Testimony

In This Section

Transforming the FAA: A Review of the ATO

STATEMENT OF

RUSS CHEW,
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER,
AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITEE ON AVIATION,

TRANSFORMING THE FAA: A REVIEW OF THE ATO

APRIL 14, 2005.

Chairman Mica, Congressman Costello, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for this opportunity to talk about the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Air Traffic Organization (ATO). This morning I will discuss the ATO’s activities and achievements as well as the ongoing challenges we face as we continue our work to restructure the FAA's air traffic services.

I know I speak for Administrator Blakey and Secretary Mineta when I say we are proud to operate and maintain the largest and safest air traffic system in the world. Our employees safely orchestrate the takeoff, landing and routing of approximately 50,000 aircraft a day across U.S. controlled airspace. It is worth noting that last year commercial aviation achieved a remarkable safety record: the lowest airline fatal accident rate in the history of aviation. Both industry and government can take credit for the hard work that went into attaining this milestone and ensuring that the traveling public has the safest air transportation system possible.

Mr. Chairman, you and this Committee have focused on ways to make FAA more customer-oriented and efficient by providing us with the statutory authority to reform and streamline our activities. Last year, we began one of the largest reorganizations ever undertaken in government. The 36,000 member ATO workforce was realigned to become a more customer-focused, bottom-line business designed to respond to the needs of our customers and stakeholders and to improve our fiscal accountability. Just over a year ago, in February 2004, we began removing layers of management, reducing our executive ranks by 20 percent and reducing the number of high paid non-executive positions by 9 percent. We also began streamlining administrative services and reducing overhead by consolidating work under one service unit rather than having it spread throughout the organization as it was prior to the ATO. Reducing overhead in the first year was primarily focused in Washington. We will continue to reduce overhead as we expand our efforts in the field.

There are now 10 operations and support service units that are accountable for achieving specified, measurable results. Basically, as I testified to you last year, we moved everyone in the ATO closer to the customer; those people using the system whether as a passenger or pilot. These changes are already resulting in positive trends and tangible accomplishments. Our unit cost is down and our productivity is up. For example, the FAA’s average cost of controlling a single Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) flight fell $17 from $457 to $440 per flight as compared to 2003. In addition, we used the competitive sourcing opportunity outlined in the President's Management Agenda, more commonly referred to as the A-76 process, for the delivery of services now provided by our Automated Flight Service Stations. This was the largest public/private competition our government has ever attempted. As a result, we expect to save more than $2.2 billion over the next ten years.

As the year continued, we created financial baselines, ensuring that each of our individual service units would have cost accounting and labor distribution reports. We began a five-year strategic business planning process that incorporates both operational and financial commitments and is tied to the FAA's Flight Plan. Working with our employees and industry partners, we assessed the value of our core functions and activities in 2004 and will use that assessment to guide our investments in programs and services. By implementing the cost accounting and labor distribution reports I mentioned as well s a new financial management system, we have established a basis for an ATO cost-control program that identifies where costs can be managed and reinvested to meet the strategic initiatives described in our 2005 business plan. This new approach to financial management will help us develop analytic tools to make management decisions based on sound business principles. Managing our costs enables us to manage our future. We must have the tools and the plans in place to accomplish this.

When it comes to the ATO’s goals for a safe and reliable air traffic system, we must succeed. Much of the nation’s economy depends on a safe, secure and reliable air transportation system. The ATO has set ambitious goals for increasing capacity in the system. Arrival and departure capacity at the 35 Operational Evolution Plan (OEP) airports has steadily increased since 2001. In fact, we set out to increase the number of daily arrivals at those top airports by 780 flights over last year’s average but actually increased the daily arrival capacity by more than 1,035 arrivals per day.

Another significant accomplishment that is a tremendous boost to capacity occurred earlier this year when we implemented a procedure known as Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums (RVSM), which essentially doubles capacity at high altitudes. The procedure permits controllers to reduce minimum vertical separation at altitudes between 29,000 and 41,000 feet for aircraft that are equipped with dual altimeter systems and autopilots. Not only does this double the capacity options for controllers and pilots, but the higher altitude routes are more fuel efficient, so it is estimated that RVSM will save airlines over $5 billion through 2016, an estimate that may prove to be conservative if fuel prices remain high.

Finally, we must make sure we are using the best technology to maintain a safe and efficient air traffic system. Jeff Shane’s testimony addresses our next generation system, but one example of what we are doing today is the Wide Area Augmentation System called WAAS. WAAS is a precise navigation system that provides the accuracy and reliability necessary for pilots to rely on the Global Positioning System during flight. Because the system is satellite-based, WAAS costs us a lot less to maintain than traditional ground-based navigation systems. Plus WAAS can be made available at numerous airports without ground-based systems, opening up more runways, which ultimately increases capacity. Since WAAS became operational in July 2003, the FAA has developed 3,000 WAAS approaches. Industry surveys predict that as many as 20,000 certified WAAS receivers will be in aircraft by the end of this year. This is a significant accomplishment in modernizing how we use our airspace and one that will have lasting, positive affects on capacity.

I would also like to note that many FAA employees, including those in the ATO, must be commended for putting their personal safety and comfort at risk in order to help establish air traffic control and aviation safety systems, procedures, and oversight in the war torn countries of Afghanistan and Iraq. Their important work, largely unheralded, is essential to the success of these fledgling democracies. When asked to help, they answered and, as a result, these countries are receiving critical assistance from the foremost aviation safety experts in the world. The Department of Transportation, the FAA and I, personally, am very proud of these extraordinary individuals.

Along with our successes in this first year, we faced a number of challenges. As the 11,000 controllers hired after the strike in 1981 become eligible to retire, it was imperative that the ATO find a way to meet the demand for controllers without straining the hiring and training pipelines. We developed the Air Traffic Controller Workforce Plan and delivered the plan to Congress in December 2004. This plan lays out cost-saving mechanisms that will allow the ATO to reduce previous staffing projections by 10 percent over the next five years. Full implementation of the plan is underway and it will enable us to have the right people in the right places at the right time.

Obviously, other significant challenges lie ahead. For example, we will enter into negotiations with two of our bargaining units this year. But with our labor costs accounting for almost 80 percent of our operating costs, we also must reach an equitable agreement that ensures financial solvency and corporate efficiency on all sides.

Another significant challenge we face is the fact that the nation’s $30 billion inventory of air traffic control facilities and equipment is aging and deteriorating. The average condition of the FAA’s en route centers is poor and is getting worse each year. The maintenance and repair backlog for these 21 facilities alone is about $118 million, a combination of repairs not made in the past, and the projected repairs needed in the current year. At some point we are going to have to replace them.

These challenges make it critical for us to change “business-as-usual” operating practices. We must make some fundamental changes. We need a revenue stream based both on our costs and on our actual units of production. And we need the right incentives in place to remain efficient.

Our biggest challenge will be to ensure that the ATO is as streamlined and efficient as possible in order to justify supporting our essential operating and capital costs as they compete with other important programs for limited fiscal resources. The ATO must deliver the safest, most efficient, cost-effective, and well managed services in order to serve our customers and stakeholders. Air traffic in this country is dynamic and the ATO must be able to adapt to future demands seamlessly and effectively without compromising safety.

The structural changes we have made and the management tools we have put in place in the last year will help us be more accountable and help you better understand those areas on which you want to focus your oversight responsibilities. Hopefully, in the upcoming years, I will be able to describe to you how these tools have helped us measure our success, prioritize our investments, and become a better, smarter, safer organization.

I am proud of the work we have done in the last year and I am even more confident in the direction we are headed. As we progress in our transformation, we intend to retain our global leadership in delivering air traffic services, by providing the greatest value to our customers, owners, and employees. We are very cognizant of the fact that we are part of a much broader team of people in government and industry that all of us are working toward keeping the most complex airspace in the world, the safest and most efficient in the world. We will work with Congress to determine the best methods for meeting the challenges facing the future of air traffic. I am grateful for the opportunity to be in a position to play a role at a time when meeting the challenges facing us will make such a difference to the future of aviation. There is hard work and tough choices before us, and I am confident that together we will do what needs to be done.

This concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any questions at this time.

Rebuilding Highway and Transit Infrastructure on the Gulf Coast Following Hurricane Katrina

Statement of

J. Richard Capka,
Acting Administrator,
Federal Highway Administration
United StatesDepartment of Transportation

Before the

Subcommittee on Highways, Transit, and Pipelines
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
United States House of Representatives

Hearing on

Rebuilding Highway and Transit Infrastructure on the Gulf Coast Following Hurricane Katrina

October 20, 2005

Introduction

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Federal Highway Administration=s (FHWA) actions to rebuild the highway infrastructure on the Gulf Coast following Hurricane Katrina. Our hearts go out to all those affected by the recent hurricanes, and we look forward to continuing our efforts to help the citizens of the Gulf Coast rebuild their transportation infrastructure and their lives. These storms have presented enormous challenges to all those involved, but the events also have helped to bring out the best in the public servants at our Agency, and I am grateful for their continued service.

I visited the affected areas with Louisiana=s Secretary of Transportation and Development, Johnny Bradberry, and Mississippi Department of Transportation=s Executive Director, Butch Brown, and the Highway Commission Chairman, Wayne Brown, and had an opportunity to see the devastation first-hand. While TV coverage, aerial surveys, and photos of bridge and roadway damage along I-10, US 90, and other area roads tell the story of Katrina=s force, they could not convey the full impact of the devastation that I witnessed.

Critical sections of Federal-aid highways in New Orleans were submerged for an extended period of time. An I-10 bridge structure at Pascagoula was damaged, forcing single lane traffic across the remaining structure. Highway bridges along both I-10 and US 90 had huge deck slabs, weighing many tons, shifted and lifted off their support piers and dumped into the water. Massive casino barges along the Mississippi coast were yanked from their moorings and deposited onto US 90 at locations, in some cases, that were more than a mile away from their original sites. US 90, an important artery for Gulf Coast residents, was impassible in numerous locations due to the debris and structural damage. This highway infrastructure damage represents only a small fraction of the total devastation inflicted on the communities in Mississippi and Louisiana.

The United States Department of Transportation and FHWA remain firmly committed to helping the ravaged areas recover as quickly as possible. There is much work to be done in both the short-term and long-term. FHWA has been working closely with our State and Federal partners before, during, and after the storm. Today, I would like to share with you some of the details related to our response.

Pre-Hurricane Activities

FHWA was well positioned to rapidly respond to the effects of Hurricane Katrina. We have permanent Division Offices in each State, and have developed both first-hand knowledge of the States and strong professional and personal relationships with State and local highway officials. The mutual trust and confidence that preexisted Hurricane Katrina provided an excellent foundation for an effective plan and team effort to execute a timely highway response to the hurricane disaster. Our Division Offices provided advice to State and local jurisdictions concerning Emergency Relief program eligibility and engineering and contracting issues, and shared lessons learned from prior emergency situations.

