[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY: IS THERE A SECURITY
GAP?
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE, DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA, CENSUS AND THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 24, 2011
__________
Serial No. 112-72
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
http://www.house.gov/reform
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
71-298 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
DARRELL E. ISSA, California, Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland,
JOHN L. MICA, Florida Ranking Minority Member
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
JIM JORDAN, Ohio Columbia
JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
CONNIE MACK, Florida JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
TIM WALBERG, Michigan WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan JIM COOPER, Tennessee
ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
RAUL R. LABRADOR, Idaho DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee PETER WELCH, Vermont
JOE WALSH, Illinois JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
DENNIS A. ROSS, Florida JACKIE SPEIER, California
FRANK C. GUINTA, New Hampshire
BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania
Lawrence J. Brady, Staff Director
John D. Cuaderes, Deputy Staff Director
Robert Borden, General Counsel
Linda A. Good, Chief Clerk
David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia, Census and the
National Archives
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina, Chairman
PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona, Vice DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois, Ranking
Chairman Minority Member
DAN BURTON, Indiana ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
JOHN L. MICA, Florida Columbia
PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
JOE WALSH, Illinois
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on June 24, 2011.................................... 1
Statement of:
Sarles, Richard, general manager and chief executive officer,
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; Chief
Michael Taborn, Metro Transit Police Division; Chief Cathy
Lanier, Metropolitan Police Department; and Anthony
Griffin, county executive, Fairfax County Government....... 8
Griffin, Anthony......................................... 41
Lanier, Chief Cathy...................................... 34
Sarles, Richard.......................................... 8
Taborn, Chief Michael.................................... 32
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Connolly, Hon. Gerald E., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Virginia, prepared statement of............... 47
Cummings, Hon. Elijah E., a Representative in Congress from
the State of Maryland, prepared statement of............... 6
Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Illinois, prepared statement of................... 3
Griffin, Anthony, county executive, Fairfax County
Government, prepared statement of.......................... 43
Lanier, Chief Cathy, Metropolitan Police Department, prepared
statement of............................................... 38
Sarles, Richard, general manager and chief executive officer,
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, prepared
statement of............................................... 11
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY: IS THERE A SECURITY
GAP?
----------
FRIDAY, JUNE 24, 2011
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Health Care, District of Columbia,
Census and the National Archives,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m., in
room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Trey Gowdy
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Gowdy, Gosar, Davis, Norton, Clay,
Murphy, and Cummings (ex-officio).
Also present: Representative Connolly.
Staff present: Ali Ahmad, communications advisor; Michael
R. Bebeau, assistant clerk; Howard A. Denis, senior counsel;
James Robertson, professional staff member; Peter Warren,
legislative policy director; Ronald Allen, minority staff
assistant; Jaron Bourke, minority director of administration;
Yvette Cravins, minority counsel; Paul Kincaid, minority press
secretary; Lucinda Lessley, minority policy director; and
William Miles, minority professional staff member.
Mr. Gowdy. The committee will come to order.
This is a hearing on the Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority: Is there a security gap?
I want to welcome our witnesses. I do not have much of an
opening statement. I am primarily here to listen.
I want to thank our witnesses again, especially our
witnesses in public safety and law enforcement, because I
realize you have competing priorities. So thank you for being
here.
Public safety is the preeminent responsibility of the
Federal Government. As such, we're here today to examine the
security of our Nation's largest transit systems--one of our
largest Nation's transit systems--the Washington Area
Metropolitan Transit Authority. Whether you're a Washington
resident or a visitor from the Fourth Congressional District in
South Carolina, it's important that you not only feel safe but
that you actually are safe.
So I thank our distinguished panel of witnesses and, just a
point of personal privilege, whenever I see uniforms I want to
thank both the chiefs for your public service. I have a special
place in my heart for law enforcement and public safety
officers. So thank you.
With that, I would recognize the gentleman from Illinois,
the ranking member, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
very much for holding this hearing.
I, too, would like to welcome the witnesses and thank them
for coming.
The events of September 11, 2001, brought the attention of
transportation security and terrorism to prominence. Subsequent
attacks in Moscow, London, and Madrid have further highlighted
terrorism as a global threat to public transit.
Transit security is especially challenging due primarily to
the very nature of the business. It's open, accessible to the
public, with predictable routes and fixed access points; and,
more importantly, it's the transportation of choice for the
masses in urban and metropolitan areas.
Further, transit officials cannot employ many of the
strategies used in aviation. Transit does not allow the
conventional security methods of X-ray machines, metal
detectors, and pre-screening of passengers.
I do not envy the balancing act that must take place
ensuring the safety, accessibility, and convenience of the
transit system, while also maintaining the attractiveness and
reliability of the system. But it must be done and done well.
So when people choose public transit they should receive both a
high degree of safety and security, as well as convenience, all
at an affordable cost.
Today's hearing will look at all of these issues but none
more than security. The operation of a secure transit
environment that spans multiple jurisdictions geographically
and that must integrate the specialties of multiple law
enforcement agency depends upon interagency and jurisdictional
coordination and cooperation. That can be hard to do without
practice, superior communication, and rigorous oversight. I am
interested today in learning from these witnesses just how they
have accomplished and improved these tasks.
WMATA, similar to transit systems across the country, are
constantly evaluating and evolving with new procedures,
techniques, and systems to increase security. Even in my home
city of Chicago, the Chicago Transit Authority recently
announced this week new security initiatives, a doubling of the
amount of all-angle security cameras across the rail system.
Hopefully, this type of initiative deters crime as well as
decreases opportunities for domestic or international
terrorists to attack our country.
WMATA, I am certain, has similar sources. So I am very
interested in today's topic and greatly anticipate the
testimony we will hear.
Transit security is a timely and necessary topic. So I
thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again I thank the witnesses for
coming and for their participation.
I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.002
Mr. Gowdy. The chair would now recognize the ranking member
of the full committee, the gentleman from Maryland, Mr.
Cummings.
Mr. Cummings. I want to thank you very much, Mr. Chairman,
for calling this hearing.
As a member of both the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, I know how critical the Metro system is to the
Federal Government and to the entire metropolitan Washington
region. As a youngster who depended on the bus to take me to a
better school on the other side of Baltimore, I also know how
critical public transit is to, as the Metro says, opening
doors.
I appreciate the opportunity today's hearing provides to
consider security on the Metro system. This system serves 86
stations and carries more than half a million passengers every
day. Given their openness, transit systems are inherently
vulnerable to a variety of potential security threats. This is
particularly true of the Washington Metro, which is such a
visible part of our Nation's capital infrastructure. It is
critical that we understand the full range of threats
confronting Metro, as well as any gaps that may exist in
metro's defenses.
Effective security on the Metro requires a system to
counter a threat to terrorism. But it also requires a system to
protect the passengers and system operators from other possible
threats. I'm deeply troubled by reports of violence against
Metro bus drivers, and I want to understand what can be done to
ensure driver safety.
Given the threats that Metro and all transit systems in our
Nation face, it is inexplicable to me that the House
appropriation for the Department of Homeland Security for
fiscal year 2012, which provided funding for transit security
programs, was less than half of the administration's request.
The Republican leadership in the House has also proposed
deep cuts across the board to other transportation programs.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, maintaining
the current funding baseline over the next 6 years for highway
and transit programs will require $331 billion. The Republican
budget would provide only $219 billion, cutting the investments
in highway and transit programs by more than $100 billion.
We simply cannot maintain our competitiveness as a Nation
by failing to make investments that enable us to build,
maintain, and protect our essential transportation
infrastructure.
And so, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the testimony of
our witnesses. I join you, Mr. Chairman, as you salute our
public employees and those in uniform; and that's very
refreshing, because I know you mean it. I've said it many
times. So many times we've heard our public employees are not
treated very fairly, and I was very glad to hear you say what
you said. Because they do so much. They are the glue that keeps
our Nation together, keeps our cities and our States together.
