to the hearing on highway infrastructure. you are watching c-span3. >> dollars do not go as far. 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.

>> i am honored to be a part of this committee and i look forward to working with everybody on the smart investments that we need. as a former chair of the transportation committee i am very much looking forward to learning from each and everyone one of you. i do represent los angeles, which you all know has been devastated over the last couple weeks by wildfires. that is really permeating all of my thoughts right now including how i think about transportation and this committee. those fires have taken at least 27 lives they have destroyed over 15,000 structures, many of the primary homes for families. my thoughts and many of our thoughts are with the people of los angeles right now. over 60,000 people have applied for fema assistance and close to 200,000 people have been under mandatory evacuation orders.

as we move into recovery, i think we all know that recovery has to be very thoughtful. one thing i would like to draw attention to is when we think about transportation many of us think about it in terms of just transportation, roads, transit and bridges. i have thought for many years that a lot of my work in california has centered around the fact that transportation is also very linked, particularly in urban areas, to building houses and to be able to build a housing that we need. if we do not fix transportation you cannot get people around communities. neighborhoods do not want to allow new residents because they are worried about parking and congestion. now as we are having to rebuild, we need to think about transportation as part of that recovery effort. it is even more important that we do this in a way that allows us to not only to rebuild housing for people that are displaced but the housing need to build prior to disasters

because of overcrowding and homelessness and the housing shortage we have fell deeply in california. first i would like to ask a question to mr. tymon, and i appreciate all of the witnesses being here today. the bipartisan infrastructure law created several programs including transformative efficient and cost saving transportation which happens to work out to be the project program -- amazing how that worked out -- to make transportation more resilience to natural hazards including extreme weather events like we saw in los angeles. as my community lives to rebuild can you talk about how the state dot's utilize critical funding provided by the by partisan infrastructure law for natural disasters and the continued impact of global warming and if you could opine on what los angeles in particular should expect to see over the coming months and years due to that

program. >> thank you for the question. first let me say our thoughts and prayers are with the folks of california and specifically the los angeles area with the wildfires. i would say that program in particular is really designed for state dot's to be able to look at their infrastructure network and figure out where they need to build it in a more resilient manner so it is hardened against the types of catastrophes that you are talking about, whether wildfires like you are seeing in california, or if it is the hurricanes that 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 that 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 it up so it is better protected against those types of disasters we have seen just in the last few months. >> thank you. turning to mr. colden, i want to thank you for being here today. you know more than 80% of communities rely on trucks to serve their freight needs including los angeles. we have several truck routes through my district as well so we are very familiar with the needs of trucks to be able to operate efficiently and safely. can you highlight areas where federal investment is needed to better serve -- speaking to communities themselves, to help them get more of what they need in terms of goods moving in and out of their communities more safely? whoever would like to speak.

i think you are better suited to this. >> would you repeat that? i thought you were directing that elsewhere. >> i did send that because i was thinking of labor being key partners in the safety conversation. for communities relying on trucking and communities impacted by freight routes that go through communities, what you would like to see from the federal government in terms of investments to make people's lives better in these communities? >> the simple and short answer is the roads and bridges are the working space and investment in the physical working space is what we really need. >> in terms of safety for drivers, is there anything you think the federal government could be doing better to support the people driving these trucks? >> i will pick it a little bit on that but -- i will pivot a

little bit of that but it is to put out a 280-page -- turn over the reins to both commercial and noncommercial entities to sort of self describe what they think is safe and whether or not they abide by that. it does not offer a lot of guidance. rather than spending time doodling with technology they should be focused on doing their core safety roll over there. what we saw in san francisco, these vehicles hitting or almost hitting commercial and noncommercial vehicles on a fairly regular basis. that will affect all road users including those working in transportation. >> the gentlelady's time is expired.

>> thank you. >> i'm not recognize the gentleman from utah. >> thank you so much. . in your testimony. the picture of a workforce shortage in the trucking industry. much of my passion is around open pathways for careers in industries like yours beyond the traditional education system. in your opinion do you think addressing the gap in the trucking workforce would address the shortfalls in the highway trust fund and other programs? what would that look like if that is the case? >> one of the things that everyone does not have to go to a four-year college. we need support for the vocational schools, driver training, tech, training, look at federal dollars, like the 529 that can be used for college and vocation schools.

that would be one of the first steps. >> one of my top priorities is to bridge the gap between perspective young people before going into thousands of dollars in debt. what would be the most helpful way for congress to expand career pathways into the trucking industry? is there a way to unite these concepts with programs? >> i think, again, looking at the driver safe act, that would be of interest to us to get the young people around. also, looking at federal dollars for training. >> we have tremendous talents, we need to make sure they are tied into some great careers. we will be working with you on that. thank you and i yield back. >> i now recognize the gentlelady from new york. >> thank you, mr. chairman and

thank you ranking member. i am looking forward to working with you and the members of the subcommittee on a bipartisan basis to advance critical surface transportation reauthorization. thank you to the witnesses joining us today. a report this month from a national transportation research nonprofit found that poor roads in the new york metropolitan area, including long island, where i represent, the cost to drivers is nearly $3500 each year. mr. chairman i ask unanimous consent to submit a copy of the trip report and an article from newsday into the record. >> without objection. >> even with critical investments from the bipartisan infrastructure law, to many of our roads, up to 30% in the new york metropolitan area, remain in poor condition. what are some of the ways you believe congress can insure the

upcoming surface transportation bill goes further toward improving roads and reducing costs for drivers? >> i think a lot of it is just a question of resources. there was a comment made at the outset of the hearing that is not an endless checkbook. this is not money we are putting into reams of paper. these are actual investments that have returns. we should treat it like that. if it requires we spend more money, we should spend more money. it is an investment in this country and we should be focused on that. >> thank you. what is the estimated annual impact on the trucking industry of our unsafe roads and highways? if you could break down some costs that would be helpful. thank you. >> could you repeat that? >> what is the estimated annual

impact on the trucking industry of our unsafe roads and highways? if you could break that down that would be helpful. >> congestion is probably the biggest cost that we see. it not only affects our industry but it includes the public, as well. basically, in my written statement, we estimated close to $109 billion a year, the equivalent of 435,000 drivers sitting idle for one year. a big cost. >> how do you think we can alleviate that cost? >> bottlenecks. american transportation research institute publishes the top 100 bottlenecks and i think it is distributed to this committee. putting in efforts as we choose projects on those bottlenecks. >> thank you, sir.

