[Senate Hearing 117-627]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]






                                 



                                                      S. Hrg. 117-627
 
PUTTING THE BIPARTISAN INFRASTRUCTURE LAW TO WORK: THE STATE AND LOCAL 
                              PERSPECTIVES

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

                                HEARING

                               before the

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 21, 2022

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
  
  GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
        
                                    ______
	
	             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
	51-564 PDF          WASHINGTON : 2023
	 
 
        
        
        
        
               COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                  THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West 
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont                 Virginia 
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island         Ranking Member
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois            CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan            RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama
MARK KELLY, Arizona                  JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
ALEX PADILLA, California             ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
                                     DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
                                     JONI ERNST, Iowa
                                     LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina

             Mary Frances Repko, Democratic Staff Director
               Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                           SEPTEMBER 21, 2022
                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware..     1
Capito, Hon. Shelley, U.S. Senator from the State of West 
  Virginia.......................................................     3

                               WITNESSES

Majeski, Nicole, Secretary, Delaware Department of Transportation     7
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
Romero, Hon. Regina, Mayor, City of Tucson, Arizona..............    15
    Prepared statement...........................................    17
Wriston, Jimmy D., P.E., Secretary, West Virginia Department of 
  Transportation.................................................    25
    Prepared statement...........................................    27
    Responses to additional questions from:
        Senator Ernst............................................    32
Tymon, Jim, Executive Director, American Association of State 
  Highway and Transportation Officials...........................    34
    Prepared statement...........................................    36
    Responses to additional questions from:
        Senator Carper...........................................    48
        Senator Boozman..........................................    50
        Senator Ernst............................................    50


PUTTING THE BIPARTISAN INFRASTRUCTURE LAW TO WORK: THE STATE AND LOCAL 
                              PERSPECTIVES

                              ----------                              


                     WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 2022

                                       U.S. Senate,
                 Committee on Environment and Public Works,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 
Washington, DC.
    The committee, met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in 
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper 
(chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Senators 
Carper, Capito, Cardin, Whitehouse, Kelly, Padilla, Cramer, 
Sullivan, Ernst.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER, 
            U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

    Senator Carper. Could I ask everyone to go ahead and take 
your seats? This is a spirited group that is gathered here this 
morning. We welcome all of you.
    Today, as you know, we are here to discuss the 
implementation of maybe the most historic piece of legislation 
that Senator Capito and our colleagues here on this committee 
have ever worked on, and that is the implementation of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. We call it the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Specifically, we will look at 
the implementation. We want to look at the implementation 
through the eyes of our State and local partners, who are 
gathered here today.
    As I think you all know, our committee played a pivotal 
role in the development of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
last year. Two pieces of legislation that we unanimously 
reported out of this committee, the Surface Transportation 
Reauthorization Act and the Drinking Water and Wastewater 
Infrastructure Act, became the foundation on which this 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was built. We are very proud of 
that.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was a once-in-a-
generation investment in our Nation's infrastructure. The law 
provides more than $350 billion, my staff first wrote this, my 
statement, and they wrote $350 million. I said, no, I think 
that is a ``b,'' for billion, for our Nation's highway 
programs. It increased formula funding to the States by 34 
percent and significantly increased funding for competitive 
grant programs for States and for local governments.
    In the 10-months since President Biden signed the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law into law, the U.S. Department of 
Transportation has been hard at work standing up new programs 
and administering the historic amount of highway funding that 
Congress has provided through this measure.
    In March of this year, this committee held its first 
hearing on the implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law. During that hearing, we heard from our Secretary of 
Transportation, Pete Buttigieg, about the Department's work to 
promptly get formula funding out to the States. This is 
critical, as you know, so that the States, our States, can get 
to work on projects that will improve their highways, bridges, 
and multimodal infrastructure.
    As a recovering Governor, I also know that the hard work of 
carrying out our highway programs is not just a Federal 
responsibility. State and local agencies play critical roles in 
prioritizing and ultimately choosing the projects that are 
funded by your respective States, depending on your own unique 
needs and challenges. As recipients of Federal highway funding, 
States are on the front lines of constructing and maintaining 
our national network of highways and bridges and improving 
safety and equity for all highway roadway users.
    To that end, I have been pleased to see the U.S. Department 
of Transportation continue to roll out new programs and provide 
funding guidance to help States and local governments navigate 
our new infrastructure law. This includes guidance for the 
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, 
and Cost-Saving Transportation, there has got to be a good 
acronym there, and it is PROTECT, formula funding, which the 
committee created in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law under 
the historic $18 billion climate title.
    The Department of Transportation released guidance for this 
program back in July. It provides nearly $7.3 billion over 5 
years to make highway infrastructure more resilient to the 
effects of climate change.
    The PROTECT program will be a game changer for States like 
mine, Delaware, which is the lowest-lying State, as my 
colleagues have heard me say repeatedly, lowest-lying State in 
the Country. Our State has highways like Route 1 which goes 
almost the length of our State from up north to all the way 
down to Maryland that are very much at increased risk of being 
washed over by storm or by a flood. Thanks to the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, States like ours, Delaware, now have 
formula funding specifically dedicated to protecting our 
vulnerable coastal infrastructure.
    In addition to the critical role that States play, it is 
also important to recognize the counties, cities, and towns 
that also have unique transportation challenges, but also 
unique transportation opportunities. That is why we also 
enhanced the role of local governments in delivering federally 
funded projects to your communities in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law. For example, we improved the ability of 
smaller communities to receive Transportation Alternative 
funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects.
    The law also makes State and local governments eligible 
recipients of several new discretionary grant programs, 
including the Reconnecting Communities Program and the Rural 
Surface Transportation Grant Program. These programs will help 
State and local governments meet the needs of their 
communities, whether they happen to be urban, or they happen to 
be rural, or somewhere in between, in order to better improve 
resiliency, improve equity, and safety. These were some of the 
top priorities we heard from stakeholders when developing this 
legislation.
    Given the large funding increase and the number of new 
surface transportation programs that were created, I believe 
that we need to hear the perspectives of those on the ground, 
you, those who have gathered here today. Doing so allows us to 
know what is working well and what might need some further 
attention.
    Our hearing today will allow us to hear from State and 
local leaders. It is an opportunity to ask how they are doing 
and what they are doing with the funding provided by the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    Senator Capito and I meet almost on a weekly basis and talk 
about issues before us, priorities before us, and I appreciate 
very much her suggestion that we have this hearing. I fully 
agree that it is timely and appropriate.
    We are privileged to have a distinguished panel of State 
and local leaders with us this day. Joining us are Nicole 
Majeski, the Secretary of the Delaware Department of 
Transportation. I was saying to Nicole that sitting right out 
here last week was a fellow who used to hold your chair, 
Shailen Bhatt, who has been nominated, as you know, to be U.S. 
Highway Administrator. I thought he did a nice job. We will see 
if we can't move his nomination along.
    We are also joined by Mayor Regina Romero from the city of 
Tucson, Arizona, Senator Kelly asked and encouraged us to 
invite you, so we are happy that you could join us. Jimmy 
Wriston, the Secretary of the West Virginia Department of 
Transportation. This is a home game. He and I were talking 
about our roots, mine in Beckley and his not far from there. 
And Jim Tymon, the Executive Director of the American 
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, 
affectionately known as AASHTO.
    Each of these witnesses will be able to provide a unique 
and diverse perspective, including perspectives from a coastal 
State, a rural mountain State, a city in the desert southwest, 
and an organization representing State departments of 
transportation across the Country.
    I want to thank our staffs for helping to pull together 
what I think is just an excellent panel. I am particularly 
pleased to be able to welcome Nicole Majeski, who leads the 
Delaware Department of Transportation. I welcome Secretary 
Majeski and all of our witnesses here today, each and every 
one. We are delighted to see you, and we look forward to 
hearing from each of you.
    Before we do, though, we are going to hear from our Ranking 
Member and my colleague and partner in this, Senator Capito, 
for her remarks. Senator Capito?

        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, 
          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

