and personalities of the new nation. exploring the american story. watch american history tv saturday on c-span two and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> c-span. democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more including wow. >> the world has changed. today a fast reliable internet connection is something no one can live without. wow is there for our customers with speed, reliability, value, and choice. now more than ever istarts with great internet. >> wow supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> next, a hearing on highway

infrastructure investments from a house transportation and infrastructure subcommittee. the witnesses the trust funding for federal and state transportation projects, safe parking for truck drivers, highway congestion, and permitting reform. it is just under 3.5 hours. >> the subcommittee on highways and transit will come to order. i asked the chairman be authorized to declare recess at any time during today's hearing. i ask unanimous consent that members not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at today's hearing and ask questions. as a reminder, if members wish to insert a document into the record correctly, also email it. documentsti@mail@house.gov.

today's hearing begins are subcommittee activity in the 119th congress. we have a number of new members of congress on the subcommittee. i want to welcome them, as well as my colleagues that have previously served. i am honored to serve as the chairman of this sub committee and i look forward to working with chairman graves and committee members beginning an act of congress. the 2021 infrastructure investment and jobs out included provisions to authorized our nations highway programs until september 30, 2026. as we begin the important work of reauthorizing our nation's surface transportation programs the committee will build upon the bipartisan successes of the 118th congress and i look forward to working with chairman graves, ranking member larson, ranking member norton, and the

rest of my colleagues in the trump administration to produce a bipartisan member driven bill which revitalizes our nation's infrastructure. it is important we hear from those working and interfacing directly with these programs to ensure congressional intent is followed we had our highway network ensures safe and efficient movement of people and freight and improves economic competitiveness. the u.s. transportation system is comprised of 4.2 million miles of public roads and almost 627,000 bridges. the infrastructure maintains our supply chain with the free-flowing movement of goods across our country to ensure that goods move eventually -- efficiently and keep costs low for american goods and services we must continue to invest in our nation's most vital infrastructure, our highways and bridges. the highways, roads, and bridges linking our communities and states supported through our

programs are the foundation of our economy. to keep projects moving and continue flexibility for state departments of transportation is imperative. states know their unique transportation needs and how to best address them. we must continue to uphold and abide by this hallmark principle in the next highway bill. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses today to share what is working, what is not, and why a simple extension of the current law would be detrimental for state dot planning of multiyear projects. i believe most here today understand the urgent need to address our nation's most pressing infrastructure concerns. we must also recognize we don't have an unlimited checkbook. $365 million for highway programs. within the five-year reauthorization for highway programs, the law increase funding by 62% compared to the

five-year average of the previous bill, the 2015 fast act. you are looking at a staggering increase. on top of reauthorizing existing programs, new discretionary programs including efforts to prioritize electric vehicle charging infrastructure, cut carbon emissions and support active transportation projects, like bike lanes, among others. with the national debt surpassing 36 trillion dollars and adding an additional $70,000 per minute we must scrutinize and streamline programs to address ways to ensure tax dollars are focused on reliable infrastructure will -- which will help grow our gdp. we must have a frank discussion about the solvency of the highway trust fund, the main source for highway projects. since 2008 congress transferred approximately $275 billion to cover the shortfall of revenues as expenditures have grown. highway funding relies on a user

based principle that is pretty simple. you purchase fuel to fill your vehicle and use the roads and the taxes from dad to go to the highway trust fund. however, electric vehicles that are often heavier than their conventional counterparts because of the weight of their batteries, don't pay into the highway trust fund. an entire segment of users does not contribute to the roads and bridges. this will not address the greater solvency issue but we must rectify this so all users are treated fairly contributing to the systems on which they rely. continued investment in our nations highway network translates to a stronger economy and improve quality of life for all americans so i look forward to today's discussion. now i recognize ranking member holmes norton for five minutes for an opening statement. rental holmes norton -- rep. ho

lmes-norton: thank you for hearing -- holding this hearing. i want to express my eagerness for the subcommittee to get started. america's roads are an important part of our larger transportation system. we rely on millions of miles of public roads and bridges including one million miles of federal aid and highways to move goods and people across the country. these roads in unison with other surface transportation systems like transit, rail, and pedestrian and biking infrastructure for the foundation for -- form the foundation of our economy. in november, congress passed thn

infrastructure law. this law is not only reauthorized service transportation programs through fiscal year 2026, but also provided $1.2 trillion to maintain, improve, and rebuild our infrastructure. within our subcommittee jurisdiction this included $355 billion for highways, $108 billion for transit, $43 billion for multimodal grants and $13 billion for highway and motorcade safety. since then, the department of transportation's hard work

resulted in the announcement of almost $600 billion for over 66,000 projects. the funding has gone towards projects in communities across the country creating jobs, improving safety, accessibility, and promoting a cleaner, greener transportation system. now, with the end of bipartisan infrastructure laws, five-year reauthorization insight, this subcommittee must ensure the investments continue. at this subcommittee -- as this subcommittee considers the next bill, it must prioritize safety. make no mistake. we are living through a public health crisis. over 40,000 people died on the roadways in 2023.

remarkably, the number represents a 5% improvement from where we were in 2021. the brunt of the deaths have been borne by pedestrians, cyclists, and communities of color. we can't allow this trend to continue. we can't allow any more families to be devastated. the bipartisan infrastructure law took safety seriously. for example, the safe streets and drugs for all program was established to help local governments plan and to build out these projects to improve safety and reduce roadway safety deaths. through this program 75% of the nation's population will become, by these safety plans.

however, there is still work to be done to improve safety. now we need to support our local governments by continuing locally driven efforts and connecting them with funding to build out these safety plans. any reauthorization legislation this subcommittee considers must make meaningful progress on this issue. safety is nonnegotiable. we must also work to continue mitigating the impact of our transportation system on the environment, especially on gas powered vehicles. transportation is the largest source of emissions in the united states. our transportation policies and programs must be reformed accordingly. expanding access to transit, walking, and biking is a

critical part of the solution. thank you to our witnesses today. i appreciate your input. regarding the needs of the nation's transportation system. i look forward to our discussion about the challenges ahead. i yield back. chair. rouzer: the gentlelady yields back and now i recognize mr. larsen. mr. larsen: thank you. the title of this hearing says it all. right now thanks to the the bipartisan infrastructure law america is building again that we need to keep it going. funding transportation does not just me and highways. investment in transit, rail, and ports keep america moving as well. i look forward to future hearings on how transit agencies and rail networks can sustain our economy. supporting over 85 thousand new

transportation projects in every congressional district to help create 1.6 million construction and manufacturing jobs across the country. the jobs have good wages, benefits, and working conditions driving the low 4.1 percent unemployment rate while modernizing our infrastructure. that is why it is unfathomable to me that on the first day of this administration the president signed an executive order to pause the process putting millions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of jobs, and thousands of projects in every commercial district in the country at risk. no committee is more bipartisan than this committee. the pain that is part of the executive order is equally bipartisan. i want to call on every member of the full committee to look at the projects and jobs in your district and reminded the administration of this bipartisan pain that this will cause your district. we should be working together across the aisle in the incoming

administration to celebrate the economic and safety benefits of transportation projects. to ensure the benefits continue to flow to our constituents we need to engage local partners. last week we heard testimony from the mayor pro tem of austin, texas who reiterated the important role local governments play in our transportation networks. local governments own 77% of national roadways. 50% of the nation's bridges and 46% of urban and rural transit providers. 90 percent of bil highway and bridge dollars go out by formula to the states. yet they are for when test -- mayor fuentes' noted that the majority of car trips are local and freight trips begin and end on local roads. competitive grants ensure communities have a chance to secure funding and advance projects that might not be prioritized by state deity -- dots.

$5 billion for more than five hundred 60 transportation projects in each state. republicans, democrats, and independence are all put in danger due to this administration's misguided executive order on transportation funding. since 20 202i have helped secure over 103 million dollars in grants for my district. the projects are developed, designed, and implemented with local input and support. i can tell that story 434 other times for every district in the country. thanks to the discretionary grants communities can get back to building projects, replacing the fairy, we modernizing the transit operations center at the port of billingham shipping terminal. the bil made its mark on the types of projects for state and local governments are building, reconnecting community pilot

programs that make it easier for people to get to work or school supporting local economic activity and improving safety for residents in areas that have been separated bypass highway projects bringing communities back together. the bil established a $5 million grant program to fund large complex infrastructure projects like the brenton smith bridge in kentucky that has long been delayed due to insufficient funding and created a $9 billion bridge investment program helping to repair and rebuild aging bridges that support key freight routes throughout the country. finally that bil is investing in the safety of projects to tackle the safety crisis in the country. more than 40,000 people die in motor vehicle crashes every year. bil boosts the highway safety program and is providing for the first time direct funding to cities, counties, and rural communities to save lives with investments including safe streets and roads for all grants and empowering your local communities to plan projects to improve how your constituents

can get around more safely. keeping our transportation system in good repair, keeping it resilient, keeping it safe, and keeping it ready for demand requires ongoing investment. i am ready to make that investment. we are ready to make that investment. let's keep it going. i want to thank the witnesses for being here today. i look forward to your testimony and i yield back. mr. colvin: the gentlemen yields back. before i get going full force i want to make a few observations of interest. there are a total of 55 members on the subcommittee. if you are wondering how that compares with other full committees, if this were a full committee, we would be ranking second in terms of total membership only behind armed services. this gives you a little sense of the width and breadth of the transportation and

infrastructure committee and the interest and importance of the subcommittee. i would like to welcome our witnesses. we thank them for being here today. briefly i will take a moment to explain our system to our witnesses. it's pretty simple. green is go. yellow is wrap it up. red is stop as soon as you possibly can. you will see the lights as you begin. i ask unanimous consent that the witnesses full statements be entered into the record. without objection i asked unanimous consent the record of today's hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided answers to any questions that might be submitted to them in writing. without objection, so ordered and i asked unanimous consent that the record remain open for 15 days for any additional comments and information submitted by members or witnesses to be included in the

record of today's hearing. without objection, so ordered. your written testimony has been made part of the record. the subcommittee asks you limit oral remarks to five minutes. i want to go through and introduce the witnesses we have here today. we have mr. jim tymon with the american association of state highway and transportation officials. we have mr. dellinger with the cargo transport is incorporated representing the american trucking associations. then we have ms. janet kavinoky with vulcan materials. then we have matthew colvin when the transportation and trades department of the aflcio. mr. tymon you are recognized for

up to five minutes. mr. tymon: thank you chair rouzer and congratulations on your appointment to the most important subcommittee in congress. chairman, ranking member norton, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for holding today's important hearing on our nation's highways and their role moving people in freight. my name is jim timon, the executive director of the american association of state highways, transportation, and officials or aashto. we recognize federal transit, past gender rail programs remain crucial to supporting our entire transportation system and my testimony will speak to iija successes and challenges and the

upcoming success -- spirit one of the most important successes of is the ability of state quixote to take formula dollars provided and utilize those to deliver tangible projects end benefits quickly. state dots do this through long-range plans and capital projects developed in partnership with npo's and localities. as a result, state dot formula dollars are spending out on projects in your communities at a faster rate than any other transportation project category in iija. when funding is distributed to states by formula, this is the most efficient, effective way to create jobs, impact the economy, and improve our transportation system. another area of progress under iija has been highway safety. in 2021 there were over 43,000 fatalities on our nation's roadways. iija provided funding and

policies that enabled state dots to accelerate deployment of proven roadway safety strategies and innovative countermeasures. since 2021 roadway fatalities declined for 10 consecutive quarters even as people are driving more miles. in 2023 there were about 41,000 roadway fatalities, still a staggering and unacceptable number. but the iija provided state dots with the foundation to continue making progress to drive the number towards zero. when it comes to iija's challenges first is the administration of the discretionary grant programs. the process around discretionary grants is shown to be slow, burdensome, and less efficient in turning federal funds into projects and benefits compared to the deployment of formula funds provided to state dots. another challenge has been the impact of inflation.

a 70% increase in highway construction costs in the last four years means states have actually lost ground on purchasing power, even with iija 's nominal funding increases, only about 20%-20 5% -- 20%-20 5%. another challenge is bureaucratic red tape with federal regulation and permitting. the iija included some provisions to address this issue. some of the provisions have not been implemented and still more can be done in the next piece of legislation. the final challenge i will mention today is related to buy america requirements. aashto and state dots remain unwavering in its our support of increasing american manufacturing capacity creating domestic jobs and increasing economic growth. there are still concerns about the industry transition to new buy america requirements.

we request reversing a rule issued earlier this month that ended the long-standing labor for manufactured products. this congress has an extraordinary opportunity to develop and enact the next service transportation reauthorization bill. under the next bill, aashto asks congress to build on the proven successes of the state dot formula programs. we request maximum flexibility and transferability between funding categories coupled with the removal of regulatory and programmatic burdens that often delay project delivery. the next bill should look at iija funding levels as the starting point and the levels should grow from that point. finally, i want to thank congress for the work -- for working with state dot's on a fixed fhwa august redistribution process and around the unprecedented natural disasters state dots have faced to the

last few months. more work is needed in both areas but we appreciate what has been done so far. thank you. to close, aashto and its members are fully committed to assisting the service committee putting together the next transfer might -- transportation bill to ensure our national long-term economic growth and improve safety through the federally assisted state implemented federal highway program. thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i look forward to your questions. chair rouzer: thank you very much. mr. dellinger. mr. dellinger: chair rouzer, del. holmes-norton, and members of the subcommittee thank you for allowing me to testify on behalf of the american trucking association. i serve as president and ceo of cargo transport is a family-based trucking company based in western north carolina. it's a privilege to be here today as you prepare to reauthorize the federal highway bill. this is an issue that affects all americans.

