[Senate Hearing 114-659]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2017
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2016
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Susan Collins (chairman)
presiding.
Present: Senators Collins, Blunt, Boozman, Capito, Reed,
Mikulski, Coons, Schatz, and Murphy.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
STATEMENT OF HON. ANTHONY FOXX, SECRETARY
opening statement of senator susan m. collins
Senator Collins. The subcommittee will come to order.
Today, we welcome Secretary Foxx, who will testify on the
President's fiscal year 2017 budget request for the Department
of Transportation (DOT) as well as Inspector General Scovel,
who will discuss his office's budget request and the oversight
and other work the Office of Inspector General (OIG) has been
and will be conducting at the Department.
The budget proposes $98 billion for the Department of
Transportation in mandatory and discretionary spending for
fiscal year 2017. The administration has asserted that this
request abides by the bipartisan budget agreement Congress
passed last year. Regrettably, that is simply not accurate.
Instead of living within fiscal reality, the budget evades
the caps by using the same old gimmicks that we have seen in
past proposals. By shifting programs from discretionary to
mandatory, the President is able to show a 36-percent reduction
in spending under the budget caps. At the same time, he takes
credit for increasing DOT's overall budget by almost 30
percent. This undermines the essence of the budget agreement.
I am also disappointed that just 3 months after Congress
passed the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST
Act), the budget proposes an entirely new 10-year, $495
billion, 21st Century Clean Transportation plan on top of the
FAST Act. It is paid for by a new $10.25 per barrel tax on
crude oil and other unspecified business tax reforms.
I am simply perplexed by the administration waiting to put
forth this plan now when Congress debated and passed a
multiyear transportation reauthorization, which the President
signed into law, just 3 months ago. It is particularly
astonishing that after ignoring Congress' repeated requests to
engage in developing the necessary reforms to keep the Highway
Trust Fund solvent, the administration has finally proposed a
source of funding, though unrealistic, as it enters its final
year.
I just do not understand why this plan, which is a
legitimate plan, even if it is not one that I think would pass,
was not proposed last year in the midst of the negotiations on
the FAST Act.
For the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the request
includes nearly $16 billion to support investments to keep our
aviation system the safest and most efficient airspace in the
world.
I have serious reservations about the legislative proposal
in the House of Representatives. It seeks to privatize air
traffic control outside of the FAA largely under the control of
the major airlines. The public, in my judgment, would not be
well-served by exempting any part of the FAA from annual
congressional oversight, which is necessary to ensure
accountability, and a sustained focus on aviation safety.
The United States has the busiest, most complex airspace in
the entire world. Our Nation's air traffic controllers handle
more than 50,000 flights a day and more than 700 million
passengers each year. To liken our system to any other in the
world is preposterous.
Congressional oversight ensures that the FAA maintains a
system that works across the aviation industry, including for
general aviation and supporting small and rural communities.
Rural States like Maine and other States represented by members
on this committee benefit greatly from services that connect
rural America with the larger transportation network.
The Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is
modernizing our air traffic control system, and it is happening
today. Much of the backbone work for NextGen is finally
complete. The FAA has safely reduced wake separation standards
at 11 locations, and data comms departure clearance services
are used at eight tower sites.
As a result, we will see reduced flight delays. That will
be very welcome by us who travel back and forth every week to
our home States. And it will also lower fuel consumption.
One of the most innovative DOT programs, which I have
consistently advocated for, is the Transportation Investment
Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) program. I am very pleased
to see that the Department and the administration continue to
highlight the importance of this vital program.
TIGER has some flexibility to fund a wide range of
transportation projects that demonstrate national or regional
significance to economic growth and job creation. In my home
State of Maine, TIGER has supported vital bridge, port, and
rail projects that otherwise might not have been built.
I am also interested to hear more about the Department's
implementation plan for the new freight and highway competitive
program known as FASTLANE to address the critical freight
issues facing our Nation's aging infrastructure.
With regard to our rail network, I am deeply concerned by
the number of rail accidents that have occurred over the past
several years, including earlier this week. I know this is of
great concern to Secretary Foxx as well.
The Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA's) budget
request highlights the need to ensure safe transportation of
crude oil and other energy products across North America.
Unfortunately, last year, several members of this committee
experienced firsthand the importance of this issue due to
freight derailments in their States. All of us who live near
Quebec, Canada, will never forget the 2013 inferno caused by a
runaway freight train that killed 47 people and decimated the
downtown of a small Canadian community.
Rail safety is a very important issue that this committee
takes seriously, and I know the Department does as well. In
recent years, we have provided funding for FRA to hire
additional inspectors and safety personnel. Last year, we
included funding to provide 33 additional safety personnel, as
well as $50 million for new railroad safety grants. I look
forward to hearing the Department's progress in hiring
inspectors and its timeline for allocating these railroad
safety grants.
With this being the final year of this administration, I
would also like to emphasize to the Secretary the importance of
prioritizing the Department's regulatory agenda. There are many
regulations working their way through the Department and the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Priority should be given
to regulations that are urgently needed and are required,
indeed, mandated, by Congress. This is not the time to be
issuing unnecessary, burdensome regulations in the midnight
hours.
Finally, as we all know, Washington, DC, is experiencing
its own transportation crisis today as the DC Metro is shut
down for emergency inspections of power cable systems.
According to the new general manager, the shutdown is the
result of a fire at McPherson Square station on Monday, which
is similar to a fatal fire that occurred at L'Enfant Plaza just
1 year ago.
The unfortunate timing of the notification for the 29-hour
shutdown as commuters were heading home last evening is having
a severe impact on the Federal work force, on tourists who are
visiting their Nation's capital, and on the DC local school
system.
Safety clearly must be the top priority for all transit
agencies. While this was a very tough decision for Metro to
make, it once again brings into question the reliability of the
system and whether or not adequate oversight is being conducted
in a system that it relied upon by so many daily commuters and
tourists who visit the Washington, DC, area. I am sure that
this issue will be brought up in questioning as well.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Susan M. Collins
The subcommittee will come to order. Today, we welcome Secretary
Foxx, who will testify on the President's fiscal year 2017 budget
request for the Department of Transportation, as well as Inspector
General Scovel who will discuss his office's budget request and the
oversight and other work the OIG has been and will be conducting at the
Department.
I welcome both of you and look forward to hearing your testimony.
The budget proposes $98 billion for the Department of
Transportation in mandatory and discretionary spending for fiscal year
2017. The Administration has asserted that the request abides by the
bipartisan budget agreement Congress passed last year; however, this is
simply not accurate. Instead of living within fiscal reality, the
budget evades the budget caps by using the same old gimmicks we have
seen in past proposals. By shifting programs from discretionary to
mandatory, the President is able to show a 36 percent reduction in
spending under the budget caps. At the same time, he takes credit for
increasing DOT's overall budget by almost 30 percent. This undermines
the essence of the budget agreement.
I am also disappointed that just 3 months after Congress passed the
FAST Act, the budget proposes an entirely new 10-year, $495 billion
``21st Century Clean Transportation Plan'' on top of the FAST Act. It
is paid for by a new $10.25 per barrel tax on crude oil and other
unnamed business tax reforms. I am perplexed why the Administration
waited to put forth this plan now when Congress debated and passed a
multi-year transportation reauthorization, which the President signed
into law, just 3 months ago.
It is particularly astonishing that after ignoring Congress'
repeated requests to engage with this Administration on developing the
necessary reforms to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent, the
Department has finally proposed a source of funding, though
unrealistic, as this Administration enters its final year.
For the Federal Aviation Administration, the request includes
nearly $16 billion to support investments to keep our aviation system
the safest and most efficient airspace in the world. I have serious
reservations about the legislative proposal in the House that seeks to
privatize air traffic control outside of the F.A.A., largely under the
control of the major airlines. The public would not be well served by
exempting any part of the F.A.A. from annual Congressional oversight,
which is necessary to ensure accountability for program performance and
a sustained focus on aviation safety.
The United States has the busiest, most complex airspace in the
world. Our Nation's air traffic controllers handle more than 50,000
flights a day and more than 700 million passengers each year. These men
and women from all over the country are responsible for providing us
with the safest and most efficient airspace in the world. To liken our
system with any other in the world is preposterous.
Congressional oversight ensures the F.A.A. maintains a system that
works across the aviation industry, including general aviation and
supporting small and rural communities. Rural States like Maine, and
other States represented by Members on this committee, benefit greatly
from services that connect rural America with the larger transportation
network.
NextGen is modernizing our air traffic control system, and it is
happening today. Much of the backbone work for NextGen is finally
complete. The F.A.A. has safely reduced wake separation standards at 11
locations and Data Comm's departure clearance services are used at
eight tower sites. As a result, we will see reduced flight delays and
less fuel consumption.
One of the most innovative DOT programs, which I have advocated for
consistently, is the TIGER program. I am pleased to see the
Administration continues to highlight the importance of this vital
program. TIGER has the flexibility to fund a wide range of
transportation projects that demonstrate national or regional
significance to economic growth and job growth. In my home State of
Maine, TIGER has supported vital bridge, port, and rail projects that
might not have otherwise been built. I am also interested to hear more
about the Department's implementation plan of the new Freight and
Highway competitive program, known as FAST LANE, to address the
critical freight issues facing our Nation's aging infrastructure.
With regard to our rail network, I am deeply concerned by the
number of train accidents that have occurred over the past several
years, including earlier this week. The Federal Railroad
Administration's budget request highlights the need to ensure the safe
transportation of crude oil and other energy products across North
America. Unfortunately, last year several members of this Committee
experienced firsthand the importance of this issue due to freight
derailments in their States. All of us who live near Quebec, Canada,
will never forget the 2013 inferno caused by a runaway freight train
that killed 47 and wiped out a community's downtown.
Railroad safety is an important issue that this Committee takes
very seriously. In recent years, we have provided funding for F.R.A. to
hire additional inspectors and safety personnel. In fiscal year 2016,
we included funding to provide 33 safety personnel as well as $50
million for new Railroad Safety Grants. I look forward to hearing the
Department's progress in hiring inspectors and the timeline for
allocating the Railroad Safety Grants. I will once again be looking
closely at how we can best target Federal funds to reduce accidents in
both passenger and freight trains.
With this being the final year of this Administration, I would like
to emphasize to the Secretary the importance of prioritizing the
Department's regulatory agenda in the months ahead. There are many
regulations working their way through the Department and OMB. Priority
should be given to regulations that are urgently needed and are
required by Congress. This is not a time to be issuing unnecessary,
burdensome regulations in the midnight hours.
With that, let me call upon my colleague and friend Senator Reed,
the ranking member.
Senator Collins. With that, let me call upon my colleague
and friend from Rhode Island, the subcommittee's distinguished
ranking member, Senator Reed.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Senator Reed. Thank you, Madam Chairman, for your kind
introduction and leadership.
And thank you, Secretary Foxx. Welcome. You have led the
Department with great energy and honesty, and we appreciate
very much your efforts over the months you have been leading
the Department.
As you work through the last year of this administration, I
want you to know that we all appreciate your leadership and the
way you have worked with the subcommittee. So thank you again,
Mr. Secretary.
Once again, I hope we can convince you to come up to Rhode
Island for a visit. In your earlier trips to Rhode Island, you
saw how our transportation is essential to our State, just as
it is to Maine and Maryland and Missouri and West Virginia and
every other State in the country. You visited our Port of
Davisville, which, once again, celebrated another record year
handling automobiles, over 269,000 vehicles in 2015, a
remarkable economic engine for the State.
You have also helped us break ground on the T.F. Green
runways for the new airport, so thank you very much. This
project will be done in 2017. Indeed, two international
airlines started service to Rhode Island because of the ongoing
efforts. Thank you again.
And we are also working with you to study intercity rail,
which is a key aspect of our economy, as it is in so many other
metropolitan areas in the United States. We want to maximize
intermodal efficiency. We want our airports, our rail systems,
and our bus systems all to operate together. These intermodal
connections are absolutely critical as we go forward. Thank you
for your interest and your personal involvement.
There are, however, some potential difficulties facing the
air traffic control system and airports in general. The
chairman has pointed them out.
As you know, the House of Representatives is considering a
bill to privatize air traffic control. Giving away billions of
dollars in Federal assets to a nonprofit corporation controlled
by airlines without any congressional oversight is I believe an
ill-conceived idea at best. And I do not think that
privatization will offer a path to safer skies.
I think it will, rather, stop NextGen investments in its
tracks, increase costs to consumers, and cut services to small
and rural commercial airports. I think it is a dangerous
proposal that moves this country in the wrong direction.
What this country does need is investment in our airports,
bridges, roads, transit systems. Again, the chairman pointed
out the Metro service interruption of 29 hours, another
indication underscoring the need for investment in transit,
railroads, ports, a host of facilities that need additional
resource, additional effort.
Deficiencies and underinvestment in our transportation
system impact American lives in ways we feel every day. Once
again, we feel it here in Washington today.
We have not been keeping up with the demand. We have not
made the necessary investment to keep pace with this demand.
The FAST Act we passed last year is to start, but America needs
more investment in infrastructure that produces more jobs and a
safer, more efficient transportation system to move our economy
forward.
Our needs are great, as you well know. Roads and bridges
throughout the country are crumbling and inadequate for the
traffic they carry.
Rhode Island's Route 610 connector, for example, is
crumbling with patches upon patches barely holding it together.
As the director of our Department of Transportation said, his
agency has been in design or on replacement for more than 30
years trying to deal with this problem. So this is not a recent
development.
Under the leadership of our Governor, Governor Raimondo,
the State has a vision, not just about fixing the 610 connector
but also making it safe, adding a bus rapid transit lane so we
can have an increase in transit in the State along with
highways. That is thinking ahead and thinking big, and it is
worthy of Federal support. And I am going to ask you to
consider that.
Amtrak, which serves the Providence rail center, has a $7.3
billion state of good repair backlog for the Northeast alone.
Many of its assets are over a century old and need to be
replaced. I support updating the entire corridor, including the
Providence station, which is an important component to the
overall system.
As I mentioned before, the FAST Act has provided modest
growth in transportation funding. But, unfortunately, the
levels fall short of demand. I do want to applaud you for your
advocacy leading up to reauthorization and for pushing us to do
more. Thank you.
Now it is your job to implement the law, and it is now our
task on this subcommittee to make decisions about
transportation funding for fiscal year 2017. Your request
includes FAST Act, level funding for service programs as well
as the new 21st Century Clean Transportation plan.
It is a bold proposal, and I appreciate the administration
looking forward with big investments. It shows the world of
possibilities on what we could achieve with the right vision.
For example, the administration's request includes $1.25
billion for the TIGER program, which is in extremely high
demand and is a linchpin in making innovative projects happen
all across this country; $15.9 billion for the FAA, which fully
funds air traffic controller work force and provides $1 billion
for NextGen programs; $2.3 billion for Amtrak current service;
and $3.7 billion for improving rail service nationwide. Again,
critical.
And as I mentioned, we are looking very closely in Rhode
Island at integrating all the services at T.F. Green Airport
and also at the Pawtucket and Central Falls locations. These
funds would help expand service not only in Rhode Island but
many other parts of the country.
$1.2 billion for the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, which will allow the agency to improve vehicle
safety defect investigations. $3.5 billion for FTA's capital
investment grant program, which has seen a 70-percent growth in
projects since fiscal year 2013.
These programs all rely on discretionary resources provided
in the transportation, housing and urban development bill and
they all save lives, create jobs, and grow the economy.
I know we will be unable to meet many of these goals due to
budget constraints, but I know that you make your request based
on the real needs you see and hear about each day. Congress
needs to hear about these needs.
Again, Secretary Foxx, thank you for your service. I look
forward to your testimony.
And thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Senator Reed.
Normally, we would now turn to the Secretary's opening
statement, but Senator Mikulski, I know that your constituents
have been most affected by the Metro, so I wanted to give you
an opportunity.
Senator Mikulski. I will do it in the question round.
Senator Collins. That sounds great. Thank you.
Senator Foxx--Secretary Foxx. I do not know whether that
was a promotion or demotion.
[Laughter.]
Senator Collins. These days, it is hard to tell.
SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. ANTHONY FOXX
Secretary Foxx. Madam Chairman, thank you so much. And I
want to thank the members of the committee, Ranking Member
Reed, and the ranking member of the full committee, Senator
Mikulski. Thank you all very much. I want to thank you for the
opportunity to meet with you today to discuss the President's
2017 fiscal year proposal for the Department of Transportation.
At the outset, however, I want to begin my statement today
by discussing the suspension of operations by Washington's
Metrorail system. This service suspension has not only been
disruptive to the local Washington, DC, community, but to the
operations of the Federal Government. Ranking Member Mikulski
has been a leader in the effort to get this system in shape,
and she and I have worked together on this issue, despite many
shared frustrations with the Washington Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority (WMATA).
Earlier this year, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
determined that the safety oversight entity that DC, Maryland,
and Virginia had created was a failure. We then informed the
three jurisdictions that we will temporarily assume safety
oversight duties while they set up a new, stronger, permanent
safety oversight entity.
Frankly, the three jurisdictions have not yet acted on
their responsibility, and I have made that point abundantly
clear in recent months and will continue to until that work is
done.
However, all of us still need to roll up our sleeves and
help WMATA help itself.
WMATA has hundreds of millions of unspent balances and open
grants. I am directing the FTA to evaluate the status of these
funds and prioritize their direction to safety wherever
possible.
Also, as work proceeds on the jumper cable issue, the FTA
will conduct a safety inspection blitz starting next week on
three other critical areas that we have identified as serious
problems for Metro: red light running, use of emergency brakes,
and track integrity. This builds on inspections that have been
conducted over the last several months.
Every year since I have been Secretary, I have urged
Congress to pass a long-term surface transportation bill.
Today, I have come in part to thank Congress for passing a
bipartisan bill last year, the FAST Act, which has done a lot
to remove the cloud of uncertainty hanging over our surface
system for the better part of a decade.
Today, I ask you to join the Obama administration as we
seek to build on the FAST Act with an even more robust 21st
century-focused plan to win the future.
For fiscal year 2017, the President's plan includes $98
billion in transportation investments, a significant increase
over the FAST Act levels to support advancements in safety,
repairing and replacing infrastructure, and driving forward
innovation and emerging technologies that can help us move
faster, more efficiently, and safer in the future.
The President's budget recognizes that neither our current
patchwork funding approach nor the rigid and antiquated
distribution of transportation dollars through formulas is
going to put our Nation's infrastructure in the best possible
position for our kids and grandkids. As the long and tortured
debate about how to put together a surface transportation bill
has shown, our transportation bills are no longer layups.
If we work hard now, it will save stress when the FAST Act
expires. While the FAST Act helps, we are still playing catch-
up, and the same demographic and economic pressures are coming.
Our future challenges, as our report Beyond Traffic tells
us, will get even worse tomorrow than they are today; 70
million more people by 2045, creating even more demand on our
transportation system; freight volumes increasing by 45
percent; 65 percent more trucks on the road; and more of the
population concentrated in what social scientists and other
observers called mega-regions.
In short, our funding and funding distribution models for
America's transportation are rearview mirrors, and the massive
demographic and economic pressures are our front windshield.
With the FAST Act's passage, Congress should rethink our
strategy, and the President's budget offers a pathway for the
future. Specifically, the President's request proposes a new
clean transportation plan. This plan not only increases
spending on infrastructure, it also looks to spend the money
smarter, pushing it to the local and regional levels where
system integration is most needed and projects can be built
much faster.
That is why the President recommends a series of
innovative, new grant programs that advance a 21st century
approach with an annual average budget of $10 billion over the
life of the plan. Also included is a nearly $20 billion
allocation for transit to address fast-growing needs, $6
billion a year for high-performance rail, and finally a clean
transportation plan that will help us prepare for the future by
providing nearly $4 billion over 10 years to research the
integration of new technologies in transportation, including
autonomous vehicles.
Some have already spoken to the allocation for NextGen and
for FAA. This funding will enable the FAA to continue
operations at current funding levels while maintaining its
focus on aviation safety.
With that, I want to thank you, Madam Chairman, for
allowing me to present the President's budget request to you. I
look forward to your questions, and I again thank the
committee.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Anthony Foxx
introduction
Chairman Collins, Ranking Member Reed, and members of the
Subcommittee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to meet with you
today to discuss the President's fiscal year 2017 budget plan for the
Department of Transportation. The President's request totals $98.1
billion in resources that will support the Department's top priority,
safety. This plan is focused on the future with high impact investments
in the safe integration of emerging technologies, such as autonomous
vehicles and unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). It supports improvements
that have the potential to transform transportation systems, save
lives, and reduce carbon emissions. The President's Budget charts a
path towards fundamental changes in the way the government balances and
integrates transportation options in planning for the future.
enhancing surface transportation
The surface transportation investments in the President's fiscal
year 2017 Budget build on the recently enacted Fixing America's Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act, which President Obama signed into law on
December 4, 2015. The FAST Act is an important down-payment for
building 21st Century surface transportation systems. It includes a
series of important changes, to improve the efficiency of permitting
and project delivery, including a number of provisions fostering
ladders of opportunity, establishes new freight-focused funding
programs, and makes changes to a number of the Department's safety
programs. These changes include creating a new grant program and
enhancing authority with respect to recalls, civil penalties, and the
collection of safety data.