    Senator Capito. Yes, thank you, Chairman Carper. I want to 
thank all of our witnesses for being here today.
    I am going to issue a statement. I am going to make my 
statement, and then I have to run to another committee really 
quickly, so I am not running out on you. I will run back. I 
wanted to combine my statements to an opening statement and 
also an especially warm welcome to Secretary Wriston.
    A little bit about him. He is a dedicated public servant 
and he has served the State of West Virginia for over 25 years. 
Last year, he received a much-deserved appointment to serve as 
the Secretary of the West Virginia DOT, and because that 
doesn't keep him busy enough, he also serves as the 
commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Highways.
    Secretary Wriston began his career at the West Virginia DOT 
in the bridge department. You wonder why I am always talking 
about bridges. He then moved to the Engineering Division and, 
for the past 12 years, served as the department's Chief 
Transportation Engineer and Special Program Manager. This 
wealth of experience has positioned him perfectly to lead the 
department.
    The IIJA has provided West Virginia the opportunity to make 
major improvements in our roadway and bridge systems. The work 
of West Virginia DOT has made it possible to move projects 
forward on Corridor H, Coalfields Expressway, Jefferson Road 
expansion in South Charleston, and I-64 St. Albans-Nitro 
Bridge.
    The State has also recently received two RAISE grants for 
the Wheeling streetscape and the Morgantown Greenbag Road 
corridor projects. I appreciate your leadership, Secretary 
Wriston, on these and other projects, and look forward to our 
continued partnership.
    With the Secretary today, we know that one person can't do 
it all, he has with him Nate Tawney, who is the Department of 
Transportation General Counsel, Lorrie Hodges, who is the head 
of West Virginia legislative affairs, been with the department 
for many years, and we have worked together, and also Melissa 
Decker from the Governor's office. Thank you all for being here 
with is.
    We did learn today, because we had a little meeting before, 
that this is the first West Virginia Secretary of 
Transportation to testify before our committee, so we are very 
happy to have that historic occasion.
    It has been a year since the President signed the IIJA into 
law. We promised the American people the IIJA would deliver 
results by improving and expanding our Nation's core 
infrastructure, an investment that we all agreed was long 
overdue. This historic legislation proves that we can come 
together to develop legislation that tackles our Nation's 
pressing challenges in a bipartisan manner.
    I am proud of what we did on this committee. The foundation 
was this committee's bipartisan projects: the Surface 
Transportation Reauthorization Act and the Drinking Water and 
Wastewater Infrastructure Act of 2021, both of those. We had 
unanimous votes coming our of this committee.
    This committee now has the responsibility, I think, of 
ensuring proper implementation of the IIJA. The witnesses here 
today are direct recipients of IIJA funding, which means they 
are perfectly positioned to give us a status update.
    The timing of this conversation is particularly 
appropriate, given that just last week, we had a hearing to 
consider the President's nominee to be Administrator of the 
FHWA, Shailen Bhatt, whom many of you know because he was a 
former DOT administrator in two States, actually.
    I know the staff at the FHWA has been working hard to 
implement the IIJA, standing up new programs, getting funding 
out of the door. But it has taken a long time before we could 
get that nomination up to us. I am with you; I hope we move 
forward on that.
    I have seen some policies from FHWA that contradict the 
IIJA statutory text. I talked to Secretary Buttigieg about this 
just yesterday. I have been told that the agency is neglecting 
to implement certain provisions of the bill, mainly the project 
delivery sections. FHWA began to deviate from the law with the 
release of the December 16th FHWA memorandum to staff, Policy 
on Using the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Resources to Build a 
Better America.
    This memorandum encourages recipients of highway funding to 
``flex'' that funding to transit investments, discourages 
States from moving forward with projects that add highway 
capacity, and imposes a one-size-fits-all approach by 
discouraging transferring program funds to where they are need 
most, which was a flexibility that was intentionally built into 
the law, it is longstanding, to ensure that each State's unique 
needs are met. Our needs in North Dakota and West Virginia are 
much different than what you need in Arizona or California or 
other places.
    Following the memorandum, FHWA released programmatic 
guidance documents for the core highway formulaic programs that 
included the same policy directives represented in the 
memorandum. Beyond contradicting the law, these guidance 
documents have created confusion among States and the FHWA 
division offices and are leading to inconsistent 
implementation.
    The IIJA provided provisions to address climate change, as 
the Chairman said, historically, a climate change dedication in 
the bill, and the resiliency of transportation infrastructure, 
and we did this in a bipartisan way. A greenhouse emissions 
performance measure was debated and ultimately left out of the 
bipartisan IIJA. The Biden Administration decided the law 
didn't go far enough and proposed a rule to impose greenhouse 
gas emissions performance measures and associated targets on 
State departments of transportation and metropolitan planning 
organizations without any authority from this Congress.
    All of these actions follow a common theme at FHWA, which 
is implementing partisan policy priorities they wish had been 
included in the IIJA, and doing so ahead of implementing many 
of the provisions that are actually in the legislation. The 
FHWA staff has done all of this without the accountability of 
having a Senate-confirmed Administrator, which hopefully we are 
going to solve.
    I had questions for Mr. Bhatt on many issues last week. 
They are pressing for us to be able to conduct our oversight 
activities.
    With that in mind, we will look for our witnesses to tell 
us what programs and policies of the IIJA are most beneficial 
in addressing the unique challenges in your State, community, 
and member States. What is going well regarding implementation? 
It is a little bit easier to say everything that isn't going 
well. We need to hear the things that are going well, because 
that is just as important.
    I am interested in how the construction landscape is 
impacting transportation projects. Supply chain, obviously, is 
a big issue, material costs, staffing shortages, Buy America 
policies have also come up.
    The IIJA included unprecedented funding to address the 
needs of our Nation's core infrastructure, our core 
transportation infrastructure. Proper implementation of the law 
is the only way to ensure that this funding will uphold the 
promises that were made to the American people with its 
passage.
    Thank you again for being here. This is important and 
timely. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing.
    Senator Carper. My pleasure. Thank you very much for your 
statement.
    For our next introduction, Senator Kelly is going to be 
introducing a special guest from Tucson.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an 
important hearing on an incredibly important piece of 
legislation, which I know all of us worked very hard on, 
especially you and your Ranking Member, the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law. This law has already made an impact in so 
many communities across the Country and in Arizona, including 
the community led by my friend and one of today's witnesses, 
Tucson Mayor Regina Romero.
    Mayor Romero became the first woman and first Latina to 
serve as mayor of Tucson when she was sworn in in 2019. She has 
a history of breaking barriers, becoming the first member of 
her family to vote and the first in her family to graduate from 
college.
    Before being elected mayor, she served on the Tucson City 
Council for more than a decade, where she championed issues 
like work force development and building the clean energy 
economy. As mayor, she spearheaded the city's efforts to 
rebuild its infrastructure, now supported by the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law.
    Mayor Romero has worked for years to address the worsening 
challenge of PFAS contamination in the city of Tucson's 
groundwater aquifer. We spoke about this yesterday in my office 
and about all the steps that she is taking to address this. 
Addressing this contamination is especially important because 
groundwater is Tucson's secondary supply of drinking water 
after water from the Colorado River. Our infrastructure law 
both makes historic investments in addressing PFAS 
contamination and making our western water infrastructure more 
resilient to drought.
    Mayor Romero has also worked to improve Tucson's 
transportation infrastructure. Just over a month ago, Mayor 
Romero and I were joined in Tucson by Secretary Buttigieg to 
announce that the structurally deficient 22d Street Bridge 
would be awarded a $25 million RAISE grant. Importantly, this 
project not only repairs a failing bridge that right now trucks 
and school buses and ambulances can't drive over, making those 
routes much longer for them, and kids have to take longer to 
get to school, but it also will help better connect several 
communities to the rest of Tucson.
    Mayor Romero has led on regional issues as well, like 
expanding transit infrastructure throughout southern Arizona, 
deploying more low-emissions buses, and even identifying ways 
to better connect Tucson and Phoenix, the two largest cities in 
the State, whether that is by widening I-10 or exploring the 
possibility of an Amtrak expansion between Phoenix and Tucson.
    Mayor Romero is a great example of how mayors, both 
Republicans and Democrats, are taking advantage of the once-in-
a-generation opportunity here provided by our Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law to fix our aging infrastructure and build 
resilient communities for the future.
    I would like to welcome my mayor, Mayor Romero, to today's 
hearing. I will be back a little bit later for my questions. 
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Carper. You are quite welcome. We thank you for the 
welcome to your mayor.
    Let me just ask, before we start our statements and 
questions, we have a million people who live in Delaware. I 
think I have met them all. What is the population of Tucson?
    Mayor Romero. Tucson has 560,000 residents in the city 
proper, and 1.1 million in the metropolitan area.
    Senator Carper. Got it, OK.
    Jimmy, what do you all have down in West Virginia these 
days?
    Mr. Wriston. Our entire State has a population of 1.8 
million, so all of your half a million people are welcome to 
the mountain State.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. Fair enough. We are delighted that our 
Secretary from Delaware has joined us, Nicole Majeski, and my 
recollection, I am trying to think, did you become secretary a 
year ago, in January?
    Ms. Majeski. A year and a half ago.
    Senator Carper. Yes, so how is it going?
    Ms. Majeski. It is going very well, sir.
    Senator Carper. Would you say that this is the best job you 
have ever had?
    Ms. Majeski. It is the best job I have ever had.
    Senator Carper. OK. How is the Governor doing?
    Ms. Majeski. The Governor is doing great.
    Senator Carper. Tell him we said hi.
    Before we turn to our other witnesses, I am just going to 
ask you to lead us off. We will hear your statement, and then 
also hear from Jim, you pronounce your name Tymon, right?
    Mr. Tymon. Yes, sir.
    Senator Carper. There we go. Then we will ask some 
questions.
    Secretary Majeski, please proceed.

STATEMENT OF NICOLE MAJESKI, SECRETARY, DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF 
                         TRANSPORTATION

    Ms. Majeski. Thank you, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member 
Capito, and members of the committee for the opportunity to 
testify today.
    I am Nicole Majeski, and I have the privilege of serving as 
the Secretary of Transportation in Delaware and representing 
our more than 2,500 dedicated employees statewide.
    Senator Carper. Are you joined by any members of your staff 
today?
    Ms. Majeski. I am joined by C.R. McLeod, our Director of 
Community Relations.
    Senator Carper. Would you raise your hand, Mr. McLeod? Mr. 
McLeod used to be my driver. I tell people I drove him. We had 
600,000 miles on my Chrysler Town and Country Minivan, when I 
sold it last year for a dollar. He put about 100,000 of those 
miles on it by himself. C.R., nice to see you. Welcome.
    Ms. Majeski. I would like to thank you, sir, for this 
invitation and for your constant support of the important 
infrastructure work that we are doing in our home State.
    The Delaware Department of Transportation is committed to 
providing excellence in transportation for every trip, every 
mode, every dollar, and everyone.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is a needed investment of 
additional Federal dollars to our transportation 
infrastructure. We are grateful to the Biden Administration and 
to the Members of Congress for this historic program that will 
ensure roads and bridges are safe and well-maintained, our 
communities are better served and connected, and that we are 
making the necessary investments for the electrification of our 
infrastructure and resiliency due to climate change.
    The $1.6 billion in Federal funding that Delaware is 
receiving through BIL, along with our committed State 
resources, will allow us to deliver the largest capital program 
to date. BIL funding is instrumental to the many initiatives in 
Delaware, and I will be highlighting a few of those today.
    As the lowest-lying State, Delaware is seeing firsthand the 
effects of climate change and sea level rise. We are 
increasingly seeing roads in our coastal areas overtopped with 
water not just during significant storm events but due to tidal 
flooding on sunny days. We estimate that a billion dollars' 
worth of our existing infrastructure is vulnerable to the 
impacts of climate change.
    To address this issue, and as part of the State's Climate 
Action Plan that Governor Carney announced last fall, we 
created the Resiliency and Sustainability Division within 
DelDOT to centralize our efforts. This division is focusing on 
incorporating resiliency and sustainability measures in the 
construction and maintenance of our projects and finding ways 
to protect our existing infrastructure.
    The division is also leading our efforts on the 
electrification of our infrastructure and fleet, incorporating 
the use of alternative energy, and minimizing the impacts on 
our environment caused by the transportation system. The newly 
created formula funding through PROTECT, carbon reduction, and 
EV infrastructure will allow us to move forward with these 
critical projects.
    Additionally, Delaware is committed to reducing greenhouse 
gas emissions through our transit fleet. Delaware has benefited 
from Federal discretionary grants supporting low or no-emission 
buses. By the end of this year, 10 percent of our fixed-route 
fleet will be all-electric. Our latest Low-No Grant through the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will allow us to purchase two 
hydrogen buses and install our first hydrogen fueling station. 
Federal discretionary grants have made these investments in 
alternative energy possible.
    Our efforts to improve our transportation systems extend 
beyond a focus on infrastructure alone. DelDOT is committed to 
ensuring that transportation is equitable and accessible for 
everyone. We have recently received two Federal grants for the 
Route 9 corridor near our largest urban area to assist us in 
planning transportation and transit improvements within the 
census-defined low-income area. The Areas of Persistent Poverty 
Grant and the RAISE Grant will allow us to do extensive 
community outreach, plan transit and multimodal connections, 
and look at opportunities to improve safety and public transit 
throughout this corridor.
    Last, I would be remiss if I did not talk about safety. As 
the DOT, safety is our top priority, the safety of the 
traveling public, regardless of the mode that they are using, 
and the safety of our work force that is out on our roads every 
single day.
    Last year was the deadliest year on our roadways in 15 
years, with 139 fatalities. Unfortunately, as of this morning, 
we have 109 fatalities, which is 20 percent higher than where 
we were last year at this time. We continue to work with our 
partners in law enforcement and the Office of Highway Safety to 
implement the recommendations of our State Strategic Highway 
Safety Plan. Over the next 6 years, we will invest hundreds of 
millions of dollars in projects across our State to improve 
safety for all modes, including our most vulnerable users: 
pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists.
    While the Safe Streets and Roads for All program is not 
available for State DOTs, we are pleased to be supporting the 
city of Wilmington on their application. Wilmington is the 
largest urban area in Delaware and has a high concentration of 
walking and bicycling activities while serving as the center of 
Delaware's bus and rail networks. Delaware is unique in that 
the State owns and maintains 90 percent of the roads and 
bridges, so our partnerships with our three counties and 57 
towns and municipalities is critical to improving safety for 
all of our users.
    In closing, under Governor Carney's leadership, we are 
committed to improving safety, reducing our emission levels, 
and developing a multimodal transportation system that is 
equitable. The components of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
will allow us to achieve these goals.
    Thank you, again, for the opportunity to speak before the 
committee today.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Majeski follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
     
    
    Senator Carper. Great, thanks very much, Madam Secretary. 
Welcome, again.
    Now, we are going to hear from the mayor of a town with 
roughly a million people. We are happy to hear from you. 
Welcome. Very nice to meet you. Please proceed.

