[Senate Hearing 117-648]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 117-648

  IMPLEMENTING IIJA: OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO ADDRESS 
                       TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION 
                           AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION
                               __________

                           NOVEMBER 15, 2022
                               __________

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


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                    
51-858 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
                              ----------                              

           Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure

                     MARK KELLY, Arizona, Chairman
BEN CARDIN, Maryland                 KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota, 
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont                 Ranking Member
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 CYNTHIA LUMMIS, Wyoming
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      MARKWANE MULLIN, Oklahoma
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan            PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
ALEX PADILLA, California             JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania         OGER WICKER, Mississippi
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware (ex       LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Caolina
    officio)                         SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West 
                                         Virginia (ex officio)

                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                           NOVEMBER 15, 2022
                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Cardin, Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland.....     1
Cramer, Kevin, U.S. Senator from the State of North Dakota.......     3

                               WITNESSES

Day, Hon. Jacob, Mayor, City of Salisbury, Maryland..............     7
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
Carroll, Michael, P.E., Deputy Managing Director, Office of 
  Transportation and Infrastructure Systems, City of 
  Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.....................................    17
    Prepared statement...........................................    19
Willox, Jim, Chairman, Converse County Commission, Converse 
  County, Wyoming................................................    25
    Prepared statement...........................................    27
Benson, Jason, Cass County Engineer, Cass County, Wyoming........    33
    Prepared statement...........................................    35

 
  IMPLEMENTING IIJA: OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO ADDRESS 
                       TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES

                              ----------                              


                       TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2022

                               U.S. Senate,
         Committee on Environment and Public Works,
          Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastucture,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure Washington, 
DC.
    The committee, met, pursuant to notice, at 2:40 p.m. in 
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Benjamin L. 
Cardin (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Present: Senators Cardin, Cramer. Also present: Senator 
Carper.

         OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 
            U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

    Senator Cardin. The Subcommittee of Transportation and 
Infrastructure of the Environment and Public Works Committee 
will come to order.
    Today's subject is implementing the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill from local jurisdictions to address 
transportation challenges. It is a hearing that I have been 
looking forward to for a long time. This is the 1-year 
anniversary of President Biden signing the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill.
    I first of all want to acknowledge and thank Senator 
Cramer, the Ranking Republican on the subcommittee, for his 
cooperation in putting together today's hearing. We both want 
to thank Senator Carper and Senator Capito, the Chairman and 
Ranking Member on the Environment and Public Works Committee, 
for allowing us to go forward with this hearing.
    As I said, this is the 1-year anniversary of President 
Biden's signature on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. But I 
think we all take great pride on this committee, the 
Environment and Public Works Committee, because we gave the 
foundation for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill by the work 
of this committee.
    We passed, over a year ago, the Surface Transportation 
Reauthorization Act, a $303 billion program for our roads and 
bridges. It was the largest program ever passed by Congress, 
and it passed unanimously in this committee. That is no easy 
task, to get a unanimous vote on such an important bill. It 
laid the foundation for the Bipartisan Infrastructure package, 
so we take great pride in the work of getting that done.
    A major national effort to deliver infrastructure we need 
to sustain our competitiveness and our economic strength for 
future generations, new opportunities for our work force. This 
bill is a lot about jobs, creating good jobs here in America, 
modernizing our infrastructure.
    A lot of us have traveled to other countries in Europe and 
Asia. We look at their infrastructure and wonder, what are we 
thinking? We have to do better. Well, we are doing better by 
the passage of this bill.
    We advanced equity and we advanced safety with the 
bipartisan action, and we met the challenge of climate change. 
I will talk about this a little bit later. I just got back from 
COP27, which is the environmental conference that was help in 
Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. I must tell you; the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure package was front and center. Americans were 
welcomed because that bill did much to deal with our 
obligations in regard to climate issues.
    There are opportunities for all States, so yes, I am going 
to talk a little bit about Maryland, because I am proud of what 
we are able to get done through this bill in Maryland. There 
are many, many examples. I am just going to give you a few 
concrete examples.
    Our multimodal transportation hubs were dramatically helped 
by the passage of this bill. A grant to the Baltimore Penn 
Station, which is going to have a new life, for the Baltimore 
Metropolitan area, New Carrollton Station in Prince George's 
County, which is the major hub for multimodal transportation in 
the Washington communities, both are going to be seeing 
substantial funds as a result and have received substantial 
funds.
    We have many bridges. We can mention the dozens of bridges 
that have already been worked on in Maryland. We have 270 that 
are in need of serious repair. I know Mayor Day will talk a 
little bit about the Eastern Shore. There are a lot of bridges 
and a lot of water on the Eastern Shore, so there are a lot of 
bridges on the Eastern Shore, and many are in need of 
attention. In Prince George's County, they got $560,000 to 
replace two bridges. That is just an example of what has 
already been acted on in the legislation.
    Today, we are going to look at it through the eyes of local 
government. Why? Because local government officials know their 
community best. They know what is needed for quality of life. 
They know what is needed for economic growth. They know where 
the priorities are in using transportation infrastructure to 
improve their communities.
    I am extremely proud of legislation that I originally 
authored with Senator Cochran of Mississippi, the 
Transportation Alternatives Program. In the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Bill, a substantial improvement was made in the 
Transportation Alternatives Program by an initiative that I 
initiated with Senator Wicker, again, from Mississippi. This is 
a bipartisan proposal.
    We now have 10 percent of the surface transportation block 
grant programs devoted to Transportation Alternatives Programs. 
These are programs that are competitive but are requested by 
local governments. The State makes the grants, but these are 
local programs to help local communities. They are for sensible 
things that you need to get people around safely, like 
sidewalks, pedestrian paths, bicycle paths. These are 
improvements to deal with the everyday needs of your community.
    Local government equity is also included in the bipartisan 
proposal. Reconnecting Communities is a program I am 
particularly proud of because, you see, we have had 
transportation programs in our community that have divided 
communities and worked against their individual interests. Come 
to Baltimore and see the Franklin-Mulberry Corridor. We call it 
the highway to nowhere, because it is a highway to nowhere. But 
it caused a lot of damage. It dislocated 1,500 Black residents, 
and those communities are still hurting today.
    The Reconnecting Communities allows us to bring these 
together to strengthen local communities. We now have a program 
which local governments can help us design to look at 
transportation programs that were not designed to help the 
local community because we were trying to get people out of 
cities or out of areas, and it divided communities. How can we 
use those funds? We need your input to deal with that.
    Local governments can make a real difference on safety 
issues. Safety issues to me are extremely important. We had a 
record number of deaths in highway accidents the first 6 months 
of this year, over 20,000 fatalities.
    I can mention several in my own State, but I will mention 
just one, a Foreign Service officer, Sarah Langenkamp, from my 
State of Maryland, who was biking home from her son's 
elementary school when she was killed. Bike safety is something 
that we can do much better with. The Transportation 
Alternatives Programs can be used for that purpose as well. We 
have authorized for the Safe Streets and Roads, another 
program, to help in regard to safety, $5 billion over the next 
5 years.
    Last, in advancing climate agenda. When you have sidewalks, 
you have safe bicycle paths where people can walk rather than 
taking cars, when you deal with the heated community centers, 
that we can cool down by having a recreational space to help 
the transportation programs, when we combine that with the 
moneys we put in the Bipartisan Bill for electric vehicles and 
the infrastructure for electric vehicles, local governments can 
make a difference in meeting our needs on climate. That was one 
of the major things we had at our COP27 meeting.
    There is a lot to talk about with our local officials: 
safety, equity, climate, quality of life, economy, jobs, and 
how local communities can help us meet the objectives of the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Package.
    We have a really distinguished group of witnesses that I am 
looking forward to hearing from. We will give you your 
introductions, but first, I want to turn it over to the 
distinguished Ranking Member, Senator Cramer.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KEVIN CRAMER, 
          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

