U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

62–187 2010

CONSTRUCTING A GREEN TRANSPORTATION 

POLICY: TRANSIT MODES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SELECT COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY INDEPENDENCE 

AND GLOBAL WARMING 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 19, 2009 

Serial No. 111–5 

( 

Printed for the use of the Select Committee on 

Energy Independence and Global Warming 

globalwarming.house.gov 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

(II) 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY INDEPENDENCE 

AND GLOBAL WARMING 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Chairman 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

JAY INSLEE, Washington 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

HILDA L. SOLIS, California 

STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, 

South Dakota 

EMANUEL CLEAVER, Missouri 

JOHN J. HALL, New York 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, JR., 

Wisconsin, Ranking Member 

JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona 

GREG WALDEN, Oregon 

CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan 

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma 

MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

GERARD J. WALDRON, Staff Director 

ALIYA BRODSKY, Chief Clerk 

THOMAS WEIMER, Minority Staff Director 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

(iii) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hon. Edward J. Markey, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, opening statement .................................................... 1 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 3 

Hon. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the 

State of Wisconsin, opening statement .............................................................. 5 

Hon. Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, opening statement ...................................................................................... 6 

Hon. Marsha Blackburn, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Tennessee, opening statement ............................................................................ 7 

Hon. John T. Salazar, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colorado, opening statement ...................................................................................... 7 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 8 

Hon. Emanuel Cleaver II, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Missouri, opening statement ............................................................................... 11 

WITNESSES

PANEL I

Mr. Peter Varga, Chief Executive Officer, Interurban Transit Partnership ...... 11 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 14 

Additional Answers for the Record ................................................................. 87 

Mr. Andy Clarke, Executive Director, League of American Bicyclists ................ 19 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 21 

Mr. Chris Zimmerman, Board Member, Arlington County Board ....................... 26 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 28 

Mr. John Boesel, Present and Chief Executive Officer, Calstart ......................... 32 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 34 

PANEL II

Ms. Erika Guerra, Manager of Government Affairs and Corporate Responsibility, Holcim (US) Inc ......................................................................................... 52 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 55 

Mr. Don Weaver, Highway Division Chairman, The Associated General Contractors of America ............................................................................................... 63 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 65 

Mr. Domenic Ruccolo, Senior Vice President, Sales and Marketing, John 

Deere Construction and Forestry Company ....................................................... 72 

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 75 

Additional Answers for the Record ................................................................. 91 

SUBMITTED MATERIALS

Submitted by Mr. Ruccolo, Joint Statement of CNH America LLC. Caterpillar, Inc. Deere and Company, Submitted to the House Science and Technology Committee Subcommittee on Energy and Environment, Hearing Examining Vehicle Technology Research and Development Programs, March 

24, 2009, Subcommittee by Domenic G. Ruccolo ............................................... 101 

Submitted by Mr. Ruccolo, Letter from Deere and Company to Honorable 

Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, November 20, 2008, Submitted by Domenic G. Ruccolo ............. 106 

Submitted by Mr. Markey, Statement of the Pavement Preservation Task 

Force of March 19, 2009 ...................................................................................... 123 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

(1) 

CONSTRUCTING A GREEN TRANSPORTATION 

POLICY: TRANSIT MODES AND INFRASTRUCTURE 

THURSDAY, MARCH 19, 2009 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ENERGY INDEPENDENCE

AND GLOBAL WARMING, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:38 a.m., in room 2203 

of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward Markey 

(Chairman of the Committee) presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Markey, Blumenauer, Inslee, 

Herseth Sandlin, Cleaver, Salazar, Speier, Sensenbrenner and 

Blackburn. 

Staff present: Danielle Baussan. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning, and welcome to the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. Today our 

hearing is on a green transportation policy. 

At the end of this year, the Nation’s primary transportation legislation, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 

Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, will expire. Congressional reauthorization of a surface transportation bill will occur at a pivotal 

time for the country, for Congress and for the climate. As Congressional leadership and the Obama Administration continue to work 

towards goals of energy independence and fighting climate change, 

transportation’s contribution to global warming and the potential 

to improve climate conditions cannot be ignored. This is underscored by the 89 percent of Americans who believe that transportation investments should support the goal of reducing energy use. 

The U.S. transportation sector is responsible for approximately 

one-third of our country’s greenhouse gas emissions. About 60 percent of these emissions are from passenger vehicles. The United 

States has 41⁄2 percent of the world’s population and 30 percent of 

the world’s automobiles. Seventy-seven percent of Americans use a 

single passenger car to commute. 

There are signs that the United States is moving in a new direction. Studies show that we are now driving shorter distances and 

taking mass transit in record numbers. Transportation legislation 

should respond to this public demand and support mass transit as 

a way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Such legislation should 

also look at all modes of transit. This includes the often-overlooked 

vehicle of our own feet. Biking and pedestrian policies are thriving 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

2 

in communities large and small, urban and suburban, and as my 

colleague, Mr. Blumenauer, will tell you, sunny and rainy. 

A discussion of climate change legislation and transportation reauthorization would be incomplete without examining transportation infrastructure policies and practices. This includes the materials used in our roads and bridges, the machines that move them 

and the people who build them. Transportation emissions don’t 

start at the end of the tailpipe. Supporting lower-energy manufacturing procedures and recycling for common transit materials can 

also reduce every ounce of CO2 from the transportation sector along 

with fuel-efficient heavy-duty machinery. Renovating existing infrastructure to reflect low-impact design standards improves water 

runoff and can increase air quality. 

Congress must reroute its approach to transportation policy. It 

must be acknowledge the indivisible link between transportation 

and climate change by giving the public choices in transit. People 

should drive because they want to, not because there is no sidewalk 

leading to the train station or because the city bus system does not 

expand into the suburbs. By doing this, transportation policy helps 

meet our President’s environmental goal to reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions and put a stop to global warming. Congress can compound this environmental benefit by supporting low-carbon fuels, 

vehicle efficiency technologies and actions that reduce the emissions inherent in our transportation system. 

In a few short months, a climate bill and a transportation bill 

will be presented to Congress. We must make sure that these bills 

reflect the transportation needs of the public and the environmental needs of the planet. 

That concludes the opening statement of the chair. 

[The statement follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

3 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 9 here 62187A.001
4 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 10 here 62187A.002
5 

The CHAIRMAN. We now turn and recognize the ranking member 

of the Select Committee, the gentleman from Wisconsin, Mr. Sensenbrenner. 

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. At 

the beginning, let me apologize for leaving after my opening statement but the Judiciary Committee is having a hearing on ACORN’s 

intimidation of voters and stuffing the ballot box, and fair elections, 

I think, are a capstone of democracy so I will be going there. 

President Obama’s budget blueprint recently estimated climate change revenues, which is taxes by any other name, of $646 billion 

by 2019. While this would represent one of the largest new taxes 

in our country’s history, President Obama’s estimates are likely 

low. A top White House economic advisor recently told Senate staff 

that the actual revenues could be two to three times higher. The 

global warming tax could reach nearly $2 trillion. 

Today we will receive testimony on parts of one sector of our 

economy, transportation, that will come under the new regulations 

and taxes under the Administration’s proposal. In assessing climate change legislation, I have repeatedly stated that there are 

four principles that I will use to assess it: impacts on the economy, 

environmental improvement, international inclusiveness and technological development. Today’s hearing provides a great opportunity to focus on how technology can improve our transportation 

sector. 

This January I wrote EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to highlight a Duke University study that found that 75 percent of respondents misjudged relative fuel savings when efficiency was expressed in miles per gallon. By contract, 64 percent accurately 

judged savings when the efficiency was expressed in gallons per 

mile. For example, in over 10,000 miles of driving, an improvement 

from 10 to 20 miles per gallon saves substantially more fuel than 

an improvement from 20 to 40. An improvement from 10 to 11 

miles per gallon saves nearly as much fuel as an improvement from 

33 to 50. This means that the greatest fuel savings will come from 

improving the least-efficient vehicles. Thus, trucks are the lowhanging fruit in reducing fuel consumption. Despite this, federal 

policy has focused almost exclusively on promoting hybrid passenger cars. According to the Oshkosh Corporation, there are 

90,000 refuge trucks in the United States, meaning garbage trucks. 

Replacing these trucks with hybrids would result in the same fuel 

savings as replacing 21⁄2 million passenger cars. Ten thousand hybrid trucks would save 7.2 million gallons of diesel each year and 

would reduce emissions by 83,000 tons. This would be like taking 

every car in New York City off the road for 25 days. As today’s witness, John Boesel, the president and CEO of CALSTART, wrote in 

his testimony, because of their high mileage and fuel use, mediumand heavy-duty vehicles alone make up 7 percent total greenhouse 

gas emissions. 

To remedy this oversight in federal policy, I have introduced the 

Heavy-Duty Hybrid Truck Research, Development and Demonstration Act of 2009. The Hybrid Truck Act is a bipartisan bill that will 

create the federal government’s first grant program exclusively designed to promote hybrid trucks. This bill can help truck manufacturers overcome technological hurdles and to reduce the economies 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

6 

of scale. It will result in more hybrid trucks, less fuel consumption 

and lower emissions. The hidden tax will be added to our electric 

bills and into the cost of every product we buy and it represents 

a fundamentally different philosophy. While I am advocating a policy that spends wisely to simultaneously reduce emissions and spur 

economic activity, the President is advocating a staggering tax program that threatens to consumer spending and business. 

I look forward to hearing from today’s witnesses to identify other 

areas where federal policy can aid businesses in developing the 

technologies we need to combat climate change, and I thank the 

chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. I thank the gentleman. 

I would also like to ask unanimous consent to introduce into the 

record a statement by BASF discussing the importance of preserving pavement. Without objection, it will be included. 

The CHAIRMAN. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon, 

Mr. Blumenauer. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I did appreciate what our ranking member said in terms of setting the context. There is a lot that we agree with. I hope at some 

point we can persuade him to look at the budget that Mr. Obama 

has suggested to show where the money goes from the cap and 

trade because it is not somehow disappearing into a black hole in 

space but to be made available to reduce the problems that average 

Americans face on an ongoing basis and to be able to advance the 

vision. Much of what he articulated I agree with. 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate deeply your scheduling this hearing 

and being able to deal with an important part of the climate 

change equation and the livability of our communities. As you 

pointed out, we are talking about a third of our greenhouse gas 

emissions. We are talking about where most Americans live, work 

and recreate. We have opportunities here, and we will hear it from 

our witnesses, to be able to tie the pieces together in a way that 

reduces greenhouse gases, that inspires new economic activity that 

provides more choices for Americans and leads us to a reduced carbon future. Despite some of the political posturing we have heard, 

I do believe at the end of the day we are going to find that there 

is a very significant consensus that is emerging with the American 

public, with people in business, labor, environment, the professions, 

because there are opportunities and there is lots of low-hanging 

fruit. Indeed, we will hear today about some things just talking 

about picking fruit up off the ground and they have in many cases 

multiple benefits in terms of improving health to the individual, 

new economic activities, not just saving the planet. I look forward 

to hearing from our witnesses, Mr. Chairman, and to be able to explore with you the big picture where we are looking at technology, 

economic development, strengthening the communities, solving 

multiple problems simultaneously. I am pleased that the President’s budget blueprint provides an opportunity to finance it, to be 

able to encourage it and to be able at the same time to provide support for businesses and American families in a way that they will 

actually be better off not suffering from the consequences of carbon 

pollution and climate change. 

