I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Dear, I hope this message finds you well. I represent motor-import.com, a trusted and reliable partner for individuals and businesses seeking cost-effective solutions for importing both used and new cars from around the world. We specialize in offering comprehensive services, including shipping, customs clearance, and delivery, to make global car buying a hassle-free and economical experience. Why Choose Motor-Import? Competitive Pricing: At Motor-Import, we are committed to helping our customers save money. We understand that purchasing a car locally can often come with a hefty price tag. Our services are designed to provide a cost-effective alternative, making it possible for you to acquire your dream vehicle for less. Global Network: With our extensive network of contacts and partners worldwide, we can source vehicles from a variety of locations, ensuring you have access to a wide range of options. Whether you're interested in a specific make and model or hunting for unique vehicles, we have you covered. Expertise in Customs: Navigating the complexities of international customs regulations can be a daunting task. Our experienced team specializes in customs clearance, ensuring that your vehicle is imported legally and without any unexpected delays or costs. Secure Shipping: We prioritize the safety of your investment. Our shipping solutions are designed to protect your vehicle during transit, ensuring it arrives in the same condition it left its origin. Reliable Delivery: We pride ourselves on timely and secure deliveries. You can trust us to get your car to your doorstep or preferred location promptly. Visit our website at Motor-Import Website to learn more about our services and explore the testimonials from our satisfied customers. If you have any questions or are interested in starting the process of importing your desired vehicle, please don't hesitate to reach out to us at contact@motor-import.com. Our team is ready to assist you in finding the best car import solution to suit your needs and budget. Say goodbye to overpriced local car dealerships and hello to affordable and convenient global car sourcing with Motor-Import. We look forward to helping you import your dream car at a price that's both competitive and satisfying. Best regards,

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

The Virginia NAACP supports HB 212 and 256

I am asking you to support HB 212, Gender Balanced & Diverse Corporate Boards as a factor in the MEI Approval process for those corporations requesting tax breaks/incentives from our State. The Companion Bill in the Senate SB 393 and sponsored by Senator Pekarsky passed in the Senate earlier this week. I hope that it will be able to pass out of the House Labor and Commerce Committee so it can be voted on in the full house. Here is further information about the Bill. Virginia law provides that in considering state tax incentives for economic development or other projects, the Major Employment and Investments (MEI) Project Approval Commission must evaluate various factors, such as return on investment and effect on employment. HB212 would add another factor for the Commission to consider how gender balanced and diverse the corporate board is of a company seeking such economic incentives, to determine whether at least 30 percent of its board consists of women and historically underrepresented groups, and whether on approval of an incentive package, the company will commit to annually update and submit board diversity disclosures to the Commission and to the Senate and House appropriation chairs. Similar bills have been proposed or passed in 13 other states, in both Democratic and Republican legislatures – and such legislation makes sense for Virginia as well. The most profitable companies in the U.S. have boards that are similarly gender-balanced and diverse. They are able to marshal a wider range of ideas, skills and knowledge to sustain corporate growth, and they more appropriately reflect their investors, their customers, and their employees. Studies have shown that companies with gender-balanced and diverse boards carry less debt, are less risk averse, have improved stock performance, and have higher employee retention rates. This bill imposes no mandate, as it only adds another factor for the Commission to consider in evaluating companies that ask for tax breaks, and it will add no line item in the budget. A similar bill passed the Senate in the 2023 General Assembly as SB1248, and the language of HB212 has been modified to better reflect the goals of the MEI Project Approval Commission. Note that NASDAQ requires corporate boards to be diverse for a company to be listed on their exchange, and Goldman Sachs will not facilitate an Initial Public Offering from a company that does not have a diverse board. What is good for the nation top tier companies is also good for Virginia. Please support HB212. In closing thank you for the good work that you perform for the citizens of Virginia.

Comments Document

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to talk with you today. My name is Marie Ann Leyko and I am a member of a group that is advocating for issues important to diverse groups. We are members of the FCDC Women's Caucus, Virginia Grassroots Coalition, Defend Democracy NoVA, and the Loudoun County Dems. I am hear to speak about HB 212. This bill was originally introduced in the 2023 General Assembly as SB 1248. It passed in the Senate but was tabled in the House Rules Committee. In 2024, HB 212 has been rewritten by Delegate Watts and is requesting that gender-balanced and diverse boards be considered a “factor” when companies request a tax breaks from the state of Virginia. Having Gender-balanced and diverse corporate boards is not a new concept. Many of our major corporations in the US have gender-balanced and diverse boards. Despite the recent backlash for such measures, The NASDAQ requires board diversity for their listed companies. The investment brokerage firm, Goldman Sachs will not fund an Initial public offering if your company does not have diverse boards. 13 states have proposed or passed similar legislation. Three American studies (KPMG, Deliotte & The Boston Club) have shown that companies with diverse boards are more profitable, have better employee retention and are less risk adverse. The homogeneous board members of the 20th Century were successful in their time. But in the 21st Century, business markets are changing due to our diverse society. The 21st Century Boards need to reflect this change in order to develop new and profitable markets. Additionally, it is believed that diverse groups will be better able to identify these markets with their advance IT skills. This bill is “not” a requirement it is only a “factor” to be considered. It is also not a mandate nor will not be a line item in the budget. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

VA NAACP support HB 238,610 and 935

I am in support of Bill HB238 presented by Del Delores McQuinn for Health Insurance; coverage for colorectal cancer screening.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

The Virginia NAACP supports HB 212 and 256

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Alexandria is a vibrant city based on history, culture, a waterfront and lots of tourism. If Virginia has money and space to build an arena then you have money and space to build new schools. Our school system is deplorable. It’s overcrowded. Think of your citizens before thinking about your quick money grab that eventually leads to an inevitable loss. We don’t want or need an arena. This is pure greed.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

The Virginia NAACP strongly support hb 348 paid sick leave

The Virginia NAACP strongly support hb 348 paid sick leave

Please vote YES on this critical piece of legislation. We're just coming out of a particularly challenging respiratory virus season--we know that illnesses like flu, COVID-19, and RSV are not going away. 1.2 million working Virginians do not have paid sick days. That's 1.2 million Virginians who aren't able to rest, recover, or protect their coworkers from catching illness if they're sick. This is not just a humane or ethical bill; it's one that makes business sense. Employers lose $160 billion annually in productivity due to workers coming to work despite illness or injury. This bill would make a huge difference in the lives of working Virginians attempting to keep themselves and their families healthy. Please vote yes!

Vote YES on HB348 to give all workers paid sick days. Not having paid sick days means that workers have to choose between paying rent and taking care of themselves or their family members, and that choice is not fair to them or to the rest of society. This is a personal health issue (people can't care for themselves or their children or families) and a public health issue. More than half of all Norovirus outbreaks can be traced back to sick food service workers who were forced to choose between working sick and losing pay or their job. I personally know multiple food service workers who don't want to go to work sick because they know the risks of spreading disease, but they feel like they must because they need to buy groceries. It's also a financial issue. Without paid sick days, workers go to work sick, infecting others and impacting productivity. Employers lose $160 billion annually in productivity due to workers coming to work despite illness or injury. Having paid sick days will also save money in lower healthcare costs.

Représentatives, My name is Amber Pearson and I am a member of United Campus Workers, and I support HB 348. If the pandemic has taught us nothing else, it is that we all suffer when people are forced to choose between their or their family's health and paying the bills. Please support this bill. Amber Pearson

STATEMENT OF FRED CODDING IRON WORKERS EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION HOUSE LABOR AND COMMERCE - SUBCOMMITTEE #2 COMMITTEE JANUARY 25, 2024 I AM FRED CODDING OF 10382 MAIN STREET, FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA 22030. THIS STATEMENT IS SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE IRON WORKERS EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION (IWEA). WE WELCOME THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS CONSTRUCTION’S CONCERNS WITH HOUSE BILL 348 AND HOUSE BILL 737. THE IRON WORKERS EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION (IWEA) CONTRACTORS WORK THROUGHOUT VIRGINIA. ITS CONTRACTOR MEMBERS, WHICH INCLUDE MINORITY CONTRACTORS, WORK ON SMALL AND LARGE PROJECTS. MEMBERS OF THE IRON WORKERS EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION ITSELF SUPPLY AND INSTALL REINFORCING STEEL, STRUCTURAL STEEL, WINDOW WALL, CURTAINWALL AND RELATED PRODUCTS ON PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE COMMONWEALTH. WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT MANY OF OUR MEMBERS ARE SMALL BUSINESSES. OUR MEMBERS EMPLOY IRON WORKERS WHO ARE WORKING ON JOBS THROUGHOUT VIRGINIA AND NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS. THEY MAY BE ON A JOB HERE IN VIRGINIA, BUT TOMORROW MAY BE IN NORTH CAROLINA, TENNESSEE, WEST VIRGINIA, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA OR DELAWARE. THEY TRAVEL EXTENSIVELY. IN ADDITION, THEY MOVE FROM ONE CONTRACTOR TO ANOTHER IN RELATIVELY SHORT PERIODS OF TIME. THIS IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE INDUSTRY. AS A RESULT, THEIR PAY LEVELS REFLECT MOBILITY. IN ADDITION, CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS FREQUENTLY PROVIDE COSTLY PENSIONS, HEALTH CARE, WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE AND PREMIUM TIME ON A NUMBER OF HOLIDAYS AS WELL AS WEEKENDS. IN ADDITION, THEY PROVIDE DISABILITY INSURANCE. IN ADDITION TO THESE, OUR MEMBER CONTRACTORS ALSO CONTRIBUTE $1.55 PER IRON WORKER MANHOUR WORKED FOR CONTINUING TRAINING OF APPRENTICE AND UPGRADING PROGRAMS. THE BURDENS THE LEGISLATION PLACES ON CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS INCREASES THOSE THEY ALREADY BEAR. THE LEGISLATION SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASES RECORD-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS. NUMEROUS OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE RECOGNIZED THESE CONCERNS. IF A BILL PASSES, WE ASK THAT THE CONCERNS OF CONSTRUCTION BE ACCOMMODATED. WE REQUEST AN EXEMPTION FOR CONSTRUCTION. ABSENT A FULL EXEMPTION, WE REQUEST AN EXEMPTION FOR THOSE WITH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS. AS NOTED, THIS HAS BEEN DONE IN MANY OTHER MAJOR JURISDICTIONS.

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

Nearly all workers will need to take time away to deal with a serious personal or family illness, or to care for a new child or an aging parent. These life stages shouldn’t mean economic insecurity for Virginia’s workforce. Providing access to paid sick days for Virginia’s workers would allow them to maintain economic security and ensure a healthier, more productive workforce in the Commonwealth. More than 80 percent of food industry workers and 75 percent of childcare workers have no paid sick days. Moreover, employers lose $160 billion annually in productivity due to “presenteeism” (the practice of coming to work despite illness or injury). Additionally, providing paid medical and family leave results in reduced turnover. Paid Sick Days Benefit Workers, Families, Businesses, Public Health & the Economy! When sick workers are able to stay home, the spread of disease slows, and workplaces are both healthier and more productive. Plus, workers recover faster from illness and obtain timely medical care –enabling them to get back to work sooner and holding down health care costs. Providing paid sick days would protect hard working families and level the playing field for small companies.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

After reviewing the proposed floor amendment that would direct the Bureau of Financial Institutions of the State Corporation to conduct a study of methods to better financial exploitation of vulnerable and elderly adults, the Virginia Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (VAELA) is in favor of the bill. However, we would ask that the proposed floor amendment be further amended to add VAELA to the list of stakeholders to be included in the work group for this study. Thank you.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

The Town of Ashland enthusiastically supports HB385. Ashland has seven vehicular rail crossings and at least eight pedestrian only rail crossings in the center of our community. For years we have shared our concerns with State and Federal legislators regarding the blocking of these vehicular crossings when a train needs to stop. On numerous occasions one train has stopped and blocked all the crossings in Town; effectively cutting off one side of our community from the other and most importantly preventing police, fire and rescue emergency services from accessing community members in need. This is not hyperbole, it happens, more frequently than anyone on this committee would be comfortable to occur in their community. Our most recent legislative agenda continues this trend of advocating for someone at the State or Federal level to take responsibility for regulating the freight providers by limiting the occurrence of trains stopping in a community and/or limiting the length of trains. The language reads as follows: The Town of Ashland supports the delegation of Federal oversight to the Virginia State Corporation Commission for the enforcement of the maximum period a highway-railroad crossing may be closed to enhance safety and accountability for obstructions that may potentially impede first responders' emergency response. We also encourage the General Assembly to take a proactive stance on this area of interest. Please do not let arguments made against similar bills in years past outweigh the safety and quality of life for Virginia communities. You have the chance to do something now - do not wait for Federal legislation. Trains have been shorter in years past and business did great, limiting length will not affect the the economic success of Virginia businesses. And finally, as a community that has over 60 trains a day pass right through our town in residential, commercial, and higher education areas do not let the rail planners tell you that fewer longer trains are better for these intersections. We've lived it, and the longer trains have made the blockage of vehicular crossings far more time consuming. On behalf of the Town of Ashland thank you for your consideration.

It is completely unfathomable to me that anyone in their right mind would want just one man on a train. A conductor or a two man crew is valuable in many ways. My conductor most importantly keeps me awake, and attentive. They keep track many things that are critical to the safety of train handling such as speed changes and direct orders from dispatchers and supervision. This is well needed. As an engineer I am responsible for handling trains that are in excess of 2 and sometimes 3 miles long. Trains with hazardous materials that most wouldn't even want to know are rolling thru their towns. All the while trying to be certain that a poorly maintained PTC system functions correctly, and to be sure the A.I. (trip optimiser/energy management) responds to train handling correctly. A.I. is already running our trains, and as a railroad engineer I have to take my train back from A.I. at least 10 times each day, because it is unable to control the train correctly. None of this is safe... Now law makers have the decision. Would you like one or two men keeping your family and town safe at night?

Every train in Virginia should have two people on there it’s a must…..

As the wife of an engineer, I can’t help but express my opinion of the importance of a two-man crew for our railroad system. The engineer and conductor are a team and work together for all of the issues of getting the train from Point A to Point B safely. The safety of the employees, commodities being transported and communities the trains pass thru all need peace of mind that the two-man crew brings.

With safety at the highest priority, having a two-man crew is the only way to achieve. Cutting cost does not supersede safety for staff and the public.

Good evening, Please provide support to HB 385, it is of up most importance for safety that train crews be properly staffed with two. This provides a safer environment for the staff in the train along with the community they are traveling through. Working in unison two operators ensure that the train is safely maneuvered. Errors can occur at any time and having two employees, well trained can mitigate these issues prior to them causing harm. We have seen the harm and environmental impact an emergency on a train can cause in East Palestine. We need to do everything in our power to prevent another emergency of that nature and I believe reducing staff is doing the complete opposite. Thank you for your considerations,

A two-person crew on every train is vital to the safety standard that Norfolk Southern claims they want to uphold.  This same standard also applies to the other Class 1 railroads that preach how much safety means to their operations as well.  With the amount of technology that is used today via computer screens, a locomotive engineer can easily miss an unsafe condition or trespasser on the tracks.  In this case, the conductor would be the one observing the tracks ahead and alert the engineer of the unsafe condition or trespasser.  Having a second person in the cab of each locomotive not only keeps the assets of the company safe, but the public as well in the towns that the railroads pass through.  In closing, I know a locomotive engineer that had a medical emergency during his trip while operating the locomotive.  The conductor quickly noticed that the engineer was having an issue and contacted the train dispatcher of the situation.  After doing so, the conductor was able to assist in stopping the train at a location where first responders could quickly access the locomotive.  In the end, the engineer was flown to a nearby hospital for emergency heart surgery.  During the recovery period, the doctor told the engineer that if his conductor wouldn't have reacted in the manner they did, he would have not survived.  A second person in the cab of every locomotive is an absolute must when it comes to everyone's safety and should never be questioned!