    Senator Cramer. Thank you, Chairman Cardin. Thank you to 
all of our witnesses.
    Mr. Willox, I want to say right away that your Senator, 
Cynthia Lummis, grabbed me on my way out of lunch. I am the 
first person to leave what is clearly the most entertaining 
lunch in D.C. this week, if you are easily entertained. Anyway, 
she grabbed me and said, would you please apologize to Jim for 
me, and tell him I am so sorry, but if you carry that ball, she 
said, she will give me notes on the lunch. Anyway, I just 
wanted to express that right away.
    Thank you all for being here, and thank you, Chairman 
Cardin, first of all, for this timely and important hearing and 
for your leadership. It really was, for those of you who think 
that we never do anything together, it is because no one really 
reports on the things we do together. This was a joy, it really 
was, to work on this bill.
    It turned out to be a good bill, not just one I sort of 
grudgingly supported, but one that I am happy to champion. I am 
especially pleased with the cooperation between the two parties 
and the four people that lead, all whose names begin with 
``C,'' strictly coincidental.
    Anyway, today's hearing is to talk about the role of local 
government and local leadership in implementation and to get 
your feedback. Even the best strategies and the best plans in 
the world have to be assessed. I think 1 year later is a good 
time to do that. Thank you for that opportunity.
    During the bill's negotiations, I really did put a strong 
emphasis on making sure that rural and local communities and 
their role in the funding formula was maintained, the 90-10 
split that you are all familiar with, and really, I don't 
think, with much pushback. I don't want to imply that it was a 
hard, difficult thing to conclude, but it was important. It 
recognizes the role of rural communities as much as anything, 
the role of a system that recognizes the East Coast and the 
West Coast, the Canadian Border and the Mexican Border, can 
only work if it is all hard covered. We can't reserve a few 
hundred miles here and there for dirt.
    Thank you for that. It was a joy. It really does ensure 
that our States and localities have consistent funding. Very 
important, as you know, particularly as we face these high 
prices we have today with inflation, that consistency and 
counting on consistent funding is so important.
    The other things that we worked hard on and I was very 
pleased by was the codification of the One Federal Decision 
policy, hard-fought. Right now, I think people on all ends of 
the spectrum, of the philosophical spectrum, can see the value 
of that, whether you are siting, whatever it is you are trying 
to permit, you may be for that or you may be against it, for 
this and against that, having a consistent regulatory regime 
that recognizes that streamlining doesn't mean compromising the 
integrity of the process, I think, it was a successful 
conclusion. I want to talk a little bit about that. I will be 
very interested in some of your experiences with the One 
Federal Decision and where we are in that.
    Obviously, and I have a North Dakotan here that I will get 
to introduce here in a little bit, but there were a lot of wins 
in it for my little State of North Dakota. We are literally, 
there is even a monument to prove it, the center of the North 
American Continent, in North Dakota. We are a long way from 
everybody that wants the things that we produce, whether it is 
food or energy. Getting it to market is important. This one 
includes a lot of wins for North Dakota, but it is really more 
about the Country than just one State.
    Now, the codification of the One Federal Decision was a 
priority item, as I said, for other committee members as well 
as myself, but it was a significant policy win and something 
that I have loudly applauded. Frankly, I think it should be 
duplicated in other areas of permitting reforms. But it is also 
one of the things that I am most concerned about. That is why I 
am going to be interested in what you all have to say about its 
enforcement.
    Implementation is far from complete. In fact, a year after 
being signed into law, especially as the Administration still 
has no specific plan as to how they intend to meet the law's 
goal of the 2-year average of project reviews. That is really 
unacceptable, especially like I said, the clock is ticking; the 
calendar is moving; inflation is real. We need to have some 
certainty.
    Permitting certainty and improved efficiency for 
infrastructure projects only comes if the agency, the United 
States Department of Transportation, makes it a priority. As 
our last hearing on this confirmed, State and local communities 
want and need predictable and expeditious permitting.
    Similarly, the bill included language to expedite NEPA 
reviews for oil and gas gathering lines if it led to the 
reduction of reduced methane. Win-win. I am a person, as is I 
think Senator Cardin is, who believes that not every 
transaction in this town requires a loser. There can be winners 
on both sides of transactions, and I think this is one of those 
situations. If you can demonstrate a reduction in methane, then 
we ought to have a faster NEPA process.
    I had a hearing in the Energy and Natural Resources 
Committee, and Secretary Van Hollen acknowledged the expediting 
authority by saying ``we will move that forward as we can.'' 
See, as we can isn't a word that is consistent with expediting.
    Responses like these don't exactly inspire confidence, not 
in our local communities, our States, nor in the industries 
that build roads. I know that Secretary Buttigieg has said he 
is ``working on it'' as well, but to anyone paying attention, 
it is pretty clear it is not a high priority.
    Anyway, the main goal here is to hear from you all. I want 
to get to that, and we will ask some questions. I hope we have 
some more participation by the committee members, but I 
wouldn't count on a lot of Republicans getting here anytime 
soon, Mr. Chairman.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Cramer. Thank you all.
    Senator Cardin. As Senator Cramer has pointed out, this is 
our first day back. Our two caucuses are meeting. There was 
some interest in debating what happened last Tuesday, so there 
is a lot of distraction here today. So we apologize if members 
are not here. Some will, I think, come and go. But I can assure 
you, the record of this committee hearing is going to be 
extremely important in our work.
    I will just make one observation, Senator Cramer, on the 
permitting. This committee worked very well together on the 
permitting provisions. It could have been pretty contentious. 
But we listened to each other, and we learned from each other, 
so I just want to thank my colleagues. I came to this 
discussion with a different view, but it was convinced that we 
had to make the progress that we were able to do in the bill. I 
think when we work together, we can really get good things 
accomplished.
    With that, I am going to introduce either two or three of 
the witnesses today, and Senator Cramer will introduce one or 
two. We will see how that goes along.
    I want to first introduce my mayor, Mayor Jake Day. I do 
not live in Salisbury; I live in Baltimore. But Mayor Day is an 
extraordinary leader in our State and the Mayor of Salisbury, 
the 28th Mayor of Salisbury. He was first elected to the city 
council at the age of 30 and was unanimously elected president 
of the council at one point.
    He spent his career revitalizing downtowns and making them 
more vibrant, living places, and that is true in Salisbury. He 
has worked for the Eastern Shore Land Conservancy, and was, in 
2021, elected president of the Maryland Municipal League, which 
is not an easy political assignment. I am very proud that he is 
a major in the U.S. Army, a veteran of the global war on 
terrorism. We thank you for your service to our Country and 
your service to our community.
    We are also joined by Michael Carroll. Michael Carroll is 
the Deputy Managing Director of the Office of Transportation 
and Infrastructure Systems and President of the National 
Association of City Transportation Officials. Michael is a 
creative and nationally respected leader with more than 25 
years of experience in transportation.
    Deputy Carroll coordinates and sets the policy directions 
for critical functions, including streets, both transportation 
and sanitation, the Philadelphia Water Department, as well as 
the newly created Office of Complete Streets. His oversights 
include infrastructure systems that make up more than 9,500 
transit stops, 2,500 miles of streets, 320 bridges, 450 lanes 
of bike facilities, 1,000 Indego bikes, and 100 Indego 
stations, 6,500 miles of sewer and water lines. If you walk 
those every day, you could certainly get your exercise. It is a 
pleasure to have you here with us today.
    I think, Mr. Willox, your introduction was supposed to be 
given. I am more than happy to introduce, or would you like to 
make the introduction for the next two witnesses?
    Senator Cramer. I kind of want to.
    Senator Cardin. OK.
    Senator Cramer. Yes, I kind of want to.
    Jim Willox, the reason I want to do it is because you are 
from a territory kind of like mine, but more importantly, 
because you have chosen to be a leader in an institution that, 
next to church councils, has got to be the hardest in the 
world, and that is county commissions. Honestly, that is where 
the rubber literally meets the road.
    I know Mr. Willox is testifying on behalf of county 
commissioners around the Country, the National Association. He 
is a chairman, not only a commissioner with Converse County, 
but with Wyoming County Commissioners Association. He 
previously served as an officer, this is really amazing to me, 
Officer of the Converse County Stock Growers, Douglas Moose 
Lodge, and the Douglas Board of Realtors. Currently Chairman of 
the Wyoming Lottery Board, Mr. Willox and his wife, Tione, 
currently own and operate Willox Properties.
    My only question is, what do you do in your spare time? 
Honestly, I know you have testified before Congress a couple of 
times before. Welcome. We are always glad to have a county 
official with us, for sure, especially on transportation 
issues, right?
    Now, we are glad to have Jason Benson with us. Thank you, 
Chairman Cardin. It is really a privilege to introduce Jason, 
who serves as the County Engineer for Cass County, North 
Dakota. For those of you not familiar with the rectangular 
blank spot in the middle of the North American Continent called 
North Dakota, Cass County is where Fargo, our largest city, 
resides.
    Other than Fargo, it is a very rural county, as well, right 
on the Minnesota border. He has been an invaluable asset to my 
office during the development and the implementation of both 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Water 
Resources Development Act. I am glad he is able to join us 
today so that the committee can receive his expertise as well.
    I do want to say, as a side note, that he is not only in 
D.C. today for this hearing. Yesterday, Jason attended a 
graveside service at Arlington Cemetery for his great-uncle, 
Army Private First-Class Robert Alexander, a North Dakotan from 
Tolley who gave the ultimate sacrifice during World War Two in 
the Pacific Theater. Until recently, his remains had not been 
identified, but Jason and his father were able to attend the 
full honor service yesterday, bringing a welcome conclusion to 
what had been a long and open-ended saga.
    I wanted to take a minute to highlight Robert Alexander's 
exemplary service to our Nation, Mr. Chairman. Jason himself 
has followed in his great-uncle's footsteps, serving 33 years 
in the United States Army and the Minnesota Army National 
Guard, including four overseas combat or peacekeeping 
deployments. Jason has worked for Cass County for 22 years and 
manages the infrastructure of nearly 637 miles of roads, over 
564 bridge structures, and an annual budget of $20 million.
    I am going to skip the rest of the resume, because, I think 
your testimony, like the rest, will speak for itself and your 
expertise. Thank you all for being here.
    Senator Cardin. Once again, we thank our witnesses. Your 
entire statements will be made part of the record. You may 
proceed as you wish. We ask that you try to summarize your 
testimony in approximately 5 minutes. If you go over a minute 
or two, we are not going to complain.
    Mayor Day.

