Hearings to examine constructing the Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill, focusing on United States Secretary of Transportation's perspective.

1[Senate Hearing 119-281]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                       S. Hrg. 119-28156                  HEARING ON CONSTRUCTING THE SURFACE7                  TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL:8                        UNITED STATES SECRETARY9                    OF TRANSPORTATION'S PERSPECTIVE10=======================================================================1112                                HEARING1314                               BEFORE THE1516                              COMMITTEE ON17                      ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS1819                          UNITED STATES SENATE2021                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2223                             FIRST SESSION2425                               __________2627                             APRIL 2, 20252829                               __________3031  Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works3233[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT3435        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov3637                              __________3839                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE4062-718                     WASHINGTON : 202641=======================================================================4243               COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS4445                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS4647                             FIRST SESSION4849             SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Chairman50            SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Ranking Member5152KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota           BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont53CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming           JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon54JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts55LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    MARK KELLY, Arizona56DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 ALEX PADILLA, California57PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska              ADAM B. SCHIFF, California58ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware59JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               ANGELA D. ALSOBROOKS, Maryland60JON HUSTED, Ohio6162               Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director63                  Dan Dudis, Democratic Staff Director6465                            C O N T E N T S6667                              ----------68                                                                   Page6970                             APRIL 2, 202571                           OPENING STATEMENTS7273Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West74  Virginia.......................................................     175Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode76  Island.........................................................     37778                                WITNESS7980Duffy, Hon. Sean P., U.S. Secretary of Transportation............    1381    Prepared statement...........................................    1582    Responses to additional questions from:83        Senator Sullivan.........................................    1984        Senator Husted...........................................    2185        Senator Whitehouse.......................................    2286        Senator Sanders..........................................    2687        Senator Markey...........................................    2988        Senator Padilla..........................................    3189        Senator Schiff...........................................    3690        Senator Blunt Rochester..................................    3991        Senator Alsobrooks.......................................    419293                          ADDITIONAL MATERIAL9495E.P.A. Hunt for Shady Deals and `Gold Bars' Comes Up Empty.......     59697                  HEARING ON CONSTRUCTING THE SURFACE98      TRANSPORTATION REAUTHORIZATION BILL: UNITED STATES SECRETARY99                    OF TRANSPORTATION'S PERSPECTIVE100101                              ----------102103                        WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2025104105                                       U.S. Senate,106                 Committee on Environment and Public Works,107                                                    Washington, DC.108    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m. in109room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore110Capito (chairman of the committee) presiding.111    Present: Senators Capito, Whitehouse, Cramer, Lummis,112Curtis, Sullivan, Wicker, Boozman, Husted, Merkley, Markey,113Kelly, Padilla, Schiff, Blunt Rochester, Alsobrooks.114115        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,116          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA117118    Senator Capito. Good morning, everybody, and thank you for119joining us this morning as we begin our work to develop the120next Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill. This hearing121is the first of a two-part series that we are having to help us122guide our work. I really want to thank Secretary Duffy for123being here with us today.124    My vision for this legislation is simple, but important. We125want to improve the movement of people and goods. Our roads and126bridges are what connect us to the people and places that127matter most in our lives. They help American businesses, large128and small, create jobs and economic opportunities, and enable129that competitiveness in the global marketplace. They connect130everything around us from Point A to Point B. Every State has131transportation needs and stands to benefit from the Surface132Transportation Reauthorization Bill.133    My home State of West Virginia is pursuing important134projects, like the Coalfields Expressway. I am specifically135mentioning these in front of the Secretary, because he will be136hearing from me on these two. Corridor H also, to better link137our communities to essential services and economic opportunity.138This legislation provides the funding and establishes the139policies and programs that enable the improvement of the140surface transportation network that we all so rely on.141    Since the enactment of the Bipartisan Infrastructure142Investment and Jobs Act, the Environment and Public Works (EPW)143Committee has reviewed and conducted oversight of the existing144policies and programs. We have learned a lot about what is145working and what is not. That effort has provided me with three146key principles for the next bill. By focusing on these147principles, I am confident that we can work toward bipartisan148legislation, as we have in the past, that will deliver results149for the American people.150    Principle One: improving the safety and reliability of151America's surface transportation network with impactful152investments. In recent years, we have seen an increase in the153number and scope of Federal transportation programs. These154programs have often had duplicative purposes, and project155availability and eligibility. This leads to an expensive and156time-intensive process to get funding out the door that157disrupts the focus of Federal funding and lessens the impact158that the legislation can make.159    As we craft the next Surface Transportation Reauthorization160Bill we must make investments that instead optimize the impact161of Federal funding and give the State partners the confidence162that they can invest over the longer period of time. We should163focus on eliminating duplicative programs that invite164regulatory overreach and increase funding for the highway165formula programs that our States rely on and have a proven166track record of success.167    Principle Two: reforming and modernizing Federal programs168and policies to increase efficiency. We all know that as169currently structured, Federal requirements can add red tape170that increases costs and time, and slows down the completion of171projects. We all want to deliver transportation benefits faster172and save money for American taxpayers.173    To achieve this goal, we need to take a serious look at the174Federal requirements to determine how to make meaningful175improvements to our planning and procurement procedures, our176environmental review processes for projects, and discretionary177grants and loans requirements. By reforming and modernizing178these requirements, we can create certainty for the partners179who make these projects happen and ensure that the public180receives the benefits of these needed investments quickly.181    Principle Three: addressing the variety of surface182transportation needs across all States. Obviously, different183States have different needs. I would not expect West Virginia,184with our mountainous peaks and valleys, to prioritize the same185transportation projects in other states in other parts of our186Country.187    By avoiding top-down mandates from Washington, and giving188States flexibility to address the individual improvements, I189think that is what we need to be looking at. The bill can190support our common goals while ensuring that Federal191regulations, programs, and policies recognize the different192needs of our States.193    It will take collaboration from my Senate colleagues, our194stakeholders, and the Trump administration in order to complete195the bill before the IIJA, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs196Act, expires in September 2026. We must be pragmatic and work197in a bipartisan way as we have in the past to develop a Senate198bill that sets us up for a productive conversation on this199reauthorization effort with our colleagues in the House.200    I am grateful to Secretary Sean Duffy, who is here to share201the Trump administration's priorities for this legislation, and202I look forward to learning more about those priorities. The203Department of Transportation's technical assistance and support204will be critical parts of this process.205    This is an excellent opportunity ahead of us to make a206pivotal impact in our surface transportation network. Each of207us knows how important that network is and the role that it208plays in keeping our Country's economy and people on the move.209I am excited to get to work and continue the EPW's bipartisan210tradition of developing this legislation.211    I want to thank our witness and the members for212participating in this hearing today. I will now turn to Ranking213Member Whitehouse for his statement.214215         OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,216          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND217218    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Madam Chair, and welcome,219Secretary Duffy. It is good to have you here.220    A strong bipartisan commitment to infrastructure got us the221historic Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Last week I222attended the unveiling of the American Society of Civil223Engineers' 2025 Infrastructure Report Card. We are not ``A''224students yet, but the report card progress, thanks to both the225Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act,226which are delivering real results across the Country.227    At the start of the Biden Administration, our228infrastructure was crumbling from decades of neglect. Forty-six229thousands bridges were in poor condition. More than 170,000230miles of major roads were in poor condition. We had unreliable231and insufficient transit systems.232    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law began turning this around233with long overdue investments in roads, bridges, transit,234ports, drinking water, wastewater, and other systems that are235the backbone of our Nation's economy. We see this progress in236Rhode Island's bridges. We have gone from 27 percent237structurally deficient in 2016 to 12 percent in 2025. Like I238said, not `A' students, but progress. The Bipartisan239Infrastructure Law brought nearly 100 projects closer to240completion in Rhode Island alone.241    As we think about the future of transportation and other242infrastructure projects, it is incumbent upon us to address a243big