U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

99–958 PDF 2016

S. HRG. 114–250 

TECHNOLOGIES TRANSFORMING 

TRANSPORTATION: IS THE 

GOVERNMENT KEEPING UP? 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION 

AND MERCHANT MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, 

SAFETY AND SECURITY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JULY 7, 2015 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

TED CRUZ, Texas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

BILL NELSON, Florida, Ranking 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

CORY BOOKER, New Jersey 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

GARY PETERS, Michigan 

DAVID SCHWIETERT, Staff Director 

NICK ROSSI, Deputy Staff Director 

REBECCA SEIDEL, General Counsel 

JASON VAN BEEK, Deputy General Counsel 

KIM LIPSKY, Democratic Staff Director 

CHRIS DAY, Democratic Deputy Staff Director 

CLINT ODOM, Democratic General Counsel and Policy Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND MERCHANT 

MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY AND SECURITY 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska, Chairman 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CORY BOOKER, New Jersey, Ranking 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on July 7, 2015 ................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Fischer ................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Booker .................................................................................. 2 

Statement of Senator Nelson .................................................................................. 43 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 44 

Statement of Senator Klobuchar ............................................................................ 46 

WITNESSES

Susan Alt, Senior Vice President, Public Affairs, Volvo Group North America . 4 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 5 

Paul E. Misener, Vice President, Global Public Policy, Amazon.com ................. 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 10 

Gregory C. Fox, Executive Vice President, Operations, BNSF Railway Company ....................................................................................................................... 12 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 14 

Michael R. Christensen, Senior Executive Lead, Supply Chain Optimization, 

Port of Long Beach ............................................................................................... 29 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 30 

APPENDIX

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to: 

Susan Alt ........................................................................................................... 53 

Response to written questions submitted to Paul E. Misener by: 

Hon. Roy Blunt ................................................................................................. 54 

Hon. Steve Daines ............................................................................................ 55 

Response to written questions submitted to Gregory C. Fox by: 

Hon. Roy Blunt ................................................................................................. 55 

Hon. Steve Daines ............................................................................................ 56 

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Roy Blunt to: 

Michael R. Christensen .................................................................................... 57 

(1) 

TECHNOLOGIES TRANSFORMING 

TRANSPORTATION: IS THE 

GOVERNMENT KEEPING UP? 

TUESDAY, JULY 7, 2015 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION AND

MERCHANT MARINE INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND SECURITY,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:35 p.m., in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Deb Fischer, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Fischer [presiding], Blunt, Booker, Nelson, 

Cantwell, and Klobuchar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA 

Senator FISCHER. Good afternoon, everyone. I am pleased to convene the Senate Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security for its sixth 

hearing, which is titled ‘‘Technologies Transforming Transportation: Is the Government Keeping Up?’’ 

Ranking Member Booker suggested holding this hearing, and he 

and I are excited to bring together a range of issues that we have 

worked on together here in the Senate. For example, we underscored the important role that technology plays in our daily lives 

by collaborating on the Internet of Things Resolution at the beginning of this Congress. I was pleased to see that our resolution 

passed the Senate earlier this year. We’ve also made progress on 

several transportation matters related to maritime, rail, and highway infrastructure. Our hearing brings our work on these various 

issues together. 

Today, we will explore the Federal Government’s response to the 

current technological developments in our Nation’s transportation 

industry. In order to maximize the efficiency and safety gains being 

made by the private sector, the Federal Government must ensure 

that it is keeping up with modern technology, regulatory frameworks must facilitate rather than hinder technological advancements. In some ways, our hearing is entering uncharted territory, 

because government is generally reactive rather than proactive. Today’s hearing is an opportunity to look into the future and to identify ways to make innovation easier so that we can grow quicker, 

safer, and easier. 

2 

Automated driving, for instance, has the potential to make trucks 

more efficient, and could result in thousands of dollars in annual 

savings. Additionally, automation has the potential to make American companies more competitive in the global market. As our 

stakeholders will testify, a patchwork of State laws is holding back 

the transportation’s—industry’s ability to take advantage of the 

benefits technology provides. Clearly, more should be done to foster 

innovation and streamline obsolete regulations. Step one is educating policymakers and innovators on what exists and how we can 

facilitate more voluntary solutions to our transportation challenges 

with cutting-edge technologies. 

Technology has the potential to automatically process, sync, and 

coordinate complex transportation systems. Increased automation 

and connectivity make transportation and logistical networks more 

efficient. Most importantly, innovations in transportation offer tremendous opportunities to improve safety. Autonomous trucking 

technologies, for example, will strengthen driver awareness and reduce accidents on our Nation’s roads. 

Additionally, we will hear how the increased use of trackside 

monitoring devices and the development of robust data bases will 

provide the railroad industry with the ability to better repair and 

upgrade critical infrastructure. In other words, the Internet of 

Things and Big Data are identifying the challenges of tomorrow 

with technologies that we have today. 

We must also appreciate the role our Nation’s ports play as centers of intermodal connection in our transportation network. To 

compete globally, America’s ports are modernizing to drive efficiency and keep goods moving throughout the country. The benefits 

of technological advancements are clear for our economy, for our 

safety, and for the efficiency of our transportation networks. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the kinds of 

policies that will promote innovation. Our country is a leader in innovation, constantly creating the next big thing to drive the global 

economic engine. 

And I would now invite Senator Booker to offer his opening remarks. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CORY BOOKER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator BOOKER. Thank you, Senator Fischer. 

I want to also just acknowledge that—Senator Blunt, it’s good to 

have you here this afternoon. 

I appreciate that Senator Fischer is holding this hearing. We’ve 

done extensive work together on both technology and transportation, and I’m excited to examine further where government can 

help and, conversely, where government could stop hindering. And 

in the ‘‘meeting the infrastructure challenges’’ especially, this is important. 

Senator Fischer and I have discussed the tremendous innovation 

happening in this country—we’re both excited by it—and how some 

of our government agencies may not actually be equipped to keep 

up with this incredible innovation. This is a theme that I’m sure 

our panel of witnesses will update us on today. 

3 

Technology is rapidly changing. Everything we do, including how 

we commute and maintain our critical transportation systems, is 

changing. It’s changing how we get to work, how we drive our cars, 

and even how we hail a cab. We have an opportunity to harness 

new technologies to dramatically improve public safety, reduce 

costs, create jobs, and address infrastructure problems in creative 

new ways. The Federal Government can be a key player in helping 

to advance and utilize these developing technologies. 

Let’s take a look at safety. While traffic-related fatalities and injuries continue to decline, over 30,000 people each year still die on 

our highways. We continue to see trains that derail too frequently, 

putting enormous burdens on our first responders. In the face of 

these challenges, we’ve got to understand the opportunity that 

comes with technology and improving our transportation systems. 

Our country has already invested billions in interstate highways, 

bridges, rails, and ports. Technology could help us to get more out 

of what we’ve already built. 

Today, there are market-ready, proven solutions to make our 

roads safer, from automatic braking to high-tech camera technologies to sensors and radar, and even autonomous cars and 

drones. Advanced technologies can now alert a truck driver, and 

even take control of a vehicle if they began to drift out of their lane 

or fail to brake with stopped traffic ahead. Technology can enable 

a smartphone, using realtime information, to suggest to a driver 

the best time to hit the road for their commute or family trip, or 

direct a driver to the nearest available on-street parking place, 

something we need in Washington. Harnessing technology will not 

only save time and fuel use, it will reduce traffic congestion for everyone else on the road, something drivers in my state and 

throughout the Northeast know all too well. New technologies can 

improve the safety and efficiency of our rail network and our port 

facilities. It is critical that we reexamine how we invest in our infrastructure, how we plan for the future, and how we make the 

best use of these technologies. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about how the 

Federal Government can help existing businesses thrive, how the 

Federal Government can be a worldwide leader and—help us to be 

a worldwide leader in innovation and advance, not stall, innovative 

and transformative innovations. 

Thank you. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Booker. 

And I would like to welcome our first panel of witnesses today. 

We have Ms. Susan Alt, the Senior Vice President, Public Affairs, 

Volvo Group North America; Mr. Paul Misener, Vice President of 

Global Public Policy, Amazon; Mr. Gregory Fox, Executive Vice 

President, Operations, BNSF Railway; and Mr. Michael 

Christensen, Executive—Senior Executive Lead, Supply Chain Optimization, Port of Long Beach. 

And, with that, I will begin with Ms. Alt if you would like to give 

us your testimony, please. 

4 

STATEMENT OF SUSAN ALT, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, PUBLIC 

AFFAIRS, VOLVO GROUP NORTH AMERICA 

Ms. ALT. Thank you. 

Chairman Fischer, Ranking Member Booker, and distinguished 

members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to be 

here today to talk about new transportation technologies and how 

they improve both safety and efficiency in our transportation network and the role that the Federal Government play in either facilitating or hindering that development. 

The Volvo Group is a world leader in sustainable transportation 

solutions. We build stuff that make the roads, and we build stuff 

that uses the roads. In the U.S., we produce heavy-duty trucks 

under the brand names of Mack and Volvo, Volvo construction 

equipment, Volvo Penta marine engines, and Prevost coaches and 

Nova transit buses. We subscribe to a build-where-you-sell philosophy, and we have more than 12,000 U.S. employees with nine 

manufacturing facilities in six States. And our goal is zero accidents. 

I’m going to comment today from a heavy-duty truck perspective, 

because trucking delivers more than 80 percent of the value of the 

freight that’s shipped in the United States. 

Buyers of heavy-duty trucks today can opt for technology that 

will keep the driver and other vehicles on the road safer, things 

like lane-departure warning systems or active braking. But, on the 

horizon, we see great potential for both vehicle-to-vehicle—V2V— 

and vehicle-to-infrastructure—V2I—technologies. Messages for V2V 

and V2I applications are sent on the 5.9 gigahertz bandwidth of the 

radio frequency spectrum. It’s sent using dedicated short-range 

communications, or DSRC. In 1999, the Government got it right 

when it set aside and protected this frequency for only safety-related communication. But, in 2013, the FCC began exploring using 

the 5.9 gigahertz spectrum to also support unlicensed Wi-Fi users. 

Proposals have been provided, but no consensus yet reached. The 

concern is that allowing other technologies to be shared on the 

same spectrum could create a lag or a latency in sending lifesaving 

communications signals. 

So, let me clarify. Let’s say vehicle number 1 is approaching an 

intersection with a green light, but the view of an oncoming vehicle 

is blocked by a building. Using a DSRC V2V application, the driver 

in vehicle number 1 can be alerted of an oncoming vehicle number 

2 that’s not slowing down for his red light, and the alert will allow 

the collision to be avoided. If there’s any latency in that signal because of interference—for example, a Wi-Fi user watching a video— 

the accident likely would not be avoided. So, until a solution is 

found for spectrum-sharing of the 5.9 gigahertz frequency, we want 

it to remain dedicated for safety-related applications only. 

An example of where vehicle-to-infrastructure—V2I—can improve safety and freight efficiency is the roadside weight and inspection stations, where trucks stop along the interstate to wait in 

long lines that can create potential hazards. The Volvo Group has 

already demonstrated technology using V2I communication protocols from the truck to the weigh station that allows moving trucks 

to wirelessly communicate their credentials to the inspection stations, such as if the weight of the vehicle is below the limit or if 

5 

the driver is wearing a seatbelt. It keeps those trucks moving and 

allowing authorities to focus on the condition of other trucks that 

haven’t been validated in a program we call Trusted Truck. 

Let me end with what is probably the talk of the town, and that 

is automated technology or autonomous vehicles. That is using connected vehicle technology fused with onboard collision avoidance 

technology. We think the area is very interesting, but caution our 

pace of implementation will be set by how safely it can be adapted 

to the vehicles, to the infrastructure, and society. 

Platooning is one example of automated technology. This is 

where there’s a lead or a pilot truck. It’s wirelessly linked to a 

truck that’s following behind it. Volvo Group and the California 

Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology, or PATH, are in 

the process of implementing a two-truck platoon demonstration at 

slow speeds that will be extended to three trucks in 2016. Fullscale demonstration has yielded some 10 percent fuel efficiency 

gains by platooning trucks because of the reduced air drag. 

We’re developing technologies for connected and automated driving because of their potential to enhance safety and improve productivity. Increasing the speed of adoption for these technologies 

could be achieved if we eliminated 12 percent Federal excise tax 

that’s added to the purchase of a new truck and offsetting that 

with a higher fuel tax. 

Another challenge is that, though our products roll across state 

lines, different states are developing different regulations to promote autonomous vehicle testing. We’ll need a national standard 

before these vehicles can become operational. 

With uncertain funding for the U.S. transportation surface—surface transportation system, adoption of these new technologies will 

allow us to move increasing amount of freights for a growing population, but it won’t solve all of our freight capacity problems, and 

it doesn’t let Congress off the hook to do its job of providing Federal funding and passing a long-term surface transportation bill. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify to you today. I look forward to questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Alt follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUSAN ALT, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, PUBLIC AFFAIRS, VOLVO GROUP NORTH AMERICA

Chairman Fischer, Ranking Member Booker, and distinguished members of the 

Subcommittee, I would like to thank you all for the opportunity to appear before 

you today to discuss the importance of innovative transportation technologies that 

are improving the safety and efficiency of our transportation network and the role 

the Federal Government plays in either facilitating or hindering that development. 

My name is Susan Alt and I am the Senior Vice President for Public Affairs for 

Volvo Group North America. 

The Volvo Group is one of the world’s leading manufacturers of trucks, buses, construction equipment, and drive systems for marine and industrial applications. 

When it comes to surface transportation, we build products that make roads and 

we build products that use them. In the United States, we produce heavy-duty 

trucks, engines, and transmissions under the Volvo and Mack brands, Volvo Construction Equipment, Volvo Penta marine engines, plus Prevost coaches and Nova 

transit buses. The United States is the largest single country market for the Group 

worldwide and since we subscribe to a ‘‘build where you sell’’ philosophy, we have 

more than 12,500 U.S. employees and nine manufacturing facilities in six states. We 

firmly believe that technology drives both improved safety and efficiency of the U.S. 

freight system and the Volvo Group has long been a leader in developing and implementing safety technologies without regulation on all our vehicles. Our goal is zero 

6 

accidents, which can only be achieved by close cooperation between public, private 

and non-profit stakeholders. 