              STATEMENT OF HON. JAKE DAY, MAYOR, 
                  CITY OF SALISBURY, MARYLAND

    Mr. Day. Chairman Cardin and Ranking Member Cramer and 
members of the subcommittee, thank you so much for your 
hospitality today. Thank you on behalf of my constituents and 
local governments across America for the opportunity to share 
our perspective.
    My name is Jake Day. I am a trained architect and city 
planner. Most recently, I served, as you mentioned, Senator, as 
President of the Maryland Municipal League, representing the 
interests of Maryland's cities and towns from Port Tobacco with 
its 18 residents to Baltimore with its 576,000 residents.
    Today, I come to you as mayor of my hometown, Salisbury, 
Maryland. It is a small but growing principal city of the 
455,000 resident Salisbury Metropolitan Area, which sits at the 
center of the DelMarVa Peninsula, the breadbasket of the 
Northeast United States. I like to think of it as the best of 
both worlds.
    We are home to Maryland's second busiest commercial airport 
and Maryland's second busiest port. We are crisscrossed by two 
U.S. highways. We have a robust trail network under 
construction. We have one regional bus transit system and even 
a micromobility company.
    As a local leader, it is my job to try to solve the 
challenges that my citizens face to living the best life they 
can with the limited resources that I have. But some challenges 
are simply stronger and taller than I can reasonably fell on my 
own. For those factors, we look to our partners in the Federal 
Government.
    Many of the mobility and infrastructure challenges are 
baked into the asphalt, the concrete, the housing and policy 
landscape. Like most American cities, ours fell victim to the 
progress of its time. In 1927 and again in 1956, two U.S. 
highways were cut through our city and displaced residents.
    The well-worn tale is as true in Salisbury as anywhere that 
most of the displaced and largely erased neighborhoods were 
home to Black families and Black-owned businesses and replaced 
with interchanges and parking lots. Federal Urban Renewal 
dollars were later used to clear blocks. Local zoning codes 
prioritized low-density and single use development, meaning 
decades of investment further separated where workers earn 
their paycheck from where they lay their heads at night.
    These past policy decisions combined resulted in an 
inefficient, unjust, and unsafe landscape, effectively keeping 
a community from functioning efficiently. It is our charge now 
to rebuild and repair from that context.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is a departure from the 
way things have always been done, and that is a welcome change. 
When infrastructure decisions are further removed from the 
communities where we articulate our priorities, investment and 
the return on investment is slowed.
    In Salisbury, we articulated three such priorities: one, to 
build a more just city, taking healing actions to make access 
to work, services, and opportunity a little bit easier, safer, 
and more equitable, particularly for communities put at a past 
disadvantage.
    This year, I joined mayors from seven cities from across 
America in the Just City Mayoral Fellowship, and we worked to 
identify policy barriers and physical barriers to progress in 
our communities. Mobility represented the single most 
significant challenge.
    Two, a safer Salisbury. We envision an end to 
transportation system decisions that make it more likely that 
our citizens will die on our roads. When we know an engineering 
solution that will save lives, we must fund them, period. In 
2021, Salisbury adopted Vision Zero policies prioritizing the 
safety of human beings over convenience.
    No. 3, a more efficient Salisbury. A hallmark of the status 
quo is the inefficient use of limited resources, whether it is 
dollars or land or energy, material, they are all treated as 
more expendable than we know they are. We envision a city more 
respectful of the rural landscape around us and the planet as a 
whole.
    I believe local officials should be trusted more than we 
have historically been to know what is best for our cities, 
counties, and towns. Americans trust local government to 
respond to their needs. Whatever the ownership of a given right 
of way, you can rest assured, your county commissioner or mayor 
has been called about it.
    Setting and delivering community priorities is our bread 
and butter. The benefits of direct allocation of infrastructure 
dollars to America's cities and towns is being felt in town 
halls and city council chambers nationwide. In Salisbury, we 
feel strongly that this has become a moment of opportunity 
where we are being treated more fully as a partner in shaping 
our destiny.
    With adequate resources and through programs like Safe 
Streets for All and Transportation Alternatives and with the 
trust of our Federal partners, we can get about the business of 
delivering on the vision of a litany of projects, each of which 
would have remained a pipe dream or languished due to a deficit 
of resources were it not for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    The principles of flexibility, human focus, direct 
allocation to local governments, and increased appropriations 
should be preserved in future infrastructure legislation. In 
particular, rural communities have more opportunity to compete 
when burdens on applicants are simplified. One year on from the 
adoption of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the view from 
city hall is an optimistic one.
    In my opinion, this law is a powerful signal that we are a 
more trusted partner to our Federal representatives than ever 
before. My city will be more just, safe, and efficient as a 
result of you placing that trust in us and providing us 
additional resources with which to deliver.
    I want to thank you for your confidence. I want to thank 
you for your attention to this critical matter for our Nation 
and for your time today.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Day follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
    Mr. Carroll.

