing pretty well right now, and while volumes are down, I don't think
    that is the only reason things are moving. I believe another big reason
    has to be the continuous conversations between you and your rail
    carriers, and for that I thank you.
                        NEW PARTNERSHIPS AND INVESTMENTS
        While I know there is concern from shippers about the future, I
    think there are also reasons to be optimistic as carriers pursue new
    partnerships and invest in their networks. Just to name a few recent
    examples, there is BNSF's new partnership with J.B. Hunt and GMXT to
    provide faster intermodal service to and from Mexico, as well as BNSF
    and J.B. Hunt's Quantum service that aims for 95 percent on-time
    performance. Another example is last year's merger between Canadian
    Pacific and Kansas City Southern and UP, CN, and GMXT launched a new
    intermodal service last year connecting Canada, the U.S., and Mexico.
        Additionally, the railroads are investing in infrastructure to not
    only maintain but also modernize their networks. Norfolk Southern
    invested $1 billion in infrastructure in 2023, while in 2024, CSX plans
    to spend $2.5 billion, UP plans to spend $3.4 billion, and BNSF plans
    to spend $3.9 billion. And I would be remiss if I did not mention the
    railroads efforts over the past year or so to enter into paid sick
    leave agreements with their labor unions--agreements which may help to
    both retain and attract employees to the rail industry. It is my hope
    that I continue to see even more approaches like these going forward
    because I believe that rail has a bright future, especially if carriers
    provide the type of reliable service that their customers deserve.
                  RAIL CUSTOMER AND PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
        Before I close, I would like to mention the Board's Rail Customer
    and Public Assistance Program in the event that there is anyone in the
    room who may not be aware of this resource. You can find information
    about the program on the Board's website. If you are having service
    issues or some other issue that you think the Board can help with, they
    are a great first call. Agency staff who work in the program are highly
    knowledgeable, and they can help with anything from giving you some
    information over the phone to informal mediation. And if you are having
    an issue and would just like to talk to someone, they will not reveal
    your identity to the railroad or other party without your consent.
    Again, it's informal, so they can't give you any binding guidance, but
    they have successfully resolved countless issues on an informal basis
    without those issues having to ever get to the Board itself.
                                    CLOSING
        I would like to close by highlighting that despite the challenges
    the industry has faced during the last few years, that the United
    States has the most extensive freight rail network in the world. And
    the value of this resource cannot be overstated. Approximately 40
    percent of long-distance freight in the U.S. moves by rail which is why
    our national freight rail network plays an indispensable role in
    delivering goods to American families and businesses. Perhaps even more
    significantly, the U.S. Department of Transportation estimates the
    total number of U.S. Freight shipments will have increased by 30
    percent between 2018 and 2040. This means that reliable and predictable
    service on the network will only become even more vital to linking
    businesses to each other within the United States and to businesses
    abroad as well. Which is why, at the end of the day, what I care about
    most is predictable and reliable rail service which in my view, cannot
    be achieved through regulation but can only be provided by the carriers
    themselves.
        And so again, I would like to thank all of you for the
    contributions you make to the freight rail network, the Nation's supply
    chain, and the Nation's economy. I encourage each of you to keep
    communicating with your carriers and when necessary, with the Board.
    Thank you so much for your time and I look forward to your questions.
                                     ______

        Good morning, everyone. It's great to be here and thank you for
    giving me the opportunity to give you this regulatory update.
                                   BACKGROUND
        Just to tell you a little more about my background, prior to
    working at the Board, I worked for 14 years with the Southeastern
    Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, the commuter railroad that
    serves the Philadelphia area. My most recent role with SEPTA was deputy
    general counsel, and in that role, I represented the agency before the
    FRA and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission; served as lead
    counsel on a major railroad reconstruction project; and served as lead
    counsel on real estate transactions and contract negotiations. Prior to
    that role, I served as the Director of Legislative Affairs for SEPTA,
    leading a team to advocate for SEPTA at the local, state, and Federal
    level, and reviewing legislation and regulations at all levels to
    determine their impact on SEPTA.
        Earlier in my career, I was in private practice with a focus on
    bankruptcy law and commercial litigation, and I served as a law clerk
    for the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    and a law clerk for the late Vincent A. Cirillo, President Judge
    Emeritus of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
                                  INTRODUCTION
        Thank you for the warm introduction. It is wonderful to be here and
    to have the opportunity to meet with all of you. Chairman Oberman was
    invited to be your guest speaker today, and I know he would have liked
    to have attended himself if he could have. Just as an aside, are there
    any Dallas Cowboys fans in the room? I flew in from Philadelphia
    yesterday and I am an Eagles fan. I am hoping to have a better
    performance today than the Eagles had on Monday night against the
    Cowboys--or you will really wish Marty could have been here today.
                            TRANSITION TO THE BOARD.
        I have had an opportunity to meet with numerous stakeholders since
    I joined the Board. I am often asked about my transition to the Board
    so I thought I would take a moment to talk about it. I joined the Board
    on January 11, 2021. When I joined the Board, I knew the issues pending
    before the Board were complex and challenging. What I didn't know was
    just how complex and how challenging they are. I know I have so very
    much to learn and believe that I will continue to learn every day until
    the last day of my term a little under 5 years from now.
        What I also quickly observed was how welcoming and helpful all my
    fellow Board Members were and how much smoother my transition was
    because of Patrick, Marty, and Ann. And Robert, who was sworn in just a
    few days prior to me, was in constant contact with me as we navigated
    the transition together. This frequent communication has continued with
    all my colleagues on both a personal and professional basis, and I am
    grateful to have the opportunity to serve with such a great group of
    people and to serve at time when it is permissible to speak with a
    fellow Board Member about pending issues. I find these conversations to
    be invaluable--especially when they involve issues where I am not in
    agreement with a fellow Member. Having the opportunity to speak with
    another Member provides me with the ``why'' behind their position and
    allows me to have a better understanding of their opposing view. In
    some instances, I have even been enlightened to the point of agreeing
    with their position and on limited occasions, I know that sharing my
    view has been persuasive as well.
        I would also be remiss if I did not point out the invaluable role
    that the Board's career professionals have had in my transition, as
    well as the help they have given to me with my learning curve. My
    observation is that the Board is very fortunate to have a small but
    highly talented group of professionals whose dedication to their work
    is evident in everything they do. In my short time on the Board, there
    has not been a question that they have not been able to answer off the
    top of their heads, and I believe the quality of our decisions speak
    for themselves. Lastly, I would like to take a moment to recognize the
    important role that my attorney advisor, Mike Small, has had in my
    transition. Mike unfortunately could not be here today. Mike has truly
    been an incredible resource to me, and I cannot imagine having made
    this transition without him. I am hoping that he is not participating
    via Zoom today and is taking a well-deserved break from listening to
    me.
                    IMPORTANCE OF HEARING FROM STAKEHOLDERS
        In my short time at the Board, I've had the opportunity to meet
    with many different groups, including railroads, shipper groups, and
    individual shippers. I have made these meetings a priority because, and
    let me stress this, these meetings are extremely important to me. It's
    one thing to read a brief or a comment that sets forth a problem that
    stakeholders are having, and another thing entirely to hear from you
    directly and have you explain to me in conversation what you are
    experiencing in the field. I can't emphasize enough how helpful these
    meetings are to me--to have the opportunity to ask questions and to
    hear your perspectives. And so, at least for me, as long as we are not
    discussing a pending matter, if SWARS or anyone here today wants to
    present a challenge, explain it, and describe what you think the
    solution is, my door is wide open. Even if the Board is hearing
    completely different proposals from other stakeholders, I still want
    your suggestions, because you're the industry experts. More input can
    only make the Board's decisions better. Right now, I've been at the
    Board for about eight months, and to say that there's a high learning
    curve is an understatement. But as I gain more experience in this role,
    I can only imagine that these meetings will become even more helpful.
                 ROLE AT THE BOARD AND REGULATORY PERSPECTIVE.
        As you all know, I am just one of the five members of the Board. We
    all bring different strengths and backgrounds to the Board, which play
    a role in how each of us reaches our decisions. In my meetings with
    stakeholders, I have often been asked about my views, my leanings, or
    how I make decisions. Just to give you a sense about my perspective: I
    try to approach issues first from a question of, ``What did Congress
    ask the Board to do?'' I look at statutes, and legislative intent, and
    especially the Rail Transportation Policy set out by Congress. Now, I
    don't know how many of you have looked at the Rail Transportation
    Policy, but it sets out fifteen often-competing policy priorities to
    guide the Board's decisions. The Rail Transportation Policy, or RTP as
    we call it, directs the Board to minimize the need for Federal
    regulatory control--but also requires the Board not to minimize it too
    much, and to still provide some regulatory control. Where there isn't
    effective competition, the RTP asks us to make sure rates aren't too
    high--but we should also make sure they aren't too low either. Congress
    carved a narrow path for the Board to walk, and shippers and railroads
    are often pitted against each other on either side.
        And yet, even though railroads and shippers are often at odds, in
    the long run, shippers, railroads, and the Board are, I think, in
    agreement. In one meeting I had with a shipper, they talked at some
    length about recurring problems with missed switches. But during that
    same conversation, the shipper emphasized the importance of a strong
    freight rail network, and how important it was for the shipping
    community that railroads are healthy. Even though shippers and
    railroads agree on this in principle, there is strong disagreement on
    how best to maintain and improve the health and strength of our freight
    rail network. But when I make decisions, and when I meet with
    stakeholders, the health and strength of freight rail network is always
    my ultimate goal.
                 COMING SOON--DEMURRAGE TRANSPARENCY MEASURES.
        With regard to recent decisions, I know that all of you are focused
    on the various aspects of your industry so you might not be familiar
    with the Board's recent decisions. I'd like to take a moment to give a
    brief overview of one recent decision and expand a bit on my views,
    because the decision will be effective this coming Wednesday, October
    6th.
        In April, the Board issued a final rule in the Demurrage Billing
    Requirements proceeding. The final rule outlines several transparency
    measures for Class I carriers when they are billing shippers for
    demurrage charges and creates minimum standards for what railroads must
    tell shippers on or with any demurrage invoice. Among the items that
    railroads must provide are the original ETA of each car, the receipt of
    each car at the last interchange with the invoicing carrier, and the
    actual placement of each car.
        While I know that transparency doesn't solve every problem, it can
    solve some and, at the very least, make clear where the points of
    disagreement are for demurrage charges. It is my hope that this rule
    makes the circumstances surrounding any demurrage charge more
    transparent to shippers so that they have a better ability to determine
    the reasonableness of individual charges.
        In that regard, I also believe that this rule may be beneficial for
    the railroads themselves. By giving shippers greater clarity into
    demurrage charges, shippers may find it less necessary to inquire about
    certain charges. And when they do have a need to contact a railroad
    about a charge, ensuring that shippers and railroads are coming to the
    issue with the same information may help to prevent some disputes and
    resolve others more quickly and easily.
        However, I recognize that this is not the end of the process. After
    the rule becomes effective in October, I ask you and your members to
    please let me know how things are going, either through your
    conversations with OPAGAC or by getting in touch with me directly. Even
    now, before the rule is effective, questions are forming in my mind:
    Have you seen changes in demurrage practices? Have you seen
    improvements? Did the Board's decision create unforeseen new issues? Is
    the additional information that you're getting from the railroads
    helpful? Is there any other information related to demurrage that would
    be helpful?
                            GOALS AS A BOARD MEMBER.
        This ties in with a couple of my goals as a Board member. The first
    of these is that I want to make sure that I do not decide these issues
    and then remain cloistered away in DC, unaware of the effect of our
    decisions on railroads and shippers. I want to be responsive to your
    concerns. But the Board necessarily is somewhat removed from the effect
    of our decisions. We aren't a shipper, and we aren't a railroad, so the
    Board very much relies on you, our stakeholders, to be its eyes and
    ears out there to tell us how things are going on the ground. And so,
    especially in situations like a pending proceeding where the rules
    prohibit me from meeting with you, I would like to request that when
    you file comments and pleadings, to get into specifics as much as you
    possibly can. Provide photos, diagrams, metrics, whatever you can.
    Really explain the situations and difficulties you're having so that I
    can step into your shoes and see things from your perspective. If some
    rule is going to have a detrimental effect on your business, please be
    sure to tell us, but as much as you can, please show us and provide
    supporting data when possible.
        Another goal I have is to help ensure that Board decisions, to the
    extent possible, provide clarity, not just to the individual parties
    before us, but to the broader community of stakeholders as well.
    Depending on the case, our decisions can have far-reaching effects. I
    want to make sure that when we decide an issue that sets out or
    clarifies a policy, or applies precedent to a new situation, that we
    set out the principles for our decision in such a way that members of
    the freight rail community can read a decision and get a good sense of
    how the Board will decide a similar case in the future.
                              OVERVIEW OF DOCKET.
        It is an incredibly busy time right now at the Board. As you are
    aware, there are several high-profile matters--all of which I,
    unfortunately, cannot discuss with you because we are not permitted to
    discuss pending proceedings. I would like to give you a quick overview
    of what the Board is working on, but first, I'd like to take a moment
    to discuss the President's Executive Order, which I've been asked about
    recently, and how the executive order impacts the Board.
               COMMENTS REGARDING EXECUTIVE ORDER ON COMPETITION.
        As you are all aware, the executive order expressed concerns about
    consolidation in industries, and the effects of consolidation on
    competition. It highlighted the effects of consolidation not only on
    consumers, in terms of pricing, service, and choice, but also on some
    producers, who may encounter concentrated market power as they try to
    sell their goods.
        While most of the executive order did not touch on the rail
    industry, the concerns about consolidation and pricing, and the desire
    to foster competition, are already reflected in the rail transportation
    policy, which is set forth by Congress, and the Board is directed to
    follow that policy when making many of its decisions.
        The rail transportation policy establishes the policy of the U.S.
    government, and the Board, to allow competition and demand to establish
    reasonable rates, and to ensure that there is effective competition. In
    the absence of competition, where rates are too high, Congress directed
    us to maintain reasonable rates. If predatory pricing and practices
    exist, or there are undue concentrations of market power, the Board,
    through our decisions and rulemakings, is tasked with prohibiting
    those.
        In other words, the driving forces and the concerns expressed in
    the President's executive order are consistent with the policies set
    forth within the Rail Transportation Policy. Therefore, concerns about
    competition, pricing, and market power will continue to inform the
    Board's decisions, as Congress intended.
        And just as a last note, the Board is an independent agency, which
    means that we are ultimately guided by the RTP and our governing
    statutes. As the RTP certainly acknowledges, regulatory action is not
    always helpful in fostering competition, and further, imposing
    regulations will often have long-term impacts. So whenever the Board
    proceeds with regulatory action, we need to be as certain as possible
    that our proposed regulations will achieve our desired outcome, and try
    to avoid situations where unintended, undesirable consequences outweigh
    the benefits of regulation.
    MERGERS.
        Now, moving on to the Board's docket: First, of course, the Board
    has two large mergers pending before it, one of which is a major merger
    of two Class I railroads. It is the first time in 20 years that the
    Board has reviewed a merger of that size. The first involves CSX's
    acquisition of Pan Am Railways, which would extend CSX's network in New
    England. The second involves Canadian Pacific's acquisition of Kansas
    City Southern, which would create a single railroad that extends from
    Canada, through the U.S., and into Mexico. For each of these mergers,
    the Board will be going through a transparent, public process, to
    ensure that concerns from all stakeholders are taken into account.
    RULEMAKINGS.
        The Board has several rulemaking proceedings before it right now,
    some initiated by the Board, and some initiated by stakeholders. I'm
    not going to go through all of them, but to highlight a few:

       We have a petition from several Class I railroads asking us
            to change how we determine whether Class I rail carriers are
            revenue adequate on an annual basis, in which they argue for a
            standard that would benchmark revenue adequacy to the S&P 500.

       We have a rulemaking proceeding to consider a new procedure
            for challenging the reasonableness of rates in smaller cases,
            in which the Board would decide a case by selecting either the
            shipper's or the railroad's final offer.

       There's another proposal from several Class I railroads to
            create an arbitration program to resolve small rate disputes.

       And we also have a proposal from several organizations to
            create regulations authorizing private railcar owners to
            assess, essentially, demurrage charges when a Class I railroad
            holds on to a private railcar beyond a reasonable time.

        That brings me to one proceeding that I particularly wanted to
    highlight, because the Board is currently seeking public comment on an
    important issue.
    FIRST-MILE LAST-MILE.
        A few weeks ago, we issued a decision asking for comments about
    issues related to first-mile last-mile rail service metrics. In my
    meetings with shippers and shipper organization, this is an issue that
    has been raised repeatedly. During these meetings, shippers have
    presented their challenges with first-mile, last-mile. While I would
    not be able to summarize those challenges, the challenges seem to vary
    by shipper. Our recent decision asks for, broadly, four types of
    information.
        First, what issues are you having? How does the issue effect your
    operations? What remedies are available to you right now? Second, are
    there additional metrics that you think would be helpful for the Board
    to collect, and how would those metrics benefit you? Third, what data
    do Class I carriers currently track? And fourth, what are the trade-
    offs for any suggestions?
        If you are having issues with first-mile last-mile service, I would
    like to hear about it. If you have an idea for information and metrics
    that you believe the Board should collect and which would be helpful to
    clarifying the challenges associated with First Mile Last Mile, I hope
    you will include it in your comments.
        In my view, and I'd ask that you keep this in mind as you consider
    your comments, the most important question the Board is asking in the
    First-Mile Last-Mile proceeding is this: What problem are we trying to
    solve? Your comments will be essential for the Board to understand the
    scope of the problem.
    PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE CRUCIAL.
        Clearly, the issues before the Board are wide-ranging, and in
    several proceedings, any action that we take could have large effects
    on the industry or the network. Because these regulations are often in
    place for many years and come with associated costs, I believe it is
    incumbent upon the Board to proceed cautiously with any action that
    could have an effect on the rail network. One way the Board can proceed
    with caution is to make sure that the Board seeks input from the very
    people who best know the network--the stakeholders. If there's one
    thing I've learned in the 70-or-so meetings I've had with shippers and
    railroads and other organizations, it's how much I don't know. I both
    value and depend upon the insight and experience from people like the
    ones in this room who are literally on the network on daily basis, to
    tell me what works and what doesn't and how we could make it better.
    So, if there is something that the Board is doing that sounds like a
    good idea or bad idea, I hope you will submit detailed comments.
    IMPORTANCE OF PROCEEDING WITH CAUTION.
        I've learned a few lessons both during the pandemic and during my
    time at the Board about how interconnected things are, how supply chain
    issues affect us all, and how many intersecting problems there are
    right now in the supply chain. In my meetings with stakeholders, both
    on the railroad and shipper sides, I've had a lot of productive and
    enlightening discussions about the issues affecting the rail network
    right now, and I cannot thank enough the people and organizations I've
    met with for lending me their expertise as I try to stay informed about
    the state of the network. I really see that as one of the most
    important aspects of my job, because whenever the Board considers
    regulatory action, I do not take this responsibility lightly, nor do I
    want us to do so in a vacuum.
        If I could sum up one takeaway from those meetings, it's that there
    are many potential issues affecting the network right now. Issues that
    stakeholders have raised to me include: chassis shortages; a shortage
    of railroad labor; truck driver shortages; and warehouse labor
    shortages. We've seen shifts in consumer demand, a lumber shortage, and
    now a continuing semiconductor shortage. And from my conversations, it
    sounds like the port and intermodal issues are likely to be with us for
    some time.
        As I hear about all of these problems, I try to focus on two
    things. First, what can the Board do to help? I say can because at
    least some of the issues that are affecting the network may originate
    elsewhere along the supply chain, and therefore it's simply not an area
    where the Board has any power to regulate. Not only should the Board
    try to regulate within its area of expertise, but it should also
    regulate within its statutory mandate.
        Second, what should the Board do to help? Part of the issue with
    regulations is that once they are on the books, it is very difficult to
    remove them. And as the Board looks to solve issues that we see in the
    network, I want to ensure that the problems that we are trying to solve
    are not temporary issues, or issues that may be resolved by the market.
    I do not want to impose a more-or-less permanent solution to what turns
    out to be a temporary problem. I wouldn't want to saddle either
    shippers or railroads with regulations that turn out to be unnecessary.
        And this just further underscores the importance of hearing from
    you when we do propose regulations or ask for input, as in the First
    Mile Last Mile docket. Wherever possible, I'd like to rely on data
    before the Board creates a new rule, and it is from you and your
    companies that we are going to get a lot of that data. So, if anyone
    has first-mile last-mile issues, or you think that some additional
    metrics would help the Board to determine what actions are necessary,
    please send us your comments. The docket number is EP 767. Comments are
    due by December 17th. Replies are due by February 17th. It would be
    great for the Board, and for other stakeholders, to hear your thoughts.
    CLOSING.
        As I said earlier, my door is always open, even if right now, that
    door is mostly a digital one. I am certainly available to meet through
    Teams or Zoom, but I'm hoping to get out and visit some of you to see
    your operations firsthand. That way, when I'm back in the office, I'll
    have a better, real-world picture of how things operate. Thanks so much
    for your time, and I'd be glad to answer some questions if you have
    any.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. TIM SHEEHY,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

