Hearings to examine issues impacting the trucking and commercial bus industries.

1[Senate Hearing 119-173]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                        S. Hrg. 119-17356                    SHIFTING GEARS: ISSUES IMPACTING7         THE TRUCKING AND COMMERCIAL BUS INDUSTRIES IN THE U.S.89=======================================================================1011                                HEARING1213                               before the1415                  SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION,16                     FREIGHT, PIPELINES, AND SAFETY1718                                 OF THE1920                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,21                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION22                          UNITED STATES SENATE2324                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2526                             FIRST SESSION2728                               __________2930                             JULY 22, 20253132                               __________3334    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and35                             Transportation3637[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3839                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov4041                                __________4243                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4461-704 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 20254546-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4748       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION4950                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS5152                             FIRST SESSION5354                       TED CRUZ, Texas, Chairman55JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington,56ROGER WICKER, Mississippi                Ranking57DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota58JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii59DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts60MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan61TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin62TED BUDD, North Carolina             TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois63ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               JACKY ROSEN, Nevada64JOHN CURTIS, Utah                    BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico65BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Colorado66TIM SHEEHY, Montana                  JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania67SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  ANDY KIM, New Jersey68CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming              LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware69                 Brad Grantz, Republican Staff Director70           Nicole Christus, Republican Deputy Staff Director71                     Liam McKenna, General Counsel72                   Lila Harper Helms, Staff Director73                 Melissa Porter, Deputy Staff Director74                     Jonathan Hale, General Counsel75                                 ------7677 SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION, FREIGHT, PIPELINES, AND SAFETY7879TODD YOUNG, Indiana, Chairman        GARY PETERS, Michigan, Ranking80JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota81ROGER WICKER, Mississippi            BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii82DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts83DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois84ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico85BERNIE MORENO, Ohio                  ANDY KIM, New Jersey86SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia8788                           C O N T E N T S8990                              ----------91                                                                   Page92Hearing held on July 22, 2025....................................     193Statement of Senator Young.......................................     194Statement of Senator Peters......................................     295Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     496Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    4597Statement of Senator Moreno......................................    4898Statement of Senator Lujan.......................................    5199Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    53100Statement of Senator Klobuchar...................................    56101Statement of Senator Markey......................................    58102    Letter dated July 22, 2025 to Hon. Todd Young and Hon. Gary103      Peters from Zach Cahalan, Executive Director, Truck Safety104      Coalition (TSC)............................................    60105106                               Witnesses107108Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive Officer, American109  Trucking Associations..........................................     5110    Prepared statement...........................................     7111Lewie Pugh, Executive Vice President, Owner-Operator Independent112  Drivers Association............................................    18113    Prepared statement...........................................    19114Fred C. Ferguson, President and Chief Executive Officer, American115  Bus Association................................................    30116    Prepared statement...........................................    32117Sean M. O'Brien, General President, International Brotherhood of118  Teamsters......................................................    34119    Prepared statement...........................................    36120121                                Appendix122123Letter dated July 21, 2025 to Hon. Todd Young and Hon. Gary124  Peters from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety..............    65125Anne C. Reinke, President and CEO, Intermodal Association of126  North America (IANA), prepared statement.......................    70127Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA), prepared statement....    72128Response to written questions submitted to Chris Spear by:129    Hon. Todd Young..............................................    80130    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    82131    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    84132    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    85133    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................    85134Response to written questions submitted to Lewie Pugh by:135    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    87136    Hon. Todd Young..............................................    87137    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    88138    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    89139    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................    90140Response to written questions submitted to Fred C. Ferguson by:141    Hon. Todd Young..............................................    90142    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    91143    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    92144    Hon. Ben Ray Lujan...........................................    94145Response to written questions submitted to Sean M. O'Brien by:146    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    94147    Hon. Maria Cantwell..........................................    95148    Hon. Tammy Duckworth.........................................    96149150                    SHIFTING GEARS: ISSUES IMPACTING151         THE TRUCKING AND COMMERCIAL BUS INDUSTRIES IN THE U.S.152153                              ----------154155                         TUESDAY, JULY 22, 2025156157                               U.S. Senate,158  Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight,159                             Pipelines, and Safety,160        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,161                                                    Washington, DC.162    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in163room SR-253, Senate Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Todd164Young, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.165    Present: Senators Young [presiding], Cruz, Fischer, Moreno,166Peters, Cantwell, Klobuchar, Markey, and Lujan.167168             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG,169                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA170171    Senator Young. Good morning, everyone. As we look forward172to a timely opportunity to review the current landscape of173these industries and to inform our work on this committee as we174draft legislation.175    Over the past few hearings I have made it a priority to176examine where within our Federal ecosystem outdated or177unnecessary rules exist, if there are any, rules that don't178impact the safety of our roads, or that can be costly for those179in the private sector looking to increase safety, improve180efficiency, and innovate to create a more robust and effective181industry that helps power our economy.182    For instance, last week during our nomination hearing of183Mr. Barrs to serve as administrator of the Agency, I commented184on FMCSA rules, which would require truck drivers to manually185place warning triangles behind a vehicle when it is stopped or186pulled over. In the most severe circumstances, this could187require drivers to exit their vehicles in severe weather when188visibility might be poor, and walk along busy highways next to189oncoming traffic.190    I think we all understand the benefit of informing other191drivers of stopped vehicles on the shoulder of the road, but if192there are avenues that could allow for industry to provide the193same or greater level of efficacy while increasing safety, then194I believe Congress should remove bureaucratic red tape195prohibiting this innovation.196    This is just one example where I think we can improve upon197our rules and regulations to give industry more flexibility to198innovate and voluntarily deploy different technologies and199applications to advance the safety of our roads. I hope this200hearing could help highlight additional opportunities as we201work on this Surface Transportation Reauthorization.202    Our reauthorization work also provides a pathway to203accomplish common-sense policy solutions to address issues204crippling our transportation network. Earlier this Congress, I205led a hearing in this subcommittee examining the drastic rise206of cargo theft and how it hurts businesses, our supply chains,207and the American people.208    That hearing highlighted the complexity of freight fraud,209and cargo theft, and the need for Congress to take a210comprehensive approach to stopping these criminals. Since that211hearing, I have learned of the need to update regulations,212implement safeguards for consumers and businesses, ensure our213law enforcement agencies are well equipped and prepared to214respond to any wrongdoing, and encourage or provide for greater215cross-government collaboration.216    This hearing provides an opportunity to further these217conversations and to hear from industry leaders representing218voices afflicted by the freight fraud and how we can work to219address these issues together.220    I know this is of the utmost importance to the Chairman of221the Full Committee, Senator Cruz, as well as our colleagues on222the Democratic side of the aisle, and I stand ready to work223with them to address this national and economic crisis.224    Last, I believe for our commercial trucking and bus225industries, I believe that they are the safest, most effective226and--among the most effective industries we have, and we must227also focus on improving our roadway infrastructure so that they228continue to be so.229    This includes maintaining road quality and focusing Federal230funding to leverage state, local, and private dollars for231infrastructure projects that will vastly improve roadway232safety. My home state of Indiana is home to over 97,000 miles233of public roadways. And as the crossroads of America, Hoosiers234rely heavily on our transportation infrastructure.235    In Evansville, Indiana, I have been working hard for years236to secure Federal funding for the I-69 Ohio River Crossing237Project to fill a critical final gap in the Nation's238transportation infrastructure, as it links I-69 between239Kentucky and Indiana over the Ohio River.240    This is the type of project which will mitigate traffic241congestion, improve overall roadway safety, and significantly242leverage non-Federal dollars, the type of project where Federal243infrastructure dollars should be focused.244    We have an experienced panel here with leaders representing245voices across the commercial trucking and bus industries. So I246thank all of you for your willingness to testify here today and247for your contributions to our dialogue.248    I now recognize Ranking Member Peters for any opening249remarks he might have.250251                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS,252                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN253254    Senator Peters. Thank you, Chairman Young, and thank you to255our esteemed witnesses for being here with us here today.256    Today we will be hearing from the trucking and motor coach257industries and workforce about the day-to-day challenges they258face, and how Congress can come together to hopefully address259them. Our nation's truck drivers are the backbone of our260economy. These frontline workers spend long hours, often away261from their families, at all times of day and night transporting262goods across the country to America's communities.263    In fact, in Michigan, over 80 percent of our communities264depend exclusively on trucks to move their goods, especially in265those rural, hard-to-reach corners of our state. It is not an266exaggeration to say that the trucking industry touches every267American's daily life each and every day. That is especially268true for Americans who have made trucking their career. There269are nearly 250,000 trucking jobs in Michigan alone and making270up one in fifteen jobs throughout my state.271    From long- and short-haul drivers, to mechanics,272dispatchers, logistics coordinators, these jobs provide key273opportunities for Michiganders. And I am committed to making274sure that these jobs live up to their promise for Michiganders275by providing fair wages, health care, and retirement benefits.276    And that is why I am proud to have one of the foremost277leaders of that fight here to testify today, Teamsters'278President, Sean O'Brien. Mr. O'Brien and members of this panel279know today very well, the single most important factor in280success of our truck drivers, and this industry, as well as for281road users across the country, is safety.282    And I believe this committee must prioritize safety in the283next Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill for both284truckers and those who share the road with. From the deployment285of advanced safety technologies, and driver assistance systems,286to investing in safer streets, stronger bridges, tackling truck287parking issues, and defending the drivers access to rest, and288bathrooms, and to addressing both the freight fraud and theft289as well.290    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on how291they think Congress and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety292Administration can tackle these issues, and how we can ensure293the FMCSA follows through on effective enforcement. I know the294FMCSA will need resources and direction from Congress to do295this, and I hope we can work across the aisle to make it296happen.297    And finally, I want to acknowledge that today's trucking298industry, as well as all freight and multimodal industries, is299facing incredibly challenging economic environment with this300administration's chaotic approach to tariffs. This doesn't just301impact truckers and consumers, changing rules, raising prices,302and economic uncertainty, impacts the manufacturers who build303the trucks, that move our goods and keep our drivers safe.304    In Michigan, our robust commercial vehicle manufacturing305supply chain relies on cross-border trade with Canada and with306a global supply chain. Many of these businesses have been307forced to consider laying off workers or pausing investments308due to a lack of certainty created by constantly shifting309tariff policies.310    We can and should pursue policies to create commercial311trucking manufacturing jobs here at home. But continued chaos312will only serve to harm U.S. manufacturers, consumers, and our313intermodal freight system.314    I am thoroughly looking forward to learning more about the315challenges in this space as well from each of our panelists316today. Thank you again for our witnesses for being here today317and for your contributions to this industry that critically318support the American economy.319    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.320    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Peters.321    Senator Cantwell, you are recognized.322323               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,324                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON325326    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to327you and Senator Peters for holding this important hearing. It328is a very important issue, in general, our transportation329network, and certainly moving forward on a Service330Transportation Bill.331    In Washington, our state, our economy runs on ports, and332runs on trade, and relies on the efficient movement of those333goods, the trucks carrying a majority of freight in our state,334moving nearly $400 billion worth of goods every year. So the335industry's contribution to our economy cannot be336underestimated.337    We must emphasize the importance, as my colleague from338Michigan just did, on the safety of commercial vehicles. Last339year, we had 54 fatal accidents in the State of Washington340involving large trucks. These incidents have devastating341impacts on the families and the communities.342    And just this past weekend, we saw a serious one with343environmental consequences, a fuel truck crashed off Highway344101, spilling 3,000 gallons of diesel gasoline, jeopardizing345tap water for 19,000 people, and damaging vulnerable salmon346habitat. So as we consider the Surface Transportation Act, yes,347safety must be a priority for that.348    We know the cost of increase of transportation goods are349being felt by consumers. My colleague just mentioned that as350well. Delays due to congestion add more than a hundred billion351dollars to the cost of moving goods every year. And that is why352in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, I made sure everybody353knew: Freight can't wait. If we don't have freight moving, we354lose our competitiveness as a nation.355    And that is why the Mega Program, the INFRA Program, and356the Ports Grant program are all about eliminating the357bottlenecks that happen in transportation that mean we can't358get our product to market in a timely fashion. 34,000 truck359drivers in the State of Washington are essential to that360freight network and the amount of freight moved by trucks361across our state is expected to increase in the next 20 years.362    So we must ensure that drivers have fair wages, access to363safe resting places, and high quality training programs. And in364addition, we have got to get rid of the high cost of tariffs365and the impact that they are having on our economy. Proposed366tariffs on trucks and truck parts could increase the cost of a367new truck by $35,000. And on top of that, fluctuations in368freight volumes as business scrambled to respond to on-again,369off-again policies have also caused uncertainty for truck370drivers.371    Last month, the Port of Seattle and Tacoma reported that37220--reported 20 percent fewer truck visits to the port compared373to June the previous year. So we obviously are seeing the374impact at our ports. So Congress must do everything we can to375help in this effort.376    So thank you, Mr. Chairman, and look forward to working377with you and the Ranking Member on these important Surface378Transportation Acts, and will be back to ask questions after379the witnesses. Thank you.380    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.381    We are going to dive right in. I would like to introduce382our witnesses for today. Each of them has extensive knowledge383about the truck and motor coach industries.384    Our first witness is Mr. Chris Spear, President and CEO of385the American Trucking Associations, his own extensive386experience in transportation and public policy, having held387senior positions at Hyundai Motor Company, Honeywell388International, and served as the Assistant Secretary of Labor389for Policy, at the U.S. Department of Labor. Welcome, sir.390    Our second witness is Lewie Pugh, Executive Vice President391of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association. Before392joining OOIDA, Mr. Pugh was an owner operator for nearly 23393years, and he earned the distinguished Million-Miles Safe394Drivers Award. Welcome, sir.395    Our third witness today is Mr. Fred Ferguson, he is396President and CEO of the American Bus Association. Mr. Ferguson397also serves as the President of the National Bus Traffic398Association, and the ABA Foundation. He has over 15 years of399experience in public policy across the government, nonprofit,400and private sectors. Welcome, sir.401    And then last, but not leastly, our final witness is Mr.402Sean O'Brien. He is General President of the International403Brotherhood of Teamsters. Mr. O'Brien is a fourth-generation404Teamster, a union that represents over one million workers405across the United States of America and Canada. It is a406privilege to have you here, sir. Welcome.407    So we will now recognize Mr. Spear to deliver his opening408statement. Mr. Spear, you are recognized for 5 minutes.409410    STATEMENT OF CHRIS SPEAR, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE411            OFFICER, AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS412413    Mr. Spear. Thank you, Chairman Young, Ranking Member414Peters, and Members of the Subcommittee. I want to thank you415for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the American416Trucking Associations.417    For over 90 years, ATA has represented an industry that418today employs 8.5 million of the hardest working men and women419in the country. We appreciate your commitment to safety. Every420American benefits from a modern, safe, and efficient421transportation network. It is even more essential to the three422and a half million truck drivers who are indispensable to our423way of life. Roads and bridges are their shop floor.424    ATA was among the first to support passage of the landmark425Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which boosted highway funding by42638 percent. Unfortunately, rising construction costs and red427tape have eroded the impact of Federal grants. One consequence428is record-high congestion now costing our economy more than429$109 billion, the equivalent of 435,000 truck drivers sitting430idle for an entire year.431    The next infrastructure bill has got to, not only alleviate432those bottlenecks, but prioritize other critical projects like433truck parking. There is currently one parking space for every43411 truckers. Expanding parking access is not only the right435thing to do for road safety, it is the bare minimum we owe our436drivers, particularly women drivers who deserve a secure, well-437lit place to rest.438    Trucking offers a pathway to rewarding careers. That was439the motivation behind the Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot440Program established by Chairman Young, and Full Committee441Ranking Member Cantwell, which allow qualified 18-, 19-, and44220-year-olds to operate safely in interstate commerce. Every443member of this panel should be invested in creating pathways444for 18 to 20-year-olds to operate safely in interstate commerce445and to be able to access good paying jobs in the trucking446industry.447    However, self-serving, factless claims that there is no448driver shortage undermine the serious work of this committee.449Driver pay does not go up 19 percent during a freight recession450unless there is a shortage of qualified drivers. You may also451hear today about how the Biden-Su Independent Contractor Rule452helps our Nation's 350,000 independent truckers.453    I encourage members of this committee to actually ask the454independent contractors about that, because they are going to455tell you that this rule takes away their freedom of choice to456be their own boss and to grow their own business.457    The trucking industry goes to great lengths to keep458roadways safe. Every year, motor carriers invest $14 billion in459safety technologies and driver training, including460apprenticeships. ATA is ready to partner with this subcommittee461and the DOT on deploying proven technologies that focus462drivers' awareness as well as mitigate and reduce crashes.463    Ground-breaking developments in the autonomous vehicle464space hold future promise for improving safety while enhancing,465not displacing, the invaluable role of truck drivers, our466industry's greatest asset. The most important safety action we467can take is ensuring that unsafe drivers do not get behind the468wheel in the first place. That requires drivers being469proficient in the English language, as well as proven drug470testing protocols.471    As more states legalize recreational marijuana, and opioids472plague our communities, Federal acceptance of both oral and473hair testing are vital to keep unsafe drivers off the road.474    Another issue that should unite us is addressing the475meteoric rise of cargo theft. This economic and national476security threat has exploded in a few--in the last few years477with annual losses now totaling a staggering $35 billion. To478protect our supply chain and employees, we need legislation to479combat fraud and empower Federal law enforcement to take the480lead. ATA testified 25 times before Congress, helping shape the481current Highway Bill. Today is our seventh hearing in just 7482months.483    We fully understand your responsibility is the safety484title, arguably the most important title in the Highway Bill.485This effort is transformational opportunity, it is not only486going to help our industry, but the entire supply chain and our487Nation's economy.488    Thank you again for your leadership and I look forward to489answering all of your questions.490    [The prepared statement of Mr. Spear follows:]491492   Prepared Statement of Chris Spear, President and Chief Executive493                               Officer,494                     American Trucking Associations495Introduction496    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, and members of the497Subcommittee, I am grateful for the opportunity to testify today on the498key issues facing the trucking industry. I am the President & CEO of499the American Trucking Associations (ATA), a 90-year-old federation and500the largest national trade organization representing the 8.5 million501men and women working in the trucking industry, including more than 3.5502million professional truck drivers.503    As a 50-state federation that encompasses 37,000 motor carriers and504suppliers, ATA proudly represents every sector of the industry. From505less-than-truckload to truckload carriers, from agriculture and506livestock transporters to auto haulers and household goods movers, and507from large fleets to mom-and-pop one-truck operators, ATA serves as the508single unified voice of the trucking industry.509    Trucking is the backbone of the Nation's economy, with more than 80510percent of U.S. communities relying exclusively on trucking to meet511their freight transportation needs. According to Federal data, heavy512and tractor-trailer truck driver is a top-ten most common occupation in51318 states.\1\ These truck drivers are the unsung heroes of our supply514chain and keep the wheels of our economy turning. In 2023, they drove515almost 330 billion miles--the equivalent of 13 million trips around the516globe--to deliver roughly 11.4 billion tons of freight,\2\ 73 percent517of the Nation's annual tonnage.\3\ Over the next decade, those drivers518will be tasked with hauling an additional 2.7 billion tons of freight519above current volumes.\4\520---------------------------------------------------------------------------521    \1\ Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics. U.S. Department of522Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. May 2024. https://www.bls.gov/oes/523current/oessrcst.htm524    \2\ American Trucking Trends 2025. American Trucking Associations,5252025.526    \3\ Freight Transportation Forecast 2024 to 2035. American Trucking527Associations, 2024.528    \4\ Ibid.529---------------------------------------------------------------------------530    ATA was one of the first industry trade associations to endorse the531bipartisan Senate bill that became the landmark 2021 Infrastructure532Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). We hope and trust that the533collaboration that provided increased resources to counter years of534neglect to our Nation's highways will continue with the next535reauthorization even as current law expires months before a midterm536election.537    IIJA represented a historic 38 percent increase in funding for538roads and bridges, which are the shop floor for our Nation's truck539drivers. Unfortunately, the impact of this historic investment was540diminished by inflation, political distractions, and economic541uncertainty over the past four years. Over the first nine months of542Fiscal Year 2024, the government spent approximately $35 billion on543bridges and highways, but after adjusting for higher construction544costs, that's 24 percent less than the same period in the year before545the IIJA was enacted.\5\ Some important programs were rolled out546slowly, and with additional red tape beyond the requirements laid out547in statute.548---------------------------------------------------------------------------549    \5\ Rampell, Catherine, ``The legacy of Bidenomics: Maybe not much550at all.'' Washington Post, 7 January 2025, https://551www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/01/07/biden-economy-biden552omics-legacy-inflation/553---------------------------------------------------------------------------554    Since the enactment of the IIJA, freight markets have remained555stagnant while costs for motor carriers have increased. Analysis from556the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) shows that,557excluding fuel costs, marginal costs per mile for truck operations have558risen to the highest recorded levels ($1.779 per mile on average) in559the history of its annual Operational Costs of Trucking report,\6\ all560while ATA's trucking activity report shows that for-hire truckload561freight has declined 3 percent between December 2021 and May 2025.\7\562As we look towards the next surface transportation reauthorization, it563is vitally important that we find ways to make investments and set564policies that will empower trucking companies of all sizes to put565skilled, well-trained drivers in newer, safer trucks on our freight566corridors.567---------------------------------------------------------------------------568    \6\ An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2025 Update.569American Transportation Research Institute, July 2025.570    \7\ ATA Trucking Activity Report (TRAC). American Trucking571Associations, 2025.572---------------------------------------------------------------------------573    In a difficult environment, this Committee has found bipartisan574consensus on issues important to the trucking industry, such as cutting575red tape for supply chain workers to obtain valuable credentials576through passage of the Transportation Security Screening Modernization577Act last year. We are grateful that the Committee has already shined a578light on the growing threat of cargo theft for our supply chains in its579February hearing titled, ``Grand Theft Cargo: Examining the Costly580Threat to Consumers and the U.S. Supply Chain,'' and advanced common-581sense bipartisan bills such as the Household Goods Shipping Consumer582Protection Act and the Promoting Resilient Supply Chains Act.583    This hearing is a tremendous opportunity for the Committee to584consider how to improve highway safety, recruit the next generation of585truck drivers to fulfilling careers, protect supply chains from586sophisticated and organized criminals, and ensure long-term American587leadership in innovation and infrastructure. We commend you for588bringing this panel together, and for your continued efforts to craft589policies that will ensure the safe and efficient movement of our590Nation's goods.591Opportunities to Increase Highway Safety592    Safety is a key focus and priority for the trucking industry. We593welcomed IIJA investments in Federal roadway safety programs, and the594industry welcomes partnerships with agencies and technology innovators595that will make our highways safer. Trucking companies make major596investments every day in proven safety technologies for their fleets:597ATA's 2022 Safety Spend Survey showed that the industry invested $14598billion annually in safety, an increase of over 40 percent above the599preceding 2015 survey.\8\ Federal regulatory reforms supported by ATA600have reduced both the number of truck-involved crashes and the crash601rate over the past several decades. However, more must be done to602improve highway safety for all motorists. ATA looks forward to603supporting workable requirements to deploy proven safety technologies,604improve drug testing to meaningfully curb the rise of impaired driving,605ensure compliance with Federal training requirements, and enforce606driver qualification requirements to make roadways safer for all road607users.608---------------------------------------------------------------------------609    \8\ 2022 ATA Safety Spend Survey. American Trucking Associations,6102023. https://www611.trucking.org/news-insights/new-study-underlines-trucking-industrys-612commitment-safety.613---------------------------------------------------------------------------614Clear Requirements for Proven Safety Technologies615    Congress and the trucking industry need to ensure that the safety616technologies on commercial vehicles enhance drivers' attention and617alertness while on the road. One technology that needs immediate618attention is Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB). AEB, and the suite of619tools that support it, is a prime example of a proven safety technology620that can reduce and mitigate crashes. Because AEB is already a mature621and well adopted safety technology in the heavy-duty sector, Congress622directed the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) in 2021 to mandate623AEB on all new heavy-duty trucks, ensuring the proliferation of this624critical safety tool. This is because AEB technology had been available625for more than 10 years in the heavy-duty sector at that point with626clearly demonstrated benefits. It is worth noting that this technology627has gone through many iterations over these 10+ years to improve its628effectiveness, integration, and driver experience based on industry629feedback.630    Last year, DOT proposed an AEB mandate for industry segments631outside of heavy-duty, where the technology is still under development632and has not been widely adopted. This exceeded Congressional intent to633focus on heavy-duty where the technology is mature. AEB is not widely634available in medium-duty and in particular vocational vehicle segments.635New developments for different vehicle configurations, braking636technologies, and sensor placements would be required to deploy AEB in637these segments in the proposed timeframe. While industry is currently638working on these issues, the systems are not yet developed at the same639level of effectiveness, integration, and driver experience as heavy-640duty. The mandate also proposed overly aggressive braking standards641that effectively treat AEB as a replacement for the driver, a standard642for which AEB is not designed. AEB and the suite of tools around it643have always been designed as a driver assistance technology. AEB is644designed specifically to help the driver respond more effectively, buy645time for the driver to avoid hazards, and potentially mitigate crashes646if the driver cannot respond in time. Industry has spent immense time647and effort building driver trust in this technology and wants to ensure648the technology is rolled out appropriately and over a realistic649timeframe--when it is truly ready--in order to maintain that trust. ATA650urges this Subcommittee to provide oversight of DOT on this matter to651ensure that regulation focuses on heavy-duty AEB, that the DOT applies652performance requirements that represent the design intent of the653technology, and that DOT works with industry to overcome barriers to654implementation. Industry is eager to work with the DOT on AEB beyond655the heavy-duty sector, but these efforts should be separate so as not656to delay a rule in heavy-duty which could save lives in the near term.657Testing for Drug Use658    Ensuring that our roads are free from drivers under the influence659of controlled substances is a top priority for the trucking industry.660Since the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) Drug and661Alcohol Clearinghouse launched in 2020, more than 308,000 positive drug662tests among commercial motor vehicle drivers have been recorded,663highlighting a persistent and alarming trend in substance use that664threatens the safety of our Nation's highways.\9\ Of these positive665drug tests, marijuana remains the leading drug violation among drivers,666accounting for roughly 60 percent of positive tests annually--a667troubling statistic that underscores its widespread impact on highway668safety.669---------------------------------------------------------------------------670    \9\ Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse: March 2025 Monthly Summary671Report. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety672Administration, March 2025.673---------------------------------------------------------------------------674    Last year, Attorney General Merrick Garland moved to reschedule675marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III substance, raising676serious concerns about the unintended consequences for highway safety.677Such a move would have weakened zero-tolerance policies, compromised a678robust Federal drug testing program currently in place for safety-679sensitive professions, significantly complicated enforcement, and680potentially increased marijuana use among all drivers. Given the681absence of a validated standard for measuring marijuana impairment and682the fact that it already accounts for most drug violations in the FMCSA683Clearinghouse, rescheduling marijuana would jeopardize the safety of684millions of road users. This Subcommittee must ensure that effective685and robust drug testing protocols for safety-sensitive occupations686remain intact, and that transportation safety is prioritized regardless687of the legal status of marijuana at the Federal level.688    Additionally, employers need to be equipped with the most689effective, reliable tools for ensuring a drug-free driving workforce.690The 2015 FAST Act required the Department of Health and Human Services691(HHS) to issue guidelines for hair testing--a proven alternative drug692testing method that allows for a longer detection window than693traditional urinalysis and yields more comprehensive results. However,694a decade later, HHS has yet to finalize the guidance in accordance with695Congress' original intent, leaving DOT without the means to accept and696recognize hair testing results in its Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse.697ATA supports efforts like H.R. 4320, which would allow positive hair698testing results to be added to the Clearinghouse and give employers699another tool to ensure that unsafe drivers are not put behind the700wheel. Dereliction of duty by HHS has had disastrous consequences for701highway safety: the absence of guidance means that nothing prevents a702driver who tests positive on a hair test from legally operating a truck703on our Nation's highways today. Another critical tool, oral fluids704testing, remains in regulatory limbo awaiting Federal finalization of705laboratory certifications before it can be used by employers in post-706accident and roadside contexts. Federal acceptance of both oral fluids707and hair testing as independent, alternative testing methods would708allow employers to identify a greater number of safety-sensitive709employees who violate Federal drug laws and keep these unsafe drivers710off the road. We urge this Subcommittee to hold HHS accountable and711require the agency to swiftly complete the regulatory steps necessary712to ensure these critical alternative testing methods are made available713to employers, as well as investigate and identify potential regulatory714barriers that may be adding to ongoing delays.715Distracted Driving716    Addressing distracted driving among all roadway users--commercial717drivers and passenger vehicle drivers--is vitally important to ATA and718its members. ATA recognizes distracted driving--whether manual, visual,719cognitive, or emotional--as a form of impaired driving. Any activity720that diverts a driver's attention threatens roadway and industry safety721and endangers all road users. Far too often, distraction is the cause722of tragedy on our Nation's roadways. According to NHTSA, in 2022,723distraction was a causal factor in 8 percent of fatal crashes and 12724percent of injury crashes; however, those figures are likely much725higher as distraction goes largely underreported in official statistics726due to drivers failing to admit to being distracted, difficulty for law727enforcement to detect distraction, and inconsistent crash reporting.728    ATA is committed to working with this Subcommittee and relevant729stakeholders--law enforcement, Federal and state regulators and730legislators, safety advocates, and drivers--to tackle this epidemic.731This begins with effective and robust enforcement of existing handsfree732and distraction laws. ATA supports federal, state, and local laws733prohibiting handheld wireless device use while driving, emphasizing734truly hands-free operation. These laws and policies should apply to and735be strictly enforced among all motorists, not just commercial drivers,736to promote safer roads. Because commercial drivers rely on essential737in-cab technologies, lawmakers must consider how best to integrate the738safe use of these vital tools while minimizing visual-manual739interaction and distraction and allow safe use of hands-free740technologies such as voice-activated dialing or voice-mail retrieval.741    ATA is also committed to prioritizing awareness, enforcement, and742technology-driven solutions that reduce distracted driving and improve743roadway safety for all. We believe safety campaigns that highlight the744grave consequences of distracted driving can lead to greater awareness745and behavioral changes that ultimately lead to cultural shifts in how746we think about and accept risky driving behaviors. We recognize that747these shifts take time and continuous exposure to safety messaging,748much like the cultural shift towards universal seatbelt use in the7491990s. Thus, it is critical that this Subcommittee ensures critical DOT750funding and other resources dedicated to distracted driving campaigns751and awareness efforts remain intact and, if possible, amplified.752Rigorous Driver Training Standards753    We also urge the Subcommittee to support efforts to ensure a754qualified and well-trained workforce and reject ongoing efforts to755exempt training requirements for new drivers. ATA has long supported756the Entry Level Driver Training (ELDT) rule, which was implemented757three years ago. Ensuring that entry-level drivers receive appropriate758instruction from a consistent, industry-wide curriculum is vital to759improving safety on our Nation's highways. While ELDT has received760nearly universal support from the industry, ATA is aware that the761spread of misinformation led to efforts to undermine the program and762exempt certain individuals from this standardized training curriculum.763We urge this Subcommittee to uphold its commitment to rigorous training764standards for both new and veteran drivers, ensuring the highest level765of safety on our Nation's roads.766    In addition to maintaining the integrity of ELDT requirements,767FMCSA must continue its work to improve oversight of its Training768Provider Registry (TPR). ATA strongly supports efforts to root out769fraudulent or substandard training providers and ensure that only770legitimate, high-quality ELDT-compliant programs are listed on the TPR.771These efforts must include increased auditing, enforcement actions, and772data validation to prevent drivers from accessing incomplete or773inadequate training and testing. Without these safeguards, more774unqualified drivers would be on our Nation's highways--a safety risk775our Nation simply can't afford. ATA and our industry partners oppose776unqualified training providers that allow individuals to obtain a777commercial driver's license (CDL) simply by paying a fee, effectively778circumventing the structured curriculum established by ELDT. While779FMCSA has made progress in establishing tools for ELDT enforcement,780until early June 2025, FMCSA's TPR website showed that only four781training providers have been removed from the TPR since 2023. Federal,782state, and industry stakeholders all recognize that these numbers are783unacceptable given the much larger volume of fraud reports to the784agency. Ensuring the quality of driver education is just as important785as ensuring its consistency, and we commend FMCSA's recent efforts to786close loopholes, remove bad actors from the TPR, and strengthen trust787in the training pipeline by removing over 50 training providers from788the registry in June. While some of these removals were involuntary or789on an emergency basis (based on a provider failing to meet or maintain790Federal and state requirements and ELDT qualifications), many of these791removals were ``voluntary.'' For example, one removal was based on a792training provider closing its doors which suggests an urgent need to793audit the registry and weed out shoddy providers. We urge this794Subcommittee to play a role in pushing this critical action to prevent795exploitation, preserve the value of the ELDT program, and improve796safety.797    Additionally, ATA strongly supports expanded enforcement of driver798qualification requirements, including English Language Proficiency799(ELP). Driver qualification standards are a fundamental component of800ensuring roadway safety. The ability to understand and respond to801traffic signs, communicate with law enforcement, and complete required802reports and logs is essential to the safe operation of commercial803vehicles on our Nation's roadway--and has long been a Federal motor804carrier safety regulation. As outlined in 49 CFR Sec. 391.11(b)(2),805commercial motor vehicle drivers operating in the U.S. must be able to806read and speak English ``sufficiently to converse with the general807public, to understand highway traffic signs and signals. . ., to808respond to official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and809records.'' ATA applauds the Trump Administration and this Congress for810taking action to clarify and enforce this longstanding requirement. In811keeping with the President's April 28th Executive Order, ``Enforcing812Commonsense Rules of the Road for America's Truck Drivers,'' the813Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) reenacted ELP requirements as814part of its Out-of-Service (OOS) criteria for commercial drivers815(effective June 25, 2025). Simultaneously, FMCSA revised its policy and816associated guidance outlining how law enforcement must assess a817driver's ability to meet the Federal ELP requirement. FMCSA's revised818ELP policy sets forth a two-part roadside assessment for roadside819enforcement to determine whether a driver's lack of English proficiency820poses safety risks warranting OOS action including (1) a driver's821ability to communicate effectively with enforcement officers (such as822load contents, origin, and destination), and (2) read and interpret823road signs, including dynamic message signs that display critical824roadway safety advisories.825    ATA supports FMCSA's clarification and revised ELP policy as a826commonsense, safety-driven measure that upholds the principle that all827drivers operating on U.S. roadways must be equipped with the necessary828communication skills to respond in real-time to rapidly evolving829roadway conditions, enforcement directions, or emergency situations. In830an April 2025 letter, ATA also urged DOT to improve tracking of CDL831issuances, including non-domiciled CDLs.\10\ We strongly support832Secretary Duffy's initiative, announced in June, to audit state driver833licensing agencies' practices regarding non-domicile CDL issuance to834ensure that all commercial drivers on our Nation's roadways are835properly qualified and licensed. We urge the Subcommittee to support836continued implementation of this policy and to complement these efforts837with a broader, end-to-end commitment to ensuring that only safe,838qualified commercial drivers--through rigorous training, testing, and839enforcement--are permitted to operate on our Nation's roadways.840---------------------------------------------------------------------------841    \10\ ``Spear, Chris. April 10, 2025. Letter to Secretary of842Transportation Sean Duffy. Available online at: https://843www.trucking.org/sites/default/files/2025-04/ATA_DOT20April%202025%20844Enforcement%20and%20CDL%20issuance%20FINAL4-10-25.pdf.845---------------------------------------------------------------------------846Supporting Trucking Career Pathways and the Dignity of the Driver847    The trucking industry, which serves as the backbone of our Nation's848economy and supply chain, continues to face driver shortages. Due to849the recent freight recession, the driver shortage has been alleviated,850but it has certainly not been eliminated. It is also important to note851that even though the driver shortage may now be less severe than it was852in 2022, the long-term causes of the driver shortage have not changed,853and the industry fully expects the shortage to worsen when the freight854market recovers. Over the next decade, trucking companies will need to855hire roughly 1.2 million new drivers to keep pace with growing freight856demand and an aging workforce.\11\857---------------------------------------------------------------------------858    \11\ ATA Driver Shortage Update 2022. American Trucking859Associations, October 25, 2022. Available online at: https://860ata.msgfocus.com/files/amf_highroad_solution/project_2358/ATA_861Driver_Shortage_Report_2022_Executive_Summary.October22.pdf862---------------------------------------------------------------------------863    Similarly, there is a diesel technician shortage in our industry.864According to data from the TechForce Foundation, an estimated 41,000865additional diesel technicians were needed in 2022, including new866positions for additional work, unfilled prior openings, and replacement867of those leaving the position.\12\ This shortage does not include the868collision repair technicians, tire technicians, etc. that are also in869demand. Long term, without additional skilled technicians to perform870both regular and acute maintenance of trucks, our vehicles will be less871safe and fuel efficient--and so will your automobiles.872---------------------------------------------------------------------------873    \12\ ATA works with TechForce to track the technicians needs of the874industry. TechForce's report on national technician needs is available875upon request. The Committee can contact them through their website:876https://techforce.org/.877---------------------------------------------------------------------------878    These are good-paying, family-sustaining jobs that are not879accompanied with the same debt that often comes with a college degree.880The vast majority of diesel technicians make $50,000-$80,000 per year881in base salary plus bonuses.