    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                            THE NEED FOR RESILIENCE:
                       PREPARING AMERICA'S TRANSPORTATION
                       INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                  SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  MAY 21, 2019

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 116-22

                                   __________

     Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    36-368PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2019

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
    U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
    E-mail, po@custhelp.com.

                  COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY

                 HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
    ZOE LOFGREN, California              FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
    DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois                Ranking Member
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             MO BROOKS, Alabama
    AMI BERA, California,                BILL POSEY, Florida
        Vice Chair                       RANDY WEBER, Texas
    CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania             BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas               ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
    HALEY STEVENS, Michigan              ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
    KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma                RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
    MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey           MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
    BRAD SHERMAN, California             TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               PETE OLSON, Texas
    JERRY McNERNEY, California           ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
    ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado              MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
    PAUL TONKO, New York                 JIM BAIRD, Indiana
    BILL FOSTER, Illinois                JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
    DON BEYER, Virginia                  JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
    CHARLIE CRIST, Florida                   Rico
    SEAN CASTEN, Illinois                VACANCY
    KATIE HILL, California
    BEN McADAMS, Utah
    JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
                                     ------

                  Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight

                  HON. MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey, Chairwoman
    SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon             RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina,
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee                   Ranking Member
    DON BEYER, Virginia                  ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
    JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia            MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida

                             C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                                  May 21, 2019

                                                                       Page
    Hearing Charter..................................................     2

                               Opening Statements

    Statement by Representative Mikie Sherrill, Chairwoman,
      Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
      Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..     9
        Written Statement............................................    10

    Statement by Representative Ralph Norman, Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
      Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..    11
        Written Statement............................................    12

    Written statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
      Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
      House of Representatives.......................................    13

                                   Witnesses:

    Ms. Susanne DesRoches, Deputy Director for Infrastructure and
      Energy, Office of the New York City Mayor
        Oral Statement...............................................    14
        Written Statement............................................    17

    Mr. Gregory D. Winfree, Director, Texas A&M Transportation
      Institute
        Oral Statement...............................................    35
        Written Statement............................................    38

    Mr. Jason Averill, Chief, Materials and Structural Systems
      Division, Engineering Laboratory, NIST
        Oral Statement...............................................    49
        Written Statement............................................    51

    Mr. Scott Reeve, President, Composite Advantage
        Oral Statement...............................................    60
        Written Statement............................................    62

    Discussion.......................................................    76

                 Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions

    Mr. Jason Averill, Chief, Materials and Structural Systems
      Division, Engineering Laboratory, NIST.........................    94

                Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record

    Statements submitted by Representative Mikie Sherrill, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
      Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..    98

    White paper submitted by Representative Sean Casten, Subcommittee
      on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on Science, Space,
      and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives..................   108

                            THE NEED FOR RESILIENCE:
                       PREPARING AMERICA'S TRANSPORTATION
                       INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, MAY 21, 2019

                      House of Representatives,
          Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight,
                   Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
                                                       Washington, D.C.

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
    room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mikie
    Sherrill [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Sherrill. This hearing will come to order.
        Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare
    recess at any time.
        Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing of the
    Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee. I am pleased once
    again to welcome Ranking Member Norman of South Carolina and
    all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
        Today, we are discussing a subject that directly touches
    all of our lives almost daily. America's transportation
    infrastructure is vital to the Nation's well-being. And in
    cities, suburbs, and small towns across the country, Americans
    rely on the roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, trains,
    airports, and ports of our transportation system to live their
    lives and to support their families.
        But climate change poses an unprecedented threat to our
    transportation infrastructure. Sea-level rise and coastal
    flooding place 60,000 miles of roads and bridges in coastal
    floodplains at greater risk. Rail infrastructure and airports
    are also vulnerable to more frequent extreme heatwaves and
    increased flooding. And the impacts of climate change for
    transportation infrastructure will only intensify over time.
        This issue hits home in New Jersey, because we've seen the
    impacts of extreme weather up close. In 2012, Hurricane Sandy
    flooded the Hudson Tunnel, the only tunnel that provides
    passenger rail access between New Jersey and New York City. We
    have been living with the consequences ever since, as the
    concrete and metal in the tunnel, the 100-year-old tunnel,
    continue to deteriorate due to the effects of age and seawater.
    I toured the tunnel earlier this month with some of my
    colleagues in Congress and saw the degradation firsthand.
        If the Hudson Tunnel must eventually be shut down for
    repairs, the economic effects for the region and the Nation
    will be catastrophic. Many of my constituents commute to work
    and school every day through that tunnel. We need to understand
    that climate change makes storms like Hurricane Sandy more
    likely and that our transportation infrastructure is exposed.
        We also need to take climate reality into account when
    planning for the future. In the Northeast, we have a solution
    called the Gateway Program that would build a second rail
    tunnel to handle passenger rail traffic while the current
    tunnel is being repaired. Gateway is vital to the region's
    future. We must ensure that the Gateway tunnel gets built as
    soon as possible, and we must make sure it is built to enhance
    the overall climate resilience of the region's transportation
    system.
        Other transportation assets in my region are similarly
    vulnerable to climate impacts. Using the Surging Seas analysis
    from Princeton University, we can see the impacts of sea-level
    rise for coastal transportation infrastructure in northern New
    Jersey. The expected sea-level rise in that area is 3 to 6
    feet, and under a 6-foot scenario, Newark Airport is virtually
    underwater, and the roads, bridges, and rail infrastructure all
    along the coastline are inundated, as you can see. A 2017
    report commissioned by Amtrak identified the same kind of
    flooding vulnerabilities along the system's coastal routes in
    the Northeast Corridor.
        This hearing is an opportunity to look forward, rather than
    backward, and to focus on solutions. I hope that the hearing
    helps us to answer questions about the role that the Federal
    Government should play in understanding and enhancing
    transportation climate resilience, and we need to understand
    what the Federal Government is doing well and not so well. We
    need to listen to cities and municipal planners when they tell
    us the challenges they face, and we need to help them share
    their lessons learned with other communities around the
    country. We also need to think creatively about how to mobilize
    our Nation's research enterprise, from Federal agencies to
    academia. The stakes are too high for anything less.
        I'm very pleased to welcome the distinguished witnesses
    appearing here today, and we thank you for appearing before the
    Subcommittee and look forward to your testimony.
        [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Sherrill follows:]

        Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing of the
    Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee. I am pleased once
    again to welcome Ranking Member Norman of South Carolina and
    all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
        Today we are discussing a subject that touches all of our
    lives almost daily. America's transportation infrastructure is
    vital to the nation's wellbeing. In cities, suburbs and small
    towns across the country, Americans rely on the roads,
    highways, bridges, tunnels, trains, airports and ports of our
    transportation system to live their lives and support their
    families
        But climate change poses an unprecedented threat to our
    transportation infrastructure. Sea level rise and coastal
    flooding place 60,000 miles of roads and bridges in coastal
    floodplains at greater risk. Rail infrastructure is vulnerable
    to more frequent extreme heat waves. Increased precipitation
    and inland flooding threaten the structural integrity of
    thousands of bridges. Airports are exposed to a spectrum of
    flooding and extreme heat risks. And the impacts of climate
    change for transportation infrastructure will only intensify
    over time.
        This issue hits home in New Jersey, because we have seen
    the impacts of extreme weather up close. In 2012, Hurricane
    Sandy flooded the Hudson Tunnel - the only tunnel that provides
    passenger rail access between New Jersey and New York City. We
    have been living with the consequences ever since, as the
    concrete and metal in the Tunnel continue to deteriorate due to
    the effects of seawater. I toured the Tunnel earlier this month
    with some of my colleagues in Congress and saw the degradation
    first hand.
        If the Hudson Tunnel must eventually be shut down for
    repairs, the economic effects for the region and the nation
    will be catastrophic. Many of my constituents commute to work
    and school every day through that tunnel. We need to understand
    that climate change makes storms like Hurricane Sandy more
    likely, and that our transportation infrastructure is exposed.
        We also need to take climate reality into account when
    planning for the future. In the Northeast, we have a solution
    called the Gateway Program that would build a second rail
    tunnel to handle passenger rail traffic while the current
    tunnel is being repaired. Gateway is vital to the region's
    future. We must ensure that the Gateway Tunnel gets built as
    soon as possible. And we must make sure it is built to enhance
    the overall climate resilience of the region's transportation
    system.
        Other transportation assets in my region are similarly
    vulnerable to climate impacts. Using the Surging Seas program
    from Climate Central at Princeton University, we can see the
    impacts of sea level rise for coastal transportation
    infrastructure in northern New Jersey. Under a six feet
    scenario with unchecked climate change, Newark Airport is
    surrounded by water and the Port Newark-Elizabeth Marine
    Terminal is inundated. A flood at this level is considered a
    virtual certainty by 2050 under this projection. A 2017 report
    commissioned by Amtrak identified the same kind of flooding
    vulnerabilities along the system's coastal routes in the
    Northeast Corridor.
        This hearing is an opportunity to look forward, rather than
    backward, and to focus on solutions. I hope that the hearing
    helps us to answer questions about the role that the federal
    government should play in understanding and enhancing
    transportation climate resilience. We need to understand what
    the federal government is doing well and not so well. We need
    to listen to cities and municipal planners when they tell us
    the challenges they face, and we need to help them share their
    lessons learned with other communities around the country. We
    need to think creatively about how to mobilize our nation's
    research enterprise, from federal agencies to academia. The
    stakes are too high for anything less.
        I'm very pleased to welcome the distinguished witnesses
    appearing here today. We thank you for appearing before the
    Subcommittee and look forward to your testimony.