back again to the trip report. it found costs from inflation have eroded up to 1.2 billion dollars worth of core construction funding over the last five years. would you agree congress -- i think you already answered this -- the overall funding for highway programs to account for the increased costs of materials and labor? >> absolutely. people talk about the ij as a $1 trillion-plus program, the money that goes toward the reauthorization portion was significant but -- again, we need to spend the amount of money it takes to keep our systems in a state of good repair and keep up with demand. yes, absolutely. >> thank you, i yield back. >> thank you. i now recognize myself for five minutes.

mr. tymon, according to the society of civil engineers, they had a report card in the nation's overall infrastructure grade was a c -- actually a c- minus. do you believe this accurately reflects the state of our infrastructure today? >> i think that assessment is a good approximation of the totality of the infrastructure network. >> can you shed light on why you think that? >> we have been under investing in our nation's transportation infrastructure for a number of years. the federal government only stepped up their 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.

within our nation. going all the way back to maybe t-21, you saw fairly significant increases, a smaller percentage increase, fast act and this last bill did provide a significant increase in investment of our nation's infrastructure but i would say what we have said is the bread-and-butter of the surface transportation programs, the highway formula dollars that go back to states. they only saw a 20% increase. that 20% increase was eaten up almost entirely by the cost of inflation. a lot inflation pretty much ate up the entire increase. they were lucky not to have to pull back on other projects they had planned, they were lucky to be able to continue with the baseline because of that 20%

increase with that inflation. >> in my own state of missouri, i-44 is heavily overused and desperately needs expansion. my question is, is there a way we can get more bang out of our snuck get more out of the dollars we're spending? so in your testimony you said that the federal government tends to be more expensive compared to each nonfederal dollar that's because of the regulations permitting. can you expand on what you mean when you say each federal dollar is more expensive. >> first i would say missouri has done an excellent job of increasing revenue at the state level to provide state resources to address the challenge they was seen. but really, at the end of the day, state dollars are easier to utilize on these projects than federal dollars because of all the bureaucratic red tape that goes along with them. you have states such as utah that say that they're only going to use federal dollars on the simplest and easiest prompts,

essentially only to do repaving. because they don't want to get into the federal requirements that are associated with using federal dollar for more complex projects. states are making that value proposition themselves and saying state dollars are easier to use on the more complex projects so we're going to use state dollars. if we make the federal process more similar to what we see in most states and make it simpler and easier, you will get more bang for your federal dollar that way, the same way a lot of states get more bang for their state dollars than they get for their federal dollars. >> thank you very much. mr. dillering, you cite in your testimony that the driver shortage is one of the greatest challenges of the -- that the trucking industry is facing. 60,000 drivers shortage, just in 2023. can you expand on the current state of the driver shortage and the impact on getting products shipped, which is what the

american people need? >> currently, we've had a little leveling in that due to the freight we've experienced in our industry so it's not as severe. one of the words that's not in there is qualified drivers. i think there are drivers out there, there are arguments about, you know, our numbers. but having qualified drivers, sometimes you need drivers that are qualified to drive tankers, to drive bulk fuel. to drive hazardous materials. and maybe they're not qualified in those areas. >> lastly, just to -- last question is i increasingly hear about the shortage or availability of parking, of safe parking structures. can you elaborate on that? >> i spoke to that earlier as well but we need safe parking

for entry level, for more females, where they feel safe. where they feel comfortable. and also for the safety, i mean if you travel your state's highways, probably at night or in the early mornings and look on the on-ramps an offramps you'll see trucks parked be there because there was not safe and adequate parking in rest areas or facilities where they were making deliveries. >> thank you. i now recognize mr. figures from alabama. >> thank you, mr. chairman. madam ranking member. thank you guys for the opportunity. i won't spend a lot of time with the preface because i do want to leave some time for some answers, particularly from the panelist from my home state of alabama. but i'll start with you, mr. colvin. at the end of the day these transportation projects boil

down to workers on the ground. the ability to have qualified workers that want to be in the profession, highly skilled and highly trained for the jobs that we need. can you just explain to us a little bit of the importance of prioritizing those work force development programs to ensure we have that highly qualified work force and also a little bit on, we know that wages consistently fail to rise with inflation. and the struggles that's presenting as it relates to that work force. >> i'll start with the second one, we hear a lot about so-called work force shortages. i think really the challenge there, it's not a work force shortage, it's a shortage of employers willing to pay livable wages to their workers and afford them quality of life and work that people are attracted to. i think that's a problem in the trucking industry. i think it undermines that more when congress goes after hours of service rules in states

trying to do the right thing. but you know, that's -- that is something that you know, i thinn solve that problem by going after the 18 to 21-year-old demographic as though they're going to be more attracted to just the same quality of job, i think that's a bit of an oversight. i think we need to give real, serious thought to that issue. not as a work force shortage issue but a shortage of good employers. with regard to work force training, i think the sort of -- the benefit we all enjoyed of massive increases in funding from the iiha does create a problem that you're suddenly increasing spend big a huge amount. you do need to prepare a work force for that. to the extent that there's a gap there, i think the best thing you can do going forward is keep sustained, higher levels of spending to meet the actual demand on our systems and have a

predictable pipeline of workers as well. >> and you, or as a rule can rather is in the midst of a very, somewhat unique but certainly sincere dispute with the mexican government that's having a direct impact on transportation and infrastructure projects here in the united states. can you give us a little bit more context, educate some of us who don't know about this issue and sort of update those of us who are aware of this issue on what's going on there? >> sure. and thank you for the opportunity to do that. it really brings together multiple issues related to surface transportation. you know, rock only is where rock is. so there is -- there are a lot of areas of this country, coastally, all up the west coast, across the gulf coast where there's no indigenous rock to 1/4ry. you've got to get the rock there

somehow. the most efficient way to do that, the most cost effective way to do that is by blue water vessel. otherwise you have to put it on rail to move it longer distances. in 1986, as a rule can embarked on a project in playa del carmen, mexico, which was then a small fishing village, to create a limestone 1/4ry that would supply 14 courts that supply, and we appreciate those who had the foresight to give the exemptions. that was the critical reason for the exemption, you can't get rock where it doesn't exist. unfortunately we have been embroiled with an issue directly with the mexican government. the former president of mexico ordered shutdown of our operations in may of 2022.