Thank you, sir. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

7 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair recognizes the gentlelady from Tennessee, Ms. 

Blackburn. 

Ms. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to welcome our witnesses. I also, as Mr. Sensenbrenner had mentioned, 

have to step out. I am going to have to step downstairs to see our 

air conditioning and heating manufacturers that are in a meeting 

down there on some similar subjects and then come back to join 

you, but I want to thank you for the hearing and I do want to welcome all of you. 

As you can hear on this panel, we will disagree about the issue 

of global warming and climate change and the science that is involved there, but one of the things I think that we all agree on is 

that traffic congestion is a problem and that this is something that 

does need to be addressed, and I would say, I am one of those that 

says there is plenty that could be done and should be done other 

than investing billions of dollars in a high-speed rail from Los Angeles to Las Vegas but there are other ways, low-cost ways to address the situation. There was a study by the Texas Transportation 

Institute that included some really commonsense approaches to 

this issue, freeway ramp metering, traffic signal coordination, incident management, high-occupancy toll lanes. Taken together, these 

measures would reduce hundreds of millions of traffic hours, save 

billions of gallons of gas and eliminate thousands of tons of emissions, all of which are important to us. 

So I think that investing highway money to correct inadequate 

bridges and increase road capacity coupled with a few simple improvements would significantly reduce emissions, reduce fuel wasted and traffic congestion and move us in a more commonsense approach along the way to solving the problem. 

With that, I will yield back the balance of my time and look forward to the testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentlelady. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Salazar. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will submit my 

full statement for the record, but I just wanted to briefly let the 

panel know that I am very interested in energy independence and 

trying to figure out where we go from here. I would like you to address the argument that a lot of people talk about, whether we 

should do maybe a carbon tax instead of a cap-and-trade system, 

if you would, but I also wanted to commend the second panel, John 

Deere. I am a farmer by trade, I run nothing but green tractors, 

and I want to commend you for your fuel efficiency efforts in that 

respect. 

So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

[The statement follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

8 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 21 here 62187A.003
9 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 22 here 62187A.004
10 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 23 here 62187A.005
11 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. Let me thank the gentleman. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Cleaver. 

Mr. CLEAVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an abbreviated 

statement. 

I think we are at an unusual moment, and if you deny global 

warming, that is fine. We are the only people on the planet with 

a sizable group still saying that there is no climate change, but we 

do have an unusual moment here and nobody can argue that putting CO2 in the atmosphere is good no matter what you believe. 

That just can’t be good. I am trying to find somebody who thinks 

that we need to suck it up. It is not a good thing. 

But some good things are happening. We are at a 52-year high 

with transit ridership, and I think that is a good thing. It was 

brought by two things: One, when we had the tremendous rise in 

the price of a barrel of oil, which ran gasoline prices up, and then 

the economy going down, people not able to buy new cars and so 

they go to transit. And so what I think we have got to do is figure 

out a way to create the most ecologically and environmentally sensitive system of mass transportation on the planet. Any nation who 

has a system superior to ours creates embarrassment to us, and so 

I am interested in hearing your ideas and suggestions and look forward to your comments. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Great. The gentleman’s time has expired, and 

now we will move to our very distinguished witnesses, and our first 

witness this morning is Mr. Peter Varga, who is the CEO of the 

Interurban Transit Partnership. He is in charge of operating the 

urban transit system in Grand Rapids, Michigan called The Rapid. 

Grand Rapids has become a leader in green buildings, mass transit 

and other environmental initiatives. Mr. Varga previously worked 

in transit management and safety in Muskegon, Michigan, and 

Santa Cruz, California. We welcome you, sir. 

STATEMENTS OF PETER VARGA, CEO, INTERURBAN TRANSIT 

PARTNERSHIP; ANDY CLARKE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

LEAGUE OF AMERICAN BICYCLISTS; CHRIS ZIMMERMAN, 

BOARD MEMBER, ARLINGTON COUNTY BOARD; AND JOHN 

BOESEL, PRESIDENT AND CEO, CALSTART 

STATEMENT OF PETER VARGA 

Mr. VARGA. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Markey and 

members of the Select Committee. This is really a great opportunity for me. 

We are a transit system that is quite successful in the United 

States and growing and I think that is one of the reasons why I 

am here because I want to talk about how you can achieve 10 percent growth in transit, double the ridership in a decade. We started 

the Authority about nine years ago. We have expanded services 

over time and in fact, we are now transporting 9.1 million trips a 

year and that is double of the ridership that we had a decade ago. 

The Grand Rapids region is quite well known for its greening efforts and its green transportation. We are part of a community sustainability partnership with cities, with businesspeople and with 

universities. Eighteen percent of all LEED projects in the United 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

12 

States come from Grand Rapids metro region. We have the first 

rectory, the first church, the first public museum, the first LEEDcertified hospital and we at The Rapid created the first LEED-certified public transit building in the United States. We never anticipated being first but we ended up being first, and being first, you 

can never change that so we tried to herald it. 

We are very well known for our sustainable practices. In my testimony, I talk to your about central station project, which is LEED. 

We are going to start using the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to expand our wealthy operations center, our maintenance facility, and it is intended to be a LEED facility as well. And 

because of our leadership in public transportation sustainable practices, we are designated by the Sierra Club in 2008 as a Cool City 

along with Denver and Minneapolis. 

In my testimony I give you several examples of public environmental benefits of a public transit system but I wanted to highlight 

one thing. Currently, there are more than 10 billion trips taken 

yearly on public transportation. With each additional billion trips 

taken, oil consumption can be reduced by 420 million gallons and 

our carbon footprint reduced by 3.7 million metric tons. Let us assume the 10 percent growth we have done in Grand Rapids in public transportation trips. The United States could save 141.9 million 

metric tons of carbon emissions annually equal to 8 percent of total 

carbon emissions from transportation and also save 15.2 billion gallons of fuel per year. I don’t know how we get from the Persian 

Gulf but if it equals that, that would be worth it, wouldn’t it? 

I have also put in some more statistics and information in my 

testimony talking about how individual actions impact the environment and how we can reduce carbon footprint. I am not going to 

go through them but I really wanted to talk to you about investment in public transit. With an average return of 6.1 percent in investment, we could create millions of American jobs, generate enormous public and private revenue and make the country more economically and environmentally efficient. At a time when our country has been calling for stimulus, sustaining a 5.5 percent growth 

in public transportation would support 5.3 million jobs and a 10 

percent growth could support 8.9 million jobs. 

So one of the things I did want to talk to you about is, I have 

in my testimony how Grand Rapids specifically has benefited from 

its public transit system. The highlights I would like to say is, we 

are starting to do a BRT project under Very Small Starts. We have 

completed a streetcar feasibility study that shows that it is feasible 

in the downtown area and we are trying to create a public-private 

partnership to develop it because currently under the New Starts 

program we are incapable of actually pushing streetcars forward. 

We have significantly improved transit services in the last decade 

and we doubled our ridership, as I said. The importance of this is 

that I do believe that the United States can double its ridership as 

well with the right kind of public investment. The primary reason 

why I am here today is to give you the how can Congress support 

local and regional public transit. You could increase the availability 

of funds for fixed projects like our proposed bus rapid transit 

project and others like light rail, commuter rail and streetcar. You 

can make available for funds for nonmotorized auctions such as 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

13 

walking and bicycling. You can reduce the transportation cost for 

Americans through investment of—— 

The CHAIRMAN. If you could summarize, please? 

Mr. VARGA. I will sum it. Sorry. In sum, I have indicated in my 

testimony that there are several ways that federal climate and 

transportation legislation can effect positive change and I encourage you to take each one of those measures that I have outlined 

and implement them because we don’t have enough time as we are 

trying to save the earth. 

[Statement of Mr. Varga follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

14 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 31 here 62187A.006
15 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 32 here 62187A.007
16 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 33 here 62187A.008
17 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 34 here 62187A.009
18 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 35 here 62187A.010
19 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Varga, very much. 

I am going to allow the leading bicyclist advocate in the Congress 

to introduce our next witness. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I wouldn’t say that where Mr. Oberstar could 

hear you, but thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is a pleasure today to have Andy Clarke. Andy is the executive 

director of the League of American Bicyclists. Last week he just 

hosted people from 47 States, several foreign countries, over 600 

advocates who were in and around the Hill sporting our trademark 

bicycle pin. I first had an opportunity to become acquainted with 

Mr. Clarke when he was advising the Federal Highway Administration’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center. He is a tireless advocate, extraordinarily knowledgeable, and we are lucky to 

have him here today. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF ANDY CLARKE 

Mr. CLARKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Mr. 

Blumenauer and members of the committee for the opportunity to 

testify before you this morning on the important role that bicycling 

can play in reducing oil dependence and global warming. 

Let me return the favor and acknowledge and thank Congressman Blumenauer for his leadership on bicycling and livable communities issues for passage last year of the bicycle commuter tax 

provision and for your leadership of the Congressional Bike Caucus, which I believe now boasts a majority of House members. 

Last week as you kicked off our 9th National Bike Summit, we 

heard from the head of Copenhagen’s bicycle program. Thirty-six 

percent of trips are made by bicycle in this northern tier city of 1 

million people. Copenhagen is hosting the next round of climate 

change talks in December and we hope delegates from all over the 

world will see firsthand how a world-class city thrives with bicycling at its core. Our summit participants were obviously wired by 

the sheer numbers of cyclists and the infrastructure that accommodates them yet the one critical lesson we learned is that Copenhagen was not always a bicycling paradise. In the 1970s their city 

streets, their squares, their public spaces were overrun with cars. 

They chose a different path and have seen bicycle use increase dramatically and now have their sights set on a 50 percent mode share 

for bicycling by 2015. 

Of course, there is a big difference between Copenhagen and U.S. 

cities. I mention it because they are actually changing people’s behavior and I think that is the key. Bicycling is perhaps the ultimate zero-emission transport mode. We all know that getting more 

people to ride or walk instead of driving will help reduce emissions. 

The question is, will they actually do it. We have the answer here 

in the United States in many of our bicycle-friendly communities. 

For example, since 1991 Portland, Oregon, has seen a 490 percent 

increase in bicycle traffic as their bikeway network has grown from 

60 miles to 280 miles. In practical terms, that means that more 

than 16,000 cyclists now cross Portland’s downtown bridges every 

day instead of 2,500 in 1991. A green dividend has been calculated 

for Portland’s integrated transport investment. The average 

Portlander drivers 4 miles less per day than the national average, 

saving 2.9 billion miles of vehicle travel and keeping more than $1 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

20 

billion in the pockets of Portland residents. Other cities that I document in my testimony such as New York, San Francisco, Cambridge, Minneapolis and Washington, D.C., have seen phenomenal 

bicycle mode share increases in recent years because of the policies, 

programs and funding they have invested to improve conditions for 

bicyclists. 

