House Transportation Committee Holds Hearing On Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse Federal Response

7 months ago

On Wednesday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee held a hearing on the federal response to the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, Maryland earlier this year.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript

Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Transcript

00:00:00 authorize to declare recess at any time during today's hearing. Without objection, that is so

00:00:04 ordered. As a reminder, if members insert a document into the record, please also email it to

00:00:09 documentsti@mail.house.gov. At this point, I'll just recognize myself for the purposes of an

00:00:16 opening statement. So we're here today to discuss the initial federal response to the March 26,

00:00:23 2024 early morning incident involving the cargo vessel Dolly and the Francis Scott Key Bridge in

00:00:28 Baltimore, Maryland, which resulted in the subsequent collapse of the bridge. And I first

00:00:33 want to acknowledge the six workers who sadly perished that morning. And on behalf of the

00:00:39 entire committee, I want to express our condolences and offer our prayers to their families and their

00:00:44 loved ones. I also want to express the committee's appreciation to the Harbor Pilot and the Maryland

00:00:49 Transportation Authority police officers who saved countless lives by closing the

00:00:54 the key bridge prior to the incident and to all the first responders who are obviously

00:00:59 involved in that in that process. And finally, I want to commend the federal, state and local

00:01:04 officials working that night to clear the wreckage and debris and obviously continuing that effort

00:01:12 and to reopen the shipping channel that supports the Port of Baltimore. This committee continues

00:01:17 to receive updates from federal agencies are responding and investigating the incident,

00:01:22 including those testifying here today. So hours after the collapse, President Biden announced his

00:01:28 intention for the federal government to pay for the initial cost of reconstructing the key bridge.

00:01:32 And the committee has received a letter from the administration officially requesting that

00:01:36 Congress authorized 100% federal cost share to rebuild the bridge and have I've personally

00:01:41 spoken to Governor Moore about the request on a couple of occasions. On March 28, the state of

00:01:46 Maryland applied for funding from the Federal Highway Administration's emergency relief program

00:01:50 commonly called ER. Within hours of receiving the Maryland Department of Transportation's

00:01:55 application, the Federal Highway Administration approved 60 million in CRIC relief funding,

00:02:00 which is which it said represented roughly 5% or so of the initial total project costs of 1.2

00:02:07 billion. This funding is intended to assist with eligible repair work, which includes emergency

00:02:12 repairs needed to restore essential travel to minimize damage or protect the remaining facilities

00:02:19 as well as permanent repairs necessary to restore the highway to its pre disaster condition. Under

00:02:26 the ER program, the federal government will reimburse the state qualifying work at 100% federal

00:02:31 cost for the first 270 days. After that initial 270 days, states get reimbursed at 80 to 90%

00:02:41 rate, depending on the classification of the program provides which the program also provides

00:02:48 flexibility to allow for reimbursement up to 90% in in some cases. So this past Friday, May 10,

00:02:55 the Federal Highway Administration informed the committee that they had designated a portion of

00:03:01 I-695 that includes the bridge as part of the interstate system effective April 29,

00:03:06 meaning that Maryland's reimbursement rate is now going to be guaranteed up to 90%.

00:03:11 All that is to say that while the President's request has been received and it's under

00:03:17 consideration, Congress still has roughly six months to to act before any cost share changes

00:03:25 might occur. So despite initial estimates of 1.2 billion to rebuild the bridge, media reports now

00:03:31 indicate that the state of Maryland estimates that the bridge may cost somewhere between 1.7

00:03:36 and 1.9 billion. So it's important that we have a very firm estimate before we take any further

00:03:43 action on the cost share. In addition, if the company that owned and operated the ship is found

00:03:48 to be liable, we must make sure that the government actively works to recover any money that is owed.

00:03:54 And that could help offset the bridge funding or be used to make the people and companies who

00:03:58 obviously rely on and work on the Baltimore Harbor to make them whole. So several members of this

00:04:05 committee have visited the site with our federal partners and for those who wish to go up there and

00:04:09 see it for themselves, the committee will continue to facilitate visits on a regular basis. So at

00:04:15 this stage, we need to make sure that we are not getting ahead of the facts and let the NTSB

00:04:19 and other agencies complete their investigations. But as we continue to learn more, we will ensure

00:04:26 that members of Congress have all the information that is available to them. And I do want to thank

00:04:31 all of our witnesses for for being here today and I look forward to to to the testimony. I did talk

00:04:38 to the governor just this morning about the hearing coming up and he's pretty optimistic about

00:04:44 the litigation too moving forward. I mentioned that just briefly in my opening statement but

00:04:49 it sounded very interesting and very very promising. So with that I will turn to Ranking

00:04:56 Member Larson for his statement. Thank you Chair Graves for holding this hearing. I want to thank

00:05:01 each of the administration officials for joining us to discuss the Francis Scott Key Bridge recovery

00:05:06 effort. First, I'd like to share I want to express my sympathies with the families of the six

00:05:11 transportation workers who lost their lives while on the job maintaining this important piece of

00:05:17 infrastructure. This incident is a reminder of why safety always has to be the top priority in

00:05:22 transportation. Safety of workers, traveling public, and the residents of communities adjacent to that

00:05:28 infrastructure. This emergency left in its wake an incredibly complex debris removal challenge.

00:05:34 A closed channel and a shuttered port, significant regional economic and global shipping ramifications,

00:05:40 and the loss of a bridge essential to freight movement and roadway mobility in the mid-Atlantic

00:05:44 region. Vice Admiral Gautier and General Graham, I want to commend you and your team and your

00:05:50 leadership and the tireless efforts of the women and men under your command for their incredible

00:05:55 work to safely remove debris and return the channel to the operations that currently exist

00:06:01 under extremely challenging circumstances. The degree of difficulty became clear when I visited

00:06:06 the site of the collapse last month. I want to thank the Coast Guard, the Corps, your state

00:06:11 partners on the unified command, especially the Maryland State Police for guiding many members

00:06:17 of Congress in our various trips to witness the damage. I look forward to hearing the latest

00:06:24 updates from you today on the status of the cleanup and the estimated timeline for the full

00:06:28 reopening of the channel and Port of Baltimore operations. I'm also eager to learn what resources

00:06:34 and authorities the Coast Guard and the Corps will need from Congress as the full costs and

00:06:38 impacts of the response become more concrete. Coast Guard has expended significant fiscal year

00:06:43 24 operations and support funds to respond to this emergency and we're grateful the Coast Guard

00:06:48 always does what it needs to get the job done. Yet it's unreasonable to expect the service to

00:06:54 absorb these response costs which are obviously not budgeted for in advance without impacting the

00:06:59 Coast Guard's ability to perform other missions. So the service must be made whole. Similarly,

00:07:04 the Corps in responding to the emergency has used fiscal year 24 operations and maintenance funds

00:07:09 appropriated for the Baltimore Harbor and channels. If not replenished, the diverted funding will

00:07:13 impact planned maintenance for the Baltimore Harbor once response is complete and in future

00:07:18 years. These amounts were not however sufficient to fund the response and last week the Corps

00:07:23 announced the reprogramming of 20 million dollars in unused funds to continue the channel

00:07:29 continued channel clearing work. This level of reprogramming is unprecedented and demonstrates

00:07:35 in the absence of supplemental funds provided by Congress for this cleanup. The budgetary juggling

00:07:40 the Corps has to do to get the bridge out of the water and off the vessel so the Port of Baltimore

00:07:45 can reopen, that juggling will continue. I urge the Corps and the Coast Guard to communicate to

00:07:50 Congress early and often on what your needs are in this process on your plans to ensure this work

00:07:54 can finish uninterrupted and to do so in a partnership with this with the legislative

00:07:59 branch. Beyond the immediate response, I look forward to hearing from the Federal Highway

00:08:03 Administrator Bott about the timeline to replace the bridge and the role the federal government

00:08:07 is playing in aiding that process. Congress established the emergency relief program in 1958

00:08:13 as part of the Federal Highway Program to provide for the reconstruction of highways and bridges in

00:08:18 the event of a disaster. Congress understood that the state could not be expected to cover the cost

00:08:24 of an unforeseen emergency loss of infrastructure out of its annual road budget. That's still true

00:08:31 today. Maryland transportation officials estimate it will cost up to 1.9 billion to replace the

00:08:36 bridge. Frankly there's a lot of estimates out there and it's a broad range so I really wouldn't

00:08:40 call them estimates at this point frankly. So while USDOT has provided 60 million in ER funds to date

00:08:47 we do know that's a fraction of the total need. Prior to collapse the Key Bridge carried 34,000

00:08:52 vehicles a day. Traffic diversion is increasing vehicle crossings in the Fort McHenry and Harbor

00:08:57 tunnels by 18 percent and truck drivers carrying hazardous materials currently must add 25 miles

00:09:04 to get through Baltimore via alternate routes including communities that did not expect hazmat

00:09:08 trucks to be going through them. This committee has a role to help rebuild this critical economic

00:09:13 artery quickly and efficiently including ensuring the project can advance without a cost share from

00:09:18 Maryland. Finally I want to welcome back committee chair Homendy and congratulations on your

00:09:23 reconfirmation last night. The NTSB's thorough investigation of this catastrophe will help

00:09:29 answer questions about how to prevent future elisions, shore up bridges, save lives and

00:09:34 protect our critical infrastructure. I look forward to what chair Homendy is able to share about this

00:09:38 incident based on the NTSB's preliminary findings which was released yesterday afternoon I believe.

00:09:44 So thank you to each of our witnesses and I thank the chair for calling this hearing

00:09:48 today and look forward to what you all have to say. I yield back.

00:09:52 So I'd ask unanimous consent that the witnesses full statements be included in the record without

00:10:02 objection that is so ordered. I'd ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing remain

00:10:06 open until such time as our witnesses have provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to

00:10:10 them in writing and without objection that is also so ordered. I'd also ask unanimous consent

00:10:16 that the record remain open for 15 days for any additional comments and information submitted by

00:10:20 members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's hearing and without objection that is

00:10:26 so ordered. So your written testimony has obviously been included in the record so the committee asks

00:10:32 that you try to limit your oral remarks to five minutes and with that Vice Admiral Gaudier you

00:10:38 are recognized for five minutes. Thanks for being here. Thank you Chairman Gray's, Ranking Member

00:10:42 Larson, distinguished members of the committee. Good morning. Thank you first off for your kind

00:10:47 words about the Coast Guard in your opening remarks and I appreciate the opportunity to

00:10:50 testify before the committee. In the early hours of March 26th the container ship Dolly struck

00:10:56 and collapsed the Francis Scott Key Bridge. Six individuals lost their lives. Baltimore lost a

00:11:02 landmark part of its skyline and the region suffered a blockade of a blockage of a crucial

00:11:07 waterway. We continue to honor the memory of those victims. Today at the 51 day point over 6,000 tons

00:11:15 of steel and concrete have been removed from the wreckage field. Access has been restored to the

00:11:20 Port of Baltimore with more than 35 large commercial vessels sailing through a limited

00:11:25 access channel and 375 additional commercial and recreational vessels have used three shallower

00:11:32 temporary access channels, the first of which was established just six days after the bridge collapse.

00:11:37 The hazardous materials aboard the motor vessel Dolly were stabilized as was the ship itself

00:11:42 and I'll report today that Unified Command believes that the Dolly will be able to be

00:11:48 refloated and removed from that site early next week is what they're looking at.

00:11:54 Particularly notable, countless complex steps in this operation have been completed without a

00:11:59 single worker injury. These monumental efforts were made possible through the exemplary unity

00:12:05 of effort of the Unified Command, rapid mobilization of personnel and resources,

00:12:10 strong coordination and trusted partnerships. The Unified Command formed within the first few hours

00:12:16 per the national response framework, our national doctrine for response to disasters and emergencies.

00:12:23 The Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, Maryland State Police, Maryland Transportation Authority,

00:12:29 Maryland Department of the Environment and Whit O'Briens, which represented the owners and

00:12:34 operators of the Dolly, have effectively leveraged each other's jurisdictions, authorities and

00:12:40 capabilities to get us where we are today. The Coast Guard is proud to be part of this response.

00:12:46 Our women and men serve on the front lines of a nation whose economic prosperity and national

00:12:52 security are inexorably linked to our maritime transportation system. We exercise six of our

00:13:00 11 statutory missions in this response, from the early hours of the search and rescue response

00:13:05 to restoring vessel traffic by setting aids to navigation. The Coast Guard's broad authorities

00:13:11 position the service to coordinate activities to assure the safety, security and stewardship of

00:13:16 our waterways, but we're also successful through partnerships and continuously exercising

00:13:22 operating coordinating with federal, state and local industry partners. One prime example,

00:13:28 Chairman, you mentioned is the fantastic work on the quick notification by the pilots to the MTA

00:13:34 dispatch, which inevitably saved countless numbers of lives. But the work is not done.

00:13:42 The Unified Command remains sharply focused on the full restoration of the MTS. Active

00:13:48 investigations continue in parallel with the response, including the Coast Guard's Marine

00:13:52 Board of Investigation, our highest level of marine casualty investigation to determine

00:13:58 the incident's causal factors and support the development of preventative recommendations.

00:14:03 Our investigation is in cooperation with the NTSB, which has taken the lead on the safety

00:14:10 investigation. And the Coast Guard investigation is also moving concurrently and separately from

00:14:17 the Department of Justice's criminal investigation. While we look forward to the results of these

00:14:22 investigations, it is evident looking more broadly that the size and complexity of ships

00:14:28 has grown over the years, placing greater demands on our marine transportation infrastructure

00:14:34 that may not have kept place with the increased risks that these vessels pose.

00:14:39 It's time for us to more broadly understand these risks. So as Deputy Commandant for Operations,

00:14:46 I will be convening a nationwide board of inquiry under Title 46 U.S. Code, led by

00:14:52 my Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy, Rear Admiral Wayne Arguin. The purpose will be to

00:14:58 assess the effect, excuse me, efficacy of the Coast Guard's suite of risk management tools,

00:15:04 evaluate how recently they've been used within major ports, and establish a holistic,

00:15:09 national-level approach to develop risk profiles, identify ways to address vulnerabilities,

00:15:15 and propose actions to reduce the risk of major incidents. This board of inquiry is a necessary

00:15:22 step to bolster our MTS resiliency and assure the safe and secure and efficient flow of commerce on

00:15:28 our waterways. Coast Guard's ready to lead this effort. Thank you for this opportunity and for

00:15:33 your enduring support of the Coast Guard, and I look forward to your questions.

00:15:36 Next, we have Major General Graham. Thanks for being here.

00:15:41 Recognized for five minutes. Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson,

00:15:47 distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today

00:15:51 to discuss the emergency response by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to the collapse of the

00:15:56 Francis Scott Key Bridge. On behalf of the Corps, please allow me to begin today by offering our

00:16:02 heartfelt condolences to the families of the six individuals lost to this tragedy. From the outset,

00:16:07 we were committed to supporting the efforts to recover their loved ones. Our thoughts and prayers

00:16:12 continue to be with them. Soon after this tragic event occurred, Maryland Governor Wes Moore

00:16:17 declared a state of emergency, and the Corps' Baltimore District Commander, Colonel Esty

00:16:21 Pinchasen, activated the district's Emergency Operations Center. Our state-of-the-art survey

00:16:26 vessels, which usually serve to verify the depth and width of the federal channels, were deployed

00:16:31 to support the initial search and rescue dive operations. Our support then evolved as the Army

00:16:36 Corps joined a multi-agency effort across all levels of government to form a unified command.

00:16:41 I've been in a good many disaster responses over the years, and this unified command team,

00:16:46 led by Coast Guard Captain David O'Connell, is one of the best I've ever seen. The guidance from

00:16:51 the President was clear from the beginning. Clearing the wreckage from the federal channel

00:16:54 was the Army Corps' top priority. We needed three things to immediately execute this mission—

00:17:00 authority, current funding, and the right contracting capacity.

00:17:04 Authority. We used the authority for the Baltimore Harbor and Channels Project. Congress authorized

00:17:09 the Army Corps to construct and maintain a 50-foot deep channel. That channel was now fully blocked

00:17:14 by the wreckage of the Key Bridge. Funding. We initially used available FY23 and FY24 funding

00:17:20 for that Baltimore Harbor and Channel Project. Additional funds, as discussed earlier by

00:17:25 Ranking Member Larson, have been provided through internal emergency reprogramming actions using

00:17:30 aged, unused funding just from Harbor Maintenance and Trust Fund projects. The Army Corps has not

00:17:38 used this emergency reprogramming authority at this scale for over 15 years. The third thing

00:17:44 we needed was contracting capacity. The Army Corps has a standard interagency agreement with the Navy's

00:17:50 supervisor of salvage and diving, led by Captain Sal Suarez and Director Paul Hankins. Soup Salve

00:17:57 are true world-class professionals. They have a suite of contracting tools that give us access to

00:18:02 superb salvage companies. In this case, the contractor they're using is Don John Marine

00:18:07 from Newark, New Jersey. The Army Corps turns to Navy Soup Salve often to leverage their unique

00:18:12 expertise. I last worked with Soup Salve in 2022 during Hurricane Ian response in Central Florida.

00:18:19 Navy Soup Salve helped us pump the upper Kissimmee River backwards for a few days,

00:18:26 saving around 12,000 homes south of Orlando from flooding. They're true professionals who know how

00:18:31 to deliver outstanding results. With these three elements in place, we embarked on the complex task

00:18:37 of determining how to begin clearing the approximately 50,000 tons of concrete, asphalt,

00:18:41 and steel from Patapsco River. For context, that's over 200 Statues of Liberty worth of material.

00:18:47 After conducting extensive engineering analysis, the Army Corps, in collaboration with our partners,

00:18:52 developed an ambitious but feasible timeline. Our plan was to initially clear a 35-foot deep

00:18:58 limited access channel by the end of April and restore the full 50-foot federal navigation

00:19:03 channel by the end of May. Certified by the Coast Guard, the limited access channel was

00:19:08 opened to one-way vehicle traffic on April 25th, a week ahead of schedule. This channel could

00:19:13 support approximately 70 percent of the port traffic, particularly the car carriers that are

00:19:17 so important to Baltimore. To open up the full channel, we first had to execute the most difficult

00:19:22 task, that of removing a section of bridge that had collapsed onto the bow of the dolly. I'm

00:19:28 delighted to report that on Monday of this week, the team successfully used precision demolitions

00:19:32 to cut the bridge away from the ship. Today, operations continue to remove the dolly from the

00:19:38 southern edge of the federal channel. This will facilitate the removal of the remaining bridge

00:19:42 wreckage from the river. We remain on track to open the full 700-foot wide by 50-foot deep federal

00:19:49 channel by the end of May. In closing, we're tremendously proud to be part of this stellar

00:19:53 unified team, who was mentioned earlier, safely removing the bridge wreckage from the federal

00:19:58 channel, allowing the Port of Baltimore to resume its role as a key supply chain node

00:20:02 and vital economic engine. Thank you, Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and members of

00:20:07 the committee, and I look forward to answering your questions.

00:20:12 Thank you. Next, Administrator Batt, you are recognized for five minutes.

00:20:15 Thank you, Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and members of the committee. Thank you for the

00:20:20 opportunity to appear before you today. The collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge on March

00:20:26 26th was a tragic event for Baltimore, Maryland, and the entire nation. While the collapse of the

00:20:32 bridge itself was shocking, we must not lose sight of the devastating impact this tragedy has had on

00:20:38 the victims and their families. The six victims were fathers, husbands, and friends in their homes

00:20:43 and communities, and they were valued members of the construction workforce. We will always mourn

00:20:48 these six individuals who lost their lives while working to strengthen our transportation system.

00:20:53 I also want to thank the emergency responders who acted quickly to save lives. I have had the

00:20:58 opportunity to visit the site of the bridge collapse, and while I have been engaged in a

00:21:02 number of bridge-related incidents during my career, I have never seen anything at this scale.

00:21:08 It is a monumental task to clean up the site and rebuild. Yet, as I appear before the committee

00:21:14 today, I have a great feeling of optimism, witnessing the ability of industry and government

00:21:19 entities to work together in times of calamity, as they have done in the weeks since the bridge

00:21:23 collapse. Immediately following this catastrophic event, the Federal Highway Administration

00:21:29 mobilized internally across multiple offices and externally with local, state, and federal

00:21:33 partners to support the response. President Biden has been clear in this administration's

00:21:39 commitment to reconstruct the bridge. Under Secretary Buttigieg's leadership, FHWA is

00:21:44 actively coordinating with other operating administrations and offices within the United

00:21:49 States Department of Transportation, the Maryland Department of Transportation, which includes the

00:21:54 Maryland Transportation Authority and State Highway Administration, the City of Baltimore,

00:21:59 U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and others to mitigate supply chain impacts,

00:22:04 manage traffic, reopen the port, and ultimately reconstruct the bridge. FHWA is actively

00:22:09 supporting the National Transportation Safety Board's investigation of the collapse. FHWA

00:22:15 has been in direct communication with MDOT, Maryland DOT, regarding all possible options

00:22:20 for reconstructing the bridge and is committed to supporting these efforts so that the bridge

00:22:25 can be reconstructed as quickly and safely as possible. It is critical that we reconstruct

00:22:32 this vital connection for people and goods traveling along the East Coast. Ensuring that

00:22:37 the I-695 corridor is open, operational, and safe for the traveling public at the earliest

00:22:43 possible moment is a top priority. On March 28th, within hours of receiving the request

00:22:49 for funding assistance from Maryland DOT, FHWA announced the immediate availability of $60

00:22:56 million in quick-release emergency relief funds. These funds serve as a down payment towards

00:23:04 initial costs and additional emergency relief program funding will be made available as work

00:23:09 continues. The administration is asking Congress to join it in demonstrating a commitment to aid

00:23:14 in recovery efforts by authorizing a 100% federal cost share for rebuilding the bridge, consistent

00:23:20 with past catastrophic bridge collapses. FHWA continues to provide wide-ranging technical

00:23:27 assistance to Maryland DOT regarding contract procurement for debris removal, procurement for

00:23:32 reconstruction operations, and project delivery strategies to reconstruct the bridge quickly and

00:23:38 safely. FHWA also is working with Maryland DOT to ensure that the new bridge will be built to

00:23:44 current design standards and in accordance with all applicable federal laws. On March 26, 2024,

00:23:51 the day of the collapse, FHWA met with the national transportation liaisons from the U.S.

