; (B) the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate; and (C) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives. (4) Evaluation The Secretary may recommend a large project for funding in the annual report under paragraph (6) only if the Secretary evaluates the proposed project and determines that the project is justified because the project— (A) addresses a need to eliminate the grade crossing as determined by the Secretary, consistent with the goals of the Program under subsection (b)(2); (B) will generate significant benefits based upon the factors listed in subsection (e)(1), as determined by the Secretary; (C) is cost effective based on an analysis of whether the benefits described in subparagraph (B) are expected to outweigh the project costs; and (D) is supported by other Federal or non-Federal financial commitments or revenues adequate to fund construction of the project. (5) Ratings (A) In general The Secretary shall create a data driven ranking to evaluate, rate, and rank large projects. The Secretary shall develop a methodology that— (i) quantifies each factor listed in subsection (e)(1)(A) on a numeric point scale, with zero being the lowest number and the maximum number determined based on the Secretary’s methodology; (ii) calculates a numerical safety score based on how the project would address each of the factors listed in subsection (e)(1)(A) with zero being the lowest number and the maximum number determined based on the Secretary’s methodology; (iii) evaluates on a 5-point scale (the points of which include high , medium-high , medium , medium-low , and low ) the benefits of the project for each of the factors listed in subsection (e)(1)(B)