So how can the federal government support bicycle travel? Climate change legislation and the next transportation bill will direct 

hundreds of billions of dollars to transportation projects and it is 

essential that a significant percentage of that investment completes 

bicycling, walking and transit systems in our cities. A recent survey by the National Association of Realtors found that close to 90 

percent of Americans agree with that approach. We must have a 

national complete streets policy to ensure that all those funds improve the safety and convenience of bicyclists, pedestrians, people 

with disabilities, transit users and yes, even motorists. 

On that point, let me reiterate that bicycling, walking and transit rise and fall together. I am not pleading a special-interest case 

today for bicycle enthusiasts. I am suggesting that livable, sustainable communities are built on the ability of people to walk, ride a 

bike and take transit for many of their daily needs and that motorists and urban freight providers will benefit from having fewer cars 

on the road. Equally, I am not suggesting that everyone suddenly 

become a 60-mile round-trip Lycra-clad bicycle commuter. Our 

focus must be on the 40 percent of trips in this country that are 

just 2 miles or less. Ninety percent of those trips are today made 

by car. Those are the most polluting trips. These are the trips we 

must make easy and convenient to be made by bike. This is where 

the greatest potential lies to reduce climate emissions in the years 

ahead. 

Today’s focus is obviously on climate change and oil use and we 

support a greater emphasis on transit, more fuel-efficient vehicles 

and hybrids, but I would be remiss if I did not remind the committee as my colleague, Congressman Blumenauer, has done, that 

when you encourage bicycling and walking, you also help address 

the health, physical activity, air quality, congestion and economic 

challenges faced by individuals, communities and our Nation. 

So thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[Statement of Mr. Clarke follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

21 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 41 here 62187A.011
22 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 42 here 62187A.012
23 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 43 here 62187A.013
24 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 44 here 62187A.014
25 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 45 here 62187A.015
26 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Clarke, very much. 

Our next witness is Chris Zimmerman. He is a member of the 

Arlington County Board in Arlington, Virginia. He serves on the 

board of directors of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. We welcome you, sir. 

STATEMENT OF CHRIS ZIMMERMAN 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the 

committee. Good morning and thank you for inviting me. I have 

submitted a statement for the record. I think to make best use of 

your time, I will just sum up a few of the things and will be happy 

to answer any questions at the conclusion of the statements. 

Let me say first, Arlington, Virginia, right here across the river 

is a community with a legacy of what is now called smart growth, 

although when my predecessors started it, they didn’t have that 

word, and it wasn’t so described, but in 2002 when the EPA gave 

out the first award for smart growth, the first award for rural excellence was given to Arlington for the success in planning and implementing the Roslyn-Boston metro corridor, which has now become kind of a laboratory or something people are coming to study 

to see what you can do in what was not previously a real urban 

area but was kind of a declining suburb and has been revitalized 

as a result of the last generation and has now demonstrated that 

there is tremendous potential in a fairly high-income growing area 

to move people to alternative transportation, to reduce both car 

ownership and car usage and vehicle miles traveled to eliminate 

drive-only trips and single car occupancy at an impressive rate and 

to do that by choice because people are opting to live there. In fact, 

they have to pay a premium that has become actually our biggest 

concern. But we have also seen at a county-wide level not only in 

the areas where we have the tremendous investment represented 

by metro rail that it is possible to get more a transit-oriented, pedestrian-oriented lifestyle and that people want it. So throughout 

our country we have been approaching this in a similar fashion. We 

are a small jurisdiction geographically. We have 200,000 people but 

we are only 26 square miles, so we are comparatively dense. Our 

metro corridors are only about 10 percent of the land area of the 

county and that is where we have concentrated most of this development, but even in the other areas we are using things like better 

bus service, extensive bicycle network. We have been implementing 

bike lanes on street as well as bike trails, improving our sidewalk 

network. We have a complete streets approach that was described 

by the preceding speaker that has made it easier for people to get 

around and in fact people are choosing more and more to walk, to 

ride bicycle and so on. Just to give you a rough idea, between 1996 

and 2008, our county added 13,000 housing units, over 1,300 hotel 

rooms, 51⁄2 million square feet of office space, 1.3 million square 

feet of retail, over 23,000 residents and 11,000 workers. During 

that same period traffic trends were basically flat and transit ridership grew by 44 percent. 

There are many other ways you can measure this. Just to give 

you one example, if you simply look at who drives alone, you know, 

how people get to work basically, if you look at how people get to 

work in the Washington metropolitan region, about three-quarters 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

27 

or so drive alone. Under the most recent survey we have, which 

was 2006 before the big run-up of gas prices, a majority of our residents do not drive alone to work. Only 47 percent of them do that. 

That is county-wide, not just the metro corridors, whereas more 

than a quarter of them take the train, 12 percent take the bus, 6 

percent walk, 3 percent bike. All those numbers are up since just 

2000. In just the course of this decade we have been able to move 

more and more people. Again, they are doing it because they choose 

to do it because we have made it attractive and increasingly it is 

what people tell us they want to do. 

I will say that the approach we have had is a comprehensive one. 

It centers first on land use and key decisions that have been made 

over the years in integrating transportation, but it includes other 

components as well including a commitment to alternative fuels, 

which we have, for instance, in our bus system, which are CNG, 

to a green building policy. We had the first green building policy 

in this region going back 10 years ago now when not a lot of people 

knew what LEED was, and we have approached it in little ways 

too with things like car sharing. We have car sharing available. I 

should say we somewhat copied Portland. We straight out stole 

your orange poles that you put on the street there. That seemed 

like a good idea. And so we have zip cars now, we have flex cars, 

and we will invite any provider at every one of our metro stations 

and in other places so that many Arlingtonians make that their 

second car, including my family, instead of owning two cars. You 

know, you don’t need to pay the insurance on it but you have the 

second car when you need it. So there are a lot of little things you 

can do. We have a comprehensive transportation demand management policy that relates to all new development that promotes 

transit use, whether it is people working in an office building or 

multi-family residential, and I could go on but obviously time is 

limited. 

Let me finally just say that I think there are a number of things 

the federal government could do that would be more helpful for 

this kind of policy including making transit investments easier. Obviously we could use more funding but it is also what you have to 

go through to get the funding and I will mention that outside of 

metro corridors one of the things we are trying to do is implement 

a streetcar like Portland’s, and there are many obstacles by the 

current state of federal policy. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[Statement of Mr. Zimmerman follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

28 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 52 here 62187A.016
29 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 53 here 62187A.017
30 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 54 here 62187A.018
31 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 55 here 62187A.019
32 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Zimmerman. Just so you know, 

Mr. Zimmerman, all the times that you mentioned Portland, this 

hearing is Mr. Blumenauer’s idea so one more idea we have to run 

up the flagpole. 

Our final witness is Mr. John Boesel, who is the president and 

CEO of CALSTART, which is a nonprofit organization based in 

California that works with public and private sectors to develop advanced transportation technologies. We welcome you, sir. 

STATEMENT OF JOHN BOESEL 

Mr. BOESEL. Thank you very much. I very much appreciate this 

opportunity today. My organization has been working to develop 

clean truck technology for the last 15 years. We are a fuel- and 

technology-neutral organization so we work with companies working on biofuels, natural gas, hybrid fuel cells, et cetera. While we 

are regional sounding in name, we are actually in this space working nationally. We have an office in Denver, and our chairman is 

Fred Hansen, the general manager of Trimet in Portland. 

What is possible from the clean truck sector? I think the California AB–32 climate change goals are possible relative to this sector, meaning a 20 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2020 and 

80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. I am a technology optimist. 

I do believe it is possible. Next slide, please. Actually the next slide 

after that. 

[Slide.] 

We have two key technologies that I think are ready and available to go today, our hybrid trucks. We have got a variety of different technologies, plug-in, hybrid electric and hydraulic hybrid. 

All are viable. These are U.S. companies producing these core technologies. We also have now three major manufacturers that are 

producing natural gas trucks and I think those are also ready to 

go and show a way to reduce our dependence on oil. Next slide, 

please. 

[Slide.] 

A key for natural gas, a key fuel that we ought to just be developing right away and doing what the Swedes are doing very effectively is biomethane. It is taking biomaterial, putting it in a digester, letting it cook for about 3 weeks, cleaning it up and putting 

it into the pipeline or directly into vehicles. The Swedes are doing 

this very effectively and they are in compliance with the Kyoto Accord and it is something that is there, low tech, ready to go. We 

should be doing it. Next slide. 

[Slide.] 

And this slide just shows that the potential between biofuels and 

hybrids is something we really ought to take advantage of. Florida 

Power and Light has taken one of our hybrid trucks, is running 

biodiesel-30 on it, and this truck today is getting a 70 percent reduction or displacement of oil between the hybrid technology and 

the biodiesel. So it is something that is here and ready to go. I 

think there should be continued support of both bio and renewable 

diesel as well as investment in the next generation, green diesel 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

33 

technology, which companies like UOP and Amerus are developing. 

Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

I think there are going to be niche opportunities for pure electric 

trucks. FedEx is deploying these delivery vans in London, and I 

would say that one reason that they are doing it is because of the 

congestion pricing policy in London has reduced the cost of these 

trucks in the London area. Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

I would say that—let me just make a few more comments on 

technologies. Other viable approaches are fuel cells and hydrogen. 

I think they are a little more of the R&D phase and need additional investment in that area, and I would say that the Federal 

Transit Administration has done a very good job of helping develop 

that technology in buses. There is a very good robust program in 

the last T bill and hopefully there will be a low-carbon-bus R&D 

program in the next T bill. There are also opportunities to advance 

the core diesel technology. There is waste heat recovery, lighter 

weight materials, lots of different approaches that we can use to 

make even basic diesel technologies more viable and more efficient. 

In summary, I just want to hit on some key policy recommendations. First of all, I think the high price of oil that we saw last year 

was the mother of all policies. It really helped drive efficiency and 

improve the business case for all the alternatives. It is clearly 

something in Europe and Japan they have figured out how to send 

a consistent price signal at the pump. On cap and trade, Congressman Salazar, to answer your question, we do not see this having 

a material impact on demand in the transportation sector. The 

price of carbon that we see coming out of cap and trade would not 

significantly affect the price at the pump, so we might see a 20- 

or 30-cent price increase as a result of cap and trade but we don’t 

think it will materially impact demand. However, if there are auction allowances we would certainly hope that they could be used for 

transportation measures. 

In the absence of a high price signal, I do think a new energy 

bill that would extend the existing tax credits for alternative fuel 

trucks and hybrid trucks is very important. On page 6 of my written testimony, we have laid out specific rebates that ought to be 

provided for hybrid trucks based on the amount of battery capabilities of each truck. 

And then lastly, I just want to thank the U.S. Army and the Department of Energy and EPA for their programs in this area and 

hopefully we can have an integrated approach going forward. 