\13\ Truck drivers make good salaries too,882with truckload drivers earning a median salary of $76,420 per year883according to a 2023 ATA industry survey.\14\ This is a nearly 10884percent increase over the two preceding years.\15\ That same study885found linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earning a median886salary of $94,525 in 2023,\16\ and local LTL drivers earning a median887salary of $80,680.\17\ Drivers who choose to become independent888contractors earn even more than those averages, while enjoying the889opportunity to set their own schedules, choose the routes they run, and890grow their own businesses. ATA strongly supports the protection of the891independent contractor business model that is at the heart of the892trucking industry.893---------------------------------------------------------------------------894    \13\ The State of Diesel Mechanics, Randall Reilly/Shell Lubricant895Solutions, 2022, at 12 (copy available upon request from https://896www.randallreilly.com/).897    \14\ Driver Compensation Study: Operations Data 2023, American898Trucking Associations, p. 14.899    \15\ Ibid.900    \16\ Ibid., P. 66.901    \17\ Ibid., P. 67.902---------------------------------------------------------------------------903    Relatedly, it is vitally important that Congress provide the904skilled trades with the same access to financial resources and905flexibility as are afforded to traditional four-year colleges and906institutions. ATA was grateful for strong bipartisan support of the907Freedom to Invest in Tomorrow's Workforce Act¸ which allows908individuals to use 529 funds to pay for training to become truck909drivers or diesel mechanics, as well as various measures to enable the910use of short-term Pell Grants for these programs. We were also grateful911to see those measures enacted in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.912    Looking ahead, we want to work with champions of the industry on913both sides of the aisle to build upon this success and work toward914parity in terms of the financial resources and options available for915the skilled trades compared to traditional colleges and universities.916ATA strongly supports establishing apprenticeships that will help new917drivers enter the industry and receive valuable training. For this918reason, we have endorsed bills such as the bipartisan, bicameral919Veterans Transition to Trucking Act and are grateful to members of920Congress, including members of the Commerce Committee, for their921leadership in advocating for robust apprenticeship programs.922    Reducing financial barriers to entry will certainly help the923trucking industry recruit the next generation of safe truck drivers.924ATA also strongly supports passage of the bipartisan LICENSE Act, which925would reduce burdensome red tape and outdated barriers to obtaining a926CDL by codifying DOT waivers issued under both Presidents Trump and927Biden with no findings of adverse safety impacts.928Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot Program929    The IIJA directed the DOT to establish the Safe Driver930Apprenticeship Pilot Program (SDAP) to provide a pathway for 18-, 19-,931and 20-year-old drivers to gain the knowledge, skills, and expertise to932drive safely in interstate commerce. The SDAP was modeled after the933apprenticeship program originally outlined in the DRIVE Safe Act and934requires apprentices to complete 400 hours of on-duty time with an935experienced driver, meet 13 performance benchmarks, and operate936vehicles with five industry-leading safety technologies, including an937active braking collision mitigation system and a forward-facing video938event capture system. The pilot program was designed to provide a level939of safety far beyond what is currently required for similarly aged940individuals to obtain their CDLs and drive intrastate to demonstrate941that, with the appropriate education, training, and safety technology,94218-, 19-, and 20-year-old drivers can operate safely in interstate943commerce.944    While ATA was enthusiastic about the prospects for this highly945anticipated and widely supported pilot program, DOT's problematic946implementation of the SDAP irreparably stunted participation and947deterred younger drivers from considering this career pathway. DOT948added two additional requirements not found in law as a condition of949participation. These included a requirement that participating motor950carriers be part of a Department of Labor (DOL)-approved Registered951Apprenticeship Program to be eligible, and a requirement that952participating motor carriers utilize driver-facing inward cameras,953another safety technology beyond the five safety technologies already954required. Importantly, the latter requirement was added almost eight955months after the enactment of the IIJA and just before the pilot956program was launched. The last-minute changes caused many motor957carriers to decline participation in the program altogether. This958egregious overstep necessitated Congressional action, which was signed959by the President, to prohibit DOT from imposing its unnecessary,960additional conditions for participation.961    Unfortunately, by the time DOT was forced to restore SDAP back to962its original intent, the pilot program was nearly at the halfway point963to the three-year sunset, and the damage had already been done. The964short duration of the pilot program and the associated lack of965permanence has deterred motor carriers from undergoing the onerous and966costly process to adjust internal operations and become eligible for967SDAP participation. Motor carriers have also cited challenges with968securing insurance for potential apprentices. At this point, with just969a few months remaining before the sunset of the SDAP, DOT's latest data970for the fourth quarter of 2024 show that only 68 apprentices have971applied, and 36 have completed the probationary periods.\18\ I would972note that 59 motor carriers and 139 experienced drivers (trainers) have973been approved to participate.\19\ If given more time, these carriers974and experienced drivers would have the opportunity to train more975apprentices. In total, apprentices have driven over 1,250,000 miles and976over 23,500 hours safely in interstate commerce.\20\ Importantly,977according to the latest data reported by DOT, no apprentices in the978pilot have been involved in a reportable crash.979---------------------------------------------------------------------------980    \18\ Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot Program, Quarterly Program981Update, End of Fourth Quarter 2024, Federal Motor Carrier Safety982Administration. Available online at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/983fmcsa.dot.gov/files/2025-02/SDAP%204Q-2024.pdf (accessed July 16,9842025).985    \19\ Ibid.986    \20\ Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot Program, Program Committee987Briefing, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, April 11, 2023.988---------------------------------------------------------------------------989    While participation fell short of the 3,000-concurrent participant990cap, the data generated from this pilot program demonstrates what the991trucking industry knows to be true: that with rigorous safety and992training guardrails, 18-, 19-, and 20-year-old drivers can operate993safely in interstate commerce. Several of our members have utilized994SDAP and are enthusiastic supporters of it. They have found the program995to be a valuable component of their overall workforce development996efforts, and the SDAP program has made a significant difference in the997lives of these apprentices.998    Importantly, the SDAP will sunset in November 2025, and apprentices999who are in the process of completing the program will unfortunately1000have to forfeit the progress they've made toward the ability to operate1001in interstate commerce. We urge this Subcommittee, and DOT, to consider1002extending the sunset of the SDAP until a more permanent solution can be1003enacted through the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization. A1004permanent pathway to fulfilling careers will help the trucking industry1005recruit the next generation of talented, safe drivers and will help1006address the pervasive driver shortage.1007Ensuring Bathroom Access1008    Truck drivers are the heartbeat of our economy and critical to1009supply chain continuity. When they stop for pickups or deliveries--1010which can take hours on end while the truck waits to be loaded or1011unloaded--drivers should have access to restroom facilities. Such basic1012accommodations are more than just common courtesy; this is about1013ensuring the dignity of drivers and supporting the men and women who do1014the heavy lifting to provide for everyone in this country. Guaranteeing1015restroom access would address a major barrier to retaining and1016recruiting more truck drivers, particularly women.1017    ATA is thankful for the bipartisan introduction of a bill in the1018House of Representatives that will confront this challenge faced by1019professional truck drivers: H.R. 2514, the Trucker Bathroom Access Act.1020The legislation requires shipper and receiver facilities to make1021existing employee restrooms available to truck drivers. We would be1022grateful for bipartisan support for this issue in the Senate as well,1023potentially for introducing a standalone measure and considering it1024during the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization. We look1025forward to working with you to ensure that drivers' most basic needs1026are met while they do the important work of delivering the Nation's1027goods.1028Expanding Truck Parking Capacity1029    Another barrier to supply chain efficiency is the ongoing, well-1030documented shortage of safe truck parking. As with prohibitions in1031accessing bathrooms while on the job, the nationwide shortage of safe,1032secure, well-lit areas to park a truck overnight is a huge disincentive1033for workers--particularly women, who currently make up only 7 percent1034of truck drivers--from entering careers in trucking. In 2015, the1035Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Jason's Law report acknowledged1036the shortage of truck parking capacity as a serious highway safety1037concern. The FHWA found that more than 75 percent of truck drivers and1038almost 66 percent of logistics personnel ``regularly [experienced]1039problems with finding safe parking locations when rest was needed.''1040\21\ Due to inaction at the federal, state, and local levels, the truck1041parking shortage has only worsened since 2015. In its 2019 update to1042the Jason's Law report, the FHWA found that the percentage of drivers1043who regularly had trouble finding truck parking had skyrocketed from 751044percent to 98 percent.\22\ This is not only a public safety issue and1045problem for drivers on the road today, it also represents an enormous1046challenge to recruiting a new generation of drivers (including women1047and other traditionally underrepresented demographics) to enter the1048industry.1049---------------------------------------------------------------------------1050    \21\ Jason's Law Truck Parking Survey Results and Comparative1051Analysis. Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of1052Transportation, August 2015.1053    \22\ Jason's Law Commercial Motor Vehicle Parking Survey and1054Comparative Assessment Presentation. Federal Highway Administration,1055U.S. Department of Transportation, December 2020.1056---------------------------------------------------------------------------1057    Sustained and robust Federal investment in the expansion of truck1058parking capacity is key to addressing this longstanding problem. ATA1059supports the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act, which would1060establish a competitive discretionary grant program and dedicate $7551061million for truck parking projects across the country.1062Protect Our Supply Chains1063    The upcoming surface transportation reauthorization is also a1064chance to address issues which have caused increasing challenges since1065the enactment of the IIJA. As the Subcommittee is aware, there has been1066a dramatic rise in the incidence of cargo theft and freight fraud,1067which is disruptive to our supply chains and which will require new1068tools and coordination at the Federal level to combat organized crime.1069Additionally, ATA supports the clarification that states are prohibited1070from superseding National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)1071standards for motor vehicle safety.1072Cargo Theft and Freight Fraud1073    ATA is grateful to the Subcommittee for beginning a larger1074discussion about the substantial impacts of cargo theft on the trucking1075industry and our Nation's supply chains with its hearing in February.1076That hearing provided a platform for a trucking executive to share his1077personal experience as a victim of cargo theft and fraud, and he1078highlighted the vulnerabilities of FMCSA's registration system, as well1079as the critical downstream impacts of those vulnerabilities. Moreover,1080the witness also used his time to encourage the Subcommittee to1081exercise robust oversight as the agency takes steps to upgrade its1082registration system and implement enhanced identify verification1083processes to further bolster security and deter bad actors.1084    ATA was encouraged by Chairman Young's publication of an op-ed1085titled, ``Cargo Theft is a Growing National Security Issue,'' following1086the hearing and wholeheartedly agrees with his assessment that Congress1087must ``examine and reconcile potential catalysts that allow criminals1088to steal cargo, modernize and implement safeguards for businesses and1089consumers, and ensure our law enforcement agencies are adequately1090prepared and equipped to respond to reports of wrongdoing.'' This1091Subcommittee is well-positioned to ensure that DOT engages in an ``all-1092hands-on-deck'' approach by coordinating with other appropriate Federal1093agencies, law enforcement, and the private sector to combat the1094organized theft groups (OTGs) and transnational criminal organizations1095(TCOs) who are currently exploiting our domestic supply chains.1096Relatedly, Chairman Cruz announced at a full Committee hearing last1097week that he is currently drafting legislation to help DOT combat cargo1098theft and rampant fraud, and we greatly appreciate his attention to1099this complex issue.1100    Furthermore, we are grateful that the Committee on Commerce,1101Science, and Transportation has already taken an important first step1102toward providing FMCSA with the necessary tools, resources, and1103authorities to protect the trucking industry and consumers from fraud1104by approving the Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act (S.1105337). Specifically, this bill restores FMCSA's ability to impose civil1106penalties against unauthorized brokers and other bad actors, allowing1107the agency to act swiftly in meting out penalties. The bipartisan1108legislation gives states the ability to use Federal funds to enforce1109consumer protection laws and root out fraudulent actors before they1110strike. The Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act is a1111critical element of a broader Federal response to freight fraud, and we1112hope that Congress advances it expeditiously.1113Strengthening NHTSA's Role in Setting Industry Standards1114    Under existing law--going back to the National Traffic and Motor1115Vehicle Safety Act of 1966, Pub. L. 89-563--when NHTSA promulgates a1116Federal motor vehicle safety standard, states are prohibited from1117issuing standards of their own on that same subject (see 49 U.S.C.1118Sec. 30103(b)(1)). Congress has charged NHTSA with promulgating1119``practicable,'' ``objective'' standards that ``meet the need for motor1120vehicle safety,'' (see 49 U.S.C. Sec. 30111(a)). Allowing states to1121promulgate their own equipment standards when NHTSA has acted1122undermines that decision.1123    However, current law contains an exception that threatens to1124swallow the rule: it expressly provides that compliance with a NHTSA1125standard does not preempt ``liability at common law'' (see 49 U.S.C.1126Sec. 30103(e)). This invites legal uncertainty, undermines1127Congressional intent to empower NHTSA to promulgate nationally uniform1128motor vehicle safety standards, and threatens supply chain integrity.1129Given that the trucking industry operates in all 50 states and that the1130market for motor vehicles is national in scope, we strongly support1131NHTSA's role as the primary authority over motor vehicle safety1132standards and urge Congress to reaffirm that role.1133Ensure Long-Term American Leadership1134    IIJA was the largest investment in our Nation's supply chain1135infrastructure in nearly a century and represented a concrete effort to1136ensure America's global economic leadership. As the Subcommittee looks1137towards the 2026 reauthorization, we would be remiss not to highlight1138additional opportunities to build on that investment moving forward and1139to make sure that Federal regulatory leadership and resource1140allocations are focused on a long-term strategy that will keep our1141economy growing for years to come.1142Federal Leadership in Autonomous Technology Development1143    As mentioned before, America's truck drivers are the unsung heroes1144of our supply chain; they are the trucking industry's greatest asset.1145The groundbreaking developments in autonomous vehicle (AV) technologies1146offer opportunities to help improve the safety and productivity of1147those individuals, and to make trucking a safer and more welcoming1148profession for the next generation of truck drivers. New autonomous1149technologies do not mean that all vehicles will become ``driverless1150vehicles'' and that truck driving jobs will be eliminated. The reality1151is more nuanced.1152    Given the variety of freight movement--including liquids,1153livestock, hazardous material, large construction equipment, and1154oversize loads--and the variety of road, terrain, and weather1155conditions throughout the country, there will continue to be a role and1156need for drivers as part of a logistics system that includes automated1157trucks. ATA believes that automated trucks will be a tool that will1158help improve the efficiency of freight movements and help address the1159persistent shortage of drivers, not replace them. Driver1160responsibilities may adjust over time with deployment of automated1161technologies, but the industry will continue to need drivers, our1162greatest asset.1163    The trucking industry has a substantial stake in the enhancements1164to road safety that automated and connected vehicle technology will1165provide. America's roads and bridges are truck drivers' workplace, and1166safety is paramount. The safety gains achieved by removing human1167error--as well as the additional economic and societal benefits--are1168very enticing to an industry that already spends billions of dollars1169annually on safety, including technology enhancements, to ensure that1170drivers and passengers of all vehicles make it safely to their1171destination.1172    ATA will continue to advocate for a strong Federal framework for1173automated vehicle testing and deployment. Such a Federal framework is1174critical for ensuring the safety and trust of the public and necessary1175for testing the efficacy of automated vehicles in interstate commerce.1176A Federal framework also provides clear paths for new and innovative1177technologies to move from testing to deployment through established DOT1178processes. This can include exemptions, interpretations,1179investigations, or data requirements designed to ensure safety and1180build public trust.1181    We encourage Congress and Federal agencies to develop proactive1182policies that will foster innovation and ensure that America does not1183fall behind its global competitors in the development of this important1184technology. AVs and automated driving system (ADS) deployment have the1185potential to significantly enhance the safety, efficiency, and1186productivity of the U.S. freight and logistics systems. We have an1187opportunity to ensure that the technologies and vehicles that generate1188those benefits are developed, improved, implemented, and sold around1189the world by American companies.1190Supporting Deregulatory Efforts1191    As the Nation's largest representative of motor carriers and motor1192carrier suppliers, ATA strongly supports the Trump Administration's1193efforts to ensure a regulatory environment that appropriately1194prioritizes reducing undue burdens and costs on motor carriers without1195compromising strong safety regulatory protections. Regulated entities,1196including motor carriers, rely on thoughtful, well-written, and safety-1197driven Federal regulations and guidance to ensure the utmost safety for1198commercial drivers and all who share the road. However, ATA recognizes1199that certain Federal rules and regulations that affect the trucking1200industry are redundant, outdated, or place undue burden on members of1201the trucking industry--in some cases, invoking compliance merely for1202compliance's sake rather than a material benefit to the industry or1203national interest. ATA applauds this Administration and DOT's efforts1204to swiftly review and take deregulatory action to existing rules,1205regulations, and guidance that remove unnecessary red tape and1206regulatory burdens and promote industry efficiency without harming1207safety.1208    As part of these efforts, in May 2025, ATA offered numerous1209targeted deregulatory recommendations to DOT and OMB aimed at aligning1210Federal regulations with modern technology, operational realities, and1211safety priorities--many of which the Administration has already acted1212on. ATA urged DOT to eliminate outdated or burdensome requirements that1213no longer contribute to highway safety. These include repealing the1214rear underride guard certification label mandate under 49 CFR 393.86,1215which creates unnecessary costs for carriers without measurable safety1216benefits, and updating roadside warning device requirements (49 CFR1217393.95(f)) to support vehicle-integrated lighting systems--particularly1218for autonomous vehicles--rather than relying on driver-deployed warning1219triangles. ATA also called for revisions to hazmat railroad crossing1220rules (49 CFR 392.10-392.11) that require all stops regardless of risk1221level, and for the repeal of legacy trailer marking rules (49 CFR1222393.13) that apply to equipment no longer in service. ATA also urged1223DOT and FMCSA to modernize Electronic Logging Device (ELD) related1224rules by allowing digital access to required documents and removing1225unnecessary paper log backup requirements (49 CFR 395.8(k)(1) and1226395.22(h)). Moreover, ATA recommended making permanent existing1227exemptions for simplified ELD use during yard moves, eliminating manual1228logging requirements that add administrative burden without enhancing1229safety. Additional reforms included eliminating the 15-day roadside1230inspection report return requirement (49 CFR 396.9), modernizing CDL/1231CLP testing rules to improve workforce entry, and rescinding broker1232transaction transparency requirements (49 CFR 371.3(c)) that conflict1233with market principles and fall outside FMCSA's safety mandate.1234    While ATA supports regulatory reform, we strongly urge Congress and1235DOT to preserve proven, safety-enhancing regulations that, if1236eliminated, would materially and consequentially impact highway safety1237for all road users. Among these critical regulations is the ELD1238mandate, which has delivered measurable reductions in hours-of-service1239(HOS) violations and crash rates since implementation. Repealing or1240weakening this mandate, which has been requested by some industry1241stakeholders, would be a step back for the industry as ELDs modernize1242compliance monitoring and enforcement without altering rest1243requirements. We also emphasize that any future changes to the1244underlying HOS rules, upon which ELD rules are predicated, must be1245grounded in data and scientific research. Similarly, as previously1246mentioned, ATA supports continued advancement of life-saving1247technologies like AEB and opposes efforts that would slow or reverse1248progress on drug and alcohol testing reforms. In all cases, regulatory1249streamlining must not come at the expense of highway safety, and we1250commend DOT and FMCSA's approach to sound, practical deregulatory1251action.1252Addressing Critical Freight Bottlenecks1253    Infrastructure investments must be made in ways that benefit1254highway system efficiency, lower supply chain costs, and ensure the1255competitiveness of American businesses with global supply chain1256partners. ATA strongly supports investments that will reduce freight1257congestion at key bottlenecks and encourage the efficient movement of1258goods at our Nation's intermodal gateways.1259    Highway congestion, for example, added nearly $109 billion to the1260cost of freight transportation in 2022--a 15 percent increase year-1261over-year.\23\ In 2022, truck drivers sat in traffic for 1.2 billion1262hours, equivalent to more than 435,000 drivers sitting idle for a1263year.\24\ This caused the trucking industry to consume an additional12646.4 billion gallons of fuel, resulting in the release of 65.4 million1265metric tons of additional carbon dioxide emissions.\25\1266---------------------------------------------------------------------------1267    \23\ Cost of Congestion to the Trucking Industry: 2024 Update.1268American Transportation Research Institute, Dec. 2024.1269    \24\ Ibid.1270    \25\ Ibid.1271---------------------------------------------------------------------------1272    ATA recommends that the next surface transportation bill bolster1273discretionary funding programs to ensure that they address major1274freight bottlenecks. ATRI annually identifies the top 100 freight1275bottlenecks nationwide, and the trucking industry suggests that DOT1276prioritize these locations for maintenance and improvement.\26\1277---------------------------------------------------------------------------1278    \26\ Top 100 Bottlenecks--2024. American Transportation Research1279Institute, 2024.1280---------------------------------------------------------------------------1281    Another contributing factor to supply chain bottlenecks and1282efficiency is the poor state of freight intermodal connectors--the1283roads that connect ports, rail yards, airports and other multimodal1284facilities to the National Highway System. Despite their vital role in1285the freight distribution network and the economy, these connectors are1286often neglected and fail to receive needed investments. Currently, only12879 percent of intermodal connectors are in good or very good condition,128819 percent are in mediocre condition, and a troubling 37 percent are1289rated in poor condition.\27\ Not only do deteriorating roads damage1290both the vehicles and the freight they carry, but FHWA found a1291correlation between poor roads and vehicle speed. Average speed on a1292connector in poor condition was 22 percent lower than on connectors in1293fair or better condition.\28\ FHWA further found that congestion on1294freight intermodal connectors causes 1,059,238 hours of truck delay1295annually and 12,181,234 hours of automobile delay.\29\ Congestion on1296freight intermodal connectors adds over $96 million to freight1297transportation costs each year.\30\1298---------------------------------------------------------------------------1299    \27\ Freight Intermodal Connectors Study. Federal Highway1300Administration, April 2017.1301    \28\ Ibid.1302    \29\ Ibid.1303    \30\ An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: 2025 Update.1304American Transportation Research Institute, July 2025.. Estimates1305average truck operational cost of $90.89 per hour.1306---------------------------------------------------------------------------1307    One possible reason connectors are neglected is that the vast1308majority of these roads (70 percent) are under the jurisdiction of a1309local or county government.\31\ Too often, these roads serve critical1310roles in regional, national, and international commerce beyond the1311geographic boundaries of the jurisdictions that have responsibility for1312them, but those broader interests may not be factored into the local1313jurisdictions' spending decisions. While intermodal connectors are1314eligible for Federal funding, this is simply not good enough. ATA1315supports a set-aside of funding for freight intermodal connectors to1316ensure that these critical arteries are given the attention and1317resources they deserve.1318---------------------------------------------------------------------------1319    \31\ Freight Intermodal Connectors Study. Federal Highway1320Administration, April 2017.1321---------------------------------------------------------------------------1322Prioritizing Projects That Improve Freight Mobility1323    Although the IIJA did not set aside funding for either highway1324bottleneck elimination or intermodal connectors, these projects are1325eligible for funding under several of the discretionary programs.1326Congress should ensure that the resources available from these1327important programs are used primarily for projects that improve1328transportation safety and mobility, as well as projects that address1329infrastructure deficiencies that contribute to supply chain1330inefficiencies. These programs should not be used to advance parochial1331agendas that are outside of their Congressionally mandated scope. Nor1332should Congress further divert funding from highway projects. Highways1333carry the vast majority of people and freight, and unlike some modes,1334including freight railroads, highway users cannot directly invest in1335their transportation infrastructure. They must instead rely on1336government agencies to effectively invest their user fee revenue in1337projects that improve roadway safety and efficiency. Using this money1338to subsidize other transportation modes breaks the trust and the1339implied agreement that users place in their elected officials to invest1340in projects that are directly beneficial to motorists.1341Providing Consistent, Sustainable Funding1342    Underpinning all these recommendations is the need for a long-term,1343stable revenue source for the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) to support1344investments in our roads and bridges. This revenue source should be1345paid for equitably by all road users, including those that do not1346currently contribute to the HTF. The trucking industry is the leading1347payer to the HTF, contributing almost half of all revenues while1348representing less than 5 percent of road users. While the trucking1349industry is proud to pay our fair share, Congressional attention and1350action is necessary to ensure a lasting, viable, and equitable revenue1351source for continued infrastructure investments.1352    Federal fuel taxes, which are the primary funding sources for the1353HTF, have not increased since 1993. If Congress will not act to1354increase those taxes, or even index them for inflation, then1355alternative solutions that account for new engine technologies must be1356enacted in a way that ensures the burden of maintaining our highways is1357allocated fairly and sustainably for future generations. ATA recommends1358a user-pay solution to the HTF shortfall that adheres to the following1359principles:13601361   Reasonably Uniform Application: Apply uniformly across1362        various classes of highway users to ensure fairness.13631364   Verifiable Metrics: Base the system primarily on measurable1365        and easily verifiable factors, such as highway and vehicle use.13661367   Evasion Prevention: Minimize opportunities for tax or fee1368        evasion to maintain revenue integrity.13691370   Administrative Simplicity: Ensure the system is cost-1371        effective and straightforward for the government to administer,1372        collect, and enforce, without imposing excessive administrative1373        or record-keeping burdens on highway users.13741375   Commerce-Friendly: Avoid creating barriers or inefficiencies1376        that hinder interstate commerce.13771378    Identifying a long-term, sustainable solution for HTF revenues can1379also provide flexibility to ultimately relieve trucking of the burden1380of the century-old, 12 percent Federal excise tax on heavy-duty trucks1381and trailers. Initially implemented as a 3 percent tax to offset the1382cost of American participation in World War I, this tax has grown to be1383one of the highest excise taxes on any good in the United States. As it1384adds over $20,000 to the cost of a new $180,000 truck and $6,000 to the1385cost of a new $50,000 trailer, this onerous charge creates a1386disincentive to putting new equipment that is cleaner and safer than1387ever before on our Nation's highways.1388    Meanwhile, at the state level, the absence of sufficient funding1389from user fees has led states to increasingly turn to tolls to fund1390infrastructure projects. Unfortunately, there appears to be a growing1391trend that places this burden disproportionately and unfairly on the1392trucking industry through the misuse of tolls. A recent court decision1393in Rhode Island legalized truck-only tolls, allowing the state to1394reinstate tolls solely on tractor-trailers, which represent just 31395percent of vehicles on the tolled facilities. In Manhattan, trucks must1396pay a toll every time they cross 60th Street, while cars pay only once1397per day. As these anti-truck tolling arrangements spread, the price1398will be borne by consumers due to higher supply chain costs. We urge1399Congress to reform Federal Interstate tolling authority to prevent1400these types of abuses.1401In Conclusion1402    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the 8.51403million people in trucking-related jobs who power our Nation's supply1404chains and keep the wheels of the economy turning. Surface1405transportation reauthorization in the 119th Congress is a potentially1406transformational opportunity for our country. The ATA looks forward to1407supporting your efforts to improve the safe and efficient movement of1408freight across our Nation and to encourage economic growth.1409    Thank you again for your leadership on these vital issues.14101411    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Spear.1412    Mr. Pugh, you are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.14131414   STATEMENT OF LEWIE PUGH, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, OWNER-1415            OPERATOR INDEPENDENT DRIVERS ASSOCIATION14161417    Mr. Pugh. Yes. Thank you, Chairman Young, and Ranking1418Member Peters, and Members of the Subcommittee. I am Lewie1419Pugh, the Executive Vice President of the Owner-Operator1420Independent Drivers Association.1421    From the U.S. Army to running my own trucking business,1422trucking is the only thing I have ever done my entire adult1423life, with over two and a half million safe miles of driving.1424OOIDA is the largest national association representing small1425business truckers and professional drivers. We have1426approximately 150,000 members across the country who operate1427240,000 pieces of equipment.1428    Our mission is to promote and protect the interests of1429members on any issues that impact their safety and their1430success. The Trump administration has embraced a new approach1431to developing trucking policy to prioritize the needs of1432truckers. It began in February when the U.S. DOT reopened its1433public comment period on broker transparency, rulemaking that1434was launched in 2020 in response to an OOIDA petition.1435    It continued in April with an executive order addressing1436OOIDA's request to enforce existing English language rules, a1437proficiency that have long been ignored. And just last month,1438Secretary Duffy announced nine major initiatives, nine, to1439improve working conditions for truckers that directly addressed1440many long-standing driver concerns, including withdrawing the1441controversial speed limiter mandate.1442    These steps are welcome and long overdue in a departure1443from the old ways of Washington. They demonstrate regulators1444are finally prioritizing truckers over corporate mega fleets,1445shippers, trial lawyers, and safety advocates. To be clear,1446OOIDA is a nonpartisan organization. We have a reputation of1447telling you how it is, and we don't pull any punches, but we1448also give credit where credit is due and advocate tirelessly on1449behalf of our members.1450    Truckers now need lawmakers to embrace the new approach the1451White House has taken with as much energy and resolve. I assure1452you this can be done in a bipartisan manner and promote highway1453safety that improves driver recruitment, retention, increases1454supply chain efficiency.1455    In fact, many of OOIDA's proposals for the Highway Bill1456already achieve these objectives. This includes enhancing1457driver training, improving restroom access, and combating1458freight fraud. More broadly, efforts to expand truck parking1459capacity, eliminate the Federal Law that prevents truckers from1460being guaranteed overtime pay, and stopping the unsafe1461increases of truck size and weights. These have all garnered1462significant bipartisan support.1463    While truckers are thrilled that folks in Washington are1464finally listening to their needs, others in the industry will1465resist this new approach. They want to return to the old way of1466doing things when maximizing corporate profits and over-1467regulating small businesses, dodging responsibility for1468improving working conditions for drivers took precedence.1469    For example, large carriers will oppose OOIDA's efforts to1470prohibit predatory lease-owned scams. By design, these leave1471truckers broke and empty-handed. Law enforcement will again1472begin to attempt to put trackers on truckers, which has been1473soundly rejected by the industry. Trial lawyers will pursue a1474totally unnecessary increase in minimum insurance requirements1475to destroy small business trucking, and brokers will fight1476tooth and nail against compliance with broker transparency1477compliance which is a rule that is already on the books.1478    Let me remind you the old approach simply doesn't work.1479Policies that large carriers swore would improve safety, like1480electronic login devices, have proven to be totally1481ineffective. The pilot program for teenage drivers has been a1482colossal taxpayer-funded failure and its enrollment numbers1483tell the story.1484    As I have outlined in my testimony, Congress has the1485ability to make the next Highway Bill the most pro-trucker pro-1486safety bill in history, but only if you commit to prioritizing1487the needs of truckers.1488    Thank you for this opportunity. And I look forward to1489answering your questions.1490    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pugh follows:]14911492      Prepared Statement of Lewie Pugh, Executive Vice President,1493             Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association1494    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, and members of the1495Subcommittee, my name is Lewie Pugh and I am the Executive Vice1496President of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association1497(OOIDA). Prior to working at OOIDA, I was a small-business trucker for1498nearly 23 years with 2.5 million miles of safe driving. Before1499operating my own trucking business, I drove a truck during my service1500in the United States Army. I still proudly hold a Commercial Driver's1501License (CDL).1502                              ABOUT OOIDA1503    The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) is the1504largest trade association representing small-business truckers and1505professional truck drivers. OOIDA has approximately 150,000 members1506located in all fifty states that collectively own and operate more than1507240,000 individual heavy-duty trucks. OOIDA's mission is to promote and1508protect the interests of our members on any issues that impact their1509economic well-being, working conditions, and the safe operation of1510commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) on our Nation's highways.1511    Almost all freight in the United States is carried by a truck at1512some point and over 70 percent is carried exclusively by truckers.1513Small trucking businesses, like those we represent, account for 961514percent of registered motor carriers in the United States, making them1515a key component of the Nation's supply chain. We are undoubtedly the1516safest and most diverse operators on our Nation's roads. Every region1517of our country and segment of our economy relies upon long-haul truck1518drivers. Our members are an integral part of the global supply chain1519and have a unique perspective on the many challenges our Nation faces1520in moving freight in the safest, most efficient manner.1521                              INTRODUCTION1522    The Trump Administration has embraced a new approach to developing1523trucking policy that prioritizes the needs of truckers. It began in1524February when the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) reopened1525the public comment period for its broker transparency rulemaking that1526was launched in 2020 in response to an OOIDA petition. It continued in1527April with an Executive Order addressing an OOIDA request to enforce1528existing English language proficiency rules that have long been1529ignored. And just last month, Secretary Duffy announced the launch of 91530major initiatives to improve working conditions for truckers that1531directly addressed many longstanding driver concerns, including1532withdrawing the controversial speed limiter mandate.1533    These steps are a welcomed and long-overdue departure from the old1534ways of Washington. They demonstrate regulators are finally1535prioritizing truckers over corporate megafleets, shippers, trial1536lawyers, and safety advocates.1537    To be clear, OOIDA is a non-partisan organization. We've always had1538a reputation for telling it like it is. We don't pull punches. But we1539also give credit where credit is due, and advocate tirelessly on behalf1540of our members.1541    Truckers now need lawmakers to embrace the new approach taken by1542the White House with as much energy and resolve. I assure you this can1543be done in a bipartisan manner that promotes highway safety, improves1544driver recruitment and retention, and increases supply chain1545efficiency. In fact, many of OOIDA's proposals for the highway bill1546already achieve these objectives.1547    This includes enhancing driver training, improving restroom access1548at facilities where truckers pick up and deliver freight, and combating1549freight fraud. More broadly, efforts to expand truck parking capacity,1550eliminate the Federal law that prevents truckers from being guaranteed1551overtime pay, and stopping unsafe increases to truck size and weight1552have all garnered significant bipartisan support.1553    While truckers are thrilled folks in Washington are finally1554prioritizing their needs, others in our industry will resist this new1555approach. They will want to return to the old way of doing things--when1556maximizing corporate profits, overregulating small businesses, and1557dodging responsibility for improving working conditions for drivers1558took precedence.1559    For example, large carriers will oppose OOIDA's efforts to prohibit1560predatory lease-to-own scams that intentionally leave truckers broke1561and empty-handed. Law enforcement will again attempt to mandate1562`trackers on truckers', which have been soundly rejected by industry.1563Trial lawyers will pursue totally unnecessary increases to minimum1564insurance requirements that will destroy small trucking businesses.1565Safety advocates will push for mandating unproven and cost-prohibitive1566equipment like side underride guards. And brokers will fight efforts to1567ensure they finally comply with existing transparency rules.1568    If you're not yet ready to embrace the new trend of prioritizing1569the needs of truckers, let me remind you that the old approach simply1570doesn't work. Policies that large carriers swore would improve safety,1571like the electronic logging device mandate, have proven ineffective. As1572predicted, pilot programs for teenage drivers have been colossal1573failures, leading their proponents to blame inward facing camera1574requirements rather than admit their own policies have made trucking1575unappealing to younger Americans.1576    Congress has the ability to make the next highway bill the most1577pro-trucker in history, but only if you commit to prioritizing their1578needs. In my testimony, I've outlined several ways you can do so while1579promoting highway safety, improving driver recruitment and retention,1580and increasing supply chain efficiency. I look forward to discussing1581these proposals with you during questioning.1582                            DRIVER TRAINING1583    The 2022 implementation of new Entry-Level Driver Training (ELDT)1584requirements represented an important first step to ensuring drivers1585entering our industry are properly trained. Unfortunately, far too many1586drivers still lack the basic skills necessary to safely operate a1587commercial vehicle. Congress must take steps to further enhance safety1588by implementing measured and widely-supported improvements to ELDT1589regulations.1590    OOIDA favors the introduction of mandatory behind-the-wheel (BTW)1591hours for new drivers. In 2015, we participated in the Federal Motor1592Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) Entry-Level Driver Training1593Advisory Committee (ELDTAC). ELDTAC was comprised of 26 industry1594representatives tasked with conducting a negotiated rulemaking on1595training regulations and requirements. The panel overwhelmingly1596supported establishing a minimum number of BTW hours in the rulemaking.1597As a result, the agency's Notice of Proposed of Rulemaking originally1598contained a 30-hour BTW benchmark. Regrettably, this critical element1599was omitted in the final ELDT rule.1600    Compared to the brief evaluation an examiner is currently required1601to conduct, mandatory BTW training provides greater opportunity to1602evaluate the skills of the entry-level driver and for the trainer to1603offer corrective actions. These hours expose the entry-level driver to1604multiple road signs and various traffic/roadway situations, giving the1605instructor more options to identify and correct deficiencies. At a1606minimum, Congress should improve ELDT by embracing the ELDTAC's1607recommendation that drivers complete a minimum of 30 hours BTW1608training.1609    OOIDA also supports the Commercial Motor Vehicle English1610Proficiency Act, S. 2114, introduced by Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS).1611This common-sense bill would require drivers demonstrate they can read1612critical road signs before being permitted to operate an 80,000 lb.1613vehicle on public roadways. It would also require CDL testing be1614conducted only in English. In addition to reading road signs,1615professional truckers routinely communicate with law enforcement and1616first responders in order to do their jobs safely and effectively.1617OOIDA has long advocated for stronger driver training requirements and1618we believe S. 2114 is a key element to achieving this goal.1619                            RESTROOM ACCESS1620    Most Americans take for granted the fact they readily have access1621to a restroom, especially where they work. For truckers who make their1622living on the road, they often depend on accessing restrooms at1623facilities where they pick-up or deliver freight. Unbelievably,1624professional drivers are frequently denied restroom access at these1625locations. While this problem effects all truckers, it is particularly1626burdensome for female drivers.1627    Although this problem has been going on for years, the COVID-191628pandemic made it worse. Throughout the pandemic, truckers literally put1629their lives on the line to keep the Nation safe. Yet at the same time,1630shippers and receivers started restricting access to their facilities,1631including restrooms. Suddenly, finding a place to use the bathroom1632became more difficult, even impossible at times for our members. While1633the pandemic has subsided and life has largely returned to normal, some1634businesses have kept these crude restrictions in place.1635    OOIDA has championed legislation in the House that would solve this1636problem. The Trucker Bathroom Access Act, H.R. 2514, is1637straightforward, bipartisan legislation that would provide truckers the1638dignity and respect they deserve. It is supported by both trucking and1639retail organizations. The bill simply requires that if a business has a1640restroom available for employees or customers, then that restroom must1641also be available to truckers when they are picking up or delivering1642freight. Importantly, the legislation does not require that a business1643build any new restrooms and includes guardrails for safety and security1644considerations at shippers and receivers.1645 BROKER TRANSPARENCY, FREIGHT FRAUD, & THE FEDERAL REGISTRATION SYSTEM1646    Existing regulations (49 CFR 371.3) require brokers to keep records1647of transactions with motor carriers. Under 371.3, each party to a1648brokered transaction also has the right to review the record of the1649transaction. This allows our members to know precisely how much a1650shipper paid the broker and how much the broker then paid the motor1651carrier. These regulations also enable carriers to verify claims1652charged against them after they finish hauling a load. As motor1653carriers are increasingly victimized by freight fraud, unpaid claims,1654dubious charges, unpaid loads, double brokered loads, and load phishing1655schemes, the current lack of transparency has left them little to no1656means to defend themselves from fraud.1657    Unfortunately, brokers have a long history of deliberately and1658blatantly circumventing transparency requirements. In order to protect1659against fraud and scams, we tell our members that they should closely1660examine documentation and verify that all information is legitimate. If1661brokers are allowed to continue evading Federal transparency1662regulations, it makes it difficult for carriers to determine who is1663adhering to the rules or who may be trying to scam them. In short,1664practices that undermine trust and transparency will make it harder to1665determine who is a bad actor.1666    In May 2020, OOIDA submitted a Petition for Rulemaking with FMCSA1667to ensure compliance with 371.3. The petition requested that brokers1668automatically provide an electronic copy of each transaction record1669within 48 hours after the contractual service has been completed and1670asked that brokers be prohibited from including any provision in their1671contracts that requires a carrier to waive their rights to access1672transaction records--a shady practice that is rampant among brokers.1673Our rulemaking was granted by FMCSA during the first Trump1674Administration.1675    Since the launch of the rulemaking in August 2020, OOIDA and its1676membership submitted thousands of comments to FMCSA, conducted meetings1677with regulators and lawmakers, and participated in public listening1678sessions supporting the need for transparency. These efforts culminated1679in the Biden Administration publishing an NPRM in November 2024,1680demonstrating that ensuring transparency has bipartisan appeal. The1681public comment period initially closed on January 21, 2025, but was1682reopened by the Trump Administration earlier this year for additional1683feedback.1684    Unfortunately, the NPRM does not explicitly include the two1685significant reforms we recommended. However, the proposal will help1686ensure that carriers finally have access to fundamental transactional1687documentation and restore a level playing field between carriers,1688shippers, and brokers. We have submitted separate comments detailing1689what FMCSA must do to strengthen the rulemaking, such as clarifying how1690they will enforce the rules and closing all loopholes that let brokers1691waive transparency rights. If implemented properly, this rulemaking1692will contribute to a more ethical, fair, and efficient freight1693brokerage marketplace.1694    If FMCSA is unable to finalize a rule that fully prevents brokers1695from evading Federal transparency regulations, it is imperative1696Congress compel the agency to do so.1697    Additionally, OOIDA, along with numerous other trucking industry1698stakeholders, strongly supports bipartisan legislation introduced by1699Senators Deb Fischer (R-NE) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) to combat1700freight fraud. S. 337, the Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection1701Act, would restore FMCSA's authority to impose civil penalties on1702unauthorized brokers, require physical addresses for brokers, compel1703the agency to analyze trends and commonalities among companies applying1704for shipping authority to identify potentially bad actors before they1705commit fraud, and allow states to use Federal funds to enforce consumer1706protection laws relating to freight movement. Earlier this year, the1707bill passed this Committee with broad bipartisan support. If it is1708unable to pass the Senate independently, it is critical S. 337 be1709included in the next Highway Bill.1710    We also thank FMCSA for responding to feedback from the trucking1711industry by addressing freight fraud through other actions. The agency1712has proposed and/or finalized various fraud-related rulemakings,1713established a registration fraud team, and is currently rolling out an1714updated registration modernization hub known as the Federal1715Registration System (FRS). FRS should help motor carriers, drivers, and1716brokers consolidate their required business information into a1717centralized portal, while preventing fraudulent actors from entering1718the industry. If administered effectively, we are optimistic the system1719can improve the registration process, enhance user experience,1720incorporate identity verification tools, and more readily identify1721fraud within the supply chain. However, the Committee must ensure that1722FMCSA is implementing these new systems and identify verification1723protocols in a safe, reliable manner that protects legitimate1724stakeholders.1725                            UNDER-21 DRIVERS1726    Large motor carriers have long peddled the thoroughly debunked myth1727of a driver shortage to promote policies that enable them to hire the1728cheapest labor possible. This includes recent efforts to lower the1729minimum age for driving interstate to 18 years old.1730    Over the objections of OOIDA, organized labor, and safety advocacy1731groups, Congress authorized the failed Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot1732Program in IIJA. Since the pilot program's launch in January 2022,1733large carriers have struggled mightily to find 18, 19, and 20-year-olds1734interested in participating. In several years, the program has only1735registered a few dozen applicants. The American Trucking Associations,1736who clamored for the inclusion of this initiative in IIJA and called1737the utilization of existing registered apprenticeship programs the1738``gold standard'' for driver training, later reversed course and said1739the stringent apprenticeship standards discouraged participants.1740Carriers have also blamed the required use of inward-facing cameras for1741lackluster driver participation. This is despite the fact that one of1742their largest carriers recently announced they will equip all of their1743tractors with driver-facing cameras.