        Chairwoman Sherrill. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Norman
    for an opening statement.
        Mr. Norman. Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill, for convening
    this meeting, and thank each one of the witnesses for taking
    the time to come.
        In case you're wondering, the rose on my lapel is for the
    100-year women's right to vote. I was there at the time. I was
    about 4 years old, and I was responsible for passing it, so
    thank you all for recognizing that.
        We are here today to examine how natural disasters and
    extreme weather events pose risks to transportation
    infrastructure and to assess the research and development
    targeted at improving the resilience of America's
    transportation infrastructure.
        Reliable and strong infrastructure is critically important
    to my home State of South Carolina. In the past 5 years alone,
    South Carolina has been impacted by a 1,000-year flood and
    back-to-back hurricanes. In South Carolina we're also concerned
    about the impact that increased flooding frequently has on our
    communities.
        To address our State's specific concerns, the Governor
    created the South Carolina Floodwater Commission. This
    commission is tasked with identifying short-term and long-term
    solutions to mitigate the impact of extreme weather, with one
    task force specifically focused on infrastructure resilience.
        I welcome the chance to consider the issue of
    infrastructure resilience and highlight the role the Federal
    Government can play in ensuring that State and local
    communities all have the resources necessary to make the best
    decision for their infrastructure planning.
        Further, I'm looking forward to learning more about
    technologies and innovations that can improve the resilience of
    America's transportation infrastructure systems and assets,
    from advanced composite materials to additive manufacturing
    with cement and concrete.
        We will also hear about some of the ambitious initiatives
    being undertaken at the Federal, State, and local levels of
    government to incorporate resilience considerations into the
    planning, design, and construction of America's transportation
    infrastructure, both now and in the future.
        In recent years, much of the country's transportation
    infrastructure has started to show its age. Across the country,
    from coastal communities to land-locked States, roads are in
    disrepair, bridges are collapsing, and tunnels are crumbling.
    Fortunately, great work is being done at the Federal, State,
    and local levels of government, within industry, and among
    academia to improve transportation infrastructure resilience.
        Composite materials, like those manufactured by Composite
    Advantage and other members of the American Composites
    Manufacturers Association (ACMA), are already being used to
    rebuild and repair our crumbling infrastructure and corroding
    assets. This is a great example of American innovation rising
    to meet the challenges facing our Nation.
        The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
    is also working hard to help improve the resilience of American
    communities. From research into advanced materials and
    enhancing traditional materials like concrete and cement, to
    the development of tools, standards, and guidelines, NIST has
    been working diligently to improve the way transportation
    infrastructure decisions are made, once again putting its
    extreme brain power to work for the American people.
        State agencies like the Texas A&M Transportation Institute
    are making positive strides to improve transportation
    infrastructure resilience. And municipal authorities like the
    New York City Mayor's office are also involved in this
    important work.
        It is encouraging to see representatives from each of these
    organizations here today, as the work they are doing will
    undoubtedly benefit officials throughout the country as they
    plan and prepare to build resilient considerations into their
    transportation infrastructure decisions.
        I look forward to a productive and insightful discussion
    with our distinguished witnesses about the risks that extreme
    weather events and natural disasters pose to the American
    transportation infrastructure, research, and activities aimed
    at operationalizing and incorporating resilient considerations
    into the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure
    systems and assets, and innovating in exciting ways that we can
    improve the resilience of America's transportation
    infrastructure, both now and in the future.
        My line of work is development. We're contractors, and this
    has extreme importance to me, particularly as it relates to the
    new products.
        Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Norman follows:]

        Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill, for convening this
    important hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your
    testimony this morning.
        We are here today to examine how natural disasters and
    extreme weather events pose risks to transportation
    infrastructure and to assess the research and development
    targeted at improving the resilience of America's
    transportation infrastructure.
        Reliable and strong infrastructure is critically important
    to my home state of South Carolina. In the past five years
    alone, South Carolina has been impacted by a thousand-year
    flood and back-to-back hurricanes. In South Carolina we're also
    concerned about the impact that increased flooding frequency
    will have on our communities.
        To address our state's specific concerns, the Governor
    created the South Carolina Floodwater Commission. This
    commission is tasked with identifying short-term and long-term
    solutions to mitigate the impact of extreme weather, with one
    task force specifically focused on infrastructure resilience.
        I welcome the chance to consider the issue of
    infrastructure resilience and highlight the role the Federal
    government can play in ensuring that state and local
    communities have all the resources necessary to make the best
    decision for their infrastructure planning.
        Further, I'm looking forward to learning more about
    technologies and innovations that can improve the resilience of
    America's Transportation infrastructure systems and assets-from
    advanced composite materials to additive manufacturing with
    cement and concrete.
        We will also hear about some of the ambitious initiatives
    being undertaken at Federal, state, and local levels of
    government to incorporate resilience considerations into the
    planning, design, and construction of America's transportation
    infrastructure, both now and in the future.
        In recent years, much of this country's transportation
    infrastructure has started to show its age. Across the country-
    from coastal communities to landlocked states-roads are in
    disrepair, bridges are collapsing, and tunnels are crumbling.
        Fortunately, great work is being done at the Federal,
    state, and local levels of government, within industry, and
    among academia to improve transportation infrastructure
    resilience.
        Composite materials-like those manufactured by Composite
    Advantage and other members of the American Composites
    Manufacturing Association-are already being used to rebuild and
    repair crumbling infrastructure and corroding assets. This is a
    great example of American innovation rising to meet the
    challenges facing our nation.
        The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
    is also working hard to help improve the resilience of American
    communities. From research into advanced materials and
    enhancing traditional materials, like concrete and cement, to
    the development of tools, standards, and guidelines, NIST has
    been working diligently to improve the way transportation
    infrastructure decisions are made, once again putting its
    extreme brain power to work for the American people.
        State agencies like the Texas A&M Transportation Institute
    are making positive strides to improve transportation
    infrastructure resilience. And municipal authorities like the
    New York City Mayor's office are also involved in this
    important work.
        It is encouraging to see representatives from each of these
    organizations here today, as the work they are doing will
    undoubtedly benefit officials throughout the country as they
    plan and prepare to build resilience considerations into their
    transportation infrastructure decisions.
        I look forward to a productive and insightful discussion
    with our distinguished witnesses about the risks that extreme
    weather events and natural disasters pose to America's
    transportation infrastructure, research and activities aimed at
    operationalizing and incorporating resilience considerations
    into the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure
    systems and assets, and innovating and exciting ways that we
    can improve the resilience of America's transportation
    infrastructure, both now and in the future.
        Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.

        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you, Representative Norman.
        And if there are Members who wish to submit additional
    opening statements, your statement will be added to the record
    at this point.
        [The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]

        Thank you Madam Chair, and I would like to join you in
    welcoming our witnesses this morning.
        In the 116th Congress, the Science Committee will be
    examining both the science of climate change and its impact on
    our society. Transportation infrastructure is critical to our
    national economy and our way of life, but it is vulnerable to
    climate change. If we do not prepare our transportation systems
    effectively, the damage will be enormous.
        As a senior Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee, I am very familiar with the challenges facing our
    transportation infrastructure. And it has become increasingly
    clear to me that climate change will be one of the most
    consequential and complex challenges. Climate implications
    exist for every type of transportation asset: highways and
    roads, bridges, railroads, airports, tunnels, ports and more.
    Every region of America is being affected: north and south;
    urban and rural; coastal and inland. The time has come to use
    the scientific tools at our disposal to adapt our
    transportation infrastructure in order to avoid the worst
    effects of a changing climate.
        Elevating the use of science in policymaking is a priority
    for this Committee, and the issue of transportation resilience
    is a perfect example of why that is so important.
    Transportation assets are designed and built to operate over
    extremely long timespans - multiple decades and sometimes as
    long as 100 years. As a result, today's transportation planning
    decisions are not only about us - they will affect our great-
    grandchildren. If transportation planning does not incorporate
    climate resilience into its calculations, the vulnerabilities
    of our transportation infrastructure will become a permanent
    feature of American life. We must work to ensure that the most
    advanced climate research findings are integrated into
    transportation planning frameworks.
        I also want to highlight the importance of mobilizing the
    nation's research enterprise to promote transportation climate
    resilience. At a federal level, this means encouraging the
    Department of Transportation and NIST to carry out research on
    how a changing climate threatens transportation assets. It also
    means prioritizing climate resilience research through federal
    grant programs such as DOT's University Transportation Centers
    program, which is a longstanding area of interest for the
    Committee. The UTC program supports cutting-edge transportation
    research at academic institutions around the country. UTCs like
    the one led by Mr. Winfree at Texas A&M are conducting some of
    the most innovative transportation research in the world. We
    want to make sure that the fruits of their labors, and the
    efforts of other forward-looking universities, professional
    societies and engineers, are being shared effectively with
    cities and states around the country.
        Preparing America's transportation infrastructure for the
    impacts of climate change is one of the major economic
    challenges facing our country, and there is much to be done.
        Thank you, and I yield back to Chairwoman Sherrill.

        Chairwoman Sherrill. At this time, I would like to
    introduce our four witnesses. Ms. Susanne DesRoches is the
    Deputy Director of Infrastructure and Energy at the New York
    City Mayor's Office of Resiliency and Office of Sustainability.
        Mr. Gregory Winfree is the Agency Director for the Texas
    A&M Transportation Institute and former Assistant Secretary of
    the U.S. Department of Transportation.
        Mr. Jason Averill is the Chief of the Materials and
    Structural Systems Division of the Engineering Laboratory at
    the National Institute of Standards and Technology or NIST.
        And our final witness, Mr. Scott Reeve, is the President of
    Composite Advantage. Today, Mr. Reeve is speaking on behalf of
    the American Composites Manufacturers Association of which his
    company is a member.
        As our witnesses should know, you will each have 5 minutes
    for your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be
    included in the record for the hearing. When you all have
    completed your spoken testimony, we will begin with questions,
    and each Member will have 5 minutes to question the panel.
        We will start with Ms. DesRoches.

