program. and if there's anyone who has a question, i would really urge that you or others direct them to our build america transportation investment center which can help them figure out not only how to make use of that tool but any of our other creative financing tools for transportation. >> great. thank you very much. we've talked a lot about complete streets, and i really appreciate the department's focus on transportation generally speaking, that it's not the department of highways or the department of rail. it is the department of transportation and we really need to be thinking about how to move people around in as safe of a way as possible and i've been working with senator heller and others on complete streets. and i wanted to first get your sense of how we're moving along. we wanted something a little more proscriptive in the statute.

we weren't able to achieve it, but on the other hand i think you've been able to work with mayors and transportation directors for state government and aarp and other stakeholders. if you could just give me a quick update on how we're moving along with respect to this because whether the statute read exactly how i wanted it to or in the compromise version, i think the key is implementation at the sort of administrator level so i want to know how we're doing and i know you have a special perspective having been a mayor. >> yes, sir. i think we're moving along fairly well. we did initiateing? e something that brought 200 mayors from across the country together to share best practices on how to implement essentially complete streets designs. our federal highway administration is also creating greater flexibility in the design of federal aid to highways so that there's at least the possibility that states and local governments can

use those roadways in more innovative ways for all users. i think this is -- this is an area where it is not just a local governments. it's also the state and federal governments have to work together to lay out best practices in all three levels of government will be involved in execution. >> sure. and if you're using fast act funding, you know, in urban honolulu versus in south dakota, obviously you're going to have a different set of priorities and that's appropriate. i want to recognize senator heller for his leadership on a bipartisan basis of trying to move this forward. i have one concern that's been expressed to me and has to do with a rule proposed this spring which aims to establish measures of highway performance and congestion and the concern is this -- that all makes sense in a vacuum but to the degree and extent that those metrics create an incentive that sort of ignores the question of multimodal, ignores potentially the question of location efficiency and sort of to the extent that the department is working on integrated multimodal

transportation systems and being smart about all this, that you don't want to create a rule which basically establishes a metric that says if you're a local d.o.t. director you say, look, that's all nice, they're encouraging us to do this, but they're paying us to do that. which is one more highway lane, one more boulevard lane and thinking in terms of transportation and sort of how can we sort of channel -- i mean, i think of the old army corps of engineer in terms of flood control, right? it was always blow as wide of a hole as you could and channelize and move the water through as quickly as possible. transportation systems certainly there are instances you want to move a car as quickly through a community as possible but other instances you want to encourage people not to take the trip because something is right next door nowadays. i know you understand that. but i want you to take a look at that rule from that perspective. >> i will, sir. >> thank you, sir. >> secretary foxx, always a pleasure to see you, thank you

for being here before us today. the fast act does a lot to incentivize the development and deployment of a very innovative transportation technologies particularly in the space of automobiles. and i want to before i go on to the questions take a moment to thank you for your work in this area. you have been a real advocate for exploring how we can really fully utilize some of the exciting new technologies eventually leading to autonomous vehicles. and as you know, i sponsored a bill that was signed into law as part of the fast act that two

allow states to use existing surface and highway transportation funds to invest in vehicle-to-vehicle infrastructure, the dsrc technology which can help deliver really critical information to those vehicles on the road and it's going to help reduce traffic congestion as we've heard from previous speakers as well as dramatically reduce accidents. section 6004 of the highway bill also directs the department of transportation to provide grants to localities to establish advanced transportation and congestion management deployment sites and i understand that solicitation process is going forward as we speak. and i also know that the department of transportation is finalizing its selection of the smart cities challenge winner and that one of the criteria for the challenge is to integrate advanced technologies in the management operation of the city which includes the deployment of connected and autonomous vehicle systems. mr. secretary, what role do you see the vehicle-to-infrastructure dsrc technology as other dsrc technologies playing in the deployment sites and to the eventually d.o.t. smart city that will be granted? >> well, i think that, first of all, we are -- we are at the very edge of a wave of

technology that will enter into the transportation space. and it is -- i think there are areas that we know are going to be areas of opportunity. the advent of connected cars. the advent of autonomous cars, i think those trends are coming, and they are unalterable in that sense and so we have a response to be ready for that. the vehicle-to-infrastructure component follows along with that. and what that means is a lot of things. in some respects you have some of that functionality today with coordinated signalization. but it also could in the future do things like your streetlights are coordinated according to the movement of automobiles, and so when there's no automobile on the road the streetlights are

dim and when cars appear, at a certain distance away, they come on. and that could create energy savings and not compromise safety. so, there are a lot of opportunities in this space. how they actually get deployed is one of the questions smart cities challenge is asking. we are trying not to be proscriptive saying you have to have your streetlights coordinated, you have to do this or that. it's more a question of what is the vision that each city has and how does technology relate to that vision. so, it's been an exciting opportunity to see 78 cities apply, to see seven finalists and to see this process moving forward but i think this is the beginning of that conversation, not the end of it. >> right. well, it is exciting and i think a critical part of that is the ability for vehicles and infrastructure to communicate back and forth which means having dedicated spectrum and as

you know there's some discussion as to whether or not the spectrum should be shared. could you speak a little bit to how important it is to make sure the spectrum is available and unfettered in these transportation systems? >> yeah, i think, again, you can't understate or overstate you on how important it is that speck presume sharing is safe. we are supportive of the safe movement of vehicles and i think the thought process to this point has been to reserve the 5.9 band for connected vehicles with the thought being that if you shared it, you would compromise safety. we're now in the throes of a research project with the fcc to determine whether you could actually share spectrum safely. and if you can, i'm sure we'll be supportive of it. we need to know before we do it, we don't need to do it before we know.

