    [Senate Hearing 119-274]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-274

                      INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT
                          IMPLEMENTATION AND CASE STUDIES

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

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                               FEBRUARY 26, 2025

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

                     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                                   ______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    62-668                    WASHINGTON : 2026

                   COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                 SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Chairman
                SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Ranking Member

    KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota           BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
    CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming           JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
    JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    MARK KELLY, Arizona
    DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 ALEX PADILLA, California
    PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska              ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
    ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
    JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               ANGELA D. ALSOBROOKS, Maryland
    JON HUSTED, Ohio

                   Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
                      Dan Dudis, Democratic Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                               FEBRUARY 26, 2025
                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
      Virginia.......................................................     1
    Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode
      Island.........................................................     3

                                   WITNESSES

    McMurry, Russell R., P.E., Vice President, American Association
      of State Highway and Transportation Officials; Commissioner,
      Georgia Department of Transportation...........................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     7
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Whitehouse....    27
    Johnson, Gary, Vice President, Granite Construction, on behalf of
      the Transportation Construction Coalition......................    30
        Prepared statement...........................................    32
    Carroll, Michael, P.E., Deputy Managing Director, Office of
      Transportation and Infrastructure Systems, the City of
      Philadelphia...................................................    48
        Prepared statement...........................................    50
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Blunt
          Rochester..................................................    53

                              ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

    Letters to Senator Capito and Senator Whitehouse from:
        Advocates for Highway & Auto Safety..........................    80
        National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA).................    86
        National Work Zone Safety Coalition..........................    88
        Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC)....................    91
        National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS)............    93
        ASCE, Statement for the Record from The American Society of
          Civil Engineers (ASCE): Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
          Act Implementation and Case Studies........................    97

                      INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT
                          IMPLEMENTATION AND CASE STUDIES

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2025

                                           U.S. Senate,
                     Committee on Environment and Public Works,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in
    room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore
    Capito (chairman of the committee) presiding.
        Present: Senators Capito, Whitehouse, Ricketts, Husted,
    Merkley, Markey, Kelly, Padilla, Schiff, Blunt Rochester,
    Alsobrooks.

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

        Senator Capito. Well, I want to welcome everybody to what I
    think will be a nice journey for this committee, and that is
    the Highway Bill, it is a massive bill that we have the
    pleasure of working on in this committee.
        Before I begin, I would like to express all of our thoughts
    and prayers for our colleague, Senator Cramer, who had an
    accident just several days ago. I will sure miss him over here
    right next to me, because he is a wonderful member of the
    conference, but hopefully he will be back soon.
        Everybody keep, he had a fall on ice, and we know how cold
    it has been. Let's hope he gets a quick recovery.
        Thank you for joining us this morning to continue oversight
    of the implementation of the IIJA. Today our focus is on the
    Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act, one of the
    foundational components of the IIJA, which was developed in a
    bipartisan manner by this committee.
        This hearing comes at a critical time, I think, as we
    approach the expiration of these provisions at the end of 2026
    in September. We want to continue what is working, but
    discontinue what is not working.
        Since the law's enactment on November 15th, 2021,
    transportation stakeholders have been delivering on its promise
    but at time experiencing some challenges.
        We have some of those stakeholders with us today. I
    appreciate them coming to provide us with an on the ground
    update of their efforts to deliver transportation projects in
    rural and urban communities.
        On the positive side, the Federal Highway formula programs
    received approximately 90 percent of the funding in the IIJA,
    which was something that I strongly supported. This funding has
    provided States with the certainty and with the flexible
    project eligibilities to address the transportation needs of
    Americans across the Country.
        In my home State of West Virginia, that formula funding is
    upgrading and modernizing our roads and bridges, which will
    connect our communities to job and economic opportunities. I
    also championed commonsense provisions aimed at accelerating
    projects so that communities are not stuck waiting to realize
    the safety and reliability benefits that they will bring.
        As an example, the IIJA codified the One Federal Decision
    policy which expedites, or should expedite, the environmental
    review process for certain projects by setting a 2-year goal
    for those reviews and allowing the use of a single coordinated
    process to develop an environmental document.
        I am curious to hear from our witnesses today if these
    provisions are being used and whether they have been having the
    desired impact. Despite the many benefits, I am aware that we
    have some challenges with the implementation of the IIJA.
    Inflation is certainly the contributing factor. It has eaten
    into the overall funding increase provided by the IIJA, and
    increased project costs.
        I look forward to our witnesses sharing the real-world
    impacts of this inflation on the work that they are doing.
        Another challenge is that many of the new discretionary
    grant programs established by the IIJA have been very slow in
    achieving their congressional intent. These programs require
    significant time and money from eligible applicants. Once a
    grant has been awarded, the project grant agreement was often
    taking more than a year to be negotiated and signed by the
    prior administration, which delays the benefits of each
    project.
        This slow-down has contributed to a ballooning amount of
    unused obligation authority that must be sent back to the
    States as part of a process known as the August redistribution.
    In 2024, that amount was $8.7 billion. This results in an end
    of the Fiscal Year scramble as States seek to put that amount
    of funding to use, often putting it toward lower priority
    projects.
        We advanced a bipartisan fix to help with this issue last
    year. The challenge remains, and is growing.
        I am sure we will learn more about our witnesses'
    experience with applying for and managing a discretionary grant
    award today.
        In addition, the implementation of the IIJA was sometimes
    clouded by executive overreach of the prior administration. My
    colleagues on this committee have often heard me talk about two
    examples of overreach: the December 16th policy memorandum that
    was issued, and the Greenhouse Gas Performance Measure Final
    Rule.
        The goal of this overreach was simply advancing the
    priorities of the prior administration even when those
    priorities were often specifically considered by this committee
    and excluded from the IIJA.
        Ultimately, it took more of a year for the prior
    administration to correct their misstep with the December 16th
    memo, and it required litigation from 22 States and action by
    the Trump administration to finally end the unauthorized
    Greenhouse Gas Performance Measure final rule.
        With the opportunities and challenges of the IIJA
    implementation in mind, I look forward to receiving testimony
    from our panel of witnesses. This review of the real-world
    impacts of the IIJA and the feedback on what is working and
    what is not working will inform this committee's bipartisan on
    the upcoming Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill.
        Thanks to the witnesses and members for participating
    today. I now recognize Ranking Member Whitehouse for his
    opening statement.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,
              U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND

        Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman, and thanks to our
    witnesses for joining us.
        Infrastructure Week had become something of a long-running
    joke until 4 years ago when Democrats and Republicans joined
    together and passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It made
    long overdue investments in our roads, bridges, transit, ports,
    drinking water, wastewater, and other systems of service, the
    backbone of our Nation's economy.
        It was a monumental first step. About a third of American's
    620,000 bridges need repair and nearly 42,000 of those bridges
    are considered structurally deficient and need replacing. Our
    Country needs more infrastructure investments.
        I am eager to join with my Republican colleagues to take
    stock of our Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, craft policies to
    fix our aging roads and bridges, and pass a package before the
    current law expires in September 2026.
        This is an obviously reasonable cause of action, and in
    ordinary times we would simply go forward with it.
    Unfortunately, we have a President who claims powers to himself
    outside the Constitutional order, even when the law says
    plainly otherwise. For example, when the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law said that $5 billion ``shall be spent'' on
    building out a national network of electric vehicle charging
    infrastructure, this administration canceled State approvals
    and froze funding way after the time for executive veto was
    passed.
        The Trump regime asks us to believe that they are simply
    taking time to review it. This is the law that members of both
    parties in this body passed. It is not subject to the whims of
    polluter mega-donors. The ongoing violation is not only
    illegal, it is costing jobs around the Country, harming our
    economic and industrial competitiveness, and accelerating
    climate change, which is already costing families thousands of
    dollars in increased insurance and grocery bills.
        In my home State of Rhode Island, we have urgent work to do
    to replace or repair bridges. The Washington Bridge, a vital
    economic artery for our region, served 90,000 vehicles every
    day before it experienced structural concerns. It has been more
    than a year since the bridge was shut down and Rhode Islanders
    are spending more time in traffic with disrupted commutes. Many
    live on the other side of the bridge from essential services
    like hospitals. The project to replace the bridge was awarded
    grants from the Mega and Infra programs, and it is waiting on
    both.
        We have other major bridges that need urgent attention.
    Fifteen bridges on the I-95 corridor through Rhode Island carry
    185,000 vehicles daily and billions of dollars' worth of
    freight.
        The project to repair those bridges was awarded funding
    from the Bridge Investment Program under the IIJA. This
    administration refuses to sign the grant agreement to allow
    access to those funds.
        Our historic Mount Hope Bridge, which is a gorgeous bridge,
    if you can say bridges are gorgeous, requires repairs and
    upgrades to address corrosion in cables due to higher humidity
    driven by climate change. This project could achieve hundreds
    of millions of dollars' worth of cost savings if implemented by
    extending the life of the bridge by 50 to 75 years.
        The project was awarded a grant from the PROTECT program,
    but this administration refuses to sign the grant agreement to
    allow access to those funds.
        Before Trump took office, the Federal Government was a
    committed partner in the effort to rebuild. Now, we have an
    administration that is canceling or delaying infrastructure
    funding nationwide, putting our bridges, our safety and even
    lives at risk. Communities across the Country are now left
    questioning whether the funding authorized by Congress will
    ever be delivered to the projects that they scoped, planned,
    and started building.
        To those questions, they presently get no answers, just
    what I call the fog bank of evasion, uncertainty, and
    unanswered calls and emails.
        There are some new ideas out there, too, the Department of
    Transportation says you now need a high marriage rate and a
    high birth rate to qualify for funding for transportation
    projects. Republican colleagues on the committee from Ohio,
    West Virginia, and Wyoming will not do well under this
    directive.
        The Department of Transportation also plans to unilaterally
    amend the general terms and conditions of existing grant
    agreements to impose ideological preferences. Well, when a
    State or local government signs a contract with the Federal
    Government for an infrastructure project, they expect and they
    rely on the Federal Government to honor its contractual
    obligations. They do not expect to receive a notice telling
    them that the signed contract has been unilaterally canceled or
    paused or abrogated or changed by the Federal Government. This
    kind of uncertainty keeps shovels from ever touching the
    ground.
        The historic Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is the law. We
    have a lot of good, serious bipartisan work to do to write the
    next Surface Transportation reauthorization. I speak for all of
    us on our side when I say we are ready to roll up our sleeves,
    get to it and pass the next authorization together.
        Senator Capito. Together.
        Senator Whitehouse. It will be pointless unless and until
    this administration respects Article I of the Constitution and
    its own obligation under Article II to faithfully execute the
    law.
        It is Article I for a reason. Our founders did not want to
    recreate a monarchy. We were to have co-equal branches of
    government with checks and balances, not rubber stamps. First
    among those co-equal branches is the legislative branch,
    Congress, us. Until our existing laws are respected, the work
    that we as a committee and as a Congress put into writing the
    laws will cease to matter.
        It is time to stand up for the American people and for our
    democracy, and end this nonsense.
        Thank you, Chairman.
        Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
        I will now turn to our witnesses for their opening
    statements. Our first witness is Russell McMurry, Commissioner
    at the Georgia Department of Transportation. Mr. McMurry is
    testifying this morning on behalf of the American Association
    of State Highway and Transportation Officials, known as AASHTO.
    As Commissioner of Georgia DOT, Mr. McMurry leads a staff of
    over 5,000, and has an operating budget above $5 billion.
        I now recognize Mr. McMurry, and thank you for coming.