obstacle: unreasonable delay. China builds high speed rail,244airports, and ports at warp speed while we tread water. Even245France, long lampooned for embodying bureaucracy, builds subway246and rail projects faster and at less cost than we do.247    Delays take many forms. There is permitting, and I am248thrilled to work with Chairman on permitting reform. There is249bureaucracy, and as I have mentioned many times before, we have250to manage this interagency process monster better.251    To be clear, I and many of my colleagues rode the Biden252Administration hard about delays of infrastructure and other253projects. This is actually very often a legislative versus254executive separation of powers issue, in which the executive255branch hides behind interagency process, all sorts of delay,256irresponsibility, non-accountability, and bad execution. We257should take our oversight responsibilities seriously, no matter258who is in the White House.259    The most recent spate of delays afflicting infrastructure260projects is the Trump freeze of INFRA, Infrastructure for261Rebuilding America, Mega, Bridge Investment, and PROTECT262funding. Thousands of projects are backed up, so they can be263screened for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) or other264mega heresies by rattled and shrunken agencies.265    I want to start by thanking Chair Capito and her staff for266their assistance in unsticking previously awarded funding for267Rhode Island's essential Washington Bridge. Madam Chair, thank268you.269    Secretary Duffy, I also want to thank you for your team's270work delivering the funding for a number of discretionary271grants in the past week, including those Washington Bridge272funds. It is a crucial project, as you know, not just for Rhode273Island, but for the region. It is where you turn to head out274toward the Cape.275    I hope that we can rapidly deliver previously awarded276funding for the array of I-95 bridges that need the work and277for the Mount Hope Bridge, which I want to show. Setting aside278how important it is as a piece of transit infrastructure, it is279also gorgeous. It is one of the most beautiful bridges in the280Country. It is 100 years old. We can extend its life. We need281to get this done.282    As I said in our call, Secretary, and as the Chair knows, I283am eager to work on bipartisan permitting reform, and the284scoping conversation with our colleagues at the Energy285Committee has already begun. I am eager to do a robust286bipartisan Water Resources bill and a robust bipartisan highway287reauthorization. These three bills could be big. They could be288transformational.289    I can not do any of that while the Trump Administration290blockades authorized and appropriated funds for approved291projects, particularly if it blockades selectively. I can not292do that if the Trump Administration violates its duty to see293that bipartisan laws we pass are executed faithfully,294faithfully, not with favoritism.295    Mr. Secretary, the door is open in this committee to big296bipartisan things for our infrastructure. I encourage you to297walk through that open door.298    If I may just revert to one other topic for a moment, I299addressed last week the mischief and the nonsense that has300surrounded the Green Infrastructure Fund. We have seen, Senator301Sullivan is a former attorney general, I am a former attorney302general, I am a former U.S. attorney, when you are firing303career staff who disagree with you and you are proceeding with304only political signatures, without any career staff who will305sign, when you are getting shot down in one court and told306there is no evidence for what you are saying in another court,307and you are still sending Federal Bureau Investigation (FBI)308agents around to harass employees, and particularly when you309are making derogatory accusations of fraud and criminality,310which Administrator Zeldin has done, first, it is a violation311of Department of Justice (DOJ) process. Second, it is a matter312of law, it is defamatory per se. It appears from the rejection313by the career staff, the rejection by the magistrate judge, and314the finding of no evidence by the Federal judge, that this was315a knowingly defamatory set of statements made by the EPA316Administrator and that acting U.S. attorney. We are going to317continue to drill down into that piece of misconduct, and I318will simply ask for the moment that the article today, ``EPA319Hunt for Shady Deals and Gold Bars Comes up Empty'' be made a320matter of record for this hearing.321    Senator Capito. Without objection.322    [The referenced information follows:]323324    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]325326    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you very much for that.327    Senator Capito. All right, so this morning we are really328honored to be joined by U.S. Transportation Secretary Sean329Duffy. Secretary Duffy was approved to be Secretary of330Transportation with 77 affirmative votes by the Senate, and was331sworn into his office on January 28th of this year.332    Prior to his service in the Cabinet, as many of us who333served in the House know, he was not just a successful district334attorney, but he was a member of the House of Representatives335with several of us, where I had the actual privilege of serving336with him on the Financial Services Committee.337    Mr. Secretary, thank you again for being here. You are338recognized for your opening statement.339340  STATEMENT OF HON. SEAN P. DUFFY, UNITED STATES SECRETARY OF341                         TRANSPORTATION342343    Mr. Duffy. Thank you, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member344Whitehouse, and members of the committee. I appreciate you all345inviting me to the committee today.346    Maybe if I could just first talk about the bipartisanship347of this committee. Per Senator Whitehouse's comments, I think348that Senator Capito has talked probably more about your349projects than her own projects in West Virginia, as evidence350that you all work together in a bipartisan fashion. I351appreciate that, because I think infrastructure is bipartisan.352    Senator Sullivan. Shelly, I am going to call you after this353hearing.354    [Laughter.]355    Mr. Duffy. I do think it is one of the unique spaces in our356government where we all work together. Our roads and bridges,357our airplanes or airports, the safety of our cars is a358bipartisan American issue, not a red or blue issue.359    My aim over the course of this hearing is to provide you a360sense of the administration's priorities as we work together on361surface transportation reauthorization and embark on what I362hope will be the golden age of transportation. I took office363just over 2 months ago, and in my first full day on the job, we364experienced a sobering reminder of why the Department's top365priority is and must always be safety.366    While I know today's hearing is about surface367transportation, I want to start by highlighting some of the368steps we are taking in the immediate aftermath of the mid-air369collision on the approach to DCA, Ronald Reagan Washington370National Airport, because they underscore how we are going to371approach our overall mission as we move forward.372    The Department of Transportation has been refocused on our373mission of safety. Following the mid-air collision, we swiftly374restricted helicopter traffic in the vicinity of DCA and375initiated a review of our Air Traffic Control work force,376policies, and procedures.377    At the end of February, less than a month after the fatal378accident, I announced my plan to streamline the hiring process379for air traffic controllers and increasing pay for new students380who attend the academy. In March, following the NTSB's,381National Transportation Safety Board, recommendations, I382announced that the FAA will permanently restrict non-essential383helicopter operations around Ronald Reagan Airport, and384eliminate mixed helicopter and fixed wing traffic.385    We will continue to push for a state-of-the-art air traffic386control system. I think America deserves it; America needs it.387It is going to be a process that is going to take all of us388working together. I look forward to sharing with you what I389have seen with regard to our antiquated system. I think when we390have those conversations, I think the Congress, Senate and391House together, Republican and Democrat, are going to work with392us, because our air traffic control system, it is using World393War II aero technology. Equipment like floppy disks are394commonplace in our towers.395    With your help, we can propel America's aviation system396into the modern era. We will do this by embracing the most397advanced 21st century technology that makes our system safer,398more affordable, and more efficient for all Americans. Whether399taking road, rail, sea, or air, cutting unnecessary red tape,400as you have mentioned, Senator Capito, and building big,401beautiful infrastructure that Americans are paying for with402their hard-earned dollars, that is a top priority. Let us do it403efficiently. Let us cut the red tape. We can still protect the404environment but let us move these projects faster.405    Lawmakers on all sides of the aisle can agree that406infrastructure projects are taking way too long to complete.407The recent reconstruction of interstate 40, the critical408Appalachian artery between North Carolina and Tennessee washed409away by Hurricane Helene, demonstrates what is possible when410everyone is working together. To expedite rebuilding, we found411creative ways to source materials closer to the job site,412saving taxpayers both time and money.413    It is this kind of innovation and problem-solving that414moves projects faster and more efficiently. There is so much415more that we can all do together. I look forward to working416with the Congress on Surface Transportation Reauthorization417through the process. I appreciate you, Senator, starting these418hearings early, as we are just beginning the conversation. I419think in Congress sometimes we start late, but to go through420regular order I think would be a real benefit for the American421people.422    We can make sure transportation infrastructure is built423with speed and ingenuity and durability so that Americans can424reap returns on their investments, not just for this generation425but for generations to come.426    I want to thank you all for having me, and I look forward427to taking all of your questions. I yield back.428    [The prepared statement of Mr. Duffy follows:]429    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]430431    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate432that.433    I do appreciate the beginning statements on the air traffic434control system. I know that you guys have diligently been435working on that. Safety is safety, whether you are driving or436whether you are flying or whether you are on a train, as you437made that very, very clear.438    I would like to ask you about bridges. Senator Whitehouse439mentioned that we still have a ways to go before our bridge440infrastructure is where it needs to be for the future. In my441State, obviously, we have a lot of rivers and mountains. We442have a ton of bridges. We need your partnership to make sure443that we are going to have the ability to fix--and we are in the444process right now of some major projects, fixing some of our445bridges or maintaining them.446    What can you say about bridges in terms of what you have447seen since you have been there on improving our Nation's448bridges, and what more would we need to do to address the449issues with bridge safety and bridge maintenance?450    Mr. Duffy. Not far from where I grew up in Wisconsin, the451I-35, 35 W I think it was in Minnesota collapsed, a bridge I452have gone over many times, the Francis Scott Key Bridge that453collapsed. We see that people lose their lives when our bridges454are not safe. I know it is a top priority for this committee455and for the department as well. We will make sure that the456grants that have been awarded are expeditiously moving through457those grants, and I am making sure we have funding for that458which was awarded.459    Beyond that, I think we have to take a look at the list of460priorities and the oldest and maybe most dangerous bridges have461to be funded first, and those projects have to get underway.462    Senator Capito. Thank you.463    For the past couple of years, I voted for the IIJA, and I464am glad that I did. I have raised concerns about the465implementation in