Response Immediately after Hurricanes

As soon as we could re-enter the affected areas, FHWA deployed personnel, including employees from outside the affected States, to work alongside State highway and local officials to help assess the damage and to help facilitate response and recovery efforts. In response to Hurricane Katrina, FHWA deployed 104 employees from our Headquarters and from 24 field offices to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi to support relief activities.

I must express my admiration for the State and local road crews, many of whom suffered great personal losses along with their community neighbors. Mississippi and Louisiana responded exceptionally well in getting debris removal underway. Road crews began clearing debris B including downed trees and power lines B from highways and bridges as soon as it was safe to do so after the storm. Consequently, with the exception of areas that were flooded, the States opened their essential Federal-aid highways for responders in less than a day, where re-entry was warranted.

FHWA employees worked shoulder to shoulder with our State and local counterparts to rapidly assess the situation and to shape strategies that would provide the most efficient response. We provided ready access to past lessons learned and helped Mississippi and Louisiana to work with Florida experts in addressing the bridge damage along I-10 and US 90, since Florida had experienced similar challenges following Hurricane Ivan last year. FHWA-provided information was used to support the flow of relief goods and services into the Gulf Coast region. This information was shared throughout all levels of government and with industry organizations, such as the American Trucking Associations. For example, FHWA posted State proclamations and weight permit and waiver information on our web site.

Just after the hurricanes, our Division Offices in the impacted areas conducted refresher training on our Emergency Relief program for joint FHWA and State damage assessment teams. For example, the Louisiana Division Office met with the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development leadership and the team members and explained the Emergency Relief Program. The same type of training was held for the local jurisdictions of Jefferson and Orleans parishes. This training increased the efficiency of the teams to make Emergency Relief program eligibility decisions.

The Emergency Relief program provides reimbursement to States for expenses related to highway infrastructure damage associated with natural disasters and other emergency situations, such as Hurricane Katrina. Examples of the type of work eligible for Emergency Relief program reimbursement include repairing pavements, shoulders, slopes, embankments, guard rails, signs, traffic control devices, and bridges, and removing debris from the highway rights-of-way. Reimbursement under the Emergency Relief program is for the repair and restoration of highway facilities to pre-disaster conditions. However, Emergency Relief program reimbursement is not for new construction to increase capacity, correct non-disaster related deficiencies, or otherwise improve highway facilities.

FHWA has made down payments to the States of Louisiana and Mississippi for emergency relief. We provided Louisiana with $5 million of Aquick release@ Emergency Relief funds for the I-10 Twin Span Bridge, which connects New Orleans and Slidell, with the understanding that more funds to support the repair of the bridge and damage to other Federal-aid highways and bridges would be forthcoming. We also provided Mississippi with $5 million in Aquick release@ Emergency Relief to reimburse the State for repairs to US 90, I-10, and other Federally funded roads and bridges.

In addition to the immediate infusion of funds, FHWA has expedited environmental reviews to ensure that we can get work underway as quickly as possible, while still being good stewards of the environment. In Headquarters, we coordinated with the Council on Environmental Quality and other Federal agencies to use existing expedited procedures to streamline the environmental analysis process for the States. For example, we worked with affected Federal and State agencies to approve the preparation of an expedited Environmental Assessment, with limited deviations from FHWA=s standard procedures, for the US 90 bridge replacement and associated approach roadwork in the area of Biloxi Bay and Ocean Springs. Furthermore, our employees in the field have used rapid-response coordination techniques to get critical environmental information immediately by phone or electronic mail.

Recovery

FHWA also has been working actively to support long-term recovery efforts across the region. Every day we are making more progress in repairing the transportation systems destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Our primary goal is to help restore the stability and quality of life to the people of the Gulf Coast as quickly as possible. Over the past few weeks we have made remarkable strides, and we will continue to build on that success to ensure that the region=s transportation network serves as an engine of its economic recovery.

We worked with the States to provide appropriate expedited procedures to get contractors underway with repairs. Incentives have been employed effectively to ensure the timeliest possible restoration of lost essential service. For example, Mississippi awarded a $5.2 million contract to repair one of the highest priority roads in the region B the I-10 bridge at Pascagoula B and included not only an incentive if work is completed in less than 31 days, but also a corresponding penalty for finishing late. I am pleased to report this bridge reopened on October 1 B almost ten days ahead of the contract completion date. Louisiana is using a similar technique to restore initial service across the I-10 Bridge at Slidell. The first phase of the I-10 repair was completed on October 14 – 16 days ahead of schedule. The sight of traffic congestion in both directions returning to the bridge within minutes of being reopened was convincing testimony to the vital nature of the service that had been restored. We strongly support these Aincentivized@ contracts, and we are out in the field working closely with the States to exercise all appropriate options and tools available during this rebuilding effort.

The long-term restoration of roadways is considered permanent repair work under the Emergency Relief program. Generally, permanent repair and reconstruction work, not accomplished as emergency repairs, must be done by a competitive bid contract method unless the State demonstrates some other method is cost-effective. This work can be expedited using innovative contracting procedures available under the Federal-aid Program, such as the design-build contracting method.

In addition to the Aquick release@ Emergency Relief funds, all affected States may use up to $100 million per State per event for Federal-aid highway roads and bridges damaged as a result of the hurricanes. When an event of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina occurs, the repair cost can far exceed available Emergency Relief funding. However, repairs can still get underway with other Federal-aid or State funds.

We will continue to work with State and local governments to identify long-term highway recovery needs. We are engaged in interagency coordination with the US Army Corps of Engineers to ensure that infrastructure recovery is coordinated and synchronized. We are leading coordination among other agencies to ensure that up-to-date engineering design criteria are provided and environmental requirements are accomplished in ways that will not impede the rapid recovery of lost or damaged infrastructure.

A number of longer-term projects have been identified in the impacted States. The following is a brief description of such projects.

Louisiana: Hurricane Katrina severely damaged the I-10 Twin Spans over Lake Pontchartrain in New Orleans. A $31 million Aincentivized@ emergency repair contract was let to provide interim two-way, single-span access to New Orleans by October 30 and access across both spans by January 18, 2006. The first span of I-10 re-opened on October 14 – 16 days ahead of schedule. Louisiana is considering a replacement bridge that would be constructed to current design standards and criteria, and we will work with them on those efforts. In addition to the bridge, many sections of I-10 were flooded due to the levee breaks. The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway and routes LA 1 and LA 23 also sustained some damage.

Mississippi: Emergency repair projects are currently underway to restore sections of US 90 from Pass Christian to Biloxi-Ocean Springs. A series of emergency repair projects are under contract (via force account) to restore US 90 to two lanes from Pass Christian to Biloxi-Ocean Springs by December 9th. Storm surge heavily damaged approximately 30 miles of US 90 roadway between Bay St. Louis and Biloxi. Additionally, two US 90 bridges B the Bay St. Louis bridge and Biloxi-Ocean Springs bridge B collapsed during Hurricane Katrina. Design-build contracts will be utilized to replace these bridges. Requests for proposals will be issued for both bridges before the end of October.

Alabama: Mobile and Baldwin Counties suffered the majority of the damage from Hurricane Katrina in Alabama. The Cochrane-Africatown Bridge over the Mobile River at Mobile was damaged by an oil rig that floated into the structure during the storm. Currently, the four-lane bridge is open only to one lane in each direction. The contract to repair the bridge so that it may be opened to unrestricted traffic was awarded on October 17, 2005.

Due to damage sustained during Hurricane Katrina, five spans of the eastbound on-ramp from US 90 to I-10 eastbound must be replaced. Currently, the ramp is closed to traffic. Alabama is preparing plans to replace the five damaged spans

Florida: US 98 on Okaloosa Island sustained substantial damage during Hurricane Katrina. Many traffic signs and signals were damaged in the Miami area. Additionally, debris removal was needed throughout the affected parts of Florida.

Future Preventative Actions

The Bush Administration recognizes that more will have to be done to restore the Gulf Coast. I-10, US 90, and other important local roads are the economic lifeline of the hurricane-damaged region and play a central role in the economy of the entire Gulf Coast region. FHWA is bringing all its resources to bear to ensure that this region can get moving again. Projects that will be the foundation for a long-term rebuilding effort will begin soon.

We have begun a review of existing bridges that might be impacted by storm surge conditions in the future. Before we can identify suitable retrofits for existing bridges of the types damaged during recent hurricanes, we must improve our understanding of, and ability to quantify, the lateral/transverse and uplift forces that result from floods and storm surges. Accordingly, we have initiated research at the Turner- Fairbank Highway Research Center to aid our understanding in this area. With respect to the design of new bridges, FHWA has developed a policy that defines a flood frequency approach for the hydraulic analysis and design of coastal bridges. We also are reviewing the problem of loose barges impacting bridges during storm conditions.

“Contraflow” is an emerging traffic operations area that requires close coordination of all levels of government. “Contraflow” (sometimes called “one way out”) is a technique used to increase highway capacity temporarily. The technique involves reversal of one or more lanes and shoulders in the inbound direction for use by outbound traffic. We recognize the challenges of evacuation and contraflow and the need for more attention to these areas in the future. As we did after Hurricane Ivan in 2004, we will analyze the events of Hurricane Katrina for lessons learned that can be applied to future situations. We also will continue to work with other Federal agencies to determine where transportation assets and systems can continue to contribute to evacuation planning and execution. FHWA will assist the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and the Department of Homeland Security in developing the Catastrophic Hurricane Evacuation Plans Report to Congress as mandated in SAFETEA-LU.

Stewardship and Oversight

While quick response in getting funding and support to the Gulf Coast region is important, we are also cognizant of the importance of financial accountability and stewardship. As the recovery work continues, I want to assure you that I am very mindful of the responsibility we have as stewards of these critical Federal resources. FHWA has taken steps to track all transactions related to the Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. We will ensure that funds are spent wisely and judiciously, and that projects comply with the requirements of our Emergency Relief program. American taxpayers deserve to know that each and every dollar dedicated to this tremendous effort is fully justified and properly accounted for every step of the way.

Conclusion

I believe that we have made significant progress thus far and are on our way to ensuring that the Gulf Coast region has a transportation system that will meet its long-term needs. We will continue to work with our State and Federal partners to ensure that highway recovery efforts are completed quickly and in a fiscally responsible manner.