The primary questions before the Subcommittee today are how technology can improve the safety and efficiency of our U.S. transportation system and whether the 

government is helping or hindering the adoption of new technologies. I am going to 

answer these questions primarily from a heavy-duty freight truck perspective because trucking delivers nearly 70 percent of the domestic tonnage and more than 

80 percent of the value of freight shipped in the United States. These questions 

come at a transitional time for the heavy-duty commercial vehicle industry because 

a great deal of vehicle technology is emerging to help mitigate accidents and increase on-time delivery of freight. The government can help by putting in place policies to ensure the safest and most efficient adoption of these technologies in vehicles. 

Let’s say you want to purchase a new heavy-duty Class 8 truck, and you want 

to take advantage of available technologies to help reduce the risk of an accident 

and ensure the freight is delivered on-time all the time. Today, there are at least 

four areas where newly developed technology will help you. 

1. The first is new safety technology on the vehicle itself such as electronic stability control (ESC), adaptive cruise control, rear view cameras, active braking 

and lane departure warning systems; 

2. The second is new technology to improve driver behavior such as remote monitoring of the quantity of hard braking applications, the speed traveled, or hours 

of operation on routes; 

3. The third area is new technology to predict the vehicle uptime such as remote 

vehicle monitoring and diagnosing to predict a failure and alert the driver or 

dispatcher to take action before it occurs; 

4. And fourth, new technology to dynamically plan the driver’s route to minimize 

stops or delays due to traffic congestion. 

You would specify all of these options to be installed on your new truck to meet 

your objective. (N.B. the National Highway Traffic Safety Agency (NHTSA) recently 

finalized a regulation that mandates ESC for new truck tractors. The rule is applicable to typical three-axle truck tractors manufactured on or after August 1, 2017 

and allows four years of lead time for all other truck tractors). 

The next step to further reduce the frequency of vehicle accidents, while also improving efficiency of the freight system is the adoption of technology that wirelessly 

connects trucks to each other, to other vehicles and transportation users, and to the 

infrastructure itself. We see great potential from both vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and 

vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) technologies. Volvo is the only truck member of the 

Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) participating in the 

newly formed V2I Deployment Coalition. We are also the first truck OEM to formally participate in the Crash Avoidance Metrics Partnership (CAMP) V2I consortium, whose mission is to assist the U.S. Department of Transportation in developing, evaluating and testing V2I applications to enhance safety, mobility, and environmental sustainability. The protocols for V2V and V2I applications are supported 

by the dedicated short range communications (DSRC) standards and operating in 

the licensed 5.9 GHz band of the radio frequency spectrum. With communications 

occurring ten times per second, it is critical that these messages be free of any signal interference. The Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and 

the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) are professional international organizations that set standards for these communication protocols. DSRC standards are 

largely mature, but are in a revision phase prior to NHTSA issuing a draft rulemaking that will mandate DSRC for light duty vehicles later this year. For example, 

the IEEE 1609.2 standard that outlines security services needs a re-defining of the 

data structures and encoding. The SAE J2735 message set dictionary is currently 

being finalized. The SAE J2945.0 and J2945.1 standards that specify the on-board 

minimum performance requirements for V2V safety systems are expected to be published later this year. These examples show that solutions are coming to address 

concerns regarding security/privacy, positioning, and scalability, to name a few. 

The government got it right when in 1999 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had the vision to set aside and protect the 5.9 GHz frequency spectrum 

for only safety related communication. However, in 2013, the FCC began exploring 

the possibility of using the 5.9 GHz spectrum to also support unlicensed Wi-Fi users 

and the coexistence of Wi-Fi and vehicle safety communications on the same spectrum. Two proposals to share the spectrum using different access mechanisms have 

been developed; however, no consensus position was reached. The concern is that 

by allowing other technologies to be shared on the same spectrum, it could create 

7 

a lag or latency in sending critical and lifesaving communication signals. Therefore, 

we join with the automotive industry, ITS America, and others in opposing S. 424, 

the Wi-Fi Innovation Act that would open up the 5.9 GHz frequency spectrum to 

Wi-Fi access for non-safety and other applications such as entertainment and advertising. Passage of this legislation is premature as the automotive, Wi-Fi and transportation safety communities work with the FCC, NHTSA, and the Department of 

Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) 

to explore whether a technical solution exists that would not compromise the opportunity to save lives. 

To clarify how this works, let me provide an example: a Vehicle to Vehicle (V2V) 

safety message may be something as simple as vehicle #1 (a loaded tractor-trailer 

operated by a professional commercial driver) approaching a signal intersection that 

is green, but the view of oncoming vehicles is blocked by a building. Using a DSRC 

based V2V application, it is possible to alert the truck driver of an oncoming vehicle 

#2 that is not slowing down for his/her red light, and the system alert will allow 

the collision to be avoided. Furthermore, there are opportunities to integrate this 

alert with the vehicle braking system to achieve partial automation to enhance safety. If there is any latency in that signal because of interference from (e.g.) a WiFi user watching a video, the accident likely would not be avoided. Consider how 

such risks can multiply exponentially in situations involving not just two vehicles 

in an intersection, but hundreds of vehicles moving through a heavily congested 

area. For this reason, until a solution is found for spectrum sharing of the 5.9 GHz 

frequency, we want the spectrum to remain dedicated for safety related applications 

only. 

Getting back to that next technology—the V2V and V2I connected vehicle technology—to further improve safety and efficiency in our transportation system, let 

me share an example of a Vehicle to Infrastructure (V2I) message that could greatly 

improve safety and freight efficiency. Truck inspections play an important role in 

maintaining safety. However stopping along the interstate to wait in long lines at 

weigh stations negatively impacts fuel efficiency and the environment, increases 

driver fatigue, and causes potential delivery delays. To avoid these disadvantages, 

the Volvo Group has already demonstrated technology using V2I communications 

protocols from the truck to the weigh station here in the U.S that allows moving 

trucks to wirelessly communicate their safety and maintenance credentials to inspections stations—keeping them moving and allowing authorities to focus on the 

condition of trucks that haven’t been validated in what was called Trusted Truck®. These messages coming from sensors on the vehicle can provide driver’s credentials 

such as if he is wearing a seatbelt or the ‘‘health’’ of a truck, such as if the tires 

are fully inflated or the overall weight is legal. Field testing such a system could 

further validate this concept. 

Another example of V2I technology’s potential contribution to play an important 

part of safer and efficient transportation is the Volvo Group’s experimental technology that allows a 360 degree scan of everything that happens in a truck’s environment. The truck analyzes the traffic around it, with the possibility to predict up 

to 5 seconds ahead what surrounding objects like people, cyclists and other vehicles 

will do—even when moving. If a collision is imminent, the driver is warned audibly 

and if the driver doesn’t stop the truck, the truck brakes for him or her. By alerting 

the driver of risks and, when needed taking control of the vehicle, the system helps 

eliminate human error and further mitigates the risk of accidents. 

I’ve told you about newly available technology and I have given you a look into 

the potential of connected vehicles. Let me end with what is perhaps the final frontier—automated or autonomous driving technologies. That is, using the connected 

vehicle technology fused with on-board collision avoidance technology. NHTSA has 

defined this as Level 3 in its criteria for Driving Automation. With many OEMs 

touting some version of this technology in the works, trucks equipped with autonomous driving technology seem to be the ‘‘talk of the town’’ in our industry. 

Volvo Group believes that vehicle automation has significant potential to improve 

traffic safety and transport efficiency while reducing the environmental and other 

societal costs. It also has the potential to increase road capacity with limited investment in road construction as more trucks could travel safely within shorter driving 

distances. Given the ‘‘high tech’’ character of trucks equipped with autonomous driving technology, and the fact even a so-called ‘‘autonomous truck’’ will still need a 

human driver for the foreseeable future, it may even lure younger drivers to an industry sorely lacking drivers. As an OEM with a global presence and many product 

areas, the Volvo Group sees potential for autonomous driving technologies for many 

types of transportation scenarios and application areas. 

Perhaps you have driven a car with adaptive cruise control or ACC? It is where 

you take a ‘‘leap of faith’’ by allowing the car’s automation technology to slow itself 

8 

if the distance set between you and another car becomes too close. We have the 

same adaptive cruise control technology in our heavy-duty trucks. Cooperative 

Adaptive Cruise Control (C–ACC), Adaptive Cruise Control married with vehicle 

connectivity technology, also called ‘‘platooning,’’ is an early application of automation that we believe will have a positive impact on safety, reduce road surface usage, 

improve traffic flow, as well as provide a significant potential to reduce fuel consumption. Full-scale experiments indicate that platooning reduces fuel consumption 

for long haul transports by approximately 10 percent over a complete transport mission due to reduced air drag. 

Future development will continue with vehicles equipped with autonomous driving technologies to be confined to operating in areas at low speed as an important 

first step towards higher degree of automation. Full automation and operating at 

higher speeds on public roads will take longer and need more research. Research 

needs to be performed in close collaboration with governmental entities in order to 

handle legal issues and public acceptance. Vehicle connectivity (V2X) will increase 

the performance of existing and future safety systems and is a prerequisite for vehicle automation; also, collaboration is necessary to agree on standards and implementation roadmaps. The technical solutions and advanced concepts for both V2X networks and integration of autonomous technologies are being conceptualized by researchers around the world. The U.S. could take a leading position in this field with 

more robust research and development funding for academia and the private sector. 

A challenge for us as a U.S. manufacturer is that different states are developing 

different rules and regulations to promote autonomous vehicle testing, but a national standard is needed as our vehicles travel across all state lines. For example, 

there are regulations regarding the allowable distance to follow a truck on public 

roadways that need to be changed to allow for further testing and demonstration. 

Clear, precise and thoughtful definitions must be provided. In this brave new world 

of ‘‘automation,’’ careful consideration must be given when writing new regulations 

for this area. Using generic terms like ‘‘driver’’, ‘‘control’’, or even ‘‘system’’ in regulations can create confusion and misinterpretation. Additionally, regulations written 

when trucks were not as ‘‘smart’’ as they are today can have a drag on adoption. 

There are inconsistent state laws for axle loading that prevents the wider adoption 

of 6x2 liftable axle configurations. The required position of marker lights at the rear 

of a trailer conflicts with the aerodynamic position of a boat tail is another such 

example 

Volvo Group and the California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology 

(PATH) are in the process of implementing a two-truck platoon at slow speeds that 

will be extended to three trucks in 2016. These trucks leverage the V2V messages 

in addition to forward-looking sensors, using radar plus a camera, to help maintain 

constant clearance and dynamically harmonize cruising speeds. The SAE standards 

organization is working to develop and harmonize the message sets and protocols 

together with the European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI). 

We are interested in developing technologies for connected and automated driving 

because of their potential to enhance safety, environmental efficiency, and productivity that are paramount to us and our customers. This may substantially change 

how the traffic system and the vehicles are designed, both in urban and extra-urban 

environments. With these technologies in widespread use, we will be able to more 

efficiently use the available road space to increase mobility and transportation efficiency. This will truly support sustainable development in the face of growing population and transportation needs. 

I’ve mentioned several times that a faster rate of adoption of these technologies 

will help meet our overall goals, but they will only be achieved if the customer can 

make a business case for their purchase. Today there is a 12 percent Federal Excise 

Tax (FET) on the purchase price of each new Class 8 heavy-duty truck. As advanced 

technologies are added to trucks and the purchase price increases, this FET becomes 

more onerous. If we eliminated that FET, and offset it with a higher fuel tax, it 

would encourage faster integration of vehicles with new technologies on our roads. 

In the face of either stagnating or uncertain funding for our U.S. surface transportation systems, it is the adoption of these new areas of technologies that will allow 

us to move increasing amounts of freight for a growing population. The technology 

will help ease congestion on the roads, but it won’t solve all our freight capacity 

problems and doesn’t let Congress off the hook to do its job of providing Federal 

funding to maintain and grow the overall infrastructure. 

The last major transportation reauthorization, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 

21st Century (MAP–21), was an important step in implementing key surface transportation policy reforms. However, infrastructure investment must be considered as 

a long-term strategic objective. The Volvo Group believes that a full six year, wellfunded reauthorization is needed to address the persistent challenges that are alVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:59 May 04, 2016 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\99958.TXT JACKIE
9 

ready well-documented and recognized as problems facing our transportation system. We are encouraged by the recent action of the Environment & Public Works 

Committee to pass the DRIVE Act and stand ready to work with the Commerce, 

Science, and Transportation Committee on its portion of the Senate’s reauthorization bill this year. 

Transportation moves our economy, and we need every sector of our economy 

functioning to maintain growth and remain competitive globally. A strong infrastructure has a direct and vital impact on America’s competitiveness. Technological 

innovations in the trucking industry can not only improve safety, but can also improve the efficiency and productivity of the network. The Federal Government 

should continue to work collaboratively with the industry to ensure that these innovations are accepted in the market. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, 

and I will be happy to respond to any questions. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you. 

Mr. Misener, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF PAUL E. MISENER, VICE PRESIDENT, 

GLOBAL PUBLIC POLICY, AMAZON.COM 

Mr. MISENER. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for having 

me. 

Amazon began selling online 20 years ago this month, in July 

1995. Our challenge was to create at scale a new form of 

warehousing, where truckloads of pallets of goods would be received and stored, but, instead of newly assembled big pallets being 

periodically trucked out to retail stores, we would ship brown boxes 

via carriers directly to customers. Thus, we developed pallet-in/boxout. At first, the sales through our website were only at retail, but 

now third-party sellers are responsible for 40 percent of all the 

units sold through Amazon, and many of our services—and many 

use our services to warehouse and fulfill orders of their goods. So, 

now we receive not just pallets of goods, we often—also receive 

small brown boxes to be stored, waiting for a customer to place an 

order for the goods. In sum, our warehouses, which we call Fulfillment Centers, now support box-in and box-out. 

Last December, Time magazine produced a brief video illustrating this process. And thank you, Madam Chair, for showing it 

here today. It begins deep inside a truck trailer parked at the loading dock at one of our warehouses, looking backward as the trailer 

door is opened. 

[Video presentation.] 

