Hearing for Key Department of Transportation Nominees

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Good morning. The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will come to order. Today we'll be considering three of President Trump's nominees for key roles at the Department of Transportation: Seval Oz, nominee for Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Research and Technology; Michael Rutherford, nominee for Assistant Secretary of Transportation for the Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy; and Gregory Zerzan, nominee for General Counsel of DOT. Transportation is and will remain the backbone of global economies. We're entering a new era defined by autonomous vehicles, smart infrastructure, and AI-driven logistics. These advancements are happening around the world, and in some cases elsewhere, because this federal government has been so hostile to innovation. President Trump and Secretary Duffy are faced with a huge undertaking, having to fix the mistakes of the last four years by modernizing regulations and enhancing safety standards. To succeed, they need advisors who understand the promise and the complexity of what lies ahead. Today's nominees fit the bill. Ms. Oz is a pioneer in transportation technology. At Google, she helped develop autonomous vehicles. In Nevada, she brought the private sector and government together to license the state's first self-driving car. And as Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Research and Technology, a newly created role, she will help align DOT's research efforts for the next generation of transportation. Mr. Rutherford experience with nearly every freight mode will serve him well as Assistant Secretary of Transportation for the Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy. At CSX, a major freight railroad, Mr. Rutherford led a 140-person team. He recognizes that optimized supply chains keep costs down for consumers. If confirmed, he will work alongside Secretary Duffy, state and local governments, and the private sector to eliminate bottlenecks and secure freight networks. Finally, Mr. Zerzan brings valuable managerial experience from his time in both the legislative and executive branches. As the current Acting Solicitor for the Department of the Interior, he oversees a large team of political appointees and career civil servants. He'll do the same at DOT, providing impartial strategic counsel to improve our skies, roadways, and waterways. These nominees are ready to help transform the American transportation system through responsible innovation, lean regulation, and a renewed focus on safety. I look forward to hearing from them today. With that, I'll turn to Ranking Member Cantwell for her opening remarks.

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome to the nominees. Congratulations on that nomination. We're here today to consider, as the chairman said, Mr. Zerzan to be General Counsel at Department of Transportation, Mr. Rutherford to be Assistant Secretary for the Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy, and Ms. Oz to be Assistant Secretary for the Office of Research and Technology. These three positions are critical to the core mission of the department in improving safety and investing in our nation's infrastructure. The department's leaders must be committed to upholding— to holding the transportation sector it regulates to protect safety and consumer standards. Mr. Zerzan, the General Counsel plays a critical role in everything the department does, determining which safety requirements are approved or eliminated, signing off on grant agreements, allowing cities and states to begin building projects. I have recent— recently expressed my concern about the now Deputy Secretary Steven Bradbury, who as General Counsel during the first Trump administration orchestrated a number of rollbacks on important safety issues, and I hope to ask you questions about that and look for a different approach. I am alarmed that the department's recent formalization of a new process that would authorize you, if you were confirmed, to take actions against safety inspectors if a company claims the inspector violated DOT's enforcement procedures, especially allowing regulated entities to regulate the very officials charged with keeping public safety. We found in the ODA process at Boeing, this became a very big issue where the ODA individuals responsible for approving the process were retaliated against and thereby pulled their punches, and a lot of it, the rest of it is history. So we need we need a strong safety regime. Maintaining the strongest safety process doesn't just save lives, it spurs economic growth, enables the U.S. to stay competitive, and certainly is essential for selling U.S. airplanes abroad. Now we continue to see a huge opportunity in which we want aviation to win, as there's a world demand for 40,000 planes. At the same time, we have to address other sectors of transportation. Last week we saw reports indicating the loss of more than 20% of the Federal Highway Administration's workforce and 30% of the Federal Transit Administration's workforce. So, clearly, this is impacting our ability to move quickly in approving projects and getting them implemented. So I would love to ask you about that and how you expect to turn that around so that DOT can continue to move forward. Mr. Rutherford, I created the freight office to improve multimodal freight planning. Okay, that sounds like a generous staff right there. I'm not sure if I created it. Maybe I had legislation and we all approved it or something like that, but let's not get Al Gore-ish here.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

We're happy to give credit to the former chair.