               STATEMENT OF HON. REGINA ROMERO, 
                     MAYOR, CITY OF TUCSON

    Mayor Romero. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. Good 
morning, buenos dias, Chairman Carper.
    Senator Carper. Buenos dias. Bienvenido.
    Mayor Romero. Buenos dias, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member 
Capito, and members of this committee. Thank you for inviting 
me to participate in today's hearing. I will share my views on 
the transformative impact the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is 
having in Tucson and cities across the Nation.
    Senator Kelly, thank you so much. I appreciate your 
gracious introduction and the way you fight for Tucson.
    Tucson, the 33d largest city in the United States, is home 
to 560,000 residents and nearly 1.1 million people in the 
greater metro area. Our lands have been stewarded by the Tohono 
O'odham and Pascua Yaqui people since time immemorial.
    Through BIL funding, Tucson is building infrastructure and 
investments that heal historic wounds, reconnect communities, 
and address the challenges that result from being on the front 
lines of climate change. My vision for Tucson's future is an 
equitable, climate-resilient, desert city that sustains itself 
through conservation, investment, and good policy.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law this committee so 
skillfully negotiated is crucial to meeting our goals. The 
Nation benefits when Congress sends money directly to cities. 
We know how to get it done.
    Just last month, Senator Kelly and I joined Transportation 
Secretary Buttigieg in Tucson where he announced a $25 million 
RAISE grant for Tucson's 22d Street Bridge. Using this grant, 
local, and regional funds, a structurally deficient bridge will 
be replaced. We will improve the quality of life for Tucsonans 
who have lived with safety risks, heavy trucks in their 
neighborhoods, few options for non-motorized travel, and 
separation from other neighborhoods.
    We will improve safety around railroad infrastructure, 
reduce crashes and emergency response times, and mitigate other 
safety issues. We will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the 
vehicle miles travelled, addressing climate resiliency. And we 
will improve the ability of Union Pacific Railroad to move 
goods more efficiently, helping to address global supply 
challenges. Thank you to the US Department of Transportation 
for selecting this project.
    There are tremendous opportunities available in the BIL, 
including resources for EV infrastructure, extending 
environmental remediation and clean energy investments, and a 
streetcar-bus rapid transit expansion. We will apply for these 
funds and appreciate Congress for increasing the transit 
funding.
    However, today, I must focus on the greatest challenges to 
our water security, PFAS contamination and the persistent 
effects of drought that threaten our Colorado River supply. It 
is important to understand the history and specifics of 
groundwater contamination in Tucson to make clear how critical 
BIL-funded projects are to securing our water supply, 
supporting our economy, and protecting public health.
    Tucson's diverse water supply portfolio includes the 
Colorado River, which is experiencing unprecedented drought. 
This makes us increasingly reliant on our groundwater supply 
that is being polluted by PFAS, a forever chemical.
    In addition to PFAS, residents of Tucson's south side have 
been historically impacted by TCE and DX, believed to 
contribute to health concerns, including cancer and heart 
disease. We are spending $1 million a year to treat PFAS and 
have already spent almost $50 million so far to deal with this 
impact from our own ratepayers, who did not cause this issue.
    Tucson has lost over 10 percent of our water supply to PFAS 
contamination, and now, parts of our system rely solely on 
their backup supply. There is no redundancy. We must protect 
our water. Tucson is a sustainable desert city because we use 
reclaimed water for non-potable uses, but that water also is 
affected by PFAS, which, in our closed-basin system, puts the 
entire water system at risk. We need to act now.
    The funding available in the BIL is critical to solving 
this need. We need DOT to move fast and for EPA to push for the 
data and assistance we need. Tucson is ready to be the 
sustainable, thriving desert city of the future.
    Thank you for allowing me to speak about how BIL funding is 
making a difference to us. I welcome any questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mayor Romero follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
     
    
    Senator Carper. Mayor Romero, thanks so much for your 
testimony and for your leadership. I am delighted that you are 
here.
    Now, we are going to turn to Secretary Wriston. Mr. 
Secretary, you are recognized to proceed. We will ask Mr. Tymon 
to do the same thing, and then we will ask some questions. Go 
ahead.

  STATEMENT OF JIMMY WRISTON, SECRETARY, P.E., WEST VIRGINIA 
                  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    Mr. Wriston. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 
Capito. I am delighted to be visiting the shining city on the 
hill today to talk to you about West Virginia's perspective.
    In particular, I do want to focus on exactly what Senator 
Capito said. I want to focus on what is working. I would be 
remiss if I didn't report on some of the difficulties that we 
are having and the challenges that we need to overcome, so I am 
going to do a little bit of that, too.
    I can tell you that I am particularly grateful for this 
committee. This committee has done a herculean task. They 
produced the most impactful transportation law that this 
Country has ever seen, I believe. This is an opportunity to 
exceed the great achievement of building the interstates across 
the Country in the last century.
    Now, the real work has to happen, and we have to move fast. 
We have to move together. We have to form partnerships to get 
this done, get it done efficiently, and take advantage of this 
great opportunity before us. We, as transportation officials, 
have to communicate, work together, and really pull the rope in 
the same direction. We have to follow the law; we have to 
understand the guidelines. We have to move within those 
guidelines to achieve a goal, not just to go through an 
exercise or a bureaucratic process, but to move the ball toward 
a predictable result that we all want to take care of.
    The mission of the IIJA is quite clear. We want to deliver 
a safe, efficient transportation system while addressing 
resiliency, equity, and environmental concerns. These things we 
can do. The Department of Transportation officials across the 
Country have been doing these very things and working toward 
these things for years and years without the resources to do 
them and to actually achieve the results. This is our 
opportunity to do so.
    West Virginia has the sixth-largest highway system in the 
Country, little West Virginia, the sixth-largest highway 
system. Like our good friends in Delaware, we take care of the 
majority of these roads. Nearly 94 percent of all the roads, 
the State is responsible for.
    We have over 7,100 bridges in West Virginia. Our bridges 
are safe. I need to make sure that everyone understands that. 
The modern inspection program was born right there in West 
Virginia, much like you were, Senator Carper.
    Senator Carper. So, it is young.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Wriston. The modern bridge inspection program rose out 
of the ashes of tragedy in Point Pleasant in 1967.
    Senator Carper. I remember that well.
    Mr. Wriston. Since then, there is no transportation person 
in the Country that doesn't know that story, and no bridge 
engineer that doesn't understand the weight of their 
responsibility. I am saying that our bridges are safe, but they 
need attention, and they need care, and we have to move forward 
along that and take great opportunity with this.
    The IIJA, I must admit, my first read-through of the bill 
just before it passed, I was a little skeptical of the Bridge 
Program. The Bridge Program works exceptionally well in West 
Virginia. The minimum of 15 percent for the off-system bridges, 
that worried me a little bit until I went to my bridge 
management system and had my great experts to run this for me 
and tell me, 15.2 percent of the bridges in West Virginia are 
the off-system, so that 15 percent minimum, it is right there. 
We are going to be able to operate within the guidelines of 
this Bridge Program and take care of all the bridges that are 
rated poor that are off-system. We think we can do them all in 
this timeframe with funding.
    Senator Carper. That is great news.
    Mr. Wriston. I think this is, as Shelley told you, I am a 
bridge engineer at heart, but I have had to broaden my view a 
little bit when taking this position. The Bridge Program works 
well with us.
    You know the rule provisions are tailored specifically for 
the great State of West Virginia, and we are going to take 
advantage of each and every one of those. We do have much 
concern about some of the discretionary programs. The formula 
programs work well. They are going to work well across the 
Country. I can firmly and confidently predict today, a year 
from now, we will be talking about great successes with the 
formula portions of this law.
    I will just as confidently predict absolute and nearly 
abstract failure on the discretionary side. We have got to do 
better with our Federal partners in these agencies. We need 
consistent direction, we need consistent guidelines, and we 
have to be able to understand them. The FHWA divisions need to 
be able to bring forth guidance in these areas that are 
consistent State to State, so that when we meet at an AASHTO 
conference, we all have the same information and the same 
guidance and we know that we can plan and work together.
    I understand I am working just a little long. I do have to 
mention the bumblebees on my great Corridor H project. This is 
a classic case of inconsistency in a Federal agency. We have 
worked diligently for years and years on Corridor H. This is 
why it is taking decades to finish this job. This is exactly 
what is happening today. We need consistent guidance. We need 
to do the front-end work on the front end, take care of these 
issues.
    A capture of two bumblebees 200 feet off of my studied 
corridor should not add years and decades to a project. It just 
cannot happen. We are going to fail abstractly if we don't make 
sure that we are all on the same page, get the same guidelines 
together, and communicate honestly and openly. Give us 
direction, work with us. We depend on these Federal agencies. 
We look at them not only as partners, but advocates for the 
State. I think they have lost their way.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Wriston follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
 
    
    Senator Carper. Thank you. To your last point, Senator 
Capito and I, our colleagues were well-pleased with the 
testimony of our witness, the nominee to be the Federal Highway 
Administrator, Shailen Bhatt. To the extent that we can get him 
confirmed and in place, it is taking too long to nominate him, 
but to the extent that we can get him confirmed, sooner rather 
that later, having been not just Secretary of DelDOT in our 
State, but also Secretary of Colorado. He worked in the State 
of Kentucky, at USDOT, so I think he can be very helpful on 
some of this stuff, as he is pretty good at common sense.
    I am tempted to say the best for last, Jim, you are welcome 
to chime in. Thanks for joining us today, and please proceed.