Mr. MISENER. There is sound for this. There we go. Thank you. 

After we receive an item, it is stored, awaiting a customer order. 

Those orange things are robots. They move shelves that weigh up 

to 750 pounds. 

Once a customer orders an item, it is retrieved and sent for packing, and then it is loaded on a truck for shipment. 

While we continue to improve the efficiency of operations within 

our facilities, we also have developed and invested heavily in a 

more efficient way to hand off boxes to the U.S. Postal Service. 

Rather than give the UPS—USPS an unsorted stack of boxes, 

we’ve begun operating over 15 so-called Sortation Centers that provide the USPS groups of boxes all going to roughly the same location. This arrangement, as well as Amazon’s package volume, benefits the USPS by letting it make better use of its facilities, equipment, and personnel without incurring the costs of building additional capacity in its upstream logistics network. 

10 

But, of course, we and our partners, and ultimately our customers, need government to keep up by providing adequate funding, innovative policies, and balanced regulation. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify. I look forward to your 

questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Misener follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PAUL MISENER, VICE PRESIDENT, GLOBAL PUBLIC POLICY, AMAZON.COM

Thank you, Chairwoman Fischer and Ranking Member Booker. My name is Paul 

Misener, and I am Amazon’s Vice President for Global Public Policy. Transformative 

innovations in commercial transportation technology are dramatically improving the 

way American consumers buy and receive goods, but the private sector cannot make 

all of the necessary improvements; government needs to keep up. Thank you for 

your attention to this important topic; for calling this hearing; and for inviting me 

to testify. 

As familiar as the Amazon.com website may be, the physical infrastructure and 

transportation operations that support the delivery of physical products ordered 

through it are less well known. Some of that infrastructure and operations—such 

as within our warehouses—is completely controlled by Amazon; some of it is shared 

with third parties, such as parcel carriers, with which we work closely; and some 

of it is beyond our control, such as the construction and maintenance of public highways and bridges. All of it is necessary, however, to support how American consumers shop online. 

Amazon first began selling online 20 years ago this month, in July 1995. By that 

time, other companies already had perfected large-scale warehousing designed to 

support networks of physical retail stores. In their model, warehouses are designed 

to receive, from suppliers, truckloads of goods, usually stacked on pallets easily 

moved by forklifts. Inside the warehouses, the pallet loads—for example, one pallet 

of light bulbs, another of staplers, and another of printer paper—would be disassembled, and the goods stored on shelves, awaiting distribution to physical stores in the 

region. Periodically, perhaps daily or weekly, and based on the inventory needs of 

individual stores, a new truckload of pallets would be assembled for delivery, perhaps with one of the pallets carrying, among many other things, two dozen 

lightbulbs, three staplers, and two boxes of printer paper. In sum: pallet in and pallet out. 

Our challenge at Amazon was to create at scale a new form of warehousing, 

where truckloads of pallets of goods would be received and stored, but instead of 

newly assembled big pallets being periodically trucked out to retail stores, we would 

ship out little brown boxes via carriers directly to customers. To meet this challenge 

efficiently, we needed to create a new kind of warehouse infrastructure that was 

highly reliant on computer technology and automation. For large items, such as a 

washing machine, we still needed to handle them individually, but for relatively 

small items—which comprise the vast majority of the items we sell—we developed 

elaborate conveyor systems which can whisk items quickly through a warehouse 

from where they are stored to other locations where they can be boxed and loaded 

into a carrier’s truck. Thus we developed at scale, pallet in, box out. 

At first, the sales through our website were only retail, meaning that we had 

bought the goods ourselves and then sold them to our buyer customers, i.e., consumers. But in order to increase the selection of products for our buyer customers, 

we invited a new class of customers to sell through our website. These seller customers, through what became known as the Amazon Marketplace, have become a 

very important part of our customer experience, and currently are responsible for 

40 percent of all the units sold through Amazon. Many of these seller customers now 

also use our services to warehouse and fulfill orders of their goods. Through this 

service, known as Fulfillment by Amazon, we now receive not just pallets of goods, 

we often also receive little brown boxes, to be stored, waiting for a customer to place 

an order for the goods. In sum, our warehouses—which we call ‘‘fulfillment centers’’—now support box in, box out. 

There are three particularly transformative aspects of our fulfillment center technology. The first is random placement of items. Take, for example, a teddy bear. A 

teddy bear is not stored on a shelf labeled ‘‘Teddy Bears’’ or ‘‘Stuffed Animals’’ or 

even ‘‘Toys.’’ It is placed among other completely unrelated items, such as a 

Cuisinart product. This process, by which products are stored anywhere within our 

fulfillment centers is called, appropriately, ‘‘random stow.’’ But although it might 

11 

seem haphazard as well as random, it is not. This process, carefully monitored by 

our computer systems, allows us, following a customer order, to find the most efficient path for that item to travel from where it is stored to the place where it is 

boxed for shipment. 

The second aspect to note is the extensive conveyor system, which I mentioned 

before. Much of this automation was designed specifically for our kind of operations, 

at large scale. Our fulfillment centers are indeed very large: many exceed one million square feet and, with mezzanine floor space included, some contain 59 football 

fields of floor area under one roof. At these sizes, it is essential for efficiency and 

customer delivery speed that items can move within the building at high speed, 

hence the extensive use of conveyor technology. 

Lastly, there are squat mobile robots from Amazon Robotics that carry shelves 

around the fulfillment center floor. A natural extension of our conveyor automation, 

these robots greatly increase the speed of order fulfillment for our customers. They 

each weigh 320 pounds and can lift 750 pounds—something like an NFL lineman— 

and we now have more than 15,000 operating in 10 fulfilment centers across the 

United States. Another kind of robot we use is called ‘‘Robo-Stow’’ which, at over 

five tons, the size of a male elephant, is Earth’s largest robot arm. This machine 

allows us to move items quickly between floors in our buildings. 

The highly-automated kind of fulfillment center is known as ‘‘sortable,’’ because 

it is designed to quickly sort items and, if there are multiple items in a customer 

order, to combine them into a single box. Another kind of fulfillment center—designed to handle larger items—is called ‘‘non-sort.’’ In total, we have over 50 fulfillment centers throughout the United States, and each generation of fulfillment center is more technically sophisticated than the prior. Ten of our eighth generation 

fulfillment centers are operating already, and the first of our ninth generation is 

under construction in Kent, Washington. 

We are continuing to improve the efficiency of our operations within our facilities 

but, of course, the speed of customer order delivery also depends on how quickly ordered goods move from our fulfillment centers to our customers, so we also are 

working to improve efficiencies outside these buildings. One way, as I recently described to the Committee, is package delivery by drone, in the future Prime Air 

service. Drone deliveries not only require innovative aviation technologies and government approvals, but also meeting logistical challenges within our fulfillment centers. 

We also have developed a more efficient way to hand off boxes to the U.S. Postal 

Service. Rather than give the USPS an unsorted stack of boxes, some bound for Nebraska and others destined for New Jersey, we now are sorting boxes and consolidating them into sets of boxes heading for customers in the same particular area 

of the country. To help do this, we have begun operating over 15 so-called ‘‘sortation 

centers’’ that provide the USPS groups of boxes, all going to roughly the same location. So, in addition to ‘‘pallet in, box out,’’ and ‘‘box in, box out,’’ we now are providing what amounts to pallet or box in, and box or pallet out. 

Amazon has invested heavily in building these sortation centers at locations optimized for injecting packages deep into the USPS network. For deliveries coming 

from Amazon sortation centers, the USPS provides only final mile delivery services: 

Amazon arranges for transportation from our fulfillment centers; for sortation at 

sortation centers; and for delivery of sorted boxes to USPS facilities. Individual 

USPS facilities receive these packages in the early morning, so that postal carriers 

can deliver them the same day. In a single day, a typical Amazon sortation center 

will sort tens of thousands of packages, speeding up delivery times as well as providing later daily cutoff times for customer orders. 

USPS and Amazon have worked together to create innovative technology and develop efficient processes, including improvements in labelling, to help the Postal 

Service reduce the costs of providing final mile services. This arrangement and 

Amazon’s package volume benefit the USPS by letting it make better use of its facilities, equipment, and personnel throughout the week and provide final mile delivery without incurring the costs of building additional capacity in its upstream logistics network. As on other days, Sunday shipments arrive at USPS post offices presorted and ready for delivery and, because Amazon provides destination address information in advance, the USPS has improved efficiency on Sundays by operating 

only from select hub locations and tailoring routes to actual requirements. 

Upstream of our fulfillment centers, we are working to ensure that goods can easily flow into our warehouse network, including via U.S. ports on both the Pacific 

and Atlantic coasts, and via rail across the country. Our work and partnerships with 

private commercial infrastructure and transportation providers of multiple modes 

will only increase in the coming years. 

12 

But, of course, our partners, we, and ultimately our customers, need government 

help to maintain adequate public infrastructure and provide appropriate regulation. 

For example, the productivity of U.S. ports is a significant concern. Ocean carriers 

have built larger ships, but the U.S. west coast ports have not improved their 

throughput and thus have fallen behind the larger ports in the world, and will continue to do so, especially as U.S. exports continue to grow. 

There are three examples of government help that deserve brief mention here. 

The first is the biggest and perhaps hardest: America’s public transportation infrastructure simply needs investment. Thank you, Chairwoman Fischer, for your personal attention to transportation infrastructure funding. As you have pointed out, 

our highways and bridges are in dire need of investment. Like other American businesses, Amazon and our customers depend on an efficient and reliable transportation system, and we agree with your belief in the importance of long-term transportation policy and long-term reauthorization. Second, we need innovative policies 

for developing the future transportation infrastructure. A bill sponsored by the 

Ranking Member, Senator Booker, as well as Senators Murray and Cantwell from 

Amazon’s home state, is one such innovative proposal, for multimodal freight policy. 

Lastly, as several of the carriers we work with have pointed out, permitting the use 

of slightly longer twin highway trailers would dramatically decrease the number of 

truck trips and miles driven. Amazon believes that such efficiency improvements 

should be embraced. Moreover, as the carriers note, research indicates that, if 

weight limits are maintained, the longer trailers actually would improve their handing properties; a finding supported by experience in Florida and North Dakota. 

In conclusion, commercial entities are deploying technologies to transform and improve the transportation infrastructure of the United States, and recent innovations 

already are providing impressive efficiency gains, improving the way American consumers buy and receive goods. But, to keep up with these advances, government 

needs to provide adequate funding, innovative policies, and balanced regulation. 

Thank you again for inviting me to testify; I look forward to your questions. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Fox, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF GREGORY C. FOX, EXECUTIVE VICE 

PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS, BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY 

Mr. FOX. Thank you very much for the opportunity. 

My name is Greg Fox. I’m Executive Vice President of Operations for BNSF Railway. What I’d like to do today is really walk 

through how BNSF is utilizing technology to improve safety and efficiency of our network. 

BNSF, as hopefully most of you know, is a large western railroad, over 32,000 route miles and 47,000 employees. My team runs 

the railroad. And, in my 31 years at the railroad, I’ve seen safety 

improve, year after year. 

In 2014, BNSF and the rail industry achieved best-ever safety results. And you can see the trend that we’ve achieved over the last 

decade. Technology has clearly played a role in this success. While 

technology is the focus of today’s hearing, investment in rail infrastructure and an inclusive safety culture for all BNSF employees 

are critical contributions, as well, to our safety results. 

Investment in maintenance and renewal of the railroad, the orange bars that you see on this chart, is also an important piece of 

safety. BNSF invests significant amounts of this kind of capital 

into our network to contribute directly to safe operations as well 

as to ensure reliability of our network for our customers. This is 

the largest component of our $6 billion of capital spend in 2015. 

The Nation’s rail operations are basically a 140,000-mile outdoor 

production line. This scope and complexity means that infrastructure and equipment sometimes fails or that human error can occur. 

Because of this, BNSF focuses on a risk-based initiative for all asVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:59 May 04, 2016 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\GPO\DOCS\99958.TXT JACKIE
13 

pects of our operations. This slide shows the categories of incident 

causes and examples of the kinds of countermeasures that we put 

in place to reduce risk. They’re a combination of critical safety 

processes as well as technology. 

While you’re very familiar with the implementation of Positive 

Train Control, I’d now like to share a brief video that illustrates 

the numerous other inspection and detection technologies that we 

deploy on the railroad to produce safety benefits. 

[Video presentation.] 

Mr. FOX. These technologies include track geometry vehicles. 

These vehicles utilize electronic and optical technology to monitor 

track geometry or the relationship with the rails at one point or 

over a distance; rail defect detection systems that utilize ultrasonic 

technology to detect internal rail defects; wheel temperature detectors that use infrared technology to identify wheel bearing fatigue; 

and machine visioning systems that inspect freight cars for defects 

in passing trains. 

BNSF is also now deploying unmanned aircraft systems, or 

drones, for supplemental visual track and bridge inspections in a 

variety of conditions. Also, earlier this year, we were one of three 

companies awarded the Pathfinder Program status from FAA for 

extended-range track integrity flights. The DOT has been a valuable partner in advancing the use of drone technology in our safety 

program. 

All of these technologies, as you might expect, generate a tremendous amount of inspection data. Leveraging this data through advanced analytics is where we’re headed next. BNSF is currently 

working with IBM on a big data advanced analytics initiative to 

take the information that we already use for—to detect safety 

standard deviations, to ultimately drive further understanding of 

the factors that cause these deviations in the first place. Our goal 

is to drive proactive maintenance practices that ultimately prevent 

derailments from occurring. 

Let’s take a look at one example. I’ll walk you through how we’re 

using advanced analytics to improve equipment—rail equipment 

safety. You saw the equipment detectors in the video earlier. BNSF 

currently has over 2,000 trackside detectors located along our 

32,000-mile network that continually monitor the overall equipment health of passing trains using a combination of thermal, 

acoustics, visioning systems, and other technologies. Today, these 

systems identify defective equipment and actions taken to address 

these defects as they’re identified. Our goal is to move from—to a 

more proactive and preventative type of response. We will go from 

focusing on absolute alarms really to understanding composite 

alarms that tell us when a combination of factors have been combined in such a way that an unsafe condition could occur. Big data 

analytics will allow us to monitor equipment health over time, over 

geography, and across railroads, and ultimately assist in extending 

asset life, improving capacity and safety. 