>> you're actively coordinating with the fcc? >> yes. >> yes. >> do you feel that is working well? >> yes, sir. there were some early hiccups perhaps on both ends but i think we're at a very good place now and working well together. >> it's great to hear. i have a few other questions i'd like to submit for the record for the secretary, but my time has expired. >> thank you, senator peters. thank you. next up is senator heller. >> mr. chairman, thank you for holding this hearing. and secretary foxx, thank you also for taking time out of your busy schedule -- >> thank you. >> -- to be here today. we have the las vegas metro chamber of commerce in town this week. >> okay. >> and they held a function last night in the kennedy caucus room. i'm -- unlike a function ever held in that caucus room before. but it was interesting the

dynamics of bringing the las vegas chamber of commerce into washington, d.c.. las vegas is a can-do city. anything you want, anything you think can happen in that town, in that city will happen. to have them come to washington, d.c., where nothing happens was quite a dynamic, and i would hope that they would come more often. maybe they would have some influence on our -- on our city out here in washington, d.c., but here's my question -- you know, there's a couple hundred of them at that event last night. their interest obviously is that corridor, the i-11 corridor, the legislation i pushed in the fast act. i don't have to tell you the importance of it. two largest cities in america phoenix and las vegas without a freeway between them. and you can imagine the economic development that would occur in the southwest if you could

connect those two cities and it's not just the connection of las vegas to phoenix but all the way down to tucson and all the way up to the canadian border. and that's the plan. they want to know. and i have to neat with them tomorrow. if you were meeting with them, i guarantee you the first they will ask you is how long is it going to take to get that corridor between phoenix and las vegas, what's the answer to that today? >> whoo. there's no pressure. you're meeting with them tomorrow. >> the question i'm going to be asked. >> senator, we understand the importance of this corridor, and your leadership on moving the process forward has been absolutely critical. and i'm sure you're aware that map 21 did provide a portion of it being designated. the fast act, as you point out, through your efforts, designates

the portion between arizona and nevada. there is a working group that we have been part of convening that is looking -- i think the biggest constraint to be honest with you is not just the planning and the design, but it's also identifying the federal and state funding sources for the project. and we're going to continue being at the table with arizona and nevada until we figure that out with them and in identifying flexibilities that may support the advancement of the i-11 corridor. so, we are working with them. i think that something like a tiered neepa analysis is currently under discussion. we're going to do everything we can to help move things forward. getting the planning is part of it, but i think getting the resources in place is going to be the biggest challenge. >> the first section of that is the boulder city bypass and that is taking federal, state, and local dollars in order for that to occur.

so, i think nevada, boulder city, las vegas are doing everything they possibly can to get ahead of this thing. tell me a little bit more about this working group. how do they prioritize these high-priority corridors like the i-11 and other projects? >> well, we always work based on what the local jurisdictions want to do. and in this case you do have a demand that is coming from both states. and getting them coordinated and figuring out how to jointly plan a project of this magnitude and how to jointly go through the permitting process and using the levers we have to try to accelerate that, that's some of the work that is currently ongoing. again, i think some of the biggest challenges are going to be each state looking at its -- its complement of transportation projects and figuring out how it can fit in the resources to do these projects, and, of course, where we have the ability to help on the funding end we're going to be looking for ways to help out. >> okay. okay. because i'm just trying to figure out is there any way of

streamlining this process. >> yes, yes. >> i'm sure that's what the working group is all about. >> yeah. >> get through this neepa program, i guess the question is i don't have an answer yet. 2 years, 10 years, 20 years, how long does a project like -- we haven't produced a new federal highway to this extent in decades, wondering -- >> i would straight the planning and design elements from the funding element. and i would say that we can move as fast as the locals can move as they work through the alignment issues. we're already trying to accelerate the neepa process, so we will continue trying to do that kind of work. i think on the funding side of it, we are constrained by what we have available. the fast act does provide additional formula dollars to each state for freight projects. in theory this could be considered for that. we have guidance that we put out this year. and to the xextent our discretionary programs will support and help, we will obviously consider any opportunity to help. >> thank you for being here.

