[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
THE NEED FOR RESILIENCE:
PREPARING AMERICA'S TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS AND OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 21, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-22
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
36-368PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY
HON. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas, Chairwoman
ZOE LOFGREN, California FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma,
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois Ranking Member
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon MO BROOKS, Alabama
AMI BERA, California, BILL POSEY, Florida
Vice Chair RANDY WEBER, Texas
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania BRIAN BABIN, Texas
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
HALEY STEVENS, Michigan ROGER MARSHALL, Kansas
KENDRA HORN, Oklahoma RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina
MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
BRAD SHERMAN, California TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee PETE OLSON, Texas
JERRY McNERNEY, California ANTHONY GONZALEZ, Ohio
ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
PAUL TONKO, New York JIM BAIRD, Indiana
BILL FOSTER, Illinois JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
DON BEYER, Virginia JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, Puerto
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida Rico
SEAN CASTEN, Illinois VACANCY
KATIE HILL, California
BEN McADAMS, Utah
JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
------
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight
HON. MIKIE SHERRILL, New Jersey, Chairwoman
SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina,
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee Ranking Member
DON BEYER, Virginia ANDY BIGGS, Arizona
JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida
C O N T E N T S
May 21, 2019
Page
Hearing Charter.................................................. 2
Opening Statements
Statement by Representative Mikie Sherrill, Chairwoman,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.. 9
Written Statement............................................ 10
Statement by Representative Ralph Norman, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.. 11
Written Statement............................................ 12
Written statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson,
Chairwoman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S.
House of Representatives....................................... 13
Witnesses:
Ms. Susanne DesRoches, Deputy Director for Infrastructure and
Energy, Office of the New York City Mayor
Oral Statement............................................... 14
Written Statement............................................ 17
Mr. Gregory D. Winfree, Director, Texas A&M Transportation
Institute
Oral Statement............................................... 35
Written Statement............................................ 38
Mr. Jason Averill, Chief, Materials and Structural Systems
Division, Engineering Laboratory, NIST
Oral Statement............................................... 49
Written Statement............................................ 51
Mr. Scott Reeve, President, Composite Advantage
Oral Statement............................................... 60
Written Statement............................................ 62
Discussion....................................................... 76
Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions
Mr. Jason Averill, Chief, Materials and Structural Systems
Division, Engineering Laboratory, NIST......................... 94
Appendix II: Additional Material for the Record
Statements submitted by Representative Mikie Sherrill, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on
Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.. 98
White paper submitted by Representative Sean Casten, Subcommittee
on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives.................. 108
THE NEED FOR RESILIENCE:
PREPARING AMERICA'S TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 21, 2019
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight,
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m., in
room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mikie
Sherrill [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Sherrill. This hearing will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare
recess at any time.
Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing of the
Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee. I am pleased once
again to welcome Ranking Member Norman of South Carolina and
all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Today, we are discussing a subject that directly touches
all of our lives almost daily. America's transportation
infrastructure is vital to the Nation's well-being. And in
cities, suburbs, and small towns across the country, Americans
rely on the roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, trains,
airports, and ports of our transportation system to live their
lives and to support their families.
But climate change poses an unprecedented threat to our
transportation infrastructure. Sea-level rise and coastal
flooding place 60,000 miles of roads and bridges in coastal
floodplains at greater risk. Rail infrastructure and airports
are also vulnerable to more frequent extreme heatwaves and
increased flooding. And the impacts of climate change for
transportation infrastructure will only intensify over time.
This issue hits home in New Jersey, because we've seen the
impacts of extreme weather up close. In 2012, Hurricane Sandy
flooded the Hudson Tunnel, the only tunnel that provides
passenger rail access between New Jersey and New York City. We
have been living with the consequences ever since, as the
concrete and metal in the tunnel, the 100-year-old tunnel,
continue to deteriorate due to the effects of age and seawater.
I toured the tunnel earlier this month with some of my
colleagues in Congress and saw the degradation firsthand.
If the Hudson Tunnel must eventually be shut down for
repairs, the economic effects for the region and the Nation
will be catastrophic. Many of my constituents commute to work
and school every day through that tunnel. We need to understand
that climate change makes storms like Hurricane Sandy more
likely and that our transportation infrastructure is exposed.
We also need to take climate reality into account when
planning for the future. In the Northeast, we have a solution
called the Gateway Program that would build a second rail
tunnel to handle passenger rail traffic while the current
tunnel is being repaired. Gateway is vital to the region's
future. We must ensure that the Gateway tunnel gets built as
soon as possible, and we must make sure it is built to enhance
the overall climate resilience of the region's transportation
system.
Other transportation assets in my region are similarly
vulnerable to climate impacts. Using the Surging Seas analysis
from Princeton University, we can see the impacts of sea-level
rise for coastal transportation infrastructure in northern New
Jersey. The expected sea-level rise in that area is 3 to 6
feet, and under a 6-foot scenario, Newark Airport is virtually
underwater, and the roads, bridges, and rail infrastructure all
along the coastline are inundated, as you can see. A 2017
report commissioned by Amtrak identified the same kind of
flooding vulnerabilities along the system's coastal routes in
the Northeast Corridor.
This hearing is an opportunity to look forward, rather than
backward, and to focus on solutions. I hope that the hearing
helps us to answer questions about the role that the Federal
Government should play in understanding and enhancing
transportation climate resilience, and we need to understand
what the Federal Government is doing well and not so well. We
need to listen to cities and municipal planners when they tell
us the challenges they face, and we need to help them share
their lessons learned with other communities around the
country. We also need to think creatively about how to mobilize
our Nation's research enterprise, from Federal agencies to
academia. The stakes are too high for anything less.
I'm very pleased to welcome the distinguished witnesses
appearing here today, and we thank you for appearing before the
Subcommittee and look forward to your testimony.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Sherrill follows:]
Good morning, and welcome to today's hearing of the
Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee. I am pleased once
again to welcome Ranking Member Norman of South Carolina and
all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Today we are discussing a subject that touches all of our
lives almost daily. America's transportation infrastructure is
vital to the nation's wellbeing. In cities, suburbs and small
towns across the country, Americans rely on the roads,
highways, bridges, tunnels, trains, airports and ports of our
transportation system to live their lives and support their
families
But climate change poses an unprecedented threat to our
transportation infrastructure. Sea level rise and coastal
flooding place 60,000 miles of roads and bridges in coastal
floodplains at greater risk. Rail infrastructure is vulnerable
to more frequent extreme heat waves. Increased precipitation
and inland flooding threaten the structural integrity of
thousands of bridges. Airports are exposed to a spectrum of
flooding and extreme heat risks. And the impacts of climate
change for transportation infrastructure will only intensify
over time.
This issue hits home in New Jersey, because we have seen
the impacts of extreme weather up close. In 2012, Hurricane
Sandy flooded the Hudson Tunnel - the only tunnel that provides
passenger rail access between New Jersey and New York City. We
have been living with the consequences ever since, as the
concrete and metal in the Tunnel continue to deteriorate due to
the effects of seawater. I toured the Tunnel earlier this month
with some of my colleagues in Congress and saw the degradation
first hand.
If the Hudson Tunnel must eventually be shut down for
repairs, the economic effects for the region and the nation
will be catastrophic. Many of my constituents commute to work
and school every day through that tunnel. We need to understand
that climate change makes storms like Hurricane Sandy more
likely, and that our transportation infrastructure is exposed.
We also need to take climate reality into account when
planning for the future. In the Northeast, we have a solution
called the Gateway Program that would build a second rail
tunnel to handle passenger rail traffic while the current
tunnel is being repaired. Gateway is vital to the region's
future. We must ensure that the Gateway Tunnel gets built as
soon as possible. And we must make sure it is built to enhance
the overall climate resilience of the region's transportation
system.
Other transportation assets in my region are similarly
vulnerable to climate impacts. Using the Surging Seas program
from Climate Central at Princeton University, we can see the
impacts of sea level rise for coastal transportation
infrastructure in northern New Jersey. Under a six feet
scenario with unchecked climate change, Newark Airport is
surrounded by water and the Port Newark-Elizabeth Marine
Terminal is inundated. A flood at this level is considered a
virtual certainty by 2050 under this projection. A 2017 report
commissioned by Amtrak identified the same kind of flooding
vulnerabilities along the system's coastal routes in the
Northeast Corridor.
This hearing is an opportunity to look forward, rather than
backward, and to focus on solutions. I hope that the hearing
helps us to answer questions about the role that the federal
government should play in understanding and enhancing
transportation climate resilience. We need to understand what
the federal government is doing well and not so well. We need
to listen to cities and municipal planners when they tell us
the challenges they face, and we need to help them share their
lessons learned with other communities around the country. We
need to think creatively about how to mobilize our nation's
research enterprise, from federal agencies to academia. The
stakes are too high for anything less.
I'm very pleased to welcome the distinguished witnesses
appearing here today. We thank you for appearing before the
Subcommittee and look forward to your testimony.
Chairwoman Sherrill. The Chair now recognizes Mr. Norman
for an opening statement.
Mr. Norman. Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill, for convening
this meeting, and thank each one of the witnesses for taking
the time to come.
In case you're wondering, the rose on my lapel is for the
100-year women's right to vote. I was there at the time. I was
about 4 years old, and I was responsible for passing it, so
thank you all for recognizing that.