As you can see, the current breadth of technology and the potential here is tremendous as long as we have a regulatory framework 

that encourages innovation. The technologies and the advanced 

analytics themselves are very complex and evolving at a very fast 

14 

pace. This means that the regulatory focus should be on safety outcomes that they focus on producing. 

One of the most significant things Congress can do for us is ensure that we have the right overall regulatory framework for railroads. If it does, the rail industry will continue to deploy technology in support of risk reduction and invest adequately in infrastructure maintenance and renewal. 

Thanks for your opportunity today to testify. I look forward to 

your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fox follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GREGORY C. FOX, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, 

OPERATIONS, BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY

Good morning, Chairwoman Fischer, Ranking Member Booker, and members of 

the Subcommittee. My name is Greg Fox and I am the Executive Vice President of 

Operations for BNSF Railway Company (BNSF). Thank you for inviting me today 

to share how BNSF uses technology to help drive risk reduction and continuous 

safety improvement on the railroad. As you can see from this slide, BNSF is a large 

Western Railroad with over 32,000 route miles operated and employing 47,000 employees. 

My team at BNSF, runs the railroad, and of all the things that go into running 

the railroad on a daily basis, safety is the most important thing we do. In my 31 

years at BNSF, I have seen the safety of our operations improve significantly. 


707GREG1.eps
15 

In 2014, BNSF and the rail industry achieved the best-ever safety results and has 

shown continuous improvement in safety over the past decade. Technology has 

played a significant role in this success. 

While technology is the focus of today’s hearing, investment in rail infrastructure 

and development of a Safety Culture of Commitment by all BNSF employees, are 

all critical elements of our approach to overall risk reduction. 


707GREG2.eps 707GREG3.eps
16 

With respect to investment, BNSF is investing record amounts of capital that contributes directly to operating a safe and efficient railroad, as well as ensuring that 

we’re positioned for growth with our customers. 

In 2015, BNSF announced a $6 billion capital investment plan, with the largest 

component allocated to renewal and maintenance of our network infrastructure and 

assets. This marks the third year in a row that BNSF has invested a record amount 

of capital back into our Network. 

The scope and complexity of the Nation’s rail operations—basically, operation of 

a 140,000 mile outdoor ‘‘production line’’, means that infrastructure and equipment 

sometimes fail, or that human error can occur. 

Because of this, BNSF has a broad-based risk-reduction framework that we utilize 

to reduce risk in all aspects of our operations. This slide shows categories of incident 

causes and examples of the kinds of countermeasures we have in place. These countermeasures include a combination of both critical safety processes as well as technology. 

[Shows BNSF Video] 

While the members of this subcommittee are familiar with the enormous industry 

undertaking to implement Positive Train Control technology, I would like now to 

share a brief video that illustrates the numerous other technologies deployed on the 

railroad to reduce risk and drive continuous safety improvement. You have heard 

less about these technologies, but each produces significant safety benefits. These 

technologies include: 

• Track geometry vehicles that utilize sophisticated electronic and optical measuring devices to monitor all aspects of our track infrastructure 

• Rail defect detection systems that utilize ultrasonic technology to detect internal rail defects 

• Wheel temperature detectors, using infrared technology, to identify wheel bearing fatigue 

• And, Machine Visioning systems to inspect freight cars in passing trains for defects BNSF is also now preparing to deploy Unmanned Aircraft Systems 

(UAS)—drones—for supplemental visual track & bridge inspections in a variety 

of conditions. Also, earlier this year, we were one of three companies awarded 

Pathfinder Program status by the FAA for extended track integrity flights. The 

FAA has been a valuable partner who has worked well with us to advance this 

game-changing UAS technology. 


707GREG4.eps
17 

Leveraging the tremendous amount of data generated by all these technologies is 

where we are headed next. Advanced Analytics covers a broad spectrum of activities, but is aimed at drawing insights and value from large amounts of data, with 

the ultimate goal to improve decision making. 

BNSF is currently working with IBM on a ‘‘Big Data’’ Advanced Analytics initiative to take the information that we already use to detect deviations from safety 

standards to ultimately using this same data to drive further understanding of the 

factors that cause these deviations in the first place. 

Our goal is to drive proactive maintenance practices that ultimately prevent incidents from occurring in the first place. 


707GREG5.eps 707GREG6.eps
18 

Let me quickly walk you through one example of how BNSF is utilizing advanced 

analytics to improve safety. 

BNSF currently has over 2,000 equipment detectors located track side along our 

32,000 mile network. These equipment detectors continually monitor the overall 

equipment health of passing trains, utilizing a combination of Thermal, Acoustic, Vision Systems, and other technologies. 

Today, these systems identify defective equipment and action is then taken to address these defects as they are identified. In order to move from today’s reactionarytype of environment to more of a proactive and preventative response, our Advanced 

Analytics initiative is combining all this equipment health information into a single 

source and we’re then utilizing it to predict future component and equipment fatigue 

and failures. Our ultimate goal is to improve railroad safety by leveraging this data 

to reduce service interruptions and derailments. 

Conclusion 

As you can see, the current breadth of technology and its potential going forward 

is tremendous as long as we have a regulatory environment that encourages innovation. I would respectfully suggest that safety outcomes should be the focus when government regulation is necessary, not the technologies and the analytics themselves, 

because those are complex and evolving at a very fast pace. 

Ultimately, the rail industry will continue to deploy technology in support of risk 

reduction, and ensuring railroads can continue to earn the revenues necessary to 

invest adequately in infrastructure, maintenance and technology will be one of the 

most significant things that Congress can do. Thank you for the opportunity for 

BNSF to testify today and I look forward to responding to your questions. 

ATTACHMENT


707PPT1.eps
19 


707PPT2.eps 707PPT3.eps
20 


707PPT4.eps 707PPT5.eps
21 


707PPT6.eps 707PPT7.eps
22 


707PPT8.eps 707PPT9.eps
23 


707PPT10.eps 707PPT11.eps
24 


707PPT12.eps
25 


707PPT13.eps
26 


707PPT14.eps 707PPT15.eps
27 


707PPT16.eps 707PPT17.eps
28 


707PPT18.eps 707PPT19.eps
29 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Mr. Fox. 

Mr. Christensen, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. CHRISTENSEN, 

SENIOR EXECUTIVE LEAD, SUPPLY CHAIN OPTIMIZATION, 

PORT OF LONG BEACH 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Madam Chairwoman, members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. 

Technology will help us address the precedented challenges that 

are facing our industry, which I believe are as revolutionary as the 

advent of containerization was, 50 years ago. Big ships and ocean 

carrier alliances are game-changers. I’ll spend the next few minutes talking about specific technologies and strategies that we’re 

implementing to meet these challenges. 

Modernizing our infrastructure is the first strategy with—and no 

port in the United States is investing more than the Port of Long 

Beach through our $4 billion capital improvement program. Our 

$1.3 billion Middle Harbor Terminal is the port of the future. It’s 

the greenest, most sustainable container cargo terminal in the 

United States that can accommodate the world’s biggest, greenest 

ships up to 22,000 20-foot equivalent units, or TEUs. Middle Harbor will strengthen our ability to compete against Canada and 

Mexico for the trade that sends cargo to every congressional district in the United States and supports a million and a half American jobs. 

The terminal—this terminal by itself would be the fourth-largest 

port in the Nation, and it will boost the capacity at the Port of 

Long Beach by 20 percent. Longshore jobs at the terminal will also 

be modernized and will shift to technical occupations, with 

longshore labor actually increasing over current levels when the 

terminal reaches its full capacity. Now, these advanced technologies will help improve efficiency and reduce air pollution, but 

they will also demand a great deal more electricity. So, how will 

we deal with this increased demand for reliable electric power? The 

answer is our Energy Island Initiative, a technology-driven strategy for transitioning energy at the port to resilient and sustainable 

self-generation systems and renewable power sources. 

So, I’ve talked about the infrastructure, or let’s call it the hardware, strategy, but what about the software? Well, it will not be 

possible to meet the challenges we face without changing the way 

the port operates. We have joined our neighbor, the Port of Los Angeles, in a Federal Maritime Commission-sanctioned Joint Port Initiative that will be aimed at enhancing the velocity and the reliability of shipments that come through the San Pedro Bay Gateway. And we’re making progress on this active—with the active involvement of stakeholders, which include the full range of beneficial cargo owners, ocean carriers, marine terminal operators, licensed motor carriers that dray this cargo to destination, chassis 

pool operators, our railroad partners, labor, and management. 

Now, a few things have already come out of this Joint Port Initiative. The supply chain optimization will largely be data-driven. 

The current highly proprietary and siloed supply chain suffers from 

a inadequate data-sharing. The San Pedro Bay Port authorities are 

examining new roles to gather, filter, and distribute reliable data, 

30 

to the benefit of the entire supply chain. Promising entrepreneurial 

software is also appearing and holding great potential. One example is software—is a software called ‘‘CargoMatic,’’ operates on a 

smartphone. It’s an Uber-like application that’s being used as a 

pilot study in the San Pedro Bay. And, under their systems, 

drayage truck drivers move imported containers from the ports to 

inland destinations, much as a taxi driver would move passengers 

from an airport. 

U.S. Department of Transportation’s Freight Advanced Travel 

Information System, or FRATIS, as we call it, is also showing great 

promise in transferring information between real—in realtime between marine terminals and drayage trucking operations. So, stay 

tuned for much more that will be coming from this Joint Port Initiative. 

In conclusion, our supply chain optimization efforts are all heavily reliant on technology in order to meet our objectives of not only 

good, but world-class, velocity and reliability. As local public agencies, the San Pedro Bay Ports are shifting from our traditional 

landlord role to one of active supply chain participant. We hope to 

see the Federal Government support us in this new role by engaging with us and in setting effective goods movement policy that recognizes the value of seaports and by creating infrastructure and 

energy funding that support the land and the waterside investments required to accommodate much needed growth in international trade. 

We look forward to working with our Federal partners in this exciting venture. Thank you for attention. I will look forward to answering any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Christensen follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. CHRISTENSEN, SENIOR EXECUTIVE LEAD, SUPPLY CHAIN OPTIMIZATION, PORT OF LONG BEACH

Madam Chairwoman, Members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity 

to speak before the Committee today at this important hearing. 

The Port of Long Beach has long stood at the forefront of innovation in international trade and transportation. From the rise of containerization, through the 

growth of Pacific Rim commerce and now into the huge steps forward in ship capacity, facility modernization, and advanced technology, Long Beach has been at the 

epicenter of change. 

As a premier, deep-water port, Long Beach strives to be a leader in goods movement safety, supply chain optimization and environmental stewardship. In service 

to its neighboring community, its city, its region, the State of California, and the 

entire United States, the Port of Long Beach has become a major economic engine. 

Now, together with our neighbor, the Port of Los Angeles, Long Beach is collaborating with our supply chain partners to further strengthen the ability of the ports 

to facilitate trade that benefits not only the region, but the entire United States. 

Cargo that moves through the Port of Long Beach sustains 30,000 jobs in Long 

Beach, 300,000 jobs in the Southern California region and 1.4 million jobs in the 

United States. Cargo hauled across the docks in Long Beach touches each and every 

congressional district in the U.S. 

At present, fast-changing economic realities in the shipping industry along with 

the advancement and application of technology are bringing leading seaports to the 

dawn of a new age of shipping. This age promises cleaner, more efficient and safer 

transportation of international trade, with exciting opportunities for growth and innovation. Technology is affecting all links in the trans-Pacific supply chain. 

Big Ship Era 

So exactly what are the changes to the shipping industry? It begins with the formation of international ocean shipping alliances and the size of the ships they are 

acquiring. These are some of the most significant developments in the maritime inVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:59 May 04, 2016 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\99958.TXT JACKIE
31 

dustry in decades. Until a few short years ago, the biggest ships calling at the Port 

of Long Beach could carry a maximum of 8,000 container units or TEUs. TEUs are 

the twenty-foot equivalent unit long cargo containers. These ships were already 

twice as big as the vessels able to fit through the old Panama Canal, which meant 

that trans-Pacific trade—the rapidly growing commerce between the U.S. and East 

Asia—came to West Coast ports like Long Beach. In fact, 40 percent of all imported 

containerized cargo moves through Long Beach and Los Angeles. 

But in 2012, the biggest container ship ever to call at a North American seaport 

came to Long Beach. That ship had a capacity of 14,000 TEUs. Ships of this size 

now regularly call in Long Beach and Los Angeles. These ships are already too big 

to pass through the expanded Panama Canal. In 2016, the expanded Panama Canal 

opens and will be able to handle vessels with capacities up to 13,000 TEUs. A 

14,000 TEU vessel is as long as the Empire State Building is tall, and as wide as 

the 10-lane 405 freeway in Southern California. And we expect to see further 

growth in ship sizes. Vessel technologies (hull design, hull coating, engine and propulsion technologies) have advanced at break-neck speed resulting in the delivery 

this year of Very-Large Container Vessels that carry over 20,000 TEUs. The advent 

of big ships has reduced the cost, the amount of fuel used, and the air pollution created in shipping each container. The four major international ocean shipping alliances have embraced this ‘‘big ship’’ strategy and have now captured over 90 percent of the worlds ocean-going containerized cargo trade. 

Larger ships, coupled with a new level of vessel-sharing dynamics created by the 

carrier alliances, have created congestion issues at most ports because the existing 

container terminals and operating practices are simply not geared to handle the discharge of containers from these vessels. To help deal with the impacts of these bigger ships and alliances, the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles sought and received permission from the Federal Maritime Commission to create a joint Supply 

Chain Optimization project. Supply Chain Optimization is an effort to find and implement ways to make the supply chain run more efficiently, maximizing velocity 

and reliability of goods movement through the San Pedro Bay gateway. The industry—accustomed to working in ‘‘silos’’ with minimal communication and information 

sharing—has responded enthusiastically and cooperatively. 

The ports’ joint effort started this March. Already, nearly a dozen meetings have 

been held. The list of stakeholder participants is all-inclusive across the industry, 

with a port executive-level steering committee, seven collaborative ‘‘Working 

Groups’’, and a stakeholder Core Advisory Group. These teams have identified new 

technology and data flow as major parts of the potential short-term and long-term 

solutions. And, as the supply chain runs more efficiently, one would expect to see 

environmental and economic benefits as well as increased job creation. 