                     TESTIMONY OF SUSANNE DESROCHES,

             DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENERGY,

             NEW YORK CITY MAYOR'S OFFICE OF RESILIENCY AND

                        OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY

        Ms. DesRoches. Good morning. My name is Susanne DesRoches,
    and I'm the Deputy Director for Infrastructure and Energy in
    the New York City Mayor's Office of Resiliency. On behalf of
    the Mayor and the city of New York, I would like to thank Chair
    Sherrill and Ranking Member Norman for the opportunity to speak
    today.
        Nearly 7 years ago Hurricane Sandy hit New York City with
    unprecedented force, tragically killing 44 New Yorkers. Over 2
    million residents were without power, some for weeks. Fuel
    shortages persisted for over a month. Subway and rail tunnels
    were closed for days. Our airports were closed to passenger and
    freight traffic, and our ports sustained considerable damage.
    Sandy caused $16 billion in damages to our region's
    transportation network, which is vital to our regional and
    national economy.
        Our national transportation system faces climate-related
    risks. The Fourth National Climate Assessment released last
    year, of which I co-authored the transportation chapter, found
    that impacts of climate change threaten the very existence of a
    reliable, safe, and efficient U.S. transportation system.
    Critical port, rail, and highway infrastructure are vulnerable
    to sea-level rise across the country in places like Houston,
    Texas; Long Beach, California; and Mobile, Alabama. Thirteen of
    the Nation's 47 largest airports have a runway within reach of
    moderate-to-high storm surge today. Inland flooding threatens
    up to 4,600 bridges across the U.S. by 2050. Climate change
    risks are not just flooding-related. Transportation will be
    impacted by rising temperatures through bridge stress,
    increased delays, buckled rails, and roadways and compromised
    worker safety.
        New York City's regional transportation network is a large
    legacy--complex legacy system that is particularly vulnerable
    to the coming risks of climate change. Already, 12 percent of
    our roadway network is at risk. By 2100, 20 percent of lower
    Manhattan streets could be subject to tidal flooding daily.
        Our transportation network is more resilient than before
    Sandy. Regional transportation agencies have implemented
    resiliency measures for our subways, trains, airports, ports,
    and tunnels. In New York City we are raising some of our most
    flood-prone streets and making them more resilient through
    elevated traffic signal controllers. We are ensuring multi-
    stakeholder coordination through our Climate Change Adaptation
    Task Force established over 10 years ago to address
    infrastructure interdependencies and the risk of a changing
    climate.
        City government is building stronger, more resilient
    facilities and infrastructure using forward-looking climate
    data from the New York City climate resiliency design
    guidelines. Last, we are partnering with FEMA (Federal
    Emergency Management Agency) to develop future flood hazard
    mapping products, the first of their kind in the Nation.
        Much has been done but much work remains. Congress can play
    an important role to ensuring the long-term resiliency of the
    cities and of our Nation's transportation network in three main
    ways. First, we encourage Congress to pass legislation that
    requires the use of forward-looking climate data in all Federal
    investments--infrastructure investments. Guidance to reach this
    goal were first articulated in Executive Order 13690 from 2015
    on floodplain management, which was revoked in 2017. Making
    this guidance law would reestablish this important standard and
    make it permanent. Taking this one step further, Congress
    should require that all infrastructure projects using Federal
    dollars use forward-looking climate data.
        Second, the city commends Congress' passing of the Disaster
    Recovery Reform Act of 2018, which allocates 6 percent of a
    community's disaster expenses from the previous year to invest
    in pre-disaster mitigation. We urge Congress to expand this
    program, further enabling Federal disaster aid to support
    resiliency investments before disaster strikes.
        Finally, we urge Congress to increase funding for freight
    and public transit infrastructure. One critical infrastructure
    is the long-overdue rail link between New York and New Jersey
    referred to as the Gateway tunnel. This project would vastly
    strengthen this vulnerable transportation line that links the
    entire Northeast Corridor.
        In conclusion, Congress has the opportunity to rethink how
    Federal Government supports the transportation needs of cities
    and communities across the country and to ensure that resilient
    investments made today provide value for all Americans for
    generations to come.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I'm
    happy to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. DesRoches follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you. And thank you so much
    for your timeliness. That was almost exactly 5 minutes. That
    was perfect.
        And next we'll hear from Mr. Winfree.

                    TESTIMONY OF GREGORY D. WINFREE,

              DIRECTOR, TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE

        Mr. Winfree. Good morning, Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking
    Member Norman, and Members of the Subcommittee and staff. Thank
    you for inviting me to testify regarding transportation
    infrastructure resilience and transportation research. My name
    is Greg Winfree, and I'm the Agency Director of the Texas A&M
    Transportation Institute, also known as TTI. Prior to joining
    TTI in 2016, I served as the Assistant Secretary on the U.S.
    Department of Transportation's Office of the Assistant
    Secretary for Research and Technology.
        Established in 1950 and a member of the Texas A&M
    University system, TTI is a State agency and largest and most
    comprehensive university-affiliated transportation research
    center in the United States. TTI has conducted work in all 50
    States and 51 countries. Our system Chancellor John Sharp was
    appointed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott to lead the Rebuild
    Texas Commission formed to help rebuild our State's
    infrastructure damaged by Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
        Between 1980 and 2017, the U.S. was hit by 227 weather-
    related disasters that caused more than $1 billion in losses.
    Ninety-eight of those happened in the State of Texas. More than
    one-third or 91 of those disasters struck between 2010 and 2017
    with nearly half striking Texas directly. Hurricane Harvey was
    the costliest in history leaving behind $190 billion in damage.
    Robust research efforts must put--must be put into place to
    change the traditional ways in which we design, build, and
    maintain our infrastructure, so I'd like to share a few
    examples of TTI research outcomes that plan for and mitigate
    these devastating occurrences.
        Additional projects like these are critical to transforming
    our infrastructure to deal with this new paradigm of extreme
    weather. In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita identified the
    critical need for safety--safely evacuating large numbers of
    coastal residents. Through TTI's University Transportation
    Center funding, UTC, researchers developed a Bluetooth travel-
    time monitoring system that was implemented in 2010 to track
    real-time traffic flow on evacuation routes. Today, the system
    is installed on over 1,000 center-line miles of Texas highways.
        In 2017, TTI led a national symposium on the barriers and
    opportunities for infrastructure renewal. Members of the
    Presidential Administration and other high-level State and
    Federal officials, as well as private-sector stakeholders, were
    in attendance, including Congressman Bill Shuster, then
    Chairman of the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee. One of the critical needs identified was
    transportation infrastructure resilience.
        In 2018, TTI developed the first-of-its-kind flood warning
    system that warns motorists in real time about locations where
    roadway flooding is likely to occur in the Houston area using
    data from 170 existing county-maintained flood sensors.
    Residents can view the warnings through the TranStar traffic
    management system website or mobile app.
        As a country, we've historically responded to weather
    disasters in a reactive way, turning to established
    rehabilitation and repair practices to return service to pre-
    disaster levels. As demands on our infrastructure systems grow
    and the population and funding to meet these demands lag
    behind, that strategy is no longer sustainable. Instead, we
    must focus more on preparation and planning. This new mindset
    requires a different approach to making our existing and new
    infrastructure more resilient.
        While U.S. DOT (Department of Transportation) research has
    made strides in this effort particularly at the Federal Highway
    Administration, sufficient program-based resources and
    capabilities focused on transportation resilience are not
    currently in place. More innovative research-based and data-
    driven solutions are required to make significant progress in
    learning how to build and maintain our infrastructure to last
    longer and withstand extreme weather events. Sample research
    needs include: Multidisciplinary research initiatives that
    involve not only the traditional approach of engineers and
    transportation planners but climatologists, hydrologists, and a
    host of other disciplines that don't normally work together.
        Examination of multiple data sets, including data collected
    on roadway flooding, GPS, and LIDAR (light detection and
    ranging), roadway elevation, climate, FEMA, and storm surge,
    just to name a few. These varying and often complex sets of
    data need to be put into a more useful and consistent format
    such as a data clearinghouse.
        More robust software models are needed to evaluate the
    impacts on infrastructure service life given an extreme weather
    event. The variety of resiliency studies and best practices
    developed by individual DOTs and the Federal Highway
    Administration in areas such as vulnerability assessment, asset
    management, and risk management should be shared and duplicated
    throughout the country. Performance measures for resiliency
    must be developed, and their correlation with other DOT
    priorities such as, safety and infrastructure condition, must
    be better understood so that scarce resources can be allocated
    most effectively.
        And, in closing, the UTC program is currently actively
    involved in transportation resilience research. Of the 35 UTCs
    awarded in the most recent competition authorized by the Fixing
    America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, seven list
    resilience as being a major focus of their programs in
    research, education, and technology transfer. As previously
    discussed, TTI's UTCs have made significant contributions to
    the state of practice in this area. This valuable program is
    contributing to the body of knowledge in transportation
    resilience, and this should continue as long as the topic falls
    within U.S. DOT and congressional priorities.
        Any severe weather event poses risk to our transportation
    system but also to our economy and our very existence. We can't
    prevent major weather disasters, but by investing resources
    into research that focuses on resiliency long before the
    disaster strikes, we will be far better able to weather
    whatever happens and whatever comes our way.
        So thank you for your time and attention. I will be happy
    to answer any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Winfree follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you.
        Mr. Averill?