00:23:57 Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National

00:24:02 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation,

00:24:06 and the EPA to discuss each agency's respective emergency procedures and considerations to

00:24:12 expedite the environmental review and permitting processes for the future reconstruction.

00:24:16 FHWA continues to meet with federal resource agencies to discuss permitting. Thank you to

00:24:21 the state, local, and federal entities who continue to collaborate in response to this tragic event,

00:24:26 whether it is an event of this scale and complexity or the comparatively smaller

00:24:31 but still impactful bridge incidents on I-95 in Philadelphia and on I-10 in Los Angeles.

00:24:36 I am proud to lead an agency that is playing a part in showing the country what can happen when

00:24:42 the government and industry come together with a common goal. There are no Democratic roads or

00:24:46 Republican bridges. Transportation truly unites us. FHWA will continue to do everything it can

00:24:52 to support the response. As the President has said, we will not rest until the cement has dried

00:24:57 on the entirety of a new bridge. Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today.

00:25:01 I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thanks. Now we'll go to Chair Homendy.

00:25:05 Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larson, and members of the committee.

00:25:11 With me today is our lead investigator on this accident, Marcel Muse, our Acting Director of

00:25:16 Marine Safety, Eric Stolzenberg, and other dedicated NTSB staff. Thank you for the opportunity to be

00:25:23 here today to discuss our ongoing investigation into the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge.

00:25:29 On behalf of the NTSB, I offer our heartfelt condolences to the families of all those who

00:25:37 were lost in this tragedy and our deepest sympathies to those who were injured or

00:25:42 otherwise impacted by this event. I also want to thank our numerous federal and state partners for

00:25:49 their support on scene and throughout this investigation. Yesterday, we released our

00:25:54 preliminary report, which shows that the DALI experienced four total power outages.

00:26:00 Preliminary information indicates that the March 25th blackouts were mechanically distinct from

00:26:07 those that occurred on March 26th. Two were related to routine maintenance in port. Two

00:26:14 were unexpected tripping of circuit breakers on the accident voyage. On the 25th, a blackout

00:26:21 occurred when a crew member mistakenly closed an engine damper while he was working on the exhaust

00:26:28 system in port. This effectively blocked the engine's exhaust gases from traveling out of

00:26:34 the vessel's stack, causing the engine to stall. Vessel power was briefly restored,

00:26:40 but insufficient fuel pressure to the online generator caused its speed to decrease. Its

00:26:46 breaker opened and a second blackout occurred. While recovering from this second blackout,

00:26:52 the crew switched to a different transformer and set of breakers from those that had been in use

00:27:00 for several months. Switching breakers is not unusual, but may have affected operations the

00:27:07 very next day on the accident voyage. So the configuration of the breakers remains under

00:27:14 investigation. On the 26th, when the ship was about .6 miles from the bridge, one high voltage

00:27:22 and one low voltage breaker that were powering most of the vessel's equipment and lighting

00:27:28 unexpectedly tripped. As a result, the vessel lost main propulsion. Bridge equipment also lost power,

00:27:35 and the voyage data recorder lost system feeds. Bridge audio continued to be recorded. The crew

00:27:43 was able to briefly restore power to the vessel, but another blackout occurred when a different

00:27:50 breaker tripped. At this point, the ship was about .2 miles from the key bridge. The crew regained

00:27:58 electrical power right before the dolly struck Pier 17, but they were unable to restore propulsion.

00:28:06 The ship had an emergency generator, which automatically started following the first

00:28:12 blackout on the 26th. However, the generator only powers systems like emergency lighting,

00:28:19 navigation, radio equipment, alarms, and a steering pump that allowed for low speed,

00:28:26 limited rudder movements. It does not power propulsion, and without the propeller turning,

00:28:33 the rudder was less effective. They were essentially drifting. We're still investigating

00:28:38 the exact time the emergency generator started. Going forward, this is a complex investigation.

00:28:46 Our investigators have been on scene consistently since this accident. In fact, they are on board

00:28:53 the vessel as I testify today. It is unprecedented to be there that long. We will continue evaluating

00:29:01 the design and operation of the dolly's power distribution system, including its breakers.

00:29:06 Examination of damage to the vessel will continue when the ship is clear of debris and moved to a

00:29:12 shoreside facility. We're also working with Maryland as they assess pier protection on

00:29:19 their other bridges. We're examining pier protection improvements that have been made

00:29:24 following other bridge collapses resulting from marine vessel strikes that we have investigated

00:29:29 in the past. Lastly, there are a lot of questions regarding the fuel. Our investigators found that

00:29:36 the ship was running on low sulfur marine gas oil at the time of the accident, which it had

00:29:41 been using since March 21st. We directed an independent lab to test all fuel stored on the

00:29:48 ship, including the fuel that was being burned at the time of the accident. The test results did not

00:29:55 identify any concerns related to the quality of the fuel. Thank you again for the opportunity

00:30:01 to testify and I look forward to answering your questions. Thank you all and now we'll turn to

00:30:07 questions and I'll let Rick answer the first one. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that.

00:30:14 First question is for Administrator Abbott. You said that when you look at reconstruction

00:30:21 of the bridge, you'll look at current standards consistent with law. Does the current law allow,

00:30:29 in a circumstance like this, a rebuild of a different kind of bridge in order to be eligible

00:30:36 for either federal or for the cost share? Because you could build one under current standards and

00:30:42 that could be in violation of what the law under this circumstance allows you to do. So,

00:30:47 can you walk through that a little bit? Thank you for the question, sir. Yeah, I think what

00:30:54 we're examining and working with Maryland DOT on, you know, the original bridge was built in the

00:31:00 1970s, you know, a truss bridge, which was common at the time. You know, today most of the bridges

00:31:07 that are being replaced that are truss bridges are being replaced by cable state bridges.

00:31:11 Different standards, obviously we're going to want to hear from the NTSB on their, you know,

00:31:16 final results of that investigation. But under the law, what we want to do is when we're replacing

00:31:22 a structure of that size, we want to build it to current standards and Maryland DOT is,

00:31:26 will be allowed to do that. What we want to make sure we're not doing is allowing for any,

00:31:31 quote unquote, "betterments" that did not exist that would be then covered by the ER program.

00:31:39 Admiral Gauthier, the Corps has expended significant resources in the recovery effort.

00:31:45 There's no mechanism for the, I'm sorry, the Coast Guard has, there's no mechanism for the Coast

00:31:51 Guard to recoup that funding. You're not typically reimbursed for this kind of work. Yet, with a

00:31:57 workforce shortage of about 10 percent, you're closing, you're downgrading stations within the

00:32:02 Coast Guard, not because of this incident, but that's just what's happening in the Coast Guard.

00:32:07 And we're not, we passed a Coast Guard authorization that gets us to 14 and a half

00:32:13 billion for 25 and 15 billion for 26. So we're not near the goal of 20, a 20 billion service for 2030.

00:32:20 So just as Congress moves forward with supplemental appropriations for the Key Bridge,

00:32:24 how is the Coast Guard thinking about being part of that supplemental appropriation to get

00:32:29 reimbursed for the, get some cost recovery for your work? Yeah, thanks, Rankin member. And I

00:32:35 don't want to get ahead of the administration on the plans or the amounts and so on, the details

00:32:40 of the supplemental. But the way you've articulated, first of all, we have been expending operating

00:32:47 funds as we do during emergencies like this, like we do for hurricane responses and other things.

00:32:51 And we've been keeping close tabs on those. And so far, we've spent about 20 million dollars of

00:32:59 direct and indirect funding on this particular response. But what we see in events like this,

00:33:05 and others like it, is that we call, we do what we call burn readiness, right? So we have to have

00:33:14 other assets around the area work harder and to cover for the boats, aircraft, people who are

00:33:19 working these. We've mobilized now when I visited the command post, on average, we've had about 200

00:33:26 individuals at the peak in the command post per day that's gone down. We're mobilizing them from

00:33:31 around the country. In fact, most of them are from outside Baltimore right now. And so there's

00:33:36 an opportunity cost from the commands that provide those individuals. And I think what this exposes,

00:33:42 sir, is, and you know us well, is that the Coast Guard readiness is becoming more and more brittle

00:33:47 as we fail to have the kind of consistent budgets reaching that 20 billion a year that the Coast

00:33:54 Guard's articulated, reaching the three billion per year on our procurement, construction and

00:34:00 improvement, double what we actually receive in order to do the necessary capitalizations. And so

00:34:06 this brittleness in our readiness manifests in a whole bunch of different ways. And we really do

00:34:12 appreciate congressional support and ask for additional support for appropriations in the

00:34:17 future. Yeah, thanks. General Graham, now to you. Kind of the same question, but last week,

00:34:22 the Corps reprogrammed $20 million in unused funds from FY 2020, including a million dollars

00:34:28 out of my district and from prior year funds. Do you have an estimate of how many more dollars

00:34:36 you might need to reprogram first? And second, how are you thinking about a supplemental

00:34:42 appropriations for cost recovery for the Corps? Ranking Member Larson, thank you for that question.

00:34:48 Similar to the Coast Guard, we certainly want to get ahead of the administration. But right now,

00:34:52 we've been able to use the project funds. And as your opening statement indicated,

00:34:57 that dredging work that we had planned to do with those funds in this year will still need to be

00:35:02 done. The emergency reprogramming that I referenced in my opening statement, most of that money

00:35:10 we didn't need. So where does that money come from? Mainly it's bid savings. A lot of these

00:35:16 projects had happened during times of COVID when it was a very favorable bid environment. And we

00:35:20 were able to go back to those funds. A good example of what some of that might be, a contractor might

00:35:29 put a claim on a project, a request for equitable adjustment. And a few years later, those claims

00:35:35 have been adjudicated. And if we didn't have to pay that request, then we would unobligate those

00:35:42 funds. Mr. Chairman, if I could indulge you for a moment, not for a question, but I do want to

00:35:49 let Chair Homendy know, I'll need to absorb your first half of the report. It's rather technical.

00:35:57 I'm not an engineer, but we'll absorb it and get back to you with some questions on it. And just

00:36:02 as a data point for the committee, the Skagit River Bridge collapse in 2013 cost a total of

00:36:08 $19 million for the insurer and took us 10 years to recover $19 million. So we should not be

00:36:16 thinking of waiting to recover costs from insurance, the insurer of the carrier or the bridge or

00:36:24 whatever in order to pay for it. It's going to have to take place first because it took 10 years

00:36:28 to get $19 million. If that's the average time it gets $19 million, we'll all be dead by the time we

00:36:35 get the money back from this ocean carrier. So just a point, just a data point for folks. Thanks.

00:36:43 Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for your testimony today. I want to start

00:36:50 by acknowledging the six workers who lost their lives as a result of the collapse of the Francis

00:36:54 Skagit Bridge. Obviously our deepest sympathies go out to their families and their loved ones.

00:36:58 Hours after the Francis Skagit Bridge tragically collapsed, President Biden came out and said it

00:37:04 was his quote intention that the federal government will pay for the entire cost

00:37:08 of reconstructing that bridge. And further, he had quote directed his team to move heaven and

00:37:15 earth to reopen the port and rebuild the bridge as soon as humanly possible. Administrator Botta,

00:37:20 I have a series of questions here as we try to understand the mechanics of the situation before

00:37:24 us. And if you would just give me a yes or no response in the interest of time. While the

00:37:30 bridge was located on I-695 prior to its collapse, it wasn't actually considered a part of the

00:37:34 interstate, but rather was Maryland State Route 695. Is that correct? Yes. The bridge had previously

00:37:41 never received any federal funding. Is that correct? Yes. I understand that Federal Highways

00:37:46 has since approved a request by Maryland to designate the bridge as interstate. Is that

00:37:51 correct? Yes. Meaning the federal share for reconstruction under the emergency relief program

00:37:56 will now be 90 percent. Is that correct? Yes, instead of 80. Okay. So what we're talking about

00:38:01 here is a delta of 10 percent for a bridge that previously never received any federal funding.

00:38:05 Yes. Okay. In your testimony, you mentioned that authorizing a 100 percent federal cross-share

00:38:12 would be consistent with past catastrophic bridge collapses. How many times has Congress

00:38:19 authorized a 100 percent federal share for a fully collapsed bridge? So the, I think the

00:38:25 reference point we're using is the I-35W collapse in Minnesota. Okay. Some say that we needed 100

00:38:31 percent federal funding so we can get the rebuilding done quickly, but that's not how

00:38:34 the ER program works. It's a reimbursement program, correct? Absolutely. As I understand,

00:38:40 the ER financing process generally individual states, the division offices, and the program

00:38:44 office have a process to make sure that projects are ready to receive funding and work can be

00:38:50 completed in a specified time period. Is that right? Yes. So it doesn't really matter if a

00:38:54 project is getting 80 percent federal share, 90 percent, or even 100 percent. The reimbursement

00:38:59 is based on project progress and delivery, correct? Yes. I just want to be clear that nothing is going

00:39:05 to move faster if this is 100 percent federal funded versus 90 percent or any other percentage.

00:39:10 Whether the state contributes money or not, the process for awarding federal reimbursement is

00:39:15 still the same, correct? Can I just deviate from the yes/no for a second? Go ahead. Yes. However,

00:39:22 the 10 percent, so this is the second largest ER request we've ever received, 2.2 billion for

00:39:27 Katrina was the first one, so 1.7 to 1.9 billion dollars. So that 10 percent delta is about 170

00:39:34 to 190 million dollars for the state of Maryland that as they're programming out their multi-year,

00:39:39 multi-billion dollar program. It may not be this project, but it may have impacts on other projects.

00:39:45 Okay. Let me just briefly in the time that I have left, let's talk about the regulatory regime that

00:39:49 will be applied here. Are we going to expect any kind of waivers or anything like that on NEPA or

00:39:58 any other regulatory compliance measures that would be customary on any other construction project?

00:40:04 So, sir, we would not waive NEPA or any of the environmental requirements, but what we have done

00:40:11 is coordinated with our agencies who issue permits and it is our intention, because the bridge

00:40:17 previously existed in this relative footprint, that it would be likely a categorical exclusion,

00:40:23 which would minimize the time. Expand on categorical exclusion. What does that mean?

00:40:27 So, you know, when you go through NEPA, you can either do like a full environmental impact

00:40:33 statement. We could find it get to a finding of no significant impact on environmental assessment.

00:40:39 Categorical exclusion is sort of the more time limited finding and what is the reason we would

00:40:47 use that basis here is because the bridge previously existed and we're putting a bridge

00:40:50 back relatively in the same footprint. You're putting it back in the same spot,

00:40:54 but not necessarily because you're probably going to use different kind of construction.

00:40:59 Would there be some associated flow studies, for example, to address the new construction?

00:41:05 So that is why we are coordinating with our sister agencies who issues the permit, because it is,

00:41:11 as I said, relatively in that same footprint, but probably going to use different peers. It's

00:41:15 probably going to have a little bit of tweaking to the approaches, a different height that was

00:41:20 there before. So that's why I can't say definitively that will be a categorical exclusion.

00:41:24 It's what we're working towards. So it sounds to me like there's going to be a great deal of

00:41:28 flexibility in the interest of getting this thing restored, rebuilt and restoring traffic and

00:41:36 commerce and everything associated with that bridge. Is that correct? I'm not sure if flexibility is

00:41:42 the right word. I think attention from the sister agencies and understanding that there is a desire

00:41:47 to move quickly. And I'm all for that. And I hope that in the future that other projects are given

00:41:51 the same consideration, because time is money and understand that that's certainly the case here.

00:41:57 But there are a lot of other projects out there pending that have cost millions in regulatory

00:42:02 compliance fees that have that have really been delayed as a result. So thank you and I yield back.

00:42:07 Yes, sir.

00:42:12 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

00:42:16 Administrator Batt, Department of Transportation data

00:42:25 show that traffic crashes rose 29 percent on alternative routes in the weeks following

00:42:36 the Key Bridge collapse. The same data show that it now takes between two and four times longer for

00:42:47 drivers to travel those alternative routes. That traffic means trucks are delayed in reaching their

00:42:57 destinations. Commuters are late getting to their jobs or home to their families. And there is more

00:43:08 air pollution and wasted fuel. How has the loss of the Key Bridge hurt traffic safety

00:43:20 and reduced mobility for drivers in the Baltimore region?

00:43:25 Thank you for the question. I think, you know, we saw in Philadelphia after I-95,

00:43:33 we had that bridge collapse that there was just all kinds of traffic moving through neighborhoods

00:43:38 and trying to find their way. And I think a similar effect is happening in Baltimore.

00:43:43 Usually when you have an impact where you remove a significant piece of infrastructure,

00:43:48 traffic seems to level out after a while. That's not happening here in Baltimore to the same extent.

00:43:53 I think it's because of just the criticality of this artery. It's part of the Northeast Corridor.

00:43:59 It's important for Maryland. It's important for Baltimore. But it's also important for the

00:44:03 Northeast Corridor. And so, yes, there are trucks and vehicles moving through neighborhoods that

00:44:07 they would not normally be on. And that's why it's so critically important that we move

00:44:11 with as much speed as possible.

00:44:15 Administrator Batt, it is clear that we need to restore commerce to the Port of Baltimore

00:44:24 and rebuild the bridge to improve safety and mobility in the region.

00:44:29 The full Maryland delegation has proposed legislation to provide 100 percent federal

00:44:38 share for the cost of the new bridge. I wholeheartedly support this legislation.

00:44:45 What effect would the 100 percent federal share have on efforts to rebuild the bridge quickly?

00:44:54 Thank you, Representative, for the question. I've spent a lot of time running state DOTs in my

00:45:01 career. I've been on the private side, so I was with AECOM before this job that works on bridges

00:45:07 across the globe. And I would just say what the benefit of the 100 percent share brings is just

00:45:13 it removes an element of uncertainty. So right now, I think Maryland, and I have to commend

00:45:18 Maryland DOT, just really been consummate professionals throughout this process.

00:45:22 Right now, what they're contemplating is an ER shortage that we have told them about,

00:45:29 that we have, you know, $3.7 billion in unmet needs as the Federal Highway Administration,

00:45:33 with about $870 million available for nationwide ER efforts. And so we're telling them we believe

00:45:41 that we'll have the ER funding there for you. And then they have the uncertainty of the 90 percent

00:45:46 versus the 100 percent. We did remove the 80 percent uncertainty. And so as you're planning

00:45:51 out these multi-year, multi-billion dollar construction programs, you know, not knowing

00:45:56 whether or not that $170 million is going to be there, you know, does it impact things in the,

00:46:02 right now at this moment? No, they're going to move forward. But as they're projecting out and

00:46:07 as they're trying to build their construction program, other contractors, it just, it's an

00:46:12 element of uncertainty that would be helpful. And just to clarify on the 100 percent, you know,

00:46:16 obviously any insurance payments, as the Ranking Member had mentioned, would be reapplied. So

00:46:22 I can pretty much with certainty guarantee this will not be 100 percent federally funded

00:46:29 eventually, because we will recoup all of the insurance payments as possible, and they will

00:46:33 go back in to the ER funds. But as the Ranking Member mentioned, we don't want to wait through

00:46:38 all of the litigation and the NTSB investigations insurance issues for that. Thank you. I yield back.

00:46:46 Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for putting this together. It's very important. Thank you,

00:46:56 witnesses. Last week, the Army Corps notified congressional offices that they would be

00:47:03 utilizing the Emergency Program Reprogramming Authority to the program to reprogram approximately

00:47:11 $33 million of previously appropriated Operation and Maintenance, Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund

00:47:19 dollars for recovery costs imposed by the collapse of the Key Bridge. Nearly $1 million

00:47:25 was reappropriated from Florida and projects in Florida without any request for input from

00:47:34 congressional delegation, the state, or the people. While the recovery effort in Baltimore is important,

00:47:41 this reprogramming of the funds represents a blatant disregard for Florida and desperately

00:47:46 needed improvements to our water resources and infrastructure. General Graham,

00:47:53 if these recently reprogrammed funds were deemed to be in excess, why did the Corps let these funds

00:48:02 sit for years and not act sooner to reprogram them towards projects locally in Florida?

00:48:08 And will the Corps plan to reimburse the South Atlantic Division for these funds?

00:48:14 [Silence]

00:48:19 Congressman Webster, thank you for that question. The example I used earlier of

00:48:24 the some of the funds that we had set aside for a contra when a contractor put a claim, that was

00:48:32 from Jacksonville and that was from the Jacksonville District and it was Jacksonville Harbor. So in

00:48:38 this case, those funds, I think 300 some thousand dollars, are no longer needed for the Jacksonville

00:48:46 Harbor project. So those funds in particular that we had set them aside for a need and that need

00:48:53 didn't materialize, we will not seek recoupment for those. We did do this work, this emergency

00:49:01 reprogramming work, Congressman, very rapidly. And we, as I stated in my opening statement, we haven't

00:49:07 used this authority at this scale for 15 years and we are a little clunky at it in terms of

00:49:13 our notification to you and your staffs. If we, if, and I'll use Jacksonville District as an example,

00:49:23 if there are some of those funds that they do find a need for, we'll figure out a way to make sure

00:49:29 that projects continue. To your first comment on some of those old funds that have been sitting

00:49:35 out there for a while, why hadn't we cleaned up the books sooner? Sir, you're absolutely right,

00:49:40 we should have. As you know better than most that the Gulf states fought against the National

00:49:48 Contingency Plan Unified Command Structure response throughout the Deep Horizon oil spill.

00:49:54 National Incident Commander's report concluded the state's efforts resulted in the political

00:50:00 and social nullification of the oil spill. Also the response doctrine and structure and governance.

00:50:09 It appears that the press reports that meetings with Maryland state officials and a number of

00:50:15 staff trips, a number of staff member trips to the wreck site that Maryland embraced the

00:50:21 National Incident Command Structure and then has worked well within that structure.

00:50:31 Is the National Incident Command Structure still an effective and efficient mechanism for

00:50:36 coordinating federal interagency, federal interagency and state local federal

00:50:43 interactions during the incidents such as the DALI?