The Supply Chain Optimization umbrella also includes the terminal efficiency 

strategies including advanced terminal operations systems and software, modernized terminal infrastructure and equipment, ‘‘peel-off’’ operations and on-dock rail 

optimization. Drayage trucking improvements include an interoperable chassis ‘‘pool 

of pools’’ and state-of-the-art traffic information systems. Other enhancements in ondock and near-dock rail operations, including short-haul rail, will be discussed as 

a means of improving the velocity of cargo flow through the San Pedro Bay and 

within Southern California. 

Supply Chain Optimization will be largely data-driven. The current highly-proprietary and ‘‘silo’ed’’ containerized marine cargo supply chain suffers from inadequate 

data sharing in terms of quantity, quality, and timeliness. The San Pedro Bay ports 

are examining new roles in gathering, filtering, and distributing supply chain data 

that will facilitate better terminal, drayage trucking, and rail operations along with 

greater levels of transparency. Information technologies will be key to this effort. 

Additionally, promising entrepreneurial software applications are already appearing 

and hold the potential for significant supply chain improvements. For instance, 

CargoMatic, an ‘‘Uber-like’’ application, is being used in a pilot study in the San 

Pedro Bay. Under their system, drayage truck drivers move imported containers 

from the ports to inland destinations in a highly-efficient manner much as a taxi 

moves passengers from an airport. Other software applications optimize the movements of empty containers and chassis by matching empty equipment with potential 

users of that equipment, avoiding costly and wasteful repositioning. And the U.S. 

Department of Transportation’s Freight Advanced Traveler Information System 

(FRATIS) has shown great promise in early trials in sharing critical information in 

real-time between marine terminal and drayage trucking operations. 

Middle Harbor Redevelopment 

When it comes to modernization to improve competitiveness, no port in the U.S. 

is investing as much as the Port of Long Beach. With a $4 billion capital improveVerDate Nov 24 2008 06:59 May 04, 2016 Jkt 075679 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\GPO\DOCS\99958.TXT JACKIE
32 

ment program this decade, the Port is making major investments in waterway, terminal, roadway, rail, security, and information technology infrastructure. For example, our $1.3 billion Middle Harbor Terminal Redevelopment’s first phase is being 

completed this summer, and when terminal operator Long Beach Container Terminal (LBCT) starts moving cargo across the docks in early 2016, it will mark Long 

Beach’s first foray into advanced terminal technology. 

Middle Harbor is the ‘‘Port of the Future’’—the greenest, most sustainable container-cargo terminal in the United States. The terminal is equipped with all electric, zero-emission cranes and cargo-handling equipment. Advanced technology incorporated into the terminal boosts the Port’s competitiveness in an age when seaports around North America are trying to protect their market share from capture 

by Canadian and Mexican ports. 

This terminal is not only big ship ready, it’s ‘‘biggest ship ready’’—with a wharf, 

crane and cargo-moving systems that can accommodate the world’s biggest, greenest 

ships up to 22,000 TEUs. Middle Harbor will allow the Port to strengthen its ability 

to compete for the trade that sustains jobs in Southern California. 

LBCT—the terminal operator—will start test operations later this year once the 

first phase of the project is completed, and ships will start calling at the new Middle 

Harbor terminal in early 2016. Ongoing construction of Middle Harbor is generating 

about 1,000 construction-related jobs. At full build-out in 2019, the terminal will be 

able to move more than 3 million TEUs of containerized cargo each year, and that 

trade will generate an additional 14,000 jobs in Southern California. That means 

that this terminal by itself would rank as the fourth-largest port in the Nation. The 

project is the most ambitious container terminal modernization ever undertaken by 

any port in the Nation. The new Middle Harbor terminal will boost the Port of Long 

Beach’s capacity by over 20 percent, adding not only significant numbers of new terminal jobs but also creating new categories of skilled terminal labor that will operate and maintain this groundbreaking technology. 

In addition to the Port’s considerable capital investment, LBCT is spending an- other $600 million on the equipment for this terminal. The Middle Harbor Redevelopment project is consolidating two aging terminals into one 304-acre mega-container terminal. When the entire 4,200-foot wharf is completed in 2019, the terminal 

will be able to simultaneously accommodate three ships as large as 22,000 TEUs. 

The rail yard on the terminal is increasing from 10,000 to 75,000 linear feet of 

track to vastly increase the share of on-dock rail to serve the terminal. Each ondock rail train takes hundreds of trucks off the road and speeds cargo to destinations throughout the Nation in the fastest and most efficient manner possible. 

All major buildings on the terminal will be Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) or ‘‘Green Building’’ certified in order to reduce power and 

water use, reuse materials, encourage use of low-emission vehicles by staff, and reduce water runoff. The North Operations/Information Technology Building, the first 

building to be completed on the site, has already received its LEED Gold Certification. 

Like the Very-Large Container Vessels it will service, Middle Harbor is a major 

leap forward in technology and Long Beach’s first automated terminal. At the new 

terminal, a crane operator at the controls of one of the world’s biggest ship-to-shore 

cranes—which can reach out to 180 feet—will take the cargo containers off the ship, 

two at a time, and place them on a platform. From there, the advanced technology 

places the containers on driverless electric vehicles that move the containers to the 

stacking cranes. These cranes automatically sort and stack the containers in highly 

dense rows. At the other end of the row, a person in the control room will lower 

the containers onto truck chassis via remote control. 

In the terminal’s battery exchange building, driverless vehicles will enter when 

directed by the terminals operating system and have their batteries replaced by robots as their batteries become depleted. 

Longshore labor will operate the cranes and the vehicles that move the containers 

from the stacks to the on-dock rail yard, and will plug in the refrigerated boxes in 

the reefer stacks. Technicians are also needed to keep the machines maintained. 

Long Beach Container Terminal is working with the longshore labor to provide 

training for these new jobs. Jobs at the terminal will shift to technical occupations, 

and the longshore union membership will perform this work. Due to increases in 

terminal capacity in the modernized Middle Harbor terminal, longshore labor is expected to increase over current levels when the terminal reaches full capacity. 

Of Long Beach’s six container terminals, Middle Harbor is the only one that is 

automated. Only one of the Port of Los Angeles’ eight container terminals is currently automated. By the time Middle Harbor is completed in 2019, it will have 

taken 15 years for planning, approvals, design and construction, and $1.3 billion in 

Port of Long Beach funding. 

33 

Automation is just one way that the Port of Long Beach is working to modernize 

and strengthen the Port’s competitiveness. For example, other terminals are raising 

and extending their water-side cranes, adding modern terminal equipment, upgrading operating systems, and dredging to accommodate the larger container ships. 

Road, bridges, and the rail system are all being modernized and expanded. With its 

$4 billion capital improvement program, the Port of Long Beach will be able to continue to attract the cargo that supports jobs both in Southern California, and across 

the U.S., including the jobs of the workers who move the cargo on the docks. 

Every element of the Port’s capital program utilizes technology to the maximum 

extent in its design, construction, and operation. New technologies are needed to 

keep pace with the larger ships, and improve productivity. Technologies big and 

small will help improve productivity and velocity. The advanced technologies that 

will help improve efficiency and reduce air pollution will move away from conventional fossil-fueled equipment and will demand a great deal more electricity. For example, shore-power systems that connect ships to land-side electricity have matured 

and are in widespread use in California, significantly reducing emissions for vessels 

at berth while at the same time controlling costs. And high-speed electric stacking 

cranes and battery-powered container movers will also add to the demand for electricity. This advanced technology will greatly add to the Port’s dependence on the 

grid for ample high-quality electric power. 

Energy Island 

In anticipation of the increasing demand for electricity, the Port in 2013 implemented a Port Energy Policy. And just as Long Beach’s 2005 Green Port Policy 

made it clear that environmental protection is a top priority at the Port, the new 

Energy Policy makes it clear that sustainable energy use is a top priority. We are 

committed with our customers and key stakeholders to deliver unprecedented energy conservation, operational efficiency and enterprise resiliency. 

We are now working on the next step. At his inaugural State of the Port address 

in January, Port of Long Beach CEO Jon Slangerup unveiled our Energy Island Initiative—a comprehensive strategy for transitioning energy at the Port to resilient 

and sustainable, self-generation systems and renewable power sources. Along with 

creating the ability for the Port to operate independently from the grid in times of 

emergency or other need, the initiative’s objectives include stabilizing power costs 

and increasing the competitive advantages of doing business at the Port of Long 

Beach. 

Energy Island captures a number of measures that Long Beach has already been 

developing, and it creates a framework for exploring the larger universe of possibilities to advance real energy solutions. 

Under the initiative, the Port has established five goals aimed at ensuring an 

ample supply of reliable electricity, alternative fuels and other energy sources as the 

Port moves toward near-zero-emissions operations. 

• Advance green power: The Port will pursue solar, wind, geothermal and the viability of tidal energy to generate its own electricity. Solar panels that provide 

a clean source of electricity are already a key feature of the Middle Harbor Terminal Redevelopment project and the Port’s new Maintenance Facility. 

• Use self-generated, distributed power with micro-grid connectivity: The ability 

to generate power independently of the grid is crucial to business continuity in 

the event of an emergency. Micro-grid controls that are connected to the grid 

also allow the Port to contribute to the regional power supply, help lower the 

city’s emissions, and supply power to vital services in an emergency. 

• Provide cost-effective alternative fueling options: The Port will explore options 

that include liquefied natural gas (LNG) as fuel for ships and locomotives, hydrogen generation, fuel cell technology and related infrastructure. This goal 

builds on the existing progress the Port has made under its Clean Trucks Program and Technology Advancement Program (TAP) to support drayage trucks 

that run on LNG, compressed natural gas (CNG), and hydrogen fuel cell technology. 

• Improve energy-related operational efficiencies: The Port will explore strategies 

for maximizing available energy resources, including upgrading equipment and 

consumption controls, offering energy-efficiency guidance and leveraging available incentives for operational efficiencies. 

• Attract new businesses, incubate transportation-oriented technology, create 

jobs, increase revenue and reduce costs: By advancing new technology and innovation that support the maritime, transportation and energy sectors, stimulating the economy is part and parcel of the Energy Island Initiative. In the 

area of innovation and job creation, the effort will build upon the Port’s existing 

34 

Technology Advancement Program for demonstrating promising new clean air 

technology, to accelerate the commercial availability of relevant and promising 

energy technologies. 

Transforming the Port into an ‘‘island’’ of renewable energy technologies and selfgeneration systems is expected to take about 10 years. The Middle Harbor terminal, 

which will operate almost entirely on electricity, is on track to become the world’s 

greenest marine container terminal and a model for cleaner seaport operations 

throughout the world. 

Taking a hard look at specific energy projects includes a comprehensive assessment of their feasibility. In each case, the Port will consider the potential benefits 

in a marine environment; capital and operational costs and benefits to the Port, the 

community and stakeholders; operational burdens on Port tenants; positive and negative environmental impacts; the need for additional infrastructure and related 

costs; and foreseeable technology improvements and obsolescence. 

Conclusion 

Technology touches every link in the marine cargo supply chain. Our Supply 

Chain Optimization efforts, Middle Harbor Redevelopment and related projects, and 

our Energy Island Initiative, are all reliant on technology, both ‘‘hardware’’ and 

‘‘software’’, in order to meet our objectives of greater containerized cargo velocity 

and reliability. As local governmental agencies, the San Pedro Bay ports are shifting 

from our traditional ‘‘landlord’’ role to one of an active supply chain participant. We 

hope to see the Federal Government support us in this new role by setting effective 

goods movement policy that recognizes the value of seaports and the economic engines they represent and by creating infrastructure and energy funding that supports land and water-side improvements needed to accommodate growth in international trade. 

We look forward to working with our Federal partners in this exciting venture. 

ATTACHMENT


707MIKE1.eps
35 


707MIKE2.eps 707MIKE3.eps
36 


707MIKE4.eps 707MIKE5.eps
37 


707MIKE6.eps 707MIKE7.eps
38 


707MIKE8.eps 707MIKE9.eps
39 


707MIKE10.eps 707MIKE11.eps
40 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you all very much. 

We will begin our round of questioning at this time. 

Ms. Alt, some research on the autonomous truck market estimates that, by 2020 to 2022, we’re going to see level–3 autonomous 

truck technologies introduced in certain states. And, at level 3, a 

driver is still required to be in the vehicle, but the truck can be 

switched into an autopilot mode when circumstances permit. When 

do you think that we’re going to see trucks equipped with that 

level-3 driving technology on American highways? And can you go 

into it a little bit more on how that all works? 

Ms. ALT. You said that you read something that it was going to 

be available in 2020? So, we are in—so, it’s 5 years from now. And 

you said ‘‘in certain states.’’ 

Senator FISCHER. Right. 

Ms. ALT. That’s possible. There are states that have more flexible 

laws to allow for testing. The challenge is, of course, the products 

we build go across the State, so we really need to have some sort 

of a Federal standard. 

The technology’s actually leading the society. I mean, the technology for two vehicles to talk to each other, where the lead truck 

or the pilot truck is leading the trucks behind it, and that—that’s 

your level 3—that technology is not that far away, in terms of the 

actual technology. The challenge is then, How can it be accepted? 

Which roads can it be driven on? And are you going to be comfortable, in your vehicle, with 160,000 pounds of freight moving beside you, with a driver that’s not—they’re in control, but they’re 

not fully in control? So, I think that the technology is possible, but 

the societal changes are going to have to be much more alerted to 

us. And then, also, we’re going to need, again, a standard across 

all the nations, because our vehicles don’t operate in one state at 

a time. 

Senator FISCHER. I understand, in the United Kingdom, they 

have the least restrictive regulations with regard to the autonomous vehicles. Within the United Kingdom, they’re not restricted, 

then, by the boundaries, right? 

Ms. ALT. I don’t think so, though I don’t know the answer to that 

fully. Sorry. 