However, the FAST Act largely maintains current programs--including
the traditional funding and program distribution between highway and
transit funding, with limited support for multimodal plans and
projects. While the FAST Act included authorization for rail programs,
rail funding will continue to be determined on an annual basis, without
the certainty provided by the multi-year trust fund structure that
currently supports highway and some transit programs.
Thus, the fiscal year 2017 Budget builds on the FAST Act, taking
the next steps to reform funding streams and encourage better planning
and projects at the State and regional levels through increased
investment in areas such as rail and transit. It also includes a series
of new, multimodal programs that increasingly cut across traditional
siloes, in support of more comprehensive regional strategies that
connect communities and support climate and greenhouse gas reduction
goals.
To address these concerns, the President's request directs
investments over a 10--year period towards a 21st Century Clean
Transportation Plan that reflect America's changing demographics and
economy, while at the same time providing access to opportunity.
--As more Americans move to cities, regions, and megaregions, it is
time for us to reassess how we plan for and use our limited
transportation dollars.
--At the same time, this Clean Transportation Plan recognizes the
impact today's transportation systems have on climate change
and the environment and seeks to build incentives that will
encourage new, cleaner forms of transportation and better land
use planning.
--This plan also acknowledges the important role that innovation and
technology play in keeping transportation safe, reliable, and
efficient by requesting funds for programs such as a new
autonomous vehicle deployment pilot that will yield important
benefits.
Overall, the President's Budget request represents a combination of
these proposed 21st Century Plan investments and funding for the
Department's traditional transportation programs. Key elements of the
request include the following:
investing in clean, 21st century surface transportation options that
reflect america's changing demographics and provide access to
opportunity
Enhances Clean Transportation Options for American Families.--Over
the next decade, the Budget invests an average of nearly $20 billion
per year in new investments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
provide new ways for families to get to work, to school, and to the
store. The Budget would expand transit systems in cities, fast-growing
suburbs, and rural areas; make high-speed rail a viable alternative to
flying in major regional corridors; modernize our freight system; and
expand the successful Transportation Investment Generating Economic
Recovery (TIGER) program to support high-impact, innovative local
projects.
Supports Investment Decisions Towards a ``21st Century Regions''
Approach That Reflects a Changing Demographics and Economy.--Currently,
the majority of Federal transportation funding flows, via formula,
through the State. To address the shifting demographics in America,
this Budget balances that funding stream, by directing billions of
dollars through regional governments, such as Metropolitan Planning
Organizations, empowering them to play a stronger role in
decisionmaking. Over a 10-year period, the Budget invests an average of
$10 billion a year towards a series of new, innovative multimodal
programs that improve the balance of funding and decisionmaking and
will accelerate the move towards smarter, cleaner, and more integrated
communities. The funding would flow across transportation modes to
support transit-oriented development; reconnect downtowns divided by
freeways; and, bicycle and pedestrian networks.
The President's Budget fully supports FAST-authorized funding
levels for surface transportation programs, aimed at keeping the system
safe and in a state of good repair. In addition to the proposed
increases for surface programs, the Budget fully funds FAST Act levels
for fiscal year 2017, across transportation modes which include: $44
billion to invest in the Nation's critical highway and bridge systems;
nearly $10 billion to support operations of public transit systems
across the Nation; roughly $730 million for the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to research and develop new,
life-saving technologies and programs; and over $640 million to support
nationwide motor carrier safety through the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA).
advances public and private sector collaboration to accelerate cost-
competitive, low-carbon technologies and intelligent transportation
systems
Continues the Transition to the Next Generation Air Transportation
System (NextGen).--The Budget requests a total of $1 billion to support
NextGen. This includes $877 million for NextGen Capital investments, an
increase of $22 million above fiscal year 2016, which will advance
modernization efforts; enhance automation; implement satellite-based
surveillance capabilities; improve data communication practices and
technology; and maximize traffic flow.
Funds Pilot Deployments of Safe and Climate-Smart Autonomous
Vehicles to Create Better, Faster, Cleaner Urban and Corridor
Transportation Networks.--To accelerate the development and adoption of
autonomous vehicles, the Budget includes $3.9 billion over 10-years for
large-scale deployment pilots to develop a common multistate
interoperability framework for connected and autonomous vehicles.
ensures transportation safety keeps pace with changing technology and
organizational needs
Integrates Surface Transportation Technologies Safely Into the
Transportation System.--High impact investments will support activities
such as NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), to test vehicle
safety through state-of-the-art equipment and more realistic crash
dummies. The Budget invests $35 million in fiscal year 2017 for this
integration.
Strengthens Regulatory Enforcement Agencies Across the Department
Through Resources and Organizational Changes.--Across the Department,
agencies are taking action to strengthen the regulatory and enforcement
capabilities that are key to protecting the safety of travelers and
movement of goods.
--Investments would provide over $47 million for NHTSA's Office of
Defects Investigation to improve its effectiveness in
identifying safety defects quickly, ensuring remedies are
implemented promptly, and notifying the public of critical
defects.
--The Budget's $295 million request for the Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) also includes proposed
organizational changes to elevate the role of research and
analysis in support of regulatory development and enforcement.
Supports Rail Safety Through Research and Development and
Implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC).--The Budget includes
$213 million to support the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA's)
rail safety and development programs, including implementation and
enforcement of PTC, as well as related track and bridge safety
activities, and another $53 million for additional safety research.
This includes $12.5 million to analyze and demonstrate the safety and
environmental benefits of Electronically Controlled Pneumatic brakes.
Protects Our Maritime Interests.--The Budget provides over $428
million for the Maritime Administration to implement programs that
promote the economic competitiveness, efficiency, and productivity of
U.S. Maritime transportation.
invests in 21st century government and project delivery
Modernizes Permitting and Project Delivery.--The Budget supports
investments, consistent with new requirements in the FAST Act that
ensure we are making 21st Century investments through 21st Century
delivery mechanisms. The Budget expands the Administration's progress
to expedite permitting and approval processes while protecting safety
and the environment.
Supports Ongoing Establishment of a National Surface Transportation
and Innovative Finance Bureau.--Building on the Administration's
successful Build America Investment Initiative, the FAST Act created a
new office to streamline and improve the application processes for
credit programs, expedite project delivery, and promote innovative
financing best practices. The Budget requests resources for
implementation, as well as $275 million for the Transportation
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Program, along with
flexibility to also use resources from a range of new multi-modal
programs to cover credit subsidy costs.
Protects Cybersecurity and Data Integrity.--The Budget includes $15
million to continue improvements to the Department's cybersecurity
protections, and another $4 million to assist the Department in meeting
the requirements of the Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of
2014.
When taken together all of these new initiatives support our
expanding freight network, and address the ongoing need for
improvements in the transportation options that support ladders of
opportunity for all Americans.
preparing for reauthorization of the faa
Planning for the Future of the FAA.--The President's fiscal year
2017 Budget request includes a total of $15.9 billion to support the
ongoing work of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This funding
level would provide the FAA with ``steady-state'' funding overall when
compared with fiscal year 2016 levels. The FAA's authorization is set
to expire on March 31, 2016. As new legislative proposals are offered
and considered, the President's budget continues to propose expanded
funding flexibilities that would help FAA manage its resources in a
more efficient and effective way.
Thank you again, for the opportunity to appear before you today and
I will be happy to answer your questions.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
We are going to start the questioning with the ranking
member of the full committee, Senator Mikulski, in light of the
fact that her constituents more than any of ours have been
adversely affected by the shutdown of the Metro system.
Senator Mikulski.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you, Madam Chair, for once again
your usual sensitivity and courtesy, something very much needed
in the body politic, and the vice chair of the committee,
Senator Reed.
Secretary Foxx, it is good to see you again. I want to
commend you and your professional staff for the outstanding job
that you do. You are a very hands-on administrator and your
staff takes their job very seriously. We in Maryland are very
happy and proud of our assets, whether it is the Port of
Baltimore, the airport, the MARC commuter rail, or the Purple
Line.
But today, we have heartburn once again over the Washington
Metro. Seven-hundred-thousand people ride the Metro every day,
700,000 people. Some older senior citizens. Many work age going
to work here at the Capitol and in the great District of
Columbia. Some are schoolchildren coming to school here in our
community, and they count on a system that is safe, reliable,
and they can count on.
Well, you know what happened. Paul Wiedefeld shut down the
system today. It was drastic. It was disruptive. And yet I
believe it was necessary.
We are deeply concerned about this. I am no Janie-come-
lately to this. Going back to 2009 when on June 7 nine people
died when two Metro trains collided, we have been working to
change the governance, improve the management, and bring more
resources.
From 2009 to 2016, we have had seven incidents of tragedy.
We have had 15 deaths, nine rider deaths, and six Metro deaths.
Some happened at Metro itself. Right after the terrible June 9
crash in August, we had a Metro employee die in Silver Spring.
He was hit by the maintenance equipment.
I will not go through every incident, but here we are,
2010, Metro employee struck by a maintenance truck. Shady
Grove, the carwash fell on an employee who lost limbs. So it is
at Metro that many of these accidents occur to Metro employees.
Then, of course, not too long ago, we had the terrible fire
at L'Enfant Plaza where one person died, but 80 nearly died of
smoke inhalation. They could not get out. Thank God for the
District of Columbia first responders who literally moved
heaven and Earth to get there to help them out.
So where are we today? We have tried to change the
management structure. We have tried to improve the governance.
You have been a big part of that, where you could appoint the
board. And we have tried to increase money.
This subcommittee has put over $1 billion into Metro every
year. It helps us buy new crash-worthy cars.
So my constituents and those in the District of Columbia
and Virginia say, well, we will tough it out for 1 day, but is
this change going to be reliable? Is it going to be
sustainable? Is it going to stick?
For months and years now, we have called for a culture of
safety. But what we get is a culture of resistance to making
changes for safety.
So my question to you, as someone who is really involved
himself, and you have run into the buzz saw of resistance just
the way I have, and the way Ben Cardin and Mark Warner and Tim
Kaine have, and Senator John Warner when he was here, so my
question to you is, what more can the Federal Government do to
help? What more should we in Congress do? Do we need more
money? Do we need more authority? What kind of change? Because
what we need is a Metro that really works, and in a way that
people have confidence that when they get on, they will get off
and they will be okay.
I also worry about the workers who themselves have often
been hurt or injured.
What could you share with us today where we can make a
change, where what you can do to help Wiedefeld get this
literally on track, and a track that gets people where they
need to go?
Secretary Foxx. Senator, first of all, I want to thank you
for what I would call your ferocious advocacy on behalf of
safety and on behalf of the workers and users of the system.
What I would say is that the coalition of the willing here
has to involve the jurisdictions themselves, and it has to
involve all stakeholders who have decisionmaking authority over
WMATA. For months, for months, I have called on the
jurisdictions to stand up an effective State safety oversight
organization.
We took over State safety oversight temporarily to give
them time to get it stood up correctly, and yet we have no
concrete movement on the part of these jurisdictions.
That would be a good start. All of us, those jurisdictions,
Congress, our Department, the board of directors, and the
leadership of the organization itself, Mr. Wiedefeld and his
team, have to have relentless focus on safety.
I am prepared to do more. I have already said that we are
going to look at open grants that WMATA has available and look
at directing those to safety-enhancing investments.
But I really think this is a place where WMATA is going to
have to run itself in a safe fashion. The culture down there
has got to change. And we cannot enable the continuation of
these safety failures any longer.
Senator Mikulski. Well, first of all, thank you.
Second, I also want to say that we are not going to take
the whole hearing today, and the leadership of the committee
has been very generous to me this morning.
The Senators from Maryland to Virginia intend to hold an
oversight meeting with Mr. Wiedefeld and other people who could
help solve this problem as soon as we get back from our spring
work period.
But are you telling me that Metro has unspent money that
they could be using right now for safety? Why is it unspent?
What do you think it could buy?
Secretary Foxx. Well, we have the authority to direct that
they use those monies to focus on their safety priorities. Some
of these dollars were appropriated or provided to them in past
years for any number of things. I have the FTA team looking at
whether any of these funds are constrained by contracts that
WMATA may have.
But rest assured, we are going to make sure that resources
are not the issue. But I think the point that I am trying to
make is, I do not think it is just resources. I think it is
culture, and I think it is a deliberate decision that is needed
on the part of everyone involved in this to focus relentlessly
on safety and get things right. We are digging ourselves out of
a hole.
Senator Mikulski. I know my time is up, but what you are
saying is there has to be an insistence and persistence, not
only from you, not only for me, but from the leaders of the
jurisdictions whose constituents themselves ride it.
We have to look at not only the money but the consistently
run red lights, and we had to make sure the tracks are rider-
worthy, and then this whole issue. But the running of the red
lights really is a fearsome issue.
Let's follow up in another meeting. I appreciate the fact
that we have a beginning framework here.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Senator Reed.
Senator Collins. Thank you, Senator.
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
Mr. Secretary, I am very interested in the development of
driverless cars, so-called autonomous vehicles, which could
provide a substantial improvement to our transportation
network, particularly by giving more options to seniors who are
living in rural areas where there is not mass transit of any
kind.
The key benefit, however, is in reducing the number of
crashes and fatalities that occur every year due to human
error. While fully autonomous vehicles may be years away, there
are tools such as collision avoidance, lane deviation,
electronic stability control, that can help reduce crashes in
the near term.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
has traditionally provided the testing regime and standards-
setting for such new safety technologies.
The budget request includes a new $4 billion request for
over 10 years for large-scale deployment pilots to test
autonomous vehicles in designated corridors. This appears to be
an entirely new role for the Department, and there are no
details in the budget on how this large amount of funding would
be used.
What is the plan? Is the budget potentially duplicative of
private sector efforts already underway to deploy these
vehicles in real-world driving situations?
Secretary Foxx. Thank you for the question. You are correct
that the proposal is $4 billion over 10 years for pilot
programs.
We also agree with you that the automated technologies have
enormous potential for safety benefits. And to accelerate those
benefits, we are proposing to invest these resources in support
of real-world testing. Now there is private-sector testing that
is currently being engaged in, but we believe that the
Government has an interest in understanding further things like
whether national policy should focus on licensing, what sorts
of testing is reliable, information-sharing among States and
the Federal Government, and to what extent we can build on
those systems.
We have actually already speeded up the deployment of these
systems through regulations, including the New Car Assessment
Program (NCAP), which is beginning to require or at least
encourage some of these technologies as you talked about, some
of the automated types of systems to come into the vehicle as
part of the grading system for NCAP.
Having said that, we believe it is beneficial for the
private sector to test, just as the public sector tests. And
many of these tests will be done in conjunction with the
private sector.
SPEED LIMITERS
Senator Collins. Thank you. Last year, Mr. Secretary, I
asked you about the status of the Department's proposed
rulemaking on speed limiters or Governors, as they are also
known. You stated at that hearing that the rule would be out
``no later than the fall.'' Here we are in our hearing a year
later and well-beyond last fall and the Department has yet to
issue its rulemaking.
I am puzzled by this because this is a rule that will help
to reduce highway fatalities. It has the support of the
trucking industry. It has the support of various safety
advocates.
Why has there been a delay in this rulemaking?
Secretary Foxx. So subsequent to our hearing last year, OMB
did accept the heavy truck speed limit, or Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), on May 18, 2015, as a top priority. We have
been working closely with OMB to get that rule pushed out.
Based on our current estimates, we expect the rule to be
completed by April 22, 2016. So within the next month or so.
Senator Collins. Thank you. I will hold you to that.
Senator Reed.
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER STAFFING
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
We spoke about air traffic controllers previously in our
statements regarding this proposed privatization. I think it
should clear where both the chair and I stand on that one. But
there is another issue and that is there is a significant
number of controllers who are eligible to retire at FAA
facilities. In fact, it looks like there are more potential
retirees than there are individuals in the pipeline prepared to
come aboard.
So what are you doing to ensure that there is no gap, that
we have an adequate number of controllers?
Secretary Foxx. I can get you the statistics, Senator, but
in short, we have annual hiring goals for air traffic
controllers, and we are currently at about 54 percent of our
hiring goal for the current year and still going. We feel very
comfortable that we will meet that target this year.
You are correct that we do have an aging work force, and we
are working to onboard new air traffic controllers and move
them through our systems as quickly as possible so that we can
stay ahead of that attrition.
In addition to the hiring goals, we are also looking at two
other aspects of the process. One is getting folks to the FAA
Academy or equivalent training as quickly as possible from the
time they get onboarded. And secondly, we are actually looking
at some of our testing programs to ensure that those are
calibrated to get us the best possible air traffic controllers.
Senator Reed. A follow-on question, the inspector general
has raised concerns that when you are looking at your work
force, you are looking at historical trends and not specific
and critical facilities.
What are you and the FAA doing to better factor in
facility-specific air traffic so that you might have the right
number, but they are just not properly located?
Secretary Foxx. I would like to take that back to the FAA
and give you a more complete answer. But what I would say is
that our airspace remains fairly dynamic. We know where a lot
of their traffic is, but we also have some modeling that helps
us predict where we think it is going to get more intense over
time.
I fully expect that our answer will reflect our projections
going forward, and our response to that. But I would like to
give a sharper answer from FAA.
NEXTGEN MODERNIZATION
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
On a related issue, an FAA issue, the inspector general
issued a report in January with some criticism regarding the
management of NextGen modernization efforts. It was a rather
long sweep in terms of the beginning of the program until
today.
But can you fill us in on some of the reforms and the pace
of reforms in this administration under your leadership?
Secretary Foxx. Sure. I will be honest, I cannot take full
credit for what I am about to say. There have been a lot of
people who have been working on this in this administration.
But effectively, what the FAA has done in this
administration is rebaseline NextGen. There was a certain
critical path for the project. It was way off scale prior to
the administration. We have since right-sized that critical
path. And we are meeting our targets even notwithstanding some
of the budget shockwaves we have experienced in past years.
Some of the deliverables are the rolling out of metroplexes
across the country; some of the flight enhancements like
optimized profile descents, which are saving millions of
dollars and tons of gasoline as planes land in our airspace;
the development of ERAM; as well as the rollout of data comm,
which will be coming on board over the next year or two.
So we feel good that we're starting to get capabilities out
there. I think one of the big risks for NextGen is getting
equipage in the cockpit of airplanes across the country,
including general aviation, and we look forward to working with
you and others to get that done.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Collins. Senator Capito.
AIRPORT RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
Senator Capito. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank the Secretary for being here with us today.
I read your interview in the New York Times business section
last Sunday. I really appreciated learning a little bit about
your history. The tributes that you paid to your parents, in
terms of your education, I thought were very inspiring for the
next generation, so thank you for doing that.
I have a localized question here. I am from West Virginia.
As you are aware, a landslide at Yeager Airport in Charleston
forced the evacuation of several people and destroyed the
Keystone Apostolic Church. It was the engineered materials
arrestor system (EMAS) that collapsed, because our airport is
built on top of three different mountains. Thankfully, nobody
was injured.
There have been a lot of entities, including the FAA, that
have been trying to do the repair work. We have also been
working with FEMA and the West Virginia Division of Highways.
The FAA provided the initial investment for the EMAS system,
which prevents planes from going over the side of the airport
down the hill.
I believe that the FAA should help us play a role in
rebuilding a new one. We need a new one. This is a very
important project for basic safety, but also, I have learned,
will play into what types of aircraft will land or be permitted
to land in the Yeager Airport, which obviously has great
circumstances.
I know there is litigation pending on this matter, but I
would like to get a sense from you any thoughts or perspectives
you might have where the FAA could be more helpful to us and to
the local community to try to rebuild the system.
Secretary Foxx. Obviously, first of all, I want to tell you
thank you on behalf of my family, for your comments. That was
very nice of you.
Secondly, to acknowledge that the collapse of the runway
safety area at Yeager Airport is a very complex issue. The FAA
continues to work with the airport. As they do that, I look
forward to giving you updates on how that conversation is
going. But I want the FAA to be helpful to you. I want the FAA
to be helpful to the community in getting that service back up
and running.
Senator Capito. Thank you. Hopefully, we can have
subsequent conversations. The rebuild on that is estimated to
cost between $25 million and $35 million. That is a lot for a
county airport to be able to sustain.
I want to ask you about the Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) appropriation that you have
in the budget and the development of the National Surface
Transportation and Innovative Finance Bureau. In our State, we
have really used these public-private partnerships to make our
money go farther and complete some highways. I am curious to
know, I noticed you asking for $3 million in new resources for
this implementation, so I am going to assume that this finance
bureau has not been implemented yet. Is that correct?
Secretary Foxx. We are in the process of standing it up. We
have some efforts underway to figure out which programs need to
be consolidated and how to set up the staffing mechanisms. But
I expect that by the time the year ends, we will have this
organization stood up.
I think the goal is to have enough personnel and resources
to make sure that it is delivering what you need in West
Virginia.
PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES
Senator Capito. Yes, I think every State is trying to
maximize resources. Certainly, what has worked for us is to
have the private company do the forward financing and then have
a steady stream paying back, because if you can get them done
sooner, they are cheaper--or less expensive. Nothing is cheap,
but less expensive.
As I was reading through your report, I noticed an issue
about the ability to increase the pass-through facility charge
limit. I guess that is a fee on every airline ticket from $4.50
to $8. Again, living in a rural area, smaller airports, what
caused my concern was it would eliminate guaranteed Airport
Improvement Program (AIP) entitlement funding for large hub
airports. I do not know what that would do to a small or
medium-sized airport. Who gets the flexibility to raise that?
The local airport?