 STATEMENT OF MICHAEL CARROLL, P.E., DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR, 
 OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS, CITY OF 
                   PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

    Mr. Carroll. Good morning, Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member 
Cramer, and members of the subcommittee. On behalf of Mayor Jim 
Kenney and the city of Philadelphia, I am profoundly grateful 
to testify.
    I am Mike Carroll, Deputy Managing Director of the Office 
of Transportation, Infrastructure, and Sustainability. As was 
mentioned, I oversee the Philadelphia Department of Streets, 
the Philadelphia Water Department, and the Office of 
Sustainability. I am also interim President of National 
Association of City Transportation Officials.
    Philadelphia's 2018 Strategic Transportation Plan 
celebrates the connection between the quality of our 
infrastructure and the tangible benefit to people's lives. 
These values match those of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    After decades of neglect, this is crucial if we want to 
ensure that world class infrastructure remains at the center of 
the Americans' agenda. We place every effort to align our 
infrastructure priorities with those of our constituents. I 
appreciate Senator Cardin's mention of the large inventory of 
assets that we manage. These assets are well-used.
    Our main regional transit authority, SEPTA, carried over 
100 million riders last year, after the pandemic. In some 
areas, nearly 20 percent of our commute trips are made by 
cycling.
    In our center city, several corridors carry 30,000 
pedestrians per day. Our historic city retains its colonial-era 
character with great pride, and it isn't physically possible 
for us to move enough people without robust options for 
transit, biking, and walking. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
strengthens our hand to deliver these safe transportation 
alternatives.
    Many Philadelphians rely on our trails and bike network to 
conduct their daily lives. We are eager to implement $4 million 
in grants from the Transportation Alternatives Program to 
improve walking and biking safety around schools, to add 
pedestrian and bike connections to the jobs at the Philadelphia 
Navy Yard. This funding will also help complete Philadelphia's 
section of the East Coast Greenway from Maine to Florida. The 
ways infrastructure binds our Country together are more than 
just symbolic.
    We agree with the law's emphasis on equity as well, because 
addressing social inequality means more opportunity. On a 
section of US Route 1 in Philadelphia called Roosevelt 
Boulevard, we used CMAQ funds to create high quality bus 
stations and express transit service. People once stood in 
patches of dirt next to a 12-lane highway, waiting to take a 
circuitous bus ride to their destination.
    In 1 year, the new service had a 17 percent increase in 
ridership, the highest increase in the whole system. One person 
told us the shorter travel times saved her job.
    We will seek more funding to extend this to other parts of 
Philadelphia, and this will be one key to updating the entire 
bus network. One neighborhood will have 65,000 more jobs 
accessible within a 45-minute bus ride than can be reached 
today.
    The list of projects we need requires us to grow our talent 
pool aggressively. USDOT's recommitment to on-the-job training, 
disadvantaged business enterprises, and flexibility on local 
hiring sets a bar for our own local efforts. Our recently 
awarded $25 million RAISE grant will help us take on a host of 
infrastructure challenges in seven historically disinvested 
neighborhoods around the city. We can now make safety 
improvements to roads where nearly a thousand people have been 
involved in traffic crashes in recent years. We will be paving 
streets that haven't been paved in more than a quarter century.
    We will also use community engagement around our projects 
to point people to jobs and contracting opportunities. These 
projects shouldn't just change the physical conditions of the 
neighborhoods; they should contribute to the life prospects of 
the people who live in these neighborhoods.
    Direct aid to cities is something else we appreciate. I was 
thrilled to join FHWA, Amtrak, SEPTA, and the Pennsylvania 
Department of Transportation to celebrate the city being 
awarded $1.5 million in Direct Bridge Improvement Program 
funding. Our project will pilot strategies to accelerate bridge 
rehabilitation over electrified rail lines. Although 
Philadelphia will immediately benefit as a community from these 
improvements, the model will serve our whole State and 
communities across the Country in the long term, as well.
    We are proud to propose a project called Reconnecting Our 
Chinatown for the Reconnecting Communities Program. This takes 
up Secretary Buttigieg's direct challenge to the city of 
Philadelphia to fix the harm done in carving our Chinatown 
community in half with the Vine Street Expressway in the 
1990's. We developed a CAP project to provide neighborhood 
space overtop of the roadway without impacting throughput on 
that vital artery.
    In general, the mix of approaches present in the 
infrastructure law provides excellent alignment of resources to 
the infrastructure needs we experience at the local level. We 
are very grateful. At the end of the day, we need Congress to 
stay focused on infrastructure, though. Even with this historic 
investment, the legacy of neglect and underinvestment will 
still persist. Our steady attention will allow us to finally 
turn the page on an era of crumbling infrastructure around the 
United States.
    Senators, I want to thank you deeply for the opportunity to 
share my thoughts with you all today. This ends my testimony.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Carroll follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Carroll, thank you very much for your 
testimony.
    Mr. Willox.

STATEMENT OF JIM WILLOX, CHAIRMAN, CONVERSE COUNTY COMMISSION, 
                    CONVERSE COUNTY, WYOMING

    Mr. Willox. Thank you, Chairman Cardin and Ranking Member 
Cramer. I really appreciate the opportunity to be here.
    I have been a commissioner for 16 years, and I currently 
serve as chairman of our local board and President of the 
Wyoming County Commissioners Association, and I am here today 
on behalf of the National Association of Counties, as well. I 
can assure you, roads are a top priority for commissioners.
    Converse County is located in Central Wyoming, and just 
like two-thirds of America's counties, we are considered rural. 
Converse County is home to the Country's largest uranium mine, 
significant oil and gas reserves, five wind farms, solar 
potential, and sprawling cattle and sheep ranches. We are 
critical to the United States' natural resource and energy 
production.
    County governments own 44 percent of public roads and 38 
percent of the bridges, more than any other level of 
government. Counties invest annually over $60 billion into the 
construction, maintenance, and operation of our transportation 
system. To paraphrase an old saying, a road is only as good as 
its weakest mile. The connectivity of interstates and U.S. 
highways to gravel county roads and one-lane bridges is vital. 
If you can't get to the interState, what good is it?
    We are pleased to see that infrastructure continues to be a 
bipartisan topic, not red or blue, but red, white, and blue as 
a topic. We want you to know that America's counties are 
working to deliver transformational infrastructure projects for 
our residents, and our counties continue to need a responsive 
Federal partner.
    In Wyoming, the IIJA will help us repair and rehabilitate 
45 local and off-system bridges. Many of these bridges are low 
volume and could be only one lane, but they may be the only 
connection to emergency services, economic operations, or 
schools.
    The IIJA significantly increased the number of competitive 
funding opportunities and created new programs, such as the 
Bridge Investment Program, which has been vital for counties in 
Wyoming and across the Nation. The Rural Surface Transportation 
Block Grant and the new Safe Streets for All Programs are also 
important new opportunities.
    As we look forward, Federal policymakers should eliminate 
obstacles and ensure the timely establishment and rollout of 
competitive grant awards. Counties believe that the new 
practice, such as using a common application for multiple 
funding opportunities at the U.S. Department of Transportation 
has implemented is a step in the right direction.
    One of the best things in the bill, and you have referenced 
it, is the One Federal Decision. We support and applaud that 
effort. However, two obstacles still remain. The Buy America 
provisions, which we support in concept, and I think we all do, 
should be applied in a commonsense, flexible way that 
appreciates any lack of domestic availability or grand costs 
inconsistent with the public interest as we balance stewardship 
of taxpayer dollars with the policy goal of building domestic 
capacity. Waivers should be issued accordingly.
    Streamlining the Federal permitting process is a 
longstanding priority of local governments. One Federal 
Decision is a step in the right direction, but the NEPA process 
is still cumbersome and counterproductive. There is little to 
no reason to go through the NEPA process to work or replace a 
county road or bridge that has been in place for decades. The 
NEPA in this case only adds costs, delays, and frustration to 
the real goal of implementing and improving our transportation 
system. That is saying that we believe that the categorical 
exclusion needs to be expanded further and more flexibility 
allowed.
    While county officials appreciate the creation of dozens of 
new opportunities in this bill, we do not believe competitive 
opportunities should come in lieu of the continued direct 
Federal funding for locally owned infrastructure.
    When the national transportation system is considered, too 
often, only Federal highways come to mind. A fellow 
commissioner of mine must use gravel and paved county roads, 
city, State, and Federal highways when delivering his cattle to 
market all in a two-and-a-half-hour trip. In resource rich 
Northern Converse County, workers take similar trips every day 
to help energize our Country.
    Breakdowns in the supply chain can be mitigated at the 
local level if we are equipped to do so, which includes having 
the maximum flexibility possible to use Federal grants. As 
proven good stewards of Federal dollars, county officials 
believe a direct, consistent Federal funding stream for local 
roads and bridges will continue to ensure a robust 
infrastructure for the future.
    Wyoming's Governor, Mark Gordon, has noted that the debt 
from this bill and others passed in response to the pandemic 
will be carried by future generations. Therefore, we have an 
obligation to make generational investments with these funds. 
County officials live and work in our communities every day. We 
know the needs of our communities better than the Federal 
Highway Administration, and I dare say, better than Congress. 
Allowing more time and broad flexibility, which are a portion 
of this bill, and we appreciate that, offers the best 
opportunity to do meaningful improvements for our communities 
and for future generations.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, thank you for this 
opportunity. I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Willox follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Cardin. Commissioner Willox, thank you very much 
for your testimony.
    Mr. Benson.