Senator FISCHER. Do they—it’s my understanding they don’t 

need special permits or even special insurance in the United Kingdom to be able to do that. I know that many companies are planning on doing some testing in the United Kingdom on British 

roads, for that reason specifically. What do you think we need to 

do here in the United States? Is it possible for the Federal Government to move forward with regulations if society is not ready for 

it yet? 

Ms. ALT. Yes, so it’s a balance, isn’t it? I mean, you don’t want 

to be forcing—or identifying which technology to use, and then putting that into some sort of Federal regulation. You want the market to establish that. But, there are—it’s a new world that we’re 

in. You—in the regulations, even putting terms like, What is a 

driver? Is the driver the system that’s moving the vehicle? Is the 

driver the guy or gal that’s sitting behind the truck—or the driving 

wheel? What is a system? There are so many semantics that we 

have to think about differently as we put this legislation into place. 

41 

So, what do we have to do differently is looking at, What can we 

do across all the states so that, when we design these vehicles, they 

can operate in all of the States? So, we need standardization of 

simple things, like the terminology, I think, is one step. 

Senator FISCHER. How close are we? 

Ms. ALT. We’re a long way away from that. 

Senator FISCHER. OK. 

Mr. Fox, in January, this committee heard testimony from the 

UP regarding the importance of encouraging performance-based 

standards in regulation. In performance standards, they move government away from design-based standards toward a goal of oriented approach to achieving that outcome. For example, the FRA 

mandates that intervals between certain types of locomotive inspections. Do you believe that performance-based standards could help 

foster innovation and technology-drive safety advances better than 

the design-based standards? 

Mr. FOX. Yes, we absolutely believe performance-based standards 

are the way we need to progress. Because performance-based 

standards are really focused more on the outcome versus the method. And by focusing on the outcomes, we’re free to innovate with 

technology or process changes. We’ve had some great examples of 

working with our safety regulator on performance-based standards 

through waivers. The predecessor of the PTC system was an example of that on the BNSF. So, it can work, and it can drive innovation, absolutely. 

Senator FISCHER. And how effective have they been? 

Mr. FOX. We’ve made some progress on waivers. And, at the 

same time, going through the waiver process does take time and, 

at times, is pretty frustrating. 

Senator FISCHER. OK, thank you. 

Senator Booker. 

Senator BOOKER. Thank you, Chairwoman. 

Ms. Alt, I’m concerned that you—well, first of all, I’m confident 

that you and I share the goals—the same goals of increasing safety 

on the Nation’s highways. And I appreciate all your work, and I 

really appreciate the things your company does. But, I’m really just 

kind of concerned, when I read your written testimony. You refer 

to the legislation I introduced with Senator Rubio in it, and I was 

actually pretty shocked at what I read. The Wi-Fi Innovation Act, 

which is a bipartisan—in both House and Senate—piece of legislation. Our bill, for those who have read it, places timelines and 

guidelines in place for the FCC to test the 5-gigahertz spectrum 

band, in consultation with the Department of Transportation. Some 

of this testing has already happened, and we’re excited about that. 

But, our bill simply provides further structure for testing alone. 

I can understand why a lot of people in the industry want to attack this, as you did in your written testimony, and maybe even 

mislead people, because the industry has been sitting on this spectrum since about 1990. But, I want to be very clear about what this 

bill actually does, for you and for others. 

For over a decade, the industry has been working on new technology while, at the same time, other technologies—using radar 

and sensors—have evolved without using dedicated spectrum. Over 

a billion dollars of taxpayer dollars has been spent on this R&D. 

42 

And our bill simply asks for testing to see whether this limited resource, this precious resource that you indicated, can be shared. It 

is a fact-finding bill, and that is all. It’s not—if it’s not safe to 

share, I agree, and the bill clearly says, there will be no sharing. 

But, if it can be safely shared, now as the other technologies are 

evolving, I’m sure people would agree that it should be. 

So, I’m disappointed in the portrayal of my and Senator Rubio’s 

legislation in your testimony. I’m shocked. I’ve been in the Senate 

for a short time, but I’ve never seen something clearly so misleading in the short time I’ve been in the Senate. 

I’ve worked closely with stakeholders on this from all across the 

board, from Secretary Fox to Advanced Safety. And as supporters 

of V2V technology, Senator Rubio and I were steadfast advocates 

of highway safety. Safety should come first. But, I’m disappointed 

by these exaggerated attacks. 

And so, the first question I simply have is, did you read our legislation, yes or no? 

Ms. ALT. No. 

Senator BOOKER. OK. So, if you didn’t read the legislation, but 

yet you say—‘‘The Wi-Fi Innovation Act would open up 5.9 

gigahertz frequency spectrum to Wi-Fi access,’’ that’s not true. That 

is a false statement. And that is very frustrating. 

And so, encountering something that—you know, when I was 

Mayor, I used to always say, ‘‘In God we trust, but everybody else 

bring me data, bring me the facts.’’ Everybody wants to obscure 

them, but the truth should come through. And so, a fact-finding bill 

that simply looks to understand, what is the best way that we can 

achieve the safety goals that your company puts first, that this 

Senator and I’m sure the whole panel puts first? And so, I’m just 

curious. My last question to you is—I believe consumers should 

have all options on the table, but should advocate safety. And I’m 

wondering if you agree that our transportation policy should be actually technology-neutral, that should be about what is best to ensure that policy and safety don’t lag behind the best cutting-edge 

technology. Do you agree with that? 

Ms. ALT. Of course I agree with that. 

Senator BOOKER. OK. So, again—— 

Ms. ALT. And may I respond to some of your comments, then? 

Senator BOOKER. You certainly may. 

Ms. ALT. So, I think we’re on the same page with that. The unlicensed Wi-Fi doesn’t have a governance structure like a licensed 

frequency does. And the IEEE, which is the Industrial Electronic 

Engineers Group, that is the group that has put two proposals forward. They have not come to a conclusion. So, our position is that 

the legislation is simply premature. 

Senator BOOKER. Ms. Alt, I’m sorry. I can believe your testimony, 

that you submitted to the United States Senate, which doesn’t say 

what you just said. It says—it indicates that you are against this 

bill because it would, quote—and I quote, ‘‘It would open up 5.9 

gigahertz frequency spectrum.’’ That is not true, and you have— 

agree with that. What the bill does, when you read it, which I hope 

you will—what the bill is simply saying is, hey, let’s begin to have 

a fact-finding endeavor that better understands the usage of this 

spectrum and the question—this is a precious asset; this is why I 

43 

know your company wants to protect it—can it possibly be shared 

without infringing on safety? That’s all we’re looking to do. 

So, attacking the bill on clearly false standings is insulting. 

My time’s run out. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Booker. 

I welcome our Ranking Member today from the Committee. Senator Nelson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Well, what about that, Ms. Alt? What about what Senator Booker 

said? 

Ms. ALT. Well, I—we’ve come to an agreement that we do not 

want to see that that spectrum is shared with other technologies 

until and unless the governing bodies are sure that there is no interference from other technology. 

Senator NELSON. Do you think that technology is practical to— 

basically, the spectrum—do you think the spectrum is practical to 

be used by the automobile industry anytime in the near future? 

Ms. ALT. I don’t know the answer to that, if it can be shared. 

And that’s really the—the position is, can it be shared with other 

technologies? The governing bodies have come to a—have not come 

to a conclusion after putting forward two proposals. 

Senator NELSON. There are 4,000 crashes—no. There are 4,000 

people that are killed each year from serious truck crashes. How 

would you suggest technology is used to lessen that? 

Ms. ALT. The more that vehicles can speak to each other, vehicleto-vehicle—this is trucks talking to trucks and/or trucks talking to 

cars—the more that they can talk to each other to let the other one 

know, ‘‘Hey, I’m here. You need to stop’’—that is a technology that 

would help reduce crashes. 

Senator NELSON. Over the last week, I met with a grieving mom 

whose daughter, on her honeymoon, when the traffic had stopped 

on Interstate 95, and it had literally come to a stop, and her new 

son-in-law and daughter were in the traffic, stopped, but a truck, 

with the driver not having had a lot of sleep because of his company requiring a roundtrip trip within the state of Florida in the 

same day of 16 hours, the truck driver was, basically, sound asleep. 

And so, she is a grieving mom because of that truck plowing into 

the back of all of those stopped vehicles. 

How would you think technology could address the issue of truck 

driver safety? 

Ms. ALT. Yes, it’s a great question. I’m a mom. I would grieve 

with her. Obviously, that’s horrible. There are electronic onboard 

recording systems that would record the hours of service that the 

driver can drive. Perhaps if there were a technology that would actually shut down the truck if he went beyond his hours could be 

something. But, requiring that trucks have these onboard recorders—this technology is available, and I believe it’s close to being 

legislated. Those are things that can help. 

Senator NELSON. And this particular truck was intrastate, not 

interstate, so what rules that we have up here—for example, we 

don’t allow the tandem trucks, in our rules, more than 28 feet, but 

44 

they are allowing two tandem trucks on intrastate, inside the state, 

of 33 feet, which is an issue that will be in front of this committee 

with regard to truck safety. 

Let me ask you, Mr. Christensen. You all have accommodated 

the big ships from Asia. And soon, in a year or two, when the Panama Canal has completed its expansion, they’ll come to the East 

Coast. You want to give any quick pointers what we could do that 

you’ve learned—lessons learned on handling those huge, huge container ships? 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Senator Nelson, thank you for the question. 

It is—they are a game changer. But, the term of ‘‘big ship’’ is a 

changing term. When I started working in the port, about 10 years 

ago, a big ship was 8,000 TEUs. In 2012, the Port of Long Beach 

started handling 14,000-TEU ships, about the same time the new 

locks in the Panama Canal were going into construction, which can 

accommodate a 13,000-TEU ship. The ships we’re handling now in 

the San Pedro Bay ports will not fit in the new locks on the new 

Panama Canal. We are—customers at the Port of Long Beach are 

now ordering 20,000-TEU ships. So, it is a—very much a moving 

target. 

To our colleagues on the East Coast, they’re already dealing with 

this with ships that are transiting the Suez Canal, and it really 

has to do with depth of channel to get them there, but, once they’re 

there, dealing with how those ships are stowed and how those 

ships are unloaded. And that is exactly the focus of our Joint Working Groups, is to figure out a whole new way to operate our ports 

so that we can deal with a very large amount of relatively unsorted 

containers coming across the wharf and hitting us in ways that it’s 

never—we’ve never had to deal with before. 

Senator NELSON. The question was, what are the lessons learned 

that you could share with the other ports? 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. The lessons, we’re still learning, Senator. And 

they really have to do with having adequate supplies of chassis, 

which has to do with an interoperable chassis pool. It has to do 

with working closer with the steamship lines and putting more discipline in their stowage of the vessel, which has been thrown aside 

because of the way that those vessels are calling on the Asian ports 

and the way the shipping alliances are working. And it has to do 

with working much, much more closely with the communication of 

data, which we’re again finding extraordinarily siloed within the 

supply chain, being able to provide a marine terminal operator 

with information more than 2 days before that vessel hits their terminal so that they can plan their moves adequately. These are all 

lessons we’re learning. I’m not sure that we could tell much more 

to our friends on the East Coast as to how to deal with that issue 

beyond that. 

Senator NELSON. Thanks. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Nelson. 

Senator Cantwell. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thanks for 

holding this hearing. 

45 

And thank you, to the witnesses. 

Mr. Misener, congratulations on 20 years. It seems just like yesterday. And definitely I would say that the transformation of delivery of goods and services has been quite impressive. We didn’t— 

I didn’t hear in your testimony a discussion about the drone issue, 

from a technology perspective, but clearly this committee, the larger full committee, has had testimony on that, and it certainly is 

one area continuing to move forward on technology and delivering 

the product. 

And, Mr. Christensen, I loved everything that you said, except 

for it would have been great if you would have said it was about 

Seattle-Tacoma instead of L.A.-Long Beach, but still very happy to 

hear your description of the economic opportunity before the 

United States, that we actually can increase the cargo shipments, 

because there is that demand and product to be shipped, but that 

we have to continuously make improvements. And this is something we see in Seattle, as well, that, somebody estimated, instead 

of 3 million cargo containers, we could do something like six. It’s 

not out of the question. So, you described that, you described that 

that would actually be good for longshoremen, even though you’re 

making technology investments. So, we’re talking about both— 

you’re talking about efficiencies. 

OK. So, my question to you and Mr. Misener, anybody else—Mr. 

Fox or Ms. Alt—is, even though we’re talking about technology that 

helps us move and be more knowledgeable about the product, do 

we still need to make investments in freight mobility from a Federal perspective to make sure that, as those products are being 

moved around, that our technology just isn’t measuring, stuck in 

congestion, and then making us less competitive? 

Mr. MISENER. Well, Senator Cantwell, if that’s partly to me, I appreciate that very much. And thank you for the congratulations. 

I’ve only been here for 15 of those 20 years, but—— 

I think we are looking for innovative policies. You’ve introduced 

a bill with Senator Booker that proposes such policies. And we congratulate you for that bill. If anything, it could be broader. It could 

be applied to more than just multimodal freight. But, that kind of 

thinking and that kind of communication—Mr. Christensen mentioned communication of data. There’s also a need for communication among stakeholders. And I think that’s a big part of your bill, 

is to get the stakeholders talking with one another to figure out innovative solutions. 

We also are fans of communication of data, as Mr. Christensen 

mentioned. That’s something we’re doing with the USPS. A big 

component of our interaction with them is making sure that they 

get forecasts of what we’re seeing, what we’re going to be shipping. 

And that is particularly important for Sunday delivery, so that 

they can have the—use the most efficient routes for driving their 

trucks and delivering parcels on Sunday. 

Senator CANTWELL. Well, you’re a global business. And Mr. 

Christensen has fixed cost, if you will. So, he mentioned the magic 

words, as far as I’m concerned: Panama and Canada. And this is 

about competition. So, this is about if we’re going to make the improvements necessary to move our product cost-effectively or 

46 

whether that business is going to go to, you know, Canada or via 

the Panama Canal. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. And it’s—— 

Senator CANTWELL. So, are you—do you support further freight 

efforts at the Federal level? 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Yes. And, Senator Cantwell, the—just as surely as we’re sitting here, as we see international trade continue to 

increase—and we are now at levels that are peaking over the prerecession levels of containerized traffic moving through our ports— 

we will surely be seeing bottlenecks develop that are infrastructure-related. As I mentioned in my testimony, the strategies are 

both infrastructure efficiency with technology infused along with 

operational efficiencies. And I believe that the legislation you’re 

proposing is timely, it’s critical to the future of our supply chain 

optimization, to be honest, and we would hope to be able to continue to collaborate with you and your team on that, because it is 

so critical to be looking ahead, recognizing that infrastructure bottlenecks don’t go away a year after you recognize them. It takes 

years and years of focus and funding and policy to make them— 

to solve these bottlenecks as they come up. 