00:50:47 Congressman, if that's for me, I can't agree more with your statement. As the Chief of Staff for

00:50:56 Admiral Allen on the Deepwater Horizon spill and now being someone who has been witness to the

00:51:02 terrific work in the unified effort in this one, it's been very, very different in terms of

00:51:08 cooperation and collaboration. Underpinning that is the absolute necessity and the benefit

00:51:16 of the Incident Command System under the National Incident Management System framework. That has

00:51:22 served this response incredibly well. It's the doctrine of the U.S. Any agency, entity, Army,

00:51:29 Corps, state can come together with a common lexicon, a common way of planning to come together

00:51:35 and make this work. But I'd also like to highlight a real difference that has made a difference,

00:51:42 and that is that elected leadership and the operational leadership has been connected in

00:51:48 a very constructive way. From Governor Moore to Mayor Scott to members of Congress from the

00:51:55 Maryland delegation, they have taken it upon themselves to get regular updates and a great

00:52:02 interest in the progress in the response. They have handled for the unified command a lot of

00:52:07 the public affairs and external communications in a very constructive way. And they've actually

00:52:13 provided the trade space for the operational response to continue on without pressure,

00:52:20 without being rushed. It's been very constructive. Thank you very much. Yield back.

00:52:26 Thank you, Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larson for holding this important hearing on

00:52:37 the federal response to the Francis Scott Key Bridge to collapse in Maryland.

00:52:42 Further extend my condolences to the families of the six individuals who lost their lives during

00:52:45 the collapse. Thank our esteemed witnesses for appearing here today, especially Administrator

00:52:52 Bott, who was with us in Memphis on Monday. Appreciate your coming to see the I-55 Bridge

00:53:00 and the urgent need to replace it across the Mississippi River, Memphis, and West Memphis.

00:53:06 That is, of course, as you well know, a national treasure to have transportation going across the

00:53:12 country there at I-40. We had the I-40 Bridge have a problem last year and shut down. I-55 Bridge

00:53:20 could have the same problem because it's in the New Madrid earthquake vault zone,

00:53:27 which is predicted to occur. It's been predicted for about 20 years, but it's going to occur. It's

00:53:32 more likely sooner than later. As you all look at the damages to the

00:53:39 Key Bridge, which were caused partially, I think, because it wasn't built to withstand that

00:53:45 large of a boat, it could have been, maybe, the piers could have been buttressed and made it more

00:53:55 stable. Is that correct? Mr. Bott, can you answer? Thank you, Representative Cohen. Yes, it was good

00:54:06 to spend some time with you in Memphis looking at that bridge. I think one of the things we're

00:54:10 waiting for, and it was great to see the preliminary report from the NTSB,

00:54:15 but I think we're going to be working closely with the NTSB just to figure out exactly what

00:54:20 types of protection might be needed for bridges and what could have been possible. But, again,

00:54:28 I don't want to step into the NTSB realm. I'm sorry. Please. Thank you, sir. For the Key Bridge,

00:54:37 we are obviously looking at, there were two dolphins on the east side, two on the west side.

00:54:42 They're rather small and the vessel just sort of bypassed the dolphins. What ended up striking

00:54:50 the pier was the starboard side of the bow that hit the column. The pier protection around the

00:55:01 column itself is timber, concrete, a little bit of steel, but it's very close into the pier itself.

00:55:08 Other structures that we're looking at have pier protection that comes out farther

00:55:16 so that a vessel can't get to the column. Other dolphins are much larger, so we are looking at

00:55:24 other structures across the United States to see what might be good models. I think the key here is

00:55:31 you have a bridge that was opened in 1977, and over time, you know, it's not the bridge that's

00:55:39 getting larger. It's not the waterway that's getting larger. It's the vessels that are

00:55:42 getting larger, and not just width, but height with containers. And so it's important that states

00:55:52 and other bridge owners are looking at, from a risk assessment standpoint, what is now going

00:55:58 through, what is the vessel traffic, and how is our infrastructure protected? So were the bridges

00:56:08 built after 1977 that were built in a fashion that they would have been able to withstand such an

00:56:14 impact? You have to. So thank you, Congressman, for the question. It's an important question. We

00:56:24 are working with our state DOT partners to identify all of the bridges that are subject to,

00:56:33 you know, seagoing vessels, also, you know, in the Great Lakes region, barge traffic on the

00:56:39 Mississippi and other waterways. I think what this region has done is driven home that need to

00:56:45 look at many of our bridges, which are older, and look at that protection, and we're going to rely

00:56:49 on the NTSB recommendations. Again, it is, there was a lot of force. I mean, I've heard different,

00:56:56 you know, analogies of the force, you know, the equivalent of a rocket ship taking off. And so

00:57:03 we just want to be careful in our consideration of how we both protect and build bridges in the

00:57:10 21st century as they're dealing with these new potential threats. Thank you. I just would like

00:57:15 to urge you, as I did in Memphis, that we need to look at preventative measures so we don't have

00:57:20 another Francis Scott Key Bridge disaster. And earthquakes would cause that, and there's no

00:57:27 place in the United States, I think, more vulnerable than the New Madrid Fault and the

00:57:31 I-55 Bridge that was built before there were seismic standards that were not part of the

00:57:37 bridge. So it's deficient, needs to be replaced, and hope that you'll look in terms just as this

00:57:43 disaster, bridges that we fund under the bipartisan infrastructure bill, be ones that might be

00:57:50 susceptible to either Earth, man, God, God created, I hate to say God, I hate to give God

00:57:57 responsibility, but disasters that are caused by other than man-made disasters.

00:58:03 I yield back and I thank you for coming and Elvis thanks you too.

00:58:07 Mr. Perry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll begin. I just offer my condolences to the family,

00:58:14 and I think it underscores, the circumstance underscores how potentially horrific,

00:58:19 almost unimaginable, what might be seen as mundane work can end up being at a critical moment. It's

00:58:26 it's it is unimaginable. If you can imagine yourself at two or three in the morning,

00:58:31 falling, you know, 100, 200 feet into the water, steel and concrete crashing around you. With that,

00:58:36 Administrator Bott, the Francis Scott Key Bridge is a toll, or was a toll facility that never

00:58:43 received any federal funding prior to the collapse, right? Yes, sir. And how much revenue did

00:58:51 the state of Maryland receive or generate from the bridge on an annual basis, if you know?

00:58:56 Sir, I'd have to double check. I don't want to give you a false impression.

00:59:00 I didn't know if you would have a different figure than I do. I've got about 56.8 million in 2023,

00:59:05 just for your reference. So that's what that's what they were taking in under the current law.

00:59:11 And under this administration's plan, the bridge would get 100% share. So the federal government

00:59:17 would pay 100% of that. And while you say that this is consistent with bridge collapse emergencies

00:59:24 in the past, and I think you're referring to the I-35 collapse, that was not a toll bridge,

00:59:31 right? That was part of the interstate system. And so my questions, I guess, center around payment

00:59:39 for this. I think we can all agree that we probably and shouldn't wait for the insurance

00:59:45 companies and the litigators to work it out. But Maryland had insurance on the bridge, didn't they?

00:59:50 Sir, I'm aware of one policy that Maryland has for $350 million.

00:59:56 $350 million, right? So that should, by all rights, you would assume be actioned and go towards

01:00:04 paying for a portion, whatever portion of the bridge reconstruction it would pay for, right?

01:00:11 Absolutely, sir. We just, I have yet to go through and have our lawyers figure out exactly what is in

01:00:17 there. But yes, whatever portion of that $350 million we would apply. So I guess when you say

01:00:24 consistent with past emergencies, as you already said, the relief fund is $3.7 billion behind.

01:00:31 We're $35 trillion this month in debt at the federal level. And I wonder if you think it's

01:00:38 fair that the American taxpayer should not only pay to reconstruct the bridge,

01:00:44 but then pay tolls after which to use the infrastructure they just paid for in their taxes.

01:00:52 Because you're going to set a new precedent here. Is that the precedent we're going to set? Or is

01:00:58 there some plan to recoup the cost of reconstruction of the bridge? And I think according to the

01:01:04 figures we've heard today, upwards of $2 billion, a bridge that originally cost $60.3 million.

01:01:10 Is there some plan to recoup that and send that back into the disaster relief fund or to the

01:01:18 highway fund, which continually needs massive infusions from the general fund just to stay

01:01:24 afloat? What's the plan? Yeah, thank you, sir. Very important questions, and I appreciate

01:01:31 your interest. So let me just try to quickly go through that. Where this was a Maryland

01:01:36 state facility before, now it's been designated as part of the interstate system. They were free

01:01:42 before to collect their tolls and use them for maybe Port of Baltimore, whatever they were using

01:01:48 them for. Now, since this has been federalized as a facility and going forward when the tolls

01:01:52 are restored, as part of the interstate system, they will have to use those for Title 23 eligible

01:02:00 funding. So whether it's the maintenance of the existing bridge or other Title 23 highway

01:02:06 purposes in Maryland, so the American taxpayer will be benefiting from those tolls. In terms of the

01:02:13 precedent, if it was a pre-existing toll facility, they are allowed to toll the facility going

01:02:19 forward. But again, it would be using Title 23 eligible expenditures on those tolls. I understand

01:02:26 the Title 23 expenditures and understand that they'd be used for surface transportation in

01:02:31 Maryland, but you're asking the taxpayers from across the country to pay for it. And, you know,

01:02:37 if you're from Washington state, likely you're never going to travel across that bridge, but

01:02:41 you're sure going to pay for it. And as long as we're setting precedent, I think it would be

01:02:45 appropriate at least to consider reimbursing through the tolls, the emergency fund or the

01:02:52 transportation fund for the entire country before all of the money goes right back to the state

01:02:58 that's going to be receiving it where the bridge resides, which arguably I think can be said

01:03:04 was not prepared to withstand the traffic impact that it had. Meanwhile, it's right there. I mean,

01:03:12 it's not like it was a surprise that the bridge is there and ships are going under it and this

01:03:16 could happen. So with that in mind, you know, with the time that I've already expended and

01:03:23 expired, I hope you would consider a plan to reimburse the taxpayer under horrific debt right

01:03:30 now who can't afford their groceries, their gas bills, their daycare bills for the cost of this

01:03:36 bridge for which one state has been receiving all the money for its entire existence and apparently

01:03:41 is going to receive all the money from the tolls for the rest of its existence. And with that,

01:03:46 Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance.

01:03:47 Mr. Garamendi, you're recognized.

01:03:54 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the hearing. Witnesses, Vice Admiral and General,

01:04:05 you and your teams and the support organizations that you've contracted with are doing extraordinary

01:04:12 work and we thank you for that. The issue before this committee was pretty much laid out by the

01:04:19 chairman in his opening remarks. And I would suggest that we have an opportunity to clarify

01:04:29 the responsibilities, some of which we heard from the previous member just a moment ago.

01:04:37 A couple of things here. First of all, the notion I President Biden is correct. OK, we'll put up the

01:04:43 full cost of reconstruction. However, that legislation should be written in such a way that

01:04:50 that the federal government. Will be reimbursed for any money received in the liability issues,

01:05:02 the 350 million that the state of Maryland had as an insurance policy on the bridge,

01:05:09 as well as whatever other liability payment may come from lawsuits against the shipping company

01:05:18 and the owners of the ship. So if we should, and this should be really the work of this committee,

01:05:23 is to carefully structure the legislation so that the federal government,

01:05:28 pointing up the 100% at the outset, would be fully reimbursed by any revenues.

01:05:33 My colleague raised an interesting point about tolls. We should consider that and how that

01:05:41 fits into it and keep in mind the entire interstate system where tolls are collected

01:05:49 in various places across the United States. So those are things that are out there. There's

01:05:53 also one other issue that I want to encourage this committee to deal with. In addition to

01:06:00 recovering. Whatever money might be available from lawsuits,

01:06:06 and that is the limit of Liability Act of 1851. It seems as though perhaps even that is precedes

01:06:16 the law in Arizona, which dealt with a different issue. That limit of Liability Act really

01:06:25 has to change. And I would urge the committee to take up this issue. I intend to present to

01:06:32 the committee at the appropriate time, a piece of legislation to do so, so that the owners of these

01:06:40 vessels would be held responsible for the cost of their mistakes. And that right now,

01:06:50 that limited liability would hold that the owner of the ship would be limited to 40 some million

01:06:59 dollars, even though the ship is worth 90 million or more, and the damage is somewhere around 2

01:07:06 billion, not including the cost of the recovery issues and the expenses that the Coast Guard and

01:07:12 the Army Corps of Engineers are now incurring. So my point here is to raise this policy issue,

01:07:23 and really the work of this committee as we go forward. I think the chairman correctly pointed

01:07:28 out that we don't need to do much for the next couple of months. But this year we have to

01:07:34 pass legislation to clarify the ability of the federal government to

01:07:41 receive any funds that are available from various lawsuits that are out there.

01:07:49 And also, this committee should, since it is our jurisdictional area, deal with this 1851 law that

01:07:59 limits the liability of the ship owner to any accident and problem that they may cause.

01:08:06 Now, I don't know if this is an appropriate question for the general and the vice admiral,

01:08:13 but you're welcome to jump in if you'd like. But I think, Mr. Batt, and if you might comment on this

01:08:19 issue about how we might structure legislation to recover whatever damages may be in the

01:08:29 future from either insurance or lawsuits. You can look for help, but you won't.

01:08:36 No, I just, you referenced them and I just, you know, I'm taking a lot of the answers.

01:08:41 I don't want to, I'm happy to share the time. So under the ER program, under the existing

01:08:46 law as it states, any insurance monies that are recouped for any ER event across the country

01:08:53 do go directly back into the ER fund. So the ranking member mentioned the $19 million

01:08:58 Skagit River Bridge, and I think it was actually about 16.6 million that was recovered through

01:09:04 insurance, went directly back in, but as he said correctly, 10 years after the incident.

01:09:09 So whether it's the $350 million insurance policy that Maryland has existing or, you know,

01:09:15 post-investigation and post-legal activity going on for as long as that may be, we will

01:09:23 recover all of that money and send it back in. But as you correctly point out, there is some

01:09:27 questions about how much liability for the ship owner that is out there.

01:09:33 That is a question really should be addressed to the Coast Guard who might want to comment on it,

01:09:37 but I'm out of time now. So I will yield.

01:09:39 Gentleman's time has expired. Mr. Babin, you're recognized.

01:09:44 Sir, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses for being here and your testimonies.

01:09:50 I think there's definitely some resentment among my colleagues and the American public

01:09:55 about this incident. The perception here is really frustrating, and some of the,

01:10:00 you've already addressed some of these, but I'd like to ask my questions. If you zoom out,

01:10:07 the Singapore flag vessel crashes into and completely destroys a historic bridge,

01:10:12 kills six construction workers, and is now trying to avoid liability for the incident.

01:10:18 People have a lot of questions. Is it safe for foreign flag vessels to operate in U.S. waterways?

01:10:24 Are other bridges safe? I've heard a number of questions wondering whether their bridges are

01:10:29 safe. Was this incident a result of foul play or negligence? What can we do to prevent this

01:10:35 from ever happening again, and who is going to pay for this thing? And I appreciate you all for

01:10:40 coming and answering questions. My first question is for Admiral Gauthier. If anyone else has

01:10:47 thoughts, please feel free to jump in. I know this whole response is a great team effort,

01:10:54 but first off, I'm told the Coast Guard is doing a great job leading the way in the unified response

01:10:59 in Baltimore, so I want to thank you and the Coast Guard for your commitment and all the hard work

01:11:05 that you and the Coast Guard have done. As you all know better than most, the Gulf States fought

01:11:11 against the National Contingency Plan Unified Command Structure response throughout the Deep

01:11:17 Water Horizon oil spill a few years ago in the Gulf of Mexico. The National Incident Commander's

01:11:24 report concluded that the Gulf States' effort resulted in the political and social nullification

01:11:32 of the oil spill response doctrine and structure governance. It appears from press reports,

01:11:39 meetings with Maryland state officials, and member and staff trips to the wreck site,

01:11:44 that Maryland embraced the National Incident Command Structure and that the response has

01:11:49 worked well within that structure. Is the National Incident Command Structure still an effective

01:11:56 and efficient mechanism for coordinating federal interagency and state-local federal interactions

01:12:02 during incidents such as the Dali Collision? Congressman, thank you very much first off for

01:12:09 the compliments to the Coast Guard. I just have to also acknowledge the leadership of Colonel

01:12:13 Pinchasen, Army Corps of Engineers, Colonel Butler, Jim Harkins, and Jeff Donahoe, who are the state

01:12:20 incident commanders. It's a fantastic leadership team. To answer your question, the Incident

01:12:25 Command System is absolutely a fundamental principle by which this incident response has

01:12:33 been successful. It's part of U.S. doctrine under the National Incident Management System.

01:12:39 It's how we respond to hurricanes, oil spills, other types of incidents just like this. I think

01:12:44 we now have a great deal of practice in the United States since the Deepwater Horizon in doing this.

01:12:50 And I think what I will just observe is that this particular incident had a very tight connection

01:12:55 between the operational commanders who were running the incident and elected leaders,

01:13:03 who all shared the same objectives. The elected leaders took the time and effort, Governor,

01:13:09 Mayor, members of Congress, to keep up to date on what was going on and to provide the trade space

01:13:14 to allow these folks to get all in the response. Okay, thank you. Second question I'd like to

01:13:19 address to Administrator Bott. I'd like to talk about the path forward from here for the Key

01:13:26 Bridge. What is the plan to replace the bridge? My constituents are not wanting to pay for this

01:13:31 thing. In my view, the company or the country responsible for the incident should be footing

01:13:37 the bill, not the U.S. taxpayer. If the U.S. is ultimately going to pay for this bridge,

01:13:43 it better come out of funds that we've already allocated. President Biden and Speaker Pelosi

01:13:49 authorized trillions for infrastructure, and that should be including bridges. The last thing I want

01:13:57 to do is to vote to spend another $1 or $2 billion on a new bridge. So, Administrator Bott, talk to

01:14:03 me on what you see as a path forward here on the payment for this thing. Thank you, Congressman.

01:14:09 And just in terms of the rebuild path, Maryland DOT plans to issue their RFP close to Memorial Day.

01:14:15 They'll select a preferred team in August, and then they're looking at construction completion

01:14:22 in 2028 is the preliminary schedule. And in terms of the payment, as I've stated, right now there's

01:14:29 a preliminary estimate $1.7 to $1.9 billion. There's a $350 million insurance payment that

01:14:35 we're working through to see what level of that would be applicable. And any funds that are

01:14:40 recovered through legal activity or insurance payouts will go back into the ER funds. We just

01:14:45 don't have a path to getting there right now in terms of what is eligible.

01:14:50 Okay, I'm out of time, so I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all.

01:14:54 Mr. Johnson.

01:14:57 Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this very important hearing, and thank you to the witnesses

01:15:02 for appearing. And thank you for the work that you've been doing to ameliorate the harm that

01:15:09 has been caused by this bridge collapse. And I also want to offer my condolences to the

01:15:17 families of the six construction workers who were killed in this bridge collapse,

01:15:25 and I'd like to commend the quick work of the police officers who made sure that traffic was

01:15:35 stopped and no other people were on the bridge who could have been killed as a result of this

01:15:43 collapse. And I also want to recognize the collaboration between state and federal

01:15:50 officials and agencies to address this situation. And I want to get at this issue of perhaps there

01:16:00 being some people in the country who are not inside the state of Maryland who resent having to

01:16:08 pay for this bridge reconstruction. Administrator Bott, can you tell us how this

01:16:19 bridge collapse impacts interstate commerce?

01:16:25 Thank you for your condolences and for the question, Congressman. I think, you know,

01:16:31 I was the Secretary of Transportation in Delaware, in Colorado, and as a deputy in Kentucky. And I

01:16:36 think that, you know, what is so critically important for our transportation system is

01:16:43 that you can drive from New York to Los Angeles across a system that is completely uniform,

01:16:48 is set to standards. And what is happening, I think we've learned through the Port of Baltimore,

01:16:54 is that that highway system is tied into ports. It's the third busiest port in the country. So

01:17:01 there are jobs that are being impacted. There is freight movements that are being impacted. There

01:17:04 are neighborhoods that are being impacted. And so, yeah, this is not just an issue for Maryland,

01:17:10 it's an issue for the Northeast Corridor and for our national economy.

01:17:13 It's actually having an impact on prices for consumer goods. Is that correct?

01:17:21 That is something that under the leadership of Secretary Buttigieg, we've been closely looking at,

01:17:25 you know, many of the goods that move through there. So there's a lot of coal that moves

01:17:30 through that port. There's a lot of automobiles and farm equipment. And so, to the extent,

01:17:36 now there's a lot of that traffic has been diverted. I don't want to get outside of the

01:17:39 Federal Highway lane to other ports, but there is a lot of movements of goods from, say,

01:17:46 ships that have diverted back to Maryland. And that is adding costs for those, say, vehicles to

01:17:51 be finished at the plants nearby. So, obviously, supply chain is important.

01:17:57 Okay, thank you. When is it projected, assuming that funding is in place,

01:18:03 that the bridge can be rebuilt and reopened?

01:18:06 Thank you, sir. The projected schedule right now is for a progressive design-build team to be

01:18:14 selected this summer and for construction to begin next year and run through 2028.

01:18:20 Thank you. And so it would be 2029 before the bridge would reopen for traffic?

01:18:27 2028, 2029. It'll be a progressive design-build, so we'll figure out the schedule as we go.

01:18:34 Thank you. Chairwoman Homendy, with respect to the causation of this cargo

01:18:43 vessel losing power and that causing it, this vessel, to drift into the bridge, are there any

01:18:54 concerns or does the fact that there was no, there seems to be no redundancy

01:19:03 in terms of the basic power of the vessel, there's no redundancy? You cut it on, you cut it,

01:19:13 it gets cut off, there's no secondary situation that would kick in. Am I correct on that? And

01:19:22 if I am correct, what are the implications as we move forward? Yeah, I mean, there's certainly

01:19:28 redundancy in the electrical system and the circuit breakers. They switched circuit breakers

01:19:33 after the power outages in port. With respect to the emergency generator, it would not

01:19:42 allow for regaining propulsion. It really focuses on the critical portions of the vessel, which

01:19:50 would be radio communication, lighting. If you had any sort of, if you wanted to regain propulsion

01:20:00 through any sort of emergency generator, it would literally take a six-story generator

01:20:08 on a vessel to do that. There is redundancy in, say, cruise ships, but vessels, the DALI is not

01:20:17 unlike other vessels. I think here is really determining for us what happened with the

01:20:25 electrical system on the accident voyage, what happened in those two blackouts, which is why

01:20:32 we have been working very closely with Hyundai, who manufactures the equipment, to try to replicate

01:20:41 some of the electrical problems that were seen that day and continue looking and testing each

01:20:52 of the components. Thank you. I yield back. Mr. Graves.