    STATEMENT OF RUSSELL R. McMURRY, P.E., VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
      ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS;
           COMMISSIONER, GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

        Mr. McMurry. Thank you, Chair Capito, and Ranking Member
    Whitehouse, and committee members for this opportunity. As
    stated, I am Russell McMurry, the Commissioner of the Georgia
    Department of Transportation representing AASHTO, which
    consists of the 50 State DOTs, Puerto Rico, and the District of
    Columbia.
        The video playing today highlights many successes resulting
    from the IIJA in Georgia, from maintenance to large capital
    projects. At Georgia DOT, we recognize that mobility of people
    and freight safely and efficiently is more than just about
    projects. It is about our quality of life and it is about our
    economy.
        The IIJA's Federal Surface Transportation funding has
    absolutely been vital to every State DOT to safely move people
    and goods. GDOT relies on the core Federal programs to deliver
    projects from across a very diverse State, from our coast to
    our mountains, and from rural Georgia, where agribusiness is
    our No. 1 economy, to metro Atlanta, with over 6 million people
    and growing. The core IIJA formula programs give States funding
    certainty to properly plan and deliver for the future.
        Federal funding is a foundational investment, vital to
    every State for State of good repair of our Nation's highways
    and bridges. In Georgia, about 80 percent of our capital
    maintenance program is from the IIJA formula programs, and 90
    percent Federal investment for bridge rehabilitation and bridge
    replacements.
        In addition to the foundational investments, IIJA has
    supported major capital projects like shown on this video. Two
    of those projects are on the top 100 freight bottlenecks in the
    Nation list, and have a combined cost of $3.2 billion. Funding
    was made possible in a large part by the IIJA funding and also
    using a design-build finance contracting method. Just two
    bottleneck projects in Georgia consumed 2 years of our total
    Federal funding.
        I am sure your State has a freight bottleneck somewhere
    that needs some work.
        It is great to see these large projects in the video, but I
    like to remind people that a rural bridge may have a
    significant economic impact as well. If a farmer can not get
    crops to market efficiently due to a load restricted or closed
    bridge, that is an impact on the farmer's bottom line. Every
    State has needs when it comes to bridges and structures, and a
    core program like the Surface Transportation Block Grant
    Program and the Bridge Formula Program added by the IIJA has
    been especially helpful in replacing rural bridges.
        Continued Federal investment in the Nation's bridges is
    very important, because bridges are just like us, they are
    getting older every day, and the older I get, the more ailments
    I have.
        IIJA increased funding levels for the Highway Safety
    Improvement Program by 30 percent. This critical investment is
    helping States to reduce fatalities on our Nation's roadways
    and provide flexibility we have taken advantage of in Georgia,
    especially for safety education programs. We partner with
    private organizations like We Are Teachers to develop age
    appropriate K-12 curriculum that is approved by the Department
    of Education in Georgia, and Lutzie 43, a non-profit based on
    eliminating drivers crash in high school students through safe
    driving summits.
        In my written testimony, I have shared additional examples
    of the many IIJA successes, and I have shared some challenges
    as well, like cost increases. When it comes to funding from the
    IIJA, I love to quote the Charles Dickens classic, it is the
    best of times, it is the worst of times. Best of times for
    funding, the worst of times due to cost increases.
        Georgia, like most every State, has experienced significant
    cost increases that have eroded the buying power of what was
    intended from the IIJA. In Georgia, we have seen a 60 percent
    increase in bridge costs, 66 percent increase in resurfacing
    costs and over 115 percent increase in widening five projects.
        Other challenges result from so many discretionary programs
    with 29 of them just at Federal Highway alone. AASHTO supports
    using discretionary grants to close the funding gap for most
    expensive projects, and we need to make sure they are projects
    of national or regional interest. The IIJA discretionary funds
    have been slow to deploy and both State DOTs and local
    governments have been challenged.
        One local grant in Georgia took 31 months from the notice
    of funding opportunity to the grant award execution. One
    Federal Decision being included in the IIJA was a very
    important step in the right direction. However, I believe there
    is still progress to be made, and look forward to your
    continued support for improving the IIJA.
        Georgia has made progress in delivery of environmental
    permitting by State funding Federal environmental resource
    positions and co-locating them in a central office to do the
    work as a team.
        We thank you for your leadership and focus on improving
    transportation for the Nation. I look forward to answering your
    questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McMurry follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. Thank you very much. We appreciate it.
        Our next witness is Mr. Gary Johnson. Mr. Johnson is the
    Vice President of Granite Construction and is testifying on
    behalf of the Transportation Construction Coalition (TCC) this
    morning.
        The TCC is a partnership of 34 national trade organizations
    and labor unions representing hundreds of thousands of
    individuals working to build, modernize and maintain the
    Nation's transportation systems.
        I now recognize Mr. Johnson for 5 minutes for his
    testimony. Thank you.

          STATEMENT OF GARY JOHNSON, VICE PRESIDENT, GRANITE
          CONSTRUCTION, INC., ON BEHALF OF THE TRANSPORTATION
                         CONSTRUCTION COALITION

        Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, Ranking
    Member Whitehouse. Thank you today for convening the hearing.
        I am Gary Johnson, Vice President of Granite Construction.
    Granite is America's infrastructure company, specializing in
    complex infrastructure projects, while also building many of
    the standard day-to-day roads across America that we all drive
    on.
        Today, I am representing the Transportation Construction
    Coalition, or TCC, a partnership of 34 national trade
    associations and labor unions. Thanks to the bipartisan
    leadership of this committee in passing the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act in 2021, my company and many others are
    experiencing record opportunities allowing us to enhance safety
    and mobility throughout the U.S.
        To date, States have committed $183 billion in IIJA highway
    and bridge formula funds to support over 91,000 new projects,
    at least one in nearly every U.S. county. This includes 2,300
    projects in West Virginia and almost 500 projects in Rhode
    Island.
        Projects across the U.S. are driving an increase in heavy
    equipment sales, asphalt and concrete production, and record
    employment levels for highway and bridge construction. Outcomes
    like these are proof the law is working as intended.
        While undeniable progress is underway, I would like to
    highlight three areas for further improvement. First, we must
    continue to invest and ensure the highest return on those
    resources. While IIJA was a much-needed course correction after
    years of status quo Federal investment, delivering the surface
    transportation network our Nation deserves and needs is not
    just a 5-year endeavor.
        Accordingly, the next multi-year bill should preserve and
    grow current highway and public transportation investment
    levels, using a user fee revenue source that captures every
    vehicle on the road. The impact of these investments is clear.
    At Granite we have seen first-hand the benefits of proper
    funding and smart project planning.
        On California's U.S. Highway 101 improvement project,
    Granite worked with CalTrans and local agencies using
    collaborative contracting methods to phase a project into
    manageable sections and leverage State and Federal funding to
    deliver critical infrastructure years ahead of schedule and
    under budget.
        As a key first step toward achieving the goal of continued
    investments, we urge all committee members to cosponsor
    legislation from Senators Fisher, Lummis, and Ricketts that
    would ensure drivers of electric vehicles join their fellow
    motorists in contributing to the investment and improvement of
    our Nation's roads and bridges.
        Second, Congress must address ways to ensure that Buy
    America does not impede progress. The TCC fully supports Buy
    America's objective of strengthening U.S. manufacturing, and we
    offer two ways to further improve that.
        First, prevent disruption in pavement product markets. The
    TCC encourages Congress to preserve the exemption for
    aggregates and paving materials that was included in the IIJA.
    All areas of the Country do not have local access to all the
    aggregate, cement, and asphalt binder needed for the paving
    jobs. It must be imported from outside the U.S.
        The TCC urges transparency and certainty in the waiver
    process. Federal agencies should develop a publicly accessible
    data base of available Buy America-compliant materials and
    products to provide stakeholders with procurement options up
    front.
        The FHA recently announced a rollback of its general waiver
    for manufactured products, making this recommendation extremely
    timely. As an example, one State department of transportation
    took 14 months to receive a waiver for a submersible pump, when
    two other States received approval for the exact same product
    in a much shorter period of time. There needs to be
    consistency.
        Finally, our employees are our greatest asset, and they
    need support through additional legislation to go home safely
    every day. In 2022, there were 96,000 work zone crashes, 37,000
    injuries, and almost 1,000 fatalities. The IIJA made important
    investments in work zone safety like enhancing the Highway
    Safety Improvement Program, and supporting the use of
    intelligent transportation systems. The next highway bill
    should incentivize States to go further in implementing
    stricter enforcement measures.
        I thank the committee for the opportunity to testify today.
    I encourage each of you and your staff to talk to a contractor
    in your State or trade association and go visit a job in your
    State. Talk to the men and women who are actually doing the
    work on the grade and get their input.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Johnson. I have done that,
    and I will do it again.
        Mr. Johnson. Good.
        Senator Capito. It is always a very great visit.
        Our final witness this morning is Michael Carroll,
    President of the National Association of City Transportation
    Officials and Deputy Managing Director of the Office of
    Transportation and Infrastructure Systems for the city of
    Philadelphia. How in the world do you say all that?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Capito. In this role, he coordinates and sets the
    policy direction for critical functions, including the city's
    department of streets. His oversight includes infrastructure
    systems that are made up of more than 2,575 miles of street and
    320 bridge structures.
        I now recognize Mr. Carroll for 5 minutes for his opening
    statement. Thank you for coming.

