Transcripts For CSPAN3 State Officials Testify On Rural Infrastructure 20170209

Wyoming, delaware and colorado. Senator john ber rasso chairs the committee. Good morning. I call this hearing to order. President trump has made improving our nations infrastructure a top priority. Infrastructure is critical to our nations prosperity. The Senate Environment Public Works Committee has jurisdiction over our nations highways and roads and its ports. These things allow for American Goods to go from the heartland to the coasts 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 or delay the modernization of infrastructure and the impact is particularly counter productive 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. 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 cannot be one size fits all. What works for baltimore, maryland, might not works for wyoming. Big ticket projects on the scale of the big dig in boston that 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 it has been discussed by Administration Officials may be Innovative Solutions for crumbling intercities 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, montana, north dakota and south dakota, Public Private partnership and other approaches 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, rhode island, vermont just to name a few. We 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. I want to 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 that to simply fix the roads and ports in our urban areas while ignoring the roads in inland ports in our rural areas that allow from products to get to the world markets. As testimony today will demonstrate, rural Water Systems also have unique challenges. Theyve been inundated by regulations from the epa which harms their ability. Rural Water Systems are challenged by the same regulations that big city Water Systems face but do no have the same resources to comply. Any Infrastructure Solutions this Committee Considers should help address rural challenges. These challenges include funding. Like their road project counter parts these systems are not the best candidates for loans. Its important to note written testimony today from the general manager of the Public Service district in West Virginia. He states, due to a lack of economys of scale in lower median Household Incomes, Water Infrastructure is often less affordable a much greater cost per household. This means that a Water Infrastructure project poses a greater final 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 works results in less money repaid to the Funding Agency and a correlating demunition of the corpus fund. Were going to have to find new ways to help pay to modernize the important projects. Its my hope that in committee will work to find solutions that work for Rural America as well. 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. Thanks. Thank you for bringing us together for an important and i think invigorating hearing. I want to say to our guests from oklahoma and West Virginia, wyoming and from colorado by weigh of delaware and from delaware, welcome were delighted that youre here. Mr. Chairman, colleagues, these folks hear me say this more times than anyone i remember but my dad taught me born in West Virginia and grew up in virginia. My dad taught my sister and me that the things worth having are worth paying for and he used to say, i dont care if you owe somebody money, work three jobs till you can pay that off but you ought to take responsibility for your obligations. The other thing my dad used to say to my sister and me. If a jobs worth doing its worth doing well. 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 today youll help us sort of thinking outside the box a little bit. Its easy to come up with ideas on how sotospend the money. How are we going to raise that money . Need some help there and need some help in figuring out how do we get help from the same money or less money. For the record, i have that couple documents mr. Chairman 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 american needing to modernize and rebuild aged infrastructure as a point of concern. Democratic senators recently released a blue print for dressing infrastructure at large, much more broader than that including water and waste water. I believe that members on both sides of the aisle are supportive of addressing this problem. This could be one of those issues that unites us and at this point in time in our nations history we could use a few of those. As a recovering governor, i look at most legislation through a particular lens and the lens i look at it through is how a particular investment make for a more nurturing environment for job preservation. In this case we got a bunch of factors i want to mention a couple of them. Quality of our workforce, the skills they bring to the workplace is important. Affordable energy. Public safety. The idea of having access to capital and access to foreign markets. Research and development, investing in the right things that generate job creation. Tax policy, common sense regulations, access to decision makers, clean air, clean water, predictability. Businesses need predictability. In 2013 an outfit called Global Institute, they issued a report called game changer and analyzes how the u. S. Could dramatically transform and expand our economy. In one of the top Game Changers that they gave us was infrastructure investment. Heres what they said the report show we need to invest between 150 and 180 billion more in infrastructure every year. Just to make up for years of underinvestment and to enable robust future growth. They said in the Global Institute if we invested it at this level it would add some where between 1. 4 to gdp every year. Almost double. Create 1. 8 million new jobs by 2020. For a lot of people on the sidelines that would like to go to work and need to go to work this would be a great place for them to go to work. One of the best ways to invest and get the most from our dollars is to maintain our existing infrastructure. Not just to do big, fancy new projects but to maintain our existing infrastructure. Its critical for the economy. Helps people in businesses move more efficiently. Last year the average commuter every year they give us a new update, they wasted 42 hours per person sitting in traffic, not moving. Not moving anywhere and thats sort of a typical thats like a work week for a lot of people just sitting doing nothing. Modern more modern infrastructure would mean less time. Our Nations Health our wealth security, rely on production of goods and services. Every day people and goods move across and array of physical systems which are collectively known as our Critical Infrastructure. Its ageing and in need of significant Capital Investments to help our economy continue to grow. 2013 infrastructure report card issued by the American Society of Civil Engineers some of them are here today, they gave us for roads, dams, Drinking Water a d, d. They graded our inland water ways with d minus. Ports received a c, bridges received a c plus. Im particularly interested in hearing three key areas that while financing techniques are a tool that may be appropriate for some kinds of project, financing by itself will not solve all infrastructure needs regardless of whether we are rural or urban state. Secondary i hope to hear more about is the need for broad infrastructure, broad Investment Strategies and while traditional forms i feel we need more investments to protect our natural infrastructure as well including our shorelines, ecosystem restoration. Risk to manmade increases and many cases becomes unmanageable. Im interested in hearing how the federal government can be more efficient with our current funding streams and get the most out of every dollar of federal investment. Infrastructure is a shared responsibility. In some cases with the private sector. I want to ensure that were helping state and local governments with this shared burden while giving them the flexibility they need. I also want to know how we can prioritize the assets we have first before budding new assets that we cant afford to maintain. Finally, this is no one size fits all approach to solving this challenge. Got to work on a bipartisan method. Lastly, mr. Chairman, colleagues, we got a couple people before us. We welcome all of our witnesses but i want to introduce tony pratt current administrator of the shoreline and waterway Management Section within the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and environmental control. I call him mr. President , president of the american shore for our nation. Hell be discussing a wide range of Water Infrastructure issues and why protect our natural infrastructures is important. Shalin comes to this hearing 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 Performance Management, reduced agency debt by 30 while delivering 2 billion in infrastructure improvements. I wrote one more note here, were not blue states. Were not blue states or red states. Were the United States. We got states that are largely rural, more urban. The needs that we have in our rural states whether its water or transportation are different from maybe what we have in 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. Welcome, everybody. Would you like to welcome your oklahoma witness. Yes, i would and 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 that are on both and were meeting at exactly the same time. 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. I want to introduce the goodlooking witness we have. I already introduced tony. No, im real pleased to introduce one of our witnesses because ive known Cindy Bobbitt for a long period of time. She was commissioner of grant county oklahoma. She was the 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. Further more 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 agriculture 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 as 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, grain, 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 nine and she bought her first piece of land when she was 16 years ole. She knows first hand the importance of agriculture industry to oklahomas economy and the needs in getting those goods to market. Commissioner bobbitt, i want to thank you for being here and for coming all the way from grant county to washington, d. C. Thank you, senator. Could i invite you to please introduce your witness. Thank you. It is a great deal of pleasure to introduce my friend, mike mcnolte who has the general manager of Putnam County West Virginia representing hes testifying on the behalf of Putnam County but also the West Virginia rural Waters Association and the National Rural Waters Association. Mike is known as an expert in our state and throughout the nation in this area. He received a bachelors of science from West Virginia tech and a masters from marshal university. He served as the general manager since 2004 and he was previously the director of the West Virginia rural water association. Rural communities and everybodys referenced this have had particularly challenges in West Virginia. Not only do we have Rural Communities but tough terrain that pose challenges in the maintenance of Drinking Water. Mikes found a way, very creatively in his area to work with the Regulatory Compliance and leverage the federal dollars. To extend a lot of municipal water to a lot of people. And we talked just yesterday theres still some people left that we cant forget about it and we wont forget about but i know hell bring valuable insight to this committee. Thanks for coming from West Virginia. Thank you. Thank you, senator. Id also like to introduce bill panose. Whos the 17th director since hes a graduate of California State University where he studied both physics and forensic sciences. His previous work is engineering with the trw corporation. Immediately prior to heading wydot. He was the director of Wyoming School Facility Department for two years. Well hear from our witnesses and well start from the department of transportation. I do want to remind the witnesses that your full written testimony will be made part of the official hearing today so please keep your statements to five minutes so that we may have some time for questions. I look forward to hearing all the testimony today beginning with mr. Panose. Thank you. Members of the committee, director of the wyoming department of transportation. Today im presenting a statement for my own state of wyoming and the transportation departments of 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 states 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. They enable tens of visitors each year to reach scenic wonders like mt. Rushmore and Yellowstone National park. So there is a national interest. And plenty of good reason for the nation to invest in 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 would be put to good use 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 rural states are low and almost never feasible for Revenue Generation. So 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 ever of paying off principal and interest is high in rural states, a deterrent to borrowing for those projects. We do not oppose a rural and improving the nations Transportation Network but they are unlikely to result in meaningful surface approximate four to one ratio funding. Also, we would have particular concern, if any, Surface Transportation Infrastructure were structured in a way that made rural state participation unrealistic. New Program Elements limited to extremely expensive projects would not be accessible by our states at least in the 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 are critical to maintain and improve americas surface 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, hoit trust fund will not be able to support even Fast Act Program levels much legislation meet needs that will grow as the economy he 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 simplify program deliver ywe want each program dollar to deliver more benefits. Before closing ill briefly mention that our rural states face significant Financial Funding challenges. We are geographically large. We include vast tracts of federal lands. 