we still have 250 employees, mexican nationals who we are paying. but we are not operating. then, as he was on his way out the door, president lopez obrador expropriated our property. and the new administration has doubled down on that ex-appropriation. they have claimed that they're turning it into what they call a naturally protected area. to be clear the only thing prohibited in this naturally protected area is 1/4rying. and they export through the only deepwater port in the yucatan peninsula, which we built, developed and operated. so we have issues related to national security. we have issues related to the supply of materials in the gulf coast. and certainly significant issues related to the treatment of u.s. companies investing abroad. >> thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. mcdowell. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

thank you to the witnesses for being here to testify before the committee today, not to pick favorite, but especially many mr. dellinger, a fellow north carolina. good to see you here today. in your testimony you discussed how poor condition of freight and modal connectors across the country create supply chain bottlenecks. we have established that this is massive driver of costs. intermodal connectors are crucial last-mile connectors between highways and ports and railroads and airports. yet the federal highway administration rated over half of intermodal connectors as being in mediocre or poor condition. your report that these roadways often get pushed todd back burner when funding decisions are made. so how do you make the case to local jurisdictions for prioritizing investment in

freight intermodal connectors? >> that is a difficult situation to -- to actually work with the local municipalities or cities to do that. it's very important that, i think, that the federal government gets involved in these connectors. these rail heads. these port heads as well. because that's places also that you'll find a tremendous amount of congestion as well. >> so why do you think it's important to specifically set aside funding for these types of projects? >> for the flow of traffic. for the flow of commerce as well. >> so one of the surprising statistics in your testimony was the highway congestion added over $100 billion to the cost of freight transportation in 2022 alone due to idling trucks and slower traffic speeds.

it follows that highway capacity improvements could reduce traffic jams, lower the operational costs to the trucking industry. can you provide an example of a state or federal policy that discourages capacity improvements of downgraded highway in the name of environmental justice? >> ky not do that. >> so let's game out the costs and long-term effects of the california air resources board emissions standards would have on the trucking industry. can you speak to that? >> basically, a company our size does not have the resources to invest in, i'm going to say what is new technology. we're game on doing and working, but we want proven technology and right now e.v.'s are not proven. basically we're in the long haul business. we run from north carolina to california.

and the infrastructure is not there. we can fuel a truck in 15, 20 minutes. and run 1,200, 1,500 miles. whereas now if you had -- if you even had the network to do it, had the charge -- had to charge overnight, run 200 or 300 miles. what kind of disruption would that bring to the economy? the commerce as well. >> sure. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. carbajal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. dellinger, what role do sustainable fuels such as renewable natural gas and renewable oil pay in reducing emissions in the near term and how can congress support their adoption? >> those are proven solutions in our industry with the combustion engines to be able to use

renewable energies. they are cleaner. you know, right now, as i mentioned e.v.'s are technology that we're not there. we're nowhere near being close. to operating that type of equipment in a long haul environment. i think it's something that would work well in municipalities and cities if they want to convert their buses, their trash trucks, their school buses. would definitely be a workable solution. but right now, definitely not in the long haul market. >> thank you. the recent floods in the soviet and fires in california demonstrate the critical need for trucks to respond quickly to disasters whether to clear roadways for emergency equipment or to transport water to fight forest fires. congress authorized states to issue overweight permits for trucks responding to disasters, but i understand that the trucking industry faces significant bureaucratic

hurdles. can you tell me what we can do to improve the system? >> well, our industry is one of the first to respond to haul water, to haul food, to haul equipment necessary to clear out. i think supporting the move act, the 118th congress had in place, maybe introduce it as well in the 119th, which allows the governors to issue permits, actually, before natural disaster is called. and actually looking beyond, you know, what qualifies for a disaster. an as well maybe even the time of the event. >> thank you. mr. tymon, can you comment about the importance of maintaining permit requirements for overweight trucks? >> thank you for that question. i do think that there is a

balance that needs to be struck when it comes to overweight vehicles. especially in times of need or emergency, making sure that there are opportunities for trucks to be able to respond to specific situations from an energy standpoint. but that also needs to be balanced with the -- the ability to preserve, maintain our nation's highway infrastructure. so when you're looking at the potential damage that overweight vehicles do to bridges and roadway pavement, we need to make sure that there's a balance there. certainly when it comes to permitting overweight vehicles, we're working to identify ways to streamline that process for interstate travel to make sure permits issued by multiple states can be done in a more coordinated fashion so it is more efficient for somebody with an overweight load traveling from, say, california all the way to new york.

that we're looking for ways to streamline that process to obtain all the permits for the individual states along that route. >> thank you. ms. kavanaugh, can you explain why we need to have the build america, buy america act for aggregate materials. giving you a softball. >> i appreciate that. i think it comes right back to, god put rocks where god put rocks. so there are about 30 million tons of rock that not just as a rule can materials but other companies bring into the u.s. from canada and caribbean nations every year to supplement and to provide for infrastructure. it's particularly important from texas across to florida and up to south carolina, but we also do this in california, we have a terminal in long beach where we bring rock in from canada. it's a way to do it cost effectively and efficiently. it's a way to -- it's a way to

address environmental issues. but it's really critical to the supply of rock in the united states and we appreciate that exemption very much. >> thank you. is the federal aid highway program designed around multiyear apportioned funding? and what provisions in title 23 depend on statings have mull year funding? >> there's a tremendous amount of title 23 that states are required to look on a year over year basis. for example, states have multiyear planning requirements. even sometimes the simplest projects are going to take multiple years to get done. so the very nature of what is essentially a capital program requires that back door capital budget in that program. >> thank you, mr. chairman, i yield back. i'm out of time. >> mr. taylor. >> thank you, chairman burlison for holding this hearing today.

