Transcripts For CSPAN3 State Officials Testify On Rural Infrastructure 20170208

I pledge to and we leave these remarks from the pennsylvania governor to go live to capitol hill for a Senate Hearing looking at the nations infrastructure and modernization efforts, being held by the Senate Environment and public works committee. These things allow for American Goods to go from the heartland to the coast and even overseas. They allow for flood protection for both rural and urban communities that save lives. In addition, our committee has jurisdiction over the environmental laws that impact the modernization of infrastructure. Doesnt matter whether the setting is urban or rural, rules and regulations can halt and delay the modernization of infrastructure and the impact is particularly counterproductive if theyre applied without understanding the difference between urban and rural. Our committee has members from both urban and rural areas. The members of this committee represent new york city, and new port, rhode island, nebraska city, nebraska, and mississippi. Wheatland, wyoming, and even the town of wyoming, delaware. The diversity of these cities and towns makes it clear that solutions to address and pay for fixing our nations crumbling roads, bridges and dams cannot be one size fits all. What works for baltimore, maryland, may not work for bags, wyoming. Big ticket products or projects on the scale of the big dig in above the than cost billions of dollars or even projects that cost hundreds of millions of dollars are rare in rural and small states. Funding solutions that involve public, private partnerships as had been discussed by Administration Officials may be Innovative Solutions for crum e crumbling inner cities but do not work for rural areas as todays testimony will show. As was stated in the written testimony, submitted today on behalf of wyoming, idaho, montana, north dakota and south dakota, quote, Public Private partnerships and other approaches to Infrastructure Development that depend on a positive revenue stream from a project are not a Surface Transportation Infrastructure solution for rural states. This committee has a number of members who represent smaller rural states, delaware, alabama, alaska, iowa, nebraska, rhode island, vermont, just to name a few. Didnt forget West Virginia. I want to ensure that the voice of these states is not lost in the overall discussion of how to fix our nations infrastructure. When i work with my colleagues to address issues important to our states, while also not ignoring the legitimate needs of large metropolitan areas as well. Stated in the written testimony, submitted by the five western states that i referenced earlier, federal highways in our rural states enable, quote, agriculture, energy, and Natural Resource products which largely originate in rural areas to move to national and world markets. This is true. It makes no sense but to simply fix the roads and ports in our urban areas while ignoring the roads and inland ports in our rural areas that allow for products from wyoming, nebraska, or iowa to get to the world markets. As testimony today will demonstrate, rural Water Systems also have unique challenges. They have been inundated by regulations from the epa, which harms their ability to modernize and to function. Rural Water Systems are challenged by the same regulations that big city Water Systems face, yet do not have the same resources to comply. Any Infrastructure Solutions this Committee Considers should help address rural challenges. These challenges include funding. Like the road project counterparts, these systems are not the best candidates for loans. It is important to note written testimony today from mike mcnulty, the general manager of Putnam Public Service district in West Virginia, he states, due to a lack of economies and scale and lower medium Household Incomes in Rural America, Water Infrastructure is often less affordable, much greater cost per household. This means a Water Infrastructure project poses a greater financial risk compared to the metropolitan project and very importantly, he says, requires some portion of a grant, not just a loan, to make the project feasible. The higher the percentage of grants required to make a project work results in less money repaid to the infrastructure Funding Agency and a correlating diminution of the corpus fund. So were going to have to find new ways to help to pay to modernize the new projects. I urge my colleagues to work with me in a bipartisan way to find these solutions. With that, i turn to the Ranking Member for his statement. Thank you very much. Thank you for bringing us together for an important and i think invigorating hearing. I just want to say to our guests from oklahoma, West Virginia, wyoming, the other wyoming, and from colorado, by way of delaware and delaware, welcome, were delighted that youre here. Mr. Chairman, colleagues, these folks are here, more times than anyone i remember, but i my dad taught me, born in West Virginia, grew up in West Virginia, my dad taught my sister and me that things worth having are worth paying for. Things worth having are worth paying for. And said, i dont care if you owe somebody money, work three jobs until you pay that off. But you ought to take responsibility for your obligations. The other thing my dad used to say to my sister, we had a choice to do jobs around the house and the garden, a job worth doing is a job worth doing well. And from that i took the idea that everything i do i can do better. I think thats true of all of us. I think thats also true of every federal and state program. Infrastructure, roads, highways, bridges, water, waste water. My hope is youll help us think outside the box a little bit on how to pay for this stuff, easy to come up with ideas on how to spend the money, always hard to figure out how are we going to raise that money. Need help there. And then some help in figuring out how do we get better results for less money or for the same amount of money. That was an audible and now my statement. For the record, i have something i want to ask unanimous consent, a couple of documents be submitted for the record. I hold them in my hand. Without objection. Thanks so much. As i think most of us know, our new president has raised the issue of america needing to modernize and rebuild aged infrastructure as a point of concern. Democratic senators, some of us here in this room, recently released a blueprint for addressing infrastructure challenges writ large, not just highways, roads, bridges, but much more broad than that, water and waste water. I believe members on both sides of the aisle are supportive of addressing this problem. This can be one of those issues that actually unites us and this point in time in our nations history we could use a few of those. This is important for more reasons than not. As a recovering governor, i look at most legislation through a particular lens, a lens i look at it through is how does a particular investment make for a more knenurturing environment f job creation. In this case, got a bunch of factors that impact on nurturing environment for job creation. I want to mention a couple of them. We dont think about this, i dont think that much. Quality of our workforce, skills they bring to the workplace is important. Affordable energy, public safety. The idea of having access to capital, access to foreign markets, research and development, investing in right things that generate job creation opportunities, tax policy, common sense regulations, access to decisionmakers, clean air, clean water, predictability, businesses need predictability. And in 2013, an outfit called an arm of mckenzie, big consulting company, they issued a report called game changer. And it analyzes how the u. S. Could dramatically transform and expand our economy. One of the top Game Changers they gave us was Infrastructure Investment. Here is what they said, the report showed we need to invest between 150 and 180 billion more on infrastructure every year to make up for years of underinvestment and to enable robust future growth. They said in the Global Institute told us in their report, if we invested at this level, it would add somewhere between 1. 4 and 1. 7 to gdp every year. Almost double gdp for the last quarter, create 1. 8 million new jobs by 2020. For a lot of people on the sidelines would like to go to work, need to go to work, this would be a great place for them to go to work, working on the projects. Same report they found that one of the best ways to invest and get most from our dollars is to maintain our existing infrastructure. Not just to do big, fancy new projects, but to maintain existing infrastructure. Infrastructure investment is critical for the economy in part because the direct jobs would create in construction, restoration work, and displaced workers we can help get back into the workforce, which we need to do. Just as important is the fact that modern infrastructure helps people in businesses move more efficiently, last year the average commuter, every year they give us a new update, we wasted 42 hours per person sitting in traffic, not moving. Not moving anywhere. And thats a typical thats like a workweek for a lot of people. Just sitting. Doing nothing. More modern infrastructure would mean less time, fewer resources wasted. Our health and security rely on production and distribution of goods and services. Every day people and goods move across an array of physical systems known as our Critical Infrastructure. It is aging and in need of significant capital investments, we know that, to help our economy continue to grow. 2013 infrastructure report card issued by the American Society of Civil Engineers, some here today, they gave us for roads, dams, Drinking Water, waste water, a d. D. They graded our inland water ways and levies with a d minus. Bridges received a c plus. As we hear testimony, im pleased in hearing witnesses in three key areas. First, while financing techniques are a tool that may be appropriate for some kinds of projects, financing by itself will not solve all infrastructure needs, regardless of whether were rural or urban state. Secondary, i hope to hear more about the need for broad infrastructure and broad investment strategy. While traditional forms of infrastructure like roads and ports are essential to our economy, i feel we need more investments to protect our natural infrastructure as well including our shorelines, echo system restoration. Without these protects, risk to man made infrastructure increases and many cases becomes unmanageable. Finally, im interested in hearing how the federal government, i think were interested in hearing how the federal government can be more efficient as i said earlier with our current funding streams and get the most out of every dollar of federal investment. Infrastructure is a shared responsibility with state and local governments and with the private sector. I want to ensure were helping state and local governments with the shared burden while giving them the flexibility they need, and i also want to know how we can make sure were prioritizing the most critical investment and working to maintain the assets we have first before building new assets that we cant afford to maintain. Finally, one no one size fits all approach to solving this challenge. Got to work on the bipartisan manner, really address the concerns. Build consensus on the path forward for the shared state responsibility to our economy. Lastly, mr. Chairman, colleagues, got a couple of people here before us, i know pretty well, and want to welcome all of our witnesses, first introduce tony pratt, current administrator in the Delaware Department of Natural Resources, current president i call him mr. President , president of the American Shore Beach Preservation Association for our nation. Hell be discussing a wide range of Water Infrastructure related issues. And why protecting it is important to restore our roads and bridges. Shailen bhatt, comes to this hearing as a current executive director for the Colorado Department of transportation, stolen from the state of delaware where he was the secretary of the department of transportation. There he led response to two hurricanes. Introduced reduce the agency debt by 30 while delivering 2 billion in infrastructure improvements. I wrote one more note here, i said, were not blue states. Were not blue states. Were not red states, were the United States. We have states that are largely rural, states more urban. And the needs we have in our rural states, water or transportation are different from what we have in our more places like where ben and i come from and represent. But we have to look out for each other. We have to look out for each other. If we do that, well all be ahead in the game. Thank you so much. Thank you, senator carper. Senator inhofe, would you like to welcome your oklahoma witness . I would. Let me mention for the benefit of our witnesses and anyone else who might be interested, the Commerce Committee and this committee have nine members, on both, and theyre meeting at exactly the same time, so if you see members going back and forth, were doing double duty this morning. And i think we can do a better job of coordinating those committees. Anyway, i want to introduce the good looking witness we have. The i already introduced tony. No, i im real pleased to introduce one of our witnesses, because ive known Cindy Bobbitt for a long period of time. Shes a commissioner of grant county oklahoma. She was elected to the grant county board. 