[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]





 
REVIEWING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS 
                                  ACT

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

                                (118-8)

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                          HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 28, 2023

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
             
             
      [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       
             
             


     Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
     transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                             transportation
                             
                             
                             
                             
                          ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 52-631          WASHINGTON : 2023
                           
                             
                             

             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

  Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington,             Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, 
  Ranking Member                     Arkansas
Eleanor Holmes Norton,               Daniel Webster, Florida
  District of Columbia               Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Grace F. Napolitano, California      Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Brian Babin, Texas
John Garamendi, California           Garret Graves, Louisiana
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiavid Rouzer, North Carolina
Andre Carson, Indiana                Mike Bost, Illinois
Dina Titus, Nevada                   Doug LaMalfa, California
Jared Huffman, California            Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Julia Brownley, California           Brian J. Mast, Florida
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey       Puerto Rico
Mark DeSaulnier, California          Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Salud O. Carbajal, California        Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Greg Stanton, Arizona,               Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
  Vice Ranking Member                Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey,
Colin Z. Allred, Texas                 Vice Chairman
Sharice Davids, Kansas               Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Lance Gooden, Texas
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Tracey Mann, Kansas
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Burgess Owens, Utah
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts      Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana            Chuck Edwards, North Carolina
Patrick Ryan, New York               Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Mary Sattler Peltola, Alaska         Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Robert Menendez, New Jersey          Eric Burlison, Missouri
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon                 John James, Michigan
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio            Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan        Brandon Williams, New York
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
                                     Mike Collins, Georgia
                                     Mike Ezell, Mississippi
                                     John S. Duarte, California
                                     Aaron Bean, Florida

                  Subcommittee on Highways and Transit

    Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, 
        Arkansas, Chairman
Eleanor Holmes Norton,               Daniel Webster, Florida
  District of Columbia, Ranking Memberhomas Massie, Kentucky
Jared Huffman, California            Mike Bost, Illinois
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Doug LaMalfa, California
Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Patrick Ryan, New York               Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Robert Menendez, New Jersey          Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon,                Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
  Vice Ranking Member                Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Lance Gooden, Texas
Grace F. Napolitano, California      Tracey Mann, Kansas
Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Burgess Owens, Utah
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiady Yakym III, Indiana
Julia Brownley, California           Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Greg Stanton, Arizona                Chuck Edwards, North Carolina
Colin Z. Allred, Texas               Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Eric Burlison, Missouri
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio            Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
John Garamendi, California           Brandon Williams, New York
Dina Titus, Nevada                   Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
Salud O. Carbajal, California        Mike Collins, Georgia
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts      John S. Duarte, California,
Mark DeSaulnier, California            Vice Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) Aaron Bean, Florida
                                     Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)


                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, a Representative in Congress from 
  the State of Arkansas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Highways 
  and Transit, opening statement.................................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Delegate in Congress from the 
  District of Columbia, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
  Highways and Transit, opening statement........................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................     5
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................     6
    Prepared statement...........................................     8

                               WITNESSES

Marc D. Williams, P.E., Executive Director, Texas Department of 
  Transportation, on behalf of the American Association of State 
  Highway and Transportation Officials, oral statement...........    10
    Prepared statement...........................................    12
Dwayne Boyd, President, Midsouth Region, CRH Americas Materials, 
  on behalf of the National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association, 
  oral statement.................................................    21
    Prepared statement...........................................    23
Aric Dreher, Assistant General Manager, Cianbro, on behalf of the 
  Associated Builders and Contractors, oral statement............    28
    Prepared statement...........................................    29
Paula Hammond, Senior Vice President, WSP USA, on behalf of the 
  American Road and Transportation Builders Association, oral 
  statement......................................................    31
    Prepared statement...........................................    32

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Submissions for the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford:
    Press Release of July 7, 2022, Statement of Sen. Kevin Cramer 
      on Federal Highway Administration's Greenhouse Gas 
      Emissions Performance Measure Proposed Rule................     2
    Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers.........    85
    Statement of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers......    89

                                APPENDIX

Question from Hon. Dina Titus to Marc D. Williams, P.E., 
  Executive Director, Texas Department of Transportation, on 
  behalf of the American Association of State Highway and 
  Transportation Officials.......................................    91
Question from Hon. Dina Titus to Paula Hammond, Senior Vice 
  President, WSP USA, on behalf of the American Road and 
  Transportation Builders Association............................    91




                             March 24, 2023

    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

    TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
    FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
    RE:      LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Reviewing the 
Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act''
_______________________________________________________________________


                               I. PURPOSE

    The Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the Committee 
on Transportation and Infrastructure will meet on Tuesday, 
March 28, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2167 of the Rayburn House 
Office Building to receive testimony on ``Reviewing the 
Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.'' 
The hearing will provide Members an opportunity to hear from 
stakeholders to examine the issues, successes, and challenges 
associated with the Administration's implementation of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, P.L. 117-58). 
Members will receive testimony from representatives from the 
American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials (AASHTO), the National Stone, Sand and Gravel 
Association (NSSGA), the Associated Builders and Contractors 
(ABC), and American Road & Transportation Builders Association 
(ARTBA).

                             II. BACKGROUND

IIJA

    On November 15, 2021, the President signed IIJA into law, 
representing the largest Federal investment in decades in the 
United States' infrastructure.\1\ This legislation provided 
$1.2 trillion for infrastructure programs over the five-year 
period from Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 to FY 2026, to sustain and 
modernize the Nation's infrastructure, including roads, 
bridges, transit, railroads, and airports, as well as energy 
and broadband.\2\ Of the total provided in IIJA, approximately 
$660 billion is administered by the Department of 
Transportation (DOT).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58, (2021), 135 Stat. 429 [hereinafter IIJA].
    \2\ Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, FHWA, available at https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/ [hereinafter Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law].
    \3\ See DOT, IIJA, Authorized Funding FY 2022 to FY 2026, available 
at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/
DOT_Infrastructure_Investment_and_
Jobs_Act_Authorization_Table_%28IIJA%29.pdf (Comm. on Transp. and 
Infrastructure calculation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Subcommittee has jurisdiction over the following modal 
administrations and offices within the DOT: the Federal Highway 
Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration 
(FTA), the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), 
certain programs under the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA), and certain programs under the Office 
of the Secretary of Transportation (OST).\4\ IIJA provided 
approximately $529 billion for programs under the purview of 
the Highways and Transit Subcommittee.\5\ Specifically, the law 
provides:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ H. Comm. on Transp. and Infrastructure, Jurisdiction and 
Activities Subcomm. on Highways and Transit of the H. Comm. on Transp. 
and Infrastructure, 118th Cong. 1 (2023) (on file with Comm.) 
[hereinafter Jurisdiction and Activities].
    \5\ See Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, supra note 2 (Comm. on 
Transp. and Infrastructure calculation based on IIJA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L$365 billion for highway programs administered by 
the FHWA; \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ See id. (providing further information on highway programs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L$108 billion for transit programs administered by 
the FTA; \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See FTA, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, available at https://
www.transit.dot.gov/BIL (providing further information on transit 
programs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L$43 billion for multimodal project, safety, and 
innovation grant programs administered by the OST; \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ DOT, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Dashboard, available at 
https://www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law-dashboard (last updated Dec. 28, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L$8 billion for safety programs administered by 
the NHTSA; \9\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ See NHTSA, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, available at https://
www.nhtsa.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law (providing further 
information on NHTSA programs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     L$5 billion for motor carrier safety programs 
administered by the FMCSA.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ FMCSA, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Impacts for FMCSA Grant 
Programs, DOT, https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/Bipartisan-Infrastructure-Law-
Grants (last updated Jan. 6, 2022).

    Taken together, IIJA's five-year average funding for modes 
under the Subcommittee's jurisdiction increased significantly; 
for example, FTA funding increased by 67 percent and FHWA 
funding increased by 56 percent compared to the five-year 
average funding authorized in the Fixing America's Surface 
Transportation Act (FAST Act, P.L. No. 114-94). In addition, 
IIJA quintupled the amount of competitive grants the Secretary 
of Transportation will award.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\ Jeff Davis, Status Check: The First Year of IIJA Competitive 
Grant Funding, Eno Ctr. for Transp., (Sept. 6, 2022), available at 
https://www.enotrans.org/article/status-check-the-first-year-of-iija-
competitive-grant-funding/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIGHWAY TRUST FUND (HTF)

    The landmark Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 (P.L. 84-627) 
established a ``user pays'' funding mechanism to provide 
financial certainty for the newly authorized National System of 
Interstate and Defense Highways. It created the Highway Trust 
Fund (HTF) and funded it through Federal excise taxes levied on 
motor fuels, heavy truck and trailers, heavy truck tires, and 
heavy vehicle use taxes.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\ Jurisdiction and Activities, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1956, the excise tax rate for highway use of motor fuels 
was three cents per gallon. The tax rate and structure has been 
revised several times since then. The current rates of 18.4 
cents per gallon of gasoline and 24.4 cents per gallon of 
diesel went into effect on October 1, 1993. In addition, all 
receipts from motor fuel taxes originally were deposited into 
the HTF.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Id. at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since 1982, portions of enacted gasoline and diesel tax 
increases were deposited into a newly created Mass Transit 
Account (MTA) within the HTF to fund public transportation 
programs.\14\ Currently, of the 18.4 cents per gallon Federal 
excise tax on gasoline, 15.44 cents is deposited into the 
Highway Account (HA), 2.86 cents is deposited into the MTA and 
0.1 cent is deposited into the Leaking Underground Storage Tank 
(LUST) Trust Fund. Of the 24.4 cents per gallon Federal excise 
tax on diesel, 21.44 cents is deposited into the HA, 2.86 cents 
is deposited into the MTA, and 0.1 cent is deposited into the 
LUST Trust Fund. All other taxes are deposited into the HA.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Id. at 5.
    \15\ Id. at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Federal motor fuel taxes have lost significant purchasing 
power since Congress last increased the tax rate 30 years ago. 
In addition, improved vehicle fuel efficiency and vehicles 
using alternative forms of fuel have further eroded Federal 
revenues. This combination has contributed to a gap between HTF 
revenues and expenditures.\16\ Since 2008, Congress has 
periodically transferred amounts from the general fund of the 
Treasury and other sources into the HTF to ensure that it can 
continue to pay its obligations.\17\ Between FYs 2008 and 2021, 
Congress transferred approximately $275 billion to the HTF, of 
which $118 billion was transferred to the HTF under IIJA.\18\ 
Despite these transfers, the Congressional Budget Office's 
(CBO) most recent estimate projects the HTF will be insolvent 
again in FY 2027.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Id. at 6.
    \17\ Id. at 6.
    \18\ Briefing from Staff, FHWA to H. Comm. on Transp. and 
Infrastructure Staff (Jan. 19, 2023, 2:00 p.m. ET).
    \19\ CBO, The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2023 to 2033 18 (2023), 
available at https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-02/58848-
Outlook.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To bridge the gap between revenues and spending, Congress 
would need to significantly cut transportation spending, raise 
Federal motor fuel taxes, or implement another method to 
provide revenues for the HTF. In recent years, there has been a 
growing focus on a mileage-based user fee, which levies a tax 
on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), as a potential future 
substitute for the current motor fuels taxes. This user fee 
could address the challenges of capturing rising fuel 
efficiency and electric vehicles. In several states, pilot 
programs are underway to test different VMT collection methods, 
as well as address subsequent challenges. In addition, IIJA 
required the Secretary of Transportation to establish an 
alternative funding advisory board and a National motor vehicle 
per-mile user fee pilot program.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ Jurisdiction and Activities, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   III. IIJA IMPLEMENTATION OVERVIEW

    Since IIJA's enactment nearly a year and a half ago, DOT 
states that FHWA has distributed almost $125 billion in highway 
formula funding to the States and announced 300 discretionary 
grants or cooperative agreements totaling approximately $2.7 
billion.\21\ ARTBA's Highway Dashboard, which uses data from 
FHWA, indicates that States have used those formula dollars to 
support 34,300 projects across the country.\22\ FTA has 
distributed approximately $35 billion in transit formula 
funding and announced 249 awards totaling $2.75 billion, and 
OST has announced approximately $4.1 billion in discretionary 
grants.\23\ However, some stakeholders have raised concerns 
with the slow rollout of IIJA funding. A 2023 outlook survey of 
its member companies by the Associated General Contractors of 
America found that just five percent of companies responded 
they have worked on IIJA-funded projects to date, while six 
percent responded they had successfully bid on projects for 
which work had yet to begin.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ Email from FHWA Staff to H. Comm. on Transp. and 
Infrastructure Staff (Mar. 14, 2023, 8:04 a.m.) (on file with Comm.).
    \22\ See ARTBA, Highway Dashboard--IIJA, available at https://
www.artba.org/economics/highway-dashboard.
    \23\ Verbal communication from OST Staff to H. Comm. on Transp. and 
Infrastructure Staff (Mar. 15, 2023, 2:25 p.m.); Email from FTA Staff 
to H. Comm. On Transp. & Infrastructure Staff (March 16, 2023, 3:57 
p.m.) (on file with Comm.).
    \24\ Assoc. Gen. Contractors of Am., Sage, High Hopes for Public 
Funding Amid Workforce and Supply Chain Challenges: The 2023 
Construction Hiring and Business Outlook, (2023), available at https://
www.agc.org/sites/default/files/users/user22633/
2023_Construction_Hiring_and_Business_Outlook_Report_Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To provide information on discretionary grants programs, 
DOT created the ``Key Notices of Funding Opportunity website 
that provides estimated timing for forthcoming Notices of 
Funding Opportunity (NOFOs) and application closing dates for 
NOFOs that have already been announced.\25\ To enable 
interested parties to track the deployment of IIJA funding, the 
Administration's website includes an interactive map showing 
the location of formula and discretionary projects.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ See DOT, Key Notices of Funding Opportunity, available at 
https://www.transportation.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/key-
notices-funding-opportunity (last updated Mar. 23, 2023).
    \26\ See Gen. Servs. Admin., Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
Dashboard, available at https://d2d.gsa.gov/report/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law-bil-maps-dashboard (last updated Feb. 15, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, there are several programs that have not been 
implemented or require additional clarity. For examples, the 
Department has not yet implemented provisions related to VMT, 
including establishing the alternative funding advisory board 
that is a precursor to pursuing a National VMT pilot 
program.\27\ Further, the Administration has not issued final 
guidance related to the Build America, Buy America Act (BABAA). 
The Administration released initial implementation guidance on 
April 18, 2022, and on February 9, 2023, the Office of 
Management and Budget issued proposed guidance.\28\ In the 
interim, FHWA issued Questions and Answers related to BABAA on 
February 1, 2023, and on February 7, 2023, FTA held a webinar 
on the applicability of the BABAA construction materials 
provision.\29\ However, the stakeholder community has stated 
that it needs additional clarity and final guidance in order to 
ensure proper compliance with these provisions.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ IIJA, supra note 1, Sec.  13002(g)(1).
    \28\ See M-22-11, Memorandum from Shalanda D. Young, Dir., Off. of 
Mgmt. and Budget, (Apr. 18, 2022), available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/M-22-11.pdf; Guidance for 
Grants and Agreements, 88 Fed. Reg. 8,374 (Feb. 9, 2023), available at 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-02-09/pdf/2023-02617.pdf.
    \29\ FHWA, FHWA's Buy America Q and A for Federal-aid Program, 
available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/contracts/
buyam_qa.cfm; FTA, Buy America Update, Construction materials Waiver 
for Certain Contracts and Solicitations, FTA Internal Webinar, YouTube, 
(Feb. 7, 2023), available at https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=61UYE680by4.
    \30\ Verbal information provided to the Committee from multiple 
stakeholders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Stakeholders and some members of Congress are concerned 
about the Administration's overreach in its promulgation of 
recent DOT rules and guidance materials.\31\ For example, on 
December 16, 2021, FHWA released a controversial memorandum 
entitled ``Information: Policy on Using Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law Resources to Build A Better America'' to put 
forth ``an overarching framework to prioritize the use of 
[IIJA] resources,'' towards existing infrastructure assets over 
adding new highway capacity.\32\ It stated that ``FHWA will 
work with recipients to encourage and prioritize the repair, 
rehabilitation, reconstruction, replacement and maintenance of 
existing transportation infrastructure, especially the 
incorporation of safety, accessibility, multimodal, and 
resilience features. Projects to be prioritized include those 
that maximize the existing right-of-way for accommodation of 
non-motorized modes and transit options that increase safety, 
accessibility, and/or connectivity.'' \33\ In addition, 
stakeholders and elected officials were concerned that this 
memorandum would have contradicted the longstanding Federal-
state partnership that has provided states the flexibility to 
prioritize projects to address their own challenges.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ Letter from Sam Graves, Ranking Member, H. Comm. on Transp. 
and Infrastructure to the Honorable Pete Buttigieg, Sec'y, Dep't of 
Transp., (Sept. 23, 2022) (on file with Comm.).
    \32\ Memorandum from Stephanie Pollack, Deputy Adm'r, FHWA to 
Associate Administrators, et. al., (Dec.16, 2021), available at https:/
/www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/
building_a_better_america-policy_framework.cfm.
    \33\ Jeff Davis, FHWA Replaces 2021 IIJA ``Guidance Memo'' with a 
More State-Deferential Version, Eno Ctr. for Transp., (Mar. 3, 2020), 
available at https://www.enotrans.org/article/fhwa-replaces-2021-iija-
guidance-memo-with-a-more-state-deferential-version/?code=FtFDf9
FVV30ArEGqXMDV9gnzvdxYHrmvXmSAjE8J33U%3D; Letter from U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce, et al. to the Honorable Shailen Bhatt, Adm'r, FHWA, (Jan. 18, 
2023), available at https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/
Coalition-Letter-FHWA-Memo-1.18.2023.pdf; Press Release, H. Comm. on 
Transp. and Infrastructure, Graves Statement on GAO Determination That 
FHWA Memo Urging States Against Road-Building Constitutes a Rule, (Dec. 
15, 2022), available at https://transportation.house.gov/news/
documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=406017; Letter from Rep. Rodney Davis, 
et al., to the Honorable Pete Buttigieg, Sec'y, Dep't of Transp. (Mar. 
7, 2022), available at https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
2022-03-07_davis_letter_to_buttigieg_re_ofd.pdf; GAO, Decision, Matter 
of: Federal Highway Administration--Policy on Using Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law Resources to Build a Better America, B-334032, (Dec. 
15, 2022), available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/820/814061.pdf 
[hereinafter GAO FHWA Decision]; Tom Ichniowski, FHWA Issues New IIJA 
Highway Funding Memo Clarifying States' Role, Engineering News Record, 
(Feb. 24, 2023), available at https://www.enr.com/articles/55987-fhwa-
issues-new-iija-highway-funding-memo.
    \34\ Letter from Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, Ranking Member, S. 
Comm. on Environment and Public Works & Rep. Mitch McConnell, S. 
Majority Leader to State Governors, (Feb. 9, 2022), available at 
https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/8/c/8c3b1b65-550b-493b-
b6cd-33b108e53eac/B44AC4860614C4E3FD4712AAB8652E9C.2022-02-07-general-
iija-governors-letter.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After repeated Congressional and stakeholder calls to 
rescind the memorandum were ignored, the General Accountability 
Office (GAO) determined, on December 15, 2022, that the 
memorandum was a rule and had a substantial impact on the 
rights and obligations of non-agency parties.\35\ Recently, on 
February 24, 2023, the FHWA issued an update to the memorandum, 
superseding the December 16, 2021, memorandum, which 
effectively reversed FHWA's guidance.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ Letter from U.S. Chamber of Commerce, et al. to the Honorable 
Shailen Bhatt, Adm'r, FHWA, (Jan. 18, 2023) available at https://
www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/Coalition-Letter-FHWA-Memo-
1.18.2023.pdf; Press Release, H. Comm. on Transp. and Infrastructure, 
Graves Statement on GAO Determination the FHWA Memo Urging States 
Against Road-Building Constitutes a Rule, (Dec. 15, 2022), available at 
https://transportation.house.gov/news/
documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=406017; Letter from Rep. Rodney Davis, 
et al., to the Honorable Pete Buttigieg, Sec'y, Dep't of Transp. (Mar. 
7, 2022), available at https://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/
2022-03-07_davis_letter_to_buttigieg_re_ofd.pdf; GAO FHWA Decision, 
supra note 33.
    \36\ See Am. Highway Users All., FHWA Administrator Bhatt Rescinds 
Fix-it-First Memo, (Nov. 2, 2010), available at https://
www.highways.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/deficit-commission-ltr.pdf; 
Memorandum from Shailen Bhatt, Adm'r, FHWA, to Assoc. Adm'rs, et. al., 
(Feb. 24, 2023), available at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-
infrastructure-law/using_bil_resources_build_better_america.cfm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, FHWA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to 
require states and metropolitan planning organizations to 
establish a new performance measure with declining targets for 
carbon dioxide and to measure and report greenhouse gas 
emissions associated with transportation under the Federal-aid 
highways program.\37\ Congress included provisions to address 
climate change and transportation resiliency in IIJA. Although 
a rule requiring a new highway related greenhouse gas 
performance measure was included in the House-passed INVEST in 
America Act (H.R. 3684), it was considered and disposed of 
during IIJA negotiations.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \37\ Nat'l Performance Mgmt. Measures; Assessing Performance of the 
Nat'l Highway System, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measure, 87 Fed. Reg. 
42,401 (July 15, 2022).
    \38\ Michael Laris, DOT proposal would require states to track 
carbon emissions from driving, Wash. Post, (July 7, 2022) available at 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/07/07/dot-
greenhouse-gas-emissions/; Press Release, FHWA, Biden-Harris 
Administration Takes Step Forward to Combat Climate Change, Announces 
Proposed Transportation Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Framework, 
(July 7, 2022), available at https://highways.dot.gov/newsroom/biden-
harris-administration-takes-step-forward-combat-climate-change-
announces-proposed; IIJA, supra note 1; H. Comm. on Transp. and 
Infrastructure Staff conversations with S. Comm. on Environment and 
Public Works Staff (Dec. 2022); Letter from Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, 
Ranking Member, S. Comm. on Environment and Public Works, et. al. to 
Stephanie Pollack, Adm'r, FHWA, (Oct. 13, 2022), available at https://
www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/3/9/39e04649-c8b0-4407-9d5f-
3f871a8a6c06/1D2F2CF32C13CBD96816CC0EDAF704DA.10.13.2022-senate-
republicans-letter-to-fhwa-re-docket-no.-fhwa-2021-0004.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       IV. ADDITIONAL CHALLENGES

    While IIJA provided historic levels of funding to address 
America's infrastructure needs, stakeholders have raised 
concerns that persistently high inflation is undermining those 
funding increases.\39\ The majority of funding in IIJA, under 
FHWA, FTA, and OST, allows recipients up to four years to 
obligate funding. If high inflation levels continue to hold, 
IIJA's funding increases in the outyears also would ``erode.'' 
\40\ However, if the higher inflation levels experienced since 
early 2021 drop, IIJA's buying power may not be affected in the 
outyears.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ Jenni Bergal, Inflation is Cutting Into States' Big 
Infrastructure Windfall, The Pew Charitable Trusts, (Nov. 30, 2022), 
available at https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/
stateline/2022/11/30/inflation-is-cutting-intostates-big-
infrastructure-windfall; David A. Lieb & Michael Casey, Inflation 
Taking a Bite Out of New Infrastructure Projects, Associated Press, 
(June 19, 2022), available at https://apnews.com/article/inflation-
usinfrastructure-projects-e89dcd5f3e623e532353f087265f9a63.
    \40\ Jeff Davis, How Much Could Inflation Erode IIJA Buying Power?, 
Eno Ctr. For Transp., (Apr. 27, 2022), available at https://
www.enotrans.org/article/how-much-could-inflation-erode-iija-buying-
power/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Inflation began rising in January 2021, reaching a 41-year 
record high of 9.1 percent in June 2022.\41\ As of February 
2023, the 12-month inflation rate had fallen to 6.0 
percent.\42\ This marks the 24th consecutive month that the 
rate remains far above the two percent the Federal Reserve 
targets for a stable economy.\43\ Additionally, producer 
prices--representing prices paid by businesses producing 
goods--increased 4.6 percent year-over-year.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ Press Release, U.S. Bureau of Labor Stat., Consumer Prices Up 
9.1 Percent Over the Year ended June 2022, Largest Increase in 40 Years 
(July 18, 2022), available at https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2022/
consumer-prices-up-9-1-percent-over-the-year-ended-june-2022-largest-
increase-in-40-years.htm.
    \42\ Press Release, U.S. Bureau of Labor Stat., Consumer Price 
Index--March 2023, (Mar. 14, 2023), available at https://www.bls.gov/
news.release/cpi.htm.
    \43\ 12-Month Percentage Change, Consumer Price Index, selected 
categories, U.S. Bureau of Labor Stat., available at https://
www.bls.gov/charts/consumer-price-index/consumer-price-index-by-
category-line-chart.htm; Board of Governors of the Fed. Reserve System, 
What is an Acceptable Level of Inflation?, https://
www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/5D58E72F066A4DBDA80B
BA659C55F774.htm (last updated July 25, 2011).
    \44\ Press Release, U.S. Bureau Of Labor Stat., Producer Price 
Indexes--February 2023 (Mar. 15, 2023), available at https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/ppi.nr0.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In early 2022, the Eno Center for Transportation warned 
that if inflation for highway costs averaged higher than seven 
percent through 2027, the increased funding provided for 
highways under IIJA could be eliminated entirely.\45\ In June 
2022, the AASHTO also raised concerns about the ability of 
states to capitalize on IIJA funding due to inflation, saying 
``[t]he cost of those projects is going up by 20 percent, by 30 
percent, and just wiping out that increase from the Federal 
government that they were so excited about earlier in the 
year.'' \46\ Prices for construction materials remain 
particularly steep. In February, the Associated General 
Contractors of America again warned that although inflation may 
be moderating in some areas, construction costs were still 
rising and squeezing businesses.\47\ However, in testimony 
before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in 
November 2022, the ARTBA stated it ``interprets the combination 
of available data as pointing to real--albeit heavily muted--
market growth over the last year.'' \48\ Additionally, ARTBA 
stated, ``Without the infrastructure law . . . we would likely 
be looking at a market contraction.'' \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ Jeff Davis, How Much Could Inflation Erode IIJA Buying Power?, 
Eno Ctr. for Transp. (Apr. 27, 2022), available at https://
www.enotrans.org/article/how-much-could-inflation-erode-iija-buying-
power/.
    \46\ David A. Lieb & Michael Casey, Inflation Taking a Bite Out of 
New Infrastructure Projects, Associated Press,(June 19, 2022), 
available at https://apnews.com/article/inflation-us-infrastructure-
projects-e89dcd5f3e623e532353f087265f9a63.
    \47\ Press Release, Associated Gen. Contractors of Am., Prices for 
Construction Materials Diverge Sharply in January as Demand Shifts from 
Homebuilding to Factory and Infrastructure Projects, (Feb. 16, 2023), 
available at https://www.agc.org/news/2023/02/16/prices-construction-
materials-diverge-sharply-january-demand-shifts-homebuilding-factory-
and-0.
    \48\ Putting the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to Work: The Private 
Sector Perspective Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Environment & Public 
Works, 117th Cong., (2022) (statement of Dave Bauer, President & CEO, 
Am. Road & Transp. Builders Ass'n), available at https://
www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/c/a/ca2062bc-d8ed-4fe8-b1fd-
17ed6d84e4c2/AC308B484A2FBC9F2384FB9F68A4ED9C.11-30-2022-bauer-
testimony.pdf.
    \49\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Fuel costs also began increasing in 2021, and over the past 
year, gasoline and diesel prices surpassed record highs.\50\ 
The rate at which these prices increased were also record-
breaking.\51\ These historically high prices contribute to 
increased business costs at multiple points in supply chains. 
After reaching a record high of $5.81 per gallon last summer, 
the National average price for a gallon of diesel fuel was 
$4.19 per gallon as of March 20, 2023, an increase of $1.10 per 
gallon from January 2021.\52\ The average price for a gallon of 
regular gasoline reached an all-time National high of $5.00 in 
June 2022, but as of March 2023 has fallen to $3.42 per 
gallon.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\ See U.S. Energy Info. Admin., Weekly U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail 
Prices, available at https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/
LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMD_EPD2D_PTE_NUS_
DPG&f=W.
    \51\ Data Spotlight, Bureau Of Transp. Statistics, Record Breaking 
Increases in Motor Fuel Prices in 2022, (Aug. 18, 2022), available at 
https://www.bts.gov/data-spotlight/record-breaking-increases-motor-
fuel-prices-2022.
    \52\ See U.S. Energy Info. Admin., Weekly U.S. No 2 Diesel Retail 
Prices, available at https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/
LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMD_EPD2D_PTE_NUS_
DPG&f=W.
    \53\ See U.S. Energy Info. Admin., Weekly U.S. Regular All 
Formations Retail Gasoline Prices, available at https://www.eia.gov/
dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_
PTE_NUS_DPG&f=W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like many industries spanning the United States economy, 
construction businesses are experiencing workforce challenges. 
Stakeholders have raised concerns about the shortage of workers 
and the impact it is having on building capital projects funded 
by IIJA.\54\ According a 2023 outlook survey conducted by the 
Associated General Contractors of America, some 83 percent of 
members cited workforce shortage as a challenge.\55\ The DOT's 
Inspector General stated that skilled labor shortages could 
affect the ability of grant recipients to complete projects on 
time and on budget.\56\ The report goes on to note that, in 
order to help address these challenges, DOT and its operating 
administrations have undertaken workforce development projects 
to support transportation industry efforts to recruit and 
retain employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \54\ Press Release, Associated Builders And Contractors, 
Construction Workforce Shortage Tops Half a Million in 2023, Says ABC, 
(Feb. 9, 2023), available at https://www.abc.org/News-Media/News-
Releases/entryid/19777/construction-workforce-shortage-tops-half-a-
million-in-2023-says-abc; Verbal Information from Stakeholder Meetings 
with H. Comm. on Transp. and Infrastructure Staff, (Jan.-Mar. 2023).
    \55\ Associated Gen. Contractors of Am., Sage, High Hopes for 
Public Funding Amid Workforce and Supply Chain Challenges: The 2023 
Construction Hiring and Business Outlook (2023), available at https://
www.agc.org/sites/default/files/users/user22633/
2023_Construction_Hiring_and_Business_Outlook_Report_Final.pdf.
    \56\ Memorandum from Eric J. Soskin, Inspector Gen. to the Sec'y of 
Transp., (Oct. 5, 2022), available at https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/
default/files/OIG%20Correspondence%20-
%20Challenges%20Facing%20DOT%20in%20Implementing%20IIJA.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    IIJA includes provisions to support worker training and 
retention. These include an allowance for highway formula 
funds--including National Highway Performance Program, Surface 
Transportation Block Grant Program, Highway Safety Improvement 
Program, and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program 
funds--to be used for workforce development.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \57\ See FHWA, Highway Funding for Workforce, available at https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovativeprograms/centers/workforce_dev/
OST_Workforce_Development_Fact_Sheet.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              V. WITNESSES

     LMr. Marc D. Williams, Executive Director, Texas 
Department of Transportation, on behalf of American Association 
of State Highway and Transportation Officials
     LMr. Dwayne Boyd, Regional President, CRH, on 
behalf of National Stone, Sand & Gravel Association
     LMr. Aric Dreher, Assistant General Manager, 
Cianbro, on behalf of Associated Builders and Contractors
     LMs. Paula Hammond, Senior Vice President, WSP 
USA, on behalf of American Road & Transportation Builders 
Association


REVIEWING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS 
                                  ACT

                              ----------                              


                        TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
              Subcommittee on Highways and Transit,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m. in 
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' 
Crawford (Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Mr. Crawford. The subcommittee hearing, ``Reviewing the 
Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act'' 
will come to order.
    I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to 
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the 
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at 
today's hearing and ask questions.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    As a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document into 
the record, please also email it to [email protected].
    I now recognize myself for the purposes of an opening 
statement.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD OF 
    ARKANSAS, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT

    Mr. Crawford. Good morning, and thank you to our panel of 
witnesses for being here today.
    Our transportation network is essential to Americans' 
mobility. It supports our quality of life, and it is vital to 
our economic competitiveness. Nearly 1\1/2\ years ago, Congress 
passed and the President signed into law the $1.2 trillion 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA.
    While I did not vote for the bill, our role today is to 
ensure effective and efficient execution of the current law. 
IIJA provided historic funding increases to address America's 
infrastructure, including over half a trillion dollars for 
programs under the subcommittee's jurisdiction. IIJA 
significantly increased funding for existing programs, created 
new programs with new eligibilities, and increased, by nearly 
500 percent, the amount of competitive grant funding the 
Secretary will award.
    Given the significant funding and discretion provided to 
the Secretary, it is essential that Congress performs its 
oversight role to ensure efficient and effective use of 
taxpayer dollars, and to ensure that the administration is 
implementing IIJA consistent with the letter of the law.
    The Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit 
Administration have distributed approximately $157 billion in 
formula funding to the States and local entities. In addition, 
FHWA, FTA, and the Office of the Secretary of Transportation 
have announced discretionary grants totaling about $9.6 
billion.
    While the Department has made progress distributing formula 
funding and awarding discretionary grants, there are very 
important areas where progress has stalled. In some cases, the 
administration is creating confusion among States and 
stakeholders, which could result in needless project delays.
    For example, the administration has not finalized its 
guidance on IIJA's Buy America provisions that pertain to 
federally funded infrastructure projects. OMB released initial 
guidance and later, proposed guidance, and agencies issued 
waivers and questions and answers, Q&As. Each new release of 
information has exacerbated the confusion and uncertainty among 
stakeholders, which is concerning, especially since most of the 
country is entering its construction season.
    We have also seen the Department push its own agenda, in 
direct contradiction of the law, through memorandum and 
executive action. Last July, the administration announced a 
notice of proposed rulemaking to require States and MPOs to 
create a new performance measure to cut greenhouse gas 
emissions stemming from transportation. However, requiring a 
rule related to greenhouse gas emissions was a policy 
considered during IIJA negotiations. In fact, it was debated at 
length, but expressly excluded from the final bill.
    I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a press 
release from July 7, 2022, from Senator Kevin Cramer, who 
serves as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure on the Senate EPW Committee, with his 
statement on FHWA's greenhouse gas emissions performance 
measures proposed rule.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
   Press Release of July 7, 2022, Statement of Sen. Kevin Cramer on 
 Federal Highway Administration's Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance 
    Measure Proposed Rule, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Eric A. 
                           ``Rick'' Crawford
July 07, 2022
 Sen. Cramer Statement on Federal Highway Administration's Greenhouse 
            Gas Emissions Performance Measure Proposed Rule
    WASHINGTON--U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Ranking Member of the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, issued the following 
statement in response to the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) 
proposed rule to impose greenhouse gas emissions performance measures 
on state departments of transportation and metropolitan planning 
organizations without any new authority from Congress:
    ``The Biden Administration's Federal Highway Administration is 
veering off course once again. First, they issued guidance aiming to 
upend the funding flexibility given to states and now they want to 
saddle state transportation departments with emission reduction 
requirements. In both instances, Congress expressly excluded these 
authorities in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and now the 
Administration is attempting an end-run based on their wishes, not the 
law.
    ``This proposed rule needs to be fully rescinded. It is dumb policy 
and the Biden Administration should take a hint from the recent West 
Virginia v. EPA decision which reminded agencies to stay within the 
confines Congress gave them.''