We are here today to examine how natural disasters and
extreme weather events pose risks to transportation
infrastructure and to assess the research and development
targeted at improving the resilience of America's
transportation infrastructure.
Reliable and strong infrastructure is critically important
to my home State of South Carolina. In the past 5 years alone,
South Carolina has been impacted by a 1,000-year flood and
back-to-back hurricanes. In South Carolina we're also concerned
about the impact that increased flooding frequently has on our
communities.
To address our State's specific concerns, the Governor
created the South Carolina Floodwater Commission. This
commission is tasked with identifying short-term and long-term
solutions to mitigate the impact of extreme weather, with one
task force specifically focused on infrastructure resilience.
I welcome the chance to consider the issue of
infrastructure resilience and highlight the role the Federal
Government can play in ensuring that State and local
communities all have the resources necessary to make the best
decision for their infrastructure planning.
Further, I'm looking forward to learning more about
technologies and innovations that can improve the resilience of
America's transportation infrastructure systems and assets,
from advanced composite materials to additive manufacturing
with cement and concrete.
We will also hear about some of the ambitious initiatives
being undertaken at the Federal, State, and local levels of
government to incorporate resilience considerations into the
planning, design, and construction of America's transportation
infrastructure, both now and in the future.
In recent years, much of the country's transportation
infrastructure has started to show its age. Across the country,
from coastal communities to land-locked States, roads are in
disrepair, bridges are collapsing, and tunnels are crumbling.
Fortunately, great work is being done at the Federal, State,
and local levels of government, within industry, and among
academia to improve transportation infrastructure resilience.
Composite materials, like those manufactured by Composite
Advantage and other members of the American Composites
Manufacturers Association (ACMA), are already being used to
rebuild and repair our crumbling infrastructure and corroding
assets. This is a great example of American innovation rising
to meet the challenges facing our Nation.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
is also working hard to help improve the resilience of American
communities. From research into advanced materials and
enhancing traditional materials like concrete and cement, to
the development of tools, standards, and guidelines, NIST has
been working diligently to improve the way transportation
infrastructure decisions are made, once again putting its
extreme brain power to work for the American people.
State agencies like the Texas A&M Transportation Institute
are making positive strides to improve transportation
infrastructure resilience. And municipal authorities like the
New York City Mayor's office are also involved in this
important work.
It is encouraging to see representatives from each of these
organizations here today, as the work they are doing will
undoubtedly benefit officials throughout the country as they
plan and prepare to build resilient considerations into their
transportation infrastructure decisions.
I look forward to a productive and insightful discussion
with our distinguished witnesses about the risks that extreme
weather events and natural disasters pose to the American
transportation infrastructure, research, and activities aimed
at operationalizing and incorporating resilient considerations
into the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure
systems and assets, and innovating in exciting ways that we can
improve the resilience of America's transportation
infrastructure, both now and in the future.
My line of work is development. We're contractors, and this
has extreme importance to me, particularly as it relates to the
new products.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Norman follows:]
Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill, for convening this
important hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your
testimony this morning.
We are here today to examine how natural disasters and
extreme weather events pose risks to transportation
infrastructure and to assess the research and development
targeted at improving the resilience of America's
transportation infrastructure.
Reliable and strong infrastructure is critically important
to my home state of South Carolina. In the past five years
alone, South Carolina has been impacted by a thousand-year
flood and back-to-back hurricanes. In South Carolina we're also
concerned about the impact that increased flooding frequency
will have on our communities.
To address our state's specific concerns, the Governor
created the South Carolina Floodwater Commission. This
commission is tasked with identifying short-term and long-term
solutions to mitigate the impact of extreme weather, with one
task force specifically focused on infrastructure resilience.
I welcome the chance to consider the issue of
infrastructure resilience and highlight the role the Federal
government can play in ensuring that state and local
communities have all the resources necessary to make the best
decision for their infrastructure planning.
Further, I'm looking forward to learning more about
technologies and innovations that can improve the resilience of
America's Transportation infrastructure systems and assets-from
advanced composite materials to additive manufacturing with
cement and concrete.
We will also hear about some of the ambitious initiatives
being undertaken at Federal, state, and local levels of
government to incorporate resilience considerations into the
planning, design, and construction of America's transportation
infrastructure, both now and in the future.
In recent years, much of this country's transportation
infrastructure has started to show its age. Across the country-
from coastal communities to landlocked states-roads are in
disrepair, bridges are collapsing, and tunnels are crumbling.
Fortunately, great work is being done at the Federal,
state, and local levels of government, within industry, and
among academia to improve transportation infrastructure
resilience.
Composite materials-like those manufactured by Composite
Advantage and other members of the American Composites
Manufacturing Association-are already being used to rebuild and
repair crumbling infrastructure and corroding assets. This is a
great example of American innovation rising to meet the
challenges facing our nation.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
is also working hard to help improve the resilience of American
communities. From research into advanced materials and
enhancing traditional materials, like concrete and cement, to
the development of tools, standards, and guidelines, NIST has
been working diligently to improve the way transportation
infrastructure decisions are made, once again putting its
extreme brain power to work for the American people.
State agencies like the Texas A&M Transportation Institute
are making positive strides to improve transportation
infrastructure resilience. And municipal authorities like the
New York City Mayor's office are also involved in this
important work.
It is encouraging to see representatives from each of these
organizations here today, as the work they are doing will
undoubtedly benefit officials throughout the country as they
plan and prepare to build resilience considerations into their
transportation infrastructure decisions.
I look forward to a productive and insightful discussion
with our distinguished witnesses about the risks that extreme
weather events and natural disasters pose to America's
transportation infrastructure, research and activities aimed at
operationalizing and incorporating resilience considerations
into the planning, design, and construction of infrastructure
systems and assets, and innovating and exciting ways that we
can improve the resilience of America's transportation
infrastructure, both now and in the future.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you, Representative Norman.
And if there are Members who wish to submit additional
opening statements, your statement will be added to the record
at this point.
[The prepared statement of Chairwoman Johnson follows:]
Thank you Madam Chair, and I would like to join you in
welcoming our witnesses this morning.
In the 116th Congress, the Science Committee will be
examining both the science of climate change and its impact on
our society. Transportation infrastructure is critical to our
national economy and our way of life, but it is vulnerable to
climate change. If we do not prepare our transportation systems
effectively, the damage will be enormous.
As a senior Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, I am very familiar with the challenges facing our
transportation infrastructure. And it has become increasingly
clear to me that climate change will be one of the most
consequential and complex challenges. Climate implications
exist for every type of transportation asset: highways and
roads, bridges, railroads, airports, tunnels, ports and more.
Every region of America is being affected: north and south;
urban and rural; coastal and inland. The time has come to use
the scientific tools at our disposal to adapt our
transportation infrastructure in order to avoid the worst
effects of a changing climate.
Elevating the use of science in policymaking is a priority
for this Committee, and the issue of transportation resilience
is a perfect example of why that is so important.
Transportation assets are designed and built to operate over
extremely long timespans - multiple decades and sometimes as
long as 100 years. As a result, today's transportation planning
decisions are not only about us - they will affect our great-
grandchildren. If transportation planning does not incorporate
climate resilience into its calculations, the vulnerabilities
of our transportation infrastructure will become a permanent
feature of American life. We must work to ensure that the most
advanced climate research findings are integrated into
transportation planning frameworks.
I also want to highlight the importance of mobilizing the
nation's research enterprise to promote transportation climate
resilience. At a federal level, this means encouraging the
Department of Transportation and NIST to carry out research on
how a changing climate threatens transportation assets. It also
means prioritizing climate resilience research through federal
grant programs such as DOT's University Transportation Centers
program, which is a longstanding area of interest for the
Committee. The UTC program supports cutting-edge transportation
research at academic institutions around the country. UTCs like
the one led by Mr. Winfree at Texas A&M are conducting some of
the most innovative transportation research in the world. We
want to make sure that the fruits of their labors, and the
efforts of other forward-looking universities, professional
societies and engineers, are being shared effectively with
cities and states around the country.
Preparing America's transportation infrastructure for the
impacts of climate change is one of the major economic
challenges facing our country, and there is much to be done.
Thank you, and I yield back to Chairwoman Sherrill.
Chairwoman Sherrill. At this time, I would like to
introduce our four witnesses. Ms. Susanne DesRoches is the
Deputy Director of Infrastructure and Energy at the New York
City Mayor's Office of Resiliency and Office of Sustainability.
Mr. Gregory Winfree is the Agency Director for the Texas
A&M Transportation Institute and former Assistant Secretary of
the U.S. Department of Transportation.
Mr. Jason Averill is the Chief of the Materials and
Structural Systems Division of the Engineering Laboratory at
the National Institute of Standards and Technology or NIST.
And our final witness, Mr. Scott Reeve, is the President of
Composite Advantage. Today, Mr. Reeve is speaking on behalf of
the American Composites Manufacturers Association of which his
company is a member.
As our witnesses should know, you will each have 5 minutes
for your spoken testimony. Your written testimony will be
included in the record for the hearing. When you all have
completed your spoken testimony, we will begin with questions,
and each Member will have 5 minutes to question the panel.
We will start with Ms. DesRoches.