So, again, I thank you; and, with that, I yield back.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Elijah E. Cummings
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.004
Mr. Gowdy. I thank the gentleman from Maryland.
Members may have 7 days to submit opening statements and
extraneous material for the record.
We will now welcome our first panel of witnesses.
I will introduce you from my left to right, your right to
left. I'll introduce you at the same time, and then we'll
recognize you in that order for your 5-minute opening
statement.
Mr. Richard Sarles is the general manager and chief
executive officer of the WMATA. Chief Michael Taborn is the
Chief of the Metro Transit Police Department. Cathy Lanier is
the Chief of the Metropolitan Police Department. Mr. Anthony
Griffin is the county executive for the Fairfax County
Government.
Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses must be sworn in
before they testify. So I would respectfully ask you to please
rise, and I will administer an oath.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Gowdy. Let the record reflect all the witnesses
answered in the affirmative.
You may be seated.
Many of you are more familiar with this process than I am,
so you should see a panel of lights. I am always reluctant to
tell anyone who has a weapon or access to a weapon that they
have to stop talking, but you will notice the green, yellow,
and red, and you may do with that what you would traditionally
do if you were driving with those.
Mr. Sarles.
STATEMENTS OF RICHARD SARLES, GENERAL MANAGER AND CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT
AUTHORITY; CHIEF MICHAEL TABORN, METRO TRANSIT POLICE DIVISION;
CHIEF CATHY LANIER, METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT; AND ANTHONY
GRIFFIN, COUNTY EXECUTIVE, FAIRFAX COUNTY GOVERNMENT
STATEMENT OF RICHARD SARLES
Mr. Sarles. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Davis, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today.
I am Richard Sarles, general manager and CEO of the
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority [WMATA or
Metro]. Accompanying me today is Metropolitan Transit Police
Department Chief Michael Taborn.
I am pleased to be here today to provide you with an update
on the progress we are making at Metro in a number of critical
areas, including safety, security, and returning our system to
a state of good repair. I will begin by providing a short
overview of Metro for those Members who are not familiar with
the system or new to the committee.
WMATA was created in 1967 through an interstate compact
between the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland,
and the District of Columbia and approved by the U.S. Congress.
Metro provides 1.2 million trips a day and is the second
largest rail transit system and the sixth largest bus system in
the United States.
Americans from all over the Nation depend on the system
when visiting the capital and attending large national events.
This unique role is why Metro is often referred to as
``America's subway.'' When your constituents visit Capitol
Hill, Metro rail provides safe and affordable transportation to
see our Nation's Capitol and visit your offices.
Metro is also a critical Homeland Security asset and has
demonstrated multiple times how important the system is in a
time of crisis, such as evacuation for major weather events and
national emergencies like 9/11. In particular, the Metro system
is vitally important to getting Federal employees to our
defense agencies such as the Pentagon and Department of
Homeland Security. Approximately 40 percent of Metro's peak
period customers are Federal employees.
The Washington region was recently ranked the second-most
congested in the country. Without a doubt, we would be number
aye if not for the estimated half a million automobiles that
Metro rail and Metro bus take off the system. Whether you ride
Metro rail or drive your car, you benefit from system.
Metro also serves as a key driver of the economy,
supporting both public and private investment and has spurred
over $37 billion in economic development at or adjacent to
Metro property. In these difficult economic times, that
development serves as a valuable source of revenue for our
State and local partners.
Now let me turn to Metro security preparedness.
Metro rail is by design an open system, as was mentioned
earlier, which provides unique challenges when it comes to
securing against potential threats. By design, it does not lend
itself to an airport-style security system. Securing our system
starts with an up-to-date threat assessment, helping us
determine how to most effectively use our personnel and
resources and to prioritize our actions to best combat
terrorism.
Another important component of our security program is
working each day in collaboration with the three jurisdictions
and more than 40 law enforcement agencies in the National
Capital Region, which enables us to share vital information
and, when needed, added support for our security efforts.
I want to thank both the Federal Bureau of Investigation
and the Transportation Security Administration and our local
partner, Chief Lanier, for their support of Metro's homeland
security program.
In addition to working to prevent acts of terrorism, we
also have to have in place plans to help us quickly respond in
the event of incidents like September 11th or an attack on our
system. In his testimony, Chief Taborn will provide you with
even more detail on how Metro police works to keep Metro
secure. But I'd like to briefly touch on the topic of safety.
Safety is our top priority at Metro. While serving as
interim general manager and as now as the permanent CEO for the
past 5 months, my personal goal has been to make sure that
every employee at Metro puts safety first.
Over the past 12 months, we have made great strides in
addressing the recommendations of the NTSB and other agencies
following the 2009 Fort Totten incident. The first billion
dollars of our 6-year, $5 billion capital rebuilding program is
dedicated to addressing those NTSB recommendations.
I want to especially recognize this committee for playing a
key role in helping to rebuild Metro. Under the leadership of
then-committee-chair Tom Davis in 2008, Congress passed a 10-
year, $1.5 billion authorization, the Passenger Rail Investment
and Improvement Act [PRIIA], to address the capital needs of
the WMATA system. The annual $150 million appropriations is the
funding commitment Congress made in PRIIA as the Federal
partner, matched by WMATA's jurisdictional partners--
Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia--for a total of $300
million a year. The $300 million represents almost 40 percent
of our capital budget.
Last year, in large measure due to the efforts of the Metro
congressional delegation, we received $150 million in PRIIA
funding. Without PRIIA, the progress we have made will be at
grave risk. In fact, we would slide backward.
What will happen if we do not receive our Federal funding
in fiscal year 2012? Let me be clear on this point. Safety will
come first. We will use whatever funds we have available to
assure that the system is safe. Everything else will be on the
table.
Unfortunately, our customers, your constituents, will bear
the burden of cuts through more frequent train delays, less
reliable trains and buses, deteriorated station conditions,
longer lines, and delayed customer information. If our efforts
are interrupted due to a lack of funding, it would ultimately
affect both the safety and reliability of the system.
Every day at Metro, we are making progress, but we have a
long way to go. However, with the continued support of our
customers, our jurisdictional partners, and congress, we will
get there.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I would
be pleased to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sarles follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.025
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Sarles.
Chief Taborn.
STATEMENT OF CHIEF MICHAEL TABORN
Chief Taborn. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Davis, and members of the subcommittee. I, too, thank you for
the opportunity to come here to testify today.
I am Michael Taborn, Chief of the Metro Transit Police for
the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority [WMATA or
Metro]. Mr. Sarles has provided an overview of Metro, and I
would like to provide additional details of our security
program.
On June 4, 1976, President Gerald Ford signed into law a
bill passed by Congress authorizing the establishment of the
Metro Transit Police [MTPD]. The MTPD is the only tri-
jurisdictional police department in the United States,
operating in the District of Colombia, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, and the State of Maryland. The department has an
authorized strength of 450 sworn officers, 153 special police
officers, 13 emergency management personnel, and 35 civilian
personnel.
The department police officers have law enforcement
jurisdictions and arrest powers throughout the 1,500 square
miles within the transit zone and responsible for crimes that
occur in, on, or against the Metro, Metro rail, and all transit
facilities. The Transit Police is a full-time, 24/7 law
enforcement agency.
Within the last year, Metro Transit Police has received
approximately 60,000 calls for service and approximately 339 of
those calls we received just in the last 6 months that involve
suspicious persons, packages, bomb threats, or similar events.
Patrol officer are deployed throughout the system with duties
that are most clearly associated with traditional police work.
The department's largest contingent is comprised of foot patrol
officers, followed by mobile patrol, Metro bus enforcement,
criminal investigations, and special operations.
A year ago, Metro Transit Police created the ``Metrostat''
to identify crime trends and hotspots which allows us to
strategically deploy our staff and resources most effectively.