the IIJA's competitive grant programs and the466time it takes, and we have already, we are going to see this as467a repeating theme, I think, of the time that it takes to get468that funding out the door.469    Can you please commit to a timely execution of project470grant agreements? We know that there are numerous projects that471are still been promised and are not through the pipeline yet,472promised by the previous administration, which is fine, but473they still did not move them through the pipeline. Can you talk474about that, and how you think that you could improve that475process in your department?476    Mr. Duffy. Thank you for the question, Senator. A lot of477you, many of you have called me and said, where is my project,478where is the money, can you speed this up. I will be happy to479talk to Senator Whitehouse about questions that are going to480come from him on did we slow, did we pause, did we stop.481    There are 3,200 announced projects at the department that482do not have signed grant agreements, 3,200. We are going to483work through those projects. If you say, where is my project? I484am not looking at 10 projects for grant agreements, 3,200, some485of them date back to 2022.486    There is a lot of workload to do to get these projects487completed, or get the grant agreements completed and the money488out the door to your States. I will just note that Senator,489usually, historically, there was 47 to 107 projects announced490between election date and inauguration day. This last491administration announced around 950 projects in that timeframe,492almost a 1,000 percent increase. Everybody wants their493projects, and I am going to do my best to get those projects494out the door. It is a historic number that was announced.495    It is easy to blow the kazoo and send up the balloons when496you announce a project. The hard work is actually doing the497grant agreement. I am committed in a bipartisan effort to make498sure we get those grant agreements signed and out the door.499Especially as we come into the spring building season, that is500a top priority for us.501    By the way, the first bridge, the first project that we502actually got through and done was Senator Whitehouse's. He503asked about bipartisanship; I am committed. Infrastructure is504non-partisan. We all use roads and bridges in blue and red505States, and I am committed to making sure we have a non-506partisan view as we move money.507    Senator Capito. I am interested in the 3,200 projects that508basically landed on your desk the day you got sworn in that509were not completed. Could you just flesh out a little bit why510they might not be? It might be that their environmental review,511their financing, can you just kind of line out a little of512those?513    Mr. Duffy. That is a good point. Some of them are, the514NEPA, National Environmental Policy Act, work had not been done515yet. That is true. There are others that would expand capacity.516If you are going to expand capacity from two lanes to four517lanes, there, it is my understanding there was a set of ideas518that we, they did not want to expand the capacity. They would519redo current capacity. If it was an expanded capacity, those520projects actually sat for a longer period of time.521    Senator Capito. They sat at the back of the line?522    Mr. Duffy. Yes. Again, when the announcement goes, I am523going to work for all of you to get these projects out. If you,524I have a lot of complaints, it is a lot of projects that we525have to get done to make sure we can meet the commitments that526were made in the last administration.527    By the way, most of these projects are really good528projects. I have not found too many that I disagree with. It is529good work for the most part.530    Senator Capito. All right. Senator Whitehouse?531    Senator Whitehouse. Thanks. Again, thank you, Secretary,532for being here, and thank you for your assistance with that bit533of bridge construction support.534    I guess also thank you, there was a misbegotten effort at535the Department of Transportation to require your office's536approval every time any one of the 50 States wanted to change537their State transportation plans. I think probably on a538bipartisan basis, State transportation directors said, what?539Why do you need to approve our State transportation plans?540    You backed that off, and thank you, because that is, that541would have been an unnecessary addition to the bureaucracy that542bedevils infrastructure projects.543    We still have the 3,200 projects. My concern is that while544some of them, a lot of what you describe as the problems on the545way to final agreement would actually have been considered and546resolved when the grant was awarded. Right? You do not put a547grant into a project where you do not know if it is two lanes548or four lanes yet. You have to figure that out first.549    It strikes me that one of the reasons for the 3,200 case550backlog that you have is that you are trying to plow through551these executive orders, many of which I believe are both552illegal and nonsense, to examine each one of them to see if553there are any MAGA hobgoblins and heresies in them like strip554out the word climate, or strip out the word equity, that kind555of stuff, which when you are fixing a bridge, if the word556equity popped up, that is not all that interesting to me.557Getting the bridge fixed is what is interesting to me.558    If the word climate popped up, that is not all that559interesting to me. Getting the bridge fixed is what is560interesting to me.561    By the way, we just got a significant grant for the Newport562Bridge, which is the key artery from the mainland to Aquidneck563Island, a lot of traffic over it. The problem was that the564cabling was rusting because there is a higher level of565humidity. We had to install dehumidification equipment in the566cabling between the cladding of the cable and the cable itself567inside the cladding to both solve the problem of rust and568reduce the rate of rusting.569    That grant application would have the word climate in it.570The increase in humidity can be tracked to climate change.571    If you want to stop a project like that to scrub out the572word climate, you are wasting an enormous amount of time. There573actually is a climate-related reason for it. If you are dealing574with coastal highways, we have roads all around Rhode Island,575and I am sure many of my coastal colleagues, and I would not be576surprised at West Virginia because of river and rainstorm577flooding, you have roads that need repair on a more rapid basis578than ordinary.579    If the applicant asking for those funds said, oh, yes, and580this is going to continue to be a problem because of climate581change, to have to go back and undo that seems like massively582unnecessary bureaucracy.583    Could you give me your, I do not think you have a study on584this, but could you give me your take from what you have seen585so far as to how many of those 3,200 stuck projects are stuck586because of the demand from the White House to have words they587do not like, like equity and climate, scrubbed out to meet the,588I guess, new anti-heretical requirements of these orders? How589much of it is actually like a substantive problem with the590infrastructure itself?591    Mr. Duffy. I appreciate the question, Senator. Again, these592projects, many of them date back three and, three and a half593years. To think that we can move through in 2 months 3,200594announced projects is, it is impossible for us to do that.595    Quickly, the problem is not that we are going through these596grant NOFOs, Notices of Funding Opportunities, right, looking597for the green and the social justice. We are looking for it598because it might not be interesting to you, I take your point,599but if you are putting on additional requirements with regard600to green or social justice, well, that drives up the cost of a601project. That takes the project a longer timeframe in which to602complete.603    I would just note that all of you on this committee and604this body, you considered, should we include green, should we605include social justice requirements in the IIJA? You debated606it, and you did not put it in there. This administration, the607last administration, actually put the requirements that you608considered but did not include, they put it in the grant609agreements. I am actually complying with the will of the610Congress by pulling it out. It is going to take longer and cost611more.612    Senator Whitehouse. Let me just ask you to consider whether613the delay of going through that heresy hunt----614    Mr. Duffy. Not a heresy hunt.615    Senator Whitehouse [continuing]. is worse than whatever the616added cost-up is from having those words included in the grant617application.618    Mr. Duffy. I have been there for 2 months, and I do not619believe following the will of the Congress is heresy. I think620when I do not follow the will of Congress, I am sure I will621hear from you. I have due respect for you, Senator, and for622this body, and I am following your will by pulling out the623green and the social justice, which is not just language. It624does not say green, green, green, green, green, social justice,625social justice. There are requirements in these proposals that626I am pulling out.627    Senator Whitehouse. Well, my time is up, so, to be628continued. Thank you very much for being here. We will continue629this conversation. I am taking my colleague's time right now.630    Mr. Duffy. I appreciate your invitation to come to Rhode631Island. I can not wait to go. I was there over the summer and632it was beautiful.633    Senator Whitehouse. You are going to love it.634    Senator Capito. Senator Cramer?635    Senator Cramer. Well, first of all, I want to make sure636that the minute and a half you went over really is in my time.637    [Laughter.]638    Senator Cramer. I think it was a worthwhile minute and a639half, Senator.640    I was not going to get into any of this, but I can not641resist asking, is humidity along the coast new to climate642change? Or was there humidity before that had to be considered?643I think it is a relevant question in the moment.644    Mr. Duffy. Listen, I am not a climate scientist, but I have645to imagine it existed for some time.646    Senator Cramer. I think so. I am, I do marvel, though, at647how green this 100-year old steel bridge is. I have seen a lot648of rusty ones, and that one is beautiful.649    The other thing I have to say, I think all of us on this650side of the dais that worked through the current bill and651worked closely with your predecessor, Secretary Buttigieg, like652him a lot. I mean, I like him a lot. I will tell you, he liked653announcements a lot. He was very good at announcements, there654were lots and lots of announcements. He showed up at a lot of655the announcements and we are grateful for all that.656    Your point that the announcement is not the grant I think657is an important one to continue to remind us of. Those of us658who hate bureaucracy also recognize there is some legitimacy to659going through the grant application and having signatures. I660appreciate your raising that point.661    Mr. Duffy. Some of the grant agreement, announcing that you662got a project, is fun.663    Senator Cramer. It is.664    Mr. Duffy. It is a great process. You all celebrate, and665have cake and ice cream and you cut ribbon. Truly the hard work666is getting the grant agreement signed and the money out the667door. That is the hard work. Again, so when I say there is6683,200, it is going to take us some time to work through that.669    Again, I want to--can I just make one--I know you all want670the projects done. I want the projects done. What is great is671the President loves infrastructure and wants big, beautiful672roads and bridges. It is not just you putting pressure on me.673It is the President who is going to say, why are not you674getting more money out the door? Get these projects done.675    Everyone around agrees on infrastructure.676    Senator Cramer. Since we are on that point, Mr. Secretary,677and welcome, and it is great to see you, and I was looking678down, the first several of us served with you in the House.679Some of them are not even here yet. Welcome, and680congratulations.681    Along those same lines, one of the things we did put in the682current bill is the One Federal Decision, codifying the One683Federal Decision rule of the first Trump administration. Yet, I684have not seen a great application of that for the last 4 years685in the permitting