TESTIMONY OF SUSANNE DESROCHES,
DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENERGY,
NEW YORK CITY MAYOR'S OFFICE OF RESILIENCY AND
OFFICE OF SUSTAINABILITY
Ms. DesRoches. Good morning. My name is Susanne DesRoches,
and I'm the Deputy Director for Infrastructure and Energy in
the New York City Mayor's Office of Resiliency. On behalf of
the Mayor and the city of New York, I would like to thank Chair
Sherrill and Ranking Member Norman for the opportunity to speak
today.
Nearly 7 years ago Hurricane Sandy hit New York City with
unprecedented force, tragically killing 44 New Yorkers. Over 2
million residents were without power, some for weeks. Fuel
shortages persisted for over a month. Subway and rail tunnels
were closed for days. Our airports were closed to passenger and
freight traffic, and our ports sustained considerable damage.
Sandy caused $16 billion in damages to our region's
transportation network, which is vital to our regional and
national economy.
Our national transportation system faces climate-related
risks. The Fourth National Climate Assessment released last
year, of which I co-authored the transportation chapter, found
that impacts of climate change threaten the very existence of a
reliable, safe, and efficient U.S. transportation system.
Critical port, rail, and highway infrastructure are vulnerable
to sea-level rise across the country in places like Houston,
Texas; Long Beach, California; and Mobile, Alabama. Thirteen of
the Nation's 47 largest airports have a runway within reach of
moderate-to-high storm surge today. Inland flooding threatens
up to 4,600 bridges across the U.S. by 2050. Climate change
risks are not just flooding-related. Transportation will be
impacted by rising temperatures through bridge stress,
increased delays, buckled rails, and roadways and compromised
worker safety.
New York City's regional transportation network is a large
legacy--complex legacy system that is particularly vulnerable
to the coming risks of climate change. Already, 12 percent of
our roadway network is at risk. By 2100, 20 percent of lower
Manhattan streets could be subject to tidal flooding daily.
Our transportation network is more resilient than before
Sandy. Regional transportation agencies have implemented
resiliency measures for our subways, trains, airports, ports,
and tunnels. In New York City we are raising some of our most
flood-prone streets and making them more resilient through
elevated traffic signal controllers. We are ensuring multi-
stakeholder coordination through our Climate Change Adaptation
Task Force established over 10 years ago to address
infrastructure interdependencies and the risk of a changing
climate.
City government is building stronger, more resilient
facilities and infrastructure using forward-looking climate
data from the New York City climate resiliency design
guidelines. Last, we are partnering with FEMA (Federal
Emergency Management Agency) to develop future flood hazard
mapping products, the first of their kind in the Nation.
Much has been done but much work remains. Congress can play
an important role to ensuring the long-term resiliency of the
cities and of our Nation's transportation network in three main
ways. First, we encourage Congress to pass legislation that
requires the use of forward-looking climate data in all Federal
investments--infrastructure investments. Guidance to reach this
goal were first articulated in Executive Order 13690 from 2015
on floodplain management, which was revoked in 2017. Making
this guidance law would reestablish this important standard and
make it permanent. Taking this one step further, Congress
should require that all infrastructure projects using Federal
dollars use forward-looking climate data.
Second, the city commends Congress' passing of the Disaster
Recovery Reform Act of 2018, which allocates 6 percent of a
community's disaster expenses from the previous year to invest
in pre-disaster mitigation. We urge Congress to expand this
program, further enabling Federal disaster aid to support
resiliency investments before disaster strikes.
Finally, we urge Congress to increase funding for freight
and public transit infrastructure. One critical infrastructure
is the long-overdue rail link between New York and New Jersey
referred to as the Gateway tunnel. This project would vastly
strengthen this vulnerable transportation line that links the
entire Northeast Corridor.
In conclusion, Congress has the opportunity to rethink how
Federal Government supports the transportation needs of cities
and communities across the country and to ensure that resilient
investments made today provide value for all Americans for
generations to come.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I'm
happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. DesRoches follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you. And thank you so much
for your timeliness. That was almost exactly 5 minutes. That
was perfect.
And next we'll hear from Mr. Winfree.
TESTIMONY OF GREGORY D. WINFREE,
DIRECTOR, TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
Mr. Winfree. Good morning, Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking
Member Norman, and Members of the Subcommittee and staff. Thank
you for inviting me to testify regarding transportation
infrastructure resilience and transportation research. My name
is Greg Winfree, and I'm the Agency Director of the Texas A&M
Transportation Institute, also known as TTI. Prior to joining
TTI in 2016, I served as the Assistant Secretary on the U.S.
Department of Transportation's Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Research and Technology.
Established in 1950 and a member of the Texas A&M
University system, TTI is a State agency and largest and most
comprehensive university-affiliated transportation research
center in the United States. TTI has conducted work in all 50
States and 51 countries. Our system Chancellor John Sharp was
appointed by Texas Governor Greg Abbott to lead the Rebuild
Texas Commission formed to help rebuild our State's
infrastructure damaged by Hurricane Harvey in 2017.
Between 1980 and 2017, the U.S. was hit by 227 weather-
related disasters that caused more than $1 billion in losses.
Ninety-eight of those happened in the State of Texas. More than
one-third or 91 of those disasters struck between 2010 and 2017
with nearly half striking Texas directly. Hurricane Harvey was
the costliest in history leaving behind $190 billion in damage.
Robust research efforts must put--must be put into place to
change the traditional ways in which we design, build, and
maintain our infrastructure, so I'd like to share a few
examples of TTI research outcomes that plan for and mitigate
these devastating occurrences.
Additional projects like these are critical to transforming
our infrastructure to deal with this new paradigm of extreme
weather. In 2005, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita identified the
critical need for safety--safely evacuating large numbers of
coastal residents. Through TTI's University Transportation
Center funding, UTC, researchers developed a Bluetooth travel-
time monitoring system that was implemented in 2010 to track
real-time traffic flow on evacuation routes. Today, the system
is installed on over 1,000 center-line miles of Texas highways.
In 2017, TTI led a national symposium on the barriers and
opportunities for infrastructure renewal. Members of the
Presidential Administration and other high-level State and
Federal officials, as well as private-sector stakeholders, were
in attendance, including Congressman Bill Shuster, then
Chairman of the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee. One of the critical needs identified was
transportation infrastructure resilience.
In 2018, TTI developed the first-of-its-kind flood warning
system that warns motorists in real time about locations where
roadway flooding is likely to occur in the Houston area using
data from 170 existing county-maintained flood sensors.
Residents can view the warnings through the TranStar traffic
management system website or mobile app.
As a country, we've historically responded to weather
disasters in a reactive way, turning to established
rehabilitation and repair practices to return service to pre-
disaster levels. As demands on our infrastructure systems grow
and the population and funding to meet these demands lag
behind, that strategy is no longer sustainable. Instead, we
must focus more on preparation and planning. This new mindset
requires a different approach to making our existing and new
infrastructure more resilient.
While U.S. DOT (Department of Transportation) research has
made strides in this effort particularly at the Federal Highway
Administration, sufficient program-based resources and
capabilities focused on transportation resilience are not
currently in place. More innovative research-based and data-
driven solutions are required to make significant progress in
learning how to build and maintain our infrastructure to last
longer and withstand extreme weather events. Sample research
needs include: Multidisciplinary research initiatives that
involve not only the traditional approach of engineers and
transportation planners but climatologists, hydrologists, and a
host of other disciplines that don't normally work together.
Examination of multiple data sets, including data collected
on roadway flooding, GPS, and LIDAR (light detection and
ranging), roadway elevation, climate, FEMA, and storm surge,
just to name a few. These varying and often complex sets of
data need to be put into a more useful and consistent format
such as a data clearinghouse.
More robust software models are needed to evaluate the
impacts on infrastructure service life given an extreme weather
event. The variety of resiliency studies and best practices
developed by individual DOTs and the Federal Highway
Administration in areas such as vulnerability assessment, asset
management, and risk management should be shared and duplicated
throughout the country. Performance measures for resiliency
must be developed, and their correlation with other DOT
priorities such as, safety and infrastructure condition, must
be better understood so that scarce resources can be allocated
most effectively.
And, in closing, the UTC program is currently actively
involved in transportation resilience research. Of the 35 UTCs
awarded in the most recent competition authorized by the Fixing
America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, seven list
resilience as being a major focus of their programs in
research, education, and technology transfer. As previously
discussed, TTI's UTCs have made significant contributions to
the state of practice in this area. This valuable program is
contributing to the body of knowledge in transportation
resilience, and this should continue as long as the topic falls
within U.S. DOT and congressional priorities.
Any severe weather event poses risk to our transportation
system but also to our economy and our very existence. We can't
prevent major weather disasters, but by investing resources
into research that focuses on resiliency long before the
disaster strikes, we will be far better able to weather
whatever happens and whatever comes our way.
So thank you for your time and attention. I will be happy
to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Winfree follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you.
Mr. Averill?
TESTIMONY OF JASON D. AVERILL,
CHIEF OF THE MATERIALS AND STRUCTURAL
SYSTEMS DIVISION, NIST
Mr. Averill. Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking Member Norman,
and Members of the Subcommittee, I'm Jason Averill, Chief of
the Materials and Structural Systems Division at the Department
of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology or
NIST. NIST works at the frontiers of measurement science to
address complex measurement challenges on every scale. In my
division, we focus our efforts from the chemical properties of
cement to buildings to the resilience of whole communities.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to
discuss NIST's programs focused on the resilience of
transportation infrastructure.