Mr. Chairman, members, thank you for this opportunity to testify. I will be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

FHWA Response to Hurricane Katrina

Statement of

J. Richard Capka,
Acting Administrator,
Federal Highway Administration
United StatesDepartment of Transportation

Before the

Committee on Environment and Public Works
United States Senate

Hearing on the

FHWA Response to Hurricane Katrina

October 6, 2005

Introduction

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) actions in response to Hurricane Katrina. Our hearts go out to all those affected by the recent hurricanes, and we look forward to continuing our efforts to help the citizens of the Gulf Coast rebuild their transportation infrastructure and their lives. These storms have presented enormous challenges to all those involved, but the events also have helped to bring out the best in the public servants at our Agency, and I am grateful for their continued service.

I visited the affected areas with Louisiana’s Secretary of Transportation, Johnny Bradberry, and Mississippi Department of Transportation’s Executive Director, Butch Brown, and the Highway Commission Chairman, Wayne Brown, and had an opportunity to see the devastation first hand. While TV coverage, aerial surveys, and photos of bridge and roadway damage along I-10, US 90, and other area roads tell the story of Katrina’s force, they could not convey the full impact of the devastation that I witnessed.

Critical sections of Federal-aid highways in New Orleans were submerged for an extended period of time. Portions of Highway 23 in Plaquemines Parish, which service communities and petro-chemical facilities, remain under water. An I-10 bridge structure at Pascagoula was damaged, forcing single lane traffic across the remaining structure. Highway bridges along both I-10 and US 90 had huge deck slabs, weighing many tons, shifted and lifted off their support piers and dumped into the water. Massive casino barges along the Mississippi coast were yanked from their moorings and deposited onto US 90 at locations, in some cases, that were more than a mile away from their original sites. US 90, an important artery for Gulf Coast residents, was impassible in numerous locations due to the debris and structural damage. This highway infrastructure damage represents only a small fraction of the total devastation inflicted on the communities in Mississippi and Louisiana.

The United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) and FHWA remain firmly committed to helping the ravaged areas recover as quickly as possible. There is much work to be done in both the short-term and long-term. FHWA has been working closely with our State and Federal partners before, during, and after the storm. Today, I would like to share with you some of the details related to our response.

Pre-Hurricane Activities

FHWA was well positioned to rapidly respond to the effects of Hurricane Katrina. We have permanent Division Offices in each State, and have developed both first hand knowledge of the States and strong professional and personal relationships with State and local highway officials. The mutual trust and confidence that preexisted Hurricane Katrina provided an excellent foundation for an effective plan and team effort to execute a timely highway response to the hurricane disaster. Our Division Offices provided advice to State and local jurisdictions concerning Emergency Relief program eligibility and engineering and contracting issues, and shared lessons learned from prior emergency situations.

Response Immediately after Hurricanes

As soon as we could re-enter the affected areas, FHWA deployed personnel, including employees from outside the affected States, to work along side State highway and local officials to help assess the damage and to help facilitate response and recovery efforts. In response to Hurricane Katrina, FHWA deployed 104 employees from our Headquarters and 23 field offices to Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi to support relief activities.

I must express my admiration for the State and local road crews, many of whom suffered great personal losses along with their community neighbors. Mississippi and Louisiana responded exceptionally well in getting debris removal underway. Road crews began clearing debris – including downed trees and power lines – from highways and bridges as soon as it was safe to do so after the storm. Consequently, with the exception of areas that were flooded, the States opened their essential Federal-aid highways for responders in less than a day, where re-entry was warranted.

FHWA employees worked shoulder to shoulder with our State and local counterparts to rapidly assess the situation and to shape strategies that would provide the most efficient response. We provided ready access to past lessons learned and helped Mississippi and Louisiana to work with Florida experts in addressing the bridge damage along I-10 and Highway 90, since Florida had experienced similar challenges following Hurricane Ivan last year. FHWA-provided information was used to support the flow of relief goods and services into the Gulf Coast region. This information was shared throughout all levels of government and with industry organizations, such as the American Trucking Associations. For example, FHWA posted State proclamations and weight permit and waiver information on our web site.

FHWA has made down payments to the States of Louisiana and Mississippi for emergency relief. We provided Louisiana with $5 million of “quick release” Emergency Relief funds for the I-10 Twin Span Bridge, which connects New Orleans and Slidell with the understanding that more funds to support the repair of the bridge and damage to other Federal-aid highways and bridges would be forthcoming. We also provided Mississippi with $5 million in “quick release” Emergency Relief to reimburse the State for repairs to US 90, I-10, and other federally funded roads and bridges.

In addition to the immediate infusion of funds, FHWA has expedited environmental reviews to ensure that we can get work underway as quickly as possible, while still being good stewards of the environment. In Headquarters, we coordinated with the Council on Environmental Quality and other Federal agencies to use existing expedited procedures to streamline the environmental analysis process for the States. For example, we worked with affected Federal and State agencies to approve the preparation of an expedited Environmental Assessment, with limited deviations from FHWA’s standard procedures, for the US 90 bridge replacement and associated approach roadwork in the area of Biloxi Bay and Ocean Springs. Furthermore, our employees in the field have used rapid-response coordination techniques to get critical environmental information immediately by phone or electronic mail.

Recovery

FHWA also has been working actively to support long-term recovery efforts across the region. Every day we are making more progress in repairing the transportation systems destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. Our primary goal is to help restore the stability and quality of life to the people of the Gulf Coast as quickly as possible. Over the past few weeks we have made remarkable strides, and we will continue to build on that success to ensure that the region’s transportation network serves as an engine of its economic recovery.

We worked with the States to provide appropriate expedited procedures to get contractors underway with repairs. Incentives have been employed effectively to ensure the timeliest possible restoration of lost essential service. For example, Mississippi awarded a $5.2 million contract to repair one of the highest priority roads in the region – the I-10 bridge at Pascagoula – and included not only an incentive if work is completed in less than 31 days, but also a corresponding penalty for finishing late. I am pleased to report this bridge reopened on October 1 – more than a week ahead of the contract completion date. Louisiana is using a similar technique to restore initial service across the I-10 Bridge at Slidell. We strongly support these “incentivized” contracts, and we are out in the field working closely with the States to exercise all appropriate options and tools available during this rebuilding effort.

The long-term restoration of roadways is considered permanent repair work under the Emergency Relief program. Generally, permanent repair and reconstruction work, not accomplished as emergency repairs, must be done by a competitive bid contract method unless the State demonstrates some other method is cost effective. This work can be expedited using innovative contracting procedures available under the Federal-aid Program such as the design-build contracting method.

In addition to the “quick release” Emergency Relief funds, all affected States may use up to $100 million per State per event for Federal-aid highway roads and bridges damaged as a result of the hurricanes. When an event of the magnitude of Hurricane Katrina occurs, the repair cost can far exceed available Emergency Relief funding. However, repairs can still get underway with other Federal-aid or State funds.

A number of longer-term projects have been identified in the impacted States. The following is a brief description of such projects.

Louisiana: Hurricane Katrina severely damaged the I-10 Twin Spans over Lake Pontchartrain in New Orleans. A $31 million “incentivized” emergency repair contract was let to temporarily restore two-way, single-span access to New Orleans by October 30 and access across both spans by January 18, 2006. Louisiana is considering a replacement bridge that would be constructed to current design standards and criteria, and we will work with them on those efforts. In addition to the bridge, many sections of I-10 were flooded due to the levee breaks. The Lake Pontchartrain Causeway and LA 1 and LA 23 also sustained some damage.

Mississippi: Emergency repair projects are currently underway to restore sections of US-90 from Pass Christian to Biloxi-Ocean Springs. A series of emergency repair projects are under contract (via force account) to restore US-90 to 2 lanes from Pass Christian to Biloxi-Ocean Springs by December 9th. Storm surge heavily damaged approximately 30 miles of US 90 roadway between Bay St. Louis and Biloxi. Additionally, two US 90 bridges – the Bay St. Louis bridge and Biloxi-Ocean Springs bridge – collapsed during Hurricane Katrina. Design-build contracts will be utilized to replace these bridges.

Alabama: Mobile and Baldwin Counties suffered the majority of the damage from Hurricane Katrina in Alabama. The Cochrane-Africatown Bridge over the Mobile River at Mobile was damaged by an oil rig that floated into the structure during the storm. Currently, the four-lane bridge is open only to one lane in each direction. A contract will be let in a couple of weeks to repair the bridge so that it may be opened to unrestricted traffic.

Due to damage sustained during Hurricane Katrina, five spans of the east bound on ramp from US 90 to I-10 eastbound must be replaced. Currently, the ramp is closed to traffic. Alabama is preparing plans to replace the five damaged spans

Florida: US 98 on Okaloosa Island sustained substantial damage during Hurricane Katrina. Many traffic signs and signals were damaged in the Miami area. Additionally, debris removal was needed throughout the affected parts of Florida.

Future Preventative Actions

Contraflow is an emerging traffic operations area that requires close coordination of all levels government. We recognize the challenges of evacuation and contraflow and the need for more attention to these areas in the future. As we did after Hurricane Ivan in 2004, we will analyze the events of Hurricane Katrina for lessons learned that can be applied to future situations. We also will continue to work with other Federal agencies to determine where transportation assets and systems can continue to contribute to evacuation planning and execution. FHWA will assist the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and the Department of Homeland Security in developing the Catastrophic Hurricane Evacuation Plans Report to Congress as mandated in SAFETEA-LU.

Stewardship and Oversight

Conclusion

Mr. Chairman, members, thank you for this opportunity to testify. I will be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

The Security of our Nation's Passenger and Freight Railroad Network

Testimony of

Joseph H. Boardman,
Administrator,
Federal Railroad Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation,

before the

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
U.S. Senate

October 20, 2005

Chairman Stevens, Ranking Member Inouye, and other members of the Committee, I am very pleased to be here today to testify, on behalf of the Secretary of Transportation, about the security of our Nation's passenger and freight railroad network. Since June 1 of this year, it has been my privilege to serve as the Administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). By delegation from the Secretary, FRA's primary mission is to promote the safety of the U.S. railroad industry and to reduce the number and severity of accidents and incidents arising from railroad operations. Our railroad safety mission necessarily includes our involvement in railroad security issues. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has the primary responsibility for transportation security. FRA plays a supporting role, providing technical assistance and assisting DHS when possible with implementation of its security policies, as allowed by statutory authority and available resources

My testimony today will provide some background on FRA’s railroad safety program and briefly describe the role that FRA plays in railroad security.