mr. chairman, my time has expire expired. >> thank you. what does it take for one to get invited to the las vegas comes to the capitol -- >> you were, mr. chairman, you were invited. >> i was. i thought it was maybe one of those what happens in the caucus stays in the caucus events. >> you had to be over 21 years. maybe you didn't meet that criteria. >> all right. next up is senator cantwell. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's good to see you, mr. secretary, and thank you for all your leadership on the freight and the fast act and you've obviously brought that up, but certainly look forward to working on what is going to be a very important tool for us to keep u.s. product moving and getting to its final destination, so thank you for that. one area where i think you and i may not have seen eye to eye on in the past has definitely got

an accentuation point put on it just last friday and that is the columbia gorge rail derailment and explosion. and it seems to us like it just came to the pacific northwest but everybody knows how much oil of balkan crude is moving through the area. i heard from last friday about their concerns about the continued movement of this product. that's primarily because this product moves through every major -- it goes through spokane, it goes through the gorge, it goes to vancouver, up in some cases all the way up to refineries, you know, in the northern part of our state through seattle. so, every community, you know, because we have just like the problem you're trying to fix on freight, you know, the rails are right there close to the ports, close to the urban centers. so, part of our challenge is the explosion and derailment that we saw on this gorge situation was the thermal jacketed 1232s. so, under your rule they will take until i think something, like, 2025 to be basically phased out.

more specifically, though, to me because this issue of the product itself is not being properly regulated. the volatility of balkan crude is over the standard by which almost every other thing is set, you know, people who are moving this product into pipelines set a vapor pressure which is the volatility of the product below ten. the nymex doesn't take contract on product unless they're ten or below and yet we're letting these shimmerppers self-determine to ship at over that pressure which means it's more volatile. the reason i bring this up is even with your own analysis of these new tank cars even the best tank cars that we're going to implement in the future, even the new thermal jacketed 117s at more than 18 miles an hour, they still have a puncture, can have a puncture. so, to me while we're improving

the rail safety, while we're improving the railcars, we also have to improve and lower the volatility of this explosive product. we can't have this product shipping through tunnels in seattle with our light rail transportation system, we can't have it next to hotels in vancouver, we can't have it going through neighborhoods with people in spokane. i'm asking you will you consider an interim rule? you have the ability now to get the study done as it relates to the transportation bill, to look at the volatility of this and d.o.e. and d.o.t. are working together. but why not given this most recent explosion look at setting an interrim rule on volatility given the hazards this material is showing to our communities across america? and certainly we just witnessed

in our region of the pacific northwest. >> senator, i want to, first of all, say that i -- i actually feel the same sense of urgency that you do around this issue. and our department has been working since the day i came in, it happened within a just few days of my taking office in this role. and it has been a real -- a real push almost every day. we've taken a bunch of actions, but i don't think we are at the end of the cycle of continuing work at this. i think we still have a lot of work to do here. i would say that on the table the stabilization issue, we've worked with the department of energy to formulate a study to understand the dimensions of this material and have a definitive study out there that

really allows us to set policy around it. i will certainly take your recommendation back to our staff and provide you with a formal response from the department. but i'm taking any and all suggestions about how to deal with this going forward. i think we are -- we've made a lot of progress. we are safer today than we were three years ago. i hope that over the next several months and years we end up safer than we are today. >> well, i just think for us we do not want to see a loss of life before we see a regulation of this vapor pressure. and with the volume of balkan crude moving through our state -- as i said, every major population center, it's just too big of a risk not to have this product, which we wouldn't let a propane, unregulated vehicle moving through downtown seattle with that vapor pressure. we're not letting, you know, natural gas the same way. the people who are moving this

product in pipeline are demanding that it have a lower vapor pressure, so, then, why are we letting, you know, these trains just continue to move as an explosive product through our community? and so while i appreciate all our efforts on the d.o.t. and the lines that we're going to do to improve our rail system, i just think fundamentally we have to reduce this vapor pressure, so thank you for considering that and look forward to your formal response. >> thank you. may i also just thank you for your leadership on freight as well, senator. i don't know that we would have as much of the conversation if it hadn't been for your efforts, so thank you. >> i think we all know freight can't wait. thank you. >> thank you, senator cantwell. and i mentioned in my opening

remarks the work that you did on the freight components and aspects of this. and a lot of the reforms with regard to railcars and blankets and refitting the protective measures and safeguards that are in here will be helpful and we're going to make sure that we work with the department to ensure that those things get put in place in a timely way. so, thank you. next up is senator ayotte. >> thank you, chairman. secretary foxx, as you know, new hampshire was recently -- welcomed the news that we received the tifia loan, a $200 million tifia loan, and thank you for that, for the i-93 improvement project which will widen 19.8 miles of interstate 93 from 2 to 4 lanes between our largest city manchester and to salem, new hampshire ", which is right on the new hampshire/massachusetts border so this is really important to our state's economy and transportation in new hampshire, so thank you for that. under the fast act there was established the national surface

transportation and innovative finance bureau to help streamline the application process for states and local entities applying for and obtaining federal financing or assistance for large surface transportation projects. i know you briefly mentioned in your written statement d.o.t.'s work to get the bureau up and running. but i wanted to -- could you please provide a detailed update for the committee regarding the department's work to implement the national surface transportation and innovative finance bureau, and have you been able to identify an executive director yet? and do you expect the bureau will be operational by the end of the year? >> on the last question first, yes, i do expect it to be operational by the end of the year. we expect to open the doors of this new bureau in the middle part of the summer. and we actually have already gone through a pretty extensive exercise at identifying some of our existing resources, human and otherwise, that could be placed into the bureau immediately.