13 years ago. And currently serves as the chairman of the board. Shes been actively involved for the past eight years with the National Association of counties, serving in many different capacities including vice chair of the National Transportation steering committee. Furthermore, she serves on the technical Oversight Working Group with the federal Highway Administration office of safety. As you can imagine, commissioner bobbitt is passionate about our nations infrastructure needs and her experience makes her an incredibly well qualified and informed witness for this committee. Grant county is an extremely rural agricultural county in the North Central part of oklahoma that relies heavily on proper infrastructure and has many infrastructure needs. In fact, they say that grant county has many bridges as they do people. Commissioner bobbitt knows the issues that Rural Businesses face as she and her husband run a farm, growing wheat, feed grains, alfalfa and cattle. They have deep roots in oklahoma as their farm has been in their family since the land run of 1893. Commissioner bobbitt grew up in rural life, driving a tractor at age 9 and she bought her first piece of land when she was 16 years old. She knows firsthand the importance of agriculture industry to oklahomas economy and the needs in getting those goods to market. Thank you for being here and for coming all the way from grant county to washington, d. C. Thank you, senator. Senator capito, could you please introduce your witness . Thank you, mr. Chairman. It is a great pleasure for me to introduce my friend, mike mcnulty, the general manager of the Public Service district of Putnam County, West Virginia, testifying on behalf of Putnam County. Mike is known as an expert in our state and really throughout the nation in this area. He received a bachelors of science from West Virginia tech and he has a masters from marshall university. He served as the general manager since 2004 and previously the director of the West Virginia rural water association. Rural communities and everybody is referencing this, have had particular challenges in West Virginia not only do we have Rural Communities, we have some tough terrain to pose significant challenges for the deployment and the maintenance and operation of Drinking Water and waste Water Infrastructure. You know what, mike has found a way, very creatively, in his area, to work with the Regulatory Compliance and leveraging the federal dollars to extend a lot of municipal water to a lot of people. And we talked just yesterday, still some people left, that we cant forget about, and we wont forget about, but i know hell bring valuable insight to this committee and, mike, thank you for coming from West Virginia and the others from West Virginia rural water association. Thank you. Thank you, senator capito. I would like to introduce bill panos, the 17th director of the wyoming department of transportation. Since october of 2015, a graduate of California State University where he studied physics and forensic science, his previous work included engineering and leadership positions with the trw corporation, commonwealth of massachusetts, state of washington, and a number of local governments. Immediately prior to heading ydot, he was a director for to years. Well start with bill panos. I want to remind the witnesses that your full rwritten testimoy will be part of the hearing today so keep your statements to five minutes so we may have time for questions. I look forward to hearing all the testimony today beginning with mr. Panos. Please proceed. Thank you, chairman barrasso, senator carper and members of the committee. Im bill panos, director of the wyoming department of transportation. Im presenting a statement from my own state of wyoming and idaho, montana, north dakota and south dakota. As Congress Considers Surface Transportation Infrastructure investment, we hope that our comments will enhance understanding of transportation challenges facing rural states. Let me again get right to our key points. Federal transportation investment in rural states benefit the nation. Highways in our rural state enable truck movements between the west coast and the large cities of the midwest and the east. They benefit people and commerce at both ends of the journey. Our highways enable significant agricultural, energy and Natural Resource products to move from their rural points of origin to national and world markets. Our highways enable tens of millions of visitors each year to reach scenic wonders like Yellow Stone National park and mount rushmore, so tourism dollars are spent in america, furthering National Economic goals. So there is a national interest. And plenty of good reasons for the nation to invest in surface transportation and rural states. There are needs for Surface Transportation Infrastructure investment in rural states as well as in all states. If Congress Advances the Surface Transportation Infrastructure initiative, the initial funds would be put to good use promptly in wyoming and other states. They would create jobs and provide safety, economic efficiency and other short and longterm benefits to the nation. Next, we have some thoughts on providing some of those benefits. Public private partnerships and other approaches that depend on a positive revenue stream are not a Surface Transportation Infrastructure solution for rural states. The traffic volumes on projects and in rural states are low. And almost never feasible for Revenue Generation. Rural states are unlikely to attract investors for those projects, even if any project revenues are supplemented by tax credits. Also, with sparse populations and extensive Road Networks, the cost per capita of paying off principle and interest is high in rural states. A deterrent to borrowing for those projects. We do not oppose a role for p3s and improving the transportation net wore but theyre unlikely to result in rural states. Any surface Transportation Initiative should strongly emphasize formula funding. Using the predominantly formula based fast act approach to distribution would ensure that both rural and urban states are participating substantially in the surface Transportation Initiative. Any Surface Transportation Infrastructure initiative should continue the current approximate 4 to 1 ratio. Also, we would have particular concern if any surface Transportation Initiative, any nonformula elements were structured in a way that made rural state participation unrealistic. New Program Elements limited to extremely expensive pronls likely would not be accessible by our states, at least in a substantial way. That type of initiative may very well lack urban rural balance. Strengthening the Highway Trust Fund is a very important objective. The Highway Trust Fund and the programs it supports are critical to maintain and improve americas Surface Transportation Infrastructure. We appreciate that in the fast act congress provided Financial Support to the trust fund and its programs through fiscal year 2020. Yet, without legislation, after 2020, the Highway Trust Fund will in the be able to support even fast act highway and Transit Program levels much less meet needs that will grow as the economy grows. So strengthening the htf, the Highway Trust Fund, is worthy of consideration and action. While our focus today is on funding and financial issues, we also encourage congress to take steps to increase federal Program Flexibility and to simplify and expedite program and project delivery. We want each program dollar to deliver more benefits. Before closing, ill briefly mention that our rural states fakes significant transportation funding challenges, were geographically large. We include vast tracks of federal land and cannot be taxed or developed. We have extensive Highway Networks and low population densities. This means that we have very few people to support each lane mile of federal highway, yet rural states contribute to the effort significantly. Nationally per capita contribution to the highway account of the Highway Trust Fund is approximately 111. Per capita contribution to the highway account attributable to wyoming is three times as much at approximately 319. So any surface Transportation Initiative congress develops should be crafted in a way that makes that takes into account funding challenges facing rural states. In conclusion, mr. Chairman, those are some of our key points and thanks again for the opportunity to be here today. Thanks so much, mr. Panos, for joining us. Mr. Mcnulty, welcome, and please begin. Thank you, good morning, chairman barrasso, members of the committee, my name is mike mcnulty, general manager of the Putnam Public Service district state charter Drinking Water utility outside of charleston, West Virginia. On behalf of West Virginia and National Rural water associations, we are grateful youve included a voice for Rural America at this hearing. Before i begin my remarks, i would like to say thank you to our states junior senator for her assistance in improving the Water Infrastructure. We were able to construct a new 16 million waste Water Utility expansion that allowed us to extend service to 400 homes and businesses. This is a very important project for Putnam County and your assistance, senator capito, was essential. Thank you. When thinking about national Water Infrastructure proposals, please remember that almost all of our countrys Community Water utilities both Drinking Water and sewer are small. Small in Rural Communities have more difficulty affording Public Water Service due to the lack of population density and economies of scale. In many states, the great majority of community Water Systems serve fewer than 10,000 people. For example, in West Virginia, it is 444 as 468 community Water Systems. In wyoming, it is 300 of the 319 systems. And in delaware, it is 196 of the 213 community Water Systems. While we have fewer resources, we are regulated in the exact same manner as large community. In 2017, there are Rural Communities in america that still do not have access to safe Drinking Water or sanitation due to the lack of population density or funding. Some in my county. If rural and small town america is not specifically targeted in legislation to fund new Water Infrastructure initiatives, the funding will bypass Rural America and be absorbed by large metropolitan systems. Small community Water Infrastructure projects are more difficult to fund because they are smaller in scale. Numerous complicated funding applications have to be completed and approved compared to one large project. This is compounded by the reality that some small communities lack the administrative expertise to complete the necessary application process and perhaps lack the political appeal of some large cities. Secondly, the lack of customer density in Rural America compounded with lower and median Household Incomes means Water Infrastructure is often a much greater cost per household. This means that a Water Infrastructure project poses a greater financial risk compared to a metropolitan project and even more importantly requires some portion of grant funding, not just loan dollars to make the project feasible. In the last ten years, my district has borrowed over 50 million from the federal government for projects that were essential to our sustainability and expansion. We could not have secured this funding from the commercial markets and kept the rates affordable for our customers. My Water Utility provides a good example of what water Infrastructure Development means to Rural America. Since its Early Development in the 1960s, our Water Utility infrastructure has expanded rapidly. Regionalizing or interconnecting with other smaller communities to provide and extend water and Sewer Service and become the engine for Economic Development in our county. One of our utility partners, the town of buffalo, was able to finance the sewer expansion needed to serve a new toyota plant. With funding from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and our states infrastructure and Jobs Development council. Without the expansion of our infrastructure, we would not have been able to service the toyota manufacturing plant. And southern West Virginia, much of our Water Infrastructure built over 100 years ago by Coal Companies and now failing and deteriorating. We have areas in my county with failing septic systems that need to be serviced by extending sewer lines. We still have pockets of people with no Drinking Water at all. And they rely on hauling water to their home cisterns. Rural commune triz in need of economic stimulus. For example in West Virginia, and wyoming, the recent declines in the Energy Sector resulted in massive losses of jobs. State revenue and the corresponding decrease in state infrastructure funding. A new Infrastructure Initiative targeted toward Rural Communities would be a welcome economic stimulus in Rural America. In closing, mr. Chairman, every rural and Small Community in the country thanks this committee for the numerous opportunities this committee provided Rural America. Thank you, mr. Mcnulty. Thank you for joining us. Thank you for your testimony. Miss bobbitt. Thank you, senator inhofe for the very warm welcome. Chairman barrasso, Ranking Member carper, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for holding todays Committee Hearing on modernizing our nations infrastructure and inviting me to testify on behalf of the National Association of counties. Infrastructure is important to our nations 3,069 counties because we build and maintain 45 of the public roads, 40 of the bridges and a third of the nations transit and airports. My name is Cindy Bobbitt and i serve as chair of the grant county oklahoma board of commissioners. Grant county is rural and serves a population of approximately 4,500 and our local economy is largely based on agriculture and Natural Resources. We are responsible for 92 of over 1,900 public road miles in the county. We the most bridges, bridge structures, over 3500. Think about that. Thats almost one bridge for every resident. While this infrastructure was ideal for transporting livestock and crops 70 years ago, it is inadequate to support todays heavier trucks, increased traffic and higher operating speeds. Grant county is not alone. Roughly two thirds of the nations counties are considered rural and face similar infrastructure challenges. Today, ill highlight some of the challenges and provide recommendations for ways congress can help us tackle these issues. First, Rural Counties are facing numerous challenges that strain our local funding options. 