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 this 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 wyoming is three times as much at 319. So any surface Transportation Initiative congress develops should be crafted in a way that makes 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. Welcome and please begin. Thank you. Good morning. Members of the committee. My name is mike mcnolte a state chartered Drinking Water and waste Water Utility located just outside of charleston West Virginia. On behalf of West Virginia were grateful that youve included a voice for Rural America at this hearing. Before i begin my remarks id like to say thank you to our states junior senator for her assistance in improving West Virginia rural 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 and your assistance was essential, thank you. When thinking about national Water Infrastructure proposals please remember that almost all of our countrys water both Drinking Water and sewer are small, small in Rural Communities have more difficult affording Public Water Service due to the lack of population density in economies of scales. In many states the great majority of community Water Systems serve fewer than 10,000 people, for example, in West Virginia its 444 of the 468 community Water Systems. In wyoming its 300 of the 319 systems and in delaware its 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 well bypass Rural America and be absorbed by large metropolitan systems. Small community are more difficult to fund because they are smaller in scale. Numerously indicated 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 median Household Incomes means Water Infrastructure is often a much greater cost per household. This means that a Water Infrastructure project poses a greater final 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 inner connecting with other smaller communities to extend water and Sewer Service and become the engine in our county. One of our Utility Partners the town of buffalo was able to finance the sewer expansion that was needed to fund the new toyota plant. 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 was built over a hundred years ago by coal companies. We have areas in my county with failing septic systems that need to be services by extending sewer lines. We still have pockets of people with no Drinking Water at all and they rely on hauling water. Rural communities are in need of economic stimulus. For example, in West Virginia and wyoming, the recent declines in the Energy Sector have 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 you and the committee for the numerous opportunities this committee has provided Rural America. Thank you. Ms. Bobbitt . Thank you for the very warm welcome. Chairman, Ranking Member and distinguished members of the committee, thank you for holding todays Committee Hearing on modernizing our nations infrastructure 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 sin did i bobbitt and i serve as chair of the grunt county oklahoma commissioners. It serves a population of 4,500 our and 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 also have the most bridges or bridgelike structures over 3,500. Think about that. Thats almost one bridge for every resident. While this infrastructure was ideal for transporting live stock and crops 70 years ago it is inadequate to support todays heavier trucks, increased traffic and higher operating speeds and grant county is not alone. Roughly twothirds of the nations counties are considered rural and face similar infrastructure challenges. Today i will highlight some of these 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 are experiencing increasing demands on our transportation infrastructure which can no longer accommodate our agriculture and energy needs. While local governments can do all we can and we are trying to, 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 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 mind we have some 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 to 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 increased federal fund to go bridges particularly off system bridges 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 nations bridge deficient back log by 2028 we would need to invest 20 billion annually well above the 12. 8 billion invested today. Third, an increased 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 statewide 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, ms. 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 recognizing something a little bit out of the box. Were not talking about roads in this testimony, were talking about Green Infrastructure, particularly coastal infrastructure. Infrastructure obviously from our Panel Members is something which we talk about in rural terms of roads and bridges and man Building Infrastructure but the Green Infrastructure that im talking about particularly beaches, dunes and wetlands are incredibly important for a number of factors. The safety that they provide during storms, the recreational opportunities and the great number of jobs that comes with those components. I want to talk about the kind of jobs first of all that come from beaches, construction of beach erosion projects is something that provides opportunities for engineers and planners and economists. Its an opportunity for dredge companies with a tremendous amount of employment to come in and do work. We think about beaches and delaware is a good example, rehoboth beach, had some good times there, is we think about the primary jobs, restaurant help, cooks, chefs, wait staff, hotels and motels and the employment there. We talk about people who our lifeguards and retail sales and real estate sales. But theres another facet of jobs that we dont talk about very much thats plumbers, electricians, roofers, builders, any number of trade jobs, hotel and Motel Management folks up and down the coast. Because of the recreation attraction of the coastline. Dr. James houston who is the Research Laboratory from mississippi indicated in work that hes done the beaches get more Recreational Use than all of our National Parks combined. This adds up to a Major Economic impact. Beaches generate 2. 25 billion to the economy annually. In 2025 for every one dollar invested by the federal government, the federal government returned 570 in annual tax revenues from beach tourism. 1 spent 570 returned. Its a very good investment we believe. For every Million Dollars invested approximately that those 30 jobs created. Coastal infrastructure is a wise investment. You either pay now or pay later. We have found in numerous storms, many storms that have hit the golf and atlantic coast, that the impacts are tremendous. 65 billion was 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. If we took a third of that about 20 billion and had invested in that in over the nation over the last 20 years would have been about a billion dollar investment, we have found that 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 and that 65 billion need would have been much greater reduced. Beaches and do you knows provide many benefits. We talk about jobs, we talking about the protection they afford. We also factor the dividing line between open water and estuarium waters. Producing jobs for fisherman. In delaware we had an example of the department of interior investing 38 million. In recovery of National Wildlife refugee. Had we spent two to three Million Dollars in restoring the beach prior to the damage being occurred we would have avoid that 38 million investment. Its wise for a lot of factors. For jobs and for protections. We believe in my summary statement we believe from the state of delaware that a higher investment that protects structures 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 theres probably justification for a higher number than that. I think thats a modest request. When the current funding is about 75 million to 100 million a year. We think that that number should be much higher and i thank you for your time today. Thank you very much for your testimony. Mr. Pratt. We appreciate hearing from you. And id like to go please begin. Thank you, sir. I want to thank you chairman and Ranking Members. I also want to recognize another neighbor and thank him for his efforts to pass authorization. In the interest of time i will summarize my testimony in addition to serving as the secretary of transportation in delaware and as the executive director of colorado i also served as the Deputy Director of kentucky cabinet. At the federal Highway Administration. So im keenly aware of the balance of urban and rural needs in the country and how its not a one size fits all solution. Colorado is a large diverse state with rapidly growing metropolitan areas. Experiencing increasing constraint mobility and vast rural areas that rely on effective and well maintained Transportation System to move agriculture and Energy Products to market. Im going to tell a quick story that i used a couple years ago in testimony prior to passage of the fast act. I tell this story because its indicative of the challenges we face. When i first began as the executive director of the colorado d. O. T. I took an 1,100 mile trip around colorado. The first traffic jam i got into was in a pretty rural part of the state up near ft. Collins on i25. I. 25. I. 25 is the major north south artery not just for passenger traffic but also an important freight corridor that connects canada and mexico. Freights an important part of our job in the transportation world p. When we got outside of the denver, we headed north we got to a four lane section which is similar a lot of the interstate thats present in rural areas. It was a thursday morning after rush hour so i was assumed there was an incident ahead because the traffic reminded me of the beltway in baltimore. There was no incident. That was just how traffic flowed on a regular basis. So when i asked what the plan was to add capacity i was told that the plans on the books were for that section of i. 25 a 45 mile section to be widened in 2070 based on current funding level so 16yearold who got their drivers license could have anticipated that road being widened when they turned 70 years old and that is just unacceptable and that is not an urban problem or rural problem that is 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 both the state and federal gas tax have not increased in nearly 25 years. Now in order to advance these important improvements to the i. 25 corridor we have called together state, local and private funds with toll back bonds and a 15 million tiger grant to construct just a 14 mile first phase from loveland to ft. Collins. There remains over 1 billion in just 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 decades we have 10 billion in unmet funding needs for highway and transit projects across colorado. We are working to address the severely deficient of i. 25 south of denver between Colorado Springs and denver. These are the two largest cities in the state. The interstate is still in its original configuration. Were working towards having that project ready to go in 18 months but we lack 4 to 500 million to make the initial improvements. In another example, we are poised to move forward in 2018 in denver but were