Subcommittee on Housing and Transportation

Hearing on "Transit in the 21st Century: Successes and Challenges."

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Faye Moore and I am the General Manager of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority -–better known as SEPTA. I appreciate your invitation to come here today to testify on the benefits to SEPTA of the TEA-21 legislation and our thoughts on how the upcoming reauthorization of that legislation can continue the progress we have seen since its enactment in 1998. I am particularly pleased to be testifying before a subcommittee on which our Senator – Rick Santorum – serves. Senator Santorum has been a great friend to public transportation in general and to SEPTA in particular. I look forward to working closely with him as this committee takes up legislation to extend Federal support for transit.

Before I discuss the main topics of my testimony today, allow me to begin with a little background on myself and on SEPTA.

I was selected to be General Manager of SEPTA in February of this year. Before becoming General Manager, I served as the Chief Financial Officer of the organization. I am a Certified Public Accountant. I know that the image of CPA’s has been somewhat tarnished in recent months, but I assure you Mr. Chairman, I am proud of my profession and believe my training is helping me look for value everywhere in our organization and focus us on operating our agency is a sound and responsible manner.

I see our core responsibility to be providing quality transportation service to our customers every day. Working with senior management and all the dedicated men and women who make up our workforce, my goal is to continue to build upon SEPTA’s commitment to quality public transit services.

The five counties that make up our service region rely upon a strong public transportation network to support their economic and social growth and stability. SEPTA’s network consists of a variety of different modes of transit service. We have commuter rail , heavy rail, light rail, streetcars, "trackless trolleys" (known elsewhere as electric trolley buses), buses and paratransit service. Each day, we provide 1,050,000 trips – making us the sixth largest transit system in the nation. Our annual operating budget is $ 822 million for the current year and our capital budget is $ 496 million per year.

Of course, Mr. Chairman, the Federal government is a substantial contributor to our capital budget. So let me turn my attention now to the Federal programs of TEA 21 and how they have helped us make improvements to our system.

First and foremost, TEA-21 has made significant additional dollars available to SEPTA. For example, in the last year of the previous authorization period, fiscal 1997, SEPTA received $ 112 million from the two main formula programs from which we receive assistance – Section 5307 Urban Formula Grants and the Section 5309 Rail Modernization program. In the current year, fiscal 2002, we have received $ 167 million from those two programs. Thanks to the assistance of our congressional delegation, we have also been successful in gaining funding from programs, such as Section 5309 Bus and Access to Jobs, for which Congress earmarks funds in annual appropriations bills.

In addition to increased funding, we also benefited from the creation of new programs in TEA-21. In particular, the Jobs Access Reverse Commute program has produced substantial benefits in our region for current, past and possibly future recipients of assistance from the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program (TANF). Both of our Senators, Sen. Santorum and Sen. Specter, have played an important role in the creation and annual funding of that program. We appreciate the work they have both done to improve the job prospects of families in our region who are struggling to make ends meet.

The increase in funding and new programs in TEA-21 have allowed SEPTA to achieve some of the key goals we set out for ourselves in the five-year business plan we developed in 1997. Some of the goals we have achieved with Federal assistance in the TEA-21 era include:

• Replacement of structures, track, roadbed and signal systems, development of a new terminal and introduction of a new fleet of railcars on the Market-Frankford Subway/Elevated line. This is our busiest line, serving 150,000 riders per day. It was originally opened for service in 1922.
• Updating of the fleet on our regional rail system through the upgrade of our Silverliner IV cars and initiating procurement of Silverliner V cars.
• Expansion of service in our fast-growing suburbs through the purchase of new buses and through matching our fleet to the market by placing small buses on suburban routes where they are most appropriate.
• Partnership with local governments to institute and expand reverse commute service for residents of low and moderate income urban neighborhoods who either seek or have jobs in the suburbs.

• Improvements to stations and transfer facilities to provide more parking and better links between transportation modes.
• Studies of options for improving our service through the construction of new rail lines such as Schuykill Valley Metro and Cross County Metro.

We recognize that this Subcommittee and the full Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs worked hard to produce the TEA-21 legislation and I would be remiss if I did not pause after delineating some of our successes under the program to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and all the members of this subcommittee and full committee, for the work you did to make the legislation a reality. As you can see, it has helped to produce real gains in the Philadelphia region.

One issue which has come very much to the forefront in recent months, which none of us foresaw when TEA-21 was drafted, is that of the security of our system. Those of us who operate transit systems were so proud of the way our colleagues in New York, New Jersey and Washington, DC responded to the September 11 attacks on our nation. The events of that day showed clearly the paradox transit faces when thinking about the terrorist threat against the U.S. -- our facilities are targets and escape routes all at the same time. Philadelphia was spared the horrors of that particular day last September. However, we are aware that our city contains historic landmarks, such as the Liberty Bell, Independence Hall and City Hall, which our enemies may view as targets in the future. With that in mind, we have been evaluating our vulnerabilities to attack and the ways in which our system can play a role in any evacuation which may be required in the future.