\1\ Large carriers will continue to1744struggle to find participants in the Safe Driver Apprenticeship Pilot1745Program as long as it is authorized, but it's not because of the1746scapegoats they have identified.1747---------------------------------------------------------------------------1748    \1\ Avila, Larry. ``JB Hunt Rolls out Driver-Facing Ca6meras.''1749Transport Dive, 26 Apr. 2023, https://www.transportdive.com/news/jb-1750hunt-driver-facing-cameras-ATRI-issues-opportunities-report/647985/.1751---------------------------------------------------------------------------1752    The pilot program has failed to yield a valid sample size and has1753inadvertently shed light on some of the fundamental problems in1754trucking that have stunted the retention of drivers. Rather than1755extending the pilot or decreasing the minimum age requirements for CDL1756holders, the Committee should consider alternative solutions that solve1757some of the problems that drive support for permitting younger drivers1758to haul interstate.1759    OOIDA agrees prohibiting younger drivers from crossing state lines1760is foolish. For example, it makes little sense for a young trucker in1761Kansas City, KS, to be allowed to drive to the state's border with1762Colorado, but not deliver freight in neighboring Kansas City, MO. But1763the solution to this problem is not suddenly permitting that1764inexperienced driver to cross the country without limitations, entering1765terrain and experiencing elements they find unfamiliar and have not1766been trained to handle safely.1767    Instead, the Committee should consider implementing an air-mile1768radius for younger drivers to operate within that would permit them to1769cross state lines. Not only will this allow businesses shipping across1770state borders to improve their efficiency, it will give inexperienced1771drivers better opportunity to develop their skills in familiar1772conditions while receiving more advanced training. Then, they can enter1773the long-haul segment of our industry when they reach 21 years of age1774better prepared for safe, productive careers behind the wheel of a CMV.1775OOIDA believes a 150-mile radius, which is currently in effect for1776other programs at USDOT, would be appropriate.1777    While OOIDA has long opposed large carriers' efforts to expand1778their driver pool to teenagers on the false narrative of a driver1779shortage, we view our air-mile radius proposal as a safer alternative1780that provides benefits to shippers, carriers, and new drivers.1781                     PREDATORY LEASE-TO-OWN SCHEMES1782    Predatory truck leasing schemes are another longstanding problem1783within our industry. While traditional lease agreements can allow1784truckers to operate as independent small-businesses, there is a subset1785of leasing arrangements that almost always exploits drivers. Under1786these ``lease-purchase'' or ``lease-to-own'' agreements, a motor1787carrier (or related entity) owns a truck and leases it to a driver. In1788turn, the driver enters in to an agreement to lease the truck back to1789and operate it for the motor carrier. This this scenario, the motor1790carrier and lessor are effectively the same entity.1791    Companies peddling these supposed ``opportunities'' typically offer1792the false promise of fair compensation, future ownership of the truck,1793and independence from employer-employee requirements. While the1794purported goal of these agreements is for the driver to become a full-1795fledged owner-operator at the end of the lease, these schemes rarely1796work. Instead, drivers are paid pennies on the dollar and have their1797work limited by the leasing entity to prevent them from ever securing1798ownership of the truck they lease. They are also provided no1799independence to seek better compensation or more steady work with other1800motor carriers.1801    This system pushes individuals who genuinely desire a career in1802trucking out of the industry and further contributes to driver1803turnover. Additionally, the financial and personal pressures resulting1804from escalating debt can create highway safety risks.1805    OOIDA supported the establishment of the Truck Leasing Task Force1806(TLTF) in IIJA and its mission to examine the terms, conditions, and1807equitability of common truck leasing arrangements. Following a series1808of productive meetings and discussions, TLTF submitted their findings1809to USDOT, the Department of Labor, and Congress in January 2025. OOIDA1810echoes TLTF's final report which found that the negative impacts of1811inequitable lease-purchase programs negatively affect individual1812drivers (especially new drivers), the trucking workforce, the health of1813the industry, and roadway safety. We encourage the Committee to1814implement TLTF's comprehensive recommendations including enacting a1815statutory prohibition on CMV lease-purchase agreements as irredeemable1816tools of fraud and driver oppression.1817                MINIMUM LIABILITY INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS1818    OOIDA has long fought efforts to increase minimum liability1819insurance requirements for motor carriers and will vehemently oppose1820legislation that includes an increase of any amount. Not only is such1821an increase wholly unnecessary, it would do nothing to improve highway1822safety, needlessly jeopardize countless blue-collar jobs, and destroy1823many small trucking businesses.1824    Federal research has demonstrated such a change is entirely1825unnecessary. A Congressionally-required study determined the vast1826majority of truck-involved crashes do not exceed today's minimum1827insurance levels. In fact, the existing minimum of $750,000 covers1828costs in over 99 percent of crashes involving a CMV.1829    It's important to understand the impact any increase would have on1830our economy. Increasing motor carriers' minimum liability requirements1831would affect all businesses transporting property, not just long-haul1832trucking operations. The impact would be felt in many sectors of the1833economy, including the agriculture, construction, manufacturing,1834towing, and materials industries. Raising insurance minimums for1835countless businesses engaged in trucking would undoubtedly cause many1836to shutter, leading to the loss of blue-collar jobs. This policy1837clearly does not belong in legislation that is designed to rebuild our1838infrastructure and encourage economic growth.1839    Calls for higher insurance requirements have come from trial1840lawyers looking to line their pockets at the expense of truckers,1841farmers, ranchers, towers, construction firms, manufacturers and any1842other industries reliant upon trucking. We strongly encourage members1843of the Committee to prevent any such provision from being included in1844the next surface transportation reauthorization.1845                             SPEED LIMITERS1846    In 2022, FMCSA launched a controversial speed limiter rulemaking1847that would restrict all heavy-duty CMVs to a single top speed across1848the country, as low as 60 miles per hour. This mandate would have a1849negative effect on road safety, crash rates, driver retention, and1850supply chain performance, which is precisely why it is incredibly1851unpopular among professional drivers.1852    While the Trump Administration has recognized the strong opposition1853to speed limiters among truckers and announced USDOT will withdraw the1854rulemaking, there are lawmakers who want to use surface transportation1855reauthorization to impose a mandate over our members' and other1856industry stakeholders' objections. These efforts must be rejected by1857the Committee.1858    However, OOIDA strongly supports efforts to go a step farther. The1859DRIVE Act, S. 1696, is legislation introduced by Senator Steve Daines1860(R-MT) that would prevent future Administrations from advancing any1861policies that create dangerous speed differentials among vehicles,1862which are proven to lead to higher crash rates. We believe this1863proposal must be included in the next Highway Bill.1864                ELECTRONIC LOGGING DEVICE CERTIFICATION1865    Since its implementation in 2017, the Federal Electronic Logging1866Device (ELD) mandate has been beleaguered by FMCSA's decision to allow1867manufacturers to self-certify devices. Over the last several years,1868nearly 300 ELDs have been deemed non-compliant by the agency, leaving1869truckers little confidence in determining what devices will ensure1870their long-term compliance with the regulation.1871    Since Congress forced truckers to comply with this mandate, you1872must now compel FMCSA to implement a long overdue certification process1873that prevents non-compliant devices from ever entering the marketplace.1874    A robust certification process would also address long-standing1875concerns involving cybersecurity threats related to ELDs. In 2020, the1876Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) issued a bulletin indicating1877self-certified devices did not follow cybersecurity best practices and1878were vulnerable to compromise. Specifically, the bulletin stated,1879``Although the mandate seeks to provide safety and efficiency benefits,1880it does not contain cybersecurity requirements for manufacturers or1881suppliers of ELDs, and there is no requirement for third-party1882validation or testing prior to the ELD self-certification process. This1883poses a risk to businesses because ELDs create a bridge between1884previously unconnected systems critical to trucking operations.'' These1885conditions have not changed in five years.1886    Furthermore, Congress must impose a ban on technology from hostile1887nations like Russia and China from being utilized in ELDs that track1888American truckers. ELDs generate copious amounts of data about our1889supply chain, including the movement of specific vehicles. Allowing our1890enemies and competitors unimpeded access to this data should concern1891lawmakers as much as it does the truckers who are forced to use the1892devices. This kind of ban could also be achieved by enacting a rigorous1893certification process at FMCSA.1894                         SIDE UNDERRIDE GUARDS1895    Truckers hold a number of concerns about mandating underride1896equipment, specifically side underride guards. These include1897operational and safety challenges regarding rail-crossings, loading1898docks, and low ground clearances, as well as equipment damage resulting1899from curbs, roundabouts, speed bumps, and other highway features.1900Additionally, there are no commercially-available side underride guards1901that have demonstrated a capability to fully prevent passenger1902compartment intrusion among passenger vehicles in highway driving1903conditions, raising serious concerns about their purported efficacy and1904benefits.1905    For decades, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration1906(NHTSA) has considered numerous options involving side underride1907guards. NHTSA has consistently concluded Federal mandates would be1908impractical and cost-prohibitive. The Committee must reject calls for1909this unworkable and costly mandate to be included in surface1910transportation reauthorization.1911       UNIQUE ELECTRONIC IDENTIFIERS OR ``TRACKERS ON TRUCKERS''1912    Truckers strongly oppose the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance's1913(CVSA) proposal to mandate the use of Universal Electronic Identifiers1914(UEI) or as OOIDA calls them, ``Trackers on Truckers''. Our members1915have been extremely clear that this concept is an unwarranted intrusion1916into their privacy, as well as an overly costly and burdensome1917requirement that does nothing to improve their efficiency or safety.1918Due to the absence of any research demonstrating how the use of UEI1919technology would improve safety, the motivation for pursuing this1920mandate appears to be nothing more than adding convenience for1921enforcement agencies.1922    In fact, truckers are concerned the implementation of this proposal1923would negatively affect highway safety if enforcement officers begin1924prioritizing roadside inspections based on potentially unreliable data,1925instead of observable safety hazards. To make matters worse, barreling1926forward with a new mandate involving the transmission of sensitive1927information only intensifies concerns involving identity theft, cargo1928theft, security threats, and more.1929    This is likely why FMCSA's September 2022 ANPRM on UEI was soundly1930rejected by industry stakeholders and never advanced through the1931regulatory process. Having reached a dead-end at the agency, CVSA is1932now turning to Congress to impose an unnecessary mandate over the1933objections of motor carriers and professional drivers. The organization1934claims the technology would only be required to transmit identifying1935information related to the CMV. However, FMCSA's stalled ANPRM went1936much further and included the possible transmission of information1937related to the individual trucker operating the vehicle. And as we've1938seen with the ELD mandate, manufacturers have gone well beyond what1939Congress required and offered devices that collect and transmit all1940types of information. As a result, truckers have little faith in CVSA1941and others' long-term commitment to limiting the type of information1942being shared.1943            TOLLING AUTHORITY EXPANSION & CONGESTION PRICING1944    Truckers hate tolls. They are an extremely inefficient and1945unreliable source of funding. Truckers also hate congestion pricing,1946which unfairly penalizes them for conditions beyond their control.1947Efforts to expand the use of tolling and congestion pricing are the1948direct result of Federal lawmakers' inability to establish sustainable1949funding streams for our highways. Rather than shifting responsibility1950(and blame) to state and local decisionmakers for your own lack of1951political will, Congress should increase the efficient and reliable1952user fees in place today, as well as take simple steps to ensure all1953road users are contributing to the maintenance and development of our1954infrastructure.1955    Truckers often have limited control over their schedules, and are1956subject to the demands of shippers and rigid hours-of-service (HOS)1957regulations. They have little choice but to use a tolled road (if a1958non-tolled alternative isn't available) or drive through metropolitan1959areas during times of high congestion. Unlike other highway users,1960truckers may lack the ability to choose alternate routes to avoid1961congestion due to size and weight restrictions, heavy vehicle1962prohibitions, and other limitations on ancillary roads. For these1963reasons, tolling and congestion fees disproportionately and unfairly1964impact truckers.1965    Let us be clear--small trucking businesses, which already pay tens-1966of-thousands of dollars in taxes every year to maintain our1967infrastructure, are willing to pay more for improved infrastructure, so1968long as it is done in a fair and equitable way. OOIDA has long1969advocated for increases to existing fuel taxes as a way to fund greater1970infrastructure investment. We support new funding mechanisms proposed1971by both the American Highway Users Alliance (AHUA) and the Truckload1972Carriers Association (TCA), which ensure all users are finally paying1973to maintain our roads and bridges.1974    If Congress is considering raising revenue, it should have the1975political courage to do so through proven, cost-effective methods like1976fuel taxes, instead of methods like tolling that disproportionately1977harm truckers. The Committee must take steps to not only limit the1978tolling of currently non-tolled highways, but ensure revenue is being1979used exclusively for the maintenance of the tolled asset.1980                      VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED FEES1981    The authorization of programs to administer Vehicle Miles Traveled1982(VMT) fees, including those targeting only truckers, would be premature1983for the next highway bill. Existing user fees are already incredibly1984efficient and easily administered. These are thoroughly proven1985mechanisms that provide a transparent and effective way to fund highway1986construction and maintenance. The costs of administering these user1987fees are extremely low--estimated to be less than 1 percent of all1988revenues collected. If Congress is serious about raising revenue in the1989near term, it must acknowledge increasing existing user fees is the1990most practical and effective solution.1991    In contrast, truck-only VMT taxes have proven to be highly1992problematic and largely unsuccessful. Whereas gasoline and diesel taxes1993have low administration costs because they are collected from a small1994number of entities, a VMT tax imposed on truckers would skyrocket the1995number of payers into the millions. Such a tax structure would be1996incredibly difficult to enforce and would require a major expansion of1997Federal bureaucracy.1998    It is a common misconception that increased costs associated with1999truck-only VMTs could simply be passed on to shippers. While its true2000most motor carriers are now capable of passing fuel surcharges along,2001it took truckers decades to defer the rising cost of fuel to their2002customers. Shippers will similarly be unlikely to immediately accept2003higher fees to cover the cost of truck-only VMT. Instead, they will2004simply hire carriers willing to absorb the most cost. For small-2005business truckers, who operate on the slimmest of margins, this would2006be particularly harmful. While shippers may one day be willing to2007accept charges for VMT, the initial years or decades of implementation2008could be devastating to small businesses.2009    IIJA required USDOT to create the Federal System Funding2010Alternative Advisory Board, a panel directed to analyze VMT. OOIDA has2011a seat on this advisory panel, but the board has only recently begun2012its work. It would be premature for Congress to take any additional2013steps to advance VMT until the panel has finished its report, which2014will include recommendations related to the structure, scope, and2015methodology for developing and implementing a nationwide pilot program.2016            NATIONAL CONSUMER COMPLAINT DATABASE IMPROVEMENT2017    FMCSA's National Consumer Complaint Database (NCCDB) has proven to2018be an ineffective tool for motor carriers and drivers to report2019coercion and unsafe practices committed by motor carriers, unscrupulous2020activities conducted by brokers, and cases of freight fraud. Typically,2021truckers do not receive a satisfactory response when they call the2022NCCDB hotline or submit their concerns via the online portal--if they2023receive one at all. The lack of response from FMCSA discourages2024truckers from using the NCCDB to submit cases, which also contributes2025to a lack of understanding of the scope of the problems our members2026face with motor carries and brokers.2027    FMCSA must improve its response to complaints filed through NCCDB,2028but we recognize the agency likely lacks the resources to do so. NCCDB2029improvements are especially important in light of potential changes to2030HOS rules resulting from upcoming FMCSA pilot programs. HOS flexibility2031must be used at the discretion of drivers; in instances where carriers2032are forcing or coercing drivers to use flexibility in an unsafe way,2033drivers must have a reliable outlet to report these abuses.2034    IIJA required the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to examine2035the NCCDB and evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to consider and2036follow-up on complaints submitted to the database, the types of2037complaints, and awareness of the system. The GAO published their2038findings in September 2023, stating, ``FMCSA has not designed2039sufficient controls to help ensure its policy for reviewing complaints2040related to motor carriers is followed.''\2\2041---------------------------------------------------------------------------2042    \2\ GAO Report to Congressional Committees, ``Motor Carrier2043Operations: Improvements Needed to Federal System for Collecting and2044Addressing Complaints against Truck, Moving, and Bus Companies,''2045September 19, 2023, (GAO-23-105972, https://www.gao.gov/assets/2046d23105972.pdf.2047---------------------------------------------------------------------------2048    We are optimistic that Secretary Duffy's recent announcement that2049the NCCDB is being migrated to a modern customer service platform to be2050more user-and mobile-friendly will help streamline the response2051process, improve response timeliness, expand complaint categories to2052include property brokers, and initiate enforcement action when2053applicable.2054    We believe ongoing NCCDB changes can further be supplemented simply2055by changing the name of the system. Possible suggestions for a more2056logical name would be the ``National Truck Safety Hotline'' or the2057``Truck Safety and Compliance Hotline.'' A new, more identifiable name2058would help raise the platform's awareness among professional truckers2059and improve its utilization.2060    Each year, FMCSA receives hundreds-of-millions of dollars for2061enforcement purposes, a large portion of which is devoted to ensuring2062compliance with regulations that have little to do with highway safety.2063While OOIDA is not in favor of increasing overall enforcement funding2064for FMCSA, we encourage the Committee to repurpose many of these2065dollars--derived largely from user fees imposed on motor carriers--to2066make NCCDB an effective and reliable tool for truckers to report2067concerns.2068       ENGLISH PROFICIENCY, NON-DOMICILED CDL HOLDERS, & CABOTAGE2069    At a minimum, motor carriers and drivers should be expected to2070comply with existing regulations that promote safety. One such2071requirement is that drivers are able to understand and communicate in2072English. 49 CFR 391.11(b)(2) states that a person is qualified to drive2073a truck only if they, ``Can read and speak the English language2074sufficiently to converse with the general public, to understand highway2075traffic signs and signals in the English language, to respond to2076official inquiries, and to make entries on reports and records.'' The2077ability to understand and react to road signs, especially in emergency2078situations, is critical for public and operational safety. Drivers must2079also be able to communicate with law enforcement and, in the case of an2080emergency, first responders.2081    On April 28th, President Trump issued Executive Order 14286,2082``Enforcing Commonsense Rules of the Road for America's Truck2083Drivers.'' The action outlined procedures that have since reinstated2084English proficiency violations back into the Out-of-Service Criteria.2085OOIDA strongly agrees with President Trump's decision to resume2086enforcement of English proficiency requirements for commercial drivers.2087We believe the Executive Order is a welcome step towards restoring a2088commonsense safety standard. OOIDA has also supported legislative2089efforts strengthening English Language Proficiency regulations. S. 21142090would ensure English Language Proficiency is included in CDL testing2091procedures, while H.R. 3608 would codify licensing and enforcement2092aspects of the Executive Order into regulations.2093    Additionally, we applaud the Executive Order's objective to gather2094more information on the number of drivers with non-domiciled CDLs2095currently operating on our roads. Non-domiciled CDLs allow individuals2096to operate a CMV for work, regardless of whether they are an American2097citizen or came to the U.S. with a work visa. FMCSA issued regulatory2098guidance in 2019 that created a loophole for states to expand the2099issuance of non-domiciled CDLs. We are hearing growing concerns from2100truckers about the prevalence of drivers using these licenses. As USDOT2101conducts a nationwide audit into state practices about issuing non-2102domiciled CDLs, we urge the Committee to consider how these drivers are2103being recruited, compensated, and treated, and the safety records of2104carriers utilizing these CDL holders. Furthermore, we question the need2105for this program entirely, as trucking is currently experiencing over-2106capacity that limits job opportunities for domestic drivers.2107    Finally, drivers from Mexico and Canada are being enticed by fleets2108to remain in the U.S. after hauling freight across our borders for the2109purpose of illegally transporting domestic loads. In many cases, fleets2110utilizing these drivers can pay them a fraction of the compensation of2111an American trucker, providing a financial incentive to continue this2112illegal practice. In addition to suppressing domestic wages, this2113practice allows drivers who have completed lower safety standards to2114operate on American roads. Law enforcement must do a better job2115identifying violations and enforcing existing cabotage rules, and FMCSA2116must take aggressive action against fleets found to be violating these2117laws.2118                  UNIFIED CARRIER REGISTRATION REPEAL2119    Administered by the Federal and state governments through a2120partnership with the motor carrier industry, the Unified Carrier2121Registration (UCR) system imposes various taxes on motor carriers and2122distributes the resulting revenue to 41 participating states. The2123system was established in 2005 for the purpose of maintaining a single2124national register of motor carriers conducting interstate travel.2125However, the system no longer meets its original objectives and2126currently does nothing more than generate revenue for states. As a2127result, UCR is a chief example of government bloat and should be2128repealed.2129    Truckers also have concerns with how the system is administered,2130starting with the inequity in the assessment of fees on motor carriers.2131The current tax structure is particularly burdensome and costly for2132single truck operators or small fleet carriers, who are assessed2133disproportionately higher fees than their larger competitors. In2134addition to concerns about inequality, the system lacks the2135transparency and accountability to merit the trust and support of motor2136carriers and Congress. Because oversight of the system is practically2137non-existent, lucrative contracts for services have been doled out with2138little to no competition or transparency.2139    In fact, transparency throughout the program is severely lacking.2140Often, it is difficult to determine precisely what programs UCR taxes2141are supporting within participating states. Many states use UCR revenue2142as a non-federal match for Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program2143(MCSAP) funding, which is devoted primarily to enforcement.2144Essentially, these states are utilizing a federally-authorized tax on2145motor carriers to leverage additional Federal funding for the policing2146of truckers. Rather than returning surplus funds to the depository,2147several `donor states' are currently flouting the UCR agreement and2148keeping revenues that exceed their entitlement in state coffers.2149                              HAIR TESTING2150    No one better understands the critical role that drug and alcohol2151testing fulfills in keeping America's highways safe than OOIDA members.2152However, there are still significant debates and unanswered questions2153concerning the use of hair testing. We do know hair testing can lead to2154false positives because of environmental contamination and the2155interference of cosmetic treatment on the analysis of hair.2156    Variances in hair types have also posed difficulties in2157standardizing drug testing. Hair shape, size, color, texture,2158formation, and other qualities varies by race, sex, age, and position2159on the scalp. Not surprisingly, all these limitations have led to2160discriminatory employment practices. There is no shortage of research2161illustrating these concerns and that is why the Department of Health2162and Human Services (HHS) refrained from mandating hair testing in their21632020 proposed guidelines. OOIDA remains opposed to any sort of hair2164testing mandate that would be initiated by Congress or HHS.2165       CRITICAL ISSUES OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE COMMITTEE2166                             TRUCK PARKING2167    OOIDA will not support surface transportation reauthorization that2168fails to dedicate Federal funding exclusively for the expansion of2169truck parking capacity. Specifically, truckers favor solutions included2170in the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act, H.R. 1659. This bipartisan2171legislation enjoys universal industry and stakeholder support.2172    Alleviating the truck parking shortage has been the top safety2173concern for American truckers for decades. Members of Congress from2174every corner of the country and across the political spectrum have2175supported this legislation over the years because they understand the2176truck parking crisis is negatively affecting their constituents who2177make a living behind the wheel. With research indicating there is a2178single parking spot available for every 11 trucks on the road, the lack2179of available spaces is forcing truckers to choose between parking in a2180potentially unsafe location, such as a highway shoulder, or continuing2181to drive while they feel fatigued or are out of available driving hours2182under federally-mandated HOS regulations. Increasingly, these factors2183are also negatively affecting the safety of the driving public.2184    The current highway bill increased spending on things like CMV2185regulatory enforcement, created new uses of funds from the Highway2186Trust Fund (HTF) for water infrastructure projects, vegetation2187management, and other non-road projects, and authorized $800 million2188for a new bike lane program, as well as a new program to promote2189``pollinator management'' along highways. At the same time, Congress--2190specifically the Senate--failed to prioritize or dedicate funding for2191truck parking.2192    Somehow, after nearly a decade of unified advocacy, the trucking2193industry still finds itself pleading for help and feeling anxious that2194the Senate may again fail to act. Frankly, truckers are sick and tired2195of some lawmakers ignoring their pressing safety needs while funding2196other pet projects, and rest assured, they will be watching closely to2197see if Washington finally delivers. If the next surface transportation2198reauthorization fails to provide dedicated funding for truck parking,2199but authorizes even a single penny of funding for new initiatives,2200OOIDA will use every tool it has to ensure the legislation is defeated.2201                        SIZE & WEIGHT INCREASES2202    OOIDA opposes controversial proposals to increase the size and2203weight of CMVs, which would reduce safety and adversely impact small2204trucking businesses. In fact, allowing bigger and heavier trucks on our2205roads would only benefit shippers and a handful of large corporate2206motor carriers.2207    These proposals would pressure small trucking businesses to2208increase their hauling capacity to stay competitive. Unlike large2209carriers, who could transition their fleets over time while maintaining2210business, smaller trucking companies and owner-operators would be2211forced to immediately modify their equipment at great cost just to2212remain viable. Unfortunately, previous weight increases have2213demonstrated heavier trucks don't lead to better compensation for2214professional drivers, as some proponents have mistakenly claimed.2215    We remind lawmakers that earlier this year, one of the Nation's2216largest retail businesses admitted before a House Committee that they2217would not pay truckers a penny more for hauling additional freight.2218Considering these factors, increasing size and weight is all cost and2219no benefit for truckers. Additionally, there is currently an excess of2220trucking capacity, and motor carriers remain more than capable of2221meeting the Nation's ongoing transportation needs.2222    Congress must also reject efforts to allow commodity-specific2223exemptions, especially for the movement of electric vehicles (EV).2224Providing preferential treatment to EV manufacturers would create a2225scenario in which heavier auto transporters inflict greater damage to2226our roads, while the owners of the EVs being hauled will pay NO fees to2227maintain our infrastructure. Truckers see these proposals for the scams2228they are and implore the Committee to reject policies that benefit EV2229manufacturers and owners at a cost to small trucking businesses. Rather2230than providing favors to select entities in our industry, Congress2231should instead focus on policies that improve conditions for trucking2232operations of all sizes.2233            INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS & WORKER CLASSIFICATION2234    Some trade associations and large motor carriers have claimed2235independent contractors in trucking are threatened by the Department of2236Labor's (DOL) 2024 worker classification rule, and that this rule2237presents safety issues for truckers and the public. This is patently2238false.2239    To set the record straight, the 2024 rule has not jeopardized or2240limited any of our 150,000 members' ability to utilize the independent2241contractor model as owner-operators, and claims that this rule must be2242changed to protect the trucking industry, public safety, or the supply2243chain are unfounded. Small-business truckers and owner-operators2244continue to have the discretion to run their business in the safest and2245most efficient way possible.2246    We believe DOL's 2024 rule struck an appropriate balance for worker2247classification and eliminated a concerning provision from the 2021 rule2248that encroached on USDOT's, and this Committee's, authority. This 20212249provision would have also allowed carriers to micromanage an owner-2250operator's business.2251    In its 2021 Final Rule, DOL created an exemption for ``safety''2252requirements, clarifying that anything a carrier required in the name2253of safety could not be used as evidence that a hiring entity was2254controlling its worker. DOL specifically noted that a contractual2255requirement for an owner-operator leased to a carrier to use a speed2256limiter was ``implemented in order to comply with specific legal2257obligations and to ensure safety,'' and that this requirement wasn't2258controlling how an owner-operator chose to manage their business.2259    Going further, in an opinion letter issued in conjunction with the2260Final Rule, DOL said that requiring owner-operators to use and comply2261with intrusive inward-facing cameras, monthly safety meetings, onboard2262monitoring systems, and numerous other measures were simply adhering to2263``certain rules to which the worker is already legally bound,'' and2264that they therefore aren't controlling a trucker's operation.2265    Given that USDOT has never mandated these technologies or2266requirements, we believe that DOL infringed on USDOT's authority by2267determining that these measures improved safety and constitute a2268specific legal obligation. In fact, as already mentioned in this2269testimony, USDOT recently announced that it would withdraw its proposed2270speed limiter rulemaking. In its announcement, the Department even2271called speed limiters a ``safety hazard'', eliminating any argument2272that these devices should be considered safety equipment by DOL.2273    We urge lawmakers to reject any proposals that are promoted under2274the guise of protecting independent contractors and be skeptical of2275legislation that would limit or conflict with this Committee's work to2276promote safety, small businesses, and the supply chain.2277                GUARANTEED OVERTIME FOR EMPLOYEE DRIVERS2278    An outdated exemption in the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) denies2279employee drivers guaranteed overtime pay. This policy has exacerbated2280problems the Committee has sought to address in the past, including2281detention time, driver retention, and even highway safety. S. 893, the2282Guaranteeing Overtime for Truckers (GOT Truckers) Act, would eliminate2283this exemption, finally placing a value on all of the hours a driver2284works, and help address these problems.2285    First, eliminating the current exemption would force shippers,2286receivers, and others throughout the supply chain to value all of a2287driver's working hours, and in turn, reduce detention time. Drivers are2288often not paid for detention time, and even when they are, industry2289practice dictates that drivers give up two hours of their time for free2290while they wait to be loaded or unloaded. As a result, drivers work 50,229160, and up to 70 hours in a week, with many of these hours spent2292unpaid, waiting at the loading dock. If drivers were paid overtime,2293then entities throughout the supply chain would finally have to pay2294drivers for all their hours on the clock and have an incentive to keep2295them moving.2296    Eliminating the exemption would also help improve driver pay and2297retention, especially in light of the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB).2298OBBB exempts overtime wages from taxes, but only if these overtime2299wages are required to be paid under the FLSA. Because truck drivers are2300exempt from the FLSA overtime provision, even if they are currently2301working for a carrier that pays them overtime, they will not benefit2302from ``no taxes on OT''. Eliminating this discrepancy will put truckers2303on equal footing with most other blue-collar workers who will be2304getting tax-free overtime in the coming years. This in turn will help2305keep drivers in the industry instead of seeking a new job with better2306compensation.2307    While this legislation falls outside the Committee's jurisdiction,2308we hope that you will support S. 893 to help address a number of2309related issues before the committee.23102311    Senator Young. Thank you for your words, Mr. Pugh.2312    Mr. Ferguson, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.23132314 STATEMENT OF FRED C. FERGUSON, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE2315               OFFICER, AMERICAN BUS ASSOCIATION23162317    Mr. Ferguson. On behalf of the American Bus Association and2318the $90 billion motor coach and group travel industry, thank2319you for your bipartisan leadership today.2320    The private motor coach industry powered 40 billion2321passenger miles in 2024, led by 1,800 operators, 90 percent of2322whom are small businesses. We are the most efficient and2323sustainable form of transportation driven by equipment2324innovation and the removal of up to 35 cars per trip. We2325generated $90 billion in economic activity in 2024, and our2326industry employs more than 500,000 Americans. We moved2327approximately 10 percent of Amtrak passengers and you are going2328to be seeing motor coaches on airport tarmacs more and more as2329buses are being a viable substitute to regional jets.2330    With this reach, we will be a key player in the upcoming2331mega decade of events and playing a crucial role in generating2332that $100 billion in economic activity that travel live events,2333and the sporting events will bring to the table.2334    Most importantly, the Committee should view us as a2335strategic transportation reserve. We answer the call for2336natural disaster evacuations, the movement of emergency2337personnel and aid, and troop movements of the U.S. military2338when it is required. Moving to the hearing, safety is a core2339pillar of ABA and has been throughout our 99 years of2340existence. Upholding a rigorous safety ethic is part of ABA's2341code of ethics and unsatisfactory members are asked to leave2342the association.2343    As Congress reauthorizes surface transportation programs,2344ABA offers five core recommendations to ensure the motor coach2345industry remains safe and competitive within the national2346transportation network.2347    Number one--Hours of Service: The motor coach industry2348operates under fundamentally different service models than the2349freight sector. Passenger and group service involves unique2350scheduling, rest periods, and safety considerations. Applying a2351uniform framework does not recognize the functional differences2352of each sector, and we urge Congress to affirm the importance2353of maintaining distinct hours of service regulations.2354    Number two--Minimum Insurance Requirements: ABA supports2355maintaining the current Federal minimum insurance levels. The2356motor coach industry operates under ongoing and rigorous2357Federal oversight with every company subjected to regular FMCSA2358inspections. This high level of accountability paired with2359industry-led efforts, such as the ABA Bus Industry Safety2360Council, and the Motor coach Safety Action Plan has contributed2361to a steady decline in passenger fatalities. Raising minimums2362would likely lead to reduced service availability across the2363transportation network without any clear safety benefit.2364    Number three--Systems Modernization: ABA encourages2365Congress to modernize the safety measurement system and the2366compliance, safety, and accountability methodologies. The2367current data is skewed across sectors and we recommend creating2368distinct peer groups for passenger carriers and adjusting data2369models to reflect size, seasonality, and operating risks.2370    Number four--The Speed Limiter: As being discussed, the2371announcement by Secretary Duffy to reconsider or withdraw the2372Speed Limiter Rule is a welcome development. We encourage the2373full withdrawal of this proposal in recognition of the motor2374coach industry's strong safety record and need for operational2375flexibility.2376    Number five--Access to federally Funded Transit Facilities:2377Private motor coach operators play an essential role in2378connecting cities, particularly rural communities. We work with2379transit hubs and train service providers, as mentioned, and we2380are a major part of the Federal 5311(f) program, yet, our2381industry faces barriers accessing publicly funded facilities,2382which is a current requirement of the law. ABA calls for2383stronger enforcement of reasonable access and better2384transparency in facility use policies.2385    In closing, ABA is committed to working closely with this2386subcommittee, our membership, and FMCSA to uphold the highest2387standards of safety, accessibility, and reliability in motor2388coach operations.2389    I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.2390    [The prepared statement of Mr. Ferguson follows:]23912392           Prepared Statement of Fred C. Ferguson, President2393         and Chief Executive Officer, American Bus Association2394    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, and Members of the2395Committee:23962397    On behalf of the American Bus Association (ABA), I would like to2398express our sincere appreciation to you for your bipartisan leadership2399and commitment in swiftly beginning the highway reauthorization2400process. Your efforts to address our Nation's infrastructure needs are2401commendable, and we value the opportunity to engage with this committee2402on issues critical to the motorcoach industry and the broader surface2403transportation system.2404    Founded in 1926, ABA is the leading national trade association2405representing the private motorcoach, charter bus, group travel, and2406tourism industries--sectors that collectively generate nearly $902407billion in economic activity annually and employ more than 500,0002408Americans. Our members provide essential service across the intercity,2409charter, tour, and commuter markets, connecting people with places and2410supporting both mobility and economic growth in urban and rural2411communities alike.2412    Beyond our commercial service, the motorcoach industry plays a2413vital role in supporting national emergency response and public service2414needs. Our vehicles and operators are regularly mobilized for natural2415disaster evacuations, the movement of emergency aid and personnel, and2416the transportation of U.S. military service members. These missions2417demonstrate the sector's logistical capacity, reliability, and2418readiness in times of crisis.2419    With nearly 400 million passenger trips taken annually, the2420motorcoach industry is a critical pillar of America's transportation2421system--providing safe, affordable, and environmentally efficient2422mobility options. From small family-owned operators to national2423carriers, motorcoaches serve communities in every state, connecting2424people to work, school, healthcare, tourism, and more. Whether moving2425students, commuters, military personnel, or travelers, our industry2426ensures access where other modes often do not reach. Motorcoaches also2427complement the broader transportation network, linking seamlessly with2428airports, rail stations, transit hubs, and roadways--truly helping bind2429the Nation together.2430    ABA has a long, constructive track record of engagement with the2431U.S. Department of Transportation and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety2432Administration (FMCSA) on a wide range of issues, including vehicle and2433driver safety, regulatory compliance, emergency preparedness, and2434workforce development. We've served as a vital partner to the agency by2435offering technical expertise, surfacing operational realities, and2436creating opportunities for dialogue with motorcoach operators of all2437sizes. Through initiatives like safety councils, listening sessions,2438and training partnerships, ABA has helped bridge the gap between policy2439design and on-the-ground implementation. We look forward to continuing2440this solutions-oriented collaboration to advance thoughtful, data-2441driven policymaking that supports both safety and the long-term2442sustainability of the industry.2443    As Congress undertakes the important work of reauthorizing the2444Nation's surface transportation programs, ABA respectfully submits the2445following recommendations under the Senate Commerce Committee's2446jurisdiction to ensure the motorcoach industry continues to operate2447safely, efficiently, and competitively in the broader multimodal2448landscape.2449    ABA Policy Priorities for Surface Transportation Reauthorization2450Hours of Service (HOS)--Preserve Industry-Specific Flexibility2451    The motorcoach industry operates under fundamentally different2452service models than the freight sector. Charters, tours, overnight2453trips, and intercity passenger service involve unique scheduling, rest2454periods, and safety considerations. Applying a uniform HOS framework2455across both freight and passenger sectors does not recognize the2456functional differences of each sector, and the corresponding2457operational and safety realities of passenger carriers. A one-size-2458fits-all model creates unnecessary compliance burdens and scheduling2459challenges, and we urge Congress to reaffirm the importance of2460maintaining distinct, tailored Hours of Service.2461Minimum Insurance Requirements--Avoid Burdensome Increases2462    Raising Federal minimum liability insurance requirements would2463impose disproportionate financial strain on small and mid-sized2464operators without demonstrable improvements in safety. There are 1,8002465motorcoach operators across the country, nearly 90 percent of whom2466operate fewer than 25 coaches. Increasing insurance costs already2467present financial limitations on these small businesses, and changes to2468the minimums would likely result in reduced service across the network.2469In our view, the existing minimums already reflect appropriate levels2470for the industry, which has consistently maintained a strong safety2471record. We urge Congress to retain the current insurance thresholds and2472avoid changes that would create barriers to market entry and service2473sustainability.2474    The motorcoach industry operates under a high level of regulatory2475oversight--an appropriate standard given the responsibility of2476transporting passengers safely. Every motorcoach company is subject to2477routine FMCSA inspections at least once every three years. In recent2478years, industry-led progress, including the implementation of the2479Motorcoach Safety Action Plan, broader adoption of advanced safety2480technologies, improved vetting of new entrant carriers, and expanded2481safety education and outreach efforts, has contributed to a steady2482decline in passenger fatalities (NHTSA FARS/FMCSA Large Truck and Bus2483Crash Facts, Nov. 2024--Table 28). ABA is proud to play an active role2484in national safety initiatives such as the Road to Zero Coalition and2485the U.S. DOT's National Roadway Safety Strategy--both of which reflect2486the industry's deep and ongoing commitment to safety.2487    In accordance with MAP-21 directives, FMCSA and its Motor Carrier2488Safety Advisory Committee (MCSAC Task 14-2) reviewed proposals to raise2489minimum insurance liability levels. Ultimately, the agency was advised2490to pause any rulemaking on this issue pending further study (FMCSA-24912014-0211). For many motorcoach operators, insurance represents one of2492the top three cost drivers--second only to vehicle acquisition and2493personnel--making any increase in mandatory coverage levels a matter of2494serious concern.2495CSA/SMS Modernization--Reflect Passenger Industry Realities2496    While the motorcoach industry supports efforts to modernize FMCSA's2497Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) program