        Senator Sheehy. Thank you all for your opening statements.
        Obviously, recent events with aviation, we will look
    forward to talking a little bit about the NTSB. But I think
    before we get to current events, as Senator Lujan alluded to
    earlier, we are in a highly polarized time. But recently there
    is a bipartisan letter shared from a number of us expressing
    concern over proposed rail merger between Norfolk Southern and
    Union Pacific. I will enter that into the record here with our
    Committee staff.
        [The information referred to follows:]

                                           United States Senate
                                       Washington, DC, October 30, 2025

    Hon. Patrick Fuchs,
    Chairman,
    Surface Transportation Board,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Karen Hedlund,
    Member,
    Surface Transportation Board,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Michelle Schultz,
    Vice Chair,
    Surface Transportation Board,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Fuchs, Vice Chair Schultz, and Member Hedlund:

        We write regarding the recently proposed merger between the Union
    Pacific Railroad (UP) and Norfolk Southern (NS) Railway and to
    encourage the Surface Transportation Board (``STB,'' or ``the Board'')
    to subject this proposed merger to a rigorous and comprehensive
    evaluation not just for its potential short-term efficiencies, but for
    its ability to demonstrate clear and tangible long-term improvements in
    competition.
        As you know, the STBs post-2001 ``Major Rail Consolidation
    Procedures'' were adopted specifically to place heightened emphasis on
    whether Class I railroad mergers enhance, rather than merely preserve,
    competition, and to ensure that any potential anticompetitive effects
    or other harms are outweighed by substantive and demonstrable gains to
    the public interest. The proposed UP/NS merger will be the first to
    come before the Board under these rules, and it is essential that you
    establish a strong precedent and apply these heightened standards in
    the way they were intended.
        In conducting its review, we strongly encourage the STB to take
    into consideration the impact the proposed merger, if approved, may
    have on our Nation's agricultural producers, and on the STBs mandate to
    preserve long-term competition and ensure efficient, economically
    viable rail service.
    Impact on Agricultural Supply Chains
        U.S. farmers, ranchers, and producers are facing historic market
    losses as they strive to provide the highest quality, lowest-cost food
    supply in the world. They depend on reliable and competitive rail
    service to move their agricultural products to markets both domestic
    and international. Our producers already face limited competitive
    options for rail service. Further consolidation could compound these
    challenges by reducing routing flexibility, constraining network
    fluidity, increasing market power, and limiting access for both
    producers and processors. As part of its review of the proposed merger,
    the STB should take into account the long-term implications for the
    movement of agricultural products across the domestic rail network,
    including potential impacts on shipping costs and market access.
    Preserving Long-Term Competition
        Since the passage of the Staggers Rail Act of 1980, which largely
    deregulated freight railroads, the number of Class I carriers in the
    U.S. has dropped from over 30 to just six. Today, four of those
    carriers control more than 90 percent of U.S. rail freight. Already
    highly consolidated, the current landscape of railroads as it exists
    today represents a fragile equilibrium with two in the west, two in the
    east, and two through the middle.
        As the STB reviews the proposed merger, it is important to consider
    how additional consolidation could alter this equilibrium. In
    particular, the Board should examine potential impacts on key freight
    corridors, where fewer alternatives for shippers could reduce
    competitive pressure on rates and service. Over time, such dynamics
    risk embedding higher costs, diminished service quality, and less
    innovation across the network. These conditions, once entrenched, are
    difficult to reverse and may discourage future market entrants. The
    STB's post-2001 merger rules are designed precisely to guard against
    this outcome, requiring that mergers demonstrably strengthen
    competition rather than simply accelerate consolidation.
    Efficient, and Economically Viable Rail Service
        Historical precedent highlights what is at stake. The 1996 Union
    Pacific-Southern Pacific merger triggered widespread service breakdowns
    and safety lapses. Integration challenges led to nine worker
    fatalities, a Federal Railroad Administration finding of a
    ``fundamental breakdown'' in safety practices, and freight disruptions
    lasting more than a year and a half--delays that cost the broader
    economy an estimated $4 billion.
        If approved, a combined UP/NS would handle more than 40 percent of
    all U.S. freight rail traffic. The Board should weigh the risks of a
    similar disruption given the proposed scale: a transcontinental system
    spanning 50,000 route miles across 43 states. Service interruptions of
    this magnitude could have severe consequences, especially for
    agricultural producers. Time-sensitive shipments during harvest could
    be delayed or spoiled, export windows could be missed, and access to
    global markets could be sharply reduced.
        We thank you for your careful consideration of this merger
    application, and its impact on domestic agricultural production, as
    well as the STB's mandate to enhance long-term competition. We look
    forward to working with you to ensure the STB continues to promote an
    efficient, competitive, and economically viable freight rail network
    that serves the public interest.
                Sincerely,

    John Hoeven
    United States Senator

    Tim Sheehy
    United States Senator

    Bill Cassidy, M.D.
    United States Senator

    Steve Daines
    United States Senator

    Roger Marshall, M.D.
    United States Senator

    M. Michael Rounds
    United States Senator

    Roger F. Wicker
    United States Senator

    Jim Banks
    United States Senator

    Joni K. Ernst
    United States Senator

    Amy Klobuchar
    United States Senator

    Martin Heinrich
    United States Senator

    Tina Smith
    United States Senator

    Raphael Warnock
    United States Senator

    Patty Murray
    United States Senator

    Ruben Gallego
    United States Senator

    Tammy Baldwin
    United States Senator

    Tammy Duckworth
    United States Senator

    Richard J. Durbin
    United States Senator

        Senator Sheehy. This letter, bipartisan, recognizes a
    growing concern from industry and from elected officials about
    mass consolidation within the rail industry. And the free
    market is the free market. As a former businessman, I support
    the best free market outcomes possible, but ultimately the free
    market must also serve its customers effectively.
        And I want assurances from both you, Mr. Kloster and Ms.
    Schultz. And I would be curious of your thoughts right now of
    what the Service Transportation Board is going to do to examine
    this merger and make sure that in the end, if it does happen,
    we are not placing the needs of our farmers and ranchers, our
    manufacturers, and our rural communities who depend on an
    increasingly consolidated rail industry to serve them, their
    needs and their businesses.
        Ms. Schultz. Thank you, Senator. I read the letter and
    clearly this transaction will be the largest and most
    monumental transaction that has ever come before the Board in
    the history of the Board. And what I can say is that I also
    expect that the record in this matter will be voluminous
    matching, you know, the magnitude of the case.
        I can speak for myself in saying that in all matters that
    come before the Board I review the evidentiary record, the
    comments that are filed on the docket, and the applicable law
    and statutes, and I will be prepared to do so in this case as
    well.
        Senator Sheehy. Mr. Kloster, any thoughts on the merger?
        Mr. Kloster. Yes, Senator. You know, I have spent my whole
    career in the rail history and I have seen a lot, and I have
    seen all the mergers, you know, the successes, but also the
    failures. You know, my view is that, yes, this is the largest--
    this will be the largest merger ever. And you know my
    commitment to you and to this Committee would be to be
    objective, to be fair, to be impartial, to do all the research
    and the analysis to come up with the right decision regarding
    this merger, or any topic that, you know, case issue that comes
    before the Board.
        Senator Sheehy. And ultimately for the Board--this is more
    of a philosophical question--but for either of you, I mean,
    what do you view the highest responsibility of the Board? Is it
    rail safety and standards of operation? Or is it industry
    health, and as far as industry health, where does that--where
    does that vector point you? Is that health of the corporations?
    The rail corporations? Is it the health of the businesses they
    serve? How do you view that that philosophical ordering of the
    priorities?
        Ms. Schultz. Senator, thank you for the question. With all
    due respect, because the merger is a pending matter I have to
    be very, very careful about any comments I make on, you know,
    my views on any of the standards that I might be reviewing. As
    I am sure you are aware, this will be a case of first
    impression as it relates to the new merger rules, they are very
    much public and available on our website, but for me to provide
    comment on my views on how I view the standards of law or how I
    might apply them would be pre-decisional.
        Mr. Kloster. I agree with Member Schultz.
        Senator Sheehy. Mm-hmm.
        Mr. Kloster. The only thing that I would add would be that
    I do not think there is any particular--there are a lot of
    matters that are important, and it is going to be incumbent
    upon me as a member, assuming I am confirmed, you know, to
    weigh all those matters.
        Senator Sheehy. Mr. DeLeeuw, obviously we had a tragedy in
    Louisville recently, and that comes on the Hill--we have the
    safest airspace in the world. We have the safest aviation
    system in the world. I think it is important we remember that
    because clickbait on YouTube wants us to think that planes will
    fall out of the sky. But they do fall out of the sky, accidents
    do happen, and I think this actually dovetails into our last
    conversation about mass consolidation in any industry, and
    oftentimes those benefits are built as efficiencies. But it
    also creates a lack of competition between manufacturers and
    between operators.
        So I am curious for your thoughts right now, and we only
    have a few seconds left, but what are your current concerns
    about what American aviation looks like so we can continue to
    be the leaders of the world, whether it is in manufacturing,
    whether it is in commercial operations. How do we maintain
    America's aviation dominance in the 21st century?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question. I
    do think we have the premier aviation system in the world. We
    have by far the absolute best controllers in the United States.
    We have professional pilots. I think our national airspace
    system is safe. When we do discover things are maybe not quite
    right, for instance, the government shutdown, the airlines, the
    FAA are very proactive at looking at the data and making
    decisions to making sure things stay safe.
        So in all matters in the aviation industry, we do very
    formalized risk assessments, we look at the consequences, and
    we look for ways to mitigate risks that we discover based on
    the hazards we are aware of.
        Senator Sheehy. Well, the NTSB is a great organization, and
    the entire world has modeled their air safety off of ours. So I
    look forward to continuing that legacy.
        Senator Lujan, I recognize you for your questions.
        Senator Lujan. Thank you, Senator.
        Mr. DeLeeuw, yesterday I had the opportunity to ask Mr.
    Morse questions about his role, as Deputy Director in the
    Office of Presidential Personnel, he told me in a meeting in my
    office when I asked him if he would ever do anything illegal,
    he said no. I appreciated that. But during his--during the
    hearing, he refused to answer any of my questions about the
    firings he carried out, saying they were subject to litigation.
        However, Mr. Morse's actions have a direct link to your
    nomination today because he wrote the e-mail illegally firing
    Vice Chair Alvin Brown from the National Transportation Safety
    Board. Yes or no, is your nomination to the NTSB to take the
    vacancy left by Mr. Brown's firing?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator, I thank you for the question. I have
    an expertise flying aircraft and aviation safety. I am eager to
    serve on the NTSB, but I am not a constitutional lawyer. So
    your question, which I certainly understand, I will
    respectfully have to leave that with the courts in the legal
    process.
        Senator Lujan. Which position would you be taking? Is there
    a vacant position today?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Sir, I have just been nominated to be one of
    the Board Members at the NTSB.
        Senator Lujan. You do not know which position it is?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Sir, I believe it is an open position
    currently, but I do not----
        Senator Lujan. I do not think it is a question from anyone
    here. It is not up to the courts. I am surprised you will not
    even answer that one.
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well----
        Senator Lujan. But I will move on. I am not trying to play
    gotcha here, just that is fact. Anyone dispute that?
        Hearing none. Yes or no, does the NTSB have a quote, ``For-
    cause removal criteria'' which says that, ``The President may
    remove a member for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or
    malfeasance in office''. And if you need the statute, it is 49
    U.S.C. Section 1111(c). And I can get a copy of it if you need
    to see it.
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Lujan. Yes or no, did Mr. Brown file a lawsuit
    suing the Trump administration for his illegal removal from the
    position at NTSB?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator, thank you for that question. Quite
    frankly, I am not aware of the--I hear rumors, I hear some
    stories in the media, but I am not aware of official lawsuits
    on--from no one.
        Senator Lujan. Fact, Mr. Brown filed a lawsuit. I do not
    know if there is any dispute. Yes or no, has Mr. Brown's case
    been resolved?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Not that I am aware of, Senator.
        Senator Lujan. Do you believe in the judicial process?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Lujan. Last week, I joined my Democratic colleagues
    in a letter to the Chairman urging him not to move forward with
    his hearing on NTSB Vice Chair Brown's replacement. As I
    mentioned in my opening remarks, Vice Chair Brown is actively
    challenging his unlawful removal in court. If the Senate moves
    forward to confirm the replacement and the courts then
    reinstate Vice Chair Brown to the NTSB, we could have two
    Senate confirmed board members for only one position.
        My question, Captain DeLeeuw, if the court rules in favor
    of Vice Chair Brown and direct him to be reinstated, will you
    commit to stepping aside swiftly?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator, that is something that I have not
    considered or thought about, but if that situation was to
    arise, I would reach out and talk to the General Counsel of the
    NTSB and possibly the Department of Justice.
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate that.
        Mr. [sic] Schultz, since you currently serve on the Surface
    Transportation Board, I would like to ask you a few questions--
    or Ms. Schultz, I apologize--yes or no; is the Surface
    Transportation Board an independent Federal agency?
        Ms. Schultz. I am sorry. Yes, Senator, the only statute----
        Senator Lujan. Yes or no--yes or no; did Board Chair
    Patrick Fuchs send an e-mail to all career staff placing
    political blame for the shutdown?
        Ms. Schultz. Chairman Fuchs sent an e-mail indicating that
    there was an impending shutdown.
        Senator Lujan. Did he put blame on someone, one party or
    the other?
        Ms. Schultz. There was language within the e-mail that
    indicated that, yes.
        Senator Lujan. So in fact, he did place political blame for
    the shutdown. The reason I say this is statements like these
    are very concerning. As you know, there is a law that passed
    Congress years ago, it was actually by a New Mexico U.S.
    Senator, Senator Hatch, it is called the Hatch Act, and this
    could be seen as a violation of the Hatch Act.
        Ms. Schultz, in your opening statement from your prior
    confirmation hearing, you wrote, quote, ``It is incumbent upon
    the Board to approach matters brought before it by conducting a
    thorough analysis of the facts and adjudicating matters in an
    impartial manner within the bounds of its jurisdiction and the
    law''.
        However, the President has made it clear that agencies like
    the STB should not be independent, but wholly beholden to the
    President's direction and demands. How can the STB effectively
    function while subjected to political interference and
    coercion? Is it possible?
        How can the STB effectively function while subjected to
    political interference and coercion?
        Ms. Schultz. I am sorry, Senator, I could not hear the last
    portion, while----
        Senator Lujan. How can the STB function effectively if they
    are subjected to political interference and coercion?
        Ms. Schultz. Coercion, sorry, sir.
        Senator Lujan. I have an accent. I apologize.
        Ms. Schultz. I just, I could not hear the last part. I am
    sorry. Senator, I appreciate the concern that you have raised.
    I would also go back to, I believe what you opened with, which
    is the STB is an independent agency. It is contained within
    statute. And I can say that, if confirmed, I will uphold and
    apply the law in a fair and impartial way.
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate that. I have other questions
    but I want to be mindful of my colleagues as well. Very much
    appreciate your response, Ms. Schultz.
        Senator Sheehy. Senator Baldwin, you are recognized for
    your questions.

                   STATEMENT OF HON. TAMMY BALDWIN,
                      U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