FRA’s Railroad Safety Program

FRA administers the Federal railroad safety laws, which provide FRA with authority over “every area of railroad safety.” 49 U.S.C. 20103(a). The agency has issued a wide range of safety regulations covering such topics as track, passenger equipment, locomotives, freight cars, power brakes, locomotive event recorders, signal and train control systems, maintenance of active warning devices at highway-rail grade crossings, accident reporting, alcohol and drug testing, protection of roadway workers, operating rules and practices, locomotive engineer certification, positive train control, and use of train horns at grade crossings. We currently have active rulemaking projects on a number of important safety topics, including locomotive crashworthiness, noise exposure of railroad employees, and continuous welded rail. In addition, FRA enforces hazardous materials regulations issued by another DOT agency, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Those regulations include requirements that railroads and other hazardous materials transporters, as well as shippers, have and adhere to security plans.

FRA has an authorized inspection staff of about 400 persons nationwide, distributed across its eight regions. (In addition, about 160 inspectors employed by the 30 States that participate in FRA’s State participation program inspect for compliance with FRA’s standards.) The inspectors are experts in specific disciplines, including track, signal and train control, motive power and equipment, operating practices, and hazardous materials. In addition, we have 16 grade crossing experts in the field. Our inspectors conduct thousands of inspections every year, investigate more than 100 train accidents, investigate hundreds of complaints, develop recommendations for hundreds of enforcement actions, and engage in a range of educational activities on railroad safety issues. Although some inspectors have had basic familiarization training on security issues, they are not security experts.

The railroad industry’s overall safety record has improved over the last decade, and most safety trends are moving in the right direction. However, significant train accidents continue to occur, and the train accident rate has not shown substantial improvement in recent years. Moreover, recent train accidents have highlighted specific issues that need prompt government and industry attention, and the strong growth of rail and highway traffic continues to drive up exposure at highway-rail grade crossings. FRA developed its Railroad Safety Action Plan to address these critical issues, and Secretary Mineta announced the plan in May 2005.

This Action Plan will:

Target the most frequent, highest risk causes of accidents;
Focus FRA’s oversight and inspection resources; and
Accelerate research efforts that have the potential to mitigate the largest risks.

FRA’s plan includes initiatives in several areas: reducing human factor-caused train accidents; acting to address the serious problem of fatigue among railroad operating employees; improving track safety; enhancing hazardous materials safety and emergency preparedness; improving highway-rail grade crossing safety; and better focusing FRA’s resources (inspections and enforcement) on areas of greatest safety concern. One of the primary elements of the Action Plan is FRA’s implementation of its National Inspection Plan, which uses sophisticated trend analysis to ensure that FRA is properly allocating its inspectors within the regions so that they are directing their efforts toward the railroads that pose the highest risks. In addition, FRA has developed guidance for its inspectors in each discipline to help them use all available data to focus not only on the railroads with the highest risks but also on the particular kinds of noncompliance that involve the most significant hazards.

FRA has begun to move forward on all of the elements of its Action Plan, and has implemented its National Inspection Plan in the three areas that account for more than 75 percent of all train accidents: human factors; track; and equipment.

FRA’s Role in Railroad Security

Since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, FRA has been actively engaged in the railroad industry’s response to the threat of terrorism. The railroads have developed their own security plans, and FRA has worked with the railroads, rail labor, and law enforcement personnel to develop the Railway Alert Network for the distribution of information and intelligence on security issues. Working with the Federal Transit Administration, another DOT agency, we have participated in security risk assessments on commuter railroads. FRA’s security director works on a daily basis to facilitate communications on security issues between government agencies and the railroad industry.

In 2003, PHMSA (then the Research and Special Programs Administration) issued a rule requiring transporters and shippers of certain hazardous materials to develop and adhere to security plans. PHMSA issued its rule under its authority, delegated from the Secretary, to “prescribe regulations for the safe transportation, including security, of hazardous materials,” 49 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1). Under the rule, security plans must include an assessment of security risks and appropriate measures to address those risks. The plans must, at a minimum, address three specific areas--personnel security, unauthorized access, and en route security. To assist railroads that transport hazardous materials and shippers that offer those materials for transport by rail, particularly small and medium-sized companies, to comply with this new requirement, FRA field personnel have spent a considerable amount of time in outreach efforts. To date, FRA personnel have reviewed more than 3,600 security plans and more than 29,000 employee security training records.

Since April 2004, FRA and PHMSA have also worked with DHS on a coordinated plan to improve the security of the rail transport of hazardous materials classified as toxic inhalation hazards (TIH). These include materials such as chlorine, which is used in water filtration plants, and anhydrous ammonia, which is used extensively in agriculture. DHS’s Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has the lead on this project. TSA has led vulnerability assessments of a number of rail corridors where TIH materials are transported. DOT and TSA published a notice and request for comments in the FederalRegister asking for input on aspects of TIH rail shipments, the DOT security program requirement, and the need for additional regulation. 69 Fed. Reg. 50988 (Aug. 16, 2004). More than 100 comments were received, addressing the following issues:

security plan improvements;
shipment identification and hazard communication;
temporary storage;
tank car integrity; and
communication and tracking.

DOT is considering possible amendments to the PHMSA security plan rule that would enhance the security of the transportation of TIH materials.

In the area of passenger security, FRA inspectors have conducted basic security reviews of Amtrak and commuter railroad security both after the 2004 train bombings in Madrid and after the July 2005 transit bombings in London. In both cases, FRA inspectors were deployed immediately after the bombings to assess the security readiness of passenger railroad facilities based on a checklist of major security criteria. In the aftermath of the London bombings, FRA worked closely on these security reviews with TSA’s new rail security inspectors. TSA focused primarily on urban rapid transit lines, while FRA inspectors concentrated on commuter and intercity passenger operations. In some situations, inspectors from the two agencies worked jointly.

FRA also supports research, development, and demonstration projects related to rail security through its Office of Research and Development (OR&D), often in cooperation with DHS. One completed project to evaluate tank car security and two current, follow-up projects provide examples. The tank car security evaluation project was conducted jointly by FRA OR&D and DHS in October 2003 at FRA’s Transportation Technology Center, Inc., in Pueblo, Colorado. Its first purpose was to evaluate the ability of hydrophones inside tank cars to detect breaches and to distinguish noise coming from a breach of the tank car from other background noises such as those present in the normal tank car operating environment. Its second purpose was to develop emergency response techniques, tools, and procedures to plug punctures in pressurized tank cars caused by small arms fire or other means. A confidential report has been completed. The acoustic signatures of the small arms fire and other projectiles were recorded from both the hydrophones and accelerometers. The results of this test proved the feasibility of developing algorithms to monitor tank cars while under load. As a follow-on to this test, DHS and FRA funded an effort to look at the effects of small arms fire on tank cars and the use of hydrophones to sense a “hit.” Development of the algorithm for detecting a hazardous material release event continues.

As a result of these tests, the Association of American Railroads and contractors have examined various methods to “harden” tank cars. All of the options to “armor” tank cars available with today’s technology are either too heavy or so expensive as to be economically impractical. FRA has learned about a new material, Dragon Shield, which is currently being used for armor coating military vehicles in Iraq. The Railway Supply Institute, the American Chemistry Council, the Chlorine Institute, and the Association of American Railroads have worked with DHS and FRA in putting together a test plan to determine the feasibility of using this liquid armor (Dragon Shield) technology to reduce tank car vulnerability based upon the threat previously identified. Testing of the material will start in FY 2006. FRA’s Office of Research and Development will continue to partner with DHS on these and other security initiatives.

In September 2004, DOT and DHS entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) concerning their respective roles on security issues. The MOU notes that DHS has the primary responsibility for security in all modes of transportation and that DOT plays a supporting role, but notes that both agencies have regulatory responsibilities in the area of transportation security. The MOU requires early coordination between the parties on the development of regulations affecting security. The MOU also contemplates the development of separate annexes on specific task and areas of responsibility. DOT and DHS have executed an annex concerning their joint project on the security of the transportation of TIH materials. FRA has also prepared a draft annex concerning rail security issues in general and has recently shared that draft with TSA. We hope to complete that annex soon.

FRA’s Cooperation with TSA’s New Inspection Force

The FY 2005 DHS Appropriations Bill Conference Report No. 108-774 earmarked $10 million for TSA to deploy up to 100 Federal rail security compliance inspectors. The first class of these inspectors completed training in early June 2005, and the final class will graduate later this month. Since June, FRA has worked closely with the managers of TSA’s new inspection program. Through regular meetings and frequent contacts, we are developing working relationships at the headquarters and field levels of both agencies. We are trying to ensure that the two agencies’ roles are clearly distinguished and do not result in duplicative inspections of the rail industry. As mentioned previously, inspectors from the two agencies have already engaged in a successful joint security review of passenger operations.

As TSA’s full complement of inspectors becomes fully functional, FRA anticipates that there will be less need for FRA inspectors to participate in activities related purely to security. FRA’s safety mission is critical and requires the constant attention of its inspection force. Of course, if FRA’s inspectors are needed to support TSA’s efforts for a limited duration in a time of an elevated security threat, FRA will make every effort to provide that support. Moreover, in those areas such as hazardous materials transportation where safety and security are significantly interrelated, FRA inspectors will continue to play an active role (e.g., in enforcing PHMSA’s security plan regulations).

Conclusion

FRA’s primary mission is helping to ensure the safety of railroad transportation. In some areas, such as hazardous materials transportation, safety and security are inextricably intertwined, which means that FRA’s safety activities will no doubt continue to have an effect on security. In general, however, FRA’s role is to support DHS and TSA in carrying out their security responsibilities, to the extent FRA can do so within its present authority and with its current resources.

Safety Issues

STATEMENT OF

MARION BLAKEY,
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

BEFORE THE

SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION

SAFETY ISSUES,

NOVEMBER 17, 2005.

Chairman Burns, Senator Rockefeller, Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss some of the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) many important safety initiatives and how they contribute to extending this unprecedented aviation safety record. In the United States, the three year average commercial accident rate is .017 accidents per 100,000 departures. To put that in more understandable terms, that accident rate is the equivalent of one fatal accident for every 15 million passenger carrying flights. This means that we are living in the safest period in aviation history. All of us who work for and with aviation safety professionals take pride in the results of our collective efforts, especially given the economic turbulence being experienced by U.S. carriers. But even as we recognize how safe it is to travel in commercial air transportation, we must look beyond to face the challenge of how to make the system safer. How can we continue to improve aviation safety as demand and complexity increase? We are facing record setting passenger numbers, new light jets, UAVs, . . . even space travel is not as far away as it once was. We cannot afford to rest on our laurels.

Since it would be impossible for me to cover in any significant detail the extremely broad range of FAA safety initiatives, I will focus my remarks on two areas that I know are of interest to this subcommittee, our oversight of aircraft maintenance and our efforts to reduce runway incursions. I think you will find our efforts in these areas to be innovative and effective.