Secretary Foxx. So it would be local airports, but really
the largest airports in the country, the rural airports, the
smaller and medium-sized airports, would be held harmless. They
would not have any change in their AIP grant access. But the
larger airports would not have access to AIP, but they would
have access to their own passenger facility charge (PFC)
increases.
Senator Capito. What happens in smaller and more rural
airports that have commercial services? It is so expensive. I
mean, for me to fly back to West Virginia an hour, to
Charleston, West Virginia, the capital city, sometimes your
airline ticket can be $700 and $800 for a round-trip ticket.
That is just preposterous.
So even though it is a small change, is just put prices
even further and further out of the market. That is my concern
on that.
But anyway, I thank you again. Thanks for your service, and
we will follow up about Yeager and see what kind of help we can
get from you and from the FAA.
Secretary Foxx. I look forward to working with you.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Coons.
AMTRAK INVESTMENTS AND POSITIVE TRAIN CONTROL
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Collins.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your service and your
leadership.
As other Senators have commented, today's emergency
shutdown of the DC Metro system was a big surprise, and for
many an inconvenience. But as someone who rides Amtrak rail
every day, I know what a priority safety has to be regardless
of the transportation mode. So I appreciate your engagement and
diligence in ensuring that we put passenger safety first.
Let me start by thanking you for your leadership, your
focus, your staff's terrific work in responding to the I-495
challenge that we had in my home community of Delaware. DOT's
support on the emergency relief funding and your ability and
willingness to work well together, Federal and State agencies,
in a compressed timeframe to fix a critical infrastructure
problem for us was greatly appreciated.
I just attended the groundbreaking of an expanded Route 301
through Delaware with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
administrator, Greg Nadeau. It was only possible because of
TIFIA financing.
I know Senator Collins and others have spoken about the
value of TIFIA financing, but I just want to add my voice. It
makes possible projects like this. Mayor Branner of Middletown
has been working on it for, I think, 30 years, so it is a long
hoped for investment.
Amtrak is of critical importance to my State, not just to
me. Like the Vice President, I think I have spent more time on
Amtrak than with my family during my time in the Senate. I am
pleased the President continues to be a strong advocate and
supporter.
As Senator Reed mentioned, there is a $7.3 billion backlog
in State of Good Repair in the Northeast Corridor alone. While
the FAST Act makes important progress in providing
authorization, I am really concerned about the sufficiency of
funding.
So tell me, if you would, what the positive train control
(PTC) investments in your budget do for Amtrak and what you see
as the prospects for sustaining investment in Amtrak and
improving its State of Good Repair.
Secretary Foxx. So in terms of how far dollars would go
specifically for Amtrak, we do not exactly have a number on
that, in terms of how far our investments would go because that
is sort of an Amtrak question in terms of how they would
invest. But our budget actually contains $1.3 billion for PTC.
That, of course, is part of our desire to ensure that we are
getting that system deployed as quickly as possible.
Senator Coons. I support the increased request for Amtrak,
and I am hopeful that we will be able to sustain that over
time.
Delaware actually happens to be one of the deadliest States
in America for pedestrians, unfortunately. Tragically, it was
number one in the country--this is on a per capita basis,
obviously--in 2012, 2013, and number three in 2014 and 2015.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has done some great
research and funded some projects on how to deal with this.
But for us, it is really a suburban problem, not an urban
problem. It is a challenge of high-speed, multi-laned suburban
commercial corridors.
Can I help start a dialogue between your office, DelDOT,
and advocacy groups about this issue and future research?
Secretary Foxx. Absolutely.
Senator Coons. I would be grateful for a chance to work
with you on that.
Funding and continuation, as I mentioned, of the TIGER
program is absolutely instrumental in advancing rail projects
in the Northeast Corridor (NEC). And improving the NEC is the
only way we can ensure our ability to add more commuter rail
frequencies to all Delaware stations, including access to MARC
service from Maryland.
I would be interested in your view on whether you think
TIGER programs will continue to be reviewed and approved on a
timely basis.
Secretary Foxx. Yes. We understand how important the TIGER
program is. We quite frankly appreciate this committee's just
incredible support for the program. You can rest assured that
we are going to work hard to review and move those dollars out,
so they can get people to work and do the good things that
TIGER grants do.
Senator Coons. It has made possible that Delaware third
track project, in part. There are some critical chokepoints
south of Wilmington, but there are another two north of
Wilmington, so it is my hope we can continue to work on that.
I am also encouraged by the great progress you are making
with New York and New Jersey on the Gateway Tunnel project.
Congratulations. I suspect you have become a good friend of
Senator Schumer's through all this, and I am hopeful we can
continue to invest in that.
Secretary Foxx. And the Governor's.
SHORT LINE RAIL
Senator Coons. Let me just last mention that short-line
railroads handle a great deal of agricultural commerce in my
community and on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. If you could
tell me briefly anything about how you think we can do a better
job of helping America's short-line rail and the critical role
they play for our ag sector.
Secretary Foxx. You are exactly right. Our short-lines are
critical. I think the changes that the FAST Act made to
hopefully make the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement
Financing (RRIF) program more accessible to short-line
railroads will be very helpful because many of them do have
large capital needs that they cannot necessarily meet on their
own. The RRIF program was designed to help them, so we want to
use as much of our existing capacity in the RRIF program to
help them.
We will do anything else we can think of to ensure that
those short-line railroads are strong.
Senator Coons. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Foxx. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Blunt.
SMART CITY CHALLENGE
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your leadership of the
Department. The FAST Act, the 5-year highway bill. After 37
extensions of the highway bill, it is really well-received
throughout the country. It would not have happened without your
leadership, and we are all pleased we had a small part of
working with you on that.
TIGER grants, as you know, the Champ Clark Bridge, which is
I think the oldest bridge still crossing the Mississippi River,
is going to be replaced with partially a TIGER grant, and a big
commitment from both Illinois and Missouri. But I think the
TIGER grant made that whole package come together.
Our hope now is that that bridge can safely be used until
its replacement is put in place, because it is a significant
detour to get to the next bridge on the river, if that bridge
is not working. So thank you for that.
To follow up on Senator Coons' thoughts about the PTC, just
awareness for you and the folks in the line of chairs there
behind you, in the FAST Act, we authorized almost $200 million
of that $1.3 billion to help commuter railroads install PTC,
particularly in areas where the State has a significant
obligation for how those commuter terminals work.
We have a situation in both Kansas City and St. Louis where
access to some of that $200 million--actually, it is $199
million. I assume $200 million would have been too much, so
Congress, in its wisdom put $199 million in that particular
category. It is available for States who are involved in public
transportation and have some unique responsibility for
implementing positive train control. I just wanted to mention
that, so you are aware that it matters significantly to how the
commuter rail system works in our State.
Also, I was pleased, as I am sure the other Smart City
Challenge finalists were, to see Kansas City--I am sure
everybody who had a city in that was pleased to be part of it.
But I clearly think Kansas City is a great potential testing
ground for Smart Cities.
It is the first Google fiber city. It is a nexus of
interstate transportation from west of us, south of us, north
of us. Several interstates come together there. And also
putting in that new trolley system, they have been able to put
some of the first phase equipment in already.
I know the chairman mentioned her interest and an interest
I share with what is happening with smart car technology. How
do you see that Smart City model coming together? And what do
you think we learn by looking at the city you finally select? I
think you are down to six or seven finalists now to be the
Smart City finalist.
Secretary Foxx. It is a great question. I see three
different buckets. One is what the private sector is doing,
which is testing, innovating, coming up with new ideas for
technology.
Currently, in general terms, there are some that are
working on connected cars that talk to each other using kind of
a GPS signal, and there is another group that is working on
autonomous cars, which have a roving eye and kind of see the
environment just like you and I do.
We actually believe those two technologies are going to
merge and you are going to have autonomous connected cars in
the future. But industry is working to innovate.
The second bucket is what we do at the government level. We
have promised to give the industry our best guidance--not the
industry, but even the States--good guidance on how to lay a
foundation for this technology to be integrated into the
marketplace. That is work that we have promised to do as an
agency.
Then the third piece is, if you have the technology and you
have the foundation, how do people actually make use of it? The
Smart City Challenge is really our way of putting the challenge
to American cities to help define how these technologies can be
used. And not just those technologies, but how to use data and
analytics better to shape this transportation decisionmaking,
how does land use integrate with that.
So we are very pleased to see 78 great cities submit
applications. We have seven finalists, and we plan to announce
the winner of the challenge in June. But we also plan to give
every city that has applied our best pathway to use Federal
programs to implement the plans they sent to us so that there
are hopefully no losers. Every city hopefully wins.
Senator Blunt. Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Schatz.
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Secretary Foxx, thanks for your leadership. I am still
waiting to hear from you regarding your trip to Hawaii. We have
a request. As you know, we have some unique needs and some
unique new projects, the Kauai TIGER grant, the rail transit
program. And we are the most isolated populated place on the
planet. So we have some unique transportation infrastructure
needs.
As you know, I support community planning strategies to
create walkable neighborhoods and to take care of pedestrians.
I think you understand that transportation systems have to be
complete. They have to be viable for cars and rail, for buses,
for bikes, and for people.
Senator Heller and I worked in the FAST Act to include a
provision that would allow the Department of Transportation to
work with metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and other
agencies to work on reducing traffic fatalities.
In particular, Hawaii has the unfortunate distinction of
being number one in terms of senior fatalities on the street.
We had nearly 5,000 in 2014, and that number continues to creep
up.
So can you tell me what the Department will do to implement
the policy that Senator Heller and I worked on in the FAST Act,
and more generally, what you are doing this year to reverse the
trend on pedestrian fatalities?
Secretary Foxx. First of all, thank you for the question.
It is an incredibly important issue. When I walked into the
Department, that was the one area, bike and pedestrian
fatalities, where we were actually seeing an uptick. This year,
I think our estimates are a 9 percent increase.
A couple things. Just this week, the Federal Highway
Administration published new safety performance measures that
call for State and regional targets to reduce highway deaths
and injuries. And it includes a separate target for pedestrian
and bicyclist fatalities and serious injuries.
We have also included a bike pedestrian performance measure
to signal our commitment to nonmotorized safety.
We have also launched a Safer People, Safer Streets
initiative with America's mayors. We have more than 200 mayors
across the country who signed on to use best practices in their
cities to build the kinds of sidewalks and pedestrian and bike
facilities that are necessary to ensure safety.
There is still a lot of work to do and building on the
language that you had put in the FAST Act, we are going to
implement that as soon as we possibly can.
Senator Schatz. We are going to need your continued
leadership, because one of the challenges that we have in
Congress is that this has actually become, unfortunately, a
partisan issue for some where it becomes a question of whether
or not you support smart growth, location efficiency,
multimodal transportation, rail, all those things, which
sometimes cut along liberal and conservative lines when, in
fact, if you look at mayors, if you look at the AARP, this is a
question of keeping people safe as they walk around.
It was incredibly disappointing to see that this became a
sort of dividing line about whether or not you think people
ought to use cars.
We have two cars in our family. We use cars. We appreciate
the highway system. We appreciate every aspect of the
transportation system.
But I think it is going to require the continued leadership
of the Federal Department of Transportation to push on MPOs, to
push on not-for-profits, to make sure that everybody
understands it cannot possibly be a partisan issue to keep our
seniors and our kids safe as they walk to school or they walk
to the market.
Secretary Foxx. Thank you. If I may just add one small
additional point?
Senator Schatz. Please.
Secretary Foxx. Which is that on these revised NCAP
standards, the way that we rate cars, the five-star rating
system that NHTSA uses, one of the things we are going to score
in the future is the collision avoidance systems that deal with
things outside the car, including pedestrians.
That is another way that we are working to address this
issue, and it is a way that technology did not make available
just a few years ago but now we think it can. So that is
another way we are trying to get at this.
Senator Schatz. Thank you very much.
Secretary Foxx. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Boozman.
TIGER
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I thank you
and the ranking member for holding this important hearing.
We appreciate having you here, Secretary Foxx, and all of
your hard work on the behalf of improving our infrastructure in
so many different ways.
I appreciate the work that Senator Collins and the
committee have done to strengthen the TIGER program and provide
critical infrastructure resources. I do hear concerns from
applicants that the Department can do a little bit more to
increase support and help applicants improve their proposals.
Then also, very importantly, those who were not fortunate
enough to get a grant, as to what the problem was, how they can
come back on the next go-round and really the criteria of what
you are looking for. So we would like to work with you on that.
Can you talk a little bit about that and just tell us how
you are trying to remedy that? I suspect you are hearing that a
little bit also.
Secretary Foxx. Sure. I think it is a great point. I think
Congress has done us a service by lowering the minimum amount
that can be used, for example, for rural areas and even urban
areas, because there are some communities where $1 million or
$2 million could do something really big for that community.
Senator Boozman. Very much. You understand that as an old
mayor.
Secretary Foxx. I do. I do. I also understand that some
communities can hire fancy consultants to package their
proposals, and in some communities, you have two people sitting
across a desk trying to figure out when the deadline is.
So what we have tried to do is to avail ourselves through a
variety of mechanisms, outreach where we actually deploy people
out in the country to do focus groups with people to try to
help them understand the process. We have done webinars.
By the way, we offer technical assistance. So if you or
someone in your State called us and said, ``Hey, I am thinking
about applying to TIGER. Can someone help me work through the
process?'' my instructions to our staff is to help those folks
get their package together and help them do the best they can
in the process.
So those are the tools that we try to use. I am
particularly concerned, quite frankly, for our rural areas that
are a lot of times stretched thin and underresourced to make
sure that we in the review phases are giving folks a very
careful look and asking a lot of questions to try to make sure
that we are making an evaluation that is fair to them.
So that is the work that we do. We have had some successes.
In fact, the last round of TIGER, we had almost 40 percent of
the TIGER grants go to rural America. I am very proud of our
ability to do that.
Senator Boozman. Very good. Thank you.
Secretary Foxx. Yes.
AIRPORT CERTIFICATION
Senator Boozman. Another thing that I would like to
emphasize is the importance of modernizing and improving the
airport certification process. I know you have worked hard to
help the aircraft industry. And again, to make it more
competitive and successful, it would be nice if we could make
it so that was a little bit easier to get done.
I would like you to comment about that, but also, on a
related note, the FAA recently published their notice of
proposed rulemaking on Small Airplane Revitalization Act. The
purpose of the legislation is to improve safety while cutting
in half the cost of new aircraft certification.
I believe the goal is to have the rulemaking done by the
end of the year.
So both of those, that is, certainly, very important, and I
think it really would greatly help our aircraft industry, which
I know that you are very interested in doing. So can you
comment about those things a little bit?
Secretary Foxx. Certainly, on part 23, which is the
certification process you are referring to, I am very
supportive of getting that rule done so that we can avail more
of our industry of the advantages of being able to self-certify
if they make certain requirements, if they meet certain
requirements. So that process is underway.
I am very hopeful that we will have that rule out before
the end of the year, certainly--hopefully.
And on the other one, I need to probably come back to you.
I do not know that I am familiar with it, so I would like to
have a chance to write you back on that.
Senator Boozman. On the other one that you commented on,
certainly, that is very important. It would be part of a
significant part of the legacy, in the sense I know that you
have worked very hard to get some of these things accomplished.
But that is one that really does need to be and it is something
we have grappled with for a while and we appreciate you taking
it on. So hopefully, we can get it done in a timely process.
Thank you all very much.
CONTRACT WEATHER OBSERVERS
Senator Collins. Thank you, Senator.
Mr. Secretary, we are going to do one more round of
questions before we turn to the inspector general.
The budget, as you are well-aware, proposes to eliminate
contract weather observers at 57 airports across the country
and require that air traffic controllers perform those
functions, in addition to their existing responsibilities.
In January, Senator Reed and I wrote to you and the FAA
administrator, urging the FAA to fully assess all of the safety
risks and hazards that could result from the loss of
professional weather observers, particularly in cold-weather
States like ours, prior to going through with the plan to
eliminate the contract weather observer program at airports.
These observers are really important in providing real-
time, critical weather information that helps keep our pilots
and our passengers safe.
For example, in Bangor, Maine, air traffic controllers are
simply unable to leave the tower, which would prohibit them
from observing real-time conditions like freezing rain or ice,
which may not be easily discernible from the tower. And that is
what our current weather observers do at Bangor International
Airport.
I also think it is important that our air traffic
controllers remain focused on safely managing the air traffic,
not on performing tasks that they are not specifically trained
or have the experience to do and that others are now doing.
So my question is, Mr. Secretary, have you considered our
recommendation that the safety risk management panel reevaluate
its proposal to determine if this change is truly wise and what
the impact would be on safety, particularly in cold climate
States?
Secretary Foxx. Yes. Yes, the FAA is actually looking at
this question. The way they are looking at this is they have
deployed several panels to various sites across the country,
including some cold-weather areas, to have these testers, if
you will, test in accordance with FAA safety management
systems.
The panels will come back to the FAA with recommendations.
Those recommendations will not be final until they have gone
through an internal process at the FAA.
So what I would say is that your letter has prompted the
FAA to do a much more extensive review of this question, and
that is prompting this work that is being undertaken. And no
final decisions will be made until we have heard back from
those folks, and we will, certainly, be happy to share what we
hear back with you.
Senator Collins. That is very good to hear. I know that the
air traffic controllers and the airport managers in both of our
States would be happy to talk with FAA further also.
Secretary Foxx. Good.
Senator Collins. Let me switch to one other issue for my
final question, and then I am going to submit the rest for the
record. There are many, so you can be happy about that part.
Secretary Foxx. Thank you.
MARITIME TRAINING VESSELS
Senator Collins. Training ships at our State maritime
academies are rapidly approaching the end of their service
lives. The fleet ranges in age from 27 to 55 years old. Without
training vessels, the maritime academies simply will not be
able to prepare adequately the future generations of maritime
workers. These vessels are an important part of the curriculum
as sea time is required for graduation and for licensure.
Last year, in the 2016 budget, the administration requested
and Congress provided $5 million for the design and planning of
a replacement vessel. I would note that the oldest vessel
reaches the end of its service life in 2019, and the T.S. State
of Maine at Maine Maritime Academy will reach the end of its
service life in 2025.
I am disappointed, therefore, that instead of moving
forward with the design and construction of the new vessel,
which is what we anticipated, the budget request instead
proposes to conduct yet another analysis of alternatives.
Now the Department has already completed a feasibility
study and initial analysis of alternatives, and a preliminary
business case analysis for the national security multimission
vessel.
Mr. Secretary, I guess my question is, given the $5 million
that was provided, why isn't the administration seeking funding
for the construction of a replacement training vessel, given
the age of these vessels that are fast approaching the end of
their useful lives?
Secretary Foxx. That was a very well-put question. The
reality is that we have been debating this internally within
the Department for quite some time. I think it is fair to say
that our Maritime Administration feels very strongly that we
need to tackle this issue and to get the new ships put in
place.
I guess the best answer I can give you is that, in the
course of balancing all of the equities throughout the budget
process, this is one where we felt like additional independent
verification and analysis and consideration of the training
requirements for cadets, we believe that we need to look at
this more in terms of understanding whether the ships are, in
fact, necessary for training.
But I understand the argument on the other side and,
certainly, understand if the committee feels differently about
it.
Senator Collins. Having christened one of those ships, I
can tell you that they are absolutely essential. Most of these
cadets either end up going into the Navy or most of them into
the Merchant Marine. If they do not have actual sea time, they
cannot get the licenses that they need. They can't even
graduate from these academies.
So let me just end by saying that I hope you will work with
us. Surely, in a $98 billion budget, we ought to be able to
find this funding.
Senator Reed.
TRANSPORTING HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) maintains a database with respect to
special permits and approvals for hazardous materials
transportation. The inspector general has issued a report that
describes it as out-of-date and incomplete, which inhibits the
ability of FRA inspectors to carry out their role of ensuring
the safe transportation of these materials.
So could you comment on what the PHMSA is doing to address
the issue? And, critically, when we will the FRA inspectors be
able to get ready access to that information to do their jobs?
Secretary Foxx. The fiscal year 2017 request includes
investments and requests for funding to do some additional IT
investments to help us in this regard. It is part of a 6-year
IT strategy that includes a well-developed investment plan
supporting improvements and a Web-based system.
PHMSA has made improvements to the hazardous material
shipment data collected, including adding a Dun & Bradstreet
identifying number and shipper profile information to its Web
portal. It is also developing certification for a data
operations quality management system that will improve user
satisfaction with data portals, including the hazmat Web
portal. And PHMSA is also developing an online smart form that
will streamline the incident reporting process to improve the
quality of data.
So there are steps that are being undertaken. We are also
asking for resources in the budget to help us take those steps
further.
SEXUAL ASSAULT AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Senator Reed. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Let me turn to
another topic.
You are the Cabinet Secretary responsible for the United
States Merchant Marine Academy. This is an issue that cuts
across too many campuses across the country and for my service
on the Armed Services Committee, it is also obviously an issue
at the service academies, the Air Force, the Navy, and West
Point. That is the issue of sexual harassment.
Each year there is a survey that must be done. Of the 136
women at the academy, 17 percent reported in this anonymous
survey that they were victims of sexual assault, and 63 present
reported being a victim of sexual harassment.
I know you do not tolerate this. You do not accept it. The
question is what we can all do to change the culture and to
provide more training and more support, so these statistics
improve dramatically and quickly.
Secretary Foxx. First of all, I want to thank you for the
question, and I want to thank this committee, including
Chairman Collins and former Ranking Member Patty Murray so much
for continuing to focus on this.