        Senator Baldwin. Thank you. I am going to continue down
    similar path to Ranking Member Lujan.
        Mr. Kloster, I am concerned deeply about the independence
    and the integrity of the Surface Transportation Board,
    especially heading into an extremely significant decision that
    the Board will have to make regarding Union Pacific and Norfolk
    Southern in that merger.
        Union Pacific's CEO recently met with the President about
    the merger and went as far as to make a contribution of funds
    to help President Trump build his ballroom. President Trump has
    stated that the merger sounds good to him, even though it
    should be clear that a merger of this magnitude would increase
    costs, create more unreliable service for shippers, and reduce
    overall competition.
        When this merger comes before the Board, do I have your
    commitment to act independently of political influence and base
    your decision on the merits and the merits alone? Or do you
    plan to deliver the decision that the President wants?
        Mr. Kloster. Absolutely, I will treat it with independence
    impartiality the merger application, it has not--they have not
    even filed an application so no one wants--no one even knows
    what they are going to propose. You know, if I am confirmed and
    I am on the Board, you know, I will look forward to, like
    everybody else, reading that and considering that. But I will
    promise to do all my research, my analysis, again, in an
    independent manner.
        Senator Baldwin. On that issue of research and analysis,
    the Surface Transportation Board's post-2001 major rail
    consolidation procedures places heightened emphasis on whether
    Class I railroad mergers enhance rather than simply preserve
    competition. So will you commit to following this comprehensive
    evaluation required by these updated standards when evaluating
    the Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern merger?
        Mr. Kloster. Yes, I will----
        Senator Baldwin. Thank you.
        Mr. Kloster.--I will follow the law.
        Senator Baldwin. Ms. Schultz, I am going to ask you the
    exact same question that I just asked Mr. Kloster. Will you
    commit to following the rigorous and comprehensive evaluation
    required by the STB's post-2001 merger rules when evaluating
    the Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern merger?
        Ms. Schultz. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Baldwin. OK. It is my understanding, and I am
    dovetailing on a question that Senator Lujan just asked,
    because when we had--and thank you both for meeting with me in
    advance of this, and having a fulsome discussion about many of
    the issues that the STB will grapple with.
        But I asked a question about whether there were any
    partisan postings or e-mails that you were aware of, and it is
    my understanding--and you replied no--but it is my
    understanding that just before the agency closed its doors on
    October 1, that Chairman Fuchs sent an unprecedented e-mail to
    agency staff blaming Democrats for the government shutdown. Are
    you aware of this e-mail and did you receive it?
        Ms. Schultz. Yes, Senator, I did receive it. And I would
    like to note, in our meeting, at that time I was not aware of
    the e-mail. Upon meeting with some of the members of your
    staff, it was brought to my attention. I did go back and I did
    review the e-mail, but at the time that we met, I was in fact
    not aware of the e-mail.
        Senator Baldwin. Among other things, that e-mail states
    that Democrats are blocking this Continuing Resolution in the
    U.S. Senate due to unrelated policy demands. And I have to tell
    you that I was really disappointed to see this e-mail. It is
    unbecoming of an independent board which is looking more like
    Trump--Donald Trump's board with the illegal firing of Robert
    Primus. Do you think it is appropriate for the Board leadership
    of an independent agency to circulate a clearly partisan e-mail
    to staff?
        Ms. Schultz. Senator, I believe it is my understanding from
    reading the news, that that e-mail went out across the
    Government as a whole. That said, what I cannot say----
        Senator Baldwin. So the Chairman sent that to other
    departments, other agencies?
        Ms. Schultz. Not our Chairman, I believe similar language
    was included across--in other----
        Senator Baldwin. Do you believe it was appropriate?
        Ms. Schultz. Senator, what I can say is, if confirmed I
    will review every case the way I have always approached it,
    which is with impartiality, absent apart from politics which
    has no place at all within any Board decision, and I give you
    my commitment that I will--any pending matter I will apply the
    law on its merits.
        Senator Baldwin. Do you believe the firing of Robert Primus
    was justified?
        Ms. Schultz. Senator, as you are aware, my former
    colleague, Mr. Primus, has filed a lawsuit against the Surface
    Transportation Board. It is my practice to not comment on
    pending litigation.
        Senator Baldwin. OK. More hypothetically then, do you--
    should the expectation be that as Board Members you will be
    removed if you do not support the President's agenda?
        Ms. Schultz. I have been appointed by the President for my
    first term. I have been nominated for a second term, and I
    serve at the pleasure of the President. So he has the power to
    appoint and the power to remove.
        Senator Sheehy. Thanks for your answer, Ms. Schultz. We are
    over time.
        We will go back to the NTSB. We have talked a lot about
    rail here. None of you are constitutional lawyers, so let us
    talk about planes and trains. Your role in the NTSB, obviously
    the NTSB is the gold standard in investigating post-crash
    analysis. As a survivor of a fatal plane crash, I have been
    through an NTSB investigation. And I do not think anybody can
    argue that that how you dissect a crash scene and draw lessons
    from that is renowned worldwide.
        But I think one thing that we can probably do better is
    hasten the feedback loop between when an accident happens and
    how that feedback makes it back to our manufacturing base, so
    we can ensure, and not just manufacturing base, our air traffic
    control system. We have heard a lot these past few months, and
    of course we are hearing a lot now about how America's ATC
    system is old. It is struggling under the weight of growing air
    traffic, and obviously now we are having controller shortages.
        So I would love to hear your thoughts about what role the
    NTSB can play in ensuring that our ATC modernization and
    airspace modernization happens rapidly and safely so we can
    meet the demands of 21st century air travel?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question.
    You know you mentioned about the NTSB. You know, the NTSB is a
    small agency, roughly about 425 people plus or minus 20, it is
    the preeminent safety agency worldwide, and what is amazing is
    for 400-and-plus people they provide a fantastic service to the
    American public.
        So the NTSB does take the time, you know, you mentioned
    about the timeliness, I think that certainly improved in the
    last few years, but the NTSB is not about necessarily a
    timeliness piece of it. They want to be at--you know,
    investigation that is timely but it is all about the quality.
    So I have worked with the NTSB for years and I would say that,
    you know, timeliness is an issue and they are aware of it, but
    it is all about the quality. So they want to make a good final
    report with safety recommendations that will benefit safety and
    save lives.
        The Chairman. Thank you. Mr. DeLeeuw, ahead of this
    hearing, Democrats criticized me for including you on this
    panel because of the pending litigation involving the former
    Mayor of Jacksonville. That is a distraction from the merits of
    your nomination. 11 people were killed in an aviation accident
    on Tuesday. This is a serious nomination and by any measure you
    are extremely qualified.
        I want to start by asking you about your experience working
    in aviation safety. You currently serve as the Managing
    Director for Safety and Efficiency at American Airlines, and
    you have been in various safety positions at American and at
    the Allied Pilots Association for more than 15 years. What
    aviation safety issues have you personally worked on?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well sir, thank you, Senator. Thank you for
    that question. Well, over the years I have worked with a lot of
    different programs. You know, the airlines they follow a safety
    management system. And so we have got four components to that,
    safety promotion, safety policy, safety risk management, safety
    assurance. I have been primarily in the safety assurance aspect
    of that which involves the voluntary confidential reporting
    programs. and aviation--we call that the Aviation Safety Action
    Program.
        We also have the Flight Ops Quality Assurance which is
    flight data monitoring. We were--I was responsible to work with
    my team to start a continuous LOSA program, and the last
    several years we have started another safety assurance program
    called the Learning and Improvement Team. All these, some of
    these are trend setters, let us say.
        But on the other part of it is that over the years several
    things have popped up. I would have to say that I was fortunate
    to be part of a joint committee between the American Airlines
    and the Allied Pilots Association. On the 737 MAX Return to
    Service, and that was successful. American was actually the
    first carrier to return the MAX to Revenue Service. But the
    entire process of working with the manufacturer was well done,
    and I think it was able to improve safety for all.
        The Chairman. Thank you. By any measure you are objectively
    very well qualified for this position. As you know, in October,
    this Committee unanimously approved my legislation, the ROTOR
    Act, which requires aircraft operating in controlled airspace
    to be equipped with ADSB IN technology. ADSB IN is a valuable
    safety enhancing technology that improves situational awareness
    in the cockpit.
        Mr. DeLeeuw, the NTSB recommended ADSB IN years ago. You
    are a commercial pilot. Can you tell us about your experience
    implementing ADSB IN and why it is important?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Thank you, Senator. That is a--it is a great
    question. I am glad to answer that. I am a huge proponent of
    ADSB IN, and I certainly appreciate everybody's work on the
    Commerce Committee, and certainly your leadership to get that
    pushed through.
        You know, American Airlines has equipped many of our
    aircraft with the ADSB IN technology. We have been using that
    and we have been trying the system out. We have worked well
    with the air traffic controllers in a certain center. At first
    everybody is a little bit skeptical, but over the time now I
    would have to say that as we have looked through it.
        And we have, you know, tried the system out, and we have
    worked with it, both pilots and controllers like this system.
    It is going to improve safety. It will save lives. It will
    reduce controller workload. It is the next step we need to
    improve safety in the airline system.
        The Chairman. And what do you foresee as the challenges to
    implementation?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well, Senator, I am a safety guy, but I would
    have to say that anytime new technology comes out, there is
    always a question about cost. I understand that. But my
    understanding is that people I have talked to, whether it is
    the labor associations, or the other airlines, there is always
    a little bit of concern on that, but in this case here there
    seems to be support throughout the industry for ADSB IN.
        The Chairman. Well, I am hopeful that the Senate and the
    full Congress will listen to your testimony and move quickly to
    pass the ROTOR Act into law and put it on the President's desk
    to be signed.
        Turning to the STB, in 2023, Congress enacted legislation
    that I wrote to fix a broken permitting process for four
    bridges between Texas and Mexico. One of those bridges is the
    Porto Verde Bridge in Maverick County, Texas. This past summer,
    the STB approved the environmental impact statement for the
    Porto Verde Bridge's corresponding railroad project. However, I
    have heard that Union Pacific has objected and put up various
    operational roadblocks to completing this project.
        Ms. Schultz and Mr. Kloster, if confirmed, will you commit
    to working with me to ensure that the Green Eagle Railroad and
    the Porto Verde Bridge sponsors get a fair shot to finish their
    project?
        Ms. Schultz. Yes, Senator.
        The Chairman. Thank you.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        The Chairman. Senator Moreno.

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

        Senator Moreno. Thank you to the nominees for being here.
    Congratulations on being nominated by the President of the
    United States. I am sure for you and your families it is a
    great honor.
        Mr. DeLeeuw, to start with you. Obviously, the NTSB is an
    investigative agency. You do not--you are not a regulator,
    correct?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Moreno. But you have been around the block, as they
    say, you have seen a lot in your career, like our Chairman
    said, imminently qualified. Kind of help us understand, help
    the public understand what the day is like for an air traffic
    controller? From your investigations where you see things went
    well, not commenting on a specific investigation, but just
    generally speaking, would you agree it is a very high-stress
    job?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator I appreciate that question. So I have
    been flying for 45 years in the national airspace system. I
    have flown all over the world, over many countries. I can say
    unequivocally that the air traffic controllers in this country
    are, by far, the best in the world. The air traffic controllers
    they have long hours, demanding days, I am aware of some of
    the--some of the impacts with the government shutdown. I am
    also aware of the struggles they have had in keeping
    controllers.
        But I am fortunate to go--every year I participate in the--
    what they call the NATCA Communication for Safety and I am
    always amazed at the professionalism of the controllers. They
    have an award ceremony on the last night there, which is they
    refer to as the Archie Awards, and they give out--recognize the
    controllers who save lives.
        So I would have to say that the--I am not an air traffic
    controller, but I have certainly worked with them. I consider
    them part of my brother and sisterhood, but they are--they are
    what keeps this national airspace system running.
        Senator Moreno. And with a stressful job like that, we have
    limitations, right? They cannot work 20 hours a day, for
    example. They have to take breaks; is that accurate?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator, I am actually not familiar with their
    work rules.
        Senator Moreno. But you would not want an air traffic
    controller that was fatigued, that was overly stressed? You
    want to make sure they are crisp and they are doing their job?
    That would be accurate just based on investigations you have
    been around?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Moreno. How many people do you know in your career
    that were either your co-workers that went a month and a half
    without getting a paycheck? Have you ever experienced that? In
    other words, have you ever--would you, like when you were--when
    you were just starting your young family, would you have gone a
    month and a half without a paycheck?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Well, I would hope I would not. If I had to do
    that, I sure would be mowing lawns then.
        Senator Moreno. Right. And that would add enormous stress
    to you, your family, your spouse, your kids?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Moreno. I mean, to think about daycare, right? You
    cannot afford daycare. Daycare does not take credit. They
    expect to get paid.
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, sir.
        Senator Moreno. And all that circulating through somebody's
    mind adds even more stress; is that fair?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Moreno. You need to be crisp when on. About a week
    ago, very unreported story, there was a helicopter--see if this
    story sounds familiar--there was a helicopter flying through
    the airspace at Cleveland Hopkins Airport. Fortunately, it was
    a nice day and that air--that helicopter flew almost directly
    in front of an inbound Southwest Airlines flight at 2,000 ft
    with almost no separation, vertical separation. They were
    literally on a collision path.
        Now, when you are a pilot and you can see things out of the
    cockpit, it is a lot easier to be able to prevent those kinds
    of accidents; is that accurate, because you can see the
    obstacle in front of you?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Senator Moreno. And you have flown into Cleveland Hopkins
    before in your career?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Many times, sir.
        Senator Moreno. So you know we have--we are like Texas, we
    have beautiful weather 365 days a year. Now, imagine if that
    had been instead of last week, a nice sunny day, imagine it
    been a heavy snowstorm, zero visibility, snow showers, and you
    were totally dependent on instrumentation, what would have
    possibly happened in that situation?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Senator, thank you for the question. I am not
    100 percent familiar with the event you are referring to, and
    I--I remember reading or seeing something about that. Based on
    what you are telling me, I assume there is an investigation
    going on.
        Senator Moreno. Of course.
        Mr. DeLeeuw. And with that being the case, I would prefer
    not to get ahead of NTSB, and I would prefer to recuse and not
    discuss that yet.
        Senator Moreno. And Mr. Chairman, the point I am trying to
    make is obvious. We have asked these air traffic controllers to
    go into a dark room in a very stressful job where there is all
    kinds of regulations about what they can and cannot do because
    we want to reduce that stress. And we are now day 37 into a
    Government shutdown in which they have not gotten paid and they
    are being used as political pawns. And quite frankly, I find
    that atrocious.
        I find it atrocious that the Air Traffic Controllers Union
    itself, not exactly a right-wing organization, has begged
    Democrats to allow us to have a vote to open the Government,
    but Democrats have refused and they are playing with people's
    lives. They are allowing our skies to become more dangerous.
        So for my Democrat colleagues, especially in this Committee
    that constantly talk about how important safety is, why don't
    we actually open the Government today--or actually let us have
    a vote. Let us have a vote to open the Government and get
    people paid.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Chairman. Senator Lujan.
        Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that.
        I am going to ask some questions of Ms. Schultz. I am going
    to respond to Senator from Ohio. Ms. Schultz, I appreciate the
    question and response that you had to Senator Baldwin.
        Mr. Kloster, the same question I have to you is, was the
    firing of Mr. Primus justified?
        The Chairman. Please turn your microphone on.
        Mr. Kloster. Oh. Sorry. I did not know him. I do not know
    the circumstances. I was not privy to the circumstances that he
    was removed by President Trump.
        Senator Lujan. I have a follow up.
        Mr. Kloster. It is a--it is in litigation, so I do not
    really have a comment on that.
        Senator Lujan. I have a follow up here. The White House
    said that they fired Mr. Primus because he did not support the
    President's America First agenda, their words.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. Ms. Schultz, yes or no, do you feel pressure
    to support the President's agenda?
        Ms. Schultz. Thank you for the question, Senator. The
    answer to that is no. Again, I think of--in response to other
    questions, in my time on the Board with pending matters, I
    approach it from a pretty similar manner, which is to look at
    the--to look at the applicable law, including any statutes,
    regs, existing precedent. I also review the record extensively,
    consider the arguments on the merits, and you know, the policy
    principles that are set forth by Congress in the Rail
    Transportation Policy----
        Senator Lujan. I appreciate--I am sorry that the Senator
    from Ohio has to leave after what he shared. I was going to
    share with him some statistics from DWI in Ohio and how many
    people die there every year. I was also going to respond to all
    that happened recently under President Trump with the nonsense
    that came from Elon Musk with termination after termination,
    threat after threat.
        My House Republican colleagues have been home for I do not
    know 40, 50 days. I do not know what they are up to. Speaker
    Johnson, when he was asked about bringing them back specific to
    pay the controllers, Speaker Johnson said, quote, ``He would
    not bring the House back to pay controllers'', because he said
    it would be a waste of our time.
        Look, I do not want to get in a back and forth of pointing
    fingers. I am tired of that. And I find I am falling guilty to
    it every day. It is time to fix this stuff. The reason there
    was not a shutdown under the previous administration with
    Democrats in the majority working with our Republican
    colleagues, because we worked together. Those CRs were amended.
    Democrats and Republicans got together to do the right thing
    for the American people. We need to do that again. And I am
    certainly hopeful that we will get there as well.
        I am sorry that Senator Moreno does not want to see that
    there is a 26 percent increase in DWI deaths in Ohio. That one
    of the leading causes of fatalities in Ohio is people getting
    killed by people driving drunk. I hope that we will have a
    chance to have a conversation and that rather than just trying
    to throw a swing, you want to sit here and you are going to
    listen to the response as well.
        I am just terribly sorry about that as well. But let me
    just get back here to close, and I appreciate the follow up
    here.
        Mr. Kloster, the same question to you. Do you feel pressure
    to support the President's agenda?
        Mr. Kloster. Well, I am not on the Board, so there has been
    no pressure, but if I was on the Board, if I was confirmed, I
    would take anyone's input, whether it was the President, or a
    member of this Committee, I would take their input. And then I
    would use that to make an independent, fair, unbiased decision.
        Senator Lujan. You would take their input if it was in the
    record? Or you are going to take their input if they go to
    social media and say something?
        Mr. Kloster. I am not on social media. I mean other than
    LinkedIn and that is----
        Senator Lujan. Do you watch--do you watch television news?
    Do you watch----
        Mr. Kloster. Oh. Totally. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. So if the President says on broadcast news--
    --
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan.--I want you all to do something and it is
    not in the record, how do you deal with that?
        Mr. Kloster. That kind of stuff goes in one ear and out the
    other, for me.
        Senator Lujan. It does not matter, correct?
        Mr. Kloster. It is not going to matter.
        Senator Lujan. It has to be in the record. Whatever
    evidence it is that you are going to use to make a decision has
    to be in the record that you are evaluating of whatever the
    case is; is that correct?
        Mr. Kloster. I am not sure what you mean by ``on the
    record'', if someone called me up?
        Senator Lujan. So help me understand, sir. I am from a
    small farm here. And is it you are going----
        Mr. Kloster. Yes. And this is my first foray into this
    world.
        Senator Lujan. Mr. Kloster, you have accepted a nomination.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan.--into a very serious job into an independent
    agency.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. There are serious cases presented to you. A
    track going awry and going off a line. The case is presented to
    you to try to figure out what has happened; is that correct?
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. Is there a record that you review that is
    part of that case? Or what would you call it? What is the paper
    that gets put in front of you that you have to read and
    understand that all the evidence, all the investigations, what
    is that called? What do you call it? Because I want to use
    your----
        Mr. Kloster. Yes. No, I understand what you mean by record
    now. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. Would you call it a record?
        Mr. Kloster. Yes. An application, or the evidence.
        Senator Lujan. OK. So I am using your words--OK. If someone
    tells you to do something in the news, since you watch the
    news, you do not do social media, but you do--you watch the
    news.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes.
        Senator Lujan. And it is not in the record as we have just
    had a conversation about what the record is, do you just
    completely ignore it? Does it have no bearing in the outcome of
    the case?
        Mr. Kloster. As I said, I would take all input, you know.
        Senator Lujan. All right. Ms. Schultz, I am not even going
    to ask you the same question because I know you are going to
    say, no. It has to be in the record. That is how you have
    proven this.
        So, Mr. Kloster, look, I am not a JD. I am not as smart as
    my colleagues here. I am a former public utility commissioner.
    I had to go to Reno to an ALJ school. You might want to go to
    the same school before you take this job so that you can
    understand what your responsibility is and how to evaluate a
    record and make a decision, man.
        If any one of us goes to the news, or we speak from the
    mountain tops, or even in this hearing, and it is not in the
    case, and the record that you have before you, that you are
    making a decision, it does not matter, man.
        I certainly hope that we just get to that case, and Mr.
    Chairman, maybe you and I can support some budget and funding
    to get some ALJ training for some of these folks and I would
    be--I would be proud to co-sponsor it with you.
        Mr. Kloster. I appreciate that recommendation. And I also
    admit that, you know, if confirmed, there is going to be a bit
    of a learning curve for me in understanding how things are
    done. And I commit to getting up to speed as quick as I can.
        Senator Lujan. There is a good school in Reno. I would be
    happy to get you information on it if you would like.
        Mr. Kloster. Thank you.
        The Chairman. Very good. Thank you to each of the nominees,
    Mr. DeLeeuw, Mr. Kloster, Ms. Schultz. My final question is
    required of all nominees.
        If confirmed, do you pledge to work collaboratively with
    this Committee to provide thorough and timely responses to this
    Committee's requests, and to appear before the Committee when
    requested?
        Mr. DeLeeuw. Yes, Senator.
        Mr. Kloster. Yes, Senator.
        Ms. Schultz. Yes, Senator.
        The Chairman. Thank you. I have 31 letters of support from
    various organizations for the nominations of Mr. DeLeeuw, Mr.
    Kloster, and Ms. Schultz. I ask unanimous consent that these
    letters be inserted in the hearing record.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        [The information referred to follows:]