Over the last several years, FAA has changed the way we oversee aircraft maintenance. In the past, FAA’s inspectors were required to complete a prescribed number of oversight activities focused on compliance with FAA regulations. In 1998, FAA began overseeing the ten largest airlines using the Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS) model which goes beyond simply ensuring regulatory compliance. The goal of the oversight model is to foster a higher level of air carrier safety using a systematic, risk-management-based process to identify safety trends and prevent accidents. ATOS has improved safety because it identifies and helps manage risks before they cause problems by ensuring that carriers have safety standards built into their operating systems.

This oversight approach leverages FAA’s inspector workforce by reducing the likelihood of repeating inspections of the same aircraft or function, unless deficiencies were found in prior inspections of the aircraft or function. Our inspectors develop safety surveillance plans for each air carrier based on data analysis, and adjust plans periodically based on identified risks. For example, with so many of our legacy carriers in financial distress, FAA inspectors can adapt their surveillance plan to increase their focus on areas that might be at risk due to financial cut-backs, such as training, quality assurance and quality control processes, and to ensure that discrepancies reported by pilots are properly addressed. I know it is important to the Inspector General (IG) that our inspectors have the tools and information necessary to be flexible in our oversight of carriers as their financial and operational situation changes.

I also know that the IG agrees with us that our new approach to oversight is a better way to make the best use of agency resources as well as to improve safety. We are currently moving all air carriers to this oversight system. In the interim, we created the Surveillance and Evaluation Program (SEP) to bridge between the old system – where inspectors went out and “kicked the tires” – and this new oversight approach. SEP inspectors use data and risk analysis in targeting their inspections to areas within the air carrier’s operation that pose a greater safety risk. Both inspection approaches use the Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS), a computer based system that analyzes inspection and air carrier data to help inspectors identify safety problems. The IG would like to see us move more carriers more quickly from the interim inspection approach to the new approach, and we are working within our existing resources to do that.

This change in oversight recognizes that FAA cannot be expected to provide quality control for every airline or effectively police millions of flights. The laws you passed and the regulations we implement all place the responsibility for safety on the airlines. FAA’s role is an important one, and we see this new approach as making better use of our resources. By focusing on risk we can determine how well the airline is managing its processes and whether or not the processes are performing as designed to meet the safety standards. Our inspection tools are designed to collect data for these purposes. Our oversight systems engage air carriers in the management of their safety issues.

I am very aware of your concern with U.S. carriers having more of their maintenance performed by repair stations, both foreign and domestic. Oversight of repair stations is a good example of why our current focus on risk management is preferable to compliance based oversight. We know FAA inspectors cannot oversee all maintenance performed on U.S. aircraft, but if some maintenance component is identified as a risk, our oversight focus would be triggered, regardless of who or where the maintenance is performed.

That having been said, we continue to work to improve our process for targeting inspector resources for oversight of repair stations based on risk assessment or analysis of data collected on air carrier outsourcing practices. We are also working on improving our automated data basis to more thoroughly document repair station inspections in order to provide the most helpful guidance to our Flight Standards Field Office inspectors. I know our efforts in these areas have been identified by the IG as being very important. The intent of our current policy is to standardize repair station inspections to provide better consistency and thorough oversight. As we consider different models of repair station oversight, we are mindful that our goal is to obtain data that is useful in our ongoing risk analysis.

I know there has been particular sensitivity to U.S. carriers’ use of repair stations outside the U.S. The concern has been that such practices, done solely to reduce maintenance costs, could have unintended safety consequences. The reality is that FAA only certificates repair stations abroad if U.S. carriers want to use the repair station and if the station meets our certification standards. FAA performs periodic inspections of these foreign repair stations. In addition, many of them hold certificates from their own countries who also perform audits and inspections. In several countries where we have Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreements (BASA), we have outlined maintenance information procedures (MIP) to ensure that foreign inspectors are placing appropriate emphasis on the Federal Aviation Regulations when conducting reviews of work done on U.S. aircraft. In these countries, we rely on the oversight of the aviation authority in addition to our periodic inspections. We are also working to ensure that these foreign aviation authorities inform and seek FAA approval of changes to repair stations operations if they directly impact FAA requirements.

It is also worth noting that a recent regulatory change has increased the accountability of all repair stations for maintenance that they contract out to third party providers. The repair station is required to be directly in charge of the work performed by third party providers and FAA now has the authority to inspect contract work performed for repair stations.

I am confident that the changes we have made in our oversight philosophy and the work we continue to do with input and assistance from the aviation community, Congress, and the international community has contributed to this historically safe period of commercial aviation safety. Our safety oversight must keep pace with the industry as it changes and I think we are well positioned to accept that challenge.

Turning to another of the FAA’s top priorities, I would like to discuss agency efforts to reduce the number and risk of runway incursions. As outlined in the FAA Flight Plan 2006-2010, the FAA is developing a range of initiatives from airport design concepts to surface movement procedures. Related efforts address the errors committed by pilots, air traffic controllers, and airport-authorized vehicle operators and pedestrians. We have set performance targets and we are holding ourselves accountable for meeting those targets. We are working hard and making progress, but we are not there yet.

Let me start with where we are today. The United States National Airspace System (NAS) has nearly 500 FAA and contract tower staffed airports that handle more than 176,000 aircraft operations – takeoffs and landings – a day, averaging approximately 64 million airport operations per year. Of the approximately 257 million aircraft operations at U.S. towered airports from FY 2001-2004, there were 1,395 reported runway incursions. This translates into approximately 5.4 runway incursions for every one million operations and less than one serious runway incursion for every one million operations. There were five collisions during this period, none of which resulted in a fatality. So when viewed in the context of the total number of operations, the number of incursions is low which means that further reducing the rate is quite a challenge, but a challenge we are undertaking.

Because we are taking it seriously, the FAA reconstructs each runway incursion using the available information and plots the approximate location of each event on airport diagrams. During this exercise, we systematically categorize each runway incursion in terms of its severity. Severity Categories A through D (A being the most serious, D the least) consider factors such as the speed and performance characteristics of the aircraft involved, the proximity of one aircraft to another aircraft or vehicle, and the type and extent of any evasive action by those involved in the event. Aircraft involved in runway incursions are grouped into either commercial or general aviation operations. Incidents are further categorized into three error types: pilot deviations, operational errors/deviations, and vehicle/pedestrian deviations. It is important to remember that runway incursions do not occur in a vacuum. The actions of pilots, air traffic controllers and vehicle drivers are intermingled and can significantly impact one another.

We have made important progress over the last few years, especially in reducing serious Category A and B runway incursions by more than 40 percent since FY 2001. In FY 2005, we had a total of 324 runway incursions. Twenty-nine of those were Category A and B incursions, which is less than 10 percent of the total. In terms of error types, there were 167 pilot deviations, 105 operational errors/deviations, and 52 vehicle/pedestrian deviations. While pilot deviations are the most common type of runway incursion, they accounted for only 31 percent of serious incursions in the past fiscal year. Operational errors/deviations, on the other hand, accounted for only 32 percent of total deviations, but 55 percent of serious deviations which represents a notable change in the distribution of runway incursion types with respect to severity. Unfortunately, in the last fiscal year we had three Category A runway incursions between two commercial jets, an event that had not occurred for the previous three years. These are the types of statistics our runway incursion safety team continuously analyzes in order to understand where our efforts will have the greatest impact in reducing risk.

During their most wanted meeting, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) highlighted the Category A incursion that took place at Boston Logan International Airport in which two commercial aircraft almost collided. We certainly share the NTSB’s concern about this incident, so I would like to describe what we have done in response. We have imposed temporary procedural restrictions until such time as controllers receive additional training to result in improved coordination within the tower. Increased runway incursions at Logan are also attributable to construction on the airfield that has caused some pilots to inadvertently cross over a runway hold short line instead of stopping. We are improving taxiway centerline markings and surface-painted holding position signs to better define hold short locations for pilots. We expect completion of this paint enhancement by mid-year 2006. Further, in October we put together a “Tiger Team” to develop other short, mid- and long-term initiatives to further reduce risk on the airport surface. Additionally, we have developed a software enhancement to the Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) that adds alert capability for intersecting runways. Installation at Logan was completed last week.

FAA is also working closely with other airport sponsors to address runway incursions. Just last week, I met with the City of Los Angeles and discussed the chronic runway incursion problem at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Roughly 80 percent of runway incursions at LAX occur on the south side of the airport. It is important to note the current airfield layout was designed to accommodate jetliners that were in service over 40-years ago. The City’s recently completed Master Plan for LAX identifies changes in the airfield layout to resolve this problem.

On May 20, 2005, FAA issued its Record of Decision for the City’s Master Plan. In August FAA issued a grant to the City for approximately $38.8 million for the relocation of the southern most runway and the addition of a new parallel taxiway at LAX. This project is expected to significantly reduce runway incursions at LAX. The City has an aggressive schedule to begin the project in January 2006 and complete it in about 26 months. We also stressed the importance of addressing runway incursions on the north side of LAX. The City plans to reconfigure the north airfield with a parallel taxiway as well to reduce runway incursions on that side of the airport. This project is currently scheduled to begin in six to eight years.

Overall, we are taking a proactive approach to address operational vulnerabilities through awareness, education, procedures, airport infrastructure, and surface technology initiatives. The FAA has worked with external organizations, airport officials, and safety experts to increase surface safety awareness on a national level. We have developed and promoted runway safety training material in conjunction with organizations such as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Air Safety Foundation. Efforts have included the creation of an interactive Web-based program to inform pilots about preventing runway incursions. The program, accessible from both the FAA and AOPA web sites, provides an introduction to runway incursion risk, information about airfield signs and markings, and strategies for enhanced position awareness and improved cockpit management. Throughout the program, various quizzes, tasks, and information visualization tools offer an interactive learning experience. Since its inception, an average of 1,800 pilots a month have completed the training program.

We have also created a brochure, Runway Safety - A Pilot’s Guide to Safe Surface Operations which highlights the importance of pre-taxi planning and properly identifying aircraft signs and markings. Over 500,000 brochures have been distributed to pilots through the AOPA magazine, AOPA Pilot and in a direct mailing to certified flight instructors and designated pilot examiners to supplement their training materials. Additionally, we collaborated with famed aerobatic pilot Patty Wagstaff and influential aviator Dick Rutan to produce educational DVDs. These DVDs review the fundamentals of airport operations through a series of common sense rules and standard communication procedures. Since the first DVD, Heads Up, Hold Short, Fly Right was released last year, flight instructors and pilots alike have consistently praised it. We believe the second film, Listen Up, Read Back, Fly Right, will merit the same response. Producing effective resource materials is a vital part of our continued outreach.

