; (B) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate; and (C) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. (4) Evaluation The Secretary may recommend a large project for funding in the annual report under paragraph (6) only if the Secretary evaluates the proposed project and determines that the project is justified because the project— (A) addresses a need to improve the condition of the bridge, as determined by the Secretary, consistent with the goals of the program under subsection (b)(2); (B) will generate, as determined by the Secretary— (i) costs avoided by the prevention of closure or reduced use of the bridge to be improved by the project; (ii) in the case of a bundle of projects, benefits from executing the projects as a bundle compared to as individual projects; (iii) safety benefits, including the reduction of accidents and related costs; (iv) person and freight mobility benefits, including congestion reduction and reliability improvements; (v) national or regional economic benefits; (vi) benefits from long-term resiliency to extreme weather events, flooding, or other natural disasters; (vii) benefits from protection (as described in section 133(b)(10)), including improving seismic or scour protection; (viii) environmental benefits, including wildlife connectivity and carbon reduction; (ix) benefits to pedestrian, bicycle, nonvehicular, and public transportation users; (x) benefits of using— (I) innovative design and construction techniques; or (II) innovative technologies; or (xi) reductions in maintenance costs, including, in the case of a federally owned bridge, cost savings to the Federal budget; (C) is cost effective based on an analysis of whether the benefits and avoided costs described in subparagraph (B) are expected to outweigh the project costs; (D) is supported by other Federal or non-Federal financial commitments or revenues adequate to fund ongoing maintenance and preservation