of a lot of these projects, either. I do not686know if you have a comment on that.687    Mr. Duffy. That is a good point, and we have to, we do have688to streamline the process even further with One Federal689Decision, taking the full meaning of the legislation and the690language.691    Senator Cramer. In the remaining half of this discussion,692at least at this moment, I would point to the emphasis that693Chairman Capito put on the formula funding, and the history of694formula funding. I often like to refer to the fact that you695cannot reserve 300 miles in the middle of the North American696continent for gravel along interstate 94, or durum from North697Dakota would never become pasta in New York.698    I think, while, and by the way, I strongly support the699Chairman's emphasis on applying that formula to even more grant700programs and discretionary programs, to the degree that we can701do that. I mean, I know the political realities of it as well.702    I would just be interested, you coming from the middle of703America and a pretty rural district, if you could just704elaborate maybe a little bit on that commitment to formula705funding in the next bill as well. It would help people706understand formula funding recognizes that the miles of road707are just about as important as how many people are in any708particular mile of that road.709    Mr. Duffy. I think it is a good point. Many of us come from710North Dakota, West Virginia, Wisconsin. Senator Lummis knows711rural as well.712    Senator Cramer. Better than any of us.713    Mr. Duffy. It is a really important point. Again, making714sure, again, our urban centers are important, making sure715people move there. We can not focus on urban centers and forget716rural America and making sure that, again, a lot of products717come from the places where we live. They might move from roads,718trains, to ships. Making sure that there is a complete view of719infrastructure is incredibly important, and I would share the720view of this committee, I think, that we have to have a721holistic view of how we have built out infrastructure.722    Senator Cramer. Great point. Some of us have our favorite723types of transportation as well. Just so people know, 90724percent of the durum wheat grown in the United States is grown725in North Dakota. That is what becomes semolina flour, which726becomes pasta. Literally, but it does not all go on the727interstate, either. A little bit goes by rail, a little bit728gets on a boat now and then.729    Anyway, I thank you for understanding. Just know that will730be a point of emphasis for a lot of us. Thank you.731    Mr. Duffy. Thank you, Senator.732    Senator Capito. Thank you.733    Senator Husted?734    Senator Husted. Thank you very much.735    I wanted to just talk about the concept of time is money,736and this process. I come from Ohio, and have only been in the737Senate for 10 weeks, and I have viewed Federal Government from738afar, and things seem to take so much longer.739    I will give you an example. This is not directly related to740the Department of Transportation, but broadband. Passed a bill741in Congress 2021 about rural broadband, still nothing has been742built. We passed a law in the State of Ohio to do rural743broadband with State money. We built it in 2 years, all by744basically saying, this is what we want, you bid on it, you745deliver it, you do it in a timeframe.746    In preparation for this conversation this morning, I was747looking, you know, how long does it take to get a new exit on a748highway? Well, five to 15 years, but if you look at it, it is749usually toward 15 years. How long does it take to build a new750bridge? Seven to 20 years, typically it is more closer to 20751than it is 7.752    What is it that you are doing to institutionalize, to look753at how we can deliver this faster? How can we help you?754    Mr. Duffy. First off, Senator, thank you for the question.755Welcome to the Senate. Congratulations.756    Senator Husted. Thank you.757    Far, with these delightful colleagues, it has been758wonderful.759    Mr. Duffy. You make an incredibly important point. I think760Senator Whitehouse made the point that in China, other places761in the world, they build their infrastructure so much faster.762We have decades of laws and rules and regulations that make it763really complicated to build.764    What we have done right now at the department is, there are765requirements that are put on funding that is in the bill that766we have to actually do. I have asked, let us take out all the767other requirements that we are putting on from the department768so we can build projects faster.769    I think we are going to work on NEPA reform in this770administration. I know that all of the body bipartisan wants to771work on regulation reform as well. Again, we can protect the772environment and move projects faster. We are not doing it773smartly.774    I think it is going to be a whole of government. We all, I775think, are recognizing what sounded like a good idea at the776beginning is now becoming a weight around our neck as we try to777build infrastructure. I would look forward to working with you778on what we are going to do at the department, what you all can779do in the Senate. If we do that, again, instead of taking 10,78020 years, we could take 3 to 5 years to build out these781projects.782    Senator Husted. I am going to ask you about being783intentional about it. Is there anybody's job inside the784department to figure out how we are going to go faster?785    Mr. Duffy. What is important for the department is to786streamline the process for the States, right? To take off as787much of the weight as possible so they can build faster and788spend more time turning dirt and less time doing paperwork. We789are at the department doing that part.790    There are some requirements that the Congress has put on us791that we include in these agreements that States have to comply792with. Offering more flexibility to States, who have, I think, a793more vested interest in moving these projects faster, I think794is a key part of this as well. I think Texas has been a great795example of delegating authority to Texas and seeing them move796more quickly on projects.797    Senator Husted. Well, we have the rules and regulations in798place to protect people, to protect the environment, to make799the process more accountable. It actually, the delays end up800costing the taxpayers more, not less, because of inflation and801other consequences of the delays.802    As a competitive item for this Nation, I just take three803things that happened in the last 4 years. Rural broadband,804charging stations, the CHIPS Act, how long it takes money to805get out the door for the construction to go, while China is806innovating nuclear power plants. You go through the list of how807long it is taking us as a Nation to literally get government808money out the door, to build the things we say we need to809compete and defend ourselves for economic and national security810takes longer and longer.811    I would argue that these rules and regulations are at the812expense of Americans, that their health, for example, if we813know that there is a traffic issue that is a safety issue, and814we take years to get it accomplished, people are dying,815people's lives, it is not good for the environment if you have816to--all these things add up and I just share that and urge you817to help us.818    Mr. Duffy. I look forward to working with you. Time is819money. We saw with inflation over the last 4 years that these820projects have become so much more expensive because they did821not move more quickly.822    Can I take one moment and just----823    Senator Capito. Yes, go ahead.824    Mr. Duffy. The cost of a whole project, upwards of 40825percent of the cost is complying with the rules and826regulations. We are not turning dirt; we are not building827bridges. We are actually giving this to consultants, money to828consultants, as we try to go through the regulatory process.829    I think if the American people knew that, they would be830outraged. They want their bridge. Put the money in--by the way,831if we streamline that process, it is not 40 percent, it is832maybe 15 percent. That means we build more bridges, we build833more roads, you get more projects and Americans are happier,834which is what we want, happy America. Less regulation.835    Senator Husted. Yes. Every time you have a compliance836officer or an attorney, that is one less construction worker or837engineer you are employing.838    Thank you, Madam Chair.839    Senator Capito. I am turning slowly to Senator Merkley,840because Senator Whitehouse wanted to make a quick comment.841    Senator Whitehouse. I just wanted to jump in and remind you842that my distaste for interagency process is something that can843be remedied purely within the executive branch by adding844transparency and accountability so that somebody is in charge845when the interagency process fails or derails or delays. Please846keep considering that, and both the Chairman and I are eager to847give you a thumbs up and a blessing if you can cleanup the848swamp of interagency process.849    Mr. Duffy. I will, and you said I might hide behind, I am850not going to hide behind that, I will join you in that effort.851    Senator Capito. Senator Merkley?852    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. I853really appreciate the point you are making about time is money.854Really, the concerns that folks have back home in Oregon is855that projects, instead of being expeditiously going forward856that they are being delayed.857    Everything you are saying, as I walked into the hearing858room, I am like, yes, yes, yes, and I am just basically asking,859put that philosophy to work. I will just take an example with860one of the bridges over the Columbia River, the Hood River861Bridge. It is absolutely sitting on the desk waiting for862approval for the contract. Meanwhile, you have the design team863waiting, you have, trying to line up the construction side,864trying to get it all lined up. You can not line those things up865until the signature gets onto the page.866    In this case, it is a signature on the INFRA grant. Can you867take a look at that project and say, is there any reason to868hold this up? Everything you just expressed, that is exactly869how people feel. Like, this project will be so much more870expensive month by month if it can not go expeditiously871forward.872    Mr. Duffy. Is this the one between Oregon and Washington?873    Senator Merkley. Well, it is one of two, actually. The Hood874River is in the middle of the Columbia Gorge, so it is the875smaller project. It has a $200 million INFRA. It is not the876interstate crossing, which is another really important project.877    Mr. Duffy. I will take a look at the smaller project. I878would love to talk to you about the I-5, because I think there879is, the bridge needs to be redone. There are some simple things880we could do to move that thing more quickly and get through the881regulatory hurdles with the Coast Guard and others. I would882love to have a conversation about that. Again, I think that883would be a top priority for us to move that project.884    Senator Merkley. As you travel the Country, you can remind885people that the only drawbridge left in the interstate system886across the Country is over the Columbia River. If America can887not figure out to put a bridge that lets the ship traffic go888under it across the Columbia, then who are we really?889    Mr. Duffy. Music to my ears.890    Senator Merkley. Thank you. Well, so that Hood River891project is one. A second project is the Pacific Coast892Intermodal Port Project. This is where there is a deepwater893port on the Oregon coast that is perfect to establish more894ability to move freight. We have many things going on in the895freight world, but we really saw before how overloaded the896Tacoma and the ports in California, southern, but this is right897in the middle of all that. It has a railroad line that serves898it, connects into the railroads going all across the Country899and the railroads going up the Columbia Gorge. It is a perfect900place to add port capacity.901    They too are hoping to see the philosophy you have been902expressing applied, so they can go forward with the design work903for that port.904    Mr. Duffy. Is this Coos Bay?905    Senator Merkley. Yes, this is Coos Bay.906    Mr. Duffy. I have had internal conversations with the907administration. It is on my radar, and I will continue to look908at it and work with others