It is a culture issue in our academies and, in particular,
at the Merchant Marine Academy. When I came into the
Department, we had this issue on the plate. We worked with the
academy to ensure that there were people in place at the
academy who were focused on making sure that complaints had a
ready place to go and that they were being adjudicated
effectively.
Unfortunately, this is an area where our success in that
regard looks like failure because you start to get reports up.
The other thing that we have taken very seriously is to
ensure we are being very intentional about ensuring more gender
diversity in the ranks of recruits to the academy. The
statistics that I have been given tell me that at the 25
percent level, the culture starts to shift and you begin to
have a culture in which these types of behaviors are not
tolerated and there is a critical mass of women there to
enforce against that. So we are working on that as well.
But we will continue at this until we get it right.
Senator Reed. I think just an aside, but the experience--my
closest proxy is West Point--is that as more and more female
cadets came in, that culture began to change, but more
specifically, as more and more of the faculty and instructors
and administrators were females, it accelerated that change.
I say with some pride that we have our first female
Commandant at the military academy, so that is another
direction I would encourage you to go in.
Secretary Foxx. Absolutely.
AMTRAK SERVICE
Senator Reed. Final question, if I may, and that is the
Northeast corridor, the Federal Railway Administration has
launched this. They are looking ahead, which I commend them
for, the vision for the Northeast corridor in the future. I
would hate to see that vision exclude in any way services to
Rhode Island.
Amtrak plays a key role in our economy. In fact, the
Providence station is not only a large Amtrak station, it is
the biggest Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
station outside of Boston's South Station. To have a future
which would avoid Rhode Island in any way, shape, or form,
either through routes or through services, would be, I think,
wrongheaded. So I wonder what you might comment.
Secretary Foxx. Yes, look, I know how the alternatives
process works. But I see no future where Rhode Island gets
bypassed. That is where I come down very solidly.
In fact, I have had conversations with Governor Raimondo
about ways to potentially look at enhancing service in Rhode
Island. We look forward to working with you and her on that.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, I very much appreciate your testimony today.
I was thinking about the range of questions that you answered
today, which literally spanned the spectrum from trains to
driverless cars to metros to ships to bridges to subways. It
really is an amazing span that your Department covers, and we
did not get even get to two questions I wanted to ask you, one
on buses and the other having to do with drones. So the number
of areas under your responsibility truly is tremendous.
We will be submitting additional questions for the record,
and the hearing record will remain open until next Friday,
March 25, for other members to submit questions to supplement
ours.
Senator Collins. I now thank you for testifying and would
call up our next witness, the inspector general.
Secretary Foxx. Madam Chair, if I might just say one thing,
I was talking to my staff yesterday and they said that this may
be my last appearance before this committee, perhaps my final
testimony, period, knock on wood. I hope that is true.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Foxx. But I wanted to say, on a personal note to
both you and to the ranking member, that a lot of times in
politics, particularly in a rancorous presidential election
year, there is a lot of noise about how things do not work.
What I wanted to say to you is that I appreciated your
friendship, your willingness to work out issues with us, and
the fact that we all recognize that transportation is neither a
Democratic nor Republican issue. It is an American issue.
So I just wanted to say thank you so much for your
friendship. Thank you for the hard work that you do for our
Department and for the American people, and I look forward to
working with you through this budget process. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I very
much appreciate those thoughtful words. I look forward, as I
know the ranking member does, to working with you as we draft
our bill. It has been a pleasure working with you, and I
commend you for your leadership.
Secretary Foxx. Thank you.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Our next witness today is the Hon. Calvin Scovel, the
inspector general of the Department of Transportation.
Mr. Inspector General, when you are ready, please proceed
with your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. CALVIN SCOVEL, INSPECTOR GENERAL,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Scovel. Chairman Collins, Ranking Member Reed, members
of the subcommittee, thank you for inviting me to testify today
on DOT's budget priorities. Each year, DOT spends more than $70
billion across a wide range of transportation programs.
Regardless of specific budget levels, effective oversight and
management are key to meeting the Department's goals and
protecting taxpayers' investments.
My testimony today focuses on three crosscutting management
challenges: safety, stewardship, and IT security.
Improving highway safety continues to be one of the
Department's most important priorities. In 2015, we made 17
recommendations to enhance NHTSA's ability to remove unsafe
vehicles from roads. This includes collecting and analyzing
more comprehensive vehicle safety data.
While NHTSA has taken steps to strengthen its defect
investigations, the agency must now effectively implement its
planned improvements to ensure automakers promptly identify
defects and recall defective vehicles. Unsafe commercial
drivers further threaten the safety of our highways,
particularly those who repeatedly violate medical-, drug-, and
alcohol-testing requirements and other safety regulations.
Of the 272 motor carrier safety cases that OIG's criminal
investigators have initiated since 2008, 14 percent involved
carriers that were banned from the roads for safety violations
but continued to operate under a new business name.
At the same time, DOT must work to maintain our Nation's
strong aviation safety record. The introduction of unmanned
aircraft systems (UAS) creates one of the most significant
safety challenges in decades. This week, FAA will have approved
more than 4,000 commercial UAS to operate in our airspace, and
the number of operators is certain to increase once FAA
publishes a final rule for small UAS this year.
However, FAA has yet to establish standard procedures or
training for air traffic controllers to safely manage UAS in
the same airspace as manned aircraft. In addition, FAA
inspectors lack clear guidance for how to conduct UAS
oversight, and FAA lacks formal systems to track and classify
the severity of UAS incidents.
With regard to stewardship, DOT has opportunities to
improve oversight of its investments and assets. For example,
we recently reported that FAA awarded a new $727 million
contract for controller training without first addressing
longstanding issues that we had identified in its prior
controller-training contract, issues that resulted in millions
of dollars in cost overruns.
Similarly, last year we reported FTA had not fully
implemented the required processes and internal controls to
award and monitor $10 billion in grant funds allocated for
Hurricane Sandy relief. Strong risk-based oversight, financial
controls, and planning are vital to eliminating fraud and
maximizing Federal investments.
Sustaining a skilled workforce, DOT's most important asset,
also remains a key challenge, particularly as workforce
demographics change.
For example, 22 percent of DOT's acquisition workforce, not
counting FAA, was retirement eligible last year. From air
traffic controllers to FAA oversight personnel to vehicle
defect analysts, DOT must identify how many staff it needs in
these positions and ensure its training programs keep pace with
changing technology.
Finally, with regard to IT security, DOT has made major
progress in implementing the required use of personal identity
verification (PIV) cards for all employees and contractors.
This is a key step in securing access to facilities and
systems.
However, DOT has been slow to address longstanding
cybersecurity weaknesses, such as the lack of effective systems
to continuously monitor for threats.
The September 2014 fire at a Chicago air traffic control
facility also demonstrated the importance of effective
contingency planning. Damage from the fire crippled that
facility and its systems for 2 weeks, significantly impacting
passengers and airlines.
Earlier this month, we reported that 5 of the Department's
12 operating administrations were not effectively testing or
meeting all requirements for their disaster recovery plans.
The Department has consistently demonstrated its commitment
to addressing these challenges, but effective management and
follow-through remain imperative. My office will continue to
assist the Department as it works to meet these goals.
Chairman Collins, this concludes my prepared statement. I
am happy to answer any questions you and members of the
subcommittee may have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Calvin L. Scovel III
Chairman Collins, Ranking Member Reed, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Department of
Transportation's (DOT) budget priorities. Each year, the Department
spends over $70 billion on a wide range of programs to meet its top
priority of transportation safety and to maintain and modernize
transportation systems. We remain committed to assisting DOT as it
works to improve how it manages programs and resources. My statement
today will focus on three cross-cutting management challenges: (1)
addressing DOT's new and longstanding safety challenges, (2) continuing
diligent stewardship over DOT's critical investments, and (3) enhancing
DOT's information technology (IT) security and preparedness. Regardless
of specific budget levels requested or approved, effective oversight
and management of safety efforts, major transportation projects, and
DOT assets are critical to ensure the greatest return on the taxpayers'
investment.
summary
Safety is DOT's top priority, and the Department faces a range of
emerging and longstanding safety challenges. These include safely
integrating Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) into the National Airspace
System (NAS), addressing risks posed by the transport of hazardous
materials (hazmat), and removing unsafe vehicles and commercial drivers
from roadways. At the same time, DOT must carry out its safety mission
within a framework of diligent stewardship over its investments and
assets. In particular, continued attention to strengthening the
Department's internal controls and risk-based oversight is critical to
the efficiency of taxpayer-funded projects to build, repair, and
maintain the Nation's surface transportation system. DOT can also do
more to reduce risk in its billion-dollar efforts to modernize the
Nation's aviation system and to develop and sustain a high-performing
workforce. Finally, DOT continues to struggle to secure the 450-plus
information systems it uses to conduct business and operate critical
transportation systems, ensure continuity of operations, and safeguard
systems from insider threats.
addressing new and longstanding safety challenges
Making the Nation's airspace, environment, and roads safer
continues to be DOT's top priority. Addressing a number of new and
longstanding safety issues we have identified will be critical for DOT
to maintain and improve the Nation's transportation safety record. In
addition to the new challenges of safely integrating UAS into the NAS,
DOT must continue to reduce safety risks in transporting hazardous
materials while improving safety on our Nation's roadways.
Integrating Unmanned Aircraft Systems Safely Into the National Airspace
System
DOT, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and industry have
maintained a remarkably safe aviation system, with no fatal passenger
accidents involving domestic commercial carriers in over 7 years.
However, the growing demand for commercial UAS operations--for purposes
ranging from precision agriculture operations to package delivery--
presents one of the most significant safety challenges for FAA in
decades. Analysts predict that as much as $93 billion will be invested
in the technology worldwide over the next 10 years.
The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requires FAA to take
multiple steps to safely integrate UAS into the NAS. However, FAA and
industry have not reached consensus on UAS-specific technology
standards that are critical to safe integration. For example, FAA and
industry still lack standards to ensure that UAS can automatically
detect and successfully maneuver around other aircraft operating in
nearby airspace.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While FAA 14 CFR 91.113 describes a pilot's ability to ``see
and avoid'' other aircraft, the UAS community is using the term
``detect and avoid'' to describe the desired capability of UAS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FAA also lacks a regulatory framework for UAS integration, which
would govern areas such as small UAS (under 55 pounds) operations,
beyond-line-of-sight procedures, larger unmanned aircraft systems, and
pilot qualifications. FAA currently approves commercial UAS operations
only on a case-by-case basis, leveraging an authority granted by
Congress to exempt small UAS from certification requirements.\2\ So
far, FAA has issued over 3,800 exemptions. We are currently reviewing
the UAS exemption and safety oversight processes. FAA intends to issue
its rule on small UAS operations in late spring 2016--more than a year
and a half behind the schedule established in the act. However, several
high-profile aspects of UAS use--such as package delivery--will not be
covered under the rule, which underscores the need for further
regulatory efforts. FAA also has not established standard procedures
for safely managing UAS in the same airspace as manned aircraft or an
adequate UAS training program for controllers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ These requirements include the steps necessary to obtain an
airworthiness certificate, including demonstrating to FAA that the UAS
conforms to an approved aircraft design and is in condition for safe
operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the number of UAS operations continues to grow, safety and
oversight will remain a significant concern. According to FAA, reported
UAS sightings by pilots have increased significantly, with more than
1,100 reports in 2015, compared to just 238 reported in all of 2014.
Some reports indicated safety risks, such as pilots altering the course
of their aircraft to avoid UAS. Despite these risks, FAA does not have
a formal system to track and classify the severity of UAS incidents. In
addition, FAA inspectors still lack clear guidance on how to conduct
UAS oversight. FAA reports that, through its recently established
registration process, nearly 370,000 operators have already registered
their unmanned aircraft. The impending rule on small UAS is likely to
further increase the number of UAS in our airspace, making UAS
oversight an increasingly critical responsibility for FAA's safety
inspector workforce.
Strengthening Cross-Modal Efforts To Address Pipeline and Hazmat Safety
Risks
A key DOT mission requiring strong cross-modal efforts is
mitigating the safety risks posed by transportation of hazmat. From
2010 through 2014, there were more than 3,000 pipeline and 78,000
hazmat incidents in the United States, including about 3,500 rail
incidents involving hazmat. These incidents resulted in fatalities and
injuries, as well as environmental and property damage. Transportation
of hazmat by air also presents serious risks, with more than 70
incidents worldwide between 1991 and 2014 involving lithium batteries
in aviation cargo and passenger baggage.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ These incidents included extreme heat, smoke, fire, or
explosions in aviation cargo and passenger baggage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)
works to implement robust and timely safety measures for mitigating
significant hazmat and pipeline accidents. However, PHMSA has made
limited progress towards meeting safety recommendations by the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and congressional mandates. For
example, PHMSA has not fully implemented a 2007 NTSB recommendation to
require railroads to immediately provide emergency responders with
real-time information regarding the identity and location of all
hazardous materials on a train. PHMSA also has not fully implemented
the safety measures included in the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory
Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011.\4\ These measures aim to
improve operators' assessments of gas pipelines, require leak detection
systems on hazardous liquid pipelines, and establish regulations for
transporting carbon dioxide by pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Public Law No. 112-90 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the aviation front, FAA established the Hazardous Materials
Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (HM VDRP) in 2006, which allows
air carriers to voluntarily disclose violations of hazmat regulations
without receiving civil penalties. While this is a good step towards
encouraging air carriers to improve hazmat safety, our 2015 report \5\
found that FAA lacked an adequate framework of internal controls to
effectively carry out HM VDRP. For example, FAA requires air carriers
to complete corrective actions for violations they disclose through the
program. However, for 31 of the 48 (65 percent) closed cases we
reviewed, FAA did not request sufficient evidence to verify that air
carriers completed all corrective actions or conducted self-audits as
required. In response to our findings, FAA recently issued a new policy
to require air carriers to document all corrective actions taken and
FAA regions to coordinate with FAA Headquarters on proposed corrective
actions and significant HM VDRP cases. Effective implementation of this
policy will require follow through with adequate training and guidance
to maximize HM VDRP's potential as a safety program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Program and Data Limitations Impede the Effectiveness of FAA's
Hazardous Materials Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (OIG Report
Number AV-2015-034), March 13, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) enforcement of
PHMSA regulations plays a large role in the safety of hazmat
transported by rail. In fiscal year 2015, FRA reported that its
inspectors identified 1,670 violations of hazardous materials
regulations, and the Agency fined railroads and other regulated
entities \6\ roughly $3.9 million. Key elements in an effective
enforcement program are considering risk when allocating enforcement
resources and imposing sufficient penalties to deter future violations.
Last month, we issued a report identifying shortcomings in the risk
assessments FRA uses for allocating hazardous materials inspection
resources and raised concerns about FRA's use of civil penalties and
lack of criminal case referrals to OIG. FRA has agreed to implement our
recommended improvements.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Entities that received these violations and fines may include
railroads, shippers, or tank car repair facilities.
\7\ FRA's Oversight of Hazardous Materials Shipments Lacks
Comprehensive Risk Evaluation and Focus on Deterrence (OIG Report
Number ST-2016-020), February 24, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increasing Safety on Our Nation's Highways
Recent large-scale recalls from automotive manufacturers and
continued efforts to enforce motor carrier regulations highlight a
number of safety challenges the Department faces. Over the last 2
years, General Motors (GM) has recalled nearly 9 million U.S. vehicles
for a defect involving a faulty ignition switch after it received more
than 100 reports of death claims and more than 200 injury claims.\8\
The GM recall and others have prompted reviews and recommendations on
how NHTSA can improve its safety processes and controls, and NHTSA is
working to address these concerns. For example, in 2011 we made
recommendations to strengthen NHTSA's Office of Defects Investigations'
(ODI) procedures for documenting and retaining evidence on defects
investigations, coordinating with foreign nations to identify safety
defects or recalls, and documenting its justifications for not
investigating identified defects. Last month, we reported on NHTSA's
progress towards those recommendations.\9\ While NHTSA has completed
the agreed-upon actions, we are concerned with how it is implementing
some of them; in particular, NHTSA lacks mechanisms to ensure staff
consistently apply the new policies. For example in response to one of
our recommendations, ODI agreed to document justifications for
exceeding investigation timeliness goals; however, over 70 percent of
delayed investigations we reviewed did not include justifications for
why these goals were not met. We made two new recommendations to
enhance ODI's quality control mechanisms, and NHTSA fully concurred.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ GM's ignition switch compensation fund had approved 124 death
and 275 injury claims as of August 21, 2015.
\9\ Additional Efforts Are Needed To Ensure NHTSA's Full
Implementation of OIG's 2011 Recommendations (OIG Report Number ST-
2016-021), February 24, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NHTSA also agreed to implement the 17 recommendations stemming from
our June 2015 audit, which found weaknesses with how ODI collects
vehicle safety data and uses that data to determine whether to open an
investigation.\10\ For example, ODI's processes were insufficient for
verifying that manufacturers submit complete and accurate early warning
reporting data, which can be essential for identifying potential safety
trends or concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Inadequate Data and Analysis Undermine NHTSA's Efforts To
Identify and Investigate Vehicle Safety Concerns (OIG Report Number ST-
2015-063), June 18, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It will also be critical for NHTSA to follow through on NHTSA's
Path Forward, a 2015 self-evaluation report released by the Secretary
of Transportation. Through this effort, the Secretary seeks to improve
NHTSA's ability to hold manufacturers accountable by implementing more
effective methods for overseeing carmakers and their suppliers, as well
as collecting and communicating vital safety information. The Secretary
also announced the formation of an expert panel to help strengthen
NHTSA's defect investigation workforce. It will be important for DOT to
closely monitor how NHTSA addresses the panel's findings and
recommendations.
At the same time, DOT has important opportunities to improve the
safety of its highway infrastructure, particularly the bridges and
tunnels that connect our Nation's roadways. For example, the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) must maintain momentum in its initiatives
in response to our recommendations to implement data driven, risk-based
oversight of bridges and implement improvements to bridge safety
mandated under the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act
(MAP-21).\11\ FHWA must also continue its oversight of highway tunnel
safety according to the National Tunnel Inspection Standards that
became effective in August 2015 and maintain a national tunnel
inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ FHWA Has Not Fully Implemented All MAP-21 Bridge Provisions
and Recommendations (OIG Report Number MH-2014-089) August 21, 2014,
and FHWA Effectively Oversees Bridge Safety, but Opportunities Exist To
Enhance Guidance and Address National Risks (OIG Report Number ST-2015-
027) February 18, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another critical--and longstanding--highway safety concern is
reducing motor carrier fatalities. Our safety investigations continue
to identify challenges for the Department and the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration (FMCSA) as they seek to remove unsafe motor
carriers from highways. Since fiscal year 2008, we have opened 272
criminal investigations involving motor carrier safety. I would like to
highlight two focus areas where the Department and FMCSA can bolster
their safety efforts.
First, FMCSA must take stringent enforcement and out-of-service
actions to remove motor carriers that repeatedly violate and blatantly
seek to circumvent safety regulations, including (1) hours of service
regulations and records of duty status; (2) medical, drug, and alcohol
testing requirements for drivers; and (3) vehicle inspection, repair,
and maintenance records. In some instances, these carriers have been
involved in multi-vehicle crashes and fatalities. While FMCSA has taken
enforcement actions and is collaborating with our office and other law
enforcement partners to remove these carriers from service, carriers
intent on breaking the law continue to pose a significant threat to
highway safety. Key actions to keep unsafe carriers off the road
include effective vetting of carriers' applications, focusing resources
on high-risk carriers, and prosecuting companies that are caught
violating the law.
The second area concerns reincarnated carriers--carriers that
attempt to operate as different entities in order to evade FMCSA's
enforcement actions. Reincarnated carriers have been involved in
approximately 14 percent of the motor carrier safety investigations we
opened since fiscal year 2008. For example, in Texas, we investigated a
company that was issued an unsatisfactory safety rating by FMCSA for
numerous violations, including falsifying hours-of-service requirements
and using drivers who were not medically examined or certified. After
being placed out of service by FMCSA, the company reincarnated under a
different name and was involved in a passenger bus crash that killed 14
people. FMCSA proposed that Congress modify Section 521 of Title 49
U.S.C. to make it a criminal penalty for knowingly and willfully
violating an out-of-service order, which will assist in prosecuting
reincarnated carriers. Criminal penalties under Section 521 currently
contain only a misdemeanor provision, which is difficult to prosecute
and less likely to result in jail time if prosecuted; therefore, its
effect as a deterrent is limited.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 49 United States Code Section 521(b)(6)(A) is a misdemeanor
statute for violations of certain FMCSA regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
continuing diligent stewardship over dot's critical investments
Diligent stewardship of DOT's investments of taxpayer funds is
vital for the Department to effectively carry out its mission. While
DOT remains committed to strengthening its oversight for highway, rail,
and transit projects, opportunities remain to improve its risk-based
oversight of projects and strengthen financial controls to protect its
investments. In addition, FAA faces challenges in its efforts to
provide effective contract and acquisition management--a critical
element in reducing risk for the major programs and systems in which it
has invested.
Maximizing Federal Investments Through Improved Risk-Based Oversight
and Better Financial Controls
DOT receives over $50 billion in Federal dollars annually to fund
projects to build, repair, and maintain the Nation's surface
transportation system. Strong risk-based oversight and financial
controls are key to the success of the more than 100,000 transportation
projects funded by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) each year.