so, this will be a steady ramping up over the course of the year, but it will start very strong, middle part of the summer. in terms of the executive director, we have a solicitation out for an executive director, but we're hopeful to get that person on boarded before the end of the year. >> great. once you get this up and running, and i'm glad to hear that's moving quickly, how would you -- thinking about this bureau over the long term, how would you envision the bureau supporting the work of our states and communities in moving forwards with larger projects like i-93? >> yes. you know, i think one of the biggest things that the bureau is going to do is to bring our innovative financing resources under one roof.

and they'll be kind of one stop shopping for the project sponsors at the state and local level as well as the private sector. in addition to that, you will find that projects that are moving within the bureau are going to have a level almost a sharper kind of level of support as they move through other aspects of the project delivery, including the permitting and other spaces that have to be -- >> i'm sure states would like to have a sherpa, that would be great. sec. foxx: absolutely. so, i expect this is going to be a very successful effort. we have some very good early experience with the build america transportation center that the president authorized us to do, and we're going to keep building on it with the bureau. >> great. thank you. sec. foxx: thank you. >> i wanted to follow-up, too, there have been health and safety concerns that have been raised related to the flammability standard of children's car seats and wondered if you were aware of these concerns, and what's being done to address them. sec. foxx: so, nhtsa's safety standard for flammability

currently does not require flame retardants. the flammability standard aims to afford adequate time for caregivers to help children escape a vehicle in the event of a fire. and we know that about 194,000 vehicle fires occur annually in the u.s., resulting in 300 fatalities and 1,250 injuries . and of these 20 fay talltality -- fatalities, 25 injuries are children. and foam used in child seats and vehicle seats can exacerbate a vehicle fire. therefore, child seat materials and motor vehicle seat materials are required to prevent flames from spreading. nhtsa is initiating research today to better understand and evaluate the issues involved in this area. including flammability requires and flame retardants for child restraints and so that work is

ongoing. >> very good. i now have a brief period left, but wanted to follow-up, one of the amendments i had on the fast act was focused on additional steps for nhtsa to take to help steps to emphasize drug-impaired driving. and in new hampshire we are seeing as we are other places in the country a heroin epidemic, an opiate epidemic and the national roadside survey has recently shown that there actually has been an increase. that data goes from 2007 to 2013 and 2014. but if new hampshire's any measure, we're seeing even from 2014 up like this. so, any brief thoughts on, you know, what we can do in terms of nhtsa's action and d.o.t. thinking about drug-impaired driving and the challenges we're facing with it? sec. foxx: we actually -- this is on our radar screen. there's a lot of activity going on to study drug-impaired driving.

i think the hardest nut for us to crack is going to be how do you set a standard, you know, you have a standard for alcohol, for instance, but how would you -- >> and how do you measure it. sec. foxx: exactly. so, this is work and research that is ongoing. but you have it on my word that we will work as expeditiously as we can to get answers. >> excellent. thank you. sec. foxx: thank you. >> thank you, senator ayotte. senator blumenthal. sen. blumenthal: thanks, mr. chairman. i want to pursue the line of questioning that senator nelson raised. and begin by saying, i think the american public would be aghast and appalled that recalls have not been extended to cars on lots right now.

cars that they are buying that in effect are subject to the same safety defects as the cars under recall. or to put it differently that they're buying defective cars simply because they haven't been told they're under recall. and if there is a need to change the law or start an education campaign, i say this to you, mr. secretary, because i know your heart's in the right place, and i respect immensely the higher standard of safety and diligence that you brought to the department of transportation during your tenure there. shouldn't the consent order be amended again right away or other tools used to stop the sale of these cars with these potentially deadly safety defects? sec. foxx: well, we did have a bit of this colloquy before. i don't believe we have the authority to do that.

sen. blumenthal: why not? sec. foxx: because the cars aren't recalled now. sen. blumenthal: why not put them under recall? sec. foxx: because we don't have the basis to do so. sen. blumenthal: why not? sec. foxx: because the evidence isn't there. in other words -- sen. blumenthal: why not? sec. foxx: because it doesn't exist. sen. blumenthal: why not get it? sec. foxx: we have a sense of what's unsafe. and that which is unsafe has been recalled. and we will continue. we've never said this takata thing has been finalized. we are continuing to search and understand the dimensions of what's unsafe. sen. blumenthal: these products are the very same ammonium nitrate air bags that have sent shafts and shards of metal into people's faces. that's why i say the american public would be aghast and appalled.

and i sat at this very table and heard from takata not ten years ago, but within the last couple of years, that they simply lacked enough parts and equipment to provide the substituted air bags that would be necessary. and i called then for them to share proprietary information with other air bag manufacturers so this recall could be done much more expeditiously and it's as though that conversation never happened. sec. foxx: i don't think that's true. i mean, this recall is the largest recall in this nation's history. sen. blumenthal: i give you credit for it. sec. foxx: it is the largest recall in this nation's history. 70 million recalled. and, by the way, we don't know whether we're done yet.