                     TESTIMONY OF JASON D. AVERILL,

                 CHIEF OF THE MATERIALS AND STRUCTURAL

                         SYSTEMS DIVISION, NIST

        Mr. Averill. Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking Member Norman,
    and Members of the Subcommittee, I'm Jason Averill, Chief of
    the Materials and Structural Systems Division at the Department
    of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology or
    NIST. NIST works at the frontiers of measurement science to
    address complex measurement challenges on every scale. In my
    division, we focus our efforts from the chemical properties of
    cement to buildings to the resilience of whole communities.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to
    discuss NIST's programs focused on the resilience of
    transportation infrastructure.
        The 2017 U.S. hurricane season and the 2018 wildfires
    remind us that natural, technological, and human-caused hazards
    take a high toll on communities. The impacts can last long
    after the event. To help address these impacts, NIST manages a
    multifaceted Community Resilience program as part of our
    broader disaster resilience work. Principal among these efforts
    is support for science-based resilience planning. Effective
    planning can improve a community's quality-of-life, economic
    well-being, its ability to recover rapidly, and to build back
    better.
        To support community planning, we produced the NIST
    Community Resilience Planning Guide that provides a practical
    and flexible approach to help all communities improve their
    resilience by setting priorities and allocating resources to
    manage risks for their prevailing hazards. Using this guide can
    help communities to integrate resilience goals into their
    comprehensive economic development, zoning, and other local
    planning activities.
        In addition, the NIST community resilience Economic
    Decision Guide, or EDG, provides a standard economic
    methodology for evaluating investment decisions. The EDG
    quantifies the costs and benefits for the variety of resilience
    options that a community may be considering. To supplement the
    NIST Community Resilience research program, NIST has designated
    a Center of Excellence devoted to community resilience. The
    Center for Risk-Based Community Resilience Planning will
    accelerate the development of systems-level models and
    associated data to support community resilience decisionmaking.
        In addition, NIST is committed to working with our Federal
    partners to transfer research results to products and end-
    users. For example, cities have partnered with NIST, EPA
    (Environmental Protection Agency), and used FEMA tools to
    develop proactive and integrated plans that address their local
    issues.
        Another critical part of community resilience is looking at
    infrastructure and building materials. Concrete is a widely
    used building material playing a principal role in
    transportation infrastructure such as bridges and roadways by
    providing strength, durability, and resiliency. These material
    properties can be linked to the performance of a key component
    of concrete, cement. NIST offers more than 20 types of cement
    Standard Reference Materials that help to ensure quality cement
    products in the integrity of structures around the globe.
        Looking toward the future, NIST is exploring exciting new
    opportunities in construction that additive manufacturing, AM,
    with cement-based materials offers. Metrology and standards
    used for traditional concrete construction are not suitable for
    AM, and NIST is doing research with our industry partners to
    assess the potential of various material systems for this area.
        NIST is also working on an advanced composite road-mapping
    effort that is focused on infrastructure. The resulting roadmap
    has the potential to lead NIST, other government agencies, and
    the industry toward wider acceptance and use of advanced
    composites for more resilient infrastructure.
        Following select disaster events, NIST conducts disaster
    and failure studies where engineers and scientists seek to
    learn from and prevent similar disasters in the future. Studies
    previously conducted by NIST have led to significant changes in
    building codes, standards, and practices to enhance the health
    and safety of the American public. NIST is currently
    investigating the effects of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico to
    better understand how the buildings and infrastructure
    performed and how we can improve that performance in the
    future.
        NIST has a long history of addressing industry needs
    through measurement science. Resilient infrastructure,
    particularly transportation, is the backbone of U.S. economic
    competitiveness, and NIST is proud to collaborate with
    industry, academia, and government agencies to meet critical
    national needs.
        I'll be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Averill follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you so much.
        Mr. Reeve?