As a private citizen, who is knowledgeable of railroad operations, I feel very strongly that reducing train crews to 1 will jeopardize the safety of all Virginians. It is a difficult job maintaining control of thousands of tons of machine and tonnage even without the job of watching out for the safety of other employees and the general public. Any delay to train movements will be exacerbated by the allowance of one-man crews, which will undoubtedly affect the public. I strongly urge legislators to require a minimum of 2 crewmen per train. Respectfully, -Edward Burnett, Lynchburg

Hello as an csx conductor we need to keep a two man crew for the safety of my fellow constituents as they operate these engines carrying all type of materials almost 2 miles long the engineer and conductor are a team that keeps moving tomorrow freight. One man crew is not acceptable anything can happen while on a train health such as heart attack, seizures, passing out etc the alerta is not safety !!!! It’ll take a numerous of hours to get help as a conductor we have the know how. A conductor is not just someone that keeps the engineers company. When we are in these nomanlands where vehicles can’t get to and something goes wrong with the train and it’s only one in cab who’s to walk 2/2.5 mile long train to fix the issue.

Hello, I’m an employee for the railroad for the past ten years. 2 person crews shouldn’t be voted for, but they are an absolute must. I can attest to the excruciating long hours, the physical wear and tear on the person working, not to mention the emotional toll the job can put on you. It would be extremely negligent to turn 2 person trains into 1 person trains. Reason 1.) With only 1 person ( the engineer) being on the train, what would happen if the train were to go into emergency. Some of these trains nowadays are 13,000 ft long, and if the only person has to shut down, lock up, and walk the train…that would take forever. It would be much easier to keep a 2nd person on a crew to walk and if need be communicate to an engineer to make cuts to clear up crossing, it just makes sense. Reason 2.) with the trains running longer and heavier nowadays, we now have to start thinking about the stress of the knuckles in the middle of trains. If the train is too long and the knuckles give out, train goes into emergency. Now the person who’s running the train has to go inspect the train for the reason the train went into emergency. No person is going to know what happens a mile behind them when running a train. MAKE TRAINS SHORTER!!!!!!! Reason 3.) I can not begin to tell you how many hours I probably spend in a rail yard, let alone on a railroad. I work in a switching yard, not line of road, and there are plenty of times where duties go by much faster with the use of a 3rd person getting involved. Imagine how much that would slow down with just 1 person. Railroads would love to go to Remote Controlled Locomotives, to cut down on cost, improve profit margins, and that’s all fine and dandy but what do you when that one person who spends so many hours in the rail yard starts to fade while working on the job? WE CAN NOT let it get to that point. We must protect the 2 person crew, and while we’re at it…push for a 3rd person. More people means less hours, less hours means more time at home with loved ones. Reason 4.) TERMINATIONS/LAYOFFS!!!!!! If we choose not to vote for 2 person crews, the railroads will get their wish and won’t have use for the people they use to cover vacancies for jobs. If people think it’s bad now just wait until the jobs get cut in half. America does not need more people on the street, they need more people involved in the infrastructure now more than ever. Protect the job force, vote for 2 person crews. We, the state of Virginia, have to protect 2 person crews. I know that this has been debated for a long time and I understand the reasons why, so I look toward the legislative lawmakers in the state, and nationally for another matter. It is up to us to do the right thing for the American people, not what’s right for the companies. The matter is quite simple, are you for more jobs or less jobs? I’m for more jobs, and I hope the lawmakers in Richmond and DC are for those too. If they are not, then I truly know where the loyalties lay and their stance is flawed, corrupted. Be bold and stand for your railroad brothers and sisters. Virginia is for lovers and we should love and protect everyone, if we can. Thank you

It’s hard enough to do your job and try to keep watch of all your surroundings as an engineer, reducing the crew would only make it more dangerous to safely operate a locomotive because you can’t monitor everything with having only half of the vision of site on one side of the locomotive. Another set of eyes is crucial to safety.

As a Locomotive Engineer with 25 years of railroad experience I am convinced of the need to have a two person crew on all trains. In the event of problems arising on the line of road, having a conductor present and ready to attend to the problem quickly helps to prevent railroad crossings from being blocked for longer than is absolutely necessary, allowing free flow of traffic and emergency services. As an Engineer I have seen the industry substantially decline its safety practices in the last 12 years. They have really put profits first before the safety of its employees, customers and most importantly the public. Human factor incidents will continue to rise if we allow single-man Crews, especially when, not if, Positive Train Control fails, as it commonly does today. Failures which are an almost daily occurrence. NO TO POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL AND NO TO PRECISION SCHEDULED RAILROADING!!!

I am writing to express my support for the proposed rule that would require a minimum of two crew members for most train operations. As a father-in-law's who's son who works for CSX Railroad as a conductor, I am deeply concerned about his safety and the safety of all railroad workers and the public. Having two crew members on a train is essential for ensuring safe and efficient operations, especially in cases of emergency, such as derailments, collisions, fires, or hazardous material spills. A second crew member can help the conductor spot potential dangers, communicate with dispatchers and first responders, apply hand brakes, perform inspections, and assist injured passengers or crew members. A second crew member can also provide backup and support for the engineer, who may face fatigue, stress, or distraction while operating the train. Reducing the crew size to one person would not only endanger the lives of railroad workers and the public, but also compromise the quality and reliability of rail service. One-person crews would face increased workload, responsibility, and pressure, which could lead to human error, delays, or accidents. One-person crews would also limit the ability of railroads to respond to changing operational needs, such as switching, doubling, or splitting trains. I urge you to adopt the proposed rule and protect the safety and welfare of railroad workers and the public. Thank you for your consideration.

As a locomotive engineer with 17 years of railroad experience I am convinced of the need to have a two person crew on all trains. In the event of problems arising on the line of road, having a conductor present and ready to attend to the problem quickly helps to prevent railroad crossings from being blocked for longer than is absolutely necessary, allowing free flow of traffic and emergency services. The railroads’ proposal of having motor vehicle based conductors to attend to line of road issues and emergencies would add significantly to the amount of time road crossing are blocked, thereby threatening lives by blocking access to emergency services. I have also seen numerous examples of motorists behaving recklessly in order to clear a road crossing before it is occupied by a train, no doubt because they have been caught in a blocked crossing scenario before. Two pairs of eyes in the locomotive cab is another safety based reason to mandate two person crews. In the age of Positive Train Control (PTC), distributed power (remote locomotive/s in the train) and auto-pilot I am constantly monitoring a number of control screens and as such unable to keep my eyes “on the road” at all times. I therefore rely on my conductor in these situations to be on the lookout for any safety critical issues. The railroads maintain that PTC is enough of a solution to safety related issues in the industry and often cite its presence in the cab as a reason to do away with the conductor craft, but in reality it only prevents trains from passing unfavorable signals and potentially colliding with another train or exceeding mandatory speed limits. Whilst these are definitely good safety upgrades PTC does not prevent collisions that are not signal related, such as road crossing incidents which can only be prevented by two vigilant crew members. I have been fortunate enough never to have hit (or heaven forbid kill) a motorist in my career thus far but I am aware that statistically I am unlikely to end my career without an incident of this kind. Being assisted by the that second pair of eyes in the cab may just allow me to reach the end of my career without someone’s death on my conscience.

To Whom it may concern: I have worked in the rail industry for 19 years now as both a conductor and an engineer. Two man crews are a necessity for public safety as a whole. We cannot rely on technological safety features to stop a train in the event of an emergency, we must have two people in the cab of locomotive while the train is moving incase the engineer becomes incapacitated due to a medical emergency and the technological safety features do not activate to stop the train. With thousands of tons of highly dangerous chemicals being ship every day in the commonwealth it would be criminally negligent of the government to allow railroads to operate trains with one man crew. Anyone who is for one man crews will have blood in their hand when (not if) an accident occurs that could have been prevented by having a two man crew in the train. For the safety of the citizens of the commonwealth of Virginia we must have two man train crews. Sincerely, Mr. Jones

As a locomotive Engineer I work all times of the day and night. I depend heavily on my conductor for safety having another set of eyes and ears are invaluable. If there was ever a medical emergency to myself or the conductor medical personnel could be contacted ASAP and directed to the exact location.

I am a retired Conductor for Norfolk Southern, retired in 2014.A few years before retiring, I was instructed to stop my train at CSX Collier Yard in Petersburg, to pick up cars bound for Crewe. We left the rear of our train on the main line and went into the CSX yard to make our pickup and then returned to our train. After getting our train together, we proceeded west, running prepared to stop at the next signal approximately two miles ahead. My Engineer was operating the train watching the speedometer, and other gauges to safely move the train to the next signal. I was watching the track ahead as we started moving and picking up speed. I observed what was determined to be a bad kink in the siding adjacent to our main line and told my Engineer to stop the train. We stopped about 75 feet before crossing a bridge where the kink was located. Upon inspection of the track, I saw that an over height truck must have hit the bridge and knocked the siding and main line out of gauge. This bridge over Squirrel Level Road had to be replaced, costing approximately 5 million dollars. Two crew members present on the train made the difference in what could have been a potential disaster from a derailment or possibly a collapse of this bridge.

I dont understand why this is up for debate every year im a locomotive engineer and i have so much going on in the cab its better with 4 eyes than 2 if i miss something the conductor is there to catch it.If something goes wrong with the train im not able to do it the conductor is that's another reason to have a 2nd person the conductor is so valuable to our daily tasks at hand please take in to consideration also public safety with 2 person crews i ask that u pass the 2 person crew bill for the safety of everybody.

I will be retiring within the next 3-5 years from a major Class I railroad… over my career as a freight conductor I have experienced countless examples of the need for at least 2 man crews on freight trains… the never ending quest for another dollar by increasing size and weight of coal and freight trains already puts the public at greater risk and now they want to scale back to single man crew so that one tired railroad man is careening down the rails at 50 mph with 30,000 tons of coal through your town… you better hope his eyelids aren’t heavy as your kid nears the tracks.

Back 2 person crews.

2 man rail crew safety is a no brainer, you need that extra set of eyes on board. With three separate screens for the engineer to look at while operating a locomotive you need that other person helping with objects outside the cab. In a few seconds I’m looking at ptc, or my distributive power screen a lot can happen on the outside from people walking the tracks, cars running grade crossing, maintenance of the way out working, etc. Railroads has put safety on the back burner for its employees and communities, and it seems to be getting worse daily with doing WAY more with less and less .

We need to ensure that at least a 2 person crew is on board the head end of all trains! As a first responder of 25 years, & a Conductor/Engineer for 20 years, I fully understand the importance of the "2 Man Crew"! PSR and Positive Train Control are not working well & should not be used to replace a human inside the cab of leading locomotives! Help protect My Safety as well as the Safety of All Citizens in Virginia!!

As a rail employee and a member of this community, I believe smaller trains and two person crews are vital to safe train movement. Longer trains add extra exposure to crews and to the community. Long train block public and private crossing causing emergency response to be delayed or impossible. Two men crews are vital to create a safe cab and options for crew members protect the public and lookout for each other.

I have been employed at my company for over 23 years, most of which has been as a Locomotive Engineer. A one-man crew on a freight train would be the worst thing that could happen here in the United States, Since the implementation of Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR) trains have got longer and heavier. It is not uncommon to have a 2.5-mile-long, 28,000-ton train. Here on the East Coast many of the railroads still run on rights-of-way that were built in the 1800s, although they may have been upgraded but were still not designed for such large trains that are too big to fit into sidings, often block road crossings for hours while waiting to get into a yard. If one-man crews were implemented engineer-only crews would have no way of cutting crossings for traffic and emergency vehicles, and no one would be readily available in the event of a derailment or train separation. Conductors would be ground-based and may take some time to reach a disabled train. Positive Train Control (PTC) does not and should not eliminate another pair of eyes in the locomotive cab. Though a great safety enhancement PTC is itself just in its infancy, Like any other software-driven platform it can easily fail to function. Train crews are subject to many long hours (12 hours plus in some cases), we don't even know when we are going to go to work so we don't get proper rest, we often have to eat fast food or gas station food and therefore have a poor diet. All of which leads to fatigue. We need two people in the cab to watch each other's back. I think shorter trains and two-man crews would go a long way to enhance the safety of the public,

As a railroad employee I cannot express how much of a necessity 2 man crews are for the safety of my fellow railroaders and the community. simply for the reason of Positive Train Control (PTC) is a $15 billion safety overlay system that is incapable of performing the cognitive functions and tasks of a certified conductor. PTC does not, and cannot perform the functions of an onboard conductor, and it cannot provide the benefits of two human beings working in collaboration inside the cab of a locomotive. Railroading is a high-risk industry. And like all other high-risk industries, teamwork is the most critical component. Over the last two decades railroads have achieved their safest and richest era because of the two-person crew. With the growing train length the need for 2 man crews is at an all time high. For example say we have a vehicle collision there’s one person to go back and assess the situation while the other relays the information to the dispatcher and tries to get emergency assistance to the effect parties. I cannot express how important it is for 2 man crews in this dangerous environment for the well being of everyone. There’s so many reasons and examples of why we should keep 2 man crews and I’m just beginning to dip my toe in the water about it. Thank you for taking the time and hearing me out.

With the amount of safety measures that this job requires, having a 1 man crew would rank as the unsafest option for any class 1 railroad. From public safety to employee safety. An engineer can NOT fix the train and be made to operate it as well. Not to mention already having a manpower shortage to move trains, now we are talking about doing away with an entire position? And for what? To save a buck? Just think if an engineer were to have a medical emergency. Who would be there to call for help or get the train stopped in a safe place to get medical attention? What if the train breaks in half blocking road crossings? There are so many things to think about when it comes to how important it is to have 2 man crews. It's time we put this to bed and never revisit the idea. It is dangerous and well set the rail industry back so far.

Two man crew at a minimum is extremely important, having a conductor on the train helps in preventing collisions, derailments and blocked crossings. This is because train engineers must stay in the engine with a multitude of responsibilities. As a conductor I’m a second pair of eyes and ears, I talk with dispatchers and other trains to resolve issues along the tracks, and look for potential problems while the engineer has to tend to their owns set of obligations and rules. Having two people on the lead engine is paramount for the safe, efficient operation of the railroad and our community.

No one man crews,

I am convinced that multiple crew members on freight trains contribute to safety and efficiency during the transport of critical rail merchandise. Two-person rail crews allow for tasks associated with trains (switching, classification of cars, en route repairs etc.) to be accomplished far more efectively than with a lone crewman. Enhanced safety and security are additional by-products of the two-person system, allowing for one member to focus on watching & monitoring the train's various systems (trainline air, positive train control, optimization) while the other member can be vigilant for unexpected potential threats, such as children playing in tracks or vehicles stranded in the line of road. Numerous studies over the years have shown indisputable evidence of multiple crew members playing a critical role in ensuring the security of the railroad cargo as well as the safety of the general public at large.

Railroads are for profit, not for safety. Please ensure the safety of your constituents by requiring 2 person crews on trains

HB385 Not only should we keep a minimum 2 person train crew but if safety is a true priority, we should move towards the addition of a 3rd crew member. The reimplementation of the use of the caboose on the rear of the train with a crew member would also add a new level of safety with the added ability to monitor live train conditions in real time from the rear of the train as well.

I'm an engineer with norfolk southern out of roanoke va. I am commenting on the dangerous practice of running trains longer than our infrastructure can handle. These long trains put the public and train crews in stressful and dangerous situations. Long trains cause delays instigated by having to meet other trains on line of road in sidings nor long enough to accommodate both trains. Trains are having to hold up to 100 miles away because both Trains are too big to pass. Also most importantly, if a train has to block road crossings, possibly for hours, you put the public at risk of not having emergency services access to them. Houses can burn down, ambulances can't get to those in need. Let's be smart and reduce these train sizes. We need two people on the headend of these trains also. We are being overwhelmed with technology on the engineer side and the stress would be unbearable being on that train alone.

This bill will play a big role in keeping the communities safe that we work around each day.When there is a situation that arises there will be 2 people able to communicate with first responders as well as citizens.If this bill does not pass then you chose profits over safety and when something does happen you will be reminded.