short about another billion dollars on that project. Every year we delay that project goes up. We take advantage of financing tools such as Public Private partnerships but financing alone does not solve our funding challenge in transportation. Weve been challenged to do more with less. We are trying to do that. Weve implemented Cash Management to flush out any cash reserves. Where it makes sense were using tolling and Public Private partnerships. And finally, were embracing technologies, vehicle to Vehicle Infrastructure and vehicle to vehicle technologies will help us operate the system much more efficiently but that does not change the need that we have a significant need for investment in this system. To conclude i would respectfully 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 an 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, we appreciate you being here. Were going to turn to questions and ill start with director panose build america Bonds Program that was part of the 2009 stimulus package. You note that it doesnt work for rural states who want to build roads and bridges. It looked i looked at that list of projects funded by build america bonds on the Treasury Department website. When you look at it, our state of wyoming had six projects the state of delaware had six projects, vermont had four projects, West Virginia had two projects, rhode island had only 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 . Its a great question mr. Chairman. My response really is limited to Service Transportation and the explanation really relies on the characteristics of rural states. As i said in my written testimony we have low population densities and we have very extensive Road Networks so paying back the principal and interest involves a high cost per capita and it discourages borrowing for transportation and rural states and, in fact, after talking with state treasure this last week, wyoming has never borrowed for a road project, surface transportation project in the state of wyoming. Thats how i would at least briefly respond to the question. And never borrowed in 120 some years, so never borrowed. Thats correct. Am i correct in assuming that all things being equal that if Additional Resources are provided, that you would rather have these resources go to your departments because youre provided testimony for a number of different states for five different states it would go to your departments so the states could decide where to apply the funds . Rather than receive specific directives from washington where money is spent . Absolutely, mr. Chairman. Youre here representing the interest of the transportation departments in five different states. What would you say is the principle concern of the rural states in developing the programs within the framework as described by the fast act . First its important to note that the fast act struck a very good balance with respect to rural and urban interest and i want to thank congress for that. They did a great job of moving the fact act through and balancing urban and rural interest. Theres also a concern but i think its in 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 actually to plan for future projects. And in our state we just finished or were working with our state legislature now and needed to ask for twice the amount of Borrowing Authority to than we wouldve otherwise to be able to cover some of those cost, cash flow needs for the projects as it relates to the continuing resolution. So in other states thats our state but in other states advanced construction and borrowing against state funds if available keep projects on schedule. Thats one thing, the continuing resolution. The second is flexibility, Program Flexibility in delivering programs and projects is fairly complex and planning and Program Requirements sort of keep us keep multiplying and the Performance Management rules also add to that and so developing some ideas like were doing here today in areas to improve Program Flexibility i and improve project delivery will help a great deal. Those were just a couple of observations, continuing resolution and stop and go and Program Delivery. Mr. Mcnolte, you mentioned almost all of the Water Systems in West Virginia serve populations fewer than 10 thousand people the like larger Water Systems these small systems still need to comply with complex federal regulations, with less administrative and Technical Expertise than the larger counter parts do. Could you talk about what steps because we all want to make sure we dont sacrifice safety, what steps congress could take to simplify compliance because we dont want to sacrifice safety. I believe congress could allocate more funds for Technical Assistance in training, to help the smaller communities and the operators and administrators to ensure that theyre able to be up on all of the regulations that come out of the epa and so forth and i believe that would really be the biggest benefit to have more dollars to go to Technical Assistance. Senator carper. When was the last time wyoming raised their gas tax . Not very long ago. 2013, right. Three or four years ago. Yeah. By ten cents. We did. Did everybody that voted for that get thrown out of office . No. Why not . The state and the citizens there saw a need for it. Is there a lesson there for us in the congress . Im sorry . Is there a lesson for us in the congress . Certainly in our state and in our particular state, it was necessary because of the changing economy in our state. Our state went through and continues to go through an economic shift that is not repeated in many states but my friend to the left here in West Virginia has had that as well. The state legislature saw that coming and they were able to support certain transportation projects by moving that forward. It was very difficult in the state legislature to move that forward but wyoming was very aware of its impending future and were proactive at being able to support that. Were scheduled to run out of money in the federal Transportation Trust fund in 2020. Its three years from now but just around the corner. Thank you. West virginia, mr. Mcnolte, former congressman from new york state with whom i served, actually its another michael mcnolte but were glad youre here. Abe lincoln used to say the role of the government is do for people what they cannot do for themselves. Whats the role of the federal government . To your recollection senator. The federal governments i see it as the obligation to ensure that the funds are available for any mandate that comes down the pipeline, for additional testing and Water Quality standards. I believe its certainly the federal governments obligation to make sure that communities receive the funds in order to comply and no unfunded mandates. Good. Im going to ask you to answer for the record, not here because i dont have enough time, but the question im going to answer for the record, better results for less money, what are some things that we need to do . I think we tried to do that in the fast act. What are some other things we can do should do between now and 2020 to enable you and all of us. If i had the time i would ask you to answer that on the record. I would ask for tony, its great to see you guys. Thank you so much for your service to our state and really to the pick it up, you come through it on i95, between will ming tin and newark and pick it up, route 1 from dover to the beach, and we have more fivestar beaches, and go from delmarva, ocean city, and to virginia. Theres an inlet called indian river inlet. Its just north of bethany beach. It flows east west with the tides. Several bridges built there over time and we had to eventually replace the bridge because of scar that going on in the inland. When Hurricane Sandy came to town, it had an adverse effect on the bridge there. I wanted to ask tony and jaylen just take a minute, talk to us about the intersection of shoreline protection, dune protection and an infrastructure, major infrastructure investment, over 100 million. How did that intersect there . Ill start because i was responsible for that bridge during Hurricane Sandy, was driving toward route 1 and got a call from the governor and said on cnn he saw our new 250 million bridge washed away. Instead of turning left, i turned right. Turns out the new bridge had not washed away. The old bridge had washed away which i think was a pretty good justification for us to replace the old bridge. It was a pretty, you know, those hurricanes, you know, and i remember when i first became the director secretary in delaware, three weeks after that, irene showed up. Everyone told me hurricanes dont come here. They often veer off or go somewhere else. In my four years there, we had two hurricanes so something changed around that. The infrastructure is so critically important. What i was struck by is how once the land link was lost how incredibly impacted those communities were. And people trying to get out, get back in. Their kids get to school. You know, i would just say that it just draws home the importance of investment in infrastructure and its so incredibly important that we do make intelligent investments. My times expired. Thank you for that. Ill say to my colleagues, we spent a fortune on that new bridge. The next hurricane that comes along could further undermine that bridge if we dont invest in the dune protection and beach protection. One hand sort of washes the other. Thats an important point i wanted to make. Thank you. Thank you, senator carper. Senator inhofe. I have to tell you, when the tornadoes veer off, they come to oklahoma. First of all, i have something to submit for the record, mr. Chairman. This is the Largest Coalition ive seen. This is a letter to President Trump from over 500 organizations through almost everything in america. Theres a level of popularity and ask that be admitted part of the record. Without objection. You know, youve had a little bit of an advantage because youve had a lot of advice and counsel with gary ridley. Im sure you and mr. Panos both are friends of gary ridley. Hes actually served as a witness before this committee more than anyone else in history of this committee. Because he knows the subject. Weve been able to pass a lot of good things and i and i think weve done some pretty creative things. Now, commissioner bobbitt, its unique the challenges you face in a very rural, rural oklahoma and youve gotten had to be creative from time to time. Could you expand on the challenges and give an example or two of how youve gotten projects over the finish line with the limited funds in your county . Thank you for that question. Yes, grant county is very rural. 4,500 people. While we have the most bridges and the fifth highest number of road miles in the entire state of oklahoma, yet our funding is 63rd out of 77 counties. So we definitely have a challenge. But one unique thing that we have done in the past as counties we worked as a partnership with the Oklahoma Department of transportation, gary ridley, and we came across when they were going to deconstruct the i40 crosstown bridge, there were a lot of used beams there. Now, beams that we could have our engineers inspect and look at and we recycled them, so we took ownership. Counties took ownership of all those 2,000 beams and brought them back to our counties. Grant county received over 100 of those beams. More beams than any other county. We have more bridges than any other county. Successfully, we have already built ten new bridges and have more beams to put if place as soon as we get the funding. That talks about how important a partnership is. That was a state and local partnership. We also would like to have that same partnership with the federal government to help us bring home projects. Yeah. And you know, the president has talked about the Public Private partnerships. Is there anything, any comments 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 so well for our very rural county. We have Municipal Bonds that are tax exempt that we need to protect because we use that type of finances to help us move our projects forward. During the f. A. S. T. Act, ive had the advantage of dealing with these issues for 22 years in the senate, and 8 years before on the committee in the house. One of the problems we had, people forget about this, up until the middle 90s the biggest problem with the Highway Trust Fund is we had too much surplus. We know what happened to that. We know now were in a crisis. One of the things we have done has been more you addressed this, mr. Bhatt, a little more creative on things we could do in the bill in giving more power to the states and giving them options, for example, on the enhancement percentages saying from state to state, in california they may have different ideas than we have