One last point is that I think T. Boone Pickens has done a good 

job of helping to educate the Nation about the economic problems 

associated with importing oil each year. Depending on the price of 

oil, that price tag goes from $250 billion to $750 billion a year. We 

simply cannot keep affording that. We have got consumer debt that 

is out of control. We have got budget deficits that are out of control 

and our trade deficit, and imported oil is a huge portion of that 

problem and it is time to really address it. Thank you very much. 

[Statement of Mr. Boesel follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

34 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 62 here 62187A.020
35 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 63 here 62187A.021
36 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 64 here 62187A.022
37 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 65 here 62187A.023
38 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 66 here 62187A.024
39 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 67 here 62187A.025
40 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 68 here 62187A.026
41 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 69 here 62187A.027
42 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Boesel, very much. 

Let me recognize the gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Blumenauer. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your courtesy 

and for scheduling this hearing. 

I am struck, Mr. Boesel, just talking about nuts-and-bolts things 

that are possible right now that are within the window of economic 

feasibility and with a little nudge might blossom to make a huge 

difference, and our ranking member did talk about the potential 

with trucking and we look forward to working with you on those 

elements. 

I have two questions that I would like to put to the panel. One 

just deals with where my friend, the ranking member, left off. He 

talked about the pool of money that could potentially be generated, 

two thirds of a trillion dollars, perhaps double that, but then ignores what happens with the money. The President envisions that 

significant amounts of money would be available to further incent 

energy efficiency, be available for rebates for families to cope with 

challenges and to be invested in other ways, and I just wonder if 

you could briefly touch on ways that the money that may potentially be generated could be spent in a way that could reduce the 

carbon footprint. For instance, Mr. Zimmerman, you talked about 

struggling with FTA to try and get them to just administer existing 

laws so you can build streetcars and other things but what difference, what could you do with those resources to build on the admirable record of success that you have? 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Congressman, we would have a long list, but, 

you know, to start, things like implementing obviously a streetcar 

is an example where a comparatively small investment can yield 

tremendous results in promoting not just transit use but the compact development pattern that you need that is really key to ultimately reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the kind of smaller 

investments you can make—we did a transit center, for instance, 

for a few million dollars, much of which in fact was federal grant 

money through the CMAC program which provided a transit nub 

in a place called Shirlington which is actually right off a major 

highway, which is an example of a compact development where you 

don’t have big, you know—you don’t have a train but we are able 

in the area of about a quarter of a cloverleaf to pack in a community that is very desirable. People want to go to visit. There are 

now people living there, working there, restaurants, and we have 

a transit center that gets about 400 buses a day and carries several 

thousand people. That was a comparatively small investment, 

which, you know, a federal grant helped make possible. There are 

all kinds of things like that you can do, and again, I would stress 

also not just the money but how do you remove the obstacles that 

make it so difficult to get that you say well, for a few million dollars am I going to hold up my project for years in process. That is 

a tough question for us. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. We want to come back to you in terms of reauthorization. I want to just touch briefly with our other panelists, 

Mr. Clarke, Mr. Varga. There is nobody that puts a gun to the 

head of the people in Arlington or Grand Rapids that forces them 

on transit, forces them to walk to work, to bicycle. You have referenced in several ways the choices, making the choices more atmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

43 

tractive so that people can take advantage of them. Would you like 

to elaborate on that for a moment, Mr. Clarke, in terms of choice 

for our citizens? 

Mr. CLARKE. Thank you. We often hear that one of the biggest 

challenges facing getting more people riding is Americans’ love affair with their cars. I believe Americans have a love affair with 

their quickest, cheapest, most convenient way of getting around, 

which we have done a very good job of making driving recently. A 

soon-to-be-published report comparing the U.S. and German transport policies shows that Germans, who love their cars and fast cars 

as much as anyone, have a 41 percent mode share for biking, walking and transit. They have the choices, they have the options and 

they choose the easiest and most convenient way of getting around. 

In Copenhagen, again, the speaker at the National Bike Summit 

said that is the reason why Copenhagers ride their bikes. It is not 

because they are big environmentalists, it is not because it is in 

their genes, it is because cycling is the easiest, quickest, most convenient way of getting around. So I think that is part of the trick 

and to refer back to your last question, I took the precaution of 

talking to Roger Geller at the city of Portland yesterday and he 

says that for about the equivalent cost of 800 feet of the I–5 Columbia River Bridge replacement project, they could effect a Copenhagen-style transformation of Portland and achieve a significant 

mode shift and mode change over a 15- to 20-year period. That 

seems to me a wise and sensible use of resources that are there. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman’s time is expired. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Salazar. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to get back to my opening statement because the—could 

you address the argument of should we just put a carbon tax on 

this and utilize that money to develop new greener technologies 

and things like that or should we do the cap and trade? Any of you 

can answer. 

Mr. VARGA. If I can address this, you should do anything you can 

whether it is cap and trade or a carbon tax or taxing vehicle miles 

traveled to get 250,000 cars off the road daily. Only 54 percent of 

people have access to public transit. You need to shift that so you 

need to use some of those revenues from those sources to deal with 

the problems rather than the current revenues that are available 

to increase public transportation. So I would encourage all of you 

to look at different kind of climate change legislation that uses 

those mechanisms to fund these alternative sources of transportation. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Which one would you prefer? I mean, a simple carbon tax on emissions or—— 

Mr. VARGA. To me, a simple carbon tax and an assessment on 

vehicle miles traveled, a combination of those things so you reduce 

also the vehicle miles traveled. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Anybody else? 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Honestly, I think that any of these approaches 

would help in almost any combination. Essentially what Mr. Varga 

said is the most important thing, that you have to make the incenmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

44 

tives reflect the policy goals and I think you have to make the price 

to be paid reflect the social cost, and, you know, anything from 

raising the gas tax, you know, which would help a lot, or something 

more sophisticated like a vehicle miles traveled tax, which in some 

ways would be better but harder to do, but really I think any of 

these things would be better than where we have been and, you 

know, it is going to be a matter obviously of what you can make 

work on, you know, many of the levels. I wouldn’t know how it 

would pick—in terms of how it affects me at the local level, any of 

these things I think would be helpful in getting the right outcomes. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Anyone else? 

Mr. CLARKE. I must say, we as an organization don’t have a par- ticular preference. We do know that as gas hit $4 a gallon last 

year, our phones were ringing off the hook. Our events were going 

crazy. In the Denver metro area, for example, their Bike to Work 

Day grew from a steady 15,000 people a year to over 25,000, almost 

25,000 people because people were focused on the price point, and 

clearly the price of gas and is a big issue as to how people choose 

to travel. So whether that is the right mechanism, we don’t really 

have a horse in the race, whether it is cap and trade, whether it 

is a carbon tax, but the price of carbon certainly needs to be raised 

so we can pay for any of these alternatives. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. Boesel. 

Mr. BOESEL. I would just say that in general I don’t know that 

a carbon tax is going to generate a higher price at the pump than 

cap-and-trade program would. I think they end up—when you see 

the proposals, they end up sort of having the same net impact. So 

in terms of demand, I don’t know that there is a huge difference. 

I do think it is critical, you know, how the revenues get spent. I 

want to applaud Mr. Sensenbrenner for his bill talking about the 

need for additional funding for hybrid truck R&D. We have got to 

find a way to fund projects like that. And so I think that is critical. 

I will say that in California there is a proposal being put forth to 

a commission that is looking at how to revamp the State’s funding 

system, and one of those is that there be a surcharge on gasoline 

and diesel, recognizing that a cap-and-trade program would not 

have a big impact. 

Mr. SALAZAR. And briefly, Mr. Boesel, you talked about innovative technologies to create more efficiency, I believe, in some of the 

work you are doing. Are you aware of Sterman Industries in Colorado that uses an Apollo space mission technology that has been 

able to increase internal combustion engine efficiencies by as much 

as 40 percent? 

Mr. BOESEL. We are quite aware of that very impressive firm, 

Mr. Salazar. I think they have got some very interesting technology, and they are one of the reasons why I am an optimist about 

what can be done to really cut oil use and carbon emissions from 

the truck sector because there are technical solutions out there. We 

just need the right kind of policies that encourage that they be 

used, and I am afraid that $2-a-gallon gasoline doesn’t really do 

that. 

Mr. SALAZAR. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the gentleman. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

45 

The chair recognizes the gentlelady from California, Ms. Speier. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to all the 

panelists. 

You know, I am struck by the statement I heard earlier today 

that Americans love their cars fast, heavy and big, which is all very 

true, and, you know, in California, where I am from, we are all 

very sensitive to the environment being energy efficient. We have 

got the AB–32 law on the books. But I go to my local dealerships 

and they tell me that overnight the popularity of hybrids dropped 

like a rock and the big, heavy SUVs were once again popular. We 

are trying to direct Detroit to build cleaner, more-energy-efficient 

cars and yet it is all about supply and demand, and how do we address that? 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I will start. You know, I think again that it is 

a matter of what we are incentivizing. I think while there is undoubtedly some truth to the statement that this is what people 

want, I think that is overstated because we have essentially been 

subsidizing automobiles and penalizing other things. If you create 

communities in which the only way to get a quart of milk is to get 

in your car, then obviously you are going to create great preference 

in driving, especially for anybody who needs to be able to get a 

quart of milk. On the other hand, I think the evidence indicates 

when you look particularly at what has been happening in real estate over a period of time, people are opting for other things. They 

are paying a premium. You know, the biggest criticism that we get 

of my community is gee, it is too expensive, everybody would like 

to live there but, you know, that is telling you something. We don’t 

have enough competition in this kind of thing. 

Similarly, just on, you know, the straight-up question of cars 

versus other things, if we are making automobile travel easier because parking is free everywhere but you have to pay to ride transit, well, you know, you are clearly giving disadvantage. So I think 

that the overall incentive structure will have a big impact and I 

think that that is implicit in the point you were making that we 

saw a tremendous change in market demand based on a fluctuation 

in a short period of time in the price of fuel, so stabilizing the price 

of fuel at a more realistic level, which would frankly be higher, reflecting the other impacts of its consumption, would go a long way, 

I think, to generating the right demand and allowing both manufacturers to know not only of automobiles but of other products to 

know that it made sense to invest in them and bring the return 

and over time, you know, I think you are going to see the behavior 

change as well, and again, I don’t know the best way to do that. 

If all you did was tax gasoline at a more sensible level and stabilize 

the price at a higher level, you would have tremendous effect on 

many of these other things we have worked too. Some of them 

might work better. But somehow you need a policy that does that. 

Otherwise I think we continue to get into this fluctuation that you 

were describing, and the complaint from people trying to do either 

policy at the local level or manufacturing goods saying, you know, 

I can’t count on what is going to happen next. 

Mr. VARGA. What I would like to say is that you should really 

incentivize public transportation, bicycling, walking versus using 

your car where you are putting your investment. If you are putting 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

46 

your investment into making it easier for people to buy cars, use 

cars, then you are not creating the kind of land-use patterns that 

really help people move to communities where they can walk easily, take a bicycle, live in a neighborhood, use public transit, get 

rid of their car. It takes an adjustment. It took me an adjustment 

to get used to my hybrid car, you know, and we have to think 

about what is important. What is important is to save the earth. 