As a spouse of an engineer for CSX and as a business owner that relies on the railroad, I am asking you to please vote for HB385. I have seen the pure exhaustion my husband faces day in and day out of the demanding schedule CSX has. There is so much that could go wrong with one-man crews I just do not understand why this would even be considered. The public safety and the safety of the crews should be number 1. Going to one-man crews greatly puts my railroader at extreme risk and also my business. Thank you for your consideration.

I have been following the Congressional hearings on CSPAN regarding railroad safety especially the Ohio hazardous cargo spill/accident. There is bipartisan support for 2 man crews and to vastly increase safety regulations and training. I also support those actions and specifically the following; 2 man crews, shortened trains and increased safety education and training for the employees. This will lead to the safer operation of trains, increased moral for employees, family members and increased company profits over the long haul.

Why even consider allowing railroads to relax safety standards, crew size and train length? Railroads are incredibly profitable. Don't let them trade safety for profit. A two-person crew ensures a safer environment for rail employees and communities. Two heads are always going to be better than one. Maintaining situational awareness, at all hours and under constantly changing conditions, is a challenge that calls for more than just one crew member navigating the complexities of railroad operations. Train lengths have gotten ridiculous! Communities are being cut off from emergency services, and pedestrians, many of them children, are cutting through trains that block public and private crossing. Imagine crossing through one train to be hit by another train traveling on the adjacent track. The danger is real! 1 truck driver can haul 1 load safely and profitably. 2 rail workers can haul more than 100 loads safely and profitably. Trains DO NOT need to be longer to be profitable. Cutting a rail-crew size in half WILL NOT make railroads safer.

I am a conductor, I feel it is necessary for at least 2 employees on every train. The engineer has many thing to observe in the handling of the train and its components, he needs someone to help him stay alert and watch the rail, talk on the radio, handle the paperwork, and not to mention if someone needs to get down to check something, you would not want the locomotive cab to be unattended while someone is on the ground….

Freight Trains need at least 2 on a CREW! Longer Trains = MEGA PROBLEM. SPSR and PTC does not guarantee SAFETY

Freight trains need at least 2 people on a crew. An extra set of actual eyes is very helpful in every situation, be it airline pilots, surgeons or railroaders.

As legislators you are charged with the safety and protection of your citizens and are elected to do so. HB 385 must pass and the Governor must sign in order that you the elected leaders fulfill your responsibility to the citizens of Virginia. Not only does this legislation protect the citizens but also the environment in limiting and reducing hazardous spills (REMEMBER LYNCHBURG VA) CSX railway's toxic spill and fire. This legislation helps protect from this type of incident. Additionally, the workers are protected this in turn makes for better and more alert employees to prevent catastrophic accidents, and injuries to the workers and public. So do not be persuaded by your campaign contributions from the powerful Railroad Lobby but vote to pass this legislation to protect VIRGINA it's people, labor, and environment.

Two man crews are vital because it applies increased situational awareness and better decision making during operations. Just by having one person onboard decreases the ability on three very important key aspects, keeping watch, monitoring the trains system, and communicating with dispatch. Two man crews improve security onboard the train because there is someone available to keep watch for potential threats such as theft or intrusions and will be able to immediately call the appropriate authorities versus a one man operation where it decreases the chances of this dramatically. We need to keep two man crews for safety purposes.

The job that our spouses have as conductors and engineers are already dangerous enough and the thought that the companies just want to “save money” at the expense of the safety of our spouses and communities is appalling. Could you be alone for 12 hours straight and continue to function at a high level to ensure that the train gets to its destination safely? All it takes is for them to make one mistake and it could cause catastrophic consequences as we already know. When the trains get longer and longer it causes more issues. If something is wrong and our spouses have to walk a 3 mile long train who knows what they would encounter on the way to fix the problem or on the way back with a long distance to the front of the train. The safety of our spouses and communities should not be revoked because of greed of these huge companies.

Freight trains need at least 2 on a crew Longer trains=MEGA PROBLEMS PSR and PTC does not guarantee safety

I have been a conductor now for almost two years. Can't believe this would even be a topic that is up for debate. We need two man crews on trains for public safety! Plain and simple debate over!

Freight trains need two person crews not only for the safety of the community but as well as the crew members. Trains crews as well as other railroad employees have taken a huge cut over the years just to increase profits. Safety has fallen to the lowest priority to maximize profits for share holders.

Freight trains need two person crews not only for the safety of the community but as well as the crew members. Trains crews as well as other railroad employees have taken a huge cut over the years just to increase profits. Safety has fallen to the lowest priority to maximize profits for share holders.

Freight Trains need at least two on a CREW! The results could be deadly otherwise.

After being a conductor/engineer for over 16 years I can’t stress enough the importance of 2 man crews. Railroading is a job with significant dangers, often not well-known by the general public. Two man crews are for safety and reducing crew size will increase danger to the public and the environment. Let’s continue to be proactive instead or reactive.

Having a one man crew is irresponsible and dangerous, It puts the lives of the crew who are on duty in danger. The thought of this should be criminal. An engineer I know had a medical emergency and had there not been another person on the train it’s possible he would have not made it. If there is an emergency while in transit only having one person in the engine would make it impossible to safely handle the situation. Having two people allows for communication of what is needed to properly and safely move the train. Also, with the hours that we work there is no set schedule which means you can be called anytime during the day or night. Having another person working with you can help to keep you alert especially during the overnight hours. These reasons show how important it is to continue to have a two man crew to maintain a safe work environment.

I worked on NS for over 36 years and saw the railroads go from 5 man crews to 2 man crews. Train has an emergency brake application the conductor has to walk the length of the train and back. If it happens on public rail crossings the crossings could be blocked for up to 2hours or longer. Rail carriers could care less about emergency vehicles or the public--they are only concerned with profits! So wonder who they got to sponsor this bill? Maybe someone should check campaign contribution record of that person!

5 year employee of Norfolk Southern, 2 man crews are necessary. Let’s keep everyone safe!

Two man crews are minimum. The work load for one man is overload, overloaded conductors make mistakes and mistakes on a train equal huge loss. Safety rules in place help but nothing is better than a second pair of eyes from you’re brother looking out for you and you looking out for him so everyone goes home safe and nothing gets damaged and the train stays on the rail. The safest work crews have two men on the ground period. These long trains congest main lines especially in heavily populated cities.

If a train doesn’t have at least two employees if something were to go wrong there would be no one to get the train moving off private and public crossings in a timely manner. This is a safety issue in the sense that someone may need medical attention or a structure fire. With one employee it could take even longer to get a relief or someone to inspect a train.

If a train doesn’t have at least two employees if something were to go wrong there would be no one to get the train moving off private and public crossings in a timely manner. This is a safety issue in the sense that someone may need medical attention or a structure fire. With one employee it could take even longer to get a relief or someone to inspect a train.

2 people is the bare minimum necessary to man the already dangerous job of working any position on the railroad. When things go South, having just one person there for backup makes all the difference. Put safety over profits.

Freight Trains need at least 2 on a CREW! Huge safety risk without two person crews so much can go on on a train there is so much to tend to it’s way to much for one crew member to handle at once so much can go wrong in just a split second.

All railroad cabs need 2 operating employees. An engineer and a conductor.

Two man crews are necessary for the safety of not only trainmen but also the communities in which they work and live. Safety should always come before the profits of the railroad - please support mandating two man crews.Also Who is going to stop the train properly if there’s a medical emergency if it’s only a one man crew. Who is going to call medical emergency services.

2 people are needed on trains. Long train result in bigger problems. For the safety of the community 2 people are needed!!!

I am part business owner of a 64 year family business that started in the New Kent county part of Providence Forge and is now in Charles City county area called Roxbury. The railroad has always been apart of our community as we rely on them to ship our product. Today I am here to tell you about the ridiculous amount of railroad crossing blockage that has cost my business time and money. These 3 mile long trains have got to stop. With our business being right beside the track we are also very concerned about a major train derailment such as East Palestine, Ohio. A derailment like this could kill anyone of my employees or myself and wipe out our family business. Safety needs to be the main priority here. I also feel that there should always be two people on the train at all times. As a business owner I would want two people, that always have eyes and ears as to save a catastrophic event from happening that could safe lives. Please please consider HB385 we need this more now than ever.

Please support HB-385 keep us safe!

Freight Trains need at least two people on a CREW! PSR and PTC does not guarantee SAFETY of the employees.

This bill is extremely important. Railroad safety is at a all time low. As a railroader I have seen the industry substantially decline its safety practices in the last 12 years. They have really put profits first before the safety of its employees and most importantly the public. East Palenstine, Ohio train derailment is one of the latest catastrophes that had a daunting affect and impact on the citizens that live there. This situation about these 2 to 3 mile long trains is not a joke anymore and how many times do we have to have a major derailment like East Palenstine happen where bills like HB385 will be taking seriously? Two man crews are a must!! There is no other option with that. As a locomotive engineer I can tell you that for the safety of the public that a human can not be replaced with any modern technology that exist today and possibly ever. Positive train control is a tool but it can never replace the human experience. Please no matter which party you are affiliated with, this is a very serious bill that needs to be passed. Thank you for your time

There should be two people on a train for not only the public’s safety but also for the train crews safety. There are many situations where time and communication are critical and can not be done with one single employee. A few examples would be a vehicle strike, while one person is down on the ground assessing the scene, the other employee can be informing first responders about the situation and where to go. Another example would be if there was a derailment, a one person crew would have to have that person walk back to find and assess what is happening and try to radio in the information on a hand held radio that has very limited range and in some areas of the territory might have no communication at all especially with trains that exceed 7000 ft. The railroads want to claim that a ground based employee will be on scene but that is not an immediate possibility, that ground based employee will need to drive towards a general area and then have to find the exact location. This could take a lengthy amount of precious time to locate and relay what is happening or has happened. This can be said about having road crossings blocked because of a problem with the train, a one person crew would have to wait until the ground based employee arrives to fix the problem while having roads blocked for all that time. Finally I would like to address the crews safety, there are safe guards to protect the train and stop it if there is an emergency. However if there is an emergency where the train operator becomes incapacitated there is no help for him, until someone notices that the train has stopped and then it must be located and someone sent out to it. That length of time that it takes could mean life or death for that employee but also means that train is not moving until it is determined why it has stopped. Two persons on a crew gives the train two sets of eyes and more reliable and rapid communication, along with being able to help and protect each other from any possible situation. Thank you for your time and attention

Living in Virginia, I want to emphasize the crucial need for a minimum of two crew members on a train. This isn't just advantageous for the community but also for the crew themselves. With a duo, there's a system of accountability and mutual reliance regarding the situation ahead. Given the frequent turnover in railroad personnel, varying skill levels are inevitable. The less experienced can learn from their more skilled counterparts in uncommon scenarios, fostering a collaborative effort to ensure the safe passage of the train. These are just a few reasons why it's imperative to mandate a two-person crew on every train in Virginia and throughout the entire country.

Two-person train crews provide enhanced safety by ensuring a second set of eyes to monitor the tracks and surroundings. This collaborative approach helps detect potential hazards, mitigates human/computer error, and contributes to overall rail safety. Viewing rail safety through the lens of airline pilots underscores the importance of two-person train crews. Similar to aviation, having a second crew member acts as a crucial layer of safety. In the event of computer glitches or failures, having two individuals onboard ensures a prompt response to adjust and correct issues, reinforcing overall safety protocols. In times of robust profitability, the decision to reduce jobs sends a concerning message about prioritizing greed over the well-being of those who rely on the services provided. This approach not only impacts the livelihoods of dedicated workers but also raises questions about the commitment to maintaining safety standards. It is essential to recognize that a thriving community depends on the responsible and ethical practices of businesses. Rather than solely focusing on maximizing profits, I urge you to consider the broader implications of such decisions on the safety, stability, and welfare of the communities you serve. I believe that a more balanced approach, taking into account both financial success and the well-being of employees and communities, would contribute to long-term sustainability and positive public perception.

It’s just another day on the railroad as a conductor to see multimillion dollar computer software fail and alarm the crew to take action against catastrophic circumstances. Ask yourself why the government doesn’t allow bulk hazardous chemicals, explosives ect, on public roadways? If you ask me I would ADD a 3rd person for good measure!

I am writing to emphasize the critical importance of maintaining a two-man work crew for train conductors. The nature of our job exposes us to hazardous conditions, and there are instances when equipment failures necessitate immediate assistance. In our line of work, safety is paramount, and having a second crew member provides an additional layer of protection. Collaborative efforts not only enhance our ability to address challenges promptly but also contribute significantly to the overall safety of operations. I strongly advocate for the continued implementation of a two-man crew policy to ensure the well-being of our team members and the effective execution of our responsibilities. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

I'm approaching 3 decades in the railroad industry. I have held numerous positions within the railroad. I have had firsthand knowledge as a 29+year locomotive engineer, just how important having another professional railroader to help with decision and to help with observation, and just general railroad knowledge. We encounter haphazard conditions on a daily basis. Railroad crews on any given tour of duty make many decisions when handling an average of 2 miles plus of trains of different commodities, with some of the most very dangerous and deadly chemicals within these trains. These decisions are mostly taken for granted by the company as well as the communities because they are 99 percent the correct and right choices that are positive outcomes. When you look at removing another vital component of the physical railroad apparatus, such as a crew member, you make decision making more difficult for the one and only crew member left to make all decision. This causes the liability and also the impact of the decision making on the One crew member more negatively impactful. Also, just think the next time you may see a train blocking a crossing and the time delay involved, just remember, if you allowed the 2nd crew member to be eliminated, your wait will definitely be even more extremely longer, waiting on someone to come and provide assistance to the train. What will towns and cities of Virginia do when the train has an emergency and time is of the utmost importance for all parties and there is no one making at least an assessment of the situation and meeting the First Responder's on arrival, but instead they are awaiting someone's arrival from the railroads. We have to ask ourselves what is the "Right Decision" at this very moment, about this two (2) person railroad bill? The answer is simple let's protect our communities, cities, towns, and the Virginians by protecting our Professional Railroader's.

From my perspective as a freight conductor I can provide valuable insight into the critical importance of having a two-member crew on trains. I emphasis on the need for a second crew member to provide crucial backup in the event of a medical emergency. The ability to swiftly bring a train to a safe stop and facilitate access for emergency responders highlights the life-saving potential of having a two-member crew in such situations. Additionally, the role of the conductor in relaying important information in the event of a derailment and the potential risks associated with transporting hazardous materials further underscore the significance of having a second crew member on board. With not having a second crew member on board it can cause communication challenges and long hours associated with working on the railroads. The practical benefits of having two crew members to share the workload and ensure efficient operation throughout extended shifts. My firsthand experience and dedication to safety provide a strong basis for my stance against single-member crews on locomotives. My insights serve to underscore the multifaceted role of a train crew and the essential safety considerations that necessitate the presence of a two-member crew. Thank you for taking my concerns into consideration.

The thing about the railroad is it’s not your average 9-5 job we work crazy hours most time 12 hours shifts with 10 hours rest. Although it seems ok but people do not understand the railroad we rest for 10 hours and most times you are called to go right back to work with a 2-3 hour call so about a 12 hour turnaround or sometimes you are rested and you don’t get that call maybe for another couple hours or even day or two a lot of people don’t understand we don’t just work on railroad we have a life outside of work family ect. Sometimes you might not be as rested as you thought because of the poor scheduling and that extra man helps by being the extra set of eyes or the extra brain by working together to keep the train safe traveling through your town. I don’t know when the last time you where kinda in a hurry and your about to cross the train track and the gates start to go down and here comes this 14000 foot train not moving that fast so you wait best case you are there for a bit worst case you sit even long because 1 the train can’t fit between the signals or sidings like the where designed for but also if something was to happen with at 14000 foot train and it goes in emergency or whatever no there is only 1 man that can’t get down to expedite the move and maybe there is a medical emergency at the railroad crossing that is blocked and help can’t get across the tracks due to excessive length in trains or the lack of the other man to help cut that road. So I vote to keep the 2 man crews and keep train length to a much manageable length.