FHWA recently revised its overall risk-based strategy to overseeing
Federal-aid highway project funds. This revised effort includes
improving the linkage between FHWA's annual assessments of State and
Federal-aid highway programs and analyzing that information to better
target its oversight reviews of highway and bridge projects. FHWA
recently completed its first full performance cycle with these revised
initiatives; in future performance cycles, management will need to
assess whether the program is robust and working as designed and make
improvements where needed.
However, to address more specific risks, FHWA needs to improve
oversight of financial and program plans covering major highway and
bridge projects--those exceeding $500 million in funding--to implement
its new guidance on project estimating, and address the backlog of
pending Federal-aid highway project closeouts to ensure effective use
of Federal funds. In addition, FHWA has yet to finalize improvements to
its financial information system to improve project data used to
oversee its programs.
FTA has similar opportunities to better target its oversight and
use tools to meet its goals to ensure major projects are on time and
within budget. For example, FTA did not verify the adequacy of the
Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority's (MWAA) support for claimed
costs on grant expenses for FTA's Dulles Rail Project.\13\ As a result,
FTA initially reimbursed MWAA for more than $36 million in unsupported
and unallowable costs.\14\ In addition, FTA faces challenges in
overseeing how local transportation agencies continue to use the
approximately $10 billion in relief funds for Hurricane Sandy. In 2015,
we reported that FTA had not fully implemented the processes and
internal controls (required by the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act)
it established to award and monitor Hurricane Sandy funds.\15\ FTA also
has yet to develop a formal coordination process with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to reduce the risk of duplicating emergency
and disaster-related assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ MWAA's Financial Management Controls Are Not Sufficient To
Ensure Eligibility of Expenses on FTA's Dulles Rail Project Grant, (OIG
Report Number ZA-2014-021), January 16, 2014.
\14\ FTA and Federal grant conditions require that grant recipients
maintain support for federally funded project costs. MWAA did not have
sufficient documentation to support some of the expenses charged to the
Dulles Rail Project and these costs are considered unsupported. These
principles also specify the types of costs that are allowable under
Federal grant awards. An example of an unsupported cost that we found
was invoices that said ``labor'' with no further details or
documentation about what these charges included. An example of an
unallowable cost that we found was $54,000 for expenses that were
outside the scope of the Phase 1 Project to which they were charged.
\15\ FTA Has Not Fully Implemented Key Internal Controls for
Hurricane Sandy Oversight and Future Emergency Relief Efforts (OIG
Report Number ST-2015-046), June 12, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fraud remains another ongoing concern. For example, our
investigators determined that an owner of a Massachusetts transit
authority bus operator diverted grant funds that were designated to pay
salaries, benefits, and other expenses for employees of the bus
company.\16\ Similarly, during liaison and coordination efforts with
FTA and other stakeholders, we discovered that a Hurricane Sandy
grantee was not reporting fraud settlements to FTA. We have reported
that the use of integrity monitors can help to prevent and detect fraud
and noted the importance of sharing fraud allegations across
organizations so we can partner to combat wrongdoing.\17\ As we stated
in June 2015,\18\ FTA must focus on promptly addressing identified
oversight issues; strengthening stakeholder agreements; and enhancing
controls to prevent, detect, and report fraud.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The former owner was sentenced in July 2015 to 70 months in
prison and ordered to pay $688,772 in restitution in connection with
his diversion of grant funds.
\17\ Initial Assessment of FTA's Oversight of the Emergency Relief
Program and Hurricane Sandy Relief Funds (OIG Report Number MH-2014-
008), December 3, 2013.
\18\ Oversight of Major Transportation Projects: Opportunities To
Apply Lessons Learned (OIG Briefing No. CC-2015-010), June 8, 2015. We
briefed Members of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Subcommittee on Transportation and Public Assets, United States House
of Representatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Structuring Major Aviation Acquisitions To Successfully Manage Risk
FAA continues to award high-dollar contracts without fully
addressing and mitigating risk in the acquisition planning and contract
award stages, often resulting in large cost overruns and delays in
system implementation.
First, FAA has had ongoing challenges in effectively structuring
several of its major acquisitions.\19\ These issues have been prevalent
with the $1.8 billion Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-
B) system. ADS-B is a new satellite-based surveillance system for
managing air traffic that is critical to the success of FAA's Next
Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). Since 2010, we have
reported that FAA faces significant risks in implementing ADS-B and
realizing benefits due to weaknesses such as its contract structure and
oversight. For example, the ADS-B contract structure bundles tasks and
costs, making it difficult for decisionmakers to manage the contract
and track costs. In addition, FAA covered the first 18 years of ADS-B's
28-year lifecycle through one contract award, rather than breaking it
into more manageable segments as OMB and the Federal Chief Information
Officer recommend.\20\ While FAA has finished deploying the 634 ADS-B
ground radio stations, based on our ongoing review, it remains unclear
whether FAA has fully mitigated past problems associated with contract
management and oversight to ensure it can achieve ADS-B technical
requirements and do so within budget. We plan to issue our next report
providing an update on how FAA is addressing ADS-B contract weaknesses
later this year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ These acquisitions include the Wide Area Augmentation System
(WAAS) Program, the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System
(STARS), and the En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM) system. FAA
has awarded contracts for these large modernization efforts using a
grand design, rather than through successive incrementally priced
awards--each of which experienced cost increases, delays, and
performance issues.
\20\ FAA's AMS lacks sufficient guidance on practices that could
minimize mistakes associated with acquisition planning, such as using
modular contracting to award information technology contracts in
incremental, workable segments; and using contract line items, with
separate pricing, contract types, and deliverables, to better manage
the acquisition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, FAA did not take sufficient steps to assess and mitigate
risk factors we identified on a previous significant contract when
selecting a bidder and awarding the new contract, potentially resulting
in increased costs to the Agency. In 2015, FAA decided to award a $727
million new Controller Training Contract (CTC), without first
addressing longstanding issues we reported with its prior controller
training contract, the $859 million Air Traffic Control Optimum
Training Solution (ATCOTS) contract. Specifically, in 2013, we reported
that before awarding ATCOTS, FAA determined there was a 60- to 80-
percent likelihood that the successful bidder would not meet FAA's
training needs with the limited staff hours proposed.\21\ However, FAA
did not require the contractor to address this issue prior to award and
had to spend millions of dollars more than expected to make up for the
shortfall in contracted resources. We made 10 recommendations in 2013
to improve FAA's management and oversight of the ATCOTS contract. We
recently reported that while FAA addressed recommendations related to
contract administration practices and oversight, it has not implemented
those related to better defining training requirements and validating
training costs. \22\ These recommendations were designed to improve
FAA's ability to develop a comprehensive understanding of its training
needs and, in turn, a more reliable estimate of the Agency's training
costs. Because FAA awarded CTC without fully addressing these
recommendations, it may encounter many of the same issues that
compromised the success of the ATCOTS contract.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ FAA Needs To Improve ATCOTS Contract Management To Achieve Its
Air Traffic Controller Training Goals, (OIG Report Number ZA-2014-018)
December 18, 2013.
\22\ FAA Has Not Sufficiently Addressed Key Weaknesses Related to
Its ATCOTS Contract (OIG Report Number ZA-2016-010), December 10, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developing and Sustaining an Effective and Skilled DOT Workforce
Maintaining an effective and skilled workforce is critical to
ensuring a safe and vibrant transportation system. This means
identifying and hiring the right number of staff with the requisite
skill mix; adapting hiring and training practices to account for
changing missions, requirements, and workforce demographics; and
implementing policies and procedures that promote employees' success
and ability to carry out DOT's mission effectively.
However, DOT agencies have not always taken adequate actions to
ensure a robust workforce. For example, FAA lacks a comprehensive
process for determining staffing levels needed to oversee its
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) program--a program that
allows FAA to delegate certain functions, such as certifying aircraft
components, to manufacturers and other organizations. Although FAA uses
a staffing model to help identify overall ODA staffing needs, the model
does not include detailed data on important workload drivers, such as a
company's size and location, type of work performed, past performance,
and project complexity and volume. In addition, FAA does not have the
data or an effective model to accurately identify how many air traffic
controllers it needs to maintain efficiency without compromising
safety. Therefore, as we recently reported, many of FAA's busiest and
most complex air traffic control facilities have a shortage of fully
trained controllers.\23\ We have an ongoing audit to examine FAA's new
controller hiring process and the changes that have occurred since its
implementation in 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ FAA Continues to Face Challenges in Ensuring Enough Fully
Trained Controllers at Critical Facilities, (OIG Report Number AV-2016-
014), January 11, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My office has made a number of recommendations to help DOT ensure
its employees keep abreast of changing technology and missions. Now,
agencies must follow through on actions planned in response to these
recommendations. For example, in 2011 we found that NHTSA's ODI did not
have a formal training program to help develop its current and future
workforce to promote continuity of institutional knowledge. In 2015,
NHTSA provided us a workforce assessment that evaluated its staffing
and training needs for ODI. NHTSA must now fully implement the results
of the workforce assessment to help inform future decisions on the
resources required for this critical mission. Similarly, we found in
2014 that FHWA had not conducted a comprehensive assessment of MAP-21's
impact on its workforce--despite the significant structural changes the
act brought about, such as consolidation of several FHWA programs. FHWA
has since completed an assessment that recognizes the Agency's need to
make changes to the way it does business and deploys staff to meet MAP-
21 requirements and carry out its mission effectively.
Changes in workforce demographics also present unique challenges
for DOT. For example, 22 percent of DOT's acquisition workforce was
retirement-eligible in fiscal year 2015, heightening the need for
improved compliance with contracting officer (CO) training and
experience requirements across all DOT agencies.\24\ DOT's acquisition
workforce is composed of hundreds of COs, CO representatives, and other
supporting staff who provide agencies with the goods and services
required to accomplish their mission at the best value to
taxpayers.\25\ While DOT has several training improvement initiatives
under way for its acquisition workforce, our 2015 review found that it
still needs to clarify and enforce its policies governing certification
and warrant authority for COs.\26\ Of the 63 COs we reviewed, 15 (24
percent) did not fully comply with DOT requirements. For example, 10
COs' certifications had expired, yet they continued to approve over
3,000 contract actions and obligate over $731 million. While DOT
recently revised its acquisition workforce policy in response to our
report, full implementation of our recommendations and enforcement of
these policies will be critical to ensure that COs have the appropriate
training, experience, and certification to award and administer DOT's
complex, high-dollar acquisitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ FAA is excluded from these data and the scope of our work
described in this paragraph because Congress exempted FAA from Federal
acquisition laws and regulations in DOT's fiscal year 1996
Appropriations Act. Congress provided FAA with broad authority to
develop its own acquisition process. Under this authority, FAA
developed the Acquisition Management System and a set of policies and
guidance designed to address the unique needs of the Agency.
\25\ COs are Government employees who can bind the Federal
Government to a contract. COs are responsible for ensuring performance
of all necessary actions for effective contracting, ensuring compliance
with the terms of the contract, and safeguarding the interests of the
United States in its contractual relationships. Contracting Officer
Representatives (COR) are Government employees responsible for
monitoring the contractor's progress in fulfilling the technical
requirements specified in the contract. For example, CORs maintain
administration records, approve invoices and perform quarterly
monitoring reports to confirm the contractor is meeting the terms and
conditions under the contract.
\26\ Some Deficiencies Exist in DOT's Enforcement and Oversight of
Certification and Warrant Authority for Its Contracting Officers (OIG
Report Number ZA-2015-041), April 9, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
enhancing dot's it security and preparedness
Attacks on public and private sector information systems, carried
out by increasingly well-funded and organized hackers, pose a
continuous threat to the more than 450 information systems DOT uses to
conduct business and operate some of the Nation's most critical
transportation systems. While DOT has made progress in protecting its
information systems, many remain vulnerable to compromise, underscoring
the need for more effective contingency planning, and aggressive
deterrence of insider threats.
Protecting DOT's Information Systems From Increasing Threats
DOT continues to face longstanding cybersecurity vulnerabilities
and must take corrective actions to address identified weaknesses that
pose threats to its information systems. To its credit, DOT has made
major progress in implementing the required use of Personal
Identification Verification (PIV) cards \27\ for all DOT employees and
contractors--a key step in securing access to DOT facilities and
systems. DOT reported issuing PIV cards to 100 percent of its
employees, and 98.3 percent have been configured for use in accessing
networks--an increase of 74.5 percent from last year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ A PIV card is a smart card that contains the necessary data
for the holder to be granted access to Federal facilities and
information systems and assure appropriate levels of security for all
applicable applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, DOT has been slow to take corrective actions to address
many other cybersecurity weaknesses. To help reduce cybersecurity
risks, OMB requires agencies to track identified weaknesses using plans
of actions and milestones (POA&M). Yet, in 2015, DOT had a backlog of
more than 3,800 POA&Ms, which included 21 unimplemented recommendations
we have made. DOT also remains behind schedule in implementing
recommendations we have made in our annual Federal Information Security
Management Act (FISMA) reports and other IT-related audits.
Many of our recommendations focus on key Administration priorities.
For example, OMB requires agencies to implement continuous information
system monitoring, which can provide near real-time security
information to senior leaders, by 2017.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Continuous monitoring involves establishing processes and
capabilities to provide near real-time security information to senior
leaders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, DOT has not yet defined the practices or technologies that
should be used or established common security controls \29\ to help
protect its information systems, including high-value asset \30\
systems. Specifically, DOT is still conducting planning and research to
determine the resources needed to ensure that common controls are
properly used, implemented, and monitored. Until those are finalized,
DOT remains vulnerable to more aggressive and complex cyber threats due
to insufficient security controls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Necessary to meet requirements of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), common system security controls are
controls that exist in one system that can be used to protect other
systems.
\30\ High-value assets are assets, systems, or datasets that may be
considered ``high-value'' by the Department based on the following
attributes--sensitivity of the information, uniqueness of the dataset,
impact of loss or compromise, system dependencies, and systems that are
integral to supporting critical department communications. A system is
considered ``high impact'' if the loss of confidentiality, integrity,
or availability for that system could be expected to have a severe or
catastrophic adverse effect on organizational operations,
organizational assets, or individuals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strengthening Contingency Plans and Security Protocols To Deter Insider
Threats
We continue to find weaknesses in DOT's ability to plan for
contingencies and recover from disruptions, even for critical systems.
For example, our ongoing work has shown that several Operating
Administrations did not conduct annual contingency plan testing for
their selected mission critical or high- and moderate-impact systems to
ensure they will work in the event of a disruption, as required.\31\
Specifically, 5 of the Department's 12 Operating Administrations did
not comply with DOT policy to conduct such testing or meet all DOT
requirements for their disaster recovery plans, potentially limiting
their effectiveness at ensuring continuity of critical systems in the
event of a malicious attack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Departmental Cybersecurity Compendium Supplement to DOT Order
1351.37, ``Departmental Cybersecurity Policy,'' Version 3.0, September
2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The importance of effective contingency plans was demonstrated on
September 26, 2014, when an FAA contract employee deliberately started
a fire that destroyed critical telecommunications equipment at FAA's
Chicago Air Route Traffic Control Center in Aurora, IL. As a result of
the damage, Chicago Center was unable to control air traffic for more
than 2 weeks,\32\ thousands of flights were delayed or cancelled, and
aviation stakeholders and airlines reportedly lost over $350 million.
While FAA completed comprehensive reviews of its contingency plans and
security procedures following the Chicago Center incident, significant
work remains to prevent or mitigate the impact of similar events in the
future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Chicago Center's air traffic and airspace responsibilities
were eventually transferred to other facilities, based on a 2008
contingency plan and airspace map. This required extensive adjustments
to ensure adequate radar and radio communication coverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notably, the event highlighted the need to enhance security and
increase the flexibility and resiliency of the national air traffic
control system. For example, FAA lacked the controls necessary to block
access to a contract employee no longer assigned to this facility,
thereby leaving the Center's high-value systems vulnerable to
unauthorized access, disruption, and loss of information. Other insider
threats pose significant threats to security, ranging from an employee
who maliciously steals data to an employee who unwittingly opens
infected email attachments. For example, in 2014, a DOT employee opened
an infected email attachment and unleashed a serious computer virus
(known as ``Dyre'') into DOT's network, compromising more than 5,000
computers and resulting in loss of productivity, email interruptions,
and data loss. The virus was designed to steal information (including
passwords), avoid routine detection, and generate new emails with
attachments to further spread the virus. While DOT reported that the
virus has been mostly eradicated, it noted the need to better train
employees to protect DOT's systems to lower the risk of system
compromise.
conclusion
The safe and efficient movement of people and goods is vital to our
Nation's economic growth, global partnerships, and quality of life. The
Department has clearly demonstrated its commitment to advance these
priorities. To continue addressing the management issues we have
identified as well as a changing transportation environment, it will be
important for the Department to follow through with new safety
standards and recommended actions, stronger financial and project
controls over major investments, and vigilant security and preparedness
measures.
We remain committed to assisting DOT as it works to improve how it
manages programs and resources and to our role in ensuring the greatest
return on investment to taxpayers. I appreciate this Committee's
continued support in the coming fiscal year to enable us to enhance our
coverage of the Department's safety programs, high-dollar
administrative and management assets, and information systems security.
This concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any
questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have.
CYBERSECURITY
Senator Collins. Thank you very much.
I was very pleased that you mentioned cybersecurity and the
vulnerabilities there. What is your assessment of the
vulnerabilities and risk to critical infrastructure that is
part of the Department of Transportation?
Mr. Scovel. Thanks for the question.
We are very concerned. It remains a significant
vulnerability for DOT as it does for virtually every other
agency across all of government. It is a threat that seems to
grow by leaps and bounds. And despite the best efforts of the
cybersecurity officials in DOT as well as other units of the
Government, it is almost as if they are being overtaken by the
threat and by technology itself.
As you know, we are required to conduct a Department-wide
survey, if you will, of information security management every
year. We have found that, in the past year, DOT made
significant progress, as I mentioned, in the use of PIV cards,
requiring PIV cards, which, when they are fully implemented
across the board, will be essential not only for facility
access, physical security, if you will, but also for what the
techies call logical access. They can be used to gain access to
particular security or computer programs.
On the other hand, where the Department has struggled is in
implementing its plan of action and milestones (POA&Ms). They
are plans of action and milestones to address critical
vulnerabilities.
In fiscal year 2014, DOT had about 5,600 POA&Ms on the
books. By the end of fiscal year 2015, they had reduced that
number to about 3,200, so they had made some progress.
But those that remain constitute significant tough nuts, in
our opinion, to crack. Many of those POA&Ms do not yet have
start dates assigned to them. The Department has not yet been
able to even estimate the remediation costs in order to
implement those.
I mentioned in my prepared statement continuous monitoring,
which is a top priority across all of government, so that
senior officials can understand on a real-time basis when
threats are appearing and what immediate action they may be
able to take to deal with them.
In order to make progress on that, the Department has to
identify those key nodes across all of DOT's cyberspace, so
that if there are places where a single, common system security
control can be effective, it can be placed at that one place,
and it can have a ripple effect for security across the board.
Just very quickly, and I have talked a long time on this,
because, as you know, it is a significant problem. DOT has
about 200 critical systems out of the 463 on the books; 163 of
those belong to FAA. DOT understands it needs to prioritize its
cybersecurity efforts to protect those most critical systems
through the means that I mentioned, the POA&Ms, the continuous
monitoring, and the common system security controls.
CYBERSECURITY--NEXTGEN
Senator Collins. That was an excellent answer, and I very
much appreciate the thoroughness. This has been a major concern
of mine.
Do you think that the NextGen system, which we are
installing for air traffic control, will help decrease the
vulnerability of our air traffic system to a cyber attack?
Mr. Scovel. Madam Chairman, it will help in some respects,
but in other respects, the NextGen systems themselves may be
vulnerable. We have undertaken some testing of some of the
systems, ADS-B (Automatic Dependence Broadcast System) and
others. We have concerns about those.
I am not at liberty in an open forum to discuss those,
because our reports have been properly deemed, after review by
the Department, to constitute sensitive security information.
We have spoken with your staff on some of those matters in the
past. We would be happy to come over and in a closed setting
discuss them with you in more detail.
SEXUAL ASSAULT AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Senator Collins. Thank you very much. This is an issue that
I continue to pursue from my seat on the Intelligence Committee
as well.
I want to follow up on a question that Senator Reed asked
the Secretary, and that has to do with sexual assault at the
U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.
The Department's most recent report on the academy shows
that the level of sexual assault and harassment remains
unacceptably high. There continues to be a large discrepancy in
the number of sexual assaults that are officially reported and
the responses to the anonymous survey. That is very troubling
because it implies that the midshipmen women still do not have
the trust and faith in the academy's leadership to report
incidents when they occur, whether it is on campus or at sea.
What recommendations do you have for how we can change the
underlying cultural attitudes that the Secretary referred to
that appear to either turn a blind eye to or in some ways not
really condone but do not forcefully act on such a disturbing
level of sexual assault and harassment at the academy?
Mr. Scovel. Madam Chairman, this is a most disturbing
problem. You and I and Senator Murray have had discussions on
this in the past, and I greatly appreciate your interest and
concern on behalf of the students at the Merchant Marine
Academy. I think the ranking member is exactly right when he
pointed out earlier, in questions to the Secretary, his
observations concerning his experience at West Point and
elsewhere in the military, Senator.