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

Okay, well, to be clear, our state had a freight office. Why? Because if you moved freight in the state of Washington, you got a percentage of the gas tax because moving freight was part of economic development. So why not prioritize transportation investment that moved economic development? So, yes, we did say, Let's create a federal freight policy, which Ray LaHood and others, and we all did. So, okay, great. So now we know freight can't wait. We had yesterday's hearing on the Surface Transportation Act, similar issue where we're saying if we're not competitive as a nation in moving freight quickly, then we're going to lose, in our case, to British Columbia or somewhere else, and then the competitive of the United States is impacted. So definitely want to continue to make sure that freight investments are prioritized, and we've talked about that yesterday as we prepare for a Surface Transportation Act. Ms. Oz, the DOT's research programs are vital for using technology to improve both safety and efficiency, and it's important to recognize that the industry, that we continue to work together on the development of these issues and get them implemented. One thing that we're really concerned about now is the spectrum interference and radio altimeters. When we look at what happened in the DCA air crash, there was a lot of discussion even about how the altimeters of those helicopters might have been affected, giving them different altitudes. And as the previous implementation and discussion between DOT and NTIA, a lot of confusion over how to have the airline industry safely transmitting and the interference that might occur with 5G and 6G. So look forward to asking you questions about that. Clearly, we have a lot to do to continue to improve transportation. I'm excited about the opportunities, excited about the continuation of drone technology, which we have championed here in the committee for many years, and the applications are so numerous and continuing to pay dividends. So obviously DOT has a very big role here to continue the rollout of that drone technology, and so look forward to asking you about that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Oz for her opening statement.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Chairman Cruz, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for the privilege to appear before you today. I i'm deeply honored and, to be candid, profoundly aware of the magnitude and urgency of the task ahead. The challenges are formidable, but the chance to shape the future of transportation and American innovation is even more compelling. I would like to acknowledge President Trump's unwavering commitment to ensuring that the U.S. Department of Transportation showcases the very best of American innovation and technology leadership. I wish to thank Secretary Sean Duffy for his confidence in my leadership and entrusting me with the responsibility of delivering the safest, most efficient, and forward-looking transportation systems. I'm grateful to my family and friends for their love and support throughout my journey. My daughter, a proud Johns Hopkins graduate, is currently performing opera overseas, and while she couldn't be here today, I'm blessed to be joined by my friends and colleagues. I begin with a simple but bold premise: I believe in the mission of saving lives. Every year, nearly 40,000 people lose their lives in traffic collisions. That's approximately 100 lives every single day. Yet, 90% of these deaths could be avoided with self-driving cars. We have the technology to save thousands of American lives. So why aren't we doing so? For every year we wait, more lives are lost. It's not just a matter of innovation. It's a moral imperative. I look forward to working with you on a national framework to advance our transportation technologies, many of which were made in America and hold the promise to prevent countless fatalities. The thought of restricting mobility is also deeply unsettling for me. Movement is as natural to me as breathing. When we lose our ability to move safely, our world shrinks. Our health, both mental and physical, suffers. We become isolated. We have all experienced the awkward moment of taking the keys away from our aging parents or lying awake at night anxiously waiting for our teenagers to return home safely. The promise of a new generation of transportation will be about building better drivers, ones who don't get distracted, never drive under the influence, possess superior perception, and react in an instant. My role would be to set clear vision for how evidence-based research and innovation drive transportation policy and infrastructure towards practical, achievable solutions that advance public safety and serve the American people. I was born to immigrant parents who deeply value the opportunities this country offered. I learned the importance of having a meaningful plan fueled by determination, hard work, and commitment. These values became the cornerstone of my career, guiding me as I built high-performance teams in the dynamic, fast-paced world of global technology. That journey led me to leadership roles with Silicon Valley's most innovative companies. I joined Google X because they shared my vision of merging advanced automotive hardware with intelligent software to solve real-world challenges, human challenges. My experience in global partnerships proved invaluable as I negotiated complex multi-party agreements that brought together traditionally competitive and, yes, even adversarial stakeholders. By strategically leveraging urgency and a well-placed fear of missing out, I aligned diverse interests and secured critical cooperation. In just 18 months, we accomplished what many thought impossible, delivering the first self-driving vehicle. I earned the trust and support of key stakeholders across state and local governments, town halls, law enforcement, and emergency services. I'm most proud of leading this extraordinary collaboration resulting in an Autopilot platform with an exceptional safety record. Building on that success, I transitioned to a global automotive supplier with over 200,000 employees where I faced new challenges driving digital transformation within a legacy industry. Looking ahead, I've been advising top AI and data science teams to assess transformative technology frontiers. Together, we can establish U.S. transportation as the gold standard by developing AI models built on the American automation stack. I am eager to mobilize my office's full resources to enhance safety, efficiency, and innovation across all modes of our nation's advanced transportation network. I've been In closing, I've been in the lion's den of the $4 trillion automotive engine projecting to grow to $7 trillion over the next decade. The Department of Transportation is our national pride for demonstrating U.S. leadership in driving the economic engine of our nation. This moment is not years away. It is now. I shared parts of my journey with you today to underscore that everything I've done academically and professionally has prepared me for this precise moment. We stand at the threshold of a generational opportunity that will define the future not only of transportation, but of American economic growth, innovation, and global influence. Success will require competent and skilled leadership to earn the public's trust. I respectfully ask for the support of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in achieving these vital goals. I look forward to answering your questions today.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Mr. Rutherford, you're now recognized for your opening statement.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Cantwell, member of the committees, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. It is an incredible honor to be President Trump's nominee as the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy, more simply referred to as the Freight Office. I'm grateful for the confidence placed in me by both President Trump and Secretary Duffy to lead this relatively new office and to shepherd its continued development under their leadership in the years ahead. I'm also grateful for my family who is here with me today. My wife Francesca, who's not just the love of my life, but pardon me for saying, senators, the most interesting person that I've ever met. She's joined by our daughter Maria Vittoria, a rising freshman and research scholar in the honors program at the University of Florida. And our 12-year-old son, Giancarlo, a source of both great pride and constant entertainment. As I sit here today before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, I'm aware of the expectations for this position, especially outside this room. Industry has long lamented the fact that freight doesn't vote. The introduction of the Freight Office was hailed as finally giving a voice to freight. While much has been accomplished, still much more is expected. I worked in industry after studying international finance and commerce at the Georgetown School of Foreign Service and getting a master's in international economics and management at SDA Bocconi in Milan, Italy. I worked in consumer goods at Johnson & Johnson and Adidas in Europe, where I learned a lot about sourcing and distribution. Then I joined CSX in 2008, starting out in intermodal before ultimately managing everything moving on the railroad except intermodal and coal. During that time, I participated in a number of strategic initiatives like the National Gateway Infrastructure Project, launching the UMAX Interline Container Program in conjunction with Union Pacific, championing 50-foot boxcar reinvestments, and assisting customers during the rollout of precision scheduled railroading. It is my sincere hope that all those who have long promoted the creation of a high-level freight office will view the first Assistant Secretary appointment of someone with my industry experience as a reflection of the commitment by President Trump and Secretary Duffy to advance the cause for freight. The mission of the Freight Office goes well beyond simply creating ease of doing business by establishing a primary, though not sole, point of contact for all things freight-related. Ad hoc coordination must make way for a more systematic and holistic approach to freight planning throughout USDOT while partnering with state DOTs and across the administration as appropriate. The proposed draft National Multimodal Freight Network, with over 78,000 roadway miles, 80,000 rail miles, 21,000 waterway miles, 140 marine ports, and 65 airports, plays a fundamental role in much of the activities of the Freight Office. Given this significance, we must get it right. If confirmed, the Freight Office will follow up on all concerns regarding the current draft, including those regarding missing mileage in some states. Building upon this work, the National Freight Strategic Plan aims to drive and align with state DOT freight plans to bolster economic growth and international competitiveness based on a shared vision of the future. In addition to addressing bottlenecks and bringing key infrastructure back to a state of good repair, this requires identifying critical freight facilities and corridors with vital interconnections to enhance overall performance of our nation's freight system. And if confirmed, I will work to ensure the timely update of the National Freight Strategic Plan consistent with current market dynamics, including shifting trade flows, the reshoring of manufacturing, and a renewed emphasis on industries of national importance. I will also seek to ensure that freight grant programs within the Office of the Secretary and across USDOT support key priorities of proper federal interest. Another key function of the Freight Office is to facilitate data-sharing opportunities among freight stakeholders. Recognizing that you cannot manage what you do not know, Freight Logistics Optimization Works, or FLOW, provides freight stakeholders with invaluable supply chain visibility, enabling them to react more proactively to forward-looking changes in the operating environment at our nation's ports. Despite early successes, there is still so much more that the Freight Office can do to build upon these earlier efforts. If I am fortunate to be confirmed as the Assistant Secretary of the Office of Multimodal Freight Infrastructure and Policy, I will devote myself to helping the Secretary promote safe, efficient, and resilient freight transportation across all modes and along the full spectrum of supply chain and logistics, from sourcing to distribution, from America's heartland to the big city and beyond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That concludes my statement, and I'd be happy to answer the committee's questions.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Mr. Zerzan.