                        TESTIMONY OF SCOTT REEVE,

                   PRESIDENT, COMPOSITE ADVANTAGE, LLC

        Mr. Reeve. Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking Member Norman, and
    Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of my company Composite
    Advantage and my fellow members in the composite--American
    Composite Manufacturers Association I appreciate the
    opportunity to testify today.
        This hearing comes at a critical time. For many years we
    have heard that our crumbling infrastructure was in desperate
    need of attention. That need has only intensified in the wake
    of increased episodes of severe weather and other environmental
    challenges. Confronting these challenges requires a new way of
    thinking about how we build and what are the best materials to
    use to enhance resiliency for preventive measures and not just
    reactive.
        Composite Advantage is one of over 3,000 manufacturers of
    fiber-reinforced polymer composites across the United States,
    including each of the districts represented on this
    Subcommittee. Composites--combinations of polymer resins and
    fiber reinforcements like glass and carbon--are used in a wide
    range of sectors. They were first widely used in boats and
    aircraft, but now companies like mine are using the materials
    to build high-performance and infrastructure components like
    bridge decks, rail platforms, and waterfront protection
    systems. Composites are stronger and more durable than
    traditional alternatives and have lower environmental impact.
    Many applications can be prefabricated to reduce installation
    times and can be fully sourced from American-made materials.
        When Superstorm Sandy devastated the Northeast, the
    Canarsie Tunnel between Brooklyn and Manhattan was flooded with
    7 million gallons of saltwater. This tunnel is used by a
    quarter million train passengers per day. The walls have
    corroded and need to be replaced. Traditional reconstruction
    would require a 15-month shutdown, but our company is
    manufacturing shells to line the tunnel walls and prevent the
    crumbling concrete from falling on the tracks. The shells can
    be installed without a full rebuild meaning 99 percent less
    demolition work and no shutdown. Even if the tunnel is flooded
    again, the composite shells will still do their job.
        Composites are being used in increasing quantities on
    America's waterways since the materials are forever resistant
    to water corrosion. Composites were used to rehabilitate the
    dock of the Statue of Liberty and repair and protect the Long
    Beach New York boardwalk after Superstorm Sandy. But composites
    can do even more. Using prefabricated bridge structures will
    minimize traffic disruption. And thanks to the elimination of
    rust and degradation, composites improve longevity and
    performance of these structures. Wraps can be externally bonded
    to decaying or damaged structures, restoring the strength of
    the bridge to its original level, again, with minimal traffic
    disruption. Composite rebar is making concrete bridges and
    tunnels resistant to corrosion that occurs with steel.
        In the Virgin Islands Hurricane Maria destroyed every
    utility pole that was wasn't a composite. Only the composite
    poles were left standing. Because of this real-life performance
    test, the Virgin Islands decided to rebuild their electric grid
    with composite structures to prevent future problems and avert
    the future costs.
        The strides made by our industry in a short period have
    been significant but more needs to be done. We need continued
    research such as that underway at institutions like Turner-
    Fairbank and others on the next generation of composite
    solutions appropriate for much larger-scale applications. Most
    of all, we need to broaden awareness of composites and increase
    their deployment in infrastructure projects by helping
    engineers and asset owners to be more comfortable using these
    new materials.
        NIST, working with industry, has developed a roadmap of
    activities to achieve this goal, first by aggregating and
    validating existing standards and design data and then working
    to develop better models of durability. Coupled with a robust
    education plan, NIST's work will help provide assurance to
    engineers on how these new materials will perform under
    specific conditions.
        Legislation has been introduced by Congressman McNerney and
    Congressman Webster authorizing these activities by NIST in
    H.R. 2393. I encourage Members of both parties to support it.
        Finally, Congress should support innovative grant programs
    that foster new technologies and demonstrate how these
    technologies can make our transportation infrastructure more
    resilient.
        Bipartisan Members of the House and Senate have introduced
    legislation called the Innovative Materials for America's
    Growth and Infrastructure Newly Expanded (IMAGINE) Act, H.R.
    1159. This legislation would create new bridge and water
    infrastructure innovation grant programs, as well as direct
    needed research on innovative materials to facilitate broader
    use. I hope all Members will consider supporting this important
    measure.
        Opportunities abound to build a more resilient tomorrow and
    should not be wasted. The composites industry stands ready to
    work with Congress to further study, develop, and deploy real
    solutions to these real challenges.
        Thank you for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Reeve follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Before we proceed, I would
    like to bring the Subcommittee's attention to two statements I
    received in preparation for our hearing. The first is written
    testimony from the Union of Concerned Scientists highlighting
    the need for climate resilience across all modes of
    transportation. The second is a letter from the Region Plan
    Association, RPA, describing the vulnerability of the Northeast
    Corridor and the importance of the Gateway project for the
    region's transportation network.
        Without objection, I am placing these documents in the
    record.
        At this point, we will begin our first round of questions,
    and I'll recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Winfree and Ms. DesRoches, I want to start by talking
    about strategic planning. How can DOT elevate climate
    resilience as a strategic research priority?
        Ms. DesRoches. Thank you. So DOT and in particular FHWA
    (Federal Highway Administration) has been working on a climate
    adaptation program for a number of years. I think that the--all
    of DOT could elevate it as a strategic priority for the agency,
    and therefore, it would lend itself to the evaluation of
    Federal dollars, right? So if a project is getting federally
    funded, DOT could make the determination as to how resilient
    that project is and tie that to the Federal funds.
        Mr. Winfree. I certainly concur with my colleague, and I
    would only offer and add that DOT will do as Congress directs,
    so requiring DOT to have that as a strategic objective I
    believe would get the ball rolling certainly, but more
    importantly, it would help it become universally applicable
    across the Department. As Ms. DesRoches stated, Federal
    Highways is out on front on those issues right now, but in
    order for it to become a departmental objective, it needs to be
    placed on their to-do list in order to get that done.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And then, Mr. Winfree, you
    talked a bit about all the data out there and the collection
    being done. Do you have a sense--I think you spoke a bit about
    how there needs to be a better software for that and then
    better able to collate that data in one place for user ease.
    Can you talk a bit about how that would look and what, you
    know, options there are for that?
        Mr. Winfree. The talk around transportation now as we look
    at it more from the mobility standpoint is that it is the safe
    and efficient movement of people, data, and goods. So it's the
    data part that's lagging behind the movement of people and
    goods. So what we are championing and what you're hearing
    across the industry is a focus toward moving all of these
    disparate data sets into a clearinghouse so it's a two-part
    analysis. One, you have to know what data is out there and what
    data is usable, and that data has to be cleansed. And then once
    it's in a form and fashion that it can be used by the research
    community, that's when you start to see useful information
    coming out of those disparate data sets.
        So it's a bit amorphous right now. There's a lot of data
    out there. There are a lot of data streams. Vehicles are
    producing more data as they become more and more computerized,
    systems writ large, traffic operations systems, so there's a
    lot that's out there but starting to put a research focus and
    brilliant minds on it to start to amass what's out there and
    start to determine how it can be used most effectively is the
    initial step.
        But what we foresee is a data clearinghouse where traffic
    operators, traffic managers, asset managers, and researchers
    would be able to tap into and utilize that information.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And then, Mr. Reeve,
    Picatinny Arsenal in my district is really at the forefront of
    a lot of the military research and development, and I've seen
    them doing some amazing work with composite materials. I guess
    what I'm questioning is, how do we ensure that we are doing as
    much as we can to rebuild our infrastructure with the most
    resilient materials? What's being done? What more needs to be
    done?
        Mr. Reeve. And the first thing in terms of what needs to be
    done is--again, is part of what we do is just education
    awareness so that the people who, when they're making the
    decisions of what materials they can use, they have that
    information because a lot of times they're sitting there with,
    OK, they've listened to one place or another place, but where
    can they get all of that in one--at one location? So that's
    part of what I--we mentioned on the NIST side, to have that
    clearinghouse, that--sort of that impartial location in which
    the asset owners can get that information. There's a good bit
    out there of information but it's all in disparate places.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And I'm afraid I'm running
    out of time, but briefly, Mr. Averill, can you talk a bit about
    how NIST has provided that clearinghouse?
        Mr. Averill. So NIST has a long history of doing scientific
    work and taking the results of that, making it publicly
    available to both end-users, as well as people like the
    building codes and standards community to ensure that there's a
    strong scientific basis for any decisionmaking being done at
    the local level or any policy that's developed in, for example,
    building codes and standards.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you all so much.
        I now recognize Mr. Norman for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Norman. Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill.
        Mr. Reeve, in your written statement you described some of
    the characteristics in composite materials and provide examples
    of resilience-based composite installations that have been used
    and are currently being deployed. Could you elaborate on what
    specific properties make composite materials a viable option
    for incorporating these into our infrastructure?
        Mr. Reeve. The--there's a number of applications and uses
    depending on what is the need. The first thing with the
    composite materials is the corrosion resistance, you know,
    saltwater, chemicals, de-icing compounds, even most acids do
    not affect the materials. So--and no matter what happens in
    that environment, that material is going to maintain its high
    strength.
        The other thing is there's a lot we can do in terms of
    design flexibility and lighter weight. So where the light
    weight comes into play is, again, in the installation side,
    minimizing the traffic--the disruption on traffic and the
    current infrastructure when they are having to do replacements
    or upgrades of the materials.
        And then the other thing is from an environmental point of
    view, the material's inert, so there's no chemicals that leach
    out of it, so there's not like with the treated wood or other
    things where people have to make use of it. So those are the
    big things, again, the materials will be there for 75 to 100
    years and maintain their strengths.
        Mr. Norman. You and I were talking earlier, you know,
    there's more needs than there is money to go around when you
    talk about this, so in your opinion what are the major barriers
    to actually getting the adoption and deployment of composite
    solutions particularly as it relates to incorporating them into
    the transportation infrastructure?
        Mr. Reeve. Again, in tying a little bit to that awareness
    and education side, one of the things that's worked in the past
    and we see as a big help in the future would be some
    demonstration projects with innovative materials, composite
    materials and other new materials that are out there because a
    lot of times when the engineers are having to make a decision
    and they're--of what materials they use and they have public
    safety in mind, they rely on what's been done previously. And
    so when there's the case studies out there of using a new
    material on this type of bridge or this type of sea wall, then
    they can look at that and say, OK, that works, I'm confident,
    I'm much more comfortable using that and deploying it because,
    again, they only have so much time and resources for making
    those decisions. So having those cases out there from some of
    those innovative projects for demonstration and view will help
    the most.
        Mr. Norman. Thank you. Mr. Averill, can you elaborate on
    the work at NIST and what it's doing to facilitate and
    accelerate the deployment of composite materials? As an
    example, how has NIST and the composite industry collaborated
    in the past, and has this collaboration been fruitful? And have
    you got plans to put this to work in the future?
        Mr. Averill. Sure. The most recent and specific example is
    where we partnered with the ACMA to do a roadmap that looked
    forward to what are the issues and barriers that might be
    present for use of composite materials, particularly for
    infrastructure applications. I came up with three main areas.
    One was looking at doing durability assessment and test data.
    The second was making that data available to researchers and to
    end-users, and the third was a piece on education and training.
    That roadmap is published and available on the NIST website so
    that the community can use that moving forward.