 STATEMENT OF JASON BENSON, CASS COUNTY ENGINEER, CASS COUNTY, 
                          NORTH DAKOTA

    Mr. Benson. Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member Cramer, thank 
you for the opportunity to testify before you today.
    I am Jason Benson, the County Engineer for Cass County, 
North Dakota. I am a member of the Legislative Committee for 
the North Dakota Association of County Engineers. I am an 
active member of the National Association of County Engineers, 
consisting of over 3,000 fellow county engineers and highway 
superintendents across the Country.
    Cass County is the most populous county in North Dakota and 
has a population of over 180,000, which is roughly 24 percent 
of the State's population. Our highway system consists of 637 
miles of roadway covering nearly 1,800 square miles.
    In 2019, the North Dakota Legislature requested a study of 
the transportation infrastructure needs of all counties, 
townships, and Tribes in North Dakota. This study was completed 
by the Upper Great Plain Transportation Institute, which is 
headquartered in Cass County. This study determined that over 
the next 20 years, an estimated $10.5 billion is needed in 
maintaining and preserving our county roads and bridges. In 
Cass County alone, the estimated costs for the next 20-year 
span is $514 million in needs.
    These significant long-term infrastructure needs are 
influenced by the agricultural industry across North Dakota, 
which requires over 1.4 million truckloads just to get the 
crops off the field every fall. In addition, there are over a 
million other truckloads needed to keep our farms producing 
high-quality crops.
    This heavy agricultural traffic taxes the durability and 
safety of these local roads. These roads were designed and 
built for the trucks and farming equipment of the 1960's. They 
are not built for the way that reflects today's traffic and 
use, influencing the cost of construction's significant rise in 
North Dakota construction costs. To keep up with the 
construction cost increases, since 2000, our Federal Highway 
funds should be approximately $2 million a year instead of our 
$1.3 million that we currently receive.
    While we collaborate closely with the North Dakota 
Department of Transportation to maximize our Federal funding, 
it is no secret to anyone that the current inflationary 
environment we find ourselves in only adds to the problem. With 
the passing of the IIJA, North Dakota counties can leverage 
funding from the Bridge Investment Program, or BIP. Cass County 
expects to replace over 41 bridge structures in the next 20 
years and over 100 minor structures that are not eligible for 
Federal funding.
    With this focus Cass County has placed on bridge 
replacement, we still face significant fiscal challenges. One 
case is the three interState bridges over the Red River between 
North Dakota and Minnesota. We recently worked with three 
counties in Minnesota to submit an interState bundle bridge 
project through the BIP Program to replace three bridges along 
the State's border. The bridges are over 70 years old and are 
deficient in design and size and can no longer safely 
accommodate large trucks or agricultural equipment.
    The Federal funds requested for this BIP grant is over $23 
million, with the non-Federal funding coming from each co-
applicant. Awarding this BIP grant to replace the three bridges 
will have a significant benefit to the Red River Valley region 
in North Dakota and Minnesota.
    Second, the IIJA provides Federal safety funding through 
the Safe Streets and Roads for All Program in the 
Transportation Alternatives Program, which includes safe routes 
to schools. This Federal funding, in combination with local 
funding, has allowed Cass County to complete $5.3 million in 
safety-related projects since 2011. I want to thank Senator 
Cramer for his support in the Safe Route to School funding for 
North Dakota's rural school zones.
    As the County Engineer, I also serve as the senior 
technical advisor on the $3.1 billion Fargo-Moorhead 
Metropolitan Area Flood Risk Management Project. Key to this 
project is that it includes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 
first ever private-public partnership, P3, which awarded a $1.1 
billion contract to build 30 miles of diversion channel, 12 
county road bridges, four interState highway bridges, four 
railroad bridges, and two aqueducts.
    I want to thank you for your support of this historic 
project by providing $437 million in IIJA funding to finish the 
construction of this project and provide the region with 
permanent flood protection by 2027.
    The IIJA provides a revenue stream that is needed across 
the counties in North Dakota and across the U.S. Unfortunately, 
these funds come with some challenges. That brings me to my 
last point.
    I am blessed to have a large staff of engineers and 
construction managers compared to many of my partner counties. 
I rely on them for design and construction of our roads, as 
well as research and grant opportunities.
    Regrettably, most counties in North Dakota and across the 
Country do not have an engineering staff. Their senior-most 
staff member is often the road superintendent focused on road 
maintenance. This makes it difficult for small counties to 
identify grant opportunity and navigate the application 
process.
    Since most counties do not have available technical 
knowledge to apply for and leverage these grant funding 
opportunities, I fear many counties will not even try to apply 
without a concerted effort to lessen the administrative burden 
that comes with these applications.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before this 
committee. I look forward to any questions you may have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Benson follows:]