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My great fear that introductions would be done in alphabetical order has been realized. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of the committee for allowing me to appear before you today. I'm Greg Zerzan, and I've been nominated for the position of General Counsel of the Department of Transportation. To begin, I would like to thank President Trump for putting his faith in me by nominating me for this position. I was born in Portland, Oregon, as the youngest child of Charles and Joan Zerzan. My parents were both members of the Greatest Generation, who lived through the Great Depression, the Second World War, and the Cold War. Dad fought in the China-Burma-India theater of the war, and Mom served as a volunteer plane spotter while working on ranches in southern Oregon and northern California. My parents met in college after Dad returned from the fighting. At the end of their wedding ceremony in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where Dad was attending medical school, the priest gave my parents the standard injunction to be fruitful, go forth and multiply, a task they took to with enthusiasm and alacrity, going on to have 12 children, mostly on Army bases across America. I'm privileged to be the youngest of those 12. My parents taught us that God, family, and country are the three great causes to which one might profitably dedicate one's life. They also taught us that the things that unite us are far more important than the things that divide us. One of my earliest political memories was my father's unbridled enthusiasm for Governor Ronald Reagan's campaign for the presidency in 1980, and in equal measure, his frustration that he could not convince my mom not to vote to reelect President Carter, whom she said seemed like an honorable man. I mention my parents because they taught us that it was important, indeed necessary, to work together, even when we disagree. It is my hope that if I'm so fortunate as to be confirmed, I will bring these lessons with me to the department. If I'm so fortunate as to be confirmed, I promise I will do my best to live out the values my parents taught us and to work with you with respect and humility, even if there are sincere policy disagreements. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I'd like to thank you for your service to this country. I would like to thank Interior Secretary Doug Burgum for allowing me to serve at the department these last six months. I would like to thank the excellent professional career civil servants with whom I've had the privilege of serving now in three administrations. I can say with no false modesty that to the extent I've enjoyed any professional success, it is in large measure because of our hardworking career federal workforce. Lastly and most importantly, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank my beautiful wife, Shannon. She made me a Texan and a father to our boys Charlie and George. No matter whatever else happens in my life, I will consider myself a success for having convinced her to marry me. Thank you all very much for this opportunity.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Well, and I commend your wife on her excellent judgment making you a Texan. Ms. Oz, we know that human error is the leading cause of car crashes. In your judgment, how close are we to a world where AV technology can significantly reduce traffic fatalities, and what do you see as the biggest obstacle to that happening?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator Cruz, thank you very much for that critical question. And it is one that keeps most of us up at night. We have the ability to bring forward a federal regulatory environment that will not only create clear, consistent direction for the industry, but also enable us to surface above the deaths that we've had that are completely solvable. AV technology, and specifically safe self-driving vehicles and robotic technology, has proven to be safer by all metrics shown in the public records. And so it's my responsibility, if confirmed, to ensure that we bring that to the forefront of this discussion.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

The US right now lacks a federal framework for AVs. Our regulatory framework is fragmented, with different rules deployed in each state. Meanwhile, countries like Germany and China have national-level coordination in testing, deployment, and product liability. How could the US lose its competitive edge to other countries in advancing this tech if the continued fractured system

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

The fractured system, Senator and committee, is due to the fact that we have different regulatory standards across different states. And you can imagine your state in particular is pretty laissez-faire about it. But if you go to California—

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

We tend to be that way about a lot.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Yeah. If you go to California, you have driving permit requirements, data requirements, which are not bad, but they have to be to some degree standardized. So my biggest concern is China's proven to be a very healthy competitor in this area. I don't think of them as an enemy as much as I think of them as an adversary or competitor that's taken a very strong mandate to making this a strategic and economic decision, to ensuring that, and as well as existential to their livelihood, to ensuring that AV technology gets on the roads in a very fast way. They are building this technology orders of magnitude faster than we are and have commanded now the 2025 mandate to use local chips on all robotaxis. And if they have 10,000 robotaxis right now driving, that means you can imagine the number of chips they're going to be starting to build up. So as we think about the foundational expertise in this country and the technology we built here, we need to make sure that our stack gets built on US chips. And in that respect, I would be very interested in the Made in America approach and ensuring that we protect that along the way. Thank you.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Mr. Zerzan, the Biden-Buttigieg DOT failed to replace the outdated air traffic control system, but they spent—it was just reported—roughly $80 billion on DEI grants and extraneous environmental goals. If confirmed, how would you, from a legal standpoint, help DOT refocus on its core safety mission, including by eliminating ideological grant requirements not justified by statute?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe it is important for the department to follow the laws that Congress has passed. And so to the extent extraneous matters are put into rulemakings or other policies that are not justified by the law, those should be addressed and remedied. Obviously, I'm not at the department, so I don't have a great deal of familiarity with Secretary Duffy's approach in this respect, but I can say at the Department of the Interior, we have taken very seriously the President's mandate to ensure that the laws are being followed and that there are not extraneous matters being included in our regulatory policies.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Mr. Rutherford, the Office of Multimodal Freight oversees the development of the National Multimodal Freight Network, the federally designated network of highways, railways, ports, airports, and other infrastructure critical to the efficient movement of freight across the United States. Within this network, shippers and transportation operators are often at odds with each other. For example, shippers may demand faster delivery, but carriers may be constrained by driver shortages or port congestion. Based on your experience working with both shippers and operators, how can the Office of Multimodal Freight help bridge these gaps?