in oklahoma, how to use those. We gave different states that option. What do you think about giving states more of those types of options and how you can make stretch your dollars a little bit more. Anything we can do to adjust the rural states through those adjustments are very, very do you agree with that . Here this is a trend weve started. We want to continue with this giving more of the options to the states. Do you agree thats moving in the right direction . Thank you, senator. Yes. I would say one of the best parts of the f. A. S. T. Act in addition to the certainty was the flexibility and its incumbent upon states to work with locals and others to make really good decisions. We pass on and interact closely with our local partners to make sure it is a colorado or a 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 country a new lesson of the dangers of old infrastructure in allowing our Water Infrastructure to crumble, millions of families find themselves in real danger of drinking leadcontaminated water. Not every community is satisfied with this dangerous status quo. In madison, wisconsin, local officials demonstrated leadership in throwing away bandaid fixes. They actually at the local level committed to a decadelong Infrastructure Project that culminated in fully replacing every service line that every lead service line in madison. Now, when my constituents learn about the infrastructure they dont understand why the children of wisconsin deserve greater protection than the children of illinois and delaware. There is no good answer, and this is why the Congress Needs to act swiftly and unanimously with direct funding support, far greater than our efforts to date to jumpstart vital water projects. As a state official, mr. Pratt, who must struggle daily in the needs of fiscal challenges and meet the needs of your residents, would you concur that states delaware both needs and would put to good use direct federal investments and Critical Infrastructure such as safe Drinking Water . Ill answer that from the perspective of somebody who handles Beach Management and wetlands management not water supply management. Certainly the overarching theme is we have not invested as we should have as a nation in that infrastructure. I would certainly welcome any other comments of the panel. Its not my world of expertise on water supply but certainly the stories we hear from around the nation are compelling stories about how i think that the overarching issue is that we have an appetite for construction of new and not much of an appetite as a nation for maintenance of what weve built in the past or improvement of what weve built in the past. Thats a philosophical point i think that needs to change. Im not an expert in water supply issues but thank you for the question, anyway. Not necessarily just water supply. People of illinois sent me to the senate with a clear message, americans are willing, ready, eager to start rebuilding our nation at all levels, all infrastructure. When i travel across illinois from Rural Communities to suburban neighborhoods, theres a unifying call on congress, please work to modernize our nations infrastructure. Make it a priority. Whether it is roads, rail, simply put, illinoisans Want Congress to place a big bet on america. They want their tax dollars invested in American Workers and American Companies to rebuild and modernize american infrastructure and must go beyond road, rail and bridges. We should be wise in making sure our investments succeed in the 21st century. This includes investments in broadband to empower every family to access high speed internet. I have parts of illinois where our kids cant do their homework because they dont have access to broadband. We cant attract businesses to Rural Communities because theres no broadband. Its all of it. I do think there is a role here to play for federal government to come in and provide those resources in partnership are local and states. I dont want to fall into the trap, madison replaced all of their own lead water supply so thats what every state should do, to each their own. Anybody on the Witness Panel can certainly talk to this. How important is the role of federal government coming in with federal dollars to help you be able to do this . Ill answer that from my perspective, too. Its in the world that i work in. Its very imperative that the federal government take an involved position. Home rule indicates that the local communities will develop their own Land Use Plan and develop as they see is best for their community. Thats across the board, residential and industrial and recreational areas and commercial areas. And when that fabric of community is built, if theres anything that is imperil, the federal government has to come in, if theres a tornado, a hurricane, or an earthquake or storm, the federal government has to respond. After the suffering has occurred. Whether it is pollution of water and no water supply for a community or a tornado wiped out a community in oklahoma. Its the federal government that will have to put the dollars up there. Investment ahead of time before the disaster, before the crisis has occurred is an important turning point we need to make and i believe absolutely the federal government has a tremendous amount to save by that investment. I thank you for those comments. Anybody else on the panel . On the end. 70 of our transportation dollars in colorado come from the federal government so its incredibly important there is a strong federal role in transportation investment and on the broadband comment, governor hickenlooper directed us to work with the Economic Development folks to provide broadband, the new highways of the 21st century. Its incredibly important for us in colorado as well. Im out of time, mr. Panos. Youll have to respond on the record. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank all of you. A couple of things. Id like to start with mr. Mcnulty. First of all, id like for the record to thank you as a resident of charleston, West Virginia, affected by the Chemical Spill into our primary water source. Putnam county Water District really came to the rescue for a lot of folks who were without water. So i dont know if you want to say take a couple second and say some of the things you did as a regional resource to help people who were without water in a crisis. Thank you, senator. Our Water Utility, we immediately were in contact with the governors office. Governor tomlin. And we worked with his staff to make sure that they could start bringing in tankers. We do have a fuel station right located at our Water Treatment facility. And we also we helped local folks that came in with their own containers fill those containers and so forth. So we did play an active role. So did many other rural utilities surrounding the county and so forth. A lot of folks helped out. Well, you were your help was very much appreciated and everybodys help. I think West Virginias Rural Communities around the country are known for neighbors helping neighbors. Certainly in that instance you all definitely helped us. Id like to kind of pivot off something mr. Pratt mentioned. In your experience at putnam, in Putnam County, are you looking more at extending new or replacing old . I mean, wheres the push pull there in terms of Water Infrastructure . Both, actually. We are expanding, as i mentioned earlier in my testimony, we just finished up a large sewer expansion to existing homes and businesses. But were also very well aware of the maintenance that has to be done and upkeep of our system, so weve expanded our Water Treatment plant, as you know. Right. And there to see it. Were still in that balance of doing both. Is it easier to get funding for one or the other . I havent had a difficult time obtaining funding for either one. Okay. Okay. The other thing in your testimony, you mentioned the we passed the water bill last year as we were leaving and in that is wifia which is a Water Infrastructure financing method similar to tifia for the waterways and for water projects. Now, in my view, this holds great promise, i feel as though, for another funding mechanism for Rural America, Rural America Water Systems. Youve expressed some skepticism for that. Would you like to speak about that . Yes, maam. The wifia will not really benefit smaller Rural Communities because you have to have larger projects to qualify. Uhhuh. Of course, our greatest concern is we do not want to see any of the funds from the Drinking Water srf or the clean water srf go to fund wifia. We want to make sure those funds stay in tact. I think the intention of wifia is to use those as a jumping point, not intending to decrease their value or decrease their amounts but to use them as a leverage point. I wonder if it would be possible for local smaller projects it band together for a wifia project. I dont know if those are within the bonds of the law. Do you know that . I dont know that, senator. I would like to ask you, mr. Panos, on the transportation issue, you mentioned in your statement that the ppps dont work for rural areas. Weve had a couple in actually mikes backyard, route 35, thats been a ppp project that i honestly dont think were on the verge of getting it completed now could have gone on if we hadnt had the ability for our state d. O. T. To use the ppp projects. Why is that not working in Rural America . Is it the scale or what . Thank you for the question. Generally in the rural states, we just dont have the Revenue Generation or the volumes that would support a Public Private partnership concept. Certainly other systems as well, other financing systems, we could look at but direct funding works best for us through the formulaic system. Its based on the type of volumes we have. Right. And the expansive nature of our surface can your state sell bonds to begin paying on a payback so you can get the project done earlier . Theyre called garvee bonds in West Virginia. Dont ask me what garvee its an acronym. Senator, we have used garvee bonds. Our primary source is through the federal government. The comment earlier i think was made about the ten cent fuel tax i guess was passed four to five years ago. 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 implementation of the infrastructure, and to advance our safety and commerce. The Highway Trust Fund has served to equitably distribute funds to states, rural and urban, and is the linchpin of our Transportation System. As many here are aware, the Congressional Budget Office projects the Highway Trust Fund will face a deficit of well over 100 billion in the 5 years following the f. A. S. T. Act expiration. So thats why i have introduced the new bill, infrastructure act, to repair the highway Solvency Fund without raising taxes of hardworking americans. Id like to ask the state d. O. T. Directors, mr. Panos and mr. Bhatt. How does this come to maintaining the roads and bridges, is there any substitute for this critical apportion funding . Mr. Bhatt, would you like to start, please . Thank you so much, senator. Funding certainty is everything and, you know, i do conservative talk radio once a month. I just go on the show and i got its not always a love fest. Its important for government to talk to our constituents. Somebody said why did you stop this project at point x, why didnt you any fool could see all you had to do was continue it on down another 20 miles. Unfortunately, we have to have logical terms, based on the needs. One of the best parts about the f. A. S. T. About was getting us out of that cycle of continuing resolutions around funding. If we have certainty around funding, then we could make better plans and it costs states and all taxpayers less money when we have certainty. And mr. Panos. For wyoming and surface transportation, i think that certainly the idea of certainty in funding, federal funding, is very, very important to us. Were very conservative in terms of how we look at finance our system. Our system is not being expanded as we speak. Its being preserved. And so we are just getting in enough money to preserve the system that we have now. Our 2,000 bridges and 7,000 miles of roads. For us, we take a very conservative role. I think the proposal that, you know, identifies the proposal that youre talking about i think identifies about youre referring to identifies a couple of things. It identifies the Highway Trust Fund is not going to be a consistent source of funding after 2020, thats critically important to us, were not expanding, were preserve what we have there. The investment has been made by the federal government. The second is it really looks at the process, regulatory review, of the projects and looks at how time consuming that is and the need to improve that. We support both of those things. Those are things that i think not only