Dive Brief:
- Rural transportation providers spoke of the need for more stable, consistent federal funding to address backlogs in rural road and bridge maintenance and construction at a March 21 subcommittee hearing of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Witnesses also said that states should have more control over how they can spend federal funds.
- Some witnesses expressed opposition to the Federal Highway Administration’s November rule requiring state departments of transportation and metropolitan planning organizations to set declining CO2 transportation emissions reduction targets on the National Highway System. Many Republicans also oppose the rule.
- Rural bus operators talked about the challenges they face with road conditions, safety and the transition to electric vehicles.
Dive Insight:
U.S. Rep. Rick Crawford, R-Ark., noted in his opening remarks that the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act “provided historic funding for the improvement of American infrastructure.” But he went on to say that witnesses expressed concerns about the cost of applying for IIJA grant programs, the lengthy review process and “the ability of small communities to comply with burdensome federal permitting requirements.”
Crawford, along with Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., and three senators, introduced a joint resolution to strike down the FHWA rule. “This one size fits all regulation puts states with more small towns and rural communities that are not able to cut emissions by building a metro system, buying electric buses, or building miles of bike lanes between communities at a significant disadvantage,” Crawford said in a Feb. 7 statement.
Jeff Greteman, president and CEO of Windstar Lines, a private bus operator based in Carroll, Iowa, echoed that concern in his testimony: “Rural states have unique needs and should not be forced into a ‘one-size-fits-all’ mandate restricting their ability to provide critical transportation investments to meet their transportation needs.”
Greteman also spoke about the challenges of transitioning to zero-emission buses for motorcoach operators in rural areas, where longer routes and the lack of charging infrastructure is the norm.
“Right now, for motorcoach vehicles, zero emissions technology is still under development — and it is unclear whether batteries or hydrogen fuel cells will be the best fit for such vehicles,” he said. Greteman also emphasized that most intercity and rural bus companies are small, privately owned businesses and that none of the federal grants that help transit agencies electrify their fleets are available to the private bus industry.
Todd Morrow, executive director of Island Transit, which serves a rural county northwest of Seattle that operates more than 60 buses over 16 routes, said it has a 17-year plan to transition its fleet to battery-electric vehicles and, for longer routes, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles.
“For small transit agencies like mine, fleet transitions like the one we’ve embarked on will take time,” he said in his testimony. Roadblocks include the loss of bus manufacturers, which has put Island Transit’s order of nine vehicles in limbo; lack of charging infrastructure in rural areas and limited vehicle range. The local electric grid’s capacity to support charging also raises concerns. “Grid resiliency, including after storm damage, is especially important,” Morrow said.
The debate over rural needs and the Biden administration’s efforts to promote a national transition to zero-emission vehicles is playing out during a presidential election year. The FHWA’s CO2 emissions rule is already being followed by 24 states and the District of Columbia, while a group of 21 state Republican attorneys general, plus Texas, filed lawsuits against the FHWA and U.S. Department of Transportation, claiming the agencies don’t have the authority to issue the rule.
