same set of problems, but there is an elected leader and there will be reasonably fair election. i'm not optimistic because they were so unfair but i think it's important that the countries themselves exercise leadership as we try to help them, and my final point is we should never disengaged from that region. ..

the fact of the matter is we repay and we finally applied a counter is -- counterinsurgency strategy. once the people thought we were going to die protecting them from a something which attend to that point and have the capability to do it, the war turned to our favor and strangely at the same time, the al qaeda had fallen in on iraq because of our presence. that is a true statement, so that was a huge negative outcome as a result of the invasion of iraq. al qaeda cell in on iraq because they saw as a huge opportunity to render a defeat for the united state and they feared strategically the united states would possibly turn iraq into a country that democratic

principles and opportunity, send in the ideologically are opposed to. even now there are support a man with the surge and force is applied differently if they did not have the so-called awakening that took place with the sunni tribal leaders who are rejecting the al qaeda brutality of seventh century television enforced upon them. we have to understand this message that they bring to my sons is a very harsh message and we can leverage against that. in afghanistan, i've been there 15, 20 times, the people themselves, when you freed the

people from the harshness and brutality of the taliban, we don't have to win their hearts and minds. all we have to do is kill the bad guy who is terrorizing them and just driving their life in the gutter. once we do that, the people are very supportive of us. so my point to you is this cancer is that they are and we have the means to deal with some of it. we can help them in terms of government you have been improving these are some of the conditions we want to see. we have learned an awful lot about how to deal with this

militarily. we forgotten the lessons of vietnam and that's one of the reasons why we have such a problem with this initially in afghanistan and also in iraq. but now, we understand how to do this and we can truly help our partners in the region than they have to use military force. this gets you the best result using the military force. there's so much we can do and i think it is learning the lessons we have learned from the mistakes we've made in applying those lessons and partnering and staying engaged. when we pull back the enemy rules forward and not is what is happening right before our eyes, friendly to the united states, you know what they want from us? to provide assist tends to train a proper security force so they

can disarm the militias and be a counterbalance against the al qaeda radical islamist threat. that's what they want. that is for us to assist me at the payoff is enormous. are we doing that? that's tragic in my view. >> very briefly, you have put your finger on an important issue and we have to think about the cost and benefits of healthy intervene. and there are costs. i would say big picture, my concern is the rebalancing we heard from general keane earlier, the rebalancing to asia and the underfunded support to the u.s. africa command that has a very big problem on its hands to cost and risk. future decisions where we may take on risk. you are putting an important

issue, which is our tears cost of inner pain. the answer is yes. we have demonstrated there are types and numbers of forces that could radicalize populations. some of the strikes we've seen overseas when they've killed civilians, especially excessively have tended to be more harmful than helpful. i would did not tonight there've been strikes. you can also overdo it. you can also assume that each room can pain is the solution. it's an instrument. it's not the solution in and of itself. when you look at this come you have to see the benefits to intervention. we are at the position where we are talking about a much later presence overseas, not just military but treasury state department and other officials and one that does increase the money will work with allies in

doing this with us in some cases for us. that intervention in my view is worth the cost. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> the chair now recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. perry. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i can assure is watching from the office to ahead a couple of other things than i've got a cold year. dr. jones come in your opening statement, you alluded to in maybe to clarify increased or continued monitoring or surveillance of all americans for the sake of making sure that we catch or keep track of these al qaeda folks. i guess from my viewpoint, it seems to me it would eat in a time of limited resource is in a place where constitution guarantees their liberties but the best thing to do is to target, specifically individuals , whatever the nature

excess, whatever the metrics are coming to travel to these places, who correspond with these folks, who live in communities that have a proclivity towards radicalization. i just want to get your thoughts on that because to me that sounds like the better approach. a massive decode code, clarify maybe your thoughts on why we are doing the opposite, why we are looking at every american for the sake of the few who would be bad actors and a sip from a standpoint of clinical correctness or why do we refuse to face this enemy head-on and target our energies and resources? >> sure. just to be clear, i did not support monitoring all americans. >> i don't believe i said that either. but i did support having a capacity to be able to monitor extremists. here's the challenge and this is why this is not a black-and-white issue.

a zero-sum issue is because we can't know and we won't know everybody that has access on the internet and radicalize this. we won't know everybody that goes overseas. there's a range of individuals that may radicalize inside the u.s. to stay here. >> i would say also as far as i know we have no proof if anyone from even the lone wolf and the patriot act provisions which haven't been used ever who has been radicalize in the united states solely on the run. they have had contact through one means or another the internet or what have you. if the nsa has the capability and ability to monitor every single thing we do that we can and should know that. the doll has gone was websites known, correspond with that act or sound, yet we did nothing and instead are spending all of this money watching all of us

americans. i guarantee you the only time i've traveled to places unsavory or not because i wanted to take my family on a vacation or myself to afghanistan or the middle east where there is a civil war going on. people that go to those places they think would not object to being suspect and i think that's where we should be focusing our efforts. >> i agree. i would point out that you don't have to travel overseas anymore to get the kind of expertise were talking about. >> are you do correspond or another. >> me that is where we should be focusing our efforts as opposed to this broad approach. i guarantee people on my staff never travel to these countries in nato horse on the people engaged in these kinds of things. spending resources is a waste of time, energy and resource is.

>> thanks, congressman. a lot of people ask this question. in my opinion, part of which are talking about is the so-called metadata that the nsa goes after. that is one excellent way in which we could get the target. congress established the law here which is subject to criticism. we actually created the system where there was to process involved. as you know, the meta-data come in looking at millions and millions of phone calls and e-mails, it is not the content. it is the connections and that's the way they get the target when they see the connections, then they've got to go to court to get a court order. and how crazy that was to somebody in china or russia or the members of al qaeda or iran.

>> while i agree with you, senator, at the same time we were doing this and we didn't pick up the boston bombers who were corresponding in making those connections. >> no system is perfect, but i will tell you we stopped a lot of -- the american government has stopped a lot of terrorist plots against this because the these methods of surveillance. i want to say something else. every time i'm on the internet to buy something, i am giving up more information in the nsa has gotten from millions of phone calls and e-mails formatted data surveillance. i just read an article in the last few days that there's a service now being sold to stores this sort of tells them where people had been based on their cell phones before the command to this tourist.

you know and i know that when i start to google something orrico on different internet sites, i am getting advertising based on previous nights. the garden is a lot more about almost every american in the nsa does unless you've got a hit where it raises suspicions and 95 to go to court. i think it is really important for the congress to be careful and the president will announce a program tomorrow before upsetting the system, which is really protected security. >> if i could just add, i deplore what edwards wouldn't it. i don't think he was a whistleblower any in many respects compromised very important security interests. but i applaud the public debate. where you're coming from us for a lot of americans are coming

from. you understand this better than they do. metadata is a listed phone numbers numbers, not names and certainly not content. i was here when all the systems came into effect. initially the bush administration in its first term when around congress enact hard the foreign intelligence surveillance act, which when i discovered that was very unhappy about. i set up to reset the system of checks and balances and there have not been any abuses. the president's advisory committee has recommended changing section 215 and stopping the story nabisco meta-data by the government. one is to create an independent agency in the second is to have the phone company store the data. the president according to reports is probably not going to

do either because the phone companies have pushed back and they don't want to store the data. just as one person observing the debate, it would be acceptable to me if we took this recommendation and pushed the data into the private sector and try to engage, adopt some of the recommendations that will make the public more comfortable. we need a strong surveillance system. but it needs also to give comfort to americans that their privacy is respected in this debate should the two changes and i hope that the president will be forward thinking on friday when he proposes changes. >> i appreciate that my time has long since expired. i appreciate the chairman's indulgence. my point is our policy, security policy to be targeted on those who would do us harm and mismatches they can to secure our god given freedom and