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

Thank you.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Thank you for the question, Senator. One of the objectives clearly for the freight office is to address issues of congestion, and congestion is the enemy of asset utilization. When we fix problems of congestion, you're not just driving down cost, but you're actually generating additional capacity so that you can also be more efficient. And we saw that at CSX with the rollout of precision-scheduled railroading. So it becomes a virtuous cycle or circle, if you will. And by working with the multimodal freight network and identifying key strategic infrastructure, we'll be able to make certain that we're focusing our emphasis on improving our overall infrastructure where it matters most to both shippers and transportation providers alike.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Ranking Member Cantwell.

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Zerzan, your predecessor, Mr. Bradbury's, role in the first Trump administration allowed for an exemption to the ADBS out system for the Department of Defense. And it was then later learned that this wasn't as the request was requested in the exemption, a very off— not very often used thing, but it turned out to be something they did all the time. So how can you make sure that as you're looking at regulations, particularly when the administration says they want to get rid of 10 rules, how can you make sure that these kinds of oversights where people really weren't paying attention to the fact that DOD and FAA did not really have a clear plan to keep these planes separated, what can you do to make sure that that kind of rulemaking and exemption isn't followed in the future?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Thank you, Senator. I take the obligation of the General Counsel to ensure the laws are being followed very seriously. I also acknowledge my own limitations on technical matters, and fortunately the department is full of people who exercise excellent judgment in most cases. So I would certainly attempt to rely upon the experts and ensure that in following the law, we're doing whatever we can do to maximize safety for the American people.

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

So how would you, in this case, when DOD came to the FAA and said, We want an exemption, how would you as counsel make sure that you're following what is the process to understand what the exemption really is, as opposed to—I'm sure a lot of people would like to give DOD an exemption, right? There's important missions that they have.

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Yeah, and I think it's an excellent question, and candidly, not being familiar with the particulars of this case, it's hard for me to give a precise answer. But I do encounter instances even in my current job where the DOD or other departments come to us and ask for various accommodations or agreements, and in each case, it is the same process, which is to rely upon the technical experts and seek their judgment and then make a good-faith determination of what I think is compliant with the law. Thank

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

you for that. And get up to speed on it because I think it will come up. This is an ongoing issue. And this incident that just happened in the Upper Midwest also just a reflection of we don't— there's something amiss here if this kind of near-miss things are continuing to happen. So, we need DOT to be on the ball. Mr. Rutherford, do we need to increase the investments in infra and freight and port infrastructure?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

I think if we, uh, Senator, if we're talking about investments in infrastructure generally, absolutely. But I think it would be premature to speak, uh, about individual grant vehicles because, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, I really want to make certain that we adopt a holistic and systematic approach. We've got a number of grant vehicles, not only within the Office of the

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

Secretary, but broadly. A more looking, you you come with this private sector experience saying, I understand the movement of goods and services. And what I'm trying to get at is that we are at a threatened point of not being competitive enough if you can't get products safely and timely to market. And so in my world, because we represent a lot of ports, I see exactly what that bottleneck can be. And so infrastructure investment is going to help us be competitive as a nation. So I want an increase in that investment. I'm just trying to see if you agree.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

I agree, and but not only those within the Office of the Secretary, but also elsewhere, whether they be in MARAD or what have you, any other investments. And that's why for me, the I guess my point is—

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

You're saying make it an ecosystem that works together very effectively. Correct. Great. We're all for MARAD spending, too, only because the market is outside the United States. 95% of consumers are outside the United States, so if you're not getting U.S. products to them timely, we're not going to be competitive.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Absolutely, and I guess where I was trying to arrive is my point of departure is really the National Freight Strategic Plan, and then that should be not only managing what we do at the Office of the Secretary, but also influencing grant-making decisions elsewhere within DOT.

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

Thank you. Thank you for that. Ms. Oz, I'd love to ask about what your daughter sings in opera, but we might not have time for that, so

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

discussed. Pardon me? To be discussed later. To

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

be discussed. So what do you think is— you've now had this private sector experience where we are really basically beta testing and rolling out to larger regimes of adoptions, but trying to do so in a safe manner. I've always thought that You know, just starting here and then just saying, well, we did a few betas and now we're going to open it up to the whole country. That's too much. Like, so what— how do you see us continuing to move forward in the adoption? And what do you do about the trucking sector and the huge workforce that is involved there? Because it's a very key part of the US economy, hundreds of thousands of people.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator Cantwell, it's an excellent question, a 2-part question. The first part has to do with the fact that, as I mentioned in my testimony, we built this technology here in America. And so we have all of the foundational capability to scale it in the most safe way we can by using conservative planning and by using systems that are fail-operational. So that includes redundancies in the system. It includes ensuring we have secondary approaches like telematics. Teleoperations, remote vehicle management. But most importantly, we need a framework in which we can give clear guidance to industry on scaling and deploying the capabilities on public roads in America in a safe way. And that's, I think, the challenge with this administration, with all of us, to incorporate many elements of the technical capabilities we currently have and just ensure that we coordinate them and work together. On a national framework. Trucking is a very interesting windfall benefactor for this technology because trucking and commerce is one of the areas that makes the most economic distinction on benefits as we have remote vehicle management. I think it's one of the first use cases that we can emerge with, and I'm hoping to provide good clarity and good guidance on how we can do that. On the technical side and with research that we've already

Ranking Member Maria Cantwell (D-WA)SPEAKER_04

All right, yeah, we I'm getting you a little out of your lane, because we're not hiring you to figure out what to do with 200,000 or 300,000 Teamsters. But at the same time, it is, when you sit there and you're looking at the framework which you describe, which I think is a good plan, having a framework that then you can coordinate with industry and then get people to buy confidence in. I've I thought the same about the drone system. You know, we had people, you know, visioning lots of drone use in the Northwest for a long, long time. I think we started in 2001 with pushing the FAA to keep moving forward. So here it's the same thing, but you also have a huge employment sector, unlike the drone industry didn't have that, you know, existing workforce issue. So we'll look forward, my time's expired, to discussing this more with you. Thank you.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

it. Thank you, sir.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Senator Schatz.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

I'll defer to Senator Curtis if he's ready.

