Ranking Member Larsen Statement from Hearing on Federal Response to Francis Scott Key Bridge Collapse
Washington, D.C.—The following are opening remarks, as prepared for delivery, from Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Rick Larsen (D-WA) during today’s hearing titled, “Reviewing and Examining the Francis Scott Key Bridge Federal Response.”
Video of Ranking Member Larsen’s opening statement is here.
More information on the hearing can be found here.
Ranking Member Larsen:
Thank you, Chairman Graves, for holding this hearing, and thank you to each of the Administration officials for joining us to discuss the Francis Scott Key Bridge recovery effort.
First, like the Chairman, I want to express my deepest sympathies with the families of the six transportation workers who lost their lives while on the job, maintaining this important piece of infrastructure.
This incident is a reminder of why safety must always be our top priority in transportation—safety of workers, the traveling public and the residents of communities adjacent to that infrastructure.
This emergency left in its wake an incredibly complex debris removal challenge, a closed channel and shuttered port, significant regional economic and global shipping ramifications and the loss of a bridge essential to freight movement and roadway mobility in the mid-Atlantic region.
Vice Admiral Gautier and General Graham, I want to commend your leadership and the tireless efforts of the women and men under your command for the incredible work to safely remove debris and return the channel to operation in extremely challenging circumstances.
The degree of difficulty became clear when I visited the site of the collapse last month. Thank you to the Coast Guard, the Corps and your state partners on the Unified Command, especially the Maryland state police, for guiding many members of Congress to witness the damage.
I look forward to hearing the latest updates from you today on the status of the cleanup and the estimated timeline for the full reopening of the channel and Port of Baltimore operations.
I am also eager to learn what resources and authorities the Coast Guard and the Corps will need from Congress as the full costs and impacts of the response become more concrete.
The Coast Guard has expended significant Fiscal Year 2024 Operations and Support funds to respond to this emergency. We are grateful that the Coast Guard always does what it needs to get the job done.
Yet, it is unreasonable to expect the Service to absorb these response costs, which were obviously not budgeted for in advance, without impacting the Coast Guard’s ability to perform other critical missions. The Service must be made whole.
Similarly, the Corps, in responding to the emergency, has used up Fiscal Year 2024 Operation and Maintenance funds appropriated for the Baltimore Harbor and Channels. If not replenished, the diverted funding will impact planned maintenance for the Baltimore Harbor once the response is complete and in future years.
These amounts were not, however, sufficient to fund the response. Last week, the Corps announced the reprogramming of $20 million in unused funds to continue channel clearing work.
This level of reprograming is unprecedented and demonstrates—in the absence of supplemental funds provided by Congress for this clean up—the budgetary juggling the Corps has to do to get the bridge out of the water and off the vessel so the Port of Baltimore can reopen. That juggling will continue.
I urge the Corps and the Coast Guard to communicate with Congress early and often on your needs in this process, on your plans to ensure this work can finish uninterrupted and to do so in partnership with the legislative branch.
Beyond the immediate response, I look forward to hearing from Federal Highway Administrator Bhatt about the timeline to replace the bridge and the role the federal government is playing in aiding that process.
Congress established the Emergency Relief (ER) program in 1958, as part of the federal highway program, to provide for the reconstruction of highways and bridges in the event of a disaster.
Congress understood, then, that a state could not be expected to cover the costs of an unforeseen, emergency loss of an infrastructure asset out of its annual road budget.
That is still true today. Maryland transportation officials estimate it will cost up to $1.9 billion to replace the bridge. While U.S. DOT has provided $60 million in ER funds to date, that is a fraction of the total need.
Prior to collapse, the Key Bridge carried 34,000 vehicles per day. Traffic diversion is increasing vehicle crossings in the Fort McHenry and Harbor tunnels by 18 percent and truck drivers carrying hazardous materials currently must add 25 miles to get through Baltimore via alternate routes, including communities that did not expect hazardous materials and trucks to be going through them.
This Committee has a role to help rebuild this critical economic artery quickly and efficiently—including ensuring the project can advance without a cost share from Maryland.
Finally, I welcome back to this Committee Chair Homendy. Congratulations on your reconfirmation last night. The NTSB’s thorough investigation of this catastrophe will help answer questions about how to prevent future allisions, shore up bridges, save lives and protect our critical infrastructure. I look forward to what Chair Homendy is able to share about this incident based on the NTSB’s preliminary findings released yesterday afternoon.
Thank you to each of our witnesses for being here today and for your testimony.
Next Article Previous Article