and especially the 8.5 million men and women that work in our industry. supply chain crisis of 2021 exposed serious consequences of underinvestment and transportation. -- underinvestment in transportation. more recently hurricane helene's devastation to my home state highlighted the need for robust transcript -- transportation networks. ata strongly supported passage of the last highway bill that made substantial investments in all 50 states. the legislation provided the largest infusion of funding for our nation's supply chain in nearly a century. and yet, the harsh reality, that after accounting for inflation we are spending less on roads and bridges today. the failure to act comes at a risk and imposes its own cost, case and point. highway bottlenecks out over $100 billion to the cost of freight transportation annually. that is the cost of 435,000

drivers sitting idle for one year. it is imperative we expand the capacity and eliminate the inefficiencies to boost u.s. manufacturing, grow public and private businesses, and lower costs for the consumer. infrastructure improvements reduce hazards, promoting safety for the motoring public and our drivers. that is a high priority for the trucking industry reflected in the fact that motor carriers invest over $14 billion annually in safety-related related systems and training. but, this is bigger than us. we need congress to help build that progress. from increasing truck parking that would alleviate dangerous situations where truckers are forced to park in unauthorized locations, to ensuring that effective and robust drug testing protocols remain intact to keep drivers from under the influence off our roads. in addition to enhancing safety,

the trucking industry made significant strides in improving our environmental footprint while continuing the task of moving the vast economy. over the past 40 years, advancements and engine technology have produced trucks that are 99% cleaner. unfortunately, over the past several years, the epa abandoned that the collaborative model and it made the -- that made these achievements possible. the epa at a patchwork of states and post mandates that threaten to raise cost and cause significant disruption without delivering the intended environmental benefits. we look forward to looking with the new administration and 119th congress to reverse the trends set forward and restore a commonsense approach that sets ambitious and achievable standards. s my trucking career began nearly four decades ago. i have seen firsthand the incredible opportunities the

industry provides individuals to support their families entertain the american dream. it is my hope that congress will continue to partner with us to incentivize workforce development and protected pathways to entrepreneurship to include the independent contractor model. making it easier for more people to find rewarding, good paying jobs in trucking. we look forward to working with everyone of you in the subcommittee as you develop an infrastructure package that promotes safety for the motoring public and our drivers while prompting the creation of efficiencies as we move our nation's economy. roads and bridges are not affiliated with a given party. they are an american priority. thank you for allowing me to speak today. i look forward to answering your questions. chair rouzer: thank you. ms. kavinoky: members of the

committee, thank you for inviting me here to testify. my name is janet kavinoky and i am here on behalf of 11,000 employees of vulcan materials company the nation's largest producer of construction materials aggregates and a producer of aggregate based asphalt and ready mix concrete. the companies of the national stone, sand, and gravel association comprise 100,000 direct jobs in 9000 locations and generate $35 billion per year annually in economic output. article one of the constitution clearly enumerates the role of congress to build roads and transportation networks upon which our nation's growth and security depend. we are proud to supply essential construction materials for the backbone of the american economy and a safe, efficient movement of goods and people. the bipartisan infrastructure investment and jobs act enacted in november 2021 marked a once

in a generation investment in surface transportation infrastructure. with the highway and transit authorizations in this law expiring september 30, 2026 i offer three underlying principles for the committee to consider as it begins the reauthorization process. first, enact a long-term bill with a certain predictable multiyear funding. a long-term federal-aid highway program authorization with reliable, predictable, multiyear funding is the foundation upon which a state and local governments and their partners across the construction industry plan, design, engineer, construct, operate, and maintain infrastructure year-over-year. state dots are the managers of their transportation infrastructure inventory, a multiyear challenge. a stable policy and predictable funding are the right approach is to address this challenge.

second, emphasize core highway programs and state decision-making. we support this committee maximizing funding through the core formula for apportionments and maintaining the federal-aid highway program as a state administered federally assisted program. for the past 100 years, formula funding to states has been the indisputable foundation of the program. formula funds are efficient and flexible, enabling state and local decision makers to address citizen needs. in contrast, the iija allocated special abortion programs with detailed eligibility is often defined by federal agencies to limit state and local decision-making flexibility. in addition, slow implementation of new programs resulted in lagging obligation rates. third, pay for investment through a highway trust fund supported by all users. beginning in 1956 the highway trust fund supported programs through user fees. however, since 2022 user fee

revenues have been insufficient. we have been fortunate that congress maintained a long-term, predictable funding levels by supplement and user fees with general funds and other transfers. we are facing the same challenge again in the upcoming reauthorization. in june, the congressional budget office projected the highway trust fund would end fiscal year 2028 with a gap of about $18 billion based on a flat spending levels. the cumulative shortfall through fiscal year 2031 is estimated at $136 billion, underscoring the need for a long-term revenue solution supported by all users. of the alternative annual appropriations would create uncertainty instead of stable, predictable, multiyear contract authority. finally, as the committee plans for on-time reauthorization we urge a return to a more typical, focused, surface transportation

reauthorization versus what i will call the iija model. vulcan supplies a full range of public infrastructure projects and benefited from more than just the surface transportation portion of iija. we feel in a focused effort, manages to regular orders, pride for discussion and negotiation, benefiting the final product, and help deliver on-time reauthorization. delays and extensions aren't in the public interest. they drive up costco mode of capital investments in hiring him and diminish the value of benefits by pushing them to the future. we recognize that to accomplish this over the next 20 months before september 30, 2026 is a daunting task and we stand ready to collaborate and partner with you. thank you for inviting me to testify. i look forward to your questions. chair rouzer: thank you. mr. colvin you are recognized.

mr. colvin: thank you for the opportunity to testify on the topic of our national highway system and national infrastructure. ttd represents millions of workers across the transportation sector and there is no part of our highways that if they don't work on, from the workers manufacturing american steel to those using it to build bridges and those preparing the ground and laying foundation for our highways, skilled professionals inspecting and maintaining. the workers aren't only delivering on the promise of the 2021 infrastructure law on generational investment but they are doing1 it while training the next generation of workers to meet the demand for the next generation of skilled labor. for decades ttd has advocated for generational investments to bring our infrastructure to the 21st century. for us it was not about spending money for its own sake. it was not about creating union jobs for the sake of creating

union jobs, though we are happy to have them. it is about hearing the voices of workers who are on the front line of our transportation system that can see unsafe practices, crumbling roads, crumbling bridges come out dating cysts -- outdated systems, insufficient capacity, inefficiencies that turn routine operations into nightmares for workers and commuters. the economic impact of these investments have already been significant and they cannot be overstated. in october of 2024 usdot announced over 1.7 million construction and manufacturing jobs were created over the prior four years. 700,000 additional in the transportation sector including pilots, port workers, bus drivers, rail engineers and other professions. i want to say, the biden administration was really critical in unprecedented

executive actions they took to ensure these investments did create and maintain good union jobs. through executive orders and regulatory actions strengthened by regulatory requirements expanding worker safety to prioritize higher labor standards in federal contracting. under the previous leadership of secretary buttigieg, the department of transportation specifically work to type federal investments in infrastructure to ensuring we had real growth in jobs, project labor agreements. that would not have happened with just the iija involved. these combined legislative and executive actions created a comprehensive framework that did not just fund infrastructure. it ensured the investments build career pathways into the middle class. federal infrastructure investments generate a

significant multiplier effect. they ensure businesses have access to workers. customers can reach commercial centers. and, goods can move efficiently throughout our supply chains. this is a strategic investment that delivers demonstrable returns for communities across america. it would be a mistake right now to rollback any of those protections. we would argue that they should all be enshrined in the end coming authorization. while i do understand that today's hearing is focused on highways i hope you can understand that i probably cannot just stick to that one mode here. but, i will say, freight does not just move on highways. it comes into ports. it is loaded onto trains and trucks. we have to look at this as an entire ecosystem. sorry. my computer is being weird. on a national scale, the

computer -- the numbers tell a powerful story. nationwide transit. sorry. get back here. on a national scale, nationwide transit ridership has been climbing with over 7.9 billion total trips projected for 2024, an increase driven by communities recognizing the economic and environmental benefit of robust investment in public transportation. the growth in public transportation has been sort of a recent surprise in -- and one we are happy to see. for years, we had been warning against workforce challenges in this sector. but, in 2023 alone the transit workforce expanded by 10,000 new jobs with salaries increasing by over $1 billion. these gains reflect not only recovery of our transit systems, but renewed confidence in the

importance of transit in our nation's infrastructure. i want to say d.o.t. recently released results from efforts they had taken to reduce the real challenge of assaults on our national transit systems. one of the findings they released is that there has been a 232% increase in assaults on transit workers over the last two years and that is unacceptable. we took real measures at the iija to deal with assaults on transit workers. the fast act was years ago. it still has not been implemented. we have to take additional actions to put a stop to this. i also cannot overstate the importance of buy american policies for our workers and economy. buy america ensures that when we spend federal dollars on infrastructure we invest in american jobs, american manufacturing, and the u.s. industrial base.

these policies create high quality union supporter jobs that pay fair wages and offer safe working conditions. they reduce our reliance on foreign supply chains, strengthen our economy, and ensure taxpayer funding delivers real benefits to american families. as congress looks towards the next surface reauthorization is essential to provide federal agencies with the resources and oversight needed to enforce effectively. i will end there. i will end with this. i know that many of you in this room were not here for the knee -- for the iija. many of you do not support the iija if my math is correct. but i will say, the efforts president trump is taking to undermine those funds i hope you can agree that whether we support it or not, undermining

grantmaking, undermining federal funding is not a serious way of dealing with implement in your policy priorities. i would urge all of you too -- even if quietly -- to urge this administration to reverse these decisions. chair rouzer: the gentlemen's time has expired. we appreciate everyone's testimony today. mr. tymon i will start with you. iija created many new discretionary grant programs administered by the department of transportation. can you share quickly with the committee your perspective on how formula funding compares to discretionary grant funding and executing projects? mr. tymon: thank you for that question chair rouzer. an estimated 67% of the formula dollars provided to state dots through iija have been spent out

in the first two years of when they are allocated. conversely, the spend out wait for discretionary grants under that same timeframe is between 1% and 7.4%. those statistics demonstrate the efficiencies that exist with formula dollars and some of the inefficiencies that exist with the discretionary grant programs. chair rouzer: can you share your thoughts on how channeling funding through the existing four highway formula programs helps with certainty and capitalizing on the expertise of our states department of transportation? mr. tymon: state dots rely on federal formula dollars for the predictability that comes with a long-term federal transportation bill. when congress enacts a five euro bill as they did with -- five year bill as they did with iija it provides the state dots a roadmap and predictability for

how much funding they will proceed each of the sup -- received each of the five years. then state dots work with metropolitan planning and localities in their state to identify a pipeline of projects ready to go each of the years. they are ready to execute that plan in a way that gets the dollars out the door, into the community, often in the first year or two of when that money is authorized and appropriated. chair rouzer: ms. kavinoky, obviously we need to look for ways to streamline and limit federal dollars so what we are appropriating some of the funding we have available, goes a whole lot further. what are your thoughts on how we can address permitting efficiencies at the federal level? how do we better streamline the review processes to ensure projects aren't getting needlessly hung up and subsequently increasing the cost pretty dramatically?

i think for every year of building a project it adds about 20%, 30% of the cost. ms. kavinoky: that's a great question and it has been asked in every reauthorization since iced tea in 1991, the year i graduated high school. this is a perennial question. fortunately iija did codify one federal decision. i think there are good opportunities going through the next reauthorization process to look at how that was implemented. and also to look again at federal permitting timelines to see where there might be opportunities again to increase it. but really, you do have an opportunity, i think, going forward, to ensure projects have the support they need, the unified stakeholder support. to use the planning process to ensure what you are moving forward is something that is not

going to get caught up in lawsuits in the future. then it is deal team -- d.o.t.s and federal highway administration's working together to expedite moving those projects along. chair rouzer: absolutely. mr. dellinger i want to give it to you given that the time is winding down a bit. can you share with the subcommittee what you see as the top challenges facing the trucking industry as we prepare to reauthorize these programs? mr. dellinger: i think the top -- what comes to mind is the role of the fet. the long-standing attacks on -- our industry and the highest taxes as well that would allow us to spend it dollars on other safety features or other investments in our company. probably, the biggest thing, and a lot of you might not be aware, but fet adds $17,000 to each of

our tractor purchases per year. i know everybody likes a buy one get one free type thing. but for every 10 trucks we purchase, we can purchase 11 trucks with the svt. with -- fet. trailers, $1500 on those. and if we purchase 200 trailers each year, we are looking at that times 200. fet is definitely a big one. chair rouzer: my time just expired. i will recognize ms. norton for the five minutes. del. holmes-norton: thank you, mr. chair. mr. tymon, since 2012, congress has directed states to incorporate performance measures to help ensure federal funding

is addressing national goals. congress listed safety as the first goal in the statute followed by infrastructure conditions. states have developed asset management plans that are directly woven into investment decisions. and since 2012 has helped improve pavement and bridge conditions in the national highway systems. by contrast, safety on the roads has gotten worse. in 2012 there were 33,561 people killed in traffic crashes. in 2023, 40,990 people died. do you support requirements to hold states accountable for investment decisions based on safety results in the same way states are held accountable for infrastructure conditions?

mr. tymon: thank you for that question. first, let me say safety continues to be the number one priority for every state dot in the country. the number of deaths we are seeing on our nation's roadways, even though it has come down over the last 10 consecutive quarters, it's still unacceptable. what i would say is the performance measure in sections that are currently in the law do require states to set up strategic highway safety plans that guide decision-making for how they allocate resources. when it comes to, essentially, forcing a state's to make investment decisions i would say the same way folks within the district of columbia don't want the federal government taking a heavy hand in how they make their investment decisions i think every state in the country prefers giving states flexibility to address the challenges on their own. they still are provided federal funds through the highway safety improvement program, to invest

in safety projects. states go over and above in dollars they are provided to make sure they are making improvements from a safety perspective. but i do not know if we would support i have your hand for the federal government in directing states in how to make those investment decisions because each state approach is the investment decisions in a unique way. del. holmes-norton: thank. mr. dellinger, the last congress i introduced the bipartisan household goods shipping consumer protection act. with congressman ezell to address freight fraud and restore federal authority to prevent scams in the shipping industry. we plan on reintroducing the spell -- this bill. there will be a bipartisan senate companion bill as well.

one of the benefits of enacting the bill for both ship -- what are the benefits of enacting the bill for both shippers and consumers? mr. dellinger: thank you for introducing the bill. we support it. definitely, anything that protects the consumer and also the goods carriers out there doing the right thing is very welcome. del. holmes-norton: thank. mr. tymon congress recently enacted a disaster bill that provides $8 billion to the federal highway administration's administration relief program. congress did not provide the 15 million dollars requested by the federal transit administration. to meet its emergency relief programs needs for disaster related repairs. does the american association of state highway and transportation

officials support providing dedicated funding to the federal transit administration's emergency relief program like they do to the highway program? mr. tymon: we believe the federal government does have a role in providing relief for emergency situations, as they did with the $8 billion bill that was just adopted. i do agree funding should be allocated to the federal transit administration program. i would say both those programs are probably historically underfunded. look at the highway program. the transit program over the years. del. holmes-norton: my time has expired. chair rouzer: mr. crawford. rep. crawford: i want to start with mr. dellinger and commend you for the forward-looking proposals you have had on the trust fund and infrastructure investment, road safety, the

driver shortage. i want to focus on the driver shortage issue. i have been a proponent of legislation to allow younger drivers access to commercial trucking with a hope of replenishing our driver workforce. can you talk about what ata is doing to support and increase the driver workforce and what we hear in this committee ought to look at as we take on surface reauthorization to do the same thing? mr. dellinger: first of all, representative crawford, thank you for supporting ata and our industry. with the stad we would like to see that become permanent. we are a little bit late at the game getting the kinks worked out. the thing sunsets in november of this year. it is something we would like to see permanent. getting younger drivers in is important also. getting women into our industry. we offer a lot of good careers. a lot of good driving careers

that women do well. getting them involved. we can do that through basically better parking, a lot more parking. i think we need funding for parking. that is not in a bucket with other groups pulling out of it. we need a safe parking for females where they feel safe being out there. rep. crawford: sure. that makes sense. mr. tymon i want to shift gears a little and talk about federal funding. you may have made comments about this already. i am a proponent of formula funding. i will admit i am a little skeptical about the wisdom of some of the iija created discretionary grants. i think that less than 6% of iija grant money has been designated and only 1% have spent and we only have eight months of iija left and i hear

how financing lags causes the cost to skyrocket as inflation devalues the dollar. can you talk about whether performance or discretionary grants are better for dots or national infrastructure needs? i want to make sure we are putting taxpayer money at it the best place to get the best return on investment. mr. tymon: thank you for that question. as i mentioned earlier, we do firmly believe the best use and most efficient use of federal dollars is through the federal-aid highway program formula dollars. 66% of the formula dollars provided to the states have been spent out in the first two years in which they have been appropriated or authorized. whereas, on the discretionary side it is between 1%-8%. you mentioned to the raised grants. that example, in the state of georgia, a local applicant received one of those grants. two years after they were selected, they have yet to even.