    Mr. Crawford. In another effort to exert its progressive 
policy preferences, FHWA released a December 16, 2021, 
memorandum that directed States to deprioritize projects that 
increased road capacity. This policy represented a complete 
departure from the successful and longstanding Federal-State 
partnership, was inconsistent with the law, and was met with 
confusion from the States and concerns from industry 
stakeholders. I was glad FHWA recently issued an updated 
memorandum superseding and effectively reversing the December 
16, 2021, memorandum.
    In addition, the administration has been using its notices 
of funding opportunity for discretionary grant programs to 
layer on requirements that do not exist in statute.
    Each of the issues I outlined have caused confusion and 
have the very real risk of delaying critical projects. And as 
everyone here knows, any project delay results in increased 
costs: something we can't afford in this environment of 
nontransitory high inflation, which is already eroding IIJA's 
funding increases.
    Oversight is not a Republican or a Democratic issue. 
Congress must fulfill its duty to ensure IIJA is being 
implemented as written and that resources are addressing our 
most pressing transportation infrastructure and supply chain 
needs. I look forward to hearing from the panel about successes 
and where improvements can be made as the Department continues 
implementation of IIJA.
    I would also like to recognize and offer my condolences to 
the families of the six workers killed last week in a highway 
construction zone near Baltimore. This tragic situation 
underscores the need to ensure the safety of all roadway users, 
including construction workers who are simply trying to do 
their jobs and help improve America's infrastructure.
    [Mr. Crawford's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, a Representative 
 in Congress from the State of Arkansas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on 
                          Highways and Transit
    Our transportation network is essential to Americans' mobility, 
supports our quality of life, and is vital to our economic 
competitiveness. Nearly one-and-a-half years ago, Congress passed and 
the President signed into law the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    While I did not vote for the bill, our role today is to ensure 
effective and efficient execution of current law. IIJA provided 
historic funding increases to address America's infrastructure, 
including over half-a-trillion dollars for programs under the 
Subcommittee's jurisdiction. IIJA significantly increased funding for 
existing programs, created new programs with new eligibilities, and 
increased, by nearly 500 percent, the amount of competitive grant 
funding the Secretary will award.
    Given the significant funding and discretion provided to the 
Secretary, it is essential that Congress performs its oversight role to 
ensure efficient and effective use of taxpayer dollars, and to ensure 
that the Administration is implementing IIJA consistent with the letter 
of the law. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal 
Transit Administration (FTA) have distributed approximately $157 
billion in formula funding to States and local entities.
    In addition, FHWA, FTA, and the Office of the Secretary of 
Transportation (OST) have announced discretionary grants totaling about 
$9.6 billion. While the Department has made progress distributing 
formula funding and awarding discretionary grants, there are very 
important areas where progress has stalled. In some cases, the 
Administration is creating confusion among States and stakeholders, 
which could result in needless project delays.
    For example, the Administration has not finalized its guidance on 
IIJA's Buy America provisions that pertain to Federally funded 
infrastructure projects. OMB released initial guidance and later, 
proposed guidance; and agencies issued waivers and Questions and 
Answers (Q&As).
    Each new release of information has exacerbated the confusion and 
uncertainty among stakeholders, which is concerning especially since 
most of the country is entering its construction season. We've also 
seen the Department push its own agenda, in direct contradiction of the 
law, through memorandum and executive action.
    Last July, the Administration announced a notice of proposed 
rulemaking to require States and MPOs to create a new performance 
measure to cut greenhouse gas emissions stemming from transportation. 
However, requiring a rule related to greenhouse gas emissions was a 
policy considered during IIJA negotiations--in fact, it was debated at 
length, but ``expressly excluded'' from the final bill.
    In another effort to exert its progressive policy preferences, FHWA 
released a December 16, 2021, memorandum that directed states to 
deprioritize projects that increased road capacity. This policy 
represented a complete departure from the successful and longstanding 
federal-state partnership, was inconsistent with the law, and was met 
with confusion from the States and concerns from industry stakeholders.
    I was glad FHWA recently issued an updated memorandum superseding 
and effectively reversing the December 16, 2021, memorandum. In 
addition, the Administration has been using its notices of funding 
opportunity for discretionary grant programs to layer on requirements 
that do not exist in statute.
    Each of the issues I outlined have caused confusion and have the 
very real risk of delaying critical projects. And as everyone here 
knows, any project delay results in increased costs--something we can't 
afford in this environment of non-transitory high inflation, which is 
already eroding IIJA's funding increases.
    Oversight is not a Republican or Democratic issue. Congress must 
fulfill its duty to ensure IIJA is being implemented as written and 
that resources are addressing our most pressing transportation 
infrastructure and supply chain needs. I look forward to hearing from 
the panel about successes and where improvements can be made as the 
Department continues implementation of IIJA.
    I would also like to recognize and offer my condolences to the 
families of the six workers killed last week in a highway construction 
zone near Baltimore. This tragic situation underscores the need to 
ensure the safety of all roadway users, including construction workers 
who are simply trying to do their job and help improve America's 
infrastructure.

    Mr. Crawford. I now recognize Ranking Member Holmes Norton 
for 5 minutes for an opening statement.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON OF THE DISTRICT 
   OF COLUMBIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS AND 
                            TRANSIT

    Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank 
subcommittee chair Rick Crawford for holding this hearing on 
the implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was one of the 
most important bills enacted last Congress. Within our 
subcommittee's jurisdiction, it provided $365 billion for 
highways, $108 billion for transit, $43 billion for multimodal 
grants, and $13 billion for highway and motor carrier safety.
    The work of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit helped 
set the bar high. Many of the funding levels in the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act are similar to what we 
proposed in the INVEST Act.
    And those Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act dollars 
are already being put to work. In my district, the Biden-Harris 
administration has announced the award of nearly $10 million 
for the District of Columbia Department of Transportation to 
buy zero-emission buses for the DC Circulator fleet. The DC 
Department of Transportation has also committed $15 million of 
Federal-aid highway funds to expand the Metropolitan Branch 
Trail, and another $18.7 million to preserve and repair the 
city's tunnels. That data is courtesy of the Highway Dashboard 
created by the American Road and Transportation Builders 
Association, and I look forward to hearing testimony from their 
witness today, Paula Hammond.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act isn't a DC-
specific success story--as the Highway Dashboard shows, 
projects are on the ground all across the country right now. 
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will benefit 
communities large and small, urban and rural. It will support 
private-sector businesses like the ones many of our witnesses 
today represent, and public-sector transportation departments 
and transit agencies. It makes meaningful investments in our 
workers, creating new allowances for States to invest in 
apprenticeships, on-the-job training, and partnerships with 
community colleges and vocational schools.
    The law also requires 5 percent of all zero-emission bus 
grants be put toward training our workers to operate and 
maintain the transit fleets of the future.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act also includes a 
new focus on supporting disadvantaged communities and using 
transportation infrastructure to renew our neighborhoods, 
rather than tear them apart.
    The law can help us start addressing some of the greatest 
challenges: the threat of climate change, the need to 
strengthen our economy and supply chains, and the 
responsibility that we have to build a transportation system 
that works for all.
    I know many Members on the other side of the aisle did not 
support the bill, but as we will hear today, the benefits of 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act are going to all 
communities, no matter their political leanings.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and 
working together to oversee this important law.
    [Ms. Norton's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
    Prepared Statement of Hon. Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Delegate in 
      Congress from the District of Columbia, and Ranking Member, 
                  Subcommittee on Highways and Transit
    I'd like to thank Subcommittee Chair Rick Crawford for holding this 
hearing on the implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act was one of the most 
important bills enacted last Congress. Within our subcommittee's 
jurisdiction, it provided:
      $365 billion for highways;
      $108 billion for transit;
      $43 billion for multi-modal grants; and
      $13 billion for highway and motor carrier safety.

    The work of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit helped set the 
bar high. Many of the funding levels in the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act are similar to what we proposed in the INVEST Act.
    And those Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act dollars are 
already being put to work. In my district, the Biden-Harris 
Administration has announced the award of nearly $10 million for the 
District of Columbia Department of Transportation to buy zero-emission 
buses for the DC Circulator fleet.
    The D.C. Department of Transportation has also committed $15 
million of federal-aid highway funds to expand the Metropolitan Branch 
Trail, and another $18.7 million to preserve and repair the city's 
tunnels.
    That data is courtesy of the Highway Dashboard created by the 
American Road and Transportation Builders Association, and I look 
forward to hearing testimony from their witness today, Paula Hammond.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act isn't a D.C.-specific 
success story--as the Highway Dashboard shows, projects are on the 
ground all across the country.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will benefit communities 
large and small, urban and rural. It will support private sector 
businesses, like the ones many of our witnesses today represent, and 
public sector transportation departments and transit agencies.
    It makes meaningful investments in our workers, creating new 
allowances for states to invest in apprenticeships, on-the-job 
training, and partnerships with community colleges and vocational 
schools.
    The law also requires 5 percent of all zero-emission bus grants to 
be put toward training our workers to operate and maintain the transit 
fleets of the future.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act also includes a new 
focus on supporting disadvantaged communities, and using transportation 
infrastructure to renew our neighborhoods, rather than tear them apart.
    The law can help us start addressing some of our greatest 
challenges--the threat of climate change, the need to strengthen our 
economy and supply chains, and the responsibility we have to build a 
transportation system that works for all.
    I know many members on the other side of the aisle did not support 
the bill--but as we will hear today, the benefits of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act are going to all communities, no matter their 
political leanings.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and working 
together to oversee this important law. Thank you.

    Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Ranking Member. I now recognize 
the ranking member of the full committee for an opening 
statement.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING 
     MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Crawford and 
Ranking Member Norton, for holding this hearing today. It is a 
welcome opportunity to highlight how Federal dollars are 
benefiting our communities--spurring transportation and 
infrastructure projects in every single congressional district 
that are creating jobs and driving economic growth.
    My message is simple today: there are great benefits to 
infrastructure funding, there are early results of the 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and there is more to come.
    You cannot have a big league economy with little league 
infrastructure.
    Last Congress, this committee answered the call of States, 
of local and Tribal governments, of industry, and other 
stakeholders, several of whom are on the panel today, that an 
aging, congested, and overburdened transportation network was 
badly in need of an overhaul. And thanks to the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law, or BIL, communities across the country are 
building better roads, bridges, transit stations, freight 
facilities, truck parking, bike lanes, and sidewalks.
    Transportation means jobs, good family-wage jobs that 
cannot be outsourced. These are private-sector construction and 
engineering jobs on projects scoped and selected by State and 
local governments with required local public input. Thanks to 
the BIL, we have updated decades-old Federal transportation 
policies to reflect economic, societal, and workforce needs. 
And thanks to the BIL, communities are building a cleaner, 
greener, safer, and more accessible transportation network.
    Congress didn't make this up. We followed the lead of 
States, cities, counties, and Tribes across the country who 
have been hard at work to modernize and transform the way 
people and goods move.
    Now, this committee's job is to oversee implementation of 
the $660 billion under the U.S. Department of Transportation. 
This dollar amount and the number of competitive grant 
opportunities is significantly larger than previous 
transportation bills the DOT has administered. It represents 
the largest increase in Federal highway investment since the 
late 1950s.
    The pace at which these dollars are reaching communities is 
impressive. A total of $200 billion has been made available 
from all the initiatives funded in the BIL, even those outside 
the scope of this committee, and DOT has issued the lion's 
share. DOT has already made available nearly $125 billion in 
formula funds to States for highways and bridges, including 
funding 21 percent of my own State's transportation budget that 
passed the legislature last year.
    To date, more than 3,700 bridge projects have launched. 
States supported 36,400 new projects with Federal highway 
formula funding through January 2023, according to analysis by 
ARTBA--another accomplishment. There is at least one new 
project underway in every congressional district in this 
country.
    ARTBA, as well, provided a summary to every member of this 
subcommittee on what is happening in your district. You know 
your districts best, but this information will help you know it 
even better. I encourage my colleagues to review that 
information.
    Thanks to the BIL in my own district, WSDOT is investing 
nearly $12 million in Federal-aid highway funds to rehabilitate 
the SR 529 Snohomish River Bridge in Everett. You don't need to 
know where it is. You just need to know the money is getting 
spent.
    Thanks to the BIL, U.S. DOT has awarded $25 million in 
RAISE grants to Whatcom County to replace the 60-year-old Lummi 
Island Ferry, and to the city of Lynnwood to construct a new 
six-lane, multimodal bridge over I-5, which will reduce 
congestion and build a more accessible transportation system 
for all.
    The BIL has also invested in more than 3,000 workforce 
projects across the country to train workers for in-demand 
jobs.
    There is more to come. The BIL will boost the U.S. economy, 
increase our domestic manufacturing base, and make our supply 
chains more resilient.
    We still have more work to do. I will continue to maintain 
regular communication with the administration. I will continue 
to work with Chair Graves, Chair Crawford, Ranking Member 
Norton, and all of you to ensure robust and fair oversight of 
these implementation efforts. It is critical that we get 
implementation of the BIL right. A successful rollout of BIL 
funding will truly demonstrate the value of infrastructure 
investment to everyone.
    And the BIL is not a set-it-and-forget-it law. We now need 
the follow through by Congress, State DOTs, U.S. DOT, cities, 
counties, transit agencies, Tribal governments, and private 
industry--all of us working together--to deliver these projects 
so communities get the maximum bang for the buck.
    Without investments made by the BIL, the economy would be 
in far worse shape. To critics who want to brush off benefits 
of the BIL, I point you to testimony today from Paula Hammond. 
As it correctly notes, even with inflation taken into account--
and inflation is a problem--there still has been market growth 
over the last year in the construction sector, whereas without 
the BIL, we would likely have seen market contraction.
    So, I am glad to say that, thanks to the BIL, the economy 
is on the move, but that is why we need to continue to see that 
implementation of the BIL happens, and I look forward to 
working with all of you to make sure that happens.
    [Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress 
    from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chair Crawford and Ranking Member Norton, for holding 
this hearing.
    Today's hearing is a welcome opportunity to highlight how federal 
dollars are benefiting communities--spurring transportation and 
infrastructure projects in every single Congressional District that are 
creating jobs and driving economic growth.
    You cannot have a big-league economy with little league 
infrastructure.
    Last Congress, this Committee answered the call of states, local 
and Tribal governments, industry, and stakeholders--several of whom are 
on our panel today--that an aging, congested and overburdened 
transportation network was badly in need of an overhaul.
    Thanks to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), communities 
across the country are building better roads, bridges, transit 
stations, freight facilities, truck parking, bike lanes and sidewalks.
    The benefits of the BIL are already underway, we are seeing early 
results and there is more to come.
    Transportation means jobs--good, family-wage jobs that cannot be 
outsourced.
    These are private sector construction and engineering jobs on 
projects scoped and selected by state and local governments with 
required local public input.
    Thanks to the BIL, we updated decades-old federal transportation 
policies to reflect economic, societal and workforce needs.
    And thanks to the BIL, communities are building a cleaner, greener, 
safer and more accessible transportation network.
    Congress didn't make this up--we followed the lead of states, 
cities, counties and Tribes across the country who have been hard at 
work to modernize and transform the way people and goods move.
    Now, this Committee's job is to oversee implementation of the $660 
billion under U.S. Department of Transportation.
    This dollar amount, and the number of competitive grant 
opportunities, is significantly larger than previous transportation 
bills administered by DOT.
    It represents the largest increase in federal highway investment 
since the late 1950s.
    The pace at which these dollars are reaching communities is 
impressive: A total of $200 billion has been made available from all 
the initiatives funded in the BIL, and DOT has issued the lion's share.
    DOT has already made available nearly $125 billion in formula funds 
for highways and bridges.
    To date, more than 3,700 bridge projects have launched.
    States supported 36,400 new projects with federal highway formula 
funding through January 2023, according to analysis by ARTBA (American 
Road & Transportation Builders Association), one of our witnesses 
today.
    There is at least one new project underway in every Congressional 
district in the country.
    ARTBA provided a summary to every member of the Subcommittee on 
what is happening in their district. I encourage my colleagues to 
review that information.
    Thanks to the BIL, in my district, WSDOT is investing nearly $12 
million in federal-aid highway funds to rehabilitate the SR 529 
Snohomish River Bridge in Everett.
    Thanks to the BIL, USDOT has awarded $25 million RAISE grants to 
Whatcom County to replace the 60-year-old Lummi Island Ferry, and to 
the City of Lynnwood to construct a new six-lane, multimodal bridge 
over Interstate 5, which will reduce congestion and build a more 
accessible transportation system for all.
    The BIL has also invested in more than 3,000 workforce projects 
across the country to train workers for in-demand jobs in 
manufacturing, semiconductors and more.
    There's more to come, the BIL will boost the U.S. economy, increase 
our domestic manufacturing base and make our supply chains more 
resilient.
    We still have work to do. I will continue to maintain regular 
communication with the administration, and I will continue to work with 
Chair Graves and all of you on robust and fair oversight of their 
implementation efforts.
    It is critical that we get implementation of the BIL right. A 
successful rollout of BIL funding will truly demonstrate the value of 
infrastructure investment, and make it easier for Congress to make 
these investments routine.
    BIL is not a ``set-it-and-forget-it'' law. We now need the follow 
through--by Congress, state DOTs, USDOT, cities, counties, transit 
agencies, tribes and private industry working together--to deliver 
projects so communities get the maximum bang for their buck.
    Without the investments made by BIL, the economy would be in far 
worse shape today.
    To the critics who want to brush off the benefits of the BIL, I 
point you to Ms. Hammond's testimony today.
    As ARTBA's testimony correctly notes, even with inflation taken 
into account, there has been market growth over the last year in the 
construction sector; whereas without the BIL, we would likely be seeing 
market contraction.
    Congress did its job to give the transportation construction sector 
the long-term resources it needed to get the economy back on track.
    Thanks to the BIL, the economy is on the move.
    That's why you'll see a clear focus among Committee Democrats to 
highlight the benefits of the BIL.
    I look forward to working with all of you to ensure the BIL is 
fully funded and implemented efficiently, effectively and according to 
Congressional intent.
    Thank you to each of our witnesses for joining us today. I look 
forward to your testimony.

    Mr. Larsen of Washington. And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Larsen. Before we go to our 
witnesses' statements, I would like to explain our lighting 
system.
    As you can probably figure out, green means go. Yellow does 
not mean slow down and proceed with caution, as you might 
expect. It actually means go like heck, because it is fixing to 
turn red. So, when it turns red, you will probably hear a 
little tap, tap, tap to remind you that your time is expired. 
So, I just wanted to make sure everybody was aware of that.
    And with that, I want to introduce our first witness, Mr. 
Marc Williams.
    Mr. Marc Williams is a member of the board of directors of 
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials and the executive director of the Texas Department of 
Transportation.
    Mr. Dwayne Boyd is with us, as well. He is here on behalf 
of the National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association. Thank you 
for being here. He is the president of the Midsouth region of 
CRH Americas Materials.
    Mr. Aric Dreher is assistant general manager of Cianbro in 
Baltimore. We appreciate you being here, as well.
    And then finally, Paula Hammond, senior vice president and 
national market leader, WSP USA, and 2023 chair, American Road 
and Transportation Builders Association.
    I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements 
be included in the record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    As your written testimony has been made part of the record, 
the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks to 5 
minutes.
    With that, Mr. Williams, you will be the first to go. I 
recognize you for 5 minutes.

TESTIMONY OF MARC D. WILLIAMS, P.E., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TEXAS 
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN 
  ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS; 
     DWAYNE BOYD, PRESIDENT, MIDSOUTH REGION, CRH AMERICAS 
 MATERIALS, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL STONE, SAND, AND GRAVEL 
 ASSOCIATION; ARIC DREHER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, CIANBRO, 
ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS; AND PAULA 
   HAMMOND, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, WSP USA, ON BEHALF OF THE 
     AMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS ASSOCIATION

TESTIMONY OF MARC D. WILLIAMS, P.E., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TEXAS 
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN 
   ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS

    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Chair Crawford, Ranking Member 
Norton, and members of the subcommittee. We appreciate the 
opportunity to appear today to discuss the implementation of 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    As I was introduced, my name again is Marc Williams, and I 
serve as executive director of the Texas Department of 
Transportation, and on the board of directors of AASHTO, and it 
is an honor to testify on behalf of AASHTO's members, the State 
departments of transportation of all 50 States, DC, and Puerto 
Rico.
    AASHTO thanks the subcommittee for your dedicated and 
tireless leadership on transportation issues, and my remarks 
today will focus on how States are working to implement the 
IIJA, and key opportunities and challenges ahead.
    AASHTO members understand the importance of partnerships, 
and have been working with U.S. DOT to ensure implementation of 
this important legislation that reflects the statutory 
provisions and the negotiated balance of policy priorities 
approved by Congress through the IIJA. Our State DOTs are 
committed to doing our part to achieve successful delivery of 
the IIJA by improving transportation safety, mobility, and 
resiliency.
    In Texas, Federal funding represents one-third of our 
overall transportation program, so, the IIJA's 5-year duration, 
its record increase in formula funds to States, and increased 
program flexibility enable Texas and our State DOT peers the 
ability to address our own unique transportation needs.
    Indisputably, the biggest challenge facing State DOTs is 
the dramatic increase in roadway fatalities over the past 3 
years. Every day, we are faced with the tragic loss of life 
across the country. I join Chairman Crawford in recognizing the 
six members of the Maryland DOT road crew who were tragically 
killed in a work zone crash last week, and we extend our 
condolences to their families and to the families of the over 
40,000 individuals we now lose every year on our Nation's 
roadways.
    In Texas, it has been over 22 years since we last 
experienced a single day without a traffic death. The IIJA's 
increased funding and flexibility for the Highway Safety 
Improvement Program allows States to expand our efforts to 
identify and implement important countermeasures to reduce 
fatalities and serious injuries.
    A particular concern that State DOTs are facing is the 
inflation and the supply chain challenges that have 
significantly driven up project costs. In Texas, our highway 
cost index growth exceeds 30 percent, effectively eroding the 
gain in Federal buying power offered through the IIJA.
    The recently reported $3.5 billion contract authority 
discrepancy between the FHWA and U.S. DOT accounting systems is 
another major concern to State DOTs, as this could negatively 
impact highway formula dollars, which are the most effective 
means of delivering Federal investment nationwide. States ask 
Congress and U.S. DOT to work to ensure that any accounting 
reconciliation will not impact State contract authority.
    While the large number of discretionary grants included in 
the IIJA presents added funding opportunities, they also create 
challenges for States, local partners, and even U.S. DOT. The 
cost of developing one grant application can reach up to 
$200,000 for some AASHTO members. The vast majority of 
proposals are unsuccessful, and those few that are successful 
can take up to 18 months for the grant to be finalized and 
funds obligated.
    AASHTO members strongly support the expansion of America's 
manufacturing capacity and workforce that are sought through 
the policy objectives of Build America, Buy America. However, 
uncertainty and complexities related to implementation of 
program requirements contribute to project delays and increased 
costs, with contractors and utility companies struggling to 
meet the new and evolving sourcing requirements. AASHTO will 
continue working with OMB to ensure that sufficient, specific, 
and permanent Buy America guidance is offered so that critical 
infrastructure projects are not disrupted while good faith 
efforts are made to integrate new requirements.
    On the new National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula 
Program, AASHTO and State DOTs are working to deliver the goals 
and outcomes established by Congress. To effectively utilize 
this funding, flexibility and adaptability in how and where to 
install EV chargers and the contracting methods will help 
States meet their unique needs.
    Workforce development remains a critical issue for AASHTO 
members, as it has contributed to the significant rise in some 
of the project delivery costs and presented challenges to State 
DOTs in managing their programs. Like other States, TxDOT is 
experiencing the highest workforce attrition rate we have seen 
in decades. In response, States are implementing measures to 
enrich workforce development, build initiatives to retain our 
workforce, and enhance and expand our DBE programs.
    To close, AASHTO members take seriously the responsibility 
to implement the IIJA to deliver critical transportation 
infrastructure. We are ready to work with Congress and U.S. DOT 
to continue to address implementation challenges contributing 
to cost increases and funding uncertainty, while improving 
program efficiencies.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I 
will be happy to answer any questions.
    [Mr. Williams' prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Marc D. Williams, P.E., Executive Director, Texas 
Department of Transportation, on behalf of the American Association of 
               State Highway and Transportation Officials
                              Introduction
    Chair Crawford, Ranking Member Norton, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today at this 
important hearing on implementation of the Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    My name is Marc Williams, and I serve as Executive Director of the 
Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and on the Board of 
Directors of the American Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Today, it is my honor to testify on 
behalf of AASHTO, which represents the state departments of 
transportation (state DOTs) of all 50 states, the District of Columbia, 
and Puerto Rico.
    I would like to extend AASHTO's utmost gratitude to you and your 
colleagues on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee 
on Highways and Transit (the Subcommittee) for your dedicated and 
tireless leadership on surface transportation reauthorization that 
ultimately led to the enactment of the IIJA. Stable and long-term 
policy and funding provided through a robust multiyear federal surface 
transportation bill remains crucial to the work of every single state 
DOT to meet its goal of improving safety, mobility, and access for 
everyone, which is articulated in AASHTO's 2021-2026 Strategic Plan 
\1\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 2021-2026 AASHTO Strategic Plan: https://www.aashtoplan.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On behalf of TxDOT and its nearly 13,000 employees, I would like to 
also share our vision of being a forward-thinking leader in delivering 
mobility, enabling economic opportunity, and enhancing safety and 
quality of life as we strive to connect our residents, businesses, and 
visitors with Texas. People represent TxDOT's customers, and over the 
last decade and every year since then, we have seen our customer base 
grow as Texas' population has increased more than any other state. In 
2022, Texas' population grew by nearly 1,300 people per day as we 
surpassed 30 million residents.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2022/2022-
population-estimates.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Accounting for Texas' ever-increasing population presents 
challenges in accommodating the growing demand on our transportation 
system. While many other states may be seeing a stagnant or declining 
population with little need for new transportation capacity, Texas must 
continue to grow our transportation infrastructure to meet demand.
    In Texas, our growth in freight transportation is even more 
dramatic. From 2014-2019, it was over three times faster than the rate 
of population growth. In 2019, our transportation system moved nearly 4 
billion tons of freight worth $2.9 trillion. This freight moves across 
80,000 miles of state-maintained highways, through 20 seaports, along 
14,700 miles of Class 1 railroad track, through 426,000 miles of 
pipelines, across 20 commercial border crossings with Mexico, and 
through 10 cargo airports. Texas leads the nation in global exports and 
cross-border trade with Mexico. A robust and strong transportation 
system enables Texas to lead the nation in economic growth and remains 
one of the strongest and most diverse economies in the world. 
Efficiency and flexibility in the implementation of the IIJA is 
critical to ensuring that TxDOT and all state DOTs can effectively 
deliver a strong federally supported transportation infrastructure 
program.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Texas Delivers 2050 Texas Freight Mobility Plan: https://
www.txdot.gov/projects/planning/freight-planning/texas-delivers-
2050.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Today's hearing is an example of Congress' important oversight 
responsibility in the successful implementation of the IIJA. AASHTO and 
state DOTs have worked closely with our federal executive branch 
partners including the US Department of Transportation (USDOT), in 
providing coordination, collaboration, and direct assistance to ensure 
that the benefits promised by the IIJA will be fully realized in the 
coming years and beyond. As key infrastructure owners and operators who 
will play a leading role in implementing this legislation, state DOTs 
have conveyed to USDOT that:
      AASHTO membership's input is critical not just at the 
outset of the IIJA's implementation, but for the full five-year 
duration of the legislation, including in development of regulations, 
guidance, and policies;
      Congressional intent behind the IIJA is to provide state 
DOTs with flexibility in how investment decisions are made with the 
Federal-aid Highway Program formula dollars to address each state's 
mobility and accessibility needs, as demonstrated by TxDOT's example 
above. Therefore, if a range of possible legislative interpretations 
exist, USDOT should provide flexibility that allows each state to best 
meet its unique transportation systems' demands, and;
      Collective efforts of states will go a long way in 
achieving the outcomes that are fundamentally agreed upon between USDOT 
and state DOTs.

    With that in mind, as part of your efforts to oversee timely and 
effective implementation of the IIJA and to help inform policy for 
future legislation, I would like to discuss the following areas with 
you this morning:
      Demonstrating progress on robust multimodal 
transportation investment under the IIJA
      Improving highway safety
      Ensuring stability and flexibility of federal formula 
dollars
      +  $3.5 billion accounting discrepancy
      +  August Redistribution
      Improving administration of discretionary grant programs
      Build America, Buy America
      Impact of inflation on delivery of the IIJA
      Supporting flexibility in the deployment of electric 
vehicle charging infrastructure
      Developing the workforce of today and tomorrow
 Demonstrating Progress on Robust Multimodal Transportation Investment 
                             Under the IIJA
    During the lead-up to reauthorization of surface transportation 
programs, AASHTO's Board of Directors adopted five core policy 
principles. The state DOT community could not be more thankful to see 
key policy and funding features reflected in the IIJA that reflects our 
priorities conveyed to Congress in October 2019.




    As key infrastructure owners and operators state DOTs' successful 
delivery of the IIJA remains paramount here in Year Two of this 
historic legislation. This year, every state DOT is laser-focused on 
demonstrating tangible progress taking place thanks to the IIJA in 
improving safety, mobility, and access for everyone.
    In Texas, federal funding represents approximately one-third of 
TxDOT's overall program, so having five years of funding certainty as 
provided by the IIJA is crucial to ensure an effectively planned 
federal program. The IIJA has also provided additional resources to 
local and modal partners across the state. For example, we have seen 
progress in our rural transit programs with IIJA funds going to help 
both capital and operational needs, and the IIJA has allowed TxDOT to 
provide additional funding for localities to improve off-system 
bridges.
    Furthermore, under AASHTO President Roger Millar's leadership \4\, 
AASHTO and its members are seeking to advance a resilient national 
transportation system that is safe, sound, and smart. Such a system 
will have the ability to prepare for--and adapt to--changing conditions 
and will be able to withstand and recover rapidly from disruptions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ AASHTO President Roger Millar's Emphasis Areas: https://
www.transportation.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-Millar-EA-
4pgr_final_web.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In meeting the expectations of the IIJA, state DOTs are proud of 
the progress they have been able to make in recent decades to invest in 
all modes of the transportation system as part of the statewide 
network. For example:
      In 2019 state DOTs invested $20.8 billion in public 
transportation, compared to the federal investment of $11.3 billion. 
Formula transit funding in the IIJA for Rural Areas (Section 5311) and 
Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities (Section 
5310) remain crucial for statewide mobility and accessibility.
      With regard to rail service, twenty state agencies 
provided $750 million in funding support to Amtrak, providing service 
to 48 percent--or almost half--of Amtrak riders system-wide in 2019. 
States will be critical to the successful implementation of the 
passenger and freight rail investments included in the IIJA, by 
applying for funding under new rail discretionary grant programs.
      For civil aviation, the Federal Aviation Administration 
reported that in 2020, states helped to support four million jobs and 
generated $850 billion in total economic activity. The increased 
funding from the IIJA will allow state DOTs to continue to make these 
kinds of critical investments.