The 2017 U.S. hurricane season and the 2018 wildfires
remind us that natural, technological, and human-caused hazards
take a high toll on communities. The impacts can last long
after the event. To help address these impacts, NIST manages a
multifaceted Community Resilience program as part of our
broader disaster resilience work. Principal among these efforts
is support for science-based resilience planning. Effective
planning can improve a community's quality-of-life, economic
well-being, its ability to recover rapidly, and to build back
better.
To support community planning, we produced the NIST
Community Resilience Planning Guide that provides a practical
and flexible approach to help all communities improve their
resilience by setting priorities and allocating resources to
manage risks for their prevailing hazards. Using this guide can
help communities to integrate resilience goals into their
comprehensive economic development, zoning, and other local
planning activities.
In addition, the NIST community resilience Economic
Decision Guide, or EDG, provides a standard economic
methodology for evaluating investment decisions. The EDG
quantifies the costs and benefits for the variety of resilience
options that a community may be considering. To supplement the
NIST Community Resilience research program, NIST has designated
a Center of Excellence devoted to community resilience. The
Center for Risk-Based Community Resilience Planning will
accelerate the development of systems-level models and
associated data to support community resilience decisionmaking.
In addition, NIST is committed to working with our Federal
partners to transfer research results to products and end-
users. For example, cities have partnered with NIST, EPA
(Environmental Protection Agency), and used FEMA tools to
develop proactive and integrated plans that address their local
issues.
Another critical part of community resilience is looking at
infrastructure and building materials. Concrete is a widely
used building material playing a principal role in
transportation infrastructure such as bridges and roadways by
providing strength, durability, and resiliency. These material
properties can be linked to the performance of a key component
of concrete, cement. NIST offers more than 20 types of cement
Standard Reference Materials that help to ensure quality cement
products in the integrity of structures around the globe.
Looking toward the future, NIST is exploring exciting new
opportunities in construction that additive manufacturing, AM,
with cement-based materials offers. Metrology and standards
used for traditional concrete construction are not suitable for
AM, and NIST is doing research with our industry partners to
assess the potential of various material systems for this area.
NIST is also working on an advanced composite road-mapping
effort that is focused on infrastructure. The resulting roadmap
has the potential to lead NIST, other government agencies, and
the industry toward wider acceptance and use of advanced
composites for more resilient infrastructure.
Following select disaster events, NIST conducts disaster
and failure studies where engineers and scientists seek to
learn from and prevent similar disasters in the future. Studies
previously conducted by NIST have led to significant changes in
building codes, standards, and practices to enhance the health
and safety of the American public. NIST is currently
investigating the effects of Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico to
better understand how the buildings and infrastructure
performed and how we can improve that performance in the
future.
NIST has a long history of addressing industry needs
through measurement science. Resilient infrastructure,
particularly transportation, is the backbone of U.S. economic
competitiveness, and NIST is proud to collaborate with
industry, academia, and government agencies to meet critical
national needs.
I'll be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Averill follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you so much.
Mr. Reeve?
TESTIMONY OF SCOTT REEVE,
PRESIDENT, COMPOSITE ADVANTAGE, LLC
Mr. Reeve. Chairwoman Sherrill, Ranking Member Norman, and
Members of the Subcommittee, on behalf of my company Composite
Advantage and my fellow members in the composite--American
Composite Manufacturers Association I appreciate the
opportunity to testify today.
This hearing comes at a critical time. For many years we
have heard that our crumbling infrastructure was in desperate
need of attention. That need has only intensified in the wake
of increased episodes of severe weather and other environmental
challenges. Confronting these challenges requires a new way of
thinking about how we build and what are the best materials to
use to enhance resiliency for preventive measures and not just
reactive.
Composite Advantage is one of over 3,000 manufacturers of
fiber-reinforced polymer composites across the United States,
including each of the districts represented on this
Subcommittee. Composites--combinations of polymer resins and
fiber reinforcements like glass and carbon--are used in a wide
range of sectors. They were first widely used in boats and
aircraft, but now companies like mine are using the materials
to build high-performance and infrastructure components like
bridge decks, rail platforms, and waterfront protection
systems. Composites are stronger and more durable than
traditional alternatives and have lower environmental impact.
Many applications can be prefabricated to reduce installation
times and can be fully sourced from American-made materials.
When Superstorm Sandy devastated the Northeast, the
Canarsie Tunnel between Brooklyn and Manhattan was flooded with
7 million gallons of saltwater. This tunnel is used by a
quarter million train passengers per day. The walls have
corroded and need to be replaced. Traditional reconstruction
would require a 15-month shutdown, but our company is
manufacturing shells to line the tunnel walls and prevent the
crumbling concrete from falling on the tracks. The shells can
be installed without a full rebuild meaning 99 percent less
demolition work and no shutdown. Even if the tunnel is flooded
again, the composite shells will still do their job.
Composites are being used in increasing quantities on
America's waterways since the materials are forever resistant
to water corrosion. Composites were used to rehabilitate the
dock of the Statue of Liberty and repair and protect the Long
Beach New York boardwalk after Superstorm Sandy. But composites
can do even more. Using prefabricated bridge structures will
minimize traffic disruption. And thanks to the elimination of
rust and degradation, composites improve longevity and
performance of these structures. Wraps can be externally bonded
to decaying or damaged structures, restoring the strength of
the bridge to its original level, again, with minimal traffic
disruption. Composite rebar is making concrete bridges and
tunnels resistant to corrosion that occurs with steel.
In the Virgin Islands Hurricane Maria destroyed every
utility pole that was wasn't a composite. Only the composite
poles were left standing. Because of this real-life performance
test, the Virgin Islands decided to rebuild their electric grid
with composite structures to prevent future problems and avert
the future costs.
The strides made by our industry in a short period have
been significant but more needs to be done. We need continued
research such as that underway at institutions like Turner-
Fairbank and others on the next generation of composite
solutions appropriate for much larger-scale applications. Most
of all, we need to broaden awareness of composites and increase
their deployment in infrastructure projects by helping
engineers and asset owners to be more comfortable using these
new materials.
NIST, working with industry, has developed a roadmap of
activities to achieve this goal, first by aggregating and
validating existing standards and design data and then working
to develop better models of durability. Coupled with a robust
education plan, NIST's work will help provide assurance to
engineers on how these new materials will perform under
specific conditions.
Legislation has been introduced by Congressman McNerney and
Congressman Webster authorizing these activities by NIST in
H.R. 2393. I encourage Members of both parties to support it.
Finally, Congress should support innovative grant programs
that foster new technologies and demonstrate how these
technologies can make our transportation infrastructure more
resilient.
Bipartisan Members of the House and Senate have introduced
legislation called the Innovative Materials for America's
Growth and Infrastructure Newly Expanded (IMAGINE) Act, H.R.
1159. This legislation would create new bridge and water
infrastructure innovation grant programs, as well as direct
needed research on innovative materials to facilitate broader
use. I hope all Members will consider supporting this important
measure.
Opportunities abound to build a more resilient tomorrow and
should not be wasted. The composites industry stands ready to
work with Congress to further study, develop, and deploy real
solutions to these real challenges.
Thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Reeve follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Before we proceed, I would
like to bring the Subcommittee's attention to two statements I
received in preparation for our hearing. The first is written
testimony from the Union of Concerned Scientists highlighting
the need for climate resilience across all modes of
transportation. The second is a letter from the Region Plan
Association, RPA, describing the vulnerability of the Northeast
Corridor and the importance of the Gateway project for the
region's transportation network.
Without objection, I am placing these documents in the
record.
At this point, we will begin our first round of questions,
and I'll recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Mr. Winfree and Ms. DesRoches, I want to start by talking
about strategic planning. How can DOT elevate climate
resilience as a strategic research priority?
Ms. DesRoches. Thank you. So DOT and in particular FHWA
(Federal Highway Administration) has been working on a climate
adaptation program for a number of years. I think that the--all
of DOT could elevate it as a strategic priority for the agency,
and therefore, it would lend itself to the evaluation of
Federal dollars, right? So if a project is getting federally
funded, DOT could make the determination as to how resilient
that project is and tie that to the Federal funds.
Mr. Winfree. I certainly concur with my colleague, and I
would only offer and add that DOT will do as Congress directs,
so requiring DOT to have that as a strategic objective I
believe would get the ball rolling certainly, but more
importantly, it would help it become universally applicable
across the Department. As Ms. DesRoches stated, Federal
Highways is out on front on those issues right now, but in
order for it to become a departmental objective, it needs to be
placed on their to-do list in order to get that done.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And then, Mr. Winfree, you
talked a bit about all the data out there and the collection
being done. Do you have a sense--I think you spoke a bit about
how there needs to be a better software for that and then
better able to collate that data in one place for user ease.
Can you talk a bit about how that would look and what, you
know, options there are for that?
Mr. Winfree. The talk around transportation now as we look
at it more from the mobility standpoint is that it is the safe
and efficient movement of people, data, and goods. So it's the
data part that's lagging behind the movement of people and
goods. So what we are championing and what you're hearing
across the industry is a focus toward moving all of these
disparate data sets into a clearinghouse so it's a two-part
analysis. One, you have to know what data is out there and what
data is usable, and that data has to be cleansed. And then once
it's in a form and fashion that it can be used by the research
community, that's when you start to see useful information
coming out of those disparate data sets.