                                     American Chemistry Council
                                                       November 6, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        On behalf of the American Chemistry Council (ACC), I strongly
    endorse the nominations of Vice Chair Michelle Schultz to serve a
    second term and Richard Kloster to serve a first term on the U.S.
    Surface Transportation Board (STB). ACC urges the Committee to move
    expeditiously to review and favorably report the nominations for
    confirmation by the full Senate.
        ACC represents more than 190 of America's leading chemical
    companies. Our members produce a wide variety of chemicals, polymers,
    and related products that make our lives and our world healthier,
    safer, more productive, and more sustainable. The business of chemistry
    supports over 25 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product and
    directly touches nearly all manufactured goods. Our industry is one of
    the largest freight rail customers, shipping 2.1 million carloads
    annually. We rely on a strong, resilient, and efficient freight
    transportation network to support our domestic and international supply
    chains.
        The STB plays a critical role in maintaining a healthy and
    competitive freight rail network while protecting the interests of rail
    customers and preventing undue concentration of market power. The Board
    faces critical challenges in modernizing its regulatory framework and
    reviewing the largest railroad merger ever proposed. Strong leadership
    is needed now more than ever to help ensure that the freight rail
    network delivers for U.S. manufacturers and serves the public interest.
        Vice Chair Schultz understands STB's vital role and has provided
    dedicated service to all rail stakeholders during her first term. Mr.
    Kloster's deep expertise and broad experience with rail carriers,
    suppliers, and customers would be a welcome addition to the Board. ACC
    believes that, if confirmed, both nominees will help continue to move
    the country's freight rail policies forward.
        Thank you for your attention to these important nominations.
                Sincerely,
                                                    Chris Jahn,
                                                     President and CEO,
                                                American Chemistry Council.
    cc: Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
    The Honorable John Thune, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
    The Honorable Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader, U.S. Senate
                                     ______

                       National Coal Transportation Association
                                          Sandy, Utah, November 3, 2025

    VIA EMAIL

    Hon. John Thune,
    Senate Majority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, D.C. 20510

    Hon. Todd Young,
    Chair,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Chuck Schumer,
    Senate Minority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Gary Peters,
    Ranking Member,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Senators Thune, Schumer, Cruz, Cantwell, Young, and Peters:

        The National Coal Transportation Association (NCTA) supports the
    confirmation of supports the confirmation of Ms. Michelle A. Schultz
    (R) of Pennsylvania to serve as Members of the Surface Transportation
    Board (STB or Board).
        NCTA is a nonprofit corporation comprised of electric utilities,
    coal producers, shippers of coal-related commodities, and entities that
    produce, repair, and manage all facets of railcar component parts and
    systems, as well as provide services for railcar operations. Its
    primary purpose is to promote the exchange of ideas, knowledge, and
    technology associated with the transportation and beneficial uses of
    coal. NCTA's members rely on a strong, reliable freight rail supply
    chain to ensure its customers receive their needed fuel.
        Our country's ever-growing reliance on freight rail commands the
    Board to provide necessary and effective oversight, especially
    considering only four Class I railroads control 90 percent of our
    Nation's freight rail traffic. Freight rail is a vital component of our
    Nation's economy. Freight rail also enhances the growth of our economy
    and our global competitiveness.
        FRCA welcomes the nomination of Member Schultz, the Board's current
    Vice Chairman, to serve a second term expiring November 30, 2030. Her
    continued leadership on the Board will help ensure continuity as the
    Board addresses longstanding proceedings such as Commodity Exemption
    and First-Mile/Last where the latter is expected to be incorporated in
    a more comprehensive data modernization initiative to include (1)
    eliminating unneeded data collections, (2) strengthening mission
    critical collections, (3) streamlining filing and automating processes,
    and (4) improving data visualization.
        NCTA welcomes the continued leadership of Vice Chairman Schultz as
    the Board faces a potential merger between two Class I carriers--under
    new merger rules that have never been tested before--in an already
    consolidated market environment, with the continued use of Precision
    Scheduled Railroading.
        FRCA views Vice Chair Schultz as an appropriate nominees to serve
    as Member of the STB and welcomes her swift confirmation.
        Thank you for your continued leadership, and commitment in ensuring
    the continuity of a full complement of Members to the Board at this
    most critical time.
                Sincerely,
                                                  John N. Ward,
                                                    Executive Director.
                                     ______

                                 Freight Rail Customer Alliance
                                                       October 31, 2025

    VIA EMAIL

    Hon. John Thune,
    Senate Majority Leader
    U.S. Senate
    Washington, DC

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Todd Young,
    Chair,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Chuck Schumer,
    Senate Minority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Gary Peters,
    Ranking Member,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Senators Thune, Schumer, Cruz, Cantwell, Young, and Peters:

        The Freight Rail Customer Alliance (FRCA)--an umbrella organization
    including trade associations representing more than 3,500
    manufacturing, agriculture chemical, and alternative fuels companies,
    electric utilities, and their customers--strongly supports the
    confirmation of Ms. Michelle A. Schultz (R) of Pennsylvania and Mr.
    Richard Kloster (R) of West Virginia to serve as Members of the Surface
    Transportation Board (STB or Board).
        Our country's ever-growing reliance on freight rail commands the
    Board to provide necessary and effective oversight, especially
    considering only four Class I railroads control 90 percent of our
    Nation's freight rail traffic. Freight rail is a vital component of our
    Nation's economy. Farmers rely on rail both for fertilizer to grow
    their crops and to deliver those crops to market, and utilities and
    propane suppliers rely on rail to receive the fuel they need to serve
    their customers. Freight rail also enhances the growth of our economy
    and our global competitiveness.
        FRCA welcomes the nomination of Member Schultz, the Board's current
    Vice Chairman, to serve a second term expiring November 30, 2030. Her
    continued leadership on the Board will help ensure continuity as the
    Board addresses longstanding proceedings such as Commodity Exemption
    and First-Mile/Last where the latter is expected to be incorporated in
    a more comprehensive data modernization initiative to include (1)
    eliminating unneeded data collections, (2) strengthening mission
    critical collections, (3) streamlining filing and automating processes,
    and (4) improving data visualization.
        In addition, FRCA appreciates the nomination of Mr. Kloster to
    serve as Member of the STB for a term expiring December 31, 2028. With
    more than three decades' direct experience working with railroads, rail
    suppliers, and shippers, Mr. Kloster will provide not just varied rail
    industry expertise to the Board but also his unique business
    perspectives geared towards solving problems. His varied background
    will allow him to become familiar with the issues before the STB fairly
    quickly--matters that involve the most substantive issues of great
    importance to the Board, shippers, railroads, and the general public.
    They are technical, complex, and challenging, requiring resolution to
    reflect today's market conditions and freight rail demands.
        FRCA welcomes the continued leadership of Vice Chairman Schultz and
    the service of Mr. Kloster as the Board faces a potential merger
    between two Class I carriers--under new merger rules that have never
    been tested before--in an already consolidated market environment, with
    the continued use of Precision Scheduled Railroading.
        FRCA views Vice Chair Schultz and Mr. Kloster as appropriate
    nominees to serve as Members of the STB and welcomes their swift
    confirmation.
        Thank you for your continued leadership and commitment in ensuring
    the continuity of a full complement of Members to the Board at this
    most critical time.
                Sincerely,
                                                Ann Warner LLC,
                                                 Spokesperson for FRCA.

    cc: Members of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation
    Committee
    About FRCA
        An umbrella membership organization, the Freight Rail Customer
    Alliance (FRCA) includes large trade associations representing more
    than 3,500 electric utility, agriculture, chemical, and alternative
    fuel companies and their consumers. Through a growing coalition of
    industries and associations, the mission of FRCA is to obtain changes
    in Federal law and policy that will provide all freight shippers with
    reliable rail service at competitive prices. www.railvoices.org
                                     ______

                                      Allied Pilots Association
                                       Fort Worth, TX, October 27, 2025

    Hon. Senator Ted Cruz, Chair,
    Hon. Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chair Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,

        On behalf of the 16,000 American Airlines pilots the Allied Pilots
    Association (APA) is honored to serve, I am writing to express APA's
    support for the nomination of Captain John DeLeeuw to serve on the
    National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Captain DeLeeuw brings an
    exceptional depth of experience and a decades-long commitment to
    aviation safety that make him superbly qualified for this critical
    role.
        With a distinguished career in aviation and safety oversight,
    Captain DeLeeuw has demonstrated unwavering dedication to the
    principles of accident prevention, investigative integrity, and public
    service. His background includes experience as a military and
    commercial pilot, leadership in safety management systems, and direct
    involvement in accident investigations. These qualifications reflect
    his technical expertise and his ability to lead with clarity and
    compassion in high-stakes environments.
        Captain DeLeeuw's insights into the operational realities of
    aviation, combined with his analytical approach to safety and risk
    management, will be a valuable complement to the NTSB's mission. His
    collaborative spirit and commitment to transparency further underscore
    his readiness to serve the American public in this capacity.
        I respectfully urge the Committee to give full and favorable
    consideration to Captain DeLeeuw's nomination. His appointment would be
    an asset to the Board and to the continued advancement of
    transportation safety in the United States.
        Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
                Sincerely,
                                      First Officer Nick Silva,
                                                             President,
                                                 Allied Pilots Association.
                                     ______

                                               GATX Corporation
                                          Chicago, IL, November 3, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz, Chairman,
    Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Mr. Chairman

        On behalf of GATX Corporation, I want to express our strong support
    for the confirmation of Michelle Schultz to serve another term on the
    Surface Transportation Board (STB). Throughout her tenure, Member
    Schultz has demonstrated a deep understanding of the freight rail
    industry and a balanced commitment to ensuring a safe, efficient, and
    competitive transportation system that benefits shippers, carriers, and
    the broader community.
        Ms. Schultz has played an essential role in improving transparency
    and collaboration between the STB and industry stakeholders. Her
    leadership in the Board's work on rail service performance data and
    dispute resolution procedures has been instrumental in advancing a more
    responsive and accountable regulatory environment. She has consistently
    emphasized pragmatic solutions grounded in careful analysis, reflecting
    a strong appreciation for safety, efficiency and operational realities.
        Her combination of legal expertise, regulatory experience, and deep
    knowledge of rail transportation policy make her an asset to the Board.
        I urge the Committee to advance her nomination.
                Sincerely,
                                             Paul F. Titterton,
                                   EVP & President, Rail North America.
                                     ______

                                             The Boeing Company
                                          Seattle, WA, November 5, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    United States Senator,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz:

        On behalf of The Boeing Company, I write to express our support for
    John DeLeeuw's nomination to serve as a Member of the National
    Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Mr. DeLeeuw's extensive expertise,
    his commitment and leadership in the field of aviation safety, and his
    willingness to serve our country in this role make him well-qualified
    to serve in this vital position.
        Mr. DeLeeuw is widely respected by his government and industry
    peers for his thoughtful approach, his analytical rigor, and his
    ability to build consensus in his efforts to build a safer commercial
    aviation system. Many Boeing pilots and engineers have known him and
    worked with him throughout his career, and his reputation in the field
    of aviation safety is exceptional.
        Mr. DeLeeuw would bring a wealth of expertise and knowledge to the
    NTSB: more than three decades of experience as a military and
    commercial pilot, with deeply rooted experience in aviation safety and
    risk management. His 19,000 flight hours, on a variety of aircraft
    including the C-130, the 727, MD-80, and the 787, give him a practical
    understanding of human factors and the operational realities that
    influence transportation safety outcomes. His work as American
    Airlines' Managing Director of Safety and Efficiency demonstrate his
    passion to improve safety for all who fly and keep us safe: passengers,
    flight crews, cabin crews, maintenance, and ATC. His personal
    commitment to advance the industry as a whole is evident in his
    involvement in organizations such as the U.S. Aviation Safety Team
    (USAST) and the International Society of Air Safety Investigators
    (ISASI).
        Given his extensive experience, Mr. DeLeeuw is well-qualified to
    help advance the NTSB's mission of improving the safety of
    transportation systems across all modes. Thank you for your
    consideration of this important nomination.
                Sincerely,
                                             Donald W. Ruhmann,
                                        Chief Aerospace Safety Officer,
                                                 Senior Vice President,
                                                   Global Aerospace Safety.
                                     ______

                          Southwest Airlines Pilots Association
                                        Irving, Texas, October 29, 2025

    Hon. Senator Ted Cruz, Chair,
    Hon. Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chair Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,

        On behalf of the more than 11,000 Southwest Airlines pilots
    represented by the Southwest Airlines Pilots Association (SWAPA), I am
    writing to offer SWAPA's support for Captain John DeLeeuw's nomination
    to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
        Captain DeLeeuw has extensive experience in the airline industry
    and has dedicated his life to aviation safety. His credentials and
    credibility make him exceptionally equipped for this vital safety role.
    I believe he is uniquely qualified as his work as an investigator and
    Managing Director of Safety for American Airlines and as the National
    Safety Chair for the Allied Pilots Association have allowed him to see
    first-hand the impact that the NTSB has on the safety and efficacy of
    the airline industry.
        A veteran military and commercial pilot, he has led safety
    management initiatives and participated directly in accident
    investigations demonstrating both technical expertise and sound
    judgment under pressure. His practical understanding of aviation
    operations, analytical approach to risk management, and collaborative
    leadership will greatly benefit the NTSB's mission.
        I respectfully ask that the Committee favorably consider Captain
    DeLeeuw's nomination. There are very few in the aviation industry who
    have the skillset, support, and credentials that John possesses. His
    service would greatly strengthen the Board and further the advancement
    of transportation safety across this great nation.
                Sincerely,
                                            Captain Jody Reven,
                                                             President,
                                     Southwest Airlines Pilots Association.
                                     ______

                                           Airlines for America
                                                       October 28, 2025

    Senator Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.
    Senator Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        On behalf of the members of Airlines for America (A4A), I write in
    support of Captain John DeLeeuw's nomination to be a Member of the
    National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
        The NTSB is a critical element of our Nation's aviation system and
    plays a key role in investigating accidents and making critical
    recommendations to enhance aviation safety. Members of the NTSB must
    have the experience and judgment to guide this important work, and
    Captain John DeLeeuw has these qualifications.
        Captain DeLeeuw's decades of experience in the cockpit of both
    commercial and military aircraft provide him the technical expertise to
    support the ongoing work of the NTSB. Additionally, his current role as
    the Managing Director of Safety and Efficiency at American Airlines
    give him unique knowledge into the safety managements systems in the
    real world.
        Airlines work tirelessly to constantly improve their robust safety
    management systems, and safety is always the priority for each and
    every flight we operate. The NTSB would greatly benefit from Captain
    DeLeeuw's expertise, and he will make important contributions to
    enhance aviation's strong safety culture.
        A4A supports Captain DeLeeuw's nomination and urges his swift
    confirmation.
                Sincerely,
                                         Christopher T. Sununu,
                                                     President and CEO,
                                                      Airlines For America.
                                     ______

                                              American Airlines
                                    Fort Worth, Texas, October 28, 2025

    Senator Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC
    Senator Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        On behalf of American Airlines and its 130.000 team members. I
    write in support of Captain John DeLeeuw's nomination to be a Member of
    the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
        The United States aviation system is the safest in the world and
    commercial aviation has long been the safest mode of transportation--
    two achievements made possible by the entire aviation ecosystem and
    importantly, the critical work and advocacy of the NTSB. The Board's
    role as chief investigator in aviation, highway, marine, rail, pipeline
    and hazardous materials transportation accidents requires impartial
    review, in-depth industry experience and an unwavering commitment to
    the safety of the traveling public and the United States.
        Captain DeLeeuw has long been a champion of safety--in the aviation
    industry and for our Nation. As a United States Air Force pilot, he
    dedicated more than seven years while on active duty in defense of the
    American people. That custodial duty followed Captain DeLeeuw to
    American Airlines where he has not only maintained the safety of the
    skies while on the flight deck, but has led our airline and our global
    industry in pursuit of continuous improvement. Captain DeLeeuw's
    experience in routine airline operations and response to large-scale
    industry safety risks--including his industry-leading work following
    the tragic Boeing 737 MAX accidents--are critical attributes to advance
    the NTSB's mission of preventing future fatalities and serious In1unes.
        American's foundation--our north star--is safety. It is bolstered
    by a robust safety management system and a constant pursuit of
    protecting our team, customers and equipment. Captain DeLeeuw has
    played an invaluable role in further strengthening American's safety
    culture--a culture that is, ultimately, industry-agnostic. I am
    confident Captain DeLeeuw's safety leadership and experience will
    support the NTSB's multi-modal safety work.
        American Airlines is proud to support Captain DeLeeuw's nomination
    and urges his swift confirmation.
                Sincerely.
                                                 David Seymour,
                                               Chief Operating Officer,
                                                         American Airlines.
                                     ______

          American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association
                                       Washington, DC, November 3, 2025

    Senator Ted Cruz, Chairman,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz;

        The American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA)
    represents the Nation's 600 short line and regional railroads.
        ASLRRA staff and our members regularly work collaboratively with
    the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) towards the shared goal
    of continuously improving safety across the rail network, benefitting
    employees, tens of thousands of shippers across the United States who
    depend on rail to be competitive, the communities where short lines
    serve, and the U.S. economy.
        The ASLRRA supports the nomination of John DeLeeuw as an NTSB Board
    Member. His decades-long career of demonstrating attention to safety
    and leadership in elevating safety above competing priorities make him
    an ideal board member.
        He understands what it takes to operate in both commercial and
    military combat environments, keeping safety at the forefront. His
    experience leading safety investigations and coordinated response at
    American Airlines includes working as the Party Coordinator for
    American Airlines when working with the NTSB on investigations. This
    deep experience in establishing practices that support safety culture
    and safety performance and the procedures and protocols of managing an
    investigation will allow for Captain DeLeeuw to make an immediate
    impact at the NSTB.
        We appreciate Mr. DeLeeuw's consistent and active engagement with
    the aviation industry. His experience with the Aviation Safety Action
    Program, which has similarities to the Federal Railroad
    Administration's Confidential Close Call Reporting (C 3 RS) program,
    will help him to understand short line railroad safety concerns and
    opportunities.
                Sincerely,
                                                   Chuck Baker,
                                                             President,
                                                                    ASLRRA.
                                     ______

                                       Flight Safety Foundation
                                          Alexandria, VA, Oct. 30, 2025
    Hon, Ted Cruz,
    Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Re: Letter of Support for the Nomination of Capt. John DeLeeuw to the
            National Transportation Safety Board

    Dear Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and Members of the
            Committee:

        On behalf of Flight Safety Foundation, I am pleased to express
    strong support for the nomination of Capt. John DeLeeuw to serve as a
    Member of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
        I have known and worked with Capt. DeLeeuw for the past seven years
    through numerous aviation safety initiatives. In his role as managing
    director of Safety & Efficiency and as a Boeing 787 captain at American
    Airlines, John leads a large, multidisciplinary team responsible for
    core safety management system (SMS) assurance programs--FOQA, ASAP,
    LOSA, fatigue risk management, and learning/improvement--integrated to
    deliver measurable safety performance. His career reflects a consistent
    pattern of data-driven analysis, just-culture advocacy, and practical
    implementation of solutions across complex airline operations.
        Capt. DeLeeuw has actively engaged with Flight Safety Foundation's
    advisory and technical work over many years. For example, he
    contributed to the Foundation's In-Time Aviation Safety Management
    System (IASMS) research roadmap efforts and has shared best practices
    with the aviation community, including as a speaker at our
    International Aviation Safety Summit (IASS). In every setting, he has
    demonstrated technical depth, operational judgment, and the ability to
    build trust among labor, management, regulators, and manufacturers--
    qualities essential to the NTSB's fact-finding mission.
        Importantly, John brings direct, relevant experience with major
    investigations and safety communications. He has served as American
    Airlines' party coordinator in NTSB investigations and understands both
    the rigor of the Board's process and the discipline required to
    separate advocacy from objective analysis. Combined with prior service
    as a U.S. Air Force C-130 evaluator and instructor pilot, his
    background equips him to approach complex investigations with
    independence, technical competence, and humility.
        From my firsthand interactions, John is principled, transparent,
    and solutions oriented. He listens carefully, tests assumptions with
    data, and helps organizations translate lessons learned into sustained
    safety improvement. I am confident he will be a thoughtful and
    effective Member of the NTSB and a constructive colleague to the Board
    and staff.
        For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to support his
    nomination favorably.
                Regards,
                                                Hassan Shahidi,
                                                     President and CEO.
                                     ______

                                      Allied Pilots Association
                                       Fort Worth, TX, October 27, 2025

    Hon. Senator Ted Cruz, Chair,
    Hon. Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chair Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,