    State DOTs are also on the cutting edge of technology and 
innovation. Through AASHTO's collaborative ``inter-committee'' working 
groups, state DOTs are directly addressing some of the most important 
emerging issues in the transportation sector--such as connected and 
automated vehicles, electric vehicles, unmanned aerial systems, and 
shared mobility.
                  Improving Safety for All Road Users
    For far too long, we have seen a tragic loss of life on our 
nation's roads and streets, and the recent significant increases in 
traffic fatalities are even more disheartening. Every state DOT in the 
nation and the AASHTO community stand with this Subcommittee in your 
unwavering commitment to do everything in our power to make our roads 
safer.
    The IIJA provides an increase in funding and flexibility for the 
Highway Safety Improvement Program that allows states to expand their 
efforts to identify and implement improvements to our surface 
transportation infrastructure that will counteract the daily tragedies 
occurring on our roads. But even with the good news of increased safety 
resources under the IIJA, the horrific estimates from the National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the increase in the 
nation's traffic fatalities confirm a grim truth that so many of us are 
aware of on both a professional and personal level: 42,915 people died 
in traffic crashes nationwide in 2021 (last full year data available), 
or 118 deaths every single day. And the 2022 data remains sobering: 
NHTSA estimates that an estimated 20,175 people died in motor vehicle 
traffic crashes, an increase of about 0.5 percent as compared to the 
20,070 fatalities NHTSA projected for the first half of 2021.
    AASHTO is fully dedicated to combating traffic fatalities and 
serious injuries in urban and rural areas across the country. We know 
that as infrastructure owners and operators, state DOTs have a leading 
role in many of the activities that will get us to zero deaths. With 
that in mind, AASHTO is organizing a Safety Summit for October 2023 
that will focus on identifying tools, procedures, and other resources 
available for considering safety for all road users throughout the 
transportation project lifecycle and on identifying gaps in these 
resources so that we can prioritize the development of solutions for 
transportation agencies to implement.
    We appreciate that the IIJA clearly calls out the principles of the 
Safe System Approach: that no death or serious injury is acceptable; 
people make mistakes and are vulnerable; we all share responsibility in 
preventing serious crashes; we need to be proactive in our efforts; and 
we need to have redundant safety strategies in place.
    The Safe System Approach is often discussed in the context of urban 
environments and vulnerable road-user safety. Addressing urban roadway 
safety is important and something state DOTs work hard to improve, 
along with our local government partners. I would also like to 
emphasize the potential for the Safe System Approach to help us address 
fatalities and serious injuries on rural roadways, as well. The rural 
roadway fatality rate--fatalities per million vehicle miles traveled--
is roughly twice the urban fatality rate. As with crashes in urban 
areas, there are a variety of factors that contribute to the occurrence 
and severity of rural crashes, but application of the Safe System 
Approach principles will help us address our rural safety challenges.
    AASHTO and state DOTs recognize the need to play a leading role in 
defining the Safe System Approach to ensure that application of these 
principles is done in a manner that recognizes the most urgent safety 
needs and priorities of individual states and local governments without 
having a one-size-fits-all approach. With each state having urban and 
rural areas, FHWA's guidance and technical support for the Safe System 
Approach needs to address both and should be coordinated with any 
guidance or resources from NHTSA or other USDOT modal administrations.
    Texas, like the nation, has seen a dramatic rise in highway 
fatalities since 2020. Tragically, Texas has not experienced a single 
day without a death on our roadways since November 7, 2000. To ``End 
the Streak'' of this devastating loss of lives, TxDOT has developed our 
most important safety campaign: #EndTheStreakTX, which is designed to 
bring awareness of, and put an end to, the needless deaths on Texas' 
roadways through public outreach, campaigns, and social media.
    TxDOT is taking dramatic steps to address this epidemic by 
increasing our investment and employing a wide range of initiatives 
aimed at achieving our vision of zero highway fatalities. The Texas 
Transportation Commission--TxDOT's governing body--has targeted funding 
for safety projects with an investment of nearly $17 billion through 
our ten-year transportation plan. To help coordinate Texas' safety 
investment in our metropolitan areas, our commission established a 
Safety Task Force with our twenty-three Metropolitan Planning 
Organizations to leverage our state funding along with the increased 
safety investment that is part of the IIJA.
    TxDOT is also active in seeking innovative solutions to design 
safer roadways for all users. Recently, in coordination with the Texas 
A&M Transportation Institute, TxDOT developed an award-winning ``Safer 
by Design'' Toolkit--a suite of tools that evaluate the effect of 
traffic control, roadside design, bike/pedestrian factors, and other 
elements that impact highway safety. This toolkit integrates the best 
available safety research and provides engineers with the quantitative 
tools needed to make effective design decisions related to safety.
    AASHTO and its members will continue to promote known 
infrastructure-based opportunities--and to identify new ones--to 
address the variety of factors contributing to crashes and the roadway 
safety needs of all road users. AASHTO's councils and committees 
continuously identify best practices to share among the states so that 
we can continue to learn from one another and spread good ideas around 
the country.
     Ensuring Stability and Flexibility of Federal Formula Dollars
    The IIJA provided a record $351 billion for highways over five 
years from the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) and General Fund, with $307 
billion provided as formula apportionments to states. Fully delivering 
on this historic commitment by Congress requires a consistent flow of 
formula dollars to states and localities each year, along with the 
ability to transfer or ``flex'' formula dollars quickly based on each 
state's investment needs.
$3.5 billion Highway Funding Discrepancy at USDOT and FHWA
    At the beginning of FY 2023, FHWA disabled program codes for pre-
IIJA funding from its accounting system--the Fiscal Management 
Information System (FMIS)--preventing States from obligating these 
funds. On February 3, 2023, FHWA informed AASHTO's Board of Directors 
of the reason for this decision. FHWA tracks program- and project-level 
data used for paying invoices and reimbursements via FMIS, which, 
according to FHWA, shows an estimated $4.7 billion balance in contract 
authority authorized prior to IIJA. However, USDOT's department-wide 
financial management system--Delphi--shows a $1.2 billion balance. 
USDOT asserts that because Delphi is their ``system-of-record,'' the 
contract authority balance in FMIS needs to be reconciled to that of 
Delphi, a downward adjustment of $3.5 billion.
    According to FHWA, the discrepancy occurred during the changeover 
by USDOT to Delphi, sometime between fiscal years (FY) 2003 and 2005. 
FHWA and USDOT have been unable to find the root cause of the 
discrepancy. But FHWA has indicated that they will be reexamining FY 
2004 through FY 2005 transactions over the next several months to 
reconfirm that finding. As a temporary measure, FHWA informed state 
DOTs this February that it is rationing access to pre-IIJA contract 
authority as the agency looks for ways to fully reconcile the two 
different accounting system balances.
    From AASHTO's perspective, the most important priorities for states 
are to:
      Allow states to fully access all pre-IIJA contract 
authority dollars;
      Make sure states do not see any reduction in their 
contract authority balance, and;
      Make sure this discrepancy is addressed in a way that 
would not further exacerbate issues associated with a large August 
Redistribution of obligation limitation.

    AASHTO strongly recommends against any rescission of highway 
formula contract authority as a means to address this discrepancy. 
State DOTs are not responsible for this USDOT accounting discrepancy, 
and state DOTs have developed their multiyear capital programs with the 
dollars previously authorized by Congress. A rescission would solely 
penalize states and their local partners by requiring reprogramming of 
other federal funds and state dollars to meet prior project 
commitments, which would in turn delay or cancel their planned 
investments elsewhere in their state--and would result in a net 
decrease in overall federal investments anticipated under the IIJA.
    Ultimately, if reconciling FMIS and Delphi requires a rescission of 
highway contract authority, we urge Congress to ensure pre-IIJA 
balances held by states are made whole through a legislative remedy. 
Our preferred solution is to authorize $3.5 billion in new contract 
authority for the Federal-aid Highway Program to make up for this 
accounting discrepancy. Alternatively, Congress could look to transfer 
$3.5 billion of contract authority from unobligated allocated programs 
(e.g., Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) 
credit program, Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) grant 
program, etc.) to the apportioned program for states.
August Redistribution
    Over the last several years, we have seen an increasingly large 
amount of annual redistribution of HTF obligation limitation to state 
DOTs, commonly referred to as August Redistribution (AR). In the most 
recent cycle, AR reached a record-high level of $6.2 billion for FY 
2022, which represents a substantial increase from $1.9 billion in FY 
2015. Such a large redistribution created significant difficulties for 
state DOTs to effectively program these dollars within a very narrow 
timeframe of about a month before the end of the federal fiscal year. 
We understand the preliminary estimate from FHWA shows an even larger 
AR amount for August 2023.
    Historically, AR dollars have only come from allocated HTF programs 
such as TIFIA and INFRA, as state DOTs fully obligate every dollar from 
the Federal-aid Highway Program. This is due to allocated programs' 
slower obligation rate compared to HTF formula apportionments to 
states. In addition, carryover balances from allocated programs have 
grown larger due to the increased funding they received under the IIJA. 
This has led to state DOTs seeing a corresponding and relative decrease 
in the amount of formula obligation limitation they receive at the 
beginning of the fiscal year. Receiving less obligation limitation at 
the beginning of the fiscal year--but then receiving large amounts 
toward the end of the fiscal year--deprives state DOTs of the ability 
to strategically deploy IIJA dollars and effectively plan their program 
of projects.
    To make the most out of the historic transportation investment made 
under the IIJA, we request that Congress reform the AR process. The 
contemporary Federal-aid Highway Program has added many new allocated 
programs through the enactment of the IIJA, resulting in AR having 
outgrown its framework developed decades ago. AASHTO's recommendations 
to improve AR include:
      Redistributing unused allocated program contract 
authority to the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBGP), as 
was done in April 2014 under MAP-21 for unobligated TIFIA balances in 
excess of 75 percent of the amount authorized for TIFIA that fiscal 
year;
      Expanding the use of the ``lop off'' provision for all 
allocated programs, where all unused contract authority from such 
programs would be converted to STBGP for distribution to states, and;
      Consider redistributing obligation limitation earlier in 
the year, such as before June 1.
        Improving Administration of Discretionary Grant Programs
    The IIJA includes a substantial increase in the number of, and 
funding for, discretionary programs. Because these programs support 
Congressional priorities, we believe the efficient and effective 
delivery of these discretionary programs is critical to the successful 
delivery of the promises made to Americans by the President and 
Congress.
    As USDOT continues to solicit applications, award dollars to 
projects, and execute project agreements, AASHTO has offered the 
following recommendations to USDOT leadership:
      Continue to provide state DOTs with a comprehensive and 
periodically updated schedule for Notices of Funding Opportunity for 
IIJA discretionary grant programs;
      Include a ``prequalification'' process for discretionary 
grant applications to:
      +  Determine project eligibility
      +  Review the ability of the grant applicant to meet all Federal-
aid requirements (such as NEPA, Buy America, Davis-Bacon, etc.)
      +  Ensure project readiness
      +  Demonstrate availability of matching funds
      +  Determine capacity to effectively administer the project
      Require permission of the project by the owner of the 
facility that is the subject of the grant request, including local 
governments' applications for projects on state-owned facilities;
      States should not be expected to administer grants 
awarded to localities if the state was not part of the application;
      Require that the proposed project be included in the 
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program;
      To the extent possible, implement the same grant 
application process across all discretionary grant programs;
      Publish a list of all applications received, and;
      State DOTs are interested in assisting and providing 
input to USDOT in order to speed up the execution of project 
agreements.

    TxDOT finds discretionary grant programs to generally be an 
inefficient tool for administering federal funds. The overwhelming 
number of grants included in the IIJA continues to create challenges 
for states, localities, and even USDOT. For applicants, the cost of 
developing grant applications can be onerous, sometimes costing up to 
$100,000 per application in Texas, or over $200,000 elsewhere. If 
awarded, it can take 15 to 18 months for the grant agreement to be 
finalized and funds obligated. USDOT continues to face challenges in 
managing the large volume of grant programs that they are expected to 
stand-up and deliver, with at least five IIJA FY 2022 grant programs 
that have not had Notices of Funding Opportunity issued to date. It may 
benefit Congress and USDOT to review whether the selected projects will 
achieve the desired objectives of the programs, and whether the 
distribution of awards are fair and equitable considering national 
performance needs and requirements.
    To help ensure transparency in the process, TxDOT has long 
advocated for a more formalized grant debriefing process to increase 
partnership and collaboration. We have recommended USDOT consider 
publishing guidelines for applicants seeking debrief meetings on their 
applications. TxDOT has also advocated for USDOT to provide applicants 
with their application scoring information and constructive feedback 
related to the specific deficiencies of each unawarded application.
                       Build America, Buy America
    AASHTO and the state DOTs strongly support the expansion of 
America's manufacturing capacity, promoting domestic jobs, and 
encouraging economic growth. At the same time, we firmly believe there 
must be a deliberative process for implementing the Build America, Buy 
America (BABA) Act that ensures timely and successful delivery of 
critical infrastructure projects funded through the IIJA.
    State transportation agencies continue to experience material and 
product delivery delays due to supply chain issues, material shortages, 
and worker shortages. Materials including aluminum, which is used in 
numerous products including light poles, mast arms, and sign panels; 
glass beads, which are used in retro-reflective pavement markings; 
fiber optic cable; epoxy; and plastic pipe/conduit are already 
experiencing delivery delays and material shortages around the country.
    With the 2023 transportation construction season under way, there 
is already significant concern regarding the readiness of industry for 
the transition to the new BABA requirements for construction materials 
that went into effect in November 2022 (Docket No. DOT-OST-2022-0123), 
including the potential for delays in the delivery of needed 
transportation projects in communities around the country. Thus, while 
we appreciate the additional guidance that is being proposed by the 
White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), AASHTO strongly 
opposes any expansion of the coverage of these requirements until 
further market-based research is conducted to determine the 
availability of American-made goods in the broad cross-section of 
materials already covered by the existing requirements.
    It should be noted that the state DOTs expended significant effort 
to change specification language, quality assurance language, and other 
documentation and training to meet the BABA guidance provided in April 
2022 in OMB memo M-22-11. Implementation of any additional or modified 
BABA requirements will require a similar level of effort to implement, 
which would not be achievable until the 2024 construction season or 
later. Thus, if the newly proposed rules are finalized, states will 
need clarification on the timeline for implementation of new or 
modified requirements by USDOT and its operating administrations.
    As with other states, TxDOT has been working diligently to comply 
with BABA, including modifying our contracts and training, implementing 
current OMB implementation guidance into our ongoing procurements for 
projects, and creating a new Buy America certification form and a 
listing of materials indicating how to classify different items. 
However, the current and ongoing uncertainty surrounding BABA is 
impacting the planning and delivery of projects, causing many critical 
projects to be significantly delayed. These delays hinder TxDOT's 
ability to deliver on its safety goals and they contribute to rising 
project costs. TxDOT now assumes an increase in proposal prices due to 
delays, additional administrative requirements, and supply chain-
related material costs. Utility companies are scrambling to find supply 
chains that meet the new compliance requirements. We have struggled to 
provide direction for utility companies because OMB has not provided 
sufficiently specific guidance, and the temporary guidance that has 
been issued continues to change upon each request for feedback from 
OMB.
    AASHTO believes that it is in the public interest that critical 
infrastructure projects intended to improve mobility and access for the 
American public are not disrupted while transportation agencies 
continue to make good-faith efforts to integrate the new BABA 
requirements into their program and project delivery processes.
              Impact of Inflation on Delivery of the IIJA
    As the nation's economy continues to recover from the effects of 
the COVID-19 pandemic, state DOTs and their partners continue to 
grapple with an unprecedented construction material supply chain crisis 
that has significantly driven up material and bid costs. According to a 
2022 analysis of government economic data by the Associated General 
Contractors of America, the prices of materials and services used in 
new, nonresidential construction leaped nearly 17 percent from the year 
prior. This figure indicates the lead times for procurement and 
delivery of many construction materials have dramatically increased, 
leading to mass unpredictability in the availability and price of some 
of these materials. Material cost increases have ranged from 15 percent 
to a doubling or tripling in some markets during this time. From 
manufactured steel, plastic, steel piping, and paint; to glass beads, 
lumber, and much more, every region of the country is facing extreme 
difficulty in procuring any number of crucial project materials.
    As a result, crucial infrastructure projects across the country run 
the risk of delay. State DOTs and the construction industry are unable 
to foresee disruptive world events, spiking energy prices, and high 
inflation that impacts the work they do every day. This has been 
especially devastating to small and disadvantaged business enterprises 
(DBE) that lack the resources to absorb these unexpected costs. While 
the transportation industry has deep experience in managing risk, the 
events and circumstances of the last two years have led to such unique 
unpredictability in the supply chain and market that contracting firms 
of all sizes are at greater risk of business failure now than in recent 
history.
    While most agree that the difficulties our industry is facing with 
supply chain constraints and inflation appear to be leveling off to a 
limited degree, the transportation industry will continue to face 
challenges. Likewise, it is important to identify solutions to ensure 
the success of the IIJA and to be ready for future supply chain or 
inflationary disruptions.
    We believe there is opportunity for USDOT to provide informational 
resources and greater recognition of existing flexibilities to address 
supply chain constraints and inflation--including such approaches as 
early material procurement and payment, the use of escalation clauses 
and the indexing of commodities and contracting provisions to assist 
smaller and DBE contractors. USDOT should also encourage additional 
opportunities to utilize innovative solutions through such avenues as 
Special Experimental Project Number 14 (SEP-14) related to alternative 
contracting and SEP-15 for innovative financing, allowing states to 
explore and expand successful practices.
    The dramatic rise in inflation, particularly in infrastructure-
related programs, is hampering the pace at which we can deliver 
projects. According to TxDOT's Highway Cost Index, the year-to-date 
increase for the 12-month moving average (March 2022 to March 2023) is 
34.7 percent. For perspective, the additional funds provided in the 
IIJA represent a six percent increase in TxDOT's overall funding. 
Therefore, while we appreciate having five years of funding certainty 
at the federal level, TxDOT is delivering less with federal funds than 
we did prior to IIJA, due solely to inflation.
    TxDOT continues to look for ways to address inflation during 
project development and delivery. We continuously update our material 
and construction prices and account for these changes in the design 
decisions we make. We must remain aware of the impacts that BABA 
requirements can have on utility relocations, and the availability of 
certain materials and supplies that could present costly delays for 
projects. And we work closely with industry to seek opportunities to 
minimize costs and improve pricing and competition.
    While inflation has reduced the originally expected purchasing 
power of the IIJA, we firmly recognize that the legislation has enabled 
state DOTs and their partners to temper the impact of inflation and 
make necessary investments in transportation infrastructure.
   Supporting Deployment of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
    AASHTO and the state DOTs are doing our part to ensure that the 
National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program in the 
IIJA achieves the goals and outcomes established by Congress.
    All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico developed 
and submitted their EV deployment plans by the August 2022 deadline. In 
addition, AASHTO signed a memorandum of understanding last year with 
the National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) and the 
Joint Office of Energy and Transportation (JOET) to support nationwide 
investment in EV charging station infrastructure. Through this 
partnership, AASHTO and NASEO have updated and expanded the content on 
the EV Clearinghouse website \5\ created for state agencies, which 
contains a wealth of resources such as sample requests for proposals 
and contracts, EV infrastructure siting and assessment tools, and other 
resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ EV States Clearinghouse: https://evstates.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, the AASHTO-NASEO-JOET agreement has delivered:
      Peer exchanges and regional dialogues to build capacity, 
lift up best practices, and ensure coordination across a national EV 
charging network that also reflects local needs;
      Data, technical, and programmatic assistance as 
identified by state DOTs to aid in the development, implementation, and 
refinement of state EV charging plans, and;
      Enhancement of communication between state and federal 
agencies to enable effective, coordinated, and timely EV charging 
planning and implementation.

    Texas will receive $400 million over five years to expand our EV 
charging infrastructure as part of the NEVI formula program. TxDOT's 
implementation of NEVI is ongoing, and we believe that flexibility and 
adaptability by FHWA to varying needs across states such as Texas is 
important to effectively implement this program. Texas is proposing to 
distribute federal NEVI funds through a competitive grant program that 
will leverage private investment and participation in program 
implementation and management. We continue to work with FHWA's Texas 
Division to establish a clear path forward that can adapt to state and 
federal procurement requirements on NEVI.
    Texas shares the perspective of many rural states, such as Wyoming, 
Idaho, Montana, and North and South Dakota that have expressed concerns 
with the rigidity of some of the NEVI program's implementation 
parameters. Providing flexibility on where and how to install EV 
chargers will give TxDOT and other state DOTs the opportunity to cater 
the NEVI program to the unique conditions of our respective states.
    With the oversight of Congress, AASHTO and the state DOTs look 
forward to partnering with USDOT and other key stakeholders on the 
deployment of EV infrastructure across our nation.
             Developing the Workforce of Today and Tomorrow
    Strategic workforce management--the systematic approach used to 
predict, prepare for, and manage workforce needs--remains an urgent and 
critical issue for all AASHTO members, especially in the aftermath of 
workforce disruptions experienced during the pandemic. State DOTs 
across the nation have increasingly expressed concerns about aligning 
the needs and priorities of the state DOTs with those of its workforce 
to place the agency in the best position for ongoing success. As 
technology and innovation advance, and public expectations and demands 
for more nimble service delivery rise, agencies will need to reimagine 
their workforce. State DOTs' constituents are increasingly demanding 
transparency, accountability, increased personalized communication, and 
on-demand service delivery.
    The new technologies associated with this work require different 
skillsets and competencies than those of traditional state DOT 
employees. Additionally, as the new generation entering the workforce 
seeks agility and innovation, and brings a service-delivery mindset, 
state DOTs need to adjust to the culture of the new workforce to 
recruit and retain these employees. Restructuring, increased diversity 
and inclusion, greater employee buy-in and collaboration, and 
organizational culture change may be required for state DOTs to succeed 
in the future.
    Workforce talent management is experiencing increased workforce 
movement as well as talent shortages. As a large portion of the state 
DOT workforce is composed of baby boomers, their impending retirements 
could result in significant knowledge loss. These retirements will also 
result in employees being promoted more quickly and, therefore, 
entering new positions with less experience and skills. In addition, 
fewer people are entering the transportation industry as a career, and 
the new skillsets needed increase recruitment and retention challenges. 
Capturing and transferring operational knowledge through knowledge 
management strategies and succession plans are critical to train 
current employees. Many state DOTs already re-examine minimum 
qualifications, compensation, and job descriptions; use short-term or 
contract employees; and implement modern work arrangements such as 
flexible work schedules and/or telework.
    State DOTs are increasingly looking to use data science curation 
and analytics to support efficient decision making. We also need 
effective information management systems and information managers to 
handle the multitude of documents, reports and data produced by the 
state DOTs as well as the increased public expectations regarding 
access to information.
    State DOTs are using innovative approaches to address workforce 
management issues. Like other states, TxDOT has had a challenging year, 
experiencing our highest attrition rate in at least three decades. To 
mitigate this issue, we are working to maintain and expand our 
workforce development programs, including enhancing our DBE program. We 
work with contractors' groups and individuals to provide a variety of 
workforce development efforts, including hosting the Texas Construction 
Career Academy, an On-The-Job Training Supportive Services program that 
provides talent development, training, and assistance to increase the 
hiring and retention of women, minorities, and disadvantaged 
individuals in the highway construction industry.
    In 2021, TxDOT created our ConnectU2Jobs initiative as part of the 
FHWA's Construction Workforce Partnership to provide training and 
employment opportunities to justice-involved young adults. 
Additionally, we have expanded our internship programs for college and 
high school students to go beyond the summer months, averaging 724 
participating interns per year. Importantly these programs lead to 
career paths. In the last three years, we have proudly had 330 interns 
return to TxDOT as full-time employees.
    In addition, five state DOTs are currently partnering with the 
Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) to provide employment to 
formerly incarcerated individuals. CEO crews support the state DOTs 
with litter abatement, vegetation management and landscaping, bridge 
and structure maintenance, and snow removal. CEO's partnership with 
Caltrans began in 2011 and CEO now has nearly 30 crews across the state 
providing reliable, high-quality litter abatement along highways in 
eight counties. These crews provide immediate employment to over 2,000 
of California's returning citizens. CEO's partnership with the Colorado 
Department of Transportation (CDOT) began in May 2017 to help address a 
labor shortage that prevented CDOT from keeping up with necessary 
bridge maintenance. CEO and CDOT now operate four crews around the 
Denver and Colorado Springs metro areas.
    To assist the state DOTs with workforce management challenges, 
AASHTO has established a new Subcommittee on Transportation Workforce 
Management. The Subcommittee is intended to provide proven, effective 
strategies to navigate workforce management issues and become a 
community of practice for state DOTs on strategic workforce management. 
The subcommittee will also address activities that enable comprehensive 
and intentional strategic workforce management, such as assessing 
workforce and workplace diversity, and assessing the capabilities and 
effectiveness of the current workforce and identifying competency gaps.
                               Conclusion
    AASHTO and its members take seriously the responsibility to 
implement this historic legislation in the coming months and years to 
deliver public benefits to every corner of our country. Thank you for 
the honor and opportunity to testify today, and I am happy to answer 
any questions.

    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Williams.
    Mr. Boyd, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

   TESTIMONY OF DWAYNE BOYD, PRESIDENT, MIDSOUTH REGION, CRH 
AMERICAS MATERIALS, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL STONE, SAND, AND 
                       GRAVEL ASSOCIATION

    Mr. Boyd. OK, thank you. Good morning, Chairman Graves, 
Ranking Member Larsen, Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member 
Norton, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting 
me to testify on the implementation of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act.
    My name is Dwayne Boyd, and I am the president of the 
Midsouth region at CRH Americas Materials. I lead our business 
operations in Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, 
and have spent the past 38 years in the construction materials 
industry.
    CRH is a leading provider of building materials solutions 
that build and connect our world. CRH employs over 75,000 
people in 29 countries. In North America, our footprint spans 
48 States and 6 Canadian Provinces.
    I am here representing the National Stone, Sand, and Gravel 
Association. Our industry operates over 9,000 locations in the 
U.S., and employs over 100,000 people in high-paying jobs to 
source 2.5 billion tons of material.
    I want to thank the members of this committee for passing 
IIJA. Your efforts to strengthen America's infrastructure means 
high-paying, skilled jobs and widespread improvements where we 
live and work. These investments are helping improve our 
Nation's infrastructure.
    The IIJA reauthorization of the Federal highway funding 
program for 5 years and the significant increase in funding 
provides much-needed stability for our States' DOTs and our 
industry. I want to mention a few areas in the implementation 
of IIJA for your consideration.
    First of all, IIJA included new Federal Build America, Buy 
America sourcing requirements for Federal infrastructure 
programs. CRH and the material industry support Buy America, as 
we primarily source our aggregates and manufacture our products 
in the local communities where we live and work.
    However, due to a limited supply, we as an industry are 
unable to produce or source enough goods like cement, 
aggregates, and liquid asphalt domestically. NSSGA and other 
trade associations, along with a diverse group from my 
industry, educated Members of Congress on this fact and were 
successful in getting aggregate-based materials excluded from 
Buy America. We encourage Congress to implement the exclusion 
for our materials, as intended in IIJA.
    Next, we need permitting reform to streamline the delivery 
of infrastructure projects. It takes years, if not decades, to 
plan and approve new projects. We strongly support the 
bipartisan provisions in IIJA that encourage Federal agency 
cooperation to reduce permitting decision to 2 years.
    As you know, the vast majority of IIJA funding is given to 
States based on standard formulas. However, there are many 
funding opportunities through a wide range of grant programs. I 
have heard from State DOT concerns about the complexity and 
criteria required to apply for these grants. I urge you to find 
ways to make it easier for applicants to apply and compete for 
these opportunities.
    One of the biggest challenges in my business is access to a 
skilled workforce. Today, CRH has more than 3,000 current open 
jobs. Over 40 percent of these jobs are for drivers and 
operators. Our industry supports legislation that would expand 
driver and operator recruitment and training, mine engineering 
education, developing vocational programs supporting the 
industry, veteran employment opportunities, and increasing the 
legal workforce of immigrants in the U.S.
    Sustainability is important to us. At CRH and across the 
industry, we are embracing our responsibility and evolving as a 
business to help better serve our customers and local 
communities with integrated, sustainable construction 
solutions. The products we make and the services we provide are 
essential, contributing to safer, cleaner, and more sustainable 
homes, cities, and critical infrastructure.
    In my career, we have led in using reclaimed asphalt 
pavement [RAP] in our pavement mix designs. We support 
increasing the allowable RAP percentage in construction 
projects. We have embraced the use of technologies like warm-
mix asphalt, the use of alternative and renewable fuels, and 
are helping to develop more efficient asphalt plants.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to testify before you 
today. CRH and the entire aggregate industry are proud to 
deliver the resources needed to build our communities and 
modernize our infrastructure, which is essential to the growth 
of our Nation.
    [Mr. Boyd's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Dwayne Boyd, President, Midsouth Region, CRH 
 Americas Materials, on behalf of the National Stone, Sand, and Gravel 
                              Association
    Chairman Graves, Ranking Member Larsen, Chairman Crawford Ranking 
Member Holmes Norton, and members of the committee, thank you for 
inviting me today to testify on the implementation of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    My name is Dwayne Boyd, and I am the President of the MidSouth 
Region at CRH, Americas Materials (AMAT). I lead our business in 
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi and have spent 38 years in 
the construction materials industry. CRH Americas Materials is a leader 
in construction materials, with a footprint that spans 47 states and 6 
Canadian provinces. At AMAT, we focus on asphalt, ready-mix, aggregates 
and cement.
    I am here representing the National Stone, Sand & Gravel 
Association (NSSGA), the voice of our nation's aggregates industry. Our 
industry operates over 9,000 locations in the U.S. and employs over 
100,000 people in high-paying jobs to source 2.5 billion tons of stone, 
sand and gravel each year that are used to sustain our modern way of 
life and build our nation's communities and infrastructure.
    First, I would like to echo the comments of my colleagues here 
today to profoundly thank the members of this committee for their work 
to craft, debate and advance the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    As our country faces economic headwinds and an uncertain future, 
the infrastructure bill is laying the groundwork to keep the aggregates 
and materials industry moving forward to build more resilient 
communities and stronger transportation networks.
    Many do not realize this, the products we mine and make in the 
aggregates industry are the essential components of roads, airports, 
transit, rail, ports clean water and renewable energy networks funded 
through the IIJA. These products are quite literally, the building 
blocks of our nation.
    The heart of IIJA, and what lies under this subcommittee's direct 
purview, is the 5-year, $350 billion reauthorization of our nation's 
highway programs. If IIJA was not signed into law in 2021, we would 
likely be under another short-term extension of our surface 
transportation programs, facing the current inflationary headwinds with 
even less resources and certainty.
    The passage of the omnibus appropriations bill in late December 
allowed for the second-year distribution of funding from IIJA to flow 
to state DOTs. Even though each state DOT must wait until Congress 
moves the annual appropriations bills to distribute the funds 
authorized by IIJA, the certainty of knowing how much they are 
receiving from the Highway Trust Fund over the five-year period has 
provided needed clarity that is driving planning and execution of new 
construction.
    As IIJA is implemented, my company and the entire construction 
industry find it critical to ensure the funds authorized and 
appropriated continue to flow as intended for the life of the bill. The 
IIJA will provide certainty to state DOTs, and everyone involved in 
delivering infrastructure projects.
    The DOTs in my area appreciate the flexibility of IIJA and the 
increased funding levels. It has allowed them to insert IIJA funds 
directly into their budgets. However, they have reported inflation has 
eroded the buying power of the increased funding levels, resulting in a 
smaller number of projects being let. Overall, IIJA has ensured they 
maintain or grow their current programs. For example:
      Mississippi is expected to pass a one-time infusion of 
funding, $600M, in part to ensure matching incoming federal funds from 
IIJA.
      Louisiana has recently seen revenue increases as well. 
They have added EV fees and sales tax fees to all vehicles to boost 
their transportation revenue stream, to ensure the state is taking 
advantage of IIJA opportunities.