constitutional freedoms so enumerated. i appreciate your thoughts and opinions in testimony today. >> i thank the gentleman. i may say for the record when i was a federal prosecutor, we did go to the private phone carriers. it was not a mass under a giant warehouse in the nsa. that's against the american american people some pause quite frankly. i do think it has an effective end is the legal system. i know it's getting late, but as chairman i want to ask or say it's my prerogative to throw one last question because we have such great expertise and i want teaching a mac for being here today. it has to do with afghan fan. i'm very concerned as to mention this lattice of forces agreement that we had a failure to negotiate that in iraq. now we're looking at king of al qaeda in iraq, taking over falluja, taking over large portions of the country and we

are faced with the dilemma with afghanistan. i think rss plan is a lot of politics with this. the lack of a better word, he's the chain a little bit tried to play to his local base, local politics. there's been some talk of zero action, which would result in a complete 100% withdraw from the region. can you tell me what impact that your auction if exercise would have on our security to the homeland and in our fight against al qaeda? vmax certainly. listen, karzai as we all know is a material figure and he frustrates the daylights out of us for the entire time he's been there at times. the fact of the matter is he's going to be gone in the spring. the election is around april and i ain't from a policy perspective, we should not react

emotionally to him, although i am by people way. look beyond karzai. there is going to be a new leader in afghanistan. if we have to sign this with the new leader, so be it because sign it or not. certainly we need to keep residual forces there. listen, the current situation so you get a grasp of the security situation, the forces were applied in the south and its relatively stable fare as a result of that. we did not get all the forces we wanted. we got 75%, 30 versus 40 and we had to sequentially apply those forces in the north. the problem was the president told those forces out before we can apply them. original at hand is to put them in the east, south, take a telegram to the same time only

to put them in the south. the situation is stable in the afghans are holding their own. the problem is in the east we are never able to generate the power we have in the south. as a result, we leave the afghans at the bit of a problem and we know that. back to the matter is we also conduct an aggressive counterterrorism program out of afghanistan bases used in the central intelligence agency do that. we conduct counterterrorism inside afghanistan using special operations forces to do that against high-value targets. both of those we need to keep. both of those would be at risk seriously if we pulled our sources out. it is hard to imagine those operations, central intelligence agency operation as robust as it is come to be conducted without any of our security forces and intelligence we are providing for them.

the situation in afghanistan is to have their issues. one is we are providing enablers for the afghan forces. they are essential in a picture organization. we need to continue to provide some enablers for them. not for 10 years, but at least a few more years after 2014 until they're able to have the capacity themselves. the just ask tom intelligence commits them communication. also we need trainers and assistants at the headquarters level to help shape the afghan military thinking about how to cope with some of the problems. we're not going how trooper pulls on the ground, but just some relatively senior officers and senior ncos to help do that. that's about 15 to 20,000 troops is what we need to do. with paul that away. all the functions go down the tube. the terrorist operation in

pakistan, which directly relates to the american people is that risk in the gains we made in afghanistan today but also be tragically at risk by pulling those forces out. >> i couldn't agree with you more. senator lieberman is an option option. >> i hope not. for me the option is the worst option for united state. it is dishonor men and women of the american oteri thought they are, when did there come a type they are. it also creates all the danger for the u.s. the general keane has taught to bow. we've got to have some patience here. i know is that the deadline for making a decision on this is december 2014. but as general keane has said, there's an election coming up. president karzai has taken this position. it's not forget a short while ago he summoned the loya jirga,

one of the people's meanings leaders around the country on this subject. what do they do? they voted to urge him to quickly enter the security or status forces agreement under which the united states of america. the afghan people know the terrible fate that awaits them if we pull out. it will be terrible for a not only in terms of it becoming a sanctuary for terrorists who will strike us again, but that is a critically important part of the world geostrategic lay. it will be important for security and prosperity to have an american presence there for some time to come. dear auction for afghanistan is the worst option for america. >> we can't labor force there

without a status of this agreement that would compromise their security. it will be signed this year either by karzai for the successor in the minutes duration will decide to leave a force of some size comes mall force there. but that doesn't fix the problem of afghanistan. the government of afghanistan has to show more spot ability for the whole country and the government of pakistan, some impressive early start by nawaz sharif has to share responsibility for come a close neighbor of afghanistan were doing more to quell the existence of terror cells, organizations and data packets dan. similarly in iraq, maliki has to govern all of iraq and government in the middle east have just got to get my bottom line is we have a responsibility to project our values and be helpful in the middle east. i don't think we should retreat.

i do think our narrative is not where it needs to be. we also have theirs on stability to use all of our government power, soft, smart and hard against terror cells air, which might have the capability to attack our interests or homeland. this committee has to make good job of staying focused. i'm pleased you asked me to participate on the panel. i just urge one more time that i'm a bipartisan basis to attack these problems and show the rest of the house that bipartisanship can drive, especially when the critical interest of the u.s. or estate. >> we thank you for being here today. dr. jones. >> of espresso in afghanistan some of these are informed by the recent visit and my they are and my time since 2001 there.

i think an exit easier option would be extremely dangerous for the united state. in my most recent trip, i visited several countries in the region. their leadership from india, russia, even from pakistan itself in several central asian governments, the assessments art dyer if there's an american withdrawal from afghanistan. that view is shared by all of afghanistan's neighbors and i think the kinds of discussions we've had about a lighter footprint dreaming are exactly what we're talking about and exactly what we need. i was dead have been somewhat impressed by some of the afghan security services ability to keep key provinces like kandahar to the center of gravity for the taliban. that's largely in the control, at least much of it i afghan and allied forces. there has been some positive

development. i think as congresswoman said, this is an afghan government responsibility, but we cannot leave. we did that once. we left the region after the soviet withdrawal in paid a major price. >> thank you, dr. jones. let me end by saying i do think we need a counterterrorism footprint they are after we withdraw in 2014. perhaps you're correct when we need to wait until the next election to achieve that. i believe as you mentioned, this is a bipartisan -- i think most people on both sides of the aisle agree with the assessment on this issue in the administration is working hard towards that end. let me close by saint thank you two other witnesses. this has been very insightful and a very distinguished panel. as you know, there will be additional questions. i ask you respond to those. the record will be hoping to

portend a spirit without objection, the committee stands adjourned. thank you. >> earlier today, the inauguration of help for chris christie. he won by defeating harbor buono on the 2013th general election. here is more now. >> discovering, our government will fight to continue said that we value our differences and we honor the strength of our diversity because we cannot fall victim to the attitude of washington d.c., the attitude that says i am always right and you are always wrong. the attitude that puts everyone into a box that they are not permitted to leave. the attitude that puts political but aries ahead of policy agreements. the belief that compromise is a dirty word. you see, as we saw in december

regarding the dream act, we can put the future of our state ahead of the partisans who would rather demonize and compromise. as your governor, i will always willing to listen as long as that listening and indecisive action for the people counting on us to do our job. [applause] because you see in the hand, i have had no greater honor in my life and having twice been elected by my fellow citizens to be the governor of the state where i was born and raised. with that honor comes the solemn obligations to make the hard decisions to raise the comfortable topics to require responsibility and

accountability to stand hard when principles are violated and to be willing to compromise to find common ground with all of our people. working every day, night and day , and shirts to be the governor. >> tomorrow on "washington journal," look at issues relating to u.s. on history. david jefferson of the straightness on the current state of the auto industry and what's in the future.