These train crews are working for long periods of time and at all hours of the day and night. They operate the trains in extremely secluded rural locations as well as urban locations that pose high risks for outsiders. They operate in all climate conditions, including severe heat, cold, and storms. When a train is stopped in secluded or high risk areas, for a repair especially, a 2 man crew is essential for personal safety and in case of a health emergency or injury. A 2 man crew is beneficial even in ideal conditions in case of unforseen sudden health crises.

Two man crew at a minimum is extremely important, having a conductor on the train helps in preventing collisions, derailments and blocked crossings. This is because train engineers must stay in the engine with a multitude of responsibilities. As a conductor I’m a second pair of eyes and ears, I serve as an immediate first responder, talk with dispatchers and other trains to resolve issues along the tracks, and look for potential problems while the engineer has to tend to their owns set of obligations and rules. Having two people on the lead engine is paramount for the safe, efficient operation of the railroad.

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

As a locomotive engineer/conductor, I feel that a two person crew is critical for the safety of our train crews, the communities we operate in and the cargo we move. With multiple crew members on board, there is always someone available to monitor systems and communicate with dispatch. Effective communication is imperative for safely operating freight trains. If there were only one crew member, that person would be required to perform multiple tasks simultaneously with little to no time left for communication with dispatch. Two person crews have always made the division of responsibilities clear, making for efficient and safe operations. This is especially important with time sensitive goods. A second person helps improve safety and security. There is always someone able to watch for threats, intrusions and emergencies at any given moment. Being able to quickly assess a situation and communicate with dispatch is essential for the safety of all concerned. As a locomotive engineer, my family counts on me to return home safely. The communities I travel the rails through count on me and my crew members to do our jobs safely, without negatively impacting their towns. Our customers expect us to be safe and efficient handling their goods. It is evident that the use of multiple crew members aboard freight trains is beneficial to all concerned. I implore you to vote for two person crews on freight trains. No one wants to ever see a tragedy like the East Palestine OH derailment happen again. A one person crew would almost assuredly have that happen. Thank you for listening and your service to the Commonwealth.

I believe 2 man crews is necessary for safety not only for communities and cities but for the people that work in the field. It's all about making profits anymore and ignoring safety and what is right. Not only trying to cut down on crew members but making the trains longer and making it more dangerous to run trains through communities and risking their safety for a profit.

The reduction of crew size suggested will impact the overall safety of my community. This attempt is solely to increase railroad profits with no due regard for public safety. Advancements in automated train controls are impressive but reported failures with this technology occur frequently. Freight rail corridors move some of the most dangerous chemicals imaginable in massive quantities. NS runs directly through my Town of Orange with CSX passing through Gordonsville. These massive dangerous trains cross multiple road crossings; any of which could spell a catastrophe. Legislature's should be more concerned with limiting the length of trains and insuring trains receive proper safety inspections prior to departing. This bill doesn’t ensure my family’s safety. Thank you for taking the time to read my comments.

having multiple crew members on a freight train can also improve efficiency. With more people, tasks can be divided and completed more quickly, allowing for a smoother and more efficient operation. This can be especially important when transporting time-sensitive goods, as it can help to minimize delays.

The railroad is inherently unsafe, and should have at a minimum a two person crew. I believe that a two person crew makes the railroads a safer environment for not only the crew working, but for other crews working in the general vicinity. More people, more eyes, and ears that are around available means that to facilitate complex moves directed toward that crew. Another employee can attach themselves to this crew, and complete it in a fraction of the time that I would take to do this with only one employee. Now for the railroads to implement a one person crew policy this would delay not only general freight movement, but jeopardize the safety of critical infrastructure, local/state, and federal commerce.

Two man crews are necessary for the safety of not only trainmen but also the communities in which they work and live. Protecting your constituents should always come before the profits of the railroad - please support mandating two man crews.

I have worked for CSX railroad for over 22 years, first as a conductor and currently as a locomotive engineer. In my time as a conductor, I had multiple occasions when I was instrumental in preventing train disasters by either reminding my engineer of upcoming speed restrictions, work areas, and stops as well as clarifying verbal instructions from train dispatchers and yard masters. In my time as an engineer, I have (more than once) been reminded by my conductor of important situations that require me to control my train in a particular way to maximize safety. As I am writing this comment, I have already been awake all day and have no real idea when I will be called in to work. When I do go to work, I will be taking a train to one of four destinations and very likely will be on duty close to twelve hours. To think that anyone can work this way on a regular basis without being fatigued at times would be absurd. Two man crews are absolutely vital for the safe operation of trains in our communities. If the carriers are allowed to run one man crews, rail disasters like the recent derailment in East Palestine,Ohio are certain to become more frequent. The carriers preach safety day and night. We must require them to practice what they preach and keep two man crews on all road trains.

Even as a new freight conductor I can clearly see the need for two man crews to stay in place, the safety ramifications are endless. For the sake of the general public and its well being, we need to stick to two man crews. Would you really want to have an unmanned or one man manning a freight train?, aside from all the toxic commodities, the sheer weight and force behind the machines have the potential to cause serious damage. We can look at East Palestine and clearly see the damage to scale, and if you think things are bad now imagine not having a human there to potentially stop these travesties.

Rail companies preach day in and day out that safety is their number one priority. After working for the railroad over 12 years, I have come to realize that safety does not come first. Having two employees in the cab of a locomotive, both conductor and engineer, is imperative for the safety of the train, the crew, and most importantly our community. The carriers claim that the installation of safety devices such as PTC will improve safety but with all technology, it will fail at some point or another. Also, in the event of an emergency, there will be an additional asset in the locomotive cab to assist with the emergency. If a road crossing needs cut or cleared, would you rather have to wait hours for another employee to show to assist or two minutes for the conductor? Train length is another factor that greatly diminishes the safety of the community. With trains exceeding over three miles in some cases, in train forces and physics play a major role in safety. Longer trains have a great chance of derailing, having a greater chance of having dangerous hazmats and a greater chance of derailing dangerous hazmats. Also affected is the length of time that trains occupy road crossings. The longer trains occupy road crossings, the longer the ambulance or other emergency vehicles must wait to service the public. Finally, there are countless rail employees that currently have knee, hip, and back issues. These issues have come into focus due to the employees constantly walking on poor conditions. With the advent of walkways and the use of walking ballast will great impact the switching operations and the employees safety giving them increased longevity. I urge everyone to vote on safety over profits. The next one maybe in your community with your family.

RR needs 2 man crew and shorter trains. Trains today are to long and block many intersections if there is a delay or problem. Can actually move more freight with same amount of engines if smaller trains. example. 2 engines for a 150 coal train. so 2 trains would be 4 engines and 300 coal cars. where now they are having 220 coal cars and 4 engines using DP power.. This is less cars and same power.

It’s really laughable that 1 man crews are even being thought of and considered. It shows that the railroads only care about profit and NOT the SAFETY of their employees or the communities that have 2 mile long trains which are a huge hazard. 2 Man crews are essential to the safety of the workers and communities I can go on and on about the benefits or pros to 2 man crews it’s a no brainer ! But the only benefit to 1 man crews is profit for the companies.

When I first started on the railroad a train that was 10,000 feet long was a monster at that time we had three people on the crew now are exceeding 16,000 feet long only two crewmembers and engineer and a conductor. There is nowhere to hide a train that big the system wasn’t designed for trains in that length road crossings will be blocked to the best of our ability we try to minimize that, but there’s only so much room, on top of all that they want to eliminate another crewmember making it only one person an engineer there’s a lot that goes on and running a train work authorities slow orders trespassers on the track we need two sets of eyes if there was an incident, the conductor would have to walk all the way through the train to find out what’s happened most the time you can’t even talk to him on the radio, his handset, because the distance is too great years ago you had a cab on the back of the train that allowed the conductor at the rear of the train to walk forward and the one on the front of the train to walk back splitting the difference. We need to guarantee that there are a minimum of two men on each crew we need to cut the train sizes down to a manageable level , my personal opinion would be somewhere about 5000 feet that would allow trains to travel and more options for them to be put in the sightings or at least not blocking road crossings.

When I first started on the railroad a train that was 10,000 feet long was a monster at that time we had three people on the crew now are exceeding 16,000 feet long only two crewmembers and engineer and a conductor. There is nowhere to hide a train that big the system wasn’t designed for trains in that length road crossings will be blocked to the best of our ability we try to minimize that, but there’s only so much room, on top of all that they want to eliminate another crewmember making it only one person an engineer there’s a lot that goes on and running a train work authorities slow orders trespassers on the track we need two sets of eyes if there was an incident, the conductor would have to walk all the way through the train to find out what’s happened most the time you can’t even talk to him on the radio, his handset, because the distance is too great years ago you had a cab on the back of the train that allowed the conductor at the rear of the train to walk forward and the one on the front of the train to walk back splitting the difference. We need to guarantee that there are a minimum of two men on each crew we need to cut the train sizes down to a manageable level , my personal opinion would be somewhere about 5000 feet that would allow trains to travel and more options for them to be put in the sightings or at least not blocking road crossings.

I believe all trains should be two person crew. Because you will never know when you will be in emergency or the engineer/conductor can have a medical emergency. Who is going to stop the train properly, if it’s only a one man crew. Who is going to call medical emergency services.

When I first started on the railroad a train that was 10,000 feet long was a monster at that time we had three people on the crew now are exceeding 16,000 feet long only two crewmembers and engineer and a conductor. There is nowhere to hide a train that big the system wasn’t designed for trains in that length road crossings will be blocked to the best of our ability we try to minimize that, but there’s only so much room, on top of all that they want to eliminate another crewmember making it only one person an engineer there’s a lot that goes on and running a train work authorities slow orders trespassers on the track we need two sets of eyes if there was an incident, the conductor would have to walk all the way through the train to find out what’s happened most the time you can’t even talk to him on the radio, his handset, because the distance is too great years ago you had a cab on the back of the train that allowed the conductor at the rear of the train to walk forward and the one on the front of the train to walk back splitting the difference. We need to guarantee that there are a minimum of two men on each crew we need to cut the train sizes down to a manageable level , my personal opinion would be somewhere about 5000 feet that would allow trains to travel and more options for them to be put in the sightings or at least not blocking road crossings.

A vote for this Bill is a vote to protect railroad workers and our communities at large and is a step in the right direction. To choose not to support this Bill is to choose stockholder's profits over your communities and constituents.

HB 385 is very important for every community that railroads travel through this will help prevent the same disaster from happening here that took place in Ohio

A 2 man crew is vital to the movement of freight and passenger trains. This protects the customers, citizens and other employees as well. Having protection over profits is way more important than anything else they are trying to cut from this bill. You would see a dramatic increase in accidents/fatalities if it is cut to 1 man crews. Only 1 set of eyes is so hard when you have multiple things going on in the travel of these trains. Please do not support this wild and unproven fictitious proposed bill.

Two man crews are a must for CSX. Safety is number one and it's goes without saying that having 1 single individual Engineer on a potential 12hr road trip is not safe. Leaving way to much room for error. Must consider emergencies of all sorts when discussin such an issue.

I started on the railroad as a conductor in 2001 and was promoted to engineer in 2011. In my almost 19 years on the railroad I have served as Safety Committee Chairman, as a Critical Incident Review Team Member, as a State Legislative Rep for my Division, as a Vice Local Chairman and currently serve as the Local Chairman for BLET Division 561 in Richmond. Since the implementation of Precision Scheduled Railroading (PSR), which is anything but precise or scheduled and can only be considered railroading in the academic sense, Class I railroads have proven that they cannot be trusted to self-police. Trains typically run through communities in excess of 2 and a half miles long, they carry extremely dangerous materials. Trains are getting longer, heavier and more dangerous. The carriers would lead you to believe that Positive Train Control (PTC) has replaced the conductor, but this could not be further from the truth. In fact, the PTC system is in its infancy stage at best. It regularly omits slow orders, work authorities and road crossings that are not working, all of which pose significant risk to life. PTC cannot inspect a train for defects such as the one that recently caused the disaster in East Palestine Ohio. PTC cannot communicate with first responders. PTC cannot cut road crossings to let emergency vehicles through. PTC cannot contact dispatchers (who are like our air traffic controllers) in the case of an emergency. If a crew member is injured or becomes incapacitated while the train is moving through your community at 60 mph PTC can do absolutely nothing. The railroads do not even trust PTC enough to let crews rely on it when it says that we have gotten a signal upgrade. How reliable can it really be? Having at the very least two crew members on every train is critical. It is important that one realizes that both conductors and engineers work on call all of the time. We often do not know when we are going to work and thereby are often subject to fatigue. Carriers fail to provide accurate train line ups and most tours of duty can last over 12 hours. It is important that trains be manned by two members so that they can keep each other alert and engaged. Also, with the implementation of newer technology it is common for an engineer to be looking at several computer screens at once. For example, he/she is often looking at the distributed power screen, the PTC screen, the trip optimizer screen all while monitoring the trains speed. While the conductor is also monitoring many of the same screens it is paramount that he/she also monitors his/her train and his/her surroundings. A vote for this Bill is a vote to protect railroad workers and our communities at large and is a step in the right direction. To choose not to support this Bill is to choose stockholder's profits over your communities and constituents.

I have been a locomotive engineer for 28 years I can’t tell you how many times having a second pair of eyes on a locomotive ( Train) saved countless lives in the general public with so many computer screens to watch it’s hard for just one man to see everything going on around them. In the event of an emergencyIt is crucial that the conductor be able to work with first responders immediately.There should be a minimum of two crewmembers on every train for the safety of the operator and the general public.

Two man train crews is essential to the safety of operation of trains. A second person is a must when backing locomotives in reverse with long hood in lead, due to curvature of track in curves and length of locomotives, there is a blind spot that the engineer cannot see. I personally would have hit a car stuck on track that I couldn’t see and was warned by the conductor that a vehicle was stuck on track. Even after I had stopped, I still didn’t see the disabled vehicle. Two crew members are critical in a crossing accident or derailment where one crewman will evaluate the scene from the ground, serve as a first responder, relay information to the engineer so he can advise dispatcher of the resources needed on the scene, assist first responders with hazmat documentation as well. Technology cannot always replace what a person does on the job.

As a locomotive engineer I know first hand that two -man Crews are essential for the safety of our citizens and railroad employees. Conductor jobs are indespensible in keeping our engineers focused and engaged for the entire tour of duty. In my qualified opinion, human factor incidents will rise if we allow single-man Crews, especially when, not if, Positive Train Control fails, as it commonly does today.

Freight trains should have a minimum of 2 people operating them. Anything fewer is dangerous for the crew and the surrounding community. The railroad should not jeopardize safety for a greater profit. Keep 2 people crews!

Two-man crews and train length shouldn't be a question asked by anyone with common sense. Accidents happen every day whether it's the crew's fault or equipment failure, we need to do what's the safest way possible to protect everyone. As an engineer myself, I can state from experience that 4 eyes are better than two and nothing is perfect in this world (including their technology of PTC and TO). Not only for the safety of the public and surroundings, but also for the safety of the crews on the train. In my time, I have seen multiple occasions where one crew members stopped the train due to second member having a medical issue. If anyone was by themself or a computer running the train, technology may stop the train but who would get the help needed? Technology is great, but so far, good thing someone is still behind the controls as it's got it's flaws like everything else. Safety is a way o f life, not all about saving the $$.

2 man crews is a necessity for safety not a want. Freight trains need 2 people for train safety and public safety! Safety over profits!

Two person crews are essential to ensure the safety of not only the crew, but the general public as well.

2 person crews are crucial to railroaders lives, our families and to the public. Trains are not toys and people that think it's easy to operate something that massive are highly mistaken and have no idea that trains can take out whole cities and towns if something bad were to happen. Having 2 brains and four eyes in the cab are obviously much better than half of that. These corporations should know better than this and should have much more respect for the people that operate them , their families and the public. The railroads, like most massive multi-billion dollar corporations, are only concerned about appeasing Wall Street leaches and finding a way to pad their pockets more all while jeopardizing peoples lives. SAFETY FIRST to ALL AMERICANS and keeping 2 person crews is the right thing to do.