SPEAKER_UNKNOWN

I'm always ready.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

All right.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

All right. Senator Curtis.

Senator John Curtis (R-UT)SPEAKER_01

flip to the right page in my book and put glasses on. All right, maybe I was a little overoptimistic. Okay, Ms. Oz, Mr. Rutherford, and Mr. Zerzan—did I get that correct? Thank you all for being here today, and congratulations to each of you. I've greatly enjoyed the opportunity to work with Secretary Duffy this year, and I appreciate the leadership he's brought to the department. He's shown a great interest in Utah. He's personally been out there, and Utah has recognized that and is very appreciative. Mr. Zerzan, Utah is experiencing rapid growth and preparing to host the 2034 Winter Olympic Games. With that comes mounting pressure around environmental review timelines and permitting processes. How can DOT's legal office help streamline these processes while maintaining integrity and fairness?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Thank you very much, Senator. It's an important question. The Supreme Court's recent Seven County decision has certainly facilitated NEPA reviews that I hope are more consistent with what was intended by Congress. So that alone will help expedite the review process and hopefully mitigate some of the litigation risk that has delayed projects of all kinds. At the Department of the Interior, we have worked on facilitating streamlined processes that are focused on what is required by statute, as opposed to other extraneous matters which may indicate policy preferences, but which ultimately end up slowing the process of permitting important projects. At the department, I would hope to help bring some of those same permitting reform ideas that are designed, again, to streamline the process while also ensuring environmental integrity.

Senator John Curtis (R-UT)SPEAKER_01

Thank you. Mr. Rutherford, how do you plan to partner with state departments of transportation to ensure freight planning reflects both national priorities and state-specific needs?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Thank you for the question, Senator. Obviously, there are a number of things within the actual functions of the freight office in terms of the review of the individual state DOT freight plans, the development of the National Freight Strategic Plan. But I think what's really important is that we both seek to drive and align. The National Multimodal Freight Network is one area where we do that, where we make certain that all of the strategic inventory of our nation's infrastructure is properly captured, because that's a point of departure not only at the freight office, but also for many of the individual state DOTs. And I think also the work similar to what Secretary Duffy has talked about last week, this need to identify initiatives of proper federal interest that are going to be strategically important. By identifying them more clearly, it will help us, for example, at the freight office, if confirmed, to respond to questions like those from the Government Accountability Office about exactly what do we mean by an exemplary project.

Senator John Curtis (R-UT)SPEAKER_01

Thank you. Yeah, that's good. Thanks, Ms. Oz. Utah has established itself as a leader in transportation innovation, thanks to strong leadership from the Utah Department of Transportation and willingness to invest in new technologies like electric aircraft. I'm interested in your perspective on how the United States is competing with China when it comes to innovative transportation technologies.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator Curtis, thank you very much for that important question. And I wanted to also say thank you for your staff for meeting with me during my recent visits to the staff office. I enjoyed our conversations around energy. So, the biggest problem we have, and specifically with China, I think, is that what your question is?

Senator John Curtis (R-UT)SPEAKER_01

Correct. Yes.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

China has mandated, as of their 2025 program, which is in effect right now, the the asset commitment, the capital commitment, the unilateral decision-making of investing in this in this energy sector and automatic driving sector in a in a very big way. And as of recently, they are selling more cars than we are. They own about 70% of the EV market, and they're building on the chipsets that they've developed in the country locally, and probably to expand to other countries in the region. The U.S., in in my estimate, built this technology, as I discussed earlier with Senator Cantwell. We need to own it. We need to build regulatory involvement around it and have the very best research that that gives that gives direction for that capability. So that means that unilaterally we have to decide we want to make this part of our agenda, which the president and the secretary definitely have have have prioritized. So I guess I hope to support that effort going forward.

Senator John Curtis (R-UT)SPEAKER_01

Thank you. I'm almost out of time. I'd just like to double down with all three of you that Utah is ready to be innovative and to lead, and I know the Secretary is as well. And any chance that Utah can be part of any innovation or things that you want to work with and experiment with, we'd love to have those conversations. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Senator Schatz.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for your willingness to serve. I have three questions, and they're all for Mr. Zerzan. Thank you for being willing to step up, and thanks to your family for the sacrifice. And I'm going to caveat this with, I know you're not in the government, and I know that's an easy way not to answer the question, and a perfectly fair way to not answer the question. So I'm actually trying to get to how you would approach this problem, because you would be within your rights to say, Well, I don't know yet, but I want you to try to answer this. The department—and I have a good relationship with the secretary—the department froze around 3,200 grant awards for review. And, I've spoken with him both publicly and privately of the problem of all of them being frozen, and then the bandwidth problem of unfreezing them individually. And he was pretty frank about the inability to process this in a timely fashion. I think we're now out of the 3,200, somewhere between 400 and 500 who have now—that have now been approved, but this is the law, and we're now talking about billions of dollars of transportation infrastructure, nonpartisan stuff, bipartisan stuff, kind of meat-and-potatoes stuff. I'm wondering how, in the interest of fidelity to the law that we passed, both the appropriations law and the IIJA, how do we effectuate a process that doesn't end up taking us 5 years to get money out that's been approved a couple of years ago now?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Well, thank you very much, Senator. Manpower is a great way to solve a lot of problems, so ensuring that you have eyeballs on the grants— I will tell you from my own experience, President Trump had ordered a review of all spending in order to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being used faithfully. At the Department of the Interior, we go through each individual grant and review and see, because the government is very good at putting in clauses for allowing it to do things like pause its spending. And so, to the extent there is a justifiable reason for doing so, then we've put a pause on it. If there's not, then the money goes out the door. So, I completely sympathize with what you're saying, and I'm familiar with the with the challenge.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