in the administration about this909project and how it could move forward every productive way. I910think it is an important area, and an important project.911    Senator Merkley. I have often heard folks talking about how912when there is a project with national significance, it really913needs to go to the top of the pile. This is one with not just914regional but national significance, to be able to get our915products out, fast and cheaply out of the U.S., to be able to916get products in fast and cheaply. We do not want them going917through, you know, Canada is adding port capacity. We do not918want to have to have stuff imported to Canada and then ship it919down into the United States. This is a huge opportunity for us920to do something of national significance.921    Mr. Duffy. I hear you, and I have heard others talk about922this same topic, Senator. I would be happy to partner on it.923    Senator Merkley. Thank you.924    Mr. Duffy. To think through how it would look and how we925could do it.926    Senator Merkley. We have a lot of projects, obviously,927lined up, as every State does. Another one is the Safe Streets928and Roads for All Program. There is a whole series of grants.929These are largely related to bicycle, pedestrian930infrastructure, and helping students get to school safely. I931did notice a whole bunch of orange shirts with the word932``bike'' on it.933    The thing that we appreciate about expanding our bike934capacity in Oregon is it reduces the congestion on our roads.935Not only is it folks who are choosing a cheaper way and a936healthier way to get to work but it is a way for everyone else937in their car to get to work faster. Everyone appreciates it.938    I wanted to encourage that set of Safe Streets and Roads939grants. They are minor grants; they just need your autopen to940go to work.941    Mr. Duffy. The Congress was clear, and I am going to abide942by the will of the Congress. I am not going to hold up any943projects. Again, bikes are healthy, bikes oftentimes in many944places move people faster.945    Senator Merkley. In the years I was working here in D.C.,946in the 1980's, I biked everywhere. I always beat my friends in947cars. By the time they could figure out a parking space, I had948already been on location 15 minutes. Anyway, thank you so much.949    Mr. Duffy. Now people are riding scooters.950    Senator Capito. Senator Lummis?951    Senator Lummis. Thanks, Madam Chairman, for beginning the952dialog between the Department of Transportation and this953committee on surface transportation now. We have a lot of big954challenges.955    Mr. Secretary, honestly, I have to say, since hours after956you were sworn in, you have been drinking out of a fire hose.957You have had crisis after crisis, challenge after challenge.958You have handled it magnificently, and I want to thank you for959the way that you are continuing to work through these projects960while you continue to communicate with the American people.961    I want to thank you specifically for looking at the Rock962Springs, Wyoming airport grants. Like everyone else, we are all963hopeful that some of these grants that were signed, sealed and964not quite delivered are moving forward. Bless you for that.965    A couple subjects with regard to surface transportation.966Electronic Vehicle (EV) mandates just really do not work for967Wyoming because of our climate, because of our cold weather.968Electric vehicles just do not go as far as they can elsewhere,969because of that there are not very many.970    When there are electric vehicles, they are just not971contributing to maintaining our roads and bridges, because you972have to be using a liquid fuel that pays a gas or diesel tax in973order to maintain our roads. We are all going to have to work974together to find out a way that electric vehicles can help975contribute to the maintenance of our Nation's roads and976bridges.977    I have one little sliver of it that I want to talk to you978about. The EV mandates and the National Electric Vehicle979Infrastructure Program (NEVI) charger program, and its related980discretionary program, budgeted $7.5 billion with really981disappointing results. It is leading to the suspension in982February that occurred so it could be evaluated.983    I want to look at that program and ask you to look at it984with me. The NEVI program just buckled under piles of985regulation and rigid technical requirements, private capital986was left on the sidelines to address the EV charging issue.987Wyoming and other States have millions of dollars sitting idle988in accounts for chargers that they just can not build. That is989money that is not creating this joyful, happy America where we990have great highways and great bridges.991    I introduced this bill called the Highway Funding992Flexibility Act that would authorize States to redirect unused993EV charger funds to roads and bridges, and then highway safety994priorities like truck parking and wildlife crossings could also995be eligible. It would empower States like Wyoming to devote996money to real highway needs with potentially billions997nationwide for addressing infrastructure priorities.998    I would like your help exploring this and maybe other ways999to make sure that money that has been appropriated could be put1000to use on big, durable projects that connect our Country, some1001of the projects that my colleagues have raised.1002    How do you recommend we go about having a dialog about1003things like that?1004    Mr. Duffy. First, Senator, I live in a place in Wisconsin1005that is cold and rural as well, and EVs do not work that well1006in my part of the Country also. Just in regard to the NEVI1007program, just to be clear, the guidance, I think, from the last1008administration was not working. I believe there has been over 31009years, 66 chargers built with the $5 billion out of the $7.51010billion that was directed toward the EV chargers, and again,1011very burdensome regulation.1012    We are redoing the guidance. We can have a debate about1013whether we should have charging stations or not. You guys all1014passed a bill with charging stations. I think if you pass a1015bill saying, we should build out American infrastructure with1016charging stations, we should build charging stations. We should1017not pay people to not have charging stations, we have 66 of1018them.1019    I look at the guidance, I am going to make the guidance1020work. Whether I agree with it or not, you told me to do it, and1021so let us do it well. There is still money there, and that is a1022role for the Congress to say, hey, do we want to take this1023money and use it for something else? That will be your all's1024decision as you go forward this next year.1025    I am going to do what you directed and 66 is a shameful1026number. Again, it goes back to the Senator from Ohio's point,1027there are way too many rules and regulations. People can not1028comply, and then you do not get the build. I would be happy to1029work with you, though, on kind of what we are thinking, and1030happy to work with you on what you are thinking.1031    I do also believe that EVs should pay part of the cost of1032roads and bridges that they use. How you do that is a question1033that we will have to grapple with.1034    Senator Lummis. Thanks, Madam Chairman. If we get a second1035round, I will ask you about truck parking. There again, there1036is a Department of Labor rule that says you can only drive a1037certain number of hours and then you absolutely have to stop.1038There is no place for them to park. That is an issue for1039another round.1040    Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.1041    Mr. Duffy. That is a safety issue. We have to address it.1042    Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Padilla?1043    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary Duffy,1044thank you for being here. I appreciated our productive and1045constructive dialog by phone yesterday on some of the1046California transportation priorities that we have been1047discussing for a while.1048    I appreciate, Madam Chair, the opportunity to shed light on1049the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It has meant more than $541050billion of investment in a number of projects throughout the1051State of California that not only help keep up with our transit1052needs, help keep modern and efficient some of the Nation's1053busiest ports, and of course, our extensive highway system. We1054are doing so to meet some deferred maintenance needs in some1055respects, but also make necessary improvements to accommodate1056both a growing population and a growing economy.1057    A lot of these projects have been a long time in coming. We1058are finally glad to see the activity happening.1059    As we talked about yesterday, it is also critical that the1060administration supports some key events that are drivers of1061goods movement, people movement, and are a catalyst for1062modernization. I am specifically referring to the L.A. 20281063Olympics to be hosted in Los Angeles, the most populous region1064in the Country already. Add to that the anticipated 50 million1065ticket holders coming to events in 2028 to make it successful1066and to lay the foundation for economic growth well beyond the1067Olympics.1068    We are looking to partner with the Department of1069Transportation in a big, big way and 2028 seems like a long1070ways away, but it is actually just around the corner from a1071planning and preparation standpoint. We need funding for those1072preparations now.1073    I think it would be helpful to have a designated line item1074in the President's budget to help us prepare not only for L.A.10752028, by the way, but also to lay the foundation for the 20341076Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City.1077    Long intro to ask you what you might be able to provide in1078terms of an update on your work to support the Olympics in10792028, including any work with the OMB to develop funding1080proposals for the Olympics.1081    Mr. Duffy. I appreciate the question, Senator. Again, it is1082the Olympics that are going to be hosted in L.A., but in1083America.1084    There is a task force in this administration that we are1085part of, that I have designated someone to as we think through1086what should the administration be looking at, what are the1087needs of the greater L.A. area as we, to your point, we are1088going to see a lot of people coming to our Country. We are1089going to move them, house them, and again, that is a thoughtful1090process that we are engaging in right now. I would agree with1091you; 3 years is right around the corner. Not a lot of time; we1092have to move quickly.1093    Senator Padilla. Move them, house them, and help maintain1094safe and secure events around the Olympics.1095    Question on a different topic. The Infrastructure and Jobs1096Act provided $8 billion in advance appropriations for the1097FTA's, Federal Transit Administration, capital investment1098grants program, one of the items we talked about yesterday,1099which helps fund large transit capital projects. Projects make1100their way through the pipeline after already rigorous review on1101their merit and their feasibility. There is a number of1102critical projects in California making their way through the1103pipeline as we speak.1104    As you can imagine, there are some constituents, there are1105some transit agencies back home, some municipalities that are a1106little nervous about the reliability of that funding, given1107some of the changes and whiplash that we are experiencing here1108in Washington.1109    As your team executes the program, can you assure us that1110the review process and just the awarding of funds going forward1111will continue to simply be based on merit?1112    Mr. Duffy. Yes, Senator, and I think you might also be1113referring to the California High Speed Rail project, which we1114are going----1115    Senator Padilla. One of a number, yes.1116    Mr. Duffy. Per our conversation yesterday, our people have1117been in touch with the California Rail Authority, I believe is1118who that is.1119    I do believe as a philosophy if we commit to rail, if we1120commit to infrastructure, we should actually build the1121infrastructure we commit to. I know that this project you have1122laid out, those distinct differences for the L.A. to San1123Franciso portion of this high speed rail. When we skip1124timelines and projections of cost that we can not meet, and it1125is $33 billion, it can be like $133 billion. There are1126timeframes that were set, it