Two man crew minimum is a must have on trains of today. In any situation 2 sets of eyes and ears is better than one. Airlines have copilot and so should trains.

2 men are definitely safer than 1. And I would go a step farther, 2 certified engineers on every train scheduled route is over 8 hrs. Similar to a Amtrak. At some point during a trip its necessary to use the restroom. Most trains are over 2 miles long. Are we supposed to stop on crossings to relieve ourself. Conductor isn't allowed at the controls of the locomotive.

All crews need 2, no back up security precautions! Two man crew=double protection

The implementation of positive train control is no substitute for a multi person crew. Given the size of freight trains being currently ran by all railway’s currently. As a 14 year veteran I consider a two man crew even more necessary than ever. I personally have ran two and a half mile trains weighing 18,000 tons at speeds of 50 plus miles per hour. The level of alertness and attention to the locomotive controls leaves little room to pay attention to much of the other aspects of moving 36 million pounds of potentially lethal cargo at high speeds! I ask all of you to imagine that coming down the street you live on every day. Scary to say the least. Given that railroads are self policed and have a history of disregarding safety for profit. This would be a guarantee for future catastrophe. In my career there has been multiple derailments due to equipment failure and trac conditions. More have been prevented by having a two man crew on all trains. In short. Do not jeopardize public safety for the profit of companies that report billions in profit yearly already. Plus consider the jobs that would be lost in our state as a result. As many as 10,000 could lose viable work. In short two man crews are vital to the safety of all Virginians Thank you

All freight trains need 2 to operate safely in Virginia. Mega trains equal mega problems as we have already seen in the past. Do what’s best and keep 2 person crews!

I believe it is in the best interest of Railroad safety for there to be Two member crews.

We need the safety of 2 person crews and shorter train lengths in Virginia.

Two sets of eyes are better than one. A two person crew on a freight train is vital for both personal and public safety. When you have a job that has unconventional hours, and can cover a stretch of territory over 200 and 300 miles, the alertness of an individual is going to suffer at some point. Not every trip, but at some point after day in and day out, it will suffer. Having two people on board helps keep alertness to the job at hand, and mental sharpness. Technology does not cover everything. Technology will not alert the crew if there are a group of kids in the gauge of the track around the curve coming up in 15 seconds. Technology will not alert the engineer “hey, I see something sparking about 10 cars back on my side.” Note “my side.” Once again, two sets of eyes are better than one. With a two person crew, response to an incident is much quicker. If something does happen, say in a rural area at night, a conductor walking their train can spot an issue much quicker than if there was no conductor there to walk a train. With the various commodities hauled by freight trains, time and response matters if there is an incident. The health of others, and environmental impact could be at stake. Conductors can relay critical information to the engineer, get emergency response initiated sooner, and help identify what commodities are involved. Who knows how long it could take just for someone to identify an issue in my scenario if there was no conductor on the train. Lastly I would like to address personal vulnerability in a one person crew scenario. Life happens. People have different health. Who has the locomotive operator’s back if something were to happen to them physically? How is that going to be alerted to the proper personnel? In closing, let it be considered that freight trains run lengthy. And that various commodities are hauled, including many hazmats. Technology doesn’t cover every base. Technology fails from time to time. Freight trains run safer when they have a two person crew to go 250 miles. The communities that these trains traverse through benefit from a two person crew.

One man crew. DEATH SENTENCE!! At least two man crew they can look out for each other. ONE MAN CREW ABSOLUTELY MIND BOGGLING!!

Railroad companies need to maintain 2 man crews, to provide safety for the employees and the general public. The way and hours we work all of us get tired and don’t seem to get enough rest and more eyes from a locomotive on the rails and surrounding area is the best way to provide safety for all of us as well as the public, and rail maintenance workers. I can’t remember a day in the last 15 years that I worked that I haven’t seen someone in the gage of the rails or close enough to the rail that could cause the bodily injury. And also been time when I was looking at the paperwork and keeping up with the gauges on the locomotive that the conductor has bought to my attention that someone or something is on the tracks or about to interfere with the movement of the train , so I feel it is in the best interest of all the company, the employees and the public that all train continue have 2 man crews .

I've worked on the railroad for CSX since 2014. The thought of cutting us from 2 man to 1 man crew is mind blowing. We've caught different issues from each side of the cab whether it be track conditions or something smoking from our train, situations where one man wouldn't have been able to handle. The company thinks Positive Train Control will make it feasible for 1 man crews. I've seen that computer system crash too many times and you're left with 2 mens knowledge of the territory. As a 2 man crew, we've had many issues with these ridiculously long freight trains. Every year it seems they get longer and more problematic, which is too much to handle for 1 man.

The rail industry is a major part of everyone’s lives whether they realize this or not. The rails provide the goods and services to businesses everyday and it is probably one of the most safest ways to transport materials. Technology is a wonderful thing and it should be used when it can however no technology can ever replace the years of training and experience of railroad workers. I think it is imperative that all trains remain a two man crew for safety of the crew and the towns and cities they operate throughout.

Two man crews are very important for the towns and communities that we operate though. One person can do everything.

Railroad companies to maintain 2 man crews, to provide safety for the employees and the general public.

It is must that we protect the community by having 2 person crews on locomotives. I’ve been a locomotive engineer for 9 years and I truly care for the communities along the railway system.

As an engineer at norfolk southern for 27 years I feel a 1 man crew should never be allowed . 1 man could never act timely in an emergency scenereo, as far as moving cars from public areas separating damaged rail cars and moving them. Also keeping one another alert on trains at all hrs. Of night . The risk is too high , for public safety. Thanks

I feel very strongly about keeping a 2 man crew on the Railroad. I think it is much safer for a 2 man crew versus 1 man. Not just for the crews and the trains they operate, but for all involved in the Railroad process. Plus I think it provides a safer environment for all those around employees and the public. Thank You

As a Conductor working for Norfolk Southern I am for mandated two person train crews due to safety concerns that I have seen first hand. Just this month (as of January 20th, 2024) I have had to fix 2 mechanical issues with trains along line of road that would have taken hours for someone to come out and fix if they used ground based conductors and blocking 3 road crossings for longer since we were an over 11000 foot train on my latest issue. I've also had 1 Positive Train Control issue this month which happened last week, their systems are not as sound as the railroad states they are and the SMART Union has been collecting issue reports on this since the railroads do not report them. Going to train length we are moving these monster trains, 10,000 to 14,000 foot long, that if we cannot get them into a terminal we have to tie down on the main lines which could cause us to block road crossings causing issues with local civil services and not allowing people to get into their driveways in some rural areas. We also have issues with train meets due to their size, there are only 2 sidings that can handle trains of these sizes from Crewe to Roanoke but will still cause us to block road crossings in the process. The rail infrastructure we run on was built for smaller train length but with technology the railroad can run them longer but the issue still is the infrastructure has not been updated for this. In closing two person crews should be mandatory at the minimum but I hope this committee does more than that to keep our great state safe. I do not want to see another East Palestine disaster happen due to the railroads corporate greed and dire negligence, especially here in Virginia.

No person who stands in opposition of HB385 has experience in dealing with residents and emergency responders who are sometimes blocked for hours at rail/highway crossings by Class 1 Railroad mega trains now operating in Virgina (sometimes exceeding 15,000 feet in length.) No person who stands in opposition of HB385 has experience or extensive knowledge of operating mainline freight trains that traverse nearly every part of our state. Thank you for consideration.

As a labor representative and a community member it is imperative this bill pass. Our state needs to be protected against the railroads greed. Rail safety here protects communities and workers. This bill is a win win. The Railroads will prosper despite their resistance.

As an employee of one of nation's largest railroads I am a believer that there is no replacement for 2 people on every train. the ptc system is not a replacement it is a tool used to try and make train movement safer when it works which it does not always do. But requiring that 2 people be on every train would always allow our trains to run smoothly, safely, and efficiently without being even more of an inconvenience to the public at large than they already are.

Please Back Two person Crewbill on the behalf of SMART union.

Fully supporting the latest railroad safety bill for a safer future! It wisely limits train lengths and mandates essential safety measures, ensuring trains and public safety are prioritized. Stationary train restrictions, mandatory two-person crews, and improved warning signs are crucial steps forward. This bill isn't just about regulations; it's about protecting lives and enhancing railway safety. Let's stand together for a safer community and a more responsible railway system. #RailroadSafety #CommunityFirst #SafetyMatters

All Trains need at least 2 on a crew to help prevent any delays to the public in case an emergency happens on the Railway. My husband works on the railroad and see first hand how dangerous things can change in a moment. Virginia needs to take safety first and help prevent blocked crossings and have sufficient employees on the trains . Virginia needs to look north in Ohio and realize, Ohio passed these standards after their tragedy which killed all types of wildlife and marine life in East Palestine. Virginia let’s take the first step to keeping our Virginia Beautiful and Safe!

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

IVF should be covered by insurance in VA. One of my closest friends is dealing with this currently and it’s absolutely horrific and a terrible experience that nobody wants/chooses to go through. On top of that they shouldn’t need to deal with the financial stress of it all. Not being able to have a family shouldn’t depend on insurance and accessibility of care due to finances.

I have a close friend who is currently going through this. It has been heartbreaking watching this situation unfold in her life. I believe IVF should be covered by insurance in VA.

I support this bill.

I support this bill. As mothers who desires a pregnancy often need assistant to pro create and it is expensive to have a bundle a joy. What parent wouldn't desire a child to leave a legacy.

Comments Document

On behalf of the Alliance for Fertility Preservation (AFP) and the cancer patients we serve, I am writing to express our strong support for HB 560 and to urge the Labor and Commerce Committee to advance this bill out of Committee. Our full comments are attached.

To whom it may concern, I am advocating for this bill to pass and for Virginia to require employers to offer coverage for IVF without the diagnosis of unexplained infertility. My roommate from college and best friend went though a devastating situation where they lost their baby at 22 weeks due to a genetic abnormality that was found at their 20 week scan. Unfortunately, to alleviate this from happening again and avoid such heartbreak, they have to go through IVF in order to ensure their embryos are tested and the gene is absent so it is not passed on. They do not get IVF coverage and are therefore having to pay out of pocket just to avoid another traumatic experience and to be able to grow their family safely. IVF should be offered and covered for any family going through these awful experiences. Thank you for your time.

According to the National Infertility Association, RESOLVE, infertility affects 1 in 8 couples and 3 in 4 never obtain needed treatment, often because they cannot afford it. Everyone deserves the right to procreate and to try to build a family. Right now, many Virginia families diagnosed with infertility fall into a “coverage gap” and pay out-of-pocket for fertility care services. Only certain employers provide any fertility care coverage in Virginia and what they do provide is often very limited. Families generally must pay high co-pays or adhere to service restrictions and lifetime dollar caps that strictly limit their treatment options, and thus make it unaffordable for many of them to proceed without risking their financial security or without achieving a successful pregnancy. For example, 1 IVF cycle can cost between $12,000 and $25,000 and, on average, it takes 2 to 3 cycles to achieve pregnancy. Additionally, highly inflated managed care pharmacy prices for IVF medications, where families with coverage can pay as much as 100% more for medications compared to prices charged to self-pay families, often contribute to 25-50% or more of total IVF costs, which can quickly drain lifetime caps and severely limit overall IVF care options. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 15 states currently have laws regarding insurance coverage for infertility diagnosis or treatment, including Maryland which borders Virginia. This puts the State at a significant competitive disadvantage, as many reproductive age residents intentionally change employers and leave Virginia to gain more attractive fertility care benefits. It is also well-documented that individuals who self-pay for an IVF procedure, or have limited benefits, often demand that 2 or more embryos be transferred to their uterus. This greatly increases the risk of multiple births and is a dangerous and costly approach for heavily burdened health care resources and can be completely avoided with greater access to covered fertility care services. Studies show that states with insurance coverage have a lower rate of multiple births because fewer embryos are transferred. This bill requires insurers to cover fertility care services based on the current standard of care for IVF treatments to achieve pregnancy success rates for singleton births at the lowest possible costs. This will greatly reduce the risk of multiple births and greatly reduce hospital and health care costs, thus saving employers money. Several recent studies have found that the cost of perinatal and neonatal care for twins is about $100,000, whereas singleton pregnancies cost about $13,000. Triplet pregnancies can cost $400,000 or more. For every 100 pregnancies from IVF that are singletons but could have been twins, about $8.7 million dollars is saved on top of reduced pain and suffering for parents and premature babies. This bill would significantly reduce this high financial and societal burden by promoting IVF technologies that use single-embryo transfers. This bill could increase the number of persons treated for infertility while also decreasing health care costs.

Bringing an insurance mandate to VA to help cover IVF and fertility preservation would help so many people. When my husband and I faced our struggles in 2005, we have no coverage and spent more than $20,000 out of pocket for one IVF cycle. This put us in debt, held us back financially early in our marriage. It added extra stress to our infertility journey. A change in state law would help so many people access the medical care they need to start a family. Thank you Rebecca Flick Leesburg, VA

Hi, I have a close friend who has struggled with infertility coverage. She lost her baby at 23 weeks and has been denied IVF coverage because of Virginia’s current laws that deny coverage to someone who conceived naturally, despite having lost the baby due to genetics malformations that would likely happen again if she did get pregnant again naturally - leaving IVF as her best option. She and countless other women in VA should be able to receive coverage no matter what their fertility circumstances are.

Hello, I am Dr. Nancy Durso. I have been providing fertility services in the Northern Virginia area for over 30 years. I have seen fertility technology improve over this time, but I have not seen change in Virginia coverage. Most couples in their 20's and 30's are just starting out and don't have the resources for fertility treatment. Maryland and now the Federal Government have included options for fertility treatment. I have had patients who moved to other states or changed jobs to have coverage. The longer couples have to wait for treatment the less likely their chance of success. Not being able to have a family creates depression, family discord, low self-esteem and social imbalance. I have personally experienced infertility as well. Even though it has been many years the internal scars are still present. Having a baby moves couples past this roadblock and allows them to get on with their lives. The technology is available to help so many. Now is the time to move forward with this legislation. We can no longer say that these treatments are experimental since they have been performed for over 45 years! Help young Virginians improve their lives by financially supporting their dreams of having a child. Thank you.

My wife and I experienced a devastating pregnancy loss at 20 weeks this June. From there, it was determined that we would need to use IVF to prevent the same outcome in future pregnancies. You would think losing our daughter would be the most devastating experience we had all year, but what happened after with our insurance pushed us further and further into the depths. We were denied IVF coverage because it was not included in our insurance plan. We spent the next few months trying to determine how to navigate getting new insurance, while continuing to work with the team of doctors who supported us through our previous pregnancy. It was hell. We were suffer, grieving our loss, and dealing with help lines and 1-800 numbers having to share our trauma just to get someone on the phone to figure out how we could get the coverage we so desperately need. Couples that are experiencing infertility are already in hell. Having extra layers of complexity to navigate made the worst experience of my life even more unbearable. To be told that a team of doctors that was intimately involved in our situation all agreed that IVF with PGT was the correct course of treatment for us to build our family, BUT that coverage was not required in the state of VA and our employers didn’t include it in our plan was humiliating. It made grieving and recovery for me and my wife horrible and near impossible, knowing that we had almost no hope at the time of getting the coverage we so desperately needed to build our family. It is unfathomable that access to IVF is limited in the state of VA the way that it is. Men and women deserve access to the medical care that they need when they need it. Aside from being the right thing to do, it is also good for Virginia as a whole. Having accessibility will mean more jobs in VA, and more funding and research for infertility as a whole. Virginia has the benefit of being home to plenty of Fortune 500 HQs. This will also make those companies more attractive to talented employees, and equitable as a whole. Expanding access in VA for IVF is good for VA and so important for men and women who want to expand their families.