it took them two years to execute a grant agreement with u.s. dot before they were even able to access the dollars. we are seeing that across discretionary programs. inefficiency associated with putting out a no flow, selecting the projects at awarding the projects. the money is just not spending out and creating jobs in communities at the rate congress hoped it would. it does create jobs and have the impact of formula dollars because of the money almost always goes out in the same year or two it is authorized. rep. crawford: mr. dellinger, on the issue of road safety. here testing for drug abuse is an issue i have heard from constituents about quite a bit over the years and the federal highway administration has been dragging its feet on regulations allowing here testing to be used in the drug and alcohol clearinghouse. i hear anecdotally all the time about how many drivers have positive hair tests, but negative urine tests. if that is concerning to me. does ata have data on the scope

of this problem and how here testing can be a positive safety solution? mr. dellinger: in 2015 the fast act was asked to find a working solution for here testing. in 2017 we began here testing at our company. the unfortunate thing is, it has never been recognized. a urine test costs between a $38 and $45. a hair test is between $88 and 98 -- $98. we have been running parallel programs since 2017. i do not know how many people would not come to our door knowing we have here testing. but let me tell you, knowing that we have it probably one in dm -- one in 10 to one in 15. rep. crawford: it improves the quality of applicant.

mr. dellinger: we like to think so, yes. but that driver, unfortunately, all he has to do is leave us when he fails the hair test and go down the street and take a urine test and then he is working for someone. rep. larsen: mr. colvin you talked about the importance of the workers as part of the iija. as we look at the next version of the bill, can you talk about the value of the work we did to tie workforce development building the next generation of infrastructure building the next generation workforce for that infrastructure? can you talk about the value of that. is it good or bad? mr. colvin: obviously, really excellent. i don't mean to undercut the real serious advancements there were in workforce training programs in the iija that i mentioned. the additional steps the

administration took. but i think that if you look beyond just the apprenticeship programs, there is a whole wealth of other employment created by these investments that they don't have those sorts of traditional apprenticeship style programs. but the building trades do. i mentioned transit. that was an industry that had an above average age of workers. they were all within, you know, -- i would say the majority were within retirement age, i think, five years. transit agencies are really struggling to bring in the next generation of workers. paired with that where policies looking at transitioning to electric buses. but we have no real pipeline for training those workers. so, you know, i think, i think we're now starting to finally see the benefits of that. i think the fact that hiring is up is obviously a good sign, and while there have been challenges with how exactly to deal with

training for transition to electric vehicles, i think, you know, more of those sort of supportive programs that pair training with procurement would be something that you should be focused on. rep. larsen: thanks. mr. tymon, i know there's a focus on the formula funding, but truthfully there'd be there would be projects that would be funded in all of our districts if we relied only on the states to take the formula money and make it happen. i can point to projects in my district. maybe it's just the nature of my district courts because their representation in congress, but the truth is they wouldn't be funded. and so i agree that it's been slow on the discretionary, but the culvert program, which we call the culvert program in our state, we're not -- the supreme court of the united states said we had to fix this, so it's a national interest that we have a culvert program, as for instance. and so i think there are

examples like that rather than just relying only on the states to take the formula money and then dangle it out in front of local government. so we heard from that -- heard from mayor porte fuentes this last week. so i want to know if you're willing to commit with this committee to actually figure out a way to improve the selection process and help communities gain access to funds. i heard it from roger millar all the time. this is the democratic and republican state dot message. it's not a republican message. it's not a democratic message. it's everybody. but i don't agree with it. and so i want to know if you'll commit to working with us to solve the problems that we do have as opposed to just relying on to give the states more money. if i saw all that money discretionary, i'd want it too if i was a state. that's not the way he wrote it. mr. tymon: absolutely. we would love to work with the committee to find ways to improve the project selection process. i would also say that, you know, i think that there should be a

robust discussion on what types of projects should be funded with federal dollars versus what shouldn't, because i think one of the reasons that these dollars are spinning out so slowly is that there are some of these smaller projects or local projects that just aren't a good fit for all of the bureaucratic red tape that goes along with. -- that goes along with a federal dollar that comes through these discretionary programs. so i think that we would absolutely welcome that discussion to figure out what are the right types of projects to be funded with federal dollars and how to improve the project selection process. rep. larsen: well, apparently we've got 20 months to do that, so i'm going to ms. kavinoky. on your -- i think in your testimony you looked, and if i've got this right, the construction cost index chart was in your in your testimony. perhaps it wasn't. ok.

it doesn't make -- that's not as relevant. it's in somebody's -- big factor material costs are high. there's inflation in that there's a little tick down in the last quarter or so. how can we keep that moving? how can we keep the inflation on material costs continuing to move down? ms. kavinoky: sure, so it was not in my testimony, but we are well aware of construction cost inflation. vulcan has seen higher than expected. rep. larsen: what can we do to keep that little movement -- downward movement going? ms. kavinoky: well, i mean, inflation is a function of a lot of different factors. the international environment we saw when russia invaded ukraine, it substantially increased our oil prices, our fuel prices. i think the more stability you have overall in the system, the global system, the economic system, that's of critical importance. you know, we continue to just manage inflation as best we can in the categories where it's sticky. we know we -- rep. larsen: i'm on my time and i want to respect the chair.

so if i could get for the record some comments from your industry on that question, that'd be real -- ms. kavinoky: i'd love to provide those for you. thank you. chair rouzer: mr. webster. rep. webster: thank you, chairman. mr. tymon, you mentioned in your written testimony that you want to ease the assessment or access to this assignment of nepa and or for states that want to do that. but how would you -- could you just elaborate on why or how or what takes place that makes you well positioned as a state, state of georgia, to take that assignment? mr. tymon: well, the nepa assignment pilot for a program that's provided for on the federal level allows states to

be able to essentially make those decisions in -- to manage that process in lieu of the federal government. and there are a handful of states that have taken that opportunity, including texas, utah, california, that have really seen an improvement in the number of months it takes to get through the nepa process because now they control that as opposed to relying more on the federal government. so we've seen that it is a very effective use of the tools that are provided at the federal level. unfortunately, not every state is going to be able to take advantage of that because one of the aspects of that program will require states to waive sovereign immunity, and there are a lot of states that are not interested in waiving sovereign immunity in order to take on those responsibilities under nepa assignments. that's been a big barrier for why other states are not taking on nepa assignments, because state legislators and some

governors are reticent to waive sovereign immunity. rep. webster: are you in georgia ready to do that? mr. tymon: well, unfortunately our our astros vice president and commissioner of the georgia dot was unable to be here today because of the snowstorm that they're dealing with. they have, i think, even three inches of snow in savannah. but georgia is one of those states that has not taken on nepa assignment, but they have incorporated other streamlining tools into what they do. they set up an office where they are able to bring in personnel from federal resource offices to be able to sit together, to be able to work on specific projects that get -- that have to go through the permitting and regulatory process. but they have found that putting those federal agencies together that are working on georgia specific projects in the room together has really improved the efficiency of being able to get

some of those projects moved through the pipeline in a more efficient manner. rep. webster: so that's -- you -- it's like an interagency thing of some sort? mr. tymon: it is. georgia is one of the states that actually pays for personnel in other federal resource agencies to work specifically on projects. so it is a little strange in that the state is actually using their dollars to pay for salaries for federal employees, but they feel it's a worthwhile investment because it helps them expedite those projects that are specific to georgia in an ideal world. -- in an ideal world, they wouldn't have to do that, the process would work faster and the people would be there to actually work on those projects. but in georgia's case they actually pay for the salaries and expenses associated with some of those federal resource agency staff to be able to expedite projects. rep. webster: so do you think

that that model should be replicated in other places? mr. tymon: i think that given the current structure, it has worked well in georgia and several other states, and i think other states are continuing to look at that as an option. so it is a model to help improve the process, especially for states that are unwilling to waive sovereign immunity or unable to waive sovereign immunity and take on nepa assignment. rep. webster: ok, i yield back. chair rouzer: mr. johnson. rep. johnson: thank you, chairman rouzer and ranking member holmes norton, for hosting this necessary hearing today, and thank you to the witnesses for your time and your testimony. the title of this hearing, "transportation to move people," is fitting because every day we rely on transportation to live our lives. in fact, all of us took some form of transportation just to be here today. whether we walked on the roads,

drove a car, or rode a train. we need to build a future where safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation is not a luxury, but a reality for every american regardless of zip code. when we invest in our infrastructure, we create a ripple effect that touches every aspect of our society and economy. the investments from president biden's bipartisan infrastructure law have already contributed to the creation of 1.6 million jobs in construction and manufacturing. our job now is to continue building on that progress, so millions are not left behind. i look forward to hearing your answer to this question, mr. tymon. on monday, president trump issued an executive order titled "unleashing american energy."

section 7 of that order states, "all agencies shall immediately pause the disbursement of funds appropriated through the inflation reduction act or the infrastructure investment and jobs act," the bipartisan infrastructure law, which will impact transportation funding under those two acts. can you explain the impact the pause in federal funding will have, and how is aashto working with the new administration to clarify this order? mr. tymon: well, thank you for that question. i will say that when we saw that executive order on monday and then how it was implemented briefly yesterday, there was a lot of concern within the state dot community because for a short period of time, a federal funding reimbursements for the formula programs was halted, and we worked closely with the new

administration and the folks at usd and usdot and at omb to make sure there was clarification that the intent of that executive order was not to stop the flow of all federal dollars that were provided for transportation programs through those two bills, and our understanding is that both usdot and omb do not intend for that executive order to impact all of the transportation programs in those two acts, and that they are working together to clarify exactly which programs it should apply to. so there was some panic yesterday initially. we do feel a little bit better about it as of yesterday afternoon and this morning, but there's still some concern. rep. johnson: yeah, it's kind of like, you know, first you're numb. and then you start realizing, ok, well, maybe there's some

wiggle room, but then when you go back and read the executive order, there is none. so there's a need for clarification amidst the chaos that has ensued from this reckless action in issuing this executive order. mr. dellinger, with the recent record-breaking increase in cargo theft across the country, this issue has become a pressing challenge for the trucking industry. american trucking association member companies have been heavily impacted, facing increased costs, disrupted supply chains, and heightened security risks. could you please elaborate on the impact this issue is having on the industry, and how can stakeholders and the federal government collaborate to enhance prevention efforts and strengthen enforcement against cargo theft? mr. dellinger: cargo threat

became rampant, and i think that basically the thieves and the rings have have learned a lot of different ways to steal, you know, whether it's stealing loads, whether it's actually going in there and posing as a broker and sending a truck in, knowing that they're not going to take the freight to where it's destined, they're going to take it to a warehouse somewhere, but probably the biggest solution would be that the federal government work that there would be some type of clearinghouse where you could call one location. i mean, we're now involved in situations where you got to go in the jurisdiction that it's in to report the crime. rep. johnson: these are illegal immigrants that are doing that, are they? mr. dellinger: i'm not going to put that on illegal immigrants. i've understood it's maybe even russian gangs -- rep. johnson: did you see an

executive order issued yesterday that related to this problem that the american trucking association and the industry is experiencing with these cargo thefts? mr. dellinger: i did not. rep. johnson: thank you. chair rouzer: the gentleman's time's expired. mr. bost, you're recognized for five minutes. rep. bost: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. tymon, as you know, i am leading a bipartisan effort in the house to authorize federal funding to expand truck parking capacities. many states have indicated they don't have enough truck parking capacity, which we know affects highway safety, supply chain efficiency, driver recruitment, and retention. as a representative of the state department of transportation, if congress created a grant program exclusively to be used in the truck parking projects, would your members pursue these federal funds for the protection of the states? mr. tymon: if there was a grant program for truck parking, states would be interested in that.

i would say that it's not just availability of funding on the state dot side. a lot of the right of way that the state dots have control of, there is a restriction as to what they can do within that right of way, including establishing new rest areas, and commercializing them to be able to support truck parking. rep. bost: so that is we need to also work on the regulations that allow you to be freed up to use the properties around there to expand that. that is good to know. if you would reach out to our staff, i'd like to see what we can do there. mr. dellinger, thank you first off for your support of the trucking legislation truck parking legislation. i think it's vitally important, and you mentioned it in your testimony that it is, and i was in the business for several years. but i'm going to switch gears here and i want to ask you about something. you know, as a former trucker myself, one of the biggest concerns with the highway trust

fund has been its long-term health and potential changes that have been put on the truckers. in your testimony, you brought up something that it was -- on the consult -- it actually bothers me, and here's why, and that was on tolls specifically on trucks. so right now, and for years we have had -- if you travel in the intra or interstate trucking industry, you have apportion plates, and those apportion plates, you basically -- if you own the business, you calculate out what how many miles last year you drove in each state, and then you pay apportionally based on each state. well, back whenever i was doing dispatching and driving myself, we couldn't figure out which one costs the most, but computers today say, ok, i can drive down one interstate in missouri and

not have to go into illinois because illinois is too expensive. do you think these tolls added on top of that will then also add to the fact that many of the trucking people that are in the trucking industries, they're going to make wise decisions. they're going to say, hey, you know what, we're no longer driving down and through that state. we're going to go around that state because we can to save money. mr. dellinger: i think that does happen. you know, i guess as far as our position on tolls, we just want tolls to be equitable. you know, we want the passenger cars to pay just like the trucks. we're not opposed to paying, but basically, you know, we are against tolling current roads, maybe new roads or bridges, but current roads, and we need alternatives where there are tolls. our company -- you know, our company, 500 trucks, we spend

close to approximately $180,000 a month in tolls. rep. bost: ok, well, first off, you said your trucking company has 500 trucks. most i ever had was 45. god bless you. but when you say the tolls, because you put tolls on existing roads, we've already paid for those, right? this is -- and the maintenance and upkeep still should be -- the idea and intent of the motor fuel tax was that we would have enough. but we've been dealing since i've been here with the issue of what taxation, what generation of revenue, especially as we start going to more ev's and everything like that, how are we going to get those revenues in, and do you have any suggestions for that? mr. dellinger: well, i guess if i had the answer, i wouldn't be running a trucking company -- rep. bost: that's true, too. mr. dellinger: but i mean, you know, we want to help to be a part of the solution and not the problem. we want to pay our fair share.

and you know, we think as well ev's need to be paying for the highway trust fund as well. and i guess -- i know it's kind of a difficult thing to raise taxes, but you know, when you look at the tax base, the fuel tax base, basically it hasn't been raised in, what, 30 years? i think back when i started driving in the 1960s and 1970s, the cars got about 8 or 10 miles a gallon. now they get, you know, between 30 and 40. rep. bost: and trucks got 2. mr. dellinger: yeah, i can remember when i first got into the business, 3 miles a gallon. now we're getting 8.2, so, so less dollars there as well. i think there's time that a solution is found. rep. bost: my time's expired and thank you for being here today. chair rouzer: mr. pappas.