>> hold that microphone a little closer to you. or it may not be on. >> it's lit up. is it working. >> there you go. >> sorry about that. thank you, chairman and ranking member, for holding this hearing today. thank you to the witnesses for your testimony. as a third generation business owners in the concrete industry, i know firsthand how important it is that our highways, roads, and bridges across the united states are safe for commuters, citizens and businesses. the upcoming surface transportation re-authorization bill, i want to ensure we are passing commonsense legislation that will fix our roads, ensure safety and help the united states economy grow. mr. tyman, i was interested to reed about georgia's initiatives to ensure electric vehicles paid their fair share in the highway trust fund. specifically you mentioned enacting an annual electric vehicle registration fee, establishing a heavy vehicle impact fee, the kilowatt hour fee for public electric vehicle

charging. 90% of total federal highway programs i find it absurd that those who choose to drive electric vehicles are not helping pay for the maintenance and upkeep on roads we all drive on even as electric vehicles cause more wear and tear on our roads than gasoline and diesel vehicles. if congress enacted georgia's initiative on the federal level would this help alleviate the trust fund solvency issue? >> thank you for that question. i appreciate you pointing out what georgia has done. again, if commissioner mcmurray were here he would, i think, be able to talk about the impact that it has had on revenue in georgia specifically. certainly as the -- as electric vehicles grow as a percentage of the fleet in the future, we're going to 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 supported primarily by the gas tax a proxy for use on

our nation's -- on our nation's transportation system. and because electric vehicles do not obviously consume gas, they're not paying in. so i think there are a lot of states across the country that have enacted some type of fee in order to proks use -- to approximate mate use of electric vehicles. i think it's something congress should take a look at as they look at re-authorization for the next year, how electric vehicles could pay into the federal highway trust fund. >> thank you. mr. tyman thank you for including your testimony, it could cost up to $200,000 for local governments to develop a grant application. that is a significant issue in my district. most municipalities can't spare $00,000 on a chance to receive funds to repair roads or fill potholes. even worse according to your testimony it took the city of athens, georgia, two years to receive funding after it was rewarded to them. two years is unacceptable to

rural communities that drastically need funding to repair or build infrastructure. i'll open this question up to the whole panel. what specific actions need to be taken by congress to ensure awardees receive their funds in under a year. especially our rural communities that cannot afford a full-time grant writer. >> i do think that one way to do that is to streamline the process at the federal level. right now as you mentioned, there's just a lot of bureaucratic red tape that happens at usdot and fhwa, to provide that funding and get a grant agreement especially with locality state d.o.t.'s are used to dealing with federal dollars. they have an established relationship with the federal highway administration. those grants can be expedited if they treat them like they do formula dollars. and just assume that states are able to administer that the way they're able to administer over $40 billion of formula dollars in a year. i do think there are ways to streamline this by just

addressing bureaucratic red tape that exists in discretionary programs. >> any other witnesses want to weigh in on that one? since i have a couple of seconds left, when we talked about the fees for the electric vehicles, in your experience how comparable are they to what you get from a, say a diesel truck for their use of a highway in a year? >> it does vary from state-to-state but most states tried to set the fees for passenger vehicles equivalent to what a passenger vehicle would pay in gas tax over the course of that year. so that it is essentially a fair treatment of electric vehicles, comparable to what vehicles that are powered by internal combustion engines. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> mr. stanton. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you for the witnesses for being here at this important hearing. i have dedicated my career to infrastructure investment.

as i my previous job, mayor of phoenix, i oversaw the largest investment in infrastructure to date in arizona. a 35-year, $32 billion transportation infrastructure plan expanding light rail, bus routes, road maintenance and repair, bikebility and walkability as well, generating millions and millions of dollars for arizona. infrastructure investment is some of the smartest way toes to spend taxpayer dollars. investment in transportation is investment in our economy and investment in our work force. you can imagine my concern when i read section 7 of president trump's executive order unleashing american energy issued january 20. the e.o. had broad language, taken at face value it 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 this 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 the agency, quote, heads my disburse funds as they deem necessary after consulting with the office of management and budget. that 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. and that uncertainty, that ambiguity is unacceptable to people on this committee and it's unacceptable to the american people. right now, back home in arizona, condition instruction crews are working to widen i-10 south of phoenix with the promise of $95 million in federal funding. this project was a bipartisan priority. business leaders, elected officials at all levels of government, rural, urban, tribal leaders, all coming together to push this other the finish line.

if the executived orer is not further clarified to make it clear, this puts billions of dollars in materials and labor at risk. these investments are important. it's important to upgrade arizona's airports, water infrastructure, railways and more. thing that this very committee has worked on in a bipartisan way. and i am hopeful and we should demand in a bipartisan way that more information and more clarity comes out today. now i'll move on to a couple of questions. as we look to our infrastructure future and advancing the next surface transportation bill a lot of attention will be placed on sustainable building materials. this is a topic i have spent time on in congress to ensure we have the resources available to build infrastructure, infrastructure in a more sustainable and resilient way. in fact rocks act that was folded into the bipartisan infrastructure law specifically directs a working group in the federal highway administration to study and use aggregates and recommended practices in

policies to ensure continued access to this important resource for growing communities. as a rule can is one of our largest material providers in arizona. and will have a key role in delivering this future. could you describe some of the efforts under way by as a rule can and the aggregates industry to deliver sustainable materials to market? >> certainly. sustainability for as a rule can is -- has long been a part of what we do. when you operate in people's back yards you've got to do it well. our commitments to people, safety and health, communities, environmental stewardship are built into everything we do. that's reflected in our products. sustainable mix design is business as usual. in our concrete line of business. we are using carbon cure technology, recycled material, we've been collaborating on a direct air capture pilot with another private sector company. and then we are currently studying redeuced heat requirements for asphalt. we've collaborated on a study of

electric and hydrogen vehicle options for a ready mix fleet. we're in a number of partners with commercial and academic institutions to look at how our products can be used differently including the use of fines, a very -- of fine, very fine materials if carbon capture, something that's fairly novel. we continue to do this work. >> appreciate your leadership in that regard. mr. dellinger, as you likely no, i have -- know, i have a bill to allow vehicles powered primarily by hydrogen fuel cells to exceed weight limits on highways. can you touch on how this would allow states to incorporate sustainable infrastructure? >> basically, it's much like the rule that's already in place for hydrogen vehicles and for electric vehicles as well. we do support the bill. >> i appreciate that answer. i yield back.