wyoming but other rural states would agree would agree with. Its good you stepped up and put some of those ideas front and center for us to look at. How we go about that, well work with congress obviously well work with congress over the next few months to develop. But i think theyre solid ideas. We, like colorado, are looking for consistency. Yeah, thank you for your compliment of the proposal. I think it i think its really important to identify a consistent Revenue Source without raising taxes at the federal level to be able to fund beyond maintenance because we all need to make sure we have that capacity in the future as well. And you you mentioned a second part of my proposal that really addresses the critical drays that projects are faced when they have to wait for that federal government approval. And i can tell you that my state has spent time and money on those burdensome federal Highway Administration processes that really dont change any outcomes. Moving forward. For example, were looking at upgrading a substandard dodge street s curve project in omaha and seen costs grow by 3 million because of these burdens that are out there. Again, this idea thats in the build usa infrastructure act, its based on a proposal that i was able to get advanced in the state of nebraska thats proved successful and hopefully we will be able to have a conversation on that here. But i would ask you, both, mr. Panos, you addressed part of it but would i believe the greater state authority over this approval process is going to, because weve shown that its going to move that approval process forward without really taking shortcuts. Were still going to meet the requirements that are there, but i think its a better a better system to put in place and a better use of taxpayer dollars. Would either of you like to address that . Just on the delays youve faced with going through the federal Highway Administration. Thank you, senator. Im quite torn on the answer that i give you and i say this with all respect. I, as a director of d. O. T. S, have fought with the federal Highway Administration to try and expedite projects over the years where we were ready to go on something. So on the one hand, expediting projects is very good. We have a big project, 1. 2 billion viaduct project in denver that is take 13 years to get to it. And some people think it is ridiculous. Theres a school next to that project. If my children went to that school, i wouldnt want the state d. O. T. To come in and say, hey, were moving the road next to you. Were taking 63 homes in the process of that. One of the federal requirements we have to follow, theres certain rules and regulations, when we take properties we have to show the burden. As the state d. O. T. Person, i would love for there to be fewer regulations, as someone impacted by the project, i think some of those federal regulations do serve a purpose. And i wouldnt disagree with you on that, but i think if we can expedite, that would always be a saving. I apologize. Im over my time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, senator fischer. Senator rounds . Thank you, mr. Chairman. It isnt very often we have an opportunity in a Committee Like this to talk about what we want to see in the future. Youve heard the president suggest that infrastructure is critical. Youre hearing members on both sides of the aisle saying that the time is now to actually start discussing how we do Infrastructure Development in the United States coming up. And i want to take just a different level than simply asking you about rules and regulations and so forth. My friend, the Ranking Member, as a former governor in his home state, recognized they could make good decisions about what their needs were. They see major issues we dont see in south dakota. Theyre concerned about rising water levels in their neck of the woods. South dakota, were concerned about things like our Rural Development of the basic infrastructure of simply delivering rural water. Matter of fact, weve got rural water programs in south dakota that the states fully funded their share of it and yet the federal government hasnt got enough money in it to actually pick up their share and the cost is going up. Weve got people that dont have that water available. Weve got other rural Water Systems in the state, and they dont have enough money to do the maintenance on some areas and they havent quite filled them out yet. Just for a minute what id like to do, as individuals that have a clear understanding from the state and local level, the opportunities and capabilities that you have, i want to reach out a little bit here. Lets make a couple of assumptions that perhaps a lot of people in this country will say will never come true. Some people say were talking about la la land or fairyland. Lets assume republicans and democrats actually agreed on a need for an infrastructure bill. Number two, lets agree, take the assumption and keep the snickers down, okay, lets agree that Congress Actually agreed on a funding bill and that Congress Actually agreed on differently than in the past, actually agreed on how they were going to pay for the funding bill. Lets agree we actually agreed on how we would distribute a significant part of those funds back to states and local units of government. Lets say we actually had the foresight to talk about roads and bridges, Water Development, about broadband which is clearly important and perhaps give some opportunities for states and local units of government to have some flexibility, what they saw as needed Economic Development. Lets just say they actually had the foresight to make a deal with the states where the states actually had some skin in the game and had a match. Similar to what we have in the highway fund. I know im making some major stretches here, but lets say we also said that we expected that a number of different projects could be made available, ports of entries along the border, whether youre talking about ports along our coast, airports, road bridges, Water Development and so forth. This is your opportunity to just expand in terms of what your capabilities are and what the limitations are the feds currently put in place. What we do to hamstring you but also the things you think youre capable of doing. Can i ask each of you, share a few seconds about what you see as your capabilities and what you could do with the resources if you had that shot. What could you do to make it better for the people that live in your area . Yes . Senator, if i could start, i the for us in wyoming, certainly with surface transportation, which im speaking about today, wed implement more safety projects. Safety is our number one issue. If we can develop additional safety projects and put them on the ground, whether that be construction of additional lanes or other kinds of safety systems, we would. We are maintaining what we have and thats what we have dollars for right now. We have a great relationship with the federal Highway Administration, a great relationship with our federal partners. Could you start it fairly quickly . We could. Okay. We have plans to put in place because of our great relationship with the federal Highway Administration and others, and so from a surface transportation, we would focus on safety. Thats our number one issue. Were a safety agency. Probably more than were a transportation agency, were a safety agency. We would focus on that. Thank you, senator. We would expand water Distribution Systems and waste water collection systems and build facilities for treatment as well. For instance, we have a project in our home county, Putnam County, West Virginia, we have 56 homes without Potable Water whose folks have to haul their water back to their home cisterns. Our county commissioner have applied for a small cities bloc grant for the last five years for 1. 5 million and for the last five years theyve been turned down. That project is designed it would be ready to go the day the after the funding got if place. Thank you. Thank you, senator. We would probably look at our off system bridge systems. We want to make sure we have safe bridges for school buses, Emergency Services, fire departments. We want to make sure those routes are brought up to standards and yes, we could do that pretty quick. We have engineering on several bridges, we just dont have the funding. We have shovelready projects ready to go. Thank you. Sir. My perspective is different, im not a highway transportation expert. The scenario you present is very dizzying so ill be dizzy. I know. If we did, i think first of all the very first thing we need as a nation is a better informed discussion as to how we invest in a decadal sense. Were doing investments i think in short term very much. I hate to say it, i was an elected official in delaware in a small town, we tend to make decisions in a two, four, six year kind of timeframe. We went to decadal planning. Understanding where the trends are, where the vulnerabilities are. If we did a better job of that, we would know how to utilize the Funds Available if they were untethered. So i think we need to have a much better information in the decisionmaking process informed by those factors. We lost 32,092 americans on roadways last year. Safety is our number one issue. Funding if there was a way to find bipartisan agreement would go a long way to saving american lives. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Senator whitehouse . I appreciate very much our 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 our guest from delaware who like rhode island shares a coastline. In rhode island, we have Sewage Treatment plants that have, as we face rising seas along our shores, moved first into the flood zone and now into velocity zones for storms. After a major storm, i far too often have to go and talk to a family whos looking at the remnants of their home that has been torn into the sea by the storm activity. We have coastal roads that are at risk of either destruction or flooding. And in many cases, the coastal road is the access to a community which creates very significant Emergency Services risks. And as were mapping more effectively where storm and sea level will be intruding, were finding more and more that the Emergency Services are on the wrong side of the flooding area. I think people remember the scenario in senator bookers state of new jersey where they couldnt bring the Fire Equipment in during sandy because of the flooding and neighborhoods burned with nobody to fight the fire. So, you know, we have those concerns. I have seaside restaurants, places like taras and the ocean mist, two wonderful bars right side by side on the sea that not long ago had 100 feet of beach and people would play volleyball and sun on the beach. And now theyre up on pilings and the ocean washes under their buildings. State beach facilities are similarly compromised and having to be moved backwards as we yield more and more of our coastline to the shore. And, of course, in a really major storm, something equivalent to the hurricane of 1938, which gave delaware a pretty good hit, but really nailed rhode island, the 10 inches of Sea Level Rise weve already seen, the 9 feet of Sea Level Rise that our state and federal experts tell us to expect by the end of the century, plus, two feet if the wind conditions are right in added tide plus we get about two feet in added tide when the moon and the stars all line up so you get an astronomical king tide. We are really planning for some very serious disruptions so i hope my colleagues as we consider what our next Infrastructure Investments should be will understand that in our coasts, we not only get all the other effects of climate change, but we get this rising sea level and then the worsening storm surge that compromises our coastlines and i know delaware let me turn it over to you to comment, because i know delaware has actually i think you have even lower elevation than we do. And a lot of the similar coastal problems. I visited there with senator coons to hear from your experts and i know he is aware of Rhode Islands because his dad, who sadly just passed away, was the head of the Rhode Island Fisheries Association for a while. So with that, i leave it to you to talk about coastal infrastructure. Your points are well made and i appreciate the opportunity to address it. We are im from boston area originally. I know the new england coastline. You have a lot better topography in rhode island than we do in delaware. Were very flat, very much a remnant of a higher sea millions of years ago. That said, one foot of rising sea level can be exponentially hundreds of feet of intrusion in a landward projection. Much better maps inform us where the risks are going to be, where the risks are today and where theyre going to be, we can begin to utilize