rep. pappas: well, thank you to the chair and ranking member for holding this session as we begin to prepare for reauthorization of surface transportation and think about how iija has been working and some of the priorities that we have that we're seeing from our district level. i really appreciate the testimony of this panel, mr. dellinger, if i could start with you and just sort of building off that conversation, you kind of beat me to the punch in bringing up the fet issue, which is something that i think we've got to take a look at if we want to achieve fairness and sustainability with respect to how we fund surface transportation. you mentioned the fet issue. this was a tax initially introduced during the world war i era to support wartime mobilization. more than 100 years ago, the federal levy is 12%, which is the highest excise tax on any product in the country. tax is only collected when trucks are newly purchased, so there's a disincentive for the procurement of newer, more efficient models. and as you say in your testimony, a single truck manufactured in 1988 emits the same pollution as 60 trucks built today.

so that's pretty amazing to consider. along with mr. lamalfa, we've introduced the modern clean safe trucks act, which will repeal the world war i era federal excise tax. i wonder if you could just speak a little bit more and underscore for the committee the importance of looking at this 12% fet, which i think sets us back with respect to us procuring newer, safer trucks, easing supply chain challenges, and working to support businesses like yours. and by the way, congratulations on 60 years in business. mr. dellinger: thank you. from the fet, i mean, you could look at it in a lot of different ways. and i spoke earlier about, you know, for every 10 trucks we purchased, we could purchase 11 and create jobs. but other ways are when you're looking at that environmental footprint as well, if we were able to take trucks, incentivize people to buy newer trucks that have better safety systems on,

and eliminate some of the 2007, 2010, and earlier trucks, and actually have then a truck that is more energy-efficient and produces less emissions would be better for the economy, would be better for the environment. i guess from also from a safety standpoint as well, having the newest and the greatest out there. rep. pappas: appreciate those comments. mr. tymon, thank you for reflecting the state perspective here. and as you know, the total amount of highway trust fund dollars that can be annually committed is capped by congress every year during the appropriations process. state dots receive their portion of the obligation limitation. they must use it before the end of the fiscal year or the funding will permanently lapse every august. to avoid losing those funds, state dots are given access to any anticipated unused obligation limitation beyond

their initial share. so this is a kind of a "wait and hurry up" approach. this is always a pain point that i hear about from my state dot places unnecessary pressure on them and puts the needs of our constituents and the priorities at risk. so in your experience, can you talk a little bit more about the august reredistribution process, how it worked this past year, what recommendations you would have for us going forward? mr. tymon: well, thank you for that question, and you're absolutely right, the fhwa's august redistribution process is broken. it was originally intended to distribute, you know, just a handful of dollars that were left as they approached the end of the fiscal year, and provided the state dots, because fhwa knew that state dots would be able to put those dollars to use as quickly as possible within that fiscal year. this past year, august redistribution was $8.7 billion, or 14.5% of the total federal highway program. so states were asked to obligate

$8.7 billion, close to 15% of the total federal highway program, in just 30 days, in the last month of the fiscal year. now, states were able to do that because they have a long -- they had a pipeline of projects that were ready to go, but we have pretty much exhausted that pipeline from state to state, and if it's not addressed legislatively, they will run into problems and obligating that and some of that money will lapse in future years. congress did enact through the warda bill a partial fix to that that will take essentially roughly $2 billion off the table, so hopefully see a reduction in next year's august redistribution. but there's also a fix that's pending in the senate passed or pros bill that would really help address this as well and help even drive that number further down. and we hope that the house can support the senate position in that bill. rep. pappas: well, thanks for your comments. we want to continue to hear from aashto on that issue, and i yield back my time.

chair rouzer: mr. babin, you're recognized. rep. babin: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to thank the witnesses for being here as well. we really appreciate your expertise. my first question is for mr. dellinger. mr. dellinger, how does the patchwork of state-specific emissions regulations and sales mandates, such as those in california, impact trucking companies in terms of operational efficiency, compliance costs, and long-term planning? mr. dellinger: well, the problem is we run in all 48 states and whenever the group of states, take on different rules, and regulations, it becomes difficult for us to operate. i mean, we are operating on interstate highways for the most part, and we do need the help to have a federal rule, not that,

carb or a group decides what we're going to do as a nation. rep. babin: ok, thank you. and my next question is for you as well. i understand that cargo theft remains a significant challenge for trucking industry, impacting ata member companies through increased costs, supply chain disruption, safety risks. what do you see as the most pressing gaps in addressing this issue, and how can industry stakeholders and policymakers work together to enhance prevention efforts and strengthen enforcement against this cargo theft? mr. dellinger: and looking at cargo theft for us as an organization, we took it on as a top-tier priority actually last january at a meeting that took place, or actually early february. it's one of those things that in our industry a lot of people did not discuss, did not share, so that's one of the negatives that you just didn't want to talk about. but it has become so prevalent that basically it is an issue

that, you know, people are starting to recognize and have discussion. again, it's having -- it's having maybe that central clearinghouse that's looking at all these thefts. i mean, we're not talking about a theft of a piece off a trailer, we're talking about the theft of an entire load. you know, this was something that was again prevalent years ago in the tobacco industry for the finished product, or maybe the electronic issue, but it's got to the point -- i mean, they're even still in roll stock paper. i don't know if they don't know what's on the trailer and just load, you know, just pick it up and go with it, but household goods. i mean, when i say goods, i'm not speaking of the household furniture. i'm speaking of toilet paper, paper towels. rep. babin: maybe that's desperation. ok, well, thank you very much.

and then my next question is for ms. kavinoky. yes, ma'am. i represent the port of houston where vulcan materials does quite a bit of business. and so we're very familiar with your company. congress should be in the business of supporting our industry partners and not stepping on their toes. i'm sure you would agree with that. can you talk a little bit about how congress should be a good partner, a better partner, if you will, in supporting the aggregates industry? ms. kavinoky: we have been very fortunate to have a good partner in congress for the aggregates industry, whether that is access to aggregates, something called the rocs act that of course we have many of you who have supported, assistance at the local level in ensuring that there is support for quarries in the places or distribution yards as in houston and the place that we need them. and of course we have enjoyed the support of many members of this committee as vulcan

materials company with our issue with mexico and the illegal shutdown of our operations there. i think the aggregates industry overall knows though that the biggest priority here is that long-term, predictable, on-time transportation bill. that's the best way you can support us. rep. babin: yes, ma'am. and then finally, do you have any thoughts on how congress should be streamlining the permitting process? permits are one of the biggest problems across the broad spectrum of our bureaucracy. so would you like to chime in and just have a few words about how maybe we could streamline that process? ms. kavinoky: sure, and understand that this allows me to add on, chairman rouzer, to what i said to you. so our production and delivery is principally affected by state and local laws, but with regard to speeding transportation project delivery, we do, in addition to the full implementation of one federal

decision, and the analysis of federal permit agency timelines, i think there are a couple of specifics to look at. one is expanding categorical exclusions, and the second is granting greater flexibility around utility relocation that can also help in speeding project development and delivery. rep. babin: ok, thank you very much, and i'll yield back, mr. chairman. chair rouzer: ms. sykes. rep. sykes: thank you, mr. chair and thank you, ranking member norton, for holding this hearing today, kicking us off for the 119th congress for the subcommittee. i appreciate your leadership and looking forward to getting to work, especially as we have a lot of great opportunities this year. thanks to the passage of the bipartisan infrastructure law in 2021, communities from coast to coast will see about $1.2 trillion in local investments to improve the reliability, resilience, and efficiency of america's infrastructure over the next 10 years, and americans are already seeing these tangible differences, including improved roads, bridges, transit

systems, airports, waterways, and environmental infrastructure. in ohio, for example, which is home to the nation's fifth largest interstate system that spans over 8000 lane miles, we have 19,000 center lane miles, the bipartisan infrastructure law is awarded 27 grants amounting to about 1.3 billion with the funding to improve our state's roads and bridges with more than 6.6 committed to our state, which we are very much looking forward to expending and using. and i'd like to turn your attention to ohio's 13th district, which is where i represent. we've seen over $176 million of investments to create jobs and promote clean, green, safe, more accessible transportation for my constituents and business communities all over. but one of the things that is really important as we are discussing these investments is that they're not just play dollars that we just talk about, and as we are building,

literally building our communities and we're talking about how we're increasing our economic opportunities. i know people in my community get really frustrated when they see detours and barrels, but barrels means jobs. i like to say each barrel means a job for someone in this community, that they're investing those resources back into ohio 13 and our across our entire state. and where we are in ohio, you can get to about 80% of the population in a day's drive, and it just shows how important we are in the transportation network across this country. so knowing that to be the case and talking about that job specifically, i want to turn my attention to you, mr. colvin, because the prevailing wage is an important part of ensuring that the folks who are working on these projects are being paid livable wages and that they can actually sustain themselves and their families. can you talk a little bit about the members who you represent and why the prevailing wage, the davis bacon standards are so important to you in our communities? mr. colvin: yeah, i mean, i think in addition to what you're

saying, it guarantees a quality of work that, you know, that they know that there will be high standards for workforce training for those workers and that the delivered product is going to be better and delivered on time. i think beyond, you know, beyond davis bacon and looking at other labor workforce protections that are built into our surface transportation programs, you know, it's sort of a promise that the people who are delivering these assets that we're investing in, you know, should, should be paid fairly and should be able to afford a middle-class lifestyle and not have it be, you know, low wages and undercutting workers as the goal for how we build out our infrastructure. rep. sykes: and thank you for saying that.

and even before we get to the point where we have someone on a job site, we have to train them. we have to recruit them into these apprenticeship programs, and i hear from literally every industry i meet with, they have a hard time recruiting and retaining employees. what are some of the things that we could do to help ensure that we have a reliable, well-trained, skilled workforce prepared to take these jobs on as we continue to expend these dollars across the country? mr. colvin: yeah, i mean, i think, you know, there was flexibility for funding in the iga to go towards workforce recruitment. i think the challenge there is that like, if a state, dot is looking at, at capital expenditures or recruiting with that money, i think, you know, the capital is going to win probably most of the time. so i think we do have to be more creative about how we recruit where we recruit from and, and i

think -- you know that that is think -- you know that that is an outstanding challenge and it's beyond just construction state dots, earlier i mentioned transit agencies that had a huge sort of impending cliff, their workforce, so i think have a good argument to make that these are, you know, good jobs with good benefits. again, the challenge is, you know, ensuring that that is prioritized by state duties, prioritized by transit agencies, and in many cases that's just, you know, poor management or a lack of forward thinking. rep. sykes: thank you, mr. chair, i yield back. chair rouzer: mr. westerman. rep. westerman: thank you to the witnesses for being here today. you know, as we consider this important reauthorization, we

have to face the fact that we have a real problem in our country that we can't really build things anymore. you know, it took 35 years to build the 1st 42,000 miles of interstate highway, and in the last 34 we've built 7000 miles. it's not just that we can't build, we can't really maintain and repair like we're capable of doing. and it's almost to the point of ridiculousness. i have a forest service road in my district that had a couple of landslides. this is a gravel road in a very remote area, and so far there's been $6 million of grants awarded to fix the road, but the timeline is maybe six years. and to tell you the truth, nobody really knows who's on first and who's on second and how this is going to get done. and we can do much better than that as a country, and we know that time is money. these delays cost things. and mr. dellinger, you know, as a user of the highway system, i think you said in your testimony $109 billion a year in delays and burning something like $6.4 billion of fuel setting in delays. we see those kinds of costs.

but then mr. tymon, in your testimony, you showed a graph on the iija funding, which ranges from about $70 billion to $80 billion a year over a five-year period. and the $80 billion in 2026 is going to have $40 billion of purchasing power. and also in your testimony you show where it takes 6 or 7.6 years to get through the nepa process. we've got to do better than that for the american people and for the -- everybody paying taxes and everybody that's using our roadways. mr. tymon, what can we do to allow state transportation departments to do what they do and build roads and do it in a timely manner? mr. tymon: well, thank you for that question. you know, i think that this has been an issue that congress has been struggling with for decades now, really. i think that people on both sides of the aisle agree that we need to do more to streamline the project delivery process.

as was mentioned, there was one federal decision provision that was provided in iija. it has not been fully implemented as congress intended by the previous administration. we're hopeful that the incoming administration, the trump administration, will embrace the one federal decision and the intent behind the timelines associated with that provision and implement it in the way that congress intended. some other ideas is, as i mentioned, in georgia they've decided to co-locate and collaborate federal resource agencies together in one interagency office to help make sure that everybody's working on a project in the most efficient way, trying to find ways to consolidate duplicative permits and reviews overseen by coast guard and army corps of engineers and the national marine fisheries services and u.s. fish and wildlife services, making sure that those things

are happening concurrently and that if there are duplicative permits by multiple resource agencies, there's only one that you need to do, as opposed to the same one over and over again for different resource agencies. rep. westerman: there's a project that should have been done in my district many, many years ago. it's interstate 49 that goes from new orleans up to kansas city and provides interstate highway. but the section in arkansas is kind of the missing link to finishing that project. i did some research. here's the environmental impact statement from 1997. this is the executive summary that's 37 pages long. the actual eis is 566 pages long, and the arkansas department of transportation tells me they have to go back and redo the whole thing before they could do that project if they were to get funding for it. i'll just ask -- i want to ask

everybody on the panel, is reforming nepa critical to getting more for our infrastructure dollars? mr. tymon? mr. tymon: i'll start and say absolutely, and not just nepa, but also looking at the underlying resource protection laws that are in place. many of those have not been modernized or looked at in over 40 or 50 years. we're not saying that they need to be eliminated, just modernized. rep. westerman: streamlined, made to work quickly. anybody else want to weigh in on that quickly? you've got a whole 7 seconds. i'll yield that back to you, mr. chairman. chair rouzer: thank you, mr. nadler. you're recognized. rep. nadler: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank our witnesses for coming here. i am eager to begin reauthorizing our nation's surface transportation programs, particularly those under the federal highway administration's jurisdiction. however, i must first address the deeply troubling issue of president trump's hastily and poorly drafted executive order titled "unleashing american energy" that at least temporarily triggered an entirely avoidable crisis.