>> it's a message from my world. i do myself is trying to understand. i think the idea came to me when i was getting some lectures as the u.s. air force academy in colorado springs. very nice, very well-educated liberal young air force officers had lots of chats with me, which i find very interesting. and he told me he wanted to create, in my mind an impression in mind of god those fellas

trade and radical sentiments. he was simply her of immigration. when people come to this country, they should love our nation. i thank you was speaking about it. i quite agree. >> did i feel prepared? yes, i really did hear first of

all, i was elected, so it didn't make that much difference. i did notice the difference between the vice president's wife and the president's wife is huge because the vice presidents wife can say anything. nobody cares. the minute you say one thing is to presidents wife come you've made the news. that was the lesson i had to learn pretty quickly. >> classic senate banking committee how the committee on transportation programs. we had about implementation a map-21 throughout fiscal year 2013 and how the federal budget constraints or affect safety and capital investments. this is about an hour and a

half. >> this hearing will come to order. today, the banking committee seeks to review how public transportation that assist our nations transit providers have it banned since the current hearing transportation law, map-21, was enacted in 2012. this committee worked well together on map-21 and look forward to hearing our committee's bipartisan work in public transportation issues. reliable and accessible public transit in rural areas like south dakota just as it is vital of march cities. our transit systems connect workers with employers, keep

cars off the road and get people where they are. safely. the public transportation titles developed by the banking committee made many important changes to federal transit programs until map-21 and the administration to institute a much-needed national framework for safety oversight in the transit emergency relief program that is hoped the new york and new jersey transportation agencies recover from superstore and sandy and in indian country, map-21 provided new fat to 83 tribes across the nation to help them deliver safe and reliable

transit services to one of the most on her serve segment of the u.s. population. our focus today will be on the implementation of map-21. we cannot overlook the highway trust fund. the mass transit account is expected to reach the ad of map-21 on september 30 with only a very small positive balance and the highway account could face a shortfall by late december. without a congressional election, votes will be unable to support current program funding levels as to map-21 expires. other transportation investment this year and beyond depends on the stability of the trust fund. the banking committee will be working with the environment and public works commerce committees

in the coming months to advance legislation to 60 map-21. we must first resume progress under the current law. today, we will hear directly from the fda on how it is implemented map-21. i look forward to hearing details about ftes strategies to improve safety and asset management practices while minimizing any new menace creative grantees, particularly rural transit providers. the committee will also hear about our map-21 changes to reject development and structure preceding. finally, the committee will examine issues that ceo has

profiled in its first research such as the need for coordination at the local level to ensure that various federal programs that assist local transportation services are working together to delete. now i turn to senator crapo for his opening statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. in july 2012, congress passed when president obama signed into law to moving ahead for progress in the 21st century act known as map-21, which authorize transportation programs through september 30, 2014. since enactment of the legislation, the federal transit administration or fta is working to implement transit provisions. at this point, map-21 programs are authorized for only another eight half months. today we hear from witnesses on implementation of map-21 provisions. some provisions of interest to

me. map-21 provided fta with new authority in transit safety while public transportation is one of the most safe modes of transportation, i look forward to an update on what progress has been made to an earth passenger safety. i also want to understand how fta is approaching the issue. in idaho in other states, many providers operate with small staff, often only one to two or three people. it's important a role to be tailored in a way that's not unduly or disproportionately burdensome to smaller rural systems, especially as rural transit has a good safety record. rural agencies in idaho and also provide idling for transportation services. for example, they facilitate transportation or the elderly persons with disabilities and medical appointment and low-income individuals to jobs. if the regulations are burdened them, it would be harder for providers to deliver service.

subs six -- map-21 directed the asset management system to aiding, understanding and assessing public transportation systems. public transportation simply cannot be captured with the one-size-fits-all approach. there are many different types of transit systems in a great deal of diversity with respect to the needs of each system and our nation. i look forward to hearing how fta plans to implement the asset management provisions. i hope the level of detail the transit providers will be required to provide to fta will be part to call and. a rural systems reporting on the aged mass of the vehicle be enough. understanding with the fta is in implementing map-21 will begin to consider reauthorization later this year. i recognize short-term extensions to allow the kind of predictability and security at a longer-term authorization can.

however, federal dollars are collected for transportation have fallen below expenditures, it's no secret the most difficult issue to be considered during the next reauthorization is how to refinance our transportation needs going forward. this includes finding a meaningful fix to the serious current inadequacies of the highway trust fund. map-21, the bill just over two years of authorization was financed using 10 years of pay for spirit we must be careful what we do with respect to financing us build the the future. again, i think our witnesses for being here and look forward to their statements and i thank you, mr. chairman for this issue. >> thank you, mr. crapo. any other members would like to submit their statements clerics >> mr. chairman, i would like to submit a statement for the record that is your questions

and senator crapo's question about the average running at the mass transit account. thank you, mr. chairman. >> anybody else clicks the mac i would like to remind my colleagues the record will be open for the next seven days for additional statements and any other materials. now i would like to introduce our witnesses. peter rogoff is the administrator of the federal transit administration. david wise is the physical structure issues that the government accountability office. i look forward to the testimony of both witnesses. mr. rogoff, please proceed with your testimony. >> thank you, chad johnson, members of the committee for this opportunity to discuss the federal administration progress in implementing the map-21. across the united states,

ridership is on track to 6,012,000,000,000 trips annually for the seventh year in a row. additional market growth in none of the last 11 quarters. this is a remarkable milestone. american cities, suburbs and communities ask for more transit not less. they are seen benefits of spending less money gasoline and less time in traffic. at the state and local level, citizens continually vote to tax themselves in their communities. the map-21 law championed by this committee and a bipartisan basis is a game changer that the bfc undirected developing an trade during communities nationwide. it's been called a two-year authorization bill that contains revenues to politics changes and that's about right. not since the enactment of the ice t. 11991 had there been such these changes. it's quite complex of 27

rulemakers, 14 circulars, 13 separate reports to congress. at the fta we have an active and engaged in an aggressive timetable to implement the law. a much more remains to be a significant progress despite the impact of the 2013 resolution, a 5% cuts or administrative budget as a result of sequestering a furlough that kept more than 95 at other employees from working from within that month. let me begin with safety. i think this committee for working in a bipartisan way for the tools, administration requested to his published a minimum, a gander through public trip vacation. we are making good progress. we reached out to state safety so they understand what made to enforce guidelines as to the of any comp looks of interest. in october we issued a comprehensive advance notice of proposed rulemaking on safety and transit asset management. while we were not required by map-21 to combine making, we did

deliberately to send a clear signal to stay coders to keep in transit system was not acrylic managing and maintaining physical assets. the transit industry bases and $86 billion backlog in preservation needs than we are under investing that need by about $2.5 billion a year. when it comes to safety authorities in map-21, we recognize the one-size-fits-all approach will not work yet effective and affordable improvements for the new york city subway system will be different than those that improve operations at the peak of not showing candidates. our entire approach to regulatory authorities focusing on adding value in keeping a safe and is resaved. we are rejecting approaches that unnecessary costs and rockers the. as it relates to our small stars program since 2000 nighttime fta is executed 26 multiyear can action agreements.