those and the local communities to begin to plan how we can remove Critical Infrastructure to better places. I think the best indication of sea level in the future, we have a tide two, three, four feet above the predicted, we see where the water goes and certainly map where those intrusion areas are. We have to do a better job. Thats part of the discussion i think were doing here today which is looking at how we manage the coastline so they provide the protection they have provided for a long time. Optimize what we learned in san day. Theres a comprehensive plan developed by the corps of engineers for the northeastern states. If we expand that to the southeast, gulf coast and eventually the west coast, that kind of systems thinking and one of the things i think ties into my colleagues here is we have particularly on the eastern seaboard and more urbanized area, we have a tremendous stress on highways for congestion and also tremendous number of 18wheel tractor trailers on roadways. New jersey has taken a lot of money to separate the highway from the jersey turnpike, truck traffic from pedestrian or automobiles for other use. And i think thats a way its coming to the future, i think were going to have to look at how the waterways of this nation have to be returned as a means by which we get better transportation to goods and services around the coastal area and means Port Management would which produce sediment. Sediment should be utilized for benefit of restoring beaches, restoring wetlands as much as we possibly can. We have institutional blockades we have to take on but im kind of running out of time here. I appreciate it. This isnt a question that requires an answer. One of the things we have discovered in rhode island as we have tried to develop the tools to be able to anticipate what storm surge and rising seas present by way of risks to us, is that the fema mapping of this has been, frankly, outright defective. And that as we look at it, we find that femas unable to replicate when it has to go back and do it again, the results it claims are solid. If you cant go back and replicate a result, its probably not very solid. We see them making premise decisions in their mapping that dont make any sense. We see them operating off of facts that are not very accurate. The result is that we will find people put into the flood zones that are not going to be flood zones and they have to buy insurance that may not be necessary. Far worse, you find people who are not being told theyre in a flood zone and the discrepancies between what our university and Coastal Resources center are doing and what the fema maps show are really considerable. I hope am some point some of our more coastal folks might join together in taking a hard look at that because a lot of people are going to be really disappointed by being let down by defective and erroneous flood mapping. Thank you, senator whitehouse. Senator ernst. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks for our panelists for being here today. This really has been a helpful, helpful discussion. And we have a number of members that come from those coastal areas and its a great discussion. What i want to point out in my question, and ill start with you, mr. Mcnulty, is that a federal government onesizefitsall approach certainly doesnt work. I come from iowa. I am landlocked. I dont have oceanfront 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 infrastructure priorities is flood mitigation. Weve heard a little bit about flood mitigation here. Our second biggest city in iowa went through two major flood events, 2008 and 2016. And to date, they have not received any Construction Funds despite being authorized in the 2014 bill and again mentioned as a priority in the 2016 bill. A few months ago i had a meeting with the head of the corps and we had a conversation about the process, the corps and the office of management and budget used to budget for flood mitigation projects. I expressed to him that communities like cedar rapids, iowa, and states like iowa will likely never see federal assistance from the corps because they lose out every time to larger states that have higher Property Values and thus higher economic benefit. Im really interested in improving these metrics so our Rural Communities have a fighting chance at tapping into expertise because if the only metric the corps uses to determine the economic benefit of a project is Property Value, then its hard for me to conclude that the corps considers building beaches or not to conclude that the corps considers building beaches in front of multimillion oceanfront homes to be a higher priority than protecting the people that live in iowa. It was also suggested to me in my meeting with the corps that because iowans have a pick yourself up by the bootstraps attitude and we work very well together in our communities to properly mitigate, we move farther down the list of priority and were basically being penalized for being proactive. And so my question for you, mr. Mcnulty, is how can we Work Together to improve our broaden the metrics the corps uses to give our Rural Communities a fighting chance at federal funds . Perhaps my colleague, mr. Pratt, might be able to answer that just a little better than i can when it comes to flood mitigation. Okay. Im willing to listen. Thank you. Certainly im coming from one of those states that has rich valuable Oceanfront Properties and i certainly understand the position youre coming from. I will say this, in my dealings with the corps, from my state of delaware, the oceanfront, there is a lack of funding to do even a lot of the work we have to do. It sounds like we do get a lot of money and it does, as my testimony indicated, theres a tremendous return on that investment. I dont think the corps metrics take into account the full range of benefits in any front of flooding, whether its ocean or gulf coast or whether its riverine or snow pack melting in the sierras this coming spring. I dont think the metrics are there. The full range of benefits. Could be recreational benefits. My understanding of the corps process from delaware, they look at not the personal Property Value but they look at the infrastructure at risk, the density of infrastructure, the utilities, the roads, the waterways, the electrical Delivery System and what the overall effect is if that fails during a storm. We have, as the senator indicated, we have not only stillwater flooding, we have velocity water. That was certainly the case with sandy. Had we only had stillwater rising issues, that would have been one thing in new jersey and new york. Totally different thing when you have waves washing through structures and one structure falls into the next to the next to the next. I think the corps certainly needs a liberalization of its analytics on how the benefits accrue, and inform the discussion. I dont know your states needs, but i certainly think that that is something that nationwide the corps process of deliberation and how they develop the benefit cost ratio. Thats what they predicate their spending absolutely. The higher benefit to cost ratio. If youre at the high tips end of that, youre going to get funding. If youre at the lower tipping rate, youre not going to get any funding. Thats what we have to undercover, what goes into that benefit side . Ive often stated all costs up to the penny of all corps projects are calculated down to the penny. The benefits, potential leave 50 to 80 of them on the table. I think we need better information. I think so. I think the onesizefitsall approach isnt working. Every community is different. If we see all the federal funding to go to areas on the coast, its hard for me to go back home and justify why the safety of people in cedar rapids is not as important as the safety and livelihood of people who live on the coasts. Thank you very much, thank you, mr. Chair. Thank you, very much, senator chair. Senator booker . Thank you very much. I concur with my colleague and friend from iowa, this is a valuable discussion and i really appreciate it. I have really big concerns about our nations Water Infrastructure. Especially as it affects rural areas in america. As well as some other poor areas. Its the kind of thing that a lot of the natural private sector incentives dont often provide. As far as being built out. As a result of that, you see real challenges for families around this country about getting access to clean, safe water. And so ill maybe start with michael mcnulty. You talked in your testimony that we have families in many parts of this country, i believe West Virginia as well as new jersey, that lack the proper facilities. According to the census bureau, when it come to these water facilities, they say 500,000 homes around the country lack access. 500,000 in america. The richest country on planet earth. Lack access to hot and cold Running Water or bathtub or a shower. Or a working flushing toilet. Now that to me is astonishing data. It includes about 11,000 homes in new jersey and portions of rural alabama that are home to lowincome predominantly black communities. Less than half of the population is connected to a municipal water system. Many of the families septic systems fail and forced to dump sewage behind their homes which brings up a lot of very Serious Health problems. In addition to tainting the water supply in general and harming the local environment, this is the leading spread of intestinal parasites such as hook worm. A lot of the parasites are not thought to exist in the United States of america but still exist in a lot of these communities in rural areas. And so, you know, i was a former mayor and these were issues i was dealing with all the time. And it can be difficult, very difficult, for cashscrapped cities, municipalities, rural and urban, of projects based off of only loans, essentially lowinterest debt. Especially in areas that dont have high revenue stream or tax base than can support the kind of work. I believe the answer has to be more grants and grant programs. As you know, currently a state can use no more than 30 of the total about it receives from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund on direct grants. Im wondering just, would you support removing that 30 cap and letting states provide more clean water grants to communities with the demonstrated financial need . Absolutely. Lets remove those restrictions. And what if we were able to remove that restriction, can you just give an idea of what impact it would have for these struggling rural and urban cashstrapped communities . You know, in West Virginia, as many folks know, you know, we have a 500 million deficit in our budget coming up and with the decline in the economy, especially with our coal severance tax. So communities are no longer have the funds to contribute toward projects like they once did. By removing that restriction and possibly lengthening the time that the loan could be paid back, communities could do so much more. We wouldnt have to rely on local partner as much where they are cashstrapped. Just had a tremendous benefit across the country. So maybe on that point, because i do know that for me when i was mayor and trying to manage things, even lowers the cost of loans helped us to do a lot of projects, perhaps to you, my last question, maybe bill panos, theres a lot of talk about a trillion dollar infrastructure package right now. My worry is if that is much more about lowinterest loans and not about direct grants. And the thing that i know for those of us who are concerned about debt and deficits, you know, we have to understand that investments in infrastructure create a multipliers effect in economic growth. So i just want to know maybe for the last 20 or so seconds i have, would you just comment on the power of having an infrastructure package that did include direct federal investments, not just loan programs . Is that something you would say is important to have a balance in that infrastructure of direct federal investles . Especially in areas that cant afford even the lowinterest loans that would need some federal resources invested in their communities . Speaking for surface transportation and in rural states, yes, direct investment does help. Especially with states that have, like rural states like wyoming, that have low volumes and dont have the kind of Revenue Generation that other states do. And, so, yes. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Thank you. Senator boozman . Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you and the Ranking Member, senator from delaware, for having this very, very important meeting. We appreciate you all being here. Miss bobbitt, as one of arkansass largest industries, agriculture is crucial to the states economy. Arkansas is home to 44,000 farms generating an economic benefit of 20 billion a year and employing one out of every six arkansans. I believe investing in infrastructure will help create jobs, keep Commodity Prices low and help us remain competitive on the global stage. Can you explain how reliable and efficient infrastructure system helps industries such as the Agricultural Industry remain competitive . Thank you for that question. Excellent question. We like you unless were playing you. Okay. As your neighbor. Youre right. Yes, if you think of the United States map and consider it a puzzle and each piece of the puzzle is a county and thats 3,069 pieces in that puzzle and it connects and the puzzle, if you take a piece out of that puzzle, its not complete. Right. Well, its the same thing with our roads and our bridges and we all have to connect because while we grow the agriculture products in our states or in our Rural Counties, it has to be delivered to the urban areas so its very important that we all work as a partnership and make sure that we can deliver our foods and our fiber to the urban area. Its not rural versus urban. We are in this together. We are one piece of the puzzle. Right. Thank you. And the second part was going to be whats the repercussions of the fixes and fails strategy that were using now . As you point out, you can have great roads in oklahoma or waterways or whatever, but if you cant get there or get out of there, it really does all go together. Again, that is correct. We dont have blue roads and we dont have red roads. Right. We have roads and bridges. So it is a partnership and it does need to be the same trucks that come down the interstates and the highways get off on our county roads. So and weve got to get our food and fiber off the rural area and into the counties or into the urban areas. Right. Especially as you look to what the future is telling us that americas going to have to do as far as feeding the world. You know, 20, 25 years as we go forward. Mr. Mcnulty, according to a recent Michigan State report, water prices across the country have risen by about 41 since 2010. Which really is an amazing statistic. If this particular trend continues, 45. 6 of american households will not be able to afford Water Services within the next five years. In your professional opinion, what kind of an effect will rising water prices have on a rural state such as arkansas . It will be hard. It will be hard for the citizens because theyll begin to cut back their use of Potable Water. But that will not change the Debt Service Requirements that are on those systems and so youre in a catch 22. Folks are thinking, well, ill reduce it and save money, you know, the water system is like, well, i cant make my debt payment so were going to have to continue to raise rates. 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, you know, that we do, do you feel like its important to address affordability . Absolutely. Affordability has to be one of the primary factors when considering when you are funding a project in this country. What can people afford . You know, we talk about, you know, folks that already have Potable Water and sanitation. Then the folks who do not have any at all. No access. And so, you know, those folks arty. Ically going to be in Rural America much lower income. So were in a catch 22 situation as you mentioned. Again, the epa sometimes rightfully so, sometimes very, very aggressively trying to get the last little bit out thats so expensive as far as our point sources and things. That raises rates, you know, as you make it such that 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. Very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, senator boozman. Senator cardin. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I want to thank all our witnesses. To me, this is one of the most important subjects we have to deal with is an area where we can get democrats and republicans working with this administration to get things done. Senator carper pointed out in his opening comments, were not proud of the fact that we get a d on infrastructure. When you go to any other country just about, certainly in the industrial world, and see the way that day deal with transportation versus the way we do, we need to invest more. I think the numbers 1. 7 billion, 1. 6 billion the American Society of Civil Engineers say we need in regards to our surface transportation. Mr. Chairman, i just really want to underscore the point you made in your Opening Statement about rural areas versus urban areas. In maryland, i can tell you the appalachian highway system now which has been rolled into the overall surface transportation programs, its absolutely vital for job creation in western maryland. The north south highway which is important for the people of West Virginia, pennsylvania and maryland is is critical to their economic future. There is an initial cost but you get it back. I81 which is important for the Washington County part of the western maryland is a vital link in which we are trying to get fast lane grants for. We need more money. Senator carper on Eastern Shore of maryland i think would agree with me that a lot of people want to get to our beaches and there is a real issue of safety. So we do need and they are expensive to do these highway projects. In the urban areas we have our challenges. I live in one of the most congested corridors in the country, one of the most congested corridors in the world, the northeast corridor. We need to invest in ways to deal with this. I want to get senator carper down here easier than his am track ride every day. We can make that faster if we had modern high speed rail. It was interesting. It was senator moynihan who advocated as a member of the committee back in 1990s for inclusion in the highway bill. It has been here for a long time. Japans system that carries many thousands of passengers of speeds of 361 Miles Per Hour japan is planning another 300 miles of route between tokyo and osacka to carry 100,000 passengers. That is what the country is doing. We are still stuck in technology that is really kind of old. We do need the capacity to modernize our infrastructure system. I know that Prime Minister will be here done to help our northeast corridor. In dealing with some of these issues. There are real opportunities here. Let me take my remaining time to go over the water issues. I agree with senator bozeman. Affordability is a key issue. Our Water Infrastructure needs is about 655 billion over the next 20 years in order to modernize our wastewater. We had 240,000 water main breaks a year costing literally billions of dollars in waste. A more efficient system will help everybody. You need support, public support to deal with Water Infrastructure. If you look for Public Private partnerships. Which im for. But this is a cost to the consumener a Public Private partnership. So we really need a stronger commitment so that we can modernize our Water Infrastructure without excessive burden on the rate payers who cant afford it. I would like to get your experiences that you have seen. Of course im coming at this from a perspective of a Natural Resource manager. It is within the realm of my sphere of exposure is. We are not aware of the ignorance we have put ourselves in. We have ignored problems we have known about for a long time whether its a coastal hazard. We have exposure to a number of risks, certainly water supply, water distribution. Transportation systems. The Water Infrastructure that supports them. I dont think we informed the public well enough. The imperative is not out there to get a Public Movement behind that investment. 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 systems and how much more work we have to do in an ever increasing population with increased demand on limited resources. Thank you for that answer. Ill point out this committee on doing what we need to do. How we deal with wastewater is very much critical factor in how we deal with chesapeake bay. And dealing the shoreline in the way erosion takes place is very much part of the strategy. Thank you for your answer. Thank you for that. Senator sanders. Thank you very much. Thank you for holding this really important meeting in an increasing tensionfilled environment. I would hope there could be a coming together to address what almost everybody understands as a national crisis. Thank you for holding the hearing. I look forward to working with you. Let me just talk about vermont for a second. Vermonts roads need an additional investment of 700 million a year to get into a state of good repair. The only reason vermont is now in 28th place in the nation is because we have to rebuild after hurricane irene. I hope we would go forward not a result of disasters but being proactive. We are the richest country in the history of the world. We used to lead the world. In cutting edge infrastructure. We were number one. That is no longer the case. We are behind many other countries. The loss of that result of that is loss of productivity. Too many accidents are because of crumbling infrastructure. The result of that is loss of economic potential. Its not only the water in flint michigan. We have Water Systems all over this country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail. Fwater system this country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail. Awater systemr this country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail. Iwater system over this country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail. This country. We used to lead the world in terms of our rail. Today we are behind japan, behind china and many other countries. Mr. Chairman, i think there is bipartisan agreement we have not invested in our infrastructure. I think there is bipartisan understanding that when we invest we create jobs. A couple of years ago i brought forth legislation called the rebuild america act. I proposed a trillion investment. To that point it was bought by republicans and democrats to be a wild and crazy idea. Im glad i think there is an understanding that given the depth of the problem, given what they tell us in terms of a need to invest 1. 6 trillion 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. One of the areas certainly in Rural America has to do with broad band. I want to put in a plug of broad band as part of our infrastructure, youre not going to attract businesses. Kids are not going to be able to do well in school unless we have access to high quality broad band. So this is a proposal that makes sense in many levels. Where the difference of opinion is going to come, i think, which is outside of the jurisdiction of this committee is how we fund a trillion dollars. I am not sympathetic to giving huge tax breaks to the large multinational corporations. That is not the way we should be going in my view. I think Interest Rates are very low now. I think it is appropriate that in a nation which is spending 650 billion on the million tear, yes, over a ten year period we can invest a trillion in reBuilding Infrastructure that will pay for itself. By job creation and tax revenue. I would like to ask one and i apologize for not hearing any of your comments, but maybe the gentleman from wyoming about the needs from Rural America. Wyoming is different from vermont but were both rural states. Where would you like to see 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 rural state is a positive thing. Other kind of borrowing doesnt work in rural states because we simply do not have the Revenue Generation to support that kind of thing. Any proposals that move forward are helpful. The second thing i would say is the existing formula system, the formula system for delivering those dollars to rural states works and yes, there could be improvements in project delivery. There could be improvements in having flexibility for states. Those systems do work. Enhancing moneys 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, we are expanding it a little bit, if you live in a more rural area and you want to get to work in a more urban area. I use it in quotes. Our largest city is 40,000. The only way to do it is by an automobile. I think we need to build up a rural bus system as well. Do you have problems with that in wyoming . Can people get to work in other ways than through an automobile . Through our federal funding programs we have Transit Program through the department of transportation that connects us, the state government, with our local governments. Counties and cities. To provide senior transportation. Just senior. But if im a worker and i want to get to work other than by automobile, in vermont thats hard to do. Is that the case in wyoming as well . It is hard but not impossible. We also have agreements with Larger Energy producers that have transportation for their workers to come from sities. We have some of that in wyoming as well but its different than in some of the other states. That are not like vermont and wyoming. Its different than the needs of new york and other plateses places. Yes. Thank you. Well go to a second round from a colorado and wyoming standpoint. The need for direct federal and vinment and highways and i as chairman in the wyoming state senate before getting elected to this position. It is critical we show the American People with any actions that congress could take to make the projects less costly im sure the current spending that you have to deal with to get more bang for your buck. Mr. Bodd, if you would like to start, then mr. Penos. Thank you, senator. Thank you for your career work. In the transportation field. I hear a lot from folks, what can the state governments do . What can local governments do . Maybe it is useful to have a cost benefit analysis done by congress to come in and just, from a nonpartisan viewpoint to say what are the costs that are imposed by some of these regulations or some of these processes and what are the benefits . I think some people view costs and benefits very differently. I think it would be useful to understand where there are necessarily benefits and where there are actual costs that are slowing down the system and at the end of that everybody just says okay. It was bipartisan. So in a bipartisan way we will implement it. I think that would be a useful exercise. I would say reduced Program Delivery would be helpful for us. Ill give you an example. We have a project in the northern part of our town called sheraton. 