     STATEMENT OF JIM TYMON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN 
   ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS

    Mr. Tymon. Thank you, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member 
Capito, and members of the committee. I do want to thank you 
for the opportunity to appear today to discuss implementation 
of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    My name is Jim Tymon, and I serve as the Executive Director 
of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials. It is my honor to testify on behalf of our members, 
the State Departments of Transportation for all 50 States, the 
District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
    First, let my start by saying that AASHTO applauds this 
committee for your leadership in the development and enactment 
of IIJA. We know that your work on earlier bills, like ATIA, 
laid the foundation for IIJA.
    The IIJA lines up extremely well with AASHTO's core policy 
principles adopted by our board of directors in 2019. It is a 
5-year bill. It prioritizes formula funding to State DOTs, and 
it provides States the flexibility to work with their local 
partners to choose the projects that meet the needs of their 
constituents. It recognizes that the transportations needs in 
Delaware are different than the needs in West Virginia, as well 
as in Arizona, and the program provides the flexibility for it 
to be applicable in all of those areas. We know that this 
legislation was the culmination of bipartisan negotiations in 
this committee. As such, AASHTO members have been working with 
USDOT to encourage them to implement IIJA in a manner that is 
consistent with the letter of the law and the negotiated 
balance of policy priorities that were necessary to get this 
bill to the President's desk.
    This morning, I would like to address the following topics: 
highway safety, discretionary grant programs, Buy America, and 
the impact of inflation on delivering projects.
    Last year, nearly 43,000 people died in traffic crashes 
nationwide. This is unacceptable, and we all must to better to 
address this crisis. Thanks to this committee's leadership, the 
IIJA increased funding and flexibility for the Highway Safety 
Improvement Program, which allows States to expand their 
efforts to implement projects and programs that improve highway 
safety.
    But it is also important to note that States utilize 
funding from nearly every Federal Highway category to make 
safety improvements. The overall increase in funding in IIJA 
will also provide State DOTs with additional resources to help 
reverse this trend and make progress toward out ultimate goal 
of zero roadway fatalities.
    Another significant aspect of IIJA is the historic increase 
in funding for discretionary grants. We believe the efficient 
and effective delivery of the IIJA's discretionary programs is 
critical to achieving some of Congress's most important 
priorities. Many of these programs are open to local entities 
that may struggle with the complex set of rules that go along 
with receiving Federal Highway funding. We encourage USDOT to 
simplify the requirements for all of their programs and 
eliminate as much bureaucratic red tape as possible. This will 
enable all grantees to be more successful, whether they are 
cities, counties, or State DOTs.
    Before I close, I would like to spend a few minutes 
discussing some of the challenges that we are already seeing 
with the implementation of IIJA. AASHTO and the State DOTs 
strongly support the intent behind the inclusion of the new Buy 
America requirements in IIJA. The expansion of America's 
manufacturing capacity and the creation of new domestic jobs 
will encourage economic growth and make us a stronger Nation.
    At the same time, we firmly believe it is in the public 
interest to implement these new requirements in a way that 
allows for the timely and successful delivery of critical 
infrastructure. The bottom line is, there are some of these 
materials and products that are used in transportation projects 
underway right now that are not made in the U.S., so 
transportation agencies need additional time to integrate these 
new requirements into their program and project delivery 
processes, and our private sector partners need additional time 
to revamp their business plans to be able to produce these 
products and materials domestically. Without that additional 
time, these projects may be delayed, and some may even be 
canceled.
    Finally, State DOTs continue to struggle with the 
unprecedented impacts of inflation. Huge increases in the cost 
of construction materials and severe supply chain disruptions 
are driving up the cost of projects and have the potential to 
wipe out the entire funding increase provided to State DOTs 
through IIJA. This will have negative effects throughout the 
industry. But the impacts of this will be especially 
devastating to small and disadvantaged business enterprises 
that lack the resources to absorb these unexpected cost 
increases.
    This is one of the reasons that AASHTO and 27 other 
national organizations support S. 3011, cosponsored by Senators 
Padilla and Cornyn. This bill would clarify that States and 
localities can use ARPA funds for transportation projects and 
to cover those incremental cost increases that we are seeing 
due to inflation. We feel strongly that Congress should send 
that bill to the President's desk before the end of the 
calendar year.
    In summary, AASHTO and its members are thrilled for the 
chance to implement this historic piece of legislation and to 
deliver public benefits to every corner of the Country. Thank 
you again for the opportunity to testify. I am happy to answer 
any questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Tymon follows:]
  [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
   
    
    
    
    