42 states limit the ability for counties to raise or change property taxes. And only 12 states authorize us to collect our own local glass taxes. We often have to choose between investing in infrastructure or in funding our Emergency Services, courthouses and Health Departments just to name a few. Second, Rural Counties experiencing increasing demands on our transportation infrastructure, which can no longer accommodate our agriculture and our energy needs. While local governments can do all we can, and we are trying to do, according to the federal Highway Administration, 40 of county roads are inadequate for current needs and nearly half of our rural bridges are structurally deficient. Third, counties raise our are facing high cost of Infrastructure Projects. Based on the american road and transportation builders association, the cost of construction, materials and labor for highway and bridge projects increased 44 between 2000 and 2013. Just a few years ago, in grant county, we could budget for a road reconstruction project at less than half a Million Dollars. Today, that same project will cost about 1 million per mile. With these challenges in mine, we have recommendations to strengthen our nations infrastructure. First, congress should make more federal highway dollars available for locally owned infrastructure. County, roads, bridges and highways serve as a lifeline for our citizens and are critical to the movement of freight and other goods and services to market. While more Financing Options are available in urban areas, rural areas do not often attract that same interest from the private sector. Now, more than ever, we need a strong federal state local partnership to remain competitive. Second, increase federal funding to bridges, particularly off system bridges. It is vital. We must build for the future, not the present. 20 years ago we were building our bridges 18 to 20 feet wide. Today, were building our bridges 24 to 26 feet wide. But that is not going to be wide enough to accommodate our larger and heavier equipment. According to u. S. Dot, to eliminate the backlog by 2028, we would need to invest 20 billion annually, well above the 12. 8 billion invested today. Third, an increase focus on safety and high risk rural roads will help our communities. And help reduce the number of fatalities we see each year. And finally, we urge congress to increase the role of counties in state wide planning and projects selection processes. We recognize that there are more infrastructure needs than there are Funds Available. However, counties have the ability to provide input on potential projects and can help maximize the effectiveness of federal infrastructure dollars. In closing, as Congress Considers ways to modernize our nations infrastructures, counties stand ready to work with our federal partners to achieve our shared goals of strengthening transportation networks, improving public safety, and advancing our economic competitiveness. Thank you, mr. Chairman. And members of the committee, for the opportunity to testify today. Thank you, miss bobbitt. Thank you for your testimony. Welcome, mr. Pratt, we look forward to hearing from you. I appreciate the time to address the committee today and i want to thank Ranking Member carper for talking about Green Infrastructure, particularly coastal infrastructure. Tony pratt, im the administrator of shoreline and Water Management for the state of delaware and president of the National Nonprofit organization advocating for beaches and good public policy. We talk about this in terms of roads and bridges and man built infrastructures. But the Green Infrastructure im talking about, beaches, dunes and wetlands are important in a number of factors. The safety that they provide during storms, the recreational opportunities and great number of jobs that come with those components. Want to talk about the kind of jobs, first of all, that come from beaches. Construction of beach and erosion projects something that provides opportunity for engineers and planner and economists to do a lot of planning work. An opportunity for dredge companies to come in and do work. We think about beaches, and delaware is a good example, Rehoboth Beach, many of you may have attended had good times in Rehoboth Beach, is we think about the primary jobs that come from beaches. Restaurant help, cook, chefs, wait staff, hotels and knoll mo and the employment there. Lifeguards and retail sales and real estate sales. But there is another facet of jobs that we dont talk about very much, plumbers, electricians, roofers, builders, any number of trade jobs. Hotel and Motel Management folks up and down the seaboard and construction jobs and travel jobs we have not considered much of, if you drive from washington or Rehoboth Beach or ocean city, maryland, you go past a number of stores there primarily because of the recreational attraction of the coastline. Dr. James houston, from the Research Laboratory from mississippi, indicated in work hes done in the past that beaches get more Recreational Use in the u. S. Than all of our National Parks combined. A stunning thought. This adds up to a Major Economic impact. Beaches help to generate 2. 25 billion annually to the national economy. In 2012, according to dr. Houston, every for every one dollar invested by the federal government, the federal government returned 570 in annual tax revenues from beach tourism. It is a very good investment, we believe. Research on the eastern seaboard indicated for every Million Dollars invested, approximately in estuary recovery, there is 30 jobs created. Coastal infrastructure is a wise investment. You either pay now or pay later. We found in numerous storms, katrina and ike and sandy, many storms that hit the gulf and Atlantic Coast and now the west coast is suffering some severe winter weather, that the impacts are tremendous. 65 billion allocated for the states primarily for massachusetts to north carolina. And concentrated on maryland to massachusetts. 65 billion was allocated to restore from that. And recover from that. We took a third of that, 20 billion, and had invested in that, in over the nation, over the last 20 year, would have been a billion dollar investment. We found in the in sandy, where there were good beaches and dunes in place, 1. 9 billion was saved because of that investment. We believe that if we had done that 20 billion over 20 years for the entire nation, about a billion dollars a year that number would have been far higher than the 65 billion need would have been reduced. Beaches and dunes provide many benefits. We talk a little bit about job, talk about the protection they afford, also protect the dividing line between open water, gulf coast, ocean coast. In delaware we had an example of the department of interior investing 38 million in recovery of a National Wildlife refuge that had we spent about 2 million to 3 million, we would have probably avoided that 38 million investment. It is wise for a lot of factors, jobs and protection and for the water. We believe from my organization and from my state of delaware that a higher investment that provides jobs, that provides protection for our nations productive habitats is a wise investment. Were advocating for something in the order of 5 billion over the next ten years. I know there is probably justification for a higher number than that, but i think thats a modest request when the current funding is about 75 million to 100 million a year. We think that number should be much higher. Thank you for your time today. Thank you very much for your testimony, mr. Pratt. Now id like to go to mr. Bhatt. Thank you for being with us. Please begin. Thank you, sir. Thank you, chairman barrasso and Ranking Member carper. In the interest of time, ill summarize my testimony in addition to serving as the secretary of transportation in delaware, and the executive director of Colorado Department of transportation, i served as Deputy Director with kentucky transportation cabinet and the federal Highway Administration. So im keenly aware of the balance of urban and rural needs in the country and how it is not a one size fits all solution. Colorado is a large diverse state with rapidly growing metropolitan areas, and vast rural areas that rely on effective and well maintained Transportation System to move agricultural and Energy Products to market. Im going to tell a quick story i used a couple of years ago in testimony prior to passage of the fast act. I tell this story because it is it is indicative of the challenges that we face. When i first began as the executive director of the colorado dot, i took an 1100 mile trip around colorado, first traffic jam i got into was in a pretty rural part of the state. Up near fort collins on i25, the major north south artery, not just for passenger traffic, but also an important freight corridor that connects canada and mexico. Freight is an important part of our job in the transportation world. When we got outside of denver where i anticipated the traffic, we got to a four lane section, two lanes in each direction, similar to a lot of the interstate that is present in many rural areas t was a thursday morning, well after rush hour, and so i assumed there was an incident ahead because the traffic reminded me of the beltway during rush hour. And my regional engineer informed me there was no ins departmen incident, thats just how traffic flowed on a regular basis. I was told the plans on the books were that section of i25, a 45mile section, to be widened in 2070 based on current funding levels. A 16yearold who got their drivers license could anticipate that road being widened when they turned 70. Thats unstacceptable. Thats a problem for the state of colorado and for commerce. Like the rest of the nation, funding for transportation in colorado is at a crossroads. Our primary source of funding, state and federal gas tax have not increased in nearly 25 years to advance the important improvements to the i25 corridor, we have called together state and local and private funds with toll peak funds to conduct a first phase from loveland to fort collins. There is over 1 billion in this corridor alone in unfunded needs. We have an annual budget of 1. 4 billion. The vast majority of which goes to asset management, which we dont even fund fully. We are short 1 billion a year to meet the currently identified Transportation Needs throughout the state. In fact, in the next decade, we have 10 billion in unmet funding needs for highway and transit projects across colorado. Were working to address the severely deficient section between Colorado Springs and denver. These are the two largest cities in state, the interstate is still in its original configuration. Were working towards having that project ready to go in 18 months, but we lack four to 500 million to make the initial improvements. In another example, were poised to move forward in 2018 with improvements to central 70 corridor in denver, but were short about another bill dollar on that project. Every year we delay that project goes up. We take advantage of financing tools and tollback bonds but financing alone does not fund our challenge in transportation. We have been challenged to do more with less. Were trying to do that. We implemented Cash Management to flush out any cash reserves. Where it makes sense, were using public and private partnerships and embracing technology that connected vehicles, autonomous vehicles, vehicle so Vehicle Infrastructure will help us operate the system much more efficiently but that doesnt change the need. To conclude, i would thank this committee for their attention and care. And say that the timing is right for additional revenues to states through the existing funding formulas for us to invest in our infrastructure. The economy continues to recover and significant new investment will be necessary to sustain and expand on that economic growth. We stand ready to partner with the federal government to make significant investments in our Transportation System for the benefit of all americans. Im happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for your testimony, mr. Bhatt. Well turn to questions and ill start with director panos. In your testimony, you discussed build america Bonds Program that was part of the 2009 stimulus package. You note that it doesnt work for rural states what wouldnt to build roads and bridges. I looked at that list of projects, on the Treasury Department website, when you look at it, our state of wyoming had six projects, state of delaware, six projects, state of vermont, senator sanders, four projects, with West Virginia had two, rhode island had one project. In contrast, new york had 59. California, 158. Illinois, 