    The projects underway in each of your states, due to the 
investments of Congress, are working to relieve congestion, increase 
movement of commerce and goods and create new energy networks and 
sources. Our economy is on a stronger path, and these infrastructure 
investments help relieve pressure points that drive supply shortages 
and inflation. That is why it is imperative Congress and the 
administration work to rapidly implement the provisions under IIJA and 
remove regulatory roadblocks and red tape that hold us back. I will 
highlight a few areas where we believe greater oversight from this 
committee and Congress will drive better results that allow us to 
build:
    Buy America Build America and the Aggregates Products Exclusion
    One of the key policy changes made under the IIJA was the creation 
of new federal Build America Buy America (BABA) sourcing requirements, 
which include the addition of ``construction materials'' to Buy America 
preferences for federal infrastructure programs.
    The aggregates, cement, concrete and asphalt paving industries 
worked with this committee and Congress, as they crafted the new 
statuary requirements to exclude aggregates, cement, asphalt additives 
and paving binders as covered construction materials. Further, products 
that are made by combining these items, like concrete and asphalt, are 
also excluded from the new BABA requirements and subsequent Buy America 
sourcing rules.
    Keep in mind that certain geographic areas of the county do not 
have the geologic deposits that allow local sourcing of stone, sand and 
gravel to make concrete, cement and asphalt to be used in construction. 
These materials must be imported from nearby countries, and often it is 
less costly and produces less air emissions than shipping material long 
distances across U.S. regions. Likewise, a lack of cement capacity in 
the states means cement must be imported. The lack of asphalt 
production and refineries, especially on the east coast, requires 
agencies and contractors to import from Canada to meet demand for 
creating basic street paving materials.
    Unfortunately, even after a year of work to implement the new BABA 
requirements, just last month OMB issued a confusing and contradicting 
rule that revised previous guidance issued. This new rule introduces 
new requirements that were not included in the IIJA and places the 
congressionally mandated exclusion for aggregates-based products, like 
asphalt and concrete, at risk.
    If OMB proceeds with their rulemaking, it will upend years-long 
work to get the BABA requirements enacted, likely requiring DOTs and 
federal agencies to delay projects, further complicating implementation 
of the IIJA's funding. We encourage OMB to proceed with a full notice 
and comment rulemaking on its proposed rule that will allow all 
stakeholders to have their input accounted for to ensure BABA, as 
intended by Congress, is efficiently implemented to maximize U.S. job 
creation.
    The aggregates industry strongly supports the goals of Congress and 
the administration to expeditiously improve our outdated 
infrastructure. It is imperative that federal and state partners 
responsible for distributing federal investments follow the BABA law 
and subsequent Buy America requirements, as written by Congress, and 
not impose any sourcing requirements or paperwork burdens on concrete, 
asphalt, cement, cementitious material, aggregates, additives and 
binder. This will ensure maximum project delivery and American job 
creation.
                  Permitting Reform Is Needed to Build
    Currently it takes years, if not decades, to plan, approve and 
execute new infrastructure projects. From road construction, to adding 
new port and rail capacity, to building air and transit networks, if 
bureaucratic delays continue, it will hamper the execution of IIJA. Not 
only does this harm our businesses, but it significantly diminishes the 
intended impact of the IIJA's investment and leaves projects exposed to 
more inflationary pressures.
    We praise the bipartisan provisions in IIJA that seek to expand 
federal agency cooperation and reduce permitting decisions to two 
years. Unfortunately, from my experience, we have yet to see this take 
hold on the ground and planning for new projects still takes years.
    That is why our industry is even more concerned with administrative 
changes to National Environmental Permitting Act (NEPA) that broadens 
definitions, adds duplicative federal agency reviews, and allows more 
opportunities for outside activists to sue and stop project 
development.
    Aggregates suppliers across the country crave certainty, as we work 
to supply the billions of tons of essential materials needed to improve 
roads; upgrade bridges; advance transportation systems and ports; and 
advance our modern energy infrastructure that will be funded by the 
investments provided by the bipartisan IIJA. We are encouraged with the 
bipartisan calls from many in this room, and around the Capitol, to 
address permitting challenges and urge action on solutions that will 
address the current challenges we face.
                    Discretionary Grant Applications
    The vast majority of IIJA funding is apportioned to states based on 
mandatory funding formulas dictated by Congress. However, there also 
exists numerous opportunities for funding through a wide range of 
competitive grant programs.
    While the administration has discretion to shape grant 
notifications, we have concerns over the complexity and criteria added 
to the applications. Many times, DOTs and localities will have to 
devote significant resources, building teams to find the data and 
answer questions needed to apply to these opportunities. This takes 
precious resources away from delivering projects to the taxpayers.
    Further, certain criteria added to applications that seek to limit 
new capacity projects or add labor requirements have discouraged states 
and localities from applying for these opportunities altogether.
    We would urge the administration to examine applications and find 
ways to reduce the application and criteria burdens to ensure the 
intended benefits of IIJA are realized by all communities
            Provide Flexibility to State and Local Agencies:
    For almost two years, our industry has been pushing Congress to 
adopt the Cornyn-Padilla state and local covid relief flexibility 
language. This legislation was championed by Rep. Dusty Johnson last 
congress and received overwhelming bipartisan support from members of 
the committee. We are pleased Congress added this language to FY 2023 
Omnibus Appropriations bill that was signed into law at the end of 
2022.
    Now enacted, this simple fix gives states and localities the 
opportunity to use up to $104 billion in unused covid relief funds for 
infrastructure projects. Under this legislation, a receiving entity can 
use up to 30 percent of its ARPA relief on infrastructure, or up to $10 
million, whichever is higher. For state governments, and for very high 
population cities and counties, 30 percent of their take is always 
going to be well in excess of $10 million. Adding up the new 
flexibility funding that each entity could utilize on infrastructure 
investments equals $104 billion:
      $58.5 billion at the state level
      $28 billion at the county level
      $17.7 billion at the city level

    Recently, for example, the state of Alabama has dedicated $660 
million in ARPA funds for upgrading local water and sewer projects.
    This new flexibility will give states and localities the 
opportunity to use leftover funds to match federal IIJA opportunities, 
allowing faster enactment of the bipartisan bill. We are looking 
forward to seeing updated guidance from the Treasury Department that 
clarifies how state and localities can apply the funding to 
infrastructure investments.
             Rail Reform Needed to Move Materials to Market
    It is no secret that rail service conditions are failing for the 
aggregates industry. Deteriorating rail conditions have a direct impact 
on our ability to supply millions of tons of aggregates and industrial 
sand, which are used to improve outdated infrastructure, build 
resilient communities, and drive America's energy production.
    In detailed comments to the Surface Transportation Board (STB) last 
year, NSSGA shared how service disruptions and unwarranted price 
increases are severely impacting our industry. Increased wait times and 
poor service are leading to material price increases and restricting 
our ability to service key markets. Further, if we are left to truck 
material to service projects and markets, instead of utilizing existing 
rail networks, it only increases shipping costs and transportation 
emissions.
    If action is not taken to improve service, the constant delays, and 
the inability to move product to market will continue to have a direct 
impact on supplying key infrastructure projects across the country. 
This will ultimately plague the implementation of the bipartisan 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    NSSGA calls on Congress and the Surface Transportation Board to 
enact meaningful rail reform that levels the playing field between 
shippers and carriers. One such proposal is the pending rulemaking at 
STB related to reciprocal switching. If enacted, this would drive 
greater competition, especially for facilities captive to one carrier.
                       Workforce Needed to Build
    A skilled and highly trained inclusive and diverse workforce is 
paramount to safely operating quarries that produce the critical 
materials found in infrastructure projects. Unfortunately, many 
aggregate producers are unable to hire and retain an adequate workforce 
in today's labor market. The aggregates and industrial sand industry 
takes pride in investing in its employees by providing attractive 
salaries, competitive benefits, robust training, support, and career 
development. Our industry's average annual salary is over $75,000, and 
most employees spend their entire careers in the industry.
    CRH continues to work hard to find, hire and train the best team. 
At the time of this testimony, CRH has over 3,000 current open jobs. 
Over 40% of these job openings are looking to fill positions in two 
categories: drivers or operations.
    NSSGA supports policies and funding from the federal government to 
train workers, increase the diversity of our workforce and ensure 
aggregate producers can access the skilled employees needed to continue 
producing the building blocks of America. We support legislation that 
seeks to expand mine engineering and related fields at colleges and 
universities and develop vocational education programs supporting the 
mining industry. We also encourage Congress and the administration to 
continue its bipartisan support for programs that work with America's 
veterans, active and reserve service members, and their spouses to find 
meaningful careers and employment opportunities. Finally, we urge 
Congress to examine and update our immigration laws and provide new 
opportunities to increase the legal workforce in the United States.
               Industry Leading the Way on Sustainability
    Our industry has been leading the way to create more sustainable 
building materials that help us reach our emission reductions goals. 
CRH, like many across the construction materials industry, are focused 
on delivering more sustainable building materials and reducing GHG 
emissions. As implementation of the IIJA, Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) 
and work on Buy Clean policies continue, we urge policymakers to 
continue working closely with industry to identify investments that 
will help achieve the emissions reduction goals. We urge policymakers 
to prioritize funding to companies to support adaptation to lower 
carbon technologies.
    The construction materials industry has invested considerable time 
and resources in developing Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) 
to advance the procurement of lower carbon materials based on 
validated, peer-reviewed methodologies. We encourage Congress to rely 
on EPDs as the metric for current and future legislation concerning low 
emission and low carbon materials. This will ensure rapid integration 
and recognition of low emission materials to build a more sustainable 
future.
    The construction materials industry has been working for many years 
to improve efficiencies in our materials production and construction 
operations. Here at CRH we are actively engaged in the sustainability 
effort. We recently announced we have raised our global ambition of 
reducing our gross carbon emissions to 30% by 2030. This is an absolute 
target, covering all of our activities across CRH globally. In the area 
where my CRH companies operate, Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, 
Mississippi and Tennessee, we are looking to significantly increase the 
use of Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) in our pavement mix designs. 
Asphalt pavement is 100% recyclable and processed RAP goes directly 
back into virgin asphalt mix, both reducing the need for liquid asphalt 
binder and utilizing a recycled material. We support increasing the 
allowable RAP percentage in construction projects. We have embraced the 
use of technologies like warm-mix asphalt, the use of alternative and 
renewable fuels, and developing more efficient asphalt plants.
    Our industry is actively engaged with FHWA's sustainable pavements 
group and greatly appreciate the industry led cooperative partnership 
to drive greater adoptability and use of sustainable materials.
    As implementation of, IIJA, IRA and work on Buy Clean policies 
continue, we urge policymakers to continue working closely with 
industry and recognize the work that has already been done. This will 
ensure rapid integration and recognition of low emission materials to 
build a more sustainable future.
                Regulatory Certainty Essential to Growth
    A sound regulatory environment from federal regulators is critical 
to our ability to keep aggregates materials supplied to every American 
community. Like all NSSGA members, we go above and beyond the many 
local, state and federal regulations to protect our surrounding 
environments.
    Remember, stone, sand and gravel are used in nearly all building 
construction and public works projects, including roads, highways, 
bridges, dams, energy projects and airports, as well as environmental 
purposes--such as treating drinking water, storm water, and stream 
restoration.
    Unlike other businesses, we are limited to where natural forces 
have deposited the materials we use, so we must engage in careful 
planning to ensure every community has access to aggregates. And 
because of high transportation and environmental costs, we normally are 
unable to move the vast amounts of aggregates we produce over long 
distances.
    NSSGA members are deeply concerned that EPA's new WOTUS rule will 
further complicate an already lengthy and burdensome process to 
establish a quarry or access reserves in an existing facility. Today, 
it takes 10-20 years to plan and develop a quarry.
    While the new rule is being portrayed as a familiar regulation, it 
in fact poses more questions than it answers, making it very difficult 
for business to plan and hire the workforce needed to supply materials. 
This rule could add millions in costs and delays for accessing reserves 
and supplying new aggregates to markets. We want to do things the right 
way, but this unclear rule makes it nearly impossible to know what the 
right way is.
    That is why NSSGA strongly supported the actions of this committee 
to move a CRA resolution that repeals the flawed WOTUS rule.
    Further, we are disappointed this rule was finalized at the same 
time that the Supreme Court is actively deliberating changes to WOTUS. 
A ruling could come out any day that will likely change how the 
definition of WOTUS is determined, requiring the agencies to rewrite 
the rules. This will force more uncertainty and delays on our industry.
    We thank the bipartisan members of Congress who have implored the 
agencies to wait for the SCOTUS ruling to be finalized, so aggregates 
operators are not forced to comprehend another rule change while we are 
working in overdrive to supply construction materials to build projects 
funded through IIJA.
                Ensure Sustainable Access to Aggregates
    NSSGA strongly supported the inclusion of Section 11526 in IIJA, 
which establishes a working group to examine and produce policies that 
ensure our nation has sustainable access to aggregate resources.
    This provision was similar to the bipartisan legislation, 
Rebuilding Our Communities by Keeping Aggregates Sustainable (ROCKS) 
Act, which was championed by Rep. Greg Stanton (AZ), Rep. Troy 
Balderson (OH), and members on this committee. While states like 
Arizona and Minnesota have acted to institute policies that ensure 
proper planning to maintain sustainable aggregate supplies, the federal 
government must also be involved in this planning.
    This will reduce construction costs and improve environmental 
outcomes, as the industry works to source materials needed to build the 
infrastructure funded under IIJA. NSSGA looks forward to working with 
FHWA, as they form the working group established under Section 11526.
                               Conclusion
    Members of the committee, thank you again for the opportunity to 
testify before you today to provide a progress update on the 
implementation of the IIJA.
    CRH and the entire aggregates industry are proud to deliver the 
resources needed to build our communities and modernize our 
infrastructure, which is essential to the growth of our nation.
    We thank you for your bipartisan efforts to strengthen America's 
infrastructure and look forward to working with you to achieve our 
shared goals.

    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Boyd.
    Mr. Dreher, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

 TESTIMONY OF ARIC DREHER, ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER, CIANBRO, 
      ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS

    Mr. Dreher. Good morning. Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member 
Norton, and members----
    Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. Check your mic there.
    Mr. Dreher [continuing]. Of the Subcommittee on Highways 
and Transit, thank you for the invitation to testify this 
morning, and for the opportunity to discuss the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act and efforts to modernize our Nation's 
most critical infrastructure.
    My name is Aric Dreher, and I am an assistant general 
manager for Cianbro, a full-service contractor that delivers 
world-class construction services for complex civil 
infrastructure projects throughout the country.
    Founded in 1949, Cianbro is one of America's largest, 100 
percent employee-owned, open shop construction and construction 
services company, operating in more than 40 States and 
employing more than 4,000 team members.
    Today, I am testifying on behalf of the Associated Builders 
and Contractors, a national construction trade association with 
68 chapters representing more than 22,000 members. In my role, 
I oversee all operations in Cianbro's infrastructure market. My 
teams have taken on some of the company's most innovative and 
challenging infrastructure projects, including the phased 
development of the District Wharf, here in Washington, DC; 
construction of the 175-foot Capital Wheel overlooking the 
Potomac River at National Harbor; the U.S. Naval Academy's 
McNair Road Bridge replacement; and the replacement of the I-
295 bridge over Veranda Street in Portland, Maine, in 60 hours, 
using accelerated bridge construction methods.
    The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has 
been hailed as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build and 
repair some of our Nation's most critical infrastructure, 
including the highways and bridges that have been in need of 
investment for decades. To accomplish this goal, however, 
critical issues must be addressed.
    Since the bill was signed into law in 2021, the 
administration has taken action, departing from the 
congressional intent of the bill, showing clear and unnecessary 
favoritism towards unionized contractors and unionized labor on 
taxpayer-funded infrastructure projects receiving Federal 
funds.
    We have seen significant changes in our economy that I 
believe will affect the overall success of this bipartisan 
effort, including record inflation, supply chain delays, and 
workforce shortages. Since November 2021, when President Biden 
signed into law the IIJA, input prices for construction 
projects have increased over 11.1 percent.
    The construction industry is facing significant supply 
chain challenges, with many in the industry finding it 
difficult to find consistently available building materials 
such as lumber, steel, and concrete, along with specialized 
construction equipment. This is driven in part by the new 
Federal investment in infrastructure and other critical 
construction, which has led to further delays, and put pressure 
on suppliers to increase production.
    ABC also anticipates the construction industry will need to 
attract an estimated half a million additional workers on top 
of the normal hiring pace in 2023 to meet the demand for labor. 
Cianbro is doing our part to meet this demand, offering 
apprenticeship opportunities in several trades, including 
electrical, millwright, pipefitter, ironworker, carpenter, 
substation technician, and power line worker.
    The IIJA Buy America provisions and the cumbersome waiver 
process that has been implemented will exacerbate these delays 
and has added costs. These requirements must also be balanced 
with safeguards against drastic cost increases and excessive 
delays to infrastructure projects without which could have a 
severe impact on the ability of contractors to complete jobs on 
time and on budget.
    Finally, the after-the-fact regulations and strings 
attached to Federal infrastructure grant programs will severely 
impact the allocation of IIJA funds. President Biden's 
Executive Order 14063 directs all Federal agencies to require 
PLAs on Federal construction projects exceeding $35 million. 
PLA mandates and preferences will increase costs and reduce 
competition on federally assisted construction projects.
    Americans deserve more efficient and effective policies 
that will encourage all qualified contractors and their skilled 
workforces to compete to build long-lasting projects at the 
best price. I have included additional details in my written 
testimony on these important points, and I look forward to 
answering your questions today.
    [Mr. Dreher's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Aric Dreher, Assistant General Manager, Cianbro, 
          on behalf of the Associated Builders and Contractors
    Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Norton and Members of the 
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit:
    Thank you for the invitation to testify this morning and for the 
opportunity to discuss the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and 
efforts to modernize our nation's most critical infrastructure.
    My name is Aric Dreher, and I am an assistant general manager for 
Cianbro, a full-service contractor that delivers world-class 
construction services for complex civil infrastructure projects 
throughout the country. Founded in 1949, Cianbro is one of America's 
largest, 100% employee-owned, open shop construction and construction 
services companies, operating in more than 40 states and employing more 
than 4,000 team members. Today, I am testifying on behalf of the 
Associated Builders and Contractors, a national construction trade 
association with 68 chapters representing more than 22,000 members.
    In my role, I oversee all operations in Cianbro's infrastructure 
market. With more than 20 years of construction experience, I have led 
teams on some of the company's most innovative and challenging 
infrastructure projects, including the phased development of the 
District Wharf in Washington, D.C.; construction of the 175-foot-tall 
Capital Wheel at National Harbor overlooking the Potomac River; the 
U.S. Naval Academy's McNair Road Bridge replacement; and replacement of 
the I-295 Bridge over Veranda Street in Portland, Maine, in 60 hours 
using accelerated bridge construction methods.
    The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has been 
hailed as a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build and repair our 
nation's most critical infrastructure, including the highways and 
bridges that have been in need of investment for decades.
    During the debate over the IIJA, ABC and its members expressed 
concerns regarding some of the bill's provisions, including the 
expansion of prevailing wage requirements, so-called ``local hire'' 
preferences, the extension of Buy America requirements and the 
significant authority granted to federal agencies through discretionary 
grant programs that could be subject to additional requirements under 
executive orders or agency directives.
    At the time, ABC urged the Biden-Harris administration and our 
federal agencies to not operate outside the scope of the bipartisan 
bill and implement the law in the same spirit of bipartisanship.
    Since the bill was signed into law in 2021, the administration has 
taken executive regulatory action, departing from the congressional 
intent of the bill and showing clear and unnecessary favoritism toward 
unionized contractors and labor on taxpayer-funded infrastructure 
projects receiving federal funds. We have also seen significant changes 
in our economy that I believe will affect the overall success of this 
bipartisan effort, including record inflation, supply chain delays and 
workforce shortages.
    Inflation's impact on construction cannot be understated. Since 
November 2021, when President Joe Biden signed the IIJA into law, input 
prices for construction projects have increased on average by 11.1%, 
and nonresidential construction materials prices are up more than 39% 
since February 2020. Combined with our current labor shortage and 
supply chain pressures, it is becoming increasingly difficult for 
construction projects to continue as originally planned.
    ABC anticipates the construction industry will need to attract half 
a million additional workers on top of the normal pace of hiring in 
2023 to meet the demand for labor. ABC has attributed a portion of this 
demand to a growing number of megaprojects associated with chip 
manufacturing plants, clean energy facilities and infrastructure, as 
well as too few younger workers entering the skilled trades.
    Cianbro is doing our part to meet this demand. Cianbro's Pre-
Apprenticeship Program supports those who are interested in the trades 
but have little to no experience get into the industry. Cianbro offers 
apprenticeship opportunities in several trades, including electrical, 
millwright, pipefitter, ironworker, carpenter, substation technician 
and power line worker. Our apprenticeship program is registered through 
the Maine Apprenticeship Program, which is federally recognized, and in 
each of these programs we utilize the nationally recognized National 
Center for Construction Education and Research's Core Curriculum. The 
apprenticeships provide team members with periodic classroom/hands-on 
instruction and continuous on-the-job learning where they can apply 
their education. Upon completion, team members become NCCER-certified, 
journey-level tradespeople, making journey-level wages with zero debt.
    The construction industry is also facing significant supply chain 
challenges, with many in the industry finding it difficult to source 
consistently available building materials, such as lumber, steel and 
concrete. This has led to delays in construction as projects wait for 
materials to arrive or for new material sources to be found.
    Additionally, we have seen delays in the delivery of components and 
parts required for specialized equipment for construction, such as 
cranes and excavators. The increased demand for construction equipment, 
driven in part by the new federal investment in infrastructure and 
other critical construction, has led to further delays and put pressure 
on suppliers to increase production.
    The IIJA Buy America provisions and the cumbersome waiver process 
that has been implemented will exacerbate these delays and added costs. 
While strategies to expand domestic jobs and manufacturing to avoid 
global supply chain disruptions and capture economic benefits within 
America must be supported, Buy America requirements must also be 
balanced with safeguards against drastic cost increases and excessive 
delays to infrastructure projects funded by taxpayers. Without these 
considerations, Buy America requirements could have a severe impact on 
the ability of contractors to complete jobs on time and on budget.
    Finally, the after-the-fact regulations and strings attached to 
federal infrastructure grant programs will severely impact the 
allocation of IIJA funds, restricting competition for taxpayer-funded 
construction projects to union contractors and workers at the expense 
of fair and open competition that provides opportunities for all 
qualified workers while offering the best value for taxpayers.
    President Biden's Executive Order 14063 directs all federal 
agencies to require PLAs on federal construction projects exceeding $35 
million. ABC has also identified a significant number of Biden 
administration federal agency infrastructure grant programs--totaling 
more than $250 billion for infrastructure projects procured by state 
and local governments--subject to language and policies promoting PLA 
mandates and preferences that will increase costs and reduce 
competition on federally assisted construction projects.
    Multiple studies of hundreds of taxpayer-funded school construction 
projects found that PLA mandates increase the cost of construction by 
12% to 20% compared to similar non-PLA projects. PLAs also unfairly 
discourage competition from quality, qualified nonunion contractors and 
their employees, which make up 88.3% of the private U.S. construction 
industry workforce, effectively preventing many small, women-, veteran- 
and minority-owned construction businesses, which skew heavily 
nonunion, and their workforces from participating in federally funded 
construction projects.
    Americans deserve more efficient and effective policies that will 
encourage all qualified contractors and their skilled workforces to 
compete to build long-lasting projects at the best price. Upholding the 
bipartisan principles included in the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act will be key to the enduring success of this legislation and 
the effective modernization of our country's infrastructure.

    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Dreher.
    Ms. Hammond, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

TESTIMONY OF PAULA HAMMOND, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, WSP USA, ON 
    BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS 
                          ASSOCIATION

    Ms. Hammond. Thank you. Good morning, and thank you for 
inviting me here in my role as the chair of American Road and 
Transportation Builders Association.
    The association's public and private-sector members design, 
build, and maintain all aspects of the transportation network 
in the United States.
    I also serve as the senior vice president for WSP USA, and 
we are the Nation's oldest engineering, design, and consulting 
organization.
    Before I offer our perspectives on the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act, I, as others have, would like to 
address briefly the tragedy in Baltimore, where six roadway 
workers were killed last week. Our heartfelt condolences to 
their families and loved ones. Our members never accept that 
such work zone intrusions are inevitable. Safety for workers 
and motorists will always be our top priority.
    Now, shifting to the IIJA, I begin with early morning on 
Friday, January 28, 2022, when the Fern Hollow Bridge in 
Pittsburgh collapsed without warning, tragically falling 100 
feet into the park below. Nine were injured, but miraculously, 
no one was killed. The bridge failure received national media 
attention, heightened by a visit from President Biden that same 
day.
    What unfortunately does not get mentioned in the media is 
what happened after the collapse. In this instance, with the 
help of $25 million in Federal funding, including with the IIJA 
dollars, a new 460-foot, four-lane bridge opened to traffic in 
less than 1 year. This new bridge is a tangible illustration of 
how Federal transportation investments can work quickly to 
benefit communities.
    In Idaho, the IIJA is also helping improve a 6\1/2\-mile 
challenging stretch of Highway 95 by building a safer route 
with added lanes, wider shoulders, and less steep grades. As 
one Idaho transportation official observed, ``I am glad we are 
moving forward. The bottom line is: We want to save lives.''
    These 2 projects are among the more than 29,000 
improvements moving forward last year in every congressional 
district with IIJA funds. This represents 2,500 more projects 
than in 2021.
    In the first 4 months of fiscal year 2023, the momentum 
continues. States have committed highway formula funds for 
7,400 projects, 3,000 more than the same period last year. We 
have provided each of you with a fact sheet, as was referenced, 
to demonstrate the ways your constituents are benefiting from 
the law.
    Mr. Chairman, it is hard to ignore the initial positive 
ways your constituents--and the benefits of the IIJA, but it is 
also hard to overlook the impacts of inflation. Increased 
material costs and supply chain challenges undoubtedly have had 
a dilutive effect on the law's investments.
    That said, it is also clear this situation would have been 
dramatically worse if Congress opted for another flat-funded 
extension of the surface transportation programs. Instead, our 
analysis at ARTBA points to real market growth over the last 
year.
    Another aspect of the IIJA story relates to new regulatory 
requirements that may influence cost and delivery of projects. 
We encourage this subcommittee to continue its oversight role, 
ensuring that commonsense environmental review and approval 
process reforms, namely the One Federal Decision, are fully 
realized. The saying ``time is money'' is apt here, as these 
reforms have the potential to reduce overall costs and move 
projects to construction more quickly.
    Conversely, well-meaning new requirements, such as the 
expansion of Buy America, if not pursued with stakeholder input 
and articulated clearly, could have the opposite outcome and 
result in unnecessary project delays.
    Mr. Chairman, we are just 16 months into the 5-year 
infrastructure law. The highway, bridge, and public 
transportation investments are working as intended. Many more 
benefits to the American people are yet to come.
    Thanks again for allowing me to participate in today's 
hearing, and I look forward to your questions.
    [Ms. Hammond's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Paula Hammond, Senior Vice President, WSP USA, on 
  behalf of the American Road and Transportation Builders Association
    Subcommittee Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Norton, and members 
of the subcommittee, thank you for convening today's hearing. I am 
Paula Hammond, a senior vice president with WSP USA, a global 
engineering and design firm. I also serve as the current chair of the 
American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA).
    Established in 1902, ARTBA is the only national association 
representing all aspects of the U.S. transportation design and 
construction community. Our 8,000 members and 36 state affiliates own, 
manage, design, build and provide equipment and materials for all modes 
of transportation infrastructure improvements. The transportation 
construction industry generates $580 billion annually in U.S. economic 
activity and sustains more than four million jobs.
    ARTBA has long advocated for federal leadership in the development 
and maintenance of a national transportation network to support 
continued U.S. economic growth and meet the public's demand for safe 
and efficient travel.
    The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides a much-
needed boost over the next five years to help support modernization of 
the nation's multi-modal transportation network.
    With year-two under way, the law's enhancements are becoming more 
apparent. From contract awards to construction activity, key market 
indicators across the project pipeline identify the initial benefits of 
federal highway investment, despite continued inflation and lingering 
supply chain issues.
    Today's hearing offers an opportunity to highlight the law's 
successes, while acknowledging the challenges that remain.
                       Driving State Improvements
    Nearly half of the IIJA's generational investment--$450 billion--
will be spent improving highways, bridges and public transportation 
systems. The IIJA represents the largest nominal increase in highway 
funding in 65 years.
    The law's success will be built on the strong partnership between 
the federal government and states. As the map below illustrates, 
federal investment supports more than 50 percent of the average state's 
capital outlays, with some states relying on federal funds for more 
than 80 percent.

  Federal funds, on average, provided 51% of annual State DOT capital 
                                outlays

                     for highway & bridge projects



    The foundation of the federal-state partnership are the formula 
programs. Nearly nine out of every 10 dollars spent on highways and 
bridges are directed via formula programs, which provide state-focused, 
recurring revenue for priorities like the National Highway Performance 
Program, the Bridge Investment Program, and the Highway Safety 
Improvement Program. These programs facilitate the pursuit of national 
needs in a manner that respects state flexibility in project selection.
    The formula programs create state funding certainty, which drives 
growth in state transportation budgets. State highway and bridge 
capital outlays are expected to increase 16 percent in Fiscal Year (FY) 
2023, according to an ARTBA analysis of all 50 state transportation 
budgets. This spending reflects planned construction activity and 
reimbursements for ongoing state and federal-aid highway projects. Over 
70 percent of the expected growth in state DOT budgets in FY 2023 will 
come from federal reimbursements to state transportation authorities.
    Further, 37 states saw an increase in the value and number of 
contract awards for highway and bridge improvements over the last year. 
The value of state and local government highway and bridge contract 
awards jumped 25 percent in 2022, as agencies increased the number of 
projects by 4,280.
    The chart below highlights states that have increased the value of 
highway and bridge contract awards, reflecting IIJA, state, and local 
funds.

  Value of State & Local Government Highway & Bridge Contract Awards, 
                          2022 Up versus 2021



Projects Advanced Nationwide
    Congress did not finalize the 2022 appropriations process until 
about six months after the fiscal year's Oct. 1 start, and four-and-a-
half months after IIJA's enactment. States nevertheless were able to 
commit year-one's $53.5 billion in highway formula funds to thousands 
of projects by the Sept. 30 deadline.
    Congress avoided a similar situation in FY 2023 by completing the 
appropriations process in December, thereby affording states 10 months 
of funding certainty. Accordingly, ARTBA's analysis of U.S. Treasury 
data shows, in the first four months of FY 2022, states committed $3.4 
billion in funds, compared with $7.2 billion in funds over the same 
time for FY 2023. This increase represents 3,000 more new projects 
compared with the first few months of the IIJA.
    Taken together, in the first 16 months of the IIJA, states 
committed funds to nearly 34,700 new projects, totaling $61.3 billion 
in formula and discretionary funds through Jan. 30, 2023. These new 
projects stretch from coast to coast, with at least one new project 
underway in every congressional district.
    Formula programs allow states flexibility to choose the type of 
work that best suits their needs. Some states are prioritizing major 
Interstate capacity improvements, while others may bundle bridge 
repairs to address maintenance backlogs. Here is a sample of how states 
are using formula funds to positively impact urban and rural 
communities.
      In Arkansas' first district, a nearly $40 million project 
is underway to repair and rehabilitate a section of Highway 148.
      Missouri's Nodaway and Andrew counties in the sixth 
district congressional district will see $11 million in the 
rehabilitation of Highway 71.
      Washington, D.C. will be using $16 million in formula 
funds to conduct maintenance on tunnel infrastructure in the district.
      The state of Washington began $34 million worth of work 
on two bridges over the Snohomish River in the second district.

    The IIJA's long-term funding certainty is helping states to move 
forward on large projects. The number of large projects receiving 
federal support of $50 million or more increased by over 50 percent in 
FY 2022. In total, 105 projects across 29 states saw $50 million+ in 
federal investment compared to just 69 projects in 25 states in FY 
2021.
    The table below highlights the top projects receiving formula funds 
during the first 16 months of the IIJA.

        FY 2022 Top IIJA Highway & Bridge Formula Fund Projects



How Formula Funds Are Directed
    ARTBA uses data from a range of federal sources to track how 
formula funds are being spent. We have made this data available via 
www.artbahighwaydashboard.org to illustrate projects by state and 
congressional district. All subcommittee member offices have received a 
copy of their district's information.
    The data also allows us to track the types of projects formula 
funds are supporting. The figure below depicts the breakdown of highway 
project investments in FY 2022.

             Value of Federal-Aid Highway Projects by Type



    States are prioritizing maintenance activities, which received 
nearly half of federal funds. Adding capacity to an existing right-of-
way is the second largest recipient of funds at 21 percent. 
Construction of a road or bridge that did not exist before accounted 
for six percent of total project costs.
    Other spending (accounting for 12 percent of project costs) 
included projects related to bridge inspections, intelligent 
transportation systems, research, planning, and other eligible 
activities.
    The advantage of formula programs is that most project selection 
decisions are made by those who know first-hand how best to improve 
mobility and safety in their communities--the states.
Project Profile: The Chester Bridge, Perryville, Mo.
    Committing federal funds to projects is typically step one of a 
multi-year process to see a project through to completion. The Chester 
Bridge project in Missouri illustrates the process of federal support 
from initial commitment through completion and reimbursement.
    The bridge spans the Mississippi River and connects Perryville, 
Missouri, and Chester, Illinois. The 2,827-foot bridge was originally 
constructed in 1942 and is in ``poor'' condition, according to the 2022 
National Bridge Inventory. The bridge sees more than 7,000 vehicle-
crossing per day.
    In FY 2022, Missouri committed over $107 million in IIJA formula 
funds towards the design-build project. The Missouri Department of 
Transportation (MoDOT) issued a request for qualifications in June 2022 
and followed up that month with industry and community briefings. The 
request for proposals was released in September 2022 and the contractor 
team was selected in March 2023.
    Ames Construction Inc. and Parsons Transportation Group were 
awarded the $284 million contract to construct the three-tower, cable-
stayed bridge. Work will get underway on the bridge this year and with 
expected completion in 2026.
    As construction work is completed, MoDOT will reimburse the 
construction team and will in turn be reimbursed by the U.S. Treasury 
for the federal portion of the project.
Transit System Improvements Underway
    Enhancements to transit systems are taking place throughout the 
country thanks to the Capital Investment Grants (CIG) program, which 
funds major capital improvements to expansion and core capacity 
projects. Types of projects receiving 2023 CIG awards include:
      New 10-mile bus rapid transit line in St. Paul, Minn.
      13-mile bus rapid transit project in Las Vegas, Nev.
      Phase 2 of Second Avenue Subway in New York City.
Discretionary Grants Supplement Formula Work
    The IIJA commits $45 billion over five years to supplemental and 
discretionary grant programs designed to address freight networks, 
promote resiliency, and provide focused support to rural and mega 
projects. About 13 percent of the IIJA's funds will be distributed via 
these programs by the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT).
    To date, the Biden administration has awarded projects evenly 
between urban and rural areas.
    For example, National Significant Freight and Highway Projects, 
known as INFRA grants, were awarded for FY 2022 with 15 projects to 
rural communities and 11 to urban areas, though urban projects received 
a larger share of funding.
    Similarly, the Local and Regional Project Assistance Program, known 
as RAISE grants, equally divided funding for the 166 projects between 
urban and rural areas. Roughly half of the awards went to road-related 
project improvements.
    Nearly all FY 2022 grants have been awarded, however grants to fund 
charging infrastructure, resiliency projects, and smaller bridge 
projects are still outstanding, even though we are approaching the 
midpoint of FY 2023.
Making Headway on Deficient Bridges
    The Fern Hollow Bridge in Pittsburgh became a front-page story when 
it collapsed in January 2022, shortly after the IIJA was signed into 
law. Thanks to federal transportation investment, including the IIJA, 
the Fern Hollow Bridge is a success story. It was rebuilt and reopened 
in less than a year.
    The law's dedicated bridge formula program will empower states to 
begin addressing the more than 223,000 bridges in need of repair or 
rehabilitation, according to ARTBA's most recent analysis of U.S. DOT's 
National Bridge Inventory database. Nearly 43,000 bridges are 
classified as structurally deficient or in poor condition, and the 
IIJA's investments will help ensure states take meaningful action to 
repair them.
    Major bridge discretionary grant awards often draw headlines, but 
bridge projects large and small are advancing across the country. For 
example, in Illinois, $107 million was dedicated to a project that 
includes an interstate bridge replacement in the central part of the 
state. Pennsylvania used formula dollars to commit to 129 bridge 
improvements in year-one of the IIJA.
    Some states with a high number of rural bridges are using the law's 
flexibility to bundle bridge projects, like in Alabama and Oklahoma, to 
access funds and accelerate repairs.
                    Amid Progress, Challenges Remain
    Funding increases in the infrastructure law are yielding real world 
improvements in communities across the country. However, the reforms 
included some of the most significant changes to federal surface 
transportation policy in over a decade, and if implemented properly, 
have potential to speed up project delivery.
Impact of Inflation
    There are few public sector actions that can deliver the same level 
of short- and long-term economic benefits as transportation 
infrastructure investment. Increased construction activity provides 
immediate job creation and retention, while putting in place capital 
assets that support supply chain improvements and enable access to 
jobs, services, materials, and markets for decades. These dual-track 
benefits are particularly critical during times of economic uncertainty 
and disruptions.
    Recent adverse economic conditions cannot be separated from an 
analysis of the IIJA's first year. Increased materials costs--and 
decreased availability or extended delivery times in many cases--have 
undoubtedly had a dilutive impact on the new law's historic investment 
levels.
    ARTBA's tracking of the costs for highway and street construction 
inputs, like energy, goods and services, show increases of almost 30 
percent since January of 2021 and 11 percent since the IIJA's 
enactment. Estimates of total project cost inflation, which also 
accounts for labor, overhead and other less volatile inputs, are not as 
extreme but still significantly elevated over historical growth rates.
    The chart below illustrates the monthly increase in highway and 
street construction goods since 2014. Cost increases began around the 
onset of the pandemic and picked up significantly in 2021. Though some 
signs of easing have occurred recently, prices are still elevated and 
volatile.