So it's a bit amorphous right now. There's a lot of data
out there. There are a lot of data streams. Vehicles are
producing more data as they become more and more computerized,
systems writ large, traffic operations systems, so there's a
lot that's out there but starting to put a research focus and
brilliant minds on it to start to amass what's out there and
start to determine how it can be used most effectively is the
initial step.
But what we foresee is a data clearinghouse where traffic
operators, traffic managers, asset managers, and researchers
would be able to tap into and utilize that information.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And then, Mr. Reeve,
Picatinny Arsenal in my district is really at the forefront of
a lot of the military research and development, and I've seen
them doing some amazing work with composite materials. I guess
what I'm questioning is, how do we ensure that we are doing as
much as we can to rebuild our infrastructure with the most
resilient materials? What's being done? What more needs to be
done?
Mr. Reeve. And the first thing in terms of what needs to be
done is--again, is part of what we do is just education
awareness so that the people who, when they're making the
decisions of what materials they can use, they have that
information because a lot of times they're sitting there with,
OK, they've listened to one place or another place, but where
can they get all of that in one--at one location? So that's
part of what I--we mentioned on the NIST side, to have that
clearinghouse, that--sort of that impartial location in which
the asset owners can get that information. There's a good bit
out there of information but it's all in disparate places.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And I'm afraid I'm running
out of time, but briefly, Mr. Averill, can you talk a bit about
how NIST has provided that clearinghouse?
Mr. Averill. So NIST has a long history of doing scientific
work and taking the results of that, making it publicly
available to both end-users, as well as people like the
building codes and standards community to ensure that there's a
strong scientific basis for any decisionmaking being done at
the local level or any policy that's developed in, for example,
building codes and standards.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Well, thank you all so much.
I now recognize Mr. Norman for 5 minutes.
Mr. Norman. Thank you, Chairwoman Sherrill.
Mr. Reeve, in your written statement you described some of
the characteristics in composite materials and provide examples
of resilience-based composite installations that have been used
and are currently being deployed. Could you elaborate on what
specific properties make composite materials a viable option
for incorporating these into our infrastructure?
Mr. Reeve. The--there's a number of applications and uses
depending on what is the need. The first thing with the
composite materials is the corrosion resistance, you know,
saltwater, chemicals, de-icing compounds, even most acids do
not affect the materials. So--and no matter what happens in
that environment, that material is going to maintain its high
strength.
The other thing is there's a lot we can do in terms of
design flexibility and lighter weight. So where the light
weight comes into play is, again, in the installation side,
minimizing the traffic--the disruption on traffic and the
current infrastructure when they are having to do replacements
or upgrades of the materials.
And then the other thing is from an environmental point of
view, the material's inert, so there's no chemicals that leach
out of it, so there's not like with the treated wood or other
things where people have to make use of it. So those are the
big things, again, the materials will be there for 75 to 100
years and maintain their strengths.
Mr. Norman. You and I were talking earlier, you know,
there's more needs than there is money to go around when you
talk about this, so in your opinion what are the major barriers
to actually getting the adoption and deployment of composite
solutions particularly as it relates to incorporating them into
the transportation infrastructure?
Mr. Reeve. Again, in tying a little bit to that awareness
and education side, one of the things that's worked in the past
and we see as a big help in the future would be some
demonstration projects with innovative materials, composite
materials and other new materials that are out there because a
lot of times when the engineers are having to make a decision
and they're--of what materials they use and they have public
safety in mind, they rely on what's been done previously. And
so when there's the case studies out there of using a new
material on this type of bridge or this type of sea wall, then
they can look at that and say, OK, that works, I'm confident,
I'm much more comfortable using that and deploying it because,
again, they only have so much time and resources for making
those decisions. So having those cases out there from some of
those innovative projects for demonstration and view will help
the most.
Mr. Norman. Thank you. Mr. Averill, can you elaborate on
the work at NIST and what it's doing to facilitate and
accelerate the deployment of composite materials? As an
example, how has NIST and the composite industry collaborated
in the past, and has this collaboration been fruitful? And have
you got plans to put this to work in the future?
Mr. Averill. Sure. The most recent and specific example is
where we partnered with the ACMA to do a roadmap that looked
forward to what are the issues and barriers that might be
present for use of composite materials, particularly for
infrastructure applications. I came up with three main areas.
One was looking at doing durability assessment and test data.
The second was making that data available to researchers and to
end-users, and the third was a piece on education and training.
That roadmap is published and available on the NIST website so
that the community can use that moving forward.
We at NIST are looking at the various performance
characteristics of lots of different materials. Most materials
have various strengths and weaknesses. We want to ensure that
we are able to characterize the performance of various
materials so that we can make an informed science-based
decision at the end-user level.
Mr. Norman. Well, and I just urge you, what we hear at the
local and State level are a lot of the decisions are made at
the local level, and they're set in their ways with using a
particular type of product that they've used just because they
used it for years and the salesmen are good salesmen. So I
would ask you to stay involved on a local level and ask
questions like what tests do you need that I can do to help you
make a decision.
Thank you so much.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And now the Chair
recognizes Congresswoman Bonamici for 5 minutes.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Chair Sherrill and Ranking Member
Norman, and to all of our witnesses today.
According to the Fourth National Climate Assessment, if we
don't address our aging and deteriorating infrastructure by
2025, we're talking about $3.9 trillion. We already have more
than 60,000 miles of U.S. roads and bridges that are
experiencing problems from extreme storms and hurricanes. And I
was thinking about this hearing today as I was watching the
national weather news.
Most of today's infrastructure and building standards don't
take into account future climate trends. Current levels of
infrastructure investment are not enough to cover even the
needed repairs and replacement now, so clearly, we have more
work to do in our communities to prepare for and respond to the
effects of the climate crisis.
And I do want to note that the Department of Transportation
was one of the 13 Federal agencies that contributed to the
National Climate Assessment, so I'm disappointed that they
were, according to what I understand from the Committee, not
willing to cooperate today with this hearing. This Committee
does have jurisdiction over the Federal research enterprise, so
it's concerning that the Department of Transportation is not
represented for this discussion today.
Ms. DesRoches, I'm concerned about a lack of coordination
among Federal agencies and the exclusion of localities in
deciding where to direct future scientific research efforts on
the effects of climate change on infrastructure, and I'm
working on a bill to help provide States and local governments
with science and best practices to prepare for and respond to
the climate crisis. And so I want to ask you, if a city wants
to access Federal climate data to help support their
transportation resilience planning but like New York, they
don't have an independent panel on climate change, is it
obvious where to look, and how can Congress help make sure that
this research is accessible and formatted in a way that cities
and States can actually use it effectively?
Ms. DesRoches. You know, I think that NOAA (National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) does an excellent job
of providing climate data. I would say that your point is well-
taken. Localities need to be using forward-looking climate data
if we're going to address the issues that you raised. So the
most important thing is that the data is readily accessible and
it's at least a regional level. Even our local data in New York
City is good for about 100 miles around New York City, so it
can be down-sampled to a regional level. And then that
information does need to be made more accessible at the local
level so that all of the things that we're talking about today
where, you know, engineers are doing the--you know, what
they've known at the local level for so long can be utilizing
forward-looking climate data, which will in fact change the
design strategies that we're implementing.
Ms. Bonamici. Any suggestions on how we can best do that?
Ms. DesRoches. So in New York City we've published climate
resiliency design guidelines that lay out a step-by-step
process for the design and engineering industry in order to
take that climate data and apply it to the built environment.
This is a really important tool. I think we could use that tool
at a Federal level so that codes and standards actually get up
to speed in terms of what we're looking forward to, not what we
are seeing from behind.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. Mr. Winfree, in my home State of
Oregon the Transportation Research and Education Center, TREC,
is leading research on the integration of transportation and
land-use electric vehicles, resiliency of engineered
structures, and transit service. It's a collaboration--the
University Transportation Center--a collaboration of several
regional schools, including Portland State University, the
University of Oregon, and the Oregon Institute of Technology.
So are these types of UTCs equipped to address the
multidisciplinary research recommendations you outlined in your
testimony? And how can the regional model of UTCs help define
climate resilience for transportation systems across the
country?
Mr. Winfree. I think it's important to keep in mind how the
competitions since the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st
Century (MAP-21) Act have required the UTCs to be formulated so
they're under a consortia model. So I think that's really at
the root of what we're talking about. The region--region 10 I
believe it is--is a consortia of those universities that you've
identified, so it's not specifically for the region. I believe
all of the 35 granted centers utilize the consortia model. So I
am a huge fan and proponent for that. That was a change we made
when I was Assistant Secretary, and I believe it's a change
that you will hear is universally well-regarded in the research
community.
So I would say step one is, as reauthorization is under
consideration, when you're looking at potentially refunding and
hopefully funding at even greater levels the UTC program, that
the consortia model remain a factor in that, as well as to keep
the--to keep it a competitive process as well.
Earlier, the UTCs were more legislative, you know, earmarks
to use a pejorative term----
Ms. Bonamici. Right.
Mr. Winfree [continuing]. But what that had done in those
instances were those centers were more aligned with the
legislative priorities than U.S. DOT. So ensuring that DOT gets
what it needs from the research community works best when it's
a competitive model where the U.S. DOT is able to set forth
what they're looking for from the research outcomes. And all of
the centers work----
Chairwoman Sherrill. OK. I think we're going to have to----
Ms. Bonamici. That's----
Chairwoman Sherrill [continuing]. Leave it at that. We're
over time----
Mr. Winfree. Yes, that's----
Ms. Bonamici. Over time, but that's very helpful. I yield
back.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you.
Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairwoman Sherrill. And next, the Chair recognizes Mr.
Waltz for 5 minutes.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
So hurricane season is on us. I represent the 6th District
of Florida. It's on us again starting June 1, and we already
have a subtropical storm Andrea out in the Atlantic, so here we
go again.
You know, in my area representing Daytona Beach, sea levels
are expected to rise by 5 inches just in the next 15 years. I
have nearly 70 miles between Volusia, Flagler, and St. Johns
counties that are at risk and continue to be at risk by a
series of storms. So, number one, I want to commend Governor
DeSantis, my predecessor in this seat, for making the
environment and resiliency a priority in his new
administration. He has recently named a Chief Science Officer
and plans to name a Chief Resiliency Officer for the State of
Florida, and I want to give him due credit for that. I myself
have joined the National Flood Coalition. So I think we are
changing the nature of actually what we're doing on this side
of the aisle to get things done.
But, you know, in my State and certainly in my area, you
know, this flooding issue isn't just homes. It's roads, it's
evacuation routes. It's a military issue according to recently
released DOD (Department of Defense) reports. So we truly need
to take this on and get serious about it. And I'm certainly
serious about it, and I know the Governor is serious about it.
So the first question for you, Mr. Averill, given your
research and based on your knowledge at NIST of the available
technology to map flooding and sea-level rise and the materials
available to build transportation infrastructure, specifically
what types of technologies should we be using?
And I understand, Mr. Reeve, your point that you made
repeatedly, that this is really an education process. I'd be
interested in your thoughts as well as specifics of what this
Committee can do, what we can do from a Federal standpoint or
encouraging our State colleagues to get that word out to our
various builders and folks setting the codes at a local level.
But what types of technology and materials should these
vulnerable areas be using? And really, I think the white
elephant in the room is planning going forward, should we be
putting infrastructure in these flood-prone areas? But
presuming that we continue to, give me some specifics on what
we should use.
Mr. Averill. Thank you. So at NIST we've worked a lot with
communities because we recognize that at the end of the day
decisionmaking for our built environment occurs at the local
level. And so at NIST we've done a number of activities to
support that decisionmaking, principally, our Community
Resilience Planning Guide provides a structure for resilience
planning and ensuring that it's got stakeholder input and that
it's incorporating some of the other plans that communities do.
We also do a lot of research, as I mentioned previously and
discussed in my testimony----
Mr. Waltz. Just not to interrupt you, do you find that that
guide is actively being used? Is there a high level of
awareness at the local level?
Mr. Averill. We certainly are publishing it as broadly as
we can. We are presenting it at conferences where people we
think need to hear that, and we have a specific stakeholder
outreach strategy to try to get that as broadly taken up as
possible. We're also coordinating with other Federal agencies,
for example, coordinating with RRAP (Regional Resiliency
Assessment Program) to try to----
Mr. Waltz. Just in the interest of time, do you have any
metrics on it actually being used rather, I understand you're
pushing it out, right, but do you have any metrics on local
communities actually adopting what you're recommending?
Mr. Averill. We have four or five communities that we're
currently actively working with in partnership, and then we
hear from----
Mr. Waltz. Was that four to five?
Mr. Averill. Yes, four to five that we're doing specific
projects----
Mr. Waltz. OK.
Mr. Averill [continuing]. Side-by-side with, and then we
periodically----
Mr. Waltz. How do we broaden that? How do we make that more
than four to five?
Mr. Averill. Well, I think we need to continue to make the
information available, and we're ready to work as opportunities
arise.
Mr. Waltz. Mr. Reeve, I think I'm out of time, but, Mr.
Reeve, any comment from the private sector?
Mr. Reeve. One comment on that where you tied on making
some of that happen is the fact that when there is Federal
funding that is part of the local project administrations, the
LPA programs and other ones that are there is that you push
down and say one of the requirements is that they reference and
they take a look at the documents that are out there.
Mr. Waltz. You're saying that's currently in place or needs
to be in place?
Mr. Reeve. That's--it needs to be in place. You know, there
are certain things that get pushed down when Federal funding is
involved, but if there are other ones in there, like I said, if
you're looking at it from a point of view, looking at the
resiliency side, then those are some of the ones, if it's not
getting out there, that's at least a way in which you can----
Mr. Waltz. Thank you.
Mr. Reeve [continuing]. You could push it on them.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Hopefully, we can get back
to some of these lines of questioning, but I do want to get
everyone in with questions, so now the Chair recognizes Ms.
Wexton for 5 minutes.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much, and thank you to the
witnesses for being here today. And I'm glad that Madam Chair
mentioned continuity of questions because the gentlelady from
Oregon brought up the UTC in her State, and my home State of
Virginia, George Mason University, which is in Fairfax, is part
of an excellent UTC, the Center for Integrated Asset Management
for Multimodal Transportation Infrastructure Systems, which is
a mouthful.
And how various transportation assets integrate with one
another as a part of the whole national network is really at
the heart of the matter, I think, when we talk about climate
resilience because we can't ensure that a community will
tolerate climate impacts well if we address the roads but not
the subway or other transit assets.
And so, Mr. Winfree, given your experience at the Federal
level and with the Transportation Institute, do you think that
the various modes are coordinated well enough within DOT when
it comes to the issue of climate resilience?
Mr. Winfree. Certainly in my experience when I was there,
the focus was on state of good repair, roads and bridges and
crumbling infrastructure. Climate change, extreme weather was
discussed, but the leadership was through Department of Energy
and EPA. I can't exactly describe what the thinking is at DOT
as we sit here today, but I would certainly--I think it's fair
to say that there could be better coordination led by the
Secretary's office to make it more of a universal issue for the
Department.
Ms. Wexton. So would you say that, historically, it's been
more of a damage control looking back and just fixing the
damage that's already been done rather than prospectively
trying to make sure that our assets are safe for the future?
Mr. Winfree. Absolutely. And I think that's still the case
from the approach other than New York City and other
municipalities, from the Federal level a lot of the focus is on
recovery, disaster recovery, getting systems back up as quickly
as possible and not enough research into how do you harden
assets, how do you prepare for the inclement weather events
that we know are coming. That's still lagging.
Ms. Wexton. And related to that, also in my State of
Virginia we're seeing more flooding, recurrent flooding--
increased, frequent high precipitation in a short amount of
time. And I know we're not alone in this. And we are also at
risk for sea-level rise and really vulnerable in that regard.
But we're seeing it across the Commonwealth, and I would
imagine other folks are as well.
Ms. DesRoches, how might insufficient stormwater management
systems accentuate the risk to road systems and other
transportation assets in cases of increased precipitation and
sea-level rise? How do those infrastructure commitments
integrate with one another?
Ms. DesRoches. So it's a complex system in that both of
those tend to be, at least on East Coast, historical systems
where they're legacy systems. They were designed, you know, for
what we saw in the past. And yes, when we have more increased
precipitation with sea-level rise that the coastal areas are
being inundated by both types of risks. I think that integrated
planning between stormwater and roadways and our transportation
infrastructure could be stronger and needs to be stronger.
We're working hard on that in New York City and are always
happy to share best practices.
But first, we need to understand better how those systems
are affecting each other, and those studies need to be done
first in order to figure out how the drainage system and the
roadway network can actually increase resiliency. Can we make
upland areas more absorbent to try to hold back some of that
precipitation through green infrastructure and other measures?
How do we think about not just the roadway but the land use
around the roadways and our transportation network in order to
be able to withstand more of those increased precipitation and
the sea-level that you talked about.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much. Do any of the other
witnesses have any thoughts on that issue?
Mr. Reeve. My only other comment would be somebody had
mentioned on the economic side, I think that's important in the
decisionmaking as you look at what's the economic impact on
this part of the infrastructure versus another one when making
those decisions. So, you know, again, and limited resources put
that preventive measures on the ones that are, again, the most
critical.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much. And I see my time is up,
so I yield back.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And the Chair recognizes
Mr. Casten for 5 minutes.
Mr. Casten. Thank you, Chair and Ranking Member Norman, for
giving me the opportunity to waive onto this Subcommittee
today. This is critically important stuff, and I know I always
tell people that the problem with our little tiny human brains
is that we really have a hard time with nonlinear trends and,
you know, the climate is not only changing but the rate of
change is accelerating. We know this intuitively because these
1,500-year floods seem to happen every year now, especially in
coastal areas, and yet we still have zoning rules based on
those historic pieces of data where we celebrate, you know,
people who project linear trends when in fact everything is
accelerating. To me, that strikes me as a problem because we
build our infrastructure on the assumption that history is a
predictor of the future, and in fact it's not.
And the private sector has in many cases started to figure
that out, and in 2017 Argonne National Labs that's located just
south of my district in Illinois partnered with AT&T to produce
a ``Road to Climate Resiliency'' white paper that detailed the
results of a project that they did that used three climate
models, 30 years of history, and months of time on Argonne
supercomputers layered over where AT&T's physical assets were
to figure out a long-term climate resiliency map.
Madam Chair, I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter
into the record the white paper entitled, ``The Road to Climate
Resiliency'' on the joint study conducted by Argonne and AT&T.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Without objection.