and if there is a way to use the concurrent consent order, to amend it to ensure that people who are buying cars are notified , we are willing and hopeful to pursue that. but i don't think this is a closed book. but our agency within existing authorities has to use evidence available to us. and we do know that these cars will eventually be recalled, in which case -- sen. blumenthal: i agree with you that they eventually will be recalled. sec. foxx: yeah. sen. blumenthal: and i take at face value the representation that you feel you lack sufficient authority now. i would like to pursue with you

the potential for the amending the consent order, or increasing that authority. because i think it's -- trust me, i really do credit you and applaud you and thank you for your focus on this issue. i want to shift to rail, and again another area where you have been very importantly creative. we need to make long-term, robust investments well beyond what we're doing now. i know you're working closely with my colleague senator booker and others from new jersey and new york for a plan on the hudson river tunnels. i'd like your commitment to work with me in developing a long-term plan to rebuild the northeast corridor beyond just those tunnels, especially the

aging bridges and tracks that we have in connecticut, the need for positive train control. there is $199 million in a measure we have just pass eded -- passed. the amtrack rail route, and track control, and i want your commitment to work with me to in applying those moneys to investment in that northeast corridor. sec. foxx: absolutely. and, by the way, on the other pieces that you mentioned on the takata issue, i want to work with you on that, too. we all have a shared interest in making sure the american public is as safe as possible. sen. blumenthal: i agree, sir. thank you so much, secretary. sec. foxx: thank you. sen. blumenthal: thank you for your diligent and dedicated work at the department. >> thank you.

it is somewhat remarkable that new cars are being sold. granted, the air bags are not defective yet therefore the authority issue, so i appreciate the dilemma you face about prioritizing those that present the greatest risk in public safety and health hazard at the moment, and starting there, but this is a -- something that we're going to have it continually stay involved with. next up, senator sullivan. sen. sullivan: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, good to see you again. i really want to thank you for coming out to anchorage, alaska, and meeting with our native leadership. it was an important meeting. i know they very much appreciate it. i wanted to follow up on an issue that came up in that meeting and that i and senator murkowski and don young have subsequently written you about. that's the issue, as you know, under the alaska native claim settlement act of 1971, and then consistently several other

federal laws it's been clear they were able to participate in businesssantaged enterprice program. the eligibility based on the certification of the system ba, and since 2009, sba has recognize the the self-certification is appropriate for ancs given that i consistent designation as economically disadvantaged businesses enterprises. what we discussed in anchorage, what we followed up and wrote you about is there's this process now that's beginning

where some of the states are not reconizing this process, kind of creating 50 different bureaucratic hurdles. in response to the her that congressman young and senator murkowski and i sent you, you stated that d.o.t. will consider guidance to states on the anc participation, and we appreciate thats but your response noted that the department has chosen not to recognize sba's certification process, in particular self-certification. as you can imagine, this is a little confusing to me and recognized as appropriate. but there seems to be a recent internal d.o.t. policy change that doesn't recognize what the sba is doing. so can you work with us to iron out that internal inconsistency? it certainly seems like there's something amiss where two federal agencies are not talking from the same sheet of music, and in your development of guidance in consideration of

this issue, i'd like your assurance to work with us to make sure there's uniformity across the 50 states in req any -- recognition of anc eligibility, which the sba clearly already does. sec. foxx: we'll work with you to clarify this. sen. sullivan: i know it's a little specific, but we raised it in anchorage, and in a letter, and there seems to be this internal inconsistency between the sba federal law and what we're doing. so i appreciate your commitment on that. let me turn to another topic. touched onmenthal it. many others were focused on regulatory reform. as a matter of fact, in a hearing several months ago, you and i talked about how long it takes to permit a bridge in america, which is a disaster, six to seven years.

i'd like to submit two articles, one called "the highway to beurocratic hell." another one called "why americans don't trust government." these lay out bridges that are become -- not new bridges, but just to be repaired, so the bridge that connects new jersey to staten island, five years? just to raze the bridge? the anderson memoriam bridge in -- memorial bridge in cambridge, massachusetts, five years? just for the permitting we're talking about. i think there's so much we can do. 61,000 structurally deficient bridges in america.

because it takes five to six years to permit a record, so even one we just want to repair, not expand. there's a lot of different ideas. one of the things that i think is a good idea is to -- if you're just repairing a bridge to waive the permitting requirements, because you're not hitting the ecosystem or the environment. are there areas that you have in terms of other things we can do besides what's in the fast act to get to what i think is a real, real problem for america. what are some of your ideas? would you be in favor of waiving requirements for just maintenance on bridges? >> bun way is -- to move permits through the process, but it's very narrow. >> we have gone pretty substantially -- i may get this wrong, so i'll send you an rfq that will give you the number, but i believe it was something

like 93% before, and we're closer now to the 6% or 97%. sec. foxx: we could move projects more quickly through the process. we have gone pretty substantially. rfq that willu an give you the actual number. but i believe it was something like 93% before, and we're closer now to 96% or 97%. i would also say a couple other things being attempted at the state level. by the way, it's not altogether always clear whether it is state or federal permitting requirements that tie these things up. sen. sullivan: yes, sir, i couldn't agree with you more. sec. foxx: there is also technology. i'll give you one example.

