[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.]