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

        Mr. Carroll. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Capito,
    Ranking Member Whitehouse, and members of the committee. I am
    Mike Carroll, and I serve as president of the National
    Association of City Transportation Officials, and am Deputy
    Managing Director of the Office of Transportation and
    Infrastructure in the city of Philadelphia. We oversee the
    delivery of capital infrastructure projects in coordination
    with our streets department and the Pennsylvania Department of
    Transportation. We call it PennDOT.
        The Federal funding support for the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act is a lifeline to overcome decades of
    neglect in infrastructure, safety, and economic opportunity for
    communities with real needs. Philadelphia's Chinatown Stitch
    Planning grant, for example, under the Reconnecting Communities
    Pilot Program, reconnects a working-class Philadelphia
    community that was split in half by construction of I-676,
    known locally as the Vine Street Expressway.
        The Safe Streets and Roads for All awards, another example,
    improves transportation infrastructure along the roads that
    contribute disproportionately to deaths and serious injuries
    and deliver essential pedestrian and bicycle safety education
    in 40 Philadelphia schools.
        Our partnership with PennDOT is a good model for the rest
    of the Country. Our State and Federal partners acknowledge the
    city is closer to the people we all serve and that we are all
    committed to in giving effective public service and faithfully
    implementing the laws and policies regardless of who enacted
    them.
        IIJA discretionary programs enable local government
    partners to extend the capacity of State DOTs. Our PennDOT
    partners have then argued for direct funding to the city
    because they can take the burden off of PennDOT. Any future
    transportation bills should consider new paths for direct
    funding to keep decisionmaking as close to the people as
    possible.
        People who live and work in Philadelphia see IIJA's
    results. We have completed paving and safety upgrades to our
    city-wide arterial network. We have completed repairs and
    reopened the Montgomery Avenue Bridge over the northeast
    corridor rail lines. We expect our MLK Bridge serving the
    central business district to open later this year.
        We see improvements in our port infrastructure and our
    airport terminal. We have begun work reducing pollution due to
    stormwater and contamination in our drinking water.
        Our contracting community has risen to the challenge as
    well. We have attracted new contractors to business in
    Philadelphia, and the work has also attracted young Americans
    to the construction industry and helped us retain seasoned
    tradesmen. This has reversed the death spiral in lost talent
    and knowledge that could otherwise impair all infrastructure
    nationwide.
        The Federal Government should ensure current funding awards
    move toward project completion and help us to avoid the added
    cost that inevitably comes with new uncertainties and delays.
    The march toward obligation is intensive and means expending
    local dollars and ramping up contractors and other businesses
    to seek opportunities.
        Everyone involved takes on the risks that are mitigated by
    trust that the Federal Government is a committed partner. Even
    where there is disagreement over program purposes, honoring
    these commitments should be the priority.
        Where the PROTECT program is targeted for the use of
    certain words, awards like the projects for the Bells Mill
    Bridge and the Green Valley Bridge over the Wissahickon Creek
    become at risk. These historic bridges serve over 13,000
    vehicles a day and urgently need repairs due to extreme weather
    events.
        Like other residents in other cities, Philadelphians want
    effective government that produces results. No one wants my
    opinions about what carbon dioxide does in the atmosphere, or
    why streets that once were never under water are now under
    water every spring rain.
        Local residents expect that if we follow the rules that
    were given to us at the time and the Federal Government awards
    us funding that they will honor these commitments regardless of
    who is in charge. The best defense you can all provide to
    combat risk and uncertainty is to take a bipartisan stance in
    favor of stability, continuity, and results.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Carroll follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Capito. Thank you very much.
        I am going to start with a very general question for all of
    you, and you have touched on this, all of you have, in your
    statements. Just concisely, what part of the IIJA had the
    greatest benefit for your experience, and which one has
    presented the greatest challenge?
        Mr. McMurry?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you. The greatest benefit comes from
    when we consider the core formula programs, that being national
    highway priority programs, the Surface Transportation Block
    Grant program, which is truly the most flexible to use for the
    States and NPOs.
        Again, I remind everybody there are sub-allocation by
    population from under 5,000, from 5 to 50, 2 to 200, and
    greater. There is, again, flexibility that we can use.
        The other programs certainly are the safety program that I
    mentioned in my testimony. The increased funding in the Highway
    Safety Improvement Program is absolutely vital as we take on
    the Nation's 40,000 fatalities on our roadways, which is just
    not acceptable.
        Then I add the Bridge Formula Program, that again, was
    added by the IIJA, which again gives funding that can be used
    especially for local governments. Bridges are everywhere. In
    fact, in Georgia, there are more local bridges than there are
    State-owned bridges, and we invest in every bridge in Georgia,
    federally and with State dollars, because all bridges are vital
    for safe and secure travel.
        Those core formula programs have been customary and
    necessary, not only for utilization but for the planning
    process. We each do a State transportation improvement program,
    either four or 6 years, and long range transportation planning
    out to 20 years, counting on reliable funding, reliability from
    year to year, in those core formula programs, because it takes
    too long to deliver these projects.
        We need that funding certainty in those core programs to
    know that we can deliver through the planning process, through
    the design, environmental, right-of-way construction process,
    to get the infrastructure delivered.
        Some of those challenges out of the IIJA in Georgia have
    been, with some of the new programs, again, to Mr. Carroll's
    testimony, things are happening and we need to be able to be
    responsive to be able to use the PROTECT dollars, which again,
    I have to say thank you in the IIJA, because we never had the
    ability to use Federal dollars to work on things such as slides
    or flooding and using Federal dollars. It has been hard to
    deploy, because they are new programs.
        One of the challenges, too, has been in the TAP program,
    the Transportation Alternatives Program, to try to deliver
    Federal projects local through a competitive process to very
    rural areas. It is hard to ask a population under 5,000 to
    deliver a Federal aid project due to the complexity of the
    funding, the NEPA.
        Often in Georgia, we have had cities and communities say
    no, thank you after they were awarded a grant, or excuse me,
    through the competitive grant process that the State DOTs have
    to administer, because they realize how much more cost it takes
    to actually administer the program. It is simply easier for
    them just to deliver the project themselves with no Federal
    dollars.
        Those couple of programs, obviously NEVI was a new program,
    it has already been mentioned today, States have been moving
    forward with those programs. Obviously it is taking a while to
    stand up those programs.
        From an AASHTO perspective, every State has different
    procurement rules and methodologies. In Georgia, we believe
    strongly that we should not put State dollars with the NEVI
    dollars. We are using a public-private partnership to use the
    Federal dollars and private sector dollars to deliver the NEVI
    program.
        States have struggled----
        Senator Capito. How many have you built under the NEVI
    program?
        Mr. McMurry. We have five under contract, but they are not
    built.
        Senator Capito. Okay.
        Mr. McMurry. It is a very--the NEVI program was a very much
    surface transportation program to a technology solution. It is
    very different. No State DOT has built C-Stores or gas
    stations.
        Senator Capito. Right.
        Mr. McMurry. How to do this on private property is taking a
    long time to navigate.
        We are fortunate because we have a public-private
    partnership, laws that allow us to advance. Other States were
    really boxed in, that they could not even deliver, because they
    didn't have a method that they could deliver on.
        Senator Capito. That is a real problem, yes.
        Mr. Johnson, quickly, the greatest benefit and greatest
    challenge.
        Mr. Johnson. Chairman, I think obviously the greatest
    benefit is the amount of money coming out in the formula aid
    funding. It took a while to get started. It was delayed a
    little bit from authorization to appropriation in 2021 and
    2022.
        Since then, we have seen a lot of money coming into the
    States that we work in. We have good backlog, we have hired
    more people, and all of that is good.
        Something else that has been very good about IIJA was the
    exemptions for the construction materials. It is hard to
    imagine but 20 to 30 percent of aggregate oil, asphalt binder,
    cement binder for concrete comes in from outside the U.S. Not
    because we want it to. We have to. We have roughly 60 asphalt
    plants, most of them in the west. Ten or fifteen in Mississippi
    and Tennessee, and a lot of those asphalt plants use binder
    from Canada. Some even use binder from South Korea.
        If we were to shut that off, or put tariffs on it, it would
    cause inflation or it would cause problems with getting jobs
    done on time.
        Some of the things that I think the next bill should look
    at, that it did not, is using recycled materials in the paving.
    The technology is there to use up to 40 percent reclaimed
    asphalt pavement in new asphalt. That has the benefit of
    lowering the cost, reducing truck trips, increasing safety on
    the roads because you are reducing truck trips, less air
    emissions, and you are using material that is U.S. material, so
    you are not having to import from outside the Country.
        Senator Capito. I am going to stop you there, because I
    want to give Mr. Carroll a chance to answer quickly, plus and
    minus.
        Mr. Carroll. Well, there is a lot of agreement, I think. I
    would focus on the safety investments as one of the biggest
    pluses for us. I will make another plug for discretionary
    programs and direct funding for cities and other local
    governments. I think we hear directly when there are issues,
    and are often in a position to react.
        More in alignment with what constituents are talking about,
    I feel like there is certainly a lot of work we need to do to
    focus on product delivery, and I think you have heard that in
    the other comments as well. Anything we can do to improve that,
    to streamline that, I am certainly going to be in favor for.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse?
        Senator Whitehouse. Thanks, Chairman.
        The Chairman did a very good thing by keeping our record
    open from our permitting reform hearing for 30 days. We are
    still in that 30-day period. I would invite each of you to
    contribute to that record what you see by way of permitting
    reforms that could help move things forward without
    compromising the purposes of the permitting requirements.
        In particular, in the grant making process, there are what
    you consider to be excessive or duplicative or unreasonable
    conditions that attach to various grant making processes. I