But when a critical mass is achieved in the student body
and even more particularly, in the administration leadership at
the academy itself, things can change.
Obviously, as inspector general, I am not in a position to
influence that, but where we have brought our forces to bear,
on, that is, with the assistance and at the request of this
committee and others, to take a look at what the school and the
Maritime Administration have done, what they have planned, what
other recommendations for improvement we might be able to make
to them.
We did that in the 2014 report. We furnished them nine
recommendations at the time. After close scrutiny, my staff
concluded that the recommended actions had all been taken by
the academy administration, so we were able to close all nine
of our recommendations from the 2014 report.
At about the same time, the academy, much to its credit,
embarked on its own action plan, 44 steps across six or seven
different phases that they intended to carry out in order to
make concrete progress on building the trust and confidence
that you mentioned is necessary on behalf of students.
They closed their action plan in 2015 without having
completed all 44 items that constituted the plan. They left--
not unaccounted for, but unresolved, at least to our
satisfaction--a handful. I think it was seven, to be specific.
But we are continuing our discussions. At the committee's
request, we have been asked to examine the academy's actions on
that action plan and see if it meets with our approval, at
least. We are continuing those discussions. We are going to
have further meetings over the next month or so on the
remaining seven. We will be in a position at that point to come
and discuss with the staff and you, if you wish, how we feel on
the academy's progress.
You mentioned earlier, and it has come up, but I would like
to mention it too, because it is a concern for me, and I have
emphasized with our staff--that is, a look at the academy's
action plan, however good it may appear to be for
implementation on the grounds at King's Point. There are
anywhere from 8 to 12 months of an academic year when students
go out in very small groups and are at sea for extended periods
of time and put into port in places that are much different
culturally and, frankly, can get wild. We can all use our
imaginations on things like that.
Those are opportunities for young people, male or female,
to be vulnerable and to find themselves in trouble. So the
Academy's action plan needs to really get at that specific
point in order to have a fighting chance of getting trust and
confidence back among the students.
Senator Collins. Thank you.
Senator Reed.
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Scovel. Obviously, we take your reports
very seriously, since we have used it for significant questions
of the Secretary.
Again, going back to your report on hazardous materials
transportation, one aspect of the report was a finding that
many cases merit referral to your office for actual criminal
investigation. Can you provide some examples of those types of
cases?
Mr. Scovel. I can. I will be happy to.
Just to review it a little bit, and I will try to do it
quickly, a couple years ago, I was on a field visit to one of
our investigative field offices in Florida. And I spoke with
one of our agents there who reported that in her 15-year career
or so with our Office of Inspector General, she had received
criminal referrals from virtually every other operating
administration in the Department except for FRA. She was
disturbed by that.
That got my attention. I came back to headquarters. We had
on our planning schedule a look at FRA hazmat procedures, and I
asked them to put in a specific objective to examine this
question of criminal referrals. So we were able to tackle that.
I can say that in the cases that we looked at, and there
were 75 between fiscal year 2010 and fiscal year 2014, we had
received zero criminal referrals from FRA. We found, however,
that there were instances of those 75--23 percent, as we looked
at it through both auditors' and investigators' eyes, should
have merited some attention from my staff, trained criminal
investigators. So those were 17 out of the 75 cases.
A couple of examples. One company produced valves that had
not been put through a required design approval process. Those
valves later caused leaks on tank cars carrying hazardous
materials. FRA chose to pursue civil penalties against that
company and in March 2015 released a rail worthiness directive
on valve replacement, but never referred the case to our office
for criminal investigation.
Another example. A different company released overweight
tank cars for use several times without rectifying the weight
problems and after they had been certified by that company as
underweight. These circumstances indicate possible false
statements by a repeat violator, but FRA did not refer that
case to our office for criminal investigation either.
A final example. Another company may have made a false
statement when it did not include in a bill of lading the
radioactive containers located on a flat railcar on the train,
but FRA again did not refer the matter to our office.
Senator Reed, we have heard from every single other
operating administration in the Department, including even the
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, in those years,
2010 through 2014. Even St. Lawrence Seaway referred a criminal
matter to us.
We have had zero from FRA, whether it was safety related or
whether it was potentially grant-fraud related. As you know,
FRA has significant oversight responsibility now for high-speed
rail grants.
So we have embarked on a concerted effort, and I know we
have the support and attention of the Department's highest
leadership as well as FRA itself, in order to turn that around,
without using every tool in the toolbox--which includes not
only civil penalties to FRA's leadership but also criminal
investigations, when properly warranted. It amounts to what I
call partial disarmament on the part of the safety regulator.
That is most disturbing. I would like to see it corrected.
CRIMINAL VIOLATIONS
Senator Reed. Let me just follow up with a question. This
is for my benefit as much is anybody else.
The procedure in the Department is that an agency would
submit a potential criminal violation to your office. You would
investigate it, and then you would submit it to the Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or the Federal attorney? What is
the stop out of your office?
Mr. Scovel. Thanks. We would take it to the assistant U.S.
attorney, to the U.S. attorney in the district where the
alleged violation occurred.
Quite honestly, they have their own priorities, as I am
sure you understand. Counterterrorism and public corruption
these days are number one on the list for FBI and Department of
Justice attention. So matters like this can sometimes be
difficult for us to attract attention. But with safety cases,
particularly where the potential for grievous effects is
significant, depending on when and where, we can often get
Department of Justice cooperation.
Senator Reed. So it is not like that FRA is going directly
to the Federal level. They have to go through you. They are not
going through you.
Mr. Scovel. Yes. This is in contravention I should say,
too, of Department orders that are very specific--that when
possible criminal activity comes to the attention of any of the
modes, they are to refer it to the Office of Inspector General.
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Senator Reed. Thank you. Just a final question on that, the
administration submits a budget for your office and you submit
a budget for your office. And we have to sort of parse it.
You are requesting additional resources from the
administration's budget, including 25 additional full-time
equivalent (FTE) positions, I believe. First of all, again, we
appreciate the work you are doing and the work is increasing, I
am sure. But can you explain how you are going to use this
additional staff, and why you need it?
Mr. Scovel. I would be happy to, and thank you for the
question. I have some notes, and if you will bear with me, I
want to be careful in how I say this because we, of course,
have had communications with the Department and with OMB as
well as others on the Hill here already, and I want to make
sure I am consistent.
Senator Reed. Yes, sir.
Mr. Scovel. We have always appreciated it, at DOT OIG, this
committee's, and your colleagues' committees over on the House
side, concern and interest in and support across all the years.
I have been the inspector general for a little over 9 years,
and it has been magnificent.
Here is where we stand now. OIG's budget request to OMB was
$93.6 million in support of an estimated 422 career level FTEs.
The President's budget request is for $90.2 million in support
of an estimated 397 career level FTEs. That would be sufficient
as well for 13 student and expert FTEs.
We do appreciate that the President's budget is intended to
help us move in the right direction. But I consider myself duty
bound to advise you, and now that you have asked, we have
advised OMB in our original budget request, the 25 additional
FTEs we originally requested is the number of staff that would
enable us to fully execute our mission focusing on safety
across all transportation modes while continuing to identify
cost-saving opportunities and making recommendations to improve
program efficiency and effectiveness. Operating below OIG's
requested level puts at risk our ability to provide full and
effective oversight of expanding DOT programs.
I submit that based on our office's record for many years
now, whatever appropriated dollars are sent our way, we make
tremendous use of. A traditional measure in the accountability
community is called return on investment. In 2015, our return
on investment was 32-to-1; for each single appropriated dollar,
we were able to return financial recoveries to the Government
of $32. For the 5 years prior to that, it was 29-to-1. So that
puts us really among the top tier of Federal Offices of
Inspector General.
The resources we have requested for 2017 we believe are
necessary to enable us to provide critical audit and
investigative support of aviation and surface safety issues. We
plan to sharpen our focus on administrative, management, and
procurement programs with significant budget and information
security impacts.
We need to maintain certain technical capabilities needed
to conduct increasingly complex audits and investigations.
And we are also overdue, since we are talking about
cybersecurity, to take measures to reinforce our own IT
security posture.
We also have significant new oversight responsibilities,
and we welcome them, that have been associated and handed to us
through the FAST Act, the Digital Accountability and
Transparency Act (DATA Act), the Grants Oversight and New
Efficiency Act (GONE Act), and the Surface Transportation Board
(STB) Reauthorization Act.
Full funding would enable us to, most importantly, cover
the increasing personnel costs that are largely outside of our
control and that have left us with insufficient funds to
support our full allotment of career level FTEs.
Sir, 75 percent of OIG's budget goes to payroll, if you
will. Much of the balance of that 25 percent is for expenses
over which we have no control--rent and the Department's own
working capital fund.
I will close by thanking you and the chairman and all
members of the committee for your consistent concern and
support for our mission. I well recognize that every government
agency these days operates in a financially constrained
environment. And I pledge to you that no matter what the final
decision may be for our office's appropriation, we will do all
we can with all we have, and my staff sitting behind me has
heard me utter those exact words in all-hands meetings and
everything else. We will always do all we can with what we have
to support the Secretary and the Congress.
Senator Reed. Thank you.
If I can make just one brief comment, the chairman has been
very thoughtful about including the inspector general in these
hearings, and the HUD inspector general has made the same basic
comments about IT security, which is a multibillion-dollar,
government-wide sort of cost that is recognized but not funded.
We were commenting about that after he left.
So we have to do some thinking I think. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Mr. Scovel. Thank you, sir.
Senator Collins. I certainly agree with the ranking member
in that regard.
Mr. Inspector General, I want to thank you so much, not
only for your excellent testimony today. I was impressed, since
we gave you know warning that I was going to ask you about
cybersecurity, how extremely on top of that issue that you are,
which I think is appropriate because I do believe it is one of
the greatest vulnerabilities that we have facing our critical
infrastructure and one that we have done the least to truly
deal with in a serious way.
But I am always very impressed when I meet with you, have
discussions with you, or hear you testify. So my thanks to you
and your office and dedicated employees who are working hard to
make sure the Department is as efficient as possible.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
The hearing record will remain open, as I indicated, until
next Friday, March 25. Undoubtedly, additional questions will
be submitted to you for the record.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department subsequent to the hearing:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
Question. The Department recently announced the seven finalists for
the Smart City Challenge, which is intended to provide $40 million over
3 years to a medium-sized city for deployment of intelligent
technologies. These may include technologies such as autonomous
vehicles, urban automation, sensor-based infrastructure, and electric
vehicle fleets to help reduce congestion and provide innovative
solutions for safety and mobility.
Mr. Secretary, given the limited amount of funding available for
research and technology, does it really make sense to spend a
substantial amount of money on only one city?
Answer. On December 2015 USDOT issued a Notice of Funding
Opportunity challenging medium-sized cities to solve tomorrow's
transportation challenges using technology and innovation. The
overwhelming response surprised us. Seventy-eight medium-sized cities
from across the country--from Portland to Providence and from Anchorage
to Albuquerque--submitted thirty-page vision proposals.
We intend to offer one city $40 million because a substantial
amount of money focused on one city has the potential to (1) be more
effective in getting the attention of medium-sized cites, (2) inspire
cities to use 21st century technology and innovation to solve
tomorrow's transportation challenges, (3) produce solutions that are
replicable in other medium-sized cities, (4) make the United States the
leader in the development of smart city transportation solutions, (5)
be enough money to create a demonstration that will make an impact in a
medium-sized city, (6) encourage universities, foundations, NGOs to
help these cities look to the 21st century solutions, and (7) be
sufficient to attract technology companies to form partnerships with
the seven finalists. While only one city will win, the Smart City
Challenge started a conversation in seventy-eight cities that has the
potential of changing how they look at transportation.
Question. As I mentioned in my opening statement, I am frustrated
the Department continues to use the same old gimmicks we have seen in
the past, shifting programs from discretionary to mandatory. The budget
proposal, excluding funding for Amtrak, includes $4.1 billion in
proposed mandatory spending for ``High-Performance Rail'' all the while
we have the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program
with nearly $33 billion in available loan assistance sitting
unobligated.
The fiscal year 2016 omnibus provided nearly $2 million to the
Federal Railroad Administration to support short line railroads with
costs associated with RRIF loan applications. Additionally, the FAST
Act included reforms to RRIF to make the program more accessible.
Mr. Secretary, how does the Department plan to use the funds
provided in fiscal year 2016 and given the changes made by the FAST Act
what concrete steps are you taking to get RRIF funding out the door?
Answer. As directed by the fiscal year 2016 Consolidated
Appropriations Act, the Department intends to use the $1.96 million
appropriated under Section 152 of Division L of the Act to assist Class
II and Class III railroads in lowering costs related to applying for a
loan under the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF)
Program. Specifically, these funds will be made available for applicant
expenses in preparing to apply and applying for direct loans and loan
guarantees. The Department is currently developing guidance to define
how these funds will be made available to eligible applicants to defray
costs, ensure efficient application processing, and achieve loan
closing.
Increasing access to and usage of the RRIF Program is a top
priority of the Department. The program can play an important role in
advancing major infrastructure projects and assisting potential
borrowers in completing smaller infrastructure, equipment, and
refinancing projects that play a vital role in the borrowers'
operations and the overall performance of the rail network. Prior to
the enactment of the FAST Act, the Department had implemented process
improvements to increase stakeholder outreach, provide technical
assistance to prospective borrowers, and improve the efficiency of the
loan application process. In 2015, the FRA completed the same number of
loans--two--as the previous 3 years combined.
The FAST Act contains several provisions intended to further
streamline the loan approval process, increase applicant eligibility,
and fund a wider array of projects.
The FAST Act also established the National Surface Transportation
and Innovative Finance Bureau (Bureau) within DOT. The Department is in
the process of establishing the Bureau to help consolidate outreach/
coordination of DOT credit programs, process applications more
efficiently, provide technical assistance, and communicate best
practices regarding DOT financing and funding opportunities.
Question. Last fall, Administrator Huerta testified before this
subcommittee on how to successfully integrate unmanned aircraft systems
into our Nation's airspace. Given the rise in the number of U.A.S.
sightings near our Nation's airports, I remain concerned about the
threat posed by potential interference with airport operations. Mr.
Secretary, what is the F.A.A. doing to address this alarming growth in
``close calls'' of U.A.S. near airports?
Answer. As of December 21, 2015, everyone who flies a UAS that
weighs more than 0.55 pounds and less than 55 pounds outdoors must
register using the FAA's new online registration system. Before
completing registration, registrants must acknowledge safety
guidelines, which include restrictions and requirements for flying near
airports. As of the end of March, over 415,000 operators have
registered.
Registration is a key component of the FAA's education efforts,
which also include the No Drone Zone campaign, the B4UFLY smartphone
app, and providing airports with educational public service
announcements to display in their terminals.
Recognizing that education has its limits, the FAA is also working
with interagency partners to evaluate UAS detection technology in the
vicinity of airports. As part of the FAA's Pathfinder program, testing
of a detection system developed by CACI International was completed at
the Atlantic City International Airport in February 2016. A total of
141 tests were conducted--72 with a UAS on the ground and 69 with
different, small UAS in flight. Engineers from the FAA, CACI, and the
Department of Homeland Security will develop a final report of findings
by August 2016.
The FAA pursues enforcement action against the operator where
unsafe or unauthorized UAS operations occur that have a medium to high
impact to the safety of the National Airspace System (NAS), where the
operator is intentionally non-compliant, or where the case involves
repeat violations. Enforcement action can take the form of a civil
penalty or a certificate action if the operator holds an FAA issued
certificate. If criminal statutes are implicated, the FAA also works
with our law enforcement partners in prosecuting those cases.
Question. I have been outspoken about the need to improve the
safety of our rail network, not just on the larger Class One railroads,
but also on the ``short lines.'' Maine has no Class One railroads.
Therefore, short lines play an integral role in connecting goods to our
citizens. In order to address their unique needs, Congress provided
funding in fiscal years 2015 and 2016 to assist the short lines in
building a stronger, sustainable safety culture through the
establishment of the Short Line Safety Institute. The Short Line Safety
Institute recently hired an Executive Director and last year began
conducting safety culture assessments at several short line railroads
across the country. How is the Department using feedback from these
assessments as it works with the Institute on the development of
training, education, and recommendations to improve the safety
performance of short lines?
Answer. The Short Line Safety Institute's (Institute) primary goals
are to enhance and improve safety practices and to increase the short
line and regional railroad industry's culture of commitment to safety
through assessing their safety culture, recommending how to improve it,
and providing leadership, training, and education about safety culture
and conformance. The Institute will accomplish these goals through Four
Pillars of activities:
(1) Safety Culture Assessment: Conducting voluntary, non-punitive,
confidential safety culture assessments (initially focused on
railroads that transport crude oil);
(2) Education & Training: Serving as a long-term training and
education resource for short line and regional railroads;
providing resources, based on industry ``best practices'', for
strengthening railroad safety culture;
(3) Research & Evaluation: Serving as a research center that
compiles and disseminates information on safety needs and
trends within the short line and regional railroad industry
(e.g., assessing education/training needs, identifying
communications gaps, and analyzing safety metrics over time);
and
(4) Strategic Communications: Disseminating timely information to
industry stakeholders about the Institute's mission and vision
and providing guidance on how to communicate internally and
externally about safety culture improvement efforts
stakeholders may undertake at their properties.
After a safety culture assessment, assessors synthesize information
collected from multiple methods (interview, document review,
observation, survey) from employees across all levels of the short line
railroad. In addition to providing individualized feedback to the
railroads assessed, the assessments are also used to identify industry-
wide gaps in safety culture knowledge. The Institute will address these
gaps with training, webinars, conferences, and other strategic
education and communication efforts. As a result, the Institute will
provide short line and regional railroads with the tools needed to
drive safety culture change.
FRA is partnering with the American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association (ASLRRA) and the Institute in this effort,
providing continuing support to the Institute as it strives to improve
safety and safety culture in the short line industry. FRA's Office of
Research & Development continues to work closely with ASLRRA, Volpe
National Transportation Systems Center, and the University of
Connecticut to ensure the Institute's processes and procedures are
evaluated for effectiveness and based on scientific rigor.
Question. We continue to hear aviation stakeholders question the
F.A.A.'s ability to implement NextGen. We have spent approximately $6
billion on NextGen to date, but passengers, shippers, and aircraft
operators have realized few benefits. This lack of progress seems to be
one of the main arguments driving the push for significant changes to
F.A.A.'s structure. Surely by now the aviation industry is seeing
benefits from the billions of dollars this committee has provided. Can
you tell us what progress F.A.A. has made on NextGen?
Answer. Passengers and operators benefit from NextGen in multiple
ways, by flying on more direct paths to their destinations with fewer
delays. NextGen benefits include fewer carbon emissions, contributing
to a greener environment.
Nationwide, the FAA has measured $1.6 billion in benefits to
airlines and the traveling public from NextGen capabilities already in
place since 2010 through 2014. Over the next 15 years, NextGen will
produce an additional $11.7 billion in benefits from those
improvements. Once all currently planned programs are in place, the FAA
expects NextGen to deliver $134 billion in direct airline, industry,
and passenger benefits through 2030. The benefits were based on the
fiscal year 2014 Business Case for the Next Generation Air
Transportation System.
Last year, the FAA completed deployment of the En Route Automation
Modernization (ERAM) system, in all FAA Centers in the continental
United States. The system is already processing information from the
634 ground transceivers that comprise Automatic Dependent Surveillance-
Broadcast, ADS-B. In places such as Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico, our
controllers can continuously track equipped aircraft, even though the
nearest radar site might be several hundred miles away.
The FAA is making flying more efficient. The Metroplex initiative
has transformed the airspace around some of our busiest cities,
replacing inefficient ground-based routes. We now have scores of new
satellite-based air traffic procedures in Houston, North Texas,
Charlotte, Washington, DC, and Northern California.
The FAA has collaborated with the aviation industry through the
NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC), a Federal advisory committee, to
develop a plan to implement a number of high-priority NextGen
capabilities in the areas of Multiple Runway Operations, Performance
Based Navigation, Surface Operations, and Data Communications. To date,
the FAA and industry have completed 42 NextGen Priorities commitments,
introducing a wide range of benefits into the NAS.
Question. In the fiscal year 2016 Omnibus bill, this Committee
provided a substantial increase in resources to the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration for the Office of Defects Investigation.
Given the dramatic increase in recalls and fines issued in recent
years, ranging from fault GM ignition switches to Takata airbags, it
was apparent NHTSA did not have sufficient engineers and resources to
properly vet defect claims. The O.I.G. has issued several reports on
NHTSA's inability to properly identify and address vehicle safety
defects due to inadequate standards and procedures. I find it troubling
that, according to the O.I.G., NHTSA has failed to consistently apply
the recommendations from a 2011 report and lacks the mechanisms to
ensure that staff consistently applies these recommendations. This
finding from the O.I.G. makes me question whether the Department is
truly making permanent changes as called for in I.G. reports for any of
the agencies within DOT. Mr. Secretary, can you tell us how you, in the
last few months of this Administration, will ensure the O.I.G.
recommendations are taken seriously throughout the Department?
Answer. NHTSA has performed a comprehensive review of its defects
program. NHTSA's internal review and the review performed by the O.I.G.
last year form the agency's roadmap for building a more effective and
comprehensive defects program. NHTSA established an aggressive schedule
to implement all of the O.I.G. recommendations, and the agency will
meet its June 30, 2016 deadline. NHTSA has already initiated additional
actions to address O.I.G.'s recent recommendations about establishing
controls and procedures over the new policies.