100% of the completed projects on this list were on-time and on budget. the restaurant tried to do so. under about 21, we cut red tape and streamline the program. for example recently which reduce the software tool, enabling communities to reduce two years to two weeks, the time needed to develop ridership forecasts on projects. this tool can save taxpayers as much as a million dollars. because of the constraints on time, with obviously made huge progress on the emergency relief program. this committee authorized the program is requested in our budget and time for hurricane sandy. since eveready testified at length in hurricane sandy, and going to save my testimony for later. importantly, i want to put out a word of warning consistent with what the chairman said it relates to develop the mass transit account of the highway trust fund. at the time subset does not take

him at the cash balance of the trust fund was thought to be sufficient to last us through the end of the fiscal year. as i say here today, i can't be sure this'll be the case. we have similar worries for colleagues at the federal have it ministration whose trust fund account is rapidly approaching insolvency. we are working with the treasury department to update assumptions that will be reflected when it's submitted. importantly just yesterday, secretary fox announced a plan to post on the d.o.t. website the monthly update that show all of america has sued our trust funds will start bouncing checks sure highway departments and transit agencies. mr. chairman, i look forward to working with the committee as we strive to make a better transit future a reality in work to shore up our trust funds. this concludes my testimony and not be happy to answer any questions you have at a later time. >> thank you. mr. wise, you may proceed.

>> chairman johnson, ranking member crapo members of the committee, and here to discuss gao's recent work on transit issues. lanza passengers to services on a daily basis and many local agencies providing services receive federal funding. the government plays a key role with map-21 having not the rest of the $10.5 billion in fy 13 and 14. while not 21 to not address long-term funding to its coveted address other issues in putting strengthening federal authority to oversee transit safety of emphasizing, restored and replacing infrastructure, consolidating programs and grants and streamline project to build that valuations and delivery. my statement today describes recent work on three related trend issues. addressing long-term funding challenges, improving capital investment decision-making in regards to maintenance and expansion of transit systems and coordinating transit services among various federal and state or local agencies. federal funds available for the

transit programs come from two sources at the u.s. treasury's general fund and mass transit account of the highway trust fund. both services-based challenges. currently congressional budget discussions raise issues about the level of general federal spending. another funding challenge is the declining revenue of the highway trust fund. revenues have eroded over time in part because tax rates and impaired because of improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency. cbo estimated that 2013 that to maintain current levels between 2015 and 2022 the fund will require $132 billion more than expected to taken over that period. about 85 billion in the transit account. to maintain current spending levels and cover revenue shortfalls, congress has transferred more than $50 billion in revenues to the fund in fy 2008. the approach may not be sustainable given demand and the

growing fiscal challenges. running surface transportation remains on the high-risk list. some of the recent work describes how they have transit agencies use federal transit funds were efficiently. map-21 require me to transit agencies to use asset management are consistent with our analyses. for example, 2013 report to commit to 700 public transit agencies struggle to maintain their rail assets in good repair. we reported that to help prioritize transit agencies with an effect from estimating the effects of those investment decisions. however, a benign with us today, only to measure the capital investment on the condition of certain transit asset. further, none of the agencies measure the effects on future ridership in part because they lack the tools to determine those effects. accordingly, we recommend we cannot additional research to help agencies measure affects a

capital investments including impact on ridership. to expand or improve public transportation, transportation season is capital funding available to the new sponsors program. an example is whereby transit agencies seek to improve service and encourage economic development at a cost relatively less than rail. we found the median cost for the 30 prt and 25 transit projects be examined from october 2005 to february 2012 were about $36 million in $576 million respectively. on many factors contribute to economic development, officials in cleveland, ohio tell us where to $5 billion in the project with major hospitals and universities and about one third the cost of comparable rail projects. on the constraint on the environment, transit card issued can be challenging. in our 2012 report is services for transportation disadvantaged

population, we found eight different programs in eight agencies thunderbird transportation or assist related to education, employment, medical and other human services. we conclude federal leadership and guidance for further collaboration offers can improve the coordination of transportation services among state and local providers. fds may progress to enhance coordination for population. according to officials as a result of map-21, the agent has been updating guidance initiate drug programs for a number of relevant programs. in addition, fda supports programs that play an important role in helping populations provide funds to state and local grantees that in turn offer services directly or through private or public transportation providers. chairman johnson, ranking member crapo members of the committee, this concludes my statement. at the place to answer any questions at this time. >> thank you offered testimony.

as we begin questions, i'll ask the clerk took a five minutes on the clock for each member. mr. rogoff, last fall fte asked for extensive input from the public transportation industry on the new transit safety asset management framework. the committee has heard from many providers that requirements for safety as asset management should be closely related to their size and allow two essays robust systems. how is fte utilizing feedback from providers to ensure that new safety and asset management framework will not take away from delivering transit services? >> thank you, mr. chairman. we share the concern on the risk

or the pathology will assembling into a regime where we're adding a bunch of bureaucracy that just distracts operators from their core mission that we are calling on them to do and that is moved people. we have been carefully crafted a a number of questions to solicit that industry and we are current day digesting hundreds of comments we have gotten from affect is that the industry. we are keenly aware that we cannot name by creating a big paper tiger here that does not value. if we do this right, the transit operators at the local level large and especially small will see the value that comes from these reporting requirements and reflect another safety profile. it's worth remembering that in the initial transit safety legislation that the obama

administration submitted to the committee, we plan to focus on relics was only at the beginning. that is still our focus. the committees went another way in terms of a broad brush approach that captures both the rail industry as well as the bus only operators. but we certainly plan to taylor that to the capabilities of those operators. import money, a lot of our work in this area is going to be guided by her safety advisory committee, which is a formal advisory committee set up by secretary of the what the legislator to congress. we are now going in the wake of map-21 to recruit more bus only operators onto the committee to advise us as we go forward. we're not going to do this in some vacuum in the. as someone who posts a taxpayer dollars and match percentages come especially to the small and

rural operators, with absolutely no incentive to see dollars distracted by bureaucracy and not into service. >> a question for david wise and steve rogoff del has transportation for transportation disadvantaged individuals in providing duplicate edge services. could you both offer on why coordination is such a problem and what are the next steps for improving coordination between federal programs, particularly with medicaid, which is estimated to use them between one and $3 billion annually by the medical transportation. mr. wise, your thoughts first.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. gas, we've definitely share the view that transportation coordination is a significant challenge. address by issuing and that of pat never been able to close the recommendation. so we feel that there have been good-faith efforts and is making progress in this area. it is a difficult problem in the rural states like south dakota. people are scattered over small populations over large areas. we have long discussions with both the native american tribes

and the sooner nation about how difficult it is to abridge these kinds they are underresourced and only a couple people. the weather conditions and the population is impoverished. they might have 120 miles. which makes the issue up for a nation all the more important throughout the country. >> mr. rogoff. >> mr. chairman, it is a problem that's been identified at the federal level for some time and it is getting better. we certainly have room to improve. we have been successful in boosting the number of mobility managers that brings all these people together and helps professionalize the effort at

the local areas to ensure we are getting the maximum value out of all the taxpayer-funded and charitably funded vehicles available. we still have the problem is stovepipe rules agency by agency. mr. wise is correct. the big talk in the room in terms of the dollars they put into it, but they have strict rules to ensure that medicaid transportation dollar on that goes for the hospital or medical visit and can be used for a visit to shopping for t-shirts. we need to figure out a way to continue to improve on the levels of coordination. you ask why is this such a problem? part of it is federal stovepipes, which we do a good job of tearing away. also, we need to recognize their local social service agencies, state action councils on aging. we have different players here. different colors, different

rules than we need about the business come especially as the world community becomes more elderly going forward to do a better job tearing away stovepipes. >> senator crapo. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it is 78 u. and i both come from very rural states because you just used up a couple of my questions. i will get into them in a little more detail. one of the questions -- the chairman's first questions over the safety and asset management in context of dealing with rural communities and small systems. i appreciated your answer with regard to the fact you are aware of the difficulties that could be placed on small systems and rural communities by a one-size-fits-all regulation intended to be focused on a large system. i just want to be very clear, my understanding as you move forward for final rules that