    Senator Carper. Thank you so much for that testimony.
    I am going to start off with Secretary Majeski. You 
mentioned the sad increase in deaths on our roads and highways 
and bridges in Delaware. For our other colleagues, I-95 is 
being reconstructed right through Wilmington, Delaware. It is 
an incredible project. The major highway in our Country 
literally goes right through Wilmington, Delaware.
    We have seen a loss of life there because of vehicles that 
are going too fast, despite the great efforts, herculean 
efforts of the Secretary and her team to address that. I was 
asked today on the train by several passengers, thank God we 
have the train because it enables us to move expeditiously up 
and down the corridor. I told people, they said, when will I-95 
reconstruction be done? I said, I think by the end of this 
year. Was that good guidance or not?
    Ms. Majeski. That is correct, sir. We hope to have all the 
major work completed by the end of this year. There will still 
be, as we call it, punch list items that will continue into 
next year. But the major impacts to the roadway will hopefully 
be completed by the end of this year.
    Senator Carper. Thanks for all the work that has gone on 
there and for your leadership, as well.
    I think it was in March of this year, our Governor, John 
Carney, announced that Delaware was going to join 13 other 
States in adopting California's zero emission vehicle 
regulations, which will make it easier for Delaware drivers to 
be able to purchase electric vehicles and save households 
anywhere from $500 to $1,000 a year on fuel costs.
    My question is, how is DelDOT supporting those commitments, 
and how will the funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
for transportation electrification align to support those 
efforts?
    Ms. Majeski. Yes, thank you. We are working with our 
partner agency, DNREC, on developing our strategic plan on EV 
deployment throughout the State. Our NEVI plan was recently 
approved, so we are excited to be able to get started on phase 
one of that, which will focus on our alternative fuel 
corridors. Then the next phase, we will work on filling the 
gaps within our transportation system to make sure that we are 
providing EV charging to not just on the main highways, but 
throughout the State, so that communities and neighborhoods 
have access to the EV charging as well.
    We are one of the partners working, like I said, with 
DNREC, but also with the electric providers to be able to make 
sure that we have the utility access and coordination to be 
able to deploy this electrification throughout the State.
    Senator Carper. Thanks. Madam Secretary, would you share 
with our committee the Delaware Department of Transportation's 
experience in working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
to ensure that transportation projects do not further imperil 
endangered species? How does proactive collaboration and 
conservation with the Fish and Wildlife Service help avoid 
project delays?
    Ms. Majeski. It is very critical that we have a good 
working relationship with the agency. We try to work 
collaboratively with all of our Federal agencies, especially, 
as my colleague mentioned, whenever an endangered species or 
any type of issue might come up. We want to be good stewards of 
the environment, and we want to protect our natural resources.
    Having that partnership with them is critical, especially 
if there is some sort of endangered species or there are 
limitations to when construction can occur. We have to be able 
to plan our projects accordingly so that we know when, in fact, 
construction can happen, so that we are not disturbing certain 
areas and species throughout the State. That partnership is 
critical. So far, so good, I will say, but there is a lot of 
planning and coordination. We have a 6-year capital plan that 
we develop, and so we are working in partnership with them to 
identify any potential conflicts that we may have and so we can 
adjust our construction timing accordingly.
    Senator Carper. OK, thank you.
    Question, if I could, for the mayor, Mayor Romero. Thanks 
again for your testimony especially on transportation equity 
and climate-related issues and your work to revitalize 
communities while also reducing transportation emissions. I 
believe that the funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law, especially when paired with new funding made available in 
the Inflation Reduction Act, will make it possible for cities 
to achieve their ambitious climate goals and make long-lasting 
and transformative changes.
    Question: how are you partnering with community-based 
organizations to ensure that they are aware of and have the 
technical capacity to access the opportunities made available 
in these two laws, and what could Federal agencies do to help 
facilitate local capacity building and enable city progress on 
climate and equity goals?
    Mayor Romero. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The city of Tucson 
has a long history of having extensive community engagement 
actions in our city. For example, right now, we are putting 
together a Climate Action Plan and making sure that we are 
getting to each and every community and in different forums.
    I believe that with the newer funds in both the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law and in the Inflation Reduction Act, we will 
have to receive technical assistance, maybe even for cities. 
The city of Tucson has a super competent team in our Department 
of Transportation and Mobility and other department. But 
technical assistance for us to be able to partner with other 
organizations in our city to be able to navigate the new 
programs that will hopefully exist for EV infrastructure and 
for electrification purposes, as well as being able to prepare 
and collaborate with other jurisdictions like the State and 
Pima County and the city of Tucson in partnering together to 
navigate the new programs that will exist for us to be able to 
electrify and expand different modes of transportation in our 
city.
    Capacity building, we were just at the Department of Energy 
yesterday. I think that another area to help us navigate is the 
partnerships with community colleges and universities as we 
create the green jobs of the future with the Inflation 
Reduction Act especially. Because we are moving from, for 
example, in Pima County, the city of Tucson, we have Pima 
College training automotive techs with the new technology of EV 
vehicles. I think that would be a best practice to be able to 
offer technical assistance and to move fast so that the cities 
can tap into the funds, receive the grants, and put the 
projects to work.
    Senator Carper. Good. What you are doing there is actually 
something that reflects in what we are doing in Southern 
Delaware in Georgetown with Del Tech in terms of training auto 
techs, and making sure that not only can they fix diesel and 
gasoline powered vehicles, but also electric vehicles.
    I am going to turn it over to my colleague, Senator Capito. 
I want to telegraph my next pitch when we come back, if we have 
time for another question or two. The question I am going to 
ask all of you is, what kind of advice, if you could give some 
advice to Secretary Buttigieg, what kind of advice would you be 
giving to him at this point in time. Senator Capito?
    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, thank you all 
for your opening statements.
    Secretary Wriston, I wanted to ask about when we were 
negotiating the Surface Transportation Reauthorization in this 
committee, we talked a lot about greenhouse gas performance 
measures, and we decided not to give the FHWA that authority. 
But they have now, FHWA has released a proposed rulemaking to 
establish a greenhouse gas emissions performance measure 
requiring States to set declining targets.
    For our State, what is your reaction to that? Have you seen 
that? What kind of measures, since we have a diffuse 
population, obviously, our emissions are going to be a lot 
less, and so to improve those is going to be more difficult for 
us. That is the way I see it. How do you see this?
    Mr. Wriston. Yes. Here we go again. The law is clear. That 
provision is not in it. Transportation is not opposed to 
working toward reducing our greenhouse gas emissions; of course 
we are not. We are going to do anything and everything we can, 
which is exactly why the flexibility that is ingrained in the 
formula programs are so important, to be able to flex just the 
carbon reduction program.
    The rules told us clearly that we could flex up to 50 
percent of that bucket to a more flexible category. We did in 
West Virginia. The FHWA's division offices, they ran the gamut 
with guidance on that across the Country, with the 52 DOTs. 
Some States were told they could; some States were told they 
couldn't. Ours was approved for 3 months while everyone else 
was still hearing that it couldn't be done.
    The greenhouse gases, the DOTs are absolutely not opposed 
to this, but we need the flexibility to do things that will get 
a result. By moving that money into a different bucket, you 
give me the flexibility to take a holistic approach, to look at 
the overall environmental concerns and put together 
comprehensive plans to address them.
    Yes, we are going to have to use a little innovation. We 
are going to have to use some technology to deliver these 
things, absolutely. But transportation is not the worst 
offender in the world with greenhouse gases. We can take care 
of a portion of this. Transportation is not the solution to 
zero greenhouse gases. It is just not true, and it is never 
going to be true.
    We can work on this. We need flexibility to do it. A firm 
performance measure, absolutely not. The minute you give me a 
performance measure, you are telling me upfront, you are going 
to set a bar, in many cases, arbitrarily, and I am going to 
have to move that needle over time or I am going to get a 
penalty somewhere.
    Senator Capito. Right. So, it is consistency. I think that 
is what we are hearing. Mr. Tymon, what are you hearing, since 
you hear from all different? The consistency, actually, we 
emphasized this last week with the nominee to say that one 
State says yes, one State says no on exactly the same types of 
provisions or requirements. What are you hearing in a more 
general sense on this issue?
    Mr. Tymon. On the greenhouse gas?
    Senator Capito. Greenhouse gas, or the inconsistency of the 
district directors.
    Mr. Tymon. I would say, first, on the greenhouse gas 
emissions, the rulemaking is currently pending. We are putting 
together our comments. We have States probably all over the map 
on this. We have several States that will support it and a lot 
of States that will be opposed to it.
    We, as an organization, were opposed to it during the Obama 
administration when they came out with this provision mainly 
because, again, it wasn't spelled out in the law that this is 
something that they should do. With this one, I think we 
clearly have concerns about as Secretary Wriston mentioned. The 
declining targets, I think, is a problem. That is an approach 
that is not used in any of the other performance measures that 
we have.
    Then, again, the ability for State DOTs to be able to 
influence this specifically, I agree with Secretary Wriston. 
Every State in the Country wants to do everything they can to 
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But State DOTs are probably 
limited in how they can impact this reduction specifically.
    Overall, I do think that it is a concern that we do seem to 
get different guidance from State to State on different issues. 
I think this example on the transferability of certain funds 
from different programs really came to light this summer. 
Several States had asked their division offices for the ability 
to transfer funds. Some were told yes; some were told no. Some 
were told yes, but then were sent a stern letter saying that 
they shouldn't do it. That is a concern for us. We have 
communicated that with FHWA and USDOT. They are aware that that 
is a concern.
    Senator Capito. OK, good. Thank you.
    On the guidance, and I only have a little bit of time left, 
but on the guidance that was put out by the FHWA, in terms of 
the memorandum that really discourages new construction, you 
want to go to maintenance, you want to go to transit, you want 
to go to bike paths and other things of that nature. How does 
that impact, is that impacting you, Secretary Wriston? Are you 
actually seeing it impacting your ability to get approval for 
certain projects?
    Mr. Wriston. Well, it certainly is. I have many of these 
projects with the preliminary designs done, particularly in 
bridges. If I need to add a sidewalk arbitrarily to a bridge, 
whether I need it or not, then I have to go back to the design 
and literally redesign the steel that holds that bridge up. It 
has to be resized.
    Conversely, going the other way, if I can't add capacity to 
my interstates, well, what am I doing to the next generation if 
I spend tremendous resources on a resurfacing job on I-79 in 
West Virginia and don't take care of the added capacity I know 
I am going to need in 12 or 15 years? It makes planning 
impossible.
    Senator Capito. OK. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Thanks, Senator Capito.
    Senator Whitehouse has joined us, and we are happy that he 
is here. Sheldon, please go right ahead.
    Senator Whitehouse. Thanks.
    Let me first ask a question of Mayor Romero. I visited your 
sister city, Phoenix, not long ago, and was told by the 
emergency management city director that they were having to 
redo the staffing for all of their first responders to deal 
with the problem of operating in extreme heat environments, 
that you needed to have more people available so that you could 
rotate somebody through a fire or a crash site or whatever it 
was much more rapidly.
    In addition to the additional personnel required for that, 
they also had to have cooling crews ready to deploy when people 
were becoming overheated and needed overheating first aid. Are 
you seeing that in your city as well?
    Mayor Romero. Excellent question, Senator. Thank you. 
Climate change in Arizona is not as tangible as we see in other 
places, like hurricanes and flooding. What climate change is 
doing to our State is that we are living in the 22d year of a 
drought. We are concerned about our water supply through the 
Colorado River, and we are experiencing more days 100 plus 
degree weather throughout the State.
    In Tucson, the way we are addressing climate change is 
through acting. We are putting together a climate action plan, 
working with the community to put it together. But we also need 
Federal funds to be able to support he plans that we have as 
cities in order to protect our residents from climate change.
    We are seeing 100 plus degree days more and more throughout 
Arizona. We are experiencing wildfires that are increasingly 
coming closer to our urban cores. We are seeing more asthma and 
especially seniors dying from heat-related illnesses. Our 
workers, I would say, our first responders, our construction 
workers, people that have to work outside are at greater risks 
of heat exhaustion in our State.
    Senator Whitehouse. Particularly when they have to wear 
protective gear to accomplish their mission successfully.
    Mayor Romero. They do, or have less hours of work, or we 
would have to change the way we deliver services as a city. 
That is very expensive.
    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you. Let me stop you there so 
that I can ask Secretary Majeski a question. I really 
appreciate it.
    Mayor Romero. Thank you.
    Senator Whitehouse. On the subject of planning, as the 
Mayor mentioned, Rhode Island, like Delaware, is a coastal 
State, and we are facing basically having to redraw our 
coastline with current sea level rise projections. You 
mentioned a billion dollars in infrastructure just in Delaware 
alone at risk.
    Could you let me know how much of that you think is related 
to sea level rise risk? If you could, also comment on the need 
for planning in local communities who don't necessarily have 
the skill set to plan ahead, the tax-based problems they are 
required to confront when they do that planning and have to 
concede that things are going to be quite different, and the 
difference between wreck and repair versus plan and protect as 
strategies, and the additional expense that that creates 
upfront for our coastal communities?
    Ms. Majeski. We are seeing the direct impacts of sea level 