I mean, there were two shows last night that talked about global 

warming like we are still debating it yet we are dumping sand on 

the beaches nearby here because the sand is being eroded because 

of global warming. We are spending money the wrong way. We 

should be spending our money incentivizing a change in behavior 

and you have to change behavior. 

Mr. BOESEL. Maybe just to add to that and say that I do think 

that the way we do our planning can really be improved, and in 

California there has been new legislation passed, S.B. 375, that 

will require metropolitan planning organizations to help come up 

with sort of a carbon footprint analysis and plan to reduce emissions in vehicle mile travel. I think Mr. Blumenauer is considering 

legislation along these lines that might also be helpful at a national level. If we start building in requirements that we reduce 

emissions through better planning, lower-carbon trucks and 

through the goods industry, then I think, you know, we can see 

some progress. 

Ms. SPEIER. Let me just applaud that because it reminds me a 

lot of the housing element requirements in California that by virtue of requiring the housing element and having a percentage of 

low-income housing, communities were forced to develop those percentages. So it sounds like a good plan, Congressman. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER [presiding]. We will talk. Thank you. 

Mr. Inslee. 

Mr. INSLEE. Thank you. 

I am just wondering going forward, looking at our transportation 

funding, you know, we have a transportation bill coming up, we 

have all these great ideas for giving Americans multiple transportation choices, which I really think this is all about between singleoccupancy cars, bikes, buses, trains, sidewalks, you name it. How 

we should think about the division of our financial resources between those? Has this group thought about what the target ought 

to be for modes that have the capacity to be safe, reliable and reduce, you know, our impact on the environment? Should there be 

a target in that regard regarding the disposition of our resources 

and how would that target relate to where we are right now? 

Mr. CLARKE. I can’t say that I have run this by my colleagues 

on the panel here but speaking for the American Bikes Coalition, 

which is a coalition of the national bicycling organizations, the 

numbers that we are commonly using are currently 13 percent of 

fatalities on our Nation’s roads are bicyclists and pedestrians, 

about 10 percent of trips are made by foot and by bicycle, and we 

get currently between 1 and on a good day 11⁄2 percent of federal 

transportation funds being spent on those modes, significantly less 

if you look just at the safety funds. So there is clearly an imbalance 

that we would like to see rectified. Our goal that we would like to 

see in this reauthorization is to find a mechanism to double the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

47 

percentage of trips that are made by foot and by bike to get us up 

to the levels enjoyed by many of our economic competitors around 

the world and to do that through everything from school programs 

which get people thinking the right way at an early age right the 

way through complete streets policies, which are supported by 

AARP and the Realtors and a variety of other groups along those 

lines. So that is the kind of balance that we would like to see more 

in the next transportation bill. 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. When you consider that something like 60 percent of transportation emissions are generated by passenger vehicles and that is about a fifth of the total of the U.S. greenhouse, 

at least CO2 emissions, as I understand it, I think there is an argument for targeting other modes and trying to promote them but I 

would say it is not only a matter of funding those but of how policy 

overall winds up incentivizing what you do so for instance, you 

know, when you have tax policy that is promoting free parking, 

that is a factor, but you also have to consider how you give out 

whatever money you give out so that if you had a policy that was 

rewarding the kinds of investments not only in the modes you want 

but also rewarding the supportive policies that, for instance, we administer at the local level, I mean, most land-use policy is local policy. Some states, you know, govern it but mostly it is the most local 

thing done, and yet what you need to do if you want to get a 

project funded whether it is a road, transportation project or any 

of it, it doesn’t really depend on a whole lot of that and the practices in the past have tended to be independent of that. In fact, 

they have tended to promote exactly the wrong kind of thing. So, 

you know, if somehow you were rewarded for the fact that you are 

investing in existing commercial areas that you have land-use policies that promote compact development and transit orientation not 

just transit adjacency, rather than rewarding people because they 

are going faster over longer distances solely, I think that that can 

have a really big impact. 

Mr. INSLEE. So let me start at the beginning. If you don’t have 

a goal, you don’t get there. I guess the question is, should we have 

a goal for our transportation policy and appropriation coming up 

here this year of a given—— 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I would say yes. 

Mr. CLARKE. Yes. 

Mr. INSLEE. Everybody is saying yes. Let me ask the question 

first. It is a great panel. Of a given CO2 emissions per mile traveled in America, everybody is saying yes to that, I assume. Is 

that—— 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. I would say yes but my only concern would be 

when you try to set the goal nationally, you have to set it in a way 

that doesn’t wind up being too low but on the other hand takes account of those areas that have already done some of the right 

things and how do you not punish them for having done so. I don’t 

think it is an easy thing or a simple thing to do but with that qualification, then I think, yeah, you should set targets. 

Mr. INSLEE. A quick question. I have been talking to the Better 

Place folks about establishing an electric infrastructure for charging electric cars. I just got a BlackBerry this morning about Spain 

moving in a very serious way to provide a public infrastructure for 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

48 

charging electric cars. We are now looking at some permitting 

issues up in the State of Washington to allow that to move forward. 

Some people have expressed concern about that ending up being a 

monopoly, one company if they come in and provided all this infrastructure. I think that can be handled but I just wonder if you have 

any insights on how we provide this electric charging infrastructure. 

Mr. BOESEL. That is a very timely question. I would say first of 

all that I am very excited about the number of electric vehicles or 

plug-in vehicles coming to the market. There are plug-in hybrids. 

There are pure electric vehicles that are coming. I think one of the 

real beauties of those cars is that people will be able to recharge 

at their home and people are finally looking at these cars as more 

urban city cars and not trying to make them do the exact same 

thing that your gasoline car could do. I think to a certain extent, 

the initial rollout of these vehicles will not be dependent on having 

a public infrastructure, and I think surveys show that people would 

love to be able to charge at home. But I do think that as we roll 

out this infrastructure, it is very important that there be a consensus within the industry, within utilities, car manufacturers, 

that we don’t get into the beta versus VHS kind of debate and we 

did that in the 1990s and we ended up with two different types of 

charging plugs and now we still have those out there and those 

same plugs are not relevant to the next generation of plug-in vehicles. The good news is that the wiring is there. 

Mr. INSLEE. With the chairman’s permission, just one quick question. Should we try to strive for some uniformity in a charging system? 

Mr. BOESEL. Yes, we definitely should, and I think that is a great 

role for government to really strive industry and get people to cooperate and talk to each other. 

Mr. INSLEE. Thank you. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Ms. Herseth Sandlin. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you. I thank the witnesses for 

their testimony. 

I represent rural America. I represent South Dakota, and I want 

to make sure that as we move toward a greener transportation system that our needs and opportunities aren’t left out of the discussion. Our transit systems certainly may not have developed quite 

as far as urban transit systems to date but there are certainly challenges to overcome but opportunities as well. The miles that we put 

on vans and buses as most transit fleets offer services hundreds of 

miles away from base communities is something that needs to be 

addressed. Most towns in South Dakota have to compete with the 

cities for the incentive grants offered by the Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration to help upgrade 

to greener and more-fuel-efficient vehicles. But many folks that I 

hear from in South Dakota are excited to take part in the new 

green transit system and are certainly doing their part to reduce 

emissions, utilize homegrown clean biofuels and become more energy efficient. Moreover, many of our towns face the unique opportunity to be able to build up green fuel-efficient fleets from the very 

beginning. For example, River Cities Transit in the State’s capital 

city of Pierre is at the forefront of our State in utilizing E85 vehimstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

49 

cles and other fuel-efficient vans and buses. They are also working 

to purchase the first hybrid van in the State to be able to used for 

public transit and they are excited to see if hybrid vehicles are a 

workable option in our State. Now, River Cities Transit is also 

working closely with many of the nine sovereign tribes in South 

Dakota to help them build up their fleets with similar vehicles and 

encouraging their leaders to make smart decisions now that will 

save both money and reduce emissions. 

So I guess I am wondering to what extent your organizations or 

other organizations that you are familiar with have been reaching 

out to rural communities to share with them strategies for developing green transportation systems as well as anything that you 

are aware of in terms of organizations or initiatives to reach out 

to Native American tribes. 

Mr. VARGA. I can talk a little bit about that. The issue here is 

that, let us look at Europe. In Europe, you have rural communities, 

you have urban communities, you have an integrated transportation system, and using alternative fueled vehicles in rural areas 

is really to an advantage but they have to connect to someplace so 

they can go someplace so they don’t have to drive across the country to get somewhere. What we don’t have is an integrated transportation system in this country that allows people to have choice. 

You take a smaller trip with a van or a bus or a car that is alternative fueled to some train station so you can get to a place, so you 

can go to the city and move around really easily. You really have 

to focus on investment across the country that gets you there. In 

rural areas, true, there has to be some increased focus of providing 

that support for transit to do that, and then in the cities you have 

to make sure that there is more fixed guideway systems in there 

so when you get there you can move around so you are not stuck 

thinking I am leaving Pierre, I have to use my car to get to Chicago. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. I appreciate your points, and South Dakota does not have Amtrak service. 

Mr. BOESEL. I just want to say, Congresswoman, that one of the 

programs we are really working hard to develop is a fuel called biomethane which is taken from biomass and it can be the Swedes— 

I am not sure if you were here earlier when I mentioned it but the 

Swedes are developing this fuel. It is a renewable form of methane 

just like the natural gas that we use today, and I think there is 

a tremendous opportunity for rural communities, particularly agricultural industries, to take advantage of that as a local fuel source. 

We would be very interested in working with the groups in your 

State to help develop that fuel. 

Mr. CLARKE. If I may, four very quick points. Number one, one 

of our most favorite bicycle-friendly communities in the United 

States is the Tucson area, and when they applied for a designation 

as a bicycle-friendly community in 2006, they got a gold designation, and included in their application, two Indian Nations, the 

city, the county, the State DOT, the regional NPO, and it was a 

truly regional application and was one of the first times that that 

really had happened and all those different parties had worked together to put together a program like that. So we are beginning to 

be able to say yes, we can answer that question in the affirmative. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

50 

The second thing I would say is that in many rural communities 

they are an ideal size and setup, perhaps often with the exception 

of the U.S. highway or State highway that might run through the 

middle of them and be a significant barrier. They are an ideal size 

and makeup for bicycling and walking and we should not forget 

rural communities and small towns in the application of enhancement and other funds to make them more bicycle friendly and 

there are perfect examples like the Mickelson Trail which are not 

only great transportation corridors but a huge recreation opportunity, and studies from the province of Quebec to the Outer Banks 

of North Carolina to the city of Portland show enormous economic 

impact of cycling on a local economy and the national economy and 

some of that it is in my written testimony. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Clarke, and just for the 

record, the Mickelson Trail is through the Black Hills of South Dakota and very popular recreation, named after our late Governor 

George Mickelson of South Dakota. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I deeply appreciate your bringing back to the 

notion of how we are going to meet the needs of all of America. I 

have enjoyed our conversations about rural and small town and the 

point you raise is one that I hope we can pursue with the organizations that are represented here about scale of community that we 

don’t count some people out just because there are artificial formulas or constructs where they don’t qualify and the other thing 

is just the capacity that there are many communities that you represent where there may not be the institutional support to be able 

to navigate these things and being able to make them friendly is 

something and I appreciate your continually bringing us back to it, 

dramatic lack of attention to Native Americans where transit is 

awkward, but if you don’t drive you are in trouble, and the application of technology, and I look forward to continuing that with you 

and subsequent efforts because I think this is a missing ingredient 

that doesn’t get the attention and I appreciate your laser-like focus. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Well, thank you, Mr. Blumenauer. I too 

appreciate your genuine interest in addressing the infrastructure 

needs of communities large and small in every region of the country, particularly throughout the Great Plains region as we have 

discussed, both in farming and ranching communities and Native 

American communities, and not just developing new infrastructure 

but maintaining existing infrastructure with this focus on transportation today. I appreciate your sentiment. Thank you. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. 