245. Could you explain to the committee why these sorts of bond programs dont really work for some of the smaller states . Great question, mr. Chairman. My response really is limited to surface transportation. And the explanation really relies in the characteristics of the fundamental characteristics of rural states. As i said in my written testimony, we have a low population density and we have very extensive Road Networks and so paying back the principal and interest involves a high cost per capita and it discourages borrowing for transportation and in rural states and in fact after talking with state treasurer this last week, wyoming has never borrowed for a road project, a surface transportation project in the state of wyoming. Thats how i would at least briefly respond to the question. Okay. And never borrowed in 120 some years, so never borrowed. Correct. Am i correct in assuming that all things being equal, that if Additional Resources are provided, you would rather have these resources go to your departments . You provided testimony for a number of different states, would go to your department so the states could decide where to apply the funds rather than receive specific directives from washington on how the money is spent. Absolutely, mr. Chairman. As i say, youre here representing the interests of the transportation departments in five different states. What is the principle concern of the rural states within the framework as prescribed by the fast act . First, it is important to note that the fast act struck a very good balance with respect to rural and urban interests and i want to thank congress for that. They did a great job of moving the fast act through and balancing urban and rural interests. There is also a concern and i think it is not just in rural states, but a number of different states, about the stop and go of the federal actions and the fast act as you know runs through 2020. Which provides more stability than other recent authorizations. Yet as to the appropriations, i think were operating under a full year now of a continuing resolution, which restricts our ability to plan for future projects. And in our state, we just finished with our working with our state legislature and needed to ask for twice the amount of Borrowing Authority than we would have otherwise to be able to cover some of those costs, cash flow needs for the projects as it relates to the continuing resolution. So in other states, thats our state, in other states, states our state, but in other states borrowing against funds to keep the highway progress on schedule until congress completes their resolutions, and the second is the Program Flexibility in delivering the programs and projects is fairly complex, and the planning and programming requirements keep multiplying and the Performance Management uls added to that developing some ideas like we are doing today in an effort to improve Program Flexibility will help a great deal. Those were a couple of observations of the continuing resolution, and stop and go and the Program Delivery improvements to e himprovement s to help our state and others. And can i ask you about the Management Systems of water in wyoming and others which serve more than 10,000 people, and like other larger systems, these still need to comply with the kcome plex federal regulations with the, per tease in the larger counterparts do, and can you talk about what steps, because we want to make sure that we dont sacrifice safety and what steps congress could signify to have compliance. I believe that congress could allocate more funds for Technical Assistance in training to help the smaller communities and the operators and administrators to ensure that they are able to be up on all of the regulations that come out of the epa and so forth. I believe that would really be the biggest benefit to have more dollars to go to Technical Assistance. Thank you. Senator carper. Thank you so much. Mr. Spanos, when is the last time that wyoming raised the gas tax . 19 not very long ago. 2013, right . Three or four years ago . Yes. And by wa what, ten cents . Yes. And did everybody who voted for that get through and out of office . No. Why not . The state and the citizens there saw a need for it. A lesson there for us in the congress . Aim sorry. A lesson for us in the congress . Snly in our state, and in our particular state, it was necessary because of the changing e kconomy in the state. Our state went through and continues to go through the economic shift that is not repeated many states, but my friend to West Virginia has had that with the energy conmy and the state ledgislature saw that coming and they were able to support certain transportation projects by moving that forward and it is difficult in the state legislature to move that forward and wyoming was very aware of its impending future and we are proactive at being able to support that. Yes, we are scheduled to run out of money in the federal Transportation Trust fund in 2020 and i remind my colleagues it is three years from now, but it is just around the corner. And so, now, the former congressman from new york state with whom i served and it is congressman michael mcnulty, but i am glad you are here. Abraham lincoln said the role of government is to do for the people what they can not do for themselves. What is the role of the federal government to prevent the drinking needs of the native West Virginia. Thank you, senator. The federal governments, and i see it as the obligation to the ensure that the funds are available for any mandate that comes down to pipeline for additional the testing and Water Quality standards and i believe it is earn will ti federal governments obligation to make shure that communities receive the funds in order to comply, and no unfunded mandates. Good. I am going to ask you to answer for the record and not here, because i dont have enough time, but i will answer for the record, the better results for less money, and if we try to do that in the fast act to try to get better results for less money, and what can we do or should do between now and 2020 to enable you to get better results for less money, and if you know i had more time i would ask you to answer that on the record. And for tony and shay lynn, it is nice to see you and thank you for the service to the United States and your state. We have a road in delaware called state route 1 and you can pick it up up coming down i95 between wilmington and newark and pick it up route 1 from dover to the beach, and we have more fivestar beaches, and you go from delmarva to virginia, and there is a bridge that goes over the inlet. And u it is called the Indian River Inlet north of bethany beach. It flows east west with the tides. And there is a big bridge built over it, and several bridges built there over time. And we had to eventually replace the other bridge because of what was going on in the inlet. When Hurricane Sandy came to town, it had an adverse effect on the bridge there. I wanted to ask tony and jaylen and take a minute to talk to us about the shoreline protection and the dune protection, and the major infrastructure of over 1,100 million and 100 million and how they intersection. I will answer that, because i was responsible for the bridge during Hurricane Sandy, and on tv the governor said that he saw the bridge washed away. So i turned left instead of right. And so it said that the new bridge ad not washed away, but the old bridge had washed away which is a pretty good justification for us to are replacing the old bridge. It was a pretty, you know, those hurricanes, and i remember when i first became the secretary in delaware and three weeks after the hurricane irene showed up, and everybody said that hrns dont come here sh, and they ve off and go somewhere else, and in my four years there, we had two hurricanes and something change around that. The infrastructure is so critically important, and what i was struck by is how and once that land link is lost how incredibly impacted the communities were, and people trying to get back out, and back in and their kids get tole school, a sound would say that it is just drawing home the importance of the Investment Infrastructure and so incredibly important that we do make int intelligent investments. I would say to my colleagues, we spent a fortune on that bridge, new bridge. The next hurricane that comele comes along could further undermine the bridge if we dont protect in the dune protection and the beach protection, and one hand washes another is the important point that i wanted to make. Thank you. Senator inhofe. I have to tell you when the torns veer off, they come to oklahoma. First of all, and i i have something to submit for the chairman, this is the Largest Coalition i have seen. This is a letter to President Trump from over 500 organizations from almost all of north america, and so there is a level of pop lairty, and i ask that be admitted as part of the record. So admitted. And you have had a lot of advice and counsel with gary ridley, and i am sure that mr. Nespanos and mr. Bunts, and he he has been a member of the committee and knows the subject and we have been able to pass a lot of good thing, and i think that the dems have done some creative thing, and commissioner bobbitt, it is unique the challenges that you face in a rural, rural oklahoma, and you have gotten to be creative from time to time, and could you expand on the funding challenges and give an example or two of how you have gotten projects over the finish line with the limited funds in your county. Thank you for that question. Yes, grant county is very rural, 4500 people. While we have the most bridges and the fifth highest number of road miles in the entire state of oklahoma, and yet our funding is 63rd of 77 counties and so we definitely have a lot of challenges. The one unique thing that we have done in the past is that as counties, we have worked with the department of transportation, gary ridley, and we came acrosst when they were going to deconstruct the i40 crosstown bridge there were a lot of used beams there. And beams that we could have our engineers look and inspect, and recycle, and so the counties took ownership of the over 2,000 beams and brought them back to our counties, and grant county received over 100 beams, and more than any other county, and we have more bridges, and successfully, we have ten new bridge, and more beams to put in place as soon as we get the funding, and that is talking about how important a partnership was. That is a state and local partnership, and we also would like to have the same partnership with the federal government to help to us bring home projects. Yes, and the president has talked about the Public Private partnerships, and any comment that you could make about how you have been successful in doing that in your area . The partnerships, the private partnerships would probably work really good for oklahoma and tulsa county, but the partnerships might not work very well for the rural county, but what we can do is that we have Municipal Bonds that are tax exempt that we have to protect, because we use those types of financing to hem to us move the projects forward. Yeah. During the fast act, and now u i have had the advantage of dealing with the issues for 22 years in the senate, and eight years before that on the committee in the house, so i have been here for all tof the rea authorizations that we have had and gotten. And one of the prob em lems and people forget about this, the middle 90s, the Highway Trust Fund problem was that we have too much surplus. And we know that now we are in a crisis, but one of the things that we have done has been more, and you have addressed this, a little bit more creative of the things that we could do in the bill to giving more power to the states and giving them options. For exampleple on the enhancement percentages saying from state to state, and in california, maybe they have different ideas in oklahoma and how to use those, and so we gave different states that option. What do you think about giving states more of those types of options. And how you can stretch your dollars a little bit more. Mr. Pont oshgus. Anything that we can do to adjust the rural states with those adjustments is very helpful. Do you agree with that here is the this is the trend that we have started, and we want to continue with this, giving more of the option s s t the states. Do you all agree that it is moving this the right direction . Yes, sir, senator. One of the best parts of the fast act in addition to the certainty was the flexibility, and it is incumbent upon the states to work with the locals and others to make decisions. We pass on and interact closely with the local partners to make sure that it is a colorado or the delaware or a oklahoma solution. Good. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator inhofe. Senator duckworth. Thank you, mr. Chairman. This question is for mr. Pratt, the flint water crisis tragically taught our nation a lesson on the old infrastructure, and allow iing that to happen, families find themselves in real danger of Drinking Water. Not everybody is okay with the status quo. Some leadership threw away the bandaid fixes and committed to the local level Infrastructure Project to fully replacing every lead service line in madison. And now, when my constituents learn about the Infrastructure Initiative completed in wisconsin, they dont understand why the children of wisconsin deserve greater protection than the people of delaware and illinois. There is no good answer, and this is why the Congress Needs to act swiftly and unanimously with direct funding support, and far greater than the efforts to date to jump start the vital water projects. As a state official, mr. Pratt, to struggling to meet the needs of the residents and the states chashlgs would you concur that the state of delaware has put in critical investiture for that. I will defer to somebody who handles the Beach Management and not the Water Management. There is no doubt that we have not invested in that area for the nation, and i will welcome any comments of the panel, but it is not my world of expertise in the world supply, but the stories around the nation are compelling about how the overarcing issue is that we have a appetite for con strubstrublg of new, and not much of the appetite as a nation of maintenance of what we have built in the past or improvement of what we have built in the past which is a philosophical point that needs to change. Im not an expert in water supply issues, but thank you for the question anyway. Not just water supply, but the people of illinois said that americans are eager and ready to rebuild the nation at all levels and infrastructure. When i travel across illinois to the urban communities and cen r centers, there is a unifying call on congress to please work to modernize our nations infrastructure and make it a priority, whether it is roads or rail or simply put, illinoisans Want Congress to place a big bet on america, and they want their tax dollars invested in American Workers and companies to rebuild, and moerndize the infrastructure and we have to go beyond the road, rail and bridges. And we need to make sure that we continue to succeed in the 21st, which includes broadband for families to have access. In fact, we have parts of illinois where kids can not do the homework, pause they dont have access to broadband and we cant Contact People in rural areas, because of no broadband. So it is more than just roads and bridges. There is a role for the federal government to come in to provide the resources in partnership with the local states. But i dont want to fall it into the trap that madison replaced all of the lead water supply, and that is what every state should do, and anybody on the Witness Panel can talk to this, but how important is the role of the federal government with federal dollars to be able to help you do that. Well, i will answer from my perspective in that it is the world i work in and very imperative for the federal government to take and involved position. Home rule indicates that the local communities will develop their own Land Use Fund and as best for the community, and that is across the board of residential and industrial and recreational areas, and commercial areas, and when that fabric of the community is built, and if there is anything imperiled, it is the federal government who has to come in to are store, and if there is a tornado or a hurricane or the forest fire or whatever storm, and the federal government has to respond, and whether it is pollution of wa watter, or a too has wiped out a community in oklahoma, it is the federal government to come out to u put the dollars in there, and invs. Ment ahead of time before the crisis has occurred is an important turning point that we have to ache ma, and the federal government has a tremendous amount to save. I appreciate the comment, and anybody on the panel . From the end. 70 of the transportation dollars in the state of colorado come from theed if ral government, so it is important to have a strong rule of the investment and Economic Development. Governor hick ehickenlooper has advised to make those recommendations. Thank you. Senator capp tishgso, i would li capito, i would like to thank you as a resident of charleston, south carolina, for helping with the are rescue of the folks without water because of the recent spill. So i dont know if you want to take a couple of seconds to say some of the things that you did as a regional resource to try to help people without water in a crisis . Thank you, senator. Our Water Utility, and we were immediately in contact with the governors office, and governor tomlin, and we worked with his staff to make sure that they could start bringing in the tankers, and we do have a fuel station located at the Water Treatment facility, and helped the local folks coming in with their own containers and filled those containers and so forth. So we did play an active role, and so did many other rural utilities surrounding kinnaw county, and a lot of folks helped out. Well, the help was appreciated and everybodys help, and i think that West Virginia as Rural Communities around the world are phone for neighbors helping neighbors and in that sense, you helped us. I would like to pith off of something that mr. Pratt mentioned. In your experience in Putnam County, are you looking more at exand thing the new or replacing the old, and i mean, with ares the pushpull in terms of the Water Infrastructure . Both, actually. As i said in the testimony, we are are finishing up a large sewer expansion, and we are well aware of the maintenance that needs to be done and the upkeep of the system. And so we have expanded the Water Treatment plant as you have known and in there to see it. Yes. And so we are still in the balance of doing both. Easier to get funding for one or the other . I havent had a difficult time obtaining funding for either one. Okay. Okay. And the other thing in your testimony, you mentioned the water bill that we were passing as we were leaving, and in that wifia, a Water Infrastructure financing method similar to tifia for the water ways and water projects, and in my view, this is holding great promise. I feel as though for another funding mechanism for rural e c neshg, and america water system, and you have expressed skepticism about that. Yes, maam. The wifia is not going to benefit the smaller Rural Community, because you have to have larger projects to qualify. Of course, the greatest concern is that we ghoont to see any of the funds from the Drinking Water srf or the clean water srf to fund wifia to make sure ma the funds stay intact. The intention of wifia is to be used as a jumping point, and not the increase their value or decrease the amounts, but to use them as a leverage point. I am wondering if it is possible for the local smaller projects to band together for a wifia project, and do you know if that is within the bounds of the law . I dont know that, senator. I would have to look into that and get back to you. And mr. Panos, you mentioned in the statement that the ppps dont work in the Rural Community and in mikes backyard, route 35 has been a ppp project that we are not on the verge of getting it completed now, but it could have gone on if we didnt have the ability to for the state d. O. T. To work the triple p projects, and why is that not working in Rural America the scale or what . Thank you for the question. Generally in the rural states we dont have the revenue to support a Public Private concept. Other systems as well, and other financing systems we could look at, but the direct funding works best for us through the form laic systlay formulaic which is based on the volumes that we have and the nature of the transportation. Can your state sell bonds to begin the famt of a project to get it done, and they are called the garvey bonds in West Virginia, but i dont know what the acronym derived from. Well, we e have used the garvey bond, and the comment l earlier that we made earlier about the 10 cent fuel tax that was passed some four to five years ago, and that only pays less than 20 of the cost of the surface transportation, and the vast majority comes from the federal government through the formulaic system. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Like my other colleagues i believe in the supporting the imple mmentation of the infrastructure, and to advance our safety and commerce. The Highway Trust Fund has served to ek wa Equitable Trust fund. And so we will have 5 billions following the fast act expiration. So that is why i have introduce ed the new duel bill infrastructure act to repair the highway Solvency Fund without raising taxes on hardworking americans. I would like to ask the state d. O. T. Drirectors, mr. Panos an mr. Butt. How does this come to maintaining the roads and bridges, is there any substitute for this critical apportion fundin funding . Thank you, senator. Funding is earn, and i do the con s conservative talk radio show, and so many of the Radio Audience asks why you didnt do x and you needed to continue it 20 more miles down the road, and you have to have it based on the financial need, and one of the best parts of the fast act was to get us out of the cycle of the continuing resolutions around funding. If we have certainty around funding we can make more funding and cost states more in funding. For wyoming, i feel that serp ti, the idea of certainty in the federal funding is very important to us. We are coneservative in terms of how we look at the pfinancing or system. Our system is not being expanded as we speak, but preserve. We want to have in enough money to preserve what we have, the 2,000 bridges and roads. So the proposal that this you are talking about identifies that you are e fe fering to that the Highway Trust Fund is not going to be a consistent source of funding after 2020, and it is critically u important to us, because we are not expanding. The federal government has been preserved and it looks at the regulatory review of the projects, and looks at how time consuming that and the need to improve that. So we support both of those thing, and those are the things that not only wyoming and other rural states would agree with. So it is good that you stepped up, and put some of those ideas front and center for us to look at, and how we go about that we will put congress over to the next few months to develop, but they are solid ideas, and we like colorado are looking for consistency. Thank you for your compliment of the proposal. I think it is really important to identify a consistent Revenue Source without raising taxes at the federal level to fund beyond maintenance, because we need to make sure that we have the capacity in the future as well. And you mentioned a second part of my proposal that really addresses the critical delays that projects are faced when they have to wait for the federal government approval. I can tell you that my state has spent time and money on the burdensome highway information processes that dont change any outcomes moving forward, and for example, we are look agent upgrading a substandard scurve project in omaha seeing the c t costs grow by 3 million, because of the burdens out there. Again, this idea thats in the build usa infrastructure act is based on the proposal that i was able to get advanced in the state of nebraska that is proving successful, and hopefully, we will be able to have a kconversation about that here. And mr. Panos, you addressed part of it here, but i believe that greater state of authority over the approval process is going to, because we have shown that it is going to move that approval process forward without really taking shortcuts. We are still going to meet the requirements that are there, and i think it is a better, a better system to put in place and a better use of the taxpayer dollars. Would either of you like to address that . Just on the delays that you have faced with going through the federal Highway Administration . Thank you, senator. I am torn on the answer that i give you and i say it with all respect. I as a director of the d. O. T. S have fought with the federal Highway Administration to try to expedite projects, and you know, over the years where we were ready to go on something, and so on the one hand, expediting the projects is very good. We have a big project, and 1. 