14 years for us to develop planning permitting and delivery about two years it complete. This is a safety project for commercial traffic moving through our state. Anything we can do, thats a good thing. Improving states flexibility and improving our flexibility in the use of some of our infrastructure. Let me give you an example. The senator talked about broad band. We are engaged in a broad band Infrastructure Project. We use the rights of way along our highways to run broadband. It created accelerated infrastructure throughout the state of wyoming. That single decision, single flexibility allowed us to do more things that the federal government is funding in our state. And the final question follows up with what standerand was talking about. Can you talk about how federal investment and transportation projects also can benefit urban states . Yes. There is the National Connectivity benefit. Truck traffic starts on 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 ends of the trip. The other is again, as stated in my writ yten testimony, these bring product to market. Cultural product, forest product, Energy Product to market that they need to go to. Finally as i stated in both my Opening Statement and written testimony i mentioned tourism. These roads bring millions of visitors to Yellow Stone National park and mt. Rushmore every year. These are tourism dollars spent in america and not in europe or canada or some other place. The reason is they can get there. And they can get home safely. And the only way they can get there as the senator had pointed out from vermont sometimes is a highway, is by car. Investing in rural states helps urban areas and the nation in those respects. Thanks. Thank you very much. I had a special interest in that question and i thank you. Scratch that one off of my list. We have history in this country of a user pay approach, those who use roads, highways, bridges pay for them, i democratically or indirectly. Is that an approach we should generally stick with or move to Something Else . In why wyoming very brief. We have a mix of user fees through registration, driver license fees. And what you referred to earlier, the tax. All of that adds up to about 30 . Other 50 comes from the federal government and the other 20 comes from a variety of different sources. I didnt have for the mix. Is the idea of a user fee approach, is that something we have done forever . Is that something we should move away from . We patriot money overseaes from national corporations. Should we stick with the user fee . Apologizing for answering with a mix. Yes. Moving towards user fees is helpful. I know youre moving toward water, but thoughts on user pays . Realizing some places it is hardship in poor communities. Senator, we are certainly doing that now through rates. Thats the approach we have across the country, you know, thats not just 100 grant funded in many cases. If it is you have to have user rates. Thank you, senator. Yes, we definitely support user fees. In oklahoma we had gas taxes as we do on the federal and our wisdom in the dirty 30s they robbed our transportation funds and used it for other things and user fees people are always willing to support user fees. I know its not really in your alley but any comments before we go . We have one thing, if we could. Very briefly. This trust fund is a good example of what it would be used for. That would be Something Else to keep in mind. Thank you. Yes on user fees. I would say users are already paying higher taxes in an unintelligent fashion. Because they are saving congestion, paying more for goods. Persons with vehicles. And another followup for you mr. Secretary black. Colorado, one of the Fastest Growing states in the country in terms of population. Im told your population is expected to increase by nearly half in the next 20 years. Much is anticipated to be in the greater denver area but also the urban centers. What challenges do growing urban areas face in colorado and other areas . How do you plan to ensure mobility for a Larger Population there . We have an infrastructure designed in the 50s, built in the 60s designed for 3 Million People in colorado where 6 Million People now and 8 million in the next 20 years. I cant build my way out of congestion in denver. You think contraception . Possibly. Unique use of Transportation Trust fund. Yes. Planned transportation is where we need to go. You used the word mobility. Whether it is in a car, ride sharing, transit, multimodal, in urban areas, i cant widen i25 to 15 lanes it needs because we will just never do it. We he dont have the money or environmental clearance. It is not just about widening roadways if our urban areas. But in rural areas, it is just not one size fits all. Great hearing. Thank you all so much. Thank you. 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 delivering 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. Its not my bailly wick but i would say we look at watt he resource across the nation. There are questions earlier today using problems weve had around madison and other locations. We have an aging infrastructure in the water Delivery System as well. Water pollution from septic solutions. The simple answer is yes, we do have a looming problem. Its something we need to inform the public as to what the risks are. I have heard it patching holes with tape. We need to do a lot better. It should be a part of this discussion. Further discussion on water, anyone want it comment on it . Sir . I was saying in Colorado Water is everything. You know, where it comes from, how it gets disbursed. So while i do transportation for a living, i think a lot of our growth we talked about, if there is not clean water and water supply if clean water and the rest of the country, then why are we doing any of this . Right. All right. Next question is rail. When we look at infrastructure is it appropriate to look at rebuilding an ageing rail system which now in many ways lags behind other major countries around the world . Am i right or wrong on that . Yes, serving in my current role i served in the northeast corridor commission. I think its ridiculous in the u. S. We dont have the rail as an option in urban areas where we had the that is similar to that in other urban networks. There is development that comes out of it. We have a lot of sprawl that needs to be address. There are urban areas doing it. But some corridores could benefit whether it is through megla hyper loop but rail investment is lagging in this country. And in terms of weather and keeping trucks off the road and rail would also be helpful, would it not . I think one of the best is one of the freight commercials that said we move a ton of freight with a gallon of diesel. Im portraying that completely. Time rate from d. C. To boston, one gallon of diesel fuel. I set that up nicely for you, sir. From a Climate Impact statement, it just makes a lot of sense. We talk a lot about passenger cars he and moving people around but freight and it is an incredibly important part of that and Passenger Rail can solve a lot of that problem as well. If i can add one thought of that. I worked on delaware bay and in that capacity worked with a colleague from new jersey as transportation planner. He and i had a lot of private conversations he talked about new jersey being a particularly congested state that highway system is already obsolete. As best as they can stay ahead of it in the very urbanized corridor of the route 95 corridor. And we have to go back it rely awning tri modal with ch is rail, waterway and roads. If we dont embrace that or embrace all three options, and i know a previous secretary of transportation who was there before secretary bodd, talked about a lot of chicken going on and empty cars coming ben and coal comes down and chicken cars going back up. We can utilize this more on rail tracks. With sustainable energies, do we have an electric grid capable of supporting the movement to is you stainable energy . Anyone want it comment on the state of our electric grid . Any thoughts on that . No. All right. Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. I would mention bill gates has a reading list and one of the books he recommends is the grid. You know, he met in the past with members of some of the i thought you were going to say would he read my book. Had grid, all right, good book too. I didnt see your book on his bo list. There was a string theory. But know. Would you like plug the book shamelessly right now . If there are no further questions, members we may submit followup questions for the record. The hearing record will be open for two weeks. I want it thank the Witnesses Today for being here today for your time. Your testimony was very helpful. The hearing is adjourn ie idd. Coming up live this afternoon, a look at the future of u. S. Policy toward russia and ukraine. Nbc news chief Foreign Affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell moderates a Panel Discussion at the carnaghi endowment for international peace. Watch that live at 3 00 p. M. Eastern on our companion network cspan. This week end on American History tv on cspan 3, saturday morning at 10 00 eastern, former law clerks of Supreme Court Justice Thurgood martial examined his legacy and opinion owns landmark cases. Why was he the most important lawyer of the 20th century . Because he did more justice for more people than any other lawyer did. And to feel as they you had been picked somehow you had won this lottery so that you got to spend a year with this incredible man was a very, very special thing. Then at 8 00, on lectures in history. Anderson University Professor joel shrock talks about freedom summer, 1964 black Voter Registration project in mississippi. In 1963, the Voter Education project discontinued funding for mississippi and you know this because ann moody talks about it in coming of age mississippi the checks stop coming. They had the fewest results of any state of the Voter Education project. Black voting in mississippi went from 5. 3 to 6. 7 . Thats it. Thats what they got for two years of beatings and arrests. Sunday afternoon at 4 00 on real america, 1982 pbs documentary the regulators focussing on pollution regulation in the National Parks. Congressman paul rogers, author of the monumental 1970 Clean Air Act was now revising that law. Althee a great deal had been accomplished in cleaning up the nations air, the anderson slides were alarming evidence that parks were still unprotected. And at 6 30, historians talk about the movement and groups that were part of the Counter Culture in the 1960s and 770s. People who produce the Counter Culture, the council of the summer of love, are more the kind of people i think we should be interested in as scholars. And what i want to talk about here is not so much the Counter Culture of spectacle or six or eight celeb ririty figurers, bus a project. A way in which a group of people tried to do something if realtime. For our complete American History tv schedule, go to cspan. Org. Now, a hearing on the efficiency and effectiveness of the medicaid program. Members of a house subcommittee question witnesses about changing in the programs