Using the Metrostat information, patrol commanders establish
crime reduction objectives for their districts, monitor
statistics, and intelligence, and then apply patrol tactics
and/or specialized equipment to address those identified needs.
To be most effective in responding to and preventing crime,
we enlist the help of other regional law enforcement agencies
and our own customers. Officers attend community meetings,
promote public awareness campaigns, and often distribute crime
prevention literature. The MTPD works aggressively with
regional police departments, such as Chief Lanier's, local
schools, and youth organizations to prevent youth disorder in
the system.
With respect to our security mission, as Mr. Sarles
mentioned, Metro, like the majority of mass transit systems in
the United States, is by design an open system. Security
strategies are complex and multi-layered. The Transit Police
utilize many tools, supported by a variety of local, State, and
Federal agencies to ensure our security strategies and policies
facilitate accurate and timely operational readiness to any
identified threat or vulnerability.
Our overall strategy security approach combines the use of
technology with enhanced operational awareness and puts an
emphasis on training, public awareness outreach efforts,
emergency preparedness, and the use of various security
assessments that take into consideration the unique designs of
our transit system.
Through the Washington Metropolitan Area Council of
Government's Police Chief Subcommittee, the MTP meets regularly
with, again, over 40 law enforcement law enforcement agencies
in the National Capital Region to address current and emergency
law enforcement issues and tends to exchange information and
ideas about the delivery of public safety.
Further, the committee facilitates appropriate dialog to
enhance regional security and antiterrorism efforts and plans
for the safe and effective transportation of millions of
passengers to the national level events such as the
inauguration of the President of the United States, July 4th
Fireworks, National Cherry Blossom Festivals, Marine Corps
marathons, and sports and entertainment events.
To help coordinate law enforcement efforts with our Federal
partners, the Metro Transit Police has an officer assigned to
the FBI's local Joint Terrorism Task Force, the National Joint
Terrorism Task Force, with Chief Lanier's Washington Regional
Threat and Analysis Center, and the Transit Police have taken
aggressive steps to combat the threat of terrorism and partner
with the Federal Transit Administration and the Transportation
Security Administration.
Officers use a variety of high visibility uniformed patrol
techniques, technology, equipment, and national security
initiatives to assist in preventing terrorism. WMATA's Security
Inspection Program was launched in December 2010, which is a
tactic also used in transportation environments to effectively
target prevention of terrorist activity, a step which is
modeled after successful programs currently in use by transit
properties in the United States, including those in New Jersey,
New York, and Boston. The purpose of the screening is to detect
any explosive material and to prevent it from being brought
into the Metro system.
In 2009, WMATA's Anti-Terrorism Team, ATT, was created
through a transit security grant. The team is comprised of 20
sworn police officers who provide high visibility patrols,
focus on protecting transportation patrons and employees. The
ATT team works closely with the Federal air marshals and the
Transportation Security Administration to develop new
strategies and techniques for combating acts of terror. Team
deployment objectives include identification of system
vulnerabilities, high visibility patrol, surveillance and
countersurveillance operations, and investigation of suspicious
activity, persons, or packages.
The Authority has made great strides in the utilization of
technology to harden WMATA's infrastructure, physical security
enhancements including lighting sensing, access control,
intrusion detection systems--as well as bus facilities. The
Program of Response Options and Technology Enhancements for
Chemical/Biological Terrorism [PROTECT] system, is capable of
detecting selected groups of chemical warfare agents within a
predetermined threshold at Metro stations. Simply put, PROTECT
and its command and control software offers information to
chemical incident operations disciplines to make more informed
response decisions.
Currently, we have over 7,000 cameras throughout the
system. Eighty-one percent of those cameras are operational.
We also use customer communications in our stations,
vehicles, and facilities to raise awareness and remind the
public to report any suspicious behavior to the police. On any
given day, WMATA patrons hear a variety of safety and security
related messages, including announcements by myself and by
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano,
whose announcement seeks the assistance of transit riders in
identifying suspicious persons or packages in the nationally
recognized ``If You See Something, Say Something'' campaign.
Transit riders also witness high-visibility patrols in
collaboration with many local, State, and Federal partners.
Since 2006, Congress has appropriated approximately $1.6
billion in transit security grant funds to help local transit
authority such as Metro to get trained personnel, participate
in exercises, and raise public awareness and protect critical
infrastructure.
The remaining funds are fully obligated in the sense that
we have received, to date, $108 million in transit security
grant funds.
In my written testimony, we have provided detailed
information on the challenges faced in spending those dollars
as quickly as possible. We're working internally at Metro to
expedite those processes.
In addition, we have provided bipartisan leadership of the
House and Senate Homeland Security Committee input on what
changes need to be made in the legislation that created the
grant program to streamline DHS grant programs.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide you this
overview of our efforts to keep Metro safe and secure, and I
will be pleased to answer your questions.
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Chief Taborn.
Chief Lanier.
STATEMENT OF CHIEF CATHY LANIER
Chief Lanier. Good morning, Chairman Gowdy, members of the
committee, Congresswoman Norton, and staff.
I appreciate the opportunity to present the statement on
behalf of the Metropolitan Police Department on our
collaborative efforts with our Federal, State, and local
partners to address the security in our Metro system.
Today, I'll provide an overview of how MPD works with Metro
on not only homeland security issues but also highlight the
joint efforts that we have to address crime and public safety.
It's relevant to all of us.
Obviously, mass transportation is one of the most
attractive targets for anyone wanting to disrupt a major city.
The TSA's Office of Intelligence concurs that mass transit and
passenger rail systems are viable targets for a terrorist
attack. An attack on a passenger rail system would garner
attention not only because of the damage and casualties but
also because it could disrupt daily operations of a major
metropolitan area for an extended period of time.
As rail systems are easily accessible to the public and
difficult to secure, they are extremely vulnerable to attacks,
as we have seen overseas. Since 2004, there have been four
major attacks on mass transit, in Moscow, Mumbai, London, and
Madrid, with almost 500 total fatalities and more than 3,000
people injured. Given the possibility of an attack on Metro and
the impact it would have on the District and the entire region,
it is important to review how authorities in the National
Capital Region work together to safeguard the transit system.
Clearly, all of the law enforcement agencies in this region
play a critical role in securing our transit and rail systems.
Although we are often thought of as first responders, our most
critical role is prevention through detection and deterrence.
Through a robust Suspicious Activity Reporting, we are uniquely
positioned to detect and prevent terrorist incidents right here
at home. Information provided by local police and, very often,
the community, if discovered early and matched with the right
intelligence, can help detect, disrupt, and prevent a terrorist
plot.
Recognizing that information sharing is critical in both
preempting and responding to an attack, MPD maintains daily
contact with Metro Transit and Amtrak police in our fusion
center through the intelligence analysts that are collocated to
other partners around the region.
In addition to tracking operational law enforcement
activity and identifying emerging threats in the fusion center,
MPD is also engaged in the Homeland Security's pilot project of
the Trap Wire, a predictive software system. This system
supports the use of our suspicious activity reporting to detect
patterns of pre-attack surveillance and logistical planning.
Beyond that, the flow of information among Federal, State,
and local partners through our Joint Terrorism Task Force is
excellent in the Nation's capital. Our agencies have worked
together for many years sharing information and coordinating
responses to a variety of situations and the many special
events that take place in the Nation's capital.
In addition to the pre-established relationships to the
members of the task force, the areas chiefs of police meet on a
monthly basis to address regional issues, including rail
safety, through the council of governments.
MPD also facilitates a weekly intelligence meeting with a
number of our key partners that include Metro Transit, the FBI,
the Secret Service, the U.S. Capitol Police, the U.S. Park
Police, Amtrak police, as well as D.C. Fire and EMS. These
meetings provide a forum for us to share critical information
about sensitive law enforcement operations as well as
classified intelligence.