Our chairman has a tradition of giving each witness 49 seconds 

to summarize their thoughts, if there is something they want to 

punctuate or something that was left off, and we just give each of 

you a quick minute to wrap up as you see fit. Mr. Varga. 

Mr. VARGA. Thank you. One of the things that has not been mentioned much is streamlining the whole federal process of getting 

transportation dollars. It has taken us 9 years to build a BRT 

project that is $40 million in cost. How civilized is that? The other 

thing is, I think that land-use patterns must be incentivized and 

tied to public transportation, tied to all these forms of transportation. It is only use those energy-efficient land-use patterns tied 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

51 

to transportation that is going to change what we are trying to 

achieve here, so thank you very much. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. 

Mr. Clarke. 

Mr. CLARKE. I would go back to the one statistic that I think is 

perhaps the most surprising, which even I have to keep checking 

to make sure I am not making up, and that is that 40 percent of 

all the trips in U.S. metropolitan areas are 2 miles or less. Those 

are the trips that we can have some impact over, and I would close 

by saying that you may recall that in 1985 the World Bank famously issued a report on transport in China that failed to mention 

the world ‘‘bicycle.’’ I would hate to come back 25 years from now 

and look at climate change legislation or a transportation bill 

passed in this Congress that fails to really adequately address bicycling and walking and transit. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I think you are safe. Mr. Oberstar will make 

sure of that. 

Mr. Zimmerman. 

Mr. ZIMMERMAN. Thank you. I would just like to mention quickly 

three things, the first what Mr. Varga said, tying transportation to 

land-use policies I think is key, funding the right things that right 

now only about 20 percent, I think, of federal funding is transit, 

and making it easier to get that is key, and then adjusting the 

other policies that, you know, don’t really make it possible to do. 

It is not only how hard it is to get the grant but it is also what 

is rewarded and taking into account things like housing costs and 

how they relate to the overall benefits and that kind of thing will 

make the biggest impact and ultimately allowing federal policy to 

promote the kind of behavior that you are looking to see at the 

local level that will really have an impact in this area. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. Thank you. 

Mr. Boesel. 

Mr. BOESEL. Mr. Chairman, three last comments. One is that I 

want to just emphasize that I think transit has been an early 

adopter of clean, low-carbon, heavy-duty vehicle technology and it 

often gets tested out and proved there in transit because of the 

public funding of transit. Then it gets adopted later on by the 

trucking industry and then later on by the commercial construction 

equipment, and particularly as we look at greening construction, 

highway construction, building construction, there is a real opportunity to develop a lower-carbon off-road vehicles, construction 

equipment to do that but it starts I think with sort of a bus program, believe it or not. Secondly is under the next T bill we would 

love to see much like we have had the safe routes to school a lowcarbon route to market for trucks, a demonstration program where 

we take a corridor and we say this is going to be a demonstration 

low-carbon goods moving corridor. And then lastly is, I think there 

is a huge opportunity if we do invest in this sector to be a world 

leader in terms of heavy-duty green technology. We can be exporting this product. In many countries, the biggest, fastest-growing 

countries, 50 percent of their vehicle population are commercial 

trucks and buses. They don’t have the kind of per capita vehicle 

ownership that we have in this country. So if we develop this prodmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

52 

uct we get it down to a decent price, it can become an export product and can be a global solution. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. Thank you very much for helping us 

build this record. 

We are going to move to our second panel here. We are going to 

have people dropping in and out, and as you have noticed, this is 

broadcast, so there are people that are actually monitoring, so we 

want to just drive ahead and not wait for the chairman, so we will 

ask our second panel to come forward because the second part of 

the equation that we are concerned with deals with how we put 

these pieces together. There are so many elements that are involved with our built environment and the infrastructure that are 

profoundly affected by the carbon input of how we build it, how we 

manage it, what we build it from. We are pleased to have on our 

second panel representatives that speak to construction materials, 

people who can talk about how we actually—the practices in effecting the building, and last but not least, some of the equipment that 

is used by the materials and the people who build it. 

Our first witness will be Erika Guerra, a manager of government 

affairs and corporate social responsibility at Holcim International, 

a leading global manufacturer of construction materials. She is 

here today from Waltham, Massachusetts, the chairman’s home 

district, and has worked on corporate sustainable development 

strategies and worked throughout North and South America. We 

welcome you here today and invite you to proceed as you are ready. 

STATEMENTS OF ERIKA GUERRA, MANAGER OF GOVERNMENT 

AFFAIRS AND CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, 

HOLCIM (US) INC.; DON WEAVER, HIGHWAY DIVISION CHAIRMAN, THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA; AND DOMENIC RUCCOLO, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, 

SALES AND MARKETING, JOHN DEERE CONSTRUCTION AND 

FORESTRY COMPANY 

STATEMENT OF ERIKA GUERRA 

Ms. GUERRA. Well, thank you and I guess I will have a little bit 

of a different accent from Massachusetts, so bear with me with 

that, please. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. We often need an interpreter with our chairman. 

Ms. GUERRA. Okay. So good morning and thank you for having 

me here. It is a privilege to appear before you today. As you said, 

I am responsible for government affairs and corporate social responsibility of Holcim. We are one of the largest producers of cement, and that is a substantial ingredient in concrete. I want to 

highlight the need for increasing the use of concrete to reduce the 

overall greenhouse gas emissions. 

Innovation is key to reducing CO2. Holcim invests heavily in research and development with a focus on optimizing our processes 

and creating products that provide better performance with fewer 

natural resources. Holcim is committed to reduce its net CO2 emission per ton of cement. We have invested more than $2 billion over 

the last 5 years upgrading and expanding our facilities in the 

United States. I commend you for your leadership in promoting inmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

53 

novative solutions to reduce environment impact of infrastructure 

construction. 

Headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts, we are the leader in 

the U.S. cement industry, serving 44 States. For the last 3 consecutive years we have been recognized as the leader of the industry 

by the Dow Jones Sustainability Index. Holcim Limited is a global 

company with operations in 70 countries and we are engaged in the 

European emission trading system. We are working with the subcommittee as part of the Energy Intensive Manufacturer Group 

that appeared before this committee yesterday at yesterday’s hearing. 

Concrete is the foundation of any modern society and it is the 

second most used commodity in the world after water. Cement is 

a critical component of concrete and when combined with water 

and aggregate becomes the glue that binds the whole mixture together. Cement gives concrete its strength and durability. Nearly 

50 percent of our product has an end use in the public sector in 

roads, airports, bridges, hospitals and schools. Cement is an energy-intensive material to manufacture. However, it only constitutes approximately 15 percent of concrete’s volume. The first 

step in the manufacturing process of cement is heating the limestone at extremely high temperatures up to 2,000 degrees, which 

produces what we call clinker, and I am introducing a new term 

here. This is the energy-intensive part of manufacturing cement 

where 90 percent of our greenhouse gases are generated. In very 

general terms, there is a ton of CO2 emitted for nearly every ton 

of cement produced. However, 50 percent of those emissions are the 

result of a chemical reaction in the process which are commonly referred to as process emissions. Another 40 percent are the result 

of the fuel combustion to maintain those high temperatures, and 

the remaining 10 percent is attributed to electricity use and transport. As a result, this immense sector accounts for 5 percent of 

global CO2 emissions and it is forecast that the demand for the 

product will increase over the next 30 years. It grows with the population. 

Holcim has identified three primary areas of opportunity to drive 

the reduction of greenhouse gases in cement production. First, capital investment, technology and process innovation can reduce the 

energy consumption of our facilities. Second, the use of waste-derived fuels like scrap tires, like biomass, like plastics, can reduce 

the CO2 intensity by replacing fossil fuels like coal. And third, the 

use of other industries’ byproducts as supplemental cementitious 

materials, second term, SCMs, can reduce the clinker content in cement. I would like to focus on this last opportunity. 

As I explained, the production of clinker is a major source of CO2

emissions from cement manufacturing. We should look for ways to 

reduce the amount of clinker in the mix. Unfortunately, we lag behind many countries by requiring inflexible recipes for cement instead of performance-based standards that adapt the needs of a 

project like in the rest of the world. Many projects can be done with 

a lower carbon footprint if performance-based standards are accepted. However, acceptance does not necessarily translate into use, especially when it comes to infrastructure projects. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

54 

Holcim encourages the development of a unified performancebased specification for cement with support from ASTM International that ensures that cement produced in the United States 

meets all technical requirements while affording producers the opportunity to innovate and develop new products. We believe that in 

order to be effective in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 

through the consumption of blended cements, national acceptance 

of performance-based standards and a preference for the use of 

these products needs to be led by federal and State governments. 

I sincerely thank you for your time and I again appreciate this 

opportunity to speak about the linkages between infrastructure development and global challenges of climate change. 

[Statement of Ms. Guerra follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

55 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 102 here 62187A.028
56 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 103 here 62187A.029
57 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 104 here 62187A.030
58 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 105 here 62187A.031
59 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 106 here 62187A.032
60 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 107 here 62187A.033
61 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 108 here 62187A.034
62 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert offset folio 109 here 62187A.035
63 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. We appreciate your adding your 

voice. It is something that I don’t think is appreciated in this 

broader conversation, and I appreciate your being part of our hearing today. 

Mr. Weaver, what do you do with all this cement? 

Mr. WEAVER. We are concrete pavers so that—— 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. I guess I should introduce Mr. Weaver as the 

Highway Division chairman at Associated General Contractors. As 

we all know, AGC is a leading advocate for infrastructure investment at the federal level and I would say at the State and local 

level as well. Mr. Weaver is vice president of Weaver-Bailey Contractors of El Paso, Arkansas, and we deeply appreciate your joining us today and the leadership that AGC has been exhibiting on 

so many of these interrelated problems. 

STATEMENT OF DON WEAVER 

Mr. WEAVER. Thank you, and I do follow Scott Williams from 

your district. He was chairman last year. And I will have another 

accent that you haven’t heard today. I will skip my first paragraph. 