I just want to offer that just operationally, we may have to invert the assumption, right? You may want to review for impropriety or, you know, noncompliance with the law or some other reason to freeze. But I think that as long as the Department of Transportation professionals have worked with the state department of transportation to to engage, that our assumption should be that that is lawful, subject to review, not that all of it doesn't go until it's individually sort of reapproved. Because if we do that—and again, I'm not trying to, you know, reduce the prerogatives of the department to align better with with the new president's priorities and the new secretary's priorities, but you're just not going to get through this list, and you're going to get people on a bipartisan basis, you know, pretty angry. The other challenge is I don't want to create a situation where it's Tammany Hall, and I got to appeal directly to the secretary to kind of release my funds, right? And then we're—then it's a mayor and a swimming pool in your council district, and that's not the way that we do transportation infrastructure. So this is not working right now, and I think the secretary would agree, but we need a new process because more manpower—you know what's going to happen. It's going to take months to just fund, hire, train, and then we're into next year and we will be one-third of our way through the list. This thing is going too slow. There is an Office of Tribal Transportation and an Office of Tribal Government Affairs, and I want to know how you're going to work with them to train lawyers and program staff on their obligations under the law regarding tribal consultation and transportation issues. The reason I mention this is that we did a bunch of things on a bipartisan basis to include tribes in ways that are novel, but they are now statutory. The problem is that, as you know, from DOI, people kind of know what tribal consultation means. DOT, not as much. And, you know, we had a problem with the Energy Department where they—this was all new to them, so they had like bonding requirements for like a, you know, a 300-person tribe as if that tribe were a municipal government that could go onto Wall Street and get a AAA rating. And so I'm—I just want your commitment to kind of work through these issues given your experience at DOI and and to help your team understand that tribes can't be treated like counties. You have to understand the unique legal obligations and trust obligations between the United States government and tribes.

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Yeah, absolutely, Senator. Thank you. And I hope I can help create value in that respect.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

Okay. Thank you. And then final question, with your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. In the last FAA reauthorization, I passed a law to create a stand-alone Aviation Consumer Protection Office to further empower this function at DOT. It's not fully established because it was subject to appropriations and we haven't appropriated money for this purpose. So that function would reside under the GC's shop. And I just want your commitment to just fight for consumers in the aviation context and for us to be able to work together on a couple of specific things. There were some rulemakings that I think were broadly popular and rational, and I'm hoping we can work together on just protecting aviation consumers.

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Thank you, Senator. Absolutely.

Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI)SPEAKER_07

Thank you.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you, Senator Luján.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for being here today. Ms. Oz, is the safety of the American people on America's roads important to you?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Critical.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Would you say it's a top priority?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Yes.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Would you say it's the number one priority?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

It's a critical priority.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Appreciate that. You worked at Google[x], is that correct?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

That is correct, sir.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

on their self-driving cars. It's my understanding that they logged over 100,000 miles on public roads. Is that about right?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

More than that.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

More than that. And there was no public disclosure of that, is that correct?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Well, at the time it was much less. We're talking about 2010 period, I presume, right? The testing was, um, in compliant with, with what the

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

You were on the team at the time and later defended this question, saying, quote, "Keeping the project quiet enabled Google to test under the radar of public opinion and lawmakers. We just didn't want the program to slow down for any reason," end quote.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Yeah, that

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

If I could finish, Google took it upon themselves to make the decision for the public and for regulators, effectively using public roads, and, by extension, American lives as a testbed. Do you stand by this decision?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

The decision at the time was accurate, uh, Senator, because there was no— there was no— there was an absence of any kind of regulatory framework. The testing framework had been received. There was no bill, uh, at the time, and, and the company went ahead and made testing in, in accordance with the compliance they received.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Do you believe that innovation should be prioritized over public safety and oversight?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Absolutely not.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Do you stand by that decision then at the time?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

I was not in the company during that period, during that 2010 period when the vehicles were being tested. I came in 2011. So the comment you're making, sir, was much later on.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Is this quote attributable to you though? Did you say this? Keeping the project quiet enabled Google to test under the radar of public opinion and

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

lawmakers? The context was keeping keeping the project, keeping the engineering teams focused, keeping media and other concerning, you know, groups that wanted to know specifics was primarily the reason why we wanted to make sure that we kept this, the engineering teams focused and that there was no distraction. That's the, that was the metaphor that was used to describe that in the context.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Is that, is that your quote though, the one I'm reading?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Probably, yes.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Probably?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

I have to see it, but I would imagine I made a

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

comment. I'll get that to you. I'll submit that into the record so we can— be certain there. What steps will you take to assure this committee that you'll prioritize safety of the American people over interests of the industry?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

While we were at Google and developing the program, I was presiding over some of the work that was being done to ensure that we had a program that couldn't could not be sinkable, sir. So that meant having extreme caution exercised at every node on the on the on the point of departure to recovery, to return of the vehicle to the home base. So that record stands for itself, and it's still probably the safest record in the industry.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Appreciate that. I mean, as you've heard from all of our colleagues, public safety matters very much to us. I appreciate you saying it's a top priority, critical priority. That's something I think that we can all agree on. So thank

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

you,

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

appreciate your responses there. Mr. Zerzan, you are currently the acting solicitor and principal solicitor at the Department of Interior, is that correct?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Yes, sir.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

And you previously served as the general counsel and chief administrative officer at the Department of the Interior, is that correct?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Uh, no, sir. I, I think that was a maybe an energy company I was in that role at.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Appreciate that. So would you say you have experience leading a major legal office and advising on federal law and regulatory issues?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Yes, sir.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Do you have substantive legal experience in transportation law?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

Uh, not with respect to the department itself, but given the interconnectedness of transportation with everything we do in this country, it's unavoidable.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

How about infrastructure policy or regulatory issues specific to the Department of Transportation? For example, aviation, rail, highway safety, motor carrier rules?