01:21:00 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I first want to join others in wishing condolences to the families of

01:21:06 those who were lost in the bridge collapse. Also, I just find it remarkable the incredible action of

01:21:14 the law enforcement community came in and stopped traffic that could have been much worse than it

01:21:19 was. Last week, I had the opportunity to go out to the bridge. Admiral, I will tell you that

01:21:28 Admiral Gilreath, Captain O'Donnell, and even Lieutenant Carter, who was behind you a little

01:21:34 while ago, just absolutely remarkable. General, Colonel, your district commander down there,

01:21:41 Colonel Pinchasen, I believe, she was awesome. I had met her down in New Orleans, and she and

01:21:48 her team did a great job. They are folks from DHS that were really, really good, just incredibly

01:21:53 thorough briefing and gave lots of comfort that things were under control. I appreciate all the

01:21:59 efforts that are underway down there. Administrator, I want to ask a question. I want to make sure I

01:22:03 understand something. You said earlier that what's being done in this bridge is consistent with

01:22:09 what's been done in other bridges in the past for disasters. Is that accurate?

01:22:14 Thank you, Representative. I'm trying to think of what I said. I wrote down that you said

01:22:20 consistent with historic bridge disasters, but there's not another bridge where FHWA came in and

01:22:26 just designated that it's going to be part of the interstate system. No, we only learned that it was

01:22:32 not part of the interstate system in light of this event. Okay, so that is an anomaly. Absolutely.

01:22:37 Okay, I want to be clear on that. Then secondly, you've talked about the use of categorical

01:22:45 exclusions and doing some type of expedited NEPA, whether you do a CADx or you do alternative

01:22:50 arrangements. I want to be clear, fully supportive of it. But in the past, Minneapolis Bridge,

01:22:55 the I-35 Bridge, I believe the Bridge in Washington State and others, similar things have been done.

01:23:00 Can you cite where there's been environmental damages or destruction from that approach as

01:23:05 opposed to going through the regular NEPA? So just trying to think through your question,

01:23:12 citing environmental damage by using the expedited approach. No, I can't cite environmental damage.

01:23:20 And I can't either. And actually, Colonel, excuse me, Major General Graham, sorry about that,

01:23:24 demoted you. General, you recall after Hurricane Katrina, the levees were built using alternative

01:23:29 arrangements. Do you remember any type of environmental damages or destruction that was

01:23:33 caused from doing the alternative arrangements? Yeah, I don't think so either. I think it actually

01:23:39 worked out really well. And so my message to you on this is that right now, the average road project

01:23:45 takes somewhere around seven years and three or four months. As you know, the White House has just

01:23:50 released new rules on NEPA in line with the fiscal, well, attempting to be in line with the Fiscal

01:23:55 Responsibility Act, but failing on some things, but that would significantly shorten it. But my

01:24:01 message is, is that this shouldn't be the exception. Environmental damages haven't resulted

01:24:06 from using categorical exclusions or alternative arrangements. Look, I don't know what the traffic

01:24:12 impacts are of this bridge. We have a bridge at home that is the source of the fourth worst

01:24:16 traffic problem in America, the Mississippi River Bridge, I-10, I-10 going from California to

01:24:22 Florida, fourth worst traffic in America. We have taken seven years to narrow a new bridge alignment

01:24:30 down to 32 alignments. Like, you can't make this stuff up. This is outrageous. We have urgency

01:24:37 there as well. Look, I want to be crystal clear. I fully support, fully support federal funding

01:24:43 up front. Let's get this thing built. Let's get it done as quickly as possible. I fully support

01:24:47 categorical exclusion or alternative arrangements. I've been in touch with the governor of Maryland

01:24:51 and I appreciate him reaching out. But this is a major anomaly. We've got a toll. We've got a

01:24:58 responsible party. This isn't a natural disaster. And I think that we need to make sure that we're

01:25:02 holding the responsible party accountable. We had a similar incident in Louisiana in the mid-90s,

01:25:08 the Brightfield. A Brightfield incident came and crashed into the River Walk in Louisiana.

01:25:13 It was a Japanese-built vessel. It was run by Chinese – it was, I think, run by Chinese and

01:25:18 flagged in Liberia. Admiral, I want to ask you real quick, can you think of any similar incidents

01:25:24 with Jones Act vessels that have occurred like this? Not from deep draft vessels. Certainly,

01:25:31 there are a number of towing vessels. Sure, some barges and much more minor incidents. Chairman

01:25:36 Hominy, are you aware of anything? And so, look, one thing I just I want to point out here, and for

01:25:42 the record, she's taken her head no. One thing I want to point out here, look, Jones Act vessels,

01:25:46 U.S.-built, U.S.-crewed, U.S.-flagged, we go through annual inspections, a night and day

01:25:52 difference. And I think that's something else we need to take into consideration here. Lastly,

01:25:55 Administrator, this bridge, it is not going to be built back exactly like it was. It will not. It's

01:26:00 going to be wider. You're going to have shoulders. You're going to have a different pier configuration.

01:26:03 You're going to have different tidal influences. You're going to have bumpers. You're going to

01:26:06 have dolphins and other things protecting the pier structures. Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay. All

01:26:11 right. I just want to make sure that we're noting that this is actually a different bridge that's

01:26:15 being reconstructed with effectively waiving or providing alternative arrangements or categorical

01:26:21 exclusions underneath. I yield back. Ms. Titus. Excuse me. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And like

01:26:31 everyone here, I too offer sympathy to the families of those who were lost. These people represent

01:26:37 sometimes the invisible folks who are on the front lines who provide safety and security in our

01:26:42 infrastructure, and also the harbor workers and police officers who were there and made the

01:26:48 situation much less terrible than it already was. I would ask the chairwoman and Administrator Bott

01:26:55 about one of the things that's been pointed out in the study of the bridge. It seems like it didn't

01:27:01 have a reliable fender system, I believe it's called, to protect the piers from the crash.

01:27:08 I wonder if you have reviewed bridges and other major ports to determine whether or not they have

01:27:13 those fenders in place. And if not, is there an existing program with funding that might be used

01:27:20 to retrofit some of those other bridges to be sure they don't have the same problem? We can be,

01:27:25 hate the word, but proactive about that. Thank you for the question. We've actually been

01:27:31 recommending, we recommended back in 1988 that the Coast Guard and the Federal Highways evaluate the

01:27:37 adequacy of pier protection on bridges over navigable waterways and U.S. ports and harbors.

01:27:43 That recommendation remains closed, unacceptable, because at the time the Coast Guard said they did

01:27:51 not have the authority to take action on that evaluation. But if I, one thing I will say,

01:27:58 and I hope that we walk away from this in considering is the Federal Government states

01:28:06 they, bridge owners, they need to evaluate current structures and make sure if you have

01:28:11 navigable waterway that you are doing a risk analysis to ensure safety, to ensure there's

01:28:18 adequate pier protection. In this situation, we are looking at pier protection. We're looking at

01:28:25 certainly the dolphins, but then the protection around the piers themselves.

01:28:30 And then looking at different bridges across the United States to see how those have been

01:28:38 improved over time. In this situation, you have a bridge that was, began operations in 1977,

01:28:45 and if it was built today, it would be built differently. And so that has to be taken into

01:28:53 consideration. I will say I'm very encouraged by what the Admiral announced their Board of Inquiry

01:29:00 about looking at ports across the United States to make sure there is adequate protection,

01:29:06 and I assume that it will include some of the structures as well, including bridges. So that's

01:29:10 great. Administrator Bott, would you like to comment on that? Thank you, Congresswoman. And

01:29:18 yes, we're obviously working closely with the NTSB and just really respect their thoughts

01:29:26 and guidance. We have already reached out to our state DOT partners who are the owners

01:29:32 of these bridges. Similar to when there's any kind of bridge tragedy after Minnesota,

01:29:37 everybody is reaching out to figure out what fracture critical bridges they had.

01:29:40 And so we're going to go out, we've already got a preliminary list, we're going to continue to

01:29:46 identify. And again, it's the deep draft vessels, it's the barges, it's examining all the threats,

01:29:51 and then doing that cost benefit analysis of what protections are sort of quickly deployable,

01:29:57 how do we get these bridges protected, and then how do we update design standards given the

01:30:02 ever-changing nature of the vessels going underneath them? Well, can you use, I believe,

01:30:07 the acronym is BFP, Bridge Replacement Rehabilitation Preservation Protection and

01:30:13 Construction Program? Is that available with any kind of funding or that can be used to retrofit

01:30:19 some of these bridges if they don't meet these requirements you're talking about?

01:30:22 Thank you, Congresswoman. Yes, so in the bipartisan infrastructure law, there was $12.5 billion

01:30:28 allocated for discretionary grant funding and about, I think, $30 billion on the formula side.

01:30:35 Seismic protection as has been retrofitting is possible. And this is something that we're going

01:30:44 to look into as we work with our state partners who are applying for those funds.

01:30:48 Well, as you look into it, if you find any problems with the program that won't allow it to

01:30:54 work towards retrofitting in a situation like this or make it more difficult, will you let us

01:31:00 know so if we need to make some changes, we can address those legislatively? Yes, ma'am.

01:31:05 Thank you. I yield back.

01:31:06 Thank you, General. The lady yields back. The gentleman from North Carolina,

01:31:14 Mr. Rouser, is recognized for five minutes.

01:31:16 Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I too want to extend my condolences to the family and all those who

01:31:22 were injured in this very tragic happening. General Graham, I'll start with you. Last week,

01:31:31 the Corps announced it would reprogram appropriated dollars specific to other Corps projects

01:31:36 towards the efforts at Baltimore Harbor. It's our understanding these funds were appropriated in

01:31:42 fiscal year 2020 or earlier and have been determined to be more than what's needed for

01:31:48 those authorized projects. Is that an accurate portrayal? Is that correct? That's accurate.

01:31:54 So this has created a bit of confusion among members and even the committee here.

01:32:02 Back home, for example, we've got the Wilmington District has seen several projects whose funds

01:32:10 have been repurposed, notably Wilmington Harbor, Moorhead City Harbor, and New River Inlet,

01:32:17 all had hundreds of thousands of dollars redirected from their maintenance accounts.

01:32:21 Can you provide the committee with the amount of reprogrammed dollars, a list of the projects you

01:32:27 are reprogramming those funds from, and which districts those projects are in? Absolutely.

01:32:35 Because we would greatly appreciate those answers as quickly as possible.

01:32:39 And then the question everybody's got on their mind is how much money is sitting out there

01:32:43 that is in an account that was appropriated in 2020 or earlier that has been left unused?

01:32:52 I'd like to know the answer to that question, too.

01:32:59 And then following up, does the Corps plan to use Section 101(a)(8) authority again in the future?

01:33:06 And if so, are there any limitations to the number of times the Corps can utilize that authority

01:33:11 within a specific time frame?

01:33:13 Rouser, probably we will have to use the emergency reprogramming authority again.

01:33:22 As I stated in my opening statement, we have not used that authority at this scale for 15 years.

01:33:29 And we understand that Congress puts specific amounts of money on specific projects,

01:33:34 and you intend it to be used for those projects.

01:33:37 From these instances, as stated earlier, most of these funds were the result of bid savings.

01:33:45 They were the result of we held on to additional money to settle claims with contractors.

01:33:50 So it's relatively a good news story that we saved the taxpayers money.

01:33:57 To your statement on our accounting procedures, do those need to be looked at so that those

01:34:04 old funds aren't sitting out there?

01:34:07 Absolutely, and we're committed to that.

01:34:09 Thank you.

01:34:11 Following up, given these funds are well on their way to being reprogrammed,

01:34:15 does the Corps plan to return any funds to those districts?

01:34:19 What's your plan there?

01:34:20 And if so, what would that timeline be?

01:34:25 To make sure I understand the question correctly, the districts had no uses for these funds,

01:34:30 and so as such, we don't plan to return them.

01:34:33 If they come up with and say, "We made and we do need some of these,"

01:34:39 we'll work with them to make sure that those projects can be delivered.

01:34:42 Sure.

01:34:44 Well, every district has a disaster of some sort at some point,

01:34:47 and I suspect that all those Army Corps districts are going to have some sort of disaster.

01:34:54 I think that's a good question.

01:34:56 I think that's a good question.

01:34:57 I think that's a good question.

01:34:58 I think that's a good question.

01:34:59 I think that's a good question.

01:35:00 I think that's a good question.

01:35:02 I think that's a good question.

01:35:03 I think that's a good question.

01:35:04 I think that's a good question.

01:35:05 I think that's a good question.

01:35:06 I think that's a good question.

01:35:07 I think that's a good question.

01:35:08 I think that's a good question.

01:35:09 I think that's a good question.

01:35:11 I think that's a good question.

01:35:12 I think that's a good question.

01:35:13 I think that's a good question.

01:35:14 I think that's a good question.

01:35:15 I think that's a good question.

01:35:16 I think that's a good question.

01:35:17 I think that's a good question.

01:35:18 Mr. Carbajal, recognized for five minutes.

01:35:20 Thank you, Mr. Chair.

01:35:23 I recently made a visit to the Francis Scott Key Bridge

01:35:28 incident with a number of my colleagues

01:35:30 to see it firsthand.

01:35:33 Admiral Gauthier, the Coast Guard

01:35:34 has an obligation to respond to all marine casualties.

01:35:38 But incidents of this size have an outsized impact

01:35:42 on Coast Guard resources.

01:35:45 This incident, unfortunately, comes

01:35:47 at a time of strained resources and a 10% workforce shortage.

01:35:52 What is the operational strain on the Coast Guard's

01:35:55 responding to the bridge collapse?

01:35:57 And how can Congress help?

01:35:59 And what is the impact on the workforce?

01:36:05 Congressman, we've mobilized people from across the country.

01:36:08 We've activated reservists to staff the command post

01:36:12 and to respond here.

01:36:13 We've used cutters and small boats

01:36:15 from around the area, helicopters and so on,

01:36:18 to do this response.

01:36:19 So there's an immediate area impact to readiness, certainly.

01:36:24 But what we know is that for unplanned incidents like this,

01:36:29 where we mobilize a lot very quickly,

01:36:32 there are also readiness impacts that happen well

01:36:34 beyond the initial site.

01:36:36 And so I think in terms of--

01:36:39 and going into what's likely to be a pretty severe hurricane

01:36:43 season, I think the main thing here

01:36:46 is that in order for the Coast Guard to reconstitute and be

01:36:49 ready for the next one, we need to have continued

01:36:51 and enduring financial appropriation

01:36:54 support from Congress.

01:36:56 We spent about $20 million so far

01:36:59 in direct and indirect costs here.

01:37:02 But we know that our readiness in the waterways management

01:37:05 field is brittle.

01:37:06 We're short aids to navigation.

01:37:08 There's a cutter that's on scene as a patrol commander that

01:37:12 is 62 years old, the Coast Guard cutter Sledge.

01:37:18 We are working to recapitalize that class of cutter

01:37:21 in the waterways commerce cutter.

01:37:22 And this is repeated again and again

01:37:24 in terms of aircraft recapitalization,

01:37:27 major cutter recapitalization support for our people.

01:37:31 Thank you.

01:37:32 Admiral Gaultier, the IMO ensures minimum global standards

01:37:36 for safe shipping practices.

01:37:38 The US flag vessels are subject to higher standards

01:37:41 and scrutiny.

01:37:43 This is one of the several reasons

01:37:44 I believe it is unacceptable that we rely

01:37:47 on flag of convenience vessels to carry over 98%

01:37:51 of our international cargo.

01:37:53 There's a small minority of my colleagues

01:37:55 who believe that the Jones Act should be repealed.

01:37:58 I am not one of them.

01:38:00 How would your job of ensuring safety in US waters

01:38:05 be made more difficult if US vessels sailing

01:38:10 in our coastal waterways and inland rivers

01:38:12 were supplanted by foreign ships with foreign mariners?

01:38:16 Congressman, your question is related

01:38:19 to safety and the Coast Guard implications of safety.

01:38:23 The Jones Act has been with us for 100 years.

01:38:25 It's pretty foundational to how maritime commerce flows

01:38:29 in the United States.

01:38:30 And the Coast Guard's worked very hard

01:38:33 to provide an equivalent level of safety

01:38:35 from foreign flag vessels, foreign crews,

01:38:38 and IMO through established standards.

01:38:40 But what I really can say here is that the Jones Act

01:38:44 is crucial for our maritime security elements

01:38:47 in terms of the industrial shipbuilding capability

01:38:52 in the United States of America that the Coast Guard

01:38:54 and that the Navy and Marin and others rely on

01:38:58 in terms of construct our US flag military

01:39:02 and public vessels as well.

01:39:04 And we do not want in any way, shape, or form

01:39:08 to jeopardize that maritime security element

01:39:12 of the defense industrial complex through shipbuilding.

01:39:14 Chair Homendy, it is common practice

01:39:20 for American mariners working on US flag ships

01:39:23 to work on board a vessel for two to three months at a time.

01:39:27 Mariners sailing on a flag of convenience vessels

01:39:31 often remain at sea for longer.

01:39:34 In the case of the DALI, I understand that the engineers

01:39:37 have been on board for more than eight months.

01:39:40 Since your preliminary report showed at least one mistake

01:39:45 by the engineer, should we be concerned

01:39:48 with the prevalence of flag of convenience vessels

01:39:51 which operate with lower standards,

01:39:53 operating in and around critical US infrastructure?

01:39:57 Well, we are still on scene and evaluating

01:40:03 everything about this accident.

01:40:06 We will look at any sort of federal regulations

01:40:09 or IMO standards to make sure they're adequate,

01:40:11 but it's too early to tell.

01:40:12 What about the standards?

01:40:17 If they abide by lower standards,

01:40:20 that shouldn't be of concern?

01:40:21 I'm not saying it's not a concern.

01:40:23 I'm saying we have to evaluate with this particular accident

01:40:27 what was in place and whether that was adequate or not.

01:40:34 But beyond this incident, is there a concern?

01:40:38 I will have to get back to you on that for the record.

01:40:43 Thank you.

01:40:44 Mr. Chair, I yield back.

01:40:46 The gentleman yields back.

01:40:50 The chair recognizes Mr. Boss from Illinois for five minutes.

01:40:54 Thank you, Madam Chair.

01:40:55 I want to associate myself with the comments

01:40:58 of the concern for the families and prayers

01:41:02 or tragedies such as this,

01:41:03 and also thank the people that responded so well

01:41:06 and are doing the work.

01:41:08 But ensuring that our nation's infrastructure

01:41:11 is secure and maintained

01:41:14 is an important responsibility of our Congress.

01:41:16 But it's also important to have uniform guidelines in place

01:41:21 to know how an infrastructure is going to be paid for.

01:41:25 Now, in my district, when local communities

01:41:28 reach out for assistance with grants to do road work,

01:41:31 they know that local cost shares at 20%.

01:41:34 Now, just recently, my district had a --

01:41:37 on Highway 51 -- US 51, we had to close,

01:41:42 and it's going to be closed for quite some time

01:41:44 because a sinkhole opened up.

01:41:45 And the local community will need to repair the road,

01:41:49 and there will be a cost connected with that work.

01:41:51 However, I don't expect the community

01:41:54 to try to redesignate the road

01:41:57 to be considered part of the interstate highway system

01:42:00 to take care of that.

01:42:01 Mr. Brott, despite being located on Interstate 695,

01:42:06 the Key Bridge was not part of the interstate highway system.

01:42:09 The incident that caused the collapse of the bridge

01:42:12 occurred in March,

01:42:14 and yet the bridge designation

01:42:15 wasn't applied to be changed until April.

01:42:19 Are you aware of any other --

01:42:22 aware of this change cost share requirements for this road?

01:42:27 And is it normal, or is it normal for a road change

01:42:33 to be designated after an incident?

01:42:35 Thank you for the question, Representative.

01:42:41 This is the first time I'm aware of redesignating a road.

01:42:44 Me too. Me too.

01:42:46 So can you explain, for the sake of the taxpayers

01:42:50 and the people around this country that also have issues,

01:42:53 how a roadway hasn't designated change suddenly

01:42:57 after repair work was identified?

01:42:59 Because I can tell you the constituents I represent

01:43:02 would like to try to figure out how to do that,

01:43:03 because that's why we --

01:43:06 look, I'm just trying to figure it out

01:43:09 because we have uniform rules in place,

01:43:14 and if we're going to change them,

01:43:16 we're the ones you come to.

01:43:17 Just, I need answers.

01:43:21 Yeah, sorry, Representative, I didn't mean to cut you off there.

01:43:24 Yes, and apologies to the community

01:43:26 that had the sinkhole.

01:43:27 I'm sure that is quite an impactful event

01:43:30 for that community.

01:43:31 In this case, this portion of I-695 was part of the NHS.

01:43:37 It was shielded as part of the interstate

01:43:40 since it was built in the 1970s.

01:43:42 I think there was a --

01:43:44 so for mapping purposes, it was part of it.

01:43:46 There were some standards that were a little bit different

01:43:51 that when they applied to have it designated,

01:43:54 we had to do the process of waivers,

01:43:56 and that got it from the 80/20 share to the 90/10 share.

01:44:01 And so I think our --

01:44:03 I think my assumption before this incident

01:44:06 was that that bridge and that section of I-695

01:44:08 was part of the interstate.

01:44:09 So this was just at the request of Maryland

01:44:12 to have it re-designated as part of it,

01:44:14 and we get those requests.

01:44:15 There are parts of the interstate system

01:44:17 that are shielded, but not necessarily part.

01:44:20 There was an example in Alabama a few years ago.

01:44:23 Okay, and you do that just through administrative rule?

01:44:25 It doesn't require an act of Congress?

01:44:26 It does not.

01:44:27 They would need to come in and say,

01:44:28 "This is why -- these are the design exceptions,"

01:44:31 whether it's the curves

01:44:33 or some of the other elements

01:44:35 that they might have had in there,

01:44:36 and then our engineers would have to say,

01:44:38 "Yes, this is why we would approve those exceptions."