    invite you to do that.
        Mr. Carroll, climate change causes very significant effects
    for coastal infrastructure. We are seeing it all the time in
    Rhode Island. We already have nearly a foot of sea level rise.
    We have roads near the coast that flood constantly. We are also
    seeing riparian flooding from rain bursts that is dramatically
    changing the way that communities have to respond in their
    infrastructure planning.
        What are the dangers where engineers, planners, designers,
    and construction firms are forbidden to discuss and predict
    climate effects?
        Mr. Carroll. Well, we need to plan so that we can build
    things effectively. I would say anything that feels like a
    restriction in pursuing the work of understanding the impacts
    on our infrastructure and our communities is going to be a
    danger not just to good infrastructure, but to the people who
    live and work in communities themselves.
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes. You mentioned high injury
    corridors. What would you like to see in a new surface
    transportation bill to provide additional resources for
    addressing the safety concerns in high injury corridors?
        Mr. Carroll. Well, I think more is always going to be the
    first thing I answer with. We talked a little bit about reform
    that would help.
        If we are making improvements which are focused on
    pedestrian movements, in particular, I think it should be
    pretty straightforward to get environmental clearance.
    Sometimes it is not as straightforward as it should be. A lot
    of work could go into making a straight path for a categorical
    exclusion, something that is more like a checklist, which takes
    maybe months to process instead of a process that can drag on
    for years.
        Senator Whitehouse. Do you see data gaps in identifying
    high injury corridors?
        Mr. Carroll. Data gaps, you said?
        Senator Whitehouse. Yes.
        Mr. Carroll. Yes, I do. I think we have done a decent job;
    we have been focused on this for a while.
        Senator Whitehouse. We, meaning your Philadelphia area?
        Mr. Carroll. I am sorry, I meant the city of Philadelphia
    has. This is a subject I will go so far as to say many of the
    cities that are part of NACTO have been focused on for a while
    as well.
        There is a big differential, if you look at any
    metropolitan region, between smaller communities. I am sure,
    rural communities have issues getting the data together to make
    the case for what they should get. If there is some work that
    happened at the Federal level or a way to promote work at the
    State level to make that data more available, that is going to
    go a long way.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thanks.
        Mr. McMurry, I mentioned in my opening remarks that we have
    PROTECT grant funding that is not coming through at this point.
    I understand that Georgia has about $240 million in PROTECT
    grant funding. What is the status of that as far as you know
    today?
        Mr. McMurry. Out of the total discretionary money that may
    be coming to Georgia, I am not sure I can answer off the top of
    my head of how much is being utilized. I can tell you, though,
    in the formula PROTECT it has been a slow start to get projects
    through the pipeline.
        As you understand, the new projects----
        Senator Whitehouse. Would you take that as a question for
    the record? I am just interested in the status today of the
    Georgia PROTECT grant funding and whether it is cleared to go,
    whether you still need grant agreements signed, what its status
    is, its process status is on the way toward being able to
    embark on those projects. If you would do that for the record,
    I would appreciate it.
        Mr. McMurry. Will do.
        Senator Whitehouse. The reason I ask that question, Madam
    Chair, is because what I believe I am seeing in the wake of the
    court order that has instructed the Trump administration to end
    frozen funds in certain areas and to come into compliance with
    the court's decision about illegal freezes is what I call the
    fog bank technique, where the official will not say no, we are
    not going to do that, I will make myself a target for violation
    of the court order, instead they retreat into the fog bank and
    you either get e-mails not answered, phones not answered, vague
    responses, we do not know, we are still looking into it, stand
    by. Even assurances that it is fine, but then the money never
    comes, or the grant agreement never gets filed.
        I think that is actually strategy at this point from the
    Trump administration. I think we are going to have to press our
    way through that because slow-mo contempt of court orders is
    still contempt of court orders. I really think we need to get
    to the bottom of this.
        As you and I have both said, Chairman, there is really
    important bipartisan work to do in this committee. It just is
    not going to work when we have an administration that will not
    faithfully execute the laws, despite the oath that was sworn to
    faithfully execute the laws.
        Senator Capito. Thank you. Agreed, and that is part of the
    oversight that we are doing in this committee.
        Senator Husted?
        Senator Husted. Thank you, Chairman Capito. I appreciate
    the witnesses spending some time with us today.
        I come recently from State government, where we oversaw the
    department of transportation and had a lot of variety of
    transportation projects we were trying to get approved, and
    would constantly fog over when they would talk with me about
    the Federal review process and permitting process and
    environmental review, and how long it was going to take to do
    this project that was of urgent nature.
        We sit here today, trying to figure out how we all get
    better at this. I will start with you, Mr. McMurry. How do we
    get better? How do we shorten that time period for review, when
    we find situations where literally the permitting process takes
    longer than the construction of these projects? How do we get
    better?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you for that. One, States that have
    taken on NEPA delegation or assignment, as it is called, have
    seen marked improvements in their time to permit. Georgia has
    not done that, but we have tried to do some other things.
        In my testimony, I mentioned, we call it an office of
    environmental quality, of where the State DOT pays for Federal
    resource agency positions at the Corps of Engineers, National
    Marine Fisheries, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, to name a few. We
    have co-located them in one office that we fund, so that they
    can work as a team to work on our environmental reviews and
    permitting.
        We have seen great gains there. In my testimony, I
    mentioned up to 80 percent time improvement on some of those
    permitting reviews. Not on all, but on some.
        I call it really an alignment, because most of the Federal
    resource agencies outside of USDOT or Federal Highway or FTA,
    their primary mission is not to advance infrastructure
    projects. We really have to have an alignment. That is what we
    have been able to do in Georgia to pull all these resource
    agencies, including State resource agencies, together under one
    roof and work as a team.
        Now, that sounds very commonsensical. Why wouldn't
    everybody work together to try to advance transportation
    infrastructure projects? Again, it was very hard. We had to
    work with each Federal agency to get buy-in and consensus that
    they would release a person not to work under their roof, but
    work in a different location to move projects forward.
        That is one thing I think that is perfectly allowable under
    the law. It can happen today. It should be really standard
    across the Nation that there should be an alignment in Federal
    resource regulatory agencies working together to deliver.
        Senator Husted. I want to get to Mr. Johnson. Do you have a
    thought on that?
        Mr. Johnson. Yes, Senator. I understand there are seven or
    eight States that have worked out authority with the U.S.
    Government on handling NEPA, on transportation projects,
    California being one. We have a lot of work in California,
    Texas being another. I understand that Texas has reported that
    since they have done that, they have reduced the time to get
    through the NEPA process from 36 months to 16 months on
    average.
        Senator Husted. Great. That begs the question, why isn't
    every State doing this? I am not sure what the answer is, but I
    think that should be encouraged.
        Just a thought here, we have often talked in recent weeks
    in this committee about time is money. Time is also cost, it is
    inflation, effects. The timeline of projects drives up the
    cost. Time is also lives. On a lot of projects, if you delay,
    where there are severe traffic issues, it leads to more
    accidents and takes a toll on human life.
        I am getting to Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, I know that
    the I-95 bridge collapse occurred, and in literally 12 days you
    were able to fix it. It is possible to do these things, when we
    have relief from regulations. I am just curious if anyone has a
    thought on this. When we have traffic projects that are
    literally holding up lives, instead of an emergency
    declaration, or an emergency waiver, could we have an urgency
    waiver? A thought to really give States the ability to short-
    circuit some of these delays and go immediately into
    construction when there is a need to save lives, we know there
    is an issue.
        Mr. Carroll, do you have any thoughts on that?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes, I would support something like that. It
    has to be done carefully, and I think we should definitely
    learn from States that have figured out how to do it, even if
    they do not have the delegation for NEPA authority.
        If we can all agree there is a process that works, we
    should just certify that process and do it. We should get it
    done. That speaks to even what I mentioned before, there are
    certain types of projects which we can be pretty comfortable
    are not going to create large environmental impacts. They are
    small in scale, they have a big impact at the intersection or
    the road segment that they take place, but they are not going
    to create a situation where there is a cascade of environmental
    impacts that justify a lot of delays.
        I certainly support something like that.
        Senator Husted. Great. Thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse. Senator Merkley?
        Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and
    thank you all for bringing your expertise to the discussion
    here in the Senate.
        I am going to start, Mr. Carroll, with you. We have a long
    list of the major infrastructure projects in Oregon that have
    benefited from our infrastructure bill. A lot of them, as I
    went through the list, the grant agreements were signed but
    money had not been obligated or the grant agreements are still
    under negotiation.
        It is just a tremendous amount of concern that this current
    administration's funding freeze is going to slow everything
    down. Every time thing slow down, the costs go up. That is so
    frustrating, because if the costs go up and now you have an
    additional gap, how are you going to fill that in?
        Also the uncertainty about really starting into a project
    where the entire vision is now on shaky ground, given the
    uncertainty. From your point of view, has this funding pause
    created uncertainty or delays that will potentially increase
    the cost of projects?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes. I am very worried about that. I have
    taken note of Senator Whitehouse's comments.
        We have had a lot of experience in the last few weeks
    trying to get our calls answered, trying to get our e-mails
    answered. Everyone, I think, is doing the best they can to make
    sure that we understand what is going on.
        We just spoke about some of the risks of uncertainty just
    coming from the normal permitting process. If we are determined
    to fix that, I think it does not make a lot of sense to add to