there is the capacity for a distinction so that we won't face the fact that our small rural operations will have defaced the same regulatory requirements in terms of scope that the larger operations will. >> you have my assurance on that, sir. as i said, it would be foolish to do otherwise. he pointed out yourself we have operators that run with very few people, relatively few vehicles and are as a result of emily efficient in the services they provide. we definitely are, not this if it's not broken don't fix it approach. we do look at this from how are we going to add value and we're going to be at my either very

small and medium-sized operators to ensure why we started with asking these questions rather than take a first draft of regulatory requirements because we really need to gather the data and get their take on what they think we cannot value. >> thank you. you also in your answers guided to the issue at basically the decision-making on what priorities will be implemented first. i think he stated that rail would be exposed to play focused on it at the outset, but that we were going to get into moving forward with the remainder of map-21 implementation. i guess my question is how do you prioritize the remainder of the implementation requirements? howard in what order are you proceeding quite >> at me be clear what everything about safety. because of the risk that we want to take all of this as a risk

based approach to all of our works on safety. the administration put forward a bill that focused principally on rail because that's at the greatest risk is. while the legislation goes in a different direction involving safety plans from everybody, we will still put me in the majority of our focus on the risk and high speed rail. ..

some of the new authorities not applying to large chunk of money or a large number of operators have had to wait. so that we can, if yo will, capture as much of the thrurs of map 21 in the earlier period as we can. >> thank you. in the discussion you had with the chairman. you did have a discussion with the chairman on the coordination issues as we move forward. and goa's report on coordination highlighted the fact total federal spending on services for transportation disadvantaged populations remains unknown. federal departments did not

track spending for roughly two-thirds of the program as identified by gao. why is this the case? why is there a problem in tracking for the spending? >> thank you. the problem lies in that these agencies transportation is not a -- it's not really the major component of what they do. so as a result some of these costs get mixed in with other programs. they just don't the accounting systems aren't set up in a way you can extract them separately. as an example, the department of health and human services reimburse state that provide them with bus passes among other transportation options to access eligible medical services. it's not clearly delineated within the accounting system. we're not able to get a full handle on how much is being spent for transportation. it's a significant amount.

as pointed out in his testimony as the population continueses to age. they will become more important in term of the budgetary impact. >> thank you. i have some more questions but i'll submit them for the record. >> yeah. senator reid. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me commend you. you always thoughtful and canalful analysis inspect is no exception today. thank you. peter is someone i've had the privilege of working on the appropriations committee and the administrative have done a great job. secretary fox named you as acting under secretary for policy, i believe. >> correct. >> i think he made a wise judgment and demonstrating his effective leadership already. i comment the secretary already. can you give us an idea the impact we do not move in a timely fashion to restore

funding in the mass transit account. when is this going to start happening? >> we always come out -- i shouldn't say always. we have determined that roughly the appropriate balance we need to maintain in the transit account of the trust fund is a billion dollars. on the head side it's $4 billion for the highway account. both the federal highway administration and the federal trance it have plans on how we manage cash in the event of balances falling below that level. within the federal transit administration it involves sometimes reimbursing a lower percentage on the dollar. someone is ready for reimbursement for 100% of the expenditure already made with we may be in a position to 90 or 80%. another approach for those handle the float, holding bills until a time we have cash in our

coffers. my concern -- i know the secretary's concern is not what will happen when we are reach that point. what happens in the month leading up to that point. when it becomes quite clear that we are headed in a place we will not be able to guarantee full reimbursement. what does it mean for the state highway commissioners or the transit agencies that need to be capital investment decisions right in the heart of the construction season. and what dampening effect will that have on keeping people to work. putting new people to work, and also making the improvements that are highway drivers and transit users need. which is why he is sounding the alarm as he is. making the information available on our website, and starting the dialogue now rather than wait forking the spring and summer to have it. >> i think that's very appropriate. i think, you know, in addition to what you have laid out, there are probably secretary effects.

one service interruptions as they try to cover the capital cosby cutting back operations. effects on bond ratings in term of the ability to go to market and fund projects in addition to the money you can't provide. they might not be able to raise the adequate resources. this has a really significant cascading event. i think it should be noted. >> unquestionably, senator. i think it's important to note somehow think of our prament as an urban program. the reality is this, if we had an interruption on our ability to reimburse transit agencies. the larger transit agencies the new york, philadelphia, chicago, miami, san francisco, certainly. it will work a hardship. they also have adequate funds

from other sources to don't main contain operations. look at the other side of the spectrum. the rural operators the federal dollars sometimes through 20eu6 80% of the enterprise both on the capital side and the operating side. if we're not able to reimbursement them in a prompt fashion we're at risk of seeing services close their doors there. there's another, i think, reality with have to come to grips with the essence of the highway trust fund is the gasoline tax. >> it has been. it covered less and less of the total bill over recent years. the good, you know, going to be less and less because the detroit auto show this week. every car is efficient. pickup truck getting lots of mileage. they didn't before. but that's we're going have to look for alternative funding mechanisms, frankly. i think you concur? >> most recently the president

has spoken about the opportunity to corporate tax reform look at the way to reinvest recognizing in part that the tax returns in less and less for each gallon purchased based on the observations we're using less and less gasoline consistent with our goal -- this program was launched under president eisenhower. was sort of win-win win. transit systems. was supported by industry because it helped sell automobiles supported by the petroleum ministry. the president was wise enough to say we're going pay for it and be able to expand and we can't -- without the road systems that began in the eisenhower administration. the productivity our --

lifestyle. we're at the point where if we don't move quickly and thought -- thoughtfully. we can begin to unralph our productivity, our lifestyle, our ability to function. senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for being here today. i have a couple of questions relative to that. i wanted to followup on where senator reid was headed. not asking you to state policy position on precial way finance this area in the future. i would be curious to know in your mind what options might be available for congress to look at. again, i'm not asking preferred course. >> well, there's a wide

options. as i mentioned earlier, the president discussed most recently is the opportunity to corporate tax reform can present to deal with our infrastructure challenge. i direct you, also, to a lot of measures that have been taken in the states recently. whether it's pennsylvania, wyoming, virginia, a variety of mixes of taxes user fees within done on a bipartisan basis. done by the state senate and governor to restore their trust funds. it includes a mix of fuel taxes, taxing oil as well as other

revenue option nas may be specific to that state. there is a wide universe out there. clearly we need to do something and something soon considering the deadlines we're facing. >> let me, if i might, focus on a custom issues that would be more rural in nature. i've talked to transit people back in nebraska, these are systems that somewhat rural. having said that, they exist also in the larger metro metropolitan areas in the state. they have some questions about the safety requirements of a map 21 and fta. the initial language suggests that each sub recipient entity would be required to have a train safety officer. according to people back home. there's an indication that the state department of

transportation would be required to ement employ state safety officers who would be responsible for statewide safety oversight. of course there's cost to that. that trains money away from other areas. this is a significant issue and it seems like there is some degree of overlap duplication there. i'm assuming there won't be additional funding. if there is, i would appreciate you telling me that. what is your thoughts on knees requirements? i would like to hear your thoughts on any resources that might be available to folks back home to deal with this burden. sure. a couple of thoughts, senator. first, we have not leveled the hard fast requirement on anyone to date. we have put out notice and comment by the public concepts to an amprm. we have taken all of those

responses back. i'm sure we have received many from rural areas and taking those to heart as we move forward with the regulatory regime. i don't want to leave the impression there's a hard and fast new requirement. indeed there are resources available for some of this. that was one of the breakthroughs of the new safety regime passed by the committee. at least the state safety organizations. there's some $22 million to be allocatedded for those. they're principally in the rail area. even at the state d.o.t. i have spoken to the state transportation commissioners a number of times about this, they have the opportunity to draw for administrative expenses a percentage of the formula dollars we spent to the state. in some way it's a good thing. it puts the money to direct service at the local level. the flip side if there's not adequate state oversight of the