Mr. Casten. Mr. Winfree, given what the private sector is
already doing, do you agree that the Department of
Transportation should make an effort to incorporate similar
Federal climate models into their planning and prioritization
activities as much as possible?
Mr. Winfree. I don't think there's--you can't--you won't
solve the issue by not looking at every available resource, and
I believe every scientific study, every peer-reviewed work that
is done in this space should be on the table. We know from a
resource perspective that DOT, the Federal Government writ
large can't answer every question in every instance, so the
more information on the table, the better I think is the proper
approach, particularly, as you pointed out, since these issues
are not linear. We need to look at them from every angle and
try and come to some common approaches and some common
understanding as to how best to address it.
Mr. Casten. Are you aware that DOT is doing anything like
what Argonne and AT&T have done of this level of model analysis
as they think about where they're going to build and how
they're going to build?
Mr. Winfree. That is not an area of research that I'm
familiar with. Like I said a bit earlier, my understanding was
EPA, Energy, and other departments and agencies were out in
front and that DOT was going to be capitalizing upon the
results of that research.
Mr. Casten. Mr. Averill, what can NIST do to start to
incorporate this modeling into their resilience work in a more
complete way? Are you guys partnering with the national labs?
Can you work some of this into your standards that you're using
for building codes?
Mr. Averill. Well, at NIST we are a nonregulatory agency,
so what we do vis-a-vis standards and building codes in
particular is we take the results of our research and we
participate in those consensus processes, but those are run
through, for example, the International Code Council or various
standards, organizations as separate nongovernmental entities.
So we are certainly interested in making sure that our research
is answering the questions that we know that the end-users have
and that would be most useful for addressing the issues you
raised.
Mr. Casten. So a question then for all of you or all of you
or any of you, how do you define success in resiliency? I mean,
I get that these are consensus processes, but if we're going to
sit there and say a community is going to be resilient or a
standard is going to be designed for resilience, what's the
metric you design for?
Ms. DesRoches. OK. I'll take that. So in New York City the
way that we are looking to the built environment is to say this
is how long the useful life of that asset will be, and when we
design and engineer that asset, we use climate change data in
order to build that asset to last the whole length of its
useful life. So we're utilizing the existing climate models and
basically saying, OK, at 2050 sea-level rise will be roughly
here. We will build that asset to that height.
So while, you know, we--you can't totally predict, there is
uncertainty in those climate projections. We can't totally
predict exactly to the inch how high sea-level rise will be in
2050. We have a good range, and we understand where that
trajectory is going, and we feel strongly that we need to be
incorporating that data today in order to ensure that asset
lasts as long as it can.
Mr. Casten. I think I'm of time, so I will yield back.
Thank you.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. The Chair now yields to Mr.
McAdams for 5 minutes.
Mr. McAdams. Thank you, Chair Sherrill and Ranking Member
Norman. We thank you for holding this very important hearing
and helping us to talk about some of the impacts of climate
change and climate resiliency.
And I represent Utah, and so in the Salt Lake and Utah
valleys we're feeling the effects of climate change in several
different ways. Most obvious is the pollution that hangs over
the valley floor, especially in the winter, causing a litany of
health impacts. Utah is one of the fastest-growing States in
the country right now, and in particular the Wasatch Front that
I represent is experiencing the bulk of that growth.
With more people comes more cars on the road, more
passengers in our trains, and more flights coming in and out of
our Salt Lake International Airport. It also means more
pollution and wear and tear on our infrastructure. So while the
Utah Department of Transportation and other organizations like
the Utah Transit Authority, our MPO (Metropolitan Planning
Organization), and Wasatch Front Regional Council and
Mountainland MPO, I think they're rising to the challenge of
addressing this growth. The problem becomes significantly
harder when we also factor in climate change, intense
fluctuations in heat, more intense weather patterns, et cetera.
Given the elevation of my district, I don't think the sea-level
rise is going to be an impact to our transportation
infrastructure per se.
But, you know, one of the things that Utah has done really
well, we were one of the first areas in the country to adopt
what we call the Wasatch Choice for 2050, a unified
transportation plan that incorporates our transit authority,
our local government, State government, our DOT in a unified
transportation plan. And it looks at our growth projections
through the year 2050 and what infrastructure investments we're
going to need to accommodate that growth, both maintenance and
then new capacity on our roads.
I guess my first question for the panel is, with extreme
weather--and I'm thinking in particular in a cold area that I
represent, the freeze-thaw cycles, and we look at the impact
and the life of an asset. And, you know, I think when we looked
at this we have a number of what we need for transportation
infrastructure investment, and clearly there's not enough
funding. We're funding what we can, but we don't have enough to
fund that infrastructure that we need, and so you know, we need
the transportation funding at the Federal level. But I'm
wondering if we also need to evaluate the life of our assets
with climate change and if the life of our assets may not be as
long as projected with the increased freeze-thaw cycles. And
can you help me to quantify that impact?
Mr. Winfree. Well, certainly at TTI, you know, we're one of
the lead institutes that look at pavement materials whether
they're cementitious, whether they're asphalt, so there's no
substitute for testing and analysis at the front end in all
weather and climate conditions.
Now, I know Carlos Braceras, your Executive Director, he's
keenly aware of that and is a partner with AASHTO (American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) and
with NCHRP (National Cooperative Highway Research Program) in
that regard, but the testing and analysis in all climate
conditions, there's just no replacement for that. And there are
several UTCs that focus on cold-weather climate impacts for,
again, asset, you know, installation, as well as asset
performance. So writ large, performance measures are needed
across the board.
Mr. McAdams. What can we do at the Federal level
specifically with the Department of Transportation to support
our State agencies in developing climate-resilient
infrastructure plans, recognizing that they will differ from
region to region then?
Mr. Winfree. There are a lot of resources that are out
there now. Better publication and coalescing them into a form
and fashion that can be used by the practitioner has always
been the challenge. I'm aware of the Volpe National
Transportation Systems Center having amassed resources, but I
don't know about the publication of that end report. So again,
the work is out there, the research is out there, but getting
it in the form and fashion that's easy and accessible for the
practitioner is the challenge.
Mr. McAdams. You know, I think as we are looking at
investing in maintaining our transportation infrastructure and
how expensive that is and knowing that every tax dollar is
precious and important and competing with other priorities, for
me, the importance of planning ahead, understanding the impacts
of climate change, and then investing in climate resilience
will make sure that we use those tax dollars efficiently and as
effectively as possible, and then also to improve and maintain
the quality of life whether it's reducing the wear-and-tear on
the road or the capacity of our transportation systems to
handle the growing population that we serve effectively.
So thank you, and I yield back.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. And now the Chair will
recognize myself for another round of questions for 5 minutes.
Just to kind of give an overview of what I'm hearing, we
have a lot of programs going on. We have the programs going on
in the New York City area, what I like to call the suburbs of
north Jersey. We have the work going on at many of our
university transportation centers like at Texas A&M, and I know
we have it at Rutgers. We've heard from different Members today
about those centers. We have NIST doing research into composite
materials. What we don't seem to have is a real understanding
of how, if you are a small to medium-sized city or municipality
and want to go do some infrastructure work, how you would
engage with all this research or all of these new composite
materials? And it makes sense what Mr. Norman is saying that
generally what you probably do is just use the same contractor
you've always used with the same materials that you've always
used and probably getting the same results that you've always
gotten.
So I think I would--you know, to the extent that we have
you here today, Ms. DesRoches, when you're looking at planning
throughout the greater metropolitan area, what engagement did
you have with NIST, what engagement did you have looking at
cost--or does the region have looking at new composite
materials or is it just a factor that the city is large enough
to really conduct its own research and develop its own tools
for use? Or do you interact with these university research
centers or NIST or any of our private people who are working in
this area?
Ms. DesRoches. Sure. Well, certainly, we do interact with a
number of Federal agencies. You know, I would say I was a
partner on the community resiliency planning guide when it
rolled out to different sectors when we were working on
guidance for transportation specifically. TRB, Transportation
Research Board, is another place that has been doing some great
research. They set up a resiliency section, which is the first
new section they've set up in I think over 10 years. And that's
really the--and I'm on that section. That's really meant to
organize all that research that TRB does across many different
committees with a resiliency lens.
So, you know, I think that no locality can do this on their
own. We do need the research from the institutions that we've
been discussing today. I do think, however, that some of the
standards-setting industry groups that's a consensus process is
not moving fast enough in order to incorporate this future-
looking climate data. I think that it takes a long time for
those standards boards to set new standards, to modify
standards, and all of these standards still use historical
weather data. And I think until we change that, the localities
will not have enough resources to be able to change how they
design, but if the standard changes and the standard says you
need to be designing for extreme heat, then that will change
the design outcome.
So I think that we both need these resources that we've
been talking about in the research, but we also need that
research to be plugged into the standard sooner and that
there's a level of urgency there that needs to be sped up.
Chairwoman Sherrill. And I sit on the Armed Services and
come from somewhat of a DOD background, and in that department
there's always a lead agency, whether it's the Navy or the Army
or the CIA or Homeland Security. In this space, in this
resiliency space we've heard that the EPA had a hand in it,
we've heard of DOT, but when we're talking infrastructure
resiliency, who are we looking to to be the lead agency in this
space? And that question is for all of you.