in massachusetts they were able to installed 14 bridges over a weekend, because the bridges were prefabricated. so they're actually ability to knock out the old bridge, slide the new bridge in and have it ready by monday morning. these technologies i think will help us speed up the construction time. but it is absolutely true when the government promises a project and it happens quickly, the public gains confidence. and when it takes decades, the public loses confidence. sen. sullivan: i'm going to submit as additional article, which is focused on making sure or veterans get expedited into the commercial trucking industry. i'll have questions on how we're doing on follow up on that. chairman thune: thank up senator sullivan. senator moran.

sen. moran: thank you for being here, and more importantly thank you for your assistance with me and my staff. what it does is allows for manufacturers of trailers to deliver them to their dealers, and that provision preempts state law. but it's my understanding that apparently many states are still attempting to enforce their own provisions? so i raise to you this particular issue of education of states, specifically to this issue, but more broadly the department is doing what to make certain our state departments of know where their jurisdiction now lies. sec. foxx: let me come back to you with a formal response, senator. it's an important issue, but i

want to answer the mail on this. but i would suspect and will verify that we are actively working to educate the states on this, but let me give you the detail. sen. moran: i would welcome the follow-up. we have a number of trailer manufacturers in kansas and of course they exist across the country and this is an important provision in getting their product to their retailers. sec. foxx: sure. sen. moran: secondlt, the fast the ecpired a study to rates on rail cares. has the gao provided you any status report as to the progress they're making with their study? have you seen any results that you can share with us? sec. foxx: i do not know the status of the gao study. i know that the nas is in the

process of standing up the committee that will be evaluating th etesting. on we are also working to ramp up and get it started. that work is under way, but that's the current status. sen. moran: when you say that, you are talking about assisting science? sec. foxx: as i understand, the method takes them a while to their committees. it takes them a while to ram up there, by the way they do that, and given the timeline we have to move off this we've moved forward with some of the development of the testing. my hope is they can move quickly enough, but we're worried that we may blow the timeline if we don't start working.

sen. moran: again i'm being repetitive, but i'm trying to make sure i understand. is that your own testing or assisting the national academy of science ?are you assisting in sec. foxx: my understanding is nas will be evaluating the testing that is done by the department. sen. moran: done by the department. ok. so the testing is your evaluation? i assume you would tell me when the testing and results are in, that is something you would commit to paying attention to as you develop your plan in regard? sec. foxx: yes, i can also tell you that the results -- no results of the testing that is being done will be published or put out there until the n.a.s. task force has a chance to really drill into it and validate it or invalidate it. sen. moran: >> thank you, mr. secretary. finally this is a manufacturing question somewhat outside the scope of the fast act, but my

question relates to harmonizing cafe standards. my understanding is that the national traffic safety administration and epa are not in sync with the standards. you can be in compliance with one and fined or challenged by the other. and the administration had the one national program trying to harmonize the regulations so a manufacturer, all of us can understand what the standards are. can you bring me up to date in that regard? sec. foxx: there's work to do underway to do the interim half way report on the cafe standards. i think things are going in a more harmonious direction than you think they are. i expect that work will continue forward and we'll be able to report out something in the fall. -- havean: if you ever

any specifics i would be grateful for you to share them. i'm always looking for harmony. sec. foxx: yes, sir. thank you. chairman thune: thank you, senator moran. he's a harmonious guy. senator from montana, senator danes. sen. danes: thank you, mr. chairman, a point that cantsenator cantwell, just a reminder, that bakken crude could transport through the keystone pipeline. they said it is all canadian crude. 100,000 barrels a day of bakken crude would enter the bakken out of baker, montana. secretary foxx, thank you for visiting montana recently, not too far from glacier national park. and that was on the -- it was a historic meeting, you were the first secretary of transportation to ever step foot on the reservation there.

sec. foxx: wow. sen. danes: i don't know if you knew you were making history. sec. foxx: i did not. sen. danes: tell me what lessons you learned from that visit in tribal transportation? sec. foxx: you know, i think there's several. number one is that you have a remarkable community. and they have a real idea of how they want to grow their economy, and, you know, tourism is obviously a big part of it. they're also agricultural products coming from the area. i found that people were very interested in multimodal transportation, very interested in having the ability to walk or bike to work, you know, there's a trail they're trying to get fixed out there.

the other piece is there were concerns of commodities moving tri-rail through the reservation. those were some of the observations that i came away with. sen. danes: thank you for that. one of major concern i hear from the cskt, as well as kalispel, in fact anyone up and down highway 93, is regarding the safety on u.s. 93. i have experienced it on in -- a kid they grew up in montana. in fact, i remember the bumper stickers that we would see, that "pray for me, i drive highway 93." what steps d.o.t. is taking to provide help on u.s. 93? sec. foxx: when we were there, highway 93 did come up. what i offered was our technical teams to try to come out and help.