I am writing in support of HB 560. I was diagnosed with premature ovarian failure at 32, and after multiple rounds of IVF and other fertility treatments, I was able to have three beautiful children. It is without question that I would not have been able to build my family were it not for the incredible health insurance my employer provided at the time. But having insurance coverage for something as basic and essential as my ability to have children should not be something left to chance or good fortune. Indeed, it was my desire to have more children that kept me at this job in order to keep that incredible health insurance coverage, even when doing so impacted my career growth. Women should not have their ability to have children depend on the charity of their employers, and infertility should be treated the way that any other medical condition would be, especially given how core it is to one's humanity. Finally, this bill should be amended to include coverage for LGBTQIA individuals who should be equally protected in their journeys to parenthood.

Thank you for taking the time to discuss such an important issue. My husband and I are a member of the "one in twenty" club, and our two children (2.5 and 4 months) are among the small but growing percentage of children who were born using invitro fertilization. We were privileged enough to be able to "afford" IVF. I put "afford" in quotations, because we spent more than a year's salary to make our babies and ensure we could grow our family without a guarantee that it would work. We would do it again, including the emotional and financial heartbreak that occurred with the failures along the way. However, not everyone has the same outcome or the same resources. We strongly encourage you to consider supporting a bill that would make IVF accessible to all individuals who need it to grow their families, specifically a bill that would have it covered by insurance. As a state university employee, I found it frustrating that some state universities covered fertility benefits, but ours did not. Taking the financial strain out of the process will not take the pain and frustration away but it will lighten the load substantially and provide more equity across the board. Thank you for considering this bill!

As a Virginia resident and former infertility patient who underwent multiple rounds of fertility treatments, I speak for all families when I ask the committee to please pass HB560-Helmer. I was fortunate that my insurance covered some family building treatments, enabling my husband and I to undergo several courses of treatment. Even with some insurance coverage, we spent over $40,000 out of pocket. We were extremely fortunate to be able to afford this amount. It is not fair that so many want to build families but cannot afford to resolve MEDICAL issues because they are not covered by insurance. Please support Virginia families by requiring insurance companies to cover fertility treatments. Thank you.

At their 20-week ultrasound, my daughter and son-in-law first discovered that their unborn baby girl was severely compromised, with no expectation of life outside the womb. This heartbreak was followed by the discovery that one of them carries a genetic anomaly that will result in a 50-50 chance going forward that the same genetic defect will be present. The loss of their baby was traumatic; IVF will allow them to avoid repeating this scenario, as their fertilized embryos can be examined for this anomaly prior to implantation. An additional benefit is that the screening process means that this genetic defect will not be passed on to their future offspring, thus eliminating the possibility of the trauma their parents experienced with their first pregnancy. Our daughter and son-in-law's health plan does not cover IVF. They had to wait six months after the loss their baby for "open season", in order to switch health plans, which they have done. Waiting for open season was an additional burden to people who were struggling with the aftermath of their loss. In this instance it's so obvious to me that the small numbers of people who find themselves in this type of situation are deserving of assistance, and a solution that cost them burdensome waiting periods and astronomical costs. My daughter has a new health plan, and she's so fortunate they had this option, but they were extremely close to having to go it on their own, as many people undoubtedly must do. Making IVF available in all health plans would go a long way in saving the physical and mental health of expectant parents.

I am writing to express my support for H560-Helmer, to mandate IVF as covered healthcare policy for all Virginians. This is coverage Virginians are behind regardless of their individual positions on broader family planning, pregnancy, and child care issues. Please insure that this bill is included in legislation that makes it to Governor Youngkin for his signature this session. Thank you, Richard Moore Reston, Va.

If I didn't have insurance that covered fertility treatment, I couldn't have a family. If I couldn't have a family, I'd leave Virginia. Support families; mandate fertility insurance coverage.

After an emergency surgery robbed my husband and I the ability to conceive naturally, our arduous journey of IVF began. IVF is extremely expensive and there are no guarantees of a happy ending. One round of IVF can cost upwards of $10,000, multi cycle packages can run $25,000 or more, plus the cost of necessary, supportive medication that can run between $3,000-$10,000 a cycle. That doesn’t include all of the pre-testing typically needed in addition to several tests administered throughout the process. Our medical insurance did not cover any of the IVF costs, medications or testing. My husband and I went through three rounds of IVF and spent close to $100,000 out of pocket. Let me repeat that. We spent close to $100,000 on IVF and went broke doing so. We spent our savings, maxed out our credit cards and borrowed money from family. At one point we considered going overseas, as the cost of IVF is a fraction in comparison to here in the United States. Hindsight, would we do it again? Absolutely! Is it fair we had to endure immense stress due to the financial burden? …absolutely not. We are some of the fortunate ones that have a happy ending to our IVF story. We are truly blessed and realize how fortunate we are knowing others cannot even start the process because they simply cannot afford it. No one should EVER have to go in debt or be robbed of the opportunity to start a family. There is still a stigma that IVF is a “women’s issue”, when in fact only 1/3 of IVF cases are due to female factor. Insurance companies use this false premise to classify IVF as a niche issue and deny coverage. Let Virginia be among the progressive states that supports women’s reproductive rights! Make ART (Assisted Reproductive Technology) affordable and covered by insurance!

Esteemed representatives, It is my honor to let you know that my husband and I were privileged enough to have a daughter two years ago via fertility treatments. After three unexplained losses, it was a dream come true. My daughter is smart, adventurous, and I’ve never seen her fearful of anything. I would pay my life savings a million times over to hear her laugh just once. But the fact is - I shouldn’t have to. Around the time my daughter was born, my sister in law had a son via IVF in Maryland. Her out of pocket medical bills, while her treatment was significant more expensive than mine, were miniscule in comparison because of her insurance coverage. While my insurance did cover a small portion, we paid thousands of dollars for the opportunity to meet our daughter. This is not even a possibility for many because of the cost. The dream of a family should not come saddled with medical debt, loans, and even more hopelessness. I am sincerely and courageously hoping that you will expand the coverage required in Virginia to allow other families to hear their baby’s laugh for the first time. Please consider lessening the load and removing even a single obstacle for families with dreams like mine - to hear their baby laugh and see them smile. I appreciate your time and attention.

Dear Representative and House Committee, IVF insurance coverage is important to thousands of families in Virginia who build their families via IVF. Virginia needs to keep up with Maryland and Washington, DC when it comes to helping people build their families. Maryland was the first state to pass an infertility insurance mandate in 1985 and the District of Columbia passed the newest mandate in 2023. As a neighboring state, due to the emotional and financial costs of IVF, lack of resources draw families to leave the state or seek employment elsewhere. Passing this bill will not only support families but ensure financial stability in doing so. Thank you, Sarah

Virginians with healthcare are able to receive specialty care for almost any disease or ailment, so why not infertility? Please consider the diagnosis of infertility as serious as any other health problem and help expand benefits to include fertility treatments.

Dear representative and House committee. iVF insurance coverage is important to thousands of families in Virginia who build their families via IVF. Virginia needs to keep up with Maryland and Washington, DC, when it comes to helping people build their families. Maryland was the first state to pass an infertility insurance mandate in 1985, and the District of Columbia passed the newest mandate in 2023. As a neighboring state, due to the emotional and financial costs of IVF, lack of resources draw families to leave the state or seek employment elsewhere. Passing this bill will not only support families but ensure financial stability in doing so.

Comments Document

The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society strongly supports HB560 to provide for fertility preservation services for individuals facing iatrogenic infertility as a result of treatment for cancer.

My Name is Sarah Mong. I am 32 years old, and a 30 year resident of Virginia. Thank you for taking the time to review my written support for the passing of HB560- Helmer, which will expand IVF services to the residents of Virginia. My husband, Stephen, and I have an extremely complicated and heartbreaking circumstance surrounding our journey to IVF. We fell pregnant in January of 2023. Getting the positive pregnancy test with our daughter, Andie Isabel Mong, was the happiest day of my life. However, we suffered an immeasurable loss on June 2, 2023, when we lost our daughter in my second trimester. It’s difficult for me to put into words the impact of our loss, and the horror at learning 20 weeks into what we were told was a “low risk pregnancy” that our daughter had inherited a sever genetic condition that impacted nearly every single internal organ system, and wouldn’t survive. I can’t even describe the heartbreak Stephen and I feel that we do not get to love and raise our Andie the way we had hoped to. It feels like a failure of nature and of science that this could happen to us. Following the loss of Andie, genetic testing was conducted, and it was determined that Stephen and I, two healthy adults in our 30’s, who had conceived naturally, have a 50% chance of recurrence in future pregnancies. The only way to prevent a pregnancy like Andie’s, and to safely build our family, is through IVF with PGT testing. Every single medical professional we have consulted with has shared with us their recommendation that we pursue IVF with PGT testing. Given what we have suffered through, it feels like a miracle that the science exists to prevent further loss and suffering though IVF with PGT. However, my heart was broken again when our insurance approved our referral for PGT, due to our genetic diagnosis, but denied our referral for IVF because my employer had not included it in the health insurance plan I was on. PGT testing on embryos could not be conducted without pursuing IVF, and we cannot safely conceive children without IVF. While grieving the loss of Andie, an impossible journey in and of its self, Stephen and I tried to navigate the very complicated world of obtaining insurance coverage for IVF. As you can imagine, it was very important to me to stay with my OB and MFM from my pregnancy with Andie. It felt impossible to do my story justice to a new OB and MFM who were not there with us through all of it; the happiness, the joy, the shock, devastation and heartbreak. I physically and mentally couldn’t stomach the thought of brining a new provider up to speed, while dealing with the physical and emotional trauma of a second term pregnancy loss. Obtaining IVF coverage by switching plans would have required us to leave both our providers behind, as well as wait until a new year, when I was one year older and my eggs were of lesser quality, to pursue IVF. That weight felt like an impossible choice added to an already impossible situation. On behalf of myself, Stephen, and Andie, I hope that you will understand the necessity of opening up access to IVF. Women who are struggling to become mothers do not need any added stress or weight to what is already a soul-crushing experience. OB’s, MFM’s and Genetic Counselors are very well trained in making the determination of what necessitates IVF and it should be left up to them to make that call.

I am an infertile resident of Virginia who utilized IVF to start my family. I considered moving to Maryland and getting a job there to secure IVF coverage. Please do right by Virginians and offer us the coverage that's available in Maryland.

This law is needed to keep up with the health insurance trends of Washington DC and the State of Maryland. Many people around the nation postpone family building due to health insurance non-coverage/limited coverage of IVF, etc. In 2010, I borrowed 20,000 to build my family. Although this was a successful family building investment, the financial burden caused much stress.

I am speaking to my support of HB560. My family experienced infertility for over seven years. The diagnosis and subsequent treatments were difficult enough without the significant stress caused the financial impact . And that is for those fortunate enough to strive for IVF, which is completely cost-prohibitive for so many people. Infertility is not a lifestyle decision. I implore you to do what can to resolve the suffering it can cause.

As a Virginia resident since 1993, I urge the Subcommittee to support HB460-Helmer, because this bill is about building families. This bill would require certain employers in the Commonwealth to provide insurance coverage for medical treatments such as IVF and fertility preservation for cancer patients. This is standard healthcare, insurance that most self-insured employers are adding because they know the positive value of this benefit. It's a benefit that helps build families, retains workers, recruits talent, and ensures that employees don't suffer financially due to paying out of pocket for care. Did you know Maryland has had this kind of coverage since 1985, and the District of Columbia passed a similar law in 2023. As someone who went through IVF and had health insurance because my husband's company was based in Massachusetts with a strong mandate, having that healthcare covered by insurance allowed us to focus on our treatment, not stress about the finances. Thank you for considering this bill.

Please note my strong support for the IVF and fertility preservation bill. I have a 3 year old born from IVF, with my husband and I not being able to expand our family without help from IVF and science. I am one of the very few people to have insurance that covered most of my treatments ($50K+), but just because I am one of the lucky ones doesn't mean I don't fully support every American having the chance to start a family. Passing this bill will change so many lives, not only to expand families but to continue to grow and develop the youth of our country.

I was diagnosed with "unexplained infertility" last year. My insurance had no coverage whatsoever for infertility unless I had a medical diagnosis of infertility. With that being said, majority of my doctor's visits were paid out of pocket and we spend over $12,000 in medical bills just last year for testing, surgeries, and 3 rounds of IUI (which were all unsuccessful). We continue with our doctor's visits this year and plan on doing IVF which will probably be another $15,000 ($5,000 of that alone for medications ONLY) out of pocket depending on deductibles and co-insurance. That itself is nearly $30,000 spent just to start of family, when there are people who have no issues getting pregnant and do not need to spend a dime. There are so many people who do not even have the option to seek help with infertility because of the financial costs. Virginia MUST make changes to allow EVERYONE to have infertility insurance coverage.

Sometimes people need a little help when it comes to building their family. Unfortunately the out of pocket cost associated with fertility treatments is unreachable for many families, costing $20k+ for a single treatment, the the expense (and stress) is compounded if a family needs multiple rounds of treatment. Insurance coverage will bring down the costs, and allow Virginians to build the family of their dreams. I am getting ready for my fourth total round of fertility treatment, and the expense is devastating, but I want a second child so so much to complete my family—I want my son to have a sibling, and my husband and I love being parents so much. Please support HB560 to build Virginia families like mine.

IVF costs are beyond what normal Americans can afford, without going into crippling debt. The only reason my husband and I have been able to afford IVF to try and build our family is because he has partial coverage through his job. We've been spent $5,000 out of pocket and that number is growing. Fertility is healthcare, and all Virginians deserve access to it, regardless of income.

I am writing to express my support for the fertility insurance coverage bill. Access to comprehensive fertility treatments is an essential component of reproductive health care, and ensuring that individuals and families have the necessary. Support is a matter of both equity and compassion.. Fertility challenges can be emotionally and financially taxing and providing inclusive insurance. Coverage is a crucial step towards alleviating the burdens associated with ART. By extending coverage to include fertility treatments, the state can make significant strides in supporting individuals and couples on their journey to parenthood. This initiative aligns with the evolving, understanding of healthcare, recognizing fertility as an integral aspect of overall well-being. It reflects a commitment to the diverse needs of Virginians, fostering a community where everyone has the opportunity to build the families they desire. I urge you to champion this cause common, ensuring that fertility insurance coverage becomes a reality for all residents of Virginia. By doing so, you will be contributing to the establishment of a more compassionate and inclusive healthcare system that meets the diverse needs of our community.

Comments Document

On behalf of the Virginia Association of Hematology and Oncology (VAHO) and the Association of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), I have attached a letter in support of HB 560.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

The International Foundation for Autoimmune & Autoinflammatory Arthritis (AiArthritis), a patient organization led by people affected by AiArthritis diseases, shares the committee’s goal of lowering patient out-of-pocket costs so that they can more easily maintain their health. However, we urge the committee to reject empowering a prescription drug affordability board (PDAB) to lead these efforts, which could ultimately cause more harm by creating more barriers between patients and their needed medications. AiArthritis has been actively involved in other states that have recently implemented local PDABs, including Colorado and Oregon, and have seen firsthand the limitations of the PDAB model in those states. Based on what we have seen, we believe that PDABs are ineffective in identifying and solving the actual problems patients with chronic conditions are facing when attempting to access their medications. Focusing solely on the price of drugs ignores the many complicated factors that ultimately drive costs up for patients and oversimplifies a very complex process. To employ a healthcare analogy, with PDABs policymakers are seeking to address a symptom rather than the underlying condition. We encourage policymakers to focus on these existing and pressing affordability and access issues, which originate from payers (insurance companies and pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs)). Additionally, reviewing only a handful of medications positions PDABs to create further inequities, picking winners and losers among patients and patient populations. We urge your committee to focus instead on the broader healthcare industry when considering reforms and identify long-term solutions rather than short-term relief for a limited few. Some PDABs have been given the authority to review prescription drug costs and set upper payment limits for them. Setting upper payment limits (UPLs) for drugs might endanger their accessibility in the state or limit appropriate reimbursement for the physicians that administer them. Patients with complex and chronic conditions often spend years identifying treatments that work for them. UPLs will not lower prescription drug costs for patients because they do not lower out of pocket costs. Additionally, treatments can also work for years but then become less effective, forcing patients to change therapies. There is no “one size fits all” health solution; therefore, it is critical that health policies do not impede access to treatments or lead to fewer options for patients. Proposals such as these target the most innovative medicines, disproportionately impacting patients with diseases where there is high unmet need and where low-cost treatment options are not available (e.g. rare diseases), running counter to the aims of personalized medicine and availability of new treatments.