As real-time information is critical in the event of a
major incident, the MPD is in the process of integrating real-
time computer aided dispatch information with not only Metro
Transit Police but other law enforcement agencies around the
region to enhance our situational awareness.
From an operational perspective, the MPD actively
participates in Metro Transit's Terrorism Identification and
Deterrence Effort, or Blue TIDE, through coordinated patrols in
and around Metro stations. As a part of these patrols, MPD's
bomb units conducts regular sweeps to detect explosive
materials, including unattended packages which have the
potential to store IEDs.
MPD also participates in similar programs on Operation Rail
Safe, which provides enhanced patrols in and around our
commuter rail posts.
With so many police departments working in the region,
coordinated information sharing and response planning is
essential. Even beyond the National Capital Region, MPD has
been participating in the Northeast Corridor Coalition since
2005. This consortium of police and transit agencies works
together to enhance security planning and programming along the
Amtrak rail between Washington, DC, and Boston. This training
includes response for active shooter scenarios as well as
chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive
attacks.
MPD and Metro Transit have a strong relationship that is
grounded in a history of mutual support. From sharing crime
information around Metro platforms to responding to events
occurring in a transit system, our overlapping jurisdictions
that require efficiency in collaborative responsibilities.
For major events occurring in the District of Columbia,
WMATA has been quick to offer services such as buses for
cooling centers, blockades, and transportation. During the
school year, Metro Transit Police participate in a daily
conference call with MPD to ensure situational awareness
regarding the safe transport of our students after school.
MPD also assists--has assisted Metro in metering large
crowds at busy stations like Gallery Place, providing traffic
control during incidents, and coordinating criminal
investigations.
While all of the joint exercises and coordinated efforts
have worked well to build relationships and enhance operational
effectiveness, the best example of our joint efforts occurred
on June 22, 2009, when nine people were killed as a result of a
collision on Metro's Red Line. This tragic incident required
the coordinated response of numerous agencies. The District's
Fire and EMS quickly coordinated the unified command, which
delineated the roles in response of all of the responding
agencies. The quick response and communications between law
enforcement and first responders led to the determination very
quickly that the event was not related to a crime or an act of
terrorism. MPD immediately set up our Joint Operations Command
Center to serve as an area command for police resources, and
practiced protocols were quickly implemented. Security
perimeters were established on the scene to identify responders
and restrict unauthorized personnel, and a rotation schedule
was established to ensure relief of personnel. This was a 3-day
operation.
Radio communications and external communications with the
media operated in strict accordance with the National Incident
Management System and Incident Command System procedures. This
incident exemplified proficient efforts of our responding
agencies in dealing with disasters of this magnitude.
Ultimately, while much collaboration has and continues to
take place, it is imperative that relevant partner agencies
continue to train, exercise, and share information on a daily
basis in order to effectively respond to any future scenario. I
can assure you that the MPD remains committed to this process.
Once again, I appreciate the opportunity to participate in
the hearing today. I'll be happy to take any questions.
[The prepared statement of Chief Lanier follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.028
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Chief Lanier.
Mr. Griffin.
STATEMENT OF ANTHONY GRIFFIN
Mr. Griffin. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, ranking member,
members of the subcommittee. I am Anthony H. Griffin, county
executive, Fairfax County, VA, a position that I have had the
privilege of holding since January 2000.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today on the
security challenges facing the Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority, otherwise referred to as WMATA. My comments
are formed from two perspectives: first, as CEO of the largest
jurisdiction in the region by population and as Director of
Emergency Management as set by the Code of Virginia; second, as
co-chair of the decisionmaking process for the National Capital
Region since the inception of the Urban Area Security
Initiative grants until the conclusion of 2010, or seven grant
cycles. Additionally, I served as chair of the Chief
Administrative Officers Committee of the Metropolitan
Washington Council of Governments, otherwise referred to as
COG, for 10 years.
Based on my own experience, the five existing rail stations
in Fairfax County, a shared bus facility, and having consulted
with my police and fire chiefs, I can say that the relationship
between Fairfax County and WMATA from a public safety
perspective is very strong. WMATA is an active participant with
the Chiefs' Committee at COG and is present when security
issues are discussed on a regional basis.
On a police operational level, collaboration and
coordination is good, whether with a specific District station
or with the County's specialty units, such as SWAT, K-9, or
EOD, when there is a need for a station sweep or for high
visibility.
WMATA regularly communicates fire systems status updates
and when there are upgrades to equipment or modifications to
stations. Fairfax County has regularly participated in large-
scale multi-jurisdictional exercises with WMATA, with a focus
on rail security and safety.
In summary, there is a strong professional relationship
between WMATA and the County's public safety agencies, and I
personally have worked well with the senior management of
WMATA.
As previously noted, WMATA is an active participant when
discussing how preparedness in the National Capital Region can
be improved, and the grant process has been a major
facilitator. It has been accepted by the participants that
transportation is a key issue when considering threats and
mitigation. Rail facilities and stations are recognized as
potential targets, and rail is integral to being able to move a
significant percentage of the region's population during a time
of crisis.
WMATA has access to other Federal grant programs
specifically oriented to transit security and safety. However,
the CAOs--or the chief administrative officers--and the Senior
Policy Group--representatives from the Governors--have agreed
that WMATA should be a funding recipient because its security
requirements exceeded its normal resources. Consequently, in
addition to the NCR localities receiving and managing
subgrants, WMATA was allocated funds for specific projects
which would enhance its security and its ability to respond to
emergencies. I have attached a list of the projects and the
amount of money assigned.
Is there a security gap? In my experience with public
safety, there are never enough resources, whether it is with my
own agencies or with WMATA. My job, and our jobs, is to
prioritize the risk and manage the resources available to the
greatest effect and benefit.
In my opinion, based on my exposure to the subject and
WMATA, I believe that WMATA has done a good job with the
resources available but that if there were more resources
available, it would help narrow the gap. I should note there
will always be a gap, but I believe continued vigilance and
effort will tilt the odds in favor of WMATA and the public
safety agencies.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the privilege to speak. I will
be pleased to respond to the committee's questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Griffin follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.030
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Griffin.
At this point, the chair will recognize the ranking member
of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman; and, again, I
want to thank all of the witnesses.
Chief Taborn, WMATA's security program consistently ranks
among the top 20 percent of transit systems nationwide as
measured by TSA inspectors using the Baseline Assessment and
Security Enhancement program, BASE. However, I know that items
such as fully operational cameras at all stops are still
lacking. So could you discuss some security needs that might
exist on challenges that you think need some additional
attention?
Mr. Taborn. Well, thank you very much, sir. We are very
grateful for the Federal Government, the Department of Homeland
Security, TSA, the Federal Transit Administration, for all of
the support they've provided to Metro through the course of
many years.
Many of those items that you talked about, cameras, we have
a 35-year old system, and it wasn't until 10 years ago when our
second police officer was killed in the line of duty that those
cameras did not have the capability of recording. As we have
gone through the years, we have sought out grants to enhance
our camera capabilities, and those are the steps that we are
taking now. We have cameras that recently, through the UASI
process, have identified the 86 Metro rail stations, so we'll
have the opportunity through sharing with jurisdictional
partners to see those types of things. But we are in the
process of working with the general manager and the new
leadership to seek funds to provide more cameras in our
systems. We know that cameras aren't always the solution, but
they aid in investigations or telling us what's going on in any
particular period of time.
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much.
I know that you were instrumental in the development of the
transit security protection measures that has been adopted
nationwide. Can you tell us about the anti-terrorism training
that your office received and how often are these drills
conducted?
Mr. Taborn. Again, as a response to the events of 9/11,
initially before the birth of Department of Homeland Security
there was a $23.5 million Department of Defense grant that was
given to the Federal Transit Administration to go out and do an
assessment of transit properties all over the United States.