Mr. Winfree. Well, I think that raises challenges. The term
infrastructure is extraordinarily broad. If you're talking
transportation, then certainly I think DOT should be at the
lead, but one of the things I was considering on the way here
are the interdependencies between really asset owners, right?
So particularly in New York, New Jersey, whenever there's a
watermain break, it impacts the road network. Well, the water
company or the water transmission folks don't necessarily work
hand-in-glove with streets and maintenance or with the highway
department. So getting across those--really lack of
communication from agency to agency, from department to
department is hugely important to make sure everybody's at the
table. So, you know, again, infrastructure is a broad term. We
need some discipline as to what falls in those categories so
that we can prioritize.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. I think what we're
struggling with a bit here is many of us have worked on
infrastructure projects--I'm sure Mr. Norman has in all your
development--in our home districts, and we've seen how, you
know, I think we're a little concerned about more regulation
because we've seen how some outdated or poorly functioning
regulation is really harming. So to the extent we could have--I
think what I'm looking for is a group to take the lead and then
start to really dig down into how we can streamline the
regulations but then make sure we have the regulations that are
forward-looking, that are looking into climate change. I do
worry about just adding layers of standards and regulations
over poorly functioning ones because then we seem to kind of
butt heads with what we're trying to accomplish in our
districts. So it sounds like the place to start is with the
DOT, who is unfortunately not in attendance today. But thank
you.
Mr. Norman, would you have further comments?
Mr. Norman. Yes, just one question for each of you. You
know, when we have an issue with what we're building, and I go
to the ones that are actually doing the work, the contractors,
the individual people doing the layers. From where you sit, and
it's pretty much back on what Mikie was talking about. From
where you sit, what should we be doing in our roles? If you
were sitting in Congress now, knowing what you know in your
different departments, what should we be doing?
Mr. Reeve. From my side, you know, what we see right now
is, most of the infrastructure is just acquisition cost-based,
OK? What's--it's low bidder, OK? So a contractor is going to
bid--to win the job, he's going to bid with some of the lower-
cost materials, which, again, in a lot of cases is the same
thing that they've done in the past. And often, you know, if
you're looking for, you know, on the procurement side to say
you need to consider the resiliency and the lifecycle costs,
the longer-term maintenance costs in making that decision, so
you pick something that even though it may cost, you know, a
premium, 10, 15 percent now, it's saving you in 30 years from
doing it over again. And so that's a change somewhat in--just
in the procurement practices.
Mr. Norman. So you would recommend I do what?
Mr. Reeve. Recommend that in those cases--in the
infrastructure side say that you need to consider, OK, a life-
timeframe of 30 years, 50 years, 75 years when you're making
the choices of what is the lowest--you know, lowest-cost
solution and that it's not just today's cost, it's what's this
going to cost you in the future. And part of that future cost
is making sure you account for what's going to be those future
weather events.
Mr. Norman. So advocacy, is that right? OK. Mr. Averill or
Mr. Winfree?
Mr. Averill. I agree with my colleague here. The Economic
Decision Guide is a formal framework for accounting for
economically decisions that might include lifecycle analysis.
We've been discussing with communities this notion of a
resilience dividend, so it's the idea that you might be
designing for a particular event in mind over a long time
horizon, but in doing so, you actually get a day-to-day benefit
that's guaranteed that you don't have to condition on the
probability of the event that might be, for example, less
maintenance or better resistance to the frequent sort of annual
events that you're going to see. So using a more formal and
lifecycle-type cost analysis would be helpful.
Mr. Winfree. And I would certainly follow on Mr. Reeve's
point. I think the flip side of what he was talking about is
lessening the fear of taking risks. Contractors by definition
take the conservative view because they don't want to get sued,
they don't want to have a bad outcome, they don't want to get
blamed for something going wrong that could have been
innovative. So it prevents a closer nexus between the research
community and the contract community that does the work because
they are risk-averse. So if there is any kind of measure that
provides guarantees on the backend or lessens the risk for the
contractor community I think is a benefit.
Ms. DesRoches. And I'll just add briefly that, you know, as
I was talking about in my testimony, if we ask questions about
resiliency as they relate to funding, you will get more
creative answers, and that's another way to raise everyone's
awareness. So if I'm asking for this amount of Federal funding
for a bridge, if the question comes back how is that bridge
resilient to extreme rain events that we expect in that area,
you will get a different answer than what the standard built
practice is today.
Mr. Norman. Thank you so much. You all have and very
informative, and I have no further questions.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you, Mr. Norman.
I'm about to go to my colleague Mr. Beyer, but I do have
one quick question for all of you since you're sitting here
that occurred to me. To your knowledge, has there been any work
done when looking at the plans for the Gateway tunnel project
on new, more resilient materials, composite materials?
Ms. DesRoches. I'm not aware. I don't have that information
with me, and so it's outside of my area of expertise, the
specific tunnel design.
Mr. Reeve. You know, I personally don't know, but I will--
you know, through the association, will see if any of the
other, you know, suppliers out there have been approached.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Did you have something, Mr.
Winfree?
Mr. Winfree. Yes, I was just going to say that I do know
that lessons learned from the tunnel failure are being utilized
in the forward planning, right, so some of the things that were
discovered were the solid-state machinery down there failed
where some of the 100-year-old tube equipment survived the
water, right? So there are lessons learned that are being
thought-forward about how to install the Gateway operation.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you very much.
I now recognize Mr. Beyer for 5 minutes.
Mr. Beyer. Madam Chair, thank you very much. And I'm sorry
I missed most of the hearing. We were struggling with trade
policy in Ways and Means, something unimportant compared to
this, but thank you for being here.
And I think this is such an incredibly important hearing.
Thank you for doing this.
I represent Virginia, northern Virginia, but we have
Norfolk, Portsmouth, and Virginia Beach, which is not only
sinking slowly but the water's rising most rapidly there I
guess than anywhere along the East Coast. It seems like 14
inches in the last 20 years. And I think Northrop Grumman that
did the charts suggested that Norfolk and Portsmouth will be
underwater something like 60 percent of the year, their
downtowns by 2040.
And then we have a little Sears home in Oxford, Maryland,
and it's always encouraging to look at the LIDAR numbers and
see if sea-level rise is just 1 foot in the Chesapeake Bay, how
much of the village is underwater and how do you get there for
the places that aren't?
Ms. DesRoches, this may be best for you coming from New
York City, which is--I mean, I'm sure you've seen the pictures
of what's going to happen to Manhattan. I live in Alexandria
across the river just south of the airport, and the last big
storm we had, the storm surge came and flooded scores and
scores of homes, and so one of the lingering infrastructure
resilience problems is, do we build a wall around the
neighborhood or do we build a berm in the middle of the G.W.
Parkway or do we continue to expand the wetlands to provide
resilience, or the most popular idea is, do we build a
submersible surge wall in the Potomac River downstream about 5
miles, and when the surge comes, the wall comes up and holds
the surge back. This is the $5 billion option.
Where is your engineering New York City background taking
you on trying to protect all these low-lying cities?
Ms. DesRoches. So great question, very complicated. So we
are looking at all options. We are looking at new planning
tools first and foremost. FEMA--we are collaborating with FEMA
on a forward-looking flood map, which will incorporate climate
change data, which will help inform residents, businesses, and
the city as to what the future floodplain looks like. We are
building coastal protection in some of our neighborhoods. We
are cooperating with the Corps on a storm surge barrier study.
We're supporting that study.
So my main answer is there isn't one silver bullet. We have
to look at this across all of the tools we have, also including
building codes, which we've talked some about today. How can we
enhance that so that we are looking systematically about
protection but also how do we enhance the resiliency of the
assets that we have today?
Mr. Beyer. Great. Thank you very much. I know it's
incredibly complicated, sort of living it with the constituents
every day.
Mr. Reeve, you talked about the ability of composite
materials to withstand saltwater. Is there a different
scientific or engineering approach depending on the salinity of
the water?
Mr. Reeve. No, it--the materials that we use in there, you
know, work with any of the different types of salinities,
again, even up to the acidic side so whether it's brackish or
anything. You know, those materials will do fine.
I will say we supply a Navy berthing--we supply berthing
structures for the Navy submarines and the aircraft carriers
and do that at--for a lot of bases across the United States. I
will say the ones--the equipment in Norfolk station gets beat
up the most.
Mr. Beyer. Yes.
Mr. Reeve. It has the roughest time with where you're
located so----
Mr. Beyer. Yes. Thank you very much. Mr. Averill. On the
materials requirements for resilient roads, bridges,
transportation assets, are they different in coastal
communities versus inland communities or are the materials
requirements basically the same?
Mr. Averill. Certainly to the extent that we would see
saltwater exposure, that would increase the chlorides, if
you're in a northern climate, for example, and you look at the
de-icing compounds that would be used up there versus maybe a
more southern climate where we don't need to treat for that. So
our research tries to work with the standards community to come
up with performance requirements for materials for a variety of
different hazards that might represent what materials across
the United States would be exposed to.
Mr. Beyer. All right. Great. Thank you all very much.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Thank you. Mr. Norman, do you have
anything further?
Mr. Norman. No.
Chairwoman Sherrill. Before we bring the hearing to a
close, I want to thank our witnesses for testifying before the
Committee today. The record will remain open for 2 weeks for
additional statements from the Members and for any additional
questions the Committee may ask of the witnesses.
The witnesses are excused, and the hearing is now
adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 11:28 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
Appendix I
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]