[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]