01:44:41 And you've got to understand the concerns of uniformity,

01:44:49 and I understand --

01:44:51 believe me, I'm not arguing,

01:44:52 "Let's not fix it as fast as possible."

01:44:54 I'm not arguing that,

01:44:56 "Hey, whatever the cost is, as we're trying to recruit,"

01:44:59 but as was mentioned by several people questioning,

01:45:02 insurance is not going to pay off overnight.

01:45:06 There's going to be arguments.

01:45:07 There's going to be all of that,

01:45:08 and we're going to fight for that,

01:45:10 and we need to get it fixed quickly.

01:45:13 It's just other communities around the nation

01:45:16 have issues that come up,

01:45:18 and not having a set standard

01:45:20 on how it is we respond

01:45:21 and how we can get a response back to our own communities

01:45:24 makes it very difficult

01:45:26 when you do something that isn't normal in this situation,

01:45:30 and then we just have to have answers.

01:45:31 So I appreciate that.

01:45:32 With that, I'll yield back.

01:45:33 -The gentleman yields back,

01:45:39 and I recognize Mr. Garcia for five minutes.

01:45:42 -Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member,

01:45:45 for hosting this hearing,

01:45:48 and thank you to all of the witnesses.

01:45:50 I want to echo the sentiment of other members

01:45:56 who are remembering the tragic loss of life

01:46:00 of six workers,

01:46:02 all of them immigrants from Mexico and Central Americans,

01:46:08 all of them seeking a better life in this country,

01:46:11 meeting a very tragic fate.

01:46:15 So as we rebuild the Key Bridge,

01:46:18 we must also advocate for stronger workplace protections

01:46:21 for all, including immigrant workers,

01:46:24 and this brings me to my first question, Administrator Bott.

01:46:28 The Coast Guard's testimony states

01:46:31 that eight construction workers were on the bridge

01:46:35 at the time of the collision

01:46:36 and that one worker was able to run to safety.

01:46:40 If there had been more time

01:46:43 when the ship's loss of power was reported

01:46:45 and when the collision happened,

01:46:48 is there a protocol in place

01:46:52 for bridge worker evacuation in an event

01:46:54 such as this collision,

01:46:57 and if so, can you describe it?

01:47:00 -Thank you, Congressman, for the question

01:47:04 and for your concern for the workers.

01:47:08 Obviously, you know, all work zones in America

01:47:11 are dangerous places,

01:47:12 and we have rules in place for both the state

01:47:18 or the city that is, you know, procuring the contract

01:47:22 and for the companies that are out there.

01:47:24 I want to defer to others here,

01:47:26 but, you know, what I learned through our discussions

01:47:30 is that there was a police officer

01:47:33 who was attempting to reach the work crew on the bridge

01:47:36 to evacuate them,

01:47:37 but just given the proximity of the ship,

01:47:39 was unable to make it to the crew

01:47:42 before the bridge struck.

01:47:43 -Do you think the protocol is adequate?

01:47:46 -Sir, I would need to think about that

01:47:52 and consult with some of our experts.

01:47:55 Obviously, this was an unprecedented event,

01:47:59 so I just want to evaluate that

01:48:03 and get back to you for the record.

01:48:04 -Chair, how many?

01:48:05 -Yeah, other bridge structures,

01:48:06 they have advanced warning systems,

01:48:08 and we'll look at that as part of our investigation,

01:48:11 but I will just say from the time

01:48:13 the pilots dispatcher called MDTA police

01:48:20 and the bridge was ordered closed was 52 seconds.

01:48:24 52 seconds.

01:48:27 That was the time of --

01:48:31 it's almost impossible to get in that situation

01:48:36 to get a longer time,

01:48:37 and if you just look at the time from the blackout

01:48:41 to the bridge strike, it was four minutes total,

01:48:43 but I appreciate your question

01:48:46 because it is really tragic what occurred,

01:48:48 and we want to prevent that from reoccurring,

01:48:50 and that's our whole mission,

01:48:51 which is why we'll look at advanced warning systems as well.

01:48:54 -And thank you for that,

01:48:55 and Administrator Bott, if you could get back to me,

01:48:58 it'd be greatly appreciated.

01:48:59 To Vice Admiral Galtier,

01:49:03 the DALI had been inspected by the Coast Guard

01:49:07 about six months prior to the incident

01:49:09 with the key bridge.

01:49:11 It's unusual that a major malfunction like this

01:49:15 could occur with no previous indication

01:49:17 of faulty systems after being cleared

01:49:20 by an inspection of only six months prior,

01:49:23 and what are the requirements

01:49:25 on foreign-flagged, foreign-owned vessels

01:49:29 to report any malfunctions to the Coast Guard

01:49:32 when operating at a U.S. port?

01:49:34 -The Coast Guard has a requirement

01:49:38 for any vessel that suffers an issue

01:49:40 to notify what we call a reportable marine casualty,

01:49:44 and there are a variety of qualifications,

01:49:47 sort of circumstances by which you have to notify

01:49:51 the Coast Guard of those casualties.

01:49:53 -Thank you much.

01:49:55 Lastly, very briefly to all of the panelists

01:49:58 who'd like to chime in,

01:50:00 although the NTSB investigation

01:50:02 is ongoing, recommendations are forthcoming,

01:50:04 what's needed from Congress, if anything,

01:50:08 to improve worker safety?

01:50:09 -So I'll speak first.

01:50:16 It's critically important for us

01:50:18 to have the fulsome results of the investigation,

01:50:21 I think, before we move ahead

01:50:22 with any sorts of implementations

01:50:25 based on those recommendations.

01:50:26 I will say, so the Coast Guard

01:50:28 is conducting a Marine Board of Investigation

01:50:30 in coordination with NTSB and cooperation.

01:50:34 If we find something in the near term

01:50:37 that we think is important and urgent enough

01:50:40 to do an advisory on, we will go ahead and do that.

01:50:42 -Thank you.

01:50:44 -Sir, this could happen in any of your districts, right?

01:50:49 And so I would say,

01:50:52 where you have navigable waterways,

01:50:54 whoever's owning, I keep reiterating this,

01:50:58 if you own a bridge,

01:50:59 if a state owns a bridge

01:51:01 or other entity owns a bridge,

01:51:02 look at the current structure,

01:51:04 do a risk assessment.

01:51:05 You can do that now.

01:51:06 You don't have to wait

01:51:08 until we issue an urgent recommendation

01:51:10 or come to the conclusion of our investigation.

01:51:12 Make sure you're ensuring safety

01:51:14 for what's going through on that bridge

01:51:18 or in the navigable waterways now.

01:51:19 -Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.

01:51:21 Thank you for your indulgence.

01:51:22 -The gentleman yields back.

01:51:24 The chair recognizes Mr. Westerman

01:51:26 for five minutes.

01:51:28 -Thank you, Madam Chair,

01:51:29 and thank you to the witnesses.

01:51:30 And my first question is going to be

01:51:32 for the Coast Guard and the NTSB.

01:51:34 Obviously, everybody just about has

01:51:37 offered their condolences to the families

01:51:41 of the people who lost their lives,

01:51:43 but I'm thinking if I were a family member,

01:51:45 I would want more than condolences.

01:51:47 I would have questions that I wanted answered.

01:51:50 And the first question is why?

01:51:52 I think from the information

01:51:54 that we've received so far,

01:51:56 the explanation would be

01:51:57 we had a vulnerable infrastructure

01:52:00 and we had a ship that lost power.

01:52:03 But I think there's a deeper question

01:52:06 as to why and also

01:52:09 what are we going to do about that

01:52:11 so that we don't get a repeat incident.

01:52:14 If the ship had had a tug escort,

01:52:21 would it have hit the bridge

01:52:22 even after it lost power?

01:52:26 -We're looking into that

01:52:27 as part of our investigation.

01:52:28 I can't answer that right now.

01:52:30 It's a question that we have,

01:52:32 but it is something we're delving into.

01:52:34 -The same for the Coast Guard.

01:52:37 We don't know whether there was sufficient time

01:52:41 to have made a difference

01:52:42 or whether it would have added

01:52:43 to the casualty or not.

01:52:44 -I hope that's something

01:52:46 that you're looking into

01:52:48 and looking at other places

01:52:49 around the country

01:52:50 where these large ships

01:52:51 are passing by a vulnerable infrastructure

01:52:54 without tugs.

01:52:55 I know Mr. Graves talked about

01:52:58 the ship in New Orleans

01:53:00 and my understanding

01:53:02 all those ships down there

01:53:03 now have tug escorts.

01:53:05 Mr. Bott,

01:53:09 you're here to discuss the need

01:53:12 for a massive bridge reconstruction

01:53:13 that will require years-long effort

01:53:15 and billions of dollars

01:53:16 from the American taxpayer.

01:53:18 Meanwhile, those very taxpayers

01:53:22 have been waiting for over two years

01:53:23 for FHWA to perform repairs

01:53:26 to a washed-out gravel road

01:53:29 on White Rock Mountain

01:53:30 in Franklin County, Arkansas,

01:53:31 in my district.

01:53:32 This road provides access

01:53:34 to four service concessionaire facilities,

01:53:37 not to mention critical passage

01:53:39 for emergency services in the area.

01:53:41 The project has already been funded

01:53:43 but is apparently so tied up in red tape

01:53:45 that my office can't even get a clear answer

01:53:48 from your agency

01:53:49 on when the washout will be filled.

01:53:52 If FHWA is unable to reconstruct

01:53:56 a gravel road in less than two years

01:53:58 and counting,

01:53:58 why should we trust your agency

01:54:00 with billions in funding

01:54:02 for a project of this magnitude?

01:54:03 Thank you, Congressman.

01:54:06 I'm happy to go back

01:54:08 and take a look and figure out

01:54:10 exactly what is going on with that project

01:54:12 and report back to your office.

01:54:13 Thank you.

01:54:14 And this, I guess, would be for the Corps

01:54:18 and for Mr. Bott,

01:54:20 but there's an issue that happened

01:54:25 in Floyd Bennett Field,

01:54:27 which is a National Park Service facility

01:54:29 in New York City.

01:54:30 You may ask,

01:54:32 "What in the world does that have to do

01:54:33 with this project?"

01:54:34 But I'll tell you what it has to do.

01:54:36 This administration used

01:54:38 alternative arrangements

01:54:40 to waive every NEPA

01:54:42 and environmental regulation

01:54:44 in the Park Service

01:54:46 to build a migrant camp,

01:54:47 and they did that

01:54:48 in less than two weeks.

01:54:50 They waived all those regulations.

01:54:53 I'm wondering if the administration

01:54:55 has the intent

01:54:57 to use alternative arrangements,

01:54:59 not just CEs,

01:55:01 but alternative arrangements

01:55:02 to repair this bridge,

01:55:03 which is obviously

01:55:04 very vital infrastructure.

01:55:06 So we are in close coordination

01:55:11 with Maryland DOT.

01:55:12 We are not going to waive NEPA,

01:55:15 but it is our strong likelihood

01:55:17 that we'll end up

01:55:18 with a categorical exclusion

01:55:19 because we're replacing a bridge

01:55:21 in relatively the same footprint

01:55:23 that existed before.

01:55:24 Does the administration have

01:55:26 the legal authority to waive

01:55:29 NEPA to use alternative arrangements

01:55:32 to even go beyond the CE?

01:55:34 Sir, I'm--

01:55:36 The answer is yes,

01:55:37 and they can do that,

01:55:39 and it's amazing to me

01:55:41 that they would do it

01:55:42 on a Park Service facility

01:55:44 that a million visitors

01:55:46 in New York City use.

01:55:48 The migrant camp,

01:55:49 yet it doesn't seem to be

01:55:51 an option on the table

01:55:52 to rebuild this

01:55:53 vital piece of infrastructure,

01:55:55 and I hope the administration

01:55:57 would not only afford

01:55:59 the same luxury

01:56:00 to critical infrastructure,

01:56:02 but also to

01:56:03 a lot of smaller projects

01:56:06 around the country

01:56:06 that get tied up

01:56:07 in the process

01:56:09 when the administration

01:56:12 has full authority to do that.

01:56:14 Thank you, Madam Chair,

01:56:15 and I yield back.

01:56:16 The gentleman yields back.

01:56:17 I recognize Mr. Stanton

01:56:19 for five minutes for questions.

01:56:20 Thank you, Madam Chair.

01:56:22 Thank you to each of the witnesses

01:56:24 for your hard work

01:56:25 in responding to this

01:56:27 critical emergency in our country,

01:56:29 and like every member of this committee,

01:56:32 I do send my deepest condolences

01:56:34 to the families of the

01:56:36 six human beings,

01:56:38 the workers who lost their lives

01:56:40 as a result of this tragic incident.

01:56:42 When the Dali crash occurred,

01:56:44 when the Dali crashed

01:56:45 into the Francis Scott Key Bridge

01:56:47 in Maryland,

01:56:48 we saw the agencies

01:56:51 represented here today

01:56:52 jump into action,

01:56:53 but the road to rebuild is long

01:56:55 and requires coordination

01:56:57 between our local, state,

01:56:59 and federal governments.

01:57:00 As a former mayor myself,

01:57:02 I understand how critical

01:57:03 intergovernmental cooperation

01:57:05 is for efficiency

01:57:08 and speedy results.

01:57:09 Administrator Bott,

01:57:11 to my understanding,

01:57:12 one of the ways

01:57:12 the Federal Highway Administration

01:57:14 responded to the disaster

01:57:15 was by reclassifying the bridge

01:57:18 as an interstate.

01:57:19 Tell us more about the purpose

01:57:21 of that reclassification

01:57:22 and how will that help

01:57:24 with speedy bridge repair.

01:57:25 Thank you for the question, Congressman.

01:57:31 We received a request

01:57:33 from Maryland DOT

01:57:35 shortly after the bridge disaster

01:57:37 to reclassify,

01:57:38 and so we went through

01:57:40 the usual process

01:57:41 that we would do for any state DOT

01:57:43 that was asking to come in.

01:57:44 I think our assumption had been

01:57:45 that it was part of the interstate

01:57:46 since it was shielded

01:57:47 and was on maps that way.

01:57:50 Just going back,

01:57:51 the difference will be that

01:57:53 instead of being part of the NHS,

01:57:55 it will be officially part,

01:57:56 it is now officially

01:57:57 part of the interstate

01:57:58 and goes from an 80/20

01:57:59 cost share to a 90/10.

01:58:01 That's great.

01:58:01 Another important action taken

01:58:03 at the outset of the disaster

01:58:04 was the quick release

01:58:06 of emergency relief program funds,

01:58:08 a reimbursable program.

01:58:09 I understand it was $60 million

01:58:12 that was released in March.

01:58:14 That's a sizable amount.

01:58:15 How is that $60 million number decided?

01:58:18 Thank you, Congressman.

01:58:21 So we have been in close contact

01:58:24 with Maryland DOT

01:58:25 from the early hours.

01:58:26 Specifically, I think this is a great example

01:58:28 of the quick release funding

01:58:29 being put to work.

01:58:30 They actually had a contractor

01:58:31 who could mobilize very quickly,

01:58:33 had cranes in the area,

01:58:35 and while the Army Corps

01:58:37 was focused on the navigable channel,

01:58:39 that $60 million

01:58:40 is helping to clear wreckage

01:58:42 simultaneously from the non-navigable waterways.

01:58:45 Obviously, the cost will be significant

01:58:48 above and beyond the initial amount.

01:58:51 Tell us the role that

01:58:54 the emergency relief program

01:58:56 will play in additional funds

01:58:57 for bridge repair

01:58:59 and any other federal highways programs

01:59:01 that will likely need to be utilized

01:59:03 in this important work.

01:59:04 Yeah, and so as some of the,

01:59:07 thank you, Congressman,

01:59:08 for some of the questions

01:59:08 that have come in, the first 270 days,

01:59:10 the emergency repair work

01:59:14 is funded at $100 million

01:59:16 and then longer-term permanent repair work

01:59:18 is funded at $90 million.

01:59:20 Traditionally, through this program,

01:59:21 the initial estimate is around $1.7 million

01:59:24 to $1.9 million for the bridge.

01:59:27 It'll be a four-year construction,

01:59:29 and that is that critical piece

01:59:31 where Maryland will have the certainty

01:59:33 that that federal funding

01:59:35 will be available

01:59:36 so that they can move forward

01:59:38 with their procurement.

01:59:39 That's great.

01:59:39 Lastly, it's my understanding

01:59:42 that one of the primary roles

01:59:43 of the Federal Highway Administration

01:59:45 currently is to also give technical assistance

01:59:48 to the Maryland Department of Transportation.

01:59:50 Is there anything you can share with us today

01:59:54 regarding those conversations

01:59:55 as the federal partners to Maryland DOT?

01:59:58 Thank you, and Congressman,

02:00:02 I do want to recognize

02:00:03 our federal highway staff

02:00:04 that have been on site

02:00:05 and in close coordination

02:00:07 both in Maryland and in headquarters.

02:00:09 So we are meeting with them

02:00:12 on the emergency work,

02:00:15 on getting the ER funding,

02:00:17 on the procurement,

02:00:18 on the elements of the bridge design

02:00:21 that are going to be out there.

02:00:21 So it is a really strong partnership that exists.

02:00:25 We appreciate the work of yourself, FHA,

02:00:29 all the other agencies represented today.

02:00:31 It is critical that we get the bridge rebuilt

02:00:34 as soon as possible,

02:00:35 not only for Baltimore,

02:00:37 the city of Baltimore,

02:00:38 state of Maryland,

02:00:39 but the entire economy

02:00:41 of the United States of America.

02:00:42 So thank you for your work you've already done

02:00:44 and the work you will do

02:00:45 on this important, important project.

02:00:46 Thank you.

02:00:47 I yield back.

02:00:48 Thank you.

02:00:50 The gentleman yields back

02:00:51 and I recognize Mr. Mast

02:00:53 for five minutes for questions.

02:00:54 Thank you, Chairwoman.

02:00:55 Thank you all for your testimony.

02:00:56 Mr. Batt, would this be an accurate way

02:01:00 to categorize you?

02:01:01 You're in charge of collecting the checks

02:01:03 for the future project.

02:01:05 Sorry, Congressman,

02:01:08 I'm in charge of collecting checks

02:01:09 for the future project.

02:01:10 The money.

02:01:11 You're in charge of getting the money

02:01:12 for the project.

02:01:13 Yes.

02:01:16 Have you received any money

02:01:19 from any insurer yet?

02:01:20 No, sir.

02:01:21 Which insurers have you sought monies from?

02:01:25 So to be clear,

02:01:27 the insurance policy that we are talking about

02:01:29 is an insurance policy

02:01:31 for the Maryland Department of Transportation.

02:01:34 And so we're working with Maryland DOT

02:01:36 to work through the elements

02:01:37 of that insurance policy.

02:01:38 Nothing for any insurance company

02:01:40 of Grace Ocean Private LTD?

02:01:43 So the Department of Justice

02:01:47 is leading efforts around the,

02:01:51 for the efforts for the United States

02:01:54 to recover the funds.

02:01:55 So that's on a federal highway function.

02:01:58 Nothing also for you

02:01:59 in terms of requesting anything

02:02:00 from insurers of MERSC

02:02:02 who chartered that vessel from Grace?

02:02:04 No, sir.

02:02:06 The Federal Highway Administration

02:02:07 role in this is the debris removal

02:02:10 in the non-navigable waterway.

02:02:12 And then working with Maryland DOT

02:02:14 to rebuild the bridge.

02:02:16 We will take back any insurance funds

02:02:20 that come in and reimburse the ER program.

02:02:22 What has Department of Justice told you

02:02:24 to this point about

02:02:26 have they requested monies

02:02:27 from any of those insurers

02:02:29 or any other companies?

02:02:31 Sir, I would not be able to comment

02:02:33 on Department of Justice efforts.

02:02:35 As far as I know they're working on,

02:02:36 I just, I'm not aware.

02:02:37 So they haven't had any contact with you

02:02:40 about requesting monies.

02:02:42 You can comment about your involvement,

02:02:44 your conversation with them,

02:02:45 not necessarily what they've done.

02:02:46 Specifically, sir,

02:02:48 the only email that I've received

02:02:51 is from DOJ to preserve all of my emails

02:02:54 for upcoming

02:02:56 and likely years-long litigation.

02:02:58 Why is it likely years-long litigation?

02:03:00 Again, sir, I can only speak to my efforts

02:03:08 around bridge building

02:03:10 and litigation that occurs

02:03:11 when there's claims

02:03:13 between a contractor and a state

02:03:16 where they don't feel

02:03:16 that the product meets.

02:03:19 That can take years.

02:03:20 So billions of dollars

02:03:23 in international maritime law,

02:03:25 I can only assume

02:03:26 will be a fairly lengthy process.

02:03:29 None of us are naive enough to say

02:03:32 that insurance companies

02:03:33 just readily come out

02:03:34 and offer us large payouts

02:03:36 for things that are insured.

02:03:38 We'd be naive to say that.

02:03:41 It's just not the state of the world.

02:03:43 But in the midst of this catastrophe,

02:03:46 I guess is a great word to categorize it.

02:03:48 Have you seen anything

02:03:50 or heard anything from DOJ

02:03:51 about these insurance companies

02:03:53 offering anything

02:03:54 or trying to say that they

02:03:56 do not have liability for this?

02:03:58 Sir, to be, I would need to come back to you.

02:04:02 I would have to check

02:04:04 with our chief counsel,

02:04:05 our general counsel at DOT

02:04:07 and other agencies,

02:04:08 but I'm happy to come back on that question.

02:04:10 I appreciate that.

02:04:11 Have you heard anything

02:04:12 about whether they've already executed

02:04:14 any type of business interruption insurance

02:04:16 for the vessel that's not in use right now?

02:04:19 Sir, I am not aware of that.

02:04:24 Okay.

02:04:26 And a lot of these questions,

02:04:28 again, I appreciate you listening to,

02:04:30 you don't have the answers for them.

02:04:32 Madam Chairwoman,

02:04:33 I would encourage this committee

02:04:34 to get some of the other entities in here

02:04:37 since we're talking significantly

02:04:38 across both sides of the aisle

02:04:40 about the funding for this bridge,

02:04:41 the timing for the repairs of this bridge,

02:04:44 things peripheral to that,

02:04:47 that we bring in the insurance companies

02:04:49 for conversation,

02:04:50 the shipping companies for conversation

02:04:52 about this as well.