dollars, then we have challenges in making sure that those dollars are spent according to law and regulation. we end up having to go as a result of inspector general things like that. i have enencouraged a number of states to take a look whether they should draw not locks but additional administrative dollars to do a better job at the state d.o.t. level. what many of them tell it seems to me they have hiring freeze at the state level, and the way the hiring freeze is sometimes imposed a the the state level with regard. >> okay. >> i'll circle back around. if there is additional questions or concerns, can we reach out to you to -- >> absolutely. if it's helpful for huhs to have a conference call we would love to do it. >> great. you are a rural state but we

celebrated the arrival of the new washington met throw car. one of the largest rail car purchases in the united states history. all manufactured in lincoln, nebraska. >> very proud of that. >> yep, thank you. senator. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to ask about another part of map 21. as you know, it aims to bring transit assets, the equipment facility in to a good state of repair. the law requires that the fta create objective standards for measuring progress toward this goal, and once the standards are in place, the law requires the recipient of federal funds to develop plans for executing on those standards. the fta was supposed to issue objective standards by october 19st of 2013. it hasn't done so yet.

the clay has put the massachusetts department of transportation in a tight spot. it's working on ab asset management plan doing the responsible thing. but it's reluctant to do too much planning because it still doesn't know what the fta's objective standards will be. when will the fta issue a final rule on asset management standards? >> as it relates to a final rule,ly get you a target date. it may well be here. let me speak more broadly to your observation. it was a new and welcome edition to map 21. as i said, we have been hampered somewhat on the resource front trying to figure out what priority to put the staff on urgently. it's a high profile for us. we just put out the amprm for them to comment on.

as i said on the safety front. we want to take industry comment so we don't come up with a one size fits all very rigid approach. we started with an amprm to get the industry's input on this. i'll be honest, senator i'm in fairly regular impact rich davey and dr. beverly scott who was in town yet. we're working on many fronts to try to advance things there. they haven't voiced the concern to me. obviously, what we're more critically interested in there governor patrick and the legislature succeeded in leveraging new dollars for transportation investment in the common wealth we want to make sure they put them to work on the most critical transit infrastructure needs on the t. of which there are many.

we'll be working with them. scott is a real leader in this industry. having done turns in rhode island, mar that in atlantic, california, and i -- we'll be looking to her to help inform our approach how it can work for big legacy systems like the t. >> well, i appreciate that. i particularly appreciate your working on the safety standards on the right lane. -- redline. we use it so -- i'm grateful for that. i really do want to emphasize. there's a deadline built in supposed to be october 1st. which means all the question about pulling the outsight you have ton totaling plan against a deadline. i hope we get it done quickly. i know, you committed to improving the commitment and making sure we meet the highest safety standards. i know, it's true for the mbta. thank you. i'm going keep a thumb in your back on this. >> that's fine.

i welcome it. i think importantingly i want to be careful how i phrase this. we have a number of statutory deadlines. i'm not sure they are workable and reasonable when they put in in the first place. we take them as strong indications on the committee on the priority they put against it. they want us to get industry input before we write rules. we need to strike that balance. >> fair enough. i want to ask you about one other thing nap is broadly speaking, congress can distribute highway transit money in two ways. distribute money through a formula, which spells out exactly how a particular state and local agency will receive money. or leave the grux of the money at the discretion of department of transportation and provide grants to state and local agencies. historically, in transportation funding bills congress distributed about 80% of the

money through formulas, and about 20% as discretionary matter. but in map 21, the number went up to 92% through formula. leaving it with little discretionary money. we saw a real move away from discretionary spending. so i want to ask, i have to ask briefly. i'm running out of time here. do you think the decrease in discretionary funding has hurt the ability to fund worthwhile projects? >> well, i think it's a little too early to tell that. i can speak to the problem that surfaced for the absence of the discretionary dollars. over three years, we were successful in competing the bus discretionary dollars we have for bus operators. not only bus only operators but also larger systems that do bus and rail operations.

it was done without earmark on a merit-s based system. we felt like question a good job. the loss of discretionary dollars turning some of the dollars it has been a source of considerable concern by the bus only operators who took a financial hit in their view. the loss of the discretionary money has meant that when they have large single investments like it's time to replace a sizeable part of their bus fleet or a new maintenance facility, they do not get a sufficient flow of formula dollars to be able to cobble enough to make investment. that's what the program was for. it may be something that the committee wants to look at as they do reauthorization. >> thank you very much.

is something we should be taking a look at. >> thank you. i want to thank the members for the testimony today. the rural aspect has been mentioned several times, and so i'm going mention it too. when it comes to the safety plan, i think the key is make sure we don't have "one size fits all" and make sure you're getting input from the rural transit system. i need a equipment from you to continue to do that. >> absolutely. that's it. good enough. i want to talk about triable programs.

i think congress has made significant. they double funds available for travel transit program. they continue to build transportation infrastructure. it's very important for health care education economic opportunity. whatever it might be. substantial assistance and support to grow and establish transit systems. you have done outreach on fta this fall. i look forward to learning about future efforts. i just need to have you share your perspective and thoughts on the successful of the fda's outreach. so far in triable america and what the fda intends to do to continue to build on success. it was effectively doubled. we moved from 15 million.

it follows up on what senator warren was saying. we spend a deal of time to make them eligible grantee to spend dollars the right way. especially given the critical mobility needs that is a lifeline to the opportunity for employment for many of the tribes. we are concerned quite frankly

that one of the is some of the payment that spit out from the formula are quite low. not -- so while they are tribes are sort of given a guarantee level of assistance, it may not be a sufficient to do something meaningful in term of we want to make sure the dollars are spent wisely. i think we will have a new challenge when we had all of these dollars on a discretionary basis, frankly, we could make a judgment call as to whether an individual tribe was ready to receive and put the funds to good use. now we are distributing them all by formula, we will certainly work to ensure that's the case we must put the money against them because they are entitled by formula while we work to get them to the place. that's an added challenge. >> thank you.

i want to thank you very much. i think you get it. travel infrastructure is critically important. poverty is rampant in rural tribes. we need to figure out way too lift them out of poverty. thing is part of it. >> absolutely. according to senator reed are up for undersecretary for policy. >> i'll be uv mood at the end of next week to be the acting undersecretary for policy. >> i don't want you to think this is a conformation hearing in that regard. i do want to know, since we're talking about policy, what toll roads are going to be playing in the future of the highway administration? that's a very controversial question. thank you for it. >> i'm only here to help. [laughter] >> senator, i feel comfortable answering this at the federal transit administrator. tolling has been an important source of funding for a number

of transit expansion. there is a rich debate that we're going to need to have, as nation over the issue of the concept that toll payers have paid for the road once and shouldn't pay again. which is one argument. the other argument being that the maintenance upkeep requires more continued investment, which the toll payers probably have not covered over the life of the structure. i think importantingly tolls are clearly part of the mix and somewhat consistent with the answer i gave to senator jo han. we need to look at every available revenue opportunity and look at both the fairness issues but also what revenues they may present to us in term of solving the trust fund problem. >> yeah. and i thank you for that answer.

i'm going let it go for a second. i think it's really important from my perspective being part of the legislative branch in this business. that with the debate before you enact the policy. i think it's really important. >> i got you. we i'll tell you this so you know, i mean, i think if the department gets out in front and i think that's a problem. that's why we need that. >> i hear you, senator. i think what we need by that there are federal statutory rules that limit the department discretion in this area. something was going to be done dramatic on the tolling front, obviously we would need have a dialogue with congress which we would have anyway. even if we had the authority. >> thank you, mr. chairman.