rise and climate change. It is real in our State. We have about 
250 miles of roadway that is overtopped with water pretty much 
year-round on sunny days, and a lot of that is due to the tidal 
flooding that we are seeing. So it is not just those strong 
storm effects. It is everyday flooding that we are seeing on 
sunny days.
    We are kind of doing a two-pronged approach here. We have 
now, with the Federal funding, we are able to kind of do 
studying. We just launched the SR1 Coastal Resiliency Study 
actually last night, where we are looking at the entire Route 1 
corridor from the beaches to the Maryland line. Because that 
stretch of roadway not only has the ocean, but it has the Bay. 
It is very vulnerable. We are looking at long-range planning, 
what we can do there.
    We are also partnering with the local universities on 
different material types and different things that we could be 
doing. We have a lot of our local small communities that are 
impacted by this flooding, as well, and so that planning and 
coordination with the local communities. We have a road in 
Bowers Beach, South Bowers. There are 30 homes. They have one 
way in and one way out, and it is overtopped with water almost 
every single day. So we are going to be using some experimental 
pavement, some pervious pavement, so we can see if that works 
so we can help this community.
    All of those things, it is going to take a lot of effort 
from us. We are partnering, as I mentioned, with the 
universities on doing roadway flooding sensors so that we can 
have better communication with our first responders and our 
school districts, as well.
    Lots of planning coordination, trying different material, 
trying to be innovative to protect the existing roadway that we 
have. But as we are planning these future projects, taking sea 
level rise into account as to what the road design is, what 
elevation should it be, and then protecting and working with 
those local communities is critical.
    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you very much.
    If I could just mention one other thing. It is not a 
question, but we just got an $82 million grant for the bridge 
that connects Aquidneck Island with the mainland through 
Jamestown. It is called the Pell Bridge after our former 
colleague, Senator Claiborne Pell.
    With climate change and with changes in humidity and 
temperature, there is more intrusion of moisture into the 
cabling and structure of the bridge, so both that bridge and 
the Mount Hope Bridge between Aquidneck Island, Portsmouth, and 
Bristol, we are having to put in very expensive repairs to 
protect those bridges to dehumidify the inside of the bridge. 
That was not something we had to think about a few years ago.
    So it is beyond just coastal flooding. Even things that 
look like really strong, fixed, stable, iconic pieces of 
infrastructure are affected, and thank goodness we got the 
biggest grant to Rhode Island transportation in Rhode Island 
history to help with that problem. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for all those points, Sheldon. 
Next is Senator Cramer. Senator Cramer, welcome. Thanks for 
coming early and staying late. Thank you.
    Senator Cramer. Thank you. I wouldn't miss this show for 
anything. We have four really good witnesses.
    Senator Carper. Should we charge admission, what do you 
think? Maybe next time?
    Senator Cramer. I wouldn't go that far. Maybe next time.
    I have to say, listening particularly to the three local 
and State officials, your stories and your reflections and your 
experiences reflect the diversity of our great Country. I think 
serve as testimony, each together and certainly all together, 
each individual and all together, as to why flexibility is so 
darned important.
    When I hear about drought in Arizona and flooding in the 
Northeast, we hear from Sheldon and Senator Carper and our 
friends from the coast about your situation a lot. Obviously, 
the mountains, we have a diverse Country. Our geology is 
different. Our hydrology is different. Our demography is 
different. We are all different. This just speaks volumes to 
the importance of federalism and States having more control.
    All of that said, a couple of things. I was, tempted, 
frankly, to give all five of my minutes to Secretary Wriston 
because I want to hear the whole bumblebee story. But I have a 
pretty good sense of what it is about. I have a pretty good 
sense of what it is about, and it too speaks to the importance 
of getting God's human creatures higher up the food chain, if 
you will, of importance at the bureaucracy.
    You said something interesting, Mr. Wriston, that I want to 
explore a little bit. In referencing the lack of a specific 
greenhouse gas rule, you said that the law is clear, it is not 
in there, or something to that effect. The problem with the 
bureaucracy is, what they have figured out is most of the time, 
they do what we require them to, but not even that, all of the 
time. But they almost never pay attention until we tell them 
what they are prohibited from doing. Do you know what I mean?
    So, the lack of a prohibition to them is license to do 
whatever they want, and that is what you are experiencing in a 
lot of these things. In fact, Mr. Tymon, we are seeing lots, I 
have noticed, out of Transportation and the DOT, lots of 
Federal registry notices. There is an uptick in all of that, at 
a time when, I love what you said Madam Mayor, when you were 
talking about all your concerns, and you said, ``and do it 
fast.'' Fast isn't in the bureaucratic mindset.
    I want to go to something we haven't talked about that is 
law, that was in the law specifically, and that is the One 
Agency Decision rule. The reason for One Agency Decision, and 
why I think it works so well, and I spent 10 years as a 
regulator in North Dakota, One Agency Decision is not to cut 
corners. It is not designed to diminish the integrity of 
oversight or environmental protection. In fact, not at all.
    I think you can do it much, much better, much, much faster 
with more efficiency and integrity with One Agency 
Decisionmaking because if you do things, rather than doing them 
chronologically, if you do them chronologically rather than 
concurrently, you are going to add time. But if you do it 
concurrently, you are going to add synergy, not just 
efficiency, but synergy, and that is what makes sense to me.
    The bureaucracy likes chronological because it serves their 
interests best. That way, every agency can take as long as they 
want to do a simple thing, and then pass it to another agency 
to take as long as they want to do a simple thing. We are 
living at a time when we have work force shortages. It is 
getting harder to attract people to public service, just as it 
is to the private sector. I think the One Agency Decision rule 
is not being utilized, and I think it could be the answer to a 
lot of your challenges.
    I would be interested, starting with you, Mr. Tymon, from 
the Association's standpoint. Again, you represent a lot of 
diversity, and we see great examples of it sitting right next 
to you. Couldn't the One Agency Decision become part of the 
solution?
    Mr. Tymon. Thank you for that question, Senator.
    I do think that every State DOT in the Country supports 
finding ways to expedite the approval of projects and doing it 
in a responsible way where we are not harming the environment. 
I do think that the Federal One Decision provisions do carve 
out a path for there to be a more efficient decisionmaking 
process. We have been advocating for 10, 15 years for a more 
concurrent review process as opposed to consecutive. This 
provides a good foundation for us to move forward in that 
direction.
    Senator Cramer. OK, really quickly then. You talked about 
the grants, the discretionary grants, we have heard about that, 
the importance of the formula. Again, can we simplify even the 
discretionary grant programs by just applying the basics of the 
formula? They are coming out with more ways to make it harder 
rather than facilitating them, in my view.
    Mr. Tymon. Well, one thing that the Administration did do 
for several of the discretionary grants is they came up with a 
common application. I have to give them a lot of credit for 
that, because I think that did help for people that were 
potential grantees, they were able to just go to one 
application. But it wasn't for every discretionary grant that 
they have out there.
    I think that is going to be a challenge for this 
Administration moving forward, given the size of the 
discretionary grants and the number of them, how can they do 
that in an efficient manner to process those applications and 
get the dollars out on the street? I think that is going to be 
very tough over the next four and a half years.
    Senator Cramer. All of the directors are nodding their 
heads. Thank you all for being here.
    Senator Carper. Thank you.
    We have been joined by Senator Padilla from California. 
Senator Padilla, welcome. Good to see you. You are recognized.
    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Right on time, no 
less.
    Colleagues, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law created the 
PROTECT program to fund projects that improve the resiliency of 
our surface transportation infrastructure. I was proud to 
author language that added wildfires to the list of natural 
disasters relevant to resiliency improvement grants under the 
PROTECT program. It made vegetation management practices and 
transportation rights of way eligible for grant funding and 
prioritizes resiliency improvements grants for addressing the 
vulnerabilities of surface transportation assets with a high 
risk of failure due to the impacts of wildfires, clearly, 
something that is increasingly common in California, as well as 
in your State, Mayor Romero.
    My question is to you: as the Tucson region faces continued 
wildfire threats, why are the resources that the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law provides central to improving the resiliency 
of our surface transportation infrastructure from wildfires and 
other natural disasters and climate vulnerabilities?
    Mayor Romero. Thank you, Senator Padilla, and thank you for 
adding wildfires to the list of natural disasters in the 
PROTECT program.
    The city of Tucson benefits from having two incredible 
national parks on both the east side of our city and the west 
boundary of our city. We have beautiful mountain ranges 
surrounding our city. We have seen wildfires in our mountain 
ranges become dangerously close to homes and residents in our 
city.
    At the same time, we must address wildland-urban interface 
issues, including risks of fires, floods, and mudslides and 
their potential impacts on both private property and public 
infrastructure.
    This is why the city of Tucson supports the inclusion of 
the PROTECT program in the BIL. It will help ensure that our 
infrastructure can stand up to such events to protect life, 
health, and property. Specifically in Tucson, we are a center 
for logistics in our region. We are 60 miles from the Mexican 
border, we have rail, we have air, we have an interState that 
connects our entire State from Tucson. Commercial activity and 
supply chain shipments move through Tucson every hour.
    Therefore, infrastructure failures in Tucson due to climate 
change can negatively impact national economic and security 
interests. The costs of these failures can be significant, so 
we need to make sure that we are putting that resiliency on our 
infrastructure so that we don't have to pay billions of dollars 
to repair. We need to be able to protect beforehand.
    Senator Padilla. I appreciate your highlighting the supply 
chain impacts, not just local geography, but once you are 
impacting supply chain and logistics of goods moving in 
addition to people moving, then we are all feeling it 
indirectly.
    My next question is in the area of flexibility and 
delivering emergency relief projects. Under current 
regulations, the Federal Highway Administration is allowed to 
being clawing back emergency relief funding if projects do not 
initiate construction by the end of the second Fiscal Year 
following the year in which the disaster occurred.
    Now, while States can apply for extensions provided in 1-
year increments for delays caused by the need for extensive 
environmental evaluation, litigation or complex right-of-way 
acquisition, the Federal Highway Administration has previously 
denied such requests for a number of projects to repair 
disaster damage. To help ensure communities that are impacted 
by natural disasters have adequate time to utilize Federal 
funds to repair their transportation infrastructure, I led a 
bipartisan letter earlier this year urging DOT to update 
emergency program regulations to extend the construction start 
deadline by 2 years.
    The question is for Mr. Tymon. Why is this proposed update 
important to ensuring State departments of transportation have 
practical requirements in a reasonable period of time to carry 
out their significant and often complex projects to repair 
transportation assets after a disaster?
    Mr. Tymon. Thank you for that question, Senator. We are 
hearing from several States, and we have seen this over the 
last five to 8 years, that several States are getting into this 
situation where the post-disaster recovery is such a complex 
effort that they need additional time beyond those 2 years to 
be able to plan and permit the project in a way that makes the 
most sense for that specific situation.
    So we certainly support your efforts to extend that 
timeline to 4 years. We think that is the best approach. This 
2-year approach may have worked well 20, 30 years ago. But 
given the changing nature of how complex these recovery 
projects are, given climate change and some of the other 
challenges that we are seeing, I think an extension is 
absolutely appropriate.
    I do want to also take a moment to mention, we really do 
appreciate your support for S. 3011, the legislation that would 
give States the flexibility to use ARPA funds for 
transportation projects, and to cover those cost increase 
associated with inflation. Thank you for that.
    Senator Padilla. I appreciate that acknowledgement. I 
understand it came up earlier in the hearing. We are still 
trying to get it done.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Carper. Senator Padilla, thank you. Senator Kelly 
has rejoined us. Senator Kelly, thank you not only for 
rejoining us, but also for inviting Mayor Romero to come and 
testify.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mayor Romero, another issue that I regularly raise on this 
committee is the challenge of PFAS contamination. We spoke 
about it yesterday in my office. Most of the PFAS contamination 
in Arizona is in our groundwater, in aquifers. That poses a 
special challenge in our State, especially in Tucson, because 
groundwater is our backup supply. That is after the Colorado 
River.
    Mayor Romero, can you briefly explain where Tucson gets its 
water from, and how important a backup supply of water is given 
the cutbacks on the Colorado River?
    Mayor Romero. Thank you, Senator, for your leadership in 
really putting PFAS on the map, especially in this Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law.
    Most of our PFAS contamination in Arizona is in our 
groundwater, in our aquifers. We are a sole source aquifer, 
which means that we get our water, our secondary supply of 
water, because our primary supply of water is from Central 
Arizona Project, which is the Colorado River water. Secondary 
source of water is our aquifer. It is a closed aquifer. That 
means that it doesn't discharge to rivers or an ocean to clean 
and remediate the PFAS from the water. It is not a recycling 
system.
    So we have to literally take our aquifer water and 
remediate it from PFAS. That is what has been taking our funds. 
We are spending a million dollars a year, we have spent almost 
$50 million in remediating PFAS. Our ratepayers did not cause 
this issue.
    With the drought, the 22-year drought that we are living in 
in Arizona, the less access to Colorado River water the more 
dependent the city of Tucson becomes on our aquifer water, on 
our secondary source. If it is contaminated with PFAS, that 
makes much less availability. Right now we are not using 10 
percent of our water supply because of PFAS contamination.
    It is incredibly important, the work that this committee 
did to include PFAS remediation and access to it for cities 
like Tucson, Arizona, because it really is our source of being 
able to continue to thrive as a city.