i can't remember where the project is in terms of planning. there is a gap in the project where they're trying to get it finished. we also offered technical assistance on the grant writing side as discretionary dollars become available. to try to move the project forward we certainly want them , to be as competitive as they can be within the programs. sen. danes: i appreciate that. tourism is a huge part of our economy in montana. sec. foxx: it's a beautiful state. sen. danes: thank you. flying into missoula, perhaps driving up to glacier national part. i want to give it over to the bridges. senator sullivan brought it up as well. in missoula, montana, three of the five bridges that cross the clark fort river are considered structurally deficient. most editorially -- notoriously is the russell street bridge. over 60,000 cross the bridges. they were constructed in the 1950s, back when my dad was going to school at the university of montana there at missoula.

in your testimony, you mention reducing bureaucratic red tape to expedite project delivery. what about these most at risk bridges? sec. foxx: well, i would say that the biggest impediment we've had has been a lot of uncertainty about funding levels. now that the fast act has passed, states are ramping up their activities in terms of rehabilitating bridges and replacing them. as they do that work, we're trying to find creative ways to help move projects through quickly. i will give you one example of a case study. we were able to work with the state of pennsylvania not only to get the projects moved through the permitting process quickly, but they actually pulled a group of i think about 500 bridges to make use of our

innovative financing programs. none of the individual bridges with that qualified or made sense to do by financing, but they got them pooled and were able to move 500 bridges through the system. so we're looking everywhere we can to move to the permitting process as fully as we can. sen. danes: well, that's good news. if you would look at adding the russell street bridge in missoula, i would greatly appreciate it. [laughter] sec. foxx: ok you got it. ,sen. danes: thank you, secretary foxx. chairman thune: thank you, senator. mr. secretary, i have to depart in a moment, but i want to say thank you for being here. you've been a great partner on a lot of these issues, and this committee and the congress has acted on highways, rail freights reform, pipeline safety, hopefully coming back from the house. and i would just encourage you, to the degree that you can is encourage or house colleagues on f.a.a.

we need to deal with that. i think we're in a much better position if we enact something that is more longer-term and has more permanent reforms. i am hopeful they can get that done here in the near future. we will a dress most of the country. >> i want to reiterate what senator moran said with regard to harmonization of regulations. as i understand it they can -- auto manufacturers don't know where they are. they can build a fleet that might satisfy requirements of one program, but not another agency, but not a state requirement. so i understand you to say work is under way, you hope to get something to us in the fall.

will that be a legislative recommendation, or will it be a change in a rule or regulation? sec. foxx: i think there's an interim report that is due as part of the work on the cafe standards. it was a ten-year program, and in year five there's work under way to do a review of progress to date. i think that our teams both the epa and the dot teams do not believe there was inconsistency. work pretty hard to make sure that the cafe standards and the greenhouse gas standards are as harmonized as possible. continue working to keep you advised and the committee advised on the progress as we go forward. sen. wicker: ok, well in august of 2012.

i realize i was almost four years ago. the administration said, and i quote, continuing the national program ensures that can build a single fleet that satisfies requirements of federal programs as well as california program. there are several discrepancies that allow compliant with one agency but not another. perhaps that has changed since august of 2012. or perhaps the administration statement was perhaps hyperbole, except that manufacturers tell us that they simply want to know what to comply with. i hope you'll commit to having ntsa work with us on the harmonization changes. so the manufacturers can know exactly where they are. me ask you, you said

something about it a proposed southeast rail commission. in charlotte, a while back. there's already a southern rail commission with mississippi, louisiana, and alabama. have you given any thought to the advantages of perhaps expanding that commission to include states that might be in the south. as opposed to having a southeast right up next to a southern rail commission. sec. foxx: senator, i think that the more states in the south that work together on establishing strong passenger rail, the better. i was speaking about the fact there is an existing compact between north carolina and virginia, and the other

contiguous states south carolina and georgia would be critical to connecting that part of the southeast. sen. wicker: you wouldn't limit that to inner city rail, would you? sec. foxx: that was the conference was about that i was speaking from. i also know there's a gulf coast working group, working to reestablish rail service between louisiana and orlando, which is also very important. sen. wicker: what a nice segue to my next question. [laughter] sen. wicker: as a matter of fact, that was established in fast? sec. foxx: it was. sen. wicker: how is that going, in your opinion? fra has been a good job in leading the group and developing a plan to fund and operate rail service throughout the gulf. what can you tell you about the progress in the past six months or so? sec. foxx: very good progress. the gulf coast working group convened on february 6, 2016, for the first time in new

orleans. we sent our fra administrator to that meeting as an indication of how important the work is. sen. wicker: and that was appreciated. sec. foxx: absolutely. they are meeting monthly, both in person and call-in meetings, as they work to look at the options for getting that service back up and running. very important service, though. sen. wicker: wonderful. i do hope your team can be as enthusiastic about this let me -- as i am and as my team is. thank you very much for keeping us apprised of that. let me move to a tough situation. in may we lost two children in mississippi as a result of vehicular heatstroke.