2 billion via duct project in denver that is take 13 years to get to it. And some people think it is ridiculous, and there is a school right next to the project, and so if my children with went to the school, i would not want the d. O. T. To say, that hey, this is what we are doing. We are take 63 home, and so there certain rules when we have to take the property, we have to show the burden, and follow the rules on relocating people. As the state d. O. T. People, i think that some of the federal regulations do serve a purpose. I would not disagree with you on that, and if we can expedite, that would be a saving. I apologize that i am over my time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator fisher. Senator rounds. It is not often that we have the opportunity in a Committee Like this to talk about what we want the see in the future. You have heard the president saw that infrastructure is critical, and members of both sides of the aisle is saying that the time is now to discussing how we do the Infrastructure Development in the United States coming up. I want to have a different look of instead of the rules and regulation, my Ranking Member here as a former governor in his state recognized they could make decisions about what the needs are, and they see the major issues that we dont see in south dakota and concerned about rising water levels in the neck of their woods, but we are worried about the basic inf infrastructure of delivering rural water. And the state has pick d ed up their share, and the government has not picked up their share, and the cost is going up, and people dont have the water available. We have other rural Water Systems in the state, and they dont have enough money to do the maintenance on some of the areas, and not quite filled them out yet. For a minute, i would like to find out with state and local levels that have the capabilities that you v and i want to reach out to make a couple of assumptions that a lot of people in the country would say it is not coming true or lala land or what, but say that the democrats and the republicans agreed on the need for an infrastructure bill, and two, agree to takes a sum shun, and keep the snikers down, that Congress Actually agreed on a funding bill, and that Congress Actually agreed different frently than in the past how to pay for funding bill, and then that lastly, we agreed to use part of the funds back to state and local levels of government, and we had the foresight to talk not just about the roads and bridges, and yet water and broadband and give some opportunities for the local states and government the have flexibility and as what they saw as needed Economic Development. And make a deal with the states who had some skin in the day, and a match, and similar to the highway fund. I know that i am making major stretches here, but also say that we expected that a number of the projects could be made available, whether it is ports of entry along the borders or whether you are talking about the ports along the coasts, airports, road bridges, water development, and so forth. This is your opportunity to expand on what the capabilities are and the limitations are that the feds currently put in place. What we are doing to hamstring you, and what you are capable of doing. And can i ask each of you, and i dont care the order, but share a few seconds about what you see as your capabilities and what you could do with the resources with that shot. What could you do to make it better for the people in the area . Yes . Senator, if i could start. For us in wyoming with the surface transportation, we would implement more safety projects. Safety is the number one issue. And if we could develop additional safety projects to put them on the ground, and whether it is construction of additional lanes or other kinds of the safety systems, we would. We are maintaining what we have, and we have a great relationship with the government and the committees. Could you start it soon . Yes, because we have is a great relationship with the federal Highway Department and others, and so we would focus on safety. Number one issue, and a Safety Agency and probably more than transportation agency. So we would focus on that. Thank you, senator. And we would expand the water distributions systems, and water collection systems, and build the facilities for the treatment as well. For instance, a project in our home county Putnam County, West Virginia, and 56 homes without potable water. They have to hall the water back to their home cisterns, and the county commissioners have applied for a small cities bloc grant for 1. 5 million, and for the last five years, they have been uturned down, and that project is designed and would be ready to go to day of the funding was in place. Thank you, senator. We would look at the off system bridge system, because we need safe bridges for the school buses, Emergency Services, fire departments, and make sure that the routes were brought up to standards and yes, we could do it pretty quick. We have engineering on several bridges, but we dont have the fund iing. So we have shovelready projects ready to go. Thank you. Sir, my perspective is different because im not a transportation expert, but the hypothetical is disneying, but we need a nation informed of the decadalsense, and we are doing the shortterm frame. So with work on things 2 to 4year plans, but we ent to decadal plans. The value of the return on the investment and if we did a better job of that, we would know how to utilize the Funds Available if they were unn tethered. So we need better Decision Making process informed by those factors. We lost 35,000 people on road, and so i would say that safety is the number one pri priority. We have little rally dozens of projects to go but for the fund ing. If funding, and if there were a way to find the bipartisan agreement, it would go a long way to saving american lives. Thank you. I a appreciate the guests here from wyoming and West Virginia and oklahoma and colorado, but you all failed to share one of Rhode Islands attributes which is a coastline. You are all landlocked, so id like to address the guest from delaware who, like rhode island, shares a coastline. In rhode island we have have Sewage Treatment plants as we have faced the rising seas along the shores moved first into the flood zone, and now into the velocity zones for storms. After a major storm i have to go to look at the family who is looking at the remnants of the home that has been torn into the sea by storm activity and coastal roads at risk of either destruction or flooding, and in many cases, the coastal road is the access to a community which creates significant Emergency Service risks. And as we are mapping more effectively where storm and sea level will be intrudintruding, finding more and more that the Emergency Services are on the wrong side of the flooding area, and i think that people remember the scenario in senator bookers state of new jersey where they could not bring the Fire Equipment in sandy, because the neighborhoods burned with nobody there to fight the fire. We have those concerns. I have seaside restaurants like tiaras and ocean mist who are two bars by the sea, and had 100 feet of beach and people would play volleyball and sup on the beac volleyball up on the be and now their pilings are washed underneath the builtings, and now, the state beaches are being compromised and moving backwards as we yield more and more of the coastline to the shore. And of course, in a huge storm like the hurricane of 1938 which gave delaware a hit, and nailed rhode island the 10 inches of Sea Level Rise that we have seen, and the 90 of the rise that our experts say to expect by the end of the century, and plus, two feet if the added tide, and when the moon and the stars lineup so you will get an astronomical king tide, and we are really planning for serious disruptions. And so, i hoped that my colleagues as we are considering what the next Infrastructure Investments will be, we understand that on the coasts we not only get the effects of climate change, but the rising sea level, and then the worst hitting storm surge that compromises the coastlines. I know that delaware, and i will turn it over for your comment, but you have lower elevation than we do, and a lot of the coastal problems that i visited with senator koons. And i know that he isware because his dad who passed away was the head of the rhode island fisheries association, and so iley it to you to talk about the coastal infrasfrak chur. Infrastructure. And yes, i am from the boston area, and so you have a different topography, and we are a remnant of the higher sea millions of years ago. And that said, one foot rise in sea level can be exponentially hundreds of feet of intrusion. And so what do we do . Number one, you hit on the eifp has produced maps to show us where the risks are going to to be and we can utilize them and the local communities to begin to plan how the remove Critical Infrastructure to the better places. The best indication of the sea level in the future, is the high tide and in the storm of the two the three feet higher than e predicted. So we match where the intrusion areas are, and that is part of the discussion that we are doing here today which is looking at how we manage the coastline, and the manner they have protected for a long time. And optimize what we with learned from sandy, and comprehensive plan by the corps of engineers for the east coast, but if we evolve it to the west coast and the other ear kra that in the eastern seaboard, we have a stress on the highways due to congestion, and 18wheel tractortrailers on the roadways, and new jersey has taken a lot of money to separate the highway on the jersey turnpike, and the foot traffic from the automobiles for other use. That is a way of coming to the future and look at the way of the water ways of the nation to be returned to get the better transportation of the goods and service around the ocoastal a area, and that would produce sediment if dredging has to accommodate for boats, and also to be used for the benefit of restoring the wetlands as much as possible, and we have institutional block aide sblock have to be target ed. And in rhode island, we have tried to develop the tools to find out what the storm surge and the rising seas present by way of risks to us, and one is that the fema mapping has been quite frankly outright defective. Looking at it, we will find that fema is unable to replicate when asked to do it again, results that are solid, and if you cant rep licate a result, it is not solid. We can see them making premise decisions in the mapping that dont make any sense. We see them operating off of the facts that are provably not accurate. The result is that we will find people put into the flood zones that are not the flood zone, and they have to buy insurance that are are the no necessary, but far worse, you have people who are not told they are are in a flood zone, and the diskrep en is is between the coastal resource center, and what fema is doing, and what the maps are showing is very different. I hope that some of the coastal folks might join together to take a look at this, because a lot of people are disappointed to be let down by defective ander roenous flood mapping. Thank you, senator white house. And this has been a helpful discussion. We have a number of members who come from the coastal areas, and it is a great discussion. What i want to point out in my question, and i will start with you, mr. Mcnulty a federal government one size fits all approach simply does not work. I come from iowa and i am landlocked without the ocean front property. And let me dig into why i think that there needs to be a little bit of the difference in the federal government. One of iowas Top Priorities is flood mitigation. We have heard about it here. The second biggest city in iowa went through two major flood events in 2008 and 2016. To date, they have not received any Construction Funds despite being authorize and mentioned as a priority in the 2016 bill. I had a meeting with the head of the corps and we had a k conversation about the process, the corps and the Budget Committee used those funds. I said that states in see dar rapid sings, iowa, will never receive money to the corps, because they will lose out to those with higher economic benefit, and values. I am interested in improving this so that community can tap into the funding. Because if the only core reason is property value, it is hard for me to conclude that the corps including building beaches in front of multimillion ocean front homes to be a higher priority than protecting the people that live in iowa. It is also suggested to me in the meeting with the corps, because i have a pick yourself up by the boot straps attitude and we are working well in the communities to properly mitigate, we move farther down the list of the priority, and basically being penalized for being proactive. So my question for you, mr. Mcnulty, how can we Work Together to improve or broaden the metrics that the corps uses to give the yurl communitys a fighting chance at federal funds . Perhaps my colleague, mr. Pratt, can answer that better than i can when it come ts to t flood mitigation. Okay. I am willing to listen, thank you. Well, certainly, coming are from one of the states with the rich valuable Ocean Front Properties and i understand the position that you are coming from. I will say that mu dealings with the corps from delaware to ocean front, there sis a lack of funding to do a lot of the work that we do. It sounds like we do get a lot of money, and we do, but as the testimony indicated, a tremendous return on the investment. I dont think that the corps metrics take into account any full range of benefits of any flood iing, whether it is oceanr gulf coast or the rivereen coming this spring, but i dont believe that the metrics are there, and the corps cannot give out a full discussion with anybody about the full range are of benefits. Maybe it is economical means. In delaware, they look at not the personal property value, and the inpra sfrak chur density, and the radios and the waterways and the electrical Delivery System, and what happens if that fails in a storm . As the senator indicated that we have not only still wa water volume, but nonstill. So if we had nonstill, it would be different, but it is different with the structures falling into one structure into the next, to the next. The core needs a liblization of the analytics of how the benefits accrue, and inform the discussion, and i dont know your states needs, but i think that it is something that nationwide, the corpss process of deliberation, and how they develop the benefit cost ratio, because they predicate the spending on that, and if it is higher, and then you get some funding. But if you trat lower tipping rate, you wont get any funding. That is what we have to understood cover, what goes into the benefit side. I have said that all costs of all projects are calculated right down to the benefits, and the benefits are 70 or so on the table. We need better information. I think so. The onesizefitsall approach is not working. If we see the federal funding going to the areas of the coast, it is real hard for me to justify why the safety of the people incedar rapids is not as important as those issues of the coast. Thank you. Mr. Booker. I want to thank the panel, and i conquer with my colleague and friend in iowa, and it is a valuable discussion