Senator CANTWELL. And how do you—your testimony—as I said, 

I really appreciated it, because you describe what the future opportunity was, and that it was growth opportunity in jobs, as well, not 

just in automation—how do you think we tell this story on a national basis? Is this data that the supply chains from other ports 

have? 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. It’s data, but it’s fractured data. Right now, 

and as I mentioned in the testimony, it’s critically important that 

we bring this data in to a—through a reliable gateway and make 

it transparent in public. We have challenges ahead of us. We’re 

working on those very, very hard in our working groups, in our 

joint port effort, as Seattle-Tacoma has worked very hard on their 

joint port efforts, as well. And we watch and benchmark what’s 

going on up there very closely. So, there are opportunities, but 

there are a lot of—opportunities ahead of us, but there’s a lot of 

work to be done. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. 

Senator Klobuchar. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. 

Thanks for holding this hearing. 

Thank you, to the witnesses. 

Mr. Fox, a December 2013 Government Accountability Office report found that the FRA faces a lot of challenges—rail safety challenges, including the fact that the inspectors only have the capacity 

to inspect less than 1 percent of all railroad activities. I come from 

a state where we are a bit of an entry point for oil from Canada, 

as you know, and oil from North Dakota, and then agricultural 

products from everywhere. And so, we’ve had an enormous increase 

in rail and a number of accompanying derailments. 

47 

And, as you know, the FRA partners with states to oversee the 

inspection of signals, tracks, and mechanical operations. And in 

April, I sent a letter to the Appropriations Committee urging increased funding for more rail inspectors. I’d like to hear more about 

what technology BNSF uses to prevent derailments. Do you think 

there’s better technology that could get us through this? 

Mr. FOX. I think we’ve shown, as an industry and BNSF, that 

we’ve leveraged, and continue to leverage technology, and the results have clearly been best-ever safety results last year, from an 

employee safety and derailment perspective. Beyond that, though, 

there’s opportunity. There’s tremendous opportunity. Again, I 

think—as we talk about regulation, part of our challenge today is 

regulation based on a design standard. And as we look at—focus 

on outcomes, again, I think that will allow the industry to innovate, innovate with technology, with process changes—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And how would—like, what kind of technology would help with this? 

Mr. FOX. As we look forward, as I mentioned in my testimony, 

I think this drone technology, very early in practice, has a real potential. This pathfinder program with FAA will move beyond line 

of sight to where we could utilize drones to travel along our private 

32,000-mile network for hundreds of miles a day, taking high-speed 

images, high-definition images of our network, down to a quarterinch accuracy. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I see. 

Mr. FOX. Post-processing that data then would help us understand exceptions. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. 

I was just, in the last week, up in International Falls, Minnesota. 

This is not a Burlington Northern issue, where a—— 

Mr. FOX. I thought I was in trouble. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I know. But, it’s where a bridge collapsed, 

a small bridge—a railroad bridge. But, it happens to be Ranier, 

Minnesota. It’s the biggest entry point on the Canadian border into 

the U.S., and it’s right by International Falls, which is the larger 

town. And so, one of the things we talked about, in addition to 

some issues—this was a Canadian national rail issue—and, in addition to the bridge collapsing and some issues they’ve been having 

with that railroad and the workers not allowing us to cross the 

railroad, the issue was that they’ve been having a lot of gradecrossing issues there. I think 8 to 10 hours a day, the trains are 

in the middle of the town, so you can imagine, that’s a lot of time, 

and people have to drive two and a half miles around the town. 

So, what I wondered about, even though this is not a Burlington 

Northern issue, is that the Railroad Safety Institute at the University of Minnesota is studying train delays to more accurately estimate train arrival times at grade crossings. And one of the things 

the mayor of this town said is, if they could even have a signal for 

the people as they’re deciding whether to take the two-and-a-halfmile route or go into the town, about if trains were on the tracks 

before they made that decision, with some kind of technology so 

that it would empower drivers to know what to do, that would be 

helpful. 

48 

But, I just wondered if you had any ideas about that crossing 

issue. I just did an amendment on the rail bill that we just passed 

through on this issue. And it was certainly brought home to me 

this week why I did it. So—— 

Mr. FOX. I think, when we talk about Federal funds supporting 

freight projects, grade separations is—clearly needs to be—clearly 

needs to be part of that. And, obviously, we’ve been active in that 

area, with contributions against those grade separations. 

I also think, when we’re talking about train headlights at the 

crossing, we also have to be talking about taillights and looking at 

the complete equation. 

But, more Federal funding for grade separations seems to be part 

of the answer. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And this sidetracks, is that—that was another thing they brought up, is, if the trains could wait somewhere 

else—and I think they’re building one—then they wouldn’t be waiting in the middle of the town. 

Mr. FOX. We all have requirements around how long we can 

block crossings. And obviously, we spend a lot of energy on—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. 

Mr. FOX.—ensuring that doesn’t—— 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. No, you’ve been very—— 

Mr. FOX.—happen. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I’ve called about a number of issues, which 

I’ve really appreciated. So, thank you. 

And just, if I could, Madam Chair, just one more question on distracted driving. 

Right now, only one state received our funding for the Distracted 

Driving Grant, which we would really like to have change. There’s 

a ton of money sitting there, and we have emerging problems, and 

that’s why Senator Hoeven and I have sponsored a bill with Senator Booker to actually change some of the criteria so we can get 

that money out to the states for education efforts on distracted 

driving. It’s called the Improving Driver Safety Act. 

And I thought I’d ask you, Ms. Alt, on what kinds of technology—we know that drivers are doing things they shouldn’t do in 

the cars. A lot of them have admitted to this in surveys. And it’s 

killing people, to the point where we’ve had, you know, 424,000 

people injured in 2013, and more than 3,000 people killed, that we 

know of, from distracted driving. And again, these are individuals 

making decisions on their own. But, are there any technologies, you 

think, from the car companies, that could be helpful with this? 

Ms. ALT. Well, I can speak not from the car companies. The 

group that I’m with, we don’t make cars; we make everything but 

cars. I can speak from the heavy-duty truck side, and that is where 

we do have alerts that are built in for a driver, to wake them up 

if their eyes begin to dim. And it’s through either some sort of vibration in the seat or some loud sound. So, you know, it’s from a 

heavy-duty perspective. 

And, of course, then there are lots of regulations, because they’re 

commercial drivers, about what they’re allowed and not allowed to 

do, regulatorily, behind the wheel. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. Well, I think, as we know—and I appreciate your words on trucks—but, this is an issue for all vehicles 

49 

as we try to figure out if there’s anything to create shutdown of 

technology when people are in a car, so they stop doing it, or certain—when someone’s driving, that they stop doing it. Because it’s 

just a growing problem. So—— 

All right. Thank you very much. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. 

We’re going to have a second round of questions, in case any 

other Senators are still trying to get here to the Committee hearing. 

And I would like to begin with Mr. Misener. First of all, I think, 

on your video, if you could have had the teddy bear delivered to 

Nebraska or New Jersey, that would have been a great ending for 

the little guy. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FISCHER. But—— 

Mr. MISENER. We’re happy to do cameos, if you would like us to 

be—— 

Senator FISCHER. Yes. 

Mr. MISENER.—hugging a teddy bear at the end of the video. 

Senator FISCHER. We can do this. That—we’re multi-talented up 

here. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FISCHER. As we look at more efficient logistic networks 

out there, how do you think that that will benefit consumers? 

Mr. MISENER. So, thank you, Madam Chair, very much. 

That logistics—the improvement of logistics infrastructure, along 

with the more broad transportation infrastructure, is very important to consumers because it affects how they receive the goods 

that they purchase online. And, on behalf of our customers, we’ve 

been trying to improve this for, well, oh, at least 20 years. And automation has always been a big part of the Amazon solution to this 

challenge. And increasing automation certainly is going to be very 

helpful to making sure that consumers get the goods when they 

need them. But, they have a choice. And that’s what we’ve always 

tried to provide them, as a choice as to delivery speeds. We’ve 

talked a little bit here about drones. Drones was really the only 

way we figured out how to get goods to consumers in less than 30 

minutes. But, for longer periods of time, there are many alternatives. And we are also offering our customers now a slow delivery alternative that gives them additional benefits at Amazon if 

they’re willing to accept it whenever it comes. And so, if you’re ambivalent whether it comes in 2 days or 2 weeks, then it’s—they can 

get an additional benefit from us. And so, it’s all about providing 

our customers the choice. And this obviously applies more broadly 

to American consumers. 

Senator FISCHER. OK. Thank you very much. 

Senator Booker. 

Senator BOOKER. Mr. Misener, how I would love to talk to you 

more about drones. You know, we share a passion for that and a 

desire for the United States of America to catch up to the world 

and other countries that are going ahead of us. It has transformative possibilities. But, sadly, I’m coming back down to earth 

to talk about trucks. 

50 

So, your testimony recommends the use of 10 feet longer trucks, 

known as ‘‘Twin 33s.’’ The Department of Transportation recently 

came out with a study showing that it takes these trucks about 22 

feet longer to stop. The length—that’s a car length and a half. The 

larger and heavier trucks are greater—are the greater destruction—where the greater destruction occurs when accidents happen. 

And so, I just have a couple of questions on that. 

One is, has your company done an analysis of the impact of safety? How will these longer trucks impact the crashes—the number 

of crashes and fatalities? 

Mr. MISENER. So, we’ve been persuaded by the carriers that we 

work with, Senator, that the 33-foot trucks are going to be safer 

because there will be fewer of them on the road, driving fewer 

miles. Any policy choice like this is a balancing of factors. I totally 

get that. And I’m not sure there’s any particular magic to 33 over, 

say, 32 or 34. And I’m not sure there’s any particular magic to the 

current number, which is 28. What we’re trying to do is find a solution that will improve efficiencies, for sure, and that can be done, 

but, at the same time, if we can drive down the number of miles 

that are driven and the number of trucks on the road, that is a 

safety improvement. We are persuaded that the right balance was 

the increase in length without increasing the weight capacity or the 

total weight of the trucks, because the weight, of course, is what 

goes into the inertia and the kinetic energy on objects like this. 

And so, it’s a—weight times velocity is the inertia, not the length 

of the truck. 

Senator BOOKER. And I appreciate that. There are a lot of things 

to balance. Safety should be the first. But, it’s also the impact on 

the infrastructure, as well. And so, with those—those heavier 

trucks, would they tear up more of our local roads? 

Mr. MISENER. We don’t support heavier trucks. To be clear, our 

support is for a longer truck. It’s not increasing the weight limits 

at all. And so, increasing the length of the truck should not affect 

the infrastructure adversely; in fact, it can help it, because—well, 

going over a bridge, for example, the weight is less concentrated 

and, therefore, easier on the bridge. 

Senator BOOKER. I appreciate that. 

And then, just last, really quickly, the—another balancing act is, 

you want greater and greater safety, but you also want to see what 

the—put the least necessary burden on businesses and how they 

operate. And so, the big issue of minimum insurance is one that 

I have some concerns about, and I’d love for you to just give me 

your thoughts. 

With the truck size and weight, we realize that trucks are getting bigger, causing bigger accidents, as well, over the last 20, 30 

years. And the minimum insurance has not been raised since the 

1980s. And so, I’m wondering do you think that there is a needed 

minimum insurance level increase, or at least pegging it somehow 

to—that is elevated regularly on an ongoing basis? 

Mr. MISENER. Well, Senator, it seems very reasonable to me. I 

mean, we—the carriers that we use are the ones who are going to 

be directly affected by that. And so, the carriers that we work with 

are reputable ones. We certainly would not want our products traveling, you know, over problematic or difficult carriers. And so, I’m 

51 

not sure I have a direct answer for you, simply because that 

wouldn’t be directly affecting us at this point. 

Senator BOOKER. OK. Thank you very much. 

Mr. MISENER. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator BOOKER. You can meet me out by the Capitol with a 

drone, if you’d like. 

Mr. MISENER. I’ll be there. 

Senator BOOKER. All right. 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Senator Booker. 

I would like to announce that the hearing record will remain 

open for 2 weeks, and, during that time, Senators are asked to submit any questions for the record. Upon receipt, the witnesses are 

requested to submit their written answers to the Committee as 

soon as possible. 

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today, and I 

thank my colleagues who attended the hearing. Thank you all. 

We are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 2:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(53) 

A P P E N D I X 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROY BLUNT TO

SUSAN ALT

Question 1. Our society and economy rely on technology, and it’s enabled tremendous economic growth and efficiencies. It’s exciting to watch these innovations move 

from the virtual world to the real, physical world. However, advances in technology 

and their widespread adoption also raise potential new dangers. The increasing use 

of automation and reliance on hardware and software in transportation networks 

raises serious questions. To what degree are rail, trucking, marine cargo, and others 

in the transportation sector accounting for the security of new systems they adopt? 

Answer. I can only speak for Volvo Group, but I would say we are accounting for 

the security of new technology systems to a very high degree. We understand that 

cybersecurity is absolutely critical to the success of new technologies in the transportation sector that connect vehicle systems internally to each other and externally 

to other vehicles, infrastructure, and the cloud. If the public does not trust the 

robustness of a new technology, especially one being applied to an area as critical 

to public safety as transportation, it will not be embraced. At Volvo Group, safety 

is one of our three core values and is built into the design of our trucks from the 

start. As computer and communications technologies begin to play a larger role in 

the design and functionality of our trucks, cybersecurity is an absolutely necessary 

element to ensure overall vehicle safety. 

Question 2. There are a number of Information Sharing and Analysis Centers 

(ISACs) that provide their members with actionable and relevant information for 

cyber risk mitigation, incident response, and information sharing. 