        We at NIST are looking at the various performance
    characteristics of lots of different materials. Most materials
    have various strengths and weaknesses. We want to ensure that
    we are able to characterize the performance of various
    materials so that we can make an informed science-based
    decision at the end-user level.
        Mr. Norman. Well, and I just urge you, what we hear at the
    local and State level are a lot of the decisions are made at
    the local level, and they're set in their ways with using a
    particular type of product that they've used just because they
    used it for years and the salesmen are good salesmen. So I
    would ask you to stay involved on a local level and ask
    questions like what tests do you need that I can do to help you
    make a decision.
        Thank you so much.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And now the Chair
    recognizes Congresswoman Bonamici for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Chair Sherrill and Ranking Member
    Norman, and to all of our witnesses today.
        According to the Fourth National Climate Assessment, if we
    don't address our aging and deteriorating infrastructure by
    2025, we're talking about $3.9 trillion. We already have more
    than 60,000 miles of U.S. roads and bridges that are
    experiencing problems from extreme storms and hurricanes. And I
    was thinking about this hearing today as I was watching the
    national weather news.
        Most of today's infrastructure and building standards don't
    take into account future climate trends. Current levels of
    infrastructure investment are not enough to cover even the
    needed repairs and replacement now, so clearly, we have more
    work to do in our communities to prepare for and respond to the
    effects of the climate crisis.
        And I do want to note that the Department of Transportation
    was one of the 13 Federal agencies that contributed to the
    National Climate Assessment, so I'm disappointed that they
    were, according to what I understand from the Committee, not
    willing to cooperate today with this hearing. This Committee
    does have jurisdiction over the Federal research enterprise, so
    it's concerning that the Department of Transportation is not
    represented for this discussion today.
        Ms. DesRoches, I'm concerned about a lack of coordination
    among Federal agencies and the exclusion of localities in
    deciding where to direct future scientific research efforts on
    the effects of climate change on infrastructure, and I'm
    working on a bill to help provide States and local governments
    with science and best practices to prepare for and respond to
    the climate crisis. And so I want to ask you, if a city wants
    to access Federal climate data to help support their
    transportation resilience planning but like New York, they
    don't have an independent panel on climate change, is it
    obvious where to look, and how can Congress help make sure that
    this research is accessible and formatted in a way that cities
    and States can actually use it effectively?
        Ms. DesRoches. You know, I think that NOAA (National
    Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) does an excellent job
    of providing climate data. I would say that your point is well-
    taken. Localities need to be using forward-looking climate data
    if we're going to address the issues that you raised. So the
    most important thing is that the data is readily accessible and
    it's at least a regional level. Even our local data in New York
    City is good for about 100 miles around New York City, so it
    can be down-sampled to a regional level. And then that
    information does need to be made more accessible at the local
    level so that all of the things that we're talking about today
    where, you know, engineers are doing the--you know, what
    they've known at the local level for so long can be utilizing
    forward-looking climate data, which will in fact change the
    design strategies that we're implementing.
        Ms. Bonamici. Any suggestions on how we can best do that?
        Ms. DesRoches. So in New York City we've published climate
    resiliency design guidelines that lay out a step-by-step
    process for the design and engineering industry in order to
    take that climate data and apply it to the built environment.
    This is a really important tool. I think we could use that tool
    at a Federal level so that codes and standards actually get up
    to speed in terms of what we're looking forward to, not what we
    are seeing from behind.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. Mr. Winfree, in my home State of
    Oregon the Transportation Research and Education Center, TREC,
    is leading research on the integration of transportation and
    land-use electric vehicles, resiliency of engineered
    structures, and transit service. It's a collaboration--the
    University Transportation Center--a collaboration of several
    regional schools, including Portland State University, the
    University of Oregon, and the Oregon Institute of Technology.
    So are these types of UTCs equipped to address the
    multidisciplinary research recommendations you outlined in your
    testimony? And how can the regional model of UTCs help define
    climate resilience for transportation systems across the
    country?
        Mr. Winfree. I think it's important to keep in mind how the
    competitions since the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
    Century (MAP-21) Act have required the UTCs to be formulated so
    they're under a consortia model. So I think that's really at
    the root of what we're talking about. The region--region 10 I
    believe it is--is a consortia of those universities that you've
    identified, so it's not specifically for the region. I believe
    all of the 35 granted centers utilize the consortia model. So I
    am a huge fan and proponent for that. That was a change we made
    when I was Assistant Secretary, and I believe it's a change
    that you will hear is universally well-regarded in the research
    community.
        So I would say step one is, as reauthorization is under
    consideration, when you're looking at potentially refunding and
    hopefully funding at even greater levels the UTC program, that
    the consortia model remain a factor in that, as well as to keep
    the--to keep it a competitive process as well.
        Earlier, the UTCs were more legislative, you know, earmarks
    to use a pejorative term----
        Ms. Bonamici. Right.
        Mr. Winfree [continuing]. But what that had done in those
    instances were those centers were more aligned with the
    legislative priorities than U.S. DOT. So ensuring that DOT gets
    what it needs from the research community works best when it's
    a competitive model where the U.S. DOT is able to set forth
    what they're looking for from the research outcomes. And all of
    the centers work----
        Chairwoman Sherrill. OK. I think we're going to have to----
        Ms. Bonamici. That's----
        Chairwoman Sherrill [continuing]. Leave it at that. We're
    over time----
        Mr. Winfree. Yes, that's----
        Ms. Bonamici. Over time, but that's very helpful. I yield
    back.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. And next, the Chair recognizes Mr.
    Waltz for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        So hurricane season is on us. I represent the 6th District
    of Florida. It's on us again starting June 1, and we already
    have a subtropical storm Andrea out in the Atlantic, so here we
    go again.
        You know, in my area representing Daytona Beach, sea levels
    are expected to rise by 5 inches just in the next 15 years. I
    have nearly 70 miles between Volusia, Flagler, and St. Johns
    counties that are at risk and continue to be at risk by a
    series of storms. So, number one, I want to commend Governor
    DeSantis, my predecessor in this seat, for making the
    environment and resiliency a priority in his new
    administration. He has recently named a Chief Science Officer
    and plans to name a Chief Resiliency Officer for the State of
    Florida, and I want to give him due credit for that. I myself
    have joined the National Flood Coalition. So I think we are
    changing the nature of actually what we're doing on this side
    of the aisle to get things done.
        But, you know, in my State and certainly in my area, you
    know, this flooding issue isn't just homes. It's roads, it's
    evacuation routes. It's a military issue according to recently
    released DOD (Department of Defense) reports. So we truly need
    to take this on and get serious about it. And I'm certainly
    serious about it, and I know the Governor is serious about it.
        So the first question for you, Mr. Averill, given your
    research and based on your knowledge at NIST of the available
    technology to map flooding and sea-level rise and the materials
    available to build transportation infrastructure, specifically
    what types of technologies should we be using?
        And I understand, Mr. Reeve, your point that you made
    repeatedly, that this is really an education process. I'd be
    interested in your thoughts as well as specifics of what this
    Committee can do, what we can do from a Federal standpoint or
    encouraging our State colleagues to get that word out to our
    various builders and folks setting the codes at a local level.
        But what types of technology and materials should these
    vulnerable areas be using? And really, I think the white
    elephant in the room is planning going forward, should we be
    putting infrastructure in these flood-prone areas? But
    presuming that we continue to, give me some specifics on what
    we should use.
        Mr. Averill. Thank you. So at NIST we've worked a lot with
    communities because we recognize that at the end of the day
    decisionmaking for our built environment occurs at the local
    level. And so at NIST we've done a number of activities to
    support that decisionmaking, principally, our Community
    Resilience Planning Guide provides a structure for resilience
    planning and ensuring that it's got stakeholder input and that
    it's incorporating some of the other plans that communities do.
        We also do a lot of research, as I mentioned previously and
    discussed in my testimony----
        Mr. Waltz. Just not to interrupt you, do you find that that
    guide is actively being used? Is there a high level of
    awareness at the local level?
        Mr. Averill. We certainly are publishing it as broadly as
    we can. We are presenting it at conferences where people we
    think need to hear that, and we have a specific stakeholder
    outreach strategy to try to get that as broadly taken up as
    possible. We're also coordinating with other Federal agencies,
    for example, coordinating with RRAP (Regional Resiliency
    Assessment Program) to try to----
        Mr. Waltz. Just in the interest of time, do you have any
    metrics on it actually being used rather, I understand you're
    pushing it out, right, but do you have any metrics on local
    communities actually adopting what you're recommending?
        Mr. Averill. We have four or five communities that we're
    currently actively working with in partnership, and then we
    hear from----
        Mr. Waltz. Was that four to five?
        Mr. Averill. Yes, four to five that we're doing specific
    projects----
        Mr. Waltz. OK.
        Mr. Averill [continuing]. Side-by-side with, and then we
    periodically----
        Mr. Waltz. How do we broaden that? How do we make that more
    than four to five?
        Mr. Averill. Well, I think we need to continue to make the
    information available, and we're ready to work as opportunities
    arise.
        Mr. Waltz. Mr. Reeve, I think I'm out of time, but, Mr.
    Reeve, any comment from the private sector?
        Mr. Reeve. One comment on that where you tied on making
    some of that happen is the fact that when there is Federal
    funding that is part of the local project administrations, the
    LPA programs and other ones that are there is that you push
    down and say one of the requirements is that they reference and
    they take a look at the documents that are out there.
        Mr. Waltz. You're saying that's currently in place or needs
    to be in place?
        Mr. Reeve. That's--it needs to be in place. You know, there
    are certain things that get pushed down when Federal funding is
    involved, but if there are other ones in there, like I said, if
    you're looking at it from a point of view, looking at the
    resiliency side, then those are some of the ones, if it's not
    getting out there, that's at least a way in which you can----
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you.
        Mr. Reeve [continuing]. You could push it on them.
        Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Hopefully, we can get back
    to some of these lines of questioning, but I do want to get
    everyone in with questions, so now the Chair recognizes Ms.
    Wexton for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much, and thank you to the
    witnesses for being here today. And I'm glad that Madam Chair
    mentioned continuity of questions because the gentlelady from
    Oregon brought up the UTC in her State, and my home State of
    Virginia, George Mason University, which is in Fairfax, is part
    of an excellent UTC, the Center for Integrated Asset Management
    for Multimodal Transportation Infrastructure Systems, which is
    a mouthful.
        And how various transportation assets integrate with one
    another as a part of the whole national network is really at
    the heart of the matter, I think, when we talk about climate
    resilience because we can't ensure that a community will
    tolerate climate impacts well if we address the roads but not
    the subway or other transit assets.
        And so, Mr. Winfree, given your experience at the Federal
    level and with the Transportation Institute, do you think that
    the various modes are coordinated well enough within DOT when
    it comes to the issue of climate resilience?
        Mr. Winfree. Certainly in my experience when I was there,
    the focus was on state of good repair, roads and bridges and
    crumbling infrastructure. Climate change, extreme weather was
    discussed, but the leadership was through Department of Energy
    and EPA. I can't exactly describe what the thinking is at DOT
    as we sit here today, but I would certainly--I think it's fair
    to say that there could be better coordination led by the
    Secretary's office to make it more of a universal issue for the
    Department.
        Ms. Wexton. So would you say that, historically, it's been
    more of a damage control looking back and just fixing the
    damage that's already been done rather than prospectively
    trying to make sure that our assets are safe for the future?
        Mr. Winfree. Absolutely. And I think that's still the case
    from the approach other than New York City and other