We have been assisted in our efforts by the Federal Transit Administration, which sent a security audit team to Philadelphia recently as part of its security audit of the top 30 transit systems in the country. Our initial estimate is that the cost of making the necessary security repairs to our system would be $ 100 million.

As you look ahead to the reauthorization of TEA-21, we have some thoughts on how the programs can be improved even more. I know you will be spending many, many hours examining options for program improvements in the months ahead. As you do, I hope you will keep in mind some broad principles which I believe will help produce legislation of maximum benefit to public transportation service in our region and across the country.

Here are the key principles I believe should be part of your deliberations:

• Focus support where you get the biggest bang for the buck. The Federal transit program has for a generation been a needs-based program. In defining needs, the Federal government should look to place its resources behind projects and programs which will provide benefits in areas where transit is a proven force in the marketplace or where compelling evidence of the need for new service is presented.

• Maintain guaranteed funding. One of the great achievements of TEA-21 was its provisions to ensure that transit spending would increase at guaranteed levels which would not be affected by the annual appropriations process. This principle of assured funding is essential to a program which focuses on capital expenditures. Capital programs require reliable funding from year-to-year so that long-term procurements and construction projects can be carried-out.

• Continue program growth. The TEA-21 era has seen record growth in the transit program. However, the program continues to fall behind the growth curve for the Federal highway program. For example, 20 years ago, the ratio of funding for the Federal-Aid Highway program as compared to the Federal transit program was approximately 2-to-1. Today, that ratio is more than 4-to-1. While it is undeniable that the need for work on our highway network has grown considerably in the last 20 years, it is hard to imagine the rate of growth in the need has been twice that in the transit program. Recent studies by the American Public Transit Association (APTA) have estimated the total funding need for transit to be $42 billion per year. The current Federal program (at $ 7.2 billion per year) meets about 17% of that goal. It is my hope the committee will consider significant growth in Federal spending for transit as part of a strategy to catch-up to the growth in the highway program and the growth in transit needs.

• Improve Flexible Funding Programs – One way to address the growing gap between highway and transit funding would be to improve flexible funding programs such as Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP) to provide additional encouragement to states and regions to allocate funds to transit. These programs were an important innovation in the early 90’s, but there is room for improvement to encourage use of flexible funds. These federal programs should address transportation deficiencies in heavily traveled and congested regions by providing flexible funding resources for viable public transit options

• Examine program reforms. As SEPTA evaluates the potential to develop the Schuykill Valley Metro project, we have taken note of the fact that the Federal transit program includes at least one important barrier to using design/build contract techniques. In current practice, the Federal Transit Administration requires that a project be 60% designed before a Full Funding Grant Agreement can be completed for it. Waiting until that level of design to lock-in a contractor robs a project sponsor of most of the benefits of the design build approach. I hope the subcommittee will review ways to remove this barrier while still preserving the necessary Federal oversight role.
• Provide Security Funding – As I noted earlier, transit systems such as ours are both targets for international terrorists and part of the response to terrorism. The Administration and Congress have recognized the link between the foreign threat to our nation and the security of our transportation facilities through the creation of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Given that the actions we need to take at SEPTA flow directly from this foreign threat, we believe the Federal government should make available significant new funds from outside the traditional transit program to meet this need.
• Meet new market challenges. – As I said before, the creation of the Jobs Access Reverse Commute program by TEA-21 was a good response to a market which was developing in the late 90’s. As we approach the next authorization period, another market which is expanding enormously is that of transit service for the elderly. Demographic changes can be sweeping, but the good news is we can see them coming. The baby-boom generation will enter its seventh decade during the next authorization period. Many elderly who do not fall under the protection of the Americans with Disabilities Act will need expanded, flexible transit service. We will be called upon to provide that service and will benefit from assistance from the Federal government as we do so. I hope we can work with this committee to develop innovative approaches to respond to this fast-growing market.

Mr. Chairman, before closing, I feel it is important to mention another key issue which is now before the Senate and which may well be included in the upcoming TEA-21 reauthorization. That issue is the fate of Amtrak. As you look at the pros and cons of providing additional assistance to Amtrak, it is my hope you will keep in mind the importance to commuters up and down the East Coast of improving and maintaining the rail infrastructure on the Northeast Corridor. SEPTA operates it busiest commuter lines on Amtrak right-of-way. Together with our colleagues in Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts, we carry many multiples of the passenger load carried by Amtrak over those tracks each day. As you consider the future of service on the Northeast Corridor, please keep in mind that most of the people using it are customers of the commuter railroads. In the absence of a financially healthy intercity rail operator on that line, the burden on the commuter agencies to maintain service would be impossible to bear.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. SEPTA hopes to work with you and each Member of this subcommittee as you develop legislation to take us through the next authorization period.

Home | Menu | Links | Info | Chairman's Page