>> mr. bresnahan, you're recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. a little bit about me. i was a heavy highway electrical contractor signatory to eight different collective bargaining agreements as well as a chairman of a joint apprenticeship training committee. something i've seen in the trucking industry, we had over 100 power units but was the reclassification of marijuana specifically as states start to evolve. as these different standards change, specifically relating to safety sensitive positions, what challenges have some of your operators face and how have they been able to stay ahead as well as in compliance. >> i think there's a misconception out there that the marijuana or cannabis being legal that people can operate vehicles under the influence and 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 which tests back and i guess the struggle we have in our industry is, we can't compromise a system we have until there is a workable solution for tests 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 post-test, post-accident test and tested positive, you know, we would would struggle defending anything in that accident. the retribution we would get for that from the public, from the media, would be astonishing. so our position is that right now, i mean, we have to accept

the testing that we have. >> is there anything specifically that congress can do or advocate for to detect that immediate level of impairment with the half-lives of marijuana, remaining inside of systems. i agree with your sentiments, there's not an immediate detection device to say yes this person is under the influence or not under the influence. is there anything specifically congress can work on that would add some clarity to the processes. >> i do not have the answer. >> my next question is for mr. colvin. i want to ask you about apprenticeship programs you made mention in your testimony about intelligent transportation systems. that was in my opinion one of the most efficient, effective ways to increase travel, commute times with congestion and various different highway systems. in my district we have 22,000 workers in the construction

industry, 34,000 in manufacturing, nearly 30,000 in transportation, warehousing and utility systems. we often speak of 21st century work force. but we're already a quarter way into the century. technology keeps evolving each day. how can apprenticeship programs close the tech skills gap in worker training. something i've seen is that the i.t.s. systems are a very finite industry. so attrag talent into those, into those skill set it's really a high brit technology. often time it's 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? >> i think one of the big problems we have identified is that we simply aren't collecting good statistical data on what those jobs are going to look like. what the impact of new technologies is on the work force. and maybe five years ago, the

bureau of labor statistics put out a comprehensive report on how they could improve that and the failures of their current ways of measuring impacts of technology. could be improved to actually quantify what the impacts are and help us measure them and anticipate them. i think there's a lot of folks who think labor stands in the way of these technologies. i don't think that could be further from the truth. we want to just be very involved in conversations about how they're implemented. if we can track that if the industry can't track that, and we're just sort of responding on an add hoc basissing we're constantly behind and thing impacts job, impacts the economy. so i would strongly advise looking at the foundational pieces of, the data collection and evaluation is really important here. >> thank you. i yield back. >> mr. moulton.

>> thank you very much, mr. chairman. in 2022, over 25,000 people died while using passenger vehicles. seven died riding passenger trains. generally passengers are 18 more times more likely to die in a vehicle than train. how would moving freight from highway to rail improve safety conditions and efficiency for all transportation? >> you know, i think whether rail or transit, those are incredibly safe modes of transportation. mile for mile transit is probably the safest transportation in this country. expanding those services is, you know, going to have a positive impact on safety. it's simply a question of you know, us making sure that we're making those investments in increased rail, passenger rail

and increased train services. >> we've heard a lot of people talk about highway congestion. widening highways. what not across the country. mr. dellinger, about how many trucks does the average intermodal train take off the highway? >> would you repeat that? >> how many trucks does one intermodal train take off the highway. >> i don't have the answer for that. >> it's 173. about 173. the railroads have good partnerships with some trucking companies, j.b. hunt was the first to do a lot of partnerships with companies, u.p.s., fedex is a bit behind but catching up. when we think about our overall transportation system, think about the congestion so many motorists face on the highways today, there's an option we don't often consider. if we just got a bunch of long haul trucks onto trains, sometimes in great partnerships

with trucking companies, we would have a lot less trafficker in trucks that need to be on the highway not to mention all people trying to get safely to their destination. what can we do to work on this in a more cooperative, comprehensive fashion? >> you are correct, a lot of carriers, j.b. shunt a big one that does that and use intermodal. i think the intermodal capacity is limited as well. then you have the expectations of the consumer. intermodal traffic is not as quick as truck traffic is. and our consumers have expectations that -- >> u.p.s., they promise you three-day service. got to get it there in three days. u.p.s. is the single biggest intermodal customer in the united states. they figured out how to do it. seems like they've got decurrent reliability. ever get a package by u.p.s.? >> yes, i do.