       Monthly Price of Inputs for Highway & Street Construction

                 (excluding capital, labor and imports)



    This national data underscores the challenging environment in which 
the infrastructure law's investments are being deployed. However, there 
is variance among states, regions and project types. We have received 
reports of input cost increases of more than 40 percent for some 
commodities, along with difficulties in procuring key materials. At the 
same time, we have seen a significant number of states in which project 
bids continue to come in below the initial engineer's estimates.
    The dilutive impact of inflation on highway and bridge investment 
underpins ARTBA's repeated urgings that the U.S. DOT adopt a consistent 
and pragmatic policy regarding price escalation clauses. As part of 
this dialogue, we have urged the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 
to modernize its practices and allow federal funds to be used for price 
escalation clauses on contracts pre-dating the bulk of COVID-induced 
economic disruption. The unprecedented and unforeseen increase in costs 
our industry has experienced in the last two years warrants enhanced 
flexibility in the use of these funds to preserve the continuity and 
efficacy of these projects.
    Ultimately, though, as challenging as this situation has been for 
states and the transportation construction industry, ARTBA interprets 
the combination of available data as pointing to real market growth 
over the last year.
    Furthermore, any discussion about materials prices and inflation 
needs to also recognize that, without the infrastructure law, we would 
very likely be looking at a market contraction.
Awaiting Project Delivery Implementation
    The IIJA featured project delivery reforms, known as ``One Federal 
Decision,'' which exemplified a bipartisan spirit. The current 
environmental review process takes an average of five to seven years to 
complete for a new federal-aid transportation project \1\, and in some 
cases, ARTBA members have even experienced projects taking up to 14 
years for review. These delays come at significant cost to taxpayers 
and illustrate the need for reform. However, in the time since IIJA's 
enactment, there has been little visible progress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Executive Office of the President, Council on Environmental 
Quality, Environmental Impact Statement Timelines (2010-2018), 
available at https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/nepa-practice/
CEQ_EIS_Timeline_Report_2020-6-12.pdf, p. 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One Federal Decision seeks to alleviate costs associated with 
project delays by setting a two-year goal for project reviews and 
moving projects from the study phase to construction more quickly, 
without sacrificing important environmental safeguards.
    At the same time, the White House Council of Environmental Quality 
(CEQ) is currently rolling back recent National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) reforms designed to reduce project delays. Reversing these 
improvements undermines the goal of saving time through streamlined 
project reviews and reinstates a NEPA process which often features 
excessive litigation over projects and procedural minutiae.
    Later this year, the U.S. DOT is scheduled to submit a report to 
Congress on the efficiencies of the environmental review process and 
impediments to reaching the IIJA's project delivery goals \2\. The 
agency should prioritize the implementation of these overdue reforms to 
ensure they have an opportunity to be utilized before their impacts are 
the subject of such a report. The IIJA's success will be judged, in 
part, by delivering infrastructure improvements to communities in a 
timely and cost-effective manner. A workable review process is integral 
to meeting this objective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Sec. 11301, Codification of One Federal Decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We appreciate the committee's oversight to date of the 
infrastructure law's implementation and urge you to remain vigilant in 
the months ahead.
Build America, Buy America
    The ``Build America, Buy America Act'' (BABA), embedded in the 
IIJA, remains a significant implementation challenge. ARTBA supports 
the clear congressional intent to grow domestic manufacturing capacity 
in the long-term. Our concern relates to the potential for short-term 
disruptions of projects emanating from the IIJA's new requirements in 
this area.
    For more than 40 years, Buy America has required a domestic 
manufacturing process for iron, steel and certain manufactured products 
permanently incorporated into federal-aid highway and transit projects. 
The IIJA expanded Buy America coverage to five categories of 
construction materials (non-ferrous metals, plastic and polymer-based 
products, glass, lumber, and drywall).
    After U.S. DOT deferred this new requirement for six months, it 
took effect on November 10, 2022. At the same time, the department 
proposed narrow waivers from Buy America requirements for items falling 
under modest de minimis thresholds and for the smallest of federal-aid 
projects. It also proposed (and finalized on Jan. 30) a waiver of the 
construction materials requirement for projects in advanced stages of 
procurement or for which contracts were already in place.
    More than 16 months following the IIJA's enactment, many of the 
parameters for Buy America implementation remain unsettled, 
underscoring our concerns about potential disruption of projects. 
Specifically:
      The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has yet to 
complete guidance on the new requirements, to ensure consistent 
implementation by all FHWA division offices, Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA) regional offices and state and local 
transportation agencies.
      OMB is considering extending Buy America coverage to 
items, including aggregates and other paving materials, which Congress 
explicitly exempted in the IIJA.
      The de minimis waiver described above is still pending 
after more than four months.
      There is still no centralized, national effort to assess 
the domestically-made availability of products falling under the five 
categories of construction materials in the law.
      FHWA is now reviewing its longstanding waiver for 
manufactured products. Rolling back this waiver will result in 
significant administrative costs and delays, in part because 
contractors will need to document the origin of small, inexpensive 
commercially-available off-the-shelf (COTS) products that exceed the 
proposed de minimis thresholds.

    We urge this committee to engage with OMB's Made in America Office, 
which is overseeing all domestic preference programs and evaluating all 
proposed waivers, to seek clarity in these areas. Moreover, U.S. DOT 
brings more than four decades of experience implementing Buy America. 
OMB should incorporate that expertise into this effort, rather than 
imposing unrealistic policies that are beyond the scope of BABA and 
could undercut the IIJA's investments with project cost increases and 
delays.
Safety
    The March 22 tragedy on I-695 in Baltimore is a heartbreaking 
reminder of the risks facing men and women employed on roadway 
construction sites. The lives of six roadway workers were lost when a 
vehicle crashed into an active construction site.
    Approximately 850 fatalities occur in and around these sites 
annually, and as many as 200 are roadway workers. Ensuring a safe 
workplace for the thousands of men and women tasked with building 
mobility and safety enhancements provided by the IIJA is ARTBA's top 
priority.
    As the IIJA supports thousands of new projects, there will also be 
an increased number of work zones, resulting in increased risk exposure 
for workers. The transportation construction community is committed to 
doing its part to mitigate an increase in the number of safety-related 
incidents.
    The health and well-being of workers who build, maintain, and 
renovate transportation systems are not always fully considered by 
those who depend on them to create a safe system. FHWA discusses ways 
to enhance pedestrian safety for ``vulnerable road users,'' but 
additional emphasis on protecting workers is critically necessary.
    Previous law requires the use of positive protection in certain 
high-risk work zones, and we urge that Title 23's Subparts J and K 
regulations be updated in accordance with the Moving Ahead for Progress 
in the 21st Century (MAP-21) reauthorization law that required 
additional considerations for use of positive separation. It also 
incorporated provisions to allow greater enforcement and/or 
consequences for those who do not follow the law.
    We also call on FHWA to require positive separation considerations 
and suppositions in the forthcoming Manual on Uniform Traffic Control 
Devices (MUTCD).
                             Looking Ahead
    The key takeaway from the 16 months of the IIJA is that its highway 
and bridge funding provisions are working as intended, with state 
transportation departments breaking ground on improvement projects in 
communities across America.
    A virtue of the multi-year surface transportation reauthorization 
is the economic benefits that will follow project completion--be it 
increased state and local tax revenue, local job creation, or a boost 
to household income--are only set to compound from where we are today.
    ARTBA members remain committed to working in partnership with state 
transportation agencies to maximize IIJA's transportation improvements.
    We will continue to provide members of Congress with regular IIJA 
updates. The association has also recently created a new resource 
(www.transpoinfo.org) that provides macro-level insights on the role 
transportation plays in every congressional district, detailing the 
scope of the transportation network, economic and safety data, and 
commute times. We trust you will use this tool to track improvements in 
your district as the law progresses.
    ARTBA appreciates the opportunity to testify before the 
subcommittee and will continue its efforts to share the project success 
stories of the IIJA in the coming years.

    Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Ms. Hammond. I appreciate all the 
testimony that our panelists have given this morning. We will 
start with questions from Members. I will recognize myself to 
begin with. I am going to pose this question to each of you; I 
will start with Mr. Williams.
    IIJA contained provisions to streamline permitting 
processes to help speed up project delivery, including 
codification of the One Federal Decision policy. Especially as 
States and industry are continuing to face persistently high 
inflation, as has been indicated in our testimony today, it is 
important that we address needless delays in permitting to 
ensure projects can move forward expeditiously.
    So, my question is this. The Department has told the 
committee that it has fully implemented One Federal Decision 
and other streamlining provisions contained in IIJA. Mr. 
Williams, has DOT communicated that to you, or are you 
otherwise aware that these provisions have been implemented?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Chair Crawford. We are aware of 
the U.S. DOT's provisions with One Federal Decision. We have 
not yet had a chance to see that in action on any of our major 
projects yet. There are a variety of things that have factored 
into that, but we look forward to hopefully achieving that and 
seeing some benefits.
    Ultimately, in our view, realizing the benefits of One 
Federal Decision is going to be up to the willingness of each 
of the individual agencies that are involved to work with DOTs 
and other infrastructure operators to expedite their own 
processes internal to their programs, so that we can ultimately 
see a reduction in the Federal permitting time that goes to 
environmental decisionmaking in our country.
    Mr. Crawford. Thank you.
    Mr. Boyd, any comments?
    Mr. Boyd. Obviously, Marc would have more insight into the 
permitting issues, but just from a contractor's perspective, 
obviously, we would love to see it streamlined. The faster the 
better. And as a contractor, we are sitting on gold, and any 
delays, obviously, we are not in favor of. So, just from a 
contractor's perspective, we would love to see it streamlined 
and sped up.
    Mr. Crawford. OK. Mr. Dreher?
    Mr. Dreher. Yes, I share the same sentiment as Mr. Boyd.
    A lot of times, when we bid a project, sometimes the 
permits are not obtained. So, we are selected to start the 
project, and we don't have the permits. So, sometimes that just 
leads to further delays.
    And on the front end of the job, getting all the permits 
before we start work, and the clients put the job out to bid, 
just increasing that overall duration, definitely poses 
challenges to the overall schedule.
    Mr. Crawford. Ms. Hammond, your comments?
    Ms. Hammond. Mr. Chairman, I think you are hearing a theme 
here.
    The one thing that keeps project transportation investments 
moving is certainty of the funding which you have applied in 
the IIJA bill, but also an understanding and quick processing 
of decisions at the Federal level in permitting agencies.
    We know that any efforts towards moving the One Federal 
Decision forward to streamlining the processing time, while 
protecting the environmental provisions of NEPA, are important 
and will certainly save us funds.
    Mr. Crawford. On that note, how committed do you think the 
administration is to improving permitting processes, especially 
given the fact that President Biden has moved to reverse NEPA 
reforms made during the previous administration?
    Well, I will go ahead and start with you, Mr. Williams.
    Mr. Williams. Thank you again, Chairman. Well, we have seen 
statements that have come through the administration through 
U.S. DOT that cause concerns about potentially overlaying 
additional regulations on top of what we see as statutory 
provisions in law. That raises concerns and questions for us 
going forward in terms of our ability to expedite the 
permitting, especially on the environmental side.
    One of the things that is very important for us in terms of 
streamlining that process, Texas and several States enjoy a 
delegation of NEPA authority to us, where we are responsible 
for administering the NEPA programs within the Federal laws 
that exist. That has proven to be successful. We hope and 
expect that that will continue to exist. But that is an area 
that we have concerns that the administration is showing signs 
that they are pushing back on some of the flexibilities that 
are provided to States to take advantage of delegated NEPA 
authority.
    Mr. Crawford. Excellent. Anybody else have any comments on 
that?
    No? Let me ask you this in the last almost 40 seconds that 
I have left. On greenhouse gas performance measures, the Texas 
DOT filed docket comments in opposition to the administration's 
proposed greenhouse gas performance management rule. In that 
proposal, FHWA sets very aggressive targets for carbon emission 
reduction and effectively takes away from States the ability to 
set their own targets. However, there is no legal authority for 
this proposed rule. Such a mandate was actually specifically 
excluded from IIJA during negotiations.
    So, putting aside the lack of legal authority, the proposed 
rule also does not distinguish between urban and rural areas, 
and rural States where larger cities are still relatively small 
can't meaningfully reduce carbon by building a subway or a bus 
rapid transit system in an effort to reduce commuter automobile 
traffic, even if it was affordable.
    So, is the administration's greenhouse gas performance 
measure a one-size-fits-all mandate?
    And how can States reduce carbon emissions from 
transportation in rural areas?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Chair Crawford. We agree that it 
is our position in Texas that the administration's proposed 
greenhouse gas rules go far beyond what is available in 
statute.
    We support continuing the reduction that we have seen in 
greenhouse gases. But the proposed rules, along with the 
targets that they have established, are completely unrealistic, 
in terms of the ability of State DOTs through the 
transportation process, to see those achieved.
    Mr. Crawford. Thank you. I will now recognize the ranking 
member for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Hammond, one of the goals of the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act is to help America tackle its biggest 
transportation projects by providing increased funding and 
long-term certainty. Your testimony notes that the number of 
large projects receiving Federal support increased by over 50 
percent last fiscal year.
    Can you speak to the economic and job creation benefits we 
see when we invest in critical large investment projects?
    Ms. Hammond. Thank you. What we have seen and know about 
transportation investments is that there are early wins and 
long-term wins in transportation investment.
    First, early wins, the benefit of added jobs in the 
community and construction jobs that are well-paying jobs and 
create a livable wage for folks.
    Long term, these kinds of transportation infrastructure 
projects not only keep our travelers safe, but also enable them 
to live and travel in a way that economic growth and quality of 
life are enhanced within their communities.
    So, it is a win-win, both early and throughout the 
continuation of investments and the benefits.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you.
    Mr. Williams, in 2020, the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials adopted a resolution 
titled, ``Addressing Race, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion.'' 
The resolution aims to promote--and here I am quoting--
``equity, diversity, and inclusion to address racism and 
inequality.''
    In a similar vein, the Texas DOT says the principles of 
diversity, equity, and inclusion must be integrated throughout 
all levels of Texas DOT to continually innovate and advance.
    Can you speak, Mr. Williams, to how Texas DOT is working to 
address racism and inequality and promote diversity, equity, 
and inclusion, in line with the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials' resolution and goals 
outlined on your website?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Ranking Member Norton. We are 
proud of the progress that we have made, both at the national 
level through AASHTO and within Texas, in growing the diversity 
of our programs, reflecting Texas and our Nation, and who we 
are and what we do.
    And we have actually seen results. We have had a number of 
programs that have been designed to provide opportunity to a 
broad cross-section of individuals. Recently, our ConnectU2Jobs 
program that we have through the Texas DOT was recognized 
nationally in providing opportunities to previously justice-
involved young adults, and introducing them and bringing them 
into the transportation industry, helping to expand the 
workforce that we have that I emphasized in my earlier remarks 
have been challenging for the industry.
    I can also say that we are seeing results within the Texas 
DOT, and those results are aligning with Federal and State law 
that focus on merit and equality in how we go about hiring and 
promotion.
    Looking at senior leadership appointments within my DOT 
over the past year, two-thirds of the hiring and promotion 
within senior leadership areas within the Texas DOT last year 
involved individuals with diverse backgrounds.
    So, we are proud of the progress that we are making, and we 
look forward to continuing that going forward.
    Ms. Norton. Mr. Williams, in your testimony you discussed 
the importance of improving safety for all road users and 
applying the principles of a Safe System Approach. Sadly, 
traffic fatalities continue to rise across the country. I am 
particularly concerned with the safety of our most vulnerable 
road users, including pedestrians.
    According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 
pedestrian deaths are increasing faster than all other traffic 
fatalities. In Texas, pedestrian fatalities accounted for one 
in five of all traffic fatalities in 2021. What steps is Texas 
taking to translate the principles of the Safe System Approach 
to real-world project design and selection?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you again for that question, Ranking 
Member. You are correct, focusing on vulnerable road users has 
been a top priority for the State of Texas as we have sought to 
reduce the rising level of fatalities that we are having in the 
State of Texas. And Texas is not alone. We have seen similar 
increases in State DOTs around the Nation, and focusing on all 
of the different contributing factors is very important.
    One of the things that we have been doing in Texas--and you 
mentioned the Safer By Design approach--that applies to both 
rural and urban areas. We have been integrating that into 
updating our design standards that we utilize on both our rural 
and urban highways to better integrate designs for vulnerable 
road users.
    In addition, we have developed a toolkit with the Texas A&M 
Transportation Institute to help look at tradeoffs on different 
types of safety measures that we can make when we are designing 
our roads to ensure safety in those programs.
    Mr. Burchett [presiding]. Thank you. Notice the aggressive 
nature that I take with that mallet. Effective leadership has 
now taken over this committee. I just want you all to know 
that. No, just kidding. Who is next?
    Oh, Mr. Webster, you are recognized.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, 
witnesses, for showing up. It is really good. I read your 
testimony.
    Mr. Boyd, you probably know that, from the U.S. Treasury, 
we have sent probably $300 billion of moneys to pump up the 
Highway Trust Fund since maybe the last 15 years or so, which 
means we are really broke. We just aren't saying it. And so, we 
pump it up with money that we really don't have from sources 
that don't apply to transportation. But we do.
    Are you in any way concerned about the certainty of future 
years of coming up with money and the solvency of the Highway 
Trust Fund?
    Mr. Boyd. Absolutely, sir. I guess the greatest benefit, 
from a contractor perspective, from the IIJA was the 5-year 
guaranteed funding. And so, we have lived in--for so many years 
it was just continuing resolution, continuing resolution, and 
it made it really difficult on the DOTs to plan. It made it 
difficult on a business such as CRH to plan, to invest, to 
invest in people, to invest in assets.
    And so, yes, there is a concern. Where are we in 5 years? 
How do we fund it in 5 years? And that is why we are going to 
look to great Congressmen like yourself to help figure this 
out.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Well, that is what I was going to 
ask you.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Do you have any----
    Mr. Boyd [interrupting]. I don't have that answer. I have 
no idea how we fund it in the future. But, obviously, we are 
going to need new revenue streams. And I am sure each of you 
have ideas on how that would be funded. But I do know, as far 
as a contractor in this industry, we would like, at the 
minimum, a 5-year plan so we can plan.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. So, you think we need something to 
plan on, I guess, in the future.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, yes.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. I have got a bill I might ask you 
to--I didn't think about this, but I do, and it is a bill that 
doesn't require any Federal, State, or local moneys. It is an 
infrastructure bill, but it is based on private money, not 
public money. And so, I would love your support for that.
    We just filed it here the first week of the session, and we 
believe that there is money out there, billions of dollars out 
there that people are willing to invest in it from the private 
sector. And even if the road, which--I don't figure this is 
going to happen--it goes belly up, they would--there would be 
no dollars, Federal dollars, State dollars, local dollars spent 
on sort of fixing that up. It would be all public, and they 
would have to bear the burden if the project failed.
    But anyway, I would give that to you as one example of 
something, and the good thing is, it would not distinguish 
between fossil fuel taxes and other opportunities for vehicles, 
electric-powered or otherwise, to skip some of those. And so, 
anyway, that is one thing I would like to tell you about.
    But does anyone else have anything to say about the 
continuation of the Highway Trust Fund, as far as the solvency 
of it?
    Yes?
    Ms. Hammond. ARTBA has long supported the notion that 
transportation revenues should be collected from the users. So, 
user fees, certainly, are what we support, and have supported 
many opportunities for looking at vehicle-miles traveled or 
road usage charge kinds of collection systems to truly charge 
the users as they are using the transportation system.
    That said, we know that in this transition between now and 
when we have a national pilot, we think that there are 
opportunities to make sure that even electric vehicles are 
paying their share and their fair use of the system. Thirty-two 
States, I believe, have enacted registration fees for electric 
vehicles, and we are encouraging the Federal Congress to 
consider a fee for electric vehicle usage, so that they are 
also contributing to the investments in the transportation 
system.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. All right, thank you. Time is out.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you, sir. My friend, Congressman 
Larsen, is recognized.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I 
couldn't help but note that in one of the testimonies the 
passage of the law was called a once-in-a-generation 
opportunity. And I really want to break us of that. Because 
when you look around the paintings of this room, you are 
reminded that passing a transportation bill was like a once in 
every 5- to 6-year opportunity. It used to be the regular, 
boring work of Congress to fund the infrastructure on a 
consistent basis. And I think we need to get back to that, 
rather than wait another generation to do something like we 
just did. And so, I hope that we can start putting pieces in 
place over the next several years so in 4 years or so, we can 
return to looking at this again, and pass another round of 
policy change and funding to continue the great work that this 
current bill is doing.
    But this bill does--we do have challenges, as well, with 
this bill. And I want to first go to Paula Hammond, because 
your testimony, as well as others, talks about the rising costs 
of inflation. I think we need to recognize that as an 
implementation challenge. I don't think we should shy away from 
that. But Mr. Williams said that we want to work with the DOT 
to address that.
    So, I am going to ask you first, what can we do to address 
that, from a construction perspective, from a----
    Ms. Hammond [interrupting]. Well, one of the things that we 
know as we recover from the pandemic and the supply chain 
issues and the rising cost of inflation is that, without this 
money, we would all be in trouble. The transportation industry 
would be in a contraction area.
    The benefits the transportation projects are creating for 
the users--let's not forget the people that we are serving--is 
going to help, I think, with the economic recovery of our 
country and in communities and States.
    I think certainty is the most important thing that Congress 
and U.S. DOT can give us on how we take care of bringing back 
manufacturing to the United States, how we do it reasonably and 
practically, and not hold up the delivery of projects with the 
uncertain Buy America provisions. We need those to be settled, 
because we support this happening, we just need to know some 
certainty. And I think that is one of the most important things 
that we can move forward with.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, Mr. Williams, do you have 
anything to add on maybe how to address this particular 
challenge?
    Again, it is a real challenge, and we shouldn't shy away 
from it.
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Ranking Member. I would echo the 
comments of the witness. Certainty in regulatory and permitting 
issues, but also flexibility, flexibility in our ability to 
utilize the different formula portion programs within the IIJA 
to meet the unique needs that each State has, so that we can 
direct those funds to the projects that can move forward most 
efficiently and effectively, and put those dollars to work.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Mr. Boyd, one of the challenges 
you outlined was workforce availability, workforce development. 
How are you dealing with workforce availability as well as 
workforce development?
    What are you doing? Maybe what you are telling your 
members, as well.
    Mr. Boyd. We are getting very, very involved in vocational 
schools from the front end. We are encouraging high school 
students to look at vocational schools. We have a very robust 
intern program ongoing, and the thousands and thousands and 
thousands of job fairs we are trying to participate in.
    And the workforce is a challenge. And like I said in my 
opening statements, drivers and operators seem to be our 
biggest hole. But we would gladly support any Federal help we 
can get, whether it be through vocational schools or any kind 
of driver or operator training that we can get done. But the 
workforce is an issue.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Great. Mr. Dreher, I don't recall 
if your testimony exactly--if you addressed--maybe you did 
address Build America, Buy America. I would argue it is 
something we here on the committee are, as well, going to walk 
through a little bit to get it to happen. Do you have some 
thoughts about how we can do that?
    Mr. Dreher. So, just the Buy America provisions, we are 
pretty familiar with it. A lot of the jobs that we bid, we 
understand the provisions. And when we run into challenges as 
we are on the project and there are only certain components of 
that project that might actually come from nondomestic sources, 
and we have to apply for the waiver. And sometimes that waiver 
process takes well over 12 months.
    It just ends up adding costs, it delays the job. And if you 
can't get these components, that ends up pushing the overall 
schedule.
    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Well, thank you. Thank you very 
much. And Mr. Chair, there are benefits to infrastructure 
funding. We have seen early results. There is more to come, and 
I appreciate the chance, and I will yield back my negative 28 
seconds to you.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you. I will covet that for never.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Burchett. This is coming to the weird part of this 
thing, where you recognize yourself. So, I am recognizing 
myself, which I always thought as kind of odd. But anyway, 
thank you all for being here.
    Mr. Boyd, I am curious about the excessive waters of the 
United States regulations that have affected your industry. How 
have they, and is it negatively or in a positive manner?
    Mr. Boyd. First of all, Congressman, thank you for visiting 
our asphalt plant in Knoxville. So, thank you for that.
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir. It is the most recycled product in 
the world, is asphalt.
    Mr. Boyd. Absolutely, absolutely. And I assume you are 
referring to WOTUS.
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Boyd. I think they are causing issues, not only for the 
DOTs, where the--probably new capacity, new construction-type 
products, but they also are causing issues for the contractors 
such as ourselves, from a permitting--trying to find new sand 
and gravel or limestone or granite quarries.
    And I gave an example yesterday to a group of people, where 
permitting was ultimately denied on a potential aggregate site, 
just due to--a farmer had just a little pond in his pasture for 
his cattle, like, less than an acre pond. And the water would 
get in the pond 3 months out of the year. Sometimes it would 
overflow over the dam. And somehow or another that overflow got 
the attention that it was a navigable stream, or went to a 
navigable stream. So, anyway, ultimately, that permitting got 
denied because of that little issue.
    So, we do need clarity around WOTUS. It seems, the rules, 
to be changing. And from a contractor perspective, that is our 
biggest issue, is from the permitting side.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Boyd. Another question, and I 
wear these old Carhartt jackets, and I remember one time my 
friend, Maxine Waters, when I was just a young freshman up 
here, asked me, ``Are you that boy that always wears that barn 
jacket?''
    And I said, ``Yes, ma'am.''
    And she said, ``Why do you wear that?''
    And I said, ``Well, Chairlady, because that jacket is just 
like me.'' I said, ``Three reasons: it holds up under pressure, 
it is American-made, and it is cheap.''
    And she said, ``We are going to get along just fine,'' and 
we have become best of friends since then. I know that causes 
both sides of the aisle much anger and fear, but I think it is 
kind of cool, myself.
    And I say that because I am always about buying American. I 
don't even buy Levi's anymore, I buy them off of eBay, because 
they are not made in America, just like this style of Carhartt 
that I like.
    Why is it so important that construction materials be 
excluded from the Buy America?
    Mr. Boyd. And that is a region-to-region issue. There are 
parts of the country that--I am going to use liquid asphalt for 
an example. That is the binder that goes on the hot mix 
asphalt. There are parts of the country in the Northeast that 
do not have access to that material. And most of that is 
brought in from Canada. So, obviously, that would create an 
issue.
    The other issue would be from an aggregate perspective. On 
the gulf coast, we have been used to getting aggregate in from 
South America on boats and ships. And so, if that is negated, 
that is obviously going to cause a supply issue on the gulf 
coast part of this country.
    And that is two examples that we have in our business.
    Mr. Burchett. All right, Mr. Dreher, you kind of look a 
little lonesome over there, so, I am going to ask you a 
question. How can the Federal Government get out of your way so 
your projects can get built better and at a lower cost?
    And I do appreciate the ABC, they have been a constant 
thorn in my side for about 26 years now, and I have enjoyed 
that relationship.
    Mr. Dreher. Thank you. Permitting, right? So, the overall 
duration of the project from start to finish, funding, 
permitting, to construction, the overall duration, just 
removing the redtape to improve that process.
    PLA mandates, we have heard it a lot today. There is a 
significant workforce shortage in all industries. We believe in 
fair and open competition. Mandating only unionized contractors 
can bid projects only exacerbates the workforce shortage issue. 
So, fair and open competition and allowing more bidders to 
participate in the projects ultimately will open the 
competition, reduce costs, and reduce schedule.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you.
    Mr. Williams, in 5 seconds, can you tell me what the 
biggest challenge for States to deliver infrastructure projects 
is?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Williams. Inflation.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you. I yield nothing back to no one, 
and I recognize Representative Strickland.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Burchett. Who have we got next?
    Mendez--Menendez. I am sorry, brother.
    Mr. Menendez. Hey, you got it right the second time. That 
is all that matters.
    Mr. Burchett. Yes, nobody gets Burchett right, don't worry.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Boyd, I just want to go to you real quickly. I think in 
your written testimony you state that CRH has over 3,000 
current open jobs. Is that correct?
    Mr. Boyd. That is correct.
    Mr. Menendez. And you have testified today that our 
workforce is one of the biggest challenges that we have in 
moving these large-scale infrastructure projects?
    Mr. Boyd. That is correct.
    Mr. Menendez. And you point to developing vocational 
schools, is that correct?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Menendez. I agree with you. You also point to 
bipartisan measures for programs for America's veterans, active 
and Reserve servicemembers. Is that correct?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Menendez. I agree with you, sir. Finally, you urge 
Congress to examine and update our immigration laws and provide 
new opportunities to increase the legal workforce in the United 
States. Is that correct?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Menendez. I agree with you, sir. And I would just urge 
you and all people in your industry across the country to urge 
your Representatives to do the same. We are here, and we are 
capable of passing those laws to get you the workers that you 
all need. And I would love, love to work with my friends across 
the aisle to make that happen for all of you. So, thank you for 
including that in your testimony.
    Ms. Hammond, your testimony highlights that at least one 
new project is underway in every congressional district. Is 
that correct?
    Ms. Hammond. That is correct.
    Mr. Menendez. In your experience leading a State DOT, how 
important is it that every community receive equitable 
infrastructure investment?
    Ms. Hammond. Well, first of all, the benefits of the 
Federal law allow for flexibility for States to make the 
investments that are needed in their States and regions and 
communities.
    As those dollars are spent flexibly, the formula dollars, 
and even in the new discretionary programs, States and local 
agencies can compete to invest in the kinds of projects and 
programs that either enhance the ability for freight to move 
better, for people to live in a suburb and work in the city, 
but also for those communities who have been harmed in the past 
by some of the investments our forefathers made in the 
transportation interstate and other kinds of investments, just 
like environmental impacts that we have seen we have made over 
the years, we are correcting those.
    And so, now our investments are able to go to the right 
place at the right time to enhance the quality of life and the 
economy of the communities that we serve.
    Mr. Menendez. Correct, and I appreciate that. And by--in a 
short way, saying that having a project in every congressional 
district basically assures the American people that no one is 
getting left behind with the implementation of this law. Would 
you agree with that statement?
    Ms. Hammond. Absolutely.
    Mr. Menendez. Thank you so much. One more question for you. 
We want to maximize this investment, every single dollar. How 
can our communities leverage these Federal dollars to ensure 
they continue to see projects delivered for their constituents?
    Ms. Hammond. Communities can and should be working with 
their State DOTs not just when there is an opportunity for a 
grant, but early and often communicate on developing a 
transportation plan that works not just for the State, but for 
the communities, as well.
    And so, the more cooperation we get at the local level with 
our delivery partners and owners of the State's infrastructure, 
and the more or the less redtape that is provided on delivering 
those dollars, the better. Certainty in the rules as they are 
coming out on the delivery of IIJA, and understanding what it 
takes to get these projects delivered is critical.
    Mr. Menendez. Absolutely. I appreciate that. So, let's work 
together is what I am hearing, right?
    Ms. Hammond. Yes.
    Mr. Menendez. Federal Government, States, municipalities 
across the country?
    Ms. Hammond. Yes.
    Mr. Menendez. I agree with you. You also mentioned--sorry, 
I am going to come back to you for one more thing. You 
mentioned flexibility in this comment. You also mentioned 
certainty, and that the best thing that Congress can do is 
provide certainty for municipalities, States, and their 
planning of these large, large projects.
    Would you agree that the certainty of fully funding and 
implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law would be 
helpful, and provide the certainty that you alluded to earlier? 
Yes or no.
    Ms. Hammond. Yes.
    Mr. Menendez. Extremely helpful. One more quick question 
with my 42 seconds.
    Mr. Williams, Texas Department of Transportation, I believe 
there are 38 congressional districts in Texas, which means 
there are at least 38 projects going on in Texas right now. I 
represent New Jersey. We only have 12 congressional districts. 
So, when we think about this as a national issue, how important 
is it that all 38 congressional districts in Texas are 
participating in this program?
    Mr. Williams. It is very important, because--and we work 
with not only those districts, but with the MPOs and the local 
communities to advance those projects and to leverage the 
Federal funds, along with State funds, to help address safety, 
resiliency, and relieve congestion around the State.
    Mr. Menendez. Absolutely. And I don't have any more time, 
but that was because the chair got my name wrong, so, I yield 
back my negative time. Thanks so much.
    Mr. Crawford [presiding]. The gentleman yields. Mr. Nehls 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Chairman.
    Mr. Williams, good to see you and the others on the panel. 
I represent Texas' 22nd Congressional District, southwest 
Houston, a very, very busy, busy area, a growing suburban area 
of Houston, and just growing leaps and bounds. And we had a 
great conversation yesterday, Mr. Williams, talking about some 
of the obstacles, some of the hurdles that we are having to 
deal with, with the population growth that we are seeing in the 
great State of Texas. And I appreciate your time.
    And one of the things that is really incredibly frustrating 
for my constituents, and I think for Americans across the 
entire country, is the politics, the politics that get involved 
with things that could have or have a potential impact on our 
lives, things that could improve our lives.
    The example I would like to share with you is: The Federal 
Highway Administration sent a letter to TxDOT, sent it to you, 
asking you all to halt construction of Interstate 45's 
expansion project because of civil rights and environmental 
justice concerns. This pause, it lasted 2 years, 2 years. There 
was a letter sent to the DOT up here, and a complaint was filed 
that said that this project, an $8 billion project, violated 
the Civil Rights Act of like 1964 or 1965.
    I don't know how this road project was considered racist. 
It was there to reduce congestion. And if anybody lives around 
that Houston area, if you ever want to try to drive to Dallas 
on I-45, or if you live off of 45 and you want to get into 
Houston, I highly recommend you don't start work at 8 o'clock 
in the morning and try to get home at 5 o'clock. A 4-hour trip 
to Dallas could take 6 hours, because it is just--it is crazy, 
that road. And we need this road.
    I believe, Mr. Boyd, that you talked about permitting, the 
delays of these permits.
    I think, Ms. Hammond, you talked about inflation. I can't 
imagine this project has been in the works for 17 years, 17 
years. It kept getting delayed. They were coming out there. The 
environmental justice warriors are saying that the project is 
racist. Big, big problems. I can't imagine what the inflation 
has done now. Maybe it is not going to be $8 billion, maybe it 
will be $9 billion, maybe it will be $10 billion because of 
these continued delays.
    Mr. Williams, is that I-45 project racist?
    Mr. Williams. I don't believe that highway projects in and 
of themselves are racist. We work hard to ensure that, when we 
develop projects, that they align with Federal environmental 
policies, and we work with the communities that are served by 
those to mitigate and minimize impacts to those communities.
    Mr. Nehls. I agree. Did the project not consider 
environmental concerns?
    Mr. Williams. We went through a number of years of 
environmental permitting, working as well with the Federal 
Highway Administration. When we reached our Record of Decision 
2 years ago, it was immediately after that that the project was 
paused.
    We did not agree with the pause. We feel that that time 
duration that was involved was entirely too long, and the 
project was severely impacted by rising inflation costs.
    We are pleased that we have reached a voluntary resolution 
agreement with the Federal Highway Administration that allows 
the project, as it was originally approved environmentally, to 
once again proceed. But the 2-year delay certainly has had a 
significant impact on that.
    Mr. Nehls. That is great. Common sense prevails, I guess, 
here.
    U.S. DOT and State DOTs are supposed to be partners, 
supposed to be partners coming together in support of the 
Nation's transportation system. How is that working out for us?
    Mr. Williams. Well, I would say that, on balance, we have a 
good partnership with our Federal Highway Administration. Our 
division office in Texas is one that we work with very 
carefully, and we work with and we appreciate the involvement 
of different levels of individuals within the Federal Highway 
Administration.
    I would say that the memorandum that was drafted a couple 
of years ago in December of 2021 that sought to redefine a 
century-old relationship between States and FHWA caused 
concern, not just for Texas, but for many of our AASHTO member 
States. We are pleased that that memo has been largely 
rescinded and replaced with a memorandum by the new 
Administrator that reflects and reaffirms that commitment.
    Mr. Nehls. One of the things we discussed yesterday was the 
Railroad Crossing Elimination Program. And I am very 
interested, obviously, in this program. It seems like something 
that would eliminate lengthy delays at railroad crossings. I 
think it improved safety, and something that the freight 
industry would support. And I ask that you work with us, work 
with my office on improving the program, and any other State 
DOT that thinks they have some good policy suggestions to 
either expand the program or make it more efficient.
    Obviously, in the news recently, rail derailments--I mean, 
individuals crossing these rail crossings unsafely, we can do 
better at that. And I want to work with you to make sure--and 
anybody else, any other State that is interested in improving 
that program, because I think it is very important.
    Thank you, sir, and I yield back.
    Mr. Crawford. The gentleman yields. Mrs. Napolitano is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Williams, your testimony discussed the need for the 
Federal Government to provide flexibility to States in 
deployment of electric vehicle charging infrastructure. I am 
very concerned that the Federal law currently prohibits States 
from allowing electric vehicle charging stations at highway 
rest stops.
    Do you believe highway rest stops would be an ideal 
location to install electrical vehicle charging stations to 
address range anxiety for long-distance travels, and adding 
charging stations in rural locations?
    Do you believe Congress should allow States to install 
these at public rest stops?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congresswoman. Speaking for 
AASHTO, I know that a number of States within the AASHTO 
organization are looking or would appreciate opportunities for 
allowing electric vehicle charging at rest areas.
    Speaking on behalf of Texas, I don't believe that that 
would be an area that we would be directly focused on. I think 
we recognize the importance of collaborating with the private 
sector to allow for electric vehicle charging infrastructure to 
be provided and implemented around the State. And that would be 
our first course of action, would be to look at existing 
private-sector infrastructure as partners in that program.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Wouldn't it add to the area of anxiety 
relief for travelers?
    Mr. Williams. Well, I believe each State has an opportunity 
to make their own decisions in that area. And so, I think, to 
the degree to which Congress can allow flexibility for those 
States to do that, I know that that would be welcome.
    Mrs. Napolitano. OK, sir. Mr. Williams, Texas and my home 
State of California are both impacted by highway-rail crossings 
and the safety and congestion issues associated with them. How 
important is the highway-rail grade crossing elimination 
program to the States?
    Mr. Williams. They are very important. And I would say, 
too, that speaking for a State that has got 88,000 miles of 
highway and 14,000 miles of Class I railroad, we have got a 
large number of at-grade railroad crossings. We get $20 million 
a year to address those, which is entirely insufficient. And 
so, we are often supplementing those funds with State funds and 
flexibility with other Federal program dollars to address them.
    We do appreciate, as well, the partnership that we have 
with Class I railroads, who often contribute some of their own 
funds to help address those needs. But there are large needs in 
that area. Yes, ma'am.
    Mrs. Napolitano. All right. Ms. Hammond, in the past, we 
have heard fears of partisanship with discretionary grants--the 
idea that the Biden administration might play favorites, or 
fail to award grants to rural areas, or refuse to award grants 
to highway projects. Your testimony finds that isn't the case.
    Can you speak to what your organization has learned about 
how the administration has distributed funds under 
discretionary grant programs like INFRA and RAISE?
    Ms. Hammond. Thank you, Congresswoman. The data that we 
collect at the ARTBA dashboard--and I encourage you, any of 
you, to go look at it at any time, not just the materials we 
provided today--really is identifying the kinds of benefits and 
areas where these discretionary grant investments are being 
made.
    We are seeing urban and rural investments made. We are 
seeing freight investments, highway safety investments, and a 
number of community enhancement investments, as well. So, I 
would say that, so far, we are pleased with how the 
administration is distributing funds. We are not seeing 
favoritism, but we are seeing much and long-needed investments 
being attended to through some of these targeted discretionary 
funds, and also with our formula funds that States have 
flexibility with.
    Mrs. Napolitano. And this helped the communities that are 
at risk, or that are low-income?
    Ms. Hammond. Excuse me?
    Mrs. Napolitano. This helped many communities that are at 
risk and at low income?
    Ms. Hammond. Yes, yes. And I mentioned before, the issue of 
some of the impacts that our investments and major interstate 
construction specifically have caused for communities over the 
years. And this is a 50-, 60-year challenge and issue.
    And one of the benefits of what we are seeing in the 
industry now is not just through discretionary grants, but our 
State DOT partners and our local agencies are looking hard at 
how to reduce and mitigate the impacts that have been caused 
reconnecting communities, not just communities of color, but 
low-income communities that were severed and impacted greatly 
in the past.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Crawford. The gentlewoman yields. Mr. Mann, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mann. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for 
being here today.
    I represent the Big First district of Kansas, 60 primarily 
rural counties in the western and central parts of our State, 
where transportation infrastructure is vitally important. We 
have a lot of agriculture, we have a lot of roads and bridges. 
We have got to have the infrastructure in place to get our ag 
products out of fields, away from feed yards, and to the mouths 
that will consume them. As a geographic center of the United 
States, Kansas offers excellent transportation advantages for 
several industries. But in order to maintain these advantages, 
it is imperative that our State's infrastructure is up to date.
    I have met with many of our road and bridge contractors all 
over Kansas. These are fantastic people, great Americans that 
are building and maintaining our infrastructure, despite 
incredible challenges with labor, regulations, redtape that 
they have cut and fight through every day.
    I believe strongly that everyone on this committee and 
everyone in Congress, whether we voted for the infrastructure 
bill or not, it is imperative that we oversee this thing to 
make sure that, if we are going to spend $1.2 trillion, that we 
actually get $1.2 trillion of infrastructure for this Nation 
and for the taxpayers in return.
    My first question for you, Mr. Boyd, can you elaborate 
specifically on the permitting challenges that you see, and how 
does it impact project costs?
    Mr. Boyd. First of all, thank you for visiting our Ash 
Grove cement plant back in your home State.
    Mr. Mann. Yes.
    Mr. Boyd. So, thank you for that.
    Back to what I said earlier about permitting issues, from a 
contractor perspective, we are ready to go to work. And to see 
the DOTs delay projects because of permitting, obviously, it 
causes workforce issues because we need to hire people, we need 
to put them to work. We don't need to be waiting.
    And so, we would just like to see, obviously, more clarity 
in the permitting process to help speed up projects. From a 
contractor's perspective, that is what we would like to see, 
just more clarity, and streamline the permitting process.
    Mr. Mann. And when you look at a project cost, generally 
speaking, how much do you--it is going to vary widely by 
project, I understand. But if it is a $10 million project, how 
much typically goes to permitting regulations with the 
compliance side of the job, so to speak, in your mind?
    Mr. Boyd. I am going to kind of look at Marc. I would say 
10 percent, 15 percent.
    Mr. Williams. That is probably a fair--yes. And the time 
delay is--the time involved, especially for environmental 
approval, is often as much as it takes to construct the project 
itself.
    Mr. Mann. Yes, and I think that is important for us to 
remember, especially when we are in an inflationary 
environment. Delays cost money, and costs are increasing, and 
you all are trying to manage the bid that you made. You have 
got to bid high, knowing that the costs are moving underneath 
your feet while you are experiencing these delays.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, I mean, and so, if the Texas DOT had a 
project they were ready to bid 2 years ago, but they weren't 
able to because of some kind of permitting issues, today that 
same project is probably 20-plus percent more than it would 
have been 2 years ago.
    Mr. Mann. There you go. So, you think about spending $1.2 
trillion, 10 to 20 percent, we are hundreds of billions of 
dollars just in the permitting. And I just think it is 
important for this committee to keep that front and center, and 
for the American taxpayer to understand that, as well.
    A similar question for you, Mr. Dreher. Regulations like 
WOTUS, NEPA, all this stuff, what would be your perspective on 
what it really costs the industry, and how much we are adding 
to project costs?
    Mr. Dreher. I will get back to you with an answer on that, 
but just very similar to the permitting, just all the 
regulatory items end up just driving up costs significantly, 
whether it is pre-construction or on-the-job costs, at the end 
of the day.
    Mr. Mann. Yes, great. Well, with that I yield back. I just 
think we have got to be hyper-focused on making sure, if we are 
going to spend $1.2 trillion, let's get $1.2 trillion of 
infrastructure in return for this great country while we move 
forward.
    So, thank you for the time, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Crawford. The gentleman yields. Mr. Johnson is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for 
holding this hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your 
testimony today.
    In 2015, President Obama signed the FAST Act, which was the 
first Federal law in over a decade to provide long-term funding 
certainty for surface transportation infrastructure planning 
and investment. Fast forward to 2021, and we saw President 
Biden sign the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act into law, 
furthering Democratic leadership's commitment to improving this 
Nation's infrastructure that had been neglected for so long.
    We have seen many positive results in just the first year 
of implementation of the IIJA, including implementation of the 
largest Federal investment in transit in this Nation's history.
    In August of last year, the Federal Transit Administration 
announced funding for the Low- or No-Emission Vehicle Program. 
This program provides funding to help transit agencies buy or 
lease U.S.-built, low- or no-emission vehicles, including 
related equipment and facilities.
    I was happy to hear that the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid 
Transit Authority received $19.3 million in grants to purchase 
25 electric buses and charging infrastructure. Ms. Hammond, for 
decades, infrastructure in Georgia and other States has 
suffered from a systemic lack of investment. In fact, in 2021, 
the American Society of Civil Engineers gave Georgia a C grade 
in its infrastructure report.
    The historic Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is 
beginning to make real and positive impact on the lives of 
millions of Georgia residents, while spurring economic 
development and creating a generation of good-paying union 
jobs, which positions Georgia to continue its significant role 
in building the 21st-century economy in our great Nation.
    Without Federal funding, how would America be able to 
rebuild old and build new infrastructure to secure our future 
as a world economic leader?
    Ms. Hammond. In short, we wouldn't. I would like to 
recognize that in Georgia and States across the country, State 
legislators are enacting State revenues to participate in and 
partner with the Federal Government in building our Nation's 
infrastructure, so, much progress has been made in recent 
years.
    I would say that we need to do this from both the Federal, 
State, and local area, and get our users involved in paying 
their fair share for the use of the system.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. The IIJA provides $50 
million in funding for the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise 
Supportive Services program through 2026. Can you speak to the 
importance of this program in improving access of small 
businesses to compete as prime and subcontractors on federally 
assisted contracts?
    Ms. Hammond. I would say today you have heard the common 
theme of workforce challenges. There is not enough of us at any 
aspect of the transportation delivery process. The 
disadvantaged business programs are going to help bring new 
partners into the transportation delivery process.
    The more we can help people contribute to the mission that 
we are on to invest in our Nation's infrastructure, the better. 
So, I encourage more of these kinds of programs and the ability 
for disadvantaged businesses to come into the business.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. Mr. Williams, you 
testified earlier about the great work that the State of Texas 
is doing in terms of diversifying workforce. What is the State 
of Texas doing to encourage diversity, in terms of businesses 
that are doing business in Texas?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congressman. You mentioned the 
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program, and that has been 
one that we have been very invested in and growing over the 
past several years. As our program has grown, so too has our 
investment in disadvantaged business enterprises.
    One of the things that I would call attention to, and I ask 
that Congress and U.S. DOT to continue to look at, is just the 
threshold that is established for companies to remain qualified 
as disadvantaged businesses. As the inflation and the cost of 
projects has risen, so too does some of the criteria in terms 
of net worth and the receipts for those companies. Those two 
also need to keep up so we can keep those companies in the 
program, and help them grow and become more established.
    Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Excellent point. Thank you, Mr. 
Williams.
    And thank you all for your testimony. And with that, I 
yield back.
    Mr. Crawford. I thank the gentleman. And Mr. Yakym is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our 
witnesses for being here today to lend your expertise as we 
conduct this important hearing on IIJA oversight and 
implementation.
    This legislation represented a significant investment in 
our Nation's infrastructure, and such a significant investment 
carries with it a significant responsibility on the part of 
this committee to exercise oversight and make sure that we are 
being good stewards of our taxpayer dollars. This means 
ensuring that worthy projects are funded, that the 
administration is following legislative intent, and that 
projects have a smooth runway, from initial concept all the way 
to the ribbon cutting.
    We also want to ensure that local governments with limited 
resources aren't so overwhelmed with burdensome regulation that 
they don't apply for funding, and thus miss out on the 
opportunities that are created by this legislation.
    I wasn't in Congress when IIJA was passed, but I want the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to create quality 
infrastructure investment and jobs around the country, as well 
as my congressional district back in Indiana. In hearing the 
testimony today, it makes me concerned that we are not hitting 
some of those benchmarks.
    All of you talked about the impact of inflation, which is 
the single top issue I have heard from my constituents inside 
my district when traveling around the district. One of the 
first meetings I had as a Member of Congress was actually with 
a regional planning authority who told me that inflation 
created a $10 million shortfall for an important overpass 
project that they wanted to do inside my district. Ten million 
dollars is a rounding error for the Federal Government. But for 
Indiana's Second Congressional District and some of these local 
municipalities, it is real money, and it is oftentimes real 
money that they don't have.
    So, the question becomes, what do they do? Do they take on 
more debt at a time of rising interest rates? Do they postpone 
the project and direct funding to other projects? Or do they 
just scrap the project altogether? It is truly a menu of bad 
options for local governments, State governments, and 
municipalities. Inflation is sand in the gears that is reducing 
the effectiveness of IIJA.
    But I have some other concerns on implementation, as well. 
Specifically, Mr. Boyd, you mentioned the OMB's confusing and 
contradicting Buy American rule that may end up upending a lot 
of the groundwork that assumed that the administration would 
follow congressional intent. Will this rule, as presently 
written, and the seemingly unnecessary confusion it has 
created, increase or decrease the cost of infrastructure 
projects?
    Mr. Boyd. Obviously, it is going to increase the cost. If 
the exclusions are not made for the bill of materials that we 
have requested, costs will go up.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you. Will it speed up or slow down the 
cost of infrastructure projects?
    Mr. Boyd. It is going to slow down.
    Mr. Yakym. Will it increase or decrease the number of 
infrastructure projects that can be completed?
    Mr. Boyd. It is obviously going to reduce the projects.
    Mr. Yakym. And do you believe that this rule will increase 
or decrease the effectiveness of IIJA?
    Mr. Boyd. It will decrease it.
    Mr. Yakym. Thank you, Mr. Boyd.
    Ms. Hammond, you talked about the challenges of permitting, 
and how it takes 5 to 7 years, on average, to complete just an 
average environmental review for a Federal-aid transportation 
project. And that is nothing to speak of lawsuits or other 
litigation that may come their way and have to work through the 
court system before going fully under construction.
    You know that the White House's Council on Environmental 
Quality is rolling back NEPA reforms, and I want to ask you the 
same question as Mr. Boyd. Will the White House's NEPA reform 
rollback increase or decrease the cost of infrastructure 
projects?
    Ms. Hammond. I am not sure I can answer that. I don't 
totally understand the reform rollback you are mentioning.
    Mr. Yakym. OK, great. Thank you.
    And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Crawford. I thank the gentleman and recognize Ms. 
Brownley for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Brownley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Hammond, you mentioned this morning the recent accident 
in Baltimore. And in your testimony, you also mentioned the 
need for what you called positive separation to help reduce 
work zone accidents. Can you elaborate a bit on what that 
entails and how it will improve safety?
    Ms. Hammond. Certainly. If you consider a heavily traveled 
highway or freeway, and when inevitably you are widening that 
road, it is always under traffic. And so, as the States and the 
local agencies are making their construction projects 
available, one of the things that we are all talking about is 
how to keep our workers safe--not just contractors, but our 
State employees, as well.
    And so, positive separation really means median barrier, or 
Jersey barrier, as you see often. That doesn't solve every 
problem. States are investing more in impact attenuators to 
protect their workers. But the more kinds of precautions we can 
take like that, in addition to speed enforcement in work 
zones--there are great gains there we need to continue--as well 
as the education of our drivers, which IIJA provides for, and 
then enforcement in general is critical as we put people's 
lives at risk every day on the road.
    Ms. Brownley. Thank you for that. And again, to ask an 
entirely different question, Ms. Hammond, what are your 
organizations doing specifically to help recruit and retain 
women in construction?
    Ms. Hammond. Personally, I have just recently been the 
chair of WTS, which is Women in Transportation, an association 
that has really been working to advance women in transportation 
throughout their careers. I have been in this industry for 44 
years. It has been pretty lonely, I will admit, at times.
    We don't get to see nor have we effectively, all of us, 
marketed transportation careers to not just men, and not just 
engineers and planners, but to the wealth of disciplines that 
are necessary to pull off the kinds of transportation 
investments we are making for communities.
    So, I think we need better coordination amongst all of us 
looking to expand our workforce and build a diverse workforce 
that truly represents the citizens that we serve.
    Ms. Brownley. Thank you. Thank you very much for that.
    Mr. Williams, in your testimony you noted that some rural 
States are seeking flexibility in the National Electric Vehicle 
Infrastructure Program. Can you elaborate on that a bit, on 
some of the specific challenges rural States are having, and 
what specific flexibilities are you seeking?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congresswoman. So, specifically, 
Texas, along with several other rural States--Montana and a few 
others--have asked for flexibility in the 50-mile placement 
requirement for electric vehicle charging stations. We believe 
that the location of those should be somewhat market-driven in 
areas, while still addressing equity and the effective 
distribution of those.
    But it is going to be costly in some areas of the State, in 
Texas and other locations, to potentially meet that 50-mile 
spacing requirement for electric vehicle charging. And so, that 
was the specific reference that we were----
    Ms. Brownley [interrupting]. I see. And what you mentioned 
earlier with regards to your own State, you said you were going 
to really deal with the private sector in terms of building 
that infrastructure. Is that one of the limitations, that there 
is just not the private sector out there in the rural areas to 
partner with?
    Mr. Williams. Yes, ma'am, a combination of that and just 
the market demand with vehicles in those areas, as well. There 
have to be users, there has to be a market demand for those 
vehicles, for those charging stations to be maintained and 
profitable. State DOTs are not in the business of running 
gasoline stations or electric vehicle charging stations. So, we 
have to work with the private sector if we are going to be 
successful with that program.
    Ms. Brownley. Thank you for that.
    And I just have a few seconds left, Mr. Dreher, to ask you 
a quick question. You mentioned the need for new construction 
equipment in your testimony. And when your company looks at 
these new purchases, would you consider zero-emission heavy 
duty vehicles in that process?
    Mr. Dreher. Absolutely. Whatever the most economical option 
is, we are certainly open to that to reduce our carbon 
footprint.
    Ms. Brownley. Great. Thank you very much.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Crawford. The gentlewoman yields. Mr. Edwards, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    To all of you, thanks for sharing some time with us this 
morning. We appreciate it. And I know some of you came quite a 
distance. I will begin with this question for the gentleman on 
the left, Mr. Williams. I can't see that far anymore, so, thank 
you.
    There is a clear theme here, that we are experiencing 
inflationary measures that are slowing projects down, making 
projects more expensive. We are experiencing supply chain 
interruptions, there are permitting issues. Because of those 
delays, how much of the $1.7 trillion in the IIJA might not be 
spent in any time that is required to be spent in that act?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congressman. So, the delays are 
certainly going to translate into a longer time period over 
which the IIJA funding would be spent. Texas will certainly 
spend all of the money that is formula apportioned to the State 
of Texas. We are going to get the money out. The challenge is 
in the timeframe and the expediency in being able to do that.
    And so, the additional permitting requirements, regulatory 
requirements can add to that. Furthermore, they can also 
increase the cost of projects themselves. And so, ultimately, 
the buying power of Federal funding has been diminished, and 
significantly so over the past couple of years in Texas, to the 
point that I made earlier, that where it stands right now we 
don't believe that the Federal buying power that we have, even 
with the increase in funds through the IIJA, is as much as it 
was just 2 years ago.
    Mr. Edwards. And so, what are the options when a project 
experiences these cost overruns? If a project has got $50 
million assigned to it, we have now spent $50 million, but 
because of inflation and delays it is going to require $75 
million, what are the options at that point?
    Mr. Williams. Well, there are no real good options. In some 
instances, the project may have to be scrapped. In other 
instances, the project may need to be rescoped. Or we have to 
find additional funds to cover the cost of that project, which 
means that another project somewhere else in the State is being 
delayed. So, there are really no good options when we are in a 
situation where the cost of projects is growing so 
significantly.
    Mr. Edwards. And so, you are telling us that a project 
might be scrapped. That means that money has been spent--in 
some cases, a tremendous amount of money has been spent--and 
somewhere along the line, we are just going to stop a project.
    Mr. Williams. If we have to stop a project, it is going to 
result in money that has been wasted. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Edwards. All right. One of the things that I have not 
heard much talk about that I know takes place, and that is 
legal delays and expenses in projects. I know that many highway 
projects, bridge projects, for one reason or another, end up in 
litigation. Can you speak at all to the cost or the time 
involved in legal disputes that you have seen as a result of 
these projects?
    Mr. Williams. Well, it has been a very real impact for 
Texas, as it has been for a number of States. Not to diminish 
the importance of ensuring that our projects align with State 
and Federal laws, but as the Congressman from Texas previously 
spoke about, we had a major project in Houston that was delayed 
by 2 years because of legal challenges that came about through 
that. And through that 2-year period, we had to work with the 
Federal Highway Administration and some of the local 
governments to address their concerns.
    The outcome of that was basically the project that we had 
approved environmentally was approved to move forward, only 2 
years later, with the impact of additional inflation costs 
being put on top of that.
    Mr. Edwards. And so, you have assigned a value--I think I 
heard maybe about 30 percent--being added to a project because 
of inflation. Can you assign a value to the legal expenses and 
delays?
    Mr. Williams. It is very difficult to do that, because they 
take different forms. But I can say that it is very 
significant. And we spoke about the inflation cost of 2 years 
of delay. Adding to that, that will translate into the hundreds 
of millions of dollars on the project that we referenced in 
Houston alone on that, as a minimum.
    In addition to that, just the time and expense that goes in 
to the professional services and other fees that are involved 
in addressing the regulatory and permitting issues, the legal 
expenses that go into that, all of that factors in to drive up 
the cost of delivering highway infrastructure.
    Mr. Crawford. The gentleman's time has expired. I am going 
to have to move on.
    Mr. Edwards. I yield.
    Mr. Crawford. Mr. Stanton is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Since its enactment 16 months ago, Arizona has received 
over $2.1 billion for roads, bridges, and other major projects 
under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Every corner 
of Arizona is benefiting, and my district is no exception: $223 
million has been allocated to reconstruct and expand the I-10 
Broadway Curve, one of the most heavily traveled sections of 
freeway in the entire region.
    This project, which runs through my congressional district, 
is the largest freeway reconstruction project in Arizona's 
history. It includes modified interchanges to improve traffic 
flow, added lane capacity, including high-occupancy vehicle 
lanes, new bridges, and improved connections to Interstate 17. 
It will enhance safety, reduce travel times, increase access to 
our largest employers, and other transportation options, 
supporting our growing population. And it will have a 
significant economic impact: 1,400 new construction jobs and 
250 long-term jobs.
    Mr. Boyd, in your testimony you discuss how the products 
you mine and make in the aggregates industry are quite 
literally the building blocks for infrastructure projects like 
the I-10 Broadway Curve, and how important it is to proactively 
manage these resources to ensure continued access. To build the 
infrastructure funded through this law, we must consider where 
our building materials are coming from, and how we get them to 
construction sites. On this front, Arizona has led the way 
through smart policies to keep these resources accessible and 
affordable.
    Can you discuss the importance of the Federal Government 
being involved in preserving access to these resources, and how 
important it is for the Federal Highway Administration to stand 
up the working group established under the law?
    Mr. Boyd. Thank you, Congressman, and I believe what you 
are probably referring to is the ROCKS Act?
    Mr. Stanton. Correct.
    Mr. Boyd. And I want to congratulate you and your team for 
being so forward-thinking on doing such.
    Obviously, from an infrastructure perspective, aggregates 
are going to be needed. From a water perspective, aggregates 
are going to be needed. And the longer we can plan out for 
where such is going to come from, obviously, the better the 
DOTs, the local municipalities, even land developers, can plan. 
And the cost of aggregates is one thing. Transportation is the 
other. So, the closer the aggregates are to the final home or 
the resting place, whether it be in a home or on a bridge or on 
a roadway, the less expensive these projects are going to be.
    So, securing these pieces of property that have aggregate 
and protecting them is important, yes.
    Mr. Stanton. All right, good. And keeping those trucks off 
the road is good for the environment, as well.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Stanton. So, it is a win all around. As we make these 
investments in our Nation's infrastructure, we cannot overlook 
the role inspections play in keeping our bridges and other 
critical infrastructure in the best shape possible. Drones are 
playing an increasingly pivotal role in the way we inspect 
infrastructure. So, the next question is for Mr. Williams.
    Can you discuss the benefits of utilizing drones for 
inspections, and how best Congress can support State DOTs in 
harnessing this technology?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congressman. The use of new 
technology across the board is vitally important, not only for 
speed and efficiency, but also safety.
    In Texas, we have what was established a couple of years 
ago as an urban air mobility task force that was established by 
our Governor and the legislature to bring industry together, 
working with TxDOT to look at ways that we can utilize drone 
technology most effectively. And we are deploying that and 
making use of that within TxDOT. We have a regular training 
program for our personnel to learn how to effectively utilize 
and operate drones within FAA regulations, and we are seeing 
that deployed both in bridge inspections, as well as in 
inspection of roadway projects.
    That also gives us an avenue to improve efficiency and 
safety for those personnel that may be tasked with being out in 
the roadway. If we can utilize drone technology to inspect our 
roads and minimize the amount of exposure that our staff may 
have, that is a benefit to us.
    Mr. Stanton. That is great. And I have a bill to try to 
better support small cities and smaller governmental entities 
and the Tribal communities, so that they can get the benefits 
of drone technology, as well, for infrastructure investment.