in the misguided attempt to pause funding for electric vehicle charging stations and similar programs, the order inexplicably froze a substantial portion of critical bipartisan infrastructure law funding, including fhwa resources. this egregious misstep forced the agency to shut down systems states depend on to process highway project agreements and reimbursements, effectively halting access to $383 billion in highway trust fund contract authority and endangering infrastructure projects nationwide. the administration sent out a memorandum late yesterday to attempt to correct this error. this committee should swiftly address the issue and ensure that the flow of essential infrastructure funding to the states continues without further delay. mr. tymon, in your testimony, you emphasized the importance of stable federal funding for state dot's. could you elaborate on the potential impacts of any funding pause on project timelines, costs, and state dot's ability to effectively leverage federal

funds? mr. tymon: well, thank you for that question. i do believe that yesterday the pause that occurred was more of a miscommunication than what the intent of the administration was, and we did work with folks at usdot and omb to make sure that that was quickly corrected. so our hope is that there is no hangover effect associated with that short-term pause. rep. nadler: do you think that that correction completely solves the problem that was caused? mr. tymon: i -- my hope is that it that it did, but before close of business yesterday, we did have assurances from usdot that the flow of federal dollars to states for the vast majority of the programs authorized under iaja would continue as normal. so i don't believe there is -- there was much of an impact, if any, to reimbursements for states. rep. nadler: thank you. mr. colvin, your testimony highlighted a notable increase in transit ridership through the

third quarter of 2024, with cities like milwaukee and madison experiencing impressive growth. you also emphasized the critical role public transportation plays in driving economic prosperity and the importance of stable federal funding for sustaining transit operations. what specific actions? -- what specific actions can congress take to ensure stable funding and mitigate the impact of political uncertainty on the implementation of vital transit projects? mr. colvin: welcome i think -- i think -- i think guaranteeing as much of the funding as we can has been a big change that, you know -- predictable funding is important, as important in public transit as it is in highway construction. i think there were other things that we did in this bill that i think have been really important in driving the return to transit post-covid. you know, i think public safety has been a big sort of driver in

terms of turning people away from transit, and i think the work that we've done to bring workers into the fold of safety planning and transit agencies, i think that's starting to pay off. i think people are seeing that it is safer, and it's 100% because we brought the voice of workers into that planning process. so i think, you know, it does go beyond just money, but, you know, certainly i think, you know, we have treated transit as sort of like a less-than in this country for many years, and i think in many ways that's just because they see -- some people see it as an urban issue and not sort of something that's enjoyed universally. i think something that everyone should be looking at is the success of rural transit post-covid recovery. the rural transit, i think, has had the biggest, quickest bounceback. beyond stable funding, it is,

-- investment in making sure that these are predictable services that we are growing service that people can count on it that it is all making a difference. rep. nadler: thank you, mr. colvin. your testimony underscored the impressive addition of 10,000 new transit workers over the past year, a remarkable recovery from the challenges faced during the height of the covid-19 pandemic. how can congress enhance and expand training programs in the upcoming reauthorization to equip transit workers with the skills necessary to operate and maintain advancing transit technologies safely? mr. colvin: well, we simply need more investment in training. i think traditionally transit has been well below in terms of total payroll invested into training, well below averages in any other industry. i think we're starting to see a change in that now, but what we did make significant investments in workforce training for new technologies, electrification,

there's not sort of an across-the-board national strategy when it comes to investing in our transit workforce, and i think that needs to change. rep. nadler: thank you, mr. colvin. i yield back. chair rouzer: mr. stauber. rep. stauber: thank you very much, mr. chair. i do want to speak to the comments of my good friend larsen made earlier. the american people rejected the policies of the last administration in november. it is absolutely the trump administration's prerogative to review the policies and programs of the last administration to ensure taxpayer dollars are being used effectively and responsibly. projects like roads, bridges, and airports will certainly align with these principles. but when we talk about $7.4 billion of american taxpayer money going to build charging stations with the buy american provisions removed, and 11 have been built in the last three years, that's what this administration will be reviewing.

we do need to stop wasting money on many ineffective projects and reinvest in hard infrastructure that makes the american public, traveling public, make it safer and better for them. $7.4 billion, 11 charging stations. mr. tymon, thanks for your service. you've been around a long time, and i read your bio, and thanks for putting in the time. i appreciate that. in 2007, the i-35 bridge collapsed in downtown minneapolis. can anybody tell me how long it took to replace that bridge? it's 10 lanes right now. 13 months, ok? so my colleague from arkansas bruce westerman talked about the nepa process. that bridge went down. we needed safe transportation across the river.

in 13 months, the federal government and the state of minnesota got it done. the nepa process -- mr. tymon, the nepa process you had mentioned earlier, is a slow, and we know that that historically if that i-35 bridge went through the process, it would be 8 to 10 years before it was built. when you delay projects, mr. tymon, would you say that cost the taxpayers money? mr. tymon: every year there is a delay, absolutely there is an increase in the cost of the project. rep. stauber: so you take my home state of minnesota. when freeze up happens, it's hard to build in december. you can't. so it stops december and it

doesn't come -- you can't start building till the may the road restrictions are off. so we've lost 5+ months already. every delay of nepa, the redundancy, the duplication of federal resources and state resources -- i think the states do a very good job of making sure that the laws are followed and that the environment is taken care of. when you have two processes following each other, one can get snagged up and stop projects for many years. would you agree with that? mr. tymon: i would, and i would say that i was a staffer for this committee in 2007 when the i-35w bridge collapsed. mr. oberstar was, i believe, the chair of the committee at that point, or the ranking member. and you're absolutely right, it was rebuilt in an expedited fashion, it would be great to see projects like that rebuilt or built at the same timeline when there isn't the urgency of an emergency that we see time and time again, whether it's i-85 in atlanta, i-95 in

connecticut earlier this year, i-95 in philadelphia a couple of years ago. we were able to rebuild those facilities extremely quickly because there was an urgency around an emergency. it would be great to see that urgency around regular projects as well. rep. stauber: our nepa process, in my opinion, needs to be changed to reflect the speed that we need to develop without changing the laws or the environmental protections or the labor standards. and i think that permitting, when we talk about permitting reform, these are projects that are going to save the american taxpayer. our small communities oftentimes can't afford the delay, to be able to wait 2 or 3 years, because it's just additional money. and then when you ask our cities and towns to pay for it because of the unnecessary delays, what do they do? they have to go to their local taxpayers. it's simply unacceptable. and mr. tymon, it's a breath of fresh air to hear you talk about the need for reform and the need to do these projects in a timely

fashion, because it's going to save the american taxpayer money. mr. chair, i yield back. chair rouzer: ms. mcdonald rivet, you're recognized. rep. mcdonald rivet: my question is for ms. kavinoky. if i'm pronouncing that correctly. for context, i want to tell you that i represent a district in michigan. we're right here in the middle, and i have significant rural communities. we have rural roads, county roads, many of them dirt roads. i appreciate the reference to that. but we know with the severe weather events that are increasing around our road maintenance costs across michigan, considering the iij's limitations in addressing inflation and rising construction costs, which i hear about all the time, what reforms to federal funding programs would you suggest are needed to help rural communities like the ones in my district compete for these federal funds and afford

the necessary upgrades? so as we have tried to fix our roads in michigan, what we have seen across my district is the roads are just continuing to disintegrate, and wanting to be able to have our communities have a fair shot at some of these federal fundings. do you have suggestions? ms. kavinoky: thank you. that is a great question, and i'd like to be able to follow up in more detail with you afterwards. i think some of this depends on how your state dot works with those rural communities and how funds are distributed, how they're prioritized. the planning process, at least as i understand it, on its face, should actually be taking care of that and getting those dollars to those needs. now, building on some themes that we've heard here today, part of dealing with inflation is getting projects done in a timely manner. you know, a project today is going to be -- is going to cost a whole lot more in the years to come. and so being able to speed that project delivery along is going to be significant, i think, to

those areas. rep. mcdonald rivet: completely, completely agree, but as we think about -- and what we have seen historically is as construction costs go up and dollars don't go as far, we end up seeing -- and mr. tymon, perhaps you can respond to this as well -- that the communities like the ones in my district are left behind as larger municipalities get dollars to and more populated areas of the state get those dollars, right? so we never seem to get to the front of the line, and i'm wondering what safeguards can be put in place. mr. tymon: so i do think that both the metropolitan planning and the statewide planning process are meant to address the needs of communities across the entire state, including rural areas. but you're absolutely right that there are certain instances where, say, a project has been planned to move forward, the

cost -- and even if there was funding identified for it either at the local level or at the state level and then it takes, you know, two or three years longer to do that project, well, the cost is increased from what the original estimate is, and oftentimes that means that the local community is left holding the bag and trying to have to make up the difference. so i know that state dots across the country are struggling with that. i know that even discretionary grant recipients under the iija who put in an application for, say, one of those programs two or three years ago, assuming that the cost is a certain amount, well, when they finally get that grant and sign an agreement 2 or 3 years later, the cost may have increased 20% or 30%. and maybe they've been successful in getting the federal grant, but now they have to make up that difference of the increase of 20 or 30%, and that's hard to do for localities who don't have necessarily a revenue source that's available to dedicate to that cost increase. rep. mcdonald rivet: i think you're exactly right.

i live in a community, represent a community that was responsible for the repair of two bridges that just disintegrated at a rate that wasn't keeping time with the funding that was coming, and ended up with repair costs that were more than four times their entire annual budgets, right? this is something that we hear all across my district. thank you very much. i yield the rest of my time. chair rouzer: mr. johnson is now recognized. rep. johnson: thank you very much. clearly when we're talking about the surface transportation bill, it's a good reminder about the interconnectedness of these assets. we're not talking about 50 different state systems. we're really talking about one national system. that's what can be a little frustrating about the donor-donee conversations sometimes we have, the idea that some states are subsidizing others. i mean, the reality is that when you look at the south dakota truck traffic, 60% of it neither originates nor terminates in south dakota.

this is really about one country making sure that we can access national and global markets. but it's not just about the money. it's also about sometimes regulatory roadblocks that we have in place that make it harder for people to be able to get goods delivered. and so mr. dellinger, as i shift to you and i'm thinking about some of those really safe drivers we have who might be younger than 21, congress has in a couple of instances in recent years had pilot projects where we want to try to make it easier for those young drivers to move from one state to the other. we know that 49 states and the district of columbia allow cdls for people who are younger than 21, and yet we don't allow nationally outside of pilot programs for younger drivers to be able to cross state lines. mr. dellinger, teach us a little bit. is there any evidence that suggests an otherwise safe 20-year-old driver shouldn't be able to cross state lines and have that cdl be effective? mr. dellinger: well, as you mentioned, 49 states do recognize interstate driving for under 21.

you know, i mentioned earlier that the pilot program was a bit flawed to begin with, and got a late start, and a lot of carriers did not jump on board because of the confusion that existed early on. that program sunsets in november this year. and so basically, you know, we do need something to be more on a permanent basis. and i think the drive safe act that maybe was introduced in the 118th may need to be reintroduced and looked at as well. but i think, you know, looking at the current program, there were not a lot of participants. i think it allowed for 3000. i think it was maybe three dozen in the program. so it definitely needs to be relooked at more on a permanent, not just a pilot program. rep. johnson: well, and you'll correct me if i'm wrong, but my understanding is that the data

we have with these drivers at the state level -- again, they're able to drive in 49 states and the district -- is that these can be really safe drivers. they don't create some sort of wildly disproportionate impact on surface transportation safety. is that your understanding as well? mr. dellinger: yes, and you know, when we look at our industry, we're typically bringing in people in their second and third careers. and if we were able to bring someone in and be their first career and train them in a safe manner where before they got habits, that -- not conducive to our industry. rep. johnson: mr. chairman, i would just note that this should be an area where we all come to an agreement that if you're a safe driver and you're able to, -- i mean, it's amazing, you know, somebody can drive from rapid city, south dakota to sioux falls, south dakota for, i don't know what that would be, maybe 300 miles, but they can't go from north sioux city, south dakota to sioux city, iowa, just

a few miles. it doesn't really make any sense. it creates all of these unnecessary barriers, federal government-created barriers. let's try to work together so that we can drive down the costs of operation, we can create outstanding careers for safe young drivers. so absolutely it can be their first career. i would also note there's been some good conversations about the need to have less federal bureaucracy around the whole nepa process. i would call the committee's attention again to my interactive, basically an enepa, that we would have a cloud-based system that would make it much easier for these agencies to hand off their various partners of the review. our antiquated analog nea process slows down citing and permitting, as this committee knows, making american citing and permitting more efficient is one of my passion projects. so i just want to thank a number of you for raising this issue. listen, let's pass dusty's bill and then everything will be fixed. thanks much. i yield back.

chair rouzer: thank you. ms. friedman from california is now recognized. rep. frei reppo friedman as a former chair of the committee under the california legislature i am looking forward to learning from each and every one of you. i do represent los angeles, which, as you all know has been devastated over the past couple weeks by wildfires. it is terminating all my thoughts now including how i think about transportation and the work of this committee. the fires have taken at least 27 lives. they destroyed over 15,000 structures. many of them were homes for our families. my thoughts and i am sure many of our thoughts are with the people of los angeles right now. over 16,000 people have a --

applied for assistance and close to 2000 people have been under mandatory evacuation orders. as we move into recovery, the recovery has to be thoughtful. when we think about transportation, many of us think about it in terms of just transportation, roads, transit, bridges. i have thought for many years, and a lot of my work in the legislature in california centered around the fact transportation is also very linked, particularly in urban areas to building housing and being able to build the housing we need. if we do not fix transportation you can't get people around the communities. neighborhoods don't want to allow new residents in because they are worried about the impact of parking and congestion. congestion is always top of my dad had. now as we have two rebuild we need to think about transportation as part of recovery to allow us to build not just the housing we need for people that are displaced, but

the housing we needed to build even prior to these disasters because of overcrowding, homelessness, and the housing shortage we have felt very deeply. first, i want to ask a question to mr. tim and. i appreciate all of the witnesses for being here today despite the snow. the bipartisan infrastructure log created several new formula programs included in the promoting resilient operations for transformative, efficient, and cost-saving transportation which happens to work out to be the project program. to make surface transportation more resilient to national -- natural hazards including extreme weather events what was in los angeles. as my community looks to rebuild it, i wonder if you can talk about how state dot's utilize critical funding provided in the bipartisan infrastructure law to improve resiliency to natural disasters and the continued impact of global warming.

and what should los angeles on a particular expect over the next coming months and years due to that program? mr. tymon: thank you for that question. our thoughts and prayers are is -- are within the votes of california, particularly, the los angeles area with the wildfires. i would say that that program in particular is really designed for the state dots to be able to look at their infrastructure network and figure out where they need to build in a more resilient matter so it is hardened against the types of catastrophes you are talking about, whether it is wildfires like you are seeing in california or if it is the hurricanes we saw earlier this fall that impacted florida, georgia, and north carolina and tennessee and kentucky. and south carolina. the impact you have seen through those disasters demonstrates we

need to be able to look at our nation's infrastructure system and determine what are the most vulnerable assets within our transportation infrastructure inventory? and figure out ways to build up so it is better protected against those types of disasters we have seen in the last few weeks. rep. freidman: more than 80% of communities across the country rely on trucks to serve freight transportation needs including los angeles. we have several truck routes through my district and we are familiar with the needs of trucks to operate efficiently and safety. can you highlight areas where federal investment is needed to better serve investment for communities themselves to help them get more of what they need in terms of goods moving in and

out of their communities and to do so more safely? whoever would like to speak. i think mr. dellinger maybe it is better suited. mr. dellinger: can you repeat that? i'm sorry. i thought you were directing it to mr. colvin. rep. friedman: i did say that. it just for communities relying on trucking and communities that are impacted by freight routes that go through communities, what would you like to see from the federal government in terms of investments to make people's lives better entities communities? mr. dellinger: the short answer is, roads, bridges, the working space, the investment in physical working space is what we really need. rep. friedman: in terms of safety for drivers is there anything you think the federal government could be doing better to support people driving these trucks? mr. dellinger: yes.