    risk and uncertainty by creating situations where we are not
    really even clear what the rules are anymore.
        Senator Merkley. Why does the administration think it is in
    the Nation's interest to increase the cost of our
    transportation projects?
        Mr. Carroll. I can not speak for that. I would like for
    these types of decisions to be based on some case that we can
    all sort of process and understand.
        Senator Merkley. A different piece of this puzzle is the
    permitting process. You just mentioned it. Often, environmental
    permits have to be processed. We are seeing a huge slashing of
    the staff at the Environmental Protection Agency which will
    have a fairly significant impact on the ability to process
    those permits. Then at the Department of Transportation, there
    is a lot of planning personnel who have been retired or laid
    off.
        Are not these personnel cuts going to also increase delays
    for our transportation infrastructure?
        Mr. Carroll. I am worried that they will.
        Senator Merkley. We have two factors, delays in the grants,
    delays in the contracts, delays in the environmental
    permitting, delays in the transportation team. All of this
    amounts to a tremendous mess. In what possible way does this
    make America better?
        Mr. Carroll. Again, I am not familiar with what the case is
    for these decisions, so I can not really speak to that.
        Senator Merkley. All right. Well, I can say that I can not
    find anybody in Oregon who feels like there is a single thing
    that is better about this. We have a bridge on the interState
    that has been a drawbridge, actually it is a pivot bridge. We
    have the last remaining bridge on a major north-south corridor
    that goes for our transportation up and down the west coast.
    Finally, we are going to get it fixed, or are we?
        We have lots of concerns about preparing critical
    infrastructure for the big earthquake that will come someday,
    and we have a 100-year-old other bridge up the Columbia Gorge.
    It is like, oh, we are finally really making strides in
    addressing some of these things, and it all just seems to be
    being messed up right now.
        I am really struck that this was an area of bipartisan
    cooperation. Somehow, we now have to have bipartisan
    cooperation to say to the administration, you are making things
    a lot worse.
        Mr. Carroll. I would just say, Americans want results. They
    want results. The more we emphasize delivering results, the
    better we are going to be in their good stead.
        Senator Merkley. Okay. I think this is something we are
    going to continue to have a lot of concern about. I appreciate,
    Madam Chairman, your holding this hearing, because Americans
    want us to get the job done. There was a lot of challenge,
    certainly, and a big influx of spending for infrastructure, the
    biggest infrastructure effort since building the interState
    highway system.
        If we now screw this up, when we are halfway into it, it is
    really damaging to the United States and a massive waste of
    resources. It just irritates the hell out of me to hear Elon
    Musk and President Trump talking about efficiency while they
    are doing everything they can think of to drive up costs. This
    Trump-flation is absolutely shocking and unacceptable.
        Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Ricketts?
        Senator Ricketts. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Capito,
    for holding this hearing, and Ranking Member Whitehouse. I
    appreciate it. Thank you to the witnesses for traveling here to
    share your experiences with regard to our transportation
    infrastructure.
        This hearing is timely, as the new U.S. Transportation
    Secretary Sean Duffy settles into his new role, recently
    confirmed by Congress, and as Congress prepares to reauthorize
    the Federal Highway Administration coming up this year.
        Transportation infrastructure, we have all said it, is
    incredibly important in my home State of Nebraska, just like it
    is from where you all come from. It is important for our
    competitiveness, for our industrial opportunity, and for really
    just our quality of life. It is something that we want to make
    sure we are doing the best job possible.
        As we are looking to reauthorize the highway authorization,
    States need to be playing a more active role in the
    programming. I am biased, because I was a former Governor, and
    I believe that we ought to allow States, and Mr. Carroll, you
    even mentioned this, that people locally are going to be able
    to have a better connection with what it needed locally.
        That is why I think one of the things we need to be doing
    is going through, the Department of Transportation should be
    doing something where we have empowering States through the
    formula funding to be able to let them make the decisions and
    not cherry-pick green projects that are discretionary grants.
        I will just give you an example, with the ones that we were
    talking about, or we have mentioned a little bit earlier, with
    regard to electric vehicles. There has been grants for electric
    vehicle charging stations and so forth. In Nebraska, electric
    vehicles do not work so well. Electric vehicles on the east
    coast, high urban areas, they work pretty good.
        In big rural States where last week the temperature in my
    State was in the teens and the single digits, you lose about 40
    percent of your charge on a batter. I have communities like
    Bloomfield and Alliance, Valentine, they are 45 minutes from
    the nearest charging station. It is not very practical to be
    pushing that solution.
        We ought to allow American innovation and consumers to
    decide how we address these issues of reducing impact on the
    environment. In the meantime, and Mr. Johnson, you mentioned
    this, EVs are heavier so they degrade our roads faster and then
    do not pass the gas tax. We do not have a way for them to
    contribute to the road system. That just doesn't make any
    sense.
        Mr. McMurry, as the tenth largest transportation system in
    the Country, I would like to hear your thoughts on what the
    Department of Transportation can do with regard to formula-
    based funding efficiencies. At the Nebraska Department of
    Transportation, we try to stretch every dollar. I am sure you
    try to do the same thing to make sure our infrastructure
    projects get done. When you have unpredictable funding schemes,
    that obviously creates havoc with that.
        In particular, would you talk about the flexibilities that
    would be important to States, and Chairman Capito mentioned
    this, on the August redistribution? Those funds come late. It
    makes it difficult for departments of transportation to plan.
    What can we do better with regard to that? Our department of
    transportation cites flexibilities in the PROTECT Act. I would
    like to hear what you think about how can we address this?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you, Senator. As far as flexibility,
    AASHTO would encourage more flexibility among our programs.
    There are some programs, especially core programs, that have
    flexibilities, you can flex up to half from one program to
    another. That is only in what is called the NE areas, not
    necessarily sub-allocation by population.
        The other flexibility I think we would suggest in
    reauthorization is looking at the PROTECT program, the NEVI
    program, carbon reduction, and put those under one umbrella to
    gives States more flexibility. Where NEVI may not work as well
    for your State but it might work better for another State, to
    give States, again, sort of that, again, home rule
    decisionmaking, to have portability and flexibility across
    programs.
        The other important part about flexibility of programs is
    actually in the delivery of projects. If there is an impediment
    for delivering in one Federal program bucket, you do not want
    to forfeit that money or let that money lapse. It would be
    better if you could flex it and deliver another project while
    still meeting the legislative intent of programs over the life
    of a bill.
        If we could look at sort of the top line of funding by
    Federal program over the life of the transportation bill, make
    sure that States are spending the money in those categories
    over the life of the bill, but give us portability year to year
    to deliver, so we can deliver the right project at the right
    time.
        As it relates to the August redistribution, a very
    complicated process, and we thank you for the WRDA bill that
    started to address this large number that has arisen because of
    not using the allocated funding, predominantly from
    discretionary programs. It is a very hard thing for States to
    do to pull down this high level August redistribution. You have
    to have enough carryover balanced from prior years to pull it
    down.
        We have to solve this. We appreciate Section 120 and the
    Transportation HUD in Fiscal Year 2025 appropriations that
    could be a big solution to this to give those allocated
    programs basically 4 years to obligate the money, instead of
    having this huge rollover balance. It makes poor planning. We
    have to deploy those dollars within 5 days, which means you
    have to have projects ready to go very quickly to use those
    dollars.
        Senator Ricketts. Chair, may I just real quickly, with Mr.
    Johnson, you mentioned NEPA and other States doing, Nebraska is
    one of those States that has started this process. One of the
    things our department of transportation says is that waiving
    sovereign immunity to implement NEPA compliance at the State
    level is a very heavy lift.
        Just quickly, in your opinion, what amendments to Federal
    laws are required to quickly construct infrastructure while
    maintaining high environmental standards, specifically around
    taking on the NEPA requirement?
        Mr. Johnson. Senator, I am sorry, I am not sure I
    understand the question.
        Senator Ricketts. What kind of reforms, if a State wants to
    take over NEPA, one of the things we have encountered is you
    have to waive sovereign immunity. That is a roadblock for us in
    Nebraska, it is a heavy lift. Are there other things you think
    that are roadblocks or things we can do in Federal law that
    would help States be able to take over the NEPA
    responsibilities?
        Mr. Johnson. I am sorry, that is outside my jurisdiction on
    what laws have to be. I just know it works in California. It
    works in Texas. I would hope that other States would do the
    same thing.
        Talking about getting the formulaic funding out, I agree,
    more flexibility in moving it from bucket to bucket is key.
    Something else I think the Federal Government should look at in
    the next bill is interState highway systems are very, very
    important for moving freight. Freight gets bottled up in areas.
    There are areas where we need to increase capacity and not just
    maintain roads.
        Thirty years ago, 50 percent of the formulaic funding went
    to new capacity. Now only 20 percent does. The American
    Trucking Association has predicted that truck freight is going
    to increase 30 percent in the next 25 years. That means we need
    more capacity on the U.S. highways and the Federal highways to
    move freight by truck from the ports, into the ports and out of
    the ports.
        Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Chairman, for indulging me
    there.
        Senator Capito. Senator Padilla?
        Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate your
    convening this hearing today.
        I am happy to report, colleagues, that the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law has delivered more than $54 billion in truly
    transformative projects in California alone. The funding has
    helped us rebuild roads, expand public transit and make our
    transportation safer, all while creating 180,000 good-paying
    jobs. Again, that is just in California alone.
        We are not done. We fully expect that additional funding
    and more jobs are on the way as investments continue to come,
    unless Elon Musk and his DOGE cohorts block our progress. As
    they slash support staff, engineers and critical safety
    personnel, there is real concern and it already impacts folks
    that I am hearing from in my State.