02:04:53 And I would hope that we would do that

02:04:54 in the next, maybe next week

02:04:56 that we're in session.

02:04:58 But it's certainly sensical

02:04:59 that we speak to you all about this,

02:05:01 but it's also sensical

02:05:02 that we speak to the private entities

02:05:04 that are involved in this as well.

02:05:06 I thank you for your testimony.

02:05:07 I thank you for the time and I yield back.

02:05:08 Thank you.

02:05:11 The gentleman yields back

02:05:12 and I now recognize Ms. Foushee

02:05:14 for five minutes for questioning.

02:05:15 Thank you.

02:05:17 And thank you to the chairs

02:05:18 for holding this hearing.

02:05:20 And thank you to the witnesses

02:05:22 for being here with us today.

02:05:24 The tragic events that took place

02:05:26 in the early morning hours

02:05:27 of Tuesday, March 26,

02:05:29 were a tragedy not simply

02:05:31 for Baltimore or Maryland,

02:05:33 but for the nation.

02:05:35 I join my colleagues in mourning

02:05:37 the six lives lost

02:05:38 in this catastrophic accident.

02:05:42 While I have been hardened

02:05:44 by the response of the Baltimore community

02:05:46 who have at last count

02:05:47 already fundraised over half a million dollars

02:05:51 to support the families

02:05:52 of the Key Bridge victims,

02:05:55 it is the responsibility

02:05:56 of both the federal government

02:05:57 and the private sector

02:05:59 to ensure something like this

02:06:00 never happens again,

02:06:01 which is at least in part

02:06:04 why we're here today.

02:06:05 The Biden administration,

02:06:07 the state of Maryland,

02:06:08 the Coast Guard,

02:06:09 and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

02:06:11 among others,

02:06:12 have taken commendable initiative

02:06:14 and swift action

02:06:15 in responding to this crisis,

02:06:18 something that has been highlighted

02:06:20 by the witnesses here today.

02:06:22 I want to thank all of you for being here.

02:06:24 I know your time is valuable,

02:06:26 especially in the midst

02:06:28 of an ongoing situation like this.

02:06:30 So my colleagues and I,

02:06:31 we greatly appreciate your time

02:06:34 and your testimonies.

02:06:36 I think most of us on this committee

02:06:39 understand that this matter

02:06:40 is going to require expeditious,

02:06:42 bipartisan support here in Congress.

02:06:44 If we wish to mitigate it best,

02:06:46 we can get to the economic

02:06:50 and the supply chain ripple effects

02:06:52 of the FSK Bridge collapse.

02:06:54 However, I believe it's worth noting

02:06:56 that there are also some significant

02:06:58 road safety implications here,

02:07:01 as well as even further,

02:07:02 that underscore this need

02:07:05 for congressional support.

02:07:07 With the port no longer at full capacity,

02:07:10 commercial trucks are being forced

02:07:13 to take roads through residential areas

02:07:15 that aren't equipped

02:07:16 for that kind of traffic.

02:07:18 Chairwoman Homendy

02:07:21 and Administrator Bott,

02:07:23 can either of you speak

02:07:24 to the traffic safety issues

02:07:26 to other vehicles on the roads,

02:07:29 to pedestrians,

02:07:31 or to the residential road infrastructure

02:07:34 that have either already emerged

02:07:36 as a result of the FSK Bridge closure

02:07:39 or are at risk of emerging

02:07:42 should access to the port remain limited?

02:07:46 - Thank you, Congresswoman.

02:07:48 Obviously, there is a...

02:07:50 Thank you for noting the traffic impacts.

02:07:52 I would just, in the interest of time,

02:07:54 I would highlight the HAZMAT traffic.

02:07:57 HAZMAT materials are not allowed

02:08:00 in the tunnels through Baltimore.

02:08:02 And so that was one of the critical elements

02:08:04 of the Francis Scott Key Bridge

02:08:06 was to provide HAZMAT material

02:08:08 to move around.

02:08:10 And now what's happening

02:08:11 is they're rerouting around the north side of 695.

02:08:14 It goes through neighborhoods

02:08:15 and it's suboptimal

02:08:17 from a routing perspective.

02:08:18 So that's just one example.

02:08:20 And then obviously, as you mentioned,

02:08:21 there are trucks and other commercial vehicles

02:08:24 and just higher levels of traffic

02:08:26 working their way through residential areas now as well.

02:08:28 - This is an issue

02:08:35 that I would typically defer to Federal Highways

02:08:38 just because we're just focused

02:08:40 on the investigation itself.

02:08:42 So thank you.

02:08:43 - Thank you.

02:08:43 Unlike many of my colleagues

02:08:46 have been particularly concerned

02:08:47 about the regional implications on unemployment

02:08:50 that the bridge collapse

02:08:51 and reduction of port operations

02:08:53 are having on the surrounding community.

02:08:55 As the state of Maryland has estimated

02:08:58 that 270,000 jobs will ultimately be impacted.

02:09:04 Even so, I've been especially encouraged

02:09:06 by the efforts thus far

02:09:08 of the Biden administration

02:09:09 to support the plethora

02:09:11 of temporarily displaced workers

02:09:13 who have had their employment

02:09:14 either directly or indirectly impacted

02:09:17 since the events of March 26.

02:09:19 For instance, the administration

02:09:22 funneled an initial tranche of $3.5 million

02:09:26 to the region via its dislocated

02:09:29 workers grant program back in April

02:09:31 to support temporary cleanup

02:09:33 and recovery employment opportunities

02:09:36 for those who've lost their jobs

02:09:38 due to the FSK bridge incident

02:09:40 with more support funds on the way.

02:09:42 Vice Admiral Gaultier and Major General Graham

02:09:47 can you speak to the efforts

02:09:48 of the US Coast Guard and the Army Corps

02:09:51 respectively about the ongoing efforts

02:09:54 to restore services and access to the port

02:09:57 given the widespread ramifications

02:09:59 such efforts will have

02:10:02 on employment in the region?

02:10:04 - Well, let me go first

02:10:06 'cause I wanna do a shout out

02:10:07 to the Army Corps of Engineers.

02:10:08 Commerce is flowing.

02:10:09 The depth of the channel

02:10:12 has been restored to 48 of 50 feet.

02:10:15 It's narrower than what it typically is

02:10:19 but it's sufficient for Coast Guard

02:10:20 to put one-way vessel and tug escort controls

02:10:24 to get traffic in and out.

02:10:26 And so we've seen over 35 deep draft vessels

02:10:30 that have transited over 300 smaller barges

02:10:34 and other things that have been able

02:10:35 to transit in and out.

02:10:37 And so I think what we're seeing

02:10:38 is that the system is restoring itself

02:10:41 to normal functions while we work together

02:10:43 in unified command to make sure

02:10:45 the full channel width and depth is restored.

02:10:48 - And ma'am, working with the port

02:10:51 in the state of Maryland,

02:10:52 open up as many alternate channels as we could.

02:10:56 Small craft and we successfully got

02:10:58 to larger and larger craft.

02:11:00 As my son will go to, he said,

02:11:02 we were able to get a 35,

02:11:05 now 40, 48 foot channel

02:11:07 to get those key car carriers moving.

02:11:10 And we remain committed to getting

02:11:11 the full channel open by the end of this month.

02:11:13 - Madam Chair, that's my time.

02:11:16 I yield back.

02:11:16 - Thank you.

02:11:20 The general lady yields back

02:11:21 and I recognize Mr. Yakum

02:11:23 for five minutes of questions.

02:11:24 - Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:11:26 I too want to offer my condolences

02:11:29 to the families who lost loved ones

02:11:30 in this disaster.

02:11:32 And I want to thank our witnesses,

02:11:33 not just for being here,

02:11:34 but also for the tireless work

02:11:36 that you and your agencies have done

02:11:39 in putting into the recovery efforts,

02:11:41 but also the investigative matters

02:11:44 that you've undertaken

02:11:45 as we look into this disaster even deeper.

02:11:47 So thank you.

02:11:47 Before I get to my questions

02:11:49 about the topic at hand,

02:11:51 Administrator Batt,

02:11:52 I feel the need to follow up

02:11:54 on a conversation we had in December

02:11:56 when you were before this committee.

02:11:58 You may recall that we discussed

02:12:00 the NEVI and the CFI programs,

02:12:03 which have a combined $7.5 billion

02:12:06 at their disposal to build

02:12:07 electric vehicle charging stations.

02:12:09 As of the December hearing,

02:12:11 NEVI had bought just one charging station

02:12:13 online in two years.

02:12:15 I asked you how many charging stations

02:12:17 you expected those programs

02:12:18 would bring online in 2024,

02:12:21 and you promised to follow up

02:12:22 with a "very specific number."

02:12:25 But in March, you sent a response

02:12:27 that contained no specific number.

02:12:30 You noted that hundreds of millions of dollars

02:12:32 had gone out the door

02:12:32 to build 7,500 ports,

02:12:34 but there was no indication

02:12:36 as to how many, if any,

02:12:38 of those would be brought online this year.

02:12:41 And thus far in 2024,

02:12:43 NEVI has been responsible

02:12:44 for six charging stations,

02:12:46 again with roughly $7.5 billion

02:12:48 at its disposal,

02:12:49 and there doesn't appear to be

02:12:50 any public information

02:12:52 for the completed CFI chargers.

02:12:54 Administrator Batt,

02:12:56 I want to give you one more chance here.

02:12:59 How many more NEVI and CFI-funded

02:13:02 charging stations do you expect

02:13:04 to be bought online for this year?

02:13:06 Thank you, Representative,

02:13:08 and thank you for the follow-up.

02:13:10 So we are working closely

02:13:11 with our state DOT partners

02:13:13 and cities across the nation.

02:13:15 We're also working closely

02:13:15 with the joint office

02:13:16 that has been set up

02:13:17 between the Department of Energy

02:13:19 and Department of Transportation.

02:13:21 Since that time,

02:13:22 there have been several states

02:13:23 that have brought online NEVI chargers.

02:13:26 There's been in Vermont, Ohio, Kentucky,

02:13:30 Utah is going to have their first.

02:13:32 So there are dozens,

02:13:34 and I will get you the specific number,

02:13:35 but dozens that we are anticipating

02:13:38 coming online just in the next couple of months.

02:13:41 35 of those states

02:13:42 have their solicitations out.

02:13:44 And then specifically on CFI,

02:13:47 on January 5th,

02:13:48 we rolled out $623 million

02:13:51 in grants in January for CFI nationwide.

02:13:55 And those will,

02:13:56 we're working with grant agreements now

02:13:59 to get those built this year.

02:14:00 So again, how many,

02:14:01 how many do you think

02:14:03 will be brought online this year total?

02:14:05 Just to give just a ballpark number.

02:14:07 You know, probably in the hundreds

02:14:10 to in the thousands range this year.

02:14:14 And again, I want to differentiate

02:14:15 between, you know,

02:14:17 DFC chargers and the level two chargers

02:14:21 that are obviously replacing ones

02:14:23 that are existing on the network.

02:14:25 Okay. Yeah.

02:14:25 Well, thank you for that.

02:14:26 And I do want to make sure that we,

02:14:28 as we go throughout the balance of the year,

02:14:29 we stay in touch on this particular topic.

02:14:31 As we, again, we've allocated

02:14:33 seven and a half billion dollars

02:14:34 and we're, as of just a few months,

02:14:37 a month ago, we were at eight total chargers.

02:14:38 And we want to make sure that the money

02:14:41 that has been appropriated by this Congress

02:14:42 is spent wisely.

02:14:44 Turning our attention to the key bridge,

02:14:46 Administrator Batt,

02:14:47 I want to build on what Mr. Boss talked about

02:14:50 with his redesignation of the bridge

02:14:53 as an interstate system.

02:14:54 I share his sentiments

02:14:56 that we should get this bridge rebuilt quickly,

02:14:59 but I believe we should also be mindful

02:15:00 of new precedents that we set and establish

02:15:03 as we go through this whole process.

02:15:06 You mentioned that part of an Alabama highway

02:15:08 was redesignated as a part of the interstate system.

02:15:10 How long did that process take

02:15:12 from application to approval?

02:15:14 This was back in,

02:15:18 sir, I'd have to go back to you on the exact dates,

02:15:21 but probably a few weeks.

02:15:24 And actually, to be clear,

02:15:26 I think that was changing the main line

02:15:28 of the interstate with the bypass.

02:15:31 So maybe not exactly apples and apples.

02:15:34 Maryland's request to redesignate this as an interstate

02:15:38 was made after the collapse.

02:15:40 Is that correct?

02:15:41 Yes.

02:15:41 Does your agency have the authority

02:15:44 to retroactively designate

02:15:47 damaged or destroyed infrastructure

02:15:50 as a part of the interstate system?

02:15:52 Sir, I would have to clarify on our exact authority

02:15:57 and the retroactive piece.

02:15:59 I just know that we received the request

02:16:01 after the incident

02:16:02 and we went through our typical process

02:16:05 and designated it as part of the interstate.

02:16:08 Is there any precedent for retroactively designating

02:16:11 damaged or destroyed infrastructure

02:16:13 as a part of the interstate system?

02:16:14 Sir, I'd have to come back to you on that.

02:16:15 I'm not aware.

02:16:17 Yeah, I would very much like to know

02:16:18 if your agency was within its authority

02:16:20 to retroactively designate this as an interstate

02:16:24 as opposed to its former designation

02:16:27 as a part of the state highway system.

02:16:29 Thank you.

02:16:30 And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.

02:16:32 Thank you.

02:16:34 The gentleman yields back

02:16:35 and I recognize Mr. Desalnier.

02:16:38 Thank you.

02:16:38 For five minutes for questions.

02:16:39 Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:16:40 And thank you to all the witnesses.

02:16:42 Just a horrible event.

02:16:44 Ms. Homendy, or all of you,

02:16:47 but I want to direct this question to you.

02:16:49 In 2007, near the district I represent in the Bay Area,

02:16:54 there was a similar incident

02:16:55 with the San Francisco Bay Bridge.

02:16:56 It's the second busiest toll bridge

02:16:58 after the George Washington Bridge in the United States.

02:17:01 But it is the terminus of Interstate 80.

02:17:04 So what happened there was the fender system

02:17:07 at California had gone further,

02:17:08 kept the bridge from being damaged,

02:17:12 but it still had to be shut down

02:17:14 so that you and Caltrans could go through

02:17:17 and make sure it was safe,

02:17:18 plus it's seismically vulnerable.

02:17:21 So what do we do in cases like that in 2007

02:17:24 where lessons learned are looked at

02:17:27 and sort of consistent with some of the other questions,

02:17:29 irrespective of whether it's part of the federal highway system,

02:17:33 and just making sure that state departments of transportation,

02:17:36 that they know what the best practices are for their area?

02:17:39 Well, for our role as part of an investigation agency,

02:17:43 we continue to share lessons learned

02:17:46 as part of any investigation,

02:17:48 including with state departments of transportation.

02:17:52 Certainly, we've conducted a number of investigations

02:17:55 involving vessel strikes on bridges

02:17:58 and have shared those lessons learned

02:18:00 and continue to do so

02:18:02 and to continue to advocate

02:18:04 even for recommendations that have been closed on acceptable.

02:18:07 But I will say that the Federal Highway Administration

02:18:10 also has close contact with their state partners

02:18:12 to continue to highlight safety issues

02:18:16 and risk assessment as well.

02:18:17 Vice Admiral, this happened very close to your admiral's,

02:18:22 the regional, his home,

02:18:24 it was beautiful on Treasure Island.

02:18:26 But in that instance,

02:18:28 also, they were required to have bar pilots come in.

02:18:32 So it's the,

02:18:33 Oakland is the fourth busiest port in the United States.

02:18:36 A lot of traffic goes through there.

02:18:38 But again, we've got lots of bridges

02:18:40 and the Bay Bridge closest to it.

02:18:42 So a lot of the operations of that port,

02:18:44 they work closely with the Coast Guard

02:18:47 to make sure that these,

02:18:48 the management of the transportation system works

02:18:51 and it works properly

02:18:52 in terms of the whole transportation system.

02:18:55 So in this case, a heavily traveled bridge.

02:18:58 How does your department and the Coast Guard coordinate,

02:19:02 again, on your experience around the world

02:19:05 on how to make sure that these structures

02:19:07 that are run by state transportation agencies,

02:19:09 particularly if they're not part of the interstate,

02:19:12 has the best information about the dangers

02:19:15 of marine traffic, commercial marine traffic?

02:19:18 - Yeah, thank you, Congressman.

02:19:20 I'm familiar with the Costco Busan incident

02:19:22 that you're referring to

02:19:23 and many years of operations there in the Bay Area.

02:19:26 So we're doing a Marine Board of Investigation.

02:19:30 We, just like we did in Costco Busan,

02:19:32 we do an investigation of findings of fact

02:19:35 and then we recommend and take remedial actions

02:19:38 based on that.

02:19:39 But I think what we're talking about here

02:19:40 is a little bit different in terms of the system

02:19:43 as you've mentioned it.

02:19:44 And so the Coast Guard does have a set of tools,

02:19:48 risk management tools,

02:19:49 that we get together with stakeholders

02:19:52 in any given port to evaluate the totality of the risk

02:19:56 if something changes,

02:19:58 like if a channel becomes deeper

02:20:00 or if a new bridge gets built and so on.

02:20:02 One comes to mind is a port and waterways risk assessment.

02:20:07 One was done in Baltimore, but not since 2001.

02:20:10 So as a result of this incident,

02:20:12 the Coast Guard is initiating a Board of Inquiry

02:20:17 under my signature,

02:20:18 which will look at how the Coast Guard

02:20:21 does these assessments

02:20:22 how recent they are in the ports around the country

02:20:25 and to examine the top 10 ports for some lessons learned,

02:20:30 including bridge, bridge fendering systems,

02:20:32 hazardous navigation and so on,

02:20:34 together with stakeholders

02:20:35 so we can draw some conclusions

02:20:37 and then move out with a refined toolkit

02:20:41 to other ports around the country.

02:20:42 - I'm coming back to Ms. Hamani.

02:20:44 Part of just the most recent report

02:20:47 about human error on the boat

02:20:50 reminds me of some of our discussions

02:20:52 about the aviation industry.

02:20:54 There's a lot of pressure on these companies

02:20:55 to move product and show a profit.

02:20:58 Are you concerned the same thing

02:21:01 that we're not providing enough oversight

02:21:03 to the people who are running the ships in the system

02:21:05 and they're being overworked,

02:21:06 so they're missing things,

02:21:07 whether it's people who are mechanics,

02:21:09 repairing the ships

02:21:10 or people who are operating the ships?

02:21:12 - Well, with respect to what occurred in port

02:21:15 on March 25th,

02:21:18 there was routine maintenance going on on the vessel

02:21:22 and it was not something that stood out to us as,

02:21:29 I mean, there's human error in everything we do,

02:21:31 routine maintenance and do,

02:21:32 if we're working on our cars in our garage,

02:21:35 sometimes we make mistakes.

02:21:36 In this case, a damper was closed

02:21:38 and an engine failed.

02:21:43 So, you know, in these situations,

02:21:47 you know, the crew took action

02:21:49 to get everything back up and running

02:21:54 and on the next day,

02:21:55 they were on a different set of breakers

02:21:57 and a different transformer.

02:21:58 So we'll look at that as part of the investigation,

02:22:02 including any sort of human error

02:22:04 that occurred on the 25th or the 26th.

02:22:06 - And I wasn't inferring a blame on the crew's part,

02:22:09 it's just the pressure on the company to make profits.

02:22:12 Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:22:13 - Thank you.

02:22:16 The gentleman yields

02:22:17 and I recognize Mr. LaMalfa for five minutes for questions.

02:22:20 - Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:22:24 I appreciate panelists come here.

02:22:28 I've been looking forward to this hearing

02:22:29 on this topic here.

02:22:31 We have a lot of bridge history in this country,

02:22:35 especially in recent years

02:22:37 and expediting the reconstruction of this is critical.

02:22:44 I'm certain to Baltimore and the Eastern Seaboard

02:22:47 as it would be, you know,

02:22:50 in any area of the country with a artery like that.

02:22:54 So what I'm especially interested in

02:22:57 is what is being done

02:22:59 and anybody on the panel wants to weigh in

02:23:02 to truly expedite this process

02:23:04 'cause when you read about it,

02:23:08 when you get information about it,

02:23:10 it sounds like there's a lot of preliminaries

02:23:12 that are of course necessary

02:23:14 with the demolition of the old bridge and such,

02:23:18 but where I get frustrated is a bog down of studies

02:23:22 and NEPA and things of that nature

02:23:24 with an already existing structure.

02:23:27 This is not a pristine area

02:23:29 and so what is being done to make a concurrent effort

02:23:32 to do that stuff and get categorical exclusions,

02:23:36 but also at the same time,

02:23:38 be moving forward as quickly as possible

02:23:42 and some examples I have of successes

02:23:45 as just Mr. D'Souza alluded to in California.

02:23:51 Now there was the Bay Bridge '89 earthquake,

02:23:54 you know, during the World Series, you may remember,

02:23:57 where about a 250 ton chunk of that collapsed

02:24:01 and I'm not sure how quickly they got that put back up,

02:24:03 but it wasn't terribly long when they put their minds to it.

02:24:07 On the adverse side of that coin,

02:24:11 you have the actual replacement of the Bay Bridge

02:24:14 took 24 years, you know, in '89,

02:24:18 when you decided there's a problem with the bridge,

02:24:20 it was decided, it wasn't completed till 2013.

02:24:25 They started construction in '02 and completed in '13,

02:24:28 so that's an 11 year actual construction time,

02:24:30 but a 24 year decision to actually and to completion.

02:24:38 The '94 Northridge earthquake

02:24:41 knocked down significant chunks of freeway

02:24:44 in Southern California

02:24:45 and the initial estimates, I believe at the time,

02:24:49 by Caltrans or others like,

02:24:52 oh, this is going to take three years,

02:24:53 which would just put a giant crimp

02:24:56 in movement and commerce in Southern California.

02:25:00 So the state and the governor, Governor Wilson,

02:25:05 put out a call for shortening that timeline

02:25:08 from basically three years to 140 days

02:25:11 and one of the people involved was this company

02:25:15 called C.C. Myers Construction Company.

02:25:18 They got it done not just in 140 days,

02:25:21 but 66 days with a large incentive,

02:25:25 a large bonus possible.

