mr. larson, good morning, and happy new year. >> happy new year, everyone. chair peskin and members of the transportation authority. i am glenn larson, the chairman of theitiens advisory committee. sfmta updated the c.a.c. on the progress of the project. during the presentation, there was a bar graph presented based upon the monthly progress reports requested by the c.a.c. and that i believe may have been circulated amongst you. it shows the slow rate of progress and a strange decline in percent completion on the vanness project between november 17 and november 2018. although we were told that the method of calculating percent completion was recently changed to show that it has gone down by a couple of percentage points, in this previous period, the percentage completion went up and then back down with ano explanation of a calculation change. therefore, c.a.c. requests that future attention be paid -- attention be paid to future progress reports. in addition, m.t.a. was asked if lessons from vanness, was going to be applied to the geary b.r.t. and better mar

mr. larson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. if i could i'd like to yield my time to representative small. >> thank you for being here. i really appreciate the dialogue about the choices that you're making when it comes to national guard versus deployment of active military. you listed some of the components, timeliness, the scope of the request, the cost and available troops. one thing i'd like to dig into more is readiness. we ask a lot from our troops. it's critical that we provide that readiness through rest and refit between missions and deployment. what impact does an increase of troops in deployment have on soldier readiness. >> so far it's been manageable. as i explain eed we try to rota the troops in about every 6-8 weeks. we're trying to make sure we maintain that deploy to dwell ratio at a manageable level. we may have to call on those same forces to deploy to another mission. the border security mission is obviously a high priority for the administration, and so we are balancing that requirement along with syria, afg

mr. larson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. if i could feel my time to representative -- >> microphone. >> thank you. undersecretary rude and admiral for being here. i appreciate the dialogue about the choices you're making when it comes to national guard versus active military and he listed some of the components, timeliness, scope of the reque request, the cost and available troops. one thing i would like to dig into more is readiness. admiral mentioned it briefly and we asked a lot from our troops and when it is critical that we provide that readiness specifically the reston refit between missions and appointment and so what impact does an increase in deployment used on the border have on soldier readiness? >> so far, it's been manageable. as i explained a few minutes ag- >> i'm sorry, we tried to rotate the troops and about every six, eight weeks and so we were trying to make sure we maintained that deployed to dwell ratio and a manageable level because he may have to call on the same forces to deploy to another mission. th

mr. larson: hope to give you as much time as you can answer, that the bipartisan nature of our concern as it relates to china. and my question would be pretty straight tord, how will you define success with our meeting with china and the standpoint from a number of us here on both labor standards and environmental standard and how will that play into whether or not you feel pending negotiations will be successful? mr. lighthizer: thank you, congressman. i would say what we are doing and what we have to remind ourselves in this context is settling the 301's. how i would define success and i would repeat, i went through to distill what everyone else, members, business groups and farm groups and experts who actually study these things. and for me, success is number one enforceable. number two, real rules on forced technology transfers, which mr. brady said and minimal intellectual property requirements and this section is probably going to be -- if we have an agreement, it will be about 27 or 28 pages. this is long and detailed. but every one of you would say normal i.t. protections to be. w