        I will just share one example. I will not name the city
    because they are fearful of retribution, but it is a Bay Area
    city that was literally on the verge of finalizing a long-
    sought grant agreement for a critical infrastructure project,
    one they spent years working, trying to secure.
        A couple of Fridays ago they were working closely with
    their contact at the Department of Transportation. By the
    following Monday, that DOT staff member was gone and the
    Department has been completely unresponsive since. They are
    wondering back home what is next? Are we ever going to see this
    money? When? The more we wait, as we all know, time is money.
        Another program I am especially proud of, the Clean School
    Bus program, is also in jeopardy. As the Chairwoman knows, this
    initiative not only benefits school districts across the
    Country but also fuels domestic manufacturing, including a
    major facility in West Virginia. The chaos is having real
    consequences for cities, for school districts, and for
    manufacturers alike.
        Now, on top of the challenges I just went through, last
    month the Department of Transportation published an order that
    prioritizes funding for communities with high marriage and
    birth rates. Senator Whitehouse touched on this earlier. It
    demands cooperation with Federal immigration enforcement. That
    is new for DOT.
        It also calls on DOT staff to unilaterally amend existing
    grant agreements that have already been negotiated and signed,
    entered into, what we consider legally binding, right? That has
    been our practice when it comes to infrastructure funding.
        My first question is this, for Mr. Carroll. What
    infrastructure projects or programs would be affected if your
    city and State were to suddenly lose Federal transportation
    funds that have been committed, even if the loss is temporary?
    What is the impact?
        Mr. Carroll. As far as I can tell, it is the whole spectrum
    that could be impacted. We focus quite a bit on improvements to
    safety and State of good repair. We are an old city, we have a
    lot of old infrastructure, and I think we have all talked about
    that so far today, that we can not wait, these things are not
    going to fix themselves. They need to be fixed and they need to
    be planned for so that those repairs take place.
        A lot of work has gone into getting where we are right now.
    We need to maintain progress. What is worrisome is that when we
    have to bring in the services of folks who look at these
    agreements and give the sign-offs from our own law department
    from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's attorneys and then
    again from attorneys at the Federal level, that could take
    years. Sometimes it does take many months to get anything that
    even looks like a hint of where we are going.
        When you get to the finish line and you have communicated
    with constituents, you have communicated with contractors, you
    have communicated with people who are seeking employment, that
    there is something coming, and just wait, we are going to get
    going, we are going to see some real on the ground things you
    can touch and feel, and then it stops and there is no
    explanation for it, it is nerve-wracking.
        Senator Padilla. It sounds like it has been disruptive.
        Mr. Carroll. Yes.
        Senator Padilla. Forget frustrating, it is becoming costly
    for taxpayers, right?
        Another program I wanted to touch on, the Infrastructure
    and Jobs Act created the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure
    Grant program, which has awarded $1.8 billion to recipients in
    nearly every State to support the increasingly popular zero
    emission vehicles. This funding was appropriated by Congress
    and mandated in statute.
        Yet the Trump Administration has blatantly ignored the law,
    freezing funding for the program, again, leaving grant awardees
    in the dark.
        Mr. Carroll, the city of Philadelphia has been awarded $20
    million for these particular grants, this category of grants.
    Will you talk about the importance of getting these grant
    agreements finalized and what the funding would mean for your
    city?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes, again, we have started training
    electricians. We badly need electricians, and this is something
    that really is the wind at the back of bringing new people into
    the industry. We expect that we would have thousands of jobs
    across the region involved in this work and installing
    infrastructure, maintaining the infrastructure, promoting small
    businesses in terms of convenience stores that are going to be
    great locations.
        It supports developing commercial corridors. It is aligned
    with PennDOT's policy. They had a very good reception to their
    NEVI plan.
        All of that work is something we want to see keep moving.
        Senator Padilla. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Blunt Rochester?
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Chairwoman Capito and
    Ranking Member Whitehouse.
        I am proud to have worked on the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law, something that we have talked about in our Country for a
    very long time. As you have heard from others, I too am deeply
    concerned about the Trump administration's freezing of Federal
    funding and mass firings, and the real life impact that will
    have on these critical projects for our communities and States
    and across the Country.
        In my State of Delaware, I even did a bridge tour,
    literally while we were streaming live, I took folks from
    DelDOT. The engineers took me to different bridges, we looked
    under the bridges. One was 80 years old. Really just to show
    people what the real life impact is on their everyday life.
        For me, we can not afford to go backward. Programs like
    Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and
    Equity Grant program, also known as the RAISE program, or the
    Reconnecting Communities program, which I helped co-author,
    will help communities be safer, have more accessibility and
    ensure that we have a strong economy.
        My first question is for you, Mr. McMurry. In January of
    this year, my State was awarded $13 million in RAISE grant
    funding that will go toward modernizing a 58-year old bridge on
    State Route 9. It will make it safer. Then we were also awarded
    $12 million to help save lives, to make our roads and our
    streets more safe for our cyclists and pedestrians.
        Following up on Senator Merkley's question, with your
    experience as commissioner of the Georgia Department of
    Transportation, what are the effects of the uncertainty, this
    uncertainty that we are seeing with funding freezes and firings
    of Federal employees as we are trying to accomplish these
    projects?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you, and you have a great DOT at DelDOT,
    by the way.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. We sure do.
        Mr. McMurry. Listen, AASHTO totally supports that we need
    to move forward where everything, if there is a grant agreement
    in place, AASHTO believes that is a contract. Same in Georgia,
    if we have a grant agreement in place, we are counting on
    moving forward.
        I hate to use this analogy, but I believe we can fly that
    airplane while we are still building it and working on it or
    tweaking it. Let's keep things moving. It is just that
    important to our Nation's economy not to pause.
        I use this example as, we as DOTs have been playing by the
    rules. The rules may need changing, but let's keep playing the
    game. Another bad analogy. We need to move those forward.
        I have a rural bridge that we received a grant for, a rural
    grant to grade separate over a railroad. The train blocks the
    town. We are over a year from the grant award and we still do
    not have a grant executed, while we are designing and buying
    the property. That is important, because we are counting on
    that grant to get this community so they are not cutoff when
    the train blocks the town.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Yes, one of the bridges I was on
    connects to the Dover Air Force Base. These are really vital.
        Can you talk also about the impact on employment of these
    funding freezes? How does that affect employment?
        Mr. McMurry. I personally can not speak or on behalf of
    AASHTO speak of what that may or may not mean. I have not seen
    that play out just yet. It is a little early for us to tell in
    Georgia what that impact may or may not be.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. I can tell you as former secretary
    of labor, it means that you stop putting shovels on the ground,
    it means people are not working. That also is a connection to
    our economy.
        I am going to shift to you, Mr. Carroll. The Reconnecting
    Communities grant program through DOT focuses on righting
    communities harmed by past transportation decisions, and also
    about eliminating barriers to ability and economic development.
    Some of these policies started in the 1950's.
        I had the opportunity to ride with Representative Dwight
    Evans on Amtrak from Delaware to Philadelphia to meet with
    residents and community members who have been trying to tackle
    this. Can you talk about, from your experience, some of the
    benefits of these projects on communities, and what impacts the
    freezes would have, real terms, real-life terms.
        Mr. Carroll. In my testimony, I talked about our Chinatown
    Stitch project, which is right in the middle of our center
    city. That project, I think, it is going to repair a community
    that was literally split in half by the Vine Street Expressway.
    From a regional transportation perspective, that expressway is
    essential to making the city work, making the nine counties,
    both in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, accessible to each other.
    It is definitely something that needed to happen.
        The way it happened really created a lot of harm in that
    community. We have a chance not just to fix that because want
    to be good, but because we can really start to generate a lot
    of energy, a lot of economic activity. We see people really
    getting interested in investing in that community.
        This is a chance to get the benefit that we are here to do
    to make America strong, to make our communities strong, to get
    people to work and make things that stand up to the test of
    time.
        Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you so much.
        I yield back.
        Senator Capito. Senator Kelly?
        Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, all of
    you, for being here today for this very important hearing. I am
    glad we are getting to discuss how to best implement the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        Before that, though, I want to ask a rather simple
    question, just to make me feel better. Mr. Carroll, did Russia
    invade Ukraine?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes, Russia invaded Ukraine.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you. I appreciate that. I did not get
    that answer yesterday in a hearing in another committee. I just
    want to make sure this is not contagious.
        One of the flagship programs we created in the law was the
    Bridge Improvement program. It did some really rather simple,
    non-controversial things, which is funding the repairs to
    failing bridges. Mr. McMurry, I am going to ask you the same
    question here.
        That program was created following all of the best
    practices that our witnesses here mentioned, that you guys
    mentioned in your testimony. The majority of the funding is
    allocated to the States through a formula program to focus on
    pressing needs.
        Then for the projects that fall through the cracks, there
    is a discretionary grant program that is available. The program
    was successful. In December, the Department of Transportation
    announced that more than 11,400 bridges are being repaired,
    thanks to that program. When bridges are not repaired, they can
    fail, and people can die.
        One of these projects is in northern Arizona on InterState
    40. It repairs four bridges that were built back in 1963 that