In addition to the work we are doing with Boston Logan and LAX, we have identified what we refer to as the Focus-35 airports, those airports that reported the most runway incursions from FY 2001 to 2004. For example, of those 35 airports, 30 airports reported more than 10 runway incursions during the four-year period. During that period, the Focus-35 airports handled 20 percent of all NAS operations yet accounted for 41 percent of all runway incursions (565). Through airport infrastructure and safety management programs, some of these airports have successfully reduced the number of runway incursions in the last year or two. The Focus-35 airports accounted for 39 percent of the Category A and B runway incursions. However, the number of such incursions decreased by 71 percent, from 24 to seven, from FY 2001 to 2004. Continued implementation of risk mitigation strategies at the Focus-35 airports offers the most immediate opportunity to continue to reduce the severity, number, and rate of runway incursions in the NAS.

As presented in the FAA Flight Plan 2006-2010, the FAA’s performance target is to reduce the number of Category A and B runway incursions to an annual rate of no more than 0.450 per million operations by FY 2010. Analysis of the trend of runway incursions from 2001 through 2004, shows that the rate of reduction flattened, suggesting that the runway safety management strategies that have been implemented early in that period had achieved their maximum effect. Therefore, in order to achieve our stated targets, the FAA must identify new strategies and re-prioritize their application.

That is why we are currently deploying a newer warning system called Airport Surface Detection Equipment-Model X (ASDE-X) to further enhance safety and improve “error tolerance”—as human error is inevitable. ASDE-X capabilities will be added to some of the sites that already have AMASS, as well as being deployed to additional busy airports. The FAA is also evaluating Runway Status Lights, an automatic system designed to improve the situational awareness of pilots and vehicle drivers through visual alerts. Red in-pavement runway entrance lights are illuminated if the runway is unsafe for entry or crossing, and red in-pavement takeoff hold lights are illuminated if the runway is unsafe for departure. The operational evaluation of runway entrance lights using ASDE-X surface surveillance occurred at Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport and the system showed promising initial results. The lights were compatible with the tempo and style of operations at a busy airport, there was no increase in air traffic controller workload, and the lights proved useful to pilots. In the future, Runway Status Lights could help mitigate runway incursions like the one at Boston Logan to which I referred. Unfortunately, this program is still in the research and development stage and will not be ready for fielding for several years. Another effort worth mentioning is a change to the airfield paint markings standard for taxiway centerlines at 72 large airports, based on enplanements. We are requiring the new markings as another proactive way to alert pilots when they are approaching hold short lines so they do not inadvertently enter a runway without authorization. We will continue to pioneer work that offers the greatest opportunity for improving NAS-wide runway safety.

Mr. Chairman, the FAA’s commitment to improving safety and extending the excellent safety record we are currently experiencing is our number one priority. I hope some of what I have shared with you today exemplifies that commitment. Of course, as I stated at the outset, FAA is involved in hundreds of important safety initiatives and what I have highlighted represents only a small fraction of what we are doing and what has contributed to today’s impressive safety record. So, while this concludes my prepared statement, I will be happy to answer your questions on any of our important safety initiatives.

Aviation Safety in Alaska

STATEMENT OF

MARION C. BLAKEY,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE AND TRANSPORTATION,

IN ANCHORAGE, ALASKA,

AVIATION SAFETY IN ALASKA

JULY 5, 2005

Good Morning, Chairman Stevens and Members of the Committee. It is a great pleasure to be here today in Alaska to testify, along with Secretary Mineta and Regional Administrator Poe. Improving aviation safety and lowering accident rates in Alaska, have been a major focus of efforts by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) over the last decade, and I’m proud to acknowledge, also by the aviation community in Alaska. The aviation community here has demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. After all, the aviation system is what connects Alaska’s cities, towns, villages, businesses and families. I believe we in the FAA have a good news story to tell about improvements in aviation safety in recent years, and an even better story to tell about future efforts to expand and build upon the successes already achieved.

Today I would like to highlight a few areas of interest to the Committee: the Capstone and Medallion programs, the growing use of weather cameras, particularly in remote locations, and the very practical benefits of the Rural Alaska Lighting program.

As I’ve often said, aviation safety will always be the first priority at the FAA. Every decision we make is with the safety of the flying public in mind. Let me begin this morning by describing how serious the FAA is in pursuing the goal of increased aviation safety in Alaska. When I first came to the FAA, we put in place a strategic business plan – we call it our Flight Plan – with specific objectives and performance targets. The FAA’s Flight Plan for 2004-2008 lists among the safety objectives for the next five years a specific objective, “Reduce Accidents in Alaska.” The stated strategy is to expand and accelerate the implementation of safety and air navigation improvements programs here. It is noteworthy because no other state was listed individually, only Alaska. Why, you might ask, does the FAA Flight Plan have a specific objective of improving aviation safety in Alaska? The answer is simple, Alaska has been called the “flyingest state in the union.” It is a place where schoolchildren board aircraft to travel to school, instead of a bus. When someone in a village is ill and needs medical attention, they will most likely be transported to the hospital via aircraft. As an essential mode of everyday transportation, aviation must be a safe mode.

A 1999 study by the National Institute on Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) ranked being a commercial airline pilot as the most hazardous occupation in Alaska. Clearly, a focused, dedicated, multifaceted, approach to improving aviation safety in Alaska was needed. I am happy to say the approach we are taking, one that represents the collective efforts of aviators, the State of Alaska, and the FAA, is working.

The most promising initiative with potential for broad application to a range of hazards, including terrain, other airborne traffic, and weather, is the Capstone demonstration program in the Alaska Region. Capstone is a technology-focused safety program in Alaska that seeks near term safety and efficiency gains in aviation by accelerating implementation and use of modern technology, in both avionics and ground system infrastructure. The key enabling technology on which Capstone is based is Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B). ADS-B gives an aircraft with the requisite data uplink/downlink and cockpit display capabilities the same information about other aircraft in the vicinity as air traffic control now receives. Capstone Phase I, which began in 1999, included the installation of government-furnished Global Positioning System (GPS) driven avionics suites in 200 commercial aircraft serving the region around Bethel, Alaska, known as the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Region (YK Delta), consisting of over 160,000 square miles. One of the two approved datalink technologies for ADS-B, the Universal Access Transceiver (UAT) also provides an uplink for weather information via Flight Information Services-Broadcast (FIS-B). The weather data is displayed on the same multifunction cockpit display used for the ADS-B display of traffic, and for terrain data.

Through 2004 the FAA Alaskan Region Capstone Program has achieved significant safety and efficiency results. Capstone equipped aircraft have had a consistently lower accident rate than non-equipped aircraft. From 2000 through 2004, the rate of accidents for Capstone-equipped aircraft dropped significantly--by 47 percent. Also, the rate of accidents for Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta Region-based air carriers has been falling since 2001, and is now at the lowest rate since 1990. Historically, the rate of air taxi accidents within the YK Delta has been two to four times the rest of Alaska, but in 2003 the accident rate for the region was below the rest of the state for the first time. That is real progress.

Phase II of Capstone will expand the coverage to southeast Alaska, in the Juneau area, and Phase III contemplates expanding the program to cover the entire state. Also as part of Phase II, additional technology infrastructure will be deployed. New Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Procedure (RNP) arrival and departure procedures will continue to be developed for the airports recommended by the industry for upgrade to Instrument Flight Rule (IFR) access. RNAV procedures provide flight path guidance incorporated in taxi procedures, with minimal instructions required during departure by air traffic controllers. RNP is on-board technology that promises to add to capacity by allowing pilots to fly more direct point-to-point routes reliably and accurately. Key benefits of RNAV and RNP include more efficient use of airspace, with improved flight profiles, resulting in significant fuel efficiencies to the airlines. An airport-to-airport Global Positioning System (GPS)/Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) based route structure will be mapped between all IFR airports. Aircraft avionics equipage is key to an accelerated implementation strategy; therefore Capstone will continue to pursue affordable avionics so that aircraft owners will have a range of choices appropriate to their operational needs. This includes both creating options for equipage and a strategy to ensure that all aircraft in Alaska are equipped.

In addition to technology improvements, the FAA has also undertaken safety management and training efforts in partnership with the aviation community here to increase safety awareness and reduce aircraft accidents. In joint efforts with the Medallion Foundation, a non-profit aviation safety organization that provides management resources, training and support to the Alaskan aviation community, the FAA is funding a program known as the Five Star Shield program, which is an enhanced safety management system. The Medallion Five Star Shield program takes a business-like approach to safety, providing for the setting of goals as well as planning and measuring performance in specific areas through the use of system safety concepts. The program is voluntary, and focuses on establishing and sustaining an elevated level of safety performance through: the development of a safety culture that holds safety as a core value; continuous professional development of individual skills and competence; proactive sharing of operational control responsibilities; hazard identification and risk management; and management practices that support the organization’s safety objectives.

The Five Stars in the Medallion Five Star Shield program include numerous methods for improving safety. To earn the First Star, each air carrier must establish a safety program which, at a minimum, should include safety meetings and audits, the use of root-cause analysis, hazard identification, incident investigations, and a viable emergency response plan. The Five Star program also requires a classroom training program for pilots, mechanics and ground service personnel, as well as required training on a PC-based computer simulator. Two annual check rides are required to receive this second Star, and annual pilot proficiency check rides are required to keep the Star. The Third Star involves operational risk management. A dynamic system that provides analytical tools as well as a system of checks and balances to proactively identify hazards and manage risks is required. The carrier must have an operational risk management system that quantifies the risks for each flight, including weather, airport, and crew readiness. The total risk score determines if the flight is conducted normally, if more management evaluation is required for release of the flight, or if the flight is cancelled. The Fourth Star concerns maintenance and ground service operations, requiring specific training and manning levels. The Fifth Star is an internal audit program, which requires incorporation of a proactive internal audit system that focuses on the use of systems safety principles, as well as regulatory compliance. This is a comprehensive audit program requirement intended to allow the operator to continuously monitor their operating systems and provide for continuous improvement. Medallion has specific detailed requirements.

The FAA is supporting the Medallion Foundation in the implementation of this program. Once an applicant has received all five Stars, and passed an independent audit, they may be certified for the Medallion Shield, which is attested to by a decal displayed on the aircraft, and can be used on uniforms and promotional materials. In order to maintain shield status, the operator must successfully pass an audit each year. If the operator fails to pass the audit, or Medallion on-site inspectors notice that a specific activity represented by a star is not being properly addressed on a continuing basis, the star and shield may be revoked. A direct benefit of the Shield program for operators is that the insurance industry has agreed to provide favorable rates for Shield carriers.