02:25:26 So on one hand, you know, and then the MacArthur Maze

02:25:31 in Oakland, I'm burning up my time here,

02:25:33 but there was a problem there.

02:25:35 I believe that was the fire.

02:25:36 Anyway, they got done in 27 days

02:25:39 with a bonus involved as well with the C.C. Myers Company.

02:25:43 Unfortunately, they're out of business now.

02:25:44 Mr. Myers passed.

02:25:46 So what could be done as far as incentives

02:25:49 to actually speed up the process

02:25:51 and not take six years, a paralysis of Baltimore,

02:25:55 but set aside bureaucracy

02:25:58 and get it done in three, let's say, okay?

02:26:01 I mean, realistically.

02:26:02 So anybody on the panel?

02:26:04 - So Congressman, just, and thank you

02:26:08 for your question and your examples that you've provided.

02:26:12 I would just say that we share your desire

02:26:15 to reopen the bridge as quickly as possible.

02:26:18 I would say that Federal Highways worked with Maryland

02:26:20 to get a programmatic CE for the debris removal in April

02:26:24 so that they weren't waiting around for an approval

02:26:27 to get the debris out of the channel

02:26:30 and we are working.

02:26:31 They are going to issue their RFP later this month,

02:26:35 hopefully get somebody under contract by August,

02:26:37 which is within five months of the incident,

02:26:41 and we'll hopefully be able to get them

02:26:43 to a categorical exclusion.

02:26:45 And they're looking at a four year,

02:26:46 four years of construction.

02:26:48 So the plan right now is for that bridge

02:26:50 to be reopened in 2028,

02:26:52 which I don't know that there's any other authority

02:26:54 that we could exert to get that done any faster.

02:26:57 - Okay, thank you.

02:26:58 Currently, you know, the movement of goods and commerce

02:27:01 is very important.

02:27:02 So is there anybody, maybe Ms. Holmendy or others,

02:27:06 a look at maybe providing a waiver for trucker hours?

02:27:12 'Cause they're gonna have at least two or three hours

02:27:13 of delays.

02:27:14 Is there a way that truckers hours can be,

02:27:18 have flexibility for time of duty on that,

02:27:21 as well as the ability to use the tunnels there

02:27:25 for ordinarily what trucks wouldn't be allowed to do?

02:27:29 - Thanks, sir, that would actually be

02:27:31 under US Department of Transportation and FMCSA

02:27:34 working with the state.

02:27:35 They can make waiver requests for truck weight.

02:27:39 And also, I'm not sure on the trucker hours,

02:27:43 I'll be happy to get back to you for the service hours.

02:27:45 But certainly--

02:27:46 - Yeah, please look into that.

02:27:47 If locals are saying that would be helpful

02:27:49 in order to complete,

02:27:51 you know, you wouldn't wanna run out by two hours

02:27:54 or something with the initial delay would be.

02:27:56 But also, is there an issue of the tunnel being available

02:28:00 to all types of trucking?

02:28:02 Are there restrictions on certain types of trucking

02:28:04 that could be helpful?

02:28:05 Could you have a waiver on maybe hazardous materials

02:28:09 having a certain time of day

02:28:10 that they could access it, for example,

02:28:14 that maybe they can't otherwise?

02:28:16 Just looking for ways for flexibility.

02:28:18 That's what I'd be asking.

02:28:19 Those be possible thoughts, you think?

02:28:21 - The gentleman's time has expired.

02:28:28 - Thank you.

02:28:28 And can he answer that?

02:28:29 - Yeah, quickly.

02:28:30 - Thank you.

02:28:31 - Happy to follow up with your office, sir,

02:28:33 on those questions.

02:28:34 - All right, thank you.

02:28:35 Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:28:36 - Thank you.

02:28:38 The gentleman yields back.

02:28:40 And I recognize Ms. Sykes for five minutes for questions.

02:28:43 - Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:28:44 And thank you to Chairman Graves

02:28:47 and Ranking Member Larson

02:28:48 for convening this full committee hearing today.

02:28:50 I, and to our witnesses, thank you for your testimony

02:28:53 and for working diligently to respond to the tragedy

02:28:55 that struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge in March.

02:28:59 And I join my colleagues in expressing my sympathy

02:29:01 to the families who lost loved ones and lives,

02:29:03 as well as the greater Baltimore and Maryland community.

02:29:08 Coming from Ohio, this is really important.

02:29:13 We have the nation's second highest number of bridges,

02:29:16 and this is a very important conversation for us.

02:29:18 And even just last week, we presented two checks

02:29:21 to our county engineer and county executive

02:29:24 for nearly $10 million to replace a decommissioned,

02:29:28 over 70-year-old bridge that is identified

02:29:31 as critical infrastructure.

02:29:32 So bridge security and safety is very important to us

02:29:35 in Ohio's 13th district and across the state of Ohio.

02:29:37 But I want to highlight something different.

02:29:40 Less than two months after this disaster struck in Maryland,

02:29:44 the majority on this committee was able to organize

02:29:47 and hold a very timely and necessary hearing

02:29:50 on the incident.

02:29:51 And this hearing and the witnesses today

02:29:53 are a perfect example of federal government fulfilling its role

02:29:56 to support state and local efforts from disasters

02:29:59 with federal dollars and resources

02:30:00 when they're needed most.

02:30:02 This partnership between governing bodies

02:30:04 is what I hoped to see more of when I was elected

02:30:06 to Congress two years ago.

02:30:08 So you all can understand my disappointment

02:30:10 when in the over a year since the train derailment

02:30:14 devastated the community of East Palestine

02:30:16 and its way of life, the majority on this community

02:30:18 has not shown the same sense of urgency

02:30:20 and has yet to notice a hearing to discuss

02:30:22 the state of rail safety in Ohio.

02:30:25 What about the people of Ohio and East Palestine

02:30:28 who have been begging us?

02:30:29 This question is to the majority who have been begging us

02:30:32 to do something on rail safety.

02:30:34 And even on the Committee on Transportation

02:30:36 and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines,

02:30:40 and Hazardous Materials, the subcommittee

02:30:42 would not hold a hearing to discuss

02:30:44 the Norfolk Southern train derailment

02:30:46 or the broader issue of rail safety,

02:30:48 leaving Democrats to host a rail safety roundtable

02:30:51 without members of the majority present.

02:30:54 And while I don't represent East Palestine geographically,

02:30:58 I am the only Ohioan on this committee

02:31:00 and East Palestine does not currently have a member

02:31:02 of the United States House of Representatives

02:31:05 serving in Congress.

02:31:05 So I have no problem speaking up for my neighbors

02:31:09 to the east of me.

02:31:11 And since the derailment in East Palestine,

02:31:13 two additional trains have derailed in Ohio alone

02:31:16 and many others across the country.

02:31:18 And the communities, local and state,

02:31:21 are still burdened with contaminated local waterways

02:31:24 and some airways across the nation.

02:31:28 Even more recently, on March 2nd of this year,

02:31:31 three trains crashed and derailed in Eastern Pennsylvania,

02:31:34 leaving at least seven crew members injured

02:31:36 with the estimated damages to the equipment

02:31:38 and track to be about $2.5 million.

02:31:41 Emergency personnel responding to the scene

02:31:43 found diesel fuel had spilled from one of the train cars,

02:31:46 but contaminant booms were deployed

02:31:48 to clean up the spill before the situation worsened.

02:31:51 It was by luck that a derailment of those three trains

02:31:54 was not worse or anything like we saw in Eastern Ohio.

02:31:58 It is very clear that the issue of train derailments

02:32:01 is not going away and turning a blind eye to the issue

02:32:04 is clearly not the path that Congress

02:32:05 or this committee should take.

02:32:08 Americans across the political spectrum,

02:32:10 including the former president,

02:32:11 the Biden-Harris administration, all agree

02:32:13 we must pass common sense rail safety legislation

02:32:17 to prevent future train derailments

02:32:19 and keep our community safe.

02:32:21 I am proud that Ohio Democrats and Republicans

02:32:24 came together to introduce the Bipartisan Rail Act last year

02:32:28 and now it is time for the House Republican majority

02:32:31 to pass the Rail Act to protect Ohioans

02:32:34 and communities across the country.

02:32:36 The Rail Act would implement effective measures

02:32:38 to keep our community safe,

02:32:40 hold railroad corporations accountable,

02:32:42 and ensure that no American living close to 140,000 miles

02:32:46 of railroad track has to worry about the threat

02:32:48 of a toxic train derailment in their backyard.

02:32:51 Finally, I would like to take a moment

02:32:54 to recognize the administration,

02:32:56 our state and local partners in the state of Ohio

02:32:59 and public servants who are continuously uplifting

02:33:02 East Palestine, even though this committee

02:33:05 and the United States House of Representatives

02:33:07 has turned a blind eye and turned their back

02:33:10 to the people of Ohio.

02:33:11 And I would also like to take a moment

02:33:13 to recognize Ms. Homendy and thank her

02:33:15 and the rest of the National Transportation Safety Board

02:33:17 for their investigation into the cause

02:33:20 of the Norfolk Southern train derailment

02:33:22 and their work in investigating other accidents

02:33:25 across the country with no doubt fewer people than you need.

02:33:29 You have continued to fill in the gap

02:33:32 where Congress have refused to act,

02:33:34 holding hearings in town halls with residents

02:33:37 in East Palestine, providing preliminary information

02:33:40 that we could act upon and a sense that people

02:33:44 in the administration, in the federal government,

02:33:46 do care about them even if this committee

02:33:48 and this Congress has refused to.

02:33:50 I look forward to reviewing the board's findings

02:33:54 and hopefully considering their recommendations

02:33:56 as we look to rail safety in America.

02:33:59 And thank you again for filling in the gaps

02:34:01 where this committee has failed the people of East Palestine.

02:34:05 Thank you, Mr. Chair.

02:34:06 I yield back.

02:34:07 - The gentlelady yields back and I recognize Mr. Burleson

02:34:12 for five minutes for questions.

02:34:13 - Thank you, Mrs. Homendy.

02:34:16 You know, it was just mentioned about the derailment

02:34:20 in East Palestine and we've had some other derailments

02:34:23 that have made the news, but overall,

02:34:26 would it not be accurate to say that trains

02:34:29 and ultimately they're more safe,

02:34:33 it's probably the safest mode of transportation

02:34:36 for goods and services, goods to be transported?

02:34:41 - For transportation, over 40,000 people

02:34:45 are dying on our nation's roads.

02:34:47 So as far as transporting goods and people,

02:34:49 rail is incredibly safe.

02:34:51 It doesn't mean that a tragedy doesn't occur

02:34:53 and that's where we come in and investigate.

02:34:55 - Okay, so I think it would be dangerous

02:34:57 if we started trying to steer activity more away from rail

02:35:03 because of these events.

02:35:05 How many people died in East Palestine?

02:35:07 - I'd like more things to go on rail.

02:35:08 - Right, how many people died in East Palestine?

02:35:10 - No one died in East Palestine.

02:35:13 - I think it's important to note that

02:35:15 while it might have been an environmental hazard,

02:35:17 I think it's important to recognize the actual numbers.

02:35:21 Mr. Barrett, or is it Baratt, or Bott, sorry, Mr. Bott.

02:35:27 My question has to do with the Francis Scott Key

02:35:32 Francis Scott Key Bridge,

02:35:34 which has been a subject for this entire hearing.

02:35:39 As I understand, there's about 15,000 jobs

02:35:42 that are dependent upon the, on the port,

02:35:45 and another 140,000 that are linked to the port.

02:35:50 Many of the individuals are worried

02:35:51 that they could lose their jobs

02:35:52 because of no longer having access

02:35:55 because of the collapse of the bridge.

02:35:56 How long will it take to construct the new bridge?

02:35:59 - Thank you, Congressman, for the question.

02:36:04 And yes, the port, and I think that's part

02:36:07 of the critical efforts of the Army Corps

02:36:09 and the Coast Guard to get that port reopened

02:36:11 so that those jobs can resume.

02:36:14 I think the bridge itself, once the port reopens,

02:36:18 is on a 2028 schedule right now

02:36:21 is the preliminary estimate to get that bridge back open.

02:36:23 - So 20, so four year estimate.

02:36:26 And that, what about the cost for the bridge?

02:36:31 - So right now, right now the way

02:36:35 that the RFP is being structured,

02:36:37 it will be a progressive design build.

02:36:39 So you go in and you say,

02:36:40 this is the structure that we need to build.

02:36:43 And then the benefits of progressive design build

02:36:46 is they can bring in different elements.

02:36:48 So that's why the cost and the schedule

02:36:50 will update as the different elements come in.

02:36:52 But right now it's estimated $1.7 to $1.9 billion.

02:36:56 - Have there been any environmental concerns

02:37:02 or any other issues that we might be able to look to,

02:37:07 to sign any waivers that might expedite

02:37:09 the construction of the bridge?

02:37:10 - Yeah, so on the environmental side,

02:37:13 and through NEPA, that's why we're likely going

02:37:16 to get to a categorical exclusion,

02:37:18 because we're putting a bridge back

02:37:20 where one existed relatively within the same footprint.

02:37:22 We'll work with our permitting agencies

02:37:25 to make sure that we're not missing anything,

02:37:28 but that is our plan.

02:37:29 - And you served as the head of transportation

02:37:34 for the state of Colorado prior to this role,

02:37:37 is that correct?

02:37:37 - In Delaware.

02:37:38 - Okay, and so in that role, what is your experience?

02:37:42 I know we just had a new rule or executive order

02:37:44 that was put in place under this administration

02:37:47 that requires project labor agreements for anything.

02:37:51 I think it's above 35 million, is that the cost?

02:37:54 - I would have to come back on the exact numbers.

02:37:58 - So in your experience on both the state level

02:38:01 and the federal level,

02:38:02 do requiring project labor agreements

02:38:05 improve the timeline of projects?

02:38:07 - Sir, I would need to come back to you

02:38:11 with specific examples on the timeline and the--

02:38:14 - What about the costs?

02:38:15 - Again, sir, I don't want to speculate.

02:38:18 I want to come back with the specific data.

02:38:20 - And I'm not trying to press on you.

02:38:22 We had a great conversation before.

02:38:25 But surely you have enough years of experience

02:38:27 to understand the distinction and the difference

02:38:30 between the costs of a project,

02:38:33 whether or not a project labor agreement is required.

02:38:36 - Yeah, with the one project I would think about,

02:38:40 and it wasn't a PLA that was required,

02:38:42 but we did do what I would call

02:38:43 the first sort of local hiring preference in Denver

02:38:46 where we replaced the I-70 viaduct.

02:38:48 And the goal is, I think it's similar

02:38:50 to where the administration is here,

02:38:52 trying to create good-paying jobs

02:38:54 and create a workforce for the future

02:38:57 and ensure that we're building the nation's infrastructure

02:39:00 and building out great jobs.

02:39:02 - But if the taxpayer were gonna get more bang for their buck,

02:39:04 they're gonna get more bridges, more roads,

02:39:06 it would be without a project labor agreement.

02:39:10 - Again, sir, I want to come back to you

02:39:11 with the specific data on that.

02:39:13 - I think the answer is yes.

02:39:14 Thank you, my time has expired.

02:39:16 - Thank you.

02:39:18 The gentleman yields back.

02:39:19 And I recognize Mr. Menendez

02:39:21 for five minutes for questions.

02:39:22 - Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:39:23 And just quickly following up,

02:39:24 I had the opportunity to visit the Portal North Bridge,

02:39:27 which runs through New Jersey,

02:39:29 a critically important part of the Gateway Program

02:39:32 to mark the 50% completion of the project.

02:39:35 It's largely being built by labor.

02:39:37 It's on time and on budget.

02:39:39 So I thank my friends in labor

02:39:41 for the incredible work that they do

02:39:42 to continue to develop

02:39:44 and build our critical infrastructure.

02:39:46 I want to thank all of our witnesses today

02:39:48 for their testimony and their ongoing work

02:39:50 regarding the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse.

02:39:53 I want to join my colleagues

02:39:54 in recognizing the six workers who lost their lives

02:39:57 during this tragic accident,

02:39:59 immigrants who are making

02:40:00 not just our infrastructure stronger,

02:40:02 but our nation stronger.

02:40:04 My thoughts are with their families

02:40:05 and the communities that they were a part of.

02:40:07 New Jersey's 8th Congressional District

02:40:09 is home to the largest port on the East Coast.

02:40:11 Following the collapse of the Key Bridge,

02:40:14 the Port of New York, New Jersey

02:40:15 was ready to accommodate additional vessels

02:40:17 to ensure our supply chain remained intact.

02:40:20 This is thanks in large part

02:40:21 to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey,

02:40:23 their dedicated teams,

02:40:24 the operators of our ports,

02:40:26 and the incredible men and women of ILA

02:40:28 who keep our region moving.

02:40:30 And Mr. Abbott, your testimony notes

02:40:33 that the Federal Highway Administration

02:40:34 will work to ensure that the new bridge

02:40:36 is built to current design standards.

02:40:38 Can you describe how design standards have changed

02:40:41 since the Key Bridge was built in 1977

02:40:44 and the challenges posed

02:40:46 by increasingly large vessels calling at our ports?

02:40:48 Thank you, Congressman, for the question.

02:40:54 I think just, you know, the,

02:40:56 if you look at the bridge,

02:40:57 it was a truss bridge, you know,

02:40:59 and they're very strong and made of steel,

02:41:01 and that was the prevailing design at that time.

02:41:03 When you look at many of the truss bridges

02:41:05 that are being replaced today,

02:41:07 they're being replaced by cable stay bridges

02:41:10 for the most part.

02:41:11 It's a lot of advantages from cost, strength.

02:41:13 You can precast the concrete sections,

02:41:16 bring them into place.

02:41:18 And so I think that's probably the likely design

02:41:22 that will come forward.

02:41:24 With regard to design standards,

02:41:27 obviously, you know, there's, you know,

02:41:29 vertical load and lateral load

02:41:31 that we have to account for.

02:41:33 And then I think specifically

02:41:35 what the Frances Scott Key Bridge has brought forward

02:41:36 and what we're going to be working very closely with

02:41:39 Chair Homendy, and I echo her call

02:41:43 to any bridge owner to begin examining

02:41:45 their bridges right now,

02:41:46 is what is the appropriate level of protection

02:41:49 that we need to design

02:41:50 so that we don't have another similar situation?

02:41:53 And taking into consideration

02:41:55 the size of the vessels

02:41:56 that are coming through our ports

02:41:58 and through our channels,

02:41:58 given that they've increased in size over,

02:42:01 definitely since 1977,

02:42:02 that would be part of the analysis.

02:42:04 Is that correct?

02:42:04 Absolutely, sir, yes.

02:42:07 I appreciate that.

02:42:08 The Port Infrastructure Development Program

02:42:10 provides grants to support efforts

02:42:11 to improve port and related infrastructure

02:42:14 and meet our supply chain needs.

02:42:16 Between 2019 and 2023,

02:42:18 this program received $9 billion in applications,

02:42:21 but only received $2.25 billion in appropriations

02:42:24 over five years

02:42:24 in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

02:42:27 Mr. Batt, should we be doing more

02:42:29 to invest in landside infrastructure?

02:42:31 Thank you, Representative.

02:42:36 I, you know, I've been actually at a bunch of ports

02:42:38 just this week.

02:42:39 I served on the Port Board in Wilmington, Delaware,

02:42:42 and I would say there is a critical need

02:42:45 for infrastructure everywhere,

02:42:46 including, you know, for the one that you mentioned.

02:42:49 And how would increased appropriations

02:42:52 to the Port Infrastructure Development Program

02:42:54 potentially help prevent future tragedies?

02:42:57 Sir, I'd want to, you know,

02:43:00 consult with the folks at Marriott

02:43:02 to get you a specific answer to that question.

02:43:04 Okay, fair enough.

02:43:05 To Chair Homendy,

02:43:06 I understand that you're limited today

02:43:07 in what you can share regarding this particular incident,

02:43:10 but can you touch on what features may be implemented

02:43:12 on both new and existing bridges

02:43:14 to better protect them from potential impacts

02:43:16 like what we saw in Baltimore?

02:43:18 Yeah, this is what we're looking at

02:43:20 as part of our investigation.

02:43:21 We're working with Maryland

02:43:22 to evaluate their other bridges,

02:43:24 and then we're looking at other areas

02:43:26 in the United States

02:43:27 where bridge owners have improved bridge infrastructure

02:43:32 after a vessel strike,

02:43:33 including any sort of fender systems,

02:43:37 pier protection, dolphins.

02:43:38 That's exactly what we're looking at.

02:43:40 We don't have recommendations today on that.

02:43:42 But again, I would stress that states

02:43:46 and bridge owners should be evaluating,

02:43:48 especially with older bridges,

02:43:51 what is going through as far as

02:43:53 in their navigable waterways now,

02:43:55 what is the risk,

02:43:57 and how should they address that?

02:43:59 And do you, quickly, a follow-up,

02:44:01 do you anticipate or have a sense of timing

02:44:03 of when those recommendations might be made available,

02:44:06 just given sort of the timely importance

02:44:07 of making sure that the existing infrastructure

02:44:09 throughout the country is up to date?

02:44:11 So we often issue urgent safety recommendations,

02:44:15 and we may, in this case,

02:44:16 decide to issue an urgent safety recommendation

02:44:18 at any time,

02:44:19 including before we issue a final report.

02:44:22 We are aiming for 18 months on a final report,

02:44:26 but again, that we may have updates

02:44:29 to the investigation that we release,

02:44:31 and we may issue urgent safety recommendations as well.

02:44:34 I think this might make sense in this instance

02:44:36 to ensure that people feel secure

02:44:37 when they're crossing any types of these bridges.

02:44:39 Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:44:40 I yield back.

02:44:40 Thank you.

02:44:42 The gentleman yields back,

02:44:43 and I recognize Mr. Eazl for five minutes for questions.

02:44:46 Thank you, Madam Chairman,

02:44:48 and thank you all for being here today.

02:44:49 Appreciate all of you and your hard work and dedication.

02:44:53 Vice Admiral,

02:44:54 we have a town in my county named after you,

02:44:59 but we pronounce it a little different there

02:45:01 in South Mississippi.

02:45:02 So, "go-chay" is the way we say it,

02:45:05 but we'll just leave that to us.