    municipalities, from the Federal level a lot of the focus is on
    recovery, disaster recovery, getting systems back up as quickly
    as possible and not enough research into how do you harden
    assets, how do you prepare for the inclement weather events
    that we know are coming. That's still lagging.
        Ms. Wexton. And related to that, also in my State of
    Virginia we're seeing more flooding, recurrent flooding--
    increased, frequent high precipitation in a short amount of
    time. And I know we're not alone in this. And we are also at
    risk for sea-level rise and really vulnerable in that regard.
    But we're seeing it across the Commonwealth, and I would
    imagine other folks are as well.
        Ms. DesRoches, how might insufficient stormwater management
    systems accentuate the risk to road systems and other
    transportation assets in cases of increased precipitation and
    sea-level rise? How do those infrastructure commitments
    integrate with one another?
        Ms. DesRoches. So it's a complex system in that both of
    those tend to be, at least on East Coast, historical systems
    where they're legacy systems. They were designed, you know, for
    what we saw in the past. And yes, when we have more increased
    precipitation with sea-level rise that the coastal areas are
    being inundated by both types of risks. I think that integrated
    planning between stormwater and roadways and our transportation
    infrastructure could be stronger and needs to be stronger.
    We're working hard on that in New York City and are always
    happy to share best practices.
        But first, we need to understand better how those systems
    are affecting each other, and those studies need to be done
    first in order to figure out how the drainage system and the
    roadway network can actually increase resiliency. Can we make
    upland areas more absorbent to try to hold back some of that
    precipitation through green infrastructure and other measures?
    How do we think about not just the roadway but the land use
    around the roadways and our transportation network in order to
    be able to withstand more of those increased precipitation and
    the sea-level that you talked about.
        Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much. Do any of the other
    witnesses have any thoughts on that issue?
        Mr. Reeve. My only other comment would be somebody had
    mentioned on the economic side, I think that's important in the
    decisionmaking as you look at what's the economic impact on
    this part of the infrastructure versus another one when making
    those decisions. So, you know, again, and limited resources put
    that preventive measures on the ones that are, again, the most
    critical.
        Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much. And I see my time is up,
    so I yield back.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And the Chair recognizes
    Mr. Casten for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Casten. Thank you, Chair and Ranking Member Norman, for
    giving me the opportunity to waive onto this Subcommittee
    today. This is critically important stuff, and I know I always
    tell people that the problem with our little tiny human brains
    is that we really have a hard time with nonlinear trends and,
    you know, the climate is not only changing but the rate of
    change is accelerating. We know this intuitively because these
    1,500-year floods seem to happen every year now, especially in
    coastal areas, and yet we still have zoning rules based on
    those historic pieces of data where we celebrate, you know,
    people who project linear trends when in fact everything is
    accelerating. To me, that strikes me as a problem because we
    build our infrastructure on the assumption that history is a
    predictor of the future, and in fact it's not.
        And the private sector has in many cases started to figure
    that out, and in 2017 Argonne National Labs that's located just
    south of my district in Illinois partnered with AT&T to produce
    a ``Road to Climate Resiliency'' white paper that detailed the
    results of a project that they did that used three climate
    models, 30 years of history, and months of time on Argonne
    supercomputers layered over where AT&T's physical assets were
    to figure out a long-term climate resiliency map.
        Madam Chair, I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter
    into the record the white paper entitled, ``The Road to Climate
    Resiliency'' on the joint study conducted by Argonne and AT&T.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Without objection.
        Mr. Casten. Mr. Winfree, given what the private sector is
    already doing, do you agree that the Department of
    Transportation should make an effort to incorporate similar
    Federal climate models into their planning and prioritization
    activities as much as possible?
        Mr. Winfree. I don't think there's--you can't--you won't
    solve the issue by not looking at every available resource, and
    I believe every scientific study, every peer-reviewed work that
    is done in this space should be on the table. We know from a
    resource perspective that DOT, the Federal Government writ
    large can't answer every question in every instance, so the
    more information on the table, the better I think is the proper
    approach, particularly, as you pointed out, since these issues
    are not linear. We need to look at them from every angle and
    try and come to some common approaches and some common
    understanding as to how best to address it.
        Mr. Casten. Are you aware that DOT is doing anything like
    what Argonne and AT&T have done of this level of model analysis
    as they think about where they're going to build and how
    they're going to build?
        Mr. Winfree. That is not an area of research that I'm
    familiar with. Like I said a bit earlier, my understanding was
    EPA, Energy, and other departments and agencies were out in
    front and that DOT was going to be capitalizing upon the
    results of that research.
        Mr. Casten. Mr. Averill, what can NIST do to start to
    incorporate this modeling into their resilience work in a more
    complete way? Are you guys partnering with the national labs?
    Can you work some of this into your standards that you're using
    for building codes?
        Mr. Averill. Well, at NIST we are a nonregulatory agency,
    so what we do vis-a-vis standards and building codes in
    particular is we take the results of our research and we
    participate in those consensus processes, but those are run
    through, for example, the International Code Council or various
    standards, organizations as separate nongovernmental entities.
    So we are certainly interested in making sure that our research
    is answering the questions that we know that the end-users have
    and that would be most useful for addressing the issues you
    raised.
        Mr. Casten. So a question then for all of you or all of you
    or any of you, how do you define success in resiliency? I mean,
    I get that these are consensus processes, but if we're going to
    sit there and say a community is going to be resilient or a
    standard is going to be designed for resilience, what's the
    metric you design for?
        Ms. DesRoches. OK. I'll take that. So in New York City the
    way that we are looking to the built environment is to say this
    is how long the useful life of that asset will be, and when we
    design and engineer that asset, we use climate change data in
    order to build that asset to last the whole length of its
    useful life. So we're utilizing the existing climate models and
    basically saying, OK, at 2050 sea-level rise will be roughly
    here. We will build that asset to that height.
        So while, you know, we--you can't totally predict, there is
    uncertainty in those climate projections. We can't totally
    predict exactly to the inch how high sea-level rise will be in
    2050. We have a good range, and we understand where that
    trajectory is going, and we feel strongly that we need to be
    incorporating that data today in order to ensure that asset
    lasts as long as it can.
        Mr. Casten. I think I'm of time, so I will yield back.
    Thank you.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. The Chair now yields to Mr.
    McAdams for 5 minutes.
        Mr. McAdams. Thank you, Chair Sherrill and Ranking Member
    Norman. We thank you for holding this very important hearing
    and helping us to talk about some of the impacts of climate
    change and climate resiliency.
        And I represent Utah, and so in the Salt Lake and Utah
    valleys we're feeling the effects of climate change in several
    different ways. Most obvious is the pollution that hangs over
    the valley floor, especially in the winter, causing a litany of
    health impacts. Utah is one of the fastest-growing States in
    the country right now, and in particular the Wasatch Front that
    I represent is experiencing the bulk of that growth.
        With more people comes more cars on the road, more
    passengers in our trains, and more flights coming in and out of
    our Salt Lake International Airport. It also means more
    pollution and wear and tear on our infrastructure. So while the
    Utah Department of Transportation and other organizations like
    the Utah Transit Authority, our MPO (Metropolitan Planning
    Organization), and Wasatch Front Regional Council and
    Mountainland MPO, I think they're rising to the challenge of
    addressing this growth. The problem becomes significantly
    harder when we also factor in climate change, intense
    fluctuations in heat, more intense weather patterns, et cetera.
    Given the elevation of my district, I don't think the sea-level
    rise is going to be an impact to our transportation
    infrastructure per se.
        But, you know, one of the things that Utah has done really
    well, we were one of the first areas in the country to adopt
    what we call the Wasatch Choice for 2050, a unified
    transportation plan that incorporates our transit authority,
    our local government, State government, our DOT in a unified
    transportation plan. And it looks at our growth projections
    through the year 2050 and what infrastructure investments we're
    going to need to accommodate that growth, both maintenance and
    then new capacity on our roads.
        I guess my first question for the panel is, with extreme
    weather--and I'm thinking in particular in a cold area that I
    represent, the freeze-thaw cycles, and we look at the impact
    and the life of an asset. And, you know, I think when we looked
    at this we have a number of what we need for transportation
    infrastructure investment, and clearly there's not enough
    funding. We're funding what we can, but we don't have enough to
    fund that infrastructure that we need, and so you know, we need
    the transportation funding at the Federal level. But I'm
    wondering if we also need to evaluate the life of our assets
    with climate change and if the life of our assets may not be as
    long as projected with the increased freeze-thaw cycles. And
    can you help me to quantify that impact?
        Mr. Winfree. Well, certainly at TTI, you know, we're one of
    the lead institutes that look at pavement materials whether
    they're cementitious, whether they're asphalt, so there's no
    substitute for testing and analysis at the front end in all
    weather and climate conditions.
        Now, I know Carlos Braceras, your Executive Director, he's
    keenly aware of that and is a partner with AASHTO (American
    Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) and
    with NCHRP (National Cooperative Highway Research Program) in
    that regard, but the testing and analysis in all climate
    conditions, there's just no replacement for that. And there are
    several UTCs that focus on cold-weather climate impacts for,
    again, asset, you know, installation, as well as asset
    performance. So writ large, performance measures are needed
    across the board.
        Mr. McAdams. What can we do at the Federal level
    specifically with the Department of Transportation to support
    our State agencies in developing climate-resilient
    infrastructure plans, recognizing that they will differ from
    region to region then?
        Mr. Winfree. There are a lot of resources that are out
    there now. Better publication and coalescing them into a form
    and fashion that can be used by the practitioner has always
    been the challenge. I'm aware of the Volpe National
    Transportation Systems Center having amassed resources, but I
    don't know about the publication of that end report. So again,
    the work is out there, the research is out there, but getting
    it in the form and fashion that's easy and accessible for the
    practitioner is the challenge.
        Mr. McAdams. You know, I think as we are looking at
    investing in maintaining our transportation infrastructure and
    how expensive that is and knowing that every tax dollar is
    precious and important and competing with other priorities, for
    me, the importance of planning ahead, understanding the impacts
    of climate change, and then investing in climate resilience
    will make sure that we use those tax dollars efficiently and as
    effectively as possible, and then also to improve and maintain
    the quality of life whether it's reducing the wear-and-tear on
    the road or the capacity of our transportation systems to
    handle the growing population that we serve effectively.
        So thank you, and I yield back.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And now the Chair will
    recognize myself for another round of questions for 5 minutes.
        Just to kind of give an overview of what I'm hearing, we
    have a lot of programs going on. We have the programs going on
    in the New York City area, what I like to call the suburbs of
    north Jersey. We have the work going on at many of our
    university transportation centers like at Texas A&M, and I know
    we have it at Rutgers. We've heard from different Members today
    about those centers. We have NIST doing research into composite
    materials. What we don't seem to have is a real understanding
    of how, if you are a small to medium-sized city or municipality
    and want to go do some infrastructure work, how you would
    engage with all this research or all of these new composite
    materials? And it makes sense what Mr. Norman is saying that
    generally what you probably do is just use the same contractor
    you've always used with the same materials that you've always
    used and probably getting the same results that you've always
    gotten.
        So I think I would--you know, to the extent that we have
    you here today, Ms. DesRoches, when you're looking at planning
    throughout the greater metropolitan area, what engagement did
    you have with NIST, what engagement did you have looking at
    cost--or does the region have looking at new composite
    materials or is it just a factor that the city is large enough