The Department, through its Office of Audit Relations and Program
Improvement, recently initiated bi-monthly recommendation update
meetings with each Operating Administration to discuss the status of
every open recommendation. As of April 1, 2016, the Department had 547
open recommendations. The OIG has closed 152 open recommendations,
including 5of the 33 that it listed as high priority, based on actions
taken by the Department to implement those recommendations. The
potential savings of the closed recommendations total over $518
million.
My office is carefully monitoring and will continue to monitor
NHTSA's and other DOT agencies' progress in meeting the benchmarks
established by the O.I.G.
Question. A local bus company in Maine has brought to my attention
a troubling rulemaking issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, regarding ``bus lease-interchange''. This rule hurts
operators who have a safe record but find themselves having to partner
with other bus companies to provide service. For example, if bus
company ``A'' breaks down on the side of the highway, full of
passengers, then company ``A'' would have to find alternative service
to get the passengers quickly and safely to their destination through a
lease agreement with another company ``B''. This rule puts full burden
of compliance and liability for company ``B'' on company ``A'', even
though company ``B'' has DOT operating authority and its own safety
record. This makes no sense if both companies have their own operating
authority and are deemed safe by DOT. While the intent of this rule was
to prevent unsafe carriers that attach themselves to reputable
companies with DOT operating authority, the rule simply fails to do
that. The very class of carriers that the rule was trying to go after
would fall entirely outside of this final rule--in short, it really
only hits the folks following the rules. The rule is detrimental to bus
service providers across the country that regularly, and often without
much notice, have to lease or charter additional service from other
carriers. I am pleased to learn the Department delayed implementation 1
year. Mr. Secretary, do I have your commitment to address these
concerns before the end of this Administration?
Answer. The Department acknowledges motor carriers of passengers'
concerns about the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's
(FMCSA) 2015 final rule about the lease and interchange of buses. FMCSA
received numerous petitions for reconsideration of the final rule and
based upon a review of the petitions, determined that the compliance
date should be extended to January 1, 2018 to provide sufficient time
to address the issues raised by the petitioners. You have my commitment
that FMCSA will issue a decision concerning each of the petitions for
reconsideration by the end of the calendar year, and FMCSA anticipates
publishing amendments to the final rule in the Federal Register for
petitions which are granted, in early 2017.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Steve Daines
Question. Secretary Foxx, the President's budget request is over
$98 billion. That is more than $22 billion, nearly 30 percent, above
last year's enacted amount. The Office of Inspector General (OIG)
reported to the Commerce Committee in January that there were 569 open
recommendations with nearly $2 billion in potential savings. What is
DOT doing to expedite implementation of these recommendations?
Answer. The Department, through its Office of Audit Relations and
Program Improvement, recently initiated bi-monthly recommendation
update meetings with each Operating Administration to discuss the
status of every open recommendation. As of April 1, 2016, the
Department had 547 open recommendations. The OIG has closed 152
recommendations, including 5of the 33 that it listed as high priority,
based on actions taken by the Department to implement those
recommendations involving questioned costs and funds put to better use,
as identified by the OIG, total over $518. The potential savings of the
closed recommendations total over $518 million.
Question. The single biggest savings is in Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) air traffic control (ATC) towers, totaling $853
million. DOT's target action date is in July. What is DOT doing to
expedite implementation of these ATC savings?
Answer. The FAA concurred with OIG Report #ST-2015-080: Efficiency
of FAA's Air Traffic Control Towers Ranges Widely. The FAA is in the
process of performing a ``Deep Dive'' into the facilities outlined in
the report in order to determine the root causes of the inefficiencies.
This will allow the FAA to determine if, in the interim, these causes
have been corrected or if there are actions that can be implemented to
improve efficiencies. The FAA is working to deliver a response to the
OIG by the end of May 2016 and to issue a final response and results,
as applicable, by the end of July 2016.
Question. Airports in Montana utilize the Federal Contract Tower
(FCT) program. These towers account for approximately 28 percent of
operations while only utilizing about 14 percent of funds. Would
expanding the FCT program improve DOT's finances?
Answer. The FAA does not believe that expanding the contract tower
program would improve FAA's or DOT's finances at this time. The FAA
currently has no plans to convert any FAA towers into contract towers.
Any expansion of the program would therefore solely involve adding more
non-Federal towers to the program, thus raising FAA's overall costs.
Question. In addition to financial responsibility, maintaining a
safe transportation network is critically important. When it comes to
addressing behavioral safety issues, States agencies, not the Federal
Government, have the best understanding of their individual challenges.
One provision I was proud to champion in the Fixing America's Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act was to qualify 24/7 sobriety programs for
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) safety grants.
While implementing the FAST Act, how will DOT ensure States have the
flexibility to institute safety programs that address their unique
challenges?
Answer. NHTSA encourages States to develop creative approaches to
improve safety. The general approach is to allow States the maximum
flexibility consistent with statutory language. With regard to the
implementation of 24-7 sobriety program grants, NHTSA plans to use the
statutory language in the FAST Act as the basis to determine those
States eligible for a grant. Although the statute specifies certain
requirements that must be met in order to receive a grant, we believe
it affords room for flexibility for a State to tailor an approach to
suit its needs while satisfying the requirements imposed under the
statute.
Question. The Amtrak's Empire Builder runs across Montana's Hi-
Line, providing much needed connectivity to 12 rural communities.
Amtrak completed a feasibility study that concluded a stop in
Culbertson, MT would have a net positive impact on Amtrak's finances.
How will DOT facilitate coordination between the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Amtrak, and local stakeholders to help bring this
service online?
Answer. Amtrak's Long Distance routes, such as the Empire Builder,
play a critical role in connecting the national rail network and
provide a vital transportation alternative to communities throughout
the country.
As directed by the Senate's fiscal year 2016 Transportation and
Housing and Urban Development Appropriations Bill report (Report 114-
75), FRA and Amtrak are in the process of re-evaluating a previous
Amtrak feasibility study on adding a station stop along the Empire
Builder route in Culbertson, MT. The Amtrak ``Passenger Rail in the
Bakken Region'' study is due to the Appropriations Committee by
December 18, 2016 and FRA and Amtrak are on track to meet this
deadline. In addition to re-evaluating the revenue, ridership, and
other operating cost metrics of the previous Amtrak study, the fiscal
year 2016 Senate report language instructs FRA and Amtrak to also
examine the capital infrastructure improvements that would be necessary
to bring intercity passenger rail service to Culbertson, MT. FRA and
Amtrak must communicate with local stakeholders and the host freight
railroad, BNSF, to gather the resource and operational requirements
needed to carry out the study.
FRA is always available to provide technical assistance to States
and local governments regarding rail issues. Depending on the results
of the study and whether Federal funding will be sought for the capital
improvements required to add a station stop, FRA may also play a more
formal role in the environmental, engineering, and design processes to
construct the local government's preferred station facilities.
Question. Inspector General Scovel, the President's budget request
is over $98 billion, more than $22 billion increase above last year. In
a letter you sent to the Commerce Committee in January, you highlighted
569 open recommendations with nearly $2 billion in potential savings if
implemented. What is the status of these recommendations?
Answer. Of the 569 open recommendations we identified as of
December 31, 2015, 174 have since been closed and 395 remain open.
Additionally, since January 2016, we have issued 40 audit reports
containing 145 new recommendations, of which 135 remain open.
Accordingly, as of April 26, 2016, there are a total of 530 open audit
recommendations.
highway safety
Question. In your testimony, you discussed recommendations for the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). We discussed
many of these recommendations, specifically the Office of Defects
Investigation (ODI) recommendations, during a Commerce Committee
hearing last June. What recommendations has NHTSA closed since our last
meeting? Has NHTSA improved its stewardship of taxpayer resources?
Answer. Since my testimony on June 23, 2015, we have closed 6 of
the 17 recommendations we made to improve ODI's pre-investigative
processes. More specifically:
--Recommendation 6, which was closed on September 30, 2015, was aimed
at improving the quality of consumer complaint data and
enhancing ODI access to important data sources such as pictures
and accident reports. In response to our recommendation, ODI
enhanced safercar.gov to:
--Provide definitions for affected parts \1\ to assist consumers in
appropriately categorizing their complaints,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The online complaint submission form requires consumer to
select up to 3 affected parts from a drop-down list of 18 options such
as airbags, brakes, lighting, and powertrain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Provide guidance to consumers on what sort of information to
include in their narrative descriptions of incidents and
their vehicles that would be most helpful to ODI in
identifying potential safety concerns, and
--Allow consumers to upload up to 5 files while submitting their
complaints, and also encourage them to hold on to important
information such as police reports and photographs for at
least 5 years.
--Recommendation 13, which was closed on October 30, 2015, was aimed
at documenting supervisory review throughout ODI's pre-
investigative process including data screening.\2\ In response
to our recommendation, ODI implemented a process to conduct a
one-on-one meeting twice a month between each Defects
Assessment Division (DAD) screener and the DAD chief to discuss
all ongoing investigation proposals and issues. These meetings
will also include discussion of any limitations confronted by
screening staff, the need for future training, and staff
utilization. These meetings will serve as a platform for the
DAD chief to provide guidance to screeners. Additionally, ODI
developed a process to document these meetings and to store the
documentation within pertinent case files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ODI has two groups that are primarily involved with its pre-
investigation process: the Defects Assessment Division (DAD) and the
Early Warning Division. OIG and ODI mutually agreed that ODI's process
for supervising the Early Warning Division would be covered under its
proposed action to close out recommendation 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Recommendation 15, which was closed on October 30, 2015, was aimed
at developing and implementing guidance on the amount and type
of information needed to determine whether to open an
investigation. In response to our recommendation, ODI developed
risk assessment matrices that take into account the frequency
and hazard levels associated with a potential safety defect.
ODI guidance defines the specific information needed to
populate the matrices, describes how that information is
evaluated, and sets forth specific standards for when an
investigation must be opened. The matrix groups issues into
red, yellow and green--red suggesting that an investigation
should be opened, yellow suggesting that more information is
required to make a call, and green suggesting a low hazard. ODI
also identified a plan to develop matrices in 11 areas that
present the highest risk to safety such as cyber-security,
brakes, and air bags by April 30, 2016.
--Recommendation 17, which was closed on November 30, 2015, was aimed
at documenting and establishing a process for enforcing
timeframes to determine whether to open investigations and to
establish a process for documenting justifications for these
decisions. In response, ODI developed a process to ensure:
--All investigation proposals will be reviewed and dispositioned by
the appropriate investigative division within 6 weeks of
initial transmittal. Additionally, if an investigation
division chief does not make a decision on an investigation
proposal in the prescribed 6-week timeframe, it will
automatically be forwarded to the Defects Assessment Panel
for consideration.
--Compliance with the 6-week standard and the justifications for
opening investigations will be documented in ARTEMIS
through internal e-mails, defect assessment panel meeting
minutes, preliminary evaluation opening resumes, and
evaluations.
--Justification for declining to investigate must reference either
an applicable risk assessment matrix (see recommendation 15
above) or a detailed explanation of why the elements of a
potential safety defect do not exist. The justifications
will be documented in ARTEMIS.
--Timely dispositioning of issues will be factored into division
chief and ODI director's performance.
--Recommendation 3, which was closed on March 31, 2016, was aimed at
requiring manufacturers to develop and adhere to procedures for
complying with early warning reporting requirements, and
require ODI to review these procedures periodically. In
response, ODI sent a notice to auto manufacturers requiring
them to provide an explanation of their current procedures to
comply with early warning reporting (EWR) requirements. Under
this notice, manufacturers will have to describe their
practices for ensuring the accuracy and timeliness of their EWR
submission, as well as their process for ensuring the correct
assignment and interpretation of ODI component codes. ODI
developed a process for conducting ongoing periodic reviews of
manufacturer practices to ensure their continued compliance
with EWR requirements.
--Recommendation 10, which was closed on April 18, 2016, was aimed at
implementing a supervisory review process to ensure that all
EWR data are analyzed according to ODI policy and procedures.
In response ODI implemented a process to conduct a bi-weekly
meeting between Early Warning Division (EWD) screeners--both
Federal employees as well as contractors--and the EWD chief.
These meetings will cover screeners' analysis of all forms of
EWR data and allow the EWD chief to provide feedback to
screeners, assess their familiarity with ODI policies and
procedures, and keep them informed of any updates to those
policies and procedures.
Based our interactions with Agency staff and their actions taken to
date, we believe that NHTSA is focused on implementing and closing our
17 recommendations, and is on the right path to improving the
stewardship of taxpayer resources.
Question. Inspector General Scovel, in your 2015 Financial
Information Security Management Act (FISMA) audit, you reported DOT had
a number of challenges resolving plans of actions and milestones
(POA&Ms) \3\--longstanding security vulnerabilities within DOT systems.
What are DOT's challenges in resolving POA&Ms, and what is the Agency's
status in implementing OIG recommendations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Per OMB Memorandum M-02-01,--A POA&M is a tool that assist
agencies in identifying, prioritizing, and monitoring progress of
corrective efforts for security weaknesses found in programs and
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer. In 2014, DOT had a backlog of over 5,600 POA&Ms. In 2015,
DOT had only resolved 1,798 (32 percent), leaving more than 3,820
POA&Ms. Of the 3,820 unresolved POA&Ms:
--2,023 POA&Ms do not have actual start dates. Of these, 188 are high
priority, and 1,569 are medium priority.
--960 POA&Ms had no documented remediation costs. Of these, 53 are
high priority, 316 are moderate priority, 534 are low priority,
and 57 are not categorized.
As part of our fiscal year 2015 FISMA audit, we issued 9 additional
recommendations increasing the total number of OIG outstanding
recommendations to 21. DOT's target action completion dates for all 21
recommendations indicate that actions would be completed by the end of
fiscal year 2016. However, we note that several recommendations have
been open since 2010.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
Question. What is the timing for the NHTSA rulemaking for the 405
grants?
Answer. The agency plans to issue an interim final rule
implementing the provisions for the Section 405 grants in May 2016..
Question. Does NHTSA consider county-based or pilot 24/7 programs
as qualifying for 405 and 164?
Answer. NHTSA is currently engaged in rulemaking to implement this
and other statutory grant requirements, and plans to publish a rule in
the near future. Under Section 405, a 24-7 sobriety program is defined
as a State law or program that authorizes a State court or an agency
with jurisdiction to require driving under the influence (DUI)
offenders to be subject to testing for alcohol or drug use. Section 164
is similar in that States are responsible for meeting the statutory
requirements and must either have the required law or program in place
to be compliant.
Question. Should NHTSA be doing a rulemaking to certify 24/7
devices?
Answer. Under the grant program in Section 405 and the transfer
program in Section 164, compliance is based on a State having a law or
program that authorizes DUI offenders to be tested for alcohol or
drugs. The statutes direct a State to meet process requirements related
to testing to be determined compliant (e.g., at least twice per day or
by continuous transdermal monitoring). They do not mandate a particular
device or that any device be used. Consequently, we do not believe that
certifying 24/7 devices is necessary under the programs.
Question. FRA and PHMSA have received increases in funding in
recent years for safety with direct calls for more inspectors on routes
that carry flammable liquids and passengers. What is the status for
hiring the inspectors and safety personnel funded by this subcommittee
at FRA and PHMSA?
Answer. Regarding PHMSA:
In fiscal year 2015, PHMSA received 7 additional inspection and
enforcement positions to support the safe transportation of flammable
liquids. The positions were allocated based on risk related to the
transportation of flammable liquids. The position breakdown includes
five new Inspectors located in Trenton, NJ (2), Kansas City, MO (1),
Ontario, CA (1), and Houston, TX (1). In addition, there are two new
Hazardous Materials Safety Assistance Team safety personnel located in
Ontario, CA (1) and Atlanta, GA (1). As of April 2016, all positions
have been successfully filled.
Regarding FRA:
The FRA received funding for 10 new inspectors, in fiscal year
2014, and five more in fiscal year 2015. All 15 of these positions have
been filled
In fiscal year 2016, we received funding for four new inspectors.
One of these positions has already been filled, and the remaining 3 are
underway.
FRA also filled all 15 positions for which we received funding in
fiscal year 2014 in our Office of Railroad Policy and Development.
These critical positions included analysts, engineers, and
environmental and freight policy experts. Additionally, we filled 14
more positions of the 20 for which we were funded for safety
headquarters staff.
In fiscal year 2016, we received funding for an additional 29
regional and headquarters safety staff. FRA has already or will soon
initiate the hiring process for all of these positions, and expects to
fill most of them in this fiscal year.
Question. Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems: Motorcoach safety is a
priority for both NTSB and the Committee. Per Section 32703(c) of MAP-
21, DOT was directed to consider within 3 years whether motorcoaches
should be equipped with direct tire pressure monitoring systems (TPMS).
Such a requirement would be consistent with the 2009 National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Safety Recommendation H-09-022 that
all new motor vehicles weighing over 10,000 pounds to be equipped with
direct TPMS. Further, in February 2014, NTSB echoed the need for
implementation this safety recommendation. The Committee requested a
status update on the implementation of the MAP-21 requirement in Senate
Report 113-182, which was adopted as part of the fiscal year 2015
omnibus appropriations bill.
The Committee is aware that the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) recently conducted motorcoach safety equipment
testing that included a testing of direct TPMS. Nonetheless, the MAP-21
deadline has passed and the NTSB's recommendation remains open.
What is the current status of the agency's consideration of direct
TPMS on motorcoaches?
Will the agency promulgate requirements in this area consistent
with Safety Recommendation H-09-022?
Answer. The agency has reviewed and evaluated the available crash
data. The analysis did not reveal a safety need to justify regulatory
action at this time. The agency will continue to monitor the crash data
for tire under-inflation on motorcoaches and will pursue future
regulatory action if warranted.
Question. FMCSA Regulations on Windshield Mounted Vehicle Safety
Technology: The Senate Appropriations Committee is aware of current
FMCSA regulations that limit the ability of commercial motor carriers
to mount vehicle safety technologies on windshields to prevent
obstruction of a driver's field of view. The Committee is also aware
that the agency routinely has recognized the benefits of certain safety
technologies, and under current rules have provided 2 year exemptions
(the maximum time allowable under the current rules) for such
technologies.
To that end, the Committee directed the FMCSA to move forward on
prescribing regulations to modify 49 CFR 393.60(e) to permanently allow
the voluntary mounting on a vehicle's windshield of vehicle safety
technology likely to achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to,
or greater than, the level of safety that would be achieved absent such
an exemption. Further, the Senate also included such a provision in the
FAST Act (Public Law 114-94), specifically Section 5301, which directed
the agency to prescribe a regulation to address this, as well.
Please provide an update on the status of these directives?
When can the Committee expect an NPRM on this issue to be put
forward?
Will the agency meet the deadline included in the FAST Act to
promulgate a rule to meet the requirements of the law?
Answer. The Department's Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA) has drafted an Interim Final Rule to amend 49
CFR 393.60(e) to permanently allow the voluntary mounting of vehicle
safety technology in the windshields of commercial motor vehicles.
FMCSA does not anticipate completion of the rulemaking by the June 1,
2016, deadline provided in the FAST Act. However, the Agency is
committed to issuing the Interim Final Rule by July 1 and a final rule
by the end of the calendar year.
Question. Amtrak PTC Deployment: We were all deeply troubled by the
deadly Amtrak accident in Philadelphia last year.
Has Amtrak activated PTC on all Amtrak-owned infrastructure?
Answer. No. Amtrak has activated PTC on all 396 route miles of the
Northeast Corridor (NEC) which it owns, and 97 route miles of line in
Michigan. Its electrified Harrisburg line is currently undergoing final
testing, and is expected to be in service in 2016, along with its
Empire Connection in New York. All other Amtrak owned line segments are
slated to have PTC activated, or in operation, by the end of 2017.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Start
Number of Route Status at End of Date for
Segment Identification Miles in Calendar Year Revenue Service
Segment Demonstration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEC (Boston to Washington)............................. 396 Operational/Complete Completed
Philadelphia to Harrisburg............................. 104 Testing March 2016
Springfield Line (New Haven to Springfield, MA)........ 62 Installing Dec. 2017
Empire Connection...................................... 10 Testing April 2016
Michigan Line (Amtrak Owned)........................... 97 Operational Completed
Michigan Line (State Owned)............................ 135 Installing June 2017
Hudson Line (Poughkeepsie to Hoffmans)................. 94 Installing Dec. 2017
Chicago Union Terminal................................. 1.5 Not Started Dec. 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. The next step that Amtrak will face is full deployment of
PTC on the National Network. As you know, unlike the Northeast
Corridor, most of Amtrak's operations occur over infrastructure owned
by host railroads. I understand negotiations between host railroads and
Amtrak over who will cover the cost for PTC implementation on the
National Network are proceeding slowly, if at all. In order to meet the
deadline for PTC implementation, Amtrak will have to make various
investments in its rail network and equipment over the next two fiscal
years.
What is the FRA doing to budget for the costs of PTC implementation
on Amtrak's National Network?
Answer. The Department of Transportation has long-stated that
public sector funding is necessary to assist resource-constrained
commuter railroads, short line railroads, Amtrak, and States with
implementing PTC. FRA has requested funding for PTC system development
and implementation grants in every budget request dating back to fiscal
year 2011 (which was released by President Obama on February 1, 2010).