AGC is the oldest construction association in the United States 

representing contractors that build all forms of infrastructure. Construction is the delivery system for a cleaner, healthier and safer 

environment. Studies show that improving our highway transportation infrastructure to allow vehicles to move freely through existing bottlenecks will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

Also, increasing transit ridership, which we have transit members 

that build transit, by improving existing systems and constructing 

new ones in congested urban areas will also have positive impacts 

on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 

As important as providing these needed infrastructure improvements is the way these improvements are made. Our industry has 

a long history of developing construction techniques and practices 

that enhance the environment. The federal government can assist 

in these practices by offering appropriate incentives but it is important that we learn from the lessons of the past and not try to mandate one-size-fits-all solutions. In many cases recycling and reuse 

of construction debris as cost-effective and would decrease the 

amount of waste sent to landfills, may reduce transportation costs, 

lower energy use and thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 

My own company, Weaver-Bailey Contractors, on three jobs in the 

urban Little Rock area recycled over 500,000 square yards of original interstate concrete pavement into 276,000 tons of base course 

that was put back underneath the highways and reused. We estimate that that saved 18,400 loads of virgin materials that would 

have been hauled to the jobsite from a quarry up to 30 miles away, 

which caused a savings of 100,000 gallons of diesel fuel and it lowered the emissions caused by the job. Similarly, recycled asphalt 

pavement allows contractors to add milled asphalt to new mixes, 

lowering the asphalt content of the new material, which saves oil, 

lowers cost and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Every ton of recycled asphalt from construction which uses the millings that you 

see the milling machine results in elimination of .03 tons of CO2

emissions. Some States are resistant to using wrap and AGC believes incentives would help these States overcome their reluctance. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

64 

Soil modification is another green practice that we use in the 

highway business. In many construction situations, onsite soils are 

not acceptable as sub-base materials. This requires the material to 

be dug up and replaced so instead of removing unsuitable material 

and putting it somewhere and digging up new suitable material 

and replacing it, which causes scars on the land, a variety of additives can be used—cement, lime, fly ash and other chemicals—and 

this saves fuel and reduces the emissions by the need to haul 

things off and haul things back in and it also helps the traveling 

public with the decrease in traffic. 

It is important to note the construction industry is not in itself 

a significant source of greenhouse gas. According to EPA estimates, 

equipment used in construction generates only .86 percent of total 

U.S. greenhouse gas emissions due to the combustion of fossil fuel. 

AGC opposes government mandates to modify equipment already 

in use or to replace such equipment via regulation or contractual 

requirement. Such retroactive requirements place a financial burden of a largely public benefit exclusively on the private contractor. 

They also have the potential to render a company’s fleet prematurely obsolete and wipe out its net worth, which is how we are 

able to find jobs. However, improvements in greenhouse gas emissions could be achieved by replacing older equipment with newer 

and more efficient equipment. AGC recommends the creation of an 

investment tax credit to encourage contractors to replace older 

equipment with new models. Newer equipment is extremely more 

energy efficient, it is operator friendly and safer and the new engines are designed to have a lot lower emissions of particulate matter and NOX Reducing particulate matter and NOX and black carbon can have a positive impact on global warming. 

In addition to the environmental benefits from replacing old 

equipment, there would be an economic benefit as well. With the 

downturn in the construction market, contractors are purchasing 

less equipment both for the current workload and the future because our future market is uncertain. U.S. equipment manufacturers have been forced to lay off a significant number of workers because of the decrease of new equipment purchases. While the recently enacted stimulus program provides significant infrastructure 

investment, it does not create long-term market opportunities. 

Until we have a full economic recovery and we see what the new 

highway bill will be, a tax credit would offer an incentive for contractors right now to buy new equipment. 

In conclusion, AGC believes that the efforts to further the use of 

construction techniques and practices that have a positive environmental impact should be encouraged. AGC cautions against creating mandates that attempt to impose specific construction practices. AGC believes that a partnership approach will better results 

for achieving the national goals. Opportunities will be available 

when surface transportation reauthorization legislation is considered later this year. AGC is evaluating proposals thus far including 

the CLEAN TEA Act, and we look forward to working with this 

committee in the future in trying to enhance our transportation 

system and our environment. Thank you. 

[Statement of Mr. Weaver follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

65 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 116 here 62187A.036
66 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 117 here 62187A.037
67 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 118 here 62187A.038
68 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 119 here 62187A.039
69 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 120 here 62187A.040
70 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 121 here 62187A.041
71 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 122 here 62187A.042
72 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. Thank you. 

Our final witness is Mr. Domenic Ruccolo, senior vice president 

at John Deere, the green equipment that our friend, Mr. Salazar 

mentioned. He is responsible for sales and marketing in the Worldwide Construction and Forestry Division. He has previously worked 

in wholesale finance and directed the Hitachi Construction and 

Mining Division. John Deere is a leading provider of products and 

services for agriculture and forestry, and we deeply appreciate your 

joining us today and look forward to your testimony when you are 

ready. 

STATEMENT OF DOMENIC RUCCOLO 

Mr. RUCCOLO. Thank you very much. On behalf of John Deere, 

I would like to thank the distinguished members of the committee 

for the opportunity to testify today on constructing a green transportation policy. 

I also would like to go on the record for thanking Mr. Salazar 

for his kind comments about our products and company as well. 

For 171 years, John Deere has enabled human flourishing by offering solutions to those who produce food, fiber and food, beautify 

and protect our environment and build and maintain our homes 

and critical infrastructure. During this period, Deere has invented, 

manufactured and sold worldwide hundreds of models of construction equipment as well as the engines powering them. Deere created these tools with a consistent purpose: improving and efficiency. Just as productivity and efficiency drive Deere’s product innovation, we suggest that it should also drive our Nation’s infrastructure policy. America’s infrastructure directly affects economic, 

social and environmental well-being. Every day we all rely upon 

our roads, bridges, transit, rail and other infrastructure to survive 

and thrive. Despite our dependence on it, the Nation has taken infrastructure for granted and permitted it to fall into disrepair without concern for its sustainability. 

The Nation’s current infrastructure has suffered from the absence of a national vision premised on both robust funding as well 

as the pursuit of the most productive and effective projects. Actions 

in recent weeks reflect Congressional leadership in creating this vision for infrastructure. It is clear you appreciate something as significant as our infrastructure requires significant funding. We also 

must make sure this and future money is spent wisely and to do 

so we need to incorporate principles of environmental sustainability 

into our infrastructure policy. 

John Deere believes one way to make infrastructure projects 

greener is through the use of productive, efficient construction 

equipment. The construction equipment marketplace has consistently demanded machine productivity and efficiency because fuel 

consumption is a primary operating cost for our customers. In response, John Deere and other construction equipment manufacturers expend substantial resources to ensure their customers can get 

the most work out of every gallon of fuel used. The federal government can take many steps to support further efforts in the construction equipment industry to improve equipment productivity 

and efficiency and reduce environmental impacts. Collaboration between the public and private sectors is needed to investigate and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

73 

fund the research and development of new standards and technologies to further improve equipment productivity and efficiency. 

By recognizing the essential road, non-road equipment will play in 

transforming the transportation and other sectors of the economy 

to achieve ambitious and necessary greenhouse gas reductions, we 

can see that appropriate investment by the federal government in 

the non-road technologies would create substantial environmental 

returns. For example, creating modal shifts from road transport to 

rail and public transportation systems is one way to help offset the 

growth in greenhouse gas emissions. 

We strongly recommend that the federal government also take 

steps to ensure construction equipment owners can more easily 

purchase new technologies that excel in productivity, efficiency and 

environmental sustainability and thereby build infrastructure to 

the demand that the Nation demands. A single piece of large construction equipment can cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. The development of tax incentives and funding specific to the 

purchase of new equipment will remove uncertainty for equipment 

owners who today face a risk that inconsistent environmental and 

other regulations created by States and locally may make equipment obsolete well before the end of its useful life. On a larger 

scale, the federal government can support greener construction 

practices and techniques by incorporating environmental considerations into infrastructure planning and funding decisions. 

As a member of the United States Climate Action Partnership, 

John Deere supports incorporating greenhouse gas measurement 

and accounting in transportation, infrastructure funding and planning. Incorporating such considerations, however, needs to be coupled with an improvement to the infrastructure project development and approval process. Transportation projects often become 

bogged down for years in inefficient and redundant processes, 

thereby increasing the project costs and undermining the ability to 

improve the environmental impact on our transportation system. 

An efficient transportation system also provides many indirect benefits. For example, improving our infrastructure, we will improve 

the environmental sustainability of many green industries critical 

to rural America including renewable energy specifically. 

I would like to especially thank committee member Herseth 

Sandlin for her support of woody biomass energy. Woody biomass 

is a prime example of rural renewable resources that can help meet 

our energy needs, address the challenges of climate change, revitalize our rural communities and improve the health of forests. 

Congress is in a position to unlock the enormous potential of woody 

biomass by supporting not only the creation of a market for it but 

also the creation of an infrastructure system that enables its ready 

and cost-effective transportation. 

In concluding my remarks, I would be remiss if I failed to mention another critical benefit Congress should consider in its infrastructure policy debate and that is job creation. John Deere witnesses firsthand the dramatic impact of the current financial crisis 

on its workforce, dealers and customers. The financial crisis has hit 

the construction industry very hard with 21.4 percent unemployment and over 2 million construction workers without jobs. The impact of the financial crisis extends well beyond the construction inmstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

74 

dustry to those skilled and hardworking Americans who manufacture our vital construction equipment. John Deere and others in 

the construction equipment industry have been forced to lay off 

many employees as a result of the plunging demand for construction equipment caused by the financial crisis. 

I want to thank you again for the opportunity to testify and I am 

happy to answer any questions that the committee may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ruccolo follows:] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

75 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 130 here 62187A.043
76 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 131 here 62187A.044
77 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 132 here 62187A.045
78 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 133 here 62187A.046
79 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 134 here 62187A.047
80 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 135 here 62187A.048
81 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 136 here 62187A.049
82 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Herseth Sandlin. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you, Mr. Blumenauer. 

Mr. Ruccolo, thank you for your testimony. I thank the other witnesses as well but my questions go to you as it relates to the Renewable Biofuels Facilitation Act. I appreciate John Deere’s support of this legislation that I have reintroduced with Mr. Greg Walden of Oregon. We believe that a key to fulfilling the renewable 

fuels standard that we passed in 2007 is to ensure that cellulosic 

biofuels can be produced from the greatest possible diversity of 

feedstocks in communities across the Nation. This particularly affects any region of the country with significant tracts of forestland, 

as you indicated, including the Midwest, the Northwest, the Northeast and the South. 

Now, I know your company has developed specialized equipment 

to collect woody biomass in forests and I hope that you can share 

more about that with the committee, but I also know that the company has been very active in South Dakota in testing new farm 

machinery that is going to make it easier to gather for producers, 

agricultural producers to gather and process corn stover and other 

farm byproducts that can be used for cellulosic ethanol production. 