should be done by 2020, now there1127is no timeframe in which it is going to be completed.1128    That is not your fault, Senator, but we have to actually1129deliver on projects for the people. We do not have high speed1130rail in America. If we want to have high speed rail and we want1131to dedicate money to it, let us actually show America what high1132speed rail looks like because we built it. We did not just1133spend the money on a project, we built a project.1134    Senator Padilla. I respect that, Mr. Secretary, but to be1135clear, that is one of a number of projects I was making1136reference to. There are transit projects, including rail lines,1137in and around San Diego. Second, part of the city in1138California, another one of the largest cities in America, in1139and around Los Angeles, second largest city in America, but the1140anchor for the most populous county in America. Around the San1141Francisco Bay area.1142    There is a significant economic contribution to the Nation1143and our Federal coffers that can continue to grow with the1144proper infrastructure investment. I want to keep those moving1145along.1146    My time is up. I will submit some questions for the record.1147I appreciate your attention and partnership.1148    Senator Capito. Senator Sullivan?1149    Mr. Duffy. I want to keep them safe, too, Senator. I want,1150when people ride the rail, I want them to be safe when they1151move.1152    Senator Padilla. Absolutely.1153    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Madam Chair.1154    Mr. Secretary, great to see you. I just want to really1155thank you. I think you are doing a great job. You have been1156very responsive. That press conference we had with our1157congressional delegation over at the Department of1158Transportation after the plane crash in Alaska was really1159meaningful to my constituents. Thank you. Keep up the fantastic1160work.1161    I want to build on what we call the FASI initiative, the1162Federal Aviation Safety Initiative in Alaska. I know you are1163committed to that. I gave a big shout-out to you in my annual1164speech to our Alaska legislature last week.1165    One thing to followup on, when you are talking about ATC,1166the Anchorage Center for the FAA on the air traffic1167controllers, these men and women do a great job. I would love1168for you, when you come to Alaska, to see them. I agree, it is1169like post-it notes, floppy disks, it is so antiquated. They do1170not just do aviation control for Alaska. Anyone who is flying1171from the lower 48 to Asia, Japan, Korea, they fly over Alaska.1172The ATC in Alaska essentially takes them, controls them, hands1173them off all the way in Tokyo. They are protecting the whole1174Country.1175    Can you commit to me to help with technical upgrades? I1176just met with a bunch of our ATC leadership and boy, oh, boy,1177they are great, but they really, really, they are World War II1178era technology.1179    Mr. Duffy. I would look forward to, I worked out what will1180be a proposal for the Senate and the House. I have shared it1181with the President. We are trying to pressure test the cost on1182this before I send it to all of you.1183    We need to, this is an American effort. Time has killed,1184because we have spent a lot of money on trying to upgrade air1185traffic control, and there are a lot of high-faluting ideas out1186there. We are at the basics. Let us build the basics of this1187system that gets rid of World War II and brings us into the118821st century. Alaska is a key part of it.1189    We talked about hot spots around the Country. You mentioned1190the Anchorage area. That has been a focus of the FAA and using1191AI technology to see if we are missing something that is not1192visible to the human eye with regard to issues in your1193airspace.1194    Senator Sullivan. Right, and thank you. Again, when you are1195looking at ATC tech, software upgrade, boy, oh, boy, Anchorage1196Center needs it. It is not just for Anchorage, like I said.1197They take care of everybody flying to Asia.1198    Mr. Duffy. I want to do the whole Country, everybody needs1199it. We need a whole American buildout. Good American jobs, tens1200of thousands of jobs. It would be great.1201    Senator Sullivan. Could not agree more.1202    Bridges, I am so glad to see the Chairman and my good1203friend, the Ranking Member, talking about big, beautiful1204bridges. That is a beautiful bridge, Senator Whitehouse.1205    By the way, the one thing, though, that my good friend from1206Rhode Island did not mention on permitting delays, he mentioned1207reforms, bureaucracy, the freezes. Far left radical1208environmentally frivolous lawsuits, my State lives with that.1209That is what we deal with every darned day. If there is not1210litigation reform, these groups want to kill roads, bridges,1211ports in Alaska, they get a free hand.1212    These groups are allowed to sue like six, 7 years after1213records of decision. It is ridiculous. We need permitting1214reform that limits the radical far left environmental groups1215from crushing every project, particularly in my State. I can1216not wait to work with Senator Whitehouse on those ideas, too.1217    Senator Whitehouse. Representing the radical far left.1218    [Laughter.]1219    Senator Sullivan. Well, you kind of do. We are still good1220friends.1221    Anyway, I did have an amendment a couple of years ago that1222I would love for you to take a look at on bridges that said, if1223it is an existing bridge and you are going to rebuild it in the1224same space or do maintenance on it, why in the heck do you need1225to do a NEPA?1226    My bill, which every Republican supported, I can not1227remember her name, a California Senator, she went on the floor1228screaming, ``The Sullivan amendment will kill children.'' I am1229like, what? I mean, so we want an exclusion from NEPA if all1230you are doing is building in the same footprint for a bridge.1231It is common sense.1232    Would not you agree with something like that, Mr.1233Secretary?1234    Mr. Duffy. A hundred percent.1235    Senator Sullivan. Okay, I am going to re-attack that, and1236Sheldon Whitehouse is going to be my cosponsor.1237    [Laughter.]1238    Senator Whitehouse. I do like working with Senator1239Sullivan.1240    Senator Sullivan. Okay, that is what I need.1241    Mr. Secretary, I have a list of frozen build grants that I1242am going to just have you for the record, not many. You guys1243have done a good, you just unfroze the FHWA, Federal Highway1244Administration, one in Whittier, Alaska. If you and I can work1245on that.1246    Then finally, we will submit that for the record. Two final1247quick questions. We are trying to do a lot, you just sent me a1248letter, I really appreciate that, yesterday, on the building1249out of the Port of Alaska, Port of Anchorage, we call it. We1250are getting Federal dollars, MARAD, Maritime Administration,1251and others. Thank you.1252    Once again, the permitting is, I wrote you about NEPA, but1253there is a NOAA, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association,1254beluga whale thing. We need to get everybody together on the1255permitting side for the Port of Anchorage and follow through on1256the President's day one Executive Order on unleashing Alaska's1257economy and resources, which we are very happy President Trump1258did that.1259    Can I get your commitment to work with us on that kind of,1260because it is not just you guys, and your letter was much1261appreciated, but it is other agencies and I think we just all1262need to get together and say, hey, this is a really needed1263port, we are finally getting Federal dollars to it. We have to1264get the permitting right. If it is six, 7 years on permits,1265that is just wasted money, wasted time.1266    Mr. Duffy. I would welcome the opportunity to work with1267you, Senator, and I look forward to seeing you in August.1268    Senator Sullivan. Great. Then finally, I will submit it for1269the record, we have an idea on the Tribal Transportation1270Program that can help our tribes get more infrastructure1271dollars. As you know a lot of our tribes, not just in Alaska,1272but in the lower 48, they really suffer from lack of1273infrastructure. There are some ideas to help that program be1274more efficient, get some more funding to our tribes throughout1275America. I would welcome to work with you on that.1276    Mr. Duffy. Yes, Senator.1277    Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You are doing a1278great job.1279    Senator Whitehouse. [Presiding.] That takes us to Senator1280Schiff.1281    Senator Schiff. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, thank you for1282being here.1283    I wanted to raise concern about a number of projects in1284California that are still waiting for an answer. In the MEGA1285program, $283 million for the Port of Long Beach Rail1286Construction project; $166 million for Contra Costa's Innovate1287680 program' $53 million for a multi-modal facility in Madera.1288In the INFRA bill, $105 million for Redwood City, S.R. 84 and1289U.S. 101, $98 million for CalTrans S.R. 99 Tulare improvements.1290    In the Rural Surface Transportation Program, $41 million1291for the city of Tracy, Corral Hollow Road project, $35 million1292for Yuba County, Plumas Lake Boulevard and FHWA, $102 million1293for CalTrans I-5, $56 million for SJV, San Joaquin Valley, air1294pollution control district, $55 million for California Energy1295Commission.1296    Reconnecting Communities, $26 million for the housing1297authority in L.A., $11 million for the city of Goleta1298multipurpose path. In the RAISE program, $25 million for BART,1299$23 million for the Palmdale grade separation project.1300    This is a partial list. These projects really have not1301received word, so they are unclear of the status of the1302projects. The delays might end up killing the projects. The1303delays will certainly end up costing more to do these projects,1304as material costs go up and other costs increase.1305    I am raising the concern because we do not know whether1306these are changes in policy that are affecting grants that have1307already been approved, or whether this is a lack of personnel1308to administer the grants. I am further concerned with layoffs1309that might further delay getting this money out the door to do1310these vital infrastructure projects.1311    I would ask for your comments generally on when you think1312these cities and counties will hear from you and your1313department. Also whether you are mindful of the fact that delay1314has a cost, a real dollars and cents cost.1315    Mr. Duffy. I appreciate the question, Senator. I would1316maybe give the whole number, there have bene 200 awards1317announced for California to the tune of $1.74 billion. There is1318a lot of money that announcements have been made over the1319course of the last 3 years. We do not have grant agreements on1320those announcements.1321    I do not know that you were here for this, but there are13223,200 announcements that were made by the last administration1323where there were no grant agreements. That is unheard of. I am1324going to work through those announcements and get grant1325agreements so we can build those projects that you are talking1326about.1327    Just quickly, I do not want the Republicans to get annoyed1328at me, but Senator Whitehouse got a bridge, and in California1329we are going to announce the Madera 410 Expressway, that one1330has been completed, we are almost ready to sign that, as well1331as the Otay Mesa $150 million, that is a border crossing. I1332believe that one is ready to go as well.1333    We have three Democrat announcements. I do not have any for1334you Republicans yet, but we are going through the projects.1335    Senator Schiff. We are a very bipartisan committee.1336    Mr. Duffy. You are.1337    Senator Schiff. I know I speak for my Republican colleagues1338when I say they are delighted with money coming to my State.1339    [Laughter.]1340    Mr. Duffy. We will see how that goes.1341    Senator Schiff. Not quite as delighted as if it were going1342to their State.1343    Mr. Secretary, I appreciate anything you can do to1344accelerate the approval process. Can you speak to how the cuts1345in personnel may be impacting the timeliness of approvals in1346this area?1347    Mr. Duffy. Yes, I appreciate the question. That has not1348impacted how we are able to move through the grant agreement1349process. We still have more employees in the department than we1350did when Joe Biden took office.1351    It is the sheer