we have some transportation in our eastern pan handle which we're concerned about with the train over there. hopefully you would be attentive to that. with that being said, recently i've heard from a number of transit authorities in my state that the grux of grant dollars has slowed down significantly. can you identify any causes with the increase of delay and on the verge of having the first budget might help relieve that some? >> senator, i would like to work your office and understand which particular part of money they're referring to. it's perplexing to me. i'm not familiar with that dynamic other than the dynamic cited. we have to await a 2004 final

appropriation in a tbowrt budget. >> this is in the past. they've been telling me we check with everybody before the hearing. all of them have been having long delays. we will get with you, sir, after this. >> i would appreciate it. i think the issue here may be there are years when we have gotten a cr for a longer period of time, you know, so. cr stretched well to march and april in the most recent year. we did not do this year in the hope and expectations once the budget deal was announced. we would be getting a budget in january. it looks like we will be. if there's a larger problem. i would like to know about it. >> thank you, also on that nationally 53% of the public transportation is by buzz -- bus. >> absolutely. only 10% of the money goes forward that.

do you think that's a proportionate proper mix? be when you look at the issue so you to be cognizant where the costs are. there are lower costs to operate a bus system versus operating a rail system. as i said in my opening statement we are under investing nationally in the bus and rail. i don't know if you -- i take your point. i have often reminded people as i did just yesterday at the transportation research board very point you make. that is that more than half of the transit trip in america is still -- >> maybe question have those people come to a meeting, mr. chairman.

we were looking at different ways to maximize our fuel efficiency and taking advantage of what we have in our country with the abundance of natural gas coming on in our state and country right now. i thought you could lead the charge on giving us the incentive to change toward natural gas vehicles. the uptick is going from diesel to natural gas. if you take that lead and we follow up with the state and school transportation of the school buses, every state can transform the commercial what we call commercial vehicular traffic. away from petroleum in to natural gas with you taking the lead on mass transit. we're going in the public transportation as far as our children. then we follow up with our state

vehicles and our state road vehicles. most of the gas company convert them free of any contract. no cost to convention. the only cost we have is the first uptick going to a natural gas powered. if you can look at that differently it would help us. we can reduce about 20 to 35%. i'm told our dependency of petroleum. >> a couple of thought, senator. i think the agency has historically leaned far forward to promote the government natural gas buses.

los angeles is natural gas bus. you're right there's an added investment cost going on. we obviously don't play in that -- i'm saying you set the tone. the federal government setting the tone -- to do that. if they do that, and if we 50 states were able to do that. we would reduce, i'm told, around 20 to 25% of our dependency. basically all of these are done locally. county by county. they run you fill up natural gas commercial vehicle.

they are running out of bulk station. it's the most doable thing we have to convert and remove about 25% of our dependency. i'm not sure that was the strongest and most effect i have impetus to make it happen. part of the is whether we as a matter of federal policy are going to fry to dictate the local decision. that's something that i think the committee should debate. >> i'm not saying dictate. the basically only thing i'm saying -- >> incentivize. you are giving us x amount of dollars to buy a diesel bus. >> right. >> let's say the same incentive you give us the money to buy the natural gas bus. let us make the decision.

the vast majority are done by formula it's converted to the low and know missions gas law. so those incentives have been there. i believe we have advanced. we have made those vehicles commercially viableed a vied to make the manufacturing go in to the space. if west virginia wanted to buy a natural gas bus and use the formula dollars are in versus the diesel bus they are eligible expenses. we not blink either way. >> okay. i'll work with you. i'm over my time. i would like to work with you. >> absolutely.

the converses will be done. say that dot convention at no cost to the taxpayer. none. they have ten year return now. that's fine. we can work. okay we can mirror those. >> okay. look forward to it. >> thank you, sir. senator schumer is on the way. senator men then does, take your time. [laughter] i'm happy to hear that, mr. chairman. and i ask that a statement i have be included in the record. meritter, i welcome my colleague from west virginia interested in mass transit. we need more advocate as someone one of the leader of the fight here on mass transit and all of it. i can tell you we can use all the help we can get. it's constantly a challenge.

that's why i appreciate it. it's a challenge to understand the importance of mass transit we worked hard last year to ratchet up a little bit. we are nowhere near where we should be for the demand. i want to limit you, administrator, for a very, i think, good job in the challenges. and i appreciate your approach to the whole effort nationally. in that regard, let me say that map 21 i work to create a new transit oriented planning program to provide grant for communities to create mix development and fairly -- federally supported transit. i sent a letter to fta this december with seven of my colleague including three on the

committee. it's program we get the program underway so we have sooner results. what time line do you have for making the announcement? >> senator, we are well aware of the program and cognizant of the committee members interest. and most notably yours as a champion for the program. in our prioritization scheme, i was asked what are we going prioritize given all the new requirement of map 21. as i said in my opening at the same statement. it's like seven years of policy in a two-year bill. we had prioritize what we were going take on in what order.

also for the opportunity for the communities to come in to get two years of money and compete two years of money. we will have a competition for the full $120 million rather than ten one year and ten the next. we thought it would be both efficient also increase the opportunity for diversity of players to come in at the more meaningful level of money. our goal is to start that process and get notices out the door in the spring and compete this summer. i apologize for the delay in getting to this. it's stacked up with a lot of other map 11 requirements. which we had to put on the street rapidly. >> i appreciate that. and i realize what we did in map 21. work with the chair we the subcommittee chair we butt a lot

of things in there. but to the extend we have a pilot program and resources dedicated for it, what i hate to see is that the pilot program doesn't ever get to fruition. >> no. that's not going happen. it's strictly matter of time. >> all right. next is the fta recently announced the next round of sandy transit funding. $3 billion for resiliency effort. according to your announcement, it's quote, intended to protect public transportation administration that has been rebuilt after hurricane sandy. my question is how high of a priority will fta place on protecting assets that were hardest hit by hurricane sandy and how you balance the considerations of geographic and

model diversity versus protecting the area most devastated by hurricane sandy. >> i've said before, at this table, in fact, but in other venues. our highest priority in allocating the funds is going protecting the existing transit infrastructure that serve millions of passengers each day. those systems and existing rail lines have, in many cases flooded multiple times. as you know, some of the infrastructure that flooded under hurricane sandy had flooded one year earlier. under hurricane eye irene and the president in asking this resiliency funding made clear he puts a strong priority in asking that funding on the taxpayer will not, going forward, have to pay to restore the infrastructure a second, third, or fourth time. it's going to be our priority as we look at it. ..