>> and they often -- >> receiving one today. >> all right. there you go. i don't know if that particular one is on a train or not. in the course of this hearing over the last few hours, i know we've 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 and reducing congestion in our nation's interstates. >> i have not heard that today. >> have not heard it once. mr. chairman. mr. chairman is not paying attention. not heard it once. that just shows we're really not thinking comprehensively about transportation in this country. but i'm delight t.d. hear on this panel there are people like yourself who actually want to talk about this. because every other country in the world thinks about transportation holistically. they don't just have an aim policy or highway policy. they think about how to solve transportation problems. virginia has tackled a lot of congestion on i-95 by investing

in csx right away, entirely paid for by the private sector until now. that's getting a lot of trucks off the highway which is making the highway more efficient. the trucks that need to be there for the motorists and also increases safety as well. speed limiters are one way to improve safety and i'm pleased the a.t.a. supports 70-mile-per-hour speed limit. how would limiting truck speeds increase road safety for all users? >> a.t.a. has had a policy and actually the speed limit is 65. >> sorry, 65. >> it's actually 65 with enhanced, if you have some of the enhanced safety features, up to 70 miles per hour. so basically as a company, i joined the company in 1986. our speed limit was 65 miles per hour and we've stuck by that even, you know, when we had

people who told uswe could get more drivers if we raised the speed limit. but we think it is a safety factor. definitely. >> i'm out of town. mr. chairman, i yield back. thank you. >> mr. is leave, you're recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate our witnesses sharing their expertise with us. i'm a new member. and this is for those of us that come into this body, on a large committee, subcommittee like this, an extraordinary experience to kind of parachute in and out on these hearings. but i had the opportunity to listen to your -- what you shared earlier. so many great questions were taken. but i do want to just introduce myself. and thank you for your work. it's a particular honor for me to serve on this committee given the importance of transportation and infrastructure to indiana's sixth district. the crossroads of america is our state's official motto. it was on my cub scout and boy

scout badge when i was a kid. more than a motto, it's central to our hoosier identity and central to an economy that's increasingly distribution-based. indiana's highways support hundreds of millions of dollars of commerce, freight trucks traverse my district 24-7 across 29,000 lane miles that are supported by indot. my district, the sixth district, encompasses part of the i-465 beltway and interstates 65, 69, 70, 74. significantly. across my district. we are early on in the throes of a crucial renewal project of i-07 from the marion county, the indianapolis line over to the ohio state border. that's my district. we're going to, with that, add 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. but with the work we're setting upon in today in this bill, i know we can make some headway. you may be best prepared to answer this question i have with regard to the design and engineering of a highway rebuild. as we go into an era where electric -- electrify case in the fullness of time, if at least some of the rolling stock, the heavy freight traffic, is coming at us, can you speak generally, very generally, as to the differential in the roadbed engineering or internet -- for interstate highways to support over the next few year kids the electrified tractor trailer

traffic that will traverse our highway system. that is to say more generally, will we be looking at a significant do-over right now as we're preparing to design and spend to rebuild a significant slice of i-70 across the district that i now represent. >> thank you for that question. unfortunately, if i attempted to answer that, the engineers i work with would get me fired because there's no way i can give you probably the best or right answer on that. i can tell you that moving to electrify case as we know as a -- as an aggregates company requires a lot of different infrastructure. it requires the ability to recharge vehicles. i would love to get you a better answer from some qualified engineers who can answer that question. >> we know of course that e.v.'s are heavier. i don't know as a percentage in terms of, you know, gross axle weight relative to the amount of

freight that an electrified tractor trailer may be able to can carry, how much heavier as a percentage. i can't 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 and if it does, we as we work on this committee, obviously need to be mindful of that. i appreciate your attempt to answer the question. it's a subject i'd like to know more about. so if you, through your association could be helpful i'd be grateful. mr. chairman, i yield back. >> ms. titus, you're recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i represent las vegas and parts of southern nevada and a lot of people coming into the area from california, from all over the world, so we have to accommodate moving them there and moving them around once they get there. as we expand our access, we are

building things in extreme heat. this is something we've put our workers out there on highways, on bridges, on all kinds of infrastructure projects in temperatures that often are 115, 120 degrees even this year. it was a record year. last year, i joined several colleagues, mostly from the southwest, some from the south too sending a letter to osha asking them to finalize rules to protect workers from this occupational exposure to extreme heat. mr. colvin could you talk to us and tell the members of this committee as we consider this re-authorization, what we might build in to protect transportation work source they can do their job and also be safe? >> i want to be sure i give you a good answer to that. i know we have a couple of unions who are very involved in this labor, i know in particular, have a great ex- have great expertise on this. i can get a more comprehensive answer and provide it to you and

your staff, that would be helpful. i don't want to misspeak on that. >> i know we need cooling stations, i know we need rest periods, access to water those kinds of things but if you've got some kind of policy already in place that would be helpful. >> sure. >> another thing i want to talk about is safety. we've heard a lot about safety over the last couple of hours. in clark county which is las vegas, we've had over 230 fatal traffic accidents last year alone. i think we're on record now to beat that this year. mr. tyman, i know astho 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 roadway, it's and you are -- it's in urban areas as. we maybe you could tell us a little bit about what you came up with and the value of having states work together on this issue, how we might incorporate it? >> thank you for that question and for recognizing the efforts

of asthto and state d.o.t.'s in this area. it's the number one priority for every d.o.t. in the country. our leader has made this his emphasis area for the year. highway safety. making sure that we're equipping all states with as many tools and resources as possible to be able to address the safety crisis which i think as mr. larson said is a public health crisis. so we gatt nerd houston this year for our second annual safety summit where we convened state d.o.t. experts across all disciplines, both on infrastructure, design and maintenance side all the way to behavioral safety side to be able to come together and identify what different states are doing to be able to drive that number down. from the number of fatalities 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. and also, you know, we continue to invest in proven safety countermeasures identified by fhwa, making sure we're demonstrating from states have been successful. i'll bring up one example, it's more on the design side, which is roundabouts. 10 years ago, 15 years ago, roundabouts were kind of a nearby area that you saw in a handful of communities. you're 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 -- they really are a safer design module for a lot of intersections we have across this country. i do this as we see more and more of those types of out of the box thinking, we're going to

see the numbers start to continue to decrease year after year. so thank you for that question. >> thank you. that's encouraging. i hope you'll provide that information as we move forward with this. people don't know quite how to do a roundabout when they first approach it, but i guess they'll learn. wish you could do something as we increase people on our roads. what about these little scooter things all over up to. that's got to be part of the mix as well. can't joust focus on the big modes of transportation. >> i do think that, you know, when you 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. but also for cyclists and pedestrians, making sure that we're incorporating designs into