volume that I was left with. Just to maybe1352remake this point, in between Obama and Donald Trump, there was135347 projects announced between election day and inauguration.1354Between Trump and Biden, there was 107 projects announced1355between election day and inauguration day. In this last term,1356there was about 950 projects announced.1357    There has been a massive number of announcements, historic.1358Then that means our department has to do the work of, truly the1359work is doing the grant agreements. The announcements are fun,1360but grant agreements are the work. I am going to get through1361that, but it is going to take me some time. I would ask for1362some patience from the committee just because the workload is1363so significant.1364    Senator Schiff. Mr. Secretary, if there is any further1365information you need and you are having any delay on our end,1366please have your staff reach out to mine. We want to make sure1367that we get you all the information necessary to move these1368projects forward.1369    Mr. Duffy. I appreciate that, Senator.1370    Senator Schiff. Thank you. I yield back.1371    Senator Whitehouse. Particularly if the delay is1372substantively based and not a heresy hunt.1373    Senator Curtis. Thank you.1374    As we were talking about bridges, I saw one big beautiful1375bridge from the Senator from California's State over to my1376State, skipping the State in between.1377    Senator Whitehouse. Quite a bridge.1378    [Laughter.]1379    Senator Curtis. Secretary Duffy, so delighted to have you1380here in this capacity. I will associate myself with my1381colleagues who have complimented your fast and early start.1382Thank you for jumping right in and the work you do.1383    I will be careful, because I do not know your travel1384schedule, but hypothetically if you found yourself in Utah in1385the next short time, we would be very excited. We have a1386project we would love to show you, our FrontRunner. I think you1387are familiar with that. We have the Olympics coming also, a few1388years later than California.1389    Eighty percent of our population is serviced by this one1390rail because of the geography of our State. That 80 percent is1391expected to double in no short time. We would love to have your1392support on that project. I would love to personally show you1393that as well, given the opportunity.1394    Mr. Duffy. Yes, Senator, I would love to work with you. If1395I could just take a moment, I want to extend my condolences to1396the State of Utah. You lost a lioness of a legislator and a1397friend of mine, and I know a friend to the great State of Utah,1398Mia Love, who served in our body in the House. She lost her1399battle with cancer. She has a wonderful family, and I know she1400loved Utah. She served your State well. Our hearts are broken.1401    Senator Curtis. Thank you. From the State, thank you for1402your friendship with her, too. I know she thought very highly1403of you.1404    I also want to bring up, Utah is unique in the sense of our1405regional planning, MPOs, Metropolitan Planning Organizations,1406they actually like each other and get along. At the time I was1407serving as mayor, I was told that we had the only statewide MPO1408project in the Country where all the MPOs agreed across the1409entire State. The synergy is just really important.1410    I just wanted to get your thoughts on MPOs, particularly in1411the reauthorization bill, how you see the role of MPOs.1412    Mr. Duffy. Senator, if it is working well in Utah, and as1413we go through the reauthorization, I am sure you will be a1414champion, and I will take your lead on what we learn from the1415success, and how do we improve on the successes in this new1416bill.1417    Senator Curtis. Excellent. Good.1418    We have had a lot of conversation today about bureaucracy1419and regulations. Going back to my mayor days, whenever we built1420a project, we knew the rule of thumb was if we took one dollar1421of Federal money it increased the cost of our project by 301422percent. Keeping the same standards, right, all the same NEPA1423requirements and yet, it was led by the State, and not the1424Federal Government.1425    One of my questions for you is what role can we transition1426traditionally done by the Federal Government to the States?1427Utah loves to be the lead on these projects. We would love to1428get your thoughts on that and how we can deal with that.1429    Mr. Duffy. I think it is a great point. We have been trying1430to designate more authority to States, because they move1431projects faster than have happened when going through the1432Federal Government.1433    To the larger point, I think there is a philosophy about1434what we have to do with these permits and the environmental1435reviews. I do believe there is an understanding, Democrat and1436Republican, that has been created today is not what was1437anticipated when bills were passed. That is why I think there1438is bipartisan support to do reform in this space, so we can1439move projects faster and more cheaply. Again, we do not have to1440sacrifice an environmental review, but I think it was Senator1441Sullivan who mentioned the litigation and the complication and1442the cost is real.1443    I will do my part; I know the administration wants to do1444their part. The Congress has to do their part as well to1445streamline this process.1446    Senator Curtis. Given any opportunity, Utah would love to1447serve as the lead agency in environmental projects. We would1448love to talk to you about that, and how that might help us1449streamline.1450    Mr. Duffy. I would love that.1451    Senator Curtis. Good. Our recreational trails program, I am1452just going to read a stat here, off-highway vehicle users like1453four-wheelers, ATVs and off-road motorcycles contribute $2811454million annually to the Highway Trust Fund and only receive $841455million back out of it. We would love to have that discussion1456with you, too. That is a big deal in Utah, returning some of1457those back to the trails programs.1458    Mr. Duffy. I would welcome that discussion. Again, I know1459it is big in Utah, but northern Wisconsin also, big deal, a lot1460of people come to ride through our beautiful forests.1461    Senator Curtis. Sounds like something I need to do. I will1462get out to Wisconsin. Thank you.1463    Mr. Duffy. I recommend July or August.1464    Senator Curtis. Okay, thanks, Mr. Secretary. I yield my1465time.1466    Senator Capito. [Presiding.] Senator Kelly?1467    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to1468Secretary Duffy for being here today. It was great to have the1469opportunity to speak to you on the phone yesterday.1470    I want to start by discussing the review of the competitive1471grant awards, as we discussed on the phone, and the guidance1472issued by the Department of Transportation on March 11th1473outlining the process of reviewing projects for grant awards1474that are not yet finalized.1475    This has caused significant disruption for a number of our1476projects in Arizona, including the replacement of the 22d1477Street Bridge in Tucson. I was on the phone with the mayor of1478Tucson yesterday about this, Regina Romero. This 22d Street1479Bridge project replaces an outdated bridge for cars that are1480going over Union Pacific's main Southern Transcon rail line in1481Tucson. It needs to be replaced. There are cars, or there are1482certain sized trucks and emergency vehicles that can not go1483over this bridge, not allowed.1484    There is also a project in Arizona, it is the widening of1485U.S. Highway 93, which is one of the deadliest roadways in1486Arizona, and part of what we call the future interstate 111487between Phoenix and Las Vegas. Phoenix and Las Vegas are1488perhaps the two closest cities in the Country, major cities,1489that are not connected by an interstate highway.1490    There is also the replacement of four bridges on interstate149140 in northern Arizona that were not built to current1492standards. Then a reconfiguration of a three-way interchange in1493the west valley, that is outside Phoenix, that also has an at-1494grade railway crossing and is one of the most congested1495intersections in the State.1496    There is also a project that widens U.S. Highway 95 to1497address a decades-long problem of traffic and unsafe roadway1498conditions between the city of Yuma and the Army's Yuma Proving1499Grounds in southern Arizona. Then there is more than a dozen1500more. I could go on; I am not going to do that.1501    I have sent you and your staff a full list of these1502priority projects. I will note, all of these projects were1503announced before election day, not after. None of them were1504selected for political reasons. They were selected because they1505are important to my State and they meet the purposes of these1506congressionally authorized grant programs. They repair bridges,1507they reduce congestion, they improve safety. Based on your1508testimony and our prior conversations, I am pretty sure we1509agree those are the exact types of projects that should receive1510funding.1511    Yet, for no fault of their own, these grant recipients in1512Arizona have had to wait several months now, not able to move1513forward on reviews or grant agreements, and forced to delay1514their construction schedules. I just had a bunch of my1515constituents in the office today talking about and asking, why1516are these things stopped?1517    Secretary Duffy, what updates can you give about when the1518internal review of grants that was laid out on March 11th will1519be completed?1520    Mr. Duffy. Senator, again I agree, many of the projects,1521good projects. I am told there are 44 awards that you received1522for $561 million in the State of Arizona. They were awarded1523before election day. I would note many of these go back two and15243 years, these projects.1525    Senator Kelly. Yes.1526    Mr. Duffy. I love that you are saying that I can cleanup1527two or 3 years of announcements in 2 months, that is a little1528bit challenging. I am committing to you, like I did on the1529phone, I am going to work through these projects.1530    Senator Kelly. Explain to me what do you mean by cleanup?1531What is required to clean them up? This is money appropriated1532by Congress, by Democrats and Republicans, grants that were1533awarded and now things seem to have come to a halt on many of1534these projects.1535    Mr. Duffy. For obligated money, when there is an1536obligation, a grant agreement is signed where there was an1537earmark for Congress, all that money is still going out. There1538has been no pause, there has been no hold, there has been no--1539money is going per the law on those grant agreements.1540    The unobligated money is the money where there has been an1541award, someone did a big announcement, hey, you get your1542project for the 22d Street Tucson bridge or road, and then it1543takes time to do the grant agreement. That is the actual work1544part of the process.1545    The announcement is easy. The grant agreement is the work.1546There are 3,200 of those projects that we have sitting at the1547department where the fun part was done with the announcement.1548We have to do the work of doing the grant agreement with the1549States. We are going to work through that quickly, as quickly1550as possible.1551    It is a historically large number. I take your point. You1552alone have 44 projects that were announced that do not have1553grant agreements on them. A lot of you all have these projects1554and you are all, I think rightfully annoyed that the money is1555not coming.1556    Many of them are years old. Again, if you are annoyed or1557concerned, I think the focus should not be on me, it should be1558elsewhere. We have been there 2 months; someone else was there1559for 4 years. I will work on those with you.1560    Senator Kelly. All right. Thank you. I appreciate it.1561    Senator Capito. Senator Alsobrooks?1562    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.1563    Secretary Duffy, good to see you again.1564    Mr. Duffy. You as well, Senator.1565    Senator Alsobrooks. I enjoyed the conversation yesterday.1566    During our discussion, we talked about our time as county1567executives. You know the Federal transportation programs really1568are so integral to the success of our States, projects like1569road maintenance, bridge repairs, safety projects. I am looking1570forward to working with you and working with this committee to1571craft a bipartisan surface transportation reauthorization bill.1572    I am also wanting