In fiscal year 2017, the $1.9 billion FRA requested for Grants to
Amtrak includes funding under both the Northeast Corridor and National
Network for PTC capital, equipment, and maintenance costs. Further, FRA
requested $1.25 billion for PTC implementation under the new
Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvement Program. In
addition to supporting commuter and short line railroads, this program
is targeted to assist States and Amtrak with their proportional share
of PTC costs on Amtrak's State-Supported routes that are required due
to Amtrak operations on those routes.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
Question. Secretary Foxx, the safe transport of crude-by-rail is of
great importance to me and my constituents. In almost every meeting
that I take back home, people tell me they are concerned about oil
trains running through their towns. While I appreciate the Department's
attention to this critical issue to date and the investments in the
fiscal year 2017 budget request, there is more work to be done. And it
needs to be done at a much quicker pace.
The National Transportation Safety Board issued three
recommendations to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) in January 2014 after finding that current
regulations are outdated and do not account for the reality of trains
frequently transporting more than 100 tank cars. Today, we have robust
requirements for oil spill response plans for pipelines and ships. We
need them for railroads, too.
Despite issuing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
comprehensive oil spill response plans in July 2014 and clear direction
from Congress to begin a rulemaking within 90 days of enactment of the
fiscal year 2016 Omnibus, PHMSA has failed to do so. In a January 4,
2016 letter you outlined that PHMSA expects to release a proposed rule
no later than June 2016 and complete a final rule in June 2017. This
time line is simply unacceptable.
Secretary Foxx, I am extremely disappointed in the continual delays
on this critical rulemaking. My constituents are counting on this
rulemaking to provide better protection for their communities and the
environment. What is causing the delay? Do you need additional
resources to support PHMSA's work on this rulemaking? I strongly urge
you to begin and complete this rulemaking earlier than the current June
2016 and June 2017 timeline. We must ensure trains carrying oil are
treated no differently than pipelines or maritime vessels.
Answer. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA) shares your concerns and is working expeditiously to publish
the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, ``Hazardous
Materials: Oil Spill Response Plans and Information Sharing for High-
Hazard Flammable Trains.'' The DOT's Rulemaking Requirements \4\
outline the processes and procedures for completing significant
rulemakings. In accordance with the procedures and as mandated by
Executive Order, the Department provided the NPRM to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for interagency review on February 24,
2016. The interagency review process coordinated by OMB may take up to
90 days. Therefore, PHMSA expects the NPRM will be published in June
2016. The DOT rulemaking procedures also require a 60 day public notice
and comment period. Receiving comments from our stakeholders, including
the emergency response community, is essential to protecting people and
the environment from the risks of hazardous materials transportation.
The volume and complexity of comments also impacts the additional
analysis and drafting during the final rule stage. Typically, final
rules require 1 year after the close of the NPRM comment period to
complete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See https://www.transportation.gov/regulations/rulemaking-
requirements-2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question. Communities in Washington remain very concerned with the
safety of the trains already running through their cities. And for good
reason. Crude oil shipments by rail have skyrocketed in Washington
State. The number went from almost no crude oil in 2011 to 17 million
barrels of oil shipped across the State in 2013. With more than 10
refinery expansions or crude oil facilities under consideration in
Washington, this figure could raise to 241 million barrels a year.
The new tank car standards rulemaking completed by DOT in May 2015
is a step in the right direction to improve the safety of transporting
crude oil.
Secretary Foxx, is the Department on track to meet the first
deadlines for upgrades to the DOT-111 non-jacketed tank cars by January
1, 2018 and the DOT-111 jacketed tank cars shortly thereafter by March
1, 2018? Do you foresee any problems with the manufacturing industry
being capable of delivering these upgraded tank cars on this time line?
The final rule also required any new tank cars constructed after
October 1, 2015 to meet the enhanced DOT-117 design and performance
criteria. How many of these DOT-117 tank cars have been produced and
are in use today to transport crude oil?
Answer. As of the 4th quarter of 2015, there were 1,793 DOT-117 and
DOT-117R cars used in flammable liquid service. Almost 1,600 of those
cars were constructed after October 1, 2015, to meet the enhanced DOT-
117 design and performance criteria. FRA does not expect the industry
to have difficulty in producing additional DOT-117 cars.
Question. I understand that the FAA is proposing to eliminate the
Contract Weather Observer (CWO) program at 57 airports, including
Spokane International Airport in Washington State. Today, the CWO
program provides weather monitoring, augmentation, and back up for
automated weather systems (ASOS) at 136 airports across the Nation.
I believe this proposal would compromise aviation safety. The ASOS
is limited in its ability to detect and accurately report on rapidly
changing weather conditions and weather sensors periodically fail or
malfunction. For example, weather such as freezing rain, freezing
drizzle, smoke, and haze are critical to flight safety at Spokane
International Airport, but these conditions are not reported by ASOS.
In fact, in December 2015, the CWO program at Spokane International
Airport documented over 900 separate augmentations to ASOS
measurements. In addition, adding weather observation duties to air
traffic controllers would degrade the speed and accuracy of the weather
observations given existing workloads managing aircraft and
requirements to for air traffic controllers to remain in the tower and
make weather observing their lowest priority.
Secretary Foxx, the CWO program is vital to the safety of our
Nation's airspace and I am very concerned with this proposal. What
analysis has the FAA conducted to ensure that such a change does not
increase safety risks and hazards at these 57 airports? Furthermore, if
the FAA believed air traffic controllers can and should take on weather
observation duties why is this change not being proposed for all 136
airports that currently have the CWO program? What makes the remaining
79 airports with CWO programs different? I respectfully request that
you reconsider this proposal and ask that you provide a full
explanation of FAA's initial decision to eliminate the CWO program,
including the stakeholder input and public comment that contributed to
this decision.
Answer. In accordance with our Safety Management System, the FAA
conducted two Safety Risk Management Panels (SRMP) at appropriate
facilities in order to make updates to weather data and variables, and
traffic volume and complexity. The SRMPs also reviewed factors to
consider in determining whether to use air traffic controllers or
contract weather observers (CWO) to observe weather. Stakeholders and
industry groups served on the panels, including Southwest Airlines,
National Air Traffic Controllers Association, National Business
Aviation Association, Air Line Pilots Association, National Oceanic
Atmospheric Administration, CWO vendors, and others.
Air traffic controllers currently function as weather observers at
75 percent of the towers in the NAS (391 facilities). CWOs function in
that capacity at the remaining 136 facilities. As a result of the
SRMPs, the updated policy identified 57 of those 136 facilities as
having similar weather and traffic volume/complexity as facilities
where air traffic controllers are used as weather observers, and at
this time the FAA is considering transitioning these facilities to
controller-provided weather services.
The SRMPs assessed the risk in transferring weather observation
responsibilities from CWO to air traffic controllers at the 57 sites.
No decision has been made at this time to transition any of the 57 CWO
sites to controller provided observation services.
Each of these safety panels will result in a recommendation, but
they do not make the final decision. The FAA must take a comprehensive
view of safety when it makes its final decisions. Ensuring the safety
of our aviation system is always the highest priority, and the
importance of accurate, reliable and detailed weather observations will
be a priority concern during this process.
Question. In the 2012 FAA authorization bill, Congress directed the
FAA to develop a plan to realign and consolidate Terminal Radar
Approach Control (TRACON) facilities. The FAA is now considering
whether to close the TRACON facility at Grant County International
Airport in Washington State and relocate the TRACON controllers to
another airport.
Grant County International Airport provides unique civilian and
military aviation services to the aviation industry, both in support of
national security interests and to the local community. On any given
day, there is a blend of fast moving military aircraft, Boeing
production and test aircraft, and slower-moving civilian aircraft all
utilizing the same airspace and the same five active runways. During
the summer months, this airspace is also shared by aircraft fighting
forest fires in the Northwest. Very rarely do these aircraft arrive at
Grant County International Airport and simply taxi off the runway as is
the case at most other airports. Instead, these aircraft perform a
variety of activities, including Rejected Take Off situations,
simulated or actual equipment failures, touch-and-go landings, full
stop and goes, wide area pattern work, and other operations that
require an aircraft to hold on a runway or execute unusual maneuvers
overhead.
Grant County International Airport is a critical training ground
for the Air Force and Navy. C-17s from Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM)
operate on the assault strip, P-3s and P-8s from Naval Air Station
Whidbey Island conduct touch-and-go training, F-15s from the Oregon Air
National Guard and EA-18Gs from Naval Air Station Whidbey Island come
to operate within the airport's pattern, and KC-135s come from
Fairchild Air Force Base (AFB) for training exercises. For JBLM in
particular, the conditions and characteristics of Grant County
International Airport cannot be replicated elsewhere in the Northwest.
In the case of Fairchild AFB, the airport provides easy access for
military aircrew training, allows training to occur at times when it
cannot at Fairchild AFB due to weather or runway closures, and serves
as their ready reserve base in the event of a natural disaster or other
emergency.
Secretary Foxx, I am concerned the FAA is not taking national
security into account when it evaluates whether or not to close the
TRACON at Grant County International Airport. Can you provide me with
assurance that the FAA will in fact be considering national security
when making the final decision?
Answer. The FAA is evaluating TRACON facilities and services for
realignment across the NAS, as required by the FAA Modernization and
Reform Act. For clarification, the FAA is considering realigning TRACON
facilities so that air traffic control services would be provided at
another location, and not closing facilities and ending the provision
of air traffic control services. The air traffic control towers are not
a part of this process.
The agency is fully committed to developing realignment
recommendations and implementing any realignments in the safest manner,
without affecting national security. At Grant County, the FAA
management and Labor Union representatives met with stakeholders,
including military, industry, and local government, to share
information, answer questions regarding TRACON services, and discuss
safety and security considerations. As required by the legislation, the
FAA takes all stakeholder input and considerations into account
throughout its analysis, recommendation development, and during the
final decisionmaking stage of the process.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Brian Schatz
Question. Safe Streets: Secretary Foxx, as you know I support
community planning strategies to create walkable neighborhoods that
minimize pedestrian fatalities. Hawaii has the highest pedestrian
fatality rate among adults over 65 so this is more than an abstract
philosophy to me, this is about reducing deaths among older people in
Hawaii.
Unfortunately, traffic fatalities among pedestrians went up again
to 4,884 deaths in 2014. The FAST Act included language Senator Heller
and I worked to secure directing USDOT to work with States and MPOs to
help them implement planning that takes into pedestrian safety into
account.
Can you tell me how the department will implement this policy and
generally what are you doing in 2016 to reverse the trend of pedestrian
fatalities?
USDOT has created a number of planning tools, manuals and best
practices for States, MPOs and others to refer to and that's important.
But what is the next step to take all of that information and get
States to integrate it into their regular planning and construction
process and start reducing that 4,884 number?
Answer. First, I share your concern and assure you that safety is
our highest priority and that commitment is the same for all forms of
transportation people choose, including walking and bicycling..
The lead action FHWA is taking in 2016 to ensure pedestrian safety
is the recently issued Safety Performance Management Final Rule (23 CFR
490), which requires all States and MPOs to annually establish and
report on a target for each of five safety performance measures,
including a nonmotorized safety performance measure: the number of
combined nonmotorized fatalities and nonmotorized serious injuries on
all public roads in the State or MPO planning area. This performance
measure encourages all States and MPOs to address pedestrian and
bicycle safety; recognizes that walking and biking are modes of
transportation with unique crash countermeasures distinct from
countermeasures to prevent motor vehicle crashes; and addresses the
increasing trend in the total number of pedestrian and bicyclist
fatalities in the United States. The Safety Performance Management
regulation will improve data; foster transparency and accountability;
and allow safety progress to be tracked at the national level. More
information is available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/
rulemaking.
Regarding the FAST Act provision you reference (section 1442), DOT
is committed to continuing to encourage States and MPOs to adopt
standards for the design of Federal surface transportation projects
that provide for the safe and adequate accommodation of all users of
the surface transportation network.
We have significant programmatic work underway to build national
capacity around multimodal planning and design issues, encourage a
flexible approach to design, and reverse the trend of increasing
pedestrian fatalities. This work will be captured in the report called
for in section 1442.
Question. Transit Costs: Secretary Foxx, I've read several articles
recently which discussed how per-mile transit and rail capital
construction in the US costs two to five times more than it does in
other industrialized nations, such as Japan or Spain. There are even
some very wide variations within the United States. Experts agree that
this is a problem that must be fixed, but don't fully know the cause of
these differences. Some speculate the issue may be due to poor
interagency cooperation, project design and routing, procurement
challenges or perhaps regulatory barriers.
Here are some examples of the problem:
--New York City's price for one kilometer of subway or commuter rail
tunnel is about five times more expensive than Tokyo's, eight
times more expensive than Berlin's or Paris's, and twelve times
more expensive than Barcelona's.
--Phase 1 of WMATA's Silver Line which is entirely above-ground and
isn't located in a dense city center, clocked in at over $150
million per kilometer. In many developed European and Asian
countries, this would be enough to build a fully underground
subway line in a dense urban core.
--For Amtrak, the Gateway project is estimated to cost $25 billion,
and its most ambitious plan for high speed rail on the
Northeast Corridor would cost nearly $300 billion. On a per-
kilometer basis, this is about twice as expensive as the
predominantly underground Maglev bullet train that Japan is
building.
With the underlying goal of stretching our transit dollars further
I'm interested in pursuing a study to identify the root causes of these
cost differentials.
Is USDOT currently studying or otherwise working to understand why
the costs of transit are so much more expensive in the U.S. than in
other industrialized nations?
If so, can you describe those efforts including a timeline for the
work to be complete?
Answer. FTA has not conducted an analysis comparing the costs of
construction of transit systems within the United States with those of
Europe or Asia. Additionally, FTA is not aware of research that has
determined that the cost of constructing transit in the U.S. is more
expensive than in other industrialized nations.
FTA cautions that the average costs per kilometer cited in the
question may not accurately reflect the actual costs of construction.
Cost per-mile comparisons may not include major items such as the
number of stations constructed or the number of vehicles purchased.
Additionally, the comparisons may not take into account whether right-
of-way is privately or publicly held, costs of financing, etc.
FTA has undertaken considerable efforts to analyze costs of FTA
funded projects. In 2005 FTA implemented a new capital costing format,
the Standard Cost Categories, to establish a consistent format for the
reporting, estimating, and managing of capital costs for major transit
projects. This information is then housed within FTA's Capital Cost
Database that currently contains the as-built costs for 35, federally-
funded, light rail and heavy rail projects. The database is used for
performing historical cost analysis and developing ``order-of-
magnitude'' cost estimates for conceptual transit projects. However,
the database does not include information for international projects
and it is therefore difficult to make like-to-like comparisons with
those projects.
Question. Port Financing: Secretary Foxx, I hear regularly from
people in my State that they need more resources to improve port and
harbor operations. Specifically the question I typically hear is,
surface transportation has the Highway Trust Fund and airports have the
Airport Trust Fund so why don't we have dedicated resources for land
side improvements to our ports?
The FAST Act created some grant programs for which port
improvements are an eligible use and directed the creation of a
National Multimodal Freight Policy. My question is, are we on track to
systematically partner with States and port authorities in a way that
meets the infrastructure needs described in the Department's Beyond
Traffic framework over the next 30 years?
Answer. The FAST Act includes several provisions to improve the
condition and performance of the national freight network and to
support investment in freight-related surface transportation projects,
including opportunities to enhance land-side improvements to ports.
States and port authorities will have an unprecedented opportunity to
partner in an effort to address our infrastructure deficit.
FASTLANE Grants, under the Nationally Significant Freight and
Highway Projects program, authorizes $4.5 billion for nationally and
regionally significant freight and highway projects over fiscal years
2016 to 2020, with up to $500 million authorized this year for freight
rail, water (including ports), or other freight intermodal projects.
Applications for FASTLANE grants were due April 14,2016, and we have
had significant initial interest in the program, including from States
and port authorities.
The Department has also taken important strides to educate ports
about the existing eligibilities within the Surface Transportation
Block Grant Program, the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Act (TIFIA) program, and the Railroad Rehabilitation and
Improvement Financing (RRIF) program. MARAD's StrongPorts initiative
has published a Port Financing Guide and is partnering with the Build
America Transportation Investment Center to provide technical
assistance to ports looking to access U.S. DOT funding and financing.
Additionally, the TIGER grant program received $500 million in
fiscal year 2016 appropriations and offers another opportunity to fund
port infrastructure projects. Through seven rounds, TIGER has awarded
funding to 45 port projects totaling $541.1 million, including two
planning grants. These projects are located across 24 States and
account for 11.7 percent of total TIGER funding.
These programs will help to meet some of the infrastructure needs
described in our Beyond Traffic framework. The FAST Act provides
certainty to States, local governments, port authorities, and the
private sector; however, it is only a down-payment for building 21st
Century surface transportation systems that our Nation deserves. The
demand for surface transportation infrastructure investment is
overwhelming, yet the FAST Act largely maintains current programs, with
limited support for multimodal plans and projects. That is why the
President's fiscal year 2017 budget request includes additional
multimodal programs and investments, to build off of the FAST Act
provisions and to continue to meet the infrastructure needs of our
surface transportation system over the next 30 years.
Question. Paratransit programs: Secretary Foxx, the FAST Act
includes several provisions to improve the mobility of people with
disabilities including new flexibility for the use of funds for
operating expenses to transit agencies that demonstrate paratransit
improvement activities, new inter-agency coordination efforts among
Federal agencies and new demonstration authority. Can you discuss the
Department's plans to assure these programs get up and running as
quickly as possible?
Answer. The FAST Act includes several provisions to improve the
mobility of individuals with disabilities and the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) has moved quickly to implement these provisions as
described below.
The FAST Act permits FTA grant recipients to use up to 20 percent
(rather than up to 10 percent) of urban or rural transit formula funds
to operate Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service if
certain conditions are met. On February 16, 2016, FTA published in the
Federal Register a Notice of FTA Transit Program Changes, Authorized
Funding Levels, and Implementation of Federal Public Transportation Law
as Amended by the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act
and FTA fiscal year 2016 Apportionments, Allocations, Program
Information and Interim Guidance that implemented this provision.
The FAST Act also created a new pilot program for innovative
coordinated access and mobility, authorizing grants to eligible
recipients to assist in financing innovative projects for the
transportation disadvantaged that improve the coordination of
transportation services and non-emergency medical transportation
services. On March 29, 2016, a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) was
published in the Federal Register announcing the availability of $2
million of fiscal year 2016 funding under this program, as well as $3.3
million in additional research funding for the Rides to Wellness
Demonstration and Innovative Coordinated Access and Mobility Grants
(R2W Demonstration Grants). The FTA will be holding a webinar on April
20, 2016 to further explain the grant program to potential grantees.
The application deadline is May 31, 2016. The goal of the competitive
R2W Demonstration Grants is to find and test promising, replicable
public transportation healthcare access solutions that support the
following Rides to Wellness goals: increased access to care, improved
health outcomes and reduced healthcare costs.
Finally, the FAST Act included new statutory requirements regarding
the Federal Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM),
including a requirement to publish a strategic plan. FTA is working
with its Federal agency partners on CCAM to develop a work plan that
addresses the required elements of this plan. FTA is already working
together with staff from the Departments of Health and Human Service,
Veterans Affairs, and Agriculture on joint projects to improve the
linkages between transportation and healthcare. These projects include
a series of Rides to Wellness forums to increase partnerships between
healthcare and transportation providers, a research project to identify
the impact of transportation on missed appointments and therefore on
the cost of healthcare and funding to encourage innovative solutions to
healthcare access challenges.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Lindsey Graham
Question. The recently enacted FAST Act contains three tire-related
provisions for which rulemakings are required: tire performance
standards for rolling resistance and wet traction; mandatory tire
registration by tire sellers at point of sale and; a tire recall lookup
tool on NHTSA's web site. What is the agency's timetable for
implementing each of these rulemakings?
Answer. The FAST Act requires NHTSA to promulgate regulations for
tire rolling resistance and wet traction minimum performance standards
by December 4, 2017. NHTSA has already begun the required testing to
guide the wet traction regulation.
The FAST Act requires NHTSA to initiate a rulemaking for mandatory
tire registration by independent sellers. However, there is no
statutory deadline for completing this rulemaking and the agency has
not yet developed a time table for completing this rulemaking.
The FAST Act also requires NHTSA to establish a publicly available
and searchable electronic tire recall database. The statute does not
require this provision to be implemented through a rulemaking and there
is no statutory deadline. NHTSA has not yet developed a time table for
completing this provision. The agency is gathering information and
meeting with stakeholders to discuss each of these requirements.
Question. NHTSA has not completed a rulemaking required under the
2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) that mandated consumer
information about tire fuel efficiency, wet traction and tread wear.
The White House announced in December 2014 that NHTSA would finalize
that rule by 2017. According to NHTSA's most recent schedule, a
proposed rule should have been sent to OMB on February 10, 2016 but
that did not happen. What is the agency's revised timetable for
completing this rulemaking within the White House imposed deadline?
Answer. NHTSA published a final rule in 2010 establishing test
methods that would be used for the new consumer information program.
However, the 2010 final rule did not specify the content or
requirements of the consumer information and education portions because
NHTSA needed to conduct additional consumer testing and resolve
important issues raised by public comments on the proposal. The agency
is drafting a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking and expects to
finalize the rule in 2017.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Collins. This hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:24 p.m., Wednesday, March 16, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at a date and time
subject to the call of the Chair.]