        On behalf of the 16,000 American Airlines pilots the Allied Pilots
    Association (APA) is honored to serve, I am writing to express APA's
    support for the nomination of Captain John DeLeeuw to serve on the
    National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Captain DeLeeuw brings an
    exceptional depth of experience and a decades-long commitment to
    aviation safety that make him superbly qualified for this critical
    role.
        With a distinguished career in aviation and safety oversight,
    Captain DeLeeuw has demonstrated unwavering dedication to the
    principles of accident prevention, investigative integrity, and public
    service. His background includes experience as a military and
    commercial pilot, leadership in safety management systems, and direct
    involvement in accident investigations. These qualifications reflect
    his technical expertise and his ability to lead with clarity and
    compassion in high-stakes environments.
        Captain DeLeeuw's insights into the operational realities of
    aviation, combined with his analytical approach to safety and risk
    management, will be a valuable complement to the NTSB's mission. His
    collaborative spirit and commitment to transparency further underscore
    his readiness to serve the American public in this capacity.
        I respectfully urge the Committee to give full and favorable
    consideration to Captain DeLeeuw's nomination. His appointment would be
    an asset to the Board and to the continued advancement of
    transportation safety in the United States.
        Thank you for your attention to this important matter.
                Sincerely,
                                      First Officer Nick Silva,
                                                             President,
                                                 Allied Pilots Association.
                                     ______

                                   Regional Airline Association
                                       Washington, DC, October 27, 2025

    Senator Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.
    Senator Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        On behalf of the members of the Regional Airline Association (RAA),
    I write in support of Captain John DeLeeuw's nomination to be a Member
    of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
        The NTSB plays a vital role in maintaining the high standard of
    safety found in our Nation's aviation system. The work they do is key
    to enhancing aviation safety and it is essential that the Board Members
    have industry knowledge and expertise to ensure that appropriate safety
    recommendations are made to improve our national airspace. Captain
    DeLeeuw's decades of experience on the flight deck of both commercial
    and military aircraft provide him with the technical expertise to
    enhance the ongoing work of the NTSB.
        Captain DeLeeuw has dedicated the majority of his career to
    improving aviation safety and increasing the adoption of a positive
    safety culture in aviation. His current role as the Managing Director
    of Safety and Efficiency at American Airlines provides him a unique
    insight into the safety management systems of the aviation industry and
    how all the operations of an airline, and the broader aerospace
    community, contribute to the safety of the National Airspace System.
        Regional carriers are proud of our robust safety management systems
    and safety is always the priority for each and every &flight we
    operate. Captain DeLeeuw would provide first-hand knowledge of our
    industry's strong safety culture and be an asset to the multi-modal
    safety work of the Board.
        RAA is proud to support Captain DeLeeuw's nomination and urge his
    swift confirmation.
                Sincerely,
                                           Faye Malarkey Black,
                                                        President & CEO
                                              Regional Airline Association.
                                     ______

                                       Amsted Digital Solutions
                             West Chester, PA, Monday, January 27, 2025

    Mr. Sergio Gor,
    Assistance to the President,
    Office of Presidential Personnel,
    The White House.

    Re: Recommendation Letter--Mr. Richard J. Kloster

        Mr. Gor,

        I am writing to wholeheartedly recommend Mr. Richard J. Kloster for
    a board seat position on the Surface Transportation Board. Having had
    the privilege of working with Richard in various capacities throughout
    my 31 years in the freight railroad industry, I can confidently attest
    to his exceptional qualifications, deep industry knowledge, and
    unwavering commitment to the betterment of rail transportation.
        Richard brings a wealth of professional experience that spans
    multiple facets of the freight rail sector. Early in his career, he
    gained hands-on insight into the operational challenges that rail
    operators face daily, providing him with a grounded understanding of
    the industry's complexities. His tenure at GE Railcar Leasing, one of
    the leading freight railcar leasing companies of its time, expanded his
    expertise and honed his ability to bridge the gap between rail network
    operations and the needs of railcar asset users. Over the past several
    years, Richard has become a recognized leader whose insights and
    research are sought after by stakeholders across the rail industry's
    ecosystem. His ability to assess strategic initiatives and offer
    actionable recommendations has been instrumental to numerous
    organizations navigating the evolving transportation landscape. On a
    personal level, Richard exemplifies humility, intellectual curiosity,
    and a genuine desire to help others succeed. His collaborative approach
    and forward-thinking perspective have fostered partnerships across the
    industry, uniting diverse stakeholders toward shared goals. He views
    the rail industry as a collective endeavor, emphasizing cooperation and
    innovation to advance its mission.
        Given Richard's extensive experience, strategic mindset, and
    balanced perspective, I am confident he would be an invaluable asset to
    the Surface Transportation Board. His ability to approach regulatory
    challenges with impartiality, coupled with his unwavering commitment to
    ensuring the growth, safety, and efficiency of the freight rail sector,
    makes him uniquely qualified for this role.
        Thank you for considering my recommendation. Please feel free to
    contact me at 214.707.3107 or bmyers@amstedrail.com if you require
    further information or wish to discuss Richard's candidacy in greater
    detail.
                Sincerely,
                                                 Brad A. Myers,
                                         EVP & Chief Operating Officer,
                     Amsted Digital Solutions Inc., an Amsted Rail company.
                                     ______

                                             Southwest Airlines
                                           Dallas, TX, November 3, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    United States Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell,

        On behalf of Southwest Airlines, I am glad to express support for
    the nomination of John DeLeeuw to serve on the National Transportation
    Safety Board (NTSB).
        As a leader in aviation safety with a history of service to the
    country, Mr. DeLeeuw is prepared to fill this critical role and help
    ensure that aviation remains the safest mode of transportation. Mr.
    DeLeeuw's strong record includes years of leadership and service as a
    pilot in the United States Air Force followed by decades as a Captain
    at American Airlines, including time as the Managing Director for
    Safety. John is a strong safety advocate who works openly and
    collaboratively with all stakeholders to continuously improve Safety
    across our industry.
        We are glad to join NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy and other aviation
    stakeholders in expressing our view that Mr. DeLeeuw will be an
    excellent addition to the NTSB, and we encourage the Senate to quickly
    to fill this important position.
                Respectfully,
                                               Capt. Dave Hunt.
                                     ______

                       Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroad Corp.
                                        Lakeville, NY, October 23, 2025

    To whom it may concern,

        I am writing in support of the nomination of Richard (Dick) Kloster
    to become a member of the Surface Transportation Board. Over the past
    30years Dick has established himself as a leader and expert in the
    Railroad Industry and has served in high-level corporate positions and
    on various transportation related boards and trade associations.
        Dick brings a wide range of experience that will be a great asset
    to the STB. Starting out as railroad field employee, Dick has literally
    worked his way through all facets of the industry and has acquired a
    unique knowledge base that is extremely rare in the industry. Dick
    brings expertise in railroad operations, railcarfleet management,
    equipment leasing, and strategic planning. His strengths in market
    research, financial planning, and supply chain management will be very
    useful in addressing the issues that are presented to the Board.
        With the range of issues currently before the Board--and the
    likelihood of additional filings ahead-it's clear that experience will
    be essential to navigating what's next. Dick's strong background,
    respected industry reputation, and genuine passion for the railroad
    sector make him exceptionally well-suited to contribute as an effective
    and valued Board member.
        I've known Dick personally for close to 20 years. I've leaned on
    him the entire time for help and advice. His vast knowledge and huge
    network of contacts have been invaluable to me.
        Thank you for your time and consideration. Please don't hesitate to
    reach out if you have any additional questions or need further
    information.
                Sincerely,
                                                   Bob Babcock,
                                                         President/CEO,
                                       Livonia, Avon & Lakeville Railroads.
                                     ______

                                      Highroad Consulting, Ltd.
                                    Highland, Indiana, October 28, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
    U.S. Senate
    Washington, DC.

    ATTN:
    Sean_Brebbia@commerce.senate.gov
    Chief Counsel for Oversight and Investigations
    Ryan_Cannon@commerce.senate.gov
    Coalitions and Member Services Advisor
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
    U.S. Senate
    Washington, D.C. 2051O

    ATTN:
    Michael_Davisson@commerce.senate.gov
    Professional Staff Member

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        I am writing to endorse Richard Kloster's appointment to the U.S.
    Surface Transportation Board. I have personally known Mr. Kloster for
    more than thirty years, and can attest to his academic background, his
    character, and the potential contribution he will make at the Board.
        Richard worked for me in an entry level marketing position at
    Chicago & North Western. He later resigned to return to the University
    of Alabama to pursue a Master's degree. He subsequently returned to
    North Western as a Market Manager in a different business unit. Richard
    has acquired impressive experience and knowledge since leaving the
    railroad; he gained new insight during his term with GE Railcar, which
    seemed to propel him forward, earning him recognition as the Number One
    industry expert in Rail car rules, policies, utilization, and
    acquisition of equipment.
        Knowing Richard, I believe it likely that he is not done yet,
    because he has the passion for problem solving, always wanting to know
    more. I have always known Richard to use a pragmatic approach when
    making business decisions, and I submit he will make a positive
    contribution when working with STB Chairman Fuchs and the other Board
    members.
        Thank you for considering this endorsement of Richard Kloster, and
    please feel free to contact me if you require additional information.
                Sincerely,
                                             Sandra J. Dearden,
                                                             President.
                                     ______

                                       The Greenbrier Companies
                                  Lake Oswego, Oregon, October 30, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Re: Nomination of Richard J. Kloster to the Surface Transportation
                Board

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        I am pleased to recommend Richard (Dick) Kloster for a position on
    the Surface Transportation Board. With over 20 years of experience in
    the rail industry, Dick has built a strong reputation as a
    knowledgeable consultant, especially in his work with shippers, supply
    chain organizations, and shortline railroads. His extensive background
    uniquely equips him to offer valuable insights and solutions to the
    Board.
        Throughout his career, Dick has shown a steadfast commitment to
    improving the efficiency and effectiveness of rail transportation. As
    an industry consultant, he has worked directly with various
    stakeholders, including railroads, shippers, and supply chain
    companies. In doing so, he has successfully navigated complex
    challenges to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes. This hands-on
    experience has provided him with a thorough understanding of the
    dynamics within the rail industry and the factors that influence its
    operations.
        His active involvement in key industry associations, such as the
    National Industrial Transportation League (NITL) and the Railway Supply
    Institute (RSI), highlights his dedication to the field. His leadership
    within these organizations demonstrates his ability to collaborate with
    a diverse group of professionals, reflecting his commitment to
    fostering dialogue and cooperation throughout the industry.
        Dick's expertise in supply chain management and his deep
    understanding of the regulatory environment makes him an ideal
    candidate for the Surface Transportation Board. He possesses a unique
    ability to balance the needs of various stakeholders while advocating
    for policies that promote innovation and sustainability within the rail
    industry. His analytical skills and strategic mindset will be
    invaluable as the Board addresses the ongoing challenges and
    opportunities facing the transportation sector.
        Dick is an exceptional candidate for the Surface Transportation
    Board. His appointment would greatly benefit the Board and
    significantly contribute to the ongoing advancement of the rail
    industry. I wholeheartedly endorse his candidacy and am confident that
    he will bring the same level of dedication and expertise to this role
    as he has demonstrated throughout his career.
        Thank you for your consideration. Should you require any further
    information or wish to discuss his qualifications in more detail,
    please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
                Sincerely
                                                Jack Isselmann,
            Senior Vice President, External Affairs and Communications,
                                                         Past Chairman,
                                                  Railway Supply Institute.
                                     ______

                               Packaging Corporation of America
                                      Lake Forest, IL, February 2, 2025

    Sergio Gor,
    Assistant to the President, Office of Presidential Personnel,
    The White House,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Mr. Gor:

        I am writing you today in regard to the open seat on the Surface
    Transportation Board (STB). I am Vice President of Transportation for
    Packaging Corporation of America (PCA), the Country's third largest
    producer of corrugated container products, and third largest producer
    of office and printing papers. PCA operate 8 paper mills and 95 box
    plants and we have business relationships with all of the Class I
    railroads and many of the short line railroads that operate in the
    United States.
        In addition to my responsibility with PCA, I currently serve as
    Chair on the STB's RSTAC Committee, Chair of the National Industrial
    Transportation League, and a Board Member of the National Freight
    Transportation Association. In the case of this letter, however, I am
    weighing in solely in my capacity at Packaging Corporation of America.
        I understand Mr. Richard (Dick) Kloster is on the short list of
    candidates to fill the STB seat. I want you to know that he has my full
    support. Over his decades of surface transportation experience, Dick
    has accumulated a blend of rail (Class I, Regional and Short lines),
    shipper and supply chain consultancy experiences. He has earned a place
    in my professional circle as someone I can bounce ideas off and know
    I'm getting a thoughtful reply based on his vast history and
    experience. He and I have had many deep conversations about supply
    chain management, and I consider him to be an expert in supply chains
    that rely on rail. I am convinced Dick will serve the STB and the
    Nation's Shippers/Supply Chains with the same distinction and integrity
    that I have experienced with him.
        Please feel free to reach out to me should you require more
    feedback. Thank you for your service to the Nation.
                Sincerely,
                                                 Ross Corthell,
                                        Vice President--Transportation.
                                     ______

                                            Modern Rail Capital
                                          Chicago, IL, October 29, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz, Chairman,
    Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Members of Committee,

        I am writing to express my support for the nomination of Richard
    Kloster to serve as a Member of the Surface Transportation Board (STB).
    Dick's extensive experience in the freight rail industry, his deep
    understanding of transportation economics, and his commitment to
    balanced, data-driven policy makes him well-qualified for this critical
    role.
        Dick brings over three decades of experience in the rail sector,
    including his current leadership at Integrity Rail Partners, his prior
    service on the board of the Railway Supply Institute, railcar leasing
    experience at GE Rail, and railroad experience with Chicago
    Northwestern Railroad. His work has consistently demonstrated a deep
    knowledge of the complex interplay between rail carriers, shippers,
    equipment owners, and regulators. He is well respected for his
    analytical rigor, collaborative approach, and focus on improving the
    efficiency and fairness of the U.S. freight rail system.
        At a time when the STB faces critical decisions, including
    oversight of major rail mergers, service performance, and
    infrastructure investment, Dick's appointment would ensure the Board
    benefits from a seasoned voice with both strategic insight and
    operational expertise. His nomination comes at a pivotal moment, and I
    am confident he will serve with distinction and integrity.
        I urge the Committee to advance Dick's nomination swiftly and
    favorably. His leadership will be an asset not only to the Board but to
    the broader transportation community and the national economy it
    supports.
        Thank you for your consideration.
                Sincerely,
                                                    Kevin Cook,
                                                             President,
                                                       Modern Rail Capital.
        Cc: Sean_Brebbia@commerce.senate.gov
           Ryan_Cannon@commerce.senate.gov
           Janie.Sheng@stb.gov
                                     ______

                  Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association
                                                       October 31, 2025
    VIA EMAIL

    Hon. John Thune,
    Senate Majority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Todd Young,
    Chair,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, D.C.

    Hon. Chuck Schumer,
    Senate Minority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Gary Peters,
    Ranking Member,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Senators Thune, Schumer, Cruz, Cantwell, Young, and Peters:

        The Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association (PRFBA) thanks
    you for considering the nominations of Vice Chair Michelle A. Schultz
    (R) of Pennsylvania and Mr. Richard Kloster (R) of West Virginia to
    serve as Members of the Surface Transportation Board (STB or Board).
        PRFBA is comprised of numerous global food and beverage companies
    headquartered in North America who generated an estimated $150 billion
    in revenues in 2024. All are major rail shippers that 1) own or lease
    their own railcars and 2) rely on the railroads to produce and
    distribute their food and beverage products that are vital to the
    health and welfare of our Nation and essential to feeding its citizens.
    Without adequate rail service, their food and beverages will not be on
    American store shelves.
        Our country's ever-growing reliance on freight rail commands the
    Board to provide necessary and effective oversight, especially
    considering only four Class I railroads control 90 percent of our
    Nation's freight rail traffic. Freight rail is a vital component of our
    Nation's economy--it enhances the growth of our economy and our global
    competitiveness.
        PRFBA welcomes the nomination of Member Schultz, the Board's
    current Vice Chairman, to serve a second term expiring November 30,
    2030. Her continued leadership on the Board will help ensure continuity
    as the Board addresses longstanding proceedings such as Commodity
    Exemption and First-Mile/Last where the latter is expected to be
    incorporated in a more comprehensive data modernization initiative to
    include (1) eliminating unneeded data collections, (2) strengthening
    mission critical collections, (3) streamlining filing and automating
    processes, and (4) improving data visualization.
        PRFBA appreciates the nomination of Mr. Kloster to serve as Member
    of the STB for a term expiring December 31, 2028. Mr. Kloster will
    provide his more than three decades' direct experience working with
    railroads, rail suppliers, and shippers. He will offer not just diverse
    rail industry expertise to the Board but also his unique business
    perspectives geared towards solving problems. Also, Mr. Kloster's
    varied background will allow him to become familiar with the issues
    before the STB fairly quickly--matters that involve the most
    substantive issues of great importance to the Board, shippers,
    railroads, and the general public. They are technical, complex, and
    challenging, requiring resolution to reflect today's market conditions
    and freight rail demands.
        PRFBA looks forward to the continued leadership of Vice Chair
    Schultz and the service of Mr. Kloster as the Board faces a potential
    merger between two Class I carriers--under new merger rules that have
    never been tested before--in an already consolidated market
    environment.
        PRFBA views Vice Chair Schultz and Mr. Kloster as appropriate
    nominees to serve as Members of the STB and welcomes their swift
    confirmation.
        Thank you for your consideration, and continued leadership and
    commitment in ensuring the continuity of a full complement of Members
    to the Board at this most critical time.
                Sincerely yours,
                                               Herman Haksteen,
                                                             President,
                             Private Railcar Food and Beverage Association.

    cc: Members of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
    Committee
                                     ______

                      National Industrial Transportation League
                                          Dunkirk, MD, October 31, 2025

    VIA EMAIL

    Hon. John Thune,
    Senate Majority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chair,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Todd Young,
    Chair,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, D.C.