It’s worth noting here that the FAA and the Medallion Foundation are not just focused on improving safety in commercial operations, but are also targeting improvements to safety in the general aviation (GA) community as well. Our efforts in this area are coordinated through the Medallion Flyer General Aviation Program, which is proving to be quite popular among the GA community. Interested pilots begin by submitting an application to the Medallion Foundation, which will then issue the pilot a free copy of the FAA “Back to Basics – Runway Safety” CD. After that, the pilot is invited to attend the FLYER Step II course, which provides access to free usage of Medallion state-of-the-art flight training devices. During this course, pilots are provided with tools designed to help establish a personal safety program. They are also introduced to hazard assessment and risk management techniques. Pilots also receive important information on flying in “white out” and “flat” light conditions, risk assessment, pilot/ATC communications, and Alaska flying tips.

The Capstone and Medallion programs clearly demonstrate that better information, better training, and better risk-management procedures can contribute significantly to reductions in aviation accidents and save lives. People here in Alaska can be very proud of the progress they’ve made. Alaska has set an example for the rest of the country.

The on-going and increasing deployment of weather cameras in numerous parts of Alaska is another beneficial use of technology that can dramatically improve aviation safety by providing near real-time information to help with pilot decision making and risk management. There are currently 55 operational locations for weather cameras, which stretch into every region of the state, and 12 more operational sites will be available in 2005. Many of these weather cameras are positioned in or near mountain passes and other geographical features which are often used by pilots to navigate on their flights. The other feature of these cameras that is so beneficial to pilots is that they are often located at rural airports where there are no weather observers, and no other means to find out what current weather conditions are prior to deciding to take off. They are also co-located with automated weather systems, providing additional visual information previously only available at those few sites with a weather observer.

These cameras, all of which can be viewed at one website, http://akweathercams.faa.gov, provide two images from each camera located at the site. One image is a file photo of the area within the camera’s range on a clear, sunny day. The other image is a real-time photo, which is refreshed every 10 minutes, of the exact same view as the file photo. This provides an instant visual comparison of weather conditions, precipitation, cloud cover, ceiling, and visibility.

The real value in these weather cameras is that they help pilots decide whether to even begin their flight, based on weather conditions, rather than have the pilots have to make difficult and hazardous decisions once they have encountered the deteriorating weather conditions in flight. Flight service specialists also have access to the weather camera images, and routinely brief pilots on the weather camera images when they call for a pre-flight briefing and during their flight, providing the most up-to-date information on the weather camera images to help pilots make that “go or no-go” decision. During an independent study conducted between December 2002 and March 2003 by Parker Associates, Inc., 68 percent of the reported decisions made based on weather cameras were to cancel or delay a flight due to weather. Air carriers, commercial operators, and general aviation pilots can avoid the cost of fuel from flights that must be diverted or repeated due to bad weather. Cameras have a positive financial impact on an industry undergoing economic challenges. Our website for the cameras has received 1.3 million “hits” in 2003, 2.3 million “hits” in 2004, and we expect the number of “hits” to increase by another 1 million this fiscal year—a real testament to how important real time knowledge of weather conditions is for pilots.

Turning now to another area of interest to this Committee, I would like to briefly highlight the FAA’s Rural Alaska Lighting Program (RALP). The goal of the Rural Alaska Lighting Program is to install airport lighting in communities with limited access to 24-hour medical facilities, to provide better access and improved lighting for aeromedical services. The Program is comprised of three tiers. Tier One is Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRLs) or permanent edge lighting at those airports that meet minimum safety requirements. Tier Two is portable, battery-powered lights for communities or airports that are unable to accommodate permanent edge lights. Tier Three is Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) and Runway End Identifier Lights (REILs) to support approach procedures at airports.

This program began in 2001 with a study that identified 63 communities needing the improved lighting. Federal funding began in FY02. In addition to the $35 million that has been appropriated for this effort so far under the FAA’s Facilities and Equipment program, the Airport Improvement Program has provided the funding for necessary runway pavement or runway safety area improvements. All of the 63 communities have received at least an interim solution to provide for 24 hour VFR aeromedical access. Twenty-six of the 63 communities have also received permanent lighting solutions. An additional 19 communities will have permanent lighting solutions by 2010. The final 18 communities have complicated land and/or environmental issues, but we will continue to work with the State of Alaska to resolve all outstanding issues.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I want to take a moment to mention the great contributions to aviation safety in Alaska made by a true visionary, Tom Wardleigh. Mr. Wardleigh shared his vision for the future of aviation in Alaska with you and all Alaskan aviators in testimony to this body in 1999. That vision is now part of Mr. Wardleigh’s legacy. The FAA is pleased to announce the creation of a new National safety award in honor of the late Thomas Wardleigh, Master Pilot, Master Mechanic, elder statesman of aviation. As with so many of this region’s innovations, Mr. Wardleigh’s contribution to aviation safety is now a national asset. Tom urged the FAA to strive for exceptional customer service and to be a proving ground for new ideas. He was a visionary who knew that if we could make an idea work in Alaska with all of its challenges, it would benefit all of aviation.

Mr. Wardleigh’s wife, Jan, is with us today. I hope she is pleased with our memorial to him. I know that this award has special meaning for you, Mr. Chairman, as I have been told that you received your floatplane rating from Tom just a few years ago

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me reiterate what I said at the outset of my testimony today – aviation safety is, and always will be, the first priority at the FAA. These programs I have discussed are the leading edge of efforts to improve aviation safety for everyone, and Alaska is once again showing the way. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify today on such an important topic. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.

AVIATION CAPACITY AND CONGESTION CHALLENGES - SUMMER 2005 AND FUTURE DEMAND

STATEMENT OF

MARION C. BLAKEY,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

AVIATION CAPACITY AND CONGESTION CHALLENGES - SUMMER 2005 AND FUTURE DEMAND

MAY 26, 2005

Good morning Chairman Burns, Senator Rockefeller, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning to discuss our plans to ease air traffic congestion this spring and summer. Secretary Mineta and I wish to offer our congratulations to you, Mr. Chairman, on assuming the Chair of this Subcommittee and to extend our good wishes to the new and returning Members of the Subcommittee. But before we discuss capacity and delays, let me address safety. As you know, safety is and will always be the FAA’s top priority. Every decision we make is done with the safety of the flying public in mind. The system must be safe, as you know, and we deliver a remarkably safe system. I am pleased to note that over the last three years, the commercial airline fatal accident rate is the lowest in history. That’s a tribute to the men and women of the FAA and the industry we support.

The health of our aviation system is critical to our economy, and the good news is that air travel has rebounded. We now project that overall passenger demand and commercial activity at FAA air traffic facilities will return to pre-9/11 traffic levels by the end of this year, reaching about 710 million passengers. Commercial operations at 17 of this country’s top 35 airports have already exceeded their pre 9/11 levels, with some airports like Salt Lake City and Fort Lauderdale already showing very high growth, above 11.5 percent and 6.6 percent over pre 9/11 levels respectively.

With approximately 9 percent of our country’s Gross Domestic Product tied to aviation, this is a very welcome rebound. However, we need to brace up because with this rebound will come delays, potentially serious ones, as early as this summer, and we need to do all we can to avoid them. That’s why today’s hearing is both important and timely.

Certainly some aviation markets have fared better than others, and new trends have emerged. Low-cost carriers have increased their market share, while the larger “legacy carriers” have been restructuring and downsizing. Also, regional and commuter carriers have been replacing and supplementing flight routes once dominated by legacy carriers, as well as introducing new services that use longer range regional jets. As a result, we are seeing significant growth in the regional carrier market, and we expect it will continue to grow.

Following 9/11, the agency worked with this Committee and industry stakeholders to prepare for the return of air traffic demand. We developed careful plans and worked to ensure that the agency was better situated to avoid the delay problems of past summers. We will continue the successful innovative steps begun in recent years that have helped to avert a repeat of past delay-riddled summers. To address and alleviate congestion and delays over the short term we will work to implement new procedures, more pavement, and better technology.

Our plan takes into account the myriad of factors -- some well beyond our control -- that contribute to system delays, including weather, security, airline operations, air traffic control, airports, infrastructure, and equipment. We are confident that this approach will provide effective inroads to manage the surge in traffic that will coincide with the busy summer travel season.

To emphasize the difficulty some of these factors create for the National Airspace System, you may recall that last summer four major hurricanes made landfall in the state of Florida, one of the country’s primary tourist and travel destinations, in just a six-week period. Airports and air traffic facilities across the state suffered significant damage, including Southwest Florida in Fort Myers; Orlando International in central Florida -- which was hit by three different hurricanes; and the FAA’s Pensacola TRACON in the Panhandle. The FAA responded quickly to restore capabilities damaged by the storms. For example, the Pensacola TRACON was nearly destroyed by Hurricane Ivan. The facility was closed on September 15^th because of the forecasted winds and storm surge. Employees volunteered to stay behind to monitor the facility condition and begin service restoration after the hurricane passed. However, during the height of the storm, the roof of the Pensacola TRACON was partially torn off. Employees on site quickly unplugged and protected the sensitive ATC equipment from the wind and rain, saving millions of dollars worth of equipment. Through the dedicated work of our employees and the cooperation of several agencies, the Pensacola TRACON was reopened for daylight operations only within two days, and to full ATC operations only 20 days after Ivan’s devastation. Additionally, FAA’s Airports Organization distributed $25 million from the Emergency Hurricane Supplemental Appropriations Act to 85 airports in Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Puerto Rico in record time, allowing the airports to make repairs and resume operations.

Many of the new procedures we are now using were the result of a first-of-its-kind meeting of industry decision makers and the government, known as “Growth Without Gridlock,” which we convened last year. The group agreed to a series of new procedures designed to relieve congestion during the heavy summer travel season. We moved away from the “first come-first served” model of air traffic when demand far exceeds capacity by issuing revised flight plans or rerouting some aircraft away from problem areas, allowing us to maximize utilization of available airspace under adverse conditions.

The most innovative of these new procedures, a concept we call “delay triggering,” imposes minor delays on the ground to avert massive delays across the National Airspace System. When delays at an airport are anticipated to reach 90 minutes or more, other airports sending aircraft into the congested area will hold flights until our controllers clear the congestion. Although this may mean brief delays for some flights, it helps prevent the massive delays that can occur system-wide when critical airports become gridlocked. This procedure has been so successful that we have incorporated the philosophy into other areas of managing demand and delays. Most recently, we began using this concept in managing departure delays from Fort Lauderdale. The feedback from our customers has been very positive, and we will continue to apply this procedure during the upcoming convective weather season.