it's a just put out a 280 something page in prm -- nprm on automated vehicles turning over the reins to both commercial and non-commercial entities to describe what they think is safe and whether or not they abide by that. instead of spending time noodling around with technology i think they should be focused on doing their core safety row over there. in san francisco, these vehicles hitting or almost hitting commercial and noncommercial vehicles on a fairly regular basis. if we see a massive expansion of that across the country, it will affect all road users including

those working in transportation. chair rouzer: the gentlelady's time has expired. now i recognize the gentleman from utah. in your testimony you paint a picture of a workforce shortage. much of my passion is working with congress surrounding open pathways for industries like yours beyond the traditional educational system. do you think addressing the gap in the trucking workforce will help address short comings in this case? mr. dellinger: everybody does not have to go to a four year college. basically we need support for vocational schools, driver training, tech training, mechanics, drivers, techs, to look at federal dollars like the

529, can it be used for college? is it able to be used for vocational schools as well? rep. owens: one of my top priorities is to bridge the gap between young people and industries five years earlier before they go into thousands of dollars in debt. what would be the healthiest way for congress to expand career pathways into the trucking industry? is there a way to unite these concepts with surface transportation programs? mr. dellinger: again, looking at the driver safe act would be of interest to us to get young people in. and also, looking at federal dollars for training. rep. owens: i just know that on our education workforce we have tremendous talents and we have to make sure they are tied to great careers. just know we will be working with you on that. i yield back. chair rouzer: i recognize the

gentlelady from new york ms. guillen. rep. vela: --i am looking forward to working with you to advance surface reauthorization this congress. thank you to all witnesses joining us today. a report this month from a national transportation research nonprofit found four votes in the new york metropolitan area including long island where i represent cost drivers nearly $3500 each year. mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to submit a copy of the trip report and an article from our local paper into the record. mr. colvin even with critical investments from the bipartisan infrastructure law, too many of our roads come up to 30% in the new york metropolitan area remain in poor condition, arming

-- harming by constituents and our economy. what are some ways you believe congress can injure the upcoming surface transportation bill goes for words to improving roads and reducing cost for drivers? mr. colvin: a lot of this is just a question of resources. there was a comment made at the outset of the hearing that it is sort of nod and endless checkbook. but, i think this is not money we are putting into reams of paper. these are actual investments that have demonstrable returns and i think we ought to treat it like that. it requires we spend more money. we should spend more money. it is an investment in this country. we ought to be focused on that. rep. gillen: thank you. mr. dellinger what is the estimated annual impact of our unsafe roads and highways? can you break down those costs? mr. dellinger: --.

rep. gillen: what is the estimated annual impact on the trucking industry of our unsafe roads and highways? mr. dellinger: basically, congestion is probably the biggest cost that we see. it not only affects our industry. it affects the motoring public as well. basically, in my written statement, we estimate close to $109 billion per year. and i didn't mention earlier that it is an equivalence of the 445,000 drivers sitting idle for one year. so, that's a big cost. rep. gillen: how can we alleviate that cost? mr. dellinger: bottlenecks. the american transportation research institute each year posted the top 100 bottlenecks. i think it is distributed to this committee. and, putting efforts, as we

choose projects come on those bottlenecks. rep. gillen: mr. colvin the trip report also found costs for inflation eroded up to $1.2 billion worth of core construction funding over the past five years. would you agree congress needs to increase the overall funding for our highway funding -- programs to account for the increased cost of materials and labor? mr. colvin: absolutely. people talk about the rep. friedman: -- iija, the amount of money that actually went to the surface reauthorization transportation program. it was significant. but, we needed to spend the amount of money it takes to keep our systems in a state of repair and keep up with demand on it. absolutely.

rep. gillen: thank you. i yield back. chair rouzer: i recognize myself for five minutes. mr. tymon the latest american society of civil engineers report card showed the nation's overall grade was in -- was a c- . do you believe this accurately reflects the state of our infrastructure today? mr. tymon: i think that assessment is a good approximation of the totality of the infrastructure network. we have been under investing in our nation's transportation infrastructure for a number of years. the federal government with rep. friedman: -- with iija stepped up investment. when you look at the last five or six federal surface transportation bills, they have not seen a level of investment

that is consistent with what the needs are out there in our nation. so, going all the way back to maybe icet you saw a smaller increase. the facet act. and then the last bill did provide a significant increase in investment in our nation's infrastructure. i would say what we have said is the bread and butter of the surface transportation programs, the formula dollars that go back to states. they only saw a 20% increase in iija eaten almost entirely by the cost of inflation. when iija was passed and out of states thought they could ramp up the number of projects they would be able to do but inflation pretty much ate up the entire increase. they were lucky to not have to

pull back on other projects they had planned. they were lucky to be able to continue with the baseline 20% increase because of inflation. in my own state of missouri i-44 is desperately overused and needs expansion. is there a way to get more bang out of our buck, get more out of the dollars we are spending? in your testimony you said the federal government tends to be more expensive compared to each nonfederal dollar. can you expand on what you mean? mr. tymon: missouri has done an excellent job over the last 10 years increasing revenue at the state level to provide state resources to address some challenges they had seen. at the end of the day, state and daughters are easier to utilize on these projects they had a federal daughters because of the bureaucratic red tape that goes

with them. states such as utah say they will only use the federal dollars on the simplest, easiest projects. essentially only to do repaving. because they don't want to get into the federalt. associated with more complex projects. states are making the value proposition themselves saying state dollars. if we make the federal process more similar to what we see in most states and make it a lot simpler and easier, you will get more bang for your federal daughter that way i did the same way a lot of states get more bang for their state dollars than their federal dollars. chair rouzer: mr. dellinger you cite in your testimony the driver shortages is currently one of the greatest challenges the trump administration is facing. 16,000 driver shortage just in 2023. can you expand on the current

state of the driver shortage and the impact on getting products shipped, what the american people need? mr. dellinger: currently we have had a little leveling on that due to the freight recession we have experienced in our industry. so it has not been as severe. one of the words that is not in there is qualified drivers. i think that there are drivers out there. there were arguments about our numbers. but having qualified drivers, sometimes, you need drivers who are qualified to drive tankers, drives with fuel, drive hazardous materials. maybe they are not qualified in those areas. chair rouzer: last question. i increasingly hear about the shortage of availability of parking, of safe parking

structures. can you elaborate on that. mr. dellinger: i spoke to that earlier as well. we need safe parking for entry-level, for more females where they feel safe and comfortable. and also, for the safety. if you travel your state's highways at night or in the early morning and a look at the on ramp send off ramps you will see trucks parked there because there was not safe and adequate parking. in rest areas for facilities where they were making deliveries. thank you. now i recognize mr. veers from alabama. >> thank you for the opportunity. i will not spend a lot of time on the process. i want to leave some time for answers, particularly from the pet honest from my home state of alabama.

but i will start with mr. colvin. at the end of the day this boils down to the ability to have qualified workers that are highly skilled for the jobs we need. do you want to explain a little bit the importance of prioritizing workforce development programs to ensure we have a highly qualified workforce and also a little bit on, we know wages consistently fail to rise with inflation. and the struggles that is presenting as it relates to the workforce. mr. colvin: we hear a lot about so-called workforce shortages. the challenge there is it is not a workforce shortage. it is a shortage of employers willing to pay a livable wage to their workers and afford them the quality of life and work people are attracted to.

i think in the trucking industry it undermines that more when congress goes after service rules in states that are trying to do the right thing. but, you know, that is something -- thinking you can solve that problem with the 18-21-year-old demographic, if they will be attracted to the same quality job i think it is an oversight. we need to give serious thought to that issue. with regard to workforce training, the benefit we all enjoyed of massive increases in funding from the rep. friedman: --iija does create a problem where your steadily increasing spending by a huge amount and you need to create a workforce.

you need to have a predictable pipeline of workers as well. reppo figures -- rep. figuresl vulcan is in the middle of a unique but sincere dispute with the mexican government having a direct impact on transportation and infrastructure projects here in the u.s.. can you educate some of us who don't know about the issue and update those of us that are aware of the issue on what is going on there? ms. kavinoky: thank you for the opportunity. this brings together multiple issues related to surface transportation. rock only is where brock is. there are a lot of areas of the country, constantly, all of the

west coast, across the gulf coast, where there is no indigenous rock quarry. you have to get the up there somehow. the most efficient and prompt -- cost avoided way to do that is by rail. otherwise you have to move at longer distances. in 1986 vulcan embarked on a project in mexico in a fishing village with no telephones, roads, no infrastructure, to create the lunchtime quarry that would supply now 14 ports that stretch from texas to south carolina. we really appreciate that this committee and others saw fit to create the exemption by america for aggregates and materials for that. it was the critical reason for that exemption. you just cannot get rock where it does not exist. unfortunately, we have been embroiled in an issue directly with the mexican government. of the former president of

mexico directed at the shutdown of our operations in may of 2022. we still have 250 employees. mexican nationals that we are paying. but, we aren't operating. then, as he was on his way out the door, resident lopez obrador expropriated our property. the new administration has doubled down on that expropriation. as a claimed they are turning it into what they call a "naturally protected area." to be clear, the only thing prohibited in the area is quarrying and export through the only deep water port in the yucatan peninsula that we build, develops, and operated. we have issues related to national security. we have issues related to the supply of materials. in the gulf coast. certainly we have a significant -- we have significant issues related to the treatment of u.s. companies investing abroad. chair rouzer: the chair

recognizes the gentleman from north carolina mr. mcdowell. rep. mcbath: -- rep. mcdowell: mr. dellinger in your testimony you discuss how the poor condition of freight intermodal connectors across the country creates bottlenecks and we established this is a massive driver of cost. intermodal connectors are crucial last mile connectors between highways and ports. and railroads and airports. yet, the federal highway administration rated over 50% of intermodal connectors as being mediocre or in mediocre or poor condition. you report these roadways are often pushed to the back burner when funding decisions are made.

how do you make the case to local jurisdictions for prioritizing investment in freight intermodal connectors? mr. dellinger: that's a difficult situation to actually work with. local municipalities or cities do that. it's very important that the federal government gets involved in these connectors, these rail heads, these port heads. these are also places you will find a tremendous amount of congestion as well. rep. mcdowell: why do you think it is important to specifically set aside funding for these types of projects? mr. dellinger: the flow of traffic, for the flow of commerce as well. rep. mcdowell: one of the surprising statistics in your testimony was that highway congestion added over $100 million to the cost of freight

transportation in 2022 alone due to idling trucks and slower traffic speeds and it follows that highway capacity improvements could reduce traffic jams and lower the operational cost to the trucking industry. can you provide an example of a state or federal policy that discourages capacity improvements or downgraded the highway in the name of environmental justice? mr. dellinger: i cannot do that. rep. mcdowell: so let's game out of the cost and long-term effects of the california bureau of resources board admissions standards on the trucking industry. can you speak to that? mr. dellinger: basically, a company of our size does not have the resources to invest in, what i will say is new technology. we are game on doing and working. but we want proven technology. right now evs aren't proven.

basically, we are in the long haul business. we run from north carolina to california. the infrastructure is not there. we can fuel a truck in 15 or 20 minutes and run 1200 or 1500 miles. whereas now, if you even had the network to do it, had the charge overnight to run 200 or 300 miles, what kind of disruption with that bring to the economy and commerce as well? rep. mcdowell: sure. mr. chairman, i yield back. chair rouzer: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. rep. clark: mr. dellinger what roles do sustainable fuels like renewable diesel and renewable natural gas play redum and how can congress support their adoption?

basically those are proven solutions in our industry with combustible engines. use renewable vendors. they are cleaner. the evs is a technology that was not there. we are nowhere near being close to operating that type of equipment in a long-haul environment. i think it is something that will work well in municipalities and cities that want to convert their buses, their trash trucks, their school buses. it would definitely be a workable solution. but right now, definitely not in the long-haul market. rep. carbajal: the recent floods in the southeast and fires in california demonstrate the critical need for trucks to respond quickly to disasters, weather to clear roadways for emergency equipment, or transport water to fight forest fires. congress authorized the states

to issue overweight permits for trucks responding to disasters. i understand the trucking industry faces significant bureaucratic hurdles. can you tell me what we can do to improve the system? mr. dellinger: our industry is one of the first to respond to haul water, to whole food, to haul equipment necessary to clear out. i think supporting the move after the 118th congress had in place, may introduce it as well and at 119th, allows -- in the 119th allowing the governors to issue permits before eight national disaster is called, looking beyond what qualifies for a disaster. and as well, maybe, even the type of event. rep. carbajal: thank you. mr. tymon can you comment about the importance of maintaining

permanent requirements for overweight trucks? mr. tymon: thank you for the question, congressman. i do think there is a balance that needs to be struck when it comes to overweight vehicles especially in times of need or emergency making sure there are opportunities for trucks to be able to respond to specific situations from an emergency standpoint. it also needs to be balanced with the ability to preserve, maintain our nation's highway infrastructure. so when you are looking at the potential damage that overweight vehicles due to bridges and roadway, pavement, we need to make sure there is a balance there. but certainly when it comes to permitting overweight vehicles, we are working to identify ways to streamline that process for interstate travel, to make sure that the permits issued by multiple states can be done in a more coordinated fashion so it's more efficient for somebody

within an overweight load traveling say from california all the way to new york. we are broke -- looking for ways to streamline that process to obtain all the permits from the individual states along that route. rep. carbajal: ms. kavinoky can you explain why we need to maintain the build america buy american act exclusions for aggregate materials? a softball. ms. kavinoky: thank you. i appreciate that. i think it comes right back to, god put rocs where god put rocs. there are about 30 million tons of rock that not just vulcan materials but other countries bring into the u.s. from canada and caribbean nations every year to sir clement -- to supplement and provide for infrastructure. it is particularly important from texas to florida and south carolina. we also do this in california. we have a terminal in long beach where we bring rock in from

canada. it is a way to do it cost effectively and efficiently. it is a way to address environmental issues. it is really critical to the supply of rock in the united states and we appreciate that exemption very much. rep. carbajal: is the federal-aid highway program designed around multiyear proportion funding and what depends on states having multi-year funding? ms. kavinoky: there is a tremendous amount of title 23 that states are required to look on a year-over-year basis for. states have multiyear planning requirements. sometimes the simplest projects take multiple years. the very nature of what is, essentially, a capital program requires that backdoor capital budget with contract authority and that multiyear program. rep. carbajal: thank you. i yield back. rep. carbajal: mr. taylor.

