tv [untitled] CSPAN June 27, 2009 4:30am-5:00am EDT
4:30 am
4:31 am
>> and the commonwealth is velfing $7 million in helping to build that technology, senator. >> thank you. i'm going to turn to my ranking member here, senator thune, for you, sir, to ask your question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. governor -- senator wyden and i have a proposal called build america bonds which i think is sort of geared at what you're talking about. it's a way of bonding for capital improvements. i agree entirely that the way that we budget around here defies any sort of common sense or, you know, rational basis for making these types of decisions. it's clearly not the way that these decisions will be made in the private sector if we ran a private business. i appreciate your observations about that. and i would say to mr. skancke that if brett favre is playing for the vikings next year there are going to be a lot more people that will want to get
4:32 am
from sioux falls to minneapolis and prmblely quickly and without having to drive through a blizzard. if i might direct a question to, this will be to mr. szabo and ms. fleming. what i take from the g.a.o.'s testimony is ridership and cost. the concern is that overly optimistic project proponents is going to overstatement ridership and understatement cost. if the federal government makes investment decisions based upon faulty forecasts we're going to fund the projects that won't be successful. so i guess the question and maybe i'll direct this to mr. szabo is how are you going to evaluate scutch projections for proposed projects -- such projections for proposed projects and are you going to rely on the project sponsor for those? >> well, first off, one of the key components that we will be ranking the applications on will be their proposed management plan and their
4:33 am
management of risk which includes covering all of the operating costs and any cost overruns. those responsibilities belong to the applicant, not the federal government. so clearly it's in their best interest to protect themselves to ensure that those forecasts are accurate. one of the things that we plan to do is to use a temp late where essentially -- template where essentially they'll provide the data to us. we'll run that data through our own calculations to ensure that as we compare the projects we're getting an apples to apples comparison. we believe that that will help ensure the integrity of the data and help us make sure that we have accurate forecasts. clearly at if r.a. we understand the fact that the projects that we -- at f.r.a.
4:34 am
we understand the fact that the projects that we choose are going to have to be successful. we understand we cannot squander this opportunity. that if we are not in fact very careful about the projects we select and ensuring the success of the projects that we select, if we fumble that wall there won't be a next generation on this. so we understand the responsibility that we have and we're prepared to take that challenge. >> senator, can i add something quickly? one of the ways to ensure that you get an accurate estimate is if the state's recommending it, make sure they chip in some money so they bear the risk as well. amtrak and pennsylvania shared the $145 million cost of the expansion of philadelphia to harrisburg. >> that's a good suggestion and one that we ought to i think take to heart if which do when we start looking at evaluating these projects.
4:35 am
>> senator, it is a key part of our plan. >> it is, ok. and let me ask ms. fleming to sort of follow-up that question too. do you think the department should take or make sure these forecasts, when it relies on this information that you want to make them as accurate as possible. i guess my question is, do you believe there ought to be a neutral party that evalue waits these forecasts too in addition to having the -- >> ridership and other forecasts are key factors in determining whether a project or a system is going to be economically viable. and unfortunately, you know, statistics and results have shown that ridership tends to be overestimated and costs tends to be underestimated. so we feel there are several ways to try to get and provide more reliable statistics. the first would be kind of following governor rendell which is really obligating the state and local governments to share some of the risks of
4:36 am
underestimated costs. for those projects where they're seeking federal assistance. another way would be to abstain statements and forecasts from independent sources -- would be to obtain estimates and forecasts from independent sources. and lastly, making the forecasts subjected to peer review and making the data publicly available. so i think that those three things would be to better ensure that the information would be more reliable. >> mr. szabo, after we spend $13 billion that's likely to be appropriated for high-speed rail over the next five years, do you expect the united states to have at least one corridor of substantial length that's served by a japanese or european style high-speed railroad? >> i think it's important that first off we wait and see what is applied for. you know, obviously i can't start commenting on what we're going to do until applications
4:37 am
come forward and are weighed, you know, graded and then approved. again, we understand the need to ensure that we have very tangible, very, you know, substantial successes. and, you know, clearly, again, you know, our vision is to follow the model of what the europeans have advanced. you know, keep in mind when the system in spain first opened up, you know, again, ms. fleming talked about how essentially they begin with one trunk line. they did. they began with their one trunk line. essentially it was six to eight trains a day running about 125 miles an hour. and from that they were so successful that they incrementally made the improvements that got them to roughly 20 trains a day at speeds of 200 miles an hour.
