April 5, 2024 The Honorable Pete ButtigiegSecretaryU.S. Department of Transportation1200 New Jersey Ave.Washington, DC 20590 Dear Secretary Buttigieg: On behalf of our millions of members and supporters, the undersigned hunting, fishing, and conservation organizations, scientific societies, and businesses contributing to the $1.1 trillion outdoor recreation economy write to express our continued commitment to working closely with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on implementation of the landmark Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)/Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). We have approached the mid-point for implementation of BIL program funding. Our organizations continue to be appreciative of the momentum behind key provisions supported by our community including the National Culvert Removal, Replacement, and Restoration Grant Program; the Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation (PROTECT) Discretionary Grants Program; and the Wildlife Crossings Safety Pilot Program. Our organizations worked closely with the Biden-Harris Administration and Congressional leaders on the foundational structure and purpose of these provisions. Firstly, we write to thank the Department and FHWA for issuing the initial notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) for the National Culvert Removal, Replacement, and Restoration Grant Program, and are eagerly awaiting notice for subsequent funding. We admire FHWA’s focus on delivering a program that meets the standards set forth in recent Presidential Executive Orders focusing on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government (EO 12898) and Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (EO 14008). We were also pleased to see FHWA actively coordinating the parameters of this new program with other federal fish passage and conservation grant programs. While we recognize the intent to achieve these objectives, we have concerns with other elements of the NOFO. In our opinion, the criteria in Section B – Federal Award Information, and Section C – Eligibility Information, precludes the program from successfully achieving the aforementioned standards in on-the-ground project implementation. Specifically, Section B states that “Grant awards are administered on a reimbursement basis. Culvert AOP Program funds will reimburse recipients only for reasonable and authorized costs incurred and for work performed after a grant agreement has been executed, allowable expenses are incurred, and valid requests for reimbursement are submitted.” We were alerted to this potential funding strategy early in the NOFO development and immediately initiated conversations with project partners throughout the country, with a focus on the Pacific Northwest, to determine if this reimbursement requirement would preclude them from pursuing this funding opportunity. We heard unequivocally, particularly from Tribal and rural underserved community partners, that this criteria effectively eliminates their ability to pursue funding from this Program. A majority of the communities where our organizations work are historically resource-dependent, capacity-limited communities that have been identified as disadvantaged by the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool and have a ‘moderate to high’ or ‘high’ level of vulnerability according to the CDC Social Vulnerability Index. The majority of potential eligible applicants from Tribes or units of local governments within these geographies simply do not have sufficient upfront funding to implement these projects on a reimbursable basis. Numerous other federal agencies recognize this dilemma, and as such, implement grant programs to ensure that historically underfunded communities can access critically important federal funds. We have serious concerns with DOT/FHWA opting not to follow tried and true federal funding disbursement methods, particularly in light of the aforementioned Executive Orders to address equity and barriers to opportunity in the disbursement of federal funds. We recognize that DOT/FHWA indicated potential for an alternative funding mechanism in the NOFO: “At DOT’s sole discretion alternative funding arrangements may be considered on a case-by-case basis.” However, we recommend that DOT amend the Program to automatically enable alternative funding arrangements for Tribal and underserved community applicants. Clearly identifying eligibility for this alternative path will remove the burden on already capacity strapped entities (such as rural counties and Tribes) who would otherwise dedicate limited staff time to develop grants with no knowledge of whether they meet the criteria for an undefined alternative funding mechanism. Further, given the capacity challenges that many rural local government and Tribal partners face, we also see implications to the success of the program under Section C of the current NOFO language: Section C – Elegibility InformationEligible Applicants are: (1) States; (2) a unit of local governments; or an (3) Indian Tribe.DOT expects that the Eligible Applicant that submits the application will administer and deliver the project. Numerous other federal funding programs allow for the pass through of funds, to enable entities such as conservation non-profits not under the same capacity limitations and often times with increased access to private philanthropic match funding, to contract with the eligible applicant to perform the on-the-ground project implementation and management duties. If the expectation of DOT is that the applicant must administer and implement the project directly, your solicitation will only secure project applications from large, well-staffed entities and fail to deliver projects. If that is not the intent of the NOFO, and funding can be passed through to alternative implementation entities, we recommend that future NOFOs be amended to clearly indicate that the pass through of funds from eligible entities is permitted. In addition to our recommendations to improve equitable access to the Program, we believe that there is significant need for the inclusion of minimum design standards in the NOFO. Given that the intent of the Program is to benefit fish passage, design criteria that includes minimum fish passage requirements and hydraulic design methodology that incorporates climate influence on hydrology should be required as part of project design funded through the Program. Hydraulic design methodology to facilitate fish passage, such as stream simulated design, is already a key component of minimum fish passage criteria for other federal funding programs. Additionally, the Program should require a minimum project design life and sizing that is climate resilient. Projects that utilize these minimum design standards will provide greater ecosystem benefit, including in many cases the dual purpose of terrestrial passage, while also