our infrastructure network that protects all users, cyclist, motorists, pedestrians, commercial truck drivers as well. >> thank you. >> ms. king hides you're recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to our witnesses for your time today. my district is the northern mariana islands. it's very remote, 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 and like everywhere else our economy heavily relies on it. the northern mariana islands receives annual federal highway funding from the territorial highway program and we need these funds due to our geography, tropical climate, limited access to natural resources, work force and work force 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 mare aa in as shared about 46 million with three other territory, american samoa, guam and the u.s. virgin islands. the iiha has increased funding annually and the program is scheduled to authorize over $49 million in f.y. 2026. we rev -- receive about 10% of that distribution of funds, ab$4.9 million. however, through some administrative formula set in 1992, the marianas and american samoa only receives 10% of the funding. no matter how you slice it we should be receiving a little bit more. we're not asking for more just enough to address our particular needs. so as this committee looks to

re-authorize 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. how could we further balance the need to buy america, build america, with remote and -- remet and rural communities' ability to access supply for construction ferrells? how do we improve that policy? >> i'm not sure i'm equipped to address outside of the construction materials industry, that's aggregates, asphalt binders, cement. because again i think what this

this committee and others in congress understood, we have geological and geographic limitations. once you look at that and how you have to get materials where they need to go it starts making more sense. what i don't know and i -- i think one very interesting question is how does that apply to other materials and other goods across the board. i'd be happy to work with my association and others to look into that for you. >> i think i was looking for you to expound just on the construction industry in general, right. but we can have that conversation offline. >> i would love to do that, thank you. >> thank you, appreciate your time i yield my time, mr. chairman. >> mr. desaulnier. >> thank you. i want to thank the witnesses and the committee, exciting moment, the biggest investment the bipartisan infrastructure law, since the eisenhower administration, where he

advocated for good-paying union jobs, republican president who once said only a fool would get in the way of an american worker bag able to organize. so different time. i think in the context of what we look at this investment, we can't look at this as just the increase in one year's budget. this is 70 years of trying to reinvest. the civil engineers put out their annual report every year, i've been reading it for a long time. they put us at the bottom of developed countries because of our investment in repair. we haven't indexed our gas tax for inflation. at a federal level. in california where i'm from we had the voters approve an increase and they improve -- approved it overwhelmingly because they knew it was a good investment. here's an opportunity to invest in a way that we haven't done for really 70 years that has multipliers throughout the economy. it's a real accomplishment.

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 that as a former small business owner, i know when building trades were work and the operating engineers were work, i had more customers just like executives. so we have a $786 billion backlog in -- of road and bridge capital repairs according to civil engineers. $435 billion needed to retear existing roads. $125 billion for bridge repair. $120 billion for system repair. and in all these contexts, the area i represent in san francisco bay area, as the economy has grown, silicon valley grew, we moved away from the coast. as the american economy shifted to more of a pacific rhyme

bicoastal economy, another port of oakland, mr. dellinger, i have a question for you and mr. colvin, in the 680 corridor which is about the third tier of interstate highways in the bay areas in my district we have a grant that's 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 685-80 corridor, headquarter to -- headquarters to bank of america and chevron over the years, also where silicon valley's employees live, in addition to that, because the port of oakland being the fourth busiest port in the country, one of the biggest exporters to china. we look at tariffs, we have to consider that as well. this investment that we're already putting people to work for in the fourth, fifth largest economy in the world, what happens now. so mr. colvin, you know, this plan has been in our regional transportation plan since i was in local government.

every two years we review it. there's an urgency for it just like the civil engineers say nationally. and new it's being held up. what does that do to our work force, union and nonunion, these are all good-paying union jobs. it goes to main street too. what does that do when we're in this uncertainty. we're ready to start doing contracts, get our environmental review done. what's the consequences for american workers when we have these kinds of cases? >> i think in the same way short-term extensions of the program are really harmful to spending in maul and large projects. i think the challenges extend to work force and other -- i'm sorry. i think sort of the absurdity of this, if you hold majorities in the senate, house and presidency, and you don't like some element of an existing law, then you have the opportunity to change it. you know. the notion that, i think, that

the vast majority of programs will be unaffected, i think that's inexcusable. the law is the law. again, there's a path forward here if you don't like it which is change it. but these disruptions are arbitrary and they just hurt this country, that's all. >> mr. dellinger, could you just comment, the fourth busiest port of the country, your trucks like to go east, we like to load them going west with almonds and other exports out, can you speak briefly to the importance of getting those projects done for your constituent groups. >> as i mentioned today on several occasions, roads and bridges are work space. anything we can do to improve is appreciated. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman, yield back. >> mr. collins, you're recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

i kind of want to take a little different tack in what i want to talk about. mr. dellinger, like you i've got about 40 years of experience. my dad really believed in child labor. so i've got a little bit of experience in the trucking business as well. and i kind of want to hit on a couple of things. probably sound like a basketball the way i bounce around but if you'll bear with me a little bit. i want -- i saw your -- several of y'all's testimony, i kind of want to package all this in where i want to go, talking about whether it was truck porking or driver shortages, or just inflationary things that you've seen in trucking. and i want to ask you where tort reform would fit into the equation. when i think of things even like truck parking 10. , 15 years ago, we parked at the

consign yes or the shipper. that way we'd be there to get loaded or ready to get unloaded. now you can't do things like that. because of the liability. that's sitting out there. with all the nuclear verdicts 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 report out there on the federal level. i know we're running a lot of cases now, trying to move them to the federal bench. in transportation. with interstate commerce. >> let neume go back to parking, i you're correct. for manier yoos, you were able to park at the consigne or shipper. and what's happened i guess in planning a lot of time they don't plan for enough of the traffic that's coming in for the daily input or output. and so a lot of times that isn't possible. and then as you mentioned, because of the liabilities, you talk about inflation.