and its Safety2498Measurement System (SMS), current methodologies unfairly group2499motorcoach operators with freight carriers, resulting in distorted2500performance metrics. ABA recommends that FMCSA separate motorcoach2501carriers into distinct peer groups, adjust violation weightings to2502align with passenger-sector risks, and revise data methodologies to2503accommodate small, seasonal operators. These changes would ensure a2504more accurate and equitable assessment of safety performance.2505Speed Limiter Rulemaking--Avoid One-Size-Fits-All Mandates2506    The speed limiter rule under consideration at FMCSA was primarily2507designed with heavy freight vehicles in mind and does not account for2508the distinct safety needs and operating conditions of motorcoaches.2509Moreover, there is no compelling reason for a nationally uniform speed2510limit for all commercial vehicles. Variations in geography, traffic2511congestion, and operational needs justify allowing companies to set2512their speed governors at different levels. The announcement by2513Secretary Duffy to reconsider or withdraw the rule is a welcome2514development. We encourage the full withdrawal of this proposal in2515recognition of the motorcoach industry's strong safety record, need for2516operational flexibility, and the adverse impact such a mandate would2517have on rural and long-distance service.2518Access to Federally Funded Transit Facilities--Ensure Fairness for2519        Private Operators2520    Private motorcoach operators often face challenges accessing2521federally funded public transit facilities, despite their role in2522delivering public transportation and complementing government services.2523ABA urges Congress to strengthen and enforce ``reasonable access''2524requirements for private operators and to improve transparency around2525facility policies. Reauthorization legislation should include2526provisions that protect access and foster greater cooperation between2527public and private transportation providers.2528    Given the Subcommittee's jurisdiction over the Federal Highway2529Administration, ABA urges Congress to take action to ensure that2530motorcoaches receive equitable access to HOV and bus-only lanes, as2531well as achieve toll parity with publicly funded transit vehicles.2532These policies are essential to promoting efficiency, reducing2533congestion, and leveling the playing field for private operators who2534deliver vital transportation services to millions of Americans without2535public subsidy.2536Regulatory Modernization--Cut Red Tape, Improve Efficiency2537    Outdated or overly complex regulatory processes continue to2538challenge motorcoach operators and impede efficient compliance.2539Reauthorization presents an opportunity to modernize vehicle inspection2540procedures, streamline commercial driver's license (CDL) testing, and2541improve FMCSA's registration and data systems. ABA supports practical2542reforms that reduce administrative burden while preserving--and in many2543cases enhancing--safety oversight.2544                    Other Critical Engagement Areas2545FMCSA Staffing--Rebuild the Passenger Carrier Division2546    FMCSA's Passenger Carrier Division plays a vital role in industry2547oversight and stakeholder engagement. However, the division has lacked2548a permanent chief for more than three years and is severely2549understaffed, with only two remaining staff members based in Iowa. To2550restore effective communication and improve regulatory responsiveness,2551ABA urges FMCSA to prioritize appointing a permanent division chief,2552fill critical vacancies, and work collaboratively with the industry to2553identify qualified candidates. A well-staffed and engaged division is2554essential to maintaining a strong, safety-focused regulatory2555environment for motorcoach operators.2556California Meal and Rest Break (MRB) Preemption--Protect National2557        Consistency2558    The 2020 FMCSA determination to preempt California's meal and rest2559break rules for interstate passenger-carrying drivers was a necessary2560and appropriate action to preserve national consistency in HOS2561regulations. State-level labor rules that overlap with Federal2562regulations create confusion, compliance risks, and operational2563disruptions. ABA urges FMCSA to deny all pending waiver requests and to2564defend the 2020 determination in court. A clear and consistent Federal2565standard is essential to ensuring legal clarity and safe, efficient2566service across state lines.2567English Language Proficiency (ELP) Rule--Improve Implementation2568    ABA supports the intent behind the ELP rule as a safety measure,2569but its current implementation varies widely across states, creating2570confusion for both drivers and testers. Enforcement inconsistencies and2571unclear testing standards undermine both compliance and recruitment.2572ABA urges FMCSA to partner with industry on a webinar or listening2573session to clarify expectations, gather state-level feedback, and2574ensure the rule is implemented in a way that supports safety without2575worsening the national driver shortage and provides a clear path back2576for those who fall short.2577    ABA is committed to working collaboratively with this subcommittee,2578the full Senate Commerce Committee, and the Federal Motor Carrier2579Safety Administration to ensure that motorcoach transportation2580continues to meet the highest standards of safety, accessibility, and2581reliability.2582    We believe that a strong partnership between policymakers,2583regulators, and industry leaders is essential to advancing practical,2584data-driven solutions that reflect the unique operating realities of2585motorcoach providers. Whether it's improving regulatory clarity,2586supporting workforce development, or ensuring safe operations on the2587road, ABA is ready to provide insights and engage constructively in2588shaping the future of passenger transportation. Safety is our number2589one priority.2590    Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to your2591questions and to ongoing collaboration on these vital issues.25922593    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Ferguson.2594    Mr. O'Brien, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.25952596STATEMENT OF SEAN M. O'BRIEN, GENERAL PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL2597                    BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS25982599    Mr. O'Brien. Thank you very much, Chairman Young, Ranking2600Member Peters, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for the2601opportunity to testify today on issues impacting the trucking2602and commercial bus industries.2603    I am Sean O'Brien, General President of the International2604Brotherhood of Teamsters. The Teamsters Union represents more2605than 1.3 million workers since 1903. That is 122 years. Our2606membership includes hundreds of thousands who start their2607workday behind a steering wheel of a commercial vehicle.2608    I am personally familiar with the subject of this hearing2609and not simply as general president of the Teamsters, I started2610my apprenticeship program at 18 years old in the rigging2611industry in South Boston where I was an apprentice rigger, then2612a low driver, hauled heavy equipment both interstate and2613intrastate.2614    The Surface Transportation Reauthorization is an2615opportunity for bipartisan action. Together, we must create2616economic opportunity and improve the lives of millions of2617Americans. The Teamsters look forward to working closely with2618the Committee to write a bill that prioritize workers,2619prioritize public safety, and protection of jobs.2620    For decades, the Teamsters have led the way in making the2621trucking industry a better and safer place to work. Teamsters'2622drivers earn wages and benefits that ensure our members can2623support their families and retire with dignity. Our union2624provides high-quality training to drivers. We regularly induct2625members into the UPS Circle of Honor and many other driver2626safety programs recognizing 25 to 30 years of safe driving2627without an accident.2628    I would like to start by talking about the state of our2629industry. You have all heard about so-called ``driver2630shortage'', and I think you just heard one of my colleagues2631testify to that, we have been told we can solve this problem by2632forcing drivers to work longer hours and operate heavier2633trucks. At UPS, for example, one of our members may spend years2634working another position, another classification before a job2635operating a tractor trailer becomes available.2636    Once our members do get behind the wheel, most remain in2637these good paying, reliable, and safe positions until2638retirement. At carriers like TForce and ABF, Teamsters only2639experience a 10 to 12 percent turnover ratio. Union drivers2640have the best wages, health care, and retirement securities. In2641Teamster shops, workers are incentivized to stay, so-called2642``driver shortages'' do not occur.2643    To help make this a reality for more workers, the Teamsters2644urge Congress to invest in high-quality CDL training. Sadly,2645predatory CDL programs are widespread in this country. They2646take money from students who then graduate unable to pass a2647skills test or operate a vehicle safely. Teamster Locals in 202648states certify members in the public as CDL drivers, usually at2649no cost to the students. Let us grow these programs for more2650American drivers.2651    The expansion and creation of competitive grant programs2652under the DOT that are accessible at teams training would help2653significantly. Federal action is also overdue to regulate2654autonomous vehicles. Allowing the unfettered operation of AVs2655is a threat to public safety and to good paying jobs in the2656trucking industry. The Surface Reauthorization presents an2657opportunity for Congress to take decisive worker first action2658on AVs.2659    I would also like to draw the subcommittee's attention to2660the growth of dangerous trucking business models. Amazon's2661trucking services are largely provided by its freight service2662partners, better known as FSPs. FSPs are contractors who, in2663turn, hire drivers. These small motor carriers exist as unique2664entities with individual DOT identification numbers.2665    This means that the Government cannot connect the dots2666between individual carriers to establish a patent of unsafe2667behavior across a fleet contracted by Amazon and many others.2668This inability to trace unsafe behavior is critical when we2669know that Amazon FSP drivers were cited for violations at a2670rate of 70 times higher than UPS Teamsters.2671    The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration should be2672directed to collect consolidated safety metrics for companies2673using contracted fleets. They should also conduct a study on2674the safety of Amazon's local last-mile delivery service using2675vehicles under 10,000 pounds.2676    The Teamsters call on the Committee to reject policies that2677would reduce safety on our roads. This would include a2678rejection of weakening hours of service regulations, or2679permitting longer, heavier trucks. Allowing corporations to2680push drivers to high levels of fatigue or to operate more2681dangerous vehicles will result in unnecessary accidents,2682injuries, and death.2683    It is important that Congress is aware that one of the2684obstacles we face in providing the benefits of Teamsters'2685representation is employer abuse of labor law and refusing to2686bargain in good faith. Employers drag out negotiations for2687years and deprive workers of better wages and safer working2688conditions. This is not a bug. It is a feature in our labor2689codes.2690    The Teamsters wholeheartedly endorsed the Faster Labor2691Contracts Act. This bill requires employers to bargain with2692workers within 10 days of voting to form a union.2693    For the record, I want to thank Ranking Member Peters and2694Senator Moreno for their co-sponsorship of this important2695legislation.2696    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look2697forward to your questions as well.2698    [The prepared statement of Mr. O'Brien follows:]26992700       Prepared Statement of Sean M. O'Brien, General President,2701                 International Brotherhood of Teamsters2702    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Peters, and members of the2703Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today on2704``Shifting Gears: Issues Impacting the Trucking and Commercial Bus2705Industries in the U.S.'' The International Brotherhood of Teamsters2706represents 1.3 million hardworking people in the United States, Canada,2707and Puerto Rico, in nearly every Congressional district, including2708hundreds of thousands of members who start their workday behind the2709steering wheel. While today I am proud to serve as the General2710President of the Teamsters Union, I also started my career as a truck2711driver, working in the rigging industry as a heavy-equipment driver in2712the Greater Boston area.2713    For decades, the Teamsters have led the way in making the trucking2714industry a better, safer place to work. Thanks to strong union2715contracts, our drivers earn wages and benefits that ensure they can2716support their families and have access to a dignified retirement. In2717the sectors in which we represent drivers, our members earn wages and2718benefits significantly higher than nonunion workers, particularly in2719the Less than Truckload (LTL) sector. For example, at UPS, a typical2720package car driver working full-time in last-mile delivery brings in2721salary plus benefits with a which substantially surpass their peers at2722nonunion operators FedEx and Amazon. Our members also work safer, with2723access to both high-quality training and workplace protections and it2724is our privilege to regularly induct members into the UPS Circle of2725Honor, recognizing 25 years of driving without an accident.2726    I appear before you today at a critical moment as this Committee2727and Subcommittee begin consideration of the surface transportation2728reauthorization. This legislation provides an opportunity to work on a2729bipartisan basis to improve our Nation's infrastructure, strengthen2730supply chains, create economic prosperity, and improve the lives of2731millions of Americans who drive, maintain, dispatch, and load the2732trucks that deliver goods to every corner of this Nation and sustain2733the lifeblood of American commerce.2734    I call on the Committee to embrace legislative proposals that2735prioritize these workers and their labor and reject corporate schemes2736eager to make driving more dangerous, drivers more fatigued, or replace2737humans entirely with unproven technologies.2738DRIVER PIPELNE2739    The Teamsters have no doubt that members of this Subcommittee have2740heard and will continue to hear about the specter of a so-called driver2741shortage and the actions that Congress should take in response.2742Industry has been pushing this narrative for more than two decades,2743including the claim that the Nation is short of as many as 60,000 or2744more drivers today, and potentially hundreds of thousands in the2745future. The Teamsters continue to reject this narrative. We agree fully2746with the recent, Congressionally mandated, National Academies of2747Science study on driver compensation and driver retention which noted2748that ``the application of traditional economic principles, therefore,2749does not support assertions of persistent shortages of drivers in the2750long-distance TL sector'' and that ``what seems likely, in the2751committee's view, is that carriers in the long-distance TL sector have2752come to believe there are chronic shortages of drivers because of the2753constant need to replace them during both expansions and contractions2754of the long-distance TL sector''.\1\2755---------------------------------------------------------------------------2756    \1\ Pay and Working Conditions in the Long-Distance Truck and Bus2757Industries: Assessing for Effects on Driver Safety and Retention,2758National Academies of Science, 20242759---------------------------------------------------------------------------2760    Instead of accepting mass driver shortage narratives on their face,2761we urge subcommittee members to instead consider several key points.2762First, that claims of driver shortages are frequently accompanied by2763legislative or regulatory requests that are harmful to drivers,2764including solving ``shortages'' by requiring them to drive longer2765hours, operate heavier trucks, or by attacking key elements of labor2766law which prevent the abuse and misclassification of drivers. In this2767regard, we view shortage claims as little more than a pretext for2768actions that might otherwise draw opposition and scrutiny.2769    Secondly, we continue to encourage this subcommittee and Congress2770broadly to delve further into the ``why'' of large carriers and their2771representatives' supposed difficulties. In 2021, an average of 50,0002772Commercial Drivers Licenses (CDL) were issued each month.\2\ Yet the2773truckload sector has long reported annual turnover rates of between 80-277490 percent. While we acknowledge that long-haul truck driving is a2775challenging career that is not suitable for everyone, a turnover rate2776of such magnitude in any other industry would raise significant alarm2777bells. As we have long maintained, there are persistent and endemic2778issues in the trucking industry driving this incredible turnover,2779including low wages, exploitative contracting schemes, predatory truck2780leasing arrangements, and more. We believe these issues are worthy of2781deeper consideration, more so than proposals which would supposedly and2782paradoxically increase driver supply by making driving a more difficult2783job.2784---------------------------------------------------------------------------2785    \2\ https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/registration/commercial-drivers-2786license/states2787---------------------------------------------------------------------------2788    Finally, our experience at Teamsters carriers like TForce, ABF, and2789UPS, as well as dozens of smaller trucking companies, offers a striking2790contrast to the turnover challenges in the truckload sector. While we2791acknowledge that there are substantial differences between truckload2792and less than truckload careers, it is still significant that we2793experience only 10-15 percent annualized turnover at Teamsters LTL2794carriers. At UPS, depending on location, an employee may spend years2795working in various positions before a position as a feeder driver,2796operating UPS tractor trailers, becomes available--at which point most2797members stay in that position until retirement. The reasons for this2798are not mysterious--as discussed above, when offered industry leading2799wages, health care, and retirement benefits, workers are incentivized2800to stay, and ``shortages'' do not occur.2801    To that point, we are unsurprised by a 2019 Bureau of Labor2802Statistics report into the question of driver availability and economic2803behavior which largely concluded that the supply of drivers behaves in2804the manner a basic supply and demand model would anticipate, with2805expected responses to economic incentives. BLS stated that ``the2806overall picture is consistent with a market in which labor supply2807responds to increasing labor demand over time, and a deeper look does2808not find evidence of a secular shortage'' and further, ``Econometric2809models of in-and outmigration of drivers support this conclusion.2810Drivers with higher earnings and [better] hours [when first observed by2811the study] are less likely to leave driving [12 months later].''2812    While we reject the shortage narrative, that does not mean that2813Congressional action on the driver pipeline is unwarranted. There are2814opportunities for Congress to include initiatives that are2815simultaneously pro-worker and pro-business in the upcoming2816reauthorization. For years, Congress has funded driver training though2817the Commercial Motor Vehicle Operator Safety Training (CMVOST) grant2818program. The program is small in scope--in 2024 it awarded a total of2819$3.5 million to 27 awardees, and most awards are targeted at advanced2820safety training for previously licensed drivers.\3\ However, a2821reworked/larger CMVOST, or the creation of a new competitive grant2822program dedicated to new licensure, could create significant2823opportunities for prospective drivers.2824---------------------------------------------------------------------------2825    \3\ https://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/Grants/CMVOST.aspx2826---------------------------------------------------------------------------2827    The need for high quality CDL training is increasingly clear as2828predatory CDL programs persist across the country. As the Commercial2829Vehicle Training Association (CVTA) stated in a recent letter to2830Secretary Duffy, ``the continued presence of non-compliant entities on2831the TPR allows these bad actors to offer substandard training services,2832resulting in students paying out-of-pocket for instruction that does2833not meet Federal standards. These students are often left unable to2834pass the CDL skills test, obtain employment, or operate safely;2835creating a significant risk to all who share the road.'' It benefits no2836one to generate ``graduates'' who can't pass a skill tests or, if they2837can, are not able to operate safely.2838    Teamsters local unions in 20 states have established training2839trusts or apprenticeship programs to train and certify our members and2840other workers as CDL drivers, as well as offering training in hazmat,2841passenger, school bus and doubles/triples endorsements--all at little2842or even no cost to students. Our programs graduate CDL holders who not2843only have the actual skills needed to be safe drivers but also obtain a2844pathway to employment. We have deep interest in growing our current2845programs to reach more Americans in new locations, to expand our2846offerings in existing programs, and to graduate increased numbers of2847highly skilled drivers. The expansion and/or creation of new funding2848streams accessible to Teamsters training programs would be critical to2849this effort, and we ask for support for this initiative in the surface2850reauthorization.2851    Opportunities to expand driver training programs also exist outside2852of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration orbit. The Teamsters2853are proud to represent the affiliated Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way2854Employes (BMWED), protecting 37,000 rail workers who build, inspect,2855and maintain railroad tracks, bridges, and structures. As part of these2856responsibilities, many maintenance of way workers (MOW) are required to2857hold a CDL to operate specialized rail equipment. Our BMWED members2858report substantial bottlenecks in receiving railroad-provided training.2859To solve this issue, we strongly support explicit clarification of the2860workforce development eligibility within the Consolidated Rail2861Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) Program to include CDL2862training programs. As labor organizations are already eligible2863recipients under CRISI, this would allow the BMWED to apply for Federal2864support to conduct training programs directly.2865AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES2866    With increased efforts by autonomous vehicle (AV) manufacturers to2867commercialize autonomous trucks, and examples of actual, limited,2868commercial deployments, it has never been clearer that Federal action2869is long overdue. At this hour, the sole unique responsibility that the2870Federal government places on the testing or deployment of autonomous2871vehicles is for the operator to report significant accidents via the2872National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) Standing2873General Order 2021-01.2874    It is incomprehensible that in the same universe in which the2875Federal government regulates the size of hazard material placards down2876to a millimeter, autonomous vehicles are permitted to freely roam the2877country without oversight. Allowing the unfettered and unregulated2878operation of autonomous vehicles--ultimately seeking to replace human2879drivers with robots--is unequivocally a threat to safety on our2880roadways and the existence of good jobs in the trucking industry. The2881surface reauthorization presents an opportunity for Congress to finally2882take decisive action on autonomous vehicles.2883    This Committee has the advantage of holding jurisdiction over both2884NHTSA, responsible for vehicle manufacturing standards, and FMCSA,2885responsible for issues regarding commercial deployment and operations.2886It is essential that the reauthorization mandates the creation of a2887regulatory framework for autonomous vehicles governing aspects under2888the jurisdiction of both agencies. We call for the adoption of policies2889and other actions enumerated in the Teamsters' Autonomous Vehicle2890Federal Policy Principles.\4\2891---------------------------------------------------------------------------2892    \4\ https://teamster.org/2023/09/teamsters-autonomous-vehicle-2893federal-policy-principles/2894---------------------------------------------------------------------------2895    We urge the Committee to specifically consider the economic impacts2896of mass deployment of unregulated autonomous vehicles on your2897constituents. The single most common occupation for men in the United2898States without a college degree is driver/sales workers and truck2899drivers.\5\2900---------------------------------------------------------------------------2901    \5\ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/11/among-young-2902us-workers-without-a-college-degree-men-and-women-hold-very-different-2903types-of-jobs/2904---------------------------------------------------------------------------2905    Industry talking points on ``fostering innovation'' and ``competing2906with foreign adversaries'' falls on deaf ears for the millions of2907Americans the AV industry seeks to automate out of a job. Among other2908efforts, the Subcommittee should consider enacting workforce2909recommendations made by the Department of Transportation's Transforming2910Transportation Advisory Committee, on which the Teamsters served.\6\2911---------------------------------------------------------------------------2912    \6\ https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/transformation/2913transforming-transportation-advisory-committee/TTACReport20242914---------------------------------------------------------------------------2915    While certain regulatory responsibilities concerning autonomous2916vehicles clearly rest with the Federal government, the subcommittee2917should not pursue legislative efforts that seek to preempt states from2918exercising their existing authorities to oversee autonomous vehicles.2919Particularly as it relates to the terms and permissibility of operating2920within states without the presence of human drivers, and the collection2921of data to inform states' decision-making. We commend every member of2922this subcommittee for their recent vote to strike a restriction on2923state action on artificial intelligence from the reconciliation bill.2924PREDATORY MODELS2925    As the Subcommittee considers how to best promote safety in modern-2926day trucking, it must act on the growth of novel corporate arrangements2927that render existing safety and accountability metrics ineffective. We2928draw the Subcommittee's attention to the trucking practices of Amazon.2929    Much of Amazon's trucking services are provided by its Freight2930Service Partners (FSP). These are contractors to Amazon who in turn use2931drivers to haul Amazon products. However, these individual motor2932carriers, many of which are small operations of only a few drivers,2933exist as unique entities with individual Department of Transportation2934(DOT) identification numbers under FMCSA's Compliance, Safety,2935Accountability (CSA) program, and subject to related enforcement2936actions through the Safety Fitness Determination (SFD) rating system.2937    The resulting effect of this model is that the safety behavior and2938metrics of the contracted carrier reflects only the performance of that2939individual carrier, not the parent organization impelling these fleets2940en masse. FMCSA lacks the ability to connect the dots between2941individual carriers or establish a pattern of unsafe behavior across2942the contracted fleet. This practice of devolving responsibility has2943come with tragic results--a 2022 Wall Street Journal investigation2944found that trucking companies hauling freight for Amazon have been2945involved in crashes that killed more than 75 people since 2015. The2946investigation further revealed that some carriers were found to be2947operating despite FMCSA Out of Service Orders; were rehired after2948significant violations; and that FSP drivers were cited for violations2949at a rate 70 times higher than UPS Teamsters drivers.\7\2950---------------------------------------------------------------------------2951    \7\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-trucks-crash-safety-2952116637934912953---------------------------------------------------------------------------2954    While the use of contracting and freight brokerages are a2955fundamental component of the trucking industry, the use of contracting2956for the express purposes of avoiding safety responsibility should not2957be permitted. To address this scourge, FMCSA should be directed to2958amend the CSA program to collect comprehensive safety metrics for2959entities making use of large numbers of contracted fleets, which would2960be inclusive of the safety performance of all contracted carriers. This2961would permit FMCSA to take relevant enforcement action in response to2962such arraignments.2963    Similarly, we note that Amazon performs most of its local last-mile2964delivery service using vehicles under 10,001 GVWR, unlike the package2965cars deployed by UPS. Critically, this also means that because these2966vehicles are generally not classified as commercial motor vehicles2967because of their weight, they fall outside the scope of FMCSA's safety2968authority, once again putting Federal regulators in the dark regarding2969their safety performance. To better understand the safety risks2970presented by these operations, the committee should require that FMCSA,2971in conjunction with safety research organizations and the Motor Carrier2972Safety Advisory Committee conduct a study on the safety of such2973operations and risks presented by their unregulated status and make2974recommendations to Congress.2975SAFETY ISSUES2976    As discussed previously, it is imperative that the surface2977reauthorization legislation does not reduce safety on our roadways and2978for our members.2979    The Teamsters oppose efforts to water down critical Hours of2980Service (HOS) regulations, including increasing drive or duty time2981windows, or providing unwarranted HOS flexibility. The DOT has2982previously identified that fatigue is a contributing factor in at least298313 percent of large truck crashes, and fatigue is tragically endemic to2984the industry.\8\ Allowing corporations to further push drivers to2985dangerous levels of fatigue is a proposal that can only result in2986unnecessary accidents, injuries, and deaths.2987---------------------------------------------------------------------------2988    \8\ https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/18esv-000252.pdf2989---------------------------------------------------------------------------2990    We also strenuously oppose efforts to raise maximum truck length2991and weight. While we appreciate that these items are bifurcated between2992this committee (length) and the Committee on Environment and Public2993Works (weight), we call on members to oppose any changes within this2994committee's jurisdiction, and in the reauthorization writ large.2995Research, including the 2019 Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits2996Study and recent studies concerning the impacts of larger trucks on2997bridge infrastructure, make clear that increasing truck size and weight2998is a clear threat to safety.\9\ Our members continue to report that2999heavier vehicles present operational difficulties such as controlling3000brake distance and maneuvering in congested traffic conditions. Our3001members also report that these larger trucks are more likely to3002overturn. These proposals are also strenuously opposed by the Teamsters3003Law Enforcement League, representing law enforcement and first3004responders across the country, based on their experiences dealing with3005overweight trucks in the states in which they are currently permitted.3006---------------------------------------------------------------------------3007    \9\ https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/sw/map21tswstudy/ctsw/3008CTSLWS%20Report%20to%203009Congress%20FINAL.pdf3010---------------------------------------------------------------------------3011DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING3012    The Teamsters Union remains committed to compliance with DOT's drug3013and alcohol testing requirements, as informed by the Department of3014Health and Human Services' (HHS) Mandatory Guidelines for Federal3015Workplace Drug Testing Programs. We acknowledge that HHS has failed to3016date to complete scientific and technical guidelines for hair follicle3017testing as a method of detecting the use of a controlled substance for3018purposes of DOT testing.3019    However, we are deeply disturbed by, and strongly opposed to,3020proposals seeking to skirt the statutory frameworks for DOT testing and3021guarantees that have been in place for almost 30 years. Specifically,3022any effort permitting the use of privately tested hair follicle samples3023to satisfy DOT panel tests and/or uploads to FMCSA's Drug and Alcohol3024Clearinghouse must be rejected.3025    Congress must continue to entrust the scientific professionals at3026HHS to determine whether mandatory guidelines for the use of a sample3027can be developed in a manner that satisfies scientific and due process3028concerns. In lieu of this, no legislative action should be taken.3029CABOTAGE3030    Since the adoption of NAFTA, Mexico-domiciled motor carriers have3031been prohibited from engaging in U.S. point-to-point (domestic)3032transportation within the United States.\10\ Despite this, recent3033research conducted by the Teamsters into issues surrounding cross-3034border trucking networks in California revealed a concerning prevalence3035of illegal cabotage operations by these motor carriers. We encourage3036the Committee to direct FMCSA to conduct an analysis of the scope of3037current cabotage violations, and work in concert with relevant law3038enforcement agencies to curtail these operations.3039---------------------------------------------------------------------------3040    \10\ 49 CFR 365.501(b)3041---------------------------------------------------------------------------3042LABOR STANDARDS3043    While outside the jurisdiction of the Committee, it is important3044that Congress broadly is aware that one of largest impediments the3045Teamsters face in providing the benefits of Teamsters representation to3046more drivers is the ability for corporations, including trucking3047companies, to abuse existing labor law and refuse to bargain in good3048faith with newly organized workers. Too often we have witnessed3049employers dragging out negotiations to deny workers from securing the3050wages and conditions they deserve indefinitely. This is a feature, not3051a bug, in our current labor codes. For this reason, we urgently express3052our strong support for the Faster Labor Contracts Act, which would3053require employers to collectively bargain with newly organized workers3054within 10 days of voting to form their union. We thank Ranking Member3055Peters and Senator Moreno for their co-sponsorship of this essential3056legislation.3057    The International Brotherhood of Teamsters thanks the Subcommittee3058for the opportunity to testify today. We look forward to continuing to3059work together on a bipartisan basis on the upcoming surface3060transportation reauthorization.30613062    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. O'Brien.3063    We are now going to turn to member questions, and I will3064begin. I will begin with the Drive Safe Act. We have had some3065of our witnesses mention this legislation, now law. This is3066something, an issue I encountered. And I do think there are3067labor shortages as it relates to drivers of large trucks in3068this country, and I have encountered it throughout the State of3069Indiana.3070    I would travel around Indiana where--right next to some3071major metropolitan areas in other states. Next to Lawrenceburg,3072Indiana, is Cincinnati, next to New Albany and Jeffersonville,3073Indiana, is Louisville, Kentucky, next to East Chicago, and3074Gary, and Chicago, Illinois, and in each of these locations, I3075discovered that there were trucking companies attempting to3076move things, not only within Indiana, they had great facility3077to do that and had enough drivers because drivers could be 183078if delivering things within Indiana. But to go across state3079lines, you have to be 21.3080    That struck me as someone who believes in the power of3081markets, as absolutely absurd. I looked in the Constitution, it3082does still say that our job is to facilitate interstate3083commerce, and so I began working on this with all sorts of3084stakeholders here. And we finally got this signed into law3085after working on it for a number of years.3086    And case closed, right? No, that is not how it works. We3087had some real challenges with implementation with the last3088administration. The Biden administration imposed a number of3089additional burdensome requirements going well beyond3090congressional intent, and it has severely hampered3091implementation and participation.3092    So we are going to give this another shot, but we want to3093do so in an informed way. So Mr. Spear, from your perspective3094at ATA, if implemented as Congress intended, how would this3095program help to bring younger qualified drivers into the3096industry?3097    Mr. Spear. We are going to utilize that interstate commerce3098element that you mentioned, which is--and you are full right to3099emphasize--49 states, 49 states have legislation on the books3100allowing an 18-year-old to drive. Now, a little short drive in3101Indiana, in California, Texas, you can get a pretty good clip3102in, right? So there are no training standards, there are no3103performance metrics attached to any of that.3104    What you did in this pilot program, and at the time, Chair3105Cantwell, agreed to a national pilot program to bring 3,000 of3106these 18-, 19-, 20-year-olds in and properly teach them how to3107safely and responsibly drive. OK. I think we would all agree on3108that, training is key. None of the 49 states have that. Your3109pilot program that was enacted has 400 hours of training of3110which you have to have a supervised driver, experienced driver3111in the cab with you, it has 14 metrics attached to it.3112    This is a step toward safety unlike the 49 states, not a3113step away. The reason that it got poor attendance is because3114the last administration put a whole number of requirements into3115the pilot that you didn't authorize, including inward-facing3116cameras. OK?3117    You already have supervision with the experienced driver in3118the cab. So I know you and I have some differences, Navy, Army,3119the Army. I was just down in Benning last Friday, my son is3120commissioned as a captain, he is a company commander, 236 18-312119-year-olds preparing to be infantrymen.3122    Senator Young. Yes.3123    Mr. Spear. OK. They are going to go do the unthinkable.3124Hopefully they don't, but if they have to, they are trained to3125be the best. If we can do that for 18- and 20-year-olds, I am3126pretty sure we can teach them how to cross state lines in a3127class A.3128    Senator Young. Yes. So you know, it is an interesting3129factoid that the 18 to 21 cohort actually has lower insurance3130rates than slightly over 21 for whatever anomalous reason. So3131it might suggest--I am speculating here--that that group who is3132motivated at the age of, say, 19 to get this sort of training3133is self-selecting, right? They are very motivated, very3134conscientious and thus on balance, may be safer, maybe even3135safer.3136    Mr. Spear. And Mr. Chairman, I would also say----3137    Senator Young. But nonetheless, we baked 400 additional3138hours in. We are going to get it right this time.3139    I am going to move on to Mr. Pugh because I did indicate in3140good faith that I wanted to continue soliciting feedback from3141others. And I know--I believe from your comments you have3142expressed some reservations, Mr. Pugh, about the experience of3143these drivers and the potential of driving into new terrain. So3144I will give you an opportunity. Do you believe that the3145requirements related to complete performance benchmarks for3146driving in different areas and at different times of the day3147including on the interstate, in city traffic, on rural two3148lanes, and evening driving are unsatisfactory?3149    Mr. Pugh. I think that we need a pathway for 18 to 21 years3150old to drive truck. I was an 18-year-old, and went in the3151United States Army and drove a truck. That was my pathway. I3152went to the Service, got my CDL, and started driving at 21. I3153do also think at 18 to 21 years old, I did a lot of dumb3154things. Even when I was in the Military, and you have oversight3155when you are in the Military, there are other people there to3156guide you, you know.3157    But with that also being said, I think what we have to3158think about here is how we do this. Because even with 400 hours3159of training, and say you drive around the State of Indiana, or3160the State of Florida, what happens when you go to the Rocky3161Mountains and you have never seen the Rocky Mountains, or in3162the Appalachian Mountains.3163    I think a much safer, better way to handle this, and I3164agree with you, it makes no sense that a kid who lives, say, in3165Louisville, Kentucky, can't just cross the state line, or a kid3166in Indianapolis can't go maybe to Chicago. You know, I3167understand what you are saying, go to Gary, but he can't cross3168to Chicago.3169    I think what we should think about is 150 air mile radiuses3170like we do in agricultural and the short haul. That way, these3171kids who are from 18 to 21 years old, they learn how to operate3172this equipment in these trucks in areas that they know where3173they are from, and they know where they are.3174    As far as inward-facing cameras, I don't think that has3175anything to do with it, because it is funny that we don't want3176inward-facing cameras for young kids that are 18 to 21, but we3177want to have them in this new Independent Contractor Law for3178owner operators who probably have 20 or 30 years experience.3179That is OK.3180    Senator Young. All right. Thank you, sir. Thanks for your3181comments. We will continue to work on this. We want to--we want3182to get this thing right.3183    So I will recognize Mr. Peters for some questions.3184    Then we will move to Chairman Cruz who just joined us.3185    Senator Peters. Well, thank you Mr. Chairman. My first3186question is for both Mr. Spear as well as Mr. O'Brien. I have3187long been a champion of the safety benefits of autonomous3188vehicle technology and what it could offer to the3189transportation system if they are deployed responsibly and3190transparently.3191    In your testimony, both of you mentioned the need for a3192Federal Policy Framework for autonomous vehicles to set the3193rules for the road. Mr. O'Brien, you brought it up in your3194opening comments as well. I agree that we need action in this3195space, but to do that, we are going to need to make sure that3196we are meeting the needs of workers, of innovators, and3197Americans who expect safe roads.3198    So my question for both of you is: Can each of you please3199expand on, perhaps, the top two or three principles that you3200believe must be addressed by Congress or regulators in a3201Federal Autonomous Vehicle Framework?3202    Mr. O'Brien, would you kick that off, please?3203    Mr. O'Brien. Yes, I appreciate this opportunity. Our3204biggest fight whenever we go to the bargaining table with any3205and all industries is automation. Automation is a real threat3206to American jobs, and we feel strongly that the biggest threat3207to the trucking industry is autonomous commercial vehicles not3208requiring human operators.3209    So that is a priority to make certain that we have human3210operators in these vehicles. And I know some people think it is3211not coming for a long time, but either way, whether it comes3212tomorrow or 20 years from now, we have to be prepared. And3213protecting good middle-class jobs is important.3214    You know, I think there was a statistic set out here today,32153.5 million drivers right now. Well, if we replace 3.5 million3216drivers, where do they go, and what do they do? And more3217importantly, it is a public safety issue. We have talked to3218many law enforcement groups regarding their concerns regarding3219autonomous commercial vehicles. And it is a real concern if you3220have a family of four driving down the road.3221    Right now the best computer and the best reaction is a3222human operator. And we have all seen how in certain situations3223where technology has failed in testing of such vehicles with3224autonomous drivers. And last, we talk about all this investment3225that we make in infrastructure. And if we allow autonomous3226vehicles to be heavier, longer, and no requirement, or expand3227requirements of when they can travel on the roads that is going3228to be a detrimental effect to bridges, roads--bridges, off-3229ramps, and roads moving forward. So we think those are the top3230three threats.3231    More importantly, it is the jobs. Where do we put these3232people that have depended upon driving commercial vehicles,3233providing goods and services to this country? And I think there3234is no better example than what we went through during the3235pandemic where truck drivers, regardless of whether you were3236union, a non-union, or independent, we were all looked upon as3237essential workers providing goods and services to this country.3238    And we are not assets. We are human beings that provided3239these goods and services so that this country could keep3240moving. And I think we should be appreciated, not forgotten.3241And the investment should be made to protect these jobs, not3242replace them.3243    Senator Peters. Very good. Mr. Spear?3244    Mr. Spear. Yes. I think Ranking Member know full well there3245are five levels of automation. The first four require a driver,3246you know, engaged in the operation of the commercial vehicle.3247Level five is driverless. We are a long ways from deploying3248that widespread. We are going to see some, you know, operations3249down in the Southwest where it makes sense. You know, the3250weather is accommodating for that sort of activity, maybe not3251so much in Wyoming, Nebraska where I am from.3252    So you know, you are going to see this crop up. But I think3253to point out, the levels one through four really improve safety3254performance, not just for the company and the driver, but for3255the motoring public. There are some really good elements of3256technology that we need to continue to foster. Level five,3257before we even get to that, I think is important.3258    This also comes down to the driver shortage. If you believe3259it or you don't believe it, it is a fact. It is a fact. We3260watch it nationwide. We have the largest number of drivers3261under our membership. We know the demand for these drivers. And3262if there is a shortage, the inclusion of such technology, even3263if it is level five, is not going to be displacing anyone's3264jobs. So this is a red herring. It is--it is a baseless threat3265that I don't believe in, and our industry has proven that.3266    Last thing, in terms of automation, the modes are3267intermodal now. In my industry includes all ports. We support3268them, rail, we are locked arms now. The automation of the3269ports, if you looked at the ILA negotiations that just happened3270for the East Coast and Gulf Coast Ports and include the ILW on3271the West Coast, 65 ports in the United States and not one of3272them ranks in the top 50 in the world for productivity,3273efficiency.3274    We cannot compete. We cannot get the throughput that the3275President wants in and out of these ports if we don't utilize3276technology. And you can do it without displacing union jobs. So3277we need both, is the point.3278    Senator Peters. Very good. I know I am low on time, but Mr.3279Chairman has granted one additional question, which I3280appreciate.3281    For Mr. O'Brien, and your testimony, you describe a3282shipping model currently being utilized by Amazon that creates3283avenues for avoiding accountability at FMCSA. I have raised3284similar concerns with the National Labor Relations Board3285regarding reports of Amazon retaliating against unionization3286activities by delivery service partners.3287    Just a quick question, given recent changes, what are the3288difficulties you face at the National Labor Relations Board3289which have impacted your ability to either prevent or address3290instances of retaliation, or other labor abuses in the3291industry?3292    Mr. O'Brien. Well, I think the National Labor Relations3293Board, and I have had this conversation with many Democrats,3294many Republicans, and someone who organizes workers every3295single day for the last 30 years, the system is broken, and it3296has been broken for a long time. And we usually try and avoid3297the NLRB at all costs because it is antiquated, and it is also3298too long of a time-frame to get any type of resolution.3299    But when you are talking about Amazon, and DSP models, and3300the FSP models, you are talking about an employer who has3301skirted obligations of direct employer in claims that they have3302nothing to do with these subcontractors, yet, they are forced3303to buy the equipment from Amazon, or lease the equipment from3304Amazon, they are forced to follow the policies and procedures,3305but they don't go on Amazon's books as it comes to recording3306safety violations or anything else. And there is proven3307statistics out there as a result of that.3308    But on a bigger scale, we have been getting--we got a3309favorable decision in California regarding the DSP model under3310the current Acting General Counsel of the NLRB. But with that3311said, the bigger picture is the reason why we are working3312bipartisan to pass the Fair Labor Standards Contract to make3313organizing a choice that doesn't involve any type of3314retribution, retaliation for direct employees.3315    And I think we are going to be fighting the subcontractor3316model for years to come, or independent contractor model. And3317look, we are not against anybody for being an owner operator,3318trying to be their own boss. I think, you know, that has been3319around for 30, 40, 50 years. What we are against is these3320corporations that are exploiting workers through a scam system3321that doesn't provide good opportunity, that has 150 percent3322turnover ratio in the industry.3323    And if there is such--and my colleague talked about driver3324shortages--if there are such driver shortages or turnovers in3325industries, you have got to ask yourself, there is something3326wrong. And that is something wrong that we identify with, is3327not being a direct employee, not having the rights to3328collectively bargain----3329    Senator Young. We are going to move on.3330    Mr. O'Brien.