    do not meet current safety standards. These bridges provide
    access to the capital of the Navajo nation. They also form the
    backbone of the trade corridor that leads to the ports of Los
    Angeles and Long Beach.
        Yet, for the last 36 days now this project has been halted
    due to the Trump administration's funding freeze. This is
    exactly the type of project which those of us who negotiated
    the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law had in mind. Yet, by
    needlessly politicizing basic investments in infrastructure,
    communities in Arizona and across the Country are facing
    needless uncertainty.
        Mr. Carroll, first for you, I imagine your department has
    received a number of competitive grants over the years.
        Mr. Carroll. Yes.
        Senator Kelly. Can you speak to how halting the
    disbursement of awarded funds disrupts a local recipient's
    ability to plan and execute projects?
        Mr. Carroll. I think it is clear that we need to engage
    with the contracting community as quickly as we can to make
    sure that we get these projects under construction to make sure
    that we meet the construction deadlines, which are statutory.
        Senator Kelly. How can you meet the deadlines without the
    funding?
        Mr. Carroll. This is the problem. We need to at least get
    clarity so that we can plan. Many of our projects are funded
    through Federal funds, they are not all. We want to prioritize
    the ones that have these deadlines, so that may mean that
    engineers and contractors are going to need to rearrange what
    they are doing.
        Even to get phone calls answered, even if the answer is you
    have to wait to know how long you have to wait or what you have
    to do in order to get the work going, that is some certainty.
    We would take that. We are not getting that kind of
    information.
        It is nerve-wracking.
        Senator Kelly. Mr. McMurry, can you weigh in as well? How
    does this affect long-term planning? Do you become hesitant to
    apply for future discretionary grants because of the actions of
    the administration?
        Mr. McMurry. First, I go back to the grant agreements, and
    thank you for this leadership from this committee on the Bridge
    Investment program for both large and small. These kinds of
    programs are very necessary for big, large bridges often
    crossing State lines to have the ability for States to compete
    to be able to pull down dollars where it would be such a budget
    impact on one State or the other to try to do a bi-State
    crossing.
        Going back again, AASHTO supports and Georgia supports any
    grant agreement that has been executed, we feel that it needs
    to move forward now. The Bridge Investment program is a great
    example of foundational investment for infrastructure.
        Senator Kelly. Do you have any of these projects that you
    know of that have been cutoff?
        Mr. McMurry. I do not. South Carolina and Georgia jointly
    have a bridge investment grant for planning, again, for
    crossing State line on InterState 95. We are in the planning
    stages of that, so we have not got to the construction phase.
        Senator Kelly. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Markey, are you ready?
        Senator Markey. Ready to go, thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Whitehouse. When has he not been ready to go?
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Capito. He is jumping in that seat.
        Senator Markey. Thank you.
        The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law unlocked the historic
    funding to rebuild America's infrastructure. In Massachusetts
    we are using the funds to replace the aging Cape Cod bridges.
    We are expanding passenger rail, and we are modernizing our
    transit systems like the MBTA.
        By providing fives years of funds, the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law gave State and localities a feeling of
    certainty, that the Federal resources needed to deliver
    critical infrastructure investments would come through.
    Unfortunately, the Trump administration smashed that surety,
    and sold out our cities and towns.
        When Trump's Department of Transportation announced it was
    freezing unobligated funds with the intent to cutoff funds for
    projects related to climate or working on behalf of
    disadvantaged communities, it unleashed uncertainty on our
    communities.
        Communities in my State are telling me that grant
    applications for typically dependable formula funds have slowed
    to a crawl. They tell me they can not find contractors for
    basic work like repairing a transit facility's roof, because
    the contractors fear that they will not be paid. That makes a
    lot of sense, uncertainty.
        They tell me they are worried about receiving funds for
    critical road safety projects because the project will help
    disadvantaged communities that Trump wants to leave behind.
        Mr. Carroll, we have heard that uncertainty can raise costs
    and cause delays. Do you agree the Trump administration's
    decisions to increase costs and delay is immediately
    jeopardizing projects that make transportation systems safer
    and more effective for communities all across Massachusetts and
    the Country?
        Mr. Carroll. As I have said, I have a lot of concern that
    those risks are out there. It will raise costs for our
    projects.
        Senator Markey. I thank you for that. I agree.
    Unfortunately, where Congress and the Biden administration
    provided funding, the Trump administration can offer only
    uncertainty.
        Mr. Carroll, under the Trump administration the Department
    of Transportation has slowed and even stopped the flow of funds
    to supposedly root out and rescind any project that addresses
    the climate crisis or helps communities that have been left
    behind by Federal investments. Let's unpack what a ``climate
    project'' or a ``equity project'' actually looks like.
        Mr. Carroll, please answer yes or no. Would a project to
    repair a bridge providing better connectivity between
    communities provide equity benefits?
        Mr. Carroll. I believe it would, yes.
        Senator Markey. Could a project to improve signaling for
    subways, enhancing their on-time performance, and making the
    transit system more reliable for their residents simultaneously
    provide climate benefits?
        Mr. Carroll. I believe it would, yes.
        Senator Markey. Could a project that makes a busy roadway
    safer for pedestrians provide equity benefits?
        Mr. Carroll. Yes.
        Senator Markey. Well, thank you. It is clear to me that
    these projects are not only reasonable but are also much needed
    in Red and Blue States alike. DOT's decision to undermine these
    projects is not only unnecessary and unlawful, it is also going
    to be very, very unpopular, especially if they tie it to DEI as
    the rationale for stopping or slowing vital transportation
    projects that benefit the entire community.
        The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided historic funding
    for passenger rail. In Massachusetts, we are receiving critical
    funds to finally fulfill our dream of regular passenger rail
    between western and eastern parts of the State.
        Mr. McMurry, Georgia has also received several Federal
    grants to expand passenger rail in your State. Mr. McMurry, do
    you agree that we must continue to provide robust funding to
    expand passenger rail?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you, Senator. Yes, AASHTO's position is
    that under reauthorization, we need to continue the same levels
    at what was previously authorized.
        Senator Markey. Thank you. That is why last Congress, I
    introduced the All Aboard Act, which would revolutionize
    America's rail system. The bill would double down on the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law's historic funding for passenger
    rail and ensure that the States, which have undertaken
    ambitious rail projects, like Georgia and Massachusetts, have
    the funds that they need in order to deliver these projects
    right on time.
        I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to
    ensure that projects in Red and Blue States, north, south, east
    and west, get the funding which they were promised.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Alsobrooks?
        Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
        The EPW committee has a long tradition of negotiating and
    passing bipartisan infrastructure legislation, which is one of
    the reasons that I was so interested in joining this committee.
    I am looking forward to working with all of my colleagues on
    both sides of the aisle as the ranking member of the
    Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee to honor this
    bipartisan tradition and pass legislation that works for each
    or our States.
        Unfortunately, as some of my colleagues have already
    mentioned, this administration is making this very difficult.
    It is hard to have a conversation about developing the next
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law when we discover that the current
    law, that it is refusing to implement the current existing law.
        Due to this administration's funding pause, Maryland's
    Department of Transportation has around $330 million in Federal
    funding that is currently on hold. These are grants that have
    already been awarded and dollars that Congress has
    appropriated.
        With all that in mind, I have just a few questions for our
    witnesses. I want to thank each of you for being here this
    morning.
        Last week, the Department of Transportation changed the
    statewide transportation improvement program, STIP, in a
    project amendment approval process. The department is now
    requiring projects that were previously approved by the Federal
    Highway Administration division offices in each State to
    instead be approved by the general counsel in the Secretary's
    office.
        We have heard a lot in this committee about this need to
    cut red tape and streamline processes to expedite project
    delivery and lower costs. With that, I would ask Mr. McMurry
    and Mr. Carroll, do you believe that sending STIP approvals to
    the office of the Secretary will lower your project costs and
    help deliver projects faster?
        Mr. McMurry. Thank you, Senator. We certainly, from AASHTO,
    and from a Georgia point of view, we certainly want to see STIP
    modifications and amendments to move forward very quickly. I
    think that is important, again, is that these are a process,
    this is a Federal process that is longstanding that we have all
    worked through to properly plan, working with NPOs, like with
    Philadelphia, city of Atlanta, all of our 15 other NPOs we have
    around the State.
        This was a process for TIP amendments, for STIP amendments,
    and we think it should move forward as it traditionally has.
        Mr. Carroll. I concur further with Mr. McMurry.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you.
        If this new process creates a bottleneck and slows projects
    down, how will these delays affect project outcomes?
        Mr. McMurry. In Georgia, we actually have a TIP amendment
    for the Atlanta NPO that is moving forward now. We are going to
    see how, if there is a true slowdown in delivery of that
    approval process. Then if it is slowed, then there could be
    projects that we are not able to advance because Federal
    Highway does not have the approval that we can push the button
    in the system to get the contract authorization necessary for
    us to bid a job.
        In Georgia, I have to have the contract fully encumbered
    with all the money when I bid a project. I am not going to bid
    a project until I know that the money is in place and it has
    been authorized.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Again, in your experience, however, you
    acknowledge that this new process is one that could add delays?
    You prefer the traditional process?
        Mr. McMurry. We are going to see how this goes. Yes, it
    could, and we are optimistic that it will not.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Okay. The reality is this
    administration is not actually concerned about efficiencies.
    The Department of Transportation is adding an unnecessary layer