before i touch on tort reform, we've seen our insurance, our total insurance pack, i'm not going to say strictly liability, increase since 2020, 42%. over the last five >> it is big for us and a lot of it is because i'm going to say nuclear verdicts and buying insurance. the association works through the federation's state-by-state to change some of the laws and i am going to mention very quickly and that is the seatbelt bag rule. you can have an accident and be severe injuries but the entries are may be caused by the person being ejected from the vehicle

because they did not have their seatbelt. that is not admissible in court in the state of north carolina. >> or anywhere. >> there's a few states where it has been changed. touching on the tort reform, i guess there's three things from a federal level. that's to make it a crime to stage accidents, putting an end to third-party financing, and if you don't know what third party financing is, i would challenge you to go to youtube and look a few years back. 60 minutes did an episode on third-party financing. but what they do is they tell you it is a lot better investment than the stock market returns but the final being to move claims to the federal court. when i say claims, accidents. maybe it is a certain dollar, whether it is 700 $50 million claymore $750,000 claim which is

the minimum insurance or if it is $1 million. i know this would may be tax the federal courts but you know, we need some type of protection in our industry from these runaway claims. >> i agree and i appreciate your response. i know you were talking about increases in 20% to 30% for every year you don't get a project started or finished and i know for a fact that road building contractors out there, they had their bids by 30% just for the permitting lawsuits from the environmentalists that are going to come with any project, doesn't matter what it is. i would venture to say that's probably a lot of the reason you see a lot of times these projects are being delayed. >> i think there are projects in every state that are delayed by lawsuits associated with federal resource laws and you are

absolutely right. every year that a project is delayed, whether it is because of that or other reasons, the cost of that project is going to go up and certainly for the last four or five years, we have seen those percentage increases due to the impact of inflation. >> right. i know i am running over on time but i just wanted to add not only do we pay around $15,000 federal excise tax on trucks but we paid on every tire we purchase. we have taxes and sales tax in every state that we have and that is federal and state so trucking is very well taxed. >> we got five minutes into a vote on the floor so i'm going to try to get our last two questions in real quick. mr. garcia. >> thank you, chairman. i will be brief. i just want to say thanks to our witnesses. i was the mayor of long beach before i got to congress. we have a city department, one of the largest in the united

states so i know investment in infrastructure for rail, for highways, for multimodal transit, all of the above is william and. as we all know, a huge chunk of america's goods, 25% of them come through long beach and los angeles to the rest of the country. investments like the bipartisan infrastructure law are so important to our port, to long beach, to the region, and to all the jobs that are happening not just at home but across the country. thanks to investments in ports and the supply chain i want to add really quick i know two things. i was grateful you brought up congestion briefly in your subcommittee and i want to just let you know also that i think it is important 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 and investments in sustainability. these are ways to address our congestion issues. just a shout out.

of course, really important for us at the port of long beach. thank you for that. i just wanted to also just briefly if you can say how important the infrastructure investment has been to vulcan and the port of long beach as closing remarks? >> for us, it allows us to move material in and get it to infrastructure projects, public, private, residential, nonresidential across california. that official movement and having that pathway is essential for us to be able to disrepute those materials. >> thank you. what of long beach received $280 million plus as part of the mega grant that will allow us to do a lot of real programs and get goods across the country faster so thank you very much to our witnesses and the chairman. >> good afternoon, mr. dillinger. as you know all too well, california has imposed a number of nonsensical policies and

regulations on trucking that have wreaked havoc on the industry and 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? >> i think it is important that the administration looks at the greenhouse gas -- reopen that and look at those items. i mentioned earlier today that basically they have been mandating things and there has been patchwork by the states that have been involved as well but we operate in all 48 states and then basically, we need the federal government to step forward and take control of our destiny. >> thank you and you have also testified about how a lot of

truckers are independent owner operators who provide a vital part of our workforce and are a great example of the american dream and how that model has come under siege in california nationally. could you talk about some of the ways we might be able to push back on what is happening in order to preserve the independent contractor model? >> it is a very important model for the industry. it has been around for 90 years and it allows people to own their own equipment. what they do is they leased to companies and basically, that model is being challenged. they are an employee and not an owner operators so to speak. so basically, we need protection from a federal standpoint. you know, we don't need a patchwork of state telling us what needs to take ways from that standpoint and then if you look at a lot of the companies

that exist today, that is how they started one truck begat two, begat 10. >> thank you very much. we will be working on both things. protecting independent contractors. finally, i think the original witness from your association was from georgia and i was going to ask him about the expansion into atlanta but perhaps you can address the question sort of more generally in terms of how the likelihood that autonomous vehicles will become more prevalent has affected your planning and the issues that we have discussed today. >> you are right, commissioner mcmurray. he regrets he is not able to be here because of the winter storm that the southern part of the united states is experiencing. the state dot's across the country are preparing for the growth of autonomous vehicles and connected vehicles within the transportation system as a

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

>> that is a very important point. i yelled back. >> the gentleman yields back and 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. it's very helpful to have for the record as we embark on reauthorizing surface transportation so thank you again. with that, the subcommittee stands in adjournment. >> on thursday, president trump to lead the fbi will be on capitol hilpeak to [captions copyright nationaln. cable satellite corp. 2025] he isormer justice senior counsel to the houseorks

intelligence community. you can watch his cation before the senate judiciary committee on c-span and you can also watch on sea -- the free c-span video app or online at c-span.org. >> c-span. democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more including charter communications. >> charter is proud to be recognized as one of the best internet providers and we are just getting started, building 100,000 miles of new infrastructure to reach those who need it most. >> charter communications supports c-span as public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> on thursday, president trump'nomie for director of national intelligence, tulsi gabbard, will be on l hi to take questions about her

tion s seed in the army natiuard and army reserve nce 2003 she also represented hawaii and congress as a democrat and competed e 2020 democratic presidential nomination but then switched to the republican p in 2024, becoming an outspoken supporter tru campaign. watch the seelec committee at 10:0 easrn on c-span, c-span now, our free mobile app, or online at c-span >> elise stefanik testified at her confirmation hearing to be ssador to the united nations before the senate foreign relatimmittee. republican fielded questions about the russiane war, the israel-hamas cease-fire, and reforming the u.n.