    Hon. Chuck Schumer,
    Senate Minority Leader,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Hon. Gary Peters,
    Ranking Member,
    Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety Subcommittee,
    U.S. Senate,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Senators Thune, Schumer, Cruz, Cantwell, Young, and Peters:

        The National Industrial Transportation League (NITL or ``The
    League'') thanks you for considering the nominations of Vice Chair
    Michelle A. Schultz (R) of Pennsylvania and Mr. Richard Koster (R) of
    West Virginia to serve as Members of the Surface Transportation Board
    (STB or Board).
        NITL was founded in 1907. Its member companies range from some of
    the largest users of the Nation's transportation systems to smaller
    companies engaged in the shipment and receipt of goods--spending
    billions of dollars on freight annually. The League is the ``voice of
    the shipper'' on freight transportation policy matters involving all
    modes. The League members move a variety of commodities via rail
    including agriculture, chemicals, steel, scrap, paper/pulp/forest,
    retail, and fuel products. NITL members require reliable and cost-
    effective freight rail transportation services to meet their production
    and customers' requirements.
        Our country's ever-growing reliance on freight rail requires the
    Board to provide necessary and effective oversight, especially
    considering only four Class I railroads control 90 percent of our
    Nation's freight rail traffic. Freight rail is a vital component of our
    Nation's economy--it enhances the growth of our economy and our global
    competitiveness.
        NITL welcomes the nomination of Member Schultz, the Board's current
    Vice Chair, to serve a second term expiring November 30, 2030. Her
    continued leadership on the Board will help ensure continuity as the
    Board addresses longstanding proceedings such as Commodity Exemption
    and First-Mile/Last where the latter is expected to be incorporated in
    a more comprehensive data modernization initiative to include (1)
    eliminating unneeded data collections, (2) strengthening mission
    critical collections, (3) streamlining filing and automating processes,
    and (4) improving data visualization.
        The League appreciates the nomination of Mr. Kloster to serve as
    Member of the STB for a term expiring December 31, 2028. NITL and its
    members have worked with Mr. Kloster during his more than three
    decades' direct experience working with railroads, rail suppliers, and
    shippers. He will provide not just varied rail industry expertise to
    the Board but also his unique business perspectives geared towards
    problem solving. His varied background will allow him to become
    familiar with the issues before the STB quickly--matters that involve
    the most substantive issues of significant importance to the Board,
    shippers, railroads, and the public.
        They are technical, complex, and challenging, requiring resolution
    to reflect today's market conditions and freight rail demands.
        NITL looks forward to the continued leadership of Vice Chair
    Schultz and the service of Mr. Kloster as the Board faces a potential
    merger between two Class I carriers--under new merger rules that have
    never been tested before--in an already consolidated market
    environment, with the continued use of Precision Scheduled Railroading.
        NITL views Vice Chair Schultz and Mr. Kloster as appropriate
    nominees to serve as Members of the STB and welcomes their swift
    confirmation.
        Thank you for your consideration, and continued leadership and
    commitment in ensuring the continuity of a full complement of Members
    to the Board at this most critical time.
                Sincerely yours,
                                              E. Nancy O'Liddy,
                                                    Executive Director,
                                 National Industrial Transportation League.

    cc: Members of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation
    Committee
                                     ______

                                                       February 5, 2025
    Mr. Sergio Gor
    Assistant to the President
    Office of Presidential Personnel
    The White House

    Dear Mr. Gor:

        I am writing to express my personal support for Richard (Dick)
    Kloster as a candidate for a role on the Surface Transportation Board
    (STB).
        It has been my immense pleasure to have known Dick for nearly 30
    years--initially working together at GE Capital Railcar Services and
    later and to this day, collaborating with him on a range of industry
    issues and initiatives.
        Dick brings a wealth of knowledge and experience to the table. His
    service as a long-time NIT League board member and years as a `go to'
    industry advisor highlights his commitment, credibility and deep
    understanding of the dynamics around serving the shipper community. He
    is a well-respected professional with keen insights that would benefit
    the shipper community and promote safety, improved service, and
    enhanced technology usage in rail transportation.
        In my roles as President, CIT Rail and Chairman and currently Past
    Chairman, Railway Supply Institute--I understand the importance of
    having well qualified, committed professionals on the STB and I'm
    confident Dick would be an outstanding board member.
        Thanks in advance for your consideration and kindly let me know if
    I can be of any further assistance.
                Sincerely,
                                              Jeffrey T. Lytle.
                                     ______

                               Railroad Development Corporation
                             Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, October 30, 2025

    Hon. Sam Brebbia, Chief Counsel,
    Hon. Ryan Cannon, Coalitions and Member Services Advisor,
    Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee,
    Washington, DC.

    Gentlemen,

        Please accept this as a letter of recommendation for the
    appointment of my railway colleague Richard Kloster to the Surface
    Transportation Board.
        As background I have known him in my capacity as both Chairman of
    Railroad Development Corporation (www.rrdc.com), a Pittsburgh-based
    family owned international railway investment and management company,
    and the Iowa Interstate Railroad (``IAIS'', www.iaisrr.com), a Class 2
    railroad operating between Chicago and Peoria in the east and Council
    Bluffs in the west. The significance of IAIS in this case is that we
    connect with each of the USA's Class 1 railroads and thus have
    interaction with STB -regulated companies on a constant basis.
        As additional background, I teach an undergrad course on rail
    deregulation at Carnegie Mellon University, having spent my life in the
    industry and being involved in not only railroading in North America
    but also railway businesses in Latin America, Africa and Europe.
        Finally, I am well aware of the STB's mission having served as Co-
    chair of its Passenger Rail Advisory Committee for the last year.
        All of the above is not to brag but rather confirm that I am well
    positioned to recommend Mr. Kloster, because of his own background.
        To be specific, he is both analytical and broad based, the best
    evidence of that being the diversity of his industry roles over the
    years ranging from statistical analysis of railcar fleets to
    representing multinationals and investors in the domestic marketplace.
    And his respect at the industry level includes an annual role in
    Railtrends, the top industry event for rail finance.
        More specifically, Mr. Kloster is well aware of the role that
    railroads like IAIS play in the global marketplace and has among other
    things brought international investors to see us, thus facilitating not
    only commerce but finance.
        I would be pleased to provide additional perspective on his fitness
    for the job, and to the extent that there is interest in a follow-up
    conversation with anyone related to his appointment I would be more
    than happy to oblige in anticipation of Mr. Kloster's confirmation, and
    this next chapter in his service to the Nation.
                Sincerely,
                                              Herny Posner III.

    cc: Hon. Jamie Sheng, Director, OPACAC, STB Mr. Richard Kloster
                                     ______

                                             Trinity Industries
                                        Dallas, Texas, November 3, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz,
    Chairman,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    Washington, DC

    Re: Nomination of Richard J. Kloster to the Surface Transportation
                Board

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        As the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation
    prepares to hold a confirmation hearing for Richard J. Kloster to serve
    as a member of the Surface Transportation Board (STB), Trinity
    Industries, Inc. (``Trinity'') appreciates the oppo1tunity to express
    its strong support for Mr. Kloster's nomination and urges the committee
    to swiftly advance Mr. Kloster for full Senate consideration.
        Trinity is a proud, publicly-held U.S. provider of railcar products
    and services in No1th America, with a leading railcar lease fleet and
    manufacturing, maintenance, and repair operations. With an owned and
    managed fleet of approximately 144,000 railcars, the Trinity platform
    plays a critical role in the North American supply chain, and the
    country's national security. Trinity supports the U.S. market with a
    footprint of 2,978 U.S. employees across 42 U.S. locations, including
    its Dallas, Texas headquarters; its production facility in Longview,
    Texas; its maintenance and repair facilities in Saginaw and Fort Worth,
    Texas; Shell Rock, Iowa; Jonesboro, Arkansas; and Ca1tersville,
    Georgia; and its rail logistics and services facilities in Florida,
    Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, North and South Carolina, Texas, and
    Virginia, among others.
        Mr. Kloster has extensive experience across the U.S. freight rail
    ecosystem. He has demonstrated great leadership in the railway supply
    industry and his deep understanding of the complexities of the rail
    network make him an excellent choice for this crucial role as a member
    of the STB. He has experience working for Class 1 and sh01t line
    railroads, a rail car lessor, a rail car fleet management service
    provider, and a transportation economic forecasting and consulting
    firm. He also holds several patents for rail car design innovations.
    His knowledge and background make him an eminently qualified nominee to
    the STB.
        Mr. Kloster will bring a unique, balanced, and knowledgeable
    perspective to the STB, and his insights into all segments of the rail
    industry will be invaluable in shaping the future of freight rail in
    America. Again, Trinity strongly supports Mr. Kloster's nomination and
    appreciates your consideration in supporting his nomination.
                Sincerely,
                                                  Jack L. Todd,
                                        Vice President, Public Affairs,
                                                   Trinity Industries, Inc.
                                     ______

                                                       November 3, 2025

    Hon. Ted Cruz ,
    Chairman,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    U.S. Senate
    Washington, DC.
    Hon. Maria Cantwell,
    Ranking Member,
    Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
    U.S. Senate,
    Washington, DC.

    Dear Chairman Cruz and Ranking Member Cantwell:

        The undersigned groups representing agricultural producers and
    agribusinesses strongly endorse and respectfully urge you to confirm
    Michelle Schultz for another term at the Surface Transportation Board
    (STB) and Richard Kloster for a first term.
        The STB provides oversight of the freight rail marketplace, and STB
    Vice Chairman Schultz understands its vital role having been a board
    member for almost five years and overseeing the rail industry's
    recovery from very rough rail service conditions. As the Board
    considers a proposal for the largest rail merger in history, her deep
    understanding of STB services in the American Supply chain will be a
    great resource.
        We are impressed by the extensive rail industry experience of Mr.
    Kloster, who founded Integrity Rail Partners Inc., a private
    transportation consulting company. Prior roles include Senior Vice
    President and Chief Commercial Officer for Alltranstek, Senior
    Consultant on freight transportation for FTR, President of Advanced
    Rail Equipment Solutions and partner for Norther American Transport
    Solutions. He also has served on the boards of the National Industrial
    Transportation League and the Railway Supply Institute.
        Given the important matters pending at the STB, we urge swift
    movement to confirm Michelle Schultz for a second term at the STB and
    Richard Kloster to a first term.
                Sincerely,

    Agricultural Retailers Association
    American Cotton Shippers Association
    American Feed Industry Association
    AmericanHort
    American Malting Barley Association
    American Seed Trade Association
    American Soybean Association
    International Fresh Produce Association
    National Association of Wheat Growers
    National Cotton Council
    National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
    National Grain and Feed Association
    National Milk Producers Federation
    North American Millers' Association
    Pet Food Institute
    The Fertilizer Institute
    USA Rice
    U.S. Rice Producers Association

    Cc: Committee on Commerce, Science & Transportation
    The Honorable John Thune, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
    The Honorable Chuck Schumer, Minority Leader, U.S. Senate
                                     ______

                                           Watco Companies, LLC
                                                      Pittsburg, Kansas
    Sergio Gor
    Assistant to the President
    Office of Presidential Personnel
    The White House

    Dear Mr. Gor,

        Please allow me to introduce myself, my name is Rick Webb, and I am
    the Executive Chairman of Watco Companies, LLC. Watco is a full-service
    supply chain solutions company focusing on freight rail services. In
    addition to rail services, we provide transloading, terminal and port,
    and logistics services. Our privately owned company is based in Kansas,
    but we currently have nearly 5,000 team members serving thousands of
    Customers throughout North America and Australia.
        I write this letter in wholehearted support of having Mr. Richard
    J. Kloster fill the open Board Member position at the Surface
    Transportation Board. Mr. Kloster and I started in the rail industry in
    the early 1980s so we have known and collaborated with each other for
    decades. I can state without hesitation or reservation that Mr. Kloster
    is someone that knows the rail industry very well having worked in just
    about every aspect of it and is known for his sharp intellect and fair-
    mindedness when doing business.
        Mr. Kloster's experience gives him a unique perspective on how the
    rail industry works and more importantly how it is supposed to work for
    the benefit of all stakeholders. Having worked for a Class 1 railroad,
    a shortline railroad, for several service providers and on behalf of
    many Customers/Shippers puts Mr. Kloster in the best position possible
    to know and understand the needs from all perspectives and to determine
    the most appropriate economic and fair solution for all parties.
        If the task is to find an STB Board Member who has professional
    standing and business experience with demonstrated knowledge in
    transportation, transportation regulation and economic regulation then,
    in my opinion, one could not find a more qualified and capable
    candidate than Richard J. Kloster.
        Best of luck with this process and let me know if you need further
    information or discussion as the decision for the next Surface
    Transportation Board Member is being made.
                Sincerely,
                                                     Rick Webb,
                                                    Executive Chairman.

        The Chairman. Senators will have until the close of
    business on November 10 to submit questions for the record. The
    nominees will have until the close of business on November 13
    to respond to those questions.
        That concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:16 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
                                John F. DeLeeuw
        Alvin Brown Firing. During an interview with my staff on October
    31, 2025, you were asked whether you would step aside without delay if
    the courts ruled in favor of Vice Chair Alvin Brown in his pending
    lawsuit challenging his unlawful removal from the NTSB. During your
    hearing, you were asked the same question. In response, you testified
    that you had ``not considered or thought about'' what you would do in
    such a situation.

        Question 1. You have now had ample time to consider this very
    important question. If the courts rule in favor of Vice Chair Brown and
    direct him to be reinstated, will you commit to stepping aside swiftly?
        Answer. I would consult with legal counsel and comply with all
    court orders.

        American Airlines Recusal. You have a long history working for
    American Airlines, spending at least 33 years flying for the airline,
    including serving as American's Managing Director for Safety and
    Efficiency.
        Although American Airlines is not a formal party to the January 29,
    2025, Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) mid-air collision
    investigation, PSA Airlines--the regional carrier involved in the
    crash--is a wholly owned subsidiary of American.

        Question 1. Given your relationship with American Airlines, do you
    intend to recuse yourself from this NTSB investigation if confirmed?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. Given your employment at American, do you commit to
    recusing yourself from all matters before the NTSB involving American
    Airlines and its subsidiaries?
        Answer. If confirmed, I will follow all applicable ethics laws and
    obligations, including recusal requirements. I will consult with NTSB
    ethics officials to ensure that any necessary recusals are handled
    appropriately.

        Question 3. Do you commit to consulting with NTSB's General Counsel
    to ensure there are no conflicts of interest before participating in
    Board matters involving American Airlines or its subsidiaries?
        Answer. Yes.

        Strong ADS-B In Performance Standard. It's crucial for the safety
    of the flying public that aviation operators, especially the commercial
    passenger fleet--which moves over 2 million passengers each day, is
    equipped with ADS-B In technology, and not alternatives that don't
    deliver on safety.
        Importantly, not every type of ADS-B In performs the same way and
    delivers the same benefits. That's why our bipartisan DCA safety
    legislation requires ADS-B In that boosts situational awareness for
    pilots and delivers real-time traffic advisories and alerts to ensure a
    robust additional layer of safety on the flight deck.

        Question 1. What are the benefits of pilots having ADS-B In that is
    integrated with avionics on the flight deck?
        Answer. ADS-B In, unlike other means to identify traffic
    information, (TCAS Advisories), offer the pilot the ability to see all
    the traffic information around them before the traffic becomes a threat
    to the crew.

        Question 2. How would ensuring a clear compliance date for
    operators to equip with ADS-B In help advance safety in our aviation
    system?
        Answer. I strongly support a deadline for ADS-B In implementation.
    Without a date, there could be delays equipping resulting in a
    degradation in safety that could have been achieved earlier.

        Question 3. Do you agree that ADS-B In provides pilots with better
    situational awareness at lower altitudes where Traffic Alert and
    Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) does not activate?
        Answer. Yes. Pilots would have ability to reference the traffic
    around them and the improved situational awareness would lead to an
    awareness of threats.

        Question 4. Do you support our efforts to ensure FAA is moving
    forward with plans to certify advanced technologies that will be able
    to deliver stronger safety benefits than TCAS?
        Answer. Yes, I believe ADS-B In provides additional safety
    enhancements and at American Airlines, our pilots have verified the
    safety benefits provided by our ADS-B In equipage. Offering airlines
    the ability to use the technology to not only improve safety but use
    the technology to improve airspace throughput, turns this mandate into
    a win/win for the National Airspace System.

        Independent Agencies. I am deeply concerned about this
    Administration's illegal firings at independent agencies--and its
    blanket refusal to nominate a Democrat to any independent Board or
    Commission. President Trump has illegally fired over 25 Members from
    independent Boards and Commissions this year, including at the NTSB.
    Meanwhile, nearly ten months into this Administration, the White House
    has not nominated any member of the opposite party to any independent
    Board or Commission.

        Question 1. Do you believe in the importance of bipartisanship on
    independent Boards and Commissions?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. Do you support having a fully staffed NTSB, which
    includes Members of the opposite political party?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. If the President or anyone else in this Administration
    threatened to fire you unless you took an action you disagreed with,
    would you refuse?
        Answer. I do not believe the President would make such a threat; if
    so confirmed, I pledge to follow the law.

        Rail Safety/Surface Transportation Reauthorization. Last year,
    there were 37 train derailments in the state of Washington. Captain
    DeLeeuw, if confirmed you will have to respond to tragedies in many
    different modes of transportation. On February 3, 2023, we saw one of
    those tragedies with the preventable train derailment in East
    Palestine, Ohio. NTSB made 34 new recommendations after its
    investigation.
        Last Congress, Senators Brown, Fetterman, Casey, and then-Senator
    Vance introduced the Railway Safety Act that would implement a number
    of those recommendations.

        Question 1. If confirmed do you commit to reviewing those 34
    recommendations and working with Congress to include comprehensive rail
    safety reforms in the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will work with the Chairwoman of the
    NTSB to advocate for implementation of the rail safety recommendations.

        Roadway Safety. The NTSB is responsible for investigating
    significant highway crashes in the United States. We are currently
    facing a concerning roadway safety trend. In the state of Washington,
    2023 was the worst year for traffic deaths since 1990. And last year,
    730 people died in crashes on our roads.

        Question 1. How do you believe we can reverse our worsening roadway
    safety record and save lives on our roads?
        Answer. I believe education to all drivers about the dangers of
    impairment, distraction, and excess speed, and advocating for the
    adoption of current NTSB Safety Recommendations to be implemented, will
    help to reverse the trend.

        Question 2. The NTSB has 198 open recommendations to Department of
    Transportation on highway safety matters. What do you believe are the
    most important recommendations the board has made to address roadway
    safety?
        Answer. Safety recommendations focusing on reducing speeding,
    impaired driving, and distracted driving by improving driver behavior
    through education and technology. These recommendations include the
    mandatory use of intelligent speed assistance systems, passive alcohol
    detection systems, and advanced driver-assistance technologies.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
                                John F. DeLeeuw
        Aviation Safety. Americans deserve safe and dependable air travel,
    and no one should have to second guess whether their loved one will
    make it safely to their destination. In your testimony you mentioned
    the importance of implementing National Transportation Safety Board
    recommendations to improve safety.

       Which open NTSB recommendations do you believe are
            especially important for improving aviation safety?
        Answer. Require ADS-B In (with a deadline), improve general
    aviation safety, and implementation of Safety Management Systems (SMS)
    for all revenue passenger-carrying operations.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
                                John F. DeLeeuw
        Question 1. In August, a CPKC train derailed in Dodge County,
    Wisconsin. This is the second derailment in the exact same location in
    two years. It raises serious questions about the reliability of this
    stretch of rail infrastructure and poses safety concerns for the
    Reeseville community. The NTSB is leading an ongoing investigation into
    the derailment. If confirmed, will you commit to thoroughly
    investigating this derailment and providing safety recommendations?
        Answer. Yes.
                                     ______

          Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
                               Richard J. Kloster
        Question 1. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is the
    Federal agency responsible, in part, for budget and personnel decisions
    across the executive branch. Recently, OMB sent a message to Federal
    employees, including members of the Surface Transportation Board (STB),
    providing funding and personnel guidance in the wake of the government
    shutdown. STB leadership forwarded the contents of this message to STB
    employees. Do you agree that merely forwarding a message from OMB about
    the government shutdown does not weaken STB's impartiality and ability
    decide matters before it in compliance with relevant laws?
        Answer. Yes, I agree that this does not affect the STB's
    impartiality and ability to decide matters before it in compliance with
    relevant laws.

        Question 2. Former STB Democrat Chairman Martin Oberman served on
    President Biden's ``White House Competition Council'' during his tenure
    as STB chairman and attended many meetings at the White House. STB
    members, and other members of independent executive agencies, interact
    with the President and other parts of the Executive Branch in the
    ordinary course of their work. Do you agree that an STB member, like
    Mr. Oberman in the Biden administration, can talk with the President or
    other members of the administration without affecting his or her
    impartiality in deciding matters before the STB?
        Answer. Yes, I agree an STB member can talk with the President or
    other members of the Administration without affecting his or her
    impartiality in deciding matters before the STB. I believe it is not
    improper or inappropriate for agency heads, including STB members, to
    communicate with the President or other parts of the Executive Branch,
    consistent with applicable law. If confirmed, I commit to giving full
    and fair consideration to all comments filed in the docket.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Eric Schmitt to
                               Richard J. Kloster
        Question 1. St. Louis is one of only a few cities in the U.S. with
    major facilities for both Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern. Any
    merger among these carriers could significantly affect the region.