    of review for STIP amendments at the same time it is slashing
    our Federal work force, the very civil servants who could help
    get projects on the ground in our States faster.
        Mr. McMurry, in your experience, is it normal for the
    Federal Highway Administration to abruptly halt a bridge
    project in the middle of construction just because there was a
    change in administration?
        Mr. McMurry. It has not been my experience that that has
    happened.
        Senator Alsobrooks. What about a resurfacing project?
        Mr. McMurry. The same.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Or any project funded through the
    standard formula allocation, for that matter?
        Mr. McMurry. That has not been my experience.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Between planning and construction, what
    we know is that these are transportation multi-year projects.
    If we start subjecting State transportation projects to
    political whims every time there is a change in administration,
    do you believe that projects will be completed on time without
    interruption?
        Mr. McMurry. I believe that will cause a challenge.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Last, I know I am running out of time
    here, about funding uncertainty. The administration issued its
    funding freeze memo, States were locked out of their payment
    portals without any indication about when they might receive
    it. Mr. McMurry, what does funding uncertainty mean for a State
    department of transportation?
        Mr. McMurry. We count on the Federal funding reimbursement
    on a weekly basis to move our funds forward, so that we can pay
    the contracts and the vendors for the work they do.
        Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you.
        Senator Capito. We are waiting to see if Senator Sullivan,
    I will give him a couple of minutes to come. While we are
    waiting, I am going to make a quick comment about the NEVI
    program because the Senator from California brought up that
    $1.8 billion had been released for that program. I want to
    point out that $1.8 billion has resulted in 58 chargers being
    built in three and a half years and in 15 States. Mr. McMurry
    said that he has five on the drawing board.
        Mr. Carroll, do you have any input on this?
        Mr. Carroll. PennDOT administers the NEVI program. We have
    been working on the charging fuel infrastructure program. We
    have not constructed any but we are planning to build about 200
    city-wide.
        Senator Capito. Right, so I mean, if we are looking for
    efficiencies and moving things quicker, I am not sure that
    program is a good example of the best way the Federal
    Government--personally, I thought it should all have been left
    to the private sector just like gas stations were built back in
    the day. Obviously lost on that one.
        Quick question for you, Mr. Johnson. Just curious, we have
    had a lot of snow and ice, and Mr. McMurry, I am sure, well,
    all three of you, really, have to deal with the
    unpredictability when the weather gets cold like this. It
    really wreaks havoc on the paving, highways, and if there is
    nothing that gets somebody steamed up more than anything, it is
    popping a tire in a pothole. It happens frequently in the
    winter for us in West Virginia.
        Are you finding this year is any more exceptional? Mr.
    Carroll, I will go to you. You have had a lot of cold weather
    there.
        Mr. Carroll. It has been on the high end. What is sometimes
    worse is the freeze-thaw back and forth. Because it was colder
    longer, for longer periods of time, it didn't get as high as I
    have seen it, but it was pretty high.
        Senator Capito. Does your municipality handle that?
        Mr. Carroll. We do.
        Senator Capito. What about you, Mr. McMurry? Are you seeing
    anything? I know it was even colder down in Georgia.
        Mr. McMurry. Yes. We actually had a big event that had snow
    from metro Atlanta all the way to the coast and down to Florida
    just a few weeks ago. That was a very big event for us.
        You are right, nobody wants to hit a pothole that results
    from cold weather. We do our best to get back out there and
    repair roadways as soon as the weather clears.
        Senator Capito. Mr. Johnson, do you have any?
        Mr. Johnson. We do a significant amount of work in the
    State of California, in Washington. The rains that we have had,
    torrential rains in California have caused a lot of short-term
    and now long-term problems of washing our roads that are going
    to have to be rebuilt. It is an issue. It varies geographically
    from State to State.
        Senator Capito. No matter how long you plan or how much you
    plan for, there is always the unpredictability.
        Mr. Johnson. Correct.
        Senator Capito. We didn't ask about Buy America waivers.
    Mr. McMurry, do you have a comment how often you use those, how
    do they work? Are they working? How can we alleviate that in a
    new bill?
        Mr. McMurry. Let me just talk a little bit about Buy
    America. First and foremost, Georgia and AASHTO totally
    supports American manufacturing. Foundationally, we are all in
    violent agreement, I like to say, on that principle.
        The issue that has happened through Buy America-Build
    America is trying through the construction materials, each
    State is having to certify the material that is Buy America
    compliant. Fifty States are having to do 50 different ways.
    That is where AASHTO stepped in and said, working with Federal
    Highway, let's make a repository of materials that if they are
    Buy America compliant in Georgia, it will be the same for West
    Virginia.
        AASHTO has taken that lead. Now, my comment is that might
    have been a better Federal Highway initiative to say, if this
    is good for the Nation, synthesize it one time instead of 50
    efforts. AASHTO has taken the lead in that.
        We would hope going forward in reauthorization that that
    could be a national data base of Buy America compliant
    components.
        As it relates to the waiver that was suspended under the
    previous administration, I am really worried about that. In my
    written testimony you will see that traditionally utilities
    that are part of our projects that we all get involved in for
    water, sewer, telecoms, all those components are usually bought
    by municipal associations in bulk, not to just do a Federal aid
    project which may be 1,000 feet or maybe even a half mile long.
        They are buying miles of power lines, they are buying miles
    of ductal iron pipe, fittings. You heard the testimony about
    submersible pumps. Things like that, the components are really
    concerning, if we can not have waivers while we work out way to
    American-made manufacturing.
        Senator Capito. Thank you.
        Senator Whitehouse, you are good?
        Senator Whitehouse. As long as we are waiting for a minute,
    I would just comment a bit on the EV program. There is a
    problem here of the chicken and the egg, what comes first. Are
    people going to buy good, effective American-made electric
    vehicles if there is not a charging infrastructure for them?
    Are people going to build charging infrastructure if electric
    vehicles are not being bought?
        To step into that freeze and drive infrastructure, which is
    what the charging stations are, the same way that you would
    build roads, same way you would build other things that the
    Government does, makes perfect sense at breaking that chicken-
    egg logjam of a new technology that is trying to emerge, to me
    at least.
        I am all for building out the infrastructure, and I know
    that in Rhode Island, there was a very significant planning
    component of where this should go, and talking to lots of
    people. The fact that there are not many actually constructed
    is a sign that that planning process has been very robust, and
    now we are ready to go, and we are eager to help build out that
    piece of infrastructure to support the many Rhode Islanders who
    have bought electric vehicles.
        What we are seeing out of the Trump administration is
    something completely different. They are willing to actually
    spend an enormous amount of taxpayer money to rip out electric
    vehicle charging and basically throw away electric vehicle
    chargers that have already been built. It is really hard for me
    not to connect the dots between a fossil fuel industry that has
    put a minimum of $100 million into Trump's election, that is
    what we know of. There is this huge dark money operation where
    we do not know who is behind it. The number is way beyond that,
    and I suspect it is fossil fuel money.
        This position that the Trump administration has taken, they
    are trying to knock down of offshore wind. Guess what? Every
    electron produced by offshore wind displaces an electron
    produced by burning natural gas. Huge giveaway to the natural
    gas incumbents. Every diminution in the electric vehicle
    market, despite Americans wanting these and the market growing
    rapidly, not only domestically but globally where our companies
    need to compete, effectively supports the gasoline
    manufacturers who have a lock on transportation through
    internal combustion engines.
        Over and over and over again you see fossil fuel money
    coming into the Trump administration and fossil fuel policies
    coming out of the Trump administration. I think that is
    something we just have to be attentive to, because it is really
    going to come back to bite us.
        We are on the edge right now of a significant dislocation
    in our property insurance markets, because they can not predict
    what is coming because of climate consequences. We are seeing
    collapse of property insurance markets, prices quadrupling,
    non-renewals spiking, companies going bust, companies leaving
    States behind. Very rickety structures being built to prop up
    the market, but it is all rickety right now. When you see
    rickety structures, that is usually the precursor to a
    collapse.
        This is a collapse that is likely to cascade through the
    property insurance market into mortgage markets. We just, 10
    days ago, had the Secretary of the Treasury say a decade from
    now, we are going to start having regions of the United States
    where you can not get a mortgage any longer. Well, if in a
    decade you are not going to be able to get a mortgage in entire
    regions, markets are going to start reacting before that.
        This is really upon us right now. The subservience of the
    Trump administration to the fossil fuel industry is going to
    have really, really, really dangerous ramifications. I just
    want to take a moment to point that out, while we have a
    moment.
        Senator Capito. I will thank you and we are going to be
    ringing it down here. I will say that there are 71,000 publicly
    available chargers in the United States. My point is, I voted
    for this bill. I was obviously in support of building out an
    infrastructure.
        My complaint is, why is it taking so daggone long? It is
    taking so long because the Biden Administration added
    requirements and mandates to comply to this that then changed
    the way that States and others could apply for this money and
    actually get it moving.
        We can debate that.
        Senator Whitehouse. I am all for it. I do not know if we
    are going to have much of a debate. I am all for speeding it
    up, and I am all for simplification. Together is my motto.
        Senator Capito. I didn't know that Donald Trump was out
    ripping out electric charging stations. I will have to check
    into that.
        In any event, with no further questions, I would like to
    ask the witnesses and all my colleagues, thank you for your
    participation in today's hearing. Senators who wish to submit
    written questions for the record will have until 5 p.m. on
    Wednesday, March 12th to do so. I believe the Ranking Member
    had a question for the record that he had already mentioned to
    you.
        The witnesses' responses to those questions are due back to
    the committee no later than 5 p.m. on Wednesday, March 26th,
    and will be submitted for the record.
        With that, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you very much.
        [Whereupon, at 11:42 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            [all]