Alexandria is a vibrant city based on history, culture, a waterfront and lots of tourism. If Virginia has money and space to build an arena then you have money and space to build new schools. Our school system is deplorable. It’s overcrowded. Think of your citizens before thinking about your quick money grab that eventually leads to an inevitable loss. We don’t want or need an arena. This is pure greed.

I am here to speak and endorse Del. Delaney's Prescription Drug Affordability Board bill.

My dad is battling stage 4 prostate cancer. He was diagnosed on 4/27/2023 and on 6/15/2023 we learned it was all over. Things looked scary yet we learned about a drug called Xtandi that could keep him with us longer. It is $8800 a month and we started going through the process of getting insurance to approve it. If they did approve it the cost would be $1905 a month. My parents are retired teachers and my dad gave 36 years to the students in Welding and Ag classes. My brother and I vowed they would get whatever they needed to fight this monster. I learned $8800 is pretty cheap for a life sustaining drug. $25,000 up to $90,000 is what some are charged. 1 in 4 Virginians don't take the right amount of prescriptions because of cost. My dad is lucky that we've made it work yet he taught me to look out for others. When you're fighting for your life you don't have the time to fight for drugs that will save you. Please support this bill and make it easier for others to get their prescription drugs. I'm currently on leave from my job to care for my dad and help my parents. If you need to ask any questions please feel free to email at robing98@gmail.com. Please vote the right way!

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

discussing impact of changes to payment structure for independent infusion centers.

I am the Executive Director of the Rare Access Action Project. My family has been affected by rare diseases. Because of that I have spent much of my career in the life sciences advocating for access to rare disease therapies and supporting rare families. Only 5% of rare diseases have an FDA approved treatment. For one-third of individuals with a rare disease, it can take between one and five years to receive a proper diagnosis. Half of all patients diagnosed with a rare disease are children, and as many as 3 in 10 children with a rare disease will not live to see their 5th birthday. For the few fortunate to have a treatment, patients face barriers to these therapies across our health care system in addition to facing a patient journey filled with misdiagnosis and lack of treatment options. Having seen PDABs in other states, we are very concerned. Since the first PDAB was created in 2019 by the Maryland legislature, PDAB legislation has been passed in 8 states (Colorado, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington). Since 2019, the experiment in government drug price controls has amassed a dubious record of success. Maryland, the oldest of the PDABs, has yet to become operational, and others have struggled to fulfill their mission. The pharmaceutical ecosystem is more complex than proponents portray it, and PDAB legislation patches on a state bureaucracy with little understanding of pharmaceutical pricing policies and the implications of their decisions. Pharmaceutical products are purchased across the United States with Virginia involved in an interstate marketplace that includes a network of federal and state discount and rebate programs (Medicaid best price, 340b pricing, VA, FFS as well as the calculations and penalties that are attached to them). Further, many commercial plans and PBMs negotiate substantial discounts, and some payers have already begun to implement value-based pricing. States such as Arizona are exploring risk pooling for therapies and the uninsured, as well as reinsurance. Price controls from PDABs could jeopardize efforts to innovate value and payment in the pharmaceutical ecosystem. Also consider, rare disease patients increasingly participate in Center of Excellence care. Universities and larger hospital systems have become hubs for both care and treatment. Drugs are purchased and administered for some rare patients outside of Virginia. Challenges will face Virginian rare patients who are on a therapy purchased outside the state beyond the purview of the Virginia PDAB. And payment for those medicines will create risk for those providers, potentially choking off access to that necessary treatment. We urge you to ensure that no patient is left fearful of losing access to treatments that offer them a chance at a better tomorrow. We believe there are solutions that can enhance affordability across healthcare. But proponents of PDAB are focused on an experimental program that has generated zero savings for patients since the first PDAB was created in 2019. We urge you to vote no on HB570. We look forward to working with you on meaningful solutions to healthcare affordability.

Comments Document

The Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) respectfully opposes HB 570, which would create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board tasked with reviewing prescription drug costs and setting upper payment limits for specified prescription drugs. Government price controls like those proposed by this bill are an especially drastic action with unpredictable consequences. While the intent of this bill is to lower drug prices, we fear HB 570 will fail to bring down costs for consumers or institutions and instead disincentivize development of new therapeutic breakthroughs. This bill will not lower prescription drug costs for patients because it does not address out-of-pocket costs. Patients pay a given price when they visit a pharmacy based on what their health insurer determines—it is for this reason why two patients will pay a different price for the same drug. Out-of-pocket costs have been rising for patients as a result of decisions made by health insurers. HB 570 does not address the price patients pay out-of-pocket and will therefore not directly impact patient affordability for prescription medications.

Comments Document

Please see the attached letter from The Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) in opposition to HB 570.

Comments Document

Small business support for PDAB and why it's critical to my workforce.

Comments Document

HDA respectfully opposes HB 570, Establishing a PDAB. HDA is the national trade association representing healthcare wholesale distributors — the vital link between the nation’s pharmaceutical and healthcare manufacturers and more than 330,000 pharmacies, hospitals, and other healthcare settings nationwide. Wholesale distributors are unlike any other supply chain participants. Distributors are primarily responsible for the physical handling and logistics of medicines and healthcare products, and have no role in determining the list prices for drugs or the amount patients pay at the counter. Rather, HDA members ensure that over 95% of all pharmaceutical products arrive to over 5,800 sites of care in Virginia. While HDA supports the state’s efforts in seeking a better understanding of the prices that consumers see at the pharmacy counter, based on our members' supply chain expertise, we have strong concerns regarding the upper payment limit (UPL) established in the legislation, the use of maximum fair price (MFP), and the impact of these policies on the physical supply chain. State-level UPLs do not adequately reflect how prescription drugs are bought and paid for in the U.S. A state-level UPL, especially a UPL following federal MFP limits, would place caps on in-state purchases but not out-of-state purchases, ultimately limiting the ability of pharmacies, clinics or other points of care to recoup costs for administering or dispensing these products, which could result in sites of care being unable to stock these medications. In short, a UPL puts patient access to timely medications at risk. While HDA is concerned over the impact of this type of proposal, we would like to express our appreciation for the inclusion of “a representative with knowledge in…supply chain business models” on the Stakeholder Council. As noted, wholesale distributors do not set list prices or play any role in determining the amount patients pay for medicines at the counter, our members are the logistical experts of the supply chain, and HDA believes it is important that the stakeholder council is representative of the full supply chain. We invite the Committee to review our full letter, and to contact HDA at any time to discuss why we oppose HB 570. Thank you for your consideration of our concern.

Comments Document

Tigerlily Foundation is a national women's oncology organization providing education, advocacy, & hands-on support for young women before, during, & after cancer. I write to you today to express our organization’s concerns over HB 570, legislation that would establish a prescription drug affordability board (PDAB) in Virginia. Establishing a PDAB in Virginia will block access to essential medicines that Virginians rely on to manage symptoms & lead healthier lives, particularly for patients living with cancer & other chronic conditions & could further exasperate already existing health inequities. Prescription drug price setting policies that often accompany PDABs, such as upper payment limits (UPLs), fail to protect access to timely & effective care & can actually increase risks for patients who need consistent access to medications to manage their health. UPLs limit reimbursement for hospitals, doctors, & pharmacists who dispense effective treatments that help patients manage disease. As a result of the proposed PDAB, Virginia patients could be forced to search elsewhere to access medications they need & could end up forgoing critical treatments altogether, which can lead to adverse health consequences including death & higher medical costs in the future. In addition, establishing a PDAB in Virginia could divert critical research resources elsewhere & have a chilling effect on the development of new medicines for patients who have limited or no treatment options today for their condition. Furthermore, any proposed PDAB should be designed to include patients & be representative of those populations. This would also include patient advocacy organizations as community advisory representatives of the Virginia House to ensure that these & future recommendations include all stakeholders. For patients who are diagnosed with complex cancers like triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), a hard-to-treat type of breast cancer that has limited treatment options & is diagnosed in Black & Hispanic women at younger ages & later stages, timely & equitable access to medical treatments prescribed by one’s physician is critical. However, drug price controls can unintentionally threaten vital pathways for patients to access cutting-edge medicines that can help them survive disease. While we commend the Virgina General Assembly & other elected leaders in Virginia for exploring solutions that alleviate health care access & affordability challenges & reduce health disparities, any policy solution must not come at the expense of vulnerable communities in Virginia, particularly Black & brown communities who already face disproportionate barriers. TNBC, among other cancers and diseases, disproportionately affects Black women, & establishing a PDAB in Virginia would have disastrous consequences on access to care, future innovative treatments, & efforts to achieve health equity. On behalf of the communities Tigerlily Foundation serves, we thank you for your leadership in seeking policy solutions to address barriers to care that Virginia patients face. However, HB 570 falls short of that goal. On behalf of our community & as an 18 year survivor of TNBC myself & a Virginia resident, I thank you for your consideration of our concerns. Please do not hesitate to contact me directly at maimah@tigerlilyfoundation.org if Tigerlily Foundation can be a resource to you and your staff. Sincerely, Maimah Karmo Founder & CEO , Tigerlily Foundation

Comments Document

Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments. Please see the attached letter.

Comments Document

The National Infusion Center Association (NICA) is a nonprofit organization formed to support non-hospital, community-based infusion centers caring for patients in need of infused and injectable medications. Our organization writes to express concerns with the Board’s ability to establish an upper payment limit for prescription drugs. We applaud Virginia lawmakers for attempting to address drug costs for patients, and we appreciate that the bill notes this will be done with consideration for administration costs. However, we are still concerned that an upper payment limit will not only fail to achieve the intended goal, but it will also harm vulnerable patients in the process. Establishing a ceiling for how much an infusion provider can be reimbursed for a drug will disrupt the delicate economics of medical benefit drug delivery and put smaller, community providers—that represent the lowest-cost care setting for these expensive medications—at risk. Infusion providers typically acquire, administer, and bill for drugs through a buy-and-bill model. Under this model, providers are reimbursed for drugs they previously purchased and stored along with a small payment for professional services that does not begin to cover the overhead of their business, known as the admin fee. To remain in business, infusion centers rely on their drug payments to offset the incredible cost-reimbursement disparity on the professional services side. Drug payments are the economic lynchpin to offset practice expenses, including inventory management, staff salaries, and office space. Lower drug payments to infusion providers will force most of the state’s community-based infusion centers to shutter their doors or discontinue administering certain drugs, forcing patients into more expensive hospital care settings or potentially ending their treatments. Upper pricing limits put a ceiling on the reimbursement for certain drugs, but they do not guarantee that the drug will actually be cheaper for patients. An upper payment limit will only establish how much insurers in the state pay for a drug. It will not change the actual cost of drug acquisition and administration for providers, and it will not change what insurers require from patients through copays and coinsurance (most infusion patients use copay assistance to cover the cost of their medications, which insurers are trying to prevent through copay accumulator programs). Though well-intended, we fear that upper payment limits will harm infusion providers and their patients, leading to access issues across the state. Taking time to better understand the buy-and-bill model that most, if not all, infusion providers rely on, will only benefit the welfare of providers and patients in the state. We hope that the Committee will be open to exploring other options, such as an amendment that would exempt infusion providers from the impact of this bill - a provider carve-out. This would avoid disruptions to community-based care delivery and keep Virginia infusion centers and patients safe.

Comments Document

January 31, 2024 RE: Written Testimony for House Committee on Health and Human Services February 1, 2024 hearing for HB 570 by Delegate Delaney. The National Minority Quality Forum (NMQF) is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit research and advocacy organization based in Washington, DC. The mission of NMQF is to reduce patient risk by assuring optimal care for all. Our vision is an American health services research, delivery and financing system whose operating principle is to reduce patient risk for amenable morbidity and mortality while improving quality of life. NMQF is committed to reducing patient risk and ensuring equitable access to beneficial treatment and care for Virginians and communities nationwide. The National Minority Quality Forum is writing to you to share our concerns that a Virginia Prescription Drug Affordability Board (PDAB) may only serve to impede the progress toward achieving health care equity for all Virginians. Price setting policies that accompany the PDAB such as an upper payment limit (UPL) increase risks for amenable morbidity and mortality for patients who depend on Medicaid to assure effective and consistent access to prescription medications to manage their health. UPLs limit reimbursement to hospitals, doctors, and pharmacists who dispense drugs deemed the most effective to help patients manage a chronic condition. While healthcare systems that serve a patient mix with higher-income levels may be able to withstand the losses from the lack of reimbursements, hospitals that are responsible for disenfranchised communities may not. Ensuring the affordability of high quality, efficacious medications is essential to the elimination of inequities in health care and outcomes. This affordability must not be effectuated by promulgating public policy that increases the health and financial costs vulnerable populations and communities in Virginia, particularly rural, Black and brown communities who are reliant upon and equity-centric public policy construct. Price setting policies that confound access to care are a barrier to inclusion in data collection and investment in research efforts that improve the quality of care for historically excluded populations. In closing, the National Minority Quality Forum shares your concerns regarding the need to assure that Virginia’s health care safety net is financially viable; however, that financial viability must not service to compromise the health and financial security of Medicaid beneficiaries. We would welcome an opportunity to partner with the Commonwealth of Virginia to explore effective and sustainable policy avenues to improving the quality and outcomes of care for all Virginians. If you have any questions regarding this public comment, please direct them to Gretchen C. Wartman, NMQF Vice President for Policy and Program (gwartman@nmqf.org). Sincerely, Gary A. Puckrein, PhD President and Chief Executive Officer National Minority Quality Forum

Comments Document

I am submitting my statement in support of HB 570, PDAB, patroned by Del Delaney. I must take four injections per year of Skyrizi which has a co-pay of thousands of dollars per injection. Medicare pays the rest of the cost. For Virginians who are not on Medicare, they must pay as much if not more, subject to their private insurance. If on Medicaid., then the Commonwealth must pay the entire cost. HB 570 will limit Virginians copays by capping the upper limit that can be charged for these medications. Tens of thousands of Virginians, like me, must take expensive prescriptions or allow their health to suffer by not taking prescriptions. I will be protected by the Biden Adminisrtation's Inflation Reduction Act which this year and in 2025 will continue to limit my copays. But Virginians not on Medicare will not have this opportunity. This situation exists because Skyrizi remains on patent. I don't have a choice. As a taxpayer, I will also benefit because the Commonwealth will spend less on prescription drugs for those on Medicaid, those using state health plans and prison inmates. The savings of millions of dollars spent by the state will be greatly appreciated by the constituents of the General Assembly and the Governor when this bill is signed into law. Thank you.

Comments Document

Thank you for accepting my letter in regard to HB 570. I represent cystic fibrosis patients in VA who are rightly concerned about the prospect of a Prescription Drug Affordability Board. On their behalf we ask you to read the attached letter and stop moving this bill forward. At the very least seek advice from as many advocates like me as possible. The patient voice needs to be heard, they should have a voice on the board, an appeals process and more. Thank you. Laura Bonnell

Comments Document

Please allow us to share our written testimony for Thursday’s House Hearing on HB 570. We write to share our deep concerns of the potentially devastating impact of the newly proposed Prescription Drug Affordability Board (PDAB) on patients living in Virginia. The attached letter outlines these concerns in detail. We would be happy to discuss these concerns more or answer any questions you have. The Alliance for Health Innovation (Alliance) is a group of diverse cross-sector stakeholders that together represent patients, providers, caregivers, academia, biopharmaceutical innovators, and business communities. Led by the Global Coalition on Aging (GCOA), the Alliance is committed to establishing the importance of innovation in achieving healthy aging and advocates for state policy solutions that support a thriving innovation sector that enables Virginians and other communities to live longer – and healthier – lives.