Part of that involved three basic premises: enhance employee
training, emergency preparedness, and public awareness; and
part of that training was a spin-off from that terrorist
activity recognition and reaction program that was given to
transit agencies across the country, the BAT, Behavioral
Assessment Training program. That was spearheaded by the
Transportation Security Administration, and it affords not only
police officers but front-line employees what to look for from
a terrorist standpoint.
And so, as typified by the events in Time Square where a
person saw something and said something, those are the types of
things that we encourage both our employees as well as our
riders to report something that may not be a big deal but may
be the key to investigate crimes. So training is something that
continues to happen.
TSA has a very good training program. The National Transit
Institute, through funding from FTA, has a great training
program. And it's getting this type of training to transit
agencies across the country.
Mr. Davis. And how often is that used?
Mr. Taborn. We provide training every year. We're in the
process now of providing training to all of our front-line
employees, over 7,000 employees, for Metro emergency response
training to familiarize them not only with terrorist tactics
but what to do in the case of an emergency. So that training is
ongoing. As new people come on in the department, come on to
the agency, we do a repetitive requirement to provide their
training.
Mr. Connolly. Would the chairman yield for a unanimous
consent request?
Mr. Gowdy. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am not a member of the subcommittee, but I am a member of
the full committee. I have a statement I would like to enter
into the record as a long-time supporter of Metro expressing my
support for management endeavors to enhance public safety and
to encourage the Federal Government to do its fair share in
support of the same.
Mr. Gowdy. Without objection, and thank you for being here.
We are delighted to have you with the subcommittee.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the chair.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Gerald E. Connolly
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.032
Mr. Gowdy. To our witnesses, our guests, and my colleagues,
who are probably aware, if not more aware than I am, votes have
been called. I think it is a very short series.
Here's the pledge I will make to you. We will sprint to the
Capitol to vote. We may walk briskly. We will go as quickly as
we can to the Capitol and vote, because we want to be good
stewards of your time. I am coming back the second I cast my
vote. I know that other colleagues will as well. This is a very
important hearing.
So Mr. Davis has graciously offered to buy any of you
drinks or something to eat if you want it during the break.
We're going to come back. If it happens again, I won't make you
do it again. But if you would indulge us to go vote, come back,
I would be very grateful; and if it happens again I won't ask
you to do it again.
So we will be in recess pending votes. Thank you.
[Recess.]
Mr. Gowdy. Welcome back. On behalf of all of us, thank you,
the witnesses, for your indulgence.
I recognize the gentleman from Arizona, Dr. Gosar.
Mr. Gosar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have just got some background checks or questions, Mr.
Sarles.
When we're looking at doing background checks, do we also
do--what kind of protocol do we have for monitoring our force
periodically?
I think one of the things we've learned in some of our
Homeland Security issues is that we may have had somebody come
by, come through and have a different background than they
profess to be. What kind of progress do we have for monitoring
particularly like maintenance, all of our different types of
employees?
Mr. Sarles. Basically, when they're hired, we have
background checks.
With regard to bus operators, we do checks on driver CDLs
to make sure that they continue to maintain their license.
Also, with regard--we have a lot of contractors working on
the sites, so we have checks on that that we do. It's basically
every 2 years--every year background checks on them. So that's
the extent that we do it today.
Mr. Gosar. Is that mandatory by compliance from the
contractor head--or is there random review?
Chief, you can answer as well.
Chief Taborn. Many of the guidelines and recommended
practices that came by way of either TSA or FTA talks about
background checks. It's something that's not mandatory, but we
embrace that, and we do it on a yearly basis for all
contractors, bus operators, as indicated by Mr. Sarles, or
train operators, their driver's license, their criminal
records. We want to check that to make sure that they're don't
have a criminal charge or traffic violations that prevents them
from delivering good-quality service.
Mr. Gosar. I know that when we reviewed TSA we had some
concerns about some of the folks in delivery, maintenance, that
aspect, because we've got a number of access points that don't
really--we're more reactive than we're proactive. And I want to
know more about where you would go with that.
Chief Taborn. Again, probably the whole universe of
operation, 8,000 employees, we on a--probably every 2 weeks, do
a records check so we know if someone is wanted for a
particular crime.
As part of their employment--initial employment, they go
back and they look at 10 years. But on a consistent basis we
run the checks of our employees, both traffic and criminal,
probably about every 2 to 3 weeks.
Mr. Gosar. Do we review how the systems actually work
themselves and how people can infiltrate a system? I guess just
more review.
As a business owner, there's always--you know, we have an
employee, we bring them in, we always have a 6-month review.
Sometimes we'll actually have another review from another
employee. You know, those kind of things for monitoring.
Because just a background check is not going to catch
everything.
Chief Taborn. Well, from the standpoint of our contract, we
do it on a yearly basis for our employees. As I indicated,
about every 3 weeks we do a check. Sometimes, depending upon
the jurisdiction, if they left this area, we don't to do a
nationwide check. We do the jurisdictional check in Maryland,
and Virginia, and District of Columbia or if, in fact, they
live in Pennsylvania, something like that.
Mr. Gosar. And a protocol if you have suspicious activity.
What would be your normal protocol if you had somebody with
suspicious activity? Or a warning light?
Chief Taborn. Again, we partner with the FBI Joint
Terrorism Task Force. So if there is any suspicious activity
that arises to that level that sort of borders on terrorism, we
will immediately let them know.
Again, we have a person, the same as Cathy Lanier, and
track it, and that information is put in there. So if there is
a possibility that there is a hit or somebody has additional
information, we all in law enforcement would know about it.
Mr. Gosar. And, last question, how do we involve the
public? How do we go about improving that relationship? Because
the public--I mean, we can't catch everything. We need the
public's insight here. How do we keep them involved and
constantly take their proactive ideas?
Chief Taborn. Good. If you go back, the basis of the ``See
Something, Say Something'' had its birth in Transit Watch and
was similar to Neighborhood Watch where messages were--things
were delivered to transit properties. New York took ``If You
See Something, Say Something.'' Others adopted ``Is That Your
Bag'' or ``See It, Say It.'' So those were slogans that sort of
embraced the public into the security in protecting themselves
while they were in public transportation.
And there are a host of initiatives. I think I was with
Chief Lanier when Secretary Napolitano launched the ``See
Something, Say Something.'' Because it has application not just
in transit but in all types of sectors. So if we say something
suspicious, we want to notify the authorities so actions can be
taken.
Mr. Gosar. Thank you.
Mr. Gowdy. The chair would recognize the gentlelady from
the District of Columbia, Ms. Holmes-Norton.
Ms. Norton. I thank you Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all
of the witnesses for your very helpful testimony.
I especially want to thank you, Chairman Gowdy, for today's
hearing on a matter of great importance to the Federal
Government because of the importance of WMATA to the Federal
Government.
I am not sure all of us were here, but in the winter of
2009 and 2010 the Federal Government itself shut down. The
major reason was because WMATA shut down.
And I think it was 2008 Congress did something with respect
to WMATA it would never do for any other regional or local
system. It authorized $1.5 billion of capital repairs of WMATA.
This was done when my good friends on the other side were in
charge.
I do want to read what this committee said at the time, at
least in part. ``Metro bus and rail service plays an
indispensable role in the day-to-day operations of the Federal
Government.'' And then the committee went on to speak of
private citizens who have business with the government who
depended upon WMATA, about the matters of State, and concluded,
thus, Metro is a national asset in which all Americans have an
interest.
Well, the Congress did come to that conclusion, and it's
interesting that we had difficulty getting the funds out. We
got the first $150,000 installment only after nine people were
killed in the tragic Metro accident, as it turns out about 2
years ago this week.
Now, you have indicated, Mr. Sarles, that you did not
receive the $150,000 this year--that would be the third
installment--that you would not let safety slip and that you
would take everything else away or as much of it as you could
in order to keep the Metro safe. And I am sure you would. But I
am not sure the committee understands what you are doing and
what we mean by ``keep it safe.''
Would you be able, for example, to keep on track for the
repairs and rehabilitation necessary to make this a safe line?