and i appreciate it. I have big concerns about our nations Water Infrastructure affecting the poor areas, and lot of the inscentives dont always provide for us to be built out. As a result off that, you will be seeing real challenges for families around this country to get clean safe water. And start with michael mcnulty. You talked about in your testimony that we have families in many parts of this country, and i believe that in West Virginia and new jersey that lack the proper facilities, and according to the census bureau, when it comes to water faciliti facilities, they say that 500,000 homes lack access, and 500,000, the richest planet on the earth lack access to hot and cold wa water for a bath or shower and a working toilet. That is astonishing including 11 h,000 homes in rural new jersey, and alabama, and less than half of the population is connected to a municipal water system. Many of the familys septic systems fail, and they are forced to dump the sewage p behi behind the homes which brings up Serious Health problems. In addition to maintaining the water supply, and this is the leading spread of intestinal parasites including hook worm. A lot of the parasites are not thought to exist in the United States of america, but in Rural Community, and so it was a former mayor, and these were issues that i dealt with all of the time, and it can be difficult for cashstrapped cities and municipalities and rural and urban to have these projects based on a loan which is less lower debt. So it is not in the higher avenue areas that do have the tax base that can support the work. I believe that the answer has to be more grants, and grant programs. Currently, the state can use no more than 30 of the total amount that it receives from the state Revolving Fund on direct grants. I am wondering if you would support removing the 30 cap and let the states provide more clean water grants to the communities with the demonstrated financial need . Absolutely. Remove those restrictions. And if we could remove that restrick shun, can you give an idea of the impact that it would have for the rural, and the ur urban cashstrapped communities . In West Virginia, as many folks know, we have a 500 million deficit coming up, and with the decline in the economy and with the coal severage act, and the communities dont have the funds to contribute to projects like they once did and by removing that restriction and lengthening the time to have the loan paid back, communities could do so much more, and not relying on the local partner where they are cash strapped. It has added a tremendous benefit across the country. Maybe on that point, because i know that for me as mayor and trying to manage it, lowering the cost of loans helped us to do a lot of projects, but perhaps for you, and maybe bill panos, there is a lot of talk about the trillion dollar infrastructure package right now, and i worry if it is more about the lowinterest loans and not direct grants. The thing that i am concerned about for those of us concerned about the debts and the deficits, we have to understand that the investments in infrastructure indicate a multiplier in the economic growth, and i would like to know if the last 20 seconds or so that i have, would you comment on the power of having an inf infrastructure package to include direct federal inv investment, and not just loan projects. Is it important to have a balance of the direct federal assistance and especially in the areas that cant afford the low interest loans that would need some federal resources invested in the communities. Speaking of the Service Transportation and rural states, yes. Direct investment does help and especially with the states that have, and rural states like wyoming with low volume, and dont have the kind of the Revenue Generation that other states do, so, yes. Thank you, senator booker. Mr. Boozman, thank you, mr. Chairman, and the Ranking Member from delaware, thank you for having this important meeting and we appreciate all of you being here. Mr. Batt, arkansas is home to 44,000 farms generating an economic benefit of 20 billion a year, and employeeing 1 of 6 arkansians. I believe that invest manage the infrastructure is going to compete jobs and keep the area cometive on the global stage. Can you talk about how this would help systems u su s such ing a ri cultural industry remain competitive. Thank you for that question. Excellent question. We like you unless we are playing you. Okay. Yes, i agree. As your neighbor. Yes, you are right. Yes, if you will think of the United States map and consider a puzzle, and each piece of the puzzle is a county, and that is 3,069 pieces in the puddlzzle, it connects. But if you take a piece out, it is not complete, and it is the same thing with the roads and the bridges. We all have to connect, because while we grow the Agricultural Products in our states and Rural Counties, it has to be delivered to turban areas, so it is very important that we all work as a partnership and make sure that we can deliver our foods and fib er to the urban area. It is not rural versus urban, and we are in this together, and one piece of the puzzle. Thank you. And right. The second part is what is the repercussions of the fixes and fails strategies that we are using now. As you can point out, great roads in oklahoma or great waterways, but if you cant get there or get out of there, it is really going to all go together. Again, that is correct. We dont have blue roads and red roads, but we have roads and bridges and, it is the same trucks that come up and down the highway get off on the county roads and we are have to get the food and the fiber off of the counties and into the urban area s. And especially as you look at what the futurists tell us that the mesamerica is going to have do as far as feeding the world, 20, 25 years as we are going forward. Mr. Mcnulty, according to a recent michigan study, water prices have rizden risen since 2010 and if the trend continues, it is estimated that 45. 6 of american households will not be able to afford water u services in the next five years n. Your professional opinion what is the effect of rising water prices and the effect on the rural areas of arkansas . It is going to be hard. It is going to be hard for the citizens, because they will begin to cut back the use of the potable water, but it is not going the change the Debt Service Requirements that are on the systems. So you are in a catch 22 and folks say, i will reduce it and save money, and then the water system is so i think it will be a very challenging time for rural Water Systems. So i guess tell me about in the next infrastructure bill if that we do, do you feel like its important then to address affordability . Absolutely. Affordability has to be one of the primary factors considering when you are funding a project in this country. What can people afford . You know, we talk about folks that already have poetable water and sanitizization and other folks that dont have any at all, those folks are going to be much lower income. So were in a catch 22 situation, the epa sometimes rightly, sometimes trying to get the last little bit as far as our point sources, that raises rates as you know make it such as you remedy that, but then as you point out, youre in a situation where people actually dont use as much water and so then that raises rates further. It certainly can. Uhhuh. Very much. Senator cardin. Thank you mr. Chairman, i want to thank all of our witnesses, to me this is one of the most important subjects we have to deal with where we can get democrats and republicans to get things done and as senator carper had in his opening comments were not proud to get a d on our infrastructure, when you look at the industrial world and see how they deal with transportation versus the way we do, i think the number is 1. 6 billion the American Society of Civil Engineers saying we need in regards to our surface transportation. Mr. Chairman, i just really want to under scoscore the statement made about rural areas versus suburban areas, the program thats been rolled into, is absolutely vital for jobs in western maryland, the importance for West Virginia, and maryland is critical to their Economic Future and it doesnt come without a cost, theres an initial cost, but you get it back, i81, a very important part of western county maryland is a vital link in which we are trying to get some fast lane grants for, but we need more money, and with senator carper on the Eastern Shore of maryland i think a lot of people agree they want to get to our beaches and theres a real issue getting to the Eastern Shore and in delaware, and so its expensive for these highway projects and we need to do it. In our urban areas we have one of the most congest arcorridorsn the world. I want to get senator carper down here easier than his amtrak ride every day. We could make that a little faster for him if we had a little modern high speed rail. It was interesting how much you have to go back, it was senator moynihan back in the 1990s for the indiaclusion of mag it carries passengers at world record speeds and japan is planning another 300 miles to carry 100,000 passengers. I imagine th i mention that because thats what other countries are doing and our tech analonology is rea kind of old. We do need to modernize our system. I know the Prime Minister is going to be here and hes going to talk to President Trump and how to help the northeast corridor with some of these real issues. Let me take my remaining time mr. Pratt to go over the water issues and i agree with senator boozman, affordability is a key issue, our Water Infrastructure needs the number i had was about 655 billion over the next 20 years to modernize our Water Systems, and water main breaks costing literally billions of dollars in waste. But if youre talking about affordability then you need support, public support, to deal with the Water Infrastructure. If you put it all in the rates or look for Public Private partnership, which im for we really need a stronger commitment for the Revolving Funds, so we can modernize it, make it more efficient without an excessive burden on the middle income families who cant afford it. I would like to get your experience on what you have seen. Im coming from a perspective of a Natural Resource manager but is certainly within the realm of what my sphere of exposure is involved in. I think its an issue that the public is not aware of the risk of the ignorance we have put ourselves in. Thats at the federal and state level. Whether its a coastal hazard, we have exposure to a number of risks, water supply, water distribution, Transportation Systems, the infrastructure that protects those. I dont think weve informed the public well enough. The imperative is not out there to the degree it should be to get a Public Movement behind that investment and i think we have to tell the story better. My reaction is basically we need to be very gut honest about how impoverished we have been in maintaining our Infrastructure Systems and how much more we have to do in an everincreasing population and demands on limited resources. You will hear much more on the chesapeake day and appreciate delawares cooperation with that. Its a critical factor and dealing with shorelines and erosion is very much part of this so i thithank you for your answer. Thank you for holding this really important meeting in an increasingly contentious political environment in the senate and around this country. I would hope very much on this issue there could be a coming together to address what almost everybody understands is a national crisis, so thank you very much for holding the hearing and i look forward to working with you. Let me just talk about vermont for a second. Vermonts roads need an additional investment of 700 a year to get into a state of good re 70,000 million. We have to rebuild after hurricane irene, which knocked out a lot of our bridges and roads, so we invested a lot, but i would hope we can go forward and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure not as a result of disasters but being proactive. We are the richest country in the world. We used to, mr. Chairman, lead the world in cutting infrastructure, that is now not the case. We are now behind many, many countries. And the result of that is loss of productive, the result of that is the loss of safety, too many accidents occur because of a crumbling infrastructure and a result of that is the loss of economic potential in jobs. So when we talk about rebuilding our crumbling roads and bridges and Water Systems and waste water plants, i had the opportunity being flint, michigan a year or so ago, and what i saw there made me disbelieve that i was living in the United States of america. But its not only the water in flint, michigan. We have failing Water Systems all over this country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail today we are behind japan, china, behind many, many countries, so mr. Chairman, i think that there is bipartisan agreement that we have not invested in our infrastructure. And i think there is bipartisan understanding that when we invest, we create jobs, now a couple years ago i brought forth legislation called the rebuild america act and proposed a trillion dollars investment and that was thought by republicans and democrats to be a wild and crazy idea. But im glad i think theres an understanding given the depth of the problem, a need to invest 1. 