April 15, 2024 The Honorable Joseph R. Biden, Jr.PresidentThe White House1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: The undersigned organizations, representing hundreds of thousands of hunters, anglers, wildlife professionals, and outdoor enthusiasts, write today regarding the implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), known also as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law or “BIL” and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Together, these laws infused billions of dollars into programs and projects that balance infrastructure investments with landscape and watershed conservation, improve fish and wildlife habitat on working forests and agricultural lands, advance natural infrastructure and nature-based solutions, connect Americans to their public lands and waters, and offer long-term benefits for climate resilience. Our coalition, co-led by the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership (TRCP) and the Association and Fish and Wildlife Agencies (AFWA), has played a pivotal role over the past few years in actively supporting the Administration’s implementation of these historic investments. Our collaborative efforts extend across jurisdictions and include federal, state, territorial, Tribal, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in local partnerships that focus on BIL and IRA programs targeting ecosystem restoration, wildfire resilience, aquatic connectivity and fish passage, wildlife crossings, clean water, and drought and flood resilience projects. Over the past year and a half, our coalition has consistently convened to explore BIL and IRA implementation opportunities and challenges. We have engaged with federal, tribal, state, territorial, and NGO stakeholders to examine implementation constraints and to develop recommendations and strategies that may achieve more efficient, meaningful, and lasting conservation outcomes. We have also focused on addressing capacity needs and other barriers to getting funding to on-the-ground projects in an efficient and environmentally beneficial manner. Following enactment of this historic funding, our coalition drafted a letter to this Administration to offer expertise and resources to ensure BIL and IRA funding delivery would be driven by science, targeted and strategic, built upon years of on-the-ground conservation and recreation partnerships, and sustainable for the long-term. As we approach the mid-point of this historic funding opportunity, we appreciate the opportunity to continue this important work together, and offer the following recommendations to address some remaining areas of concern based on our shared experiences with BIL and IRA implementation. Enhanced Federal Agency Coordination and Collaboration for Durable Conservation and Outdoor Recreation at the Landscape and Watershed Scale It is critically important to maximize benefits for fish and wildlife by continuing to direct the historic funding from BIL and IRA to achieve transformational change at the landscape and watershed levels. The broad and extensive funding opportunities provided through BIL and IRA span numerous federal agencies and programs. The magnitude of funding provides great opportunity, but in some instances has led to siloed decision making. We continue to be concerned that simply funding a large number of projects without an overarching coordinated vision or plan, including the utilization for existing landscape level plans, will not have the desired impact for fish and wildlife conservation. This approach has also created a complex network of funding opportunities that grantees need to knit together to address the full scope of a project or artificially fragment a project into parts. This adds to the administrative burden for grantees, particularly in underserved communities, and reduces the potential for transformational outcomes. We support the use of existing landscape and watershed-scale plans to guide federal investments of BIL and IRA funds. Further, enhanced coordination amongst the Federal agencies that receive funding for similar and related purposes is essential to maximize potential for landscape and watershed scale conservation. We encourage the administration to require federal agencies to coordinate their funding and programs for enhanced successful conservation outcomes. We are encouraged by the formation of the Interagency Fish Passage Task Force, under the leadership of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and we would support similar efforts that facilitate the development of shared priorities and outcomes in other areas. Address Federal Agency Workforce Capacity Common themes of challenges and hurdles that federal agencies face throughout the implementation process are primarily associated with a lack of staffing capacity and technical expertise needed to effectively deploy the resources granted by unprecedented amounts of BIL and IRA funding. Another major concern shared by officials across the federal family is a lack of technical and scientific expertise on the ground, especially because each state, territory, and region in the United States faces different needs and challenges. A recent Department of the Interior (DOI) Inspector General (IG) Report found that DOI bureaus and offices are still 20-to-30 percent below the capacity needed to get the dollars out the door responsibly. Since the adoption of the BIL, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has worked to accelerate hiring for key federal positions, including engineers, scientists, project managers, IT, HR specialists, and construction managers. Integral to this effort was the release of OPM’s Talent Surge Executive Playbook and the utilization of specific hiring flexibilities, including temporary appointments, to address discrete agency critical hiring needs. Despite these efforts, several key agencies still face challenges in ensuring they can promptly deploy the funding, maintain staffing and resource capacity, produce reliable information, and establish appropriate program controls. We recommend expanding initiatives such as OPM’s Talent Surge Executive Playbook, Schedule A authority, and the Intergovernmental Personnel Act Mobility Program to address staffing and technical expertise challenges. We strongly encourage the use of federal contractors with a demonstrated ability and track record for managing large project portfolios, who can navigate the planning and federal review processes, and deliver federal funds to on-the-ground projects in an efficient and environmentally beneficial manner.One example of increasing capacity through partnerships includes work by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), who is expanding their collaboration with the Forest Service to conduct controlled burns in some of the places in the United States that need them most. Throughout North America, a dizzying array of landscapes need fire in some intervals. When they do not get the fire they need, many become prone to potentially destructive and extreme wildfires because of the natural fuels