to ask you about three questions. One is1573regarding construction costs for infrastructure that we know,1574particularly highway construction, have increased1575significantly. The Federal Highway Administration's National1576Highway Construction cost index, which measures the rate of1577inflation and labor and material costs, increased, we know, 591578percent since 2021, 36 percent between 2022 and the first half1579of 2023.1580    These costs continue to rise. We know that they really,1581this will impact how much infrastructure we can build with1582allocated funds.1583    The question is, how will the administration plan to ensure1584that transportation funding keeps pace with inflation, so that1585projects in States like Maryland are not delayed and are not1586downsized?1587    Mr. Duffy. Senator, I think that is a great question and I1588appreciated our conversation yesterday, two former prosecutors.1589I appreciate the good work you have done in all the roles you1590have had in your public service.1591    You are right, we have to do our work in the department to1592get these projects out the door, get grant agreements signed1593and get new notices of funding opportunity done as well. Again,1594we can have a massive infrastructure build in this Country. The1595sooner we do it, I think to your point, the more cost effective1596it will be. We get today's cost when we do projects, not1597tomorrow's cost if they are delayed.1598    I think also an important part of it is not just the work1599that we have to do. I do believe that the Congress has to do1600its work on permitting reform. That is taking a very long time,1601too. It is not the work that you have done or the department1602has done, it is that the process to go through to begin these1603projects takes so long. If they are delayed, five, six, 101604years, the cost of completion is significant.1605    Also, part of that, we can reduce the cost of the1606consultants and the permitting, which means more money will be1607there for the road or the bridge or whatever, the rail that we1608are working on.1609    Senator Alsobrooks. Okay. Also, I know there has been a lot1610of conversation today about bridges. Maryland happens to also1611be very concerned about a bridge, in particular the Francis1612Scott Key Bridge that collapsed after being hit by a vessel in16132024. The collapse highlighted some vulnerabilities that we1614have in our Nation's bridge infrastructure, and particularly1615around bridges that were not designed to withstand these modern1616vessel strikes.1617    In response to the tragedy in Maryland, the National1618Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)conducted an investigation1619and issued a preliminary report which highlighted other high1620risk bridges that are across the Country.1621    The question is whether you will commit to expeditiously1622adopting the recommendations that the NTSB outlined in that1623preliminary report?1624    Mr. Duffy. I would note I have worked very closely with the1625NTSB and their Chair, Jennifer Homendy, has done an excellent1626job and has partnered with us very well. I want to take a look1627at the recommendations, and again, to implement recommendations1628on the number of bridges that she highlighted would indicate a1629significant amount of money that comes in this upcoming bill.1630    Again, the resources have to be provided and you all have1631to have the discussion if that is a priority for the Congress.1632I am happy to engage. We should have a broader conversation1633together about what that priority list looks like.1634    Again, the Francis Scott Key Bridge, lives were lost there,1635tragic. We want to make sure that does not happen again.1636    Senator Alsobrooks. Okay. Just a final question, I know we1637talked also about transit. On average, the Washington1638Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) carries over1639800,000 passengers daily across rail and bus systems. Very1640important to the D.C. area and the metropolitan area, including1641Maryland.1642    I want to ask you whether you will, the funding stream has1643been so important to us. I know that the lack of predictable1644funding really does harm the safety of passengers. I know we1645talked a lot about safety on those trains.1646    As Secretary, will you work with Congress in supporting1647long-term predictable funding streams for transit systems like1648WMATA and MTA, Maryland Transit Administration?1649    Mr. Duffy. I am happy to have that conversation. I do think1650that, again, everyone driving in a car may be challenging if1651you are coming into Washington, DC or to New York City. Transit1652is an important part of it.1653    We should expect that if we want people to ride our trains,1654our trains should be safe. They should not be subject to1655violence on our subways or our trains. I think that is local1656communities, and I think the mayor has been making good efforts1657in D.C. here. We have to take steps to make sure people are1658safe.1659    Also, I think we have to look at the cost. In New York, I1660believe it is, the next most expensive place to build subways1661is London. New York is five times more expensive than London.1662We have to get our costs under control as well. We do not have1663an unlimited amount of money, we do not have a money printing1664machine, though some people might think the Congress is a money1665machine. It is not.1666    Let us use the money well and make investments that go1667further for the taxpayer and the American people and make sure1668that they are safe. I would work with you on that and figure1669out how we make those goals a reality.1670    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you. I yield. Thank you.1671    Senator Capito. Thank you. Senator Blunt Rochester?1672    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Chairwoman Capito and1673Ranking Member Whitehouse.1674    It is good to see you, Secretary Duffy. I want to first of1675all thank you for your responsiveness when I called or texted.1676You have been very responsive and I appreciated our1677conversation as well in preparation for today's hearing.1678    I am running back and forth between two committees, so I1679apologize. The other committee was also focused on safety, the1680Commerce Committee. We were talking about aviation safety.1681    Today we all know how important safety is, and I just want1682to thank you for taking the time.1683    I want to focus, for me, on a couple of projects, you have1684probably heard a theme here from many of us, that are important1685to Delaware. I know when we talked, one of our conversations a1686few months ago was about the announcement of funding freezes.1687You were very responsive at that time.1688    I shared with you recently that in Delaware, we have the1689Cape May-Lewes Ferry system, which received a $20 million grant1690to replace an aging vessel with a hybrid ferry that is now on1691hold. This new hybrid ferry's engine would reduce fuel1692consumption by 35 percent. That is transformational.1693    Over the past 60 years, the Cape May-Lewes Ferry has been a1694stable provider for travel and tourism. The service transports1695approximately 775,000 passengers and 275,000 vehicles a year.1696Without this funding for the modernization, this vessel, we1697would just be at risk.1698    Secretary Duffy, I wanted to talk to you about the1699certainty of these funds. Can I tell my constituents that this1700funding for the project is still confirmed?1701    Mr. Duffy. Yes, so Senator, just--yes. When you say the1702money was, we froze money, we did not freeze any money at the1703department. There are obligated projects that money continued1704to go out on. These are, I appreciate, you have been very1705kind----1706    Senator Blunt Rochester. No, that is what I mean you were1707responsive to call me back and tell me the money is not----1708    Mr. Duffy. These are announced projects that we needed1709grant agreements on. That is going to take some work. I do not1710see any issue with the announcements, and that we should be1711able to do grant agreements. I have to again prioritize, for1712everybody has projects to the tune of 3,200 of them.1713    I am trying to get through them as quickly as possible. You1714can tell your constituents, the Secretary does not see any1715issue with these grant agreements that were announced and he is1716going to try to work through them as quickly as possible.1717    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you. I just request that our1718team continue to followup with each other after the hearing.1719    Mr. Duffy. Absolutely.1720    Senator Blunt Rochester. I would like to bring another1721project to your attention and that is the city of Wilmington1722was awarded a $17 million RAISE grant to build the appropriate1723infrastructure for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles along the1724riverfront in support of a larger riverfront development1725project. While monthly land use discussions have continued with1726the Federal Highway Administration, the grant agreement1727discussions have not yet resumed.1728    Secretary Duffy, if you can clarify, you said this is not1729on hold, but is one of the challenges because it is multi-modal1730transportation?1731    Mr. Duffy. No. I appreciate the question, Senator. This is1732one of the issues that this project is, for the Wilmington1733RAISE grant, it was announced in 2021. This is an old one. I1734have been there for 2 months. I will commit to working with you1735and your team and our team to make sure we get the grant1736agreement written and get the project going.1737    With the 2-months I have been there, I am not the holdup,1738it is 3 years in the making to get us here. I think it is fair1739for you to go, well, I do not care about the past 3 years, I1740care about what you are going to do for me today. I am going to1741work with you to deliver for you and this administration.1742    Senator Blunt Rochester. It is interesting; you are1743actually talking on my behalf, what you think I might be1744thinking. I am just saying, this is an important project to1745Delaware.1746    Mr. Duffy. Yes.1747    Senator Blunt Rochester. I just want to confirm that it is1748part of a larger picture. It also includes flood mitigation and1749protection. I just want to make sure that our teams can work1750together to make sure that the talks continue and that we get1751this implemented for Delaware.1752    Mr. Duffy. Absolutely.1753    Senator Blunt Rochester. I see some folks in the audience1754who have their bike rider shirts on. I am also very much1755supportive of programs like the Safe Streets and Roads for All1756and the Neighborhood Access and Equity program. These1757investments have helped, as I mentioned, safety. We think about1758the safety of cyclists as well as pedestrians.1759    We hope that you will also focus on these grants and making1760sure that this money is not politicized. I know there was an1761internal memo that talked about the different things that would1762be potentially on the chopping block. We hope that our cyclists1763and pedestrians as well as those who are traveling are safe.1764    Thank you, and I yield back.1765    Mr. Duffy. Thank you, Senator.1766    Senator Capito. Thank you.1767    I want to thank you, and Secretary Duffy, I want to thank1768you. We do not have any further questions, so I would really1769like to thank you. Your whole testimony was really, I think,1770goes back to your House roots, realizing that all politics is1771local for all of us. You did your homework before you came on1772all of our various projects.1773    We really appreciate that. From what I have heard1774everywhere, the responsiveness has been amazing.1775    Senators who wish to submit questions for the record have1776until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, April 16th, to do so. The responses1777to those questions are due back to the committee are due back1778to the committee no later than close of business on Wednesday,1779April 30th, and will be submitted for the record.1780    Senator Whitehouse. Let me just thank you, Chairman, for1781what I consider to be a refreshing outbreak of normal today.1782    [Laughter.]1783    Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Secretary.1784    Mr. Duffy. Thank you all. I am very grateful.1785    Senator Capito. Thank you, Secretary.1786    This meeting is adjourned.1787    [Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]17881789                                  [all]