several taylor -- rep. taylor: thank you for having this hearing. thank you chairman burlison and ranking member norton for holding the hearing today and thank you to the witnesses for your testimony. as a third-generation business owner in the concrete industry i know how important it is our highways, roads, and bridges across the u.s. are safer commuters, citizens, and businesses. the upcoming surface reauthorization transportation bill i want to make sure we are passing common sense legislation to fix our roads, ensure safety, and help the u.s. economy grow. mr. tymon in your testimony i was interested to read about georgia's initiatives that insured electrical vehicles paid their fair share in the highway trust fund. particularly you mentioned enacting an annual electric vehicle registration fee,

establishing a heavy vehicle impact fee, a kilowatt hour fee for public electric vehicle charging. with 90% of total federal highway programs coming from the highway trust fund i find it absurd that those who choose to drive electric vehicles are not paying for the upkeep of the roads we all drive on even as electra vehicles because more wear and tear on roads then gasoline and diesel vehicles. if congress enacted george's on the federal level what it alleviate the solvency issue? mr. tymon: i appreciate you pointing out what the commission has done. certainly, as the electric vehicles grown as a percentage of the fleet in the future we will need to find a way to have them pay into the system for --

from a user fee standpoint. right now the highway trust fund is primarily supported by the gas tax, a proxy for use in our nation's transportation system. and because electric vehicles do not, obviously, consume gas, they are not paying in. there are a lot of states across the country that have enacted some type of fee in order to approximate use of the system for electric vehicles and i think this is something congress should look out as they look at reauthorization for the next year, how electric vehicles could pay into that. rep. taylor: thank you for including in your testimony it could cost up to $20,000 for local governments to develop a discretionary agreement. that's a significant issue in my district. most cities and municipalities can spare $200,000 on a chance of receiving federal funds.

according to your testimony you took athens, georgia two years to receive funding after it was awarded to them. two years is unacceptable for rural communities that desperately need funding to repair or rebuild infrastructure. i pose this question to the whole panel. what specific actions need to be taken by congress to ensure awardees receive funds in under one year, especially rural communities that can't afford a full-time grant writer? mr. tymon: one way to do that is streamline the process at the federal level. as you mentioned, right now, there is just a lot of bureaucratic red tape that happens at u.s. dot to provide the funding and get a grant agreement especially with the locality. state dots are used to dealing with federal dollars. they have not established a relationship with the federal highway administration. those grants can absolutely be expedited if they treat them like they do formula dollars and just assume that states are able to administer that the way they

are able to administer over $40 billion of formula dollars in a year. there are ways to streamline this by addressing bureaucratic red tape that exists. rep. taylor: any other witnesses want to weigh in? since we talked about fees for electric vehicles, in your experience, how comparable are they to, say, and diesel truck for their use on the highway in a year? mr. tymon: most states have tried to set the fees for passenger vehicles equivalent to what a passenger vehicle would pay in gas tax over the course of the year so it is, essentially, a fair treatment of electric vehicles comparable to what vehicles are powered by internal combustion engines.

rep. stanton: i have dedicated my career to infrastructure investment. at my previous job as mayor of phoenix i oversaw the largest investor in infrastructure to date in arizona $32 billion transportation infrastructure plan expanding light rail, bus maintenance, repairs, bike ability, walk ability, generating millions and millions of dollars for arizona. infrastructure investment is one of the smartest ways to spend taxpayer dollars. investment in transportation is investment in our economy and investment in our workforce. imagine my concern when i read section seven of president trump's executive order unleashing american energy issue january 20. language taken at face value that could put the bipartisan infrastructure law dollars at risk. last night, i sent a letter to the acting secretary of the department of transportation asking for immediate

clarification. without clarification, we don't know the true impact of the order, what it means for ongoing funding of bipartisan infrastructure law dollars. i saw this morning the white house put out a memorandum to clarify that agency heads may disburse funds as they deem necessary after consulting with the office of management and budget. this provided some clarification, but not enough. too much ambiguity. too much uncertainty around disbursement of these dollars that this congress voted for in a bipartisan way. that uncertainty, that ambiguity is unacceptable to the people on this committee. and it is unacceptable to the american people. right now, home in arizona, construction crews are working to widen eitan south of phoenix with the promise of $95 million in federal funding. this project was a bipartisan

priority. business leaders, elected officials, rural, urban, tribal leaders coming together to push us over the finish line. if the executive order is not further clarify to make it clear , it puts billions of dollars in materials and labor at risk. these investments are important. it is important to upgrade arizona airports, water infrastructure, roads, bridges, railways, and more, things this very committee has worked on in a bipartisan way. and we should demand in a bipartisan way that more information and clarity comes out today. now i want to move on to a couple questions. we look to our infrastructure future advancing the next surface transportation bill. a lot of attention will be placed on sustainable building materials, a time i have spent time on in congress to ensure we have the resources available to build infrastructure in a more sustainable, resilient way. the bipartisan infrastructure

law specifically directs the working group in the federal highway administration to study and use aggregates and recommended practices and policies to ensure continued access to this support resource for growing communities. vulcan is one of our largest material providers in arizona and we will have 8 -- and it will have a key role in delivering this future. rep. carbajal can you describe some efforts underway by vulcan to deliver sustainable materials to markets? ms. kavinoky: sustainability for vulcan has long been a part of what we do. when you operate in people's backyards, we have to do it well. our commitments to people's safety and health, communities, environmental stewardship from a that is built into everything we do and reflected in our products. sustainable design is business as usual in our concrete business. we are using carbon technology, cement, retired materials, collaborating on a direct air

capture parted with another private sector company and studying reduced heat requirements for asphalt. we collaborated on the study of electric and hydrogen vehicle options for our ready mix fleet and we are in a number of partnerships with commercial and academic institutions to look at how our products can be used differently including the use of refined materials for carbon capture, something that is fairly novel. we continue to do this work. >> i have a to allow vehicles pd primarily by hydrogen fuel cells to exceed certain weight limits on highways. how would this allow states to incorporate sustainable infrastructure? mr. dellinger: basically much like the rule already in place for hydrogen vehicles. and for electric vehicles as well. at ata we do support capital.

rep. stanton: i appreciate that answer. i yield back. >> i was the signatory to diffeg and the chairman of the joint apprenticeship training committee and something i've seen in the parking industry we had over 100 power units was the reclassification of marijuana specifically asked states start to evolved head of federal statutes. my question is for mr. belanger --mr. dellinger as different standards change specifically related to safety sensitive positions what challenges have some of your operators faced and how have they been able to stay ahead as one is in compliance? mr. dellinger: there is a misconception out there that marijuana cannabis being legal

means people can operate vehicles under the influence. that is a problem. we do not have a test that tells us if you are under the influence or not. so we have to rely on the current urine test or hair test. i guess the struggle we have in our industry is we cannot compromise the system we have until there is a workable solution for a test to know whether you are actually under the influence at the time. i think in our company, if we had an accident at any degree and we had a posttest accident and tested positive, we would struggle defending anything about that accident. the retribution we would get for that from the public, from the

media, would be astonishing. our position is, right now, we have to accept the testing we have. rep. bresnahan: is there anything specifically congress can do or advocate for with the immediate detection of impairment with the half-life of marijuana remaining inside of systems. i agree there is not an immediate detection device to say, yes, this person is under the influence or not. is there anything congress can work on that would add some clarity to the processes? mr. dellinger: i don't have the answer without that solution. rep. bresnahan: mr. colvin i want to ask you about apprenticeship programs and intelligence transportation systems, in my opinion one of the most efficient and effective ways to increase travel commute

times with congestion in various different highway systems. in my district we have 22,000 workers in the construction industry, 34,000 in manufacturing and nearly 30,000 in transportation, warehousing, and utilities. we often speak of the 21st century workforce. we are already a quarter of the way into the century. technology evolves each day. how can a british of to close the tech skills cap in worker training? i have seen that its systems are a very finite industry. so attracting talent into those skill sets is really a hybrid technology. often, it is left under the guidance of the employer to enhance the baseline of skills. how do you feel, again, as members of congress, we can start to train the next generation of workers? mr. colvin:s what are the big

problems we identified is we are simply not collecting good statistical data on the impact of good technologies -- new technologies on the workforce. maybe five years ago the bureau of labor statistics put out a pretty conference of report on how they could improve the end of the real failures of their current ways of measuring the impact of technology, how that could be improved to actually quantify what the impact of these are and help us measure them and anticipate them. i think a lot of folks think labor stands under the way of these technologies. it could not be further from the truth. we want to be very involved in conversations about how they are implemented. if we can track that, if the industry cannot track that end we are just responding on an ad hoc basis, constantly behind the game, i think that impacts jobs and impacts our economy. i would strongly advise and looking at the foundational pieces, the data collection and evaluation, as really important here. rep. bresnahan: thank you.

i yield back. >> thank, mr. chairman. 2022, over 25,000 people died while using passenger vehicles. seven died writing passenger trains. generally passengers are 18 times more likely to die in a passenger vehicle accident compared to a train. how would moving passengers on freight from highway to rail improve safety conditions and efficiency for all transportation? mr. colvin: i think whether rail or transit, those are incredibly safe transportation. i think transit, in particular, from our perspective, it's probably the safest form of transportation in this country. it is expanding those services. that will have a positive impact on safety. it is simply a question of, us

making sure we are making those investments in increased passenger rail services. rep. moulton: we have heard a lot of people talk about highway congestion, widening highways and whatnot across the country. mr. dellinger about how many trucks does the average train to take off the highway? mr. dellinger: repeat that. rep. moulton: about how many trucks does one intermodal train take off the highway? mr. dellinger: i don't have the answer. rep. moulton: about 173. one train. that is a lot of efficiency. jb hart was one of the first to do partnerships with companies like ups. fedex is a little behind but catching up. what we think about our overall transportation system. we think about the congestion so many motorists face on the highways today. there is an option we don't

always consider. if we just got a bunch of long haul trucks onto trains, sometimes you can create partnerships with trucking companies. we would have a lot less traffic for the trucks that need to be on the highway, not to mention all the people trying to get safely to their destination. what can we do to work on this in a more cooperative, comprehensive fashion? mr. dellinger: you are correct. there are a lot of carriers, large ones, that do that and use intermodal. but i think the intermodal capacity is limited as well. then you have the expectation to the consumer. intermodal traffic is not as quick as truck traffic is. rep. moulton: yes. mr. dellinger: our consumers have expectation. rep. moulton: ups promises three day service. they have to get it there in three days. ups is the single biggest intermodal customer in the u.s.. they have figured out how to do it.

it seems like they have decent reliability. do you ever get a package through ups, mr. dillinger? mr. dellinger: i do. i am receiving one today. rep. moulton: there you go. i do not know if that particular one is on the train or not. over the course of the hearing in the last few hours we have heard a lot from people about widening highways. how many of my colleagues have brought up expanding intermodal service as an alternative to getting traffic down or reducing congestion on our nations interstates? mr. dellinger: i have not heard that today. rep. moulton: i have not heard it once. mr. chair is not paying attention but he has not heard it once. it shows you aren't thinking comprehensively about transportation in this country. i am delighted to hear on this panel that there are people like yourself that actually want to talk about this. because, every other country in the world thinks about transportation holistically. we don't just have an airline policy or highway policy.

we think about how to self transportation policy. virginia has tackled a lot of congestion on i-95 by investing in the csx right away entirely paid by the private sector until now. that is getting a lot of trucks off the highway, making the highway more efficient. for the trucks then need to be there, for the motorists. it increases safety a lot as well. speed limiters are one way to improve safety. i am pleased the ata supports a 70 mile-per-hour speed limit. how would limiting truck speeds increase road safety for all users? mr. dellinger: ata has had a policy -- actually, the speed limit is 65. 65 with enhanced -- if you have a,b, some enhanced safety features, up to 70 miles per hour. basically, i joined a company in

1980 six. our speed limit was actually 65 miles per hour. we have stuck by that. even when we had people that told us we could get more drivers if we raised the speed limit. we think it is a safety factor. definitely. rep. moulton: i'm out of my time. i yield back. thank you. rep. carbajal: mr. sharif. you are recognized. reppo sharif -- >> i am a new member. for those of us that come into this body on a large subcommittee like this it's been an extraordinary experience to parachute in and out on these hearings. i had the opportunity to listen to your -- what you shared with so many earlier. some great questions were taken. i do want to introduce myself. and thank you for your work. it is a particular honor for me to serve on this committee given the importance of transportation and infrastructure to indiana's

six jester tree the crossroads of america is our state's official model. it was on my cub scout and boy scout badge when i was a kid. it's more than a model. it is central to our hoosier identity. it is central to an economy that is increasingly distribution based. indiana's highway support hundreds of billions of dollars of commerce, trucks across our district, 28 thousand lane miles supported. might district, the sixth district encompasses portions of the fight for 65 bill white and interstates 65, i-69, i-70, i-74. significantly, across my district, we are, early on, in the throes of a crucial renewal project of i-70 from the marion county, that in an outline from the ohio state border. that's my district.

we will come up with that, at some desperately needed travel lanes. as you cross from ohio into my state, my district, i'm not proud of where we are today from the standpoint of our road condition. with the work we are seeing today in this bill, i know we can make headway. ms. kavinoky you might be best prepared to answer this question i have with regard to the design and engineering of the highway rebuild. as we go into an era where the electrification in the fullness of time, at least to some of the rolling stock, the heavy freight traffic is coming at us. can you speak very generally asked to the differential in the roadbed engineering for interstate highways to support

over the next several decades the electrified tractor-trailer traffic that will traverse our highway system? more generally, will we be looking at a significant do over right now as we are preparing to design and spend, to rebuild a significant slice of i 70 across the district that i now represent? ms. kavinoky: thank you for that question. if i attempted to answer that the engineers i work with would get me fired. there is no way to give you the best or right answer. i can tell you that moving to electrification, as we know, as an aggregate company requires a lot of different infrastructure. it requires the ability to recharge our vehicles. i would love to get you a better answer from some qualified engineers that can answer the question. rep. shreve: we know that evs

are heavier. i do not know if gross axle weight relative to the amount of freight that and electrified tractor-trailer would be able to carry how much heavier of a percentage. i cannot help but wonder if the design standards for a new, modern, rebuilt interstate segment is going to require a significant do over within the next 10 or 20 years. if it does, we, as we work on this committee, obviously, we need to be very mindful of that. i appreciate your attempt to answer the question. it is a subject i would like to know more about. so, if you, through your association to be helpful, i would be grateful. mr. chairman i yield back. rep. titus: i represent las vegas in southern nevada. we have a lot of people coming into the area from california and all over the world. so, we have to accommodate

moving them there and moving them around when they get there. as we expand our access, we are building things in extreme heat. this is something we put our workers out there on highways, on bridges, on all kinds of infrastructure projects. in temperatures that are often 115, 120 degrees, even this year, a record year. last week i joineds several colleagues, mostly from the southwest, but from the south too sending a letter to osha to ask them to finalize rules to protect workers from this occupational exposure to extreme heat. mr. colvin can you tell the members of the committee as we consider this reauthorization what we might build in to protect these transportation workers so they can do their job and also be safe? mr. colvin: i want to be sure to give a good answer to that. i know we have a couple of unions that are very involved in this labor. i know some in particular have

great expertise on this. if i can get a more comprehensive answer to you or your staff, that would be helpful. i just don't want to misspeak. host: i know we need cooling stations. we need rest periods, access to water, those kinds of things. but if you have got some kind of policy already in place, that would be helpful as we move forward. another thing i want to talk about is safety. we've heard a lot about safety over the last couple of hours in . in clark county, las vegas, we have had over 230 fatal traffic accidents last year alone. i think we are on the record to beat that this year. i know that you brought together a group last october, some of the departments of transportation from different states to talk about this issue of safety. it's not just roadways, it's in urban areas as well. maybe you could tell us a little bit about what y'all came up with and the value of having states work together on this issue and how we might

incorporate it. mr. tiemann: thank you for that question and for recognizing the efforts of state dots in this area. as i mentioned earlier, it is the number one priority for i think every state dot in the country. the president of the association this year, has made his emphasis area for the year, one of them, safety, highway safety, making sure that we are equipping all states, with as many tools and resources as possible to be able to address the safety crisis, which i think is really a public health crisis. we gathered in houston this year for our second annual safety summit, where we convened state dot experts across all disciplines, both on the infrastructure design and maintenance side all the way to the behavioral safety side. to be able to come together and identify what different dates are doing to drive that number down.