6 trillion that a trillion dollars is in fact a reasonable amount of money. And when we do this, not only do we create a nation that is more productive and safer, we also create up to 15 million jobs and jobs in areas where we need them. And one of the areas certainly in rule america has to do with broadband, so i want to put in a plug with broadband with infrastructure, so any small town in wyoming, kids are not going to do well, businesses will not do well unless theres a proposal for broadband. Where the difference of opinions going to come i think which is outside the jurisdiction of this committee is how do we fund a trillion dollars . I am not synthetic to giving huge tax breaks to wall street or large multinational corporations who invest in our infrastructure. Thats not the way we should be going in my view, i think Interest Rates are very low now. I think its appropriate in a nation thats spending 650 billion on the military that yes over a tenyear period we can invest a trillion dollars it will repay for itself. So i would say just like to ask one and i apologize for not hearing any of your comments, but somebody who maybe the gentleman from wyoming and the needs of Rural America. Wyoming is different from vermont but both very rural states. Where would you like to see Infrastructure Investment going . I can speak for Service Transportation in wyoming. And say that any proposal that brings forward something that we can take advantage of as a rule state is a positive thing. P3s and other kind of borrowing doesnt work in wyoming or rural states because we dont have the revenue to support that. So any proposals that move forward are helpful. The second thing is the existing formula system for delivering those federal dollars to rural states works, and yes, there would be improvement to project delivery, improvement in having flexibility for states but those systems do work. So enhancing monies to those existing Delivery Systems would be very positive for rural states like wyoming. Thank you. Let me ask you this, in vermont with a few exceptions. Were expanding it a little bit, if you live in a more rural area and want to get to work in a more urban, i use those in quotes because our largest city is 40,000, the only way to do it is by automobile. I think we need to build up a rural bus system as well. Do you have problems like that in wyoming . Can people get to work in other ways than by automobile . We do have a tran ssit, whic connects us countries and cities to provide senior transportation. But if im a worker and i want to get to work other than by automobile, in vermont its pretty hard to do, is that the case in wyoming as well . Its hard but not im probapo. We also have some of that in wyoming as well but its different than the needs in vermont or wyoming, different from the needs in new york. Thank you, senator. We have from a colorado and wyoming standpoint, the need for direct federal investment in highway, i agree i was head in the wyoming state senate before getting elected to this position. I think it is critical we show the American People we are being efficient with the current levels of funding so if you are aware from a vermontwyoming standpoint to make sure that it is as unnecessary as possible, that we could just get more bang for the buck . Thank you, senator. And thank you for your career work in this transportation field. I think that i hear this a lot from folks, what can the federal government do, State Government do, locals do . Maybe it would be better to have a cost benefit analysis done by congress to come in and just from a nonpartisan viewpoint just say what are the costs that are imposed by some of these regulations because some view costs very differently and to understand where there are necessarily benefits and actual costs that are slowing down the system and at the end of that everybody says okay it was bipartisan and in a bipartisan way well implement might be a good exercise. We have a project in the northern part of our town of sheridan, a city of sheridan and its called the north sheridan project. 14 years for us to develop the planning, permitting and delivery delive delivery about two years to complete. So anything we can do to deliver projects quicker, is a good thing. Improving states flexibility and also improving the flexibility in the use of our infrastructure, let me give an example senator had talked about broadband, we are engaged a broadband project, and we use the sides of our highways to run our broadband line. That single decision has created an accelerated broadband allowed us to do more things with the existing infrastructure that the federal government is funding in our state. It follows up with what senator sanders were talking about with rural states can you talk about how projects can also benefit urban states . Yes, theres a couple of things, one is the sort of the National Connectivity benefit. Truck traffic through wyoming starts in the west coast and goes to chicago or east coast cities, this is a national benefit. The idea that we invest in those interstate highways will help commerce at both end of the trip. Again as stated in my written testimony, these highways in rural states bring product to market, Agricultural Products, forest products, so theres a strong benefit in urban areas by investing in rural states and finally as stated in both my Opening Statement and written testimony i mentioned tourism. These roads bring million of visitors to Yellow Stone National park in mt. Rushmore, these are tourism dollars spent in america, not in europe or canada or some other place, and the reason is they can get there and get there safely and home safely and the only way sometimes the senator pointed out is by highway, by car so investing in rural states helps the nation and the urban areas in those respects. Senator carper. Thank you i had a special interest in that question, so thank you, just scratched that one off my list. We have a history in this country of user pay approach, those who use roads, highway, pay for them directly or indirectly. That an approach we should generally stick with or move to Something Else . In wyoming. Very brief very brief. We have a mix of drivers licenses fees and what you referred to earlier the tax, all of that ads up to only about 30 , the other 50 comes from federal government then the other 20 comes from a variety of different sources. Ask i didnt ask for the mix, is the idea of a user fee something that we should move away from borrow money to do all this . Repate riariate money . Yes, it is helpful. Thanks. I know your water, but any thoughts on user fees . I realize in some places its a hardship in very poor communities. Senator, were certainly doing that now through rates so thats the approach we have across the country thats not just 100 grant funded in many cases and even if it is you still have to use user rates. Yes, we definitely support user fees. In oklahoma we had gas taxes as we do on the federal and in our wisdom in the dirty 30s, they robbed our transportation funds and used it for other things and now we cant support it but people are always willing to support user fees. I know its not really up in your alley, but any comments . One thing if i could. This trust fun is a good example of what it would be used for, Something Else to keep in mind in the discussion. Thank you. Yes, on user fees and would say users are already paying higher taxes in an unintelligent fashion paying more for goods. Repairs to their vehicles. Yes. Another followup if i could for you secretary bodd, californcolorado one of the fastest expected pop you population in the next 25 years, what challenges do rural areas face in the next 25 years . Thank you senator carper, we had an infrastructure built in the 1950s where 6 Million People, were going to 8 Million People in the next 20 years and i cant build my way out of congestion. What do you think contraception . [ laughter ] possibly. That would be a unique of the Transportation Trust fund. Yes. Planned transportation is where we need to go. [ laughter ] but i just believe that mobility you used the word mobility i think whether its in a car, in ridesharing, in transit in multimodel i think in the urban area i cant widen i25 to the 15 lanes because we dont have the environmental clearance so its not just about widening, it just not feasible. Great to the panel thanks all. Senator sanders. Thank you, mr. Chairman. There are some people who think that we are looking at a looming water crisis in this country in terms of being able to deliver clean water to the people of america. Are they right in their concerns . Can somebody comment on the situation of making sure we get clean water to people in this country . Im the closest person for that. I will say we look at Water Resources across the nation. There are some questions today using problems we have had around the nation in madison and other locations an we have an aging infrastructure in the water Delivery System as well. Water pollution is as senator cardin mentioned about the Chesapeake Bay problem and yes, we do have a looming problem. I have referred to it as patching holes with gum and tape as best we can, but we need to do a lot better. Further discussion on water . Anyone want to comment on it . I would say in Colorado Water is everything. Where it comes from, how it gets dispersed so while i do transportation for a living i think a lot of our growth we talked about if theres not clean water and water supply in the rest of the country, then why are we doing any of this . Right. Next question is rail. When we look at infrastructure is it appropriate to look at rebuilding an aging rail system which now in many ways lags behind other major countries around the world . Am i right on that . Wrong on that . Prior to serving in my current role, i served on the northeast corridor system for rail. I think its ridiculous in the u. S. We dont have the rail as an option in urban areas where we have the density similar to that in japan or other urban areas in network, we have a lot of sprawl caused by a car culture that needs to be addressed. Some urban centers are doing it but there are certainly corridors that could benefit. But rail investment is certainly something that is lagging in this country the. In terms of climate change, a move of rail would also help would it not. I think one of the best commercials was a freight commercial that says we move a ton of freight with a gallon of diesel fuel. From a Climate Impact statement it just makes a lot of sense. We talk a lot about passenger both cars and moving people around but freight is an incredibly important part of that and Passenger Rail can add to that as well. I worked for the delaware bay in that kmacapacity worked with with a gentlemen from new jersey and he talked about new jersey being a particularly congested state that the highway system is already obsolete as best as they can try to stay ahead of it of the route 95 corridor and we have to go back on relying on a t trimodel, and if we dont embrace all three options, we have a lot of chicken going out of and empty cars coming back when we have coal going down and chicken carts going back you could utilize these a lot better. As somebody who believes we should move to wind and solar sustainable energy, do we have a grid, anyone want to comment on the state of our electric grid . All right. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I would mention bill gates has his reading books, and one he recommends is the grid. I thought you were going to say he was going to read my book. All right. The grid. I didnt see yours, would you like to plug the book shamelessly right now . [ laughter ] the hearing record will be open for two weeks i want to thank you all the witnesses for being here, the time and testimony was very helpful. The hearing is adjourned. We have more live coverage from capitol hill coming up at 2 30 eastern, the army, navy will testify regarding the military readiness and sequestration of the respectedirespective branches. And continuing the nominating of jeff sessions, members stayed in overnight to debate that nomination. A final vote is expected at 6 50 eastern and you can watch it live on cspan 2. Here are a few programs cspan viewers saw last week. Rex tillerson. When i wake up each morning the first thing i ask myself is all of our people safe . The safety of every Single Member of our state Department Family regardless of where he or she is posted is not just a prior to for me its a core value and will become a core value of this department. [ cheers and applause ] from the senate floor, senator brian shauts on immigration. Its not that we are trading liberty for security. We are getting no additional security. This is all about being cruel to muslims because its good politics for some people. White House Press Secretary sean spicer on Media Coverage. On one Media Coverage we are talking about downgrading the president. The idea of calling it journalism is pathetic. The uk Prime Minister. The president is clear that policy is wrong. And michael flynn. President trump has criticized the agreements reached between iran and the Obama Administration as being weak and eneffective. Iran is now feeling emboldened. As of today we are putting iran officially on notice. If the nominee cannot gain the 60 votes, cannot garner bipartisan support of some significance, then the answer is not to kachange the rules, the answer is to change the nominee. If you want me to start issuing subpoenas on the dccc im probably not going to do it but just go ahead and suggest it. The gentlemens time has expired. Are you asked me i did not, i did not ask. You asked me i did. Gentleman, gentleman i think we need to calm down here a little bit. All programs are available at