that also is serving 80% of the same traffic washed out. that is not going to maintain mobility in the face of the next disaster so those are going to be our priorities going in. it is hard for me to say now until we get all the applications and how some of the other factors like geographic diversity and other things will play out. i think we have put out a good notice that takes into account all of the critical factors that

we need to look at and when we get the applications and we will then have to rack and stack them to make sure the investments costs are beneficial and capture the most critical infrastructure on both sides of the river and also make sure that we are fulfilling the president's commitment to ensuring that we don't pay a second, third and fourth time to restore it. >> i appreciate it that and as someone who along with senators schumer led the fight was andy money and to make sure the transportation elements were a part of it, i certainly believe that the consequences of systems moving large numbers of americans and to have a history of constant challenges due to flooding and weather related issues make a highest priority use just simply on the number of people being serviced and the reality that we have repetitive loss. we want to avoid the repetitive

loss to the taxpayer and maximize they number of americans who are using the transit system so while there's obviously a whole host of challenges that would be the reality and finally by me mr. chairman mr. wise reference the rapid transit projects. how do you see the role of the prt playing in the future of u.s. transit services? these projects are very often appealed as a lower-cost more flexible option but they lack some of the surface characteristics and economic development potential of others. >> yes to both of those senator, thank you. in the work we did actually for the committee several years ago on brt i think the result of that are promising but there are constraints as you mentioned. a bus is not a train and some people view it that way. that said, given the funding environment we are in right now

and will be in for the foreseeable future i think a lot of areas c, brt is a good alternative and one that is much more feasible to implement then rail which tends to be as i noted in my statement much more expensive. now, that said there are characteristics of brt's he implemented that make it stand apart from regular buses so you will see in the systems we visited seattle eugene and a few other places there will be nicer, newer more brightly you know painted buses. the bus stops will be above the ground. they will be not people putting the card into the machine but buying them before him. there are similarities to rail travel and the very sophisticated brt's mouse a much what you we see here but now for example probably the poster

child for the best brt system in the world is in bogotá colombia where looks very much like a train. in fact you have to look closely to see the difference. the stations are very ornate and they look like very nice rail stations. you don't really see that here in the dedicated guideways are kind of a mixed bag. there are some that where they have more dedicated guideways than others and some of it is cost. i recall when he visited the system and eugene springfield oregon that there were a couple of areas where it's just impossible to give a dedicated guideways to the system just because of the complicated intersection trying to navigate so we have seen some mixed results but i know that most of the people we talked to in the different systems really see promise with the brt. it's much less expensive and much quicker to implement and they have seen economic development. as i mentioned the one in cleveland ohio where they -- officials have seen four or $5 billion worth of development along the euclid avenue corridor

that leads downtown up to the cleveland clinic area and another one in kansas city in a rather depressed area not too far from downtown kansas city. the true system has brought additional development and gotten some additional grants but the promise of brt would help spur development in that area. so i think and i think you'll see a lot of development going on here in montgomery county which is looking to implement a fairly extensive bus rapid route on the corridor quarter. a lot of them are seeing real promise and bus rapid transit. >> senator schumer. >> thank you mr. chairman and i want to welcome you mr. wise and congratulate you mr. rogoff on your promotion. i know you from your days here. i know you are filling large shoes because your predecessor worked for me for nine years and now is going on to become d.o.t. commissioner in new york city.

i know that office well. i know she will do a great job. but i'm glad you are there. i feel very good about that. i have a few questions. first regarding capital grants under 5309. i know that under map-21 we tried to streamline and accelerate block project delivery on both new starts and small starts. i know that's working well so i congratulate you on that. i have a couple of specifics here in terms of brt. first, albany our capital district transportation authority is becoming a leader in brt. albany is growing with a lot of economic activity. and they have three core cities, troy schenectady and albany and all the people living in the midst of those so it has metropolitan area with a little over a million people. it's not large enough for a subway system or rail system but bus rapid transit is made for it

traded fits to a tea and i help them get as cdt eight grant plan for their brt. they have been working with fta regional offices in new york and they are poised to apply for ignition to a small starts program. they are already working really well on this and they have a red line already from downtown albany downtown schenectady and they plan to more one to try and one out to the u. of albany. it's great so are you familiar with the plan in albany at all? >> i spoke with people at cdt eight. we are pleased to give them that planning grant and you are right they are well along in the development. i think the good news here really as it relates to this project in all of the interested new entrants to the new starts in small starts program is the agreement currently pending on the floor.

you will recall last year the combination of the continuing resolution in the sequester below that left funding for the new starts in small starts program in a place where we could not even fulfill our existing obligations that we have already signed up. the appropriations bill currently pending before you is through the combination of on obligated balances and new appropriations gets us to our request level which means we are back in the business of looking at new folks to admit. speak and i have to commend me you will work personally with cdt a and do everything you can? >> sure. when they make the requisite request we see no stopping to that being a successful project. >> the second one is buffalo. buffalo has experimented with different kinds of transit particularly the main street project which was a flop and we are helping them undo that right now 30 years later that day too

are made for this type of system. again similar size and a little more than 1.5 million in the metropolitan area. they want to study an extension of the buffalo transit system out to amherst which is the eastern suburb and where the university of buffalo is in now the university of buffalo is in the medical corridor so it's a perfect situation. again cannot have your commitmencommitmen t to help them get into the small starts program? >> sure. we will look at the applications as they come in but here again i think it's fair to say that the nft a is taking time to look at what they want to do and i think mr. wise pointed out some of the benefits we can see when we do rapid transit the right way which is to say all of the full investments the unique vehicles and signal priority which means they almost always get a green light when they could assemble.

signal. you can move quite a few people at a affordable cost compared to rail. >> do you seamy barriers in the way they're? >> as you pointed out there are some geometric hurdles you can always overcome but there are also great opportunities and i think whenever you connect large employers like university and the help center those are the kind of sentiments that we see grace -- great success. >> that would like to go to gateway. as you know new starts is really helpful for the east side access to the largest programs in the country is supported. there's another being developed on the western and as amtrak's gateway program. to build two new tunnels under the hudson river into manhattan. the current tunnel is 100 years old and not flood proof. they are at full capacity. it's not just a passenger rail

project but a critical transit project. new jersey transit runs two-thirds of the trains from new jersey to manhattan. we have our end a fight with governor christie over that and i had federal funding so now we are going back at it because the need for tumult is crucial. so i had three questions on the gateway program. first you agree that it's a critical passenger rail and a transit project? second you believe it could be a candidate for the new starts program and third, do you need legislative authority to admit gateway into the new starts program? >> let me take those in order. i would point out that we have had a painful history and trying to get the necessary tunnel link capacity under the hudson and the time off that are currently serving an extraordinary number of passengers both on on the amtrak site in new jersey transit side.

>> those tunnels are over 100 years old. do i agree that it's an essential investment? we absolutely must do something about those. i believe we are approaching 110-year-old tunnels. they not only constrain capacity but it is certain point they will become a real safety risk. and you know think about the people that will result if we were to lose that capacity all of a sudden. could it be a candidate for the new starts program? yes it could do what we would need is a project sponsored to come forward and do the development work and most importantly, with the necessary local match. your final question, do i need special legislation to help make that happen? we will take around turn on that but i don't think so. obviously the entire program expires at the end of the year but i think the question you may be alluding to is how do we deal

with the new start project for which amtrak is a participant? i don't know if i would need legislation for that. you know we have had amtrak do some necessary investments in this part of the east side access. they are responsible for "the herald" interlock which is a large portion of the project so there may we be a way of doing this without special legislation but if it's needed we will simply call it to your attention. >> you don't think it will be? >> i don't think so on its face. speak and you get back to me in a couple of days? finally the montague tunnel. as you know we have a real interest in restoring this time i'll. give me a status report on how it's going and how the repair is going. >> you my understanding as things are going along well. this is one of benefits that you get him closing the entire facility, is you do not have to worry about the safety risks posed by the workers.

you have the ability to put all kinds of equipment in the tunnel and you don't have to move trains through the same time. i have heard nothing that they are off schedule or over budget and indeed in some of these tunnels we are making what we call a local resiliency funding some investments to allow them to move utilities to the roof of the time also should we have flooding again we won't lose all the signal capacity. >> though i had? >> yes, sir. >> he i want to thank our witnesses for your testimony today. this hearing is adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> now our look at the future of connected cars and self-driving cars and how regulations will play a part. representatives from toyota horizon and the global automakers association took part in annual the annual consumer electronics association innovators summit. this hour-long