    to really conduct its own research and develop its own tools
    for use? Or do you interact with these university research
    centers or NIST or any of our private people who are working in
    this area?
        Ms. DesRoches. Sure. Well, certainly, we do interact with a
    number of Federal agencies. You know, I would say I was a
    partner on the community resiliency planning guide when it
    rolled out to different sectors when we were working on
    guidance for transportation specifically. TRB, Transportation
    Research Board, is another place that has been doing some great
    research. They set up a resiliency section, which is the first
    new section they've set up in I think over 10 years. And that's
    really the--and I'm on that section. That's really meant to
    organize all that research that TRB does across many different
    committees with a resiliency lens.
        So, you know, I think that no locality can do this on their
    own. We do need the research from the institutions that we've
    been discussing today. I do think, however, that some of the
    standards-setting industry groups that's a consensus process is
    not moving fast enough in order to incorporate this future-
    looking climate data. I think that it takes a long time for
    those standards boards to set new standards, to modify
    standards, and all of these standards still use historical
    weather data. And I think until we change that, the localities
    will not have enough resources to be able to change how they
    design, but if the standard changes and the standard says you
    need to be designing for extreme heat, then that will change
    the design outcome.
        So I think that we both need these resources that we've
    been talking about in the research, but we also need that
    research to be plugged into the standard sooner and that
    there's a level of urgency there that needs to be sped up.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. And I sit on the Armed Services and
    come from somewhat of a DOD background, and in that department
    there's always a lead agency, whether it's the Navy or the Army
    or the CIA or Homeland Security. In this space, in this
    resiliency space we've heard that the EPA had a hand in it,
    we've heard of DOT, but when we're talking infrastructure
    resiliency, who are we looking to to be the lead agency in this
    space? And that question is for all of you.
        Mr. Winfree. Well, I think that raises challenges. The term
    infrastructure is extraordinarily broad. If you're talking
    transportation, then certainly I think DOT should be at the
    lead, but one of the things I was considering on the way here
    are the interdependencies between really asset owners, right?
    So particularly in New York, New Jersey, whenever there's a
    watermain break, it impacts the road network. Well, the water
    company or the water transmission folks don't necessarily work
    hand-in-glove with streets and maintenance or with the highway
    department. So getting across those--really lack of
    communication from agency to agency, from department to
    department is hugely important to make sure everybody's at the
    table. So, you know, again, infrastructure is a broad term. We
    need some discipline as to what falls in those categories so
    that we can prioritize.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. I think what we're
    struggling with a bit here is many of us have worked on
    infrastructure projects--I'm sure Mr. Norman has in all your
    development--in our home districts, and we've seen how, you
    know, I think we're a little concerned about more regulation
    because we've seen how some outdated or poorly functioning
    regulation is really harming. So to the extent we could have--I
    think what I'm looking for is a group to take the lead and then
    start to really dig down into how we can streamline the
    regulations but then make sure we have the regulations that are
    forward-looking, that are looking into climate change. I do
    worry about just adding layers of standards and regulations
    over poorly functioning ones because then we seem to kind of
    butt heads with what we're trying to accomplish in our
    districts. So it sounds like the place to start is with the
    DOT, who is unfortunately not in attendance today. But thank
    you.
        Mr. Norman, would you have further comments?
        Mr. Norman. Yes, just one question for each of you. You
    know, when we have an issue with what we're building, and I go
    to the ones that are actually doing the work, the contractors,
    the individual people doing the layers. From where you sit, and
    it's pretty much back on what Mikie was talking about. From
    where you sit, what should we be doing in our roles? If you
    were sitting in Congress now, knowing what you know in your
    different departments, what should we be doing?
        Mr. Reeve. From my side, you know, what we see right now
    is, most of the infrastructure is just acquisition cost-based,
    OK? What's--it's low bidder, OK? So a contractor is going to
    bid--to win the job, he's going to bid with some of the lower-
    cost materials, which, again, in a lot of cases is the same
    thing that they've done in the past. And often, you know, if
    you're looking for, you know, on the procurement side to say
    you need to consider the resiliency and the lifecycle costs,
    the longer-term maintenance costs in making that decision, so
    you pick something that even though it may cost, you know, a
    premium, 10, 15 percent now, it's saving you in 30 years from
    doing it over again. And so that's a change somewhat in--just
    in the procurement practices.
        Mr. Norman. So you would recommend I do what?
        Mr. Reeve. Recommend that in those cases--in the
    infrastructure side say that you need to consider, OK, a life-
    timeframe of 30 years, 50 years, 75 years when you're making
    the choices of what is the lowest--you know, lowest-cost
    solution and that it's not just today's cost, it's what's this
    going to cost you in the future. And part of that future cost
    is making sure you account for what's going to be those future
    weather events.
        Mr. Norman. So advocacy, is that right? OK. Mr. Averill or
    Mr. Winfree?
        Mr. Averill. I agree with my colleague here. The Economic
    Decision Guide is a formal framework for accounting for
    economically decisions that might include lifecycle analysis.
    We've been discussing with communities this notion of a
    resilience dividend, so it's the idea that you might be
    designing for a particular event in mind over a long time
    horizon, but in doing so, you actually get a day-to-day benefit
    that's guaranteed that you don't have to condition on the
    probability of the event that might be, for example, less
    maintenance or better resistance to the frequent sort of annual
    events that you're going to see. So using a more formal and
    lifecycle-type cost analysis would be helpful.
        Mr. Winfree. And I would certainly follow on Mr. Reeve's
    point. I think the flip side of what he was talking about is
    lessening the fear of taking risks. Contractors by definition
    take the conservative view because they don't want to get sued,
    they don't want to have a bad outcome, they don't want to get
    blamed for something going wrong that could have been
    innovative. So it prevents a closer nexus between the research
    community and the contract community that does the work because
    they are risk-averse. So if there is any kind of measure that
    provides guarantees on the backend or lessens the risk for the
    contractor community I think is a benefit.
        Ms. DesRoches. And I'll just add briefly that, you know, as
    I was talking about in my testimony, if we ask questions about
    resiliency as they relate to funding, you will get more
    creative answers, and that's another way to raise everyone's
    awareness. So if I'm asking for this amount of Federal funding
    for a bridge, if the question comes back how is that bridge
    resilient to extreme rain events that we expect in that area,
    you will get a different answer than what the standard built
    practice is today.
        Mr. Norman. Thank you so much. You all have and very
    informative, and I have no further questions.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you, Mr. Norman.
        I'm about to go to my colleague Mr. Beyer, but I do have
    one quick question for all of you since you're sitting here
    that occurred to me. To your knowledge, has there been any work
    done when looking at the plans for the Gateway tunnel project
    on new, more resilient materials, composite materials?
        Ms. DesRoches. I'm not aware. I don't have that information
    with me, and so it's outside of my area of expertise, the
    specific tunnel design.
        Mr. Reeve. You know, I personally don't know, but I will--
    you know, through the association, will see if any of the
    other, you know, suppliers out there have been approached.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Did you have something, Mr.
    Winfree?
        Mr. Winfree. Yes, I was just going to say that I do know
    that lessons learned from the tunnel failure are being utilized
    in the forward planning, right, so some of the things that were
    discovered were the solid-state machinery down there failed
    where some of the 100-year-old tube equipment survived the
    water, right? So there are lessons learned that are being
    thought-forward about how to install the Gateway operation.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you very much.
        I now recognize Mr. Beyer for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Beyer. Madam Chair, thank you very much. And I'm sorry
    I missed most of the hearing. We were struggling with trade
    policy in Ways and Means, something unimportant compared to
    this, but thank you for being here.
        And I think this is such an incredibly important hearing.
    Thank you for doing this.
        I represent Virginia, northern Virginia, but we have
    Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Virginia Beach, which is not only
    sinking slowly but the water's rising most rapidly there I
    guess than anywhere along the East Coast. It seems like 14
    inches in the last 20 years. And I think Northrop Grumman that
    did the charts suggested that Norfolk and Portsmouth will be
    underwater something like 60 percent of the year, their
    downtowns by 2040.
        And then we have a little Sears home in Oxford, Maryland,
    and it's always encouraging to look at the LIDAR numbers and
    see if sea-level rise is just 1 foot in the Chesapeake Bay, how
    much of the village is underwater and how do you get there for
    the places that aren't?
        Ms. DesRoches, this may be best for you coming from New
    York City, which is--I mean, I'm sure you've seen the pictures
    of what's going to happen to Manhattan. I live in Alexandria
    across the river just south of the airport, and the last big
    storm we had, the storm surge came and flooded scores and
    scores of homes, and so one of the lingering infrastructure
    resilience problems is, do we build a wall around the
    neighborhood or do we build a berm in the middle of the G.W.
    Parkway or do we continue to expand the wetlands to provide
    resilience, or the most popular idea is, do we build a
    submersible surge wall in the Potomac River downstream about 5
    miles, and when the surge comes, the wall comes up and holds
    the surge back. This is the $5 billion option.
        Where is your engineering New York City background taking
    you on trying to protect all these low-lying cities?
        Ms. DesRoches. So great question, very complicated. So we
    are looking at all options. We are looking at new planning
    tools first and foremost. FEMA--we are collaborating with FEMA
    on a forward-looking flood map, which will incorporate climate
    change data, which will help inform residents, businesses, and
    the city as to what the future floodplain looks like. We are
    building coastal protection in some of our neighborhoods. We
    are cooperating with the Corps on a storm surge barrier study.
    We're supporting that study.
        So my main answer is there isn't one silver bullet. We have
    to look at this across all of the tools we have, also including
    building codes, which we've talked some about today. How can we
    enhance that so that we are looking systematically about
    protection but also how do we enhance the resiliency of the
    assets that we have today?
        Mr. Beyer. Great. Thank you very much. I know it's
    incredibly complicated, sort of living it with the constituents
    every day.
        Mr. Reeve, you talked about the ability of composite
    materials to withstand saltwater. Is there a different
    scientific or engineering approach depending on the salinity of
    the water?
        Mr. Reeve. No, it--the materials that we use in there, you
    know, work with any of the different types of salinities,
    again, even up to the acidic side so whether it's brackish or
    anything. You know, those materials will do fine.
        I will say we supply a Navy berthing--we supply berthing
    structures for the Navy submarines and the aircraft carriers
    and do that at--for a lot of bases across the United States. I
    will say the ones--the equipment in Norfolk station gets beat
    up the most.
        Mr. Beyer. Yes.
        Mr. Reeve. It has the roughest time with where you're
    located so----
        Mr. Beyer. Yes. Thank you very much. Mr. Averill. On the
    materials requirements for resilient roads, bridges,
    transportation assets, are they different in coastal
    communities versus inland communities or are the materials
    requirements basically the same?
        Mr. Averill. Certainly to the extent that we would see
    saltwater exposure, that would increase the chlorides, if
    you're in a northern climate, for example, and you look at the
    de-icing compounds that would be used up there versus maybe a
    more southern climate where we don't need to treat for that. So
    our research tries to work with the standards community to come
    up with performance requirements for materials for a variety of
    different hazards that might represent what materials across
    the United States would be exposed to.
        Mr. Beyer. All right. Great. Thank you all very much.
        Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Mr. Norman, do you have
    anything further?
        Mr. Norman. No.
        Chairwoman Sherrill. Before we bring the hearing to a
    close, I want to thank our witnesses for testifying before the
    Committee today. The record will remain open for 2 weeks for
    additional statements from the Members and for any additional
    questions the Committee may ask of the witnesses.
        The witnesses are excused, and the hearing is now
    adjourned. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                   Appendix I

                                  ----------
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]