    Senator Kelly. Yesterday we were talking about how the 
plume in the aquifer, the PFAS plume is mobile.
    Mayor Romero. It is moving.
    Senator Kelly. It is moving, and we have to get ahead of 
it. These funds in the Infrastructure Bill allow us to fund 
that remediation effort to head it off at the pass.
    Yes, we have a lot of work to do. I want to continue to 
work with you, and we will work with the EPA on this to make 
sure everything is in place to deal with this issue.
    Another issue that I raise in this committee often is a 
transportation issue, finishing InterState I-10, actually 
expanding it between Phoenix and Tucson. It goes down to two 
lanes for 25 miles. Every day there is an accident that causes 
a backup in excess of an hour.
    The Arizona Department of Transportation has applied for a 
Mega Projects grant, which we created in the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, to widen this 25-miles stretch and better 
connect our two population centers. In the remaining time here, 
Mayor, from Tucson's perspective, what are the advantages of 
expanding I-10 and improving the flow of people, goods, 
services, between our two major cities?
    Mayor Romero. Thank you for your leadership on both the 
PFAS issue and this issue, Senator. For Tucson, it is extremely 
important to be able to have access to the largest city in our 
State. There are commuters going back and forth from Phoenix to 
Tucson. It is a primary connectivity. The delay, the accidents 
on that stretch of InterState 10 that cause the flow of goods 
and services between our cities, the first and second largest 
city in the State, is very cumbersome, especially because we 
share the road with semi-trucks. That becomes another delay 
issue of supply chain services.
    We are looking forward to additional leadership from you in 
terms of the work that you have done with the possibility of 
Amtrak connecting commuters from Phoenix to Tucson. That way, 
we could remove single passenger cars from I-10, so that we 
could see those goods and services flow better. Thank you so 
much, Senator.
    Senator Kelly. Yes, Tucson is the 33d biggest city in the 
Country, Phoenix fourth or fifth, fifth biggest. Yes, we have 
to resolve these problems. It is not only 25 miles of two 
lanes, but there is also no feeder or access road. So when 
there is an accident, you have hundreds of cars often that are 
just stuck there for hours. There are major manufacturers of 
renewable energy, technology, even electric cars, and this 
potentially could shut down their production lines.
    So it is good for Arizona, it is good for individuals, and 
it is good for companies and safety as well. So thank you.
    Mayor Romero. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Kelly. We have been 
joined by Senator Sullivan from Alaska. Senator, how are you 
doing? Welcome.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am doing 
great.
    Senator Carper. You are recognized.
    Senator Sullivan. Madam Ranking Member, good to see you as 
well.
    Mr. Tymon, I want to talk to you about an issue I think is 
important. In your testimony you discussed AASHTO's core policy 
principles, including the increase in flexibility, reduction of 
program burdens, and improvements of project delivery. I think 
we all would agree on the importance of that.
    My question relates to the assignment of NEPA authorities 
to States, which is a really important program, certainly 
important for Alaska, and supports your core principles. The 
FHWA has been inserting language into the MOUs between States 
that would allow them to withdraw NEPA authorities from States 
upon a ``civil rights allegation.''
    Now, there is no statutory authority whatsoever. I am going 
to meet with the nominee to be the next director of the FHWA, 
he had a hearing here last week. I am going to meet with him 
this afternoon and talk about this.
    Or more broadly, if they determine that a project doesn't 
fit ``environmental justice goals.'' These are really broad 
mandates, again, not statutory at all. Not to minimize the 
seriousness of civil rights violations, I have been making a 
strong argument that the Biden Administration actually 
proactively discriminates against Alaska Native people, 
indigenous people in my State. But that is a whole other topic.
    But this certainly, from my perspective, provides potential 
for abuse of discretion by the Federal Government when the 
whole purpose of what we are trying to do here is provide more 
flexibility to the States and to be able to get a more 
streamlined permitting process that is State-focused. It is my 
understanding from reviewing comments by FHWA that they have 
already strong-armed Florida and Utah into accepting this 
language into MOUs.
    Can you comment on the potential impact of this MOU 
language change on transportation projects, delays it might 
cause, and really abuse of discretion? We don't want civil 
rights violations; we are all against that. But to try to 
insert it into the NEPA authorities for States to me is a real 
broad abuse of discretion. I would be very interested in your 
views.
    Mr. Tymon. Thank you, Senator. First, let me say that this 
program in particular I have a specific interest in. I spent 12 
years on the House Transportation Committee, part of that 
working for Chairman Don Young.
    Senator Sullivan. I know. We miss him every day.
    Mr. Tymon. This program originated really from language in 
the House back, I believe starting with SAFETEA-LU, actually, 
the first iteration of this.
    Senator Sullivan. Yes.
    Mr. Tymon. We have heard from many of the NEPA assignment 
States about their concerns with the changes in the agreement 
that FHWA is pushing for.
    Senator Sullivan. By the way, do you think FHWA has any, 
you know the staff, do you think they have any statutory 
authority to do this? I don't, but I am curious about your----
    Mr. Tymon. I think they are trying to fix a problem that 
doesn't exist. We have had extensive conversations with the 
Administration. They say that they don't see anything that has 
happened so far that would raise concern for them, but they 
want to put this in here anyway, just from a belts and 
suspenders standpoint.
    Again, I don't think this is a problem that exists that 
they need to fix.
    Senator Sullivan. Yes.
    Mr. Tymon. They have been pushing hard, you mentioned 
several States that did accept the language. Their agreements 
were expiring. They had the choice of really accepting the 
language or essentially not having----
    Senator Sullivan. Well, I know for a fact my State is very 
concerned about this. We have a strong record on all of these 
issues. But it just seems to be a broad overreach. Also, it is 
going to do what I think every panelist in this hearing is 
against, which is delay the implementation of infrastructure in 
our States.
    Would you agree with that? Certainly has the potential to 
do that. Because remember, the language is an accusation of 
civil rights violation. I mean, anyone can make an accusation.
    Mr. Tymon. Right, and when you talk to FHWA, they say they 
aren't going to utilize this in a way to delay projects. But I 
will say that States that are utilizing this program have built 
up an infrastructure to be able to take on these 
responsibilities and the delegation of that authority. In those 
States, actually FHWA has kind of reduced their presence.
    So to have to reverse this trend for States that have had 
this agreement, it would be a really tough transition to go 
back to the way things were before those States entered this 
program.
    Senator Sullivan. OK, thank you. Any other witnesses have a 
view on this? It is a very narrow topic, but it is a pretty 
important one. Again, I know my State is quite concerned about 
it. Anyone else?
    Mr. Wriston. If I may, there is also a significant issue of 
sovereign immunity and giving that up with this.
    Senator Sullivan. That is a good point.
    Mr. Wriston. That is a big part of this as well.
    Senator Sullivan. Great, thank you. Anyone else?
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I think it is an important 
issue that we need to look at hard, particularly as we are 
getting ready to vote on the confirmation of the new FHWA 
Administrator.
    Senator Carper. I am glad to hear that you are going to be 
meeting with him this afternoon. We are very much interested in 
moving that along. I know you share that, too.
    Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Senator Capito, and then if we have no one 
else, I will wrap it up. I have a couple more questions. One of 
the questions I have already telegraphed, the advice you would 
all have for Secretary Buttigieg. My other question is going to 
what questions you wish you had been asked and have not been 
asked.
    All right, Senator Capito.
    Senator Capito. Thank you, and thank you all.
    I want to end the questioning on, it is related to the 
bumblebee, but we had Director Williams from Fish and Wildlife 
who came to West Virginia, spent a whole day with us. We spent 
some time with Secretary Wriston, we spent some time with our 
DEP and with some of our stakeholders. I appreciate her visit 
very much.
    But it became very apparent that we have a communications 
problem here. At this point it was Fish and Wildlife. But what 
really struck me in terms of the One Federal Decision 
provisions, that have been in effect for a while, we simply 
codified them in this last bill, because we know that will save 
time and money and hopefully have these concurrent reviews.
    But it was almost like, well, Fish and Wildlife has this 
review, and then, well, we have Corps of Engineers over here 
and we have Federal Highway Administrator here, then we have 
West Virginia DOT here, and we have West Virginia Environmental 
Protection here. It just seemed like it was a ping-ponging of 
responsibility and a lack of communication, and not getting to 
the approvals that you need to get to to get these things 
moving forward.
    Secretary Wriston, One Federal Decision, Mr. Tymon talked 
about it a little bit. Is it actually in effect in your mind? 
Because now we are talking about, if a permitting bill comes 
up, one of the bases of this permitting bill, we think, might 
be that One Federal Decision would be extended to energy 
projects, grid projects and all these other things. We are the 
test case here in Transportation. Is it working? Is it a 
reality? What are the problems? What are the good things about 
it?
    Mr. Wriston. Well, the good things, it is the framework for 
the FHWA to be the single point, and to be the clearinghouse. 
As the Secretary of Transportation, when I assign someone a 
project, the first thing I do is put somebody in charge, 
somebody I can hold accountable. That is what we have to do 
with this process, is put somebody in charge.
    You ask if this is working; absolutely not. It has largely 
been ignored. We have had discussions at meetings that the 
Acting Director was at. There doesn't seem to be a sense of 
urgency to enact this or to even discuss it very much.
    The key to this provision in the law is going to be to act 
quickly and get it in place and address these processes. We 
have to rebuild trust between the States and these Federal 
agencies. You are right; the communication is awful. It is a 
recipe for failure. We have to address these communication 
issues. And if we can't do that, then we are going to have a 
predictable result. We are not going to like it, but we are 
going to have a predictable result.
    But no, it is absolutely not working. If we are going to 
wait 2 years into the program to do something that we need on 
the front-end of everything we are doing, how does that make 
any sense whatsoever? Once again, there is a Federal 
inconsistency there. We have to do better. We have to close 
those communication gaps.
    Senator Capito. I think that is part of the purpose of the 
hearing really today, is for us to say, these provisions of, as 
you said in your opening statement, which I thought was very, 
very impactful, when you say we have a chance here, you have 
been around a while, we have a chance here that you have never 
seen. Because now we have the money, it is not just the time, 
it is the money. We also have the will of Congress, and of the 
President to move forward on these things. I know our Governor 
certainly is very active. He wants to build or he wants to fix 
and maintain, and I know you have a lot of pressure that way.
    But if we wait until the back end, we are going to end up 
wasting money, No. 1, because we are going to end up approving 
things that maybe wouldn't have gotten approved if they had had 
the full vetting. You know how it is, you start to run out of 
money so you get a little bit panicky and you go, OK, we will 
do that, and you find out 2 years later that wasn't a good 
idea.
    That is how you get one and a half miles of Route 35 built 
and it stays like that for 25 years until you completed it, 
thank you very much, just this last year.
    So I am very concerned about this, because we want to move 
these projects. We don't want to skirt any of the environmental 
laws, absolutely. We don't want to endanger a species. But we 
want to have common sense. I was impressed to hear that the 
Secretary of Transportation in Delaware doesn't have the same 
problem.
    Maybe that goes to the inconsistencies that we have heard 
about in the hearing, one State can work very well, one State 
not so well. Then you get inconsistent opinions. You don't want 
to go one way if you are not sure that in 6 months you are 
going to get pulled back.
    For instance, you had the right to be flexible with your 
funding. You got the funding flex that you wanted in West 
Virginia, then you get a letter 3 months later saying, you 
shouldn't be doing that. That makes no sense and you wonder, is 
the right hand talking to the left hand.
    So my thing is, I think this One Federal Decision is the 
best way to go. But it has to be implemented and we, I think, 
are responsible for the oversight to make sure this is 
happening. Hopefully if we get somebody in place at Federal 
Highways, because when you don't have anybody in charge, as you 
said, when you don't have anybody in charge that is really 
accountable, it makes it more difficult to hold them 
accountable.
    Thank you all very much. I am going to have to run. But I 
did appreciate everything, and I want to thank my West 
Virginians for coming across the mountain on those beautiful 
roads. I appreciate it. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Senator Capito, thanks so much for 
suggesting we have this hearing. This has been illuminating. I 
want to say to our friends from West Virginia what a joy it is 
working with your Senator, both your Senators, actually. Thank 
you for that.
    I mentioned earlier that I was going to ask you if you had 
any advice for Secretary Buttigieg. I mentioned earlier that I 
was going to ask you if there was a question you wish you had 
been asked that you haven't been asked. Before I do that, I 
want to go back a little bit to our earlier discussion on the 
proposed greenhouse gas performance measure. I tell you, Mayor, 
what you shared with us, you and the folks from not just your 
city but your State, really from throughout that part of our 
Country, what you are going through in terms of drought and 
temperatures is just unbelievable. Unbelievable.
    I am a big music fan, and every now and then I quote a guy 
named Stephen Stills, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young, Buffalo 
Springfield, Stephen Stills who once wrote a song that starts 
off with these words, ``Something's happening here, just want 
it is ain't exactly clear.'' Well, in this case it is very 
clear what is going on. It is going on not just in the 
Southwest, it is not just going on in our part of the world, 
but it is going on all over the world.
    It is important that while we address the symptoms of those 
problems, we also address the root causes of those problems. 
One of the simpler ways to do that are actually embodied in the 
legislation that the President signed a year ago, the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the legislation that he 
signed just last month, which provides a lot of ways to combat 
climate change and actually grow a lot of jobs.
    So with that, I think we ought to note that the Federal 
Highway Administration has the authority, I understand, to 
issue the rule that we have been talking about here I think 
since 2012. That rule was previously issued, and then I am told 
it was rescinded. So it had the authority to issue the rule, 