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Benson, thank you for your testimony.
    I must tell you, I was keeping track of all the different 
projects you all have started. The bill is working. We have a 
lot of activity going. It is great to see that.
    I am certain there is a lot more you want to do. We are 
just getting started under the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
package. I think it is very encouraging to see the variety of 
transportation programs that have been started and the input 
that you have been able to do in your local communities.
    I want to start with a general question, if I might. That 
is, most of the decisions on priority-setting is made at the 
State level. If you look at the formula funding, 90 percent 
goes to the States. The States have input from local 
government, but those decisions are generally managed at the 
State level.
    The Transportation Alternatives Program are local 
applications, but the decisions are made at the State level, as 
well. On most of the competitive national grant programs, the 
State prioritizes and the State plays a critical role in which 
programs within a State are going to get the maximum attention 
at the national level.
    My fundamental question, having a panel of local officials, 
is it working the way you want it to work for local input, or 
is there anything we should be considering so that local 
officials have a more meaningful role in the way the States are 
making these priority decisions?
    Mayor Day, I will start with you, and we will just go down 
the row and the aisle.
    Mr. Day. Mr. Chairman, let me start off by saying that we 
have benefited from countless grants, especially Transportation 
Alternatives, that have passed through the State, so I want to 
be careful in providing you this answer, because we appreciate 
our friends at the State DOT.
    That being said, look no further than the execution of 
projects within our city limits, where the priorities of a 
State Department of Transportation and the priorities and 
values of the constituents that are going to have to use that 
piece of infrastructure, then a perhaps safer but certainly 
compromised solution. Those compromised solutions are never the 
safest nor the most efficient nor the best solution. We have 
countless examples of those.
    What I would like to emphasize is that, at the local level, 
whether it is a master planning process, and I can talk to you 
about our downtown master planning or our parks planning 
process, or whether it is a specific design project, such as 
our Eastern Shore Drive community corridor, or whether it is 
our Urban Greenway Plan, or our Rails to Trails Plan, each of 
those engaged the public directly in community-based planning.
    Those processes, where constituents of yours and mine and 
all of ours, but at the local level, have had a voice in 
articulating visions, priorities, their values, and even the 
details of what they would like to see in a project, those 
processes ought to be trusted. When at the local level, we hear 
what our constituents want out of a project, need out of a 
project, and then ask us to be held accountable for us, because 
they are going to ask us to maintain that project, I would say 
that we have demonstrated that we can be a trusted partner, and 
that direct allocation of resources to the lowest levels of 
government, whether that is a county or a municipality, is the 
best way to stay connected to those articulated values, those 
priorities, and again, I believe, even the design details of an 
infrastructure project in our communities.
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Carroll.
    Mr. Carroll. I certainly endorse everything Mayor Day said. 
I want to be careful not to take anything away from what I 
think Jim Willox is going to say over on my left here.
    But I think what you are hearing is right. We definitely 
appreciate our States and the role that they play. We depend on 
them for a lot, including the technical expertise to make sure 
we are doing everything the right way, and the accountability 
is important.
    However, if we have demonstrated over decades we know how 
to do something, then we should have shorter timeframes to turn 
around projects. Senator Cramer mentioned 2 years, even for 
low-cost paving projects, where we have been doing this decade 
after decade, and we may just have a few new features, it 
doesn't seem like even a 6-month or 10-month process makes any 
sense.
    What I think would be great is if we could incentivize 
States to achieve some performance standard or something like 
that in terms of improving local access, improving project 
delivery, and any creative ideas that make that an attractive 
thing for them to do, whether it is giving them better access 
to unallocated funds is an idea that I heard.
    It is not necessarily like it is all stick and not carrot. 
I think that would be really good for us to take up federally. 
We will work with our States to make it make sense on the 
ground.
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Willox.
    Mr. Willox. Thank you.
    I think there are two prongs to your question. There is the 
stuff that is directly to the local governments, and we need 
the broadest flexibility and actually the most time to work 
there, and that is good. But in Wyoming, it is generally 
working well. We meet with the director quarterly on a 
statewide association. Our director attends almost every one of 
our statewide commissioner meetings, and we have these 
conversations.
    What the burden is a lot of times are the rules from FHWA 
that have to pass through WYDOT to implement those programs. 
WYDOT may want to be more flexible, Wyoming Department of 
Transportation, may want to be more flexible, but the box that 
they are in provides some difficulty to tune it in to those 
local needs and those local unique characteristics.
    I would say, generically, to answer your question, it is 
working with some refinement. We always want that blend of a 
statewide approach and direct local. B the more flexibility and 
the more time we have, it always is better for us to deal with 
the local issues, inflationary pressures that we are dealing 
with now, and the nuance that is different in parts of the 
State, or adjacent States even have different needs. Overall, 
yes, I would rather it be this way than more be brought to the 
top. The more to the bottom, the better.
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Benson.
    Mr. Benson. Thank you, Senator Cardin.
    I will take a couple different angles to this. One, I 
definitely appreciate the ability for local decisions to be 
made on those applications and sending it more directly up 
instead of having to send everything through the North Dakota 
Department of Transportation. That being said, we have a great 
relationship with the director of the North Dakota DOT and 
their local government division.
    One of the challenges that we have found with this is that 
many of our smaller counties, there may be 3,000, 4,000 people, 
there may be maybe 6,000 to 8,000 people in the county. Their 
funding currently passes through the North Dakota DOT, who is 
Title Six compliant. Their county may not be Title Six 
compliant for exercising and using those Federal funds.
    We still have those small counties that needs to go back to 
the DOT and say, we need your help in assisting those funds, to 
go through them, or else they have to go through this 
compliance process, which, for a small community, may not be 
something that they are able to do.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you. Senator Cramer.
    Senator Cramer. Thank you.
    Mr. Benson, I want to start with you, and then we will go 
back around and talk a little bit about the, you talked 
extensively about BIP, there are two bridge funding programs. I 
think you said you have 41 major bridges in Cass County, 100 
maybe smaller ones.
    As I recall, North Dakota, statewide, it is many hundreds 
of bridges, obviously. If you could just elaborate a little bit 
on not just your experience, but maybe advising others of how 
to take advantage of that program, and then helping us, advise 
us on, if we can, how we would tweak it, simplify it, or for 
that matter, how the DOT might simplify it or allow more 
maximization of the bridge program.
    One thing that we have heard is, as tough as our roads are, 
bridges create a very significant challenge and safety risk. If 
you could just elaborate a little bit on the bridge program.
    Mr. Benson. Absolutely. Thank you, Senator Cramer.
    In Cass County and the counties that border Minnesota in 
North Dakota have about have of the county bridges in the State 
because of the winding, meandering rivers that flow to the Red 
River to the north. Because of that, yes, I have 550 bridges of 
which about half are on the Federal system of 20 feet or 
greater.
    That is similar to other neighboring counties. So It is a 
massive infrastructure demand that many of those bridges were 
put in in the 1930's, 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's, and again, 
for the old, tandem grain truck or single axle grain truck, not 
the semi-truck and large equipment that they need to carry 
today.
    To be able to use this program to bundle bridges, I think 
it really takes it upon counties to look differently. A lot of 
them are used to looking at, OK, we have a couple bad bridges. 
How can we get them done? Two years from now, we can save up, 
and we will apply for some Federal funding. We might have some 
local money to match, and we can knock out this bridge or maybe 
one or two bridges.
    But we have to look bigger now to look out, and having a 5-
year, 10-year plan on how we can bundle these into one project 
to submit through the BIP program, and then if we can get that 
bridge bundle to complete six, eight, ten bridges in a county, 
or maybe it is marrying that project up with your sister 
county.
    Locally, there might be three or four bridges that are in 
the same part of your county that you could lump those together 
and have one large project, and again, knock out. Even for 
North Dakota to be able to do $5 million or $10 million, that 
is a lot of bridges that can be completed.
    Senator Cramer. Let us just go this way and give you guys a 
break. Wyoming is probably similar.
    Mr. Willox. Thank you, Senator. I think what is valuable to 
realize is that connectivity issue that I talked about. If you 
can't get to the next road, what do you do? You can travel on a 
poor road. You can travel on a bad gravel road, but if that 
bridge has failed, you are not going to get there.
    The focus on bridges in this bill is really valuable. WYDOT 
in Wyoming is passing through 35 percent instead of the 
statutory minimum 15 percent so we can do a lot more of those 
bridges to increase that connectivity. We have old railcars 