    It looks like I have run out of time, so, I will yield back 
the rest of my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Collins [presiding]. Thank you. The Chair now 
recognizes Mr. Burlison for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You are looking good 
in that seat. I have a question for Mr. Dreher.
    You mentioned in your testimony that the Biden 
administration has prioritized union contractors on taxpayer-
funded projects. Why do you believe the administration--I mean, 
this is just a basic question--why do you believe they are 
pursuing that policy?
    Mr. Dreher. The common theme today has been workforce 
shortage. By having that mandate in place, we are limiting 
competition. We are limiting the amount of open shop 
contractors that can bid that project. And the result is 
increased costs. It only exacerbates the current challenges 
that are facing us right now.
    Mr. Burlison. And those costs are borne on the taxpayer.
    Mr. Dreher. On the taxpayer. Less competition and 
challenges to the workforce leads to increased costs.
    Mr. Burlison. So, would it be safe to say that we are 
getting less roads, getting less bridges, less infrastructure 
for our same dollars?
    Mr. Dreher. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Burlison. OK.
    Mr. Dreher. And recently, we had some nice opportunities, 
nice projects that fit Cianbro very well. We had to pass on 
them because of the PLA mandates.
    Mr. Burlison. And the time delays that this might create, 
how--give me some real-world----
    Mr. Dreher [interrupting]. Just the overall duration of the 
job and just tying that back to workforce shortages and some of 
the permitting challenges. In our world, time is money. Any 
delays in the permit process--you bid a job, sometimes you 
don't get the permit until 3 months into it. It ends up adding 
to the back end and drives up costs significantly.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you.
    Mr. Boyd, I have a few questions for you, sir. Can you 
explain some of the permitting challenges that you are seeing?
    Mr. Boyd. I am going to go back to an earlier statement, 
going back to WOTUS, and that has been our biggest challenge, 
from an aggregate industry. And it seems there has not been a 
lot of clarity around WOTUS, and it seems to be changing.
    From an aggregate facility, we are looking 10, 20 years 
out. And we don't need to make a financial decision or a 
business decision based on what if's--so, we would like some 
clarity around WOTUS.
    Mr. Burlison. Well, I hear from farmers all the time about 
WOTUS, but can you elaborate on how it impacts you in 
aggregate?
    Mr. Boyd. Any time you move dirt, any time you do any 
stripping, clearing, whether it be trees, whatever, obviously, 
you have to do some pre-work to see if you have blue streams, 
blue water, anything that would fall under WOTUS. So, any time 
you turn any dirt over, WOTUS seems to get involved.
    Mr. Burlison. OK, so, you can't--any time you move dirt at 
all you have got to get permitting for it.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Burlison. Can you elaborate on the importance of having 
construction materials excluded?
    I noticed that in your testimony that you said that they 
were excluded in what was a bipartisan legislation, but the new 
rules threaten to have this aggregate material now included in 
the Buy America.
    Mr. Boyd. That is correct. The industry has asked for 
aggregate cement, liquid asphalt, and other building materials 
to be excluded from Buy America. And the reason being is some 
of the country is unable to source those local materials, 
whether it be aggregates in the gulf coast area, or liquid 
asphalt, which is the binder that goes in the hot mix, that has 
historically come from Canada. And if these products are not 
excluded, obviously there is going to be a significant increase 
in cost, a great possibility of projects not even being able to 
get done. And if they get done, the transportation cost is 
probably going to make them not feasible.
    Mr. Burlison. I talked to people today. In fact, I talked 
to someone who is building a home, and they were shocked at the 
price of concrete. And so, this would only exacerbate that 
problem.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, it would. A lot of cement is imported.
    Mr. Burlison. Thank you, I yield back.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentlelady from Ohio, Mrs. Sykes, for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the ranking 
member, for organizing this meeting for us today.
    I am from Ohio, as it was indicated, and one of the reasons 
I wanted to be on this committee, and particularly this 
subcommittee, is because of all of the highway infrastructure 
in our State. And just in case you are not familiar, Ohio has 
121,000 centerline miles. We are the fourth largest interstate 
system in the country, the eighth largest roadway network, and 
the fifth highest volume of traffic nationwide, according to 
the Ohio Department of Transportation.
    And even if I were to drill down a little bit into Ohio's 
13th Congressional District, where I am from, where I 
represent, and knowing that we have a lot of construction needs 
statewide, also locally, thinking of our Summit County High 
Level Bridge, which is the bridge that connects Akron to 
Cuyahoga Falls over the Cuyahoga River. It is 220 feet high. It 
is 75 years old. It is 8 years older than the Interstate 
Highway System itself, and needs some significant repair as we 
are looking at the civil engineers grading us a C-minus for our 
infrastructure, which I think is probably a little generous.
    This Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is incredibly important 
to our State, our economy, and our safety, and its 
implementation is incredibly important to me in my community.
    But one of the things I want to talk about is the 
permitting, the regulatory issues, because we have focused on 
that quite a bit. And this question, I will ask all of you to 
answer it very, very quickly, because I do only have a couple 
more minutes left.
    The Buy America, Build America program is important. I come 
from Akron, Ohio, where we literally built the tires and 
organized the ability for people to get to and from on that 
interstate system. Building in America, having my hometown, my 
friends and neighbors build things, is not only important for 
our progress, our economy, our hope, our future, it is a big 
deal, and it is what made us build the best middle class in the 
country.
    What is the one thing that the administration could do to 
move the Buy America, Build America process along? Very 
specifically, not general. We talk a lot in generalities. What 
very specifically can or should we be pushing for?
    And I will start with you, Mr. Williams. Just a few words.
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congresswoman. Very specifically, 
I would say practical and reasonable waivers when those are 
necessary, and clear guidance for industry and States to adopt 
into our specifications.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you.
    Mr. Boyd?
    Mr. Boyd. CRH does support Buy America, and I guess to 
answer your question is to exclude the products that we ask to 
be excluded, from a construction material standpoint.
    Mrs. Sykes. Mr. Dreher?
    Mr. Dreher. A simplified waiver process during 
construction.
    Mrs. Sykes. Ms. Hammond?
    Ms. Hammond. And I would say certainty of the rules.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you. Thank you all for working with me, 
and being so brief in your responses.
    So, Mr. Dreher, I heard you say PLAs were problematic for 
some of this work. And it caught my attention because in Ohio 
we have bipartisan support for project labor agreements. We 
have consistently protected them through Republican Governors, 
Democratic Governors, Republican super-majority legislatures in 
Ohio. We have found this to be incredibly important for our 
State in building the infrastructure.
    And it is my understanding that PLAs are good because they 
help control construction costs, they help prevent overruns, 
they help ensure efficient completion of projects. And really, 
one of the most important parts is ensuring fair wages for 
people to work. Our most important, valuable asset is the 
people we have in our communities, and giving them the ability 
for safe working conditions where they can earn enough money to 
continue to live in our communities is really one of the best 
parts about it.
    And so, when I hear you criticize them, I take it very 
personally when I think about the laborers in my community, and 
the operating engineers, and the folks who are working these 
projects, knowing that they need those fair wages so they can 
bring them home to their families and participate in our 
economy.
    So, tell me again why you are against project labor 
agreements, why you are against getting these fair wages and 
safe working conditions for our people, for the people that I 
represent in Ohio 13?
    Mr. Dreher. We work with union contractors all the time. We 
are not anti-union. However, there are certain provisions in 
these agreements that we just can't agree to. We are paying 
dues, union dues that our workers won't see the benefits to 
after the project is complete.
    So, overall, limiting the amount of competition when a 
project is advertised is only going to exacerbate the 
challenges that we have right now with the workforce shortage. 
Less contractors bidding a project results in increased costs.
    Mrs. Sykes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think my time is up, 
and I yield back.
    Mr. Collins. All right. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Stauber, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Inflation has and 
continues to be a detriment to all Americans.
    Let me paint a picture. Working class families struggle to 
put the food on their table as their grocery bills skyrocket. 
So, they go to work to put in more hours and hopefully take 
home more pay. But now they can't afford the materials to 
complete their projects. Since no one can afford materials for 
their projects, they get terminated or abandoned. Now, no one 
gets paid: a spiral of doom created by the reckless spending of 
this administration.
    The IIJA was supposed to be the largest investment in 
infrastructure in decades, but pair that with a $3.5 trillion 
reconciliation bill, a $700 billion spending bill, and the 
value simply erodes.
    Back home, I have been told over and over again that 
inflation has eaten up nearly all of the funding for our 
infrastructure projects. The status quo should not be 
acceptable to any of us.
    Mr. Dreher, can you describe in more detail how inflation 
has eroded the buying power of IIJA and the impact on your 
business?
    Mr. Dreher. So, inflation has driven up costs. Costs are 
up, I think, over 40 percent in the last few years. We have 
seen projects where we have bid, we are actually the low bidder 
and successful, and States don't award the job because 
sometimes the budgets are done 5 years ago, and we are way over 
the budget, so, sometimes the project gets shelved and punted 
to another time or rescoped.
    So, it just really limits the opportunity to execute these 
projects, build the bridges, and it is having a significant 
effect.
    Mr. Stauber. So, would you say inflation and supply chains 
have been rather devastating?
    Mr. Dreher. Yes, devastating. And also during construction, 
a lot of the challenges that we spoke about today when we can't 
get a particular material because it doesn't meet the Buy 
America provisions just adds to extended schedule, extended 
costs.
    Mr. Stauber. Right. Thank you. Changing gears a bit, I want 
to discuss permitting reform. Members on this committee, 
including myself, have spent months crafting legislation that 
will be on the floor this week that will streamline permitting 
for mining and infrastructure projects.
    Mr. Boyd, it is great to see you. Could you please explain 
how some of these reforms, if passed, would help advance 
infrastructure investments?
    Mr. Boyd. First of all, thank you for your leadership on 
H.R. 1, and CRH proudly supports you with this endeavor. So, 
thank you.
    I am just going to repeat what you said. Streamlining, 
streamlining the permitting----
    Mr. Stauber [interrupting]. Yes, and I will repeat the 
question, Mr. Boyd. Can you please explain how some of these 
reforms, if passed, would help advance infrastructure 
investments?
    Mr. Boyd. It would obviously speed them up. I think we said 
before in this panel that time is obviously money. I think that 
is the biggest impact, just speeding the projects up.
    Mr. Stauber. When you delay a project for, let's say a 
year--in northern Minnesota our construction season is shorter. 
When you delay a project, if you delay a project because of the 
lengthy permitting process, if you delay it for one 
construction season, can you give us an idea what that 
additional cost would be?
    Mr. Boyd. I am just going to go over our 38-year history, 
OK? So, historically, it has been 3 to 5 percent a year.
    Mr. Stauber. Yes.
    Mr. Boyd. The last 2 years, it has been double digits, 15 
to 20 percent more.
    Mr. Stauber. So, 15 to 20 percent more in the last couple 
of years, that it costs more for investment in infrastructure. 
And that is what I was getting at, the inflation.
    Is the inflation, in your opinion--you have got a lengthy 
career--causing some projects not to move forward because of 
the cost?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, there is no doubt about that.
    Mr. Stauber. And many projects, or just a few?
    Mr. Boyd. I wouldn't know a number. Obviously, these DOTs 
have a fixed budget. And so, they are going to do as many 
projects as that money allows. So----
    Mr. Stauber [interposing]. Right.
    Mr. Boyd [continuing]. The more it costs, the less projects 
are getting done.
    Mr. Stauber. I think that the investment in our 
infrastructure is critically important, but with the inflation, 
we are not going to be able to have the buying power that we 
need.
    And with that, my time is up. Mr. Chair, I yield back. 
Thank you.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentlelady from Oregon, Ms. Hoyle, for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Thank you. My first question is for 
Ms. Hammond, who I would like to point out is a graduate from 
Oregon State University, the land-grant school in the heart of 
my district.
    So, Ms. Hammond, your testimony notes that 37 States saw an 
increase in value and number of contract awards for highway and 
bridge improvements over the last year. The value of State and 
local contracts also increased. Can you speak to the impacts of 
this increased Government funding on private-sector jobs in the 
construction industry?
    Ms. Hammond. Well, certainly, when we saw the contract 
awards stable or going down over the years, we see a loss in 
the ability for construction jobs. What we have seen in the 
last year--in 2022, for example--contract awards were up 24 
percent. We actually think in our data that we are reviewing 
that inflation accounted for about half of that, so, 12 
percent. And in every region and State, it is different.
    So, as these investments are rolling forward, and through 
the rest of the act, through the 5-year life of the act, we are 
seeing people be able to not just come work on a job on a 
project, but that careers are being developed. We talked about 
the ability to bring more people into our industry for the 
long-term health of the industry and for delivery of ongoing 
future transportation. The importance of bringing people in for 
careers, high-paying jobs, and the ability to earn a living 
wage is just critically important.
    So, we see that we are back on an uptick of investments, 
which mean jobs now and in the future.
    Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Great, thank you. Previously, before 
being in Congress, I was a labor commissioner, statewide labor 
commissioner in Oregon, and worked a lot on expanding access to 
apprenticeships and getting into the building and construction 
trades.
    I think one of the worst things that we have done is 
stigmatized these jobs in that they are good jobs with good 
wages, with good pensions, and no college debt. And if you want 
to know how valuable those jobs are, just try and get a plumber 
or an electrician.
    So, one of the things that we did, because you would never 
have someone go to college and not know what kind of program is 
good or bad, is before I left, I started working on a report 
card for all of our programs, and the current labor 
commissioner will be posting those so that we can have 
transparency about what programs have higher graduation rates, 
how much you can make after you graduate this program, whether 
or not there is a pension, how much it costs to go into the 
program, because transparency allows people to make a decision 
based on the merit of the program. I would say it is a merit-
based decision, as it were.
    I will say, although I worked with open shops very well, 
and I worked with union shops very well, the data that I have 
seen is that the union programs have better graduation rates, 
the union programs have higher employment rates, they have 
higher wages. So, with this report card system, what I would 
encourage you, Mr. Dreher, is once that is up, we will get it 
over to you to look so that you can work with your programs. 
And if they are good, say great job. And if not, see if they 
can raise their standards so that we can have exceptional 
programs for people in the trades and have that be equal to a 
college degree.
    But my next question--my--actually, that is a comment, not 
a question. Mr. Boyd, CRH is an employer in my district, 
provides good jobs, and it is a good place to work. I know a 
number of my constituents that work there. As we are talking, I 
know you have done a lot with workforce. Can you just speak to 
just the idea of how do we get the word out about jobs like the 
ones that you provide that will provide good careers? How do we 
get the word out that this is a good option?
    Mr. Boyd. RiverBend Materials, correct?
    Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Boyd. OK. So, thank you. We are making a conscious 
effort to start recruiting at a lot younger age, and even 
getting into the elementary schools, and trying to introduce 
them to construction. We do a lot of job fairs, where we may 
have equipment out there, inviting young children to come sit 
on a piece of equipment, or put on a hard hat, or put on a 
safety vest, just trying to get some interest.
    I got a text from a customer yesterday, and he was 
reminding me--he is in the ready-mix business, and he was 
reminding me that he had concrete truckdrivers in Memphis, 
Tennessee, that made six figures last year. So, that might not 
sound like a lot of money, but in Memphis, Tennessee, that is 
pretty good money.
    And so, these young kids can make a living, a good living, 
and without having to go to college. And we are just trying to 
get that message out.
    Ms. Hoyle of Oregon. Thank you. I am looking forward to 
working with you on that.
    And I yield back my time.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentleman from California, Mr. LaMalfa, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Panelists, let me just go right down the line real fast. 
What percent of our atmosphere is CO2? Take your 
best guess. You don't have to be accurate. All down the line.
    Mr. Boyd. Repeat that question.
    Mr. LaMalfa. What percent of our atmosphere is 
CO2, carbon dioxide?
    [No response.]
    Mr. LaMalfa. Wild guess, it is OK.
    Mr. Williams. I will bite. Five percent.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Five?
    Mr. Boyd. I will just follow you.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Dreher. We will go 7 percent. That is my favorite 
number.
    Ms. Hammond. I will see their 5 percent and suggest that we 
know that transportation causes 49 percent of CO2, 
so, that is why we are all working on energy transition.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Right. So, what number do you think it is?
    Ms. Hammond. Five.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Five? How about you? I didn't hear you, Mr. 
Dreher.
    Mr. Dreher. Oh, 7 percent.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Seven. Did you have one, Mr. Boyd?
    Mr. Boyd. So, we have got a 5, 7?
    Mr. LaMalfa. It is ``The Price is Right.''
    Mr. Boyd. Eight, at the high end.
    Mr. LaMalfa. All right. Well, I appreciate that, and I 
don't mean to put you on ice. I ask a lot of people that 
because all we hear is climate change, climate change, 
CO2, CO2. I heard a couple of you on the 
panel saying you are looking to change your vehicles to 
electric, even though we don't have the electric grid. And me, 
as a farmer, I wouldn't be real happy about running out and 
replacing $300,000 or $500,000 or million-dollar pieces of 
equipment because someone wants it to be electric.
    The answer is 0.04 percent, not 1 percent, not one-half of 
1 percent. It is 0.04 percent, and it has gone up from 0.03 
over the last couple of decades. This is what we are being all 
contorted into doing, is this tiny change in CO2. If 
we get below 0.02, plant life starts dying off.
    So, let me ask Mr. Boyd, are a lot of your vehicles Tier 4 
already, or the vehicles that you know about in the industry?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. All right, so, that is the cleanest burning 
diesel equipment you can get, right?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, sir.
    Mr. LaMalfa. All right. How about Mr. Dreher. What do you 
think?
    Mr. Dreher. Yes.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. So, why would anybody be anxious to go out 
and change out all those vehicles that you have been upgrading 
in my home State of California?
    CARB has eliminated lots of equipment. We are down at least 
70,000 truckers and all because they don't make a mandate for a 
2011 or newer vehicle. And so, it is going to be harder to get 
things from the ports, all this, all that.
    So, anyway, I just wanted to underline that as we get all 
giddy about trying to make everything electric, especially in 
my home State, when they are shutting down the power grid and 
taking out hydroelectric dams, and they barely kept in place 
the nuclear powerplant for an additional 5 years, which is 9 
percent of our grid. I don't know how we are going to do this. 
I don't know how you guys are going to do construction out in 
remote areas, where there aren't power lines yet nearby or what 
have you in order to charge this stuff. Maybe you will bring 
generators.
    So, anyway, thank you for letting me rant on that a little 
bit.
    Mr. Boyd, what are some of the challenges of trying to get 
permits to get stone, sand, and gravel available, especially 
like in places like California, where just a few years ago--and 
I don't know what is current now, but in order to get these 
products into the bay area, they gave up getting it locally. 
They barged it in from British Columbia and stuff like that.
    Mr. Boyd. Yes. I think that goes back to what we talked 
about a while ago on Buy America. Using your district as a 
great example, if these exclusions are not made on the 
construction materials end, I don't know how your district is 
going to get any projects done, just due to the permitting 
issues that you currently have. You have no other option but to 
bring it in outside of America.
    Mr. LaMalfa. From somewhere else, a long ways away. A lot 
longer transportation, right?
    Mr. Boyd. No question.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes. Mr. Dreher, when we are talking about the 
Infrastructure Act here, where there were attempts in this 
committee, attempts in Congress to make it not what it ended up 
being, at least on the highway section, but get rid of the 
ability to add highway capacity, downgrading projects, and 
instead Secretary Buttigieg put in performance measurements to 
reduce CO2 and greenhouse gas from highway 
transportation. These are holding up projects.
    So, this was supposed to be a so-called Infrastructure Act 
that the President and Democrats pretty much did on their own 
in the last session. The House Republicans didn't have a whole 
lot of opportunity to help shape.
    So, the intent of Congress ended up being, by the time it 
got through the House and the Senate, to do a bill that would 
be a little more broad in transportation projects. So, give me 
your interpretation of what we ended up with if we can't add 
lanes and we can't do the things that are actually going to 
upgrade infrastructure. You are going to have to go fast, 
sorry.
    Mr. Dreher. I don't have any information on that question.
    Mr. LaMalfa. No info? OK. Well, buying--again, like in my 
home State, they will put out a transportation--a new gas tax, 
for example, put that in place. And then, by the time it gets 
passed, the voters have agreed to it, they pull the rug out 
from under them, and it ends up going for bike paths, buying 
land, and things like that, and it can't go for lane capacity 
expansion for infrastructure.
    They can barely keep the focus on fixing infrastructure we 
have, or certainly adding to it like what people, real people, 
want. So, instead we get high-speed rail; half of it is 
underwater in the Central Valley right now.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will yield back.
    Mr. Collins. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
California, Mr. DeSaulnier.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you. That is good.
    Mr. Collins. Yes, sir. Five minutes.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. You must have taken some high school 
French.
    Mr. Collins. I am from Georgia.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Mr. Williams, I wanted to follow up on your 
comments for Ms. Brownley about infrastructure and renewables 
and alternative fuels. And I agree with you. But being from a 
big State like California, and having had a role as a--I was 
appointed by two Republicans and one Democrat to the California 
Air Resources Board and was a member of the California 
Transportation Commission, so, we are aggressively moving. But 
in big States with urban, suburban, and rural areas, I agree 
with you. But getting that mix right with the private sector on 
the infrastructure as the fleet comes out is a real challenge.
    So, I would love to have a longer conversation with you, 
but how do you envision that--and this--the difficult part, as 
we have learned about particularly electric vehicles, is range 
anxiety. So, somebody is traveling from Austin to San Antonio. 
I think we can do it that way, by putting it strategically, but 
I wonder if you could respond to that and some of your 
challenges, given the diversity of your demands in Texas, like 
California.
    Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. Thank you, Congressman, and we 
appreciate the partnership that we have, working with my 
counterparts in California. And we, as a large State, a diverse 
State, we face a lot of the same challenges.
    And one of the things that we believe is important, if the 
EV charging--the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure 
provisions of the IIJA are going to be effective, we are going 
to need to have some flexibility in where and how States locate 
those. And speaking from Texas' point of view--and I believe 
many other States are like that--we really see that the role of 
the private sector is going to be vitally important.
    We, as a DOT, don't have the mission or the ability to rely 
upon our State resources to maintain these electric vehicle 
charging stations. We have seen these charging stations already 
begin to be deployed across the State as they have been also in 
California and many other locations. And so, we know that the 
private industry, the private-sector industry, has been able to 
begin doing that successfully.
    The provisions of the IIJA, in our view, in order to be 
able to get the biggest bang for the buck to stretch those 
dollars more, our ability to work with private industry, to 
have them step into the role of providing some of the Federal 
match, maybe more than the Federal match in some areas, and 
taking on the responsibility, while we provide the oversight, 
maintain and deploy those vehicle charging stations will allow 
those to be distributed more effectively.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. And will make the overall drive more 
successful rather than imposing it.
    I want to ask you another question. Similarly, places like 
Austin and San Francisco, where I am from, an eastern suburban-
urban district, a lot of employers don't want to go back to 
their old commute in places like that. There are professions 
that are particularly matched to that--so, software engineers, 
even though we are laying a lot of them off--in both of those 
areas.
    So, some of the challenges you are having of accepting that 
there may be opportunity to cut down on congestion as we build 
out highways, and sort of the partnership, I would say, with 
other modes, with heavy rail, light rail, buses, pedestrian, 
bikes, we need a lot of research, but we don't have the 
opportunity in many ways to take advantage of this.
    So, it is sort of the opposite of induced demand, from my 
perspective, is--if you can get a two-income household to get 2 
days a week to work four 10s and still be as productive. So, I 
was wondering your experience, again, since you have similar 
constituencies in places like Austin to San Francisco. What are 
you finding?
    Mr. Williams. Well, we certainly see that vehicle-miles of 
travel has increased in Texas now above pre-pandemic levels. 
So, the people have come back. They are driving differently, 
so, the peak period has spread out. I think we are seeing that 
many workers, even those that are returning and working in the 
office, are taking the opportunity to have some flexibility in 
their workday, and to leave earlier or return later from home, 
and still recognize the ability to be productive in some 
instances from a remote location.
    And so, we see that in some of our own personnel. We are 
seeing that in the transportation industry, particularly in the 
professional services sector, as well.
    Mr. DeSaulnier. Well, I would suggest this is one of those 
instances where Texas and California have more, practically 
speaking, on the infrastructure rollout in common, rather than 
a lot of the politics we talk about that seem to divide us. 
Thank you so much.
    Mr. Collins. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
New York, Mr. Williams, for 5 minutes.
    Representative Williams of New York. Thank you, Mr. 
Chairman.
    My district in central New York is full of people that 
work, that are workers. Not nearly as many work-from-home 
opportunities, and they rely on the infrastructure that we 
provide. And it is our job to provide that for them.
    Mr. Dreher and Mr. Boyd, I have spoken to many members of 
your respective associations. A lot of representation in my 
district, and they are excited to get to work on 
infrastructure-related projects in central New York and the 
Mohawk Valley. We have a lot going on there. It is a very 
exciting time.
    However, one of the problems we have run into--this is 
going to be shocking, particularly in New York--is the highly 
litigious legal environment in our country. The notorious New 
York scaffold law comes to mind. That one piece of legislation 
actually adds 8 to 10 percent on overhead on every single 
project, construction project, in my State. If you can imagine, 
8 percent fewer roads, 8 percent more potholes, 8 percent fewer 
bridges that get repaired in a timely manner, you can see that 
creates quite a drag. Even Secretary Buttigieg has spoken on 
this issue, so, it seems like it would be a bipartisan issue.
    Gentlemen, either of you or both of you, how would 
meaningful tort reform affect our country's ability to improve 
our infrastructure? Can you correlate those two?
    Mr. Boyd. Impact on the business. We truck a lot of 
material, whether we truck in incoming material or trucking 
outgoing material, and trucks, obviously, are a liability on 
the road. And having some type of tort reform to reduce some of 
that liability would, obviously, reduce cost and would be very, 
very beneficial to business.
    Representative Williams of New York. I assume that it would 
be beneficial to taxpayers that expect to get more out of their 
investment in infrastructure.
    Mr. Boyd. Correct.
    Representative Williams of New York. Mr. Dreher, do you----
    Mr. Boyd [interrupting]. Tax dollars will obviously go 
further.
    Representative Williams of New York. Sir? I am sorry?
    Mr. Boyd. Tax dollars would obviously go further.
    Representative Williams of New York. OK. It looks like we 
are facing a lot of headwind on inflation. I have heard that 
testimony in your comments, and we seem to be spending a lot 
and getting a whole lot less. It is very concerning.
    Can you speak specifically, either of you or both of you, 
to the premiums that your businesses pay, or your members pay?
    What is the set-aside? What is the overhead that they set 
aside for these kinds of liability tort issues overall, can you 
quantify that or define that in any way?
    Mr. Boyd. I cannot quantify it for my business. No, sir.
    Representative Williams of New York. OK. I will just 
comment for a moment that this scaffold law--we are doing a 
replacement of the Tappan Zee Bridge, work on the Tappan Zee 
Bridge in New York State, not in my district, but a critical 
piece of infrastructure. And it is estimated that this single 
rule--that is unique to New York State, by the way, so, if this 
was really a worker safety issue, if this was really something 
that the world was crying for to protect workers, which, of 
course, is very important, then it would be universal. And yet 
it exists alone in New York State. The Tappan Zee Bridge 
project will have incurred up to $200 million of additional 
expense due to the scaffold law, and I find that a pretty 
shocking waste of critical resources that, frankly, we need.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Thank you for your answers.
    Mr. Collins. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
New York, Mr. Ryan, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Good afternoon now to all of you. Thank you for being here 
and taking your time.
    The first question: Through January 2023, States have 
already launched 36,400 projects with IIJA formula funds going 
towards all kinds of projects, but I am particularly focused on 
rural and small communities like the one that I represent in 
upstate New York, which I think often just would not even be in 
a position to have these funds without something like IIJA.
    So, I wanted to ask for anyone, but particularly directed 
to Ms. Hammond to start, highway funding from IIJA will be used 
to help construct and expand Route 17 and Route 86 in my 
district, which anyone who has driven will tell you is in 
desperate need. Can you discuss how Federal funding provided by 
the law will benefit rural communities specifically, starting 
with Ms. Hammond and open up to anyone else?
    Ms. Hammond. Thank you for the question.
    One of the things we haven't talked a lot about today is 
what the money is being spent on. What we know in our data at 
ARTBA and the collection of the projects underway is that about 
2 percent of those projects are greenfield or brandnew corridor 
types of construction. But importantly, 46 percent of the funds 
to date are being spent to repair, rehabilitate, and modernize 
roads and bridges around the country, both in urban and rural 
areas.
    Rural areas oftentimes see a higher run-off-the-road safety 
risk for two-lane roadways, and the safety investments, the 
rehabilitation and modernization projects that are being spent, 
are truly making our infrastructure safer.
    Mr. Ryan. Thank you. And open up to anyone else to add.
    I will just say as anybody is thinking, to your point, Ms. 
Hammond, this project in my community--I am 41 years old. We 
have been waiting for this essentially my whole life, and we 
would not be able to do this without IIJA.
    Ms. Hammond. Yes.
    Mr. Boyd. I think what you said--I think what this does is 
highlight the flexibilities that the DOTs have to do with this 
money, and I think that is very important that the DOTs do have 
that flexibility, and they can use the money where they see 
fit. So, I think that may be why the job is getting done.
    Mr. Ryan. Thank you, thank you.
    Oh, go ahead, sir.
    Mr. Williams. I am just going to echo the emphasis on rural 
areas in Texas. We have the highest rural population of any 
State. Since 2016, through Federal funding, and then also 
combine that with State funding, we have increased our 
investment in our rural areas by over 600 percent.
    As noted, the fatality rate in those rural areas is usually 
double what we see in urban areas. So, it is very important for 
us.
    Mr. Ryan. I commend you. And as an upstate New Yorker, I 
appreciate the rural investment.
    Sir?
    Mr. Dreher. From a contractor's perspective, it is 
extremely exciting. There is so much work out there, and I 
think it is important to continue to keep the playing field 
open, union and nonunion contractors alike, to really control 
those costs and give the best overall benefit to the American 
taxpayer.
    Mr. Ryan. I will save my time and not debate you on that 
topic, sir. But your point is taken.
    A follow-on question to all of you, as I said, I think 
going back to Eisenhower, this is the most significant 
investment. I am a glass-half-full kind of person. I think we 
should be tremendously proud that we have, in a bipartisan 
way--to remind all my colleagues--gotten this done. It is 
always room to improve. But I want to ask everybody, if 
Congress had not enacted the IIJA, how would your members, your 
departments be doing right now? What would be the tradeoff, had 
we not done this?
    Mr. Williams. I will just say, from a State DOT's 
perspective, we do appreciate the increase in formula 
apportionment dollars that has come. It was a 20-percent 
increase in our Federal program. It was about a 6-percent 
increase, overall. Every dollar helps. And when we are facing a 
time right now where we have seen rising costs, it is vital 
that we try to put as much money to work as possible. And 
flexibility within the provisions of the IIJA are important for 
that.
    Mr. Ryan. And just to build, unless anyone else wanted to 
add on that question, is it fair to think that in some regards 
the certainty of Federal funding helps to somewhat buffer the 
inflationary challenges which we all recognize are certainly 
real and affect specific projects? Is there some upside there? 
Anyone.
    Ms. Hammond. If I could just reinforce the fact that the 
certainty and the sustainable program over the 5 years, and 
hopefully beyond, gives State DOTs and others the ability to 
plan for and make those investments that are needed.
    We have had a big drought in our infrastructure investment 
for many years. This is finally getting the ball rolling, and 
we hope it continues.
    Mr. Ryan. Thank you, and I am sorry I went over, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Collins. That is all right. The Chair now recognizes, I 
guess, myself, Collins from Georgia, for 5 minutes.
    Just to let you know, I am new here. It is my freshman 
year. I have spent 30 years in the trucking industry. I am an 
owner of a trucking company. So, I have got 30 years between 
these ears of getting beaten to death with rules, regs, and 
taxes. And I would like to think that we came up here with that 
knowledge to help get things fixed. So, I want to try to 
summarize some things from what I have been hearing all 
morning.
    First of all, we have a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, 
$529 billion of it went to transportation, and that is it. The 
rest of it is tied up in Green New Deals and wasteful spending. 
EV charging stations that my Democratic Representative from 
Georgia talked about in Atlanta and EV buses, that is not going 
to do anything for congestion, and that is a huge problem in my 
area in the State of Georgia.
    We have got an agency that is focused on social issues from 
the top down, instead of hiring people for doing the job. We 
have got a Federal Government that has been giving away money 
left and right that has been causing inflation.
    The other thing that has been causing inflation is the fact 
that we have gone from energy independent to energy dependent, 
and your gas is up and your diesel is up.
    We also have--I have heard it here this morning, over and 
over, overreach, overreach. Whether it is rules and regulations 
or agencies out there with this WOTUS rule, permitting 
problems, we have got tremendous problems. It seems like we 
have caused the problem here.
    So, Mr. Williams, I would like to just briefly ask, do we 
need to hire people based on their abilities, their experience, 
and their expertise?
    Mr. Williams. Absolutely. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. Mr. Boyd. Congestion. We live it 
every day in Atlanta. Will congestion help in reducing the 
number of trucks that are needed on the road?
    Mr. Boyd. Congestion won't help.
    Mr. Collins. If we reduce congestion.
    Mr. Boyd. Oh, yes, it would. Yes.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. And also rules in place that we 
have right now, we just had a new rule that you had to pay to 
get your commercial driver's license.
    Mr. Boyd. Correct.
    Mr. Collins. We also have stuck with the age 21 driving 
minimum for interstate commerce and interstate driving. If we 
reduce those two things, or went back to the way it was, would 
that help increase the amount of people you need in the 
workforce out there?
    Mr. Boyd. It would. It would give us the ability to hire 
more drivers. It would also put more in the field of being a 
driver. Yes.
    Mr. Collins. Would you say trucks are safer today than what 
they were 20 years ago?
    Mr. Boyd. Absolutely.
    Mr. Collins. And I heard Mr. Williams from New York, he was 
talking about tort reform. And I would like to just follow up 
with you for a minute on that.
    Tort reform is reflected in a number of our insurance out 
there, is it not?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes, it is.
    Mr. Collins. Would you say it has had a huge impact on 
worker's comp?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Collins. What about auto liability?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Collins. And general liability?
    Mr. Boyd. Yes.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you.
    Ms. Hammond, inflation has hit a high. It set a record 
right now. And what do you think Congress can do to offset the 
cost of this inflation on these projects?
    Ms. Hammond. Well, I think we have talked a bit about that 
today.
    One of the things we would like is the continuation of your 
committee's oversight on the delivery of the program to ensure 
that it is being delivered as intended, and that it is rapidly 
getting out to the construction workers on the road. Let's get 
these projects built, number one.
    The other issue is in areas where we have flexibility or 
decisions yet to be made on Buy America. Let's make sure that 
we are putting practical and realistic goals in place, and 
waivers, so that in this time of transition, as we rebuild 
America's manufacturing capabilities, that we don't slow down 
projects as a result. Having the waivers in place that enable 
us to make this transition would be great. Projects will be 
delivered sooner.
    Mr. Collins. Thank you. I would like to add to that if we 
would move some of that Green New Deal money over to true 
infrastructure projects, and get our roads and bridges fixed, 
and reduce this congestion, that would be a huge help.
    And the other thing is I think we need to unleash our 
American oil, and produce our own oil here, and get off of 
that, energy independent.
    With that, I yield back. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentleman from Washington--gentlelady from Washington----
    Ms. Strickland [interrupting]. Gentlewoman.
    Mr. Collins. Sorry, I am sorry.
    Ms. Strickland. That is all right.
    Mr. Collins. I told you I was new here.
    Ms. Strickland. You are doing really well.
    Mr. Collins. Ms. Strickland from Washington for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Strickland. Thank you, Chairman Crawford and Ranking 
Member Holmes Norton.
    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is indeed working. In my 
home State of Washington, the State has already committed over 
$152 million in Federal funds for highway and bridge projects. 
In Washington State's 10th Congressional District, that 
includes funding for the State Route 167 interchange project 
between Interstate 5 and State Route 509, replacing the 70th 
Avenue overpass at I-5 and the X Street roundabout.
    And what is interesting about these projects is that they 
create jobs for both the public and private sector, and they 
are integral to helping our ports be more effective to move 
goods. These projects benefit commuters, families, and workers 
through strong provisions in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. 
And I am very thrilled today to see that we have Ms. Paula 
Hammond testifying today, who is the former secretary of the 
Washington State Department of Transportation, who can speak to 
this transformative investment.
    So, Ms. Hammond, I will start here. Through your lens as 
the former leader of the Washington State Department of 
Transportation, and now as the 2023 chair of ARTBA, how have 
both the private and public sectors benefited from 
implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in 
Washington State?
    Ms. Hammond. Well, Congresswoman Strickland, you know how 
long in Washington State alone--every State is probably 
similar--we have been trying to make the investments to 
maintain the assets we have, but also build for the future.
    The transportation needs in our country are changing. 
Travel patterns are changing. We are using new technology, 
which is bringing much more efficiency to our transportation 
system. And I would add that the investments in transit and the 
partnership between highway agencies and transit agencies is 
bringing a whole new approach to having the ability to move 
more people, which then frees up congested freeways for goods 
movement.
    So, we have some very important projects in our State that 
we have been trying to get to for many years, and this 
Investment Act is helping us now finally make those 
investments. It takes both the Federal and State partnership.
    Ms. Strickland. Absolutely. And during my time as mayor of 
Tacoma from 2010 to 2017, we would often say, ``When is 
infrastructure going to happen?'' So, I am very honored that 
the 117th did pass this.
    Ms. Hammond, one thing I would like to focus on, too, is we 
are making these huge investments, and we talked about jobs and 
wealth creation. And can you talk a bit about how we make sure 
that minority-owned contractors, women, minorities, veterans, 
and other underrepresented groups are going to get access to 
some of this growth?
    Ms. Hammond. We have recognized that we have a workforce 
challenge in general in our industry, and we are competing with 
other industries that are in a growth mode, as well.
    The kinds of programs that the Infrastructure Act is 
providing is helping diversity--DBEs and MWBEs get into the 
business of supporting transportation. So, the more we can work 
to expand, to train workers, to work towards the trades-kind of 
careers that folks can have, and the more we look to bring 
others into the industry, the better off we are all going to be 
for the long term. This is an investment for the decades to 
come.
    Ms. Strickland. Great, thank you.
    I want to pivot a bit and talk about workforce challenges 
in the private sector, and I would like to start with you, Mr. 
Boyd. What can we do to help the private sector hire more 
people and create more jobs?
    Mr. Boyd. One of the things I talked about in my opening 
statement was some Federal support from a vocational training 
perspective. Any way the Federal Government could help us 
expand vocational training, it would be greatly appreciated.
    Ms. Strickland. All right. Thank you very much. I have 
talked to a lot of different private-sector employers in just 
about every single sector, from healthcare to transportation to 
manufacturing. And a very common theme that comes up is that, 
even if we filled every job with every American worker, we 
would have all these job vacancies.
    So, one of the things that I hope we are able to do 
together as a Congress is to really look at immigration reform 
in a very thoughtful, smart way, so that we are able to get 
things built, and really put this money to work.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. [presiding]. Thank you. The Chair 
recognizes Mr. Duarte from California.
    Mr. Duarte. Hello. Like the very handsome gentleman before 
me, I am also new to Congress and from a business--agricultural 
and farming--background. He is from trucking, but more similar 
than different.
    If I buy a cheeseburger or a pair of shoes online, I get 
asked, ``How was your experience?'' One star, two stars, three, 
four stars, five stars. Get extra credit, maybe in a raffle if 
I give comments.
    Ms. Hammond, you work with a group that represents national 
construction companies. Are there ever any opportunities for 
the companies that are affected or the local councils of 
government that want to get these projects built to give 
feedback, give comment, rate their local agency offices, which 
ones are easy to work with, which ones are rational, which ones 
are problem-solution oriented, which ones are just a pain or 
don't get back altogether? Do you ever get that opportunity?
    Ms. Hammond. I had lots of opportunities like that when I 
worked at the State DOT to hear from our constituents.
    We often get feedback from the public or our local leaders 
on a project-specific basis, and the more us States know, or 
the DOTs at the time knew that we were meeting their needs, the 
better off and more effective we could be on the next project.
    Mr. Duarte. Sure.
    Ms. Hammond. So, sometimes State DOTs and/or legislators 
will ask, ``How are we doing?''
    Mr. Duarte. Let me ask the general panel another question--
--
    Ms. Hammond [interposing]. Yes.
    Mr. Duarte [continuing]. And I will take answers as they 
come. Would it be helpful, in your opinions, to set up a 
structured feedback process, so that every agency, every agency 
office, every State and local office of whatever--the 
regulatory agencies, is getting feedback from, again, the local 
governments, the local councils of government, the local 
project construction companies, so that oversight hearings like 
this could be more productive, find the best practices? This 
administration or a subsequent administration could review that 
feedback and focus on where things are going right, and try and 
deal with where things are going less correctly.
    Ms. Hammond. Yes, as long as it is productive. And social 
media certainly shows us some of the downside of anonymous 
comments. But yes, I think----
    Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. Anonymous or not--anonymous is 
always an option, I guess. But go--the others, please.
    Mr. Dreher. I think--100 percent agree. I think the more 
that we can work together, the better off, in terms of the 
delivery of the project, removing roadblocks, and just working 
together. I think that is really a good idea.
    Mr. Boyd. I think it is an outstanding idea. Just like we 
do as a business, I mean, we send out those surveys, and 
obviously want to know what our customers think, and what we 
can do to--ways we can improve. It is a great tool.
    Mr. Williams. People are our customers, and we welcome 
feedback. We welcome feedback at all levels, and we often go 
out and seek that. That gives us, as was mentioned, the 
opportunity to improve. And so, good or bad, it always is 
something we can build on.
    Mr. Duarte. Well, I am speaking here with the Texas 
Department of Transportation. Are you aware, Mr. Williams, of 
any current programs in States that you are familiar with that 
solicit--and again, when you solicit it uniformly, you then 
have responses, and you can at least begin to think that you 
have got a uniform survey methodology that you can then act on.
    Again, either in Congress, congressional oversight, or in 
the current administration or future administrations, we could 
better surface problems if we have a structured survey of how 
these agencies are performing.
    Mr. Williams. We have certainly undertaken those efforts in 
our own agency to receive public comment on how we do, as a 
Department of Transportation. And I would imagine, while I 
can't speak to specifics, that some of our other DOT partners 
do the same in different forms.
    Mr. Duarte. Excellent. That was my main question. I will 
take any other further thoughts on that you folks have, or----
    Mr. Dreher [interrupting]. Just from a contractor's side, 
again, some of the DOTs that we work with actually will 
encourage contractor involvement during the permitting process 
and design process. And again, the overall value to the end 
user, it is a benefit.
    Mr. Duarte. So, you see some best practices out there.
    Mr. Dreher. Absolutely.
    Mr. Duarte. But they are not uniform best practices.
    Mr. Dreher. That is correct.
    Mr. Duarte. And so, a survey or a feedback process would 
allow us to establish better, more uniform direct practices. 
So, all this bang for the buck and getting room for improvement 
stuff could then have a formal process that, again, would allow 
political entities to kind of help manage with a bit more 
information, a bit broader survey. As thankful as we are for 
the four of you today, a formal process would be just 
fantastic, also, in my opinion.
    Mr. Dreher. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you. I will yield back.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. 
Allred from Texas.
    Mr. Allred. Well, thank you, and I want to thank our 
witnesses for being here to talk about the historic investments 
that we have made as part of the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act.
    I think Texas has received as much as anybody. I think we 
were one of the biggest recipients from this legislation. In 
fact, over the 5 years, we are going to receive $27.84 billion 
for improvements to our roadways and our bridges. We have 
already received nine discretionary IIJA grants valued at over 
$104 million.
    In my district alone in fiscal year 2023 we received $12.75 
million in IIJA commitments for highways and bridge projects 
supporting one new project in fiscal year 2023, six projects in 
fiscal year 2022, and those six projects represent $234.8 
million for projects for new roads, interchange improvements, 
rehabilitating existing roadways, right-of-way improvements, 
traffic signal installation improvements, improving pedestrian 
lighting. If you are in my district, the IIJA is helping you 
right now, and it is also creating jobs. And so, it was the 
right thing to do.
    And Mr. Williams, I was really interested in a couple of 
things in your testimony. Thank you for being here. As always, 
great working with TxDOT. You highlighted how we are 
implementing what I think is an impressive plan to build out an 
electric vehicle charging network in Texas.
    Thanks in large part to the National Electric Vehicle 
Infrastructure Formula Program, Texas is going to receive $60 
million in 2022, the most of any State, to help us meet our 
goal of expanding access to electric vehicles. Is there 
anything you want to highlight as lessons learned as you 
continue to implement this program, especially in regards to 
working with our State energy officials and the Joint Office of 
Energy and Transportation?
    Mr. Williams. Good to see you again, Congressman, and thank 
you for the opportunity to respond to your question.
    Certainly, any time we are looking at formula 
apportionments, because we have the biggest highway system and 
the most users on that highway system, Texas is typically going 
to be at the top of the list in terms of the amount of funding 
distribution that we received. And so, that was reflected in 
the apportionment program for the National Electric Vehicle 
Infrastructure Program. In total, we will see about $400 
million coming to Texas for that program.
    And one of the things that is going to be very important 
for us to be able to administer that effectively is to have 
flexibility in where and how those vehicle charging stations 
are located. To be able to have flexibility also in the 
contracting methods, we see that it is going to be very 
important for us to be able to work effectively with the 
private sector in order for that to be successful. They are 
going to be the ones that will house those stations and be 
partners with us in deploying and maintaining those stations.
    So, flexibility is probably the most important point of 
emphasis that I would point to to make that program successful 
for us.
    Mr. Allred. I completely agree with you, and I think that 
is what people want to see. They also want to have local input 
as much as they can in terms of the placement of this.
    But to get $400 million for Texas for us to implement this, 
I think, is enormous. As you know, in our State, range anxiety 
for an electric vehicle is a real thing. If you want to drive 
across our State, you need to have this network. And if we are 
going to move in that direction, I think it is really 
important.
    I have met also with a lot of folks from your office about 
what we are doing to try to reduce and make our roadways safer, 
and to reduce our roadway fatalities. Unfortunately, as you 
know, we have not had a single day without a roadway fatality 
since November 7, 2000. And it is a tragedy, and we are working 
together to try to address that. I noticed in your testimony 
you discussed how the IIJA funding could help with that. But 
how does TxDOT or other State DOTs plan to leverage these 
safety resources to address making our roadways safer?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you again, Congressman. As you are 
aware, the Dallas-Fort Worth region has one of the biggest 
metropolitan planning organizations in the Nation, the North 
Central Texas Council of Governments. One of the initiatives 
that our commission launched was a task force between TxDOT and 
our MPOs across the State to look at how we can work together 
to combine the various funding sources, many coming from the 
IIJA, many coming from State sources, to really be on the same 
page in addressing, really, the critical rise that we have seen 
in fatalities across the Nation and in Texas.
    Mr. Allred. Yes. Well, thank you so much for being here. I 
appreciate your testimony.
    I don't have time to ask my other questions. But to the 
other witnesses, thank you for sharing your expertise. Your 
testimony was enlightening.
    And I yield back.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you. I recognize myself for 5 
minutes.
    Like my predecessors, I want to thank everybody here for 
joining us today. It is clear that both the panel of witnesses, 
as well as the members of the committee, care a great deal, and 
have concerns about the high inflation levels, as well as the 
severe workforce shortages, and so, I would like to start with 
my first question for Mr. Boyd.
    CRH and your industry are essential in executing 
infrastructure investments. In my district, the aggregate 
industry has 12 locations where you are producing materials to 
build infrastructure projects like the new Gateway Tunnel that 
will greatly increase rail capacity, or flood control projects 
that protect our communities.
    What is the greatest challenge you face in getting these 
materials to job sites so we can see the infrastructure 
benefits realized?
    Mr. Boyd. Could you repeat the last sentence? I couldn't 
hear it.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. What is the greatest challenge you 
face in getting these materials to job sites so we can see the 
infrastructure benefits materialize?
    Mr. Boyd. So, our greatest challenge in getting the 
materials is, to start with, permitting issues in different 
parts. If a quarry or aggregate facility is permitted, the 
other challenge is, obviously, transportation, whether it be 
truck, rail, barge. That is the other issue, as far as getting 
materials to the job.
    And I don't know if that is kind of the direct--I don't 
know if that answers your question, or were you looking for 
more, or what?
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. I think that is a good-enough 
answer, because if we are looking at the real solutions over 
time, we need to be focusing on understanding both the 
construction as well as getting the product to market to ensure 
that we can keep our communities safer, and the transportation 
infrastructure needs are met in full.
    If there are other members of the panel who have an answer, 
or want to opine on that, I would welcome that.
    Mr. Williams?
    Mr. Williams. Congressman, thank you. I would just capture 
that in terms of certainty of supply chain. When we are working 
with our contracting industry we rely upon to bid on our 
projects, and there is uncertainty in their supply chain, if 
there is uncertainty about--many of these projects will take 2, 
3, 4 years to develop. If they don't know where that material 
is going to be over the next 2 or 3 or 4 years, you are going 
to see a significant increase in pricing that we are having to 
pay.
    And so, the degree to which we can have certainty in where 
that material is going to come from, be it aggregate or asphalt 
or steel, that is going to help us better see more competition, 
and reduce our pricing and the inflation that we have been 
experiencing.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Anybody else on the panel have----
    Mr. Dreher [interrupting]. Just additionally, uncertainty 
drives up costs when we are bidding the job, but also during 
construction. Not having a good handle on when materials are 
arriving, and just the uncertainty impacts the schedule. Again, 
it drives up costs. Time is money.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. OK, thank you.
    Ms. Hammond?
    Ms. Hammond. I think all of the above. The more ability 
that contractors have to plan for and procure the items, and 
with the knowledge that the project is going forth on the pace 
that they anticipated, the better off we all are.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. OK, thank you. I yield to myself 
the remainder of the time.
    Mr. Moulton from Massachusetts.
    Mr. Moulton. Great. Well, thank you. Let me just start by 
thanking all the witnesses for being here. I am sure you must 
have a certain feeling of dread every time a new Member walks 
in at the end here to ask more questions. We recognize this is 
a bit of a marathon, but we certainly appreciate it.
    Mr. Williams, I spent some time in Texas myself, and I am 
wondering if I might start with you. Certainly, when I was 
there, traffic congestion was a big problem. Is it still a huge 
challenge facing Texas?
    Mr. Williams. Yes, sir. Texas, year after year, adds more 
people than any other State in the Nation. Those people tend to 
come with their cars and trucks, and that compounds the 
congestion that we see on our highways.
    Mr. Moulton. So, I am told that Texas DOT--I don't know if 
this applies to you personally, but I am told that TxDOT 
currently believes that widening the Katy Freeway did not 
create more congestion, even though empirical data shows 
otherwise. In 2008, the freeway was expanded to 28 lanes, 
making it one of the widest in the world. The project was 
immediately hailed as a success, and commute times were 
initially shortened. But within 5 years, peak-hour travel times 
were longer than before the expansion. From 2011 to 2014, a 
morning commute on the freeway has increased by 25 minutes, or 
30 percent. The afternoon commute has increased by 55 percent.
    And sort of writ large in America, we have done capital 
projects, highway projects in urban areas to the tune of about 
$500 billion between 1993 and 2017, which has caused congestion 
to grow by more than 144 percent, far faster than population 
growth due to induced demand.
    So, given that induced demand means that congestion 
outpaces population growth, are you looking at alternatives, or 
are you still just planning to widen highways as wide as they 
can get?
    Mr. Williams. Thank you, Congressman. Well, we certainly 
realize that, to have an effective, multimodal transportation 
system, we have to work with other agencies, as well, who are 
responsible for those modes, be it transit--and in Texas a very 
important factor is freight. In fact, freight demand has grown 
by three times the rate of population demand.
    Mr. Moulton. Right.
    Mr. Williams. And as I testified previously, we are one of 
the fastest growing States in the Nation.
    I would push back on some of the data on the Katy Freeway. 
Some of that is selectively chosen, and doesn't realize or 
recognize the fact that some of those dates in the data that 
they are pointing to, there was adjoining highway construction 
going on on parallel corridors that actually had to divert 
traffic. So, some of that induced demand isn't something that I 
would characterize as induced demand, but in reality it is 
diverted demand, often coming from other facilities.
    Mr. Moulton. But you do believe in induced demand. You 
understand that as a----
    Mr. Williams [interrupting]. I believe that there is some 
induced demand. I believe that some of the opponents----
    Mr. Moulton [interrupting]. So, in 2019, to your point 
about freight, Virginia analyzed transportation options for I-
95 from Fairfax County to Fredericksburg, the most congested 
stretch of highway in the entire United States. And they 
determined that adding a traffic lane would cost $12.6 billion, 
and within 10 years would bring little to no congestion 
improvements because of induced demand.
    Instead, what the State chose to do--or the Commonwealth 
chose to do, I should say--is invest $3.7 billion in expanding 
commuter rail, Amtrak service, and easing traffic chokepoints 
between Richmond and Washington, DC, to the benefit not only of 
commuters, passengers, but also to freight traffic. This option 
cost nearly $10 billion less, and has gotten a lot of freight 
off 95. I mean, do you think it is crazy for Virginia to do 
this?
    Mr. Williams. Not at all. I think that each State DOT, as 
they look at their individual projects, have to analyze the 
demands that are causing those, and make the right decisions 
for those projects and those corridors.
    Mr. Moulton. I mean, where I live in Massachusetts, I can 
drive into the city at rush hour. It takes between 75 and 90 
minutes, sometimes a little bit more. The train takes between 
25 and 35 minutes. And yet the frustration that we have in 
Massachusetts is that the train took 25 minutes 100 years ago, 
so, it hasn't gotten any better.
    But in Texas, you are spending billions of dollars every 
year building brandnew infrastructure. So, if you built modern 
commuter rail, you could have travel times that are three to 
five times faster than driving. And I just--it is hard to 
imagine why Texas commuters wouldn't want that as an option. No 
one is saying you have to take it. No one tells me I have to 
take the train if I am going into the city. But having an 
option that is significantly faster than driving is something 
that we value, and I certainly, as a former Texas resident, 
would have valued myself.
    So, I hope that you are going to look seriously at these 
alternatives because, at the end of the day, you control a lot 
of money, and you can either create a lot of induced demand or 
give people options to get around the State of Texas much 
faster than they can today.
    Thank you, I yield back.
    Mr. Kean of New Jersey. Thank you. The gentleman yields 
back.
    Are there any further questions from members of the 
subcommittee who have not yet been recognized?
    Seeing none, that concludes our hearing for today. I would 
like to thank each of the witnesses for your testimony.
    I would ask unanimous consent that the record of today's 
hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have 
provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to them 
in writing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 
for 15 days for any additional comments or any information 
submitted by the Members or witnesses to be included in the 
record of today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    The subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 1:02 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]