Currently we have an Aviation ISAC, a Maritime Security ISAC, a Surface Transportation ISAC, and a Public Transit ISAC. How would you rate the overall communication and coordination within and between these ISACs, as well as others outside 

the transportation sector who may have relevant expertise? 

Answer. In addition to the ISACs mentioned above, the automobile industry recently formed an auto cybersecurity ISAC composed of members of both the Auto 

Alliance and Global Automakers industry groups. While focused on passenger automobiles, this may be an important venue for the trucking industry to engage as well 

in communication and coordination around vehicle cybersecurity issues. 

We have also talked to our industry trade groups, and according to the American 

Public Transportation Association (APTA), the Transportation sector is closely connected and the individual ISACs are part of and engaged with each other and the 

National Council of ISACs (NCI). The NCI includes ISACs from the critical sectors 

who meet on a regular basis to share intelligence and prevent threats. The surface 

transportation ISACs (Surface, Public Transit, Over the Road Bus) utilize many of 

the same analysts who immediately analyze and disseminate cybersecurity information and threat intelligence with their members including the NCI and interrelated 

sectors, ISACs. 

Question 3. In your testimony, you said that states are developing different, and 

sometimes inconsistent rules and regulations to promote autonomous vehicle testing. How many states have produced different rules and regulations related to autonomous vehicles, and to what degree are these different rules hindering manufacturers? 

Answer. In response to public interest over autonomous vehicle testing and in anticipation of the proliferation of this technology, many states have already moved 

to address autonomous vehicles through legislation, regulation, or executive order. 

Thus, we (those companies developing autonomous vehicles or autonomous vehicle 

technology) work within an ever growing patchwork of definitions, allowable vehicle 

standards and requirements in order to develop and bring technologies to the U.S. 

market as a whole. 

Without the standardization of regulations in the areas of testing and deployment 

of autonomous vehicles, as well as establishing liability issues and data collection 

54 

allowances, it will add cost, time, and complexity to the development process, slowing the introduction of technology that can help solving some of the most intractable 

transportation infrastructure problems of our generation. 

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, six states (California, 

Nevada, Michigan, Florida, North Dakota, and Tennessee) and the District of Columbia have passed one or more specific laws addressing autonomous vehicle technology. Sixteen additional states are currently considering legislation. 

In addition to laws, regulations, and executive orders dealing with the broad concept of vehicle automation, there is additional public policy complexity and uncertainty around supporting technologies, such as V2V and V2I communications, and 

specific applications of automated driving, such as vehicle platooning. 

Question 4. Can you elaborate whether there’s potential to increase safety on our 

Nation’s roads and interstates if we have a single, consistent national standard for 

autonomous vehicle testing? 

Answer. I believe the public stands to benefit from streamlining the regulatory 

environment and making it more receptive to new ways of accomplishing longstanding goals such as transportation safety. As such, a single, consistent national 

standard for autonomous vehicle testing would foster innovation and smooth the 

pathway to market in a much greater way than the current patchwork of state policy approaches. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROY BLUNT TO

PAUL E. MISENER

Question 1. As you discussed the important role of automation helping companies 

ship more efficiently, is there also a growing role for the Internet of Things (IoT) 

to help improve the transportation ecosystem, for example with autonomous vehicles 

and fleet management? 

If so, what kinds of roles are you seeing now and do you envision in the future? 

Specifically, should Congress look to leverage the benefits of IoT as we develop our 

next highway bill? 

Answer. Technological advancements that help create safe, real-time distribution 

operations, including those that deploy highly automated ground and airborne infrastructures, will have profound impacts for our entire transportation system. Specific 

to Amazon, our future Prime Air service will deliver packages five pounds and less 

to customers in 30 minutes or less using small unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), 

or drones. Flying below 500 feet, and generally above 200 feet except for takeoff and 

landing, and weighing less than 55 pounds total, Prime Air UAS will take advantage of sophisticated ‘‘sense and avoid’’ technology, as well as a high degree of automation, to ensure safe operations, including at distances of 10 miles or more, well 

beyond visual line of sight. 

Once operational, Prime Air will increase the overall safety and efficiency of the 

current ground transportation system by allowing people to skip the quick trip to 

the store or by reducing package deliveries by truck or car, which will ease congestion. For the same reasons, Prime Air will reduce buyers’ environmental footprint. 

If a consumer wants a small item quickly, instead of driving to go shopping or causing delivery vehicles to come to her home or office, a small, electrically-powered 

UAS will make the trip faster and more efficiently and cleanly. 

There is absolutely a growing role for the Internet of things in all modes of transportation, and Congress should encourage Federal agencies to work collaboratively 

with industry to ensure technological advancements are not unnecessarily impeded 

by regulations, which were often written around an onboard human operator. Government agencies should take a performance-based approach to regulating rapidly 

evolving technologies, setting a target level of safety and allowing industry to innovate to meet that requirement. 

Question 2. Our Society and economy rely on technology, and it’s enabled tremendous economic growth and efficiencies. It’s exciting to watch these innovations move 

from the virtual world to the real, physical world. 

However, advances in technology and their widespread adoption also raise potential new dangers. The increasing use of automation and reliance on hardware and 

software in transportation networks raises serious questions. 

To what degree are rail, trucking, marine cargo, and others in the transportation 

sector accounting for the security of new systems they adopt? 

Answer. At Amazon, our guiding principle is customer trust. We use information 

in a responsible, appropriate, and secure manner to innovate and improve the customer experience, and we are constantly striving to exceed our already high levels 

of software and hardware reliability, as well as guard against cyber intrusion. In 

55 

order to ensure the continued safety and security of the transportation space, we 

need willing government agencies to work with industry to better understand rapidly developing technologies and how they will connect into our current transportation system. For example, we need the Federal Aviation Administration and the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration to work expeditiously with industry 

to create an Unmanned Traffic Management (UTM) system to safely coordinate the 

activities of the increasing numbers of small drones flying at low altitudes. Much 

of the success of UTM will rely on establishing the identity of vehicles and on secure 

reliable information networks. This will ensure the safety and security of the airspace, while not impeding existing manned aircraft operations. 

Question 3. There are a number of Information Sharing and Analysis Centers 

(ISACs) that provide their members with actionable and relevant information for 

cyber risk mitigation, incident response, and information sharing. 

Currently, we have an Aviation ISAC, a Marine Security ISAC, a Surface Transportation ISAC, and a Public Transit ISAC. 

How would you rate the overall communication and coordination within and between these ISACs, as well as others outside the transportation sector who may 

have relevant expertise? 

Answer. Amazon has not traditionally been considered part of any of the transportation sector ISACs, although we would welcome an opportunity to participate. For 

the vast majority of our deliveries, we rely on our carriers, including the U.S. Postal 

Service. 

Specific to Amazon Prime Air, we have met with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and other Federal agencies, and welcome future collaboration 

on drone security issues; however, rather than the ad hoc manner in which meetings between DHS and industry have occurred in the past, we believe DHS should 

stand up a formal committee under the Federal Advisory Committee Act for drone 

industry input. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. STEVE DAINES TO

PAUL E. MISENER

Question. Mr. Misener, many people in my home state of Montana as well as 

many around the Nation appreciate the products and services provided by Amazon. 

It enables people in rural communities to access a wider spectrum of products that 

may not be available in their immediate markets and have them delivered the next 

day. In your testimony, you discuss Amazon’s pursuit of delivery via drones. As 

someone who spent 12 years in cloud computing, I am an advocate for innovation. 

I also deeply appreciate privacy concerns and safety. Drones have the ability to collect massive amounts of data as they fly. I have asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) similar questions. As Amazon considers utilizing drone technologies, 

how will it ensure the privacy and safety of customers and innocent bystanders? 

Answer. At Amazon, our guiding principle for privacy is customer trust. We use 

information in a responsible, appropriate, and secure manner to innovate and improve the customer experience, and we know we must get privacy right to meet our 

customers’ high expectations of us. We will use this same privacy-by-design approach for Amazon Prime Air, our future drone package delivery service. 

Consumer privacy is an area in which the U.S. approach to drone regulation already is particularly strong. We recognize that drone technology could cause privacy 

infringement if commercial or private use is not undertaken in a sensible, privacyconscious manner, so we welcome and support the National Telecommunications 

and Information Administration (NTIA’s) leadership in developing best practices in 

its current multi-stakeholder process. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROY BLUNT TO

GREGORY C. FOX

Question 1. Our society and economy rely on technology, and it’s enabled tremendous economic growth and efficiencies. It’s exciting to watch these innovations move 

from the virtual world to the real, physical world. 

However, advances in technology and their widespread adoption also raise potential new dangers. The increasing use of automation and reliance on hardware and 

software in transportation networks raises serious questions. 

To what degree are rail, trucking, marine cargo, and others in the transportation 

sector accounting for the security of new systems they adopt? 

56 

Answer. At BNSF Railway, security is key to our overall risk mitigation efforts 

that support safe rail operations. The various technologies deployed to operate 

BNSF Railway—hardware, software and the networks they connect to—require deliberate focus to avoid or mitigate security risks. We adjust as needed from an offensive and defensive security posture as new risks surface in deployed information 

systems by working with our vendors and industry partners to ensure our security 

posture meets industry standard best practices and is capable of protecting our complex, distributed network. We continue to invest in and strengthen our security posture via equipment, software, and skills. The complexities lie in the myriad of technologies of various ages and capabilities (hardware, software and networks) developed in house and from vendors that are needed to function as a given system and 

our business need to ensure connectivity both internal to BNSF and at times with 

external partners via the Internet. 

With regard to new systems that we adopt, if developed in house, the code is tested for potential risk. We leverage third party products and internal processes to test 

software looking for those high risk vulnerabilities and if found to exist, will require 

the application developer to remedy the code prior to moving said code into production. We also leverage various technology to protect our system’s data, manage accessibility and system software changes as well as 24/7 monitoring. For third party 

hosted software such as cloud, we perform a security assessment during the product 

evaluation period. We also routinely audit processes, system changes and accessibility routinely. 

Question 2. There are a number of Information Sharing and Analysis Centers 

(ISACs) that provide their members with actionable and relevant information for 

cyber risk mitigation, incident response, and information sharing. 

Currently we have an Aviation ISAC, a Maritime Security ISAC, a Surface Transportation ISAC, and a Public Transit ISAC. 

How would you rate the overall communication and coordination within and between these ISACs, as well as others outside the transportation sector who may 

have relevant expertise? 

Answer. I would rate the communication and coordination within modal Information Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs) as very good. We also partner with the 

AAR and other government agencies for information sharing as well as leveraging 

several third parties in the cyber industry. The process has proven to be invaluable 

as we are able to understand the current vulnerabilities and at times provide each 

other with potential forewarning of suspected issues as they surface. ISACs also provide the platform for additional opportunities to share best practices that may have 

worked well or not worked as intended which helps all modes reach a desired result 

more expeditiously. In these cyber instances, time can be of the essence. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. STEVE DAINES TO

GREGORY C. FOX

Question. Mr. Fox, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) has over 1,900 miles 

of railroad across my home state of Montana. They do a great service in transporting Montana’s agricultural and energy products to markets across the Nation. 

In your testimony, you discuss the use of drones for carrying out inspections. 

I commend the innovative efforts to increase safety. How will this continue to be 

developed and how is BNSF addressing personal privacy of unintended data collected? 

Answer. BNSF has started to deploy Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)—or 

drones—for supplemental visual track and bridge inspections in a variety of conditions. Earlier this year, we were one of three companies awarded Pathfinder Program status by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which will permit a focus 

on beyond-line of sight operations for extended track integrity flights. The Pathfinder Program concept of operations are still being developed and we will continue 

to work with the FAA on this effort. 

BNSF’s interest in the use of UAS has been driven in full by the potential safety 

applications and benefits we hope to demonstrate through our partnership with the 

FAA. We have begun to identify numerous opportunities to supplement our existing 

track and infrastructure inspections. In regards to track integrity, this technology 

can help to assess safety concerns that could cause a derailment, such as landslides 

or washouts, and help BNSF understand the track conditions for some of our more 

remote assets. 

BNSF’s UAS program operates under the Section 333 Exemption Number 11206 

which BNSF was granted by the FAA and only allows us to operate on or above 

BNSF owned property. In order to operate on other property prior approval from 

57 

surrounding land owners must be secured and includes data collection protections. 

BNSF further interprets this exemption to mean that BNSF cannot collect data 

from assets not owned by BNSF. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROY BLUNT TO

MICHAEL R. CHRISTENSEN

Cybersecurity 

Question 1. Our society and economy rely on technology, and it’s enabled tremendous economic growth and efficiencies. It’s exciting to watch these innovations move 

from the virtual world to the real, physical world. 

However, advances in technology and their widespread adoption also raise potential new dangers. The increasing use of automation and reliance on hardware and 

software in transportation networks raises serious questions. 

To what degree are rail, trucking, marine cargo, and others in the transportation 

sector accounting for the security of new systems they adopt? 

Answer. Each segment of the marine transportation supply chain is taking 

cybersecurity very seriously. At the Port of Long Beach, our cybersecurity security 

teams are pouring significant resources into continuously improving our program 

and governance. This includes increased security, and monitoring for applications, 

information, and networks. We currently have business continuity plans in place, 

and emphasize training for end users. 

Ocean carriers, marine terminal operators, and railroads are likewise continuously reviewing and strengthening their own cybersecurity technologies and capabilities. Particular attention is being placed on the new automated container terminals to be sure they are protected from intrusion. 

Question 2. There are a number of Information Sharing and Analysis Centers 

(ISACs) that provide their members with actionable and relevant information for 

cyber risk mitigation, incident response, and information sharing. 

Currently we have an Aviation ISAC, a Maritime Security ISAC, a Surface Transportation ISAC, and a Public Transit ISAC. 

How would you rate the overall communication and coordination within and between these ISACs, as well as others outside the transportation sector who may 

have relevant expertise? 

Answer. Given that ISAC has only been in existence for 18 years, cybercrime has 

a head start. The ISACs have created a nationwide collaborative platform that did 

not exist before. So there has been a lot of progress in the way of information sharing, and threat mitigation, good and better practices. Cyber threats evolve along 

with technology, so there must be an asserted effort and dedication to continuous 

improvement. 

Æ