--not having the best benefits in the industry.3331    Senator Peters. All right. Thank you.3332    Senator Young. Thank you. Thank you, sir.3333    Mr. O'Brien. Yes.3334    Senator Young. Senator Cruz, you are recognized.33353336                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ,3337                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS33383339    Senator Cruz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to each of3340the witnesses for being here.3341    I want to go back, Mr. Spear, and Mr. O'Brien, to the topic3342that Senator Peters raised, which is autonomous vehicles, which3343is obviously an incredibly important topic, one that impacts3344over three million jobs, one that impacts our economy3345profoundly.3346    Mr. O'Brien, I wanted to give you an opportunity to respond3347to what Mr. Spear said particularly talking about levels one3348through four of automation and what your view and the3349Teamsters' view is on levels of automation that fall short of3350removing the driver. What is, you all, view on that?3351    Mr. O'Brien. I am not familiar with one through five, what3352he is talking about, but I can talk about the threat. You know3353we talk about automation and I drove a truck my entire life. I3354drove oversized loads, I hauled heavy equipment both interstate3355and intrastate, and you know, there is no better brain--or3356better computer than your brain or your instinct.3357    Now, we understand technology is coming and we are not3358trying to impede any type of technology that is going to make3359business more efficient. Our sole goal is to protect these3360jobs, and to make certain that people that don't have the3361opportunity to go to college, that don't have the opportunity3362to get high, you know, white-collar jobs have the opportunity3363in the trucking industry.3364    I am a fourth-generation truck driver, and I have seen3365firsthand how important it is to maintain these jobs at the3366highest level. If we try and replace human operators with3367computers, I think one, it is going to be detrimental to3368recruiting new drivers, which further would give credibility to3369a driver shortage because the uncertainty of the industry.3370Second, again, it is going to be such a public safety risk.3371    I mean, do you want your family driving in a car, a3372minivan, next to a vehicle, not being operated by a human? I3373don't. I have two boys and I, you know, would hate to think3374that they are vulnerable to a malfunction in a computer.3375    And last, the infrastructure, I mean, how many times, and3376you have been around a long time, Senator, well respected, have3377you fought long and hard to improve infrastructure especially3378in your state? Now, if we allow all these autonomous vehicles3379to run wild, it is going to destroy that infrastructure that3380we, as taxpayers, have all invested in over the last several3381decades.3382    And I think the most important thing, and I will say it3383again, is the jobs. Where do these people go if you eliminate3384three million jobs? And people may not think, or there is3385testimony here, it is not happening for a long time. Don't kid3386yourself. If a big tech could have this done tomorrow and these3387corporations could operate without human operators, without3388paying wages, benefits, that would happen tomorrow.3389    Senator Cruz. So Mr. O'Brien, Mr. Spear, both of you all3390have called for a Federal framework for autonomous vehicles. I3391want to ask each of you, what are the most important two or3392three elements in any Federal framework? Mr. Spear, you can go3393first.3394    Mr. Spear. Well, I think interstate commerce, you have got3395to protect it, we need one standard, not 50. Right now you have339616 states that have automated vehicle laws on the books. We are3397operating, we are developing technologies that I think are3398going to, you know, really be forward-leaning in terms of3399productivity and what it can do for the supply chain in levels3400one through four.3401    We are a ways out from full autonomy. You might see it, as3402I said earlier, in the Southwest, but nationwide I just don't3403see it in the near future. But to get there you have got to3404develop----3405    Senator Cruz. What do you mean by ``a ways out'', how would3406you quantify that?3407    Mr. Spear. I would say probably 10, 15 years out. But it is3408always described as threat to jobs, threat to jobs. I go back3409to the ports example, 65 ports in this country, not one of them3410ranks in the top 50 for efficiency and productivity. This3411President wants to take things to a whole another level. To3412grow this economy, we are going to need both jobs and autonomy.3413    We are going to need technologies to get that throughput in3414and out of those ports and on our roads to where it needs to3415go. You are going to need both those hardworking union jobs,3416and you are going to need technology to assist them. This is3417assuming the economy remains stagnant that we have got to wrap3418our--you know, bubble wrap around all these jobs to protect3419them. No, we don't. They are going to be there. We need more3420throughput to grow the economy, we are just not going to be3421able to do it by adding more people. You are going to have to3422add technology to get efficiency. It is that simple. You need3423both.3424    Senator Cruz. So Mr. O'Brien, top two or three elements in3425a Federal Framework for AVs?3426    Mr. O'Brien. We need human operators in these vehicles. And3427if it is true what he is saying, if you are going to replace a3428human operator in a commercial vehicle, where does that person3429go? Where has that job gone? And I am all for efficiencies. I3430don't think--I don't want you to think that we are not for3431efficiencies. I am familiar with the ILA Agreement on the East3432Coast. I sit on the Port Authority Board at the Massachusetts3433Port Authority, which you know, as well.3434    But there are efficiencies built in there, but there is3435also job protection as a result of implementation of this3436technology which further gives credibility on, when you sit3437down and negotiate a collective bargain agreement you can3438embrace the technology and also the efficiencies, but you also3439can protect and create new jobs as a result of this technology.3440So I think second priority be, upon implementation, you create3441opportunities and jobs as a result of this technology.3442    Senator Cruz. Thank you. OK. Final question, Mr. Spear, the3443Texas Department of Public Safety has reported that you can buy3444a Mexican CDL for as little as $2,500. Fraudulent licenses mean3445we don't know if these drivers are qualified to be on the road.3446What should Congress do to make sure that only qualified,3447properly vetted drivers are operating on our roads?3448    Mr. Spear. Well, I think--you are absolutely right and it3449is happening, and it is a big problem. We talked about English3450language proficiency, making certain that they can communicate3451in the English language. That is critical. People out there3452taking advantage of B-1 drivers coming in, drop a load, they3453are using them for weeks to move freight in the United States.3454That is illegal. It is called cabotage.3455    You can buy illegal CDLs, you know, on the corner. This is3456not uncommon. We need Federal enforcement, we need to work with3457state enforcement and local to understand those credentials and3458take these drivers off the road. They have no business being3459out there. We have seen foreign drivers that don't speak3460English, that are having no insurance whatsoever and operating3461shoddy equipment out there. That is the kind of riffraff we3462need to get out. That is not the image any of us want. OK? We3463are very proud of our industries and what we do, but that kind3464of thing happens and there is an accident that is not a3465reflection of our efforts. We need good coordination with our3466Federal regulators to ensure that these folks are taken off the3467road.3468    Senator Cruz. Thank you.3469    Senator Young. OK. I am going to recognize Senator Moreno3470for questions. Senator.34713472               STATEMENT OF HON. BERNIE MORENO,3473                     U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO34743475    Senator Moreno. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for doing this3476hearing. I thought maybe Mr. O'Brien, I will start with you.3477There is some conversation about tariffs, not that this is a3478hearing about tariffs, but let us say that real quick. You3479care. I think when I look in your eyes and I have met with you,3480you actually care deeply about making certain that we have a3481growing, thriving middle class in this country. I mean, that is3482not an act. That is something that you believe in your heart3483and soul.3484    Mr. O'Brien. Yes. I think someone referred to me as a--hold3485on--as a ``self-promoting union boss'' in one of their3486articles. But I am not a self-promoting union boss. I am a3487truck driver from a middle-class family that appreciates and3488embraces the preservation of the middle class.3489    Senator Moreno. Right. So when we think about tariffs, we3490can go out and find the cheapest labor on earth, slave wages in3491China, massively subsidized industries, and there is this3492mentality that somehow tariffs are bad for America, when in3493reality, wouldn't you say that it is good to have trade3494barriers to put American workers on a level playing field with3495workers around the world?3496    Mr. O'Brien. Yes. I mean, there is no secret where what our3497position is as a union on tariffs, and I know there is a3498concern with--when these tariffs are implemented, if they are3499implemented, and when they are implemented, what is that--what3500effect is that going to have on the consumer? Now, we have to3501go back in history a little bit. Remember when we had plenty of3502industry in this country where we were producing goods and3503services, where we were manufacturing steel, we were doing a3504lot of this work, and then these bad trade deals that happened3505in 1993 with NAFTA and everything else had an impact on jobs3506and they went away, and our jobs, and everything went overseas,3507and that level playing field was completely uneven to the3508American worker.3509    Now, fast forward where we want to repeal a lot of these3510trade deals. We want to impose these tariffs unilaterally I3511believe to what we are paying, and what they should be paying,3512there is a concern that we are going to diminish jobs, and3513where is all this cost going to go?3514    Now, we have got to take a look--there is a lot of factors3515here--we have got to take a look at excessive compensation with3516a lot of these CEOs, and these corporations, and their3517willingness to reward Wall Street instead of the people that3518work in these jobs.3519    So we can have that debate as well on: Hey, you know what,3520if these tariffs come in, take a little less in your own3521pocket, stop giving more to the--to Wall Street and just reward3522your workers and don't pass this cost on the consumers. The3523fear of the unknown is what is----3524    Senator Moreno. But ultimately it is important, I think I3525am hearing you say which I agree with 100 percent. I just hope3526my colleagues listen to this. Is that we want to have these3527jobs in America. That is very important, because these are good3528working-class jobs that allow a mom or a dad to be able to3529provide a living for their family, retire debt free. That is3530really important, so totally, totally with you on that one.3531    Let us dig a little deeper into this English requirement.3532Now, I wasn't born in this country. My mom made me learn3533English pretty quickly. And I don't think there are a lot of3534legal immigrants that think differently than I do. They believe3535that we should assimilate, learn English, learn the language.3536    But what are the implications for you and your members3537when, during the Biden years, you had ten million people come3538in this country illegally, a lot of them under the guise of3539independent contractors started becoming truck drivers? The3540giant spike that happened, these are people that spoke no3541English, had no idea of our traffic laws, and yet they were3542unleashed on our roads.3543    What was it like for your members to be able to--to drive3544on the roads with people that, again, had no idea what they3545were doing, no idea about our safety requirements?3546    Mr. O'Brien. Well, I think it is extremely frightening to3547be honest with you. You had a lot of trucking companies that3548were actively recruiting in foreign countries to bring people3549over here on those work visas, whatever they are called, and3550train them and put them on the roads where they are not from3551this country, they don't know this language.3552    So our members are very passionate. By the way, our3553membership of 1.3 million is well representative from first-3554generation immigrants who came over here the right way, who3555learned the language, learned the laws, obtained their CDLs3556properly and, you know, went to work, and everything else. But3557you know, it was frightening times and it still is. I mean, we3558heard a comment today about Mexican truck drivers coming over3559these borders and doing the cabotage. We are 100 percent in3560agreement that shouldn't be happening.3561    Matter of fact, we would rather have Mexican drivers drop3562their trailers at the borders and let American companies pick3563them up and do the deliveries.3564    Senator Moreno. Yes. I mean, so clearly that is something3565that should be in legislation.3566    I will switch over to you, Mr. Spear, real quickly. There3567is this conversation about, you know, what is a threat to the3568trucking industry. I think we need to--maybe if you could3569briefly describe what it meant to the trucking industry to have3570the Congressional Review Act that eliminated the Advanced Car3571Truck Rule, and what that meant. Because we forget, we forget3572that that was a mere six or seven weeks ago. What would that3573have meant to the industry if we had gone through--down the3574cliff of electrification on semis?3575    Mr. Spear. You would have witnessed consolidation in our3576industry that has never happened since 1980 during3577deregulation. I mean the medium and small companies, 68 percent3578of our members are less than 100 trucks, 35 percent are less3579than 25 trucks. Those companies would be gone, gone, because3580they can't have access to that kind of equipment because there3581is not enough of it under those rules. And it would be three3582and a half times more than what they pay for a brand new diesel3583today, which by the way emits 98.5 percent less than what it3584did in 1988.3585    So 60 trucks today emit what one truck emitted in 1988.3586That is how far we have come. We didn't need, you know, the3587United States of California telling our industry operating in358850 states how to work with the EPA to get clean air and water.3589We were already doing that.3590    So revoking these through the CRA, you just took off one of3591the biggest threats to our industry in a matter of 8 months,3592and it is now allowing us to do a whole host of other3593constructive things such as the Safety Title. So I thank you3594for that vote.3595    Senator Moreno. No, it is great. And let us talk about, so3596Mr. Pugh or Mr. Spear, if you want to answer, what does the one3597big beautiful bill and bonus appreciation mean to your3598industry? The ability to make an investment, have that, be able3599to be--depreciate; is that positive or negative for you?3600    Mr. Pugh. Yes. We appreciate the big beautiful bill and3601understand that what we--what we need to see happen now3602though----3603    Senator Moreno. I am talking about just the bonus3604depreciation, the ability to write off your equipment. Is that3605a net positive or net negative?3606    Mr. Pugh. That is definitely a net positive to be able to3607write off equipment for sure.3608    Senator Moreno. Right. So I just want to just recap real3609quick, to my Democrat colleagues, wrong on tariffs, wrong on3610immigration, wrong on EVs, and wrong on voting against the one3611big beautiful bill. And if my colleague, would you mind one3612more question as--and you wouldn't mind? OK. I always ask3613permission from my great colleague here from Nebraska.3614    So one last question, Mr. Spear; what is the average age of3615the semi in America, on the road, more or less?3616    Mr. Spear. Yes, we assessed that a couple years back,3617particularly in California, but nationally 53 percent of the3618commercial vehicles operating in the country are 2010 or older.3619    Senator Moreno. And what level autonomy those have?3620    Mr. Spear. I am sorry?3621    Senator Moreno. What level autonomy do they have?3622    Mr. Spear. Well, it is----3623    Senator Moreno. That would be level zero. These things have3624no safety technology. They are much worse emitters of--and what3625is keeping people from buying new cars? I am going to answer my3626own question. There is Federal excise tax.3627    Mr. Spear. Absolutely.3628    Senator Moreno. Twelve percent. So if we can--if we can3629massively reduce the Federal excise tax and allow people to3630open the door to buying new semis, talk real briefly because I3631am wearing on the patience of my colleague on taking over3632time----3633    Mr. Spear. She is still nodding so I think we are safe. But3634Senator Cantwell alluded to this in her opening statement, too.3635The added cost from the FET, the Federal excise tax, by the3636way, this dates back to the Titanic sinking. This was put in3637place by Congress, coupled with a number of other provisions3638that no longer exist, ours do, it is a 12 percent tax on trucks3639and trailers, and that is about $35,000 for both, total, each3640purchase.3641    So you know, if you have got somebody out there that is3642buying, say, 1,800 new tractors, you know, for a third of their3643fleet that they turn over every year, that is $65 million. That3644is real money. So that is going to the Federal Government, not3645to them.3646    So we would argue for repealing this. It was put in place3647to fund trench warfare in World War I. It is outdated. We can3648take that money. It is our money, not the governments. We can3649invest it in training, pay, equipment, get that brand new3650equipment out there and replace the old stuff. You will reduce3651emissions by 83 percent just by putting new diesels out on the3652road.3653    Senator Moreno. Great. Thank you.3654    Senator Young. So I recognize Senator Lujan.36553656               STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,3657                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO36583659    Senator Lujan. Mr. Spear, just last month, I had the honor3660of meeting with the Gunter family from New Mexico. And if you3661know who this family is, you will know of the tragic loss of3662two brothers, Brad and Chad. Now, they were killed when a truck3663drove off of Interstate 40 and crashed through their blacksmith3664shop. What they shared with me is that the truck's cruise3665control was set to 65 miles per hour and the brakes were never3666applied as the truck ran into a blacksmith shop.3667    Technology exists to prevent this, which makes this even3668harder. Can you explain how automatic emergency braking works3669and how it could be used to prevent tragedies like the one the3670Gunter family had to suffer, to prevent this suffering from3671happening again?3672    Mr. Spear. Yes, I will. Actually this dates back to when I3673was with Hyundai Motor Company, and all the motor companies I3674was the signature for that, for Hyundai signed on voluntarily3675adopting AEB on all new models. So I am very familiar, this3676dates back to the Obama administration.3677    So this technology works. It has been in place, not just in3678passenger vehicles, but in the commercial sector. I would say3679our industry is lagging a bit behind. There needs to be a lot3680more testing. This was a rule that was not removed from the3681Federal Registry for regulations, the regulatory agenda.3682Secretary Duffy kept that in place.3683    So I do think there is promise there for both cars and3684trucks. I am also mindful, Senator, that two-thirds of the3685accidents that involve commercial vehicles are caused by3686passenger vehicles. So I want to be clear about that. Texting3687and speeding, they are not paying attention. They are on their3688phone. That is a problem that is not going away anytime soon.3689    So here is something that--a situation where AEB can really3690play an invaluable role of saving lives and bringing down that3691fatality rate to zero.3692    Senator Lujan. So Mr. Spear, are you saying that if3693vehicles had technology to prevent passenger vehicles from3694being involved in those distracted crashes that would be3695helpful here as well?3696    Mr. Spear. Yes. And it goes back to the earlier discussion3697too about automated vehicles. That level one to four, there are3698telematics in there where the two are communicating with each3699other. So if you are on autopilot in the car and you are3700asleep, God forbid, or you are texting and not paying3701attention, the car is going to see the obstacle coming, whether3702it is a trailer, or a building, or what not, it is going to see3703that, it is going to apply the brakes, it is going to send off3704warnings to the driver. That is preventive. We prefer that. We3705prefer the kind of technology where the accident doesn't3706happen, where people don't get killed. And I think there is a3707lot of promise there. We should continue to invest in it.3708    Senator Lujan. I appreciate you saying that. There is a3709rulemaking currently before Secretary Duffy on a piece of3710legislation that I proudly passed with Rick Scott and other3711members of this committee that would require more of this3712technology to be in vehicles across the country. So I am very3713proud to hear you say that.3714    Now, with the trucking, can you tell me how you will work3715to ensure that the technology we just talked about is deployed3716in trucks as soon as possible, on the braking side?3717    Mr. Spear. Well, you have got to test it. Obviously there3718is a lot of variables in terms of weight, how it is applied3719across the board, is it for new trucks, is it existing trucks,3720these are all things that--you know, you need to take a little3721bit of time before mandating something, to be sure that it3722works, and that you are getting a return on that. So you know,3723I know that there has been some opposition here to electronic3724login devices and others said that our companies work people,3725you know, for endless hours. No, they don't. No, they don't.3726That is why we have electronic login devices so they don't go3727over their period of work, that they are well-rested. OK.3728    If you want to keep paper books and cheat, all right, but3729the rule that you guys passed, told DOT to do is technology3730that tracks it, it keeps them under those hours, keeps them3731safe, keeps them rested. These are good things for the motoring3732public, not just our fleets and drivers. So there are3733technologies out there that have a safety return, and that is3734your title.3735    So I think this is an important discussion. You got to keep3736investing in the good technologies, test them, deploy them. I3737think the Department is very good about picking the best3738technologies that impact our industry and our safety rates.3739    Senator Lujan. And that includes braking?3740    Mr. Spear. Yes, that includes braking, absolutely.3741    Senator Lujan. Now, on driver fatigue, Mr. O'Brien, I do3742have a question there. As we know, it is a contributing factor3743to at least 13 percent of large truck crashes, and it was3744likely a contributing factor when the truck rammed into the3745blacksmith shop of the Gunter brothers. What needs to happen to3746reduce crashes due to fatigue?3747    Mr. O'Brien. Well, I think, you know, any talk of expanding3748hours of service would be detrimental and that would cause more3749collisions, more driver fatigue. But my colleague, I will agree3750that, you know, technology that is going to reduce the risk of3751certain crashes even though if a driver does fall asleep for3752fatigue, or there is something preventable that technology can3753alert to avoid it, I mean, I don't think anybody at this table3754would disagree that that is paramount to the safe operation.3755But I think any talk of expanding hours of service would be3756detrimental and be a safety concern moving forward as well.3757    Senator Lujan. Appreciate that, sir. Now, last question I3758have, and I will submit the others into the record. According3759to the FMCSA report, over 60 percent of truck drivers are not3760tested for alcohol and other substances following fatal crashes3761despite an existing statute requiring carriers to do so.3762    It is clear that this quote, ``self-policing policy'' is3763failing. Now, my question is, this lack of accountability which3764I would deem unacceptable, Mr. O'Brien, do you support efforts3765to ensure that all truck drivers are tested for drugs and3766alcohol following fatal crashes?3767    Mr. O'Brien. 100 percent. A matter of fact, I had a3768personal experience in the City of Boston. I was working for a3769crane company, Shaughnessy & Ahearn, and a driver ran3770underneath my flat bed of my truck and he died. I immediately,3771at 22 years old, was taken from the scene and drug tested, even3772though that I was not the cause of the accident. But that is an3773example. But I think the problem is, is enforcement,3774enforcement.3775    Senator Lujan. Um-hum.3776    Mr. O'Brien. I mean, I don't think anybody wants anybody3777going down the road in an 80,000-pound vehicle under the3778influence of any controlled substance and/or alcohol.3779    Senator Lujan. Mr. Spear, yes or no?3780    Mr. Spear. Absolutely, yes. I think it is paramount. And3781will go so far to say hair testing as well.3782    Senator Lujan. Yes.3783    Mr. Spear. In part because you have an opioid, you know,3784plague going into every community right now. There are things3785out there with legalization recreational marijuana, we didn't3786face that 10, 20 years ago. We do now. We need more tools to3787make sure that, to Sean's point, anyone that gets behind the3788wheel of an 80,000-pound vehicle is not impaired.3789    Senator Lujan. Appreciate that. Mr. Pugh, yes or no?3790    Mr. Pugh. Yes, we would support--we support after--post-3791crash testing for sure. But we do not support the hair testing3792because we don't feel that there is enough research or data out3793there to show that it is true, as what a urine test is. And3794also with different nationalities, different types of people,3795it doesn't always come out accurate, and there is plenty of3796proof to show that. Urine test has been working. That is what3797scientists set up years ago. That is what we should be using.3798    Senator Lujan. Thank you, Mr. Pugh. And Mr. O'Brien, you3799have something else, but my time has expired. I will make sure3800that we get something----3801    Mr. O'Brien. I am good. Thank you.3802    Senator Lujan. OK. Very good.3803    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.3804    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Lujan.3805    Senator Fischer, you are recognized.38063807                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER,3808                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA38093810    Senator Fischer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am so happy you3811are back.3812    [Laughter.]3813    Senator Fischer. Ouch. You deserved that.3814    Senator Young. OK.3815    Senator Fischer. Mr. O'Brien, thank you for being here3816today. I enjoyed working with you last year on the REEF Act3817where we helped ensure that railroaders' hard-earned benefits3818were not going to be subject to sequester. That legislation,3819now law, was a prime example, I believe, of how Congress,3820industry, and labor can come together to benefit hardworking3821people. As we look forward to surface reauthorization, I hope3822we can continue in this collaborative fashion between industry3823and labor.3824    You mentioned, sir, in your testimony and in earlier3825comments here today, the importance of removing predatory CDL3826training programs from the training provider registry. I know3827this is a concern that is shared by Mr. Spear and ATA, as well3828as CBTA and others.3829    Mr. O'Brien, what steps do you recommend this committee3830take to improve FMCSA's oversight of the TER?3831    Mr. O'Brien. Well, I think first and foremost, I think--I3832want to thank you for your hard work with our rail workers who3833obviously need CDLs outside of the FMCA, we have about 40- to383450,000 members that fix and keep the rails moving so the trains3835can stay on them.3836    But more importantly, I think we have to take a deep dive3837on all the vendors that are on the list that provide CDL3838training because there are a lot of predatory trainers out3839there that will put you through a training program where you3840are not qualified, you can't pass a skills test, and you are3841not marketable. Most of these folks are paying out of their own3842pockets to go to these schools.3843    So I think eliminating the bad actors by doing some audits,3844and statistics can show that they are not performing and/or3845providing the qualified drivers necessary to keep our roads,3846the public safety--and the people safe. Now, we have 20 schools3847that we run nationwide under the Teamster umbrella, and I ran3848one of them in Boston in the late 90s where we were very3849successful in our training, and we were able to successfully3850train, but more importantly, transition people into jobs that3851actually could do the jobs because of their training, because3852of their education.3853    And a lot of what we have seen over the past years are3854people coming from some of these predatory schools coming to3855our 20 training facilities who paid thousands upon thousands of3856jobs--thousands of dollars and are not qualified to do this3857job. So I think imposing and enforcing criteria and mandates3858for these predatory, and getting rid of the ones that are not3859successful or it is just a money grab.3860    Senator Fischer. OK. Thank you very much. Mr. Spear, and3861Mr. Pugh, I want to thank you both for your continued support3862of my Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act. The3863bill cracks down on cargo theft by giving FMCSA enforcement3864tools to protect consumers from fraud by scammers. This3865committee has unanimously advanced the bill, and I look forward3866to working with both of you to get it into law.3867    On another topic, I want to discuss EVs, not all the stuff3868we have we have already gone through, so calm down. I want to3869be able to discuss with you both the Highway Trust Fund. Now3870through the--or though the fund is outside this committee's3871jurisdiction I remain concerned about its solvency, and the3872impact that insolvency would have on our entire system,3873infrastructure around this entire country.3874    Though not a silver bullet we need to get electric vehicles3875paying into the fund. Currently electric vehicles don't pay a3876dime. They are heavier. They cause more damage to roadways3877without paying for the repair, for the maintenance. They impact3878new construction as well. I have legislation that requires3879electric vehicles to contribute to the Federal Highway Trust3880Fund, and I know T&I, Chair Graves in the House, has a proposal3881as well, and I appreciate his work to address this important3882issue.3883    From your perspective, gentlemen, why is it important for3884EVs to contribute to the trust fund and for Congress to step up3885and address the Fund's solvency in our upcoming surface3886reauthorization?3887    Mr. Spear. So you know, I am calm, now.3888    Senator Fischer. Thank you.3889    Mr. Spear. You know me better than my own staff. So I would3890just say that all users have to pay. They do. If you are on the3891roads, you are on the bridges, you should pay. EVs don't, and3892they are heavier. It is a developing technology that we need to3893capture and ensure that our roads and bridges remain a priority3894and that those using them are contributing to that.3895    I think fairness and some evolution here. It has been since38961993 since Congress has, you know, raised the fuel tax. It is3897not politically popular, I get it, on both sides of the aisle.3898We just did a Highway Bill, we took it out of general funds.3899Not a big fan of that. We do support the user fee. Why? Because3900the fuel tax is the most efficient way to pay into the trust3901fund, it is less than a penny. So we need to replace it with3902something that doesn't jack up the administration costs, like3903tolling, weight, distance tax, or even congestion pricing. We3904are talking about 20-25 percent administrative fee. We need3905that money going to roads and bridges, not getting chewed up in3906administration costs.3907    So we are looking very seriously about advocating a3908registration fee that applies to everybody, trucks, cars, EVs.3909You already register your vehicle at the state DMVs. You just3910simply pay for what you normally would pay in fuel costs at the3911pump. Get rid of the gas tax, get rid of the tire tax, get rid3912of all the taxes, put it in a registration fee. You are3913probably looking at about $200 to $250 a year for a motorist.3914OK? Be more for us. That is fine. We are willing to do that.3915But for a motorist, having that spread out, too, over 123916months, because $250 for some folks is a lot of money.3917    Senator Fischer. It is. Yes.3918    Mr. Spear. Spread it over 12 months so they can pay it that3919way. But that will capture everybody. It is fair. You are using3920it. You register a vehicle. There you go.3921    Senator Fischer. Mr. Pugh, I would like to hear your3922thoughts as well.3923    Mr. Pugh. Yes, we definitely support some sort of3924registration fee, or something, going to the Highway Trust Fund3925with electric vehicles. I mean, by all means, why shouldn't3926they pay? They use the highways and they should. We should also3927make sure we are not giving them special carve outs for hauling3928them or transporting them when they are--because they are3929heavier loads to haul and transport. We should make sure we are3930not doing that as well.3931    I think what we need to do is, unfortunately, is get the3932intestinal fortitude here in Congress to raise the gas tax3933because it hasn't been raised. It does work. You pay it at the3934pump. People don't realize it. Why create anything new other3935than for these vehicles, electric vehicles, to pay a3936registration?3937    Senator Fischer. Yes, I am just--I am just focused on3938capturing a user fee of some kind from EVs.3939    Mr. Pugh. Yes.3940    Senator Fischer. Whether they are passenger vehicles,3941trucks, whatever.3942    Mr. Pugh. Correct.3943    Senator Fischer. Because they pulverize a road--a road bed,3944and more so.3945    Mr. Pugh. I would also think that we could put some sort of3946a collection on their pumps just like we do for fuel, but for3947electricity. We take it right there at the time.3948    Senator Fischer. Thank you. Thank you very much.3949    And thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator Moreno, who has3950escaped, I would like to point out that he and I are trying to3951work on something here so that we can add more revenue to the3952Highway Trust Fund. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.3953    Senator Young. Well, thank you for your leadership on that3954issue, Senator Fischer. I would love to review that bill if I3955am not already on it.3956    So, I will recognize Senator Klobuchar.39573958               STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,3959                  U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA39603961    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you. And I heard the beginning3962of your testimony there, Mr. Spear, when I was here earlier,3963and you were talking about cargo theft, correct? And as you3964know, we have held a hearing in this subcommittee on the3965growing threat of cargo theft often involves high value retail3966goods, but not always. One dairy protein export company in3967Minnesota has reported an average of one to three break-ins per3968month just for containers of dry milk powder. Of course3969valuable, but I don't think people probably think it is like3970jewelry or something, but this is what is going on with some of3971the food shipments.3972    How can we best address this issue? And I think I will ask3973you that as well, Mr. Pugh. Thanks.3974    Mr. Spear. Well, I would just say thank you for your3975leadership and co-sponsoring the CORCA Bill. You have heard two3976testimonies now in this committee as well as in Judiciary3977Committee, and we are very excited that you all are taking the3978time to really shine a spotlight on this issue. We need Federal3979leadership, in concert with state and local, and in partnership3980with our industry. We have all got to, collectively, come3981together if we are to put a stop at this practice.3982    This is a lot more advanced than what we were seeing 10,398315, 20 years ago. As long as trucks have been on the road,3984there has been theft. I mean hit-and-run type things. What we3985are seeing now is transnational organizations operating out of3986Eastern Europe, Russia. They are hacking into the bill of3987laden. Sometimes when the truck is in motion, driver sees it3988come up, the drop changes, they think it is legit because it is3989the company. By the time they drop the load and figure out what3990just happened; it is long gone.3991    This is very advanced, you know, type of practices that we3992really need coordination with DHS, DOJ, with our states and3993local government, and industry.3994    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you.3995    Mr. Spear. So thank you for that.3996    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Mr. Pugh.3997    Mr. Pugh. Yes. And we need--FMCSA needs the power to go3998after these folks, and the oversight as well, as long as--and3999truckers need a place, and brokers as well to report these kind4000of things. We get calls on a daily basis at OOIDA where drivers4001are taking loads and they get the load, they deliver the load,4002and it is a fictitious broker, the broker is pretended to be4003someone else.4004    I know brokers are dealing with the same thing with4005truckers. They get trucking companies that are getting their4006identity stolen. It is too easy for trucking companies to sell4007their identity, and it is much too easy to get into our4008industry in the first place. That is where this all starts.4009    Senator Klobuchar. Yes.4010    Mr. Pugh. As I have said in a past hearing, you can take4011someone off the street who has never even been in a truck or4012seen a truck, and in a month and a half they can be a full-4013blown truck driver and motor carrier. That is insane. That is4014insanity. You know, to be a broker, you post a $75,000 bond and4015you are a broker.4016    Senator Klobuchar. OK.4017    Mr. Pugh. We have got to start at the beginning, stopping4018these folks.4019    Senator Klobuchar. All right. One of the things that this4020kind of plays into is just workforce retention and supply4021chain, and that means ensuring that crucial careers like4022trucking receive good wages, my grandpa started out delivering4023and pulling a wagon, ended up as a miner. But we know, Mr.4024O'Brien, we know that unions ensure that truck driving not only4025keeps workers with good wages, but also makes it safer. Talk4026about this as the need to keep our drivers there in the long4027term.4028    Mr. O'Brien. Well, I think it is continuity of the4029workforce. I mean, you take companies like UPS, where you can4030go to work as a part-timer unloading trucks at 18, you become403121, you can go out in the road, deliver a package, your4032earnings go up, you are accruing credit for your health and4033welfare pension, and then when you get enough seniority, you4034get the ability to drive tractor trailers.4035    There is a path to a career here, and that path to a career4036is your wages being the highest, you have the best health4037benefits, and have a retirement that you can retire with4038respect and dignity. You look at ABF, you look at TForce, you4039look at a lot of regional carriers that we represent, there is404010 to 15 percent turnover ratio, not because of low wages, not4041because of benefits or anything else, and that is proven. I4042mean, we have statistics that prove it.4043    And I think the higher standards that are set, especially4044working under a collective bargaining agreement, is going to4045help retain drivers. That is why it is important, and I4046mentioned earlier, we have got a bipartisan bill with Senator4047Hawley and Senator Booker, requiring the fair labor standards4048contract where you can organize without any threats of4049retribution, retaliation, and there is a mechanism to get to a4050first contract through binding arbitration.4051    Senator Klobuchar. OK, very good.4052    Mr. O'Brien. Thank you.4053    Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Enjoy working with you as you4054know.4055    Last question, Mr. Ferguson, I weirdly just got a text from4056Charlie Zelle, you know he used to head up Jefferson Bus Line.4057    Mr. Ferguson. Absolutely. He is a strong member of ours.4058    Senator Klobuchar. Right. And then became the head of our4059transportation. He was transportation commissioner, did a great4060job and now at our Met Council, he is just announcing--I don't4061know--well, I will tell you about it later. OK. So the FMCSA,4062the Passenger Carrier Division, can you speak to the impact4063this was in your testimony that low staffing has on motor coach4064operators and how important this is; a different version of the4065question than Mr. O'Brien?4066    Mr. Ferguson. Yes, my testimony recommends that4067prioritizing staffing at the Passenger Carrier Division is a4068huge priority.4069    Senator Klobuchar. Um-hum.4070    Mr. Ferguson. The interaction that our staff has with their4071staff is ongoing and daily, typically. You know, understanding4072what is the operational reality of this regulation or that new4073requirement is very helpful for the regulators to understand4074what is it like on the roads and on the ground, and vice versa,4075for us to have a better understanding of intent, desire, you4076know, outcomes. It can allow us to better communicate and share4077with our membership what is happening, what is coming, et4078cetera.4079    So having more points of contact, more partners, you know,4080we host a variety of webinars, in-person safety briefings, you4081know, having speakers, engagement, that cross-coordination is a4082huge part of our success.4083    Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you. I am done, but I will4084ask, in writing, Mr. Spear, some questions about distracted4085driving. This is a big priority of mine and really, really4086important. So maybe we can have another hearing on that at some4087point. But thank you.4088    Senator Young. Senator Markey.40894090               STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD MARKEY,4091                U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS40924093    Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.4094    According to CBS analysis of Federal data, Amazon's4095delivery truck contractors consistently have higher safety4096violation rates compared to the rest of the industry. From 20194097to 2024, Amazon's contractors had a violation rate roughly4098double the industry average. Because of Amazon's nefarious4099corporate practices of misclassifying workers and shirking its4100joint employer responsibilities, Amazon itself has not been4101held accountable by regulators for the performance of its4102fleet.4103    Each individual subcontracted delivery truck company faces4104consequences when something goes wrong. Companies like Amazon4105can use this subcontracting scam to wash their hands of4106responsibility for the overall performance of their operations.4107An operation the size and scale of Amazon's lacking a4108comprehensive safety record for which the company can be held4109accountable is dangerous for drivers and other motorists, and4110unfair to companies that play by the rules.4111    Mr. O'Brien, do you agree that Amazon's trucking model4112shields the company from accountability for its safety record?4113    Mr. O'Brien. It absolutely does.4114    Senator Markey. And in your view, maybe you can expand,4115does Amazon structure its operations this way to avoid4116accountability?4117    Mr. O'Brien. Yes, I testified earlier that, you know, they4118use a lot of these independent contractors, these smaller4119companies that have their own individual DOT numbers, which it4120is tough to point to saying Amazon is responsible, and Amazon4121will say, well, they are not direct employees of ours. They are4122subcontractors. So it is a--it is a game, it is a scam.4123    And you look at an employer like United Parcel Service that4124is similar in nature where they have all direct employees. They4125have a proven track safety program in place, collectively,4126administered by the union and by management where we do the4127same exact work, the same neighborhoods, and we have got a4128stellar record in safety because of the training, and the4129cooperation, and the work collectively by both.4130    Now if you--I will give you a prime example and everybody4131sees Amazon in their neighborhoods. If you look at an Amazon4132truck in your neighborhood delivering you look at the shape4133that that truck is in, you look at the condition it is in, and4134then you look at the condition that a UPS truck is in, that4135will tell the story right there.4136    Senator Markey. Yes. And so as a result, safety just falls4137into a regulatory black hole. Who is responsible? You know, so4138that is the issue.4139    Mr. Chairman, I have a letter from the Truck Safety4140Coalition that I would like to enter into the record,4141unanimously.4142    Senator Young. Without objection.4143    [The information referred to follows:]41444145    Senator Markey. Thank you. In Mr. Spear's testimony, he4146discusses at length an argument we often hear, Mr. O'Brien,4147from the trucking industry. The government should weaken safety4148regulations, such as lowering the minimum age to hold a4149commercial driver's license from 21 to 18 to address the4150trucking industry driver shortage. Trucking is a very dangerous4151industry, any argument to lower safety standards deserves close4152scrutiny.4153    So let us examine the so-called ``driver shortage'', the4154word ``shortage'' implies the pool of qualified workers is too4155small. But two million people hold commercial drivers licenses4156in the United States. And hundreds of thousands more licenses4157are issued every single year. All these qualified drivers are4158competing for about 900,000 long-haul trucking jobs. And while4159there are plenty of qualified drivers available, many trucking4160companies struggle to retain these drivers.4161    In fact about--this is an incredible number, 90 percent of4162truck drivers leave their job after one year, 90 percent. This4163high level of turnover suggests the issue might not be whether4164there are enough drivers, but whether existing drivers are4165getting enough out of the job.4166    So before we take more actions to make trucking less safe,4167Mr. O'Brien, do you believe that a 90 percent turnover rate in4168the long-haul trucking is the sign of a healthy industry?4169    Mr. O'Brien. No. I think long haul trucking is a very4170difficult job. I think we can all agree to that. It is a lot of4171time away from your family, a lot of sacrifice. But if you have4172a 90 percent turnover ratio, then there is something wrong in4173the industry. When you look at unionized carriers who have 104174to 15 percent turnover ratio, that is significant because that4175means people are happy with their wages. They are happy with4176their benefits.4177    When you have a race to the bottom and people keep leaving4178jobs after 12 months or leaving the industry, and I think the4179number we have, there is four to six million people in this4180country that hold CDL licenses and I believe 3.5 million are4181actually on the roads today. So there is definitely a breakdown4182somewhere and we know for a fact that when people aren't making4183the highest wages, when they are not getting the best benefits,4184they are not going to stay at a job.4185    Senator Markey. Yes. So when wages are too low, you are4186obviously going to have massive turnover. And 90 percent4187turnover rate shows workers are not thriving. And any argument4188that says that they are is just not credible. My father was a4189truck driver, sat at our kitchen table every night, every4190morning. I am a senator, but he got paid a living wage. And so4191truck drivers are hardworking people. My father was, 61-65, and4192you can just see what that truck driver looked like. OK. It is4193a hard----4194    Mr. O'Brien. They had good diners back then, sir.4195    [Laughter.]4196    Senator Markey. Excuse me?4197    Mr. O'Brien. They had good diners at the truck stops back4198then.4199    Senator Markey. Yes, the times have changed and we are4200going to have to build in protections to make sure that those4201people who could put three children through college and law4202school, you know, have protections, benefits that fit the hard4203work that they put in every day.4204    I thank you, Mr. Chairman.4205    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Markey. And thank4206you to all of our witnesses. This has really been a terrific4207hearing. We have appreciated all of your testimony.4208    Senators will have until the close of business on Tuesday,4209July 29, to submit additional questions for the record and the4210witnesses will have until the close of business on Tuesday,4211August 12 to respond to those questions.4212    This concludes today's hearing. The Committee stands4213adjourned.4214    [Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]42154216                            A P P E N D I X42174218                      Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety4219                                                      July 21, 202542204221Hon. Todd Young, Chair,4222Hon. Gary Peters, Ranking Member,4223Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,4224Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines, and Safety,4225United States Senate,4226Washington, DC.42274228Dear Chairman Young and Ranking Member Peters:42294230    Thank you for convening tomorrow's hearing, ``Shifting Gears:4231Issues Impacting the Trucking and Commercial Bus Industries in the4232U.S.'' Truck drivers and the trucking industry are critical to our4233Nation's supply chain and the movement of essential goods. Improving4234the safety of our roadways will both optimize efficiency and ensure4235that truck drivers and all road users return home to their loved ones4236after their travels. Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety (Advocates)4237respectfully requests this letter be included in the hearing record.4238The Physical, Emotional and Financial Costs of Truck Crashes Are4239        Devastating4240    In 2023, 5,472 people were killed and over 153,000 people were4241injured in crashes involving large trucks.\1\ Since 2009, the number of4242fatalities in large truck crashes has increased by 62 percent.\2\ In4243that same timespan, the number of people injured in crashes involving4244large trucks rose by 107 percent.\3\ In fatal two-vehicle crashes4245between a large truck and a passenger motor vehicle, 96 percent of the4246fatalities were occupants of the passenger vehicle.\4\4247---------------------------------------------------------------------------4248    \1\ Overview 2023.4249    \2\ Annual Report 2022 and Overview 2023 Note, the 62 percent4250figure represents the overall change in the number of fatalities in4251large truck involved crashes from 2009 to 2023. However, between 20154252and 2016 there was a change in data collection at U.S. DOT that could4253affect this calculation. From 2009 to 2015 the number of fatalities in4254truck-involved crashes increased by 21 percent, and between 2016 to42552023, it increased by 17 percent, and between 2015 and 2016, it4256increased by 14 percent.4257    \3\ Annual Report 2022 and Overview 2023 Note, the 107 percent4258figure represents the overall change in the number of people injured in4259large truck involved crashes from 2009 to 2023. However, between 20154260and 2016 there was a change in data collection at U.S. DOT that could4261affect this calculation. From 2009 to 2015 the number of people injured4262in truck-involved crashes increased by 59 percent, and between 2016 to42632023, it increased by 14 percent, and between 2015 and 2016, it4264increased by 14 percent.4265    \4\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), Large Trucks.4266https://www.iihs.org/topics/fatality-statistics/detail/large-trucks.4267---------------------------------------------------------------------------4268    Truck driving is identified as one of the most dangerous4269occupations in the U.S. by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.