For example, the accident involved cars from the 1970's, which
were obsolete but which you have no alternative but to use. So
you are still using, are you not, the 1970's vintage cars where
virtually all of those who died were killed? And what are you
going to do? What would be your priorities? Would you be able
to be on track if we pulled all the funds away? Describe to us
what the work is all about.
Mr. Sarles. With regard to the $150 million a year, that,
matched with the local contribution of $150 million, is $300
million a year, which is nearly 40 percent of our budget. If we
lost that, we would, as I said, cause us to slide backward. We
would still proceed with the purchase of those cars for
replacement.
Ms. Norton. How many of those have you purchased?
Mr. Sarles. There's 300 cars to be replaced. Those are the
oldest cars.
Ms. Norton. How many have been purchased so far?
Mr. Sarles. We placed the order for the 300 plus some other
cars----
Ms. Norton. So none of those cars have been replaced as of
yet.
Mr. Sarles. No. They are being designed right now with the
manufacturer Kawasaki in Nebraska, and then we start taking
delivery in of them in 2013.
But if we lost 40 percent of our capital budget, we would
still operate safely. That doesn't mean we would operate
reliably. For instance, we would not be able to do the track
reconstruction. We're dealing with tracks, rails that are 30,
35 years old. We would not replace them. What happens when you
don't replace them is you have to operate at slower speeds. So
it would slow down the system.
You would also--we would find ourselves doing a lot more
daily inspections and finding problems, which would mean there
would be interruptions during even the peak period if we have
to go in and make the quick fix to keep the railroad running.
The same thing is true with buses. We have been able to,
over the last several years, buy enough buses to get the bus
system in shape, at least with regard to the age of the buses.
We would have to stop buying those.
As a result, the buses would get older and older, and they
would break down, and the service that we provide to our bus
customers would deteriorate. When you don't do the
reconstruction, it means that you have more breakdowns, you
operate more slowly. Because, in order to keep it safe--and,
ultimately, we've seen tragically what has happened when there
wasn't enough funding for the system.
Mr. Gowdy. I thank the gentlelady from the District of
Columbia.
The chair at the point would recognize the gentleman from
Missouri, Mr. Clay.
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman; and I thank the
witnesses for their appearance today.
Chief Taborn, news reports have highlighted an increase in
crime at the Prince George's County Metro stops. In fact, 6 of
the top 10 Metro stations with the highest crime rates in the
D.C. metropolitan area were in Prince George's County. Can you
detail what is being done to curb this crime?
Chief Taborn. Sure. In the 86 stations, we have many
stations that are end-of-the-line stations; and that's where we
have the larger parking facilities, whether it is garages or
parking lots. Seventy-five percent of the crimes that occur on
the Metro are crimes against property. So whether it's stealing
the GPS, the catalytic converter, or seeing change and breaking
the window and stealing that, those are the types of crimes
that we see most in the outlying jurisdictions and in
particular Prince George's County.
What we've done is work with Interim Chief Magaw and
reached out to his department, Prince George's County. The
general manager met back in April with 17 of the local
jurisdictional law enforcement leaders or their representatives
and talked about the crimes in and around the entire
jurisdiction and specifically those that we had seen an
elevation in crime; and we got a commitment from those chiefs
to do as much as they possibly could do.
One of the solutions was to provide them with a SmarTrip
card so their officers on patrol, as they go into the parking
lot, they could go, wherever they are doing patrol, have access
to that. And when you increase the visibility of law
enforcement, there is a probability that those people who are
committing those crimes will be reduced.
We also have, as Chief Lanier indicated, Blue TIDE, where
we partner on a quarterly basis with law enforcement throughout
the National Capital Region and show a combined effort, whether
it's in Montgomery County, Prince George's County, the District
of Columbia, and we show that we are there to support and those
types of efforts are those that we advocate and jointly
participate in collaborations.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Chief Lanier, I want to say it was last year at the
L'Enfant Station, or one of the southwest stations, there was a
group of young people that were attacking passengers, and of
course the public saw some of the disturbing video. Has that
been curtailed as far as these roving groups of young people
that attack passengers indiscriminately?
Chief Lanier. I can speak to the cases that I am aware of
that have occurred at the entrance of the Metros and around the
Metros; and, yes, we have been very successful.
Gallery Place was another place where we saw large groups
of young people who came down, particularly evenings and
weekends, that were creating all kinds of havoc around the
train. We worked jointly with Metro to put together kind of a
crowd metering system, an experience we learned in some of the
larger special events here, to kind of separate and meter those
groups into the transit stations a little bit carefully to keep
those groups that are looking to start trouble with other
groups separated, and that really has made a big difference,
and particularly around the Gallery Place Metro.
I know we have still had some disturbing incidents, though.
There is a lot of young people that come from all over the
region that just are using the Metro as a way to carry out
their bad behavior.
Mr. Clay. And have there been arrests made from officers
witnessing some of this activity? Are you all looking at video?
Chief Lanier. I would have to defer to Chief Taborn.
Chief Taborn. The case that you are making reference to
that happened at L'Enfant Plaza, we did in fact arrest the
young lady, a female approximately 15 years of age. She was
found guilty, and she was sentenced.
We have other situations where we utilize the videos or any
type of information that is provided to us and we do a
concerted effort to investigate all of the sources. We visited
many schools that these young people were attending; and, based
upon that type of collaboration with the Metropolitan Police
Department, we were able to identify this young lady and she
subsequently admitted her involvement in this. And, again, she
was sentenced.
Mr. Clay. Thank you both for your responses.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Gowdy. One of the core functions of Federal Government,
obviously, is national security and national defense. One of
the core functions of State government, at least in my State,
education is in the Constitution, and public safety is near and
dear to my heart as well, and it is also a core function of
government.
I feel the pain of the budget debates. I can tell you in
South Carolina, being married to a public schoolteacher, it was
tough last year watching our friends be furloughed; and as a
prosecutor having to furlough your employees in your office for
5 to 7 days without pay and then watch your sheriff have to
furlough deputies, it is tough. Because if you can't spend
money on public safety and national security, it makes you
wonder where you are spending money.
But at some point after the debate is over about our fiscal
straits, you all still have to do the job. So I guess what I am
asking is, aside from the resources which my colleagues have so
aptly and ably asked you about, aside from the resources, is
there anything else Congress can do, is there anything else we
can do to help you do your jobs better? I understand the budget
part and the finance part. Is there anything else we can do?
Chief Lanier. Well, everything kind of centers around
finances, unfortunately.
I will just say from my perspective, I have been here 21
years in Washington, DC, so I have been here throughout Metro's
development and watching the population in Washington, DC, and
the region continue to grow and watching the shifts in economic
development and the crime patterns that go along with that.
Crime patterns traditionally follow transportation, whether it
be major roadways or trains or what it is.
We have been really successful driving crime down in the
city. Unfortunately, our success is creating issues for Metro.
Because when you are really successful at pushing the kind of
hard-core, committed folks, people who are committed to crime,
they are going to go the easiest place to carry out their
crimes and get away. And Metro makes it difficult to police.
I can't imagine how Chief Taborn does his job with the size
of the force he has. I was at the Pentagon last week with a
chief over there. The Pentagon Force Protection Uniformed
Police Department has 850 officers. They are not subject to the
volume of 911 calls. They are not subject to the--typically,
the ridership on Metro is almost the population of the District
of Columbia. I can't imagine how Chief Taborn polices that
Metro. It is geography that moves. It is very difficult.
So I don't know what always is the politically correct
thing to say when we are here testifying, but I know that he
being probably won't say it, but I will say it for him. I think
he needs more police officers. I really, really do. We work
together, and we try and help with that challenge, but police
officers in those train stations and on those platforms not
only make people feel a lot safer but they will be safer. So
that's my two cents.