A major accomplishment this year is our implementation of Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums or DRVSM. This is a tremendous boost to air traffic capacity because it essentially doubles capacity at high altitudes, adding six cruising altitudes or jet lanes above 29,000 feet. The procedure permits controllers to reduce minimum vertical separation at altitudes between 29,000 and 41,000 feet from 2000 feet to 1000 feet for aircraft that are equipped with dual altimeter systems and autopilots. Not only does this double the capacity options for controllers and pilots, but the higher altitude routes are more fuel efficient. We estimate the DRVSM will save airlines approximately $5 billion through 2016, an estimate that will prove to be conservative if fuel prices remain high.

Another major initiative is the expanding implementation of Area Navigation (RNAV) procedures to additional airports. RNAV procedures have been implemented and are performing successfully at Las Vegas, Philadelphia, and Dulles airports. Just last month, 13 RNAV departure procedures went into full operation at Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport – the world’s busiest airport. These procedures provide flight path guidance incorporated in taxi procedures, with minimal instructions required during departure by air traffic controllers. This significantly reduces routine controller-pilot communications, allowing more time on frequency for pilots and controllers to handle other safety-critical flight activities. Key benefits of the RNAV procedures include more efficient use of airspace, with improved flight profiles, resulting in significant fuel efficiencies to the airlines. RNAV procedures are scheduled for implementation at Dallas-Ft. Worth airport this year as well.

Another technological innovation, known as Required Navigation Procedure or RNP, promises to add to capacity. RNP is on-board technology that allows pilots to fly more direct point-to-point routes reliably and accurately. RNP give pilots not only lateral guidance, but vertical precision as well, and the system is highly precise and accurate. RNP reaches all domains of flight – departure, en route, and arrival. This not only will allow more efficient airspace management, but also provide savings in fuel costs for the airlines. For example, in January 2005, in partnership with Alaska Airlines, we implemented new RNP approach procedures at Palm Springs International Airport, which is located in very mountainous terrain. Under the previous conventional procedures, planes could not land unless the ceiling was at least 2,300 feet. With the new RNP procedures, approved air carriers can now operate to a ceiling of 684 feet, which allows much better access during bad weather. Additionally, RNP has enabled aircraft to cut significant mileage out of their flight path into Palm Springs – nearly 30 miles – which translates into substantial fuel savings for operators. The U.S. is leading the world in RNP, by issuing the first set of criteria and standards in this area in the very near future. Boeing and Airbus support RNP, and our standards are being embraced in Europe, Asia and South America, and by our neighbors to the north in Canada.

In addition, we improved communication among the system users and the FAA. Airlines agreed to improve their input to the FAA’s flight schedule monitor system using new software so that it will more accurately reflect the latest airline schedule plans. This move minimizes unused airport capacity when flights are rescheduled or cancelled. Also, airlines are encouraged to file flight plans earlier, allowing for more time to address potential congestion problems. In addition, our relationship with the air carriers who participate in our daily conference calls is genuinely cooperative, reflecting our common understanding that we all have a stake in the process. The conference calls – scheduled every 2 hours during the busiest portion of the day -- also provide an opportunity for feedback. Customers let us know if they believe they were disadvantaged by a prior day’s delay reduction measures or offer ideas on how we can all improve the system. We all know that continued cooperation is essential to the success of our spring and summer airspace management plans. Delays are bad for business, regardless of whether you are a large, legacy carrier, a low-cost carrier or a regional airline.

I’d like to take a moment to recognize this Committee’s role in addressing system capacity constraints. With the passage of Vision 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act, you provided the FAA and DOT with additional tools to address unexpected challenges that threaten to reduce capacity or cause delay at critical chokepoints. We must be ready to react to situations when they unfold. For example, the authority provided by Vision 100 enabled us to take initial action last year at Chicago O’Hare International Airport to address over-scheduling by air carriers and the resultant excessive delays that affected the entire National Airspace System.

As you know, two major carriers, American Airlines and United Airlines, have hubs at O’Hare. The competition for market share is compounded by the obvious physical limitation on the number of planes that can take off and land during any time period. Moreover, it has been well demonstrated over the years that delays at O’Hare have the potential to cause delays at as many as 40 other airports nationwide. Consequently, managing delays at O’Hare is essential to the effective management of air traffic nationally. In November 2003, major delays began occurring as a result of steady increases in flights, as O’Hare’s slot rules phased out, and a shift by American Airlines of flights from St. Louis to O’Hare. Vision 100 enabled us to take action.

Early last year, Secretary Mineta and I asked United and American to make a voluntary 5 percent schedule reduction during peak travel times. This voluntary reduction took effect March 4, 2004. American and United further agreed to reduce their overall peak-hour schedules by another 2.5 percent by June 10, 2004. This voluntary agreement was extended through last summer, as negotiations between the FAA and all airlines serving O’Hare continued in an effort to craft a more comprehensive plan to reduce flight delays, and one which treated all air carriers serving O’Hare fairly. Eventually, in August 2004, a voluntary agreement for schedule reductions during peak hours was reached involving all airlines currently serving O’Hare, and which allowed some leeway for new entrant carriers as well. This agreement took effect in November, and in March 2005 was extended through October 29, 2005. At the same time we extended the agreement, we also published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which proposes options to address congestion at O’Hare for the next three years. By that time, if approved by FAA, O’Hare’s proposed Modernization Project or a reasonable alternative to that project could provide additional airport capacity.

Since the voluntary agreement took effect last November, O’Hare’s on-time arrival performance has improved by more than 10 percent, and overall delay minutes from November through this past February have been cut by 22 percent, as compared to the previous year. We estimate that maintaining limits on the number of arrivals through April 2008 will result in a reduction in delays at O’Hare, and save airlines and passengers over $700 million lost through delays as compared to November 2003. As noted above, the proposed rule is timed to expire as airport capacity improvements are expected to take hold. Under the terms of the NPRM, we will review every six months the level and length of delays and other operating conditions, to determine if the airport can accommodate more arrivals. If additional capacity becomes available while the rule is in effect, we propose a method to assign the additional capacity to air carriers interested in initiating or expanding service at O’Hare.

We partner with airports to address capacity and delay concerns and we support implementation of solutions with funding from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). By the end of 2008, eight new runway projects are scheduled for commissioning. These include new runways at: Minneapolis-St. Paul; Cincinnati; St. Louis; Atlanta; Boston; Charlotte; and Seattle, and a runway extension at Philadelphia. Beyond 2008, we are working with other airports to increase capacity. We recently announced our final Record of Decision for Los Angeles, which will permit the airfield reconfiguration project to go forward. We continue to maintain and monitor the schedule for the Environmental Impact Statement at Chicago as well. We are also working closely with Fort Lauderdale on a major runway extension, and three major metropolitan areas Chicago, Las Vegas, and San Diego who are considering the need for new airports. We are supporting, through AIP funding, the preparation of regional studies in the New York Metropolitan area and the LA Basin.

While new runway construction typically provides the largest increase in capacity, there are new technologies and procedural improvements, such as Traffic Management Advisor (TMA) and Precision Runway Monitor (PRM), which add capacity, as well. TMA is a tool that assists the air traffic controller to sequence and schedule aircraft to the runway to maximize airport and terminal airspace capacity without compromising safety. PRM approaches have been implemented at San Francisco, Philadelphia, Cleveland and Minneapolis-St. Paul, and are planned for Atlanta and St. Louis. PRM allows air traffic controllers to run simultaneous operations on closely spaced parallel runways. It should be noted that increases in capacity from new runway construction often cannot be fully realized unless implemented along with new procedures and technology.

As with other networks that experience peak period demand surges, congestion management, such as congestion pricing, could be an option at a small number of airports where demand may come to exceed capacity in the short term, pending capacity expansion, or in the long term if capacity expansion is not a practical option.

In FY 2004, the FAA completed a study analyzing system capacity, taking into account the socio-economic and demographic trends expected to occur in the United States through 2020. This study expanded the focus of the 35 OEP airports and evaluated nearly 300 commercial service airports nationwide. This study identified airports and metropolitan areas expected to have significant growth in population and/or income that could result in an increase in the demand for air transportation that may not have been previously anticipated. The study identified the airports that need additional capacity and any constraints to enhancing capacity. Without capacity improvements at airports in these areas, this demand may go unsatisfied. In FY 2005, the FAA will complete a second phase of this study that will take a more detailed look at the non-OEP airports and will begin to identify possible solutions to increase long-term capacity

We must also make sure we are using the best technology to maintain a safe and efficient air traffic system. One example of this is the Wide Area Augmentation System, known as WAAS. WAAS is a precise navigation system that enhances the satellite signals from the Global Positioning System (GPS) to provide the accuracy and reliability necessary for pilots to rely on GPS during flight. Because the system is satellite-based, WAAS procedures cost a lot less to implement and maintain than traditional ground-based navigation systems. WAAS makes more airspace usable to pilots, provides more direct en route paths, and provides new precision approach services to runway ends. The implementation of WAAS into the NAS will result in safety and capacity improvements. Since WAAS became operational in July 2003, the FAA has developed 3,000 WAAS approaches. This is a significant accomplishment in modernizing how we use our airspace, and one which will have a lasting, positive effect on capacity.

In the longer term, however, we know that these short and mid-term efforts will simply not be enough. The recent FAA aviation forecast provides further evidence that our current system, already coming under stress in some areas, will be stretched to its limit as future demands continue to grow. Passenger totals are expected to exceed one billion by 2015, and we project up to a tripling of passengers, operations and cargo by the year 2025. As Secretary Mineta said in a speech before the Aero Club in January 2004: “The changes that are coming are too big, too fundamental for incremental adaptations of the infrastructure. We need to modernize and transform our air transportation system – starting right now.”

Our overarching goal in the Next Generation initiative is to develop a system that will be flexible enough to accommodate very light jets and large commercial aircraft, manned or unmanned air vehicles, small airports and large, business and vacation travelers alike, and to handle up to three times the number of operations that the current system does with no diminution in safety, security and efficiency. At the same time, the system would minimize the impact of aviation on the environment.

However, the move to a modern, efficient and technology-driven aviation system is going to require sustained, long term investments. The problem we face is that the status of the Aviation Trust Fund, which supports these investments, is inextricably tied to the fortunes of the aviation industry. Policy makers need to know that there is a gap that exists between our revenue and expenses, and this gap is quickly eroding the Trust Fund. The FAA needs a stable source of funding that is based both on our costs and the services we provide so that we can meet our mission in an extremely dynamic business environment. Tying fees to the cost of providing service protects both FAA and the customers who use FAA services by not subjecting our ability to provide a critical level of service to unrelated factors like ticket prices. A stable, cost-based revenue stream can also ensure funding for long-term capital needs. We also believe that a cost-based revenue structure would provide incentives to our customers to use