\5\ In 2023,4270961 occupants of large trucks were killed in crashes.\6\4271---------------------------------------------------------------------------4272    \5\ National Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries in 2023, Bureau4273of Labor Statistics, Dec. 2024, USDL-24-2564, available at: https://4274www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf.4275    \6\ Overview 2023.4276---------------------------------------------------------------------------4277    These devastating crashes result in long-lasting impacts which4278often are not accounted for in statistics alone. For every single death4279and serious injury, there is a horrific ripple effect forever changing4280the lives of children, parents, friends and communities.4281    According to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), traffic4282incidents, which include crashes, are one of the seven main causes of4283traffic congestion which erodes the reliability of travel time.\7\ The4284report notes that for truck operators, ``[t]he cost of unexpected delay4285can add another 20 percent to 250 percent'' to their hourly costs.\8\4286The cost to society from crashes involving large trucks and buses was4287estimated to be $128 billion in 2021, the latest year for which data is4288available.\9\ When adjusted solely for inflation, this figure amounts4289to over $155 billion.\10\4290---------------------------------------------------------------------------4291    \7\ Traffic Congestion and Reliability: Trends and Advanced4292Strategies for Congestion Mitigation, March 2020, FHWA. Available here:4293https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion_report/chapter42942.htm (2020 Traffic Congestion and Reliability Report).4295    \8\ 2020 Traffic Congestion and Reliability Report.4296    \9\ 2023 Pocket Guide to Large Truck and Bus Statistics, FMCSA,4297Dec. 2023, RRA-23-003.4298    \10\ CPI Inflation Calculator, BLS, available at https://4299www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calcu4300lator.htm, calculated from Jan. 2021-Jan. 2025.4301---------------------------------------------------------------------------4302Solutions to Improve Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety are Available and4303        Proven4304    Automatic emergency braking systems (AEB): According to the4305Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), equipping large trucks4306with forward collision warning and AEB could eliminate more than two4307out of five crashes in which a large truck rear-ends another4308vehicle.\11\ In 2015, Advocates, along with the Center for Auto Safety,4309the Truck Safety Coalition (TSC) and Road Safe America, filed a4310petition with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration4311(NHTSA) seeking the issuance of a rule to require forward collision4312avoidance and mitigation braking systems (F-CAM), now more commonly4313known as AEB, on commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) with a gross vehicle4314weight rating (GVWR) of 10,000 pounds or more.\12\ The agency granted4315Advocates' petition in October 2015 but no subsequent action has been4316taken.\13\ The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) requires4317the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to issue a Final Rule by4318November 2023 for AEB in large CMVs and the issuance of a Federal Motor4319Carrier Safety Regulation (FMCSR) to require drivers use AEB.\14\ DOT4320issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in July 2023.\15\4321Advocates submitted comments to the NPRM. When this Rule is completed4322and implemented, it will have a significant impact on safety and result4323in substantial reductions in highway deaths and injuries.\16\4324---------------------------------------------------------------------------4325    \11\ IIHS, Study shows front crash prevention works for large4326trucks too, available at: https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/study-shows-4327front-crash-prevention-works-for-large-trucks-too.4328    \12\ Petition for Rulemaking, Feb. 19, 2015, Docket NHTSA-2015-43290099-0001.4330    \13\ Grant of Petition for Rulemaking, NHTSA, 80 FR 62487, Oct. 16,43312015.4332    \14\ Id.4333    \15\ 88 FR 43174, July 6, 2023.4334    \16\ Id.4335---------------------------------------------------------------------------4336    Speed limiting devices: According to the Federal Motor Carrier4337Safety Administration (FMCSA), 10,440 people were killed from 2004 to43382013 in crashes where the speed of the CMV likely contributed to the4339severity of the crash.\17\ On average, that is over 1,000 lives lost4340annually to speeding CMVs. In September 2016, NHTSA and FMCSA issued a4341joint NPRM to require vehicles with a GVWR of more than 26,000 pounds4342to be equipped with a speed limiting device.\18\ The NPRM estimated4343that setting the device at 60 MPH has the potential to save almost 5004344lives and prevent nearly 11,000 injuries annually.\19\ Setting the4345speed at 65 MPH could save as many as 214 lives and prevent4346approximately 4,500 injuries each year.\20\ Subsequently, in May 2022,4347FMCSA issued an Advanced Notice of Supplemental Proposed4348Rulemaking.\21\ Last month, DOT announced that it was withdrawing the4349rulemaking despite research demonstrating that the technology is4350currently being used by 77 percent of trucks on the road in the United4351States.\22\ It is incumbent that the DOT restore this rulemaking or4352more lives will be needlessly lost.4353---------------------------------------------------------------------------4354    \17\ Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Federal motor Carrier4355Safety Regulations; Parts and Accessories Necessary for Safe Operation;4356Speed Limiting Devices, NPRM, NHTSA AND FMCSA, 81 FR 61942, Sep. 7,43572016. (SL 2016 NPRM).4358    \18\ SL 2016 NPRM.4359    \19\ SL 2016 NPRM.4360    \20\ Id.4361    \21\ 86 FR 26317 (May 4, 2022).4362    \22\ U.S. DOT, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy Unveils4363Pro-Trucker Package as Part of President Trump's Executive Order (Jun.436427, 2025); Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis (PRIA) and Initial4365Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, FMVSS No. 140, Speed Limiting Devices,4366p. 28 (NHTSA, Aug. 2016).4367---------------------------------------------------------------------------4368    Truck parking: The lack of safe and convenient truck parking merits4369Federal action. Yet, dedicating more Federal funding to building4370parking facilities alone will likely not solve the issue. Studies have4371demonstrated that the parking shortage is often most acute in areas of4372the country, such as along the Interstate 95 corridor in the Northeast,4373where building facilities for parking may not be realistic due to costs4374and scarcity of open land.\23\ As such, along with providing funding to4375address this issue, Advocates urges policymakers to examine additional4376remedies to address this problem such as use of existing dormant4377facilities.4378---------------------------------------------------------------------------4379    \23\ Federal Highway Administration, Commercial Motor Vehicle4380Parking Shortage (May 2012).4381---------------------------------------------------------------------------4382    Underride guards: This critical safety equipment can prevent a4383passenger vehicle from traveling underneath a trailer during a crash.4384Yet, for decades the Federal safety standards for rear underride guards4385were woefully outdated. In 2022, NHTSA issued a Final Rule revising the4386regulations, but the performance standards for rear guards remain below4387industry standards.\24\ As such, Advocates, Truck Safety Coalition4388(TSC), Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways (CRASH) and Parents4389Against Tired Truckers (P.A.T.T.) filed a petition for reconsideration4390which was denied by the agency in 2024.\25\4391---------------------------------------------------------------------------4392    \24\ 87 FR 42339 (July 15, 2022)4393    \25\ 89 FR 53505 (Jun. 27, 2024).4394---------------------------------------------------------------------------4395    In the spring of 2017, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety4396(IIHS), for the first time, tested a side underride guard.\26\ The4397guard successfully prevented a vehicle from traveling underneath the4398side of a trailer at 35 miles-per-hour (MPH).\27\ In August of 2017,4399IIHS performed a second test of an underride guard at 40 MPH (the speed4400at which IIHS conducts its frontal crash tests of passenger cars) and4401once again the guard prevented underride of the vehicle.\28\ In April44022023, NHTSA issued an Advanced Notice Proposed Rulemaking on the4403installation of side underride guards that drastically undercounted4404crashes involving underride as well as failed to properly evaluate the4405benefits from requiring this equipment on trailers and4406semitrailers.\29\ DOT must advance this rulemaking utilizing accurate4407data.4408---------------------------------------------------------------------------4409    \26\ IIHS, Side guard on semitrailer prevents underride in 40 mph4410test (Aug. 29, 2017).4411    \27\ Id.4412    \28\ Id.4413    \29\ 88 FR 24535 (Apr. 21, 2023).4414---------------------------------------------------------------------------4415    Entry-level driver training: In 1991, Congress, concerned with the4416unacceptable level of truck crashes and the quality of training being4417given to commercial driver's license (CDL) applicants, directed the4418FHWA to issue a rule requiring entry-level driver training (ELDT).\30\4419After repeated failed attempts by FMCSA to issue a rule requiring ELDT,4420the agency convened the Entry-Level Driver Training Advisory Committee4421(ELDTAC) to conduct a negotiated rulemaking in 2015.\31\ The ELDTAC4422recommended that all CDL candidates receive a minimum number of hours4423of behind-the-wheel (BTW) training.\32\ The vote was unanimous by the4424members of the Committee representing safety groups, training schools,4425the motorcoach industry and individual drivers.\33\ Consensus was4426reached by the ELDTAC regarding the BTW requirement because this4427provision ensures that candidates' training will include a minimum4428amount of time operating a vehicle. The requirement was included in the4429NPRM but excluded from the Final Rule issued in 2016.\34\ We urge4430Congress to close this glaring loophole in Federal training4431requirements for CDL candidates.4432---------------------------------------------------------------------------4433    \30\ 72 FR 73226 (Dec. 26, 2007).4434    \31\ 79 FR 49044 (Aug. 19, 2014).4435    \32\ Federal Minimum Standards for CMV Entry-Level Driver Training4436Written Statement, June 5, 2015 (Final Statement).4437    \33\ Id.4438    \34\ 81 FR 88732 (Dec. 8, 2016).4439---------------------------------------------------------------------------4440Weakening Essential Safety Regulations is Irreconcilable with Roadway4441        Safety4442    Federal limits on the weight and size of interstate CMVs: Current4443maximum weights and lengths for CMVs aim to protect truck drivers, the4444traveling public, and our Nation's roads, bridges and other4445infrastructure components. Even with these thresholds, the American4446Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) reports ``these vital lifelines are4447frequently underfunded, and over 40 percent of the system is now in4448poor or mediocre condition.'' \35\ In their 2025 Report Card, roads4449received a grade of ``D+,'' with 39 percent in poor or mediocre4450condition.\36\ Bridges received a ``C,'' with about a third of the4451Nation's bridge inventory (221,791 spans) in need of repair4452replacement. In addition, approximately 45 percent of bridges have4453exceeded their planned design lives of 50 years.\37\ Moreover, driving4454on deteriorated and congested roads still costs the average driver over4455$1,400 per year in vehicle operating costs and lost time.\38\4456---------------------------------------------------------------------------4457    \35\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/445803/Full-Report-2025-Natl-IRC-WEB.pdf.4459    \36\ Id.4460    \37\ Id.4461    \38\ Id.4462---------------------------------------------------------------------------4463    Raising truck weight or size limits could result in an increased4464prevalence and severity of crashes. Longer trucks come with operational4465difficulties such as requiring more time to pass, having larger blind4466zones, crossing into adjacent lanes, swinging into opposing lanes on4467curves and turns, and taking a longer distance to adequately brake. In4468fact, double trailer trucks have an 11 percent higher fatal crash rate4469than single trailer trucks.\39\ Overweight trucks also pose serious4470safety risk. Brake violations are a major reason for out-of-service4471violations.\40\ According to a North Carolina study by IIHS, trucks4472with out-of-service violations are 362 percent more likely to be4473involved in a crash.\41\ This is also troubling considering that4474tractor-trailers moving at 60 miles per hour are required to stop in4475310 feet--the length of a football field--once the brakes are4476applied.\42\ Actual stopping distances are often much longer due to4477driver response time before braking and the common problem that truck4478brakes are often not in adequate working condition. Moreover,4479increasing the weight of a heavy truck by only 10 percent increases4480bridge damage by 33 percent.\43\4481---------------------------------------------------------------------------4482    \39\ An Analysis of Truck Size and Weight: Phase I--Safety,4483Multimodal Transportation & Infrastructure Consortium, November 2013;4484Memorandum from J. Matthews, Rahall Appalachian Transportation4485Institute, Sep. 29, 2014.4486    \40\ Roadside Inspections, Vehicle Violations: All Trucks Roadside4487Inspections, Vehicle Violations (2019--Calendar), FMCSA.4488    \41\ Teoh E, Carter D, Smith S and McCartt A, Crash risk factors4489for interstate large trucks in North Carolina, Journal of Safety4490Research (2017).4491    \42\ Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49 Part 571 Section4492121: Standard No. 121 Air brake systems (FMVSS 121).4493    \43\ Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge network Costs, NCHRP Report4494495, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2003.4495---------------------------------------------------------------------------4496    Despite claims to the contrary, bigger trucks will not result in4497fewer trucks. Following every past increase to Federal truck size and4498weight limits, the number of trucks on our roads has gone up. Since44991982, when Congress last increased the gross vehicle weight limit,4500truck registrations have more than doubled.\44\ The U.S. DOT4501Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study also addressed this meritless4502assertion and found that any potential mileage efficiencies from the4503use of heavier trucks would be offset in just one year.\45\4504---------------------------------------------------------------------------4505    \44\ 2017 Annual Report.4506    \45\ Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Federal4507Highway Administration (June 2015).4508---------------------------------------------------------------------------4509    There is overwhelming opposition to any increases to truck size and4510weight limits. The public, local government officials, safety, consumer4511and public health groups, law enforcement, first responders, truck4512drivers and labor representatives, families of truck crash victims and4513survivors, and even Congress on a bipartisan level have all rejected4514attempts to increase truck size and weight limits. Also, the technical4515reports released in June 2015 from the U.S. DOT Comprehensive Truck4516Size and Weight Study concluded there is a ``profound'' lack of data4517from which to quantify the safety impact of larger or heavier trucks4518and consequently recommended that no changes in the relevant truck size4519and weight laws and regulations be considered until data limitations4520are overcome.\46\4521---------------------------------------------------------------------------4522    \46\ Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, Federal4523Highway Administration (June 2015).4524---------------------------------------------------------------------------4525    We urge Congress to oppose any increases to Federal truck size and4526weight limits, including mandating pilot programs, measures specific to4527certain products, and state or industry specific exemptions. These4528endless exemptions undermine a critical Federal safety regulation,4529needlessly jeopardize public safety and present unnecessary obstacles4530for enforcement.4531    Minimum age requirements for interstate truck drivers: CMV drivers4532under the age of 19 are four times more likely to be involved in fatal4533crashes, as compared to CMV drivers who are 21 years of age and older,4534and CMV drivers ages 19-20 are six times more likely to be involved in4535fatal crashes (compared to CMV drivers 21 years and older).\47\ Yet,4536some segments of the trucking industry have been pushing to allow4537teenagers to operate CMVs in interstate commerce for more than 204538years, often relying on their own forecasts for the number of drivers4539needed as a rationale. These projections have consistently failed to4540materialize.\48\ The trucking industry continues to face a driver4541retention crisis, not a driver shortage. Past witnesses representing4542parts of the trucking industry have testified before Congress that4543there is not a driver shortage and perpetuating this falsehood could4544negatively affect the supply chain.\49\4545---------------------------------------------------------------------------4546    \47\ Campbell, K. L., Fatal Accident Involvement Rates By Driver4547Age For Large Trucks, Accid. Anal. & Prev. Vol 23, No. 4, pp. 287-2954548(1991).4549    \48\ FMCSA Document ID: 2000-84100-0782. American Trucking4550Associations, Truck Driver Shortage Analysis 2015 (Oct. 2015) and 20194551available here: https://www.trucking.org/news-insights/ata-releases-4552updated-driver-shortage-report-and-forecast.4553    \49\ ``The State of Transportation'' Hearing, U.S. House of4554Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,4555---------------------------------------------------------------------------4556    The IIJA included a provision requiring the establishment of pilot4557program to permit teen truckers to operate in interstate commerce. This4558program is basically a ``science experiment'' with all road users4559serving unknowingly as ``test subjects.'' If accepted research4560protocols are not followed by FMCSA, it could result in preventable4561deaths and injuries and will also jeopardize the legitimacy of the4562outcomes of the program. Lastly, the agency's recommendations and4563conclusions in the required report to Congress must be supported by4564sufficient evidence and data collected during the program. We urge this4565Committee to continue oversight of this program.4566    Truck drivers' hours of service and electronic logging devices4567(ELDs): Self-reports of fatigue, which almost always underestimate the4568problem, find that fatigue in truck operations is a significant issue.4569In a 2006 driver survey prepared for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety4570Administration (FMCSA), ``65 percent [of drivers] reported that they4571often or sometimes felt drowsy while driving'' and almost half (47.64572percent) of drivers said they had fallen asleep while driving in the4573previous year.\50\ In fact, the National Transportation Safety Board4574(NTSB) has repeatedly cited fatigue as a major contributor to truck4575crashes as determined by its investigations.\51\ Expanding the hours4576operators of trucks can drive through misguided pilot programs or4577undermining the use of ELDs through endless exemptions for carriers4578transporting livestock and insects as a rationale for moving more goods4579puts truck drivers, their loads and everyone on the roads with them at4580risk.\52\4581---------------------------------------------------------------------------4582    \50\ Hours of Service of Drivers, NPRM (2010 NPRM), FMCSA, 75 FR458382170 (Dec. 29, 2010), citing Dinges, D.F. & Maislin, G.,''Truck Driver4584Fatigue Management Survey,'' FMCSA (May 2006), FMCSA-2004-19608-3968.4585    \51\ NTSB, Highway, Multivehicle Work Zone Crash on Interstate 954586Cranbury, New Jersey June 7, 2014, Accident Report NTSB/HAR-15/02 (Aug.458711, 2015) and Fatigue, Disregard for Safety Regulations and Oversight4588Failures Lead to Fatal Bus and Truck Collision in Upstate New York,4589Report HIR-24-08, December 19, 2024.4590    \52\ U.S. DOT, U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy Unveils4591Pro-Trucker Package as Part of President Trump's Executive Order (Jun.459227, 2025); FMCSA, ELD Hours of Service (HOS) and Agriculture4593Exemptions; Public Law No: 119-4 (2025).4594---------------------------------------------------------------------------4595Automated driving system (ADS) technology4596    Autonomous driving technology has made advances yet remains unable4597to consistently operate safely with all road users, conditions and4598scenarios, as evidenced by fatal and serious crashes involving4599passenger motor vehicles equipped with ADS of varying levels.\53\4600Transparency and robustness in crash and incident data reporting4601involving vehicles equipped with ADS are critical to the safety of4602public roads, the management of cities in which they are operating, for4603researchers and related industries as well as for Congress and the DOT4604as it considers legislative and regulatory proposals. Further, if those4605incidents had involved autonomous commercial motor vehicles (ACMVs),4606which are larger and heavier with more stopping distance needed, the4607results could have been even more catastrophic, and the death and4608injury toll could have been much worse. Some of the most pressing4609safety shortcomings associated with autonomous vehicle (AV) technology,4610which include the ADS properly detecting and reacting to all other road4611users and cybersecurity, are exponentially amplified by the greater4612crash force of an ACMV. As such, it is imperative that ACMVs be subject4613to comprehensive safety regulations, including having a licensed driver4614behind the wheel for the foreseeable future.4615---------------------------------------------------------------------------4616    \53\ NHTSA, Standing General Order 2021-01 (Aug. 2021). ADS4617Incident Report Data available here: https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/ffdd/4618sgo-2021-01/SGO-2021-01_Incident_Reports_ADS.csv.4619---------------------------------------------------------------------------4620    The interest in expanding the use of this technology must not be4621used as a pretext to eviscerate essential safety regulations4622administered by the FMCSA, and particularly in the absence of new4623standards to ensure the technology performs safely and as needed. The4624public safety protections provided by the FMCSRs have become no less4625important or applicable simply because a CMV has been equipped with an4626ADS. In fact, additional substantial public safety concerns are4627presented by ACMVs. This includes the deployment of emergency beacons.4628More research needs to be done on the safety impact of cab mounted4629beacons rather than Congress taking action to force FMCSA to allow4630their use.4631    Drivers operating an ACMV must have an additional endorsement or4632equivalent certification on their commercial driver license (CDL) to4633ensure they have been properly trained to monitor and understand the4634ODD of the vehicle and, if need be, to operate an ACMV. This training4635must include a minimum number of hours of behind-the-wheel training.4636    The remote operation of AVs, including any for ACMVs, presents4637distinct safety concerns including issues involving latency. Remote4638operators are often tasked with exercising some operational control4639over the vehicle, either for normal operations or in response to4640commands of an emergency responder. As such, all remote operators must4641be legally licensed in the U.S. to operate the AV in question. In4642addition, remote operators face unique challenges in the operation of4643an AV compared to a driver located in the vehicle. For instance, a4644human driver behind the wheel may have access to a broader range of4645details regarding the driving environment than someone located in an4646office far from the actual location of the AV, potentially in another4647country. Therefore, individuals in these roles must be given specific4648training for remote operations. These individuals should also have4649significant experience operating both an AV on public roads and remote4650operation of an AV in realistic training scenarios. Lastly, remote4651operators must never be in a situation where they would even4652potentially have to oversee the ``real time'' operation of more than4653one AV and there should be limits on hours of service for these4654positions.4655    Advocates and numerous stakeholders developed the ``AV Tenets,''4656policy positions which should be foundational to any AV4657legislation.\54\ The AV Tenets have four main, commonsense categories4658including: 1) prioritizing safety of all road users; 2) guaranteeing4659accessibility and equity; 3) preserving consumer and worker rights;4660and, 4) ensuring local control and sustainable transportation. While4661the AV Tenets were developed for application to vehicles under 10,0004662pounds, many of the principles also apply to larger commercial4663vehicles. At a minimum, ACMVs must meet safety standards for the ADS4664and related systems, including for cybersecurity, and operations must4665be subject to adequate oversight as a starting point for their4666potential deployment.4667---------------------------------------------------------------------------4668    \54\ https://saferoads.org/autonomous-vehicle-tenets/.4669---------------------------------------------------------------------------4670    In December 2024, Advocates released a public opinion poll that4671found 9 of 10 adults surveyed are concerned about themselves or their4672loved ones getting into motor vehicle crashes.\55\ The survey noted4673that 88 percent of respondents affirmed sharing the roads with4674driverless trucks presented concern, with 69 percent acknowledging a4675high level of concern. The high percentage expressing concern was4676regardless of political affiliation or region.4677---------------------------------------------------------------------------4678    \55\ Online CARAVAN SURVEY, The Public is Very Concerned About4679Traffic Safety Even Though They Are Not Aware of the Enormity of the4680Deadly Toll on our Roadways (Dec. 2024). Available at: https://4681saferoads.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Advocates-December-2024-Poll-4682Report-12-4-24.pdf.4683---------------------------------------------------------------------------4684Conclusion4685    The DOT must implement the directives to address the truck crash4686fatality and injury toll, and we urge Congress to prioritize oversight,4687advancing proven safety measures and funding for such in the next4688transportation reauthorization legislation.4689    Thank you for your consideration of these issues. We look forward4690to continuing to work with you to improve safety on our Nation's4691roadways.4692            Sincerely,4693                                           Catherine Chase,4694                                                         President.4695cc: Members of the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight,4696Pipelines, and Safety4697                                 ______46984699  Prepared Statement of Anne C. Reinke, President and CEO, Intermodal4700                  Association of North America (IANA)4701    On behalf of the Intermodal Association of North America (IANA),4702thank you Subcommittee Chair Young, Ranking Member Peters, and4703Subcommittee Members for convening this hearing to discuss policies and4704regulations impacting the trucking industry, particularly with an eye4705toward the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization.4706    As the only transportation trade association that represents the4707combined interests of intermodal freight providers and customers, IANA4708represents more than 1,000 corporate members, including railroads,4709ocean carriers, ports, intermodal truckers and over-the-road highway4710carriers, intermodal marketing and logistic companies, and suppliers to4711the industry. IANA's associate (non-voting) members include shippers4712(defined as the beneficial owners of the freight to be shipped),4713academic institutions, government entities, and non-profit trade4714associations.4715    Unlike single transportation modes, global and domestic intermodal4716freight supply chains are comprised of separate entities that work4717together to complete each intermodal movement. Truck movements are an4718essential link in the intermodal supply chain and each container's4719journey requires multiple drivers to complete a combined total of 984720million intermodal trucking moves annually.4721    Recognizing the broad range of issues under the Subcommittee's4722jurisdiction, IANA looks forward to working with you to advance4723policies in the next surface transportation authorization law that4724increase intermodal supply chain efficiency, support the industry's4725essential workforce, and foster economic growth and competitiveness. An4726overview of the Association's most pressing policy principles related4727to trucking can be found below.4728Workforce4729    According to the American Trucking Associations (ATA), in 2023, the4730trucking industry faced a shortage of roughly 60,000 drivers. ATA4731further projects that the industry must recruit more than 1 million new4732drivers over the next decade to replace an aging workforce and keep4733pace with growing freight demand. Given these estimates, IANA4734encourages Congress to advance legislation that supports the retention4735of the existing trucking workforce, reduces regulatory burdens, and4736incentivizes new drivers to enter the industry.4737    Presently, drivers must be at least 21 years old to operate a4738commercial motor vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. This age barrier4739serves as a deterrent for 18-to 21-year-olds who are interested in4740entering the workforce. Frequently, these individuals undergo training4741and apprenticeship in other fields before their age qualifies them to4742operate a CMV in interstate commerce. IANA supports Federal efforts4743that would allow drivers between the ages of 18 and 21 to enter the4744interstate workforce, while maintaining safety objectives.4745    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) took a critical4746step in creating a career pathway for the next generation of interstate4747CMV drivers by establishing the Safe Driver Apprenticeship Program4748(SDAP) under the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. The pilot4749program allows qualified younger drivers to operate in interstate4750commerce and ensures participants satisfy comprehensive training and4751safety standards. Unfortunately, the addition of extraneous4752requirements, beyond what is written in law, has hampered participation4753in the program by both motor carriers and drivers. To maximize the4754potential of the SDAP and the future trucking workforce, we encourage4755Congress to build on its important work under the IIJA by steering the4756program back on course and ensure it is implemented according to4757Congressional intent.4758    Another top priority for the intermodal industry is to preserve the4759independent contractor model, which allows truck drivers to enjoy4760maximum flexibility by choosing the hours and routes that best align4761with their personal circumstances and preferences. While not directly4762under the Committee's jurisdiction, we hope to count on your support4763for this important issue that stands to impact approximately 400,0004764independent truck drivers and an estimated 80 percent of the intermodal4765drayage trucking workforce. Although employee driver positions are4766readily available, these individuals have made the conscious decision4767to carry out their work as independent owner-operators--investing time4768and financial resources in their small business, which includes4769training, regulatory compliance, licensing, insurance, and the purchase4770of a truck.4771    To further the trucking industry's workforce recruitment and4772retention goals, IANA supports Congressional efforts--such as S. 2228,4773the Modern Worker Empowerment Act- that empower these hardworking men4774and women by providing increased certainty and consistency to their4775classification as independent contractors.4776Cargo Theft4777    In recent years, instances of organized cargo theft and fraud have4778increased at an alarming rate. According to CargoNet's annual analysis,4779reported cargo theft incidents rose 27 percent between 2023 and 20244780across the United States and Canada. Demonstrating the rise of4781premeditation, CargoNet estimates that instances of strategic theft--4782which involve the use of fraud and deception in addition to, or in4783place of, physically stealing cargo--have risen by over 1,500 percent4784since the first quarter of 2021. Fraud and deception tactics may4785include identify theft, forged bills of lading, and advanced cyber4786tactics.4787    It is important to note that crime statistics represent reported4788theft, as the occurrence is not always reported for a host of reasons,4789including reputational brand management, tedious paperwork, fear of4790increased insurance costs, and low cargo recovery rates. Knowledge that4791cargo theft is vastly underreported leads to a wide span of loss4792estimates, ranging from $455 million annually to several billion4793dollars.4794    It is likely that theft, fraud, and cyber-security attacks aimed at4795freight transportation will require a host of solutions, and we applaud4796Congress for its dedication to identifying bipartisan approaches, such4797as S. 1404, the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act and S. 337, the4798Household Goods Shipping Consumer Protection Act. Both of these bills4799would make meaningful changes at the Federal level to identify,4800prosecute, and deter cargo theft. A coordinated, national response is4801needed to address this growing threat by improving enforcement4802capabilities and fostering increased collaboration across relevant4803federal, state, and local agencies.4804Truck Size and Weight4805    In 1991, Congress froze truck size and weight limits on Federal4806highways. The intermodal industry wholly adopted this standard and,4807accordingly, built trailers and containers in compliance with Federal4808law. Any changes to these long-standing regulations will upend4809intermodal operations, sending a ripple effect across the entire supply4810chain as intermodal equipment is carefully designed for safe and4811efficient transport by water, rail, and road.4812Intermodal Connectors4813    Despite constituting less than one percent of total National4814Highway System (NHS) mileage, NHS-designated intermodal connectors play4815an outsized role in freight network fluidity. These connectors provide4816necessary links to seaports, rail facilities, and airports that allow4817for seamless interaction between transportation modes and are essential4818to the movement of goods between points of origin and destination.4819According to a 2017 study by the Federal Highway Administration, only4820nine percent of intermodal connectors are classified as in good or very4821good condition. Under the next surface transportation reauthorization,4822IANA strongly supports continued eligibility and robust funding made4823available for improvements to intermodal connectors under Federal4824formula and discretionary programs.4825    Thank you for your time and your leadership in support of4826intermodal goods movement and its related issues. It is our hope that4827IANA can be a resource as Congress continues developing reauthorization4828legislation. We look forward to working with you and would welcome the4829opportunity to further engage with your offices. If you or your staff4830have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at4831areinke@intermodal.org or 301-982-3400.4832                                 ______48334834 Prepared Statement from the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA)4835    The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) respectfully submits4836the following comments for the record in response to the Committee on4837Commerce, Science & Transportation's Subcommittee on Surface4838Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety's hearing on ``Shifting4839Gears: Issues Impacting the Trucking and Commercial Bus Industries in4840the U.S.''4841    CVSA is a nonprofit organization comprised of local, state,4842provincial, territorial and Federal commercial motor vehicle (CMV)4843safety officials and industry representatives. The Alliance aims to4844prevent CMV crashes, injuries and fatalities and believes that4845collaboration between government and industry improves road safety and4846saves lives. Our mission is to improve CMV safety and enforcement by4847providing guidance, education and advocacy for enforcement and industry4848across North America.4849    CVSA commends the Subcommittee for holding a hearing to explore and4850understand issues facing the CMV industry. The hearing offered a timely4851opportunity for Senators to engage with industry stakeholders to better4852understand the unique challenges of the CMV industry, in addition to4853learning about the surface transportation priorities of the industry4854witnesses participating in the hearing.4855    CVSA and its members are committed to improving CMV safety in the4856motor carrier industry and have long supported solutions to improve CMV4857safety on our Nation's roadways. Discussion during the July 22 hearing4858covered a variety of issues confronting the industry, such as effective4859use of safety technology, impaired and fatigued driving, and regulatory4860improvements. The Committee's upcoming work on surface transportation4861reauthorization is the perfect opportunity to address some of the4862issues shared by stakeholders. CVSA is committed to improving roadway4863safety and welcomes this opportunity to share several solutions to4864issues affecting the CMV industry.4865Universal Electronic Vehicle Identifier4866    As part of its written testimony, the Owner-Operator Independent4867Driver Association (OOIDA) misrepresented one of CVSA's reauthorization4868priorities, the universal electronic vehicle identifier.4869    The universal electronic vehicle identifier is an inspection4870selection tool and solution for inspectors to better identify and4871prioritize vehicles with safety concerns for intervention, more4872effectively and efficiently removing unsafe vehicles and drivers from4873the Nation's roadways. Currently, when an inspector is observing CMVs4874available for inspection, that inspector can only view information for4875a single truck at a time when using various screening technologies and4876tools. Additionally, inspectors have to manually review the information4877when they query the screening technology programs. Inspectors have a4878limited window in which to view the information and make the inspection4879selection decision.4880    Under current inspection selection procedures, inspectors are not4881receiving a complete picture of the CMVs in their vicinity that are4882available for inspection. Using technology to identify multiple4883vehicles electronically would allow enforcement to increase the number4884of vehicles that are screened for inspection while using data to better4885select vehicles for intervention, creating efficiencies for the4886enforcement community and the motor carrier industry. A universal4887electronic vehicle identifier would provide inspectors with a complete4888picture of the vehicles around them, so they can better identify and4889prioritize vehicles that are operating unsafely. After reviewing a4890complete picture of the vehicles in the vicinity, the inspector4891maintains discretion to select the vehicle that poses the greatest4892imminent hazard to road users.4893    OOIDA's label of the universal electronic vehicle identifier as4894``trackers on truckers,'' misrepresents what CVSA would like to see as4895part of implementation of a universal electronic vehicle identifier.4896There are no credible privacy concerns with implementation of a4897universal electronic vehicle identifier because sensitive information,4898such as driver information and data, would not be transmitted. The only4899data transmitted would be the universal vehicle identifier. The4900universal vehicle identifier, potentially tied to the vehicle4901identification number, would provide enforcement with access to the4902information they currently access by running the vehicle's USDOT number4903or license plate number, creating a more efficient means to retrieve4904data already available to them. CVSA's state and territory members are4905pursuing a requirement that CMVs be equipped with a universal4906electronic vehicle identifier to improve roadway safety--not to track4907trucks or their drivers, a point CVSA has made clear in its outreach on4908this topic and the Alliance is committed to ensuring any legislative4909language or regulatory requirement for a universal electronic vehicle4910identifier reflects the technology's intended purpose. Additionally,4911CVSA disputes OOIDA's claim that the universal electronic vehicle4912identifier would negatively impact safety. The universal electronic4913vehicle identifier will aid inspectors in selecting the vehicles on the4914roadway that are most in need of an inspection or intervention. For4915example, a system that uses the universal electronic vehicle identifier4916could flag vehicles that are operating under a Federal or state out-of-4917service order. These are vehicles that should not be operating yet are4918on the road despite significant safety issues, placing other road users4919at risk. Deployment of a universal electronic vehicle identifier could4920help inspectors better identify these vehicles for removal from the4921roadways.4922    There are additional applications for how a universal electronic4923vehicle identifier can aid enforcement beyond the inspection selection4924process. For example, a universal electronic vehicle identifier can4925support enforcement in identifying instances of motor carrier fraud and4926USDOT number theft. In instances where USDOT number theft is suspected,4927enforcement can rely on the electronic vehicle identifier, in addition4928to a motor carrier's registration information, to determine if the4929vehicle being driven is associated with the USDOT number.4930    With the size of the CMV industry, it is not possible for the4931roughly 13,000 inspectors across North America to inspect every4932vehicle, driver and motor carrier operating on our roadways on a4933regular basis. Chairman Young shared in his opening statement that4934Congress needs to ensure that law enforcement agencies are well-4935equipped. Implementing a universal electronic vehicle identifier would4936provide the CMV enforcement community with a tool that would4937significantly improve the way CMVs are selected for inspection,4938leveraging limited resources and improving roadway safety.4939Safety Technology and Automated Commercial Motor Vehicles4940    During the hearing, various forms of safety technologies were4941discussed. CVSA generally supports policies that encourage the4942deployment of safety technologies proven to improve CMV safety, either4943through preventing or mitigating the severity of crashes. As budgets4944continue to tighten and technology continues to advance, it is4945imperative that those in the safety and enforcement communities take4946full advantage of technological advancements that improve safety and4947demonstrate a net benefit to society. As Congress considers developing4948performance standards and specifications for safety technologies, it is4949imperative to work with industry and the enforcement community to4950ensure that the devices are effective and that any regulations put into4951place are enforceable.4952    A focus of the hearing was automated, or self-driving, CMVs. For4953several years, CVSA's membership has been working to prepare for the4954presence of automated CMVs on our roadways. CMVs equipped with4955automated driving systems (ADS) have the potential to significantly4956improve roadway safety. As ADS technology continues to advance and be4957tested on public roadways, it is imperative that Federal agencies,4958lawmakers, law enforcement and motor carriers keep pace with the ADS4959industry. While ADS-equipped CMVs have the potential to improve roadway4960safety, that potential is based on the vehicles and technology being4961well maintained and fully functional. Oversight by the enforcement4962community is necessary to ensure ADS-equipped CMVs are properly4963maintained. Unfortunately, there are challenges with applying the4964traditional roadside inspection program to ADS-equipped vehicles,4965because the current roadside inspection program is not compatible with4966ADS-equipped CMVs. The current inspection process relies heavily on the4967driver to complete an inspection, for example. In addition,4968incorporating all possible roadside inspection locations into an ADS-4969equipped CMV's operational design domain is not practical. To address4970these challenges, CVSA coordinated several years of research and4971discussion with state and local CMV enforcement officials, motor4972carriers and ADS developers to design an alternative approach to4973ensuring ADS-equipped CMVs receive the necessary oversight to ensure4974compliance with Federal safety regulations.4975    CVSA recommends implementing the Enhanced Commercial Motor Vehicle4976Inspection Program, an inspection standard and procedure designed to4977govern the inspection of ADS-equipped CMVs operating without a driver/4978operator on duty. The program establishes a no-defect, dispatch (point-4979of-origin) inspection program and includes an enhanced inspection4980standard and procedure for motor carriers operating ADS-equipped4981vehicles, as well as a 40-hour CVSA training course and exam (written4982and practical) for motor carrier personnel who will be conducting the4983inspections. Under this program, rather than the driver conducting a4984pre-trip inspection (as is currently done), for ADS-equipped CMVs,4985CVSA-trained and -certified motor carrier personnel would conduct the4986Enhanced CMV Inspection Procedure at the point of origin before4987dispatch.4988Surface Transportation Reauthorization as a Solution to Issues Facing4989        the CMV Industry4990    Although the hearing focused on challenges within the CMV industry,4991the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization presents a critical4992opportunity to address these issues. To further the discussion, CVSA4993has identified key priorities that should be considered in the4994reauthorization process.4995Improvements to the Enforcement Training and Support Grant Program4996    One issue that can be addressed in the upcoming surface4997transportation reauthorization legislation is ensuring that there is a4998well-trained inspector population available to enforce the Federal4999Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). In the Infrastructure5000Investment and Jobs Act, Congress created the Enforcement Training and5001Support Grant which created a new approach to how certification5002training to state and local CMV inspectors is developed and delivered.5003In order to improve the training of inspectors, CVSA recommends a5004series of improvements to the structure and administration of the5005Enforcement Training and Support Grant to be included as part of the5006surface transportation reauthorization legislation.5007    Currently, qualified state inspectors are used to deliver the CMV5008inspector certification training included under the Enforcement5009Training and Support Grant. Inspectors who want to become instructors5010are required to become qualified as an instructor in each type of5011curriculum they wish to instruct. However, due to a misinterpretation5012of Congressional intent, activities under the current Enforcement5013Training and Support Grant are limited to the development and delivery5014of certification training to state and local enforcement personnel5015seeking to become certified as a CMV inspector, excluding the training5016of the instructors for the courses. These instructors, who are also5017state personnel and inspectors, are a critical part of the training5018process and their training should be part of the same program. In5019addition to the overall improvement to the quality of training5020instructors are receiving and the administrative benefits of5021consolidating all state and local roadside inspector and instructor5022training into one program, this clarification would match the5023intentions of the creation of the program in the Infrastructure5024Investment and Jobs Act. To resolve this, CVSA seeks language5025clarifying that the state instructors delivering the certification5026training to state personnel under Enforcement Training and Support5027Grant should be trained and managed under the grant as well.5028    Another recommendation to improve the Enforcement Training and5029Support Grant is to implement a multi-year grant cycle. The Enforcement5030Training and Support Grant currently operates on an annual award cycle,5031which contains multiple downsides for the delivery of this important5032training. First, a single year of funding impacts the grant recipient's5033ability to implement a comprehensive training program reliably and5034consistently. Additionally, the administrative burden of annually5035applying for a single year of funding is cumbersome on grantees, as5036well as the agency. Further, a multi-year grant cycle would provide the5037state and local inspectors receiving the critical certification5038training with much needed stability and continuity. In addition, a5039multi-year grant cycle would ensure consistency with the delivery of5040the enforcement training program, as well as give the grant recipient5041the opportunity to deliver on longer terms goals and objectives.5042Finally, transitioning to a multi-year grant cycle would reduce the5043administrative burden of soliciting and awarding the grant program for5044the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). CVSA supports5045a multi-year grant cycle for the Enforcement Training and Support5046Grant.5047    A final improvement for the Enforcement Training and Support Grant5048is to ensure that the activities under the Enforcement Training and5049Support Grant are delivered by the organization comprised of state5050government agencies responsible for the oversight and implementation of5051CMV enforcement activities.5052    In order to ensure the quality of the training, the state agencies5053responsible for motor carrier enforcement programs strongly support5054limiting the CMV Enforcement Training and Support Grant program to one5055recipient and support that the program be delivered only by the5056organization comprised of state government agencies responsible for the5057oversight and implementation of CMV enforcement activities. CVSA is the5058organization responsible for developing and maintaining the North5059American Standard Inspection Program (NASI). CVSA's certification5060standards are identified by the FMCSRs in 49 Code of Federal5061Regulations (CFR) Sec. 350.105 as the certification standard to which5062CMV inspectors must adhere. As the entity responsible for the5063certification standard, CVSA is best qualified to deliver the5064certification training for NASI inspectors, as well as instructors. The5065state agencies responsible for CMV safety inspections comprise CVSA's5066membership and will ensure the quality of the training program.5067Identifying CVSA as the entity responsible for this training would5068provide the jurisdictions with long term stability within this critical5069training program.5070Personal Conveyance5071    Another challenge for the CMV industry is fatigued driving. The5072International Brotherhood of Teamsters acknowledged this in its written5073testimony, when they cited fatigue as ``endemic to the industry.''5074Driver fatigue is a significant contributor to CMV crashes and poses a5075substantial risk to road safety. A National Transportation Safety Board5076study found that 31 percent of heavy truck crashes with fatalities to5077the driver involved fatigue.