         When reviewing a merger of this scale, how do you
                intend to evaluate local economic impacts in cities like
                St. Louis--specifically in terms of employment, service
                reliability, and freight movement?

        What safeguards will you commit to implementing to ensure that
    communities like St. Louis don't lose rail capacity or face service
    degradation as a result of network realignment?
        Answer. Because the UP-NS merger is currently pending before the
    STB, I cannot comment further. If confirmed, I commit to carefully
    reviewing all comments of stakeholders, filed in the docket and to
    apply the relevant law.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
                               Richard J. Kloster
        Surface Transportation Board (STB) Independence. During the 114th
    Congress, then Chairman Thune sponsored the Surface Transportation
    Board Reauthorization Act of 2015, which became law. Senator Thune's
    bill wisely added these 13 words to the law: ``The Surface
    Transportation Board is an independent establishment of the United
    States Government.''
        I am concerned that the White House will seek to put its thumb on
    the scale of Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger unless we have board
    members that are committed to its independence from this or any
    President.

        Question 1. YES or NO: Do you believe in the importance of
    bipartisanship on independent boards and commissions?
        Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to working in a fair and
    objective manner with all members of the STB, regardless of party
    affiliation.

        Question 2. YES or NO: If the President or anyone else in this
    Administration threatened to fire you unless you took an action you
    disagreed with, would you refuse?
        Answer. While I do not believe the President or anyone else in this
    Administration would take any such actions, if confirmed, yes, I would
    refuse.

        Question 3. YES or NO: Do you commit to make an independent
    determination of the merger's impact on American farmers, workers, and
    families regardless of political pressure?
        Answer. While I cannot comment on pending (or anticipated) matters,
    yes, in any matter that comes before me, if I am confirmed, I commit to
    making independent determinations consistent with law.

        Question 4. Do you think an STB Member is required to follow the
    President's direction?
        Answer. I believe the STB Members should and will review all
    evidence and comments filed on the docket fully and fairly.

        Question 5. If confirmed, do you intend to follow formal or
    informal direction from President Trump with respect to any actions
    taken in your official capacity?
        Answer. As noted for Question 4, if confirmed, I will review all
    evidence and comments filed in at the STB docket fully and fairly.

        Question 6. Approximately nine months ago, you ``liked'' a LinkedIn
    post that read: ``MAGA with a mandate from the American people demands
    that all 3 of these be confirmed. If you are Republican and vote nay
    then your political career is OVER!!'' The post contained pictures of
    Kash Patel, Tulsi Gabbard, and Robert Kennedy Jr., while their
    nominations were pending before the Senate.

        Yes or No: Do you agree that an STB Member is charged with
    protecting the public interest--not political interests?
        Answer. Yes, I agree that an STB member is charged with following
    the law, which I commit to.

        Hatch Act Violations: The Hatch Act generally prohibits Executive
    Branch employees from engaging in political activity while on duty.
    Political activity includes ``activity directed at the success or
    failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office,
    or partisan political group.''
        At the hearing, STB Member Schultz acknowledged receiving an e-mail
    from STB Chair Patrick Fuchs which blamed only ``Congressional
    Democrats'' for the government shutdown.

        Question 1. Do you think it is appropriate for the head of an
    independent agency to send an agency-wide e-mail attempting to assign
    political blame to only one political party?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to complying with the Hatch Act. I
    am not familiar with this situation, but my understanding is that that
    this was a government-wide e-mail from the Executive Office of the
    President, and STB leadership from both parties has long followed
    established redistribution protocols for EOP-drafted notices.

        Question 2. If you were directed to send an e-mail like this to STB
    staff, would you refuse?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to complying with the Hatch Act as
    an STB member.

        Question 3. If you believed an employee of the Board violated the
    Hatch Act, would you report it to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel?
        Answer. Yes, if confirmed, upon advice of counsel, I would report a
    violation of the Hatch Act to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.

        Competition: Mr. Kloster, you have been in the rail industry for
    decades and have witnessed the changes to the rail industry brought on
    by precision scheduled railroading (PSR).

        Question 1. How would you define PSR?
        Answer. PSR is a term used in the industry to describe changes in
    operating philosophy and practice. Most large railroads have deployed
    aspects of PSR, some significantly but others much less.

        Question 2. How has PSR impacted the rail industry?
        Answer. I think that railroads have made changes over the years
    that have had different impacts and that the core of the issue for
    shippers is how it has affected their service, which is a very personal
    and specific thing to a particular shipper.

        Question 3. How have you seen consolidation among railroads impact
    the industry?
        Answer. Over the last 30 years, I've seen rail consolidation led to
    great efficiencies and improvements in rail service, as well as opening
    new markets for shippers. But I've also seen consolidation led to
    increased prices and other difficulties for shippers. The economics and
    competitive impacts of any consolidation are unique and should be
    carefully studied.

        Question 4. What issues do you think the board needs to take a
    closer look at to improve service and competition in the rail industry?
        Answer. Reliable rail service and competition in the rail industry
    are at the center of many pending matters currently before the STB. If
    confirmed, I commit to working diligently with my STB colleagues on
    these matters.

        Common Carrier Obligations: Federal law required railroads to
    provide ``transportation or service on reasonable request.''

        Question 1. Do you believe that this common carrier obligation
    includes a duty to provide reliable service to shippers?
        Answer. Common carrier can be found in 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11101, and if
    confirmed, I will uphold the law.

        Cost-Benefit Analyses: Currently, the surface transportation board
    is not required to formally consider the costs and benefits of a
    regulation during the rulemaking process.

        Question 1. Do you believe the Board should conduct a formal costs
    and benefit analysis as part of the rule making process?
        Answer. As a private sector executive and market analyst, I am
    always weighing costs and benefits, and as a policy matter that is what
    the STB has always done and what it should continue to do.

        Question 2. Are there ever times where you think a rule should not
    pass a cost benefit analysis?
        Answer. Any rule adopted by the STB has, by definition, passed a
    cost-benefit analysis, whether or not it follows the formal procedures
    outlined by OMB policy.

        Reciprocal Switch Rule: In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
    Seventh Circuit overturned the Board's reciprocal switching rules.

        Question 1. Do you believe the Board should revisit the regulations
    to update them in accordance with the Court's findings?
        Answer. This issue is now back at the Board and commenting on this
    issue would not be appropriate. If I am confirmed to the Board, I
    commit to working with my fellow members to address and resolve this
    issue.

        Rate Cases: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently
    overturned the Board's Final Offer Rate Review case which the Board
    implemented in response to provisions within the STB Reauthorization
    Act of 2015.

        Question 1. Do you believe that rate review cases at the Board need
    to be expedited?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to working diligently to make sure
    all rate issues are dealt with fairly and in a timely fashion.

        Question 2. What ideas do you have to expedite rate review cases?
        Answer. If I am confirmed, I commit to working with the other Board
    Members to explore ways to expedite rate review cases.

        Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Merger. If approved, the Union
    Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger would be the largest rail merger in the
    U.S. history. The combined railroad would be worth over a quarter of a
    trillion dollars and control 40 percent of the Nation's rail traffic.
    In Washington State, one in every six tons of freight travels by rail.
        Whether that's our wheat harvest moving to export port or consumer
    goods traveling to households--Washington's farmers, families, and
    businesses deserve reliable freight service options at reasonable
    rates.

        Question 1. YES or NO: Do you commit to following the STB's merger
    rules that require you to only approve this merger if it increases
    competition?
        Answer. While I cannot comment on pending (or anticipated) matters,
    I do commit to always following relevant laws and acting impartially.

        Question 2. YES or NO: Do you commit to carefully examining the
    impacts on ports, farmers, small business shippers, and to workers and
    public safety?
        Answer. Again, while I cannot comment on pending (or anticipated)
    matters, I commit to giving full and fair consideration to all evidence
    and comments filed in the record.

        Helping America's Farmers. According to an October 2, 2025, report
    from the Farm Bureau, U.S. Farm Income is down year-over-year for
    almost every crop category tracked, including: Corn, Soybeans,
    Vegetables & Melons, Wheat, Hay, Cotton, and Rice. For example the
    report notes, ``From January through August 2025, U.S. soybean exports
    to China totaled just 218 million bushels, down sharply from 985
    million bushels in 2024, when China purchased about half of all U.S.
    soybean exports.''

        Question 1. What can the STB do to lower transportation barriers
    for America's farmers and ensure they have rail access at reasonable
    rates to market their crops?
        Answer. I believe the STB should fairly apply the laws and
    regulations in order to ensure an efficient and reliable interstate
    rail network that benefits all shipper industry segments.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
                               Richard J. Kloster
        Agricultural Shippers. Agricultural producers depend on reliable
    and competitive rail service to move their products to domestic and
    international markets. Agricultural shippers already face limited
    competitive options for rail service and further consolidation could
    compound these challenges.

       How do you plan to protect the interests of agricultural
            shippers going forward?
        Answer. Agricultural shippers, as well as many other industries,
    are vital to the railroads. If confirmed, I commit to using the legal
    authorities of the STB to ensure an efficient interstate railroad
    network.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
                               Richard J. Kloster
        Question 1. The common carrier obligation requires the railroads
    provide service upon reasonable request and at reasonable rates.
    However, it unfortunately lacks a clear definition, which the
    Transportation Research Board found to be ``poorly defined.'' Earlier
    this year, I introduced the Reliable Rail Service Act with Senator
    Marshall to better clarify the common carrier obligation, with the
    strong support of a wide range of rail shippers and rail labor unions.
    Do you believe that additional clarification of the common carrier
    obligation would provide more certainty to shippers?
        Answer. I believe clarity is always a good thing, and that reliable
    rail service is a top issue. If confirmed, I commit to working closely
    with Senator Baldwin on rail service issues. If the Reliable Rail
    Service Act is enacted, I would apply the requirements set forth in the
    Act.

        Question 2. One of my longstanding priorities is for the STB to
    review, reduce or eliminate most or all its existing commodity
    exemptions. Shippers of exempted commodities are currently unable to
    seek relief from the STB unless they receive a ``revocation'' of the
    exemption beforehand. Doing so is a costly and lengthy process, and few
    shippers have pursued revocations for that reason. If confirmed, will
    you commit to looking into this issue further?
        Answer. This is a matter that is currently before the Board, so it
    would be inappropriate for me to comment on it. If confirmed, I commit
    to looking into this issue with my fellow Board Members.

        Question 3. Do you believe the President and his Administration
    should be allowed to shape and influence Board actions and decisions?
        Answer. Yes, the President and his Administration can do so, such
    as by providing comments to government agencies.

        Question 4. As an Independent Regulatory Agency, should the Board
    officially engage in partisan activities, including communications with
    Agency employees?
        Answer. The STB is an independent agency established by Congress.
    The Board must carry out its functions in a fair and impartial manner.

        Question 5. If the Board and its members are required to no longer
    operate as an independent and impartial agency, what impact would it
    have on our country's freight rail network and the national supply
    chain?
        Answer. The Board is an independent agency by law and if confirmed,
    I commit to making decisions fairly and after full consideration of the
    record.

        Question 6. Can the Board effectively function if subjected to
    political interference?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to always exercising my own
    independent judgment after a thorough review of the record.
                                     ______

    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester to

                               Richard J. Kloster
    Topic: Independence of the Surface Transportation Board (STB)
        Question 1. The White House said they fired Member Primus because
    he did not support the President's America First agenda.

        a. Do you believe Mr. Primus's firing was justified, and does it
    compromise the integrity and impartiality of the Board?
        Answer. Because Mr. Primus has filed a lawsuit regarding his
    firing, it would be inappropriate for me to provide to comment on.

        b. Considering this, do you feel pressure to support the
    President's agenda? Should every member, including Democrats support
    the President's agenda? If not, should they be removed?
        Answer. Because Mr. Primus has filed a lawsuit regarding his
    firing, it would be inappropriate for me to provide to comment on. The
    STB is an independent agency and if confirmed, I commit to following
    executing my duties consistent with law.

        c. Given the independence of the Surface Transportation Board, do
    you believe the President and the Trump administration should be
    permitted to influence the Board's decisions?
        Answer. The President and the Trump administration are free to
    provide comments in the record on pending matters before the STB. This
    has been the practice of previous administrations, as well.

        d. If the Board and its members operate with only the President's
    agenda in mind, how will this impact our Nation's freight rail network
    and national supply chains? Can the Board continue to function
    effectively?
        Answer. If confirmed, I commit to executing my responsibilities as
    a member of the STB fairly and impartially, after full consideration of
    the evidence and facts presented in the record of all matters that come
    before me.

        Question 2. During your confirmation hearing, Ms. Schultz confirmed
    that Chairman Fuchs sent an unprecedented e-mail to Surface
    Transportation Board staff blaming Democrats for the government
    shutdown.

        a. How would you define the Hatch Act?
        Answer. The Hatch Act is current law and if confirmed, I commit to
    complying with the Act.

        b. Is it appropriate for apolitical Surface Transportation Board
    staff to be subjected to partisan e-mails from Board leadership and
    does it undermine the impartiality of the Board?
        Answer. Because I am not at the STB, I have no personal knowledge
    of any e-mails, but I understand this was a government-wide e-mail from
    the Executive Office of the President. If confirmed, I commit to
    complying with the Hatch Act and would consult with agency counsel on
    all potential Hatch Act issues.
                                     ______

          Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ted Cruz to
                              Michelle A. Schultz
        Question 1. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is the
    Federal agency responsible, in part, for budget and personnel decisions
    across the executive branch. Recently, OMB sent a message to Federal
    employees, including members of the Surface Transportation Board (STB),
    providing funding and personnel guidance in the wake of the government
    shutdown. STB leadership forwarded the contents of this message to STB
    employees. Do you agree that merely forwarding a message from OMB about
    the government shutdown does not weaken STB's impartiality and ability
    to decide matters before it in compliance with relevant laws?
        Answer. Yes, I agree that sending such a message has no bearing on
    the STB's impartiality and ability to decide matters before it in
    compliance with relevant laws. As a general matter, STB leadership has
    long complied with government-wide personnel, funding, and other
    general administrative policies set forth across Administrations of
    both parties--from executive orders on hiring to regulations on
    workforce and building management to guidance on budget formulation. It
    is my understanding that the established practice of STB leadership,
    regardless of party, has been to utilize OMB-drafted notifications and
    that this practice is consistent with government-wide protocols or
    practices across Administrations.

        Question 2. Former STB Democrat Chairman Martin Oberman served on
    President Biden's ``White House Competition Council'' during his tenure
    as STB chairman and attended many meetings at the White House. STB
    members, and other members of independent executive agencies, interact
    with the President and other parts of the Executive Branch in the
    ordinary course of their work. Do you agree that an STB member, like
    Mr. Oberman in the Biden administration, can talk with the President or
    other members of the administration without affecting his or her
    impartiality in deciding matters before the STB?
        Answer. Yes, an STB member can talk with the President or other
    members of the Administration without affecting his or her impartiality
    in deciding matters before the STB. As you point out, former Chairman
    Oberman actively participated in President Biden's ``White House
    Competition Council,'' interacting with the President and other parts
    of the Executive Branch. In Executive Order 14036, Promoting
    Competition in the American Economy, which established the White House
    Competition Council, President Biden encouraged former Chairman Oberman
    and the STB to consider substantial policy changes and enforcement
    actions, including rulemakings, investigations, and adjudicatory or
    licensing actions (e.g., merger reviews). Biden Administration
    officials then played active roles in many related or ensuing
    proceedings, by issuing public statements, submitting comments, and
    appearing at hearings.
        Given the significance of the Board's work for our Nation's supply
    chain and the policy preferences of other political officials, some of
    whose jurisdictions are affected by Board decisions or have a statutory
    and regulatory role in Board proceedings, I understand the reasons why
    Administration officials would offer views on the Board's proceedings.
    I recognize the benefits of collaboration across government to address
    issues of national significance, which allows leaders to integrate
    perspectives and avoid siloed solutions. I also see value in the
    efficiencies and other benefits gained by consistent administrative
    policies across agencies, reflecting different agencies' jurisdictions
    and subject matter expertise. As such, I do not view interaction with
    the President or other parts of the Executive Branch, that are
    consistent with applicable law, as undermining my impartiality.

        Question 3. You have served on the STB under both the previous and
    current administration. During your tenure at the STB, has either
    administration, through official or unofficial channels, commented on
    board proceedings or decisions? To clarify, official means include an
    official filing in an open STB docket or an official publicly reported
    meeting, such as a hearing. Unofficial channels include press releases,
    statements in the press, comments made in official government documents
    that were not officially submitted to a STB docket, like an Executive
    order or official memorandum communication. If yes, please provide
    examples.
        Answer. Yes, during my time on the Board, the previous and current
    administrations have both officially and unofficially commented on STB
    proceedings and decisions. For example, the Biden Administration
    routinely weighed in on STB policy, decisions, and administration, and
    the following are non-exhaustive examples within different facets of
    the agency's work:

       Rulemaking. President Biden's Executive Order 14036
            encouraged former Chairman Oberman and the Board to consider
            commencing or continuing a rulemaking to strengthen its
            regulations pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 11102(c). The STB had a
            pending matter on the topic at that time. After the Executive
            Order was issued, the U.S. Department of Transportation and
            U.S. Department of Agriculture officially offered comments in
            the relevant docket. After the STB decided to close that docket
            and commence a new rulemaking, a special assistant to President
            Biden informally offered views on the STB's new proposed rule,
            which was then a pending matter, to the Wall Street Journal. In
            general, on the White House website, the Biden Administration
            listed STB rulemakings as actions the administration was taking
            to advance competition in transportation.

       Adjudication/Licensing. In Executive Order 14036, President
            Biden encouraged former Chairman Oberman and the Board to
            consider certain rail carrier actions or responsibilities when
            determining whether a merger is in the public interest. When
            the STB evaluated the proposed voting trust underlying the
            proposed merger between Canadian National and Kansas City
            Southern, the U.S. Department of Justice formally filed
            comments. After the STB issued its decision on the proposed
            voting trust, Administration officials informally commented on
            the action to the New York Times. In general, the Biden
            Administration commented on and participated in several
            adjudicatory proceedings of interest, ranging from new
            passenger rail service to other mergers or transactions,
            including other Federal agencies' weighing in on the proposed
            merger between Canadian Pacific and Kansas City Southern.

       Investigations/Enforcement. President Biden also encouraged
            former Chairman Oberman and the Board to vigorously enforce new
            on-time performance requirements adopted pursuant to the
            Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008. After
            Executive Order 14036 was issued, Amtrak filed a complaint to
            the STB, and the agency launched an investigation consistent
            with statutory requirements. The relevant parties have
            subsequently settled.

       Administration. As indicated above, the Biden Administration
            issued many executive orders, directives, and guidance
            documents concerning personnel, funding, and other
            administrative matters at the STB and other government
            agencies. Chairman Oberman implemented many workforce,
            planning, and other such policies in compliance with or
            consistent with the Biden Administration's issuances.

       Litigation. Consistent with statute, in carrying the
            agency's litigation responsibilities, the STB routinely
            collaborates and jointly files with the DOJ in defending the
            STB's decisions and on other matters.

       Agency-specific advisory councils. Both by statute and
            through the Board's discretion, officials from other agencies
            serve on the STB's advisory councils, including the Railroad-
            Shipper Transportation Advisory Council and Passenger Rail
            Advisory Council, and informally contribute views on the
            relevant subject matter for discussion.

       Multi-agency bodies. In addition to the White House
            Competition Council, former Chairman Oberman also participated
            on the White House-led efforts on supply chain resilience.

       Oversight and agenda formulation. Biden Administration
            officials have formally and informally participated in and
            commented on the STB's oversight proceedings, including
            testimony from former Secretary Buttigieg.