4:38 am
so this is going to take a buildout, you know, a buildout much like the construction of the interstate highway system. and, again, we need to understand, the it v.g. system in france today, if you ride from paris to strawsburg, if you come out of paris you are going 200 miles an hour. 2/3 along the way you flow on to what they call traditional track and you're doing speeds of about 125 miles an hour. so it's not this either or proposition. >> mr. chairman, my time has expired. i thank you all very much. >> i'm called elsewhere. senator udall can going to take over and senator boxer will be next. senator hutchinson and then it's all up to senator udall from new mexico. he's going to fix the whole problem. >> senator lautenberg, on your
4:39 am
way out the door, i just want to thank you very much for this hearing, sir. and high-speed rail is critical. it's just really critical. i want to pick up on senator thune's comments about the funding. senator thune, i just wanted to pick up on your points about the funding because it's very critical. this $13 billion standing alone just can go so far. but in my state we had an election about putting in $9 billion funding package, and the people voted aye which was kind of remarkable given the latest votes that we had. so, you know, the people there really understand it. and our system, and i think -- i bet most everybody in this room has been to my state. it will eventually connect sacramento, our state capital, to san diego in the south. that is the first phase will be between los angeles and san francisco, points in between.
4:40 am
i also want to point out the private sector has to be leveraged into this too. in california we're working with the private sector so you take the $13 billion, you add the $9 billion from my state, hopefully billions from other states, and hopefully billions from the private sector that you can get involved in it. and it starts to look like something on the scale not quite what governor rendell wants, i don't think. because i think he even has a bigger plan, but i think you start to leverage and you start to see some real things happening. and i wanted to just point out that our studies, and if i am saying something that's been disproven, let me know, show that our high-speed rail in california save 12.7 million barrels a year by 2030 and reduce co-2 emissions by 12 billion pounds per year. supposed to be 160,000 construction jobs and literally
4:41 am
they're saying california hundreds of thousands of permanent jobs by 2035. so i think as we look at a lot of the problems facing us, this great recession, the co-2 problem, the need to be energy independent, the need to make people feel comfortable getting out of their car, this seems to be one place. so i have two questions. the first one, both of them, actually, is to administer -- administrator szabo. what is your development for high-speed rail nationally, and what do you consider most important for funding? will a state contribution bear some weight here? >> yes, that is one of the elements that while not mandatory in most of the tracks that, you know, the funding tracks that we provide, it's certainly that is something
4:42 am
that is weighted, and something certainly that is encouraged. you know, our vision, frankly, matches what they have done in europe. and i think it's important to note you can compare it a little bit to the road system where you have local roads, you have county roads, you have state highways, you have u.s. highways and you have an interstate system. in all -- and all play a very, very important role, and they all interconnect with each other to provide hopefully a first-class road system. our approach will need to be the same on rail. just like it is in europe. you know, in europe, in japan, not every train is going 200 miles an hour. many of them are, but there continues to be a niche in the market for 110-mile service. there seems to be a niche in the market for traditional 79-mile-an-hour service.
4:43 am
>> will state effort matter? >> absolutely. critical element. yes, absolutely. >> i said i had two questions. i have three. that's one. the second one is to mr. skancke who served as commissioner on the national surface transportation policy and revenue study commission. he's been very important in advising us in the e.p.w. committee on how to proceed with the next highway bill, etc. then i have the last question to mr. szabo. so, mr. skancke, do you believe d.o.t. has a realistic and workable plan to implement high-speed rail nationally? and what steps must they take to ensure we have a sustainable system in the u.s.? >> senator boxer, i don't think the nation as a whole has a plan for high-speed rail. you know me very well to know that i am very candid to answer the questions. >> that's why i asked it. >> i think our nation lacks a
4:44 am
vision on how we are going to move our american public out to 2050. it's why this congress in safety lieu created the transportation -- in safetlu created the transportation bill. as we get people out of our own horse and buggy, that it is a cultural sift. we have to convince the american public that high-speed passenger rail is going to be predictable, that it's going to be ontime and it's going to be reliable. and we do that two ways. one, we just make the investment. we don't talk about what the programs are going to look like. we've done that. we studied corridors. we know what the alignment should look like. i believe that we just need to do it. we need to step up, fund it, find the funding mechanisms that are needed and make the necessary investment. >> ok. >> i think it's just that simple. >> ok.