Mr. Gowdy. Chief Taborn, Chief Lanier, this is such a
different world that we are living in, at least those of us up
here who grew up in different times. One of the beautiful
things about summertime in Washington is the influx of young
people, either working in my colleagues' offices or working for
committees or just visiting the Nation's capital. And you stop
and think what this current crop of young people have seen,
from Colombine, to Timothy McVeigh, to 9-11, to shootings in
schools. It is a world that I didn't grow up in. I grew up with
the garden variety of stealing and shoplifting and that kind of
crime. It is a different world.
My colleagues have addressed the national security part.
For the garden-variety assaults--and you mentioned property
damage--are you getting the prosecutorial support that you
want? Are the crimes being taken seriously? And I say that with
some trepidation as a former prosecutor as to what the answer
may be. Is safety that doesn't amount to something cataclysmic
and horrible being taken seriously, in your judgment?
Chief Taborn. I think, in response to your question, those
crimes involving crimes against persons, we do get a lot of
support. Other crimes that may involved fare evasion,
disorderly conduct, spitting, drinking, eating, doing a lot of
the smaller things, our offices make the stop, they write the
citation, they go to court, and, more often than not, those
cases are not prosecuted.
So what that does in operating under constraints with the
budget is we pay overtime when we send an officer to court. So
when there is no follow-up--and we have not even talked about
the juveniles. Because juveniles, you either issue them a
warning citation or you do a custodial arrest. They now know
that there is not going to necessarily be follow-up if you
issue them a citation. So that is an area that we could see
some improvement in.
We would also like to improve the grant process to assist
us with getting dollars back into the transit security grant
program and to look at the flexibility of those grants. We know
that the Department of Homeland Security focuses on terrorism,
but many of the crimes that happen in the subway, we may not be
able to get funding to attack that. But if we attack the
regular day-to-day crime, the spin-off is it makes it difficult
for a terrorist to commit any other crime.
So the funding of an explosive K-9 is an example. That will
be funded, but a regular patrol dog will not be funded. So we
often ask and we will be asking TSA next week when we meet with
the top 50 transit chiefs in Denver to see if, in fact, there
is some flexibility in the grant so that we cover the whole
universe of security.
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Chief.
To my colleagues, given the seriousness of the issue and
the fact that our witnesses were gracious enough to wait on us,
if anyone interested in I guess we'll call it a lightning round
to ask a couple of follow-up questions, please proceed.
The gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank you for your
indulgence.
I have just one question. I would like to do a little
follow-up on the whole question of background checks. I would
like to ask a hypothetical question.
Basically, because I am concerned that we don't deny
individuals the opportunity to reenter the work force or to
regain acceptance back into society after they have been
convicted of criminal violations, if a person had gotten caught
with enough marijuana 13 years ago to be arrested and
convicted, come back under the 10-year rule, depending on what
the transgression may have been, would that person be eligible
for employment with the agency?
Mr. Sarles. I really have to get back to you on that, the
specific answer on that. We try to balance what the crimes were
against what the person is being asked to do. So I would have
to get back to you with a more specific answer on that.
[The information referred to follows:]
[Note.--The information referred to was not provided to the
subcommittee.]
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much. I would appreciate that.
Because I have run into so many instances where there was
blanket denial. And then, when you do a little checking, you
find out that the individual may have done something and that
he or she would actually pose no threat at all to anything. But
their record is there, and they are denied an opportunity. So I
would very much appreciate an answer to that question.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Clay.
Mr. Clay. No further questions.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Chairman, just one question. I would be
remiss if I didn't ask it. After all, this is a committee
consisting of members from throughout the country.
My question really has to do with the effect of the Red
Line Metro crash on other parts of the country. Most of us did
not know--I don't believe I knew until the crash--that there
were no national rail standards. I was astonished, because I am
accustomed to safety standards in every other mode of
transportation. No one would think of getting on an airplane if
they thought that every city could do its own standards. It is
the very essence of interstate commerce. Obviously, these
trains don't always go across State lines the way that ours do.
But Congress, in the wake of this historic crash that so
alarmed the country, many of us introduced a bill, and it is
reintroduced this year, that would require the Department of
Transportation to develop national rail standards. Now local
jurisdictions could have their own standards if those standards
were consistent with national standards. They wouldn't have to
be enforced by the Department of Transportation, or they could
ask the Department of Transportation to take on that task.
I ask this question, Mr. Sarles, because we are fortunate
that you have led two major transit systems. I would like to
know whether you think national rail standards would help
improve the safety of Metro and other rail transit agencies
around the country; and if so, how and why?
Mr. Sarles. In fact, in my last position we ran commuter
rail which is governed by Federal regulation, the FRA. I
welcome that. I think it is good to have national standards.
Ms. Norton. So commuter rail here in the district?
Mr. Sarles. A commuter rail here would have FRA regulation.
Ms. Norton. So they would be governed by national
standards?
Mr. Sarles. Right.
Ms. Norton. You are from New Jersey?
Mr. Sarles. From New Jersey, right.
Ms. Norton. So part of what you had jurisdiction over was
governed by national standards.
Mr. Sarles. Right.
Ms. Norton. How did you do the rest?
Mr. Sarles. Well, we had a State oversight commission or
committee which oversaw the light rail lines. We worked well
with them.
I will say that, as an operator, the primary responsibility
for safety rests with us. But it is excellent to have
oversight, because you never see everything.
Ms. Norton. Well, you have some oversight.
Mr. Sarles. Yes.
Ms. Norton. But you don't have the same standards, though,
so you can have apparently a very low standard in one part of
the country and a high standard in another.
Mr. Sarles. And that is why I think Federal Government
involvement in terms of making sure that, even if the State
agencies are doing it as an oversight, that there is some
overlaying uniform set of criteria so that everyone lives up to
the same standards I think is a good idea.
Ms. Norton. Could I ask--I was astonished that bus drivers,
Chief Taborn, were being attacked apparently often enough so
that a job action was threatened and that the attacks may be
over fares. Could you explain what prompts these attacks and
what you are doing to protect our bus drivers?
Chief Taborn. Sure. So far this year there have been
approximately 22 to 25 assaults on bus operators. They span
from either spitting upon a bus operator, throwing a cup of
water upon a bus driver, assaults with a weapon.
The case that we had last week out at Capitol Heights was a
mother who had a stroller and wanted to bring the stroller on.
It is the policy of WMATA that you fold your stroller up for
safety reasons. She didn't want to do that. She decided to spit
in the face of the bus operator and subsequently punched her.
So that was a situation that happened.
Most of the assaults stem from fare cases, people who don't
want to pay the fare. And one would conclude that the bus
operator probably has the most difficult job in transportation.
They have to ask for a fare, deal with people who may not care
for them, and then drive the bus while they are sitting behind
them. So, oftentimes, they may be the subject of assaults.
So we have been working with the various unions to come up
with a way that we can----
Ms. Norton. Are there more officers on the buses? Our chief
spoke about how you need more officers. But when you see
something like that happen, how does a bus driver know that he
is going to go out and he is going to get home in the evening?
Mr. Sarles. One of the other things that we are looking at
is how to protect the bus drivers. You can't have a police
officer on every bus.
Ms. Norton. No, you can't.
Mr. Sarles. So we have been working with the union to come
up with a shield that would separate the bus driver from the
passengers. It is one way to provide protection to them.
Ms. Norton. I regret that that has to be done, but you
can't ask somebody to drive a bus if you are going to be
assaulted, and you don't know who is going to get on your bus
and do so.
Thank you.
Mr. Gowdy. The gentleman from Missouri.
Mr. Clay. Just real quickly, I won't take the entire 5
minutes.
Chief Taborn or Mr. Griffin, in fiscal year 2011, Congress
appropriated $2.2 billion for a FEMA State and local program
which include the Transit Security Grant Program and the Urban
Area Security Initiative. For fiscal year 2012, President Obama
requested $3.8 billion for the State and local programs.