        Examples span both administrations. During my time on the Board,
    President Trump's Administration has offered formal and informal views
    on the Board's agenda and proceedings. For example, President Trump has
    issued executive orders concerning government-wide review of
    regulations and policies related to competition, regulatory barriers,
    and American energy dominance, including EO 14267, Reducing Anti-
    Competitive Regulatory Barriers, and EO 14154, Unleashing American
    Energy. Trump Administration officials have also commented on potential
    and pending adjudications or licensing matters, such as the DOJ's
    recent formal comments on the proposed transaction between Norfolk
    Southern and Norfolk & Portsmouth Belt Line Railroad Company. Relevant
    across administrations, it is important to note that the Board's
    statutes and regulations explicitly reference the participation of
    other agencies in STB proceedings and other matters.
        As stated above, given the significance of the Board's work for our
    Nation's supply chain and the policy preferences of other political
    officials, and considering different jurisdictions and statutory and
    regulatory roles, I expect government officials, regardless of party,
    to continue weighing in as appropriate on STB matters in the future.

        Question 4. When you have made STB decisions in the past, how did
    comments by either Administration, made through official or unofficial
    channels, impact your decision making?
        Answer. During my time on the Board, I have demonstrated that I
    advance and promote thorough and fair decisions based on the evidence
    and argument in the record. I objectively review comments filed by all
    interested parties in the docket and make decisions based on the
    merits, including consideration of the Rail Transportation Policy of
    the United States at 49 U.S.C. 10101.

        Question 5. If confirmed for an additional term, would the process
    you use to make STB decisions change if the current administration or a
    future administration were to file comments through official or
    unofficial means?
        Answer. No. I have always given careful consideration to all
    comments filed officially in the docket. If confirmed, I will continue
    to review the comments filed by all interested parties fairly,
    impartially, and thoroughly.
                                     ______

        Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Eric Schmitt to
                              Michelle A. Schultz
        Question 1. The Terminal Railroad Association of St. Louis was
    established in 1889 to serve as a neutral switching and terminal
    operator for multiple major freight carriers. Today it manages key
    infrastructure in the region, including the only two active rail
    bridges across the Mississippi River at St. Louis--the Merchants and
    MacArthur Bridges. Five of the six Class I railroads hold ownership
    stakes in the TRRA, but a merger between Union Pacific and Norfolk
    Southern could significantly shift that balance.

         How would you apply competition standards to determine
                whether such a change in ownership could reduce competition
                or access in the St. Louis region?

         Do you believe that the Board should take a more
                active role in reviewing the governance of joint terminal
                companies when ownership concentration increases through
                mergers?
        Answer. Because the merger is a pending matter, I am unfortunately
    unable to answer your question as any comments about how the standard
    of law will be applied in this case would be pre-decisional. What I can
    say is that I will be carefully reviewing all comments that are filed
    in the docket. I will also review the facts, evidence and applicable
    law and will make a decision based upon the merits of the case.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to
                              Michelle A. Schultz
        Surface Transportation Board (STB) Independence. During the 114th
    Congress, then Chairman Thune sponsored the Surface Transportation
    Board Reauthorization Act of 2015, which became law. Senator Thune's
    bill wisely added these 13 words to the law: ``The Surface
    Transportation Board is an independent establishment of the United
    States Government.''
        I am concerned that the White House will seek to put its thumb on
    the scale of Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger unless we have board
    members who are committed to its independence from this or any
    President.

        Question 1. YES or NO: Do you believe in the importance of
    bipartisanship on independent boards and commissions?
        Answer. Yes, impartial decision-making is important to the STB's
    work.

        Question 2. YES or NO: If the President or anyone else in this
    Administration threatened to fire you unless you took an action you
    disagreed with, would you refuse?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. YES or NO: Do you commit to make an independent
    determination of the merger's impact on American farmers, workers, and
    families--regardless of political pressure?
        Answer. Yes. I commit to reviewing the merger decision based upon
    the record including the filed comments of all stakeholders, the
    pleadings, the applicable law, and the evidence. I also commit to
    applying the principles set forth by the Rail Transportation Policy of
    the United States as enacted by Congress.

        Question 4. Do you think an STB Member is required to follow the
    President's direction?
        Answer. As it relates to pending matters, I believe that an STB
    Member will review all comments filed on the docket fairly and with
    impartiality.

        Primus Removal. In the statute that created the predecessor to the
    STB in 1887, Congress set the standard of ``inefficiency, neglect of
    duty, or malfeasance in office'' for removal of a board member.
    Congress renewed that standard in 1995 when it created the modern STB.
    The only explanation the White House gave for the firing of Robert
    Primus from the STB was that he ``did not align with the President's
    America First agenda.''

        Question 1. You and Mr. Primus served together for over four-and-a-
    half years on the Board. In your personal experience, did you ever
    witness Mr. Primus act with, ``inefficiency, neglect of duty, or
    malfeasance in office?''
        Answer. As you are aware, Mr. Primus has filed a lawsuit against
    the STB. As a matter of practice, I do not comment on pending
    litigation.

        Question 2. Do you personally think it was appropriate for the
    President to fire Mr. Primus?
        Answer. Respectfully, again, I must defer providing an answer to
    this question. As you are aware, Mr. Primus has filed a lawsuit against
    the STB. As a matter of practice, I do not comment on pending
    litigation.

        Bipartisanship: The STB is designed to be composed of Members from
    different political parties. Specifically, pursuant to Congress's
    statutory directive, not more than three STB Members may belong to the
    same political party.

        Question 1. Do you believe the STB's decision-making process and
    credibility benefit from having Members from different political
    parties on the Board?
        Answer. This is required by 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1301 (b)(1).

        Question 2. Do you believe it is important for the STB to have
    Senate-confirmed Members of the opposite political party?
        Answer. The membership is set forth by 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1301 (b)(1),
    and it is required by law that the composition of the Board does not
    include more than three members of the same political party.

        Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Merger. If approved, the Union
    Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger would be the largest rail merger in the
    U.S. history. The combined railroad would be worth over a quarter of a
    trillion dollars and control 40 percent of the Nation's rail traffic.
    In Washington State, one in every six tons of freight travels by rail.
        Whether that's our wheat harvest moving to export port or consumer
    goods traveling to households--Washington's farmers, families, and
    businesses deserve reliable freight service options at reasonable
    rates.

        Question 1. YES or NO: Do you commit to following the STB's merger
    rules that require you to only approve this merger if it increases
    competition?
        Answer. I commit to applying the standard set forth in 49 U.S.C.
    Sec. 11324. As you are aware, this will be a case of first impression
    as it relates to the application of the merger standard. I commit to
    applying all the requirements set forth in 49 C.F.R. Sec. 1180.1 to the
    facts that are presented in the docket and to make an impartial
    decision that is based upon the law, the record and that is in the best
    interest of the national rail network.

        Question 2. YES or NO: Do you commit to carefully examining the
    impacts to ports, farmers, small business shippers, and to worker and
    public safety?
        Answer. I commit to carefully reviewing the record and the impacts
    to all stakeholders, including those you have identified. This case is
    the largest transaction to ever be filed with at the Board.
        I am aware of the significance that this decision could have on the
    national rail network. I feel the weight of the importance of this
    decision and take this responsibility very seriously.

        Hatch Act Violations: The Hatch Act generally prohibits Executive
    Branch employees from engaging in political activity while on duty.
    Political activity includes ``activity directed at the success or
    failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office,
    or partisan political group.''
        At the hearing, you acknowledged receiving an e-mail from STB Chair
    Patrick Fuchs which blamed only ``Congressional Democrats'' for the
    government shutdown.

        Question 1. Do you think it is appropriate for the head of an
    independent agency to send an agency-wide e-mail attempting to assign
    political blame to only one political party?
        Answer. I am committed to complying with the Hatch Act. In
    assessing the appropriateness of an agency-wide e-mail, I would ensure
    its legality, including through consultation with the STB's Office of
    Chief Counsel and, as applicable, consideration of relevant U.S. Office
    of Special Counsel precedent, such as advisory opinions on
    communications that concern policy or legislation and reference a
    political party. Further, I would ensure the e-mail's accuracy,
    including the evaluation of information, reporting, or analysis from
    credible and non-partisan sources.
        Finally, I would consider the necessity or value of the e-mail and
    any relevant procedures, such as whether it involves pertinent legal or
    policy information disseminated consistent with established protocols
    or circulars reflecting different agencies' jurisdictions.

        Question 2. If you were directed to send an e-mail like this to STB
    staff, would you refuse?
        Answer. As I have demonstrated throughout my government service, I
    would continue to comply with the Hatch Act. In assessing the
    appropriateness of any agency-wide e-mail, I would ensure its legality
    and accuracy and consider its necessity or value and any relevant
    procedures.

        Question 3. If you believed an employee of the Board violated the
    Hatch Act, would you report it to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel?
        Answer. Yes, if I believed an employee of the Board violated the
    Hatch Act, I would report it to the U.S. Office of Special Counsel.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to
                              Michelle A. Schultz
        Question 1. The common carrier obligation requires the railroads
    provide service upon reasonable request and at reasonable rates.
    However, it unfortunately lacks a clear definition, which the
    Transportation Research Board found to be ``poorly defined.'' Earlier
    this year, I introduced the Reliable Rail Service Act with Senator
    Marshall to better clarify the common carrier obligation, with the
    strong support of a wide range of rail shippers and rail labor unions.
    Do you believe that additional clarification of the common carrier
    obligation would provide more certainty to shippers?
        Answer. I believe predictable, reliable, service that meets the
    needs of shippers is critical to the supply chain and the Nation's
    economy. As you are aware, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sec. 11101(a), a rail
    carrier shall provide transportation or service on reasonable request.
    I believe that upon reasonable request is a question that is determined
    based upon the facts of each case. If the Reliable Rail Service Act is
    enacted, I would apply the requirements set forth in the Act to any
    cases alleging violations of the common carrier obligation.

        Question 2. One of my longstanding priorities is for the STB to
    review, reduce or eliminate most or all its existing commodity
    exemptions. Shippers of exempted commodities are currently unable to
    seek relief from the STB unless they receive a ``revocation'' of the
    exemption beforehand. Doing so is a costly and lengthy process, and few
    shippers have pursued revocations for that reason. If confirmed, will
    you commit to looking into this issue further?
        Answer. Docket No. EP 704 (Sub-1) (Review of Commodity, Boxcar, and
    TOFC/COFC Exemptions) is currently a pending matter. If confirmed, I
    commit to looking into this issue further.

        Question 3. Do you believe the President and his Administration
    should be allowed to shape and influence Board actions and decisions?
        Answer. I believe that all Presidents and their Administrations
    have at one time, or another provided comments to governmental
    agencies. Given the significance of the Board's work for our Nation's
    supply chain and the policy preferences of other political officials,
    as well as the different jurisdictions and statutory and regulatory
    roles, I believe government officials, regardless of party, will
    continue weighing in as appropriate on STB matters in the future.

        Question 4. As an Independent Regulatory Agency, should the Board
    officially engage in partisan activities, including communications with
    Agency employees?
        Answer. Pursuant to 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1301(a), ``(t)he Surface
    Transportation Board is an independent establishment of the United
    States Government. The STB's statutory mission requires impartiality in
    our adjudicatory and regulatory functions. Our decisions are based upon
    evidence and the applicable law, not partisan considerations. As a
    general matter, the STB leadership has long complied with personnel,
    funding, and other administrative policies set forth across
    administrations of both parties--from executive orders on hiring to
    regulations on workforce and building management to guidance on budget
    formulation.

        Question 5. During the hearing, you stated that you serve at the
    pleasure of the President. 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1301 (b) (3) specifies that
    the President must give cause when removing a Board Member.

        a. Do you agree with this part of the Agency's statute?
        Answer. As you are aware, Mr. Primus has filed a lawsuit against
    the STB in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
    Because this is the core legal question raised in the lawsuit, it would
    be inappropriate for me to provide a response.

        b. If a Board Member is fired without cause, does it compromise the
    integrity and impartiality of the Board?
        Answer. Again, with all due respect to the question, it pertains to
    pending litigation and I must refrain from comment. What I can say is
    that the agency, by way of statute, is an independent agency. If
    confirmed, I commit to following the law and continuing to issue
    decisions based upon evidence and the law. I believe this approach
    protects the integrity of our processes and public confidence in our
    decisions.

        Question 6. If the Board and its members are required to no longer
    operate as an independent and impartial agency, what impact would it
    have on our country's freight rail network and the national supply
    chain?
        Answer. The Surface Transportation Board is an independent agency
    as set forth in statute. See 49 U.S.C. Sec. 1301(a). I will defer to a
    Court ruling on this matter, or any statutory change from Congress and
    I will uphold the law.

        a. Can the Board effectively function if subjected to political
    interference?
        Answer. The Board is an independent agency. I believe it is not
    only appropriate, but helpful, when Members of Congress write letters
    to the STB raising either their concerns or the concerns of their
    constituents. To the extent those concerns are related to a pending
    matter, the letter is then filed in the public docket so that all
    members of the public have access. This same respect for transparency
    would apply to any elected officials or any stakeholders.
                                     ______

    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester to

                              Michelle A. Schultz
    Topic: Independence of the Surface Transportation Board (STB)
        Question 1. In your opening statement, from your 2018 confirmation
    hearing, you wrote: ``it is incumbent upon the Board to approach
    matters brought before it by conducting a thorough analysis of the
    facts and adjudicating matters in an impartial manner within the bounds
    of its jurisdiction and the law.''

        a. Following your first term on the Board, do you still find that
    to be the case? And do you believe it is still possible despite recent
    pressures from the President and the Trump administration?
        Answer. Yes. I still believe it is incumbent upon the Board to
    approach matters with impartiality, transparency and within the bounds
    of the law.
        I have not been contacted by the President or anyone within the
    administration regarding any pending matter.

        Question 2. The White House said they fired Member Primus because
    he did not support the President's America First agenda.

        a. Do you believe Mr. Primus's firing was justified, and does it
    compromise the integrity and impartiality of the Board?
        Answer. Mr. Primus filed a lawsuit against the Surface
    Transportation Board in U.S. District Court for the District of
    Columbia. As a general practice, I do not comment on pending litigation
    and must refrain from comment here.

        b. Considering this, do you feel pressure to support the
    President's agenda? Should every member, including Democrats support
    the President's agenda? If not, should they be removed?
        Answer. Again, the issue of removal is currently pending in
    litigation. I must respectfully refrain from commenting.

        c. Given the independence of the Surface Transportation Board, do
    you believe the President and the Trump administration should be
    permitted to influence the Board's decisions?
        Answer. I believe that the President as well as members of the
    Trump administration are free to provide opinions and file comments in
    pending matters as have members of prior Administrations. I will review
    all filed comments from all stakeholders, as well as the pleadings,
    evidence and applicable law and will issue a decision based upon the
    record in its entirety and on the merits.

        d. If the Board and its members operate with only the President's
    agenda in mind, how will this impact our Nation's freight rail network
    and national supply chains? Can the Board continue to function
    effectively?
        Answer. As indicated in my opening statement and in response to
    similar questions presented during the hearing, I approach every
    pending matter by reviewing the record--including the pleadings, the
    filed comments from stakeholders, the evidence, the applicable law, and
    the principles of the Rail Transportation Policy of the United States
    as enacted by Congress.
        After carefully weighing all the aforementioned, I strive to reach
    decisions that are consistent with the applicable law, and which
    provide the best outcome for the rail network.

        Question 3. During your confirmation, you confirmed that Chairman
    Fuchs sent an unprecedented e-mail to Surface Transportation Board
    staff blaming Democrats for the government shutdown.

        a) How would you define the Hatch Act?
        Answer. By the plain language of the Act itself.

        b) Is it appropriate for apolitical Surface Transportation Board
    staff to be subjected to partisan e-mails from Board leadership and
    does it undermine the impartiality of the Board?
        Answer. I am committed to complying with the Hatch Act. In
    assessing the appropriateness of an agency-wide e-mail, I would ensure
    its legality, including through consultation with the STB's Office of
    Chief Counsel and, as applicable, consideration of relevant U.S. Office
    of Special Counsel precedent, such as advisory opinions on
    communications that concern policy or legislation and reference a
    political party. Further, I would ensure the e-mail's accuracy,
    including the evaluation of information, reporting, or analysis from
    credible and non-partisan sources. Finally, I would consider the
    necessity or value of the e-mail and any relevant procedures, such as
    whether it involves pertinent legal, or policy information disseminated
    consistent with established protocols or circulars reflecting different
    agencies' jurisdictions.
    Topic: Reduced STB Staff Capacity
        Question 1. In previous testimony before this committee, you stated
    that ``The efficiency of freight and intercity passenger rail
    transportation is vital to the Nation's mobility and economic
    competitiveness.'' Earlier this year, Chairman Fuchs reduced staffing
    capacity and closed the Office of Passenger Rail, an office dedicated
    to this very issue and Amtrak's on-time performance.

        a. Do you agree with the Chairman's decision to close this office
    and how will it impact the STB's ability to improve and expand
    intercity passenger rail throughout the country?
        Answer. On August 1, 2025, the STB combined its two legal offices,
    the Office of Proceedings (OP) and the Office of the General Counsel
    (OGC), into one Office of Chief Counsel. The Board combined these
    offices to streamline and improve drafting and review procedures, which
    will benefit the Board and the public. The Office of Chief Counsel also
    houses the Board's Chief of Passenger Rail and Investigations, who will
    lead the Board's cross-disciplinary passenger rail flex team. When a
    matter is initiated, a team will be formed to leverage expertise from
    across the agency and nimbly respond to the needs of the case. This
    team replaces the Office of Passenger Rail and ensures the Board can
    efficiently continue to fulfill its statutory passenger rail
    investigatory and adjudicatory responsibilities. To date, Chairman
    Fuchs has not terminated any employee under any Reduction in Force
    action. I support the agency's actions to combine the two legal offices
    and housing the Chief of Passenger Rail and Investigations within the
    legal office. I believe these actions will improve the Board's ability
    to effectively carry out its statutory responsibilities concerning
    passenger rail and other matters.
                                     ______

       Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to
                              Michelle A. Schultz
        Rail Merger. Senator Hoeven and I led a bipartisan group of
    senators in calling on the Surface Transportation Board to closely
    scrutinize the proposed merger and ensure long-term competition in the
    railroad industry.

       You mentioned in your testimony that in your role you must
            be ``mindful of what best serves the long-term health and
            vitality of the national rail network.'' How will you analyze
            the potential long-term and knock-on effects of the proposed
            merger?
        Answer. Because the merger is a pending matter, I am unfortunately
    unable to answer your question as any comments about how I intend to
    analyze any specific aspect of the case and/or apply the standard of
    law in this case would be pre-decisional. What I can say is that I will
    be carefully reviewing all comments that are filed in the docket. I
    will also review the facts, pleadings, evidence and applicable law and
    will make a decision based upon the merits of the case that is in the
    best interest of the network.

        Agricultural Shippers. Agricultural producers depend on reliable
    and competitive rail service to move their products to domestic and
    international markets. Agricultural shippers already face limited
    competitive options for rail service and further consolidation could
    compound these challenges.

       How do you plan to protect the interests of agricultural
            shippers going forward?
        Answer. With all due respect to the question, again, the merger is
    a pending matter and is case of first impression, so I am unable to say
    how I plan to protect the interests of agricultural shippers going
    forward. What I can say is that I will be reviewing all the filed
    comments from all stakeholders, the pleadings, the applicable law and
    the evidence and will make a decision based upon the merits of the
    case. I will also be applying the principles set forth in the Rail
    Transportation Policy of the United States as enacted by Congress. I
    recognize the significance that this case will have on the national
    rail network and commit to making a decision that is in the best
    interest of the network.

                                      [all]