from the number of fatalities that we are seeing on our nation's highways. ashto also passed a resolution two years ago reassuring every state's commitment to safety. we were one of the signatories to the biden administration's national highway safety strategy. we also continue to invest in proven safety countermeasures, making we are demonstrating where states have been successful. one example of the design side's roundabouts. 10 years ago, 15 years ago roundabouts were kind of a niche , area that you saw it just a handful of communities. you are seeing more and more states and localities adopt roundabouts because while they may seem quirky to drivers when they first see them, there really are a safer design module for a lot of intersections.

that we have across this country. i think as we see more and more of those types of out-of-the-box thinking, we will see that number continue to decrease year after year. thank you for that question. host: thank you. that's encouraging. i hope you'll provide us that information as we move forward with this. people don't quite know how to do around about when they first approached it. i guess they will learn. i wish we could do something. as we increase the users of our roads, what about the scooter or motor things that you see all over town? that has to be part of the mix, as well we can just focus on the big modes of transportation. guest: i do think that when we think about safety, it has to be a holistic view of what safety means for the entire transportation system, and for all users, as well. so, not just for drivers, for passenger vehicles, or for

commercial truck drivers also , but for cyclists and pedestrians, making sure that we're incorporating designs into our infrastructure network that protects all users cyclists, motorists, pedestrians, commercial truck drivers as well. rep. titus: thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. chair: ms. king hines, you are recognized. >> rep. king-hinds thank you, mr. chair and thank you to our witnesses for your time today. my district is the northern mariana, northern marianas island. it's very remote and very isolated part of our country, but like every part of our country, we rely on a very functioning transportation system to efficiently move people and goods. like everywhere else, our economy heavily relies on that. the northern mariana islands received highway funding through the highway administration as co-territorial highway program. we seriously need these funds due to our geography, tropical climate, limited access to natural resources, workforce,

and workforce shortages. highway construction is significantly higher in my district than it is in many of the contiguous states. this makes exemptions from build america, buy america requirements so crucial and critical to my district. the mariana shares about 46 million with three other territories american samoa, guam, and the u.s. virgin islands. the iija has increased program funding annually, and the territorial highway program is scheduled to be authorized. over 49 million in fy 26, and we receive about 10% of that distribution of funds, which equates to about $4.9 million. however, mr. chairman, through some administrative program, we only received 10% of this funding. no matter how you slice it, population, highway miles for

landmass, we should be receiving a little bit more. we are not asking for more, actually, just enough to be able to actually address our particular needs. so as this committee looks to reauthorize surface transportation program, i ask that we take a serious look at the territorial highway program allocations and require federal highways to use a rational criteria that actually allows each of the insular areas to address its unique and particularized transportation issues. this question is specific to ms. kavinoky, because he has spoken about baba, right? how could we further balance the need to buy build america with remote and remote and rural communities' ability to access, supply for construction materials? how do we improve that policy? guest: not sure i am a coach to address outside the construction materials industry, that is

aggregates, asphalt binders, cementitious materials. because, again, i think what this committee and others in congress understood was we have geological and geographic limitations. and once you look at that and how you have to get materials where they need to go, it starts making more sense. but i don't know, and i think would be an interesting question, is how does that apply to other materials and goods across the board? i would be happy to work with my association and others to look into that for you. rep. king-hinds: i think i was looking for you to to expound just in the construction industry in general, right? but we can have that conversation offline. guest: guest: i would love to do that, thank you. rep. king-hinds: i appreciate your time. i yield my time, mr. chairman. rep. desjarlais: thank you, mr.

chairman. i want to thank the committee. it is the biggest investment in the bipartisan infrastructure law since the eisenhower administration when he advocated for a good paying union jobs. a republican president who wants that only a full would get in the way of an american worker being able to organize. a different time. i think in the context of this investment, we can't look at this as just an increase in one year's budget, it is seven years of trying to reinvest. civil engineers put out there and i'll report every year and they put this in the bottom of developed countries because of our investment in repair. we have not indexed our gas tax for inflation at the federal level in california where i am from. we had the voters approve an increase overwhelmingly because they knew it was a good investment. so here's an opportunity to invest in a way that we haven't done for really 70 years that has multipliers throughout the economy.

and it was the biden administration that did this, and it was the biden administration that did this, and it's a real accomplishment, but this committee has historically been so bipartisan in a problem solving way. really appreciate the ongoing efforts to get this product out so that people can see it. people get good paying jobs. main street gets the benefit of that economy. as former small business owner, i know when the building trades were working and the operating engineers were working, i had more customers just like a $786 billion backlog of road and bridge capital repairs, according to the civil engineers, $435 billion needed just for repairing existing roads. 125 billion for bridge repair. $120 billion needed for system repair. the area i represent, the san francisco bay area, as silicon

valley grew, we moved away from the coast and as the american economy shifted to more of a thick ring bicoastal economy, the port of oakland, mr. dollinger, and have a question for you and mr. colvin, in the i-680 corridor which is at the third tier of interstate highways in the bay area in my district, we have a grant that's now being held up because we're trying to figure out what the consequences of the executive action have been on this grant. $166 million in the 68,580 corridor. it is a headquarters to companies like bank of america and chevron. it is also where silicon valley's employees lived. in addition to that, the port of oakland being the busiest ports in the country and one of the biggest exporters to china, we look at tariffs and we have to consider that as well. this investment that we have already started putting people to work for, what happens now?

mr. colvin, this plan has been in our transportation plan since i was in local government. every two years we review it. there is an urgency for it. now it is being held up. what is that due to our workforce, union and nonunion? but it goes to main street, too, what does it do when there is uncertainty when we already start doing contracts and we are getting our environmental review done? what is the consequence for american workers in these cases? mr. colvin: i think in the same way that short term extensions of the program are really harmful to spending in large, small and large projects. i think the challenges extend, you know, to workforce and other, i think, you know, sort of the absurdity of this is that that the majorities in the senate in the house and the

presidency, when you hold majorities, you don't like some element of an existing law, then he had the opportunity to change it. the motion that the vast majority of programs will be unaffected, i think that is inexcusable. the law is the law. there is a path forward if you don't like it, which is change it. these distractions are arbitrary. rep. desaulnier: mr. dollinger, the fourth busiest port in the country were your truck selected luis, we would like to have them loaded going west so that we can export almonds and other products out so we get that benefit. can you speak to that briefly , the importance of getting these projects. for your constituents? >> as i mentioned today on several occasions, the roads and bridges are our work space and anything we can do to improve is appreciated. rep. desaulnier: thank you.

i yield back. chair: mr. collins, you are recognized. rep. collins: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to take a different tact. mr. dollinger, like you, i have about 40 years of experience. my dad really believed in child labor. i have a bit of experience in the trucking business as well. i wanted to hit on a couple of things. i probably sound like a basketball the way i bounce around but if you bear with me a little bit -- i saw in several of you all's testimony, talking about whether it was truck parking or driver shortages or inflationary things you have seen in tracking. and i want to ask you where tort reform would fit into this equation. because when i think of things

like truck parking, 10, 15 years ago, we parked in the shipper. that we would be there to get loaded or unloaded. now you can't do things like that because of the liability that it is sitting out there. with all the nuclear verdict that you see going on -- and i would just like to get your input on what you see as a specific -- if you see a need for tort reform out there at the federal level -- i know we have a lot of cases now and we are trying to move them to the federal bench in transportation with interstate commerce. guest: let me go back to the parking, you are correct. for many years you were able to park that way. what has happened, i guess in planning a lot of times, they don't plan for enough traffic that is coming in for their daily input or output.

so a lot of times, that is impossible. and then the liabilities. you talked about inflation. before i touch on tort reform, we have seen our total insurance package -- i will not say strictly liability, increase since 2020, 42% over the last five years. it is big for us. a lot of it is because of -- i will say nuclear verdicts are things that take place in our industry. the association has worked state-by-state to change some of the laws. and i will just mention one very quickly, the seatbelt gag rule. you can have an accident and

have severe injuries, but the injuries may be are caused by the faith -- the person being ejected from the vehicle because they didn't have a seatbelt. there's a few states where that law has been changed. but touching on the tort reform, i guess there's three things from a federal level. that is making it a crime to stage accidents. , putting on than to third-party financing. if you don't know what third-party financing is, i would challenge you to go to youtube and look at a few years back, a 60 minutes episode on third-party financing. they tell you that it is a lot better investment than in stock market returns. but the final aim is to move claims to the federal court. maybe it is a 750 million dollar

claim or $750,000 claim which of the minimum insurance, or if it is a million dollars, i know this would may be tax the federal courts. but we need some type of protection in our industry from these runaway claims. >> i agree. mr. timeline, i know you are increasing -- talking about increases of 10% to 20% for every year you don't get a project finished. i know for a fact that road building contractors had their bids by 40% just for the permit in lawsuits from the environmentalists that will come with any project, doesn't matter what it is. i will venture to say that is probably a lot of the reason that you see that a lot of times these projects are being delayed.

guest: guest: there are projects in every state delayed by lawsuits associated with federal resource laws and you are right, every year a project is delayed, whether it is that other reasons, the cost of the project will go up. certainly for the last four or five years, we have seen this percentage increases year to year due to the impact of inflation. rep. collins: mr. chairman, i know i am running out of time. not only do we pay 14, 15 thousand dollars federal excise tax on tracks, but we pay it on every tire we purchase. on tags. we have a sales tax in every state. federal and state. trucking is very well-text. share: we have that 5 minutes into a roll call vote on the floor, so i want to try to get our last two questions in real quick. mr. garcia, you are recognized. rep. garcia: thank you, chair. and i'll be brief. i know both just got called. obviously i just want to say thanks to our witnesses. i was the mayor of long beach for 8 years right before i got to congress. we have a port. it's a city department.

it is one of the largest seaports in the united states and so i know that investment in infrastructure for goods movement for rail, for highways, for multimodal transit, all of the above is really important. as it all now, a good chunk of america's goods, 25% of them come through long beach and los angeles to the rest of the country. investments like that that part is in infrastructure lot were so important to our port, to long beach, to the region, and to all the jobs that that are happening not just at home but across the country thanks to investments in ports and the supply chain. i wanted to add really quickly, i know two things. mr. dellinger, i was really grateful that you had brought up congestion briefly. i just want to let you know also that it's important that as we are looking at highways, that we are also looking at other ways we can take on congestion. modernization of highways, rail, other types of multimodal transit, investments in sustainability.

these are also ways to address our congestion issues. i just wanted to, to, to mention that. and then also, just a shout out, vulcan is in long beach, really important for us. thank you for that. and ms. kavinoky, i just wondered briefly if you can say how important if the structure has been to vulcan and to the port of long beach? guest: it allows us to move material in and get it to the infrastructure projects, public, private, residential and nonresidential across california. that efficient movement and having that pathway is essential for us to distribute those materials. rep. garcia: thank you. the port of long beach received 280 million dollars as part of the port investment ground. that will allow us to get goods across the country faster. thank you so much. chair: mr. cowie.

rep. kelly: thank you, mr. dollinger. as you know, california has imposed a number of nonsensical policies and regulations on trucking that have wrecked havoc on the industry and on on commerce. some of those are already being pulled back now with the change of federal administrations. could you just itemize a few of those that are still standing that perhaps could be pulled back by rescinding waivers? guest: i think it's important that the administration looks at the greenhouse gas, and reopen it and look at those items. i mentioned earlier today that basically carb has been mandating things and has been a patchwork of states that have been involved as well with it. we operate in all 48 states. and basically, we need the federal government to step

forward and take control of our destiny. >> thank you. he also testified about how trackers are independent operators or write a good part of our workforce and are a great example of the american dream, how that model has come under siege both in california and nationally. can you talk to some of the ways we might be able to push back on what's happening in order to preserve the independent contractor model? guest: it's a very important model for our industry, it had been around 90 years, and it allows people to own their own equipment. basically what they do is lease to companies. basically that model is being challenged. that they are an employee and not an owner-operator, so to speak, so we need protection from the federal standpoint, not a patchwork of states that are telling us what needs to take

place from that standpoint. if you look at a lot of the companies that exist today, that's how they started, one truck. you get two and then you get 10. so. rep. kiley thank you very much, we will be working on raining in karb as well as the independent contractor model. i was going to ask about expansion into atlanta. perhaps you could address the question sort of more generally in terms of how the likelihood that the autonomous vehicles will become more prevalent has affected your planning and the issues that we've discussed today. guest: you are right. commissioner mcmurray, who was regrets that he is not able to be here because of the winter storm that hit the southern part of the united states, i would save that the state dots across the country are preparing for the growth of autonomous vehicles and connected vehicles within the transportation system

as a whole. we're seeing more and more of that in certain urban areas with waymo expanding operations in certain areas, and other companies as well. but just as importantly is the inclusion of technology as a whole in what we do from a transportation networks, not just autonomous vehicles or connected vehicles, but how we are incorporating technology into how we operate our nation's transportation system. because rather than first looking at expanding capacity within our nation tire infrastructure, state dot's i looking at how to better operate the existing system using technology, and we're seeing more technology being incorporated into what state dot's and localities are doing with their transportation network. because it is a good use of the money and it certainly is cheaper than, say, adding additional lanes. that might be a solution in certain areas, but we're certainly also looking at how we can better leverage technology

to better utilize the existing capacity within our highway network. rep. kiley: i think that is a very important point. i yelled back. chair: the gentleman yields back. seeing no other questions from any other member of the committee, this concludes our hearing for today. i want to thank each of our witnesses for your great testimony and for your answers to the many questions that have been presented. i think it's very helpful to have for the record, as we embark on reauthorizing surface transportation. thank you again,. with that the subcommittee stands in adjournment. [gavel bangs] ♪ announcer: listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio is easy. tell your smart speaker, "play

c-span radio app," and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 eastern. important affairs throughout the day. weekdays, catch "washington today." listen to c-span every time. just tell your smart speaker "play c-span radio." c-span, created by cable. ♪ book tv, every sunday, featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. here is a look at what is coming this weekend. at 4:00 p.m., our guest looks at the potential risks of artificial intelligence and the prospective regulation of the tech industry in his book "taming silicon valley." and a sociology professor discussing that discovery of lithium in california's tilton sea region, and the role of the mineral in the electric vehicle

industry. at 8:00 p.m.astern, august argues that robert e. lee has been unfairly canceled in america, including at washington and lee university, where he served as president from 1865 to 1870. then at 10:00 p.m. eastern on "after words," the democrati oregon senator ron wyden, shared his thoughts on having the tenacity to parents who progressive goals through strong alliances, hard work, and focus. what book tv every sunday on c-span2, and signed a full schedule on your program guide, or online anytime at booktv.org. ♪ announcer: democracy. it isn't just an idea. it's a process entrusted to a select few with guiding its basic principles. it is where debates unfold, decisions are made, and the nation's course is charted. democracy