rescinded the rule. It is clear that we have to address 
transportation emissions, which are, as you know, the largest 
source of carbon emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. I 
think it is like 25, 30 percent of our greenhouse gas emissions 
are from the cars, trucks, and vans we drive. Maybe another 25 
percent comes from our generation of electricity, maybe 20 
percent or so from our cement plants, steel mills and so forth.
    It is clear that we have to address transportation 
emissions. I hope that the Infrastructure Bill that we passed 
and enacted and funded and is now being implemented will help 
our States reduce emissions. I believe the rule gives the 
States the certainty they need in order to make sure there is a 
followup with respect to the flexibility that you need.
    Now, for advice to Secretary Buttigieg. I still call him 
Mayor Pete. Actually, I call him Secretary Pete. He says no, 
you can call me Mayor Pete. So I am not sure what to call him. 
He is actually pretty good to communicate with, communicative 
and responsive and so forth. I think it comes from being a 
mayor. That is always helpful.
    I would just like to ask each of you, and Mr. Tymon, we 
will start with you, if you would like. If you could give Mayor 
Pete/Secretary Pete maybe one piece of advice that he might 
have for him and his administrators who are charged with 
standing up the new transportation programs of our Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, what might that be?
    Mr. Tymon. First, I would say that the Secretary I think 
has been a tremendous Ambassador for the Administration in this 
area. I think he has been extremely well received and respected 
with the industry for the work he has done here over the last 
year and a half.
    I would say, my recommendation to him and to the folks that 
work with him is to continue to respect the fact that the 
transportation needs in each State are very different. 
Providing them the flexibility to be able to address those 
needs in the way that best suits that particular State is an 
extremely important part of this bill and of these programs. It 
has really been the foundation on which the Federal 
transportation programs have been built over the last 50, 60 
years. It served it extremely well during that time period, and 
I think it will continue to serve it well in the future.
    Senator Carper. All right, good. Thank you. Secretary 
Wriston, if you could give Secretary Buttigieg one piece of 
advice with respect to actually implementing this law, standing 
it up, what might that advice be?
    Mr. Wriston. I think my advice to the Secretary would be to 
surround yourself with the very best people that you can get. 
If you walk into a room and you are the smartest person in that 
room, you are in the wrong room. That is what I would say to 
him.
    Senator Carper. I have never walked into a room where I was 
the smartest person anywhere.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. These folks on our staffs and my colleagues 
hear me say it often, I have had some success in my life, but I 
have always surrounded myself with people smarter than me. My 
wife says, it is not hard to find them.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. All right, Mayor, same question.
    Mayor Romero. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would say once a 
mayor, always a mayor, so you could go ahead and call Mayor 
Pete ``Mayor Pete.'' I am really happy that he is the head of 
our Department of Transportation for our Nation. As a fellow 
mayor, he understands the intricacies and the needs of the 
cities. As mayors, we have to provide the services and balance 
our budgets and run our cities smoothly to provide a quality of 
life for our residents.
    So what I would say is that the direct funding to cities is 
extremely important, because cities are a little bit different 
than State agencies. We have the capacity and we have the plans 
to institute the climate resiliency and climate adaptation 
strategies that will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
    For example, in the city of Tucson, we have our climate 
action and adaptation plan, we want to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions to zero by 2030. So direct funding to our cities with 
the Federal funding is going to be super important. Because 
just as we received the $25 million from RAISE for our bridge, 
we also received $12 million to purchase zero-to-no emission 
electric buses for our transit fleet.
    So we have a plan. We know how to get it done. We would 
appreciate the Department of Transportation to be able to work 
directly with the cities, so that we can layer funding to be 
able to deliver the goals that both the city of Tucson and the 
Biden Administration and Congress have in this Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law.
    Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
    Secretary Majeski, maybe a piece of advice for Mayor Pete, 
if you will.
    Ms. Majeski. Sure. I would say this is a historic time. We 
are going to invest more in infrastructure than ever before. 
State DOTs are going to be delivering the largest capital 
programs than we have ever done before. So I think listening to 
the States, giving States the flexibility to be able to deliver 
our programs, that is going to be key, and making sure that we 
have Federal Highway division offices in our States that want 
to work with us, that are partners that are listening to us 
that are helping us kind of get to yes as opposed to always 
kind of putting up roadblocks in our way.
    I do appreciate the work and the effort that AASHTO does 
for us. They bring us all together, and we are able to do these 
peer exchanges and find out what is working in their States, 
and we can have these open dialogs. That is where we do find 
that a lot of these inconsistencies end up happening. AASHTO 
provides a great platform for us to be able to all come 
together and have a collective voice for this. My advice would 
be to listen to the States.
    Senator Carper. That is good. When I was Governor, I loved 
being part of the National Governors Association, loved being 
part of the NGA. We learned a lot, shared a lot of ideas and 
issues with one another and worked together. I have always 
found that is a big part of what AASHTO does, it benefits us 
and I know others, every other State as well.
    This is an opportunity for you to add any thoughts or 
comments you have, if you want to put it in the form of a 
question that you were not asked, you are welcome to do that. 
Any closing thought? Mr. Tymon, we will start with you.
    Mr. Tymon. Against my better judgment, I will dip my toe in 
the water here and just say that if you would ask where 
Secretary Majeski and I had gone to college, you would find out 
that we are both proud Blue Hens.
    Senator Carper. Fighting Blue Hens?
    Mr. Tymon. Absolutely. This might be the first time that 
this panel had has two Blue Hens testifying.
    Senator Carper. Those are pretty good bookends, I like 
those bookends right here. That is great.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. My wife went to Appalachian State 
University. They have been playing, punching above their weight 
in football. My sister and a bunch of my cousins went to 
Marshall. I think I mentioned that to you, Jim. After they 
knocked off Notre Dame the first game of the year, my sister is 
hard to live with. So the Fighting Blue Hens will hopefully 
never have to play Marshall again, or Appalachian State in 
Boone, North Carolina. It is a tough thing to do.
    All right, Mr. Secretary.
    Mr. Wriston. I guess the last thing I would like to leave 
the committee with would be, we have all received grants. I 
have recently received one, $16.2 million for a project in 
Wheeling for a streetscape project. Excellent project, it is 
going to change the face of Wheeling, West Virginia. It is a 
wonderful project.
    Experience tells me, though, that the agreement process 
after that grant has been awarded to me is very cumbersome, 
very difficult, takes a lot of time. The time it takes to get 
that agreement in place is going to be longer than it was for 
me to apply for that grant and the review process, get the 
grant awarded. This project is under contract. It has been 
awarded. I have a contractor ready to go to work. I need clear 
guidance from the FHWA that I can go ahead and put the other 
pieces of the funding and start that contractor working, and 
use this.
    That is not clear to me today, whether I can do that. 
Should I wait? Should I hold up? These are the types of things 
we deal with in the discretionary arena.
    I would hope that the new FHWA Director would pay close 
attention to the agreement portion of this, not only revise 
that process, but I would recommend elimination of it 
altogether. We have a process where we were awarded a project, 
we enter the data for that project in a record system the FHWA 
has, their system, the FEMA system.
    What do we need an agreement for? We are done. Let's move 
forward. That is a process that doesn't do anything.
    That is my final word for the day.
    Senator Carper. Good. As we have said several times here, I 
pushed the Administration pretty hard to get us a nominee. And 
they have given us one, we think he is excellent. Led two 
States, he has led Delaware, Colorado, is very heavily involved 
in Kentucky and I think he has great credentials. He is also 
someone who is really good at communicating. He has sat in your 
seat not once but twice, both you and Secretary Majeski. I 
think that is very helpful.
    I don't think I mentioned this earlier. I have heard a lot 
of, been around Joe Biden for a long time and he and I have 
heard each other's favorite sayings forever. One of his 
favorite sayings is, all politics is personal, all diplomacy is 
personal. I think Shailen Bhatt gets that. And I think he will 
turn out to be a good communicator, good partner as we go 
forward. We just need to get him confirmed. Thank you.
    Mayor, please.
    Mayor Romero. Chairman Carper, I just want to thank you for 
being so generous with your time and thank this Committee for 
their incredible work. As a mayor, brand-new mayor of the city 
of Tucson, well, I can't say that any more, it has been almost 
3 years this November.
    Senator Carper. Does it seem longer?
    [Laughter.]
    Mayor Romero. What I would like to say is that I am 
incredibly lucky, and mayors across this Country are incredibly 
lucky to be able to serve during a time when the Federal 
Government is investing historic levels of funds in our 
communities. It has allowed the city of Tucson, and me as their 
mayor, to be able to plan and make transformative investments 
and change the historically disinvested neighborhoods in our 
areas in one generation.
    So I have to thank you, appreciate the incredible work that 
has been done in this committee to be able to get to a point 
where it became a bipartisan law. For me, I am looking forward 
to continue working for the quality of life of our residents on 
PFAS, on infrastructure, on greenhouse gas reduction in our 
city, and to be able to think and dream boldly in putting plans 
in front of our community for a continuation of our streetcar.
    That is the next step for us, to be able to think big, 
think bold, and think transformative in terms of the investment 
that this law can put in the hands of our cities, where we can 
do transformative change in just one generation.
    I want to thank you all for your hard work and the Biden 
Administration for believing in investing in cities directly, 
and in the infrastructure of our Nation.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for saying that. I should have 
written down the number of times people have used the word 
transformative. Almost every witness has, and it really is 
transformative. I think we are really fortunate to be in this 
situation. It is tough to be in a situation where climate 
change and global warming are the crisis, we don't want that. 
But the good news is I think we have common cause to address 
that. I think we are very much inclined to find a way to 
collaborate on the transportation side.
    Most people remember Albert Einstein saying that the 
definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over 
again and expect a different result. A lot of people have heard 
that quote, not so much my favorite Einstein quote: ``In 
adversity lies opportunity.'' In adversity lies opportunity. We 
face great adversity, but there is real opportunity here. We 
are going to realize that opportunity by the kind of 
collaboration that I think we are all committed to.
    Last word, and I will have a little bit of a closing 
statement. Secretary Majeski, wonderful to see you. Thank you 
for your leadership and thank you for bringing that wonderful 
memory of your team sitting back there in the first and second 
row.
    Ms. Majeski. Of course, always. Thank you again for the 
opportunity to be here today and for the constant support that 
you and our entire delegation have given us and the investments 
that we are making across our State.
    I would be remiss if I didn't close with talking about 
safety. Every presentation that I have been doing for the last 
almost year now I start that presentation by showing our 
fatality chart. I get that updated chart once a week. We are 
constantly having to drive home the message of safety and the 
importance that this is not just a DOT issue, this is 
everyone's issue, and that we need everyone's participation and 
help in reducing the number of roadway fatalities and serious 
injury crashes that we are seeing on our roads.
    So we are very grateful for the additional focus that the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has put on safety, because this 
is not something that is going away. It is going to be at the 
forefront of everything that we do, every single DOT. So having 
the support for Congress to provide us with the funding and the 
resources that we need, we are very grateful for that.
    Thank you, sir.
    Senator Carper. Thanks for mentioning that.
    Senator Capito and I and our team, our colleagues on this 
committee, are blessed with wonderful staff members. The woman 
sitting over my left shoulder, who is looking up now, has just 
focused again and again and again on safety, and making sure 
that when we write legislation, big bills or even not so big 
bills, that we have a huge focus on safety. It is needed.
    Let me close by again thanking all of you for joining us. 
It has been illuminating, and I think enjoyable. It was great 
to be back, Secretary Wriston, we had a family reunion back in 
Beckley, West Virginia, to celebrate the 100th anniversary of 
my mother's birthday, and the 130th anniversary of my 
grandmother's birthday. They were both born on the same day, 
August 18th.
    It was so wonderful to ride through West Virginia and be 
back in Raleigh County, where one of my great-great-great-great 
grandfathers was a co-founder of Raleigh County. I got to speak 
at a church where when I was a little boy, I used to go to 
church with my grandparents who wanted me to grow up and be a 
preacher. I wanted to be a naval flight officer, and actually 
ended up doing other things. But actually to be back in a 
church my grandfather co-founded and speak in that church was 
just wonderful, as you can imagine.
    All those great West Virginia memories.
    In closing, thanks again for not just showing up but for 
sharing your perspectives with us on the implementation of this 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It is a great opportunity here; 
we don't want to blow it. One of the best ways to ensure that 
we don't is to find ways to collaborate and work together.
    A little bit of housekeeping before we adjourn. I would 
ask, this is my favorite part of the hearings, when I get to 
ask for unanimous consent to submit statements relating to 
today's hearing into the record, and there is nobody here to 
object. I can say without objection, and nobody objects. That 
is good.
    [The referenced information was not submitted at the time 
of print.]
    Senator Carper. Senators are welcomed and invited to submit 
written questions for the record through close of business on 
Wednesday, October 5th, and we will compile those questions, we 
will send them to each of you. We ask you to reply by Wednesday 
2 weeks out, Wednesday, October 19th, please.
    With that, it is a wrap. Thank you all. Have a great rest 
of your day, and we look forward to seeing you soon. Thank you. 
Hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]