\1\ Additionally, fatigued drivers perform5078more inappropriate lane deviations and have slower steering responses,5079experience reductions in responses to speed changes of a lead vehicle,5080have increased speed variations, exhibit slower reaction times,5081experience impaired visual scanning or ``tunnel vision,'' and are at5082risk of falling asleep at the wheel. All of these factors increase the5083likelihood of crashes and near-crashes resulting from driver error.\2\5084In the motor carrier industry, the Federal hours-of-service5085requirements exist to help prevent and manage driver fatigue. While5086sleep cannot be regulated, the hours-of-service rules set forth a5087framework that, if followed, allow drivers to get the rest necessary to5088operate their vehicles safely. It is important that the hours-of-5089service requirements continue to focus on fatigue management and5090safety, factoring in the best available fatigue data.5091---------------------------------------------------------------------------5092    \1\ Factors that Affect Fatigue in Heavy Truck Accidents Volume 2:5093Case Summaries. National Transportation Safety Board. NTSB Report5094Number SS-95-02. https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/5095SS9502.pdf.5096    \2\ Guidelines and Materials to Enable Motor Carriers to Implement5097a Fatigue Management Program. North American Fatigue Management5098Program. https://nafmp.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/5099implementation_manual_en.pdf5100---------------------------------------------------------------------------5101    Opportunities for driver fatigue can be reduced by clarifying the5102definition of personal conveyance within the FMCSRs by adding a maximum5103time for its use. Under personal conveyance, a driver is able to use a5104loaded or unloaded CMV for personal use and count that driving time as5105off-duty time. With the current definition of personal conveyance, a5106driver can drive hundreds of miles over the course of several hours5107under the designation of personal conveyance before, during, or after5108their workday, putting them at risk for increased levels of fatigue.5109    Roadside inspectors see countless examples of this occurring, with5110drivers claiming they are operating their vehicle for personal use,5111when in reality they are extending their driving time. Some common5112examples of personal conveyance abuse include using personal conveyance5113for up to 10 hours between dropping off loads and going to the next5114pick up; driving over two hours claiming they are looking for a place5115to park when there are open spaces along the two-hour drive; using5116personal conveyance to make up for time lost at loading docks; and5117switching to personal conveyance time just before violating the 11-or511814-hour rules. Allowing significant extension of driving time with the5119use of personal conveyance undermines the goals of the hours-of-service5120regulations, which exist to mitigate the impacts of fatigue on highway5121safety.5122    In recent years, CVSA inspectors have observed a rise in personal5123conveyance abuse and misuse. For example, as part of a data collection5124conducted by CVSA in 2023, CVSA found that when personal conveyance was5125being used by a driver, it was being used improperly nearly 40 percent5126of the time. Additionally, CVSA has seen an increase in false log5127violations, which is where personal conveyance violations are5128documented. False log violations have jumped from the seventh most5129frequently cited driver violation in 2019 to the third most cited in51302021, 2022 and 2023. In 2024, false log violations were the twelfth5131most frequently cited driver violation. When looking at ``false logs--5132personal conveyance'' violations, the number of violations rose from5133the 60th most frequently cited driver violation in 2021 (when the5134specific violation code was created) to the 27th most frequently cited5135in 2024.5136    Analysis of the 2023 data collection revealed that motor carriers5137whose drivers use personal conveyance improperly have a crash rate that5138is four times higher than motor carriers whose drivers use personal5139conveyance properly.5140    Additionally, the driver out-of-service (OOS) rate is over two5141times higher for motor carriers with drivers improperly using personal5142conveyance.5143    Using personal conveyance to extend driving time increases the5144possibility of fatigued driving and can endanger other road users.5145Placing a limit on the time that a driver can use personal conveyance5146is a strategy for mitigating fatigued driving that should be5147implemented.5148Motor Carrier Safety Program Improvements5149    Congress provides funding to the states, through FMCSA's Motor5150Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) and High Priority Grant.5151States and local agencies use these funds to conduct enforcement5152activities, train enforcement personnel, purchase necessary equipment,5153update software and other technology, and conduct outreach and5154education campaigns to raise awareness related to CMV safety issues.5155The goal of these programs is to reduce CMV-involved crashes,5156fatalities and injuries through consistent, uniform and effective CMV5157safety programs. The programs seek to identify safety defects, driver5158deficiencies and unsafe motor carrier practices and remove them from5159the Nation's roadways. To address issues and ensure that, as Chairman5160Young mentioned in his opening statement, law enforcement agencies are5161well-equipped to fulfill the goals of MCSAP, CVSA recommends multiple5162improvements.5163    To improve MCSAP, CVSA supports giving FMCSA the authority to allow5164states to make adjustments to their maintenance of effort (MOE) and5165enforcement activity minimums, when appropriate. As a condition of5166MCSAP, states are required to meet minimum financial requirements,5167known as MOE, by investing state funds in their CMV safety enforcement5168programs. States must also meet certain CMV inspection and enforcement5169minimums in order to have traffic safety activities reimbursed under5170MCSAP. However, the MOE and minimum activities benchmarks are outdated5171and often no longer relevant to the jurisdiction's program due to5172changes in program structure, responsibilities and priorities.5173    The motor carrier industry has evolved significantly since the MOE5174and inspection benchmarks were last updated. State CMV safety programs5175have evolved alongside industry to address the most prevalent safety5176issues, making the 20-year-old MOE and inspection benchmarks outdated5177for many programs. Giving states the option to request an adjustment to5178their MOE and inspection benchmarks ensures that their minimum state5179contributions meet the needs of their program and the current motor5180carrier safety trends. FMCSA should be given the authority to consider5181permanent changes to a jurisdiction's MOE upon request, providing the5182states with additional flexibility to manage their programs.5183    Another recommendation to improve MCSAP would provide greater5184spending flexibility for jurisdictions. Activities that are primarily5185eligible for MCSAP funding are the national program elements, which5186include driver and vehicle inspections; traffic enforcement; compliance5187reviews, carrier interventions, investigations and new entrant safety5188audits; public education and awareness; and data collection and5189quality. There are some activities and expenses not currently covered5190under MCSAP, which limits how jurisdictions are able to spend MCSAP5191funds, placing unnecessary constraints on state programs and limiting5192efficacy. Creating additional spending flexibility by expanding MCSAP5193eligibility would allow jurisdictions to spend MCSAP funds in ways that5194meet their individual needs, maximizing the benefits of MCSAP funds.5195Based on feedback from the states, CVSA recommends expanding MCSAP to5196include physical infrastructure, including MCSAP-related facilities5197construction, purchases and maintenance; MCSAP-related activities5198performed by non-MCSAP personnel, such as oversize/overweight5199enforcement; intrastate carrier compliance reviews; tools, promotional5200items and educational items for distribution to industry; and overtime5201for non-CMV traffic enforcement.5202    A final recommendation would create a dedicated funding program for5203local jurisdictions. Currently, there is not a dedicated funding5204mechanism to provide funding for local enforcement agencies5205participating in the MCSAP program. As a result, local jurisdictions5206must compete with state agencies for limited grant funds. Dedicated5207funding for local jurisdictions should be competitive in nature and5208restricted to local jurisdictions with an active memorandum of5209understanding with the lead MCSAP agency in their state. This dedicated5210funding will help ensure that local jurisdictions who wish to5211participate in the MCSAP program have the resources to fully5212participate.5213Minimum Qualifications for Entry as a Motor Carrier5214    As was noted in the hearing, it is currently far too easy to obtain5215a USDOT number and enter the industry as a motor carrier.5216    Safety on the roadways is paramount, particularly within the motor5217carrier industry. It is critical that those operating in commerce5218understand what is required of motor carriers, how to comply with the5219Federal regulations and how to establish a strong safety culture within5220their operations. Currently, however, very little is required of an5221entity to obtain registration and begin operations as a commercial5222motor carrier. In comparison, CMV inspectors and enforcement personnel5223must be trained and certified to conduct inspections, and CMV drivers5224must go through a rigorous Entry Level Driver Training and/or5225qualification process and be properly credentialed in order to drive a5226CMV. No such standards or qualifications exist, however, to become a5227motor carrier. Motor carriers applying for a USDOT number do not have5228to demonstrate qualifications in the same way as CMV inspectors and5229drivers. As a solution, CVSA supports requiring that FMCSA establish a5230set of minimum motor carrier qualification standards. Creating a5231standard for entry for motor carriers reinforces an industry-wide5232safety priority and would ensure those entering the industry are5233equipped to do so safely. CVSA is preparing specific recommendations on5234what should be included as part of these motor carrier qualifications5235and will bring these specific recommendations to Congress as part of5236its work on surface transportation reauthorization legislation.5237Improvements to the New Entrant Safety Audit Program5238    The purpose of the New Entrant Safety Audit in 49 CFR Sec. 385.3095239is to provide educational and technical assistance to the new motor5240carriers and gather safety data needed to assess the new entrant's5241safety performance and the adequacy of its basic safety management5242controls. The existing New Entrant Safety Audit Program is not5243adequately fulfilling its purpose and instead provides minimal5244education to motor carriers.5245    The New Entrant Safety Audit Program should return to the intended5246focus on motor carrier education before operation. This would increase5247efficiency, reaching more carriers to proactively improve new entrant5248safety and create more uniformity for all new entrants regardless of5249assignment type. CVSA is preparing specific recommendations on what5250improvements should be made to the New Entrant Safety Audit Program and5251will bring these specific recommendations to Congress as part of its5252work on surface transportation reauthorization legislation.5253Expanding CDLPI Eligibility to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands5254    Multiple hearing participants spoke about the importance of having5255well-trained, credentialed drivers as part of the workforce. For5256example, the American Trucking Associations (ATA) touched on how having5257qualified drivers is vital for improving safety in their written5258testimony. CVSA understands the importance of having well-trained and5259qualified drivers on the roadways.5260    One way to address driver credentialing and guarantee a qualified5261CMV driving population is to expand the Commercial Driver's License5262Program Implementation (CDLPI) grant eligibility to include Puerto Rico5263and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Currently, the commercial driver's license5264(CDL) programs in both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are not5265recognized by FMCSA as equivalent to the standards in 49 CFR Part 383.5266Making the territories eligible under the CDLPI grant program would5267enable them to improve their existing CDL programs and bring them in5268line with Part 383, ensuring those drivers are properly trained and5269credentialed, increasing safety on the roadways.5270    Additionally, this will bring uniformity to the enforcement of the5271safety regulations surrounding CDLs, particularly when it comes to CMV5272drivers from either territory operating a CMV in one of the 50 states5273in the U.S. Currently, because their licenses are not recognized as5274equivalent, CDL drivers from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands5275may end up with two driver's licenses--one from their home territory5276and one from a state. FMCSA and the states strive for a ``one driver,5277one license'' approach for all CDL drivers. Including Puerto Rico and5278the U.S. Virgin Islands in the CDLPI program would enable the5279territories to improve their CDL programs to bring them in line with 495280CFR Part 383, which would allow FMCSA to recognize those licenses and5281equivalent to other U.S. issued licenses, allowing for a single and5282proper credential for all CDL holders from those territories.5283ELD Certification5284    CVSA also supports requiring that FMCSA create a process for5285certifying electronic logging devices (ELDs). Currently, manufacturers5286self-certify that their devices meet the ELD specifications set by5287FMCSA. FMCSA has the ability to remove a device from the list of self-5288certified ELDs if, after self-certification, the device is found to be5289non-compliant by the agency. This lack of Federal oversight before a5290device is deemed compliant results in carriers purchasing ELDs that are5291later deemed non-compliant and then having to replace those devices.5292The volatility of removing ELDs from the list of registered devices5293places additional burdens on motor carriers who may not have realized5294their selected ELD was non-compliant.5295    Additionally, relying on compliant ELDs is key to effective5296enforcement of the hours-of-service regulations, which exist to help5297prevent and manage driver fatigue. ELDs make it easier for inspectors5298to identify violations and take unsafe, non-compliant carriers and5299drivers off the roadways, all while saving time for both enforcement5300and industry.5301    Establishing a certification process administered by FMCSA would5302address the issues with self-certification while providing motor5303carriers with a more reliable list of eligible devices.5304Applicability of Drug and Alcohol Testing Requirements5305    Impaired driving continues to be an issue that negatively impacts5306safety on our roadways, and CVSA maintains that continued enforcement5307of impaired driving standards for both drugs and alcohol use is a key5308component of CMV safety programs. In its written testimony, ATA5309identified improvements to drug testing as a solution to address a rise5310in impaired driving. Additionally, Senator Lujan used part of his time5311to ask the panelists about impairment and drug and alcohol testing,5312highlighting the need to address this safety issue. Impaired driving5313remains a threat to roadway safety, and resources devoted to rigorous5314enforcement of impaired driving standards are needed.5315    Currently, compliance with the drug and alcohol testing and5316reporting requirements in 49 CFR Part 382 apply only to CDL drivers,5317excluding drivers operating the 11 million non-CDL CMVs on the Nation's5318roadways. Non-CDL CMVs weigh between 10,001 and 26,000 pounds, and5319examples include large box trucks, large truck-trailer combinations and5320passenger carrying vehicles that seat 9-15 passengers.5321    When a CDL-driver has a positive drug or alcohol test result, the5322result is placed in the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse where motor5323carriers can view if a driver is in a prohibited status and therefore5324unable to operate a CMV in interstate commerce. In order to have their5325prohibition rescinded, the disqualified driver must complete a return-5326to-duty process.5327    However, data from FMCSA shows that of 296,021 drivers with at5328least one drug and alcohol program violation, there are 186,3375329prohibited drivers in the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse, and only5330109,684 drivers have completed the return-to-duty process and are no5331longer in a prohibited status.\3\ In addition, we are seeing instances5332where motor carriers hiring for a non-CDL CMV driver position5333unknowingly hire a driver in a prohibited status, placing these unsafe5334drivers back on the roadway. Those motor carriers are then penalized5335for unknowingly hiring a driver in a prohibited status when those5336drivers are stopped for inspection. However, because the requirements5337in 49 CFR Part 382 do not apply to non-CDL drivers, those motor5338carriers are not required to check their status in the Drug and Alcohol5339Clearinghouse.5340---------------------------------------------------------------------------5341    \3\ April 2025 Monthly Summary Report. Drug and Alcohol5342Clearinghouse. FMCSA. April 2025. https://clearinghouse.fmcsa.dot.gov/5343content/resources/Clearinghouse_MonthlyReport_April20255344.pdf, p. 95345---------------------------------------------------------------------------5346    Recent data from FMCSA shows an increase in crashes and fatalities5347in the non-CDL CMV sector. For example, from 2021 to 2022, the number5348of CMVs involved in a fatal crash with a weight rating between 10,0015349and 14,000 pounds increased 4 percent.\4\ Additionally, FMCSA has5350observed increases every year since 2016 of fatal crashes involving5351large trucks with a weight rating between 10,001 and 14,000 pounds.\5\5352---------------------------------------------------------------------------5353    \4\ Commercial Motor Vehicle Crash Data Overview. FMCSA. December53542024. https://www5355.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/fmcsa.dot.gov/files/2024-12/5356Commercial%20Motor%20Vehicle%2Crash%205357Data%20Overview%20508.pdf, p. 155358    \5\ Commercial Motor Vehicle Crash Data Overview. FMCSA. December53592024. https://www5360.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/fmcsa.dot.gov/files/2024-12/5361Commercial%20Motor%20Vehicle%20Crash%536220Data%20Overview%20508.pdf, p. 175363---------------------------------------------------------------------------5364    Drivers that fail to comply with the drug and alcohol requirements5365pose a significant risk to all motorists. If being in a prohibited5366status within the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse disqualifies a driver5367from operating any CMV, then all CMV drivers should be subject to the5368drug and alcohol testing and reporting requirements found in the safety5369regulations. CVSA supports expanding the applicability of the drug and5370alcohol testing and reporting requirements in 49 CFR Part 382 to5371include non-CDL CMV drivers.5372Hazardous Materials Safety Grant Improvements5373    The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)5374administers multiple grant programs that provide funding for recipients5375to train and conduct outreach to first responders, communities and5376hazardous materials industry safety professionals. Specifically, the5377Hazardous Materials Instructor Training (HMIT), Assistance for Local5378Emergency Response Training (ALERT) and Community Safety grants are5379separate grant programs that target different stakeholder groups,5380despite sharing a common mission of training stakeholders on hazardous5381materials safety. These existing hazardous materials safety training5382grants should be consolidated into a single training grant. Combining5383these related grant programs into one training grant improves5384efficiency of the grant process, allowing PHMSA to better fund quality5385grant applications and provides grantees with flexibility to meet the5386most pressing training needs, while reducing the administrative burden5387for both PHMSA and the grantees.5388    In addition, due to the shared goals of the grants, many grant5389recipients receive funding from multiple grants to fund various5390training programs. For example, five non-profit organizations received5391funding from multiple grants as part of the fiscal 2024 awards across5392the various programs. Currently, if a recipient receives funding from5393two different grant programs, they have to submit separate funding5394proposals, track expenses for each grant separately and submit separate5395reports to the agency. This also doubles the amount of administrative5396work for the agency, as they have to oversee these steps of the grant5397process. By consolidating the grant programs, grant recipients can5398redirect the resources dedicated to the administrative tasks of5399multiple grants to the mission of hazardous materials safety and PHMSA5400can more efficiently manage and administer their grant programs.5401Consolidation also allows more flexibility for grant recipients. By5402combining the funding into one grant, funding can be dedicated to5403projects that comprehensively address current needs. Under the current5404structure, grant applicants must create projects that fit the narrow5405requirements of each grant and funding levels are tied to the specific5406grant criteria.5407Conclusion5408    As Congress begins its work on surface transportation5409reauthorization, it is important to use this as an opportunity to5410address and prioritize challenges confronting the CMV industry.5411Congress can ensure that enforcement has the tools necessary to enforce5412safety regulations and improve roadway safety by implementing a5413universal electronic vehicle identifier, making improvements to the5414Enforcement Training and Support Grant, and creating flexibility in the5415Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program. CVSA encourages the committee5416to consider its additional recommendations on personal conveyance,5417motor carrier qualification standards, the New Entrant Safety Audit5418Program, expanding CDLPI eligibility, ELD certification, the5419applicability of drug and alcohol testing requirements and hazardous5420materials safety grants. Each of the Alliance's recommendations aligns5421with the Subcommittee's task of examining issues to improve the safety5422of the CMV industry and the Nation's roadways.5423                                 ______54245425     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to5426                              Chris Spear5427Autonomous Vehicles5428    Question. During the hearing you voiced support for the further5429adoption of autonomous vehicles and noted the safety benefits of5430automation, along with the increases in efficiency and productivity the5431technology can bring.5432    Mr. Spear, can you provide further information on the benefits of5433the driverless operation of commercial motor vehicles with Level 4 and5434Level 5 automated driving systems? We have already seen driver-out5435testing and deployment of Level 4 vehicles on some roads in Texas, when5436can we expect wider driver-out deployment of driverless Level 45437vehicles and what can this Committee due to support the AV trucking5438industry going forward?5439    Answer. First, it is important to clarify the types of automation5440when discussing AV policy. SAE defines levels of automation based on5441the degree to which it can control the vehicle. SAE levels 1-3 provide5442limited degrees of control and require a human driver. SAE levels 4-55443are driverless and do not require a human to be engaged with the5444driving task while automation is engaged. ATA sees potential benefits5445to both driver assistance automation (SAE levels 1-3) and driverless5446automation (SAE levels 4-5) in terms of safety and efficiency. However,5447there are some unique challenges for developing, testing, and deploying5448level 4 automation in commercial vehicles. It is important that we are5449able to continue to develop and test level 4 automation in order to5450learn where it may be able to improve commercial vehicle operations and5451under what conditions.5452    The testing and very limited deployments of Level 4 driverless5453commercial vehicles in Texas and other Southwest U.S. corridors is5454promising. But these are not enough to fully understand the safety of5455driverless commercial vehicles, their operational requirements, or how5456the technology can ultimately be integrated into our supply chain5457effectively. We need a Federal framework for AV testing and deployment5458to facilitate these efforts, particularly for commercial vehicles. A5459Federal framework allows for transparency and consistency in how AV are5460tested and deployed regardless of the types of vehicles, types of5461operations, or geographic locations. This lets all road users, our5462fleet members included, understand where the technology shows potential5463and decide if and how it could be beneficial in commercial vehicle5464transportation. A Federal framework also helps ensure consistency5465between states in how AV are tested and deployed, which is critical for5466facilitating long haul automated commercial vehicle deployments. We5467recommend that the committee direct the Department of Transportation to5468create and manage such a framework, and to ensure that the DOT has the5469resources necessary to collect, organize, and disseminate data on AV5470deployments.5471Outdated Regulations5472    Question. Outdated and overly burdensome regulations continue to5473hinder progress in both safety and innovation--particularly in the5474surface transportation sector. The upcoming surface transportation5475reauthorization presents a key opportunity to revisit and modernize5476these regulations under the FMCSA purview.5477    Mr. Spear, can you highlight any technologies your members are5478using that can increase safety? And are there specific regulations that5479you or your members have encountered that could be updated or reformed5480to better support safety advancements and innovation in this industry?5481    Answer. ATA members actively leverage a range of safety-enhancing5482technologies and innovations--from automatic emergency braking (AEB)5483and collision mitigation systems. ATA is a strong supporter of AEB5484technologies for their life-saving abilities, and Congress has directed5485USDOT to mandate AEB on heavy duty commercial vehicles. We look forward5486to working with USDOT to finalize a mandate that is aligned with5487Congressional direction and supports a higher standard of safety on our5488Nation's roadways. We also support the industry-wide adoption of5489electronic logging devices (ELDs), which have cut Hours of Service5490violations by more than 50 percent--representing significantly fewer5491instances of fatigued driving on U.S. roads. Yet in many cases,5492outdated regulations hinder full deployment of safety technologies and5493innovations--some of these with common sense solutions. For example,5494drivers are still required to carry printed ELD manuals and backup5495paper logs, despite the widespread availability of digital5496alternatives.5497    Similarly, current rules mandate that drivers exit their vehicles,5498sometimes in risky roadway conditions, to manually place reflective5499warning triangles when stopped roadside--a decades-old requirement that5500increases risk to the driver and fails to recognize modern, vehicle-5501integrated lighting technologies that can perform the same function5502more safely and effectively. This warning triangle regulation has also5503stymied the full deployment of autonomous commercial trucking--a5504promising piece of the puzzle when thinking about how to make our5505Nation's roadways safer.5506    In addition to these technology-related reforms, ATA has5507recommended non-technology-based updates, including commonsense5508improvements to the Commercial Driver's License (CDL) process. These5509include allowing third-party knowledge testing, permitting states to5510test out-of-state applicants, and enabling Commercial Learner's Permit5511holders who have passed their skills test to operate under supervision5512while awaiting credentialing. These changes would help alleviate5513workforce bottlenecks without compromising safety. We also recommended5514that FMCSA eliminate outdated requirements like the rear underride5515guard certification label, which serves no safety purpose once a5516trailer is in service.5517    We're grateful to Secretary Duffy, FMCSA, and the broader5518Administration for moving swiftly on several of ATA's recommendations,5519including the proposal to remove the outdated requirement for hard-copy5520ELD materials and rear underride labels. We're encouraged by this5521momentum and look forward to continuing our work together to modernize5522the regulatory landscape in a way that enhances safety, supports5523innovation, and improves industry efficiency.5524Freight Fraud and Abuse5525    Question. In my opening statement I mentioned the prevalence of5526freight fraud and cargo theft. To summarize, Congress needs to act to5527prevent this pervasive practice from continuing.5528    Mr. Spear, how significant is this problem for your members and how5529can Congress partner with industry to combat this issue?5530    Answer. This is a significant problem, and I am grateful to you for5531shining a light on this issue by holding a subcommittee hearing in5532February to consider its impact. Freight fraud and cargo theft impacts5533motor carriers of all sizes and specializations and is a threat to5534America's national security and economic resilience. We are grateful5535for your ongoing leadership on this issue.5536    Freight-related fraud and cargo theft have become increasingly5537sophisticated and costly, posing serious risks to supply chain5538integrity and motor carrier operations. As ATA members report growing5539incidents of double brokering scams, identity theft, and fictitious5540pickups--often orchestrated by bad actors exploiting gaps in the5541current registration system administered by FMCSA--ATA continues to5542elevate our focus on this issue. Cargo theft is no longer a problem to5543be handled on a one-off basis. Rather, cargo theft is now a criminal5544enterprise that has resulted in billions of dollars in lost goods.5545Since the first quarter of 2021, strategic theft has risen 1,5005546percent. From electronics to clothing to food, nearly every industry5547has been hit and consumers experience the consequences at the cash5548register. Cargo theft costs the American economy up to $35 billion per5549year with an average value per theft of more than $200,000.5550    These thieves show no signs of slowing down with cargo theft5551incidents reported during the first quarter of this year, a 36 percent5552increase compared with Q1 2024. This figure is likely much higher given5553the nature of cargo theft and fraud reporting in the industry and5554limited data collection on the law enforcement side.5555    One of the most alarming aspects is the way in which these criminal5556operations have become more sophisticated. Thieves are using advanced5557technology to track shipments, identify routes, and even disrupt5558communication systems to exploit weaknesses in the supply chain.5559Whether it is tricking motor carriers or drivers into delivering5560freight to thieves or striking poorly secured distribution centers,5561these criminals are taking advantage of any opening they can find. Not5562only can registration and other forms of cyber-related freight fraud5563lead to cargo theft, but it also results in significant loss of5564industry and employee efficiency when numerous hours are lost to5565undoing operational, reputational, and other business damage.5566    This issue is particularly urgent for small and mid-size carriers5567who lack the resources to absorb these losses, navigate a fragmented5568fraud-reporting system, or put the extensive security protocols in5569place to prevent becoming a victim in the first place. Congress can5570play a critical role by partnering with industry to modernize broker5571registration and oversight requirements, ensure FMCSA dedicates5572appropriate resources to enforcement and fraud prevention, and support5573interagency coordination with law enforcement. FMCSA is already in the5574process of modernizing its registration and other cyber systems to weed5575out and prevent fraud in the trucking industry while creating a more5576seamless user experience for motor carriers. ATA applauds and supports5577the agency's efforts. We also encourage Congress to consider5578establishing clearer authority for FMCSA to act against fraudulent5579brokers and to increase transparency in the freight marketplace--5580without undermining the commercial flexibility that allows legitimate5581brokers and carriers to operate efficiently.5582    ATA has been grateful for bipartisan support of legislation such as5583the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act, which is currently pending5584before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We stand ready to work with this5585committee on legislative solutions to strengthen DOT and FMCSA programs5586to address fraud and theft, while preserving the functionality of a5587competitive freight market.5588                                 ______55895590   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to5591                              Chris Spear5592Potential Tariff on Commercial Vehicles and Commercial Vehicle Parts5593    Manufacturing supply chains in North America are deeply integrated.5594Parts and components sometimes travel back and forth multiple times5595between the United States, Canada, and Mexico before final5596manufacturing. When President Trump threatened 25 percent Tariffs on5597trade with these countries, the American Trucking Associations5598estimated this could increase the cost of new trucks by $35,000.55995600    Question 1. What would higher prices on new vehicles, or their5601parts, mean for your members?5602    Answer. Motor carriers do not have the ability to absorb the5603significant price increases, nor can they easily pass along additional5604tariff-related costs to their customers. Trucking is a highly5605competitive business with more than 550,000 fleets in the U.S. Most of5606those fleets are small. In fact, 95.5 percent of motor carriers have 105607or fewer trucks. Intense competition among those companies leads to5608very lean profit margins, with most fleets netting 5 percent or less in5609a normal year. This business is one of the few where the pool of5610competitors is not limited by size or location, with small fleets5611competing against large ones and east coast-based companies competing5612with those based on the west coast. This commonly results in5613underbidding, which strains margins and reduces the flexibility to pass5614along increased operating costs to customers.5615    As an example of this intense competition and the impacts, just5616look at industry trends over the last couple of years. After the5617initial boom in freight during the early part of the global Covid-195618pandemic, truck freight slowed dramatically. Households that were5619buying appliances and other household goods when travel was difficult5620pivoted to spending dramatically more on experiences including travel.5621As a result, trucking experienced a prolonged freight recession, where5622freight volumes contracted, freight rates fell, and the costs of5623operating a truck continued to rise. These trends pushed many fleets5624out of business and created financial hardship for those that remained.5625    During this period of falling volumes and contracting freight5626rates, motor carriers faced much higher costs. According to the5627American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), the cost to operate5628a truck one mile, excluding fuel, surged over 19 percent in just a5629couple of years. As previously mentioned, it is difficult for carriers5630to pass along these added expenses particularly when freight rates are5631declining. To preserve financial flexibility in the face of higher5632truck prices, fleets frequently chose to cut or postpone truck5633purchases.5634    If forced to adapt to increasing costs due to Section 232 tariffs,5635many fleets will likely choose to hold on to older equipment and5636extended trade cycles. While this is not ideal, and likely to cause5637some operational challenges, it is not unreasonable for them to extend5638trade cycles. In 2024 the average age of the active Class 8 truck fleet5639was 5.69 years, equivalent to the average of this measure over the last5640ten years and 4.4 percent below the average over the last 20 years.5641    In short: carriers are not keeping their trucks for as long as they5642used to, suggesting that many fleets have the ability to maintain their5643current equipment and can extend their trade cycles. This really would5644be the only option for most motor carriers since absorbing higher truck5645prices and passing them along to customers is not feasible.56465647    Question 2. How would a tariff on imported commercial vehicle parts5648impact the cost of purchasing and repairing commercial vehicles?5649    Answer. In recent years, due to several factors including5650environmental regulations, the price of new Class 8 tractors has5651surged. In fact, a recent analysis from the American Transportation5652Research Institute (ATRI) showed that the average purchase price of new5653Class 8 trucks has surged from less than $130,000 in 2014 to $170,0005654in 2023. Even more compelling, that increase was most significant5655between 2021 and 2023, with the average price jumping 21 percent from5656roughly $140,000 to $170,000. Based on those current prices, ATA5657estimates that if a 25 percent tariff was applied to imported heavy-5658duty Class 8 tractors from Mexico, with no rebates for U.S. or USMCA5659content, the price of that tractor could increase by $30,000 or more.5660    On top of those costs, motor carriers are also required to pay a5661Federal excise tax (FET) on the sale of new truck equipment. The FET on5662heavy-duty trucks is 12 percent of the purchase price. With a new Class56638 truck costing an average of $170,000 (likely higher in 2025), a 255664percent tariff applied to all new trucks from Mexico would increase the5665retail price to $200,000. This means that trucking companies would have5666to pay the 12 percent FET on the post-tariff price of $200,000, not5667$170,000. That brings the total price of a new truck, on average, to5668$224,000, which is simply cost prohibitive for most trucking companies.5669These numbers do not account for any maintenance costs, which would5670increase if the price for new parts increases, or the potential surge5671in insurances prices because of increased equipment costs.5672    It should again be noted that trucking companies operate on very5673thin profit margins, leaving them with extremely limited ability to5674absorb higher prices. In 2023, the latest data available, most5675truckload sub-sectors, who buy a significant percentage of new5676tractors, saw their average operating margins plummet to low single-5677digits. In that same year, the less-than-truckload (LTL) sector, which5678tends to have better margins, still only posted 12 percent operating5679margins.56805681    Question 3. If it is more expensive to maintain and replace parts5682on commercial vehicles, would there be an impact on safety on our5683roads?5684    Answer. Absolutely. As motor carriers extend the lives of their5685trucks, it is likely that the highways will become less safe than they5686would have been under normal buying rates. Newer trucks are equipped5687with more advanced safety technology such as anti-lock braking systems,5688advanced emergency braking, forward collision warning, and electronic5689stability control, which makes them safer to drive and helps avoid5690accidents. A Section 232 tariff would likely impair highway safety5691progress if carriers are discouraged from purchasing new trucks due to5692high prices.5693    Additionally, as larger fleets buy new trucks, they sell their5694three-to five-year-old trucks on the secondhand market. Smaller fleets5695often buy these trucks to replace the older ones that they operate.5696This cycle of purchasing used equipment benefits smaller carriers that5697cannot afford new trucks and contributes to the improvement in highway5698safety by allowing those smaller fleets to affordably phase out still-5699older equipment. However, if larger fleets slow their purchases of new5700equipment, this cycle will be interrupted and smaller fleets won't have5701the access to a sufficient supply of newer used trucks, thus further5702impairing safety on America's roadways.5703Freight Infrastructure Investments5704    American businesses spend over $2 trillion annually on logistics5705costs. Highway congestion increases truck transportation costs by over5706$100 billion each year. Driving down these costs will allow businesses5707to hire more people and will decrease the costs of goods at the grocery5708store.5709    In the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, I created the Mega grants5710program, which is tackling some of the worst congestion choke points in5711the nation, like the I-5 Bridge in WA, which is the 31st worst truck5712bottleneck in the nation, and the Brent Spence Bridge, which is the571315th worst truck bottleneck according to your organization.57145715    Question 1. Do you think we need to continue funding the mega5716projects grant program in the next surface reauthorization?5717    Answer. As you point out, highway congestion imposes very high5718direct costs on the trucking industry, which are ultimately passed on5719to consumers and make U.S. farmers and manufacturers less competitive5720globally. Congestion also reduces supply chain reliability, which5721imposes additional costs on shippers. The American Transportation5722Research Institute (ATRI) has identified the top 100 highway5723bottlenecks nationwide. These bottlenecks are responsible for a5724disproportionate share of freight congestion costs. Addressing these5725bottlenecks often requires a significant investment, one that states5726may not be able to cover on their own. The Mega Grant program, with its5727focus on projects with significant national or regional impacts and5728high project costs, is ideally situated to help move major bottleneck5729projects forward, and ATA supports its continued funding, with5730additional resources. ATA also supports creation of a new discretionary5731program focused solely on addressing the most costly highway5732bottlenecks.5733                                 ______57345735   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to5736                              Chris Spear5737Distracted Driving Prevention5738    In your testimony, you described the need to combat distracted5739driving among all roadway users. In 2021, I passed my SAFE to DRIVE Act5740to provide additional funding to states to enforce distracted driving5741laws.57425743    Question 1. Can you expand on the importance of law enforcement in5744addressing distracted driving?5745    Answer. Enforcement is a critical tool for reducing distracted5746driving. However, its effectiveness relies on two key factors. First,5747laws must be clear, simple, and enforceable. Law enforcement must be5748able to utilize statutes and act when a driver is actively holding or5749visibly using a device while driving. Distracted driving laws that5750focus only on certain activities like talking or texting with5751exceptions for certain applications or utilities, such as GPS mapping5752or making phone calls, or that provide distracted driving as a5753secondary offense make enforcement of these laws challenging, if not5754impossible in some scenarios. Additionally, laws that are well-5755written--clear, simple, and enforceable--allow for outreach and5756education that amplifies the effects of enforcement. Clear and simple5757laws are much easier to message to educate the public on the dangers of5758distracted driving, how they can comply with the law, and the legal and5759financial consequences for failing to do so. Based on the realities of5760limited staffing and resources, enforcement can only direct eyes on a5761small portion of drivers only part of the time. However, amplified5762outreach efforts allow law enforcement's efforts to motivate a much5763larger audience to remain safe and focused while behind the wheel.5764    The State of Ohio recently passed updated distracted driving laws--5765backed by strong support from the state's legislature, governor, and5766executive agencies--which has led to sizable reductions in distracted5767driving and crashes in their state. Two years after Ohio's handheld-5768device ban became enforceable as a primary offense (effective April57692023), the tougher distracted-driving law led to an 8 percent decline5770in crashes, 3 percent fewer injuries, and a 4 percent reduction in5771fatalities statewide after two years. In the first full year of5772enforcement alone (October 2023--October 2024), the state saw 1,1125773fewer distracted-driving crashes and a 19.4 percent drop in fatal5774crashes, around 138 lives saved. This law and enforcement gains5775corresponded with nearly 15,400 fewer overall motor-vehicle crashes5776year-over-year, underscoring the law's early success. However, these5777results did not require a significant increase in actual enforcement5778efforts as the clear language of the statute and effective messaging by5779the state to drivers was enough to drive measurable change.5780    Additionally, ATA is a member of the National Distracted Driving5781Coalition and recommends the committee reach out to the Coalition for5782more information on Ohio's efforts specifically or for more information5783on best practices around laws, policies, outreach, and analysis. ATA5784has assembled its own Distracted Driving Working Group charged with5785examining how the trucking industry can play a role in ensuring fewer5786instances of distraction on our Nation's roadways among all types of5787drivers.57885789    Question 2. In addition to law enforcement, what other efforts can5790be made to prevent distracted driving in the trucking industry?5791    Answer. Much like enforcement, commercial fleets and the trucking5792industry rely on outreach to amply efforts to prevent distracted5793driving. Increasingly, commercial drivers report witnessing passenger5794car drivers distracted--whether that be using a device, eating, or5795applying makeup--on our Nation's roadways, posing an increased risk of5796crash especially when driving in the proximity of a large truck.5797Informing the public of the risks associated with distracted driving5798near large trucks--let alone how to drive while focused on the road5799near a large truck--is critical. However, fleets often lack resources5800for distracted driving prevention and messaging to the broader driving5801public. Additionally, fleets must focus on educating and protecting5802their own drivers. They may set internal policies based on local laws,5803rely on outreach produced by others to educate their drivers, and/or5804have limited opportunities to conduct that outreach face to face. By5805bolstering the resources and attention given to distracted driving laws5806and the outreach surrounding those laws, we also improve the resources5807for fleets to update their policies and outreach. It is also worth5808noting that the best practices around commercial vehicle distracted5809driving are still being developed. Many ATA members have adopted5810driver-facing cameras which can detect handheld device use. Fleets are5811still developing their policies around cameras, trying to balance5812safety with legitimate concerns about privacy, security, and liability.5813Outreach efforts can go beyond the general public to help identify and5814highlight best practices around in the trucking industry and how new5815technologies are reducing distracted driving in trucks.5816                                 ______58175818  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to5819                              Chris Spear5820Truck Parking5821    In 2023 a Greyhound bus traveling westbound on I-70 from5822Indianapolis, Indiana to St. Louis, Missouri experienced a deadly crash5823in Highland, Illinois while exiting at a rest area. The bus crashed5824into three trucks which were parked on the shoulder of the exit ramp.5825Three bus passengers were killed. The driver and 11 of the other5826passengers were injured.5827    NTSB found that a contributing factor was the three trucks parked5828on the shoulder of the exit ramp. The lack of available truck parking5829remains a major problem, not just for the trucking industry, but for5830the traveling public, as this horrible incident so tragically5831illustrates.5832    Last Congress, Senators Lummis and Kelly introduced the Truck5833Parking Safety Improvement Act to provide Federal grants to expand5834parking for commercial trucks. I joined several of my colleagues on5835both sides of the aisle in cosponsoring this bill, but unfortunately it5836didn't pass.58375838    Question 1. As Congress works on the next Surface Transportation5839Reauthorization bill, what would you recommend we do to increase truck5840parking across the country, and how would you recommend we pay for it?5841    Answer. The lack of truck parking is a perennial challenge, and5842each year truck drivers identify it as their number one or two concern.5843According to the USDOT, 98 percent of truck drivers state that they5844regularly have difficulty finding a safe place to park for the night.5845This is an issue that impacts not only highway safety but also supply5846chain productivity and workforce development for the trucking industry.5847It is hard to attract the next generation of truck driver (particularly5848women, who only account for 7 percent of drivers currently on the road)5849to enter the profession if those individuals cannot be guaranteed5850access to safe, well-lit facilities.5851    ATA is extremely grateful for your support of the Truck Parking5852Safety Improvement Act in the previous Congress. We continue to believe5853that this legislation to ensure dedicated Federal investment in the5854construction of safe truck parking spaces nationwide is the best5855solution to the parking problem. We strongly support its5856reintroduction, and we strongly encourage you and your colleagues to5857support its passage. Funding should come from the Highway Trust Fund,5858either as a new, standalone discretionary program or a set-aside from5859an existing discretionary program.5860                                 ______58615862   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to5863                              Chris Spear5864Side Underride Guards5865    In your written testimony, you call for the deployment of quote5866``proven safety technologies''. I'd like to call attention to one5867simple, lifesaving technology--side underride guards. In 2017, the5868Insurance Institute for Highway Safety conducted crash tests of5869trailers equipped with side underride guards at 35 mph and 40 mph. The5870test results demonstrate that the side underride guards prevented5871lethal passenger compartment intrusion, thereby saving lives.58725873    Question 1. If you support the deployment of proven safety5874technologies, under what circumstances would ATA support deployment of5875side underride guards?5876    Answer. The testing conducted by IIHS and other groups on vehicular5877underride