that are bridges. We have an old railcar, and it works to a 
certain point, unless you point out the vehicles that we travel 
and the volume is different.
    But I think the focus on bridges is really positive. In our 
State, they are passing through more so we can do more to 
cities, towns, and counties. I do think that we will continue 
to need to focus on bridges whether they are rural or 
municipal, because I think those are our biggest threat to our 
infrastructure is the bridges and making sure we keep that 
connectivity to get from point A to B.
    Senator Cramer. Mr. Carroll, before you answer that 
question, what the heck happened to the Eagles last night? That 
was one of the craziest--but you know, you got that one loss, 
and now you can move forward.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carroll. Yes, no comment. Hopefully, it is just that, 
right? I can take one loss. Thank you for that.
    Senator Cardin. You were coming to Washington, so you 
wanted to make it possible.
    Senator Cramer. There you go.
    Mr. Carroll. I would have a much bigger smile if things 
went well.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Cramer. This is why he is a politician.
    Mr. Carroll. That is true. I appreciate that. Yes, I will 
say, just as you have heard from my colleagues, in a municipal 
environment, losing a bridge isolates the community. That is 
profound. People who rely on walking and biking in particular, 
if that bridge, which they have walked across for their whole 
lives is out, and some of them are out, that really has a huge 
impact on their quality of life, their life opportunities. We 
want to prioritize those projects, but we need the resources to 
do that.
    The bridge projects can be very complicated in an urban 
environment. I mention the program we are trying to kick off 
around bridges over electrified lines. Those are very complex 
because we need to coordinate the removal, the replacement of 
this infrastructure that we don't own before we can get to the 
infrastructure we do own to make fixes. That could add years to 
project timelines.
    Everything we can do to keep the focus on these bridges is 
going to help us a ton. We need to ramp up to that, though. So 
it is good to have some planning funds, some capacity building 
worked into the infrastructure law. It may take us a little bit 
of time to get to actual fixes, but if we take that perspective 
that this is more of a marathon, I think we are going to be 
very happy across the Country with the end results.
    Senator Cramer. Mr. Mayor, we are going to stall for 
Chairman Carper to gather his thoughts.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Day. Happy to.
    Senator, I will share two things, and both sort of positive 
tales. One, we really appreciate the funding that has been 
received in our community to address the rebuild of our Mill 
Street and Naylor Mill Road bridges. But there is a second 
tale, and this is of US Route 13 business right in the center 
of our city, which has been going through a multiyear design 
process and some construction to replace a 1929 bridge.
    The cautionary tale here is around flexibility. The 
original design of this project, of this bridge replacement, 
which included Federal, State, and local dollars, was oriented 
on incorporating the Maryland State Highway Administration's 
standard for bike lanes. This standard would have put bike 
lanes on a 35,000 car a day road, open to and adjacent to 
traffic, rather than recognizing that there was a parallel 
planning process ongoing at the local level for an urban 
greenway that would be adjacent and could, if collaboratively 
designed, prioritize safety as we wanted to, a principle that 
Maryland State Highway Administration has, and prioritize the 
throughput necessary on a 35,000 person a car a day, which I 
use every single day, which matters to all of us.
    When you look at those two processes in parallel, you would 
see an obvious solution. Just put it up on a curb and have the 
multi-user path right there, and everybody is happy. But that 
is not the way things happen. They happen in a silo, and the 
State DOT is working on its plans, and at the local level, we 
are working on ours.
    The solution has been, we are working together now, but it 
took somebody recognizing and arguing for, why can't we 
collaboratively work on these processes, which again, bring 
local vision, local priorities, local values, into a process 
and trust us with those things? Ultimately, things have worked 
out, but I do think we could have saved money and we could have 
saved time if that had been the standard way of doing business.
    Senator Cardin. We are joined by our distinguished 
Chairman.
    Senator Carper. No, it is me.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Cardin. I just want to underscore the point that 
Senator Cramer said earlier, the four Cs: Senator Cramer and 
Senator Cardin, we are the subcommittees, but it was Senator 
Carper and Senator Capito who set up the climate that we could 
have the success of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill by the 
work we did in our committee. We are really fortunate about his 
leadership on this committee. Senator Carper?
    Senator Carper. Thank you, Ben, to you and to your wingman 
and our good friend, Kevin. Thank you for your leadership.
    I think if people across the Country, many of whom I have 
heard say, why don't you work together in Washington? Why don't 
you just find stuff you can work together on? We passed, with a 
lot of support from these two gentlemen and certainly from 
Senator Capito and others, the most extensive, meaningful, 
consequential Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill we have ever 
passed. We are very proud of that.
    It is one thing to pass it. It is another thing to 
implement it. Part of our job, as you know, is to do oversight. 
We are doing that, and that is part of what today's hearing is 
all about.
    A special welcome to our friend from Salisbury, Maryland. 
In Delaware, we have no commercial television. We have a couple 
TV stations down in Salisbury. As Ben knows, if you want to 
message the people in Delmarva, Maryland or the people in 
Delmarva that are from Delaware, you want to be on your 
stations. We think a lot about Salisbury and the news coverage 
that you provide and the information that you provide, whether 
it is transportation infrastructure or any variety of other 
things.
    We welcome you all today. I walked in, Mr. Carroll, I 
walked in and I didn't look at the panel, but I just walked in, 
and I heard you speaking, and I thought it was James Lankford. 
I am going to ask you a question here in a minute, and we will 
see if you still use your James Lankford voice. He is one of 
our favorites, a really smart cookie and a good Senator. You 
could have been identified with a lot worse, so that is not a 
bad one to be involved with.
    I think Mr. Day mentioned Route 13. We have a very 
prominent family that came over from France a couple hundred 
years ago and settled in Northern Delaware. They started the 
DuPont company, what was a powder company initially, gunpowder, 
turned out to be something way, way more than that and still is 
doing amazing things around our Country and around the world.
    The DuPont family literally helped pay for building Route 
13, significant parts of Route 13 through Delaware and also 
funded schools for African American kids that otherwise would 
not have had a chance to get an education. I think we got the 
DuPont family, with a big boost and a big help, got Route 13 
down to the border with Maryland. You guys took it over from 
then. That was before we had bipartisan infrastructure 
legislation.
    I have a question, if I could now, we will see what voice 
you respond in. For Mr. Carroll, a question on local project 
delivery. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law significantly 
increased, as you know, the number of opportunities for local 
governments to access Federal Highway Funds, primarily through 
new, competitive grant programs. More grant opportunities will 
help cities, will help counties, and will help towns across the 
Country to fund local priorities that may or may not be 
prioritized by State departments of transportation.
    However, delivering federally funded projects can pose a 
challenge, as you know, especially for local agencies that have 
less capacity or less capability or experience with Federal 
programs. Some have a lot, and some have relatively little. The 
question is: how can Congress and the U.S. Department of 
Transportation help to build greater local capacity to both 
apply for and carry out federally funded highway projects? Mr. 
Carroll, please.
    Mr. Carroll. Thank you, I will do my best. I think that is 
a great question. I wish I had a pat answer.
    Senator Carper. Senator Lankford gave it to me.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carroll. That is right. I should be careful running 
around here, impersonating people, though. I think we need to 
look at models that have worked, identify best practices, work 
collaboratively with the States.
    Most States at the district level, most of the regional 
districts for FHWA are committed to try helping communities. 
But I would say we are often in passive mode, where it is the 
squeaky wheel that reaches out and keeps asking questions and 
knows who to call in D.C. or your State capital and ends up 
getting a little bit further ahead.
    I think it would be good if there was a little bit more 
proactive outreach. Some of the things that worked were really 
kind of put on the table as part of the program so that there 
is a model that we can look to when program guidance comes out 
or the notices of funding opportunities comes out. There is a 
lot of good outreach, and we really appreciate that. But if we 
could extend that a little bit longer, especially as folks are 
awarded, so that they know that they are doing it right, they 
are getting the support to do that, I think that could go a 
long way. Those are the ideas that come to my mind.
    Senator Carper. Good, thank you.
    I have one other question that would be, Mr. Chairman, for 
the entire panel, dealing with the discretionary grants. The 
U.S. Department of Transportation is still working, as you 
noted, to develop the Notice of Funding Opportunity for a 
number of new discretionary grant programs, including something 
called the PROTECT Grants and grants for communities that are 
charging and fueling initiatives.
    These charging and fueling infrastructure, EV and hydrogen 
fueling stations, that sort of thing, we put a lot of money 
into that, and we want to make sure we get our money's worth. 
Last time I checked, 30 percent of the carbon emissions, 
greenhouse gas emissions in our Country come from our mobile 
sources, so this is, as you know, hugely important stuff.