Gregory ZerzanSPEAKER_00

I am not a lawyer who has a substantial amount of background with that. Set of laws.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

Now, the Department of Transportation general counsel typically needs deep knowledge across transportation-specific sectors. And as you know, our country faces tremendous transportation and safety issues right now, as I was just questioning Ms. Oz—air traffic controllers, autonomous vehicles, rail safety, and all the rest. This administration just continues to baffle me with its staffing decisions. There's experts out there that are deep in all of this policy. I appreciate your honesty and your candor in that response, sir. I just don't understand, Mr. Chairman, why, with all the depth of experts in and around specific areas, that sometimes this happens. I just don't understand it. Nothing against you personally. I appreciate the work you do at the Department of the Interior. I'm sure you were fabulous with the energy companies that you've supported as well. We should nominate you to be at the Department of Energy, or we should put you back into this spot at the Department of the Interior, because you're doing well there. But nonetheless, that's just my opinion. Mr. Rutherford, one question I guess I have for you, sir, is January 6th. So, I'm sorry to bring this up again, but you posted that—you said that January 6th, that it was a a disruption. You said that your father, a former congressman, was one of the few to continue to vote against certifying the votes after the January 6th disruption. Would you call January

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

6th an insurrection? Mr. Senator, I'll tell you, I'm the son of a policeman, my father, who's a a congressman, and I certainly don't condone violence against members of our law enforcement. So if you're speaking to that, that's one thing. If you're speaking to the certification of the vote, I think every member of Congress is required by law to certify the vote, and it's not until Congress has certified a vote that the president is elected.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

My question is not those things. My question is very specific: Was January 6th an insurrection?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

I would leave that to someone else to describe.

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

So you stand by calling it a disruption?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

It certainly disrupted the process of the day. I

Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-NM)SPEAKER_09

mean, look, to your point, I appreciate what you're saying there. People died that day. Officers were beaten. Some of them are no longer with us. Words matter, y'all. And we're going to be leaders in these positions. Senator, there's just— if I could finish, sir, because my time's up as well, and I appreciate the indulgence. Mr. Chairman, I just, I just hope just down the road with some of these things, we just remember that, you know, it all matters. I appreciate the service of your father as well, and the work that was done in those spaces. And you're all going to be confirmed. Um, but just words matter as we just get through all this stuff, is all that I'm asking. Thank you for the indulgence, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

I would just— I thank my friend from from New Mexico, and I would note that the Department of Transportation Office of Multimodal Transportation is unlikely to have any direct responsibilities concerning January 6th. And if we want to have a discussion about January 6th, I'm more than happy to do so. And I'm happy to say under no way, shape, or form was January 6th an insurrection. I think that's a term that is loaded with partisan content and inaccurately describes what occurred that day. But given this hearing is on DOT nominees, this is probably not— Mr.

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Chairman, I think we can both agree it was a bad day, though.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

I think this is not the right forum for that discussion. Senator Moreno.

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and congratulations to all of you on being nominated. I'm sure you feel the way most people would feel in your position, which is it's a great honor to be asked by the President of the United States to serve their country. Ms. Oz, I'll start with you. When you look at your job and making certain that we're advancing research and technology in the automobile industry, where do you see a vision of where we are from a transportation perspective in, let's say, 10 or 15 years? Is private ownership of cars still a factor, or are self-driving, autonomous vehicles going to be the primary and only means of transportation?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator, first of all, it's good to see you. I enjoyed our time together in your offices, beautiful offices, and we touched on some of these subjects. So, and I appreciate your interest in, in the automotive industry and of your continued commitment I do believe Americans deserve a choice. They deserve a choice on what type of modality they wish to use to get from point A to point B. In some cases, we may no longer want or need to drive in traffic anymore. And in some cases, we want to turn on the ignition and just go on a deep rural drive somewhere in the back roads. So we should have that choice. There is some learnings that we can take probably from the first use cases for the self-driving cars other than freight will most likely be in the realm of fleet management. Because it's going to be easier to maintain fleets of vehicles, turn them on to home base, get them maintained properly. But that will also mean more cars being sold in total volume. Because if you can drive 100,000 miles in one year on a fleet vehicle with 90% utility optimization, You can sell more cars.

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Sure. Well, again, I'm not I'm not concerned about the number of vehicles sold. I'm concerned about ultimately, are we looking to replace private ownership of cars? That's that's my main question. Because here here's the the concern I have. During the during the Biden administration, they had a very unhealthy obsession with EVs, and that led to a disastrous amount of government money spent, hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies. They drove car companies almost off the cliff to make EVs. California, of course, lost their mind, whatever was left of it, and wanted everybody driving an electric vehicle. Thanks to the Congressional Review Act, we ended that. Thanks to our chairman, who did a lot of work with the one big, beautiful bill, we've now made kind of an old-fashioned concept come true, which is car companies should make the cars that people want to buy. So my question to you and what I worry about is that we don't want to go from an obsession with EVs to an obsession with AVs. And we obviously understand Level 1 autonomy to Level 4 autonomy, totally understand as long as it's optional, as long as it's not mandated that somebody buy that tech. One of the things I find interesting is my colleagues talk about how all these safety technologies should be mandated. I took the time to find out what kind of cars they personally drive, and you'd be shocked to know that they didn't purchase themselves those advanced driving technologies. So they don't want to spend their own personal money to buy more safety systems in their own cars, but want to mandate that very same technology for all Americans. Rules for thee, but not for me. My question to you, when you're advising our great Secretary of Transportation/NASA Administrator—maybe we'll nominate him to be the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, too. He would definitely do a better job than Jerome Powell, but that's a different topic for

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

I think they're giving that to Marco Rubio.