So if you could expand on those initiatives and elaborate on the necessity of these projects if we are going to have greener fuel sources 

in the future, and if you could also speak to some of the challenges 

you are currently facing as you assist efforts to expand the diversity of feedstocks for biofuels. 

Mr. RUCCOLO. Certainly I will try to hit on all of those things. 

There were a number of topics in your question and I will be glad 

to address that. 

Relative to woody biomass, yes, we do have a product essentially 

referred to as an energy bundler, if you will. It goes about collecting residue off the forest floors, if you will, either after a logging 

operation or just that it naturally exists, and actually promotes the 

health of the forest, if you will, also reduces certain risks, as you 

know, of forest fires and essentially takes this residue and compresses it in a way that creates kind of bundles of material that 

can be used in cogen plants and so on as an alternative form of energy and certainly one that is renewable. So on the forestry front, 

that is the purpose of the wood biomass in particular. 

In terms of biomass that comes from either corn stover or other 

forms of agricultural products, we have several projects underway 

there in terms of really developing the technologies associated with 

turning agricultural residue, if you will, into other forms of energy, 

be it fuels or otherwise, and being with the construction and forestry division and not the expert necessarily on agricultural biomass efforts but would certainly if there are more specific questions 

more than glad to take those questions back and get back to the 

committee with those specific answers. 

Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Thank you. And also for the record, just 

as Mr. Salazar mentioned his familiarity with John Deere’s equipment, I too spent many hours in my youth on the green machines 

there on the family farm. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you 

to our entire panel. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

83 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Well, we are reaching the wrap-up here but 

I would like to pose to each of our panelists an opportunity to 

maybe drill down for a moment about the incentives, the government standards that were referenced and opportunities to change 

the process. Part of what we have heard from our witnesses so far 

is a little frustration at a time when it can get a little complex. Mr. 

Zimmerman referenced his frustration with not being able to actually get a project through the federal process, which ends up providing delay, driving up costs. Mr. Weaver, I think you referenced 

it. I am curious if you would like to just start first talking about 

what the government specs should be, how the federal government—we are dealing with reauthorization now, the Surface Transportation Act, which expires in 6 months and I think will be reauthorized by this Congress. If you want to touch on how specifically 

you think we can help by driving some different standards and opportunities not just for pilot projects but maybe something that is 

performance based that would enable us to make it easier to use 

the new processes that you reference and to make it easier to not 

have to jump through hurdles to be able to incent some of the State 

or local governments to take some of the innovations not just to be 

able to recycle but you are saving landfill and energy. Would each 

panelist make a brief comment about the specification issue? 

Ms. GUERRA. Thank you for the question, and it is certainly a 

complex issue that this legislation will be addressing on greenhouse gases and I think one of the first points is to look at this 

legislation in a holistic way and really trying to link in our case, 

you know, the intensity of cement and producing greenhouse gases 

but with the benefits of concrete as an efficient material when it 

comes to highway infrastructure. 

In terms of the specs, I think there is lot that government, federal government can do. There are specs for blended cements or 

performance-based standards. The problem is that they are not utilized across the board. There is only a handful of States that recommend on their projects these performance-based standards so I 

think there is an opportunity to mitigate the impact of greenhouse 

gases by the usage of blended cements if it is a federal mandate 

for performance-based standards rather than just a recipe or a prescription of cement. We don’t need the same strength on our driveways that we need on our highways and that will drive a lot of innovation on our industry and the entire sector. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. 

Mr. Weaver. 

Mr. WEAVER. Yes. I would like to see the Department of Transportation coordinate across all of their entities, federal transit, federal highways, FAA, their specifications to be a little more uniform 

on the use of recycled material and locally available material rather than specking some exotic things that has to be transported 

great distances like the FAA specs and the federal highway specs 

are totally different. According to her, the minimal cement content, 

the end result spec, let us do our own mix designs on asphalt, concrete. We got to guarantee it. Let us come up with what we think 

will work and prove it rather than the State or the federal agency 

telling us what we have to use. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

84 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. But making it performance based. As long as 

it does the job—— 

Mr. WEAVER. Yes. I would call it end result rather than performance, but end result—if they want 3,500-pound concrete that is 

going to last 50 years, instead of telling us how much cement to 

put in it, we can substitute maybe some rock or some sand, some 

locally available materials and make it denser and better than 

what they specify. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. 

Mr. RUCCOLO. Getting back to the part of your question in terms 

of maybe some of the frustration you sensed here, especially in 

terms of the creation of incentives or some of the inconsistencies 

in regulations from State to State or municipality to municipality 

when it comes to some of the requirements associated with equipment, I think one of the things is that there has been some consistency in terms of what the EPA has come out with where it kind 

of gets extrapolated, if you will, at the State or local level I think 

is what causes a lot of the uncertainty that Mr. Weaver expressed 

as well in his opening statement and I think that into itself, finding some mechanisms that do incentivize construction contractors, 

if you will, construction equipment owners to acquire new pieces 

that will move the needle, if you will, relative to greenhouse gas 

and emissions and remove some of the fear in terms of obsolescence 

that a lot of these new regulations are causing I think is one that 

would be a great step forward moving forward. And relative to the 

highway bill in particular and the whole topic of infrastructure and 

where do we take the infrastructure going forward for the Nation 

is certainly one that is complex and I think the previous panel hit 

on a few issues of where it has to be balanced. The infrastructure 

requirements in rural America are certainly different than they are 

in more-urban areas and it is going to be certainly a difficult task 

in terms of achieving a balanced approach that addresses and at 

least touches on the needs of all Americans. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Well, let me just express my deep appreciation 

for your patience here with us today and laying out a very strong 

case for an element that doesn’t get appropriate attention in our 

climate change discussion. A ton of carbon being generated to create a ton of concrete is something that I think people find sort of 

staggering if they are not equipped with it, and I have been very 

impressed with what your industry has done to try and develop a 

greener, lighter carbon footprint and the construction industry, the 

leadership that is being exhibited at some of the State and local 

level is really remarkable. Your point about equipment manufacturing, which is essential to all of this, we have got a lot of equipment out there that actually does generate a tremendous amount 

of pollution and is inefficient, but as Mr. Weaver points out is an 

important part of the net worth of a lot of small- and medium-size 

businesspeople and they are going to need some help in the transition, and I think across the board you are uncovering a series of 

elements that are very, very important for us to consider in climate 

change, in reauthorization, in what is going to happen in the next 

round of economic stimulus because I don’t think the economy is 

going to rebound quickly, and transportation finance. So you have 

really set the table here in an underappreciated part of the commstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

85 

mittee’s work and I appreciate deeply your helping us build the 

record here today. 

I wonder if we haven’t exhausted your time and patience if each 

of you might have a minute that you would like to offer up to just 

kind of punctuate one item as we conclude the hearing. 

Ms. GUERRA. Yes, just to reiterate that the energy-intensive part 

and the ton of CO2 generated in cement, it can really be upset by 

all the benefits of concrete usage. Cement is an energy-intensive 

product but it is only 15 percent of concrete, so there is a lot of opportunities to really work on both ways to reduce our carbon footprint. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. Super. 

Mr. WEAVER. I want to help Mr. John Deere. We think that an 

incentive, a tax incentive, whether it is targeted tax credit or whatever to replace new equipment. With the money flowing to the 

States now to rebuild the highways, a lot of contractors will take 

old equipment, as I did this winter—I rebuilt a 24-year-old piece 

of equipment and I didn’t bring it up to current standards but it 

is going to be good enough to last another 10 or 12 years. Had 

there been some kind of incentive there, I wouldn’t have rebuilt 

that, I would have went and bought a new one for $300,000. But 

this money is coming and I think it is time that people have a plan 

to replace their older equipment. 

You know, on a personal note, Little Rock has over 60 miles of 

bicycle pedestrian trails starting at the Clinton Library and the 

centerpiece of it is the longest pedestrian bicycle bridge in the 

United States and, excuse me, but it is named the Big Dam Bridge. 

It goes over a dam. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. And Congressman Snyder is shamelessly promoting it, that along with your streetcar. We appreciate that. 

Thank you, Mr. Weaver. 

Mr. RUCCOLO. I would like to conclude by just saying the topic 

of infrastructure spending is a tough one. It is one that is extremely expensive. We fully understand and appreciate that. We 

also I think all need to come to the realization the cost of our failure to do so has got a tremendous cost as well that maybe is not 

one that can be as easily defined, if you will. 

To Congressman Salazar’s initial question about cap and trade 

just to share Deere’s view on that, our view is we are very much 

in favor of a cap-and-trade system for the simple reasons that it 

allows for greater flexibility but I think will drive greater innovation and get us to the kinds of greenhouse gas levels that are going 

to be necessary going forward. 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. That is a great note on which to conclude the 

hearing. 

For the last 30 months I have been having conversations with a 

variety of stakeholders including representatives of each of your industries about how we should be rebuilding and renewing America, 

what sort of vision we have going forward, not just another transportation bill but the big picture that each of you have referenced, 

and I must say that meeting with 250 stakeholders now over 21⁄2

years and having a series of conferences around the country—we 

will be in Atlanta again this Monday—I am struck by the pockets 

of innovation that people aren’t aware of, the flexibility that is not 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

86 

maybe necessarily associated with various sectors of the economy 

and the potential of bringing people together. You may have noticed that occasionally is a little controversial around there. There 

is a little controversy, a little debate but what we are seeing starting at the grass roots and as evidenced by your testimony today 

that there are broad areas of consensus that can bring people together to help solve economic problems, saving the planet and making the quality of life improved for all Americans, and we really appreciate your contributions for advancing that debate and look forward to working with you and the committee as we move forward. 

Thank you very much. 

We are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGS

87 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 148 here 62187A.050
88 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 149 here 62187A.051
89 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 150 here 62187A.052
90 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 151 here 62187A.053
91 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 152 here 62187A.054
92 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 153 here 62187A.055
93 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 154 here 62187A.056
94 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 155 here 62187A.057
95 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 156 here 62187A.058
96 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 157 here 62187A.059
97 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 158 here 62187A.060
98 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 159 here 62187A.061
99 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 160 here 62187A.062
100 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 161 here 62187A.063
101 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 162 here 62187A.064
102 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 163 here 62187A.065
103 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 164 here 62187A.066
104 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 165 here 62187A.067
105 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 166 here 62187A.068
106 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 167 here 62187A.069
107 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 168 here 62187A.070
108 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 169 here 62187A.071
109 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 170 here 62187A.072
110 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 171 here 62187A.073
111 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 172 here 62187A.074
112 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 173 here 62187A.075
113 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 174 here 62187A.076
114 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 175 here 62187A.077
115 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 176 here 62187A.078
116 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 177 here 62187A.079
117 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 178 here 62187A.080
118 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 179 here 62187A.081
119 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 180 here 62187A.082
120 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 181 here 62187A.083
121 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 182 here 62187A.084
122 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 183 here 62187A.085
123 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 184 here 62187A.086
124 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 185 here 62187A.087
125 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 186 here 62187A.088
126 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 187 here 62187A.089
127 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with HEARINGSInsert graphic folio 188/250 here 62187A.090