02:45:07 So, anyway, as you know,

02:45:10 one of the few remaining United States shipbuilders

02:45:13 is in my county,

02:45:14 District Huntington Ingalls,

02:45:17 and what can we do,

02:45:19 what can be done to encourage the greater use

02:45:23 of United States flagged vessels

02:45:25 to ensure that ships coming through our ports

02:45:28 are held to the highest mechanical standard?

02:45:31 Yeah, thanks, Congressman.

02:45:36 I think I might be named after somebody

02:45:38 who grew up in that town.

02:45:40 But the Coast Guard works very hard to assure

02:45:44 that with the number of foreign flagged vessels

02:45:46 that call in U.S. ports every single day

02:45:49 that we maintain an equivalent level of safety.

02:45:52 We do this through

02:45:53 the International Maritime Organization.

02:45:55 Actually, they're meeting this week

02:45:56 on a number of issues of emerging technologies.

02:46:00 So, we've done things like

02:46:01 worked on the standards of training,

02:46:04 watchkeeping, and certification

02:46:06 for all mariners, U.S. and international.

02:46:09 We want to do this in a way, sir,

02:46:11 that doesn't disadvantage our U.S. mariners

02:46:14 so we can have the equivalent levels

02:46:16 that global shipping and global crews on vessels

02:46:20 have to adhere to.

02:46:21 Thank you.

02:46:22 Additionally, do you think this incident

02:46:24 could be a cause for recommending harbor tugs

02:46:27 escort large ships through larger channels?

02:46:30 And if so, do you think this incident

02:46:33 could have been avoided?

02:46:34 It may be, but we don't know yet.

02:46:37 It's too early in the investigation

02:46:38 to understand whether tugs would or would not

02:46:41 have helped in this circumstance.

02:46:43 Although what I will say is that

02:46:46 there are some areas in some ports around the U.S.

02:46:50 that have tug escort requirements

02:46:53 for a variety of reasons,

02:46:54 and they're all different.

02:46:55 For example, under the Verrazano Bridge.

02:46:58 For example, the state of California

02:47:00 for tank vessels entering into the San Francisco Bay area.

02:47:05 Those determinations are typically made

02:47:07 by harbor safety committees

02:47:09 with all stakeholders getting together

02:47:11 to understand the totality of risk,

02:47:13 not just the Coast Guard,

02:47:15 and then agreeing on what tug requirements

02:47:17 might be particular to that area of risk.

02:47:20 Very good.

02:47:21 Administrator Byatt,

02:47:24 I noticed in DOT FY 2025 appropriations budget request

02:47:31 that there were no additional funds

02:47:34 provided beyond the annual $100 million authorization

02:47:38 in the emergency relief fund.

02:47:39 Given the backlog of requests and unmet needs,

02:47:43 especially in Mississippi,

02:47:45 how do you anticipate fulfilling the request

02:47:48 for all highway projects and this bridge?

02:47:53 Thank you, Congressman, for that question.

02:47:55 I know that the OMB director

02:47:58 was part of a tour of the site a few weeks ago.

02:48:02 I don't want to get ahead of the administration,

02:48:04 but I believe that generally speaking

02:48:06 the ER backlog has been topped up

02:48:10 through supplementals historically,

02:48:12 and I believe that may be part of the discussion.

02:48:15 Thank you.

02:48:16 Continuing with you,

02:48:18 along with ensuring the process moves along quickly,

02:48:21 how do you plan to coordinate with the state of Maryland

02:48:25 and other stakeholders to ensure

02:48:26 that proper funds are obligated quickly?

02:48:29 Thank you, Congressman.

02:48:32 It is absolutely top of mind,

02:48:34 and having worked in the private sector,

02:48:35 I know that projects delivered on time and on budget

02:48:37 are always our target,

02:48:40 and so we are moving with great speed,

02:48:43 working in close coordination with them

02:48:45 to make sure that they're hitting all of the timelines,

02:48:47 and they've set an aggressive schedule as well.

02:48:49 Very good.

02:48:50 Chair, it's been reported the actions taken

02:48:53 by the vessel and the state police

02:48:55 who took swift action to minimize the casualties.

02:48:59 In the future,

02:49:01 how can we better improve the communication

02:49:03 between vessels, people on the bridge,

02:49:05 and emergency responders?

02:49:06 That is part of our investigation,

02:49:09 and we'll look at that.

02:49:11 It was key when the pilots reached out

02:49:14 to the dispatchers,

02:49:15 and the dispatchers called MDTA police.

02:49:18 It was a very quick notification

02:49:21 to shut down operations on the bridge,

02:49:23 and everyone just involved in that was...

02:49:29 It was a heroic effort, certainly.

02:49:31 So we will look at that as part of our investigation

02:49:33 to determine what should be the standard going forward.

02:49:38 Thank you, and thank you all again for being here today,

02:49:41 and Madam Chairman, I yield back.

02:49:42 Thank you.

02:49:45 The gentleman yields,

02:49:46 and I recognize Mr. Auchincloss

02:49:47 for five minutes for questions.

02:49:49 Thank you, Madam Chair.

02:49:51 Some of my colleagues today

02:49:54 have indicated their support

02:49:57 for the concept of federal monies

02:50:00 being repaid through tolling on the bridge.

02:50:04 I would associate myself with that concept

02:50:07 and with interest in that concept.

02:50:09 I think in general,

02:50:10 tolling on critical infrastructure

02:50:13 is an appropriate way to fund it in the long run,

02:50:15 and I would encourage the relevant agencies in Congress

02:50:19 to consider that, not just for this bridge,

02:50:21 but for all bridges going forward

02:50:24 as we think about how to responsibly fund

02:50:26 critical infrastructure and address the backlog.

02:50:29 Vice Admiral, I appreciate your testimony,

02:50:32 and I appreciate also the unified response in Baltimore

02:50:36 that you have been part of.

02:50:37 And I'm concerned, though,

02:50:40 about the strain on the Coast Guard

02:50:43 and whether that is going to further exacerbate

02:50:45 the service's challenges

02:50:49 in operating with a budget and workforce deficit.

02:50:51 Since the surge in Baltimore wasn't anticipated,

02:50:54 there will be downstream effects

02:50:56 on other Coast Guard missions and stations.

02:50:58 If the service does not receive

02:51:00 additional resources from Congress,

02:51:02 what are the likely short and long-term consequences

02:51:04 for operations in a place like Massachusetts?

02:51:07 Congressman, as you know,

02:51:11 we surge resources to the top priorities at the moment,

02:51:14 whether that be a bridge collapse

02:51:16 or a hurricane response or a search and rescue case.

02:51:19 But to your point, more often we do that,

02:51:22 and with insufficient budget,

02:51:25 to make sure that we can do things

02:51:27 like recapitalize our assets

02:51:29 and to close this urgent workforce gap

02:51:32 that we have in enlisted ranks,

02:51:34 our ability to do that is going to be eroded over time.

02:51:37 So articulate the trade-offs that we might have to make.

02:51:41 What should Congress understand about trade-offs

02:51:44 that have to happen if you're not resourced appropriately?

02:51:46 So take, for example,

02:51:47 this near 10% enlisted workforce shortfall.

02:51:51 If we do not have the recruiting

02:51:56 and retention capability within the Coast Guard

02:51:59 in order to get that back up to normal,

02:52:02 then we're going to have to continue on

02:52:04 doing the sorts of things that we've done,

02:52:06 like not completely staffing

02:52:09 certain stations around the country

02:52:11 where there might be some redundancies.

02:52:13 We might not--

02:52:14 And then what does that mean for your mission set?

02:52:16 So can you not do, for example,

02:52:18 law enforcement for recreational boating?

02:52:21 Can you not do illegal fisheries law enforcement?

02:52:23 What are some of the missions that might get eroded

02:52:25 if you don't have the resourcing?

02:52:26 That's right.

02:52:27 We're going to have to make tough choices

02:52:29 to deliberately back off of doing certain things

02:52:32 that we would normally do,

02:52:34 like some recreational boating boardings,

02:52:37 like some fisheries law enforcement boardings,

02:52:40 like some lower priority

02:52:43 aids to navigation around the country.

02:52:46 Good.

02:52:47 I think it's important to be specific about the trade-offs,

02:52:49 because I want Congress to understand

02:52:51 that you can't get something for nothing,

02:52:54 and we have to fund

02:52:56 the Coast Guard's vital 11 missions.

02:52:58 I know you're also conducting

02:53:02 an Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study,

02:53:04 one of the goals of which is to reduce

02:53:06 the risk of marine casualties

02:53:07 and increase the efficiency of vessel traffic

02:53:09 on the Atlantic Coast.

02:53:10 How is the Coast Guard re-evaluating this study

02:53:12 in light of the Baltimore accident,

02:53:14 and how should ports evaluate potential risks

02:53:16 to their infrastructure going forward?

02:53:18 I think Baltimore is a sober reminder

02:53:19 of the consequences when you have large vessels,

02:53:22 and then you have a mishap,

02:53:24 and then you have some critical infrastructure,

02:53:26 and then we have the results that we've seen.

02:53:28 What we're doing in terms of the Port Access Route Studies

02:53:31 is exactly to prevent those sorts of circumstances.

02:53:36 As we know that there will be more fixed objects,

02:53:40 i.e. wind turbines, wind farms offshore,

02:53:43 starting in New England

02:53:44 and then working down to other parts of the country,

02:53:47 we need to have assurances

02:53:49 that there are shipping lanes

02:53:51 that will be free from the construction

02:53:54 of offshore wind farms

02:53:55 so that maritime transportation can continue

02:53:58 at low risk to collisions and elisions.

02:54:00 - I appreciate it, and I'll yield back.

02:54:03 - Thank you.

02:54:06 The gentleman yields back,

02:54:07 and I recognize Mr. Williams

02:54:09 for five minutes for questions,

02:54:10 and apologize for skipping you earlier.

02:54:11 Sorry.

02:54:12 - That's all right.

02:54:12 Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.

02:54:13 Thank you all for being here

02:54:16 and for your expert testimony.

02:54:17 I've read through the accident report,

02:54:20 such as it is,

02:54:21 and would like to follow up on some details of that

02:54:25 just to try to understand it,

02:54:26 and maybe, Madam Chairwoman, start with you.

02:54:32 Do we know, I'm sure we do,

02:54:37 are we looking at the manufacturers

02:54:40 of HR1, LR1 breakers,

02:54:42 the TI-BUS, the transformer,

02:54:44 the control system,

02:54:47 all of those things that appear

02:54:50 in the switchboard cabinet in your report?

02:54:54 You have the inspector that's taping those shut.

02:54:56 Have we identified the manufacturer

02:54:59 of all of those components,

02:55:01 including the sub-assemblies

02:55:03 and the things that are inside?

02:55:05 - Yes, so we are currently working with Hyundai,

02:55:07 who manufactured many of the components,

02:55:10 and they are a party to our investigation

02:55:14 and have come to Baltimore to work with us

02:55:17 to do testing on board the vessel,

02:55:19 and our engineers are back on board the vessel today.

02:55:22 - So I understand that Hyundai would,

02:55:25 you know, would assemble the control system,

02:55:30 the panel, if you will, like a panel shop would,

02:55:32 but the individual components inside,

02:55:35 whether that's a PLC or a SCADA system

02:55:37 or sensors, actuators, whatever those things are,

02:55:40 are we looking all the way down into the components,

02:55:43 the whole supply chain that made up all those components?

02:55:46 - We are.

02:55:47 - And is there, when you represent,

02:55:50 you know, the transformer,

02:55:52 the ICMS, the integrated control and monitoring system,

02:55:58 you're saying all of that comes from Hyundai?

02:56:01 - Not every single feature or sensor comes from Hyundai,

02:56:07 but if we are looking at any sensors or pumps

02:56:11 or any other component on the vessel,

02:56:14 then we will work with whoever that manufacturer is.

02:56:18 - Is there an investigation into cybersecurity

02:56:23 that's being evaluated for all these components?

02:56:26 - Well, currently we have no evidence of this time

02:56:29 to suggest that this was a cybersecurity threat.

02:56:31 It has been stated at unified command

02:56:34 that the Coast Guard and FBI

02:56:37 also did not believe this was a cybersecurity issue.

02:56:40 We have a memorandum of understanding with the FBI

02:56:44 that if there is any evidence of that,

02:56:47 we have to turn this over immediately to them.

02:56:49 - Is there a criminal investigation going on at all?

02:56:52 - I am aware that there is some work being done

02:56:56 by the Department of Justice,

02:56:58 but that's not within the NTSB's review.

02:57:01 - So in a cybersecurity or a cyber attack,

02:57:06 there's a lot of concern about embedded systems

02:57:09 embedded into, you know,

02:57:12 what's called a real-time operating system

02:57:14 or inside the control logic

02:57:17 or inside the control elements there.

02:57:20 That would require an enormous amount

02:57:22 of sophisticated forensics to evaluate,

02:57:25 and I would think which would require

02:57:27 dismantling that whole switchboard

02:57:29 and doing a component-by-component search.

02:57:33 Is that kind of investigation underway?

02:57:36 - Our investigators have over 400 years of experience

02:57:41 who are investigating this accident itself,

02:57:43 and they go where the evidence takes them.

02:57:46 As far as anything the Department of Justice or FBI is doing,

02:57:50 that is not something I can speak to.

02:57:52 - Well, in terms of 400 years of experience,

02:57:54 there's probably just the last five that are relevant

02:57:57 in terms of cybersecurity,

02:57:58 particularly in industrial controls.

02:58:00 - Right. My point, though, is they have

02:58:03 significant expertise on marine safety.

02:58:04 - I understand your point,

02:58:06 and I have significant expertise as well.

02:58:08 And so, you know, the point of my question is,

02:58:13 you know, as we've seen in embedded systems

02:58:17 and in very integrated components

02:58:20 from a wide variety of vendors,

02:58:22 that understanding the entire supply chain,

02:58:24 understanding and evaluating things

02:58:28 all the way down to the operating system

02:58:30 or even the BIOS and other features

02:58:35 deep in the systems is critically important.

02:58:37 As I read through the accident report,

02:58:43 it's not clear to me that anybody knows

02:58:44 why those breakers tripped,

02:58:45 why the transformer tripped offline,

02:58:48 what dumped the bus.

02:58:49 And it seems like until we know the origin

02:58:52 of the actual accident,

02:58:54 that all of these things should be taken

02:58:57 as likely or at least possible.

02:58:59 Would you agree?

02:59:00 - Yeah. This is a preliminary report,

02:59:03 and what we released yesterday was preliminary.

02:59:06 We are still conducting our investigation,

02:59:09 and we go where the evidence takes us.

02:59:10 - And that includes a forensics

02:59:14 on the actual components that are there,

02:59:19 which would require significant disassembly

02:59:21 and evaluation, in my opinion.

02:59:23 - We will follow the evidence

02:59:26 and anything security-wise.

02:59:28 If we find anything,

02:59:29 we will turn it over immediately

02:59:31 to the criminal authorities.

02:59:32 - Thank you very much. I yield back.

02:59:33 - Thank you.

02:59:34 - Thank you. The gentleman yields back,

02:59:38 and I recognize myself for five minutes

02:59:40 for questioning.

02:59:40 You've all been sitting here for a long time.

02:59:43 You've been pretty thoroughly questioned.

02:59:47 I just want to wrap up with,

02:59:49 is there anything any of you want to highlight

02:59:51 for your respective agencies

02:59:53 that will be helpful to this committee

02:59:55 that you haven't already covered?

02:59:56 I'll start with Vice Admiral Gaudier,

02:59:58 and we'll move down the line.

03:00:00 - Congresswoman, a factual statement.

03:00:05 I think that this has been pretty thoroughly questioned.

03:00:08 In terms of the,

03:00:11 I've been asked several questions

03:00:13 in terms about Coast Guard resourcing,

03:00:15 and I think it bears repeating from our perspective

03:00:18 is we're incredibly proud of the folks in the field

03:00:22 who have responded.

03:00:23 They have done an amazing job

03:00:25 with their counterparts to do this.

03:00:27 We cannot guarantee over time

03:00:31 that the Coast Guard is going to be able to perform

03:00:33 at that level,

03:00:34 whether that be a search and rescue case

03:00:36 or a patrol in Asia

03:00:39 or patrolling for the potential for mass migration

03:00:44 in the Caribbean

03:00:45 without substantial support

03:00:47 and enduring support from Congress

03:00:49 and appropriation side

03:00:50 in terms of recapitalizing our aging assets

03:00:53 and improving our procurement construction

03:00:56 and improvement support from Congress,

03:01:00 things that help the people in terms of training

03:01:04 that leads us to successful operations like this.

03:01:08 So I appreciate the opportunity to convey that to you.

03:01:11 - Major General Graham.

03:01:14 - Thank you for that question

03:01:17 and the opportunity to be here today.

03:01:19 Probably two points I'd just like to wrap up with.

03:01:22 We talked a lot about safety of the general public.

03:01:25 I just want to commend the teams on site

03:01:27 from the Coast Guard to the Port

03:01:28 to the various agencies,

03:01:30 knock on wood right now,

03:01:32 it's been an amazingly safe operation.

03:01:35 It was probably some of the riskiest diving operations

03:01:37 you could have.

03:01:38 Tethered divers going down,

03:01:39 water you certainly can't see to the end of your fingers

03:01:44 with we were guiding them by sonar,

03:01:46 really steel sticking out

03:01:48 and they did it amazingly safely.

03:01:52 Job's not over yet

03:01:53 and our commitment is to continue that safety record

03:01:56 until the federal channel is completely cleared.

03:01:59 There was a lot of discussion

03:02:01 on the resiliency of infrastructure.

03:02:03 About three weeks after the DALI hit the bridge,

03:02:07 some barges broke away on the Ohio River near Pittsburgh

03:02:10 and they bounced off of two of the locks and dams

03:02:13 that the Corps runs on the upper reaches of the Ohio River

03:02:18 and the infrastructure withstood those strikes

03:02:21 because it was designed to withstand those strikes.

03:02:25 Right now we're trying to stretch

03:02:28 taxpayers dollars as far as we can

03:02:30 and we're looking at some of the gates on those structures

03:02:32 and to see if we can go from steel

03:02:34 to fiber reinforced polymers.

03:02:37 And one of the things we're taking a look at

03:02:39 is to see well if we do build them

03:02:42 from fiber reinforced polymer,

03:02:43 will they withstand barge strikes and whatnot

03:02:46 as well as steel does.

03:02:50 And so all that is to make a shameless plug

03:02:52 for research and development funding

03:02:54 that we agencies need to continue

03:02:57 to advance the state of engineering.

03:03:00 Thank you.

03:03:01 Shameless plug noted.

03:03:02 Mr. Vatt.

03:03:05 Thank you Madam Chair.

03:03:08 I would just say I would end where I started

03:03:11 which is you know I've been around a number of these

03:03:13 sort of bridge disasters or disasters

03:03:16 and just the confidence I feel that this response

03:03:22 whether it's through the Unified Command

03:03:23 or the Army Corps or the Coast Guard,

03:03:26 Federal Highways, all the various parts of USDOT,

03:03:28 I feel like it's just been such a exemplary response

03:03:31 and a message to send the American people

03:03:34 that when disaster strikes,

03:03:36 you know the government is there working

03:03:39 in close coordination with the private sector.

03:03:41 I appreciate a lot of the questions

03:03:44 from the majority around the funding of the bridge.

03:03:46 I appreciate their concern for fully funding it

03:03:50 open to looking at the different you know

03:03:53 methodologies that they brought forward.

03:03:55 I would just highlight from a Federal Highway perspective

03:03:57 that there is 3.7 billion dollars

03:03:59 including the bridge of unmet need across the country

03:04:02 in red states and blue states and the ER program

03:04:05 as it's designated we want to follow the law

03:04:07 and it doesn't really matter the color of the state

03:04:10 we're going to show up and we want to make sure

03:04:12 that the funding is available for ER programs

03:04:15 across the country.

03:04:16 Thank you.

03:04:17 Ms. Hamedy.

03:04:18 Thank you.

03:04:19 First of all let me thank this committee

03:04:21 on a bipartisan basis.

03:04:22 You led the effort to reauthorize the NTSP-B

03:04:26 as part of FAA reauthorization

03:04:29 so thank you very much for that.

03:04:31 You also led the way on fully funding the NTSB

03:04:35 along with house appropriators for our request for FY24.

03:04:42 We hope you will do the same for FY25

03:04:44 but our FY24 funding came in a little bit lower.

03:04:50 Again we fully appreciate it because it is higher

03:04:55 than we receive now but if you just look

03:04:57 at this investigation we have 12 people

03:05:01 in our office of marine safety.

03:05:03 They need an additional five that doesn't include

03:05:05 all the other modes within the NTSB that need people

03:05:10 and the supporting offices as well as dealing

03:05:12 with unfunded mandates, lab equipment and training needs.

03:05:17 So the 10.7 million that we got in an increase

03:05:21 in FY24 actually translated into a little over five

03:05:25 because we had to take on a 5.2% pay raise.

03:05:29 Well deserved but we have to think about the impact

03:05:33 on the smaller agencies there and so we have about five

03:05:36 and we have to figure out okay what 11 positions

03:05:40 out of the hundreds can we fund.

03:05:43 So for the office of marine safety itself 12 people

03:05:48 on their staff half of which are dedicated

03:05:51 to this particular accident and they have

03:05:55 over 60 other cases and what happens

03:05:58 is those get pushed a little bit so they could focus

03:06:00 on the next major one.

03:06:02 So any support you can provide for FY25

03:06:05 is really appreciated.

03:06:06 Thank you.

03:06:07 One more really quick question.

03:06:09 Major General Graham, does the Corps have an updated timeline

03:06:13 for when the full federal navigation channel will open?

03:06:15 Our commitment is to have it fully open by the end

03:06:20 of this month, sooner if possible.

03:06:22 Okay thank you.

03:06:24 I'm way over my time but they gave me the gavel

03:06:25 so nobody's stopping me.

03:06:28 Thank you.

03:06:28 I yield back.

03:06:30 Are there any further questions from any members

03:06:32 of the committee who've not been recognized?

03:06:33 Seeing none that concludes our hearing for today.

03:06:37 I would like to thank each of the witnesses

03:06:39 for your testimony and the committee stands adjourned.

House Transportation Committee Holds Hearing On Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse Federal Response

Category

Transcript

Recommended