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Well, he— I think the quote is 4 jobs. So, so Sean still has a couple more left. But back to the point, when you're advising him, I just want to be clear-eyed about your advice to him. Is it going to be, hey, we have to move to level 5 autonomy and start down the path of eliminating private ownership of cars? Or Or is this how do we invest more in level 1 through level 4 to drive those technologies to be less expensive so that more customers on their own, like my colleagues who currently have not chosen to buy those technologies because maybe they thought they were too expensive to have them. It's a big difference in that conversation.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator, I appreciate the analysis, and cost and affordability is a critical measurement in terms of this freedom. And I think we support, and I will support, all of the above in terms of Level 1 through Level 4. I don't think we'll see Level 5 in my lifetime, but I do think that we can see this capability deployed on all different types of engines, whether they're ICE or electric. So in that case, I think I would support your view on this. Thank

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Yeah, because what I don't want to live is in a dystopian future in which big tech controls the transportation industry in America. As you know, and we talked about this in my office, America did not invent the automobile, but we invented what the automobile became. And the automobile is the ultimate expression of freedom: the idea that I'm here in Washington, D.C., I can go wherever the heck I want in a car that I own, not controlled by big tech, not controlled by government, I can decide what kind of car I buy with my own money. It's a concept that my Democrat colleagues over the last 4 years lost sight of. They said, All of the above. They said, We want to give consumers choice, but in reality, the heavy, heavy hand of government was taking away those choices. And I just want to be incredibly clear that from your perspective, this is not about mandating or driving America towards the point in time in which the only people that control transportation in this country is giant technology companies that would mine our data and have complete control over our lives, because it can control where we went and how we went there. I just want to be clear that that is absolutely not something that you would support.

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

I will support the freedom of choice and the freedom to drive in this country because it's a part of our way of life.

Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)SPEAKER_06

Okay, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Senator Kim.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Rutherford, I'd like to start with you. The FAST Act of 2015 required the Department of Transportation establish a National Multimodal Freight Network to assist states in strategically directing their resources, improving performance of our freight system. OST-F is currently in the process of developing this network and has published a draft map for public comment. It includes rail lines, highways, ports, rivers, and airports. I believe that this effort is crucial for effectively modernizing these systems and can serve as a larger purpose as well as to help guide our own support. So I just wanted to ask if you could commit that the National Multimodal Freight Network be finalized under your leadership should you be confirmed.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Thank you for the question, Senator. And first and foremost, I agree with you about the significance of it, not only for DOT, within DOT, but also at the individual state DOTs. It's a key area of alignment across the federal, state, and local levels. And Finalizing that is certainly a priority day one if confirmed.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

Okay, great. Is that something you would work with me on to make sure that we can keep that going?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Absolutely, because the way I look at the National Multimodal Freight Network is it really gives us a sense of the current state of play, and that needs to be the point of departure from which we then develop a broader national freight strategic plan.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

Another part of that would be, there's the Freight Logistics Optimization Works initiative, FLOW. It's crucial understanding and responding to the supply chain disruptions. This was something that was launched in 2022 in response to some of the supply chain disruptions that we were facing at that time, establishes that public-private partnership between the industry partners and the government so that we can have a better understanding of the purchase order data from importers, et cetera. So, I just wanted to ask, if you're confirmed, can you commit to continuing this program under your leadership and working with Congress to ensure its success?

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

Yes, Senator. And supply chain visibility, it is everything. I like to describe transportation as being an outdoor sport. You've got to be able to change as the operating environment changes. And that forward-looking visibility that FLOW provides, I think, is incredibly helpful. And we've got a great base from which to build. But there's a lot more that we can do with that. And I look forward to exploring those opportunities if confirmed.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

Yeah, just, it's something that, when we look back on, we want to make sure we never have that kind of supply chain disruption before, the effect that it caused on families, on higher prices, and all sorts of other issues. So I'm glad to hear that and hope to be able to work with you on that. Ms. Oz, I'd like to just kind of follow up on some points. A colleague of mine had asked you earlier about the autonomous vehicle efforts, especially when it comes to Google, asked in terms of the issues about Google disclosing that their self-driving cars had logged over 140,000 miles. They disclosed that in 2010. I guess I just wanted to ask you kind of point blank again: Do you think that there was any reason for Google to disclose and to be able to be more transparent about the training as well as the testing that they were doing when it came to autonomous vehicles?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Senator, thank you for the question. As I mentioned to Senator Luján, Google was at the time operating under a testing scenario which was fully compliant with their capabilities, and the decision to test on public roads was also fully compliant. That was during the time that I actually had not joined yet, so my comments were made after the fact, and my comments were more related to the ability for them to test and to lead in not being distracted and focus in what they were doing so as not to be distracted by outside comments and interests in what we were doing.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

I guess I'd be kind of curious now that you're seeking a position that's going to have some oversight over this in terms of understanding. I mean, I can see how you can have that position when you are working for Google, but where is the line here? Where is the line in which a company needs to be transparent about testing and testing technology that is still not fully proven, still has concerns over accidents, and doing it in the general public without the public understanding that this is being tested, uncertain when these tests are going to occur, doing it alongside others? I guess I'm just kind of trying to think through, where does that go from here? Where do you draw that line?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

Well, the world's changed quite substantially since then. So right now we do have statewide regulations on what's required by each state. It's fairly open and transparent, but there's no federal framework right now. And that's mainly the reason why I'm here, sir, is to help inform NHTSA and other regulatory policy bodies on how we can most safely, with the most integrity, using the most unbiased and objective data, ensure that we do this in a public domain and we can scale in an accelerated fashion.

Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ)SPEAKER_03

Yeah, I guess, just as I'm wrapping up here, I guess I just want to raise the point. I understand that. And I do think that there needs to be conversation about a federal level across the states as well you're talking about it. But I guess it just makes me uneasy about what position you would take when it comes to your position, if your position is going to basically stand by the kind of approach that Google and other companies should just be able to do whatever they do because any type of public criticism or transparency is going to get in the way, is going to distract them, I think is the word that you used. I don't think congressional oversight or our ability to look into what companies are doing is about distracting these companies from what they're doing. I do think that there should be public transparency. So I just raise that I'm worried about what position you will take when it comes to federal rules, federal approaches to this all. And with that, I'll yield back.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you very much. And I want to thank each of the nominees for being here. Ms. Oz, Mr. Rutherford, Mr. Zerzan, my final question is required of all nominees. If confirmed, do you pledge to work collaboratively with this committee to provide thorough and timely responses to the committee's requests and to appear before the committee when requested?

Seval OzSPEAKER_05

I do, Mr. Chairman.

Michael Albert RutherfordSPEAKER_08

I do. Yes, sir.

Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX)SPEAKER_02

Thank you. Senators will have until the close of business on Friday, July 25th, to submit questions for the record. The nominees will have until the close of business on Monday, July 28th, to respond to those questions. That concludes today's hearing. The committee stands adjourned.