is encouraging, but we do not believe it is sufficient to5878establish a mandate. As noted by NHTSA, most of these devices are still5879being tested and are not yet commercially available. We also think it5880is unlikely that side underride protection for vehicles can be5881effective at higher speeds, as the energy that must be absorbed is too5882great for the materials and structures that are in current designs.5883This does not mean we are against side underride deployment. We support5884efforts for further research and testing into their effectiveness, and5885we think deployments are extremely helpful in learning more about their5886real-world performance and design requirements.5887    In our comments responding to the NHTSA NPRM, we pointed out that5888if side underride guards are unlikely to be effective at higher speeds,5889some degree of crash prevention or mitigation would also be necessary5890to reduce the energy of the impact. These systems, such as Automatic5891Emergency Braking, are much more effective at reducing speed and energy5892compared to an impact guard. Our main point is that as side impact5893guards for vehicles continue to be tested and developed, we should5894focus efforts on safety technologies which could prevent or mitigate5895these types of crashes prior to impact. These technologies are5896available today, are relatively mature, but lack standardization in5897performance and testing.5898    Regarding a mandate, ATA pointed out that trucking is not a5899monolith, and that there are many kinds of trucks, trailers, and5900operations. A mandate, particularly a broad one covering all newly5901manufactured trucks, would need to consider all these different types5902of vehicles and their operations. In the proposed mandate, any truck in5903any kind of operation would need to meet whatever minimum performance5904requirements would have been set forth. This would include dry vans,5905tankers, flatbeds, auto haulers, grain hoppers, dry bulk tanks, or any5906other type of vehicle. A mandate is only as effective as its minimum5907performance requirements, and much greater breadth of testing would be5908required to establish performance across all these different5909configurations.5910    We also pointed out that all configurations of vehicles with low5911clearance must be careful around high-grade crossings, especially rail5912crossings. Some ATA members have stopped using aerodynamic skirts on5913the sides of certain vehicles for exactly this reason, despite their5914fuel economy benefits. These devices were getting stuck or damaged at5915rail crossings or on customer loading docks that have steep grades.5916This is a problem which engineers can potentially solve by developing5917appropriate design requirements. However, there was no consideration in5918the proposed mandate for whether the side impact designs would meet5919this safety requirement, or how changing designs to meet this5920requirement would impact performance.59215922    Question 2. Do you agree that side underrides guards on trucks save5923lives?5924    Answer. Yes, but as shown in the NHTSA analysis only a portion of5925vehicle crashes involving side underride occur at speeds at which5926guards have been tested. As noted above, we see side underride5927protection as one of several potential ways to address these types of5928crashes. We see driver assistance technologies such as AEB as more5929mature, applicable in more types of crashes, and ultimately more5930effective at this time. We fully support additional testing and5931development of side underride guards to better understand their5932performance, including design requirements to address the kinds of5933issues described above.5934Inclusion of Vulnerable Road Users in NHTSA's Cost Benefit Analysis5935    A draft DOT report concluded that regulations requiring side5936underride guards were cost beneficial. According to a whistleblower and5937news reports, ATA lobbied DOT to alter the draft report. Subsequently5938the language and numbers of the draft report were altered. The draft5939report's cost benefit analysis concluded that preventing the deaths of5940vulnerable road users by requiring side underride guards was cost5941beneficial. Unfortunately, this life-saving research was not officially5942published.5943    NHTSA has a pending Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on side5944underride guards, which would protect the lives of automobile5945occupants, as well as vulnerable road users like pedestrians,5946bicyclists and motorcyclists. NHTSA made assumptions in their cost5947benefit analysis to exclude whole categories of preventable deaths.5948Consequently, preventing the deaths by truck underride of vulnerable5949road users such as pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists was not5950even considered in the ANPRM's cost-benefit analysis. As a result of5951that and other omissions, NHTSA erroneously concluded that the cost of5952installing side guards exceeded the benefits.59535954    Question 1. Do you agree that vulnerable road users should be5955included in these statistics, which would likely change the cost5956benefit analysis?5957    Answer. The engineering involved in preventing a vulnerable road5958user (VRU) underride is very different from that of preventing5959vehicular underride. We think a separate analysis for vulnerable road5960users is a better approach, so that solutions specific to VRUs (such as5961the Lateral Protection Device developed by Volpe) can have their cost/5962benefit analyzed. The lower energy of impacts involved in VRU crashes5963also means there is more design flexibility for addressing operational5964requirements, including those described above. The geography of VRU5965crashes also means that efforts can be targeted to surface streets5966where VRU encounters are more prevalent, rather than on the highways5967where VRU encounters are rare. We recognize that side guards for VRU5968have been adopted in Europe and many other locations, and we are ready5969to work with stakeholders on addressing these crashes here in the U.S.5970Our role, as experts on the equipment and their operation, is to help5971convey the operational requirements of our freight network. Trucking is5972not one size fits all so, when introducing any safety technologies, we5973recommend focusing on use cases with the highest exposure to risk and5974lowest barriers to adoption.5975                                 ______59765977    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to5978                               Lewie Pugh5979    OOIDA represents small trucking businesses, which currently make up5980over 96 percent of registered motor carriers in the U.S. Like many5981small businesses, owner-operators and small trucking fleets operate on5982the slimmest of margins. When costs unexpectedly arise, these margins5983become even smaller, making it challenging to remain profitable. Even5984nominal cost increases can force some operators out of business5985entirely.5986    One controversial issue currently being debated is whether Congress5987should increase truck size and weight limits in the next Highway Bill.5988I have seen information from OOIDA stating that it could cost an owner-5989operator upwards of $10,500 to add axles to a truck to operate at599091,000 pounds--an increase from the current limit of 80,000 pounds that5991is being proposed by some in Congress. I am assuming extra weight would5992also increase the cost of fuel and general wear and tear for small5993trucking businesses.59945995    Can you explain your concerns about increasing the size and weight5996limits of trucks, as well as the financial and real-world impacts it5997would have on small business truckers specifically?5998    Answer. Increasing size and weight is all cost and no benefit for5999truckers. Proponents of weight increases portray new limits as optional6000and maintain that carriers won't have to haul at these weights if they6001don't want to do so. But inevitably, the higher limits become the new6002standard as businesses and shippers seek out carriers that offer the6003increased capacity. As you point out, the cost to upgrade equipment6004would be prohibitive for many small-business truckers. Unlike6005specialized or large carriers, who either possess the necessary6006equipment or could transition their fleets over time while maintaining6007business, smaller trucking companies and owner-operators would be6008forced to immediately modify their equipment at great cost just to6009remain viable.6010    Even if small trucking operations pay for upgrades, our experience6011has shown that they rarely see a return on this investment. This was6012demonstrated during a House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee6013hearing earlier this year. One of the Nation's largest retailers said6014that if they could put more weight on a truck hauling their product,6015they would not increase pay for truckers hauling additional freight.6016                                 ______60176018     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to6019                               Lewie Pugh6020Outdated Regulations6021    Outdated and overly burdensome regulations continue to hinder6022progress in both safety and innovation--particularly in the surface6023transportation sector. The upcoming surface transportation6024reauthorization presents a key opportunity to revisit and modernize6025these regulations under the FMCSA purview.60266027    Mr. Pugh, can you highlight any technologies your members are using6028that can increase safety? And are there specific regulations that you6029or your members have encountered that could be updated or reformed to6030better support safety advancements and innovation in this industry?6031    The best way to increase safety is to properly train drivers. While6032there is a role for proven, cost-effective technology solutions, safety6033starts with the driver. At a minimum, Congress must require 30 hours6034behind-the-wheel training for those seeking a commercial driver's6035license (CDL). Additionally, lawmakers should pass S. 2114, which would6036require drivers demonstrate English language proficiency before being6037licensed and require CDL testing be conducted only in English. These6038are simple solutions that would have a more profound impact on highway6039safety than unproven technologies that have been marketed as safety6040devices.6041    The electronic logging device (ELD) mandate imposed by Congress has6042done nothing to improve safety. In fact, crash rates continue to move6043in the wrong direction since the implementation of the ELD mandate. Our6044members have consistently indicated ELDs increase their stress,6045reporting a constant sense of `fighting the clock' to complete a haul6046or find a safe place to park before running out of allowable driving6047hours under rigid hours-of-service rules. Large motor carriers6048convinced lawmakers--many who now tout their support for deregulation--6049that ELDs would dramatically improve safety. However, there is no6050indication the mandate has done anything to deliver on those promises.6051The time has come to repeal the ELD mandate.6052    The development of autonomous vehicles (AVs) and Automated Driving6053Systems (ADS)-Equipped CMVs have the potential to drastically change6054the trucking industry, in particular its workforce. We feel elected6055officials, Federal regulators, and our industry partners must develop6056AV policies in a responsible manner that considers the perspective of6057American truckers, as we have yet to see any assurances that AVs can6058operate as safe as human drivers on our Nation's roads. While AVs might6059improve safety under certain conditions, they create new risks with6060dangerous outcomes.6061    Over the last several years, the U.S. Department of Transportation6062(DOT) agencies have pursued respective rulemakings to ``ensure'' the6063safe introduction of ADS-equipped CMVs onto the Nation's roadways. Many6064of the questions included in these proposals remain hypothetical in6065nature and OOIDA has questioned why DOT has chosen to focus on6066regulations that may or may not be necessary depending how the6067technology performs. These regulatory proposals seem destined to fail6068without more concrete data about how AVs will function and how they6069will impact highway safety, the transportation workforce, and national6070security. OOIDA supports mandatory testing, safety, and crash reporting6071requirements that will provide the public with direct and easy access6072to information about AV performance.6073Freight Fraud and Abuse6074    In my opening statement I mentioned the prevalence of freight fraud6075and cargo theft. To summarize, Congress needs to act to prevent this6076pervasive practice from continuing.60776078    Mr. Pugh, how significant is this problem for your members and how6079can Congress partner with industry to combat this issue?6080    Answer. Freight fraud is a serious and growing problem for small-6081business truckers. This Committee has already taken a significant step6082towards fighting freight fraud by passing S. 337, the Household Goods6083Shipping Consumer Protection Act. It is imperative this legislation be6084signed into law.6085    In the potential absence of regulatory improvements, Congress must6086also ensure brokers are compliant with existing Federal rules involving6087transparency. Circumventing or evading these requirements has led to a6088lack of transparency in the supply chain, which makes it more difficult6089for motor carriers--especially small trucking businesses--to protect6090themselves from fraudulent brokers. OOIDA has petitioned FMCSA to6091ensure brokers are no longer dodging transparency rules. If the agency6092fails to deliver substantial safeguards, Congress must do so in the6093next Highway Bill.6094                                 ______60956096   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to6097                               Lewie Pugh6098Potential Tariff on Commercial Vehicles and Commercial Vehicle Parts6099    Manufacturing supply chains in North America are deeply integrated.6100Parts and components sometimes travel back and forth multiple times6101between the United States, Canada, and Mexico before final6102manufacturing. When President Trump threatened 25 percent Tariffs on6103trade with these countries, the American Trucking Associations6104estimated this could increase the cost of new trucks by $35,000.61056106    Question 1. What would higher prices on new vehicles, or their6107parts, mean for your members?6108    Answer. Small business truckers already struggle to afford new6109vehicles due to extremely high prices, which have increased6110dramatically over time due in large part to excessive environmental6111regulations. Any increase in the cost of new vehicles would further6112limit our members ability to purchase them. To keep costs down, OOIDA6113members often purchase used vehicles. Higher costs for new vehicles6114would likely drive up the cost of used vehicles over time, further6115limiting our members ability to acquire equipment.6116    Increases in the cost of both new and used trucks will result in6117small business truckers simply operating their existing equipment6118longer. However, higher costs for parts will make it more expensive to6119maintain this older equipment.61206121    Question 2. How would a tariff on imported commercial vehicle parts6122impact the cost of purchasing and repairing commercial vehicles?6123    Answer. This would likely result in higher costs, which may result6124in some motor carriers deferring maintenance.61256126    Question 3. If it is more expensive to maintain and replace parts6127on commercial vehicles, would there be an impact on safety on our6128roads?6129    Answer. Yes, any conditions that force motor carriers to defer6130maintenance could negatively impact safety. However, Congress must also6131consider how excessive, unnecessary, and ineffective regulations have6132driven up the cost of new equipment without any discernable6133improvements to safety. Lawmakers must also be careful not to embrace6134new proposals that drive up operating costs without improving safety,6135including minimum insurance increases, and the mandated use of side6136underride guards and Universal Electronic Identifiers.6137Driver Training6138    You both represent truck drivers who also want the roads they are6139driving on to be safe. There are those who claim we need to make it6140easier for truck drivers to get a license by allowing them to get6141tested in any state, not just the state where they received their6142training.6143    It may surprise some people that there are no Federal requirements6144for truck drivers to spend a certain amount of time training behind the6145wheel of a truck. However, in the state of Washington, drivers must6146have at least 30 hours of behind-the-wheel training.61476148    Question 1. What can we do to improve training for truck drivers so6149that our roads are safer?6150    Answer. At a minimum, Congress must require 30 hours behind-the-6151wheel training for those seeking a commercial driver's license (CDL).6152Additionally, lawmakers should pass S. 2114, which would require6153drivers demonstrate English language proficiency before being licensed6154and require CDL testing be conducted only in English.61556156    Question 2. Should we make it easier for prospective drivers to6157circumvent strong state requirements?6158    Answer. No. However, OOIDA believes the most effective way to6159ensure drivers across the country are properly trained is to strengthen6160Federal Entry Level Driver Training requirements.6161Overtime for Truck Drivers6162    President Trump promised workers that their overtime earnings would6163not be taxed.61646165    Question 1. Was the promise fulfilled for truck drivers?6166    Answer. Unfortunately, the Fair Labor Standards Act unfairly6167exempts truckers from being guaranteed overtime pay. As a result,6168truckers will not benefit from ``no taxes on overtime'' policies like6169most other blue-collar professionals. To solve this problem, Congress6170must pass S. 893, the Guaranteeing Overtime for Truckers Act, which6171will repeal this outdated exemption. Providing competitive and6172sustainable compensation will also help address the trucking industry's6173astronomically high driver turnover rates, which prevent truckers from6174gaining the experience to operate at the safest levels.6175                                 ______61766177   Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to6178                               Lewie Pugh6179Question Topic: Truck Parking6180    Question. In 2023 a Greyhound bus traveling westbound on I-70 from6181Indianapolis, Indiana to St. Louis, Missouri experienced a deadly crash6182in Highland, Illinois while exiting at a rest area. The bus crashed6183into three trucks which were parked on the shoulder of the exit ramp.6184Three bus passengers were killed. The driver and 11 of the other6185passengers were injured.6186    NTSB found that a contributing factor was the three trucks parked6187on the shoulder of the exit ramp. The lack of available truck parking6188remains a major problem, not just for the trucking industry, but for6189the traveling public, as this horrible incident so tragically6190illustrates.6191    Last Congress, Senators Lummis and Kelly introduced the Truck6192Parking Safety Improvement Act to provide Federal grants to expand6193parking for commercial trucks. I joined several of my colleagues on6194both sides of the aisle in cosponsoring this bill, but unfortunately it6195didn't pass.61966197    A. As Congress works on the next Surface Transportation6198Reauthorization bill, what would you recommend we do to increase truck6199parking across the country, and how would you recommend we pay for it?6200    Answer. Congress must enact a long-term, sustainable program, like6201the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act, to invest in parking capacity6202to address the national shortage of truck parking. Over the past two6203decades, numerous studies at the state and Federal level have examined6204the parking issue, and the problem is clear: there are shortages in6205every part of the nation, and more funding is needed for more spaces.6206    Legislation like the Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act would6207dedicate Federal funding for expanding capacity. Currently, truck6208parking must compete with other more politically-popular projects, and6209given the consistent shortage, it is clear that parking is not being6210prioritized how it should be.6211    The Truck Parking Safety Improvement Act has enjoyed broad6212bipartisan support as well as support from every segment of the6213trucking industry and beyond. This legislation is a ``must-pass'' as6214part of the next highway bill.6215    On the question of funding, OOIDA has long advocated for increases6216to existing fuel taxes as a way to fund greater infrastructure6217investment. The current fuel taxes are the most efficient and6218straightforward way to collect revenue. Mechanisms, such as a vehicle-6219miles-traveled fee or tolling, have significantly higher overhead costs6220and unanswered questions about implementation. We also support policies6221that would ensure all road users pay into the Highway Trust Fund, such6222as a fee on electric and hybrid vehicles.6223                                 ______62246225    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to6226                               Lewie Pugh6227    Question. Side Underride Guards:6228    Do you agree that side underrides guards on trucks save lives?6229    Answer. In certain conditions, side underride guards have6230demonstrated an ability to prevent passenger compartment intrusion in6231passenger vehicles. However, testing has been limited to extremely6232narrow circumstances, which are not reflective of highway driving6233conditions. The true safety performance of these devices cannot be6234determined until they are tested in a wide variety of conditions,6235including varying speeds and angles of impacts. Additionally, we have6236not seen any research on the safety outcomes associated with vehicle6237deflection resulting from impacts with side underride guards. OOIDA6238remains staunchly opposed to any Federal side underride guard mandate.6239    Rather than requiring the use of impractical, costly, and unproven6240devices, the best way to increase safety is to properly train drivers.6241While there is a role for proven, cost-effective technology solutions,6242safety starts with the driver. At a minimum, Congress must require 306243hours behind-the-wheel training for those seeking a commercial driver's6244license (CDL). Additionally, lawmakers should pass S. 2114, which would6245require drivers demonstrate English language proficiency before being6246licensed and require CDL testing be conducted only in English. These6247are simple solutions that would have a more profound impact on highway6248safety than a side underride guard mandate.6249                                 ______62506251     Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Todd Young to6252                            Fred C. Ferguson6253Outdated Regulations6254    Question. Outdated and overly burdensome regulations continue to6255hinder progress in both safety and innovation--particularly in the6256surface transportation sector. The upcoming surface transportation6257reauthorization presents a key opportunity to revisit and modernize6258these regulations under the FMCSA purview.6259    Mr. Ferguson, can you highlight any technologies your members are6260using that can increase safety? And are there specific regulations that6261you or your members have encountered that could be updated or reformed6262to better support safety advancements and innovation in this industry?6263    Answer. Many ABA members have proactively invested in advanced6264safety technologies that not only protect passengers but also help6265prevent accidents before they occur. These include collision mitigation6266systems (such as active cruise braking and autonomous emergency6267braking), lane departure warning systems, electronic stability control,6268and speed monitoring technology. Several operators have also adopted6269telematics platforms to monitor driver performance and vehicle6270diagnostics in real time, supporting both safety and operational6271efficiency.6272    However, despite these advancements, several outdated or overly6273broad regulations create barriers to innovation. For example:62746275   Hours of Service (HOS) rules, while critical for safety, are6276        still largely modeled on trucking operations rather than6277        passenger service, limiting flexibility in how rest and driving6278        time are scheduled--even when modern fatigue management tools6279        are in place.62806281   Speed limiter mandates were developed with freight carriers6282        in mind and don't account for the motorcoach industry's unique6283        operating characteristics and proven safety record. Imposing a6284        single speed threshold could inadvertently increase congestion6285        risks and undermine safety benefits.62866287   CSA/SMS scoring methodologies don't always accurately6288        reflect motorcoach safety performance and can penalize smaller6289        or seasonal operators whose data sets don't fit the freight6290        model.62916292   CDL testing and credentialing processes often remain paper-6293        based and slow to adapt to modern training and assessment6294        tools, delaying the onboarding of qualified drivers.62956296    The upcoming surface transportation reauthorization is a pivotal6297chance to modernize these frameworks. By aligning regulatory6298requirements with current technologies and safety practices, Congress6299and FMCSA can support an environment where innovation is encouraged6300rather than hindered--and where passenger safety remains the top6301priority.6302                                 ______63036304   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to6305                            Fred C. Ferguson6306Potential Tariff on Commercial Vehicles and Commercial Vehicle Parts6307    Manufacturing supply chains in North America are deeply integrated.6308Parts and components sometimes travel back and forth multiple times6309between the United States, Canada, and Mexico before final6310manufacturing. When President Trump threatened 25 percent Tariffs on6311trade with these countries, the American Trucking Associations6312estimated this could increase the cost of new trucks by $35,000.63136314    Question 1. What would higher prices on new vehicles, or their6315parts, mean for your members?6316    Answer. On behalf of the U.S. motorcoach industry, higher prices on6317new motorcoaches or their critical components would have profound6318negative impacts on operators and the communities they serve. Because6319there are currently no motorcoaches manufactured within the United6320States, our industry is entirely reliant on imports from Canada and6321Europe to modernize fleets. If tariffs are imposed, the resulting cost6322increases would:63236324   Raise trip prices for schools, seniors, rural communities,6325        and military transport, all of whom depend on affordable6326        motorcoach service.63276328   Force smaller operators--who make up over 80 percent of our6329        industry--to delay or forgo fleet replacement, undermining both6330        safety and environmental progress.63316332   Slow recovery from the pandemic, which already caused the6333        loss of 50 percent of operating companies.63346335    Recent data already show new motorcoach sales are down 5.6 percent6336this year, after a strong rebound in 2024. Tariffs inject further6337uncertainty into purchasing decisions, eroding the confidence operators6338need to invest in newer, safer vehicles.63396340    Question 2. How would a tariff on imported commercial vehicle parts6341impact the cost of purchasing and repairing commercial vehicles?'6342    Answer. A tariff on imported parts would directly increase the cost6343of maintaining and repairing motorcoaches--many of which must stay in6344service well beyond their intended life cycle, particularly for small6345and mid-sized family-owned companies operating on thin margins. While6346key components like engines and transmissions are often domestically6347produced, many systems and assemblies--such as electrical components6348and specialized safety equipment--must be sourced internationally.6349    This would lead to:63506351   Higher repair costs, passed along to consumers who rely on6352        motorcoaches for commuting, tourism, and essential6353        transportation.63546355   Longer downtime, as operators struggle to find affordable6356        replacement parts.63576358   Further pressure on smaller fleets, reducing service6359        availability and potentially triggering more business closures.63606361   There may additionally be reduction of some vehicle useful6362        life as good preventative maintenance practices may not be6363        implemented on schedule, potentially impacting the resale value6364        of used vehicles.63656366    At a time when the industry is still working to recover capacity6367lost during COVID-19, additional cost burdens from tariffs could6368reverse hard-won gains and destabilize service nationwide.63696370    Question 3. If it is more expensive to maintain and replace parts6371on commercial vehicles, would there be an impact on safety on our6372roads?6373    Answer. Yes--making it more expensive to purchase new motorcoaches6374or maintain existing ones would directly undermine safety progress. The6375motorcoach sector has an outstanding safety record, accounting for just63760.015 percent of all U.S. roadway fatalities over a recent five-year6377period. But maintaining this record depends on operators being able to6378refresh fleets and adopt new safety technologies.6379    When costs rise due to tariffs, operators are forced to:63806381   Delay fleet replacement, continuing to run older vehicles6382        without the latest safety design and technology.63836384   Postpone installation of advanced systems, such as collision6385        mitigation and electronic stability control, which help prevent6386        crashes.63876388   Divert limited resources from training and preventive6389        maintenance, further risking operational safety.63906391    Because motorcoaches are essential for evacuations during6392disasters, military transportation, and rural mobility, any policy that6393slows fleet renewal can harm public safety far beyond the companies6394themselves.6395    In short, tariffs on motorcoaches and their parts will mean higher6396costs, fewer safety advancements, and reduced access to vital6397transportation. With no U.S. manufacturing alternatives for complete6398motorcoaches, we urge policymakers to exclude motorcoaches and their6399components from any increased tariffs, in recognition of the industry's6400essential role in the economy and transportation infrastructure.6401    I'd be glad to share more data or meet with your teams to further6402discuss these critical issues.6403                                 ______64046405  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to6406                            Fred C. Ferguson6407Question Topic: Motorcoach Driver Fatigue6408    Question 1. In 2023 a Greyhound bus traveling westbound on I-706409from Indianapolis, Indiana to St. Louis, Missouri experienced a deadly6410crash in Highland, Illinois while exiting at a rest area. The bus6411crashed into three trucks which were parked on the shoulder of the exit6412ramp. Three bus passengers were killed. The driver and 11 of the other6413passengers were injured.6414    According to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the6415probable cause of the crash was the bus's departure from the travel6416lanes onto the shoulder of the exit ramp due to fatigue. NTSB found6417that a contributing cause was the driver's irregular work-rest schedule6418and prolonged time awake.6419    NTSB recommended that the American Bus Association inform its6420members about the Highland, Illinois crash and urge them to develop6421fatigue management programs to educate drivers and other employees6422about fatigue, its causes, and its countermeasures.64236424    A. When will the American Bus Association complete its6425implementation of this NTSB recommendation?6426    Answer. ABA appreciates the opportunity to work with the National6427Transportation Safety Board on initiatives to improve highway and6428motorcoach safety. ABA expects to complete all of the aspects of the6429NTSB recommendation by February 2026. To date, ABA has sent out 36430different communications briefing our members on the details and6431findings of the crash as well as recommended activities to improve6432their safety posture. We have also invited the NTSB to attend ABA6433safety meetings to brief our members on the findings of the recent6434crash as well as incorporated education sessions focusing on the safety6435management cycle into in-person safety meetings of motorcoach operators6436taking place in August as well as other regional meetings during the6437fall of 2025. We hope to have a session on fatigue management set for6438January of 2026. ABA already has a relationship with the Commercial6439Vehicle Safety Alliance, the current home of the North American Fatigue6440Management Program, as well as a scheduled presentation by them and6441distribution of some of their safety materials.6442    The NTSB also made several recommendations to Greyhound to help6443mitigate driver fatigue, including revising its driver scheduling6444policies to reduce scheduling variability that results in irregular6445work-rest cycles.6446    NTSB also made several recommendations to Greyhound to help6447mitigate driver fatigue, including revising its driver scheduling6448policies to reduce scheduling variability that results in irregular6449work-rest cycles.64506451    B. Does the American Bus Association support these NTSB6452recommendations to Greyhound?6453    Answer. ABA supports the NTSB recommendations related to monitoring6454driver fatigue and fatigue management policies. We believe these are6455good safety practices included in their recommendations that all motor6456carriers (truck and bus) will benefit from being reminded about, and6457ABA's peer-led education offerings will feature future sessions6458focusing on fatigue management best practices. We look forward to6459sharing Greyhound's refined best practices and their successful6460implementation of these recommendations. Passenger safety remains ABA's6461number one priority and we look forward to sharing these resources and6462best practices with the broader motorcoach and passenger carrier6463industry.64646465    C. When can we expect Greyhound to implement these recommendations?6466    Answer. ABA appreciates the question and the intent behind it, but6467ABA does not have insight as to the development of Greyhound's internal6468policies and operations and can not comment on Greyhound's behalf. We6469believe that they will work to implement these recommendations and6470revise their practices as quickly as practicable.6471Question Topic: Truck Parking6472    Question 2. NTSB found that a contributing factor to the crash in6473Highland, Illinois was the three trucks parked on the shoulder of the6474exit ramp. The lack of available truck parking remains a major problem,6475not just for the trucking industry, but for the traveling public, as6476this horrible incident so tragically illustrates.6477    Last Congress, Senators Lummis and Kelly introduced the Truck6478Parking Safety Improvement Act to provide Federal grants to expand6479parking for commercial trucks. I joined several of my colleagues on6480both sides of the aisle in cosponsoring this bill, but unfortunately it6481didn't pass.64826483    A. As Congress works on the next Surface Transportation6484Reauthorization bill, what would you recommend we do to increase truck6485parking across the country, and how would you recommend we pay for it?6486    Answer. While my testimony focused specifically on the motorcoach6487industry rather than trucking, I do want to emphasize that parking6488challenges also have serious implications for motorcoach operations and6489the traveling public more broadly. Motorcoaches frequently encounter6490scarce, inadequate, or poorly designed parking and staging areas,6491particularly near interchanges, rest areas, and key destinations. This6492creates safety hazards not only for professional drivers but also for6493passengers disembarking in areas never intended for passenger loading6494or unloading.6495    From the perspective of motorcoach operators, any effort to6496increase safe, dedicated parking infrastructure will benefit the6497overall safety and efficiency of the surface transportation system.6498While I defer to my colleagues in the trucking sector on the specific6499scope of truck parking needs, I would recommend that Congress consider:65006501   Expanding eligibility under parking grant programs to6502        explicitly include motorcoach parking, staging, and passenger6503        facilities, to avoid similar risks for buses that must resort6504        to parking on shoulders or undesignated areas.65056506   Integrating parking improvements into broader infrastructure6507        investments, such as rest area modernization and multimodal6508        facility development, to serve both freight and passenger6509        carriers effectively.65106511   Ensuring Federal funds for parking are distributed in a way6512        that prioritizes safety-critical corridors and high-traffic6513        regions, including those frequented by motorcoach operators.65146515    As to funding, Congress could consider dedicating a modest portion6516of existing Highway Trust Fund revenues or leveraging discretionary6517grant programs like CMAQ, INFRA and RAISE, with clear set-asides to6518improve commercial vehicle parking capacity. Investing in safe parking6519infrastructure is a shared benefit: it protects drivers, passengers,6520and all roadway users.6521    Again, while this issue primarily affects freight, it is vital that6522any Federal policy take into account the unique needs of motorcoaches6523as part of a comprehensive solution to parking shortages nationwide.6524ABA has and will continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the6525freight community in seeking full implementation of Jason's Law and6526hopes that as this Committee and the Department of Transportation6527consider future truck parking initiatives that they consider all6528commercial vehicles within the sphere of fleets and commercial vehicle6529road users seeking parking alternatives.6530                                 ______65316532    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to6533                            Fred C. Ferguson6534Motorcoach Driver Fatigue6535    Question. In your written testimony, you called for the tailoring6536of hours-of-service regulations for the motorcoach industry.6537    Given the unique and irregular scheduling demands in the motorcoach6538industry, how do you plan to ensure that any changes still properly6539address the risks of driver fatigue?6540    Answer. Yes, in my testimony, I emphasized the need to preserve6541industry-specific flexibility in Hours of Service (HOS) regulations for6542motorcoach operators. This flexibility is critical because motorcoach6543operations differ significantly from freight trucking in terms of trip6544lengths, schedules, passenger responsibilities, and rest opportunities.6545Our charter bus drivers often operate on irregular schedules that6546include waiting time at hotels, tourist attractions, or special6547events--time that, while not ``off-duty'' under current regulations,6548does not contribute to fatigue in the same way continuous driving does.6549    That said, we fully agree that addressing driver fatigue must6550remain a top priority. Our approach is to work with FMCSA to develop6551tailored policies that reflect the realities of motorcoach operations6552while maintaining a strong safety framework. This includes:65536554   Supporting enhanced driver training and fatigue management6555        education.65566557   Encouraging the adoption of onboard technologies that6558        monitor driver behavior and provide early warnings of fatigue.65596560   Promoting data-driven oversight that considers the unique6561        operating patterns of motorcoach carriers rather than applying6562        one-size-fits-all rules designed for freight.65636564    We believe that a thoughtful, flexible approach--grounded in real-6565world operating data--can both improve safety outcomes and avoid6566unnecessary disruptions to the essential passenger services our6567industry provides.6568    ABA has worked with several entities in the past and in recent6569years on driver fatigue and distracted driving research, including with6570the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, Washington State6571University, University of Michigan, University of South Florida, the6572National Academies of Science, the Transportation Research Board,6573FMCSA's Medical Review Board and other interested parties. We are in6574full support of future research studies, soliciting our members,6575vehicle manufacturers and other industry experts to fully engage and6576participate in further pursuit of this initiative if this Committee6577would like to request additional research efforts looking at motorcoach6578driver fatigue. We hope that a research-based and data-driven approach6579will be considered before moving forward with any changes to existing6580mandated service hour limits.6581                                 ______65826583    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to6584                            Sean M. O'Brien6585    Question. In 2023, the year with the most recently available NHTSA6586and FMCSA crash data, there were 1,743 large-truck crashes in6587Mississippi. Sadly, 107 people lost their lives in those crashes, and65881,019 people were injured. This is a 23 percent increase in fatalities6589compared to the previous year. From 2013 to 2023, truck crash6590fatalities rose by 70 percent in Mississippi. Despite this troubling6591trend, efforts to raise the gross vehicle weight limit in Congress6592persist in the lead-up to Reauthorization.6593    In a recent letter to Congress, the International Brotherhood of6594Teamsters Law Enforcement League added its voice in opposition to6595increased truck size and weight limits, which include proposed Double659633-foot trailers that would decrease a truck's stopping distance by 226597feet as compared to today's double 28-foot trailers, while also6598increasing rollover propensity.65996600    Mr. O'Brien, could you please reiterate why the International6601Brotherhood of Teamsters continues to oppose proposals in Congress to6602increase the Federal gross vehicle size and weight limits, and expand6603on your knowledge of the safety dangers posed by longer configurations,6604like Double 33s, in particular?6605    Answer. All available research, including that conducted by both6606the Department of Transportation and third parties, as well as the6607everyday experiences of Teamster drivers and law enforcement personnel6608have made abundantly clear the dangers presented by longer and heavier6609trucks. These vehicles and combinations, including double 33s and6610triples, are more difficult to operate, damage infrastructure like6611roads and bridges, and when involved in crashes result in more severe6612and fatal incidents. We thank Senate Wicker for his long-time6613opposition to truck size/weight increases and it is imperative that6614Congress reject efforts to increase length or weight in the upcoming6615surface transportation reauthorization.6616                                 ______66176618   Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Maria Cantwell to6619                            Sean M. O'Brien6620Potential Tariff on Commercial Vehicles and Commercial Vehicle Parts6621    Manufacturing supply chains in North America are deeply integrated.6622Parts and components sometimes travel back and forth multiple times6623between the United States, Canada, and Mexico before final6624manufacturing. When President Trump threatened 25 percent Tariffs on6625trade with these countries, the American Trucking Associations6626estimated this could increase the cost of new trucks by $35,000.66276628    Question 1. What would higher prices on new vehicles, or their6629parts, mean for your members?66306631    Question 2. How would a tariff on imported commercial vehicle parts6632impact the cost of purchasing and repairing commercial vehicles?66336634    Question 3. If it is more expensive to maintain and replace parts6635on commercial vehicles, would there be an impact on safety on our6636roads?6637    Answer. At this time, we do not have an estimate on the impact of6638potential tariffs on the commercial motor vehicle industry. Broadly,6639the Teamsters believe that targeted tariffs can play a role in6640reshoring jobs that have been sent abroad.6641Truck Safety6642    Tragically, on July 18th, a tanker truck carrying 9,000 gallons of6643diesel and gasoline overturned off of Highway 101 in Clallam County,6644Washington, spilling 3,000 gallons of hazardous material into Indian6645Creek. This spill threatened the drinking water of over 19,000 people6646in Port Angeles and contaminated a vulnerable habitat for salmon to6647spawn. Fortunately, no one was hurt. This incident demonstrates the6648importance of ensuring our trucks and truck drivers are safe.66496650    Question 1. Your members want the roads to be safe because they6651want to make it home to their families. What can we do to ensure that6652commercial vehicle drivers on our roads are safe?6653    Answer. As discussed below, Congress should ensure that drivers are6654receiving high-quality training at the time of initial licensure and6655when receiving additional endorsements, including for hazardous6656materials. It is also imperative that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety6657Administration has the necessary resources to oversee and inspect motor6658carriers of all sizes and take enforcement action as necessary.6659Finally, we encourage Congress to examine specific and novel models of6660trucking operations, like those implemented by Amazon and its vast6661fleet of contracted services and take action to ensure that companies6662cannot exploit current safety regulations to operate dangerously.6663Autonomous Vehicles6664    As you said in your testimony, the Federal government has not6665developed any safety requirements for self-driving trucks.66666667    Question 1. Since there are no safety requirements on the Federal6668level, do you think it is wise for Congress to prevent states from6669ensuring autonomous cars and trucks are safe?6670    Answer. It is an unequivocally bad policy for Congress to restrict6671states from taking responsible actions on autonomous vehicles to keep6672their citizens safe. While certain authorities, like equipment6673standards, are clearly the responsibility of the Federal government,6674States must continue to be allowed to exercise their rights when it6675comes to the operations of autonomous vehicles on their roads. As6676mentioned, efforts to restrict states are particularly offensive when6677the Federal government to date has provided no alternatives. Preventing6678states from acting is little more than a giveaway to the industry to6679operate in any manner it sees fit, even if doing so puts lives in6680danger.66816682    Question 2. What steps should Congress take regarding autonomous6683vehicles?6684    Answer. Congress must create and mandate a national framework for6685autonomous vehicles that encompasses manufacturing and equipment6686standards at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,6687operational requirements overseen by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety6688Administration and addresses workforce impacts of the adoption of these6689technologies. We encourage Congress to adopt proposals outlined in the6690``Teamsters Autonomous Vehicle Federal Policy Principles''.6691Speed-limiters6692    Earlier this month, the Trump administration withdrew a proposed6693rule that would have required speed-limiting devices on commercial6694vehicles. Excessive speed is a leading cause of fatal accidents on our6695roads.66966697    Question 1. Do you believe speed-limiting devices improve safety6698for commercial vehicle drivers and others on the roads?6699    Answer. We have long supported the requirement for speed-limiters6700on commercial vehicles. Teamster members across multiple fleets6701currently operate vehicles with these technologies installed, and we6702believe that they play a role in improving safety and reducing speed6703related accidents.6704Driver Training6705    You both represent truck drivers who also want the roads they are6706driving on to be safe. There are those who claim we need to make it6707easier for truck drivers to get a license by allowing them to get6708tested in any state, not just the state where they received their6709training.6710    It may surprise some people that there are no Federal requirements6711for truck drivers to spend a certain amount of time training behind the6712wheel of a truck. However, in the state of Washington, drivers must6713have at least 30 hours of behind-the-wheel training.67146715    Question 1. What can we do to improve training for truck drivers so6716that our roads are safer?6717    Answer. Congress should:67186719  1)  Ensure that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety (FMCSA) is properly6720        auditing the Training Provider Registry, and removing bad6721        actors who are providing substandard and/or predatory training6722        programs.67236724  2)  Create new opportunities through a competitive grant program for6725        high-quality entry level training programs. These grants should6726        be constructed to give specific consideration to programs6727        operated by labor organizations which provide pathways to6728        employment.67296730  3)  FMCSA and Congress should examine current Federal Entry Level6731        Driver Training requirements and consider mandating reasonable6732        behind-the-wheel hours requirements.67336734    Question 2. Should we make it easier for prospective drivers to6735circumvent strong state requirements?6736    Answer. In considering flexibilities relating to training and6737licensure, Congress should not create an environment where prospective6738drivers are able to ``forum shop'' the licensing process. Creating6739incentives to receive licensure in a certain state because of the6740presence of less stringent requirements or more lax testing standards6741will ultimately decrease road safety.6742                                 ______67436744   Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Duckworth to6745                            Sean M. O'Brien6746Question Topic: Truck Parking6747    Question. In 2023 a Greyhound bus traveling westbound on I-70 from6748Indianapolis, Indiana to St. Louis, Missouri experienced a deadly crash6749in Highland, Illinois while exiting at a rest area. The bus crashed6750into three trucks which were parked on the shoulder of the exit ramp.6751Three bus passengers were killed. The driver and 11 of the other6752passengers were injured.6753    NTSB found that a contributing factor was the three trucks parked6754on the shoulder of the exit ramp. The lack of available truck parking6755remains a major problem, not just for the trucking industry, but for6756the traveling public, as this horrible incident so tragically6757illustrates.6758    Last Congress, Senators Lummis and Kelly introduced the Truck6759Parking Safety Improvement Act to provide Federal grants to expand6760parking for commercial trucks. I joined several of my colleagues on6761both sides of the aisle in cosponsoring this bill, but unfortunately it6762didn't pass.67636764    A. As Congress works on the next Surface Transportation6765Reauthorization bill, what would you recommend we do to increase truck6766parking across the country, and how would you recommend we pay for it?6767    Answer. The Teamsters have endorsed the Truck Parking Safety6768Improvement Act, have included it among our union's priorities for6769reauthorization and look forward to its inclusion in the final6770legislation. We support the creation of a new authorization under Part6771180 as provided in the bill, and if enacted will support full funding6772for the program in the appropriations process.67736774                                  [all]