because of being left in automobiles in rear seating positions. you it's just heartbreaking. today is national child vehicular heatstroke prevention and awareness day. i don't know if people are apprised of that. having witnessed two of these tragic losses, i wanted to ask about this. section 24-114 of the fast act requires dot to conduct research into effective ways to minimize the risk of hyper thermia and hypothermia to children or other unattended passengers in rear seating positions. do you feel any information for the committee about this what -- is this study being conducted?

what information can you give to the public and the committee at this point on this tragic series of events? sec. foxx: senator, first of all, it's a tragic loss anytime you lose any lives, but our young people particularly. if you wouldn't mind, i would like to submit for the record on that and give it a thorough response to that question on the status. sen. wicker: ok, all right. i had to come in late. how are we doing on the amtrak board of directors? did you discuss that earlier? sec. foxx: we have not discussed it. sen. wicker: what do you think on that? will the administration be putting forth nominees to ensure that they have the full representation? sec. foxx: that's my hope. i will need to maybe respond back to you. i'll try to call you in the next couple days to give you a sense of that, but at present, i don't know specifically. sen. wicker: let's think on

national system when we do. let's think long distance interest when we do this. sec. foxx: absolutely. sen. wicker: from all accounts, you have done a marvelous job i think it is falling to me to say the hear record will stay open for two weeks. during this time, senators asked to submit any question for the record will receive the witnesses requested to submit written answers to the committee as soon as possible. so, with that said -- do you have anything you'd like to add, mr. secretary? sec. foxx: senator, if i might. i'm recalling some of the colloquy we've had about our takata situation, and i -- it's a very serious situation, and i think we have committed to do a lot of things today to work with the committee to ensure we're doing every single thing we can do to ensure the safety of the

public. i want to make it very clear though. we have done an awful lot to try to push this into the public light and make sure takata is doing every single thing we can push them to do to get this right. to the point of when i was just talking with senator blumenthal, i made a comment i don't want misconstrued about the safety of these cars today. takata is under a consent order to prove that the air bags are safe. if they cannot demonstrate that proof, those airbags cannot be used in the future in cars. based on the evidence we have today, we don't have a basis to

prevent those air bag from going into new cars today. but we do know they will be recalled at some point in the future. i wanted to make sure the record -- it is a very complicated issue. i wanted to make sure the record is clear on where i stand on that, and hopefully we can continue to work together on this. sen. wicker: thank you for the clarification. sec. foxx: yes, sir. sen. wicker: not having been here for that exchange, i won't follow up, but perhaps we might follow up with questions on the record. sec. foxx: sure. that's fine. sen. wicker: thank you secretary foxx. if there's no objection, this hearing is now adjourned. sec. foxx: thank you, sir. thank you.

[indiscernible]

[indiscernible]

>> what is your timeline? did you mean august? sec. foxx: i don't kn that we're ready to announce a date, but i would say before august, but after june. [ laughter ] >> this is going to be within dot. how many staff members do you think might be there? sec. foxx: it will start with something around 50 or so, but we'll have more to say about it as we roll it out. we'll have a little splash with it. it's actually a big deal. update youguidance , said within the coming months,

would that also be -- sec. foxx: i think on the sort the rift and harmonization, that work is actually already started, so we -- i think it will take some time to get them fully consolidated, if you will, but, you know, i think in the next several weeks will have some steps you have taken that we can talk about. then we will continue to make progress. >> so there's still about 20 million inflator's that they have not disclosed between now and 2019. is that something you like to see auto companies do now? or do you want to wait until the -- sec. foxx: i think as much information is good, and, you know, frankly i share the

sentiments of many members of congress. this issue is and how important it is. we are going to use every bit of authority we have, we're going to use every bit of leverage we have using the concept order, but we sure do need the help of the auto industry. >> do you think congress can step in to give you more power. to demand that kind of disclosure? think imminent hazard authority would be helpful. a lot of our authorities are , verifiablecrete evidence. when you have situations like somewhere there is evidence, but not evidence that you can take to the bank, there is a place we can take a little bit more action. right now, we can't.

you either do it or you don't. if you do it, you have to have a lot of backup to withstand a potential lawsuit. > is it the fact that the inflator's and the cars are not on the market yet, or the cars have been been out long enough to have the physical proof? sec. foxx: exactly. it's an issue of time, and we know that after a few years these things become more dangerous. that's where we have focused. >> just one more minute. >> are they still on time for july? sec. foxx: that is the hope. we need to see where we are. i know where we're making

progress. >> and the assessment is due at june. is that still on time, do you think? sec. foxx: i think work there is ongoing. i don't have the latest on how we're watching up against the timeline, but i know everybody is working hard. >> do in the smart city challenge? where are you from? [ laughter ] >> you don't want to tell us now? where are you from? [laughter] >> i like it. exactly. exactly. >> any thoughts, you mentioned maybe doing a side-by-side. sec. foxx: well, you know, intervening events have conspired, and the staff that the white house issued i think is pretty much where we are as an administration, so that's where we are.

[indiscernible]

>> some other outlets have an exhibition, too. non-politics, but it is coming to do with p