Earlier this month, the House passed the fiscal year 2012
Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill which
provides $1 billion for State and local programs, or $2.8
billion below the President's request and $1.2 billion below
fiscal year 2011.
Chief Taborn, how would substantial cuts to the Transit
Security Grant Program affect Metro's ability to prevent a
terrorist attack?
Chief Taborn. Well, any cuts in grants would have an
impact, but we cannot just think about this transit agency.
There are about 6,000 transit agencies across the country, many
who are larger and who are in metropolitan areas, and we can't
selfishly want to make sure that we get all of the funds. So
the decision as to how they go about assigning the grants based
upon the risks and the assessments is a difficult one. But many
of the programs that we want to move forward that are based
upon assessments that have been conducted on our system would
sort of fall by the wayside. So, you know, we would encourage
the funding of those programs to the highest level.
Mr. Clay. Thank you.
Mr. Griffin, how would substantial cuts to the Urban Area
Security Initiative affect the National Capital Region's
ability to prevent a terrorist attack, including against Metro?
Mr. Griffin. It certainly would make it a greater
challenge.
Given my experience over the years, I have cautioned the
decisionmakers on two issues. One, I think it is advisable to
use the grants to the extent possible on one-time acquisition,
more capital oriented, so that if the grant goes away you still
have the capital and you are not building in operational
requirements.
The second guideline that I have advocated is that we
should not initiate any program with the UASI funding that we
are not willing as local governments to sustain, and that has
been a tough message and not one that has always been adhered
to. But the reality of it is, for the process that we have just
completed, there was an 18 percent reduction in UASI funding,
and that was handled primarily by Homeland Security by
eliminating funding for the second-tier UASI-eligible
communities so that the first-tier communities could continue
to receive the funding they had received the previous year.
I would forecast that funding is going to continue to
decline, and we have to embrace our decisionmaking that leads
to continuing programs that we can sustain at the local level
once the funding disappears.
Mr. Clay. And the Washington Metro area is second tier or
first?
Mr. Griffin. We are first tier. We rank fourth in terms of
the amount of funds received behind New York City first, Los
Angeles second, Chicago third, D.C. fourth.
Mr. Clay. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Gowdy. The gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and this is
certainly my last question.
Mr. Griffin, the Transit First Coalition has called on
WMATA's board of directors and member jurisdictions to look at
alternatives to cutting services, knowing that something has to
occur. Are there any other options that you might be thinking
of that would provide the opportunity to not cut services but
continue to provide those that are obviously greatly needed?
Mr. Griffin. I can only speak from the perspective of
Fairfax County. In Virginia, a substantial amount of the
operational funding, the operational subsidy that is provided
to WMATA, is actually provided by the local jurisdictions; and
so it is a significant consideration.
When I prepare a budget for my board of supervisors, we
have over the years continued to support WMATA and have paid
the county's share for both operational and for capital. We see
that as a very valuable investment. We do have to balance that
against all of the other activities that we have within the
county.
I am not advocating that we give more, necessarily. What we
do is we take a balanced look at what our requirements are and
what is desirable in the way of service provided by WMATA. That
is not just the rail. It is also the bus service. We look at
doing things collaboratively.
Fairfax County recently built a new bus maintenance
facility in the western part of the county. We collaborated
with WMATA. It is actually a shared facility. It meets WMATA's
requirements, and it clearly meets our own requirements. We run
a very large bus system as well. So we look for collaborative
ways to do business together to enhance the service but
minimize the cost.
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Gowdy. I thank the gentleman from Illinois.
The gentleman from Arizona, Dr. Gosar.
Mr. Gosar. My colleagues bring up a good point. As a
business owner, there is only a limited amount of money here.
So I want to ask the question, I think one of the major
concerns from the GAO and the congressional fellows in regards
to budget is we have a problem and we want to know why we have
a problem where we have 80 percent of the funding not being
used. Tell me, can you provide us why we have funding with
estimates of almost 80 percent of the Federal grant dollars
that you have received have not been used? Can we get a detail
on that?
Mr. Sarles. Which grant program are you referring to?
Mr. Gosar. Unused security grants.
Mr. Sarles. Unused security grants. I think there--and I
will let the Chief go into the details. But one of the issues
in that particular case, I think we have obligated almost 100
percent of the grants. But when you look at the process--unlike
the FTA, when you look at the process that is used by the
agencies that provide that funding, it is a different process.
It is a very lengthy process to get to the money. I will let
the Chief go through the details on it.
Chief Taborn. I think, as Mr. Sarles indicated, many of the
grants that we have received through the transit security grant
programs came to us oftentimes 16\1/2\ months into a 30-month
program. They also come with requirements that we have to do
environmental, historic preservation. So there are a lot of
different requirements.
And oftentimes when we make applications for those grants
using the design and technology that we applied for, that
technology may have changed. So anytime there is a change, we
have to go back through the cycle, reach back out to FEMA, and
submit again.
It is not something that is unique to this transit agency.
I think you find the same thing with transit agencies across
the country.
Internally, we are working to do everything that we can in
the most expedient manner to comply with FEMA, to comply with
the Department of Homeland Security, but there, too, there is a
discussion of policy, which policies to use and which
guidelines to go through. And oftentimes transit agencies are
waiting to find out what it is that they need to do. Because we
definitely would like to expend that money. We have identified
those projects, and all of that money, as indicated by Mr.
Sarles, has been obligated. But we have to adhere to the
requirements of FEMA or, in some of the grants, the State
administrative office.
Mr. Gosar. So, in context, a lot of the problems have to do
with who has the jurisdictional aspects and the lack of a
nimble Federal Government and agency review; am I speaking
clearly?
Chief Taborn. You're absolutely correct.
Mr. Gosar. Because I know I am one of those people that
actually had to sponsor a jurisdictional problem over two
agencies over who had jurisdiction over a pipeline and who had
the ground. It has become obscene as a taxpayer, as a
businessman, and as a citizen.
Mr. Sarles, my point comes back to you again. One size
doesn't fit all. I heard a comment about having one set of
standards. One size does not fit all at all; does it?
Mr. Sarles. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by that, but
I want you to contrast in terms of Federal rules and grant
making.
On the ARRA grants, I think we got $100 million. Maybe it
was $200 million. We have expended two-thirds of that. Because
the rules were different, the process for getting the money was
different, and we were able to put it to work faster. And we
see the same thing when you look at formula funding grants from
the FTA, the rules are different. We are able to get through
the process faster and be able to expend and get improvements
from it.
Mr. Gosar. So, to me, it seems like we should be evaluating
agencies based upon like a nonprofit; should we not? For
example, an agency like the Army Corps of Engineers, where you
have a $3 million grant and only $1 million of it actually goes
to the services, the administrative costs within that of two-
thirds is ridiculous.
So what we have to have is an agency that is much more
nimble and working with local and State facilities to make sure
that more of that dollar is actually spent and allow you the
nimbleness to utilize it the way you see fit based upon the
conditions here. Because the conditions here are going to be a
lot different than they are for me in Arizona; are they not?
Mr. Sarles. I don't know about Arizona, but I know here
that when we get the money we expend as fast as possible to get
the improvements to our customers.
Mr. Gosar. Thank you.
Mr. Gowdy. I want to thank our panel.
Ms. Holmes Norton was gracious enough to take me to meet
Chief Lanier, and then Chief Lanier was gracious enough to
introduce me to her department, and that visit remains one of
the highlights of my first 5 months. So, Chief Taborn, I would
love--and I don't know whether Ms. Holmes Norton would be
willing to take me anywhere else or not. I think she probably
will. She is very gracious.
Ms. Norton. Anytime, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gowdy. I would love if she would allow me to join her
to visit you so I can know more about it and be a better
advocate for you and your officers.
Chief Taborn. Absolutely. We would be honored.
Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, and again I thank the guests for
indulging us while we voted.
We will be adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional information submitted for the hearing record
follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T1298.041