Comments Document

Honorable Chairman Ward, Vice Chair Herring, Members of the House Labor and Commerce Committee, and respected staff, Community Access National Network is gravely concerned with the nature of HB 570 as a "quick fix" to complicated issues, posing serious threats to access of timely treatment for people living with HIV in the state of Virginia. Attached is a detailed letter of concern regarding the proposed prescription drug advisory board. As a patient group, our first and foremost concern is the bill's abject lack of focus on patient perspectives and failure to prioritize patient experience as an aimed outcome. In our experience in other states, namely Colorado, boards lacking specified patient voices are dismissive and otherwise unresponsive to patient concerns. This is especially troubling as PDABs are typically targeting medications used to treat rare diseases, cancer, and public health concerns, like HIV and Hepatitis C - threatening patient access to lifesaving care. Similarly, these boards tend to lack expertise across the drug channel and are exceptionally selective in pursuing information - often neglecting to consider conflicts of interest with contractors serving the board or failing to disclose these conflicts. Nothing in HB 570 requires assessment or monitoring of potential unintended consequences. Nothing HB 570 requires pass through of any "savings" to patients or plan sponsors. Rather HB 570 seeks to establish "winners" and "losers" among industry interests while leaving patients behind. Whether the "winners" are pharmacy benefit managers or particular manufacturers, patients are removed entirely from decision making of our own care but for the mere afterthought of public comments. CANN urges the committee to seek a different route, one focused on patients, evaluating barriers to care, like consolidation of the provider and pharmacy spaces, addressing payor originated administrative burdens, and tackling the self-dealing nature of "vertical integration" among these interests at the expense of patients, our employers, and the state. This is NOT that bill. We urge you to vote NO on HB 570. CANN is ever at your service and happy to discuss real solutions for patients, should the legislature find the pleasure to do so.

Comments Document

I am the Executive Director of the Rare Access Action Project. My family has been affected by rare diseases. Because of that I have spent much of my career in the life sciences advocating for access to rare disease therapies and supporting rare families. Only 5% of rare diseases have an FDA approved treatment. For one-third of individuals with a rare disease, it can take between one and five years to receive a proper diagnosis. Half of all patients diagnosed with a rare disease are children, and as many as 3 in 10 children with a rare disease will not live to see their 5th birthday. For the few fortunate to have a treatment, patients face barriers to these therapies across our health care system in addition to facing a patient journey filled with misdiagnosis and lack of treatment options. Having seen PDABs in other states, we are very concerned. Since the first PDAB was created in 2019 by the Maryland legislature, PDAB legislation has been passed in 8 states (Colorado, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, and Washington). Since 2019, the experiment in government drug price controls has amassed a dubious record of success. Maryland, the oldest of the PDABs, has yet to become operational, and others have struggled to fulfill their mission. The pharmaceutical ecosystem is more complex than proponents portray it, and PDAB legislation patches on a state bureaucracy with little understanding of pharmaceutical pricing policies and the implications of their decisions. Pharmaceutical products are purchased across the United States with Virginia involved in an interstate marketplace that includes a network of federal and state discount and rebate programs (Medicaid best price, 340b pricing, VA, FFS as well as the calculations and penalties that are attached to them). Further, many commercial plans and PBMs negotiate substantial discounts, and some payers have already begun to implement value-based pricing. States such as Arizona are exploring risk pooling for therapies and the uninsured, as well as reinsurance. Price controls from PDABs could jeopardize efforts to innovate value and payment in the pharmaceutical ecosystem. Also consider, rare disease patients increasingly participate in Center of Excellence care. Universities and larger hospital systems have become hubs for both care and treatment. Drugs are purchased and administered for some rare patients outside of Virginia. Challenges will face Virginian rare patients who are on a therapy purchased outside the state beyond the purview of the Virginia PDAB. And payment for those medicines will create risk for those providers, potentially choking off access to that necessary treatment. We urge you to ensure that no patient is left fearful of losing access to treatments that offer them a chance at a better tomorrow. We believe there are solutions that can enhance affordability across healthcare. But proponents of PDAB are focused on an experimental program that has generated zero savings for patients since the first PDAB was created in 2019. We urge you to vote no on HB570. Our written testimony is included in an additional document.

Comments Document

Letter attached

Thank you to Chair Ward and Members of the House Labor and Commerce Committee for the opportunity to weigh on an issue that directly affects the health and wellbeing of the patients I serve. I write to you to ask for your support for HB570 in establishing a Prescription Drug Affordability Board in Virginia. As a physician who has practiced in our Commonwealth for years, I see every day how patients struggle to pay for expensive medications that I prescribe. Because every individual is unique, with unique health needs, doctors prescribe the best medications that are tailored to best meet the special needs of our patients. Unfortunately, prescription drugs are becoming more expensive every year. And when prescription drugs become more expensive, my patients feel the pinch. For those who have to pay out-of-pocket, prescription drugs can be downright unaffordable. In some cases, my patients have told me that they pay thousands of dollars for medications they need to be healthy. Many Virginians are in the same boat. Too many of them are skipping their medications or splitting pills. A majority of Virginians are concerned they won’t be able to pay for their prescription drugs. Prescription drugs don’t work if people can’t take them. Medications don’t work if people split pills and skip them every other day. And in the case of certain medical conditions, not taking medications as prescribed can have harmful, even potentially deadly, consequences. No patient should have to ration their care. No patient should be denied their medications because cost is a barrier. By creating an independent panel of health care experts who will weigh data and involve all stakeholders, we can begin the work of bringing down high drug costs and finally bring some balance and fairness to a health care system that has long squeezed hardworking Virginia families. For these reasons, I strongly encourage you to support HB570.

Comments Document

Details in attached memo.

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support of House Bill 570 to create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board. As a physician, I know too well how critical access to prescription drugs is for my patients. Prescription drugs are a key tool in a doctor’s toolbox for helping patients manage health conditions, prevent complications from illness, and improve quality of life. But right now, too many of my patients simply cannot afford the drugs I prescribe them. They may be forced to take a less effective, more affordable alternative, split pills, or just forgo their medication altogether. These patients aren’t alone — 1 in 4 Virginians who depend on prescriptions chooses not to take those medications solely because of the cost. At the same time, large pharmaceutical companies are making record profits. The largest one nearly tripled its earnings over the past two years, making $100 billion in revenues. In 2023, pharmaceutical companies hiked the list prices for 112 drugs at a rate higher than the rate of inflation. No Virginian should be forced to split or skip pills while pharmaceutical corporations are making money hand over fist. It’s time for lawmakers to take action. Doctors like me support the creation of a Prescription Drug Affordability Board to lower the cost of medicine by setting cost limits on how much patients will pay for certain medications. We trust that the health and medical experts who comprise the Board will use a data-based approach to set reasonable rates for patients to pay. By creating a Prescription Drug Affordability Board, Virginia lawmakers can help hold greedy pharmaceutical corporations accountable and make the market more fair. But more importantly, you can help my patients and all Virginians who rely on prescription drugs better afford the medications they need to live and thrive. I urge you to pass HB 570 without delay.

Comments Document

Chair Sickles and Members of the Committee, On behalf of the Arthritis Foundation, representing the nearly 60 million Americans and 26% of Virginia residents living with doctor-diagnosed arthritis, we would like to provide comments on HB 570, a bill to create a Prescription Drug Affordability Board (PDAB). People with autoimmune forms of arthritis often rely on biologic medications to maintain their health, and as these are expensive medications, issues of high drug costs and access are always a top priority. Please find the attached comments for information only on this legislation and considerations for those living with arthritis in Virginia. Thank you for your consideration. Melissa Horn Director of State Legislative Affairs, Arthritis Foundation

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Alexandria is a vibrant city based on history, culture, a waterfront and lots of tourism. If Virginia has money and space to build an arena then you have money and space to build new schools. Our school system is deplorable. It’s overcrowded. Think of your citizens before thinking about your quick money grab that eventually leads to an inevitable loss. We don’t want or need an arena. This is pure greed.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

Comments Document

On behalf of the American Diabetes Association, representing 743,024 people in Virginia with diagnosed diabetes and and the estimated 51,233 diagnosed with diabetes every year, please accept the following public testimony in support of HB 610.

VA NAACP support HB 238,610 and 935

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

Chair Maldonado and Honorable Members of House Labor and Commerce – Subcommittee #1: On behalf of the more than 3.1 million Virginians with or at risk for diabetes, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) thanks Delegate Price for her leadership in authoring House Bill 610 - specifying health plan coverage for insulin and certain diabetes equipment, supplies, and services. Specifying coverage for insulin, continuous glucose monitors, accessible blood glucose monitors for individuals who are legally blind, emergency glucagon kits, regular foot care, and eye exams will ensure that Virginians living with diabetes will have access to the health care they need to manage a relentless disease that can lead to costly and horrific complications such as amputation, blindness, kidney failure, heart attack, and even death. The ADA is also strongly in support of the bill's language for diabetes self-management education and training (DSME/T) and medical nutrition therapy (MNT) visits to be covered/conducted in-person or via telemedicine. The COVID-19 pandemic shed a light on the many health care services that can be appropriately delivered via telehealth. Allowing for telehealth services can address barriers to care including transportation, mobility, difficulty in getting time off from work, difficulty in obtaining childcare, and living in a rural community that may be far from facilities providing these much-needed in-person services. Among ADA’s Legislative and Regulatory Priorities are to ensure all people with and at risk for diabetes are covered under public and private health insurance. Proper management of diabetes reduces costly complications. The Association estimated that the total direct medical expenses for diagnosed diabetes in Virginia was $6.1 billion in 2017, with an additional $2.3 billion spent on indirect costs like lost productivity. By keeping supplies, services and treatment affordable and accessible, we can help keep people with diabetes out of the ER and the hospital, and away from expensive and potentially disabling or deadly complications. HB 610 will help achieve that goal and we encourage the Committee's support. Thank you for your consideration. Should you have any questions, please reach out to me at mbillger@diabetes.org

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

VA NAACP support HB 238,610 and 935

HB385: there’s an importance and safety to having two man crews.. safety for the company and the public.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

discussing impact of changes to payment structure for independent infusion centers.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

PosiGen strongly supports HB1062 which makes several critical clarifications to the net metering statute including language to clarify the treatment of battery storage and smart inverters, explicitly allowing for third-party ownership arrangements in the net metering program, and removing barriers in order to participate in net metering. The allowance for third-party ownership ("TPO") is critical for renewable energy developers such as PosiGen. PosiGen is a certified B Corp with a mission to provide "Solar for All" through our low-and-moderate income accessible product offerings. The TPO structure allows PosiGen to utilize the federal tax credit on behalf of households who do not have the tax liability necessary to claim it, opens up additional federal incentives such as the ITC bonus credits, has no upfront cost, and places the burden of maintaining and repairing the system on the developer - not the customer. PosiGen's uniquely accessible TPO product relies on underwriting customers based on expected savings instead of the traditional FICO, income, or DTI requirements which makes it accessible to all homeowners. Currently the ambiguity of whether TPO products are allowed or would subject the developer to regulation as a public utility is a primary reason PosiGen has not been able to expand to Virginia. Given the federal support coming to states for expanding access to clean energy, such as through the EPA's Solar For All competition, addressing this barrier for LMI households is critical to do in 2024. We urge support for HB1062. Thank you.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

Members of the House Labor & Commerce Committee, The Commonwealth and its political subdivisions deserve the flexibility needed to seek out the best rates of return for the cash under their management. Currently they are limited to banks, causing a conflict where the Commonwealths agents are often aware of better deposit rates at their hometown credit union's branch only to be reminded that they are barred from opening a credit union account. Such deposit authority should never be the exclusive right of one type of financial depository. Credit Unions, by obligation of their charters, must pass on retained earnings to the cooperative's membership in the form of superior deposit/loan rates, and better service. This fact means that deposits are kept locally, the fruit of which is a boon to local and state tax bases. In any event, the Commonwealth's financial agents will still retain the right to place funds in the places they deem most advantageous, regardless of charter type. Your support of HB 1205 will ensure that right to fulfill this important fiduciary duty. Whit Sours 36 Old Laurel Hill Rd Verona VA 24482

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

Hi there, I'm Natalie from Social Busy Bee, your partner in the exciting world of Instagram growth. I've discovered something phenomenal for skyrocketing your Instagram popularity and I'm thrilled to share it with you! Social Growth Engine introduces a groundbreaking service that takes your Instagram engagement to new heights. It's effortless: - Zero in on producing unforgettable content. - Extremely budget-friendly at a mere $36/month. - Completely safe (no password needed), incredibly powerful, and Instagram's best friend. I've experienced remarkable results firsthand, and I'm sure you will too! Amplify your Instagram presence right now: http://get.socialbuzzzy.com/instagram_booster Best wishes, Natalie at Social Busy Bee"

Hi I am writing to you on behalf of The Well Connection UK, a media and publishing company. We could easily get virginia.gov featured in various publications such as magazines, online blogs and news sites. This would undoubtedly help virginia.gov with publicity, reputation, domain authority and organic search engine rankings. We have a wide range of options including completely free collaborations, sponsored posts, guest posts and banner ads. If this sounds of interest, please reach out to the senior business development manager, Anita at info@thewellconnection.co.uk and whatsapp +447395206515 (GMT) Kind regards Clifton Junior Outreach Assistant

Alexandria is a vibrant city based on history, culture, a waterfront and lots of tourism. If Virginia has money and space to build an arena then you have money and space to build new schools. Our school system is deplorable. It’s overcrowded. Think of your citizens before thinking about your quick money grab that eventually leads to an inevitable loss. We don’t want or need an arena. This is pure greed.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.

Comments Document

The purpose for this amendment is to correct an omission in the current legislation that is preventing property owners from receiving rights to accurate disclosure of utility usage, utility rates charged and proper billing for electric and natural gas utilities that are distributed and controlled by building owners and/or property management companies. The current codes affords usage and billing protections ONLY to "TENANTS" in tenant/landlord situations. NO PROTECTIONS FOR OWNERS OF “OWNER OCCUPIED COMMERCIAL OFFICE UNITS/PROPERTIES” exist in the current Virginia code. Please pass this important legislation to enable equal protections under the law for unit owners and tenants. See the attached PDF file for the rights that this amendment will extend to unit owners.

Comments Document

Currently the Virginia Administrative Code Title 20, Chapter 305 (20VAC5-305.90), that covers utility distribution and billing for apartment houses, office building and shopping centers, INCLUDES NO PROTECTIONS FOR UNIT OWNERS when electric and natural gas utilities are provided to unit owners by a property management company. The current codes affords usage and billing protections ONLY to "tenants" in tenant/landlord situations. See the attached attached PDF file. This deficiency has created a situation in which unit owners are unable to attain any insight into their actual utility usage, the rates charged for their electric and/or natural gas utilities and proper billing for utilities from property management companies. The purpose for this amendment is to eliminate a loophole in the legislation that is preventing unit owners from the right to receive accurate disclosure of utility usage, utility rates charged and proper billing for utilities that are facilitated and controlled by property management companies.

The purpose for this bill is to amend the Virginia Administrative Code 20VAC5-305-90 for sub-metering and billing to afford the same sub-meter reading and billing protections for office building unit owners that are afforded to tenants in office building tenant/landlord situations. Under the current legislation, requirements for proper metering and billing by property management companies are not inforceable. As such, unit owners have no rescourse for attaining accurate utility usage and billing data for electric and gas utilities that are distributed via sub-meters.

I'm not sure which bill I'm commenting on entirely. All I know for sure is I'm a type 1 diabetic of 30 years. And our government seems to care very little about my health or the insane costs of the medication that I absolutely have to have to live. Or getting the care I need. Which has been expensive, and has kept me struggling to survive pay rent or see the many doctors I need to see. I am ready to share my story. About my lows where I wake up in the hospital then wind up with an $8000 hospital bill as well as a $4000 bill for a 10 minute ambulance ride. Or about my highs, or just about the struggle of being a Diabetic who was uninsured who struggles to survive in a government that seems to care more about pharmaceutical companies profits than it's citizens health. I have quite a bit to say on the subject and my struggles as a diabetic.