    Others, such as the Reconnecting Communities Program, have 
a Notice of Funding, but awards have not yet been made. As 
USDOT develops funding notices and selects recipients, what 
advice would you give the Department of Transportation on how 
they can help make sure that these grant programs work well for 
local recipients and prioritize projects that will most benefit 
the Administration's climate inequity goals?
    Mr. Benson, do you want to lead off with that, please? Tell 
me again where you are from.
    Mr. Benson. Cass County, North Dakota, the county that 
surrounds Fargo, the most populated city in North Dakota.
    Senator Carper. OK, good. Welcome.
    Mr. Benson. Thank you, Senator Carper.
    To your point, I think a couple different things. One, when 
it comes to some of the new Notice of Funding Opportunities 
that come out and then the application periods, one of the 
challenges that I have seen is that sometimes it is relatively 
quick, flash to bang, to when the NOFO comes out to when you 
have to have the application in.
    In some cases, I think some entities are looking at it and 
going, well, if I had known maybe a little while ago, I could 
have prepped, but next year I will probably have a project that 
will be ready to go. I think the time from the NOFO to when the 
application is due, especially this first round, and I think 
that is, in a lot of cases for a lot of these grant 
opportunities, this cycle, they are all new or many of them are 
new. So identifying projects that fit the criteria, now that 
you know the criteria, you can go back and relook and better 
prioritize those projects within your infrastructure plan. We 
only have so many dollars, whether it is a 10 percent match or 
not, we only have so many local dollars to expend on these 
projects every year.
    Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, could I have just a couple of minutes so the 
others can respond to this question?
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Chairman, you can have as much time as 
you want.
    Senator Carper. Thank you, thank you so much.
    Mr. Willox, do you agree with anything that Mr. Benson has 
just said?
    Mr. Willox. Ditto. Thank you, Senator.
    I think two things. Going back to your point about the 
electrification, there is a really good example there of how 
one size doesn't fit all and some adaption there. The NEVI 
Program requires charging stations with every 50 miles, it is 
the requirement coming from FHWA.
    We don't have gas stations that are 50 miles apart in 
Wyoming. Wyoming Department of Transportation applied for 11 
exemptions to that, and eight of them were denied without 
explanation. We need to have more, if we want to implement 
that, there needs to be more flexibility, particularly in those 
rural areas where there isn't even a rest area for 70 miles on 
the interState. We need to have that flexibility.
    If we want to implement charging stations, which I think is 
a laudable goal that we can agree on, we need to put them where 
it makes the most sense. The current box that the FHWA is 
working with doesn't allow for us to put those charging 
stations where practical.
    Also, they are about a $200,000 investment from the 
individual that wants it. It is an 80-20 match. It is about a 
million bucks for a four unit charging station. Maybe we ought 
to put two in and make it more economical, because the 
recapture is going to be extremely difficult.
    One specific example: if we want to help the carbon 
emissions with electrification, let us make that eligibility a 
little broader, so we can get it where it makes sense, and 
there will be some economic return.
    Again, capacity for applying is always an issue. The 
commissioner may be the guy writing the grant, and it may be 
the county clerk that has to comply with it, so the simpler we 
can have for all grants is important. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for that.
    Mr. Carroll, please, same question.
    Mr. Carroll. Yes, so I will make a couple comments about 
the NEVI. I will just say that we are really enthusiastic for 
it. I think the kinds of issues that my colleagues are raising, 
we will keep our eyes on. Because even in a city where we do 
have denser spacing of fueling opportunities for the existing 
fueling options, we want to make sure that the spread is good 
and that people have equitable access. If we can kind of have a 
little bit of discretion and flexibility in locating the 
stations that end up coming into place as we zone for different 
things, that would be helpful for us.
    I will also shift a little bit and just say, I really 
appreciate the focus on resilience and programs like PROTECT, 
especially capacity building. I have talked a lot today about 
how important it is for us to work with communities, to hear 
their voices in the decisions we make. So the opportunities to 
do some community-level capacity building to bring people to 
the table for conversations about infrastructure is going to be 
really crucial for us to be successful.
    Senator Carper. Do you have a favorite team in the NFL this 
year?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Carroll. Yes, I do. Yes, I do.
    Senator Cardin. The Denver Broncos?
    Mr. Carroll. No, not the Denver Broncos. It is the 
Philadelphia Eagles, and I will sing the fight song, if you 
would like me to.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. We will see, we will see. I was saying a 
couple of weeks ago, until the Phillies dropped out of the 
World Series----
    Mr. Carroll. It has been a hard last couple of weeks.
    Senator Carper. It was tough. It was tough, but they got 
beat by a very good team. I said that a couple nights before 
the Phillies were eliminated, if the Phillies won the World 
Series and the Eagles won the Superbowl, the citizens of the 
city would probably have burned the city to the ground, and 
they probably would.
    Mr. Carroll. No comment.
    Senator Carper. That wouldn't happen in Salisbury.
    Mr. Day, answer my original question please, that I was 
asking.
    Mr. Day. Although, I will say, our minor league baseball 
team is pretty good. Delmarva Shorebirds.
    Senator Carper. Oh, yes, they are.
    Mr. Day. I don't want to repeat anything that you have 
heard. I do agree with the concerns that you have heard about 
implementation.
    What I will say it, there are several examples within the 
legislation that have set a better standard. Particularly, we 
have seen the reduced narrative requirements, the simplified 
benefit-cost analysis requirement. All of that makes it easier 
on smaller communities, rural communities, to be able to 
participate in applying and turning around quickly an 
application for some of these grants.
    The other thing I would say is that many of our communities 
have been trusted and developed experience when it comes to the 
application for and management of certain block grants. Over at 
HUD, our CDBG dollars, that is something most of our 
communities are familiar with how to manage.
    So, when it comes to the Surface Transportation Block 
Grants and applying for those dollars, I would say opening or 
lowering the threshold for which communities can apply and have 
access to those funds, to even the lowest level of NPO, so 
50,000, urbanized areas that have 50,000, I think most of us 
are prepared to take on those rigorous grant management 
processes.
    Trust us to deliver with the limited capacity we have and 
to be responsible and, ultimately, held accountable.
    Senator Carper. Thanks so much for letting me go over my 
time. I just want to say to those of you from Maryland and 
Pennsylvania and from the Dakotas or from Wyoming, we very much 
appreciate and enjoy working with you as Senate delegations. We 
are not all Democrats or Republicans, but we work across the 
aisle pretty well in this committee, very well in this 
committee.
    We are especially proud of the two men sitting to my right. 
We just say thank you for sitting in here to work with us and 
get stuff done. Thank you.
    Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Chairman, this has been an 
incredible panel and really helpful. I want to thank all four 
of our witnesses.
    Mr. Benson, you raised very important points about 
capacity. If you are dealing with a local government that 
doesn't have that capacity to do what you are saying, there has 
got to be accommodations made. So I just really want to thank 
you for bringing that to the attention of our committee.
    Mr. Willox, your point about the regulatory process is 
something we struggle with, so it is a process. It is an 
ongoing issue, and I think your comments are going to be very 
helpful to us in trying to continue our work together so that 
the objectives are accomplished. If you delay, it is denied. We 
recognize that.
    Mr. Carroll, as you were talking about the importance of 
pedestrian and bike paths in downtown Philadelphia, I was 
thinking of Baltimore, which is a similar situation. We can't 
survive, literally, unless we have safe ways that people can 
walk and bike. In Philadelphia, you are right. If we want to 
preserve the history of Philadelphia and the population you 
have in that city, you have to be able to have safe ways to 
travel. I appreciate your bringing that to our attention.
    Mayor Day, I was thinking very much about Route 50 and what 
it has done to certain communities. I have seen the communities 
firsthand. We built Route 50 so we could get people to the 
beaches in Delaware and Maryland. That was the reason why we 
did all of these roads to help people that didn't necessarily 
come from Salisbury itself.
    There is an equity issue that we have to deal with. I think 
your testimony has helped us understand that the tools here can 
really help the economic growth of our local communities, make 
them safer, and provide equity.
    Mr. Carroll, your answer on the electric vehicles is right. 
Equitable access is going to be a critical issue here. Access 
is going to be a critical issue for communities that have been 
underserved in the past. We are committed to including that in 
the Bipartisan Infrastructure package.
    I want to thank all four of you for your contributions to 
the record today and to the hearing. I can assure you we are 
listening. We are proud of the 1-year anniversary. We have much 
more ahead of us, but we have to build on this in the future, 
and you have helped us establish that record. Thank you all 
very much.
    Before we adjourn, some housekeeping. Senators will be 
allowed to submit written questions for the record through the 
close of business on Tuesday, November 29th. We will compile 
those questions and send them to our witnesses. We will ask you 
to reply by Tuesday, December 13th.
    With that, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:54 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                                 [all]