                       Submissions for the Record

                              ----------                              


Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Submitted for the 
                Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
                              Introduction
    The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) appreciates the 
opportunity to submit a statement to the House Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Highways and 
Transit regarding the hearing on ``Reviewing the Implementation of the 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.''
    ASCE was an ardent supporter of the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021. Successful implementation of this once-in-a-
generation investment has the potential to improve safety for Americans 
and modernize the nation's roads, bridges, transit systems, pipes, 
ports, broadband, airports, schools, and drinking water systems. As 
implementation of the five-year IIJA continues, ASCE asks Congress to 
maintain a strong commitment to the provisions included in this law.
    Once passed into law, landmark legislation requires diligent review 
and evaluation. ASCE commends the House Subcommittee on Highways and 
Transit for holding a hearing on this subject. This hearing is a good 
opportunity to examine ongoing considerations related to the 
implementation of the IIJA.
        Recommendations for effective implementation of the IIJA
    With the $1.2 trillion investment provided by the IIJA, the federal 
government can restore its critical partnership with cities and states 
to improve and modernize our nation's infrastructure. To optimize the 
investment associated with over 100 new programs and many more existing 
programs across critical infrastructure sectors, ASCE developed key 
recommendations for Congress, the Administration, and state and local 
governments to consider regarding IIJA implementation.
1. Cut Red Tape and Increase Transparency Across Government Agencies
    ASCE has identified areas where the federal government should work 
with industry stakeholders to ensure projects are not delayed due to 
overly burdensome and often redundant red tape. First, while ASCE 
supports the intention of the Build America, Buy America Act (BABAA) 
language in the IIJA, we need to ensure that language does not hamper 
innovation, cause unnecessary project delays and cost increases, or 
further constrain markets. While guidance from the Administration 
related to BABAA is helpful, with continued inflation and supply chain 
issues already creating challenges for the effective implementation of 
the IIJA, it will be critical to not add additional burdens or 
requirements that could further impede the full impacts of this 
historic investment. For many gadgets and materials that engineering 
professionals rely on every day, there are no American manufacturers.
    Second, ASCE is encouraged by the IIJA codifying One Federal 
Decision, which will lead to cost reductions, and applauds the 
Administration for developing a Permitting Action Plan to further 
accelerate the federal permitting and environmental review process. One 
of the key recommendations in the 2021 Report Card for America's 
Infrastructure \1\ was to streamline the project permitting process 
across infrastructure sectors while ensuring appropriate safeguards and 
protections are in place. Therefore, ASCE believes the most recent plan 
is a step in the right direction to ensure that projects can be 
delivered on time and on budget, while maintaining the rigorous 
environmental review process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ASCE applauds the 118th Congress' prioritization of permitting 
reform. ASCE supports the inclusion of provisions that aim to further 
reform the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process in the 
Lower Energy Costs Act (H.R. 1). Drawn-out regulatory review processes 
can be detrimental to infrastructure investment by delaying projects, 
creating uncertainties, and increasing overall project costs. 
Permitting reform can help the projects supported by the IIJA break 
ground in a timely manner.
    Finally, the federal government has a responsibility to ensure IIJA 
funds are properly managed. The historic scope of the IIJA and the 
large number of partners needed to deliver the legislation, such as 
state and local governments, contractors, consultants, non-profits, and 
even the public, means the federal government will face a complex 
challenge to reduce the risk of waste, fraud, and abuse. Therefore, 
transparency will be key, especially in areas like the grant selection 
process.
2. Streamline the Engineering Contracting Process
    In recent years, many projects around the country have been slowed 
down due to increased change orders during the contracting process. The 
Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee (EJCDC), a joint venture 
of ASCE, the National Society of Professional Engineers, and the 
American Council of Engineering Companies, publishes documents related 
to engineering, construction, design/build, construction manager as 
advisor, construction manager at risk, and procurement. The use of the 
EJCDC documents reduces potential errors, redundancies, or conflicts in 
construction contracts. EJCDC updates its documents approximately every 
five years to reflect industry trends, court decisions, and changes in 
applicable laws and regulations. The EJCDC has developed contracts for 
scoping, preliminary design, final design, construction, and 
commissioning. Therefore, the EJCDC has contracts that are ready to 
expeditiously move projects through the process when utilized 
appropriately.
    EJCDC construction contract forms that can effectively deliver 
projects under a variety of project delivery methods funded under the 
IIJA are available, and ASCE urges federal and state agencies to accept 
the current versions of the documents without exception. Additionally, 
it is necessary to ensure that smaller, rural, or disadvantaged 
communities are aware of these contract forms and have access to them.
    Therefore, ASCE recommends that all federal agencies follow the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Utilities Service (RUS) 
model, which has preapproved certain standard EJCDC engineering and 
construction series documents for use in projects funded under the RUS 
Water and Waste Disposal program. By preapproving EJCDC documents, the 
USDA has eliminated the need for applicants to purchase the separate 
Funding Agency edition of the documents and therefore has streamlined 
the process and made these documents more accessible for rural or 
disadvantaged communities. Local agencies are also relieved of the 
burden of drafting and editing documents for later approval by federal 
and state agencies.
    Furthermore, ASCE supports qualifications-based selection 
procedures outlined by the Brooks Architect-Engineers Act, the numerous 
similar state and local laws, and the American Bar Association's Model 
Procurement Code for State and Local Governments for engagement of 
engineering services. As the IIJA is implemented, ASCE strongly 
recommends that the application of the Brooks Act is upheld.
3. Collaborate with the Engineering Community to Develop Technical 
        Assistance and Leverage Non-traditional Data Sources for 
        Disadvantaged and Rural Communities
    The IIJA took great strides to acknowledge the inequities that were 
created or exacerbated by our nation's built environment. Examples of 
positive steps include establishment of the Reconnecting Communities 
Pilot Program at the Department of Transportation, investment in 
Superfund and brownfields remediation, and set-aside funds for rural 
and disadvantaged communities throughout many of the water and 
broadband infrastructure programs.
    ASCE would like to build on these steps and focus on examining how 
public agencies are working with non-traditional data sources to 
identify which communities could benefit the most from infrastructure 
investment. For example, the Los Angeles County Department of Public 
Works is considering new metrics when making investment decisions, 
including U.S. Census Bureau data on potential exposure to pollutants, 
prevalence of certain health conditions, and socioeconomic factors. 
Having well-established metrics and a variety of dependable aggregated 
data sources can assist in making sure the IIJA is effectively 
benefiting the communities that need investment most.
    ASCE and the engineering community stand ready to work with federal 
agencies to help expand upon the technical assistance programs that 
many rural and disadvantaged communities will rely on to receive 
competitive grants. Agencies should coordinate with the nation's 
engineers to help identify those communities that need assistance and 
determine what type of assistance is needed, whether it is grant 
preparation, identifying suitable projects that will bring community 
benefits, or long-term capacity building within agencies or 
jurisdictions.
4. Dedicate Resources to Grow the Pipeline of Skilled Workers
    To realize the potential of this five-year legislation, it is 
critical that we have the civil engineering workforce in place to 
design, build, and maintain the nation's infrastructure. The American 
Council of Engineering Companies found that the industry will need to 
add 82,000 full- and part-time engineers to implement the IIJA. 
Workforce shortages abound across the infrastructure sector and are 
especially felt among public agencies who are working to implement the 
IIJA.
    Public agencies, which have varying levels of resources at their 
disposal, are at different stages in solving this issue. Some are 
deploying advanced workforce recruitment and retention strategies, 
while others are just now beginning to encounter shortages. One 
strategy to attract and retain more workers is offering a better 
explanation of pension benefits. Research from the National Institute 
on Retirement Security shows many employees and potential employees 
don't understand how pensions work. Younger workers in particular may 
not realize the value of reliable monthly income during their 
retirement. Thorough initial conversations about how a pension can 
complement a total compensation package can give public sector 
employees a boost and help them compete with private industry 
counterparts.
    Other practices for recruiting and retaining workers include 
changing policies to allow same-day job offers and increasing resources 
available to potential and current employees through online portals and 
toolkits. For example, the Washington State Department of 
Transportation has a Workforce Development Toolkit, which offers 
interview tips, information on the modern work environment, and talent 
development resources such as tuition reimbursement and leadership 
development.
    Infrastructure owners cannot effectively utilize the influx of 
funding from the IIJA if they do not have the workforce in place. 
Congress recognized workforce needs with provisions in the CHIPS and 
Science Act of 2022. ASCE believes Congress should build on these 
commitments and encourage state and local governments to include 
skilled workers in their long-term workforce development plans.
5. Require the Use of the Most Up-to-Date Codes and Standards and 
        Regularly Fund Climate Data Updates
    The most reliable way to ensure our nation's infrastructure is 
resilient and that we are truly building back better is the widespread 
adoption and enforcement of modern, up-to-date building codes. 
Therefore, ASCE strongly encourages federal agencies to incentivize the 
use of up-to-date codes and standards, which can mitigate risks of 
climate or manmade events such as hurricanes, fires, sea level rise, 
and more.
    The following ASCE documents and standards should also be utilized 
for new projects that are receiving IIJA funds. These same documents 
serve as a basis upon which such a model code can be developed:
      ASCE 7, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for 
Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE/SEI 7-22), currently an integral 
part of U.S. building codes, describes the means for determining soil, 
flood, tsunami, snow, rain, atmospheric ice, earthquake, and wind 
loads, and their combinations for resilient structural design;
      ASCE 24, Flood Resistant Design and Construction, 
prescribes a standard for cost effectively increasing resiliency by 
reducing and eliminating risks to property from flood hazards and their 
effects;
      ASCE 41, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing 
Buildings, standardizes methods for the retrofit of existing buildings 
to increase resiliency in communities after a seismic event;
      ASCE Manual of Practice 140, Climate-Resilient 
Infrastructure: Adaptive Design and Risk Management, provides guidance 
for and contributes to infrastructure analysis/design in a world in 
which risk profiles are changing due to climate change per the Fourth 
National Climate Assessment.
      ASCE Manual of Practice 74, Guidelines for Electrical 
Transmission Line Structural Loading, provides guidelines for the 
interpretation of ASCE 7 specifically for overhead power lines and 
includes updated wind and ice loadings that all overhead transmission 
and distribution lines should be designed for with the consideration of 
current climate change data.
      ASCE Manual of Practice 141, Wood Pole Structures for 
Electrical Transmission Lines: Recommended Practice for Design and Use, 
provides guidelines for the proper design and analysis of wood pole 
structures used in our distribution and transmission grid 
infrastructure.

    While many state and local government agencies are leading the way, 
to fully realize the benefits of the IIJA, ASCE encourages federal 
agencies and Congress to support and incentivize the widespread 
adoption and enforcement of up-to-date building and infrastructure 
codes. The recent creation of the National Initiative to Advance 
Building Codes, which will focus on helping state and local governments 
adopt the most up-to-date building codes and standards, indicates that 
federal officials understand the importance of these codes and 
standards for resilience. ASCE stands ready to support the work of the 
initiative.
    Additionally, we urge Congress to provide robust funding to federal 
agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA), FEMA, and NIST, whose missions include both developing the data 
necessary for ensuring standards can address the impacts of climate 
change and preparing and implementing a national model code that 
considers increasingly strong storms. While some states have taken it 
upon themselves to update data sets, such as rainfall data, this has 
led to a piecemeal approach and fails to recognize that floodplains and 
other hazards do not end at state lines, putting communities across the 
country at risk. We cannot build resiliently relying on backward-
looking data and, therefore, strongly urge Congress to fund these 
critical programs.
6. Incentivize Asset Management and Life Cycle Cost Analysis
    As new competitive grant programs are developed across federal 
agencies, these programs should provide incentives for asset management 
and life cycle cost analysis as a routine part of the planning process. 
There are a growing number of state and local governments and private 
sector infrastructure owners demonstrating the long-term advantages of 
employing comprehensive asset management practices. However, asset 
management plans are not required or incentivized by the federal 
government in many sectors. By encouraging the development and regular 
update of asset management plans and life cycle cost analysis as a 
condition to receive new federal funding, we can ensure programming and 
planning for operations and maintenance are part of every new 
infrastructure project. Furthermore, by providing prioritization for 
those agencies already using asset management practices, the federal 
government can ensure additional state and local agencies develop asset 
management plans and implement life cycle cost analysis.
    ASCE recommends federal agencies assess each new and existing IIJA 
program to determine whether requiring an asset management plan is 
feasible and would provide value for stakeholders. Additionally, ASCE 
encourages infrastructure owners that already have asset management 
plans to regularly update them so that these tools remain useful for 
decision-making.
                ASCE's resources on IIJA implementation
    Recognizing that the IIJA is benefiting communities in all 50 
states, ASCE also created an online map feature (Figure 1). Users can 
view projects in their state or region and filter the results by 
infrastructure category. The five-year IIJA includes funding for a wide 
variety of infrastructure projects, such as fixing potholes, replacing 
lead pipes, deploying broadband services, increasing rail activity, and 
cleaning up the environment. ASCE believes it is important to track 
projects that are supported by this legislation and illustrate the 
impacts of this historic investment.
    Showcasing the specific location and benefits of a project to a 
community can help foster better understanding everywhere of how 
infrastructure strengthens the economy and improves quality of life. To 
underscore that point, ASCE has also partnered with the American 
Council of Engineering Companies and the American Public Works 
Association to produce the Engineering & Public Works Roadshow. The 
Roadshow partners are making stops around the country to highlight the 
benefits that recently-completed projects have brought to communities, 
from easing supply chain chokepoints to revitalizing downtown 
districts.



  Figure 1_ASCE's IIJA project map, available through its online IIJA 
                    Implementation Resource Center.

                               Conclusion
    ASCE thanks the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit for 
holding a hearing on implementation of the IIJA, which ASCE strongly 
advocated for. ASCE asks Congress to maintain a robust commitment to 
infrastructure as implementation of the IIJA continues.
    ASCE appreciates the opportunity to share our recommendations for 
efficient implementation of the IIJA. We stand ready to answer any 
questions and we look forward to working with Congress on successfully 
implementing this historic legislation.

                                 
Statement of the Association of Equipment Manufacturers, Submitted for 
              the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
    Chairman Crawford, Ranking Member Holmes Norton, and Members of the 
Subcommittee on Highways and Transit:
    The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) appreciates the 
opportunity to submit this statement for the record as the U.S. House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure examines the 
implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
    AEM represents more than 1,000-member companies manufacturing 
equipment and providing services for the agriculture, construction, 
utility, mining, and forestry sectors worldwide. Our industry supports 
approximately 2.3 million jobs across all 50 states, represents 11 
percent of the manufacturing sector in America, and contributes $316 
billion a year to the U.S. economy.
    The IIJA presents a tremendous opportunity for the equipment 
manufacturing industry. In 2021, AEM released a report detailing the 
projected economic impact of increased infrastructure investment to the 
equipment manufacturing industry. According to the data, more than 
100,000 family-sustaining equipment manufacturing jobs will be created 
before 2024 due to the IIJA. These are high-skilled jobs in primarily 
rural areas that pay an average annual income of $89,700, which is 33 
percent above the current national average. The report also showed that 
the IIJA would create nearly 500,000 new manufacturing jobs overall, 
generate over $2 billion in new federal, state, and local tax revenue 
from the equipment manufacturing industry, and result in an additional 
$27 billion in overall economic output.
    AEM's recently released 2023 Economic Impact Report highlights the 
industry's return to growth and increased output following the end of 
the COVID-19, backing up the 2021 projections on the impact of the IIJA 
on the equipment manufacturing industry. This triennial report was 
prepared by the Market Intelligence Team at S&P Global and details the 
impact of the three major sectors--agriculture, construction, and 
mining--that make up the equipment manufacturing industry. These are 
all sectors heavily dependent on robust infrastructure investment. The 
return to growth for the equipment manufacturing industry in 2022 is 
part of a broader rebound in U.S. manufacturing output, which saw an 
estimated 14 percent increase in 2022. The 4.2 percent employment 
growth seen by the equipment manufacturing industry in 2022 outpaced 
the broader manufacturing employment growth of 3.8 percent seen last 
year.
    As a leading advocate in getting this critically important bill 
across the finish line, AEM continues to work with the leaders in 
Congress and the Administration to successfully implement the bill. 
With at least one new IIJA supported project in each congressional 
district, the equipment manufacturing industry making the equipment 
that builds these projects has shown time and again that it is a 
resilient force in the North American economy, weathering everything 
from global pandemics to supply chain disruptions with strength and 
determination. As we look to the future, we are confident that this 
industry will continue to adapt and innovate in the face of new 
challenges, providing stable jobs and economic opportunities for 
communities across the country.
    The 2.3 million men and women of the equipment manufacturing 
industry are ready to get the job done and ensure that continued 
infrastructure investment ushers in a new era of economic prosperity 
for all Americans. We look forward to working with all members of the 
Committee to advance policies and agreements that strengthen American 
manufacturing and secure our nation's long-term infrastructure 
advantage.



                                Appendix
                              ----------                              


  Question from Hon. Dina Titus to Marc D. Williams, P.E., Executive 
Director, Texas Department of Transportation, on behalf of the American 
       Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

    Question 1. In your testimony, you noted that Texas' population is 
consistently increasing which can create challenges for the state's 
transportation network. Likewise, Southern Nevada has a growing 
population and I am proud of the work our Regional Transportation 
Commission is accomplishing to accommodate this boom, especially by 
improving connectivity.
    Can you speak more on the role transit plays in helping meet a 
state's transportation demand, especially in places like Texas and 
Nevada where the population is growing in number and neighborhoods are 
expanding in size?
    Answer. Thank you for your question, Congresswoman Titus. The Texas 
Department of Transportation (TxDOT) continues to plan cooperatively 
with regional partners to implement a variety of multimodal and 
innovative strategies to address high population growth. These efforts 
have expanded in recent years and include investments in new transit 
services, fleet replacement and electric vehicle projects, bus rapid 
transit, and light rail and streetcar projects in our growing 
metropolitan, urban, and rural areas. TxDOT has also launched its 
inaugural Statewide Multimodal Transit Plan to develop long-term 
strategies to the year 2050 that will be integrated into the State's 
Long Range Transportation Plan.

Question from Hon. Dina Titus to Paula Hammond, Senior Vice President, 
  WSP USA, on behalf of the American Road and Transportation Builders 
                              Association

    Question 1. You mentioned in your testimony that any discussion on 
increased materials prices and inflation also needs to recognize that, 
without the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, there would likely be a 
market contraction.
    Could you expand on this a little more, and perhaps even talk about 
how the certainty of federal funding from the infrastructure law can 
help states and industry ride out short-term inflation so that it can 
sustain economic growth in the long-run?
    Answer. The federal-aid highway program is a major driver of state 
highway and bridge construction activity, accounting for over 50 
percent of state capital expenditures, so the certainty and level of 
federal investment can have a major economic impact.
    The stability afforded by a multi-year surface transportation law 
allows states to make long-term decisions about highway and bridge 
capital programs and to weather uncertain economic conditions, like 
increased materials prices and inflation. It also helps contractors, 
material suppliers, design firms, and other businesses as they consider 
investments in equipment, technology, plants, and facilities.
    There is an immediate boost in economic activity as construction 
work begins, followed by longer-run improvements in productivity.
    Historically, when states have to rely on short-term laws and 
extensions, the following effects on state highway and bridge program 
spending occurred:
      In 2003-2004 the real market dropped five percent during 
a series of 12 short-term extensions between the end of the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and the 
enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 
Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU).
      State highway and bridge program spending declined six 
percent under a series of nine short-term extensions between 2010 and 
2011 after SAFETEA-LU expired.
      Investment declined seven percent between 2012 and 2013 
under the two-year Moving Ahead Progress in 21st Century (MAP-21) law.

    Long-term federal-aid highway bills have coincided with periods of 
real state highway and bridge program growth:
      Total spending under TEA-21 increased 24 percent between 
1998 and 2002.
      Under SAFETEA-LU the market grew five percent between 
2005 and 2009.
      Prior to the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, real 
spending under the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST 
Act) grew 12 percent between 2015 and 2019.

    The image below charts the growth and value of state highway and 
bridge program spending from 1982 through 2022:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]