4:45 am
4:46 am
and it's our intent to make sure that that deadline is met. secondly, it's impossible to talk about high-speed rail without at the same time talking about positive train control. again, using the european models, you know, they have their european train control. you can't have trains going 200 miles an hour if you don't have some element of positive train control. >> we have to fix it for the ones we have got going now. i hope you move quicker than 2015. that's some place that i have to compromise. i think it needs to be swifter than that. thank you. >> senator hutchinson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. let me start with judge eckels and just ask that -- well, let me first state that i hope there will be funding tore projects other than those that may be further along than the texas t-bone, and if you could
4:47 am
apply right now for federal funding in part of this stimulus, what would you ask for it to do? >> today, our biggest need is the market and environmental engineering studies. before we go on the ground with a system we want to make sure that it's a system that will be viable, will have the market that will support the system. unlike the east coast, we don't have regular service between houston and dallas today. so to develop one we need to make sure that we are building a system which can be priced so we can compete with the automobiles, with the aircraft and also to keep an operational system. i do think bringing the discipline of the marketplace to the system can help set a fair schedule and construction, you know, of the technology that will make sense and would be viable for the long term for the state. >> let me ask mr. szabo, i'm looking at a map, basically the
4:48 am
amtrak system with the high speed corridors that have been designated, the 11 that have been designated in the darker red, and is this the beginning of a planned system, that those are investments that are already being made? and do you favor the ones that are already in the amtrak system being upgraded to high speed or are you looking at other factors like a new high speed rail project that might feed into amtrak and therefore enhance amtrak's capabilities? >> one of the next steps we absolutely must take is the development of a national rail plan. when i say that, i mean it from a most comprehensive standpoint. we have to understand how high-speed rail is going to overlay on traditional intler
4:49 am
city rail, how commuter rail is going to overlay on top of that. and frankly, we have to understand how it's going to interact with the freight rail network. so there are all these components that need to be looked at to ensure we have a comprehensive strategy when it comes to rail. you can't talk about high speed rail without talking about the impact on freights. you know that map is a document that happens to exist today, but certainly there's the need for a much bolder, clearer vision. and a national strategy on how to get there. >> have you ever talked or even put on the table with the amtrak corridors that do share freight rail lines, which make for problems of on time service, which then cause problems at the fare box, have
4:50 am
you put on the table, sharing the space and adding a line on the same corridor as the freight rail, which if you could get a reasonable deal, like maybe free use of that space in exchange for getting out of the freight rail system, which they would certainly benefit them, because they don't like dealing with amtrak, have you ever thought about trying to get a second rail on the same right of way as one of the ways for higher speed rail service in highly congested corridors? >> i think clearly there's multiple options. the key is that whatever we do, and clearly if we're going to have true high speed rail, it has to be on a dedicated
4:51 am
corridor, but whatever we do, we have to make sure we achieve a win-win relationship with the freight industry. we have an obligation to make sure that if the passenger trains are operating, that they're operating on time, you know, clearly reliability is a very critical component of ensuring a high quality passenger rail operation and growing ridership. >> have you looked at having a separate track, though, to make that happen? you can talk about it, but in reality, at least on the sunset limited and the texas eagle i know so well, the experience has not been good. >> yeah. i mean, any of these options can be considered. >> well, i would ask if, in the parameters of the spending of this stimulus money, that is a factor, if looking at those
4:52 am
congested areas where you might be able to get a more streamlined service for high speed rail if that might be an option? >> certainly that could be a component that would be measured in a state's application to us. you know, there are clear advantages to that, as far as reliability which is one of the components we measure, safety, which is one of the components we measure, so again if that was part of an application, it's a criteria that could be viewed favorably. >> a state effort is one criteria that would be very important for matching funds and then possibly if you could ease congestion for better service and higher speed rail in state application, that would be a good factor. >> that's right, yes. >> judge exels, let me ask you -- eckels, let me ask you,
4:53 am
obviously the texas t-bone is not going to be looking at an amtrak route, but are there options on the texas t-bone that might provide duel-rail with freight line, are or you looking at a different, all-new right of way. >> senator, the very fast track portion of the system, as mr. szabo pointed out, the system would have to have its own tracks. we think the whole system should be a separate track anyway. but as you described, in the urban corridors, the highway 290 corridor coming into houston we partner with the harris county toll authority, the yube pacific railroad, the houston met reauthority and the high speed rail and right of way and share a common corridor. the idea where it's appropriate to lay a track adjacent to
4:54 am
freight railroads, and there's a number of places where that makes a lot of place, particularly in the urban areas where you have a limited right of way. as we move out, it depends on the demand we get from the freight side. we have found them to be reluctant to give up the right of way, claiming they need it for future development and it's theirs. it's a continuous problem. we're not for taking a lot of new right of way, we'd like to consolidate as much as possible with txdot as much as possible. >> that's what -- i just think coming to some realistic terms with the freight rail is going to be in everyone's interest. because they have a business to run and you can understand their wanting to keep control of their tracks. that's why i think getting sort
4:55 am
of separated out where we can, but not having the huge expense of eminent domain and those issues. >> there are many places where it's cheaper for us to relocate the freight rail and buy them a new area than for us to try to condemn a new right of way. >> thank you very much. my time is up, i appreciate all of your coming in and helping us get through this it is a very important new capability for america to have true multimodal planning for transportation. thank you. >> thank you, senator hutchison. as senator boxer was leave she mentioned the letter between she and senator rockefeller and asked that it be put as part of the record, there's no objection, it will be ordered to be part of the official
4:56 am
record. governor rendell, i appreciate your enthusiasm for capital budgets and also high speed rail. i wish in a way we could get the same kind of enthusiasm in the west and one of my questions here was, why no high speed rail corridor in the southwest. we have good sized population centers in el paso, albuquerque, denver, as i look at the map here, it looks like that would make sense. i'm wondering, congress, we haven't designated or haven't authorized its 11th -- we have authorized 11 high speed rail corridor, yet the department of transportation has only designated 10. i hope you're reserving that last one for the southwest. but could you tell me a little bit of the thinking on the 11th
4:57 am
and where you are and what's the -- what your thoughts are on an el paso-albuquerque-denver corridor? >> i'm assuming that's to me. >> yes. yes it is, mr. szabo. >> frankly there's no position to announce at this time relative to any 11th high speed rail corridor, but the important thing is it's not necessary to be an applicant under the grant guidance we've issued. i think most of this gets addressed again as we start taking a look at a national rail plan. quite frankly, it's possible that there's the need for more than 11. we need to take a look at where are those markets where there's good potential, what is the interest from those states? and historically, there's not
4:58 am
been a strong interest from the southwest, but it sounds like the level of enthusiasm frankly nationwide is changing considerably. so i think the issues of whether there's an 11th corridor a 12th corridor a 13th whatever will get fleshed out as we put together a national rail plan. >> senator, could i take a shot at that? >> yes. >> i think the way this is going to happen is to do it. i think that's what mr. skancke said, it's up to us to find a way to do it to scale. i think it comes incrementally. if i could, and i've thought and thought and i've had wall street people in to try to see how i could finance high speed rail from philadelphia to pittsburgh, 200-mile-per-hour rail. if we built that, there's no doubt in my mind that others would be 200 miles per hour and
4:59 am
from pittsburgh to detroit to chicago, the texas t-bone may be your best shot. if they can build it and prove it work, how tough is it to take it -- i don't know if el paso is on the t-bone -- >> el paso isn't, but el paso is one of the strongest supporters of high speed rail, not that they expect to see the line to houston, but the line from el paso to albuquerque to denver, and they see the proof in the system on t-bone, this would be the next step to provide the capacity to build the el paso route to albuquerque and on to other points in the west. >> the -- one of the things that's been fascinating in new mexico, governor richardson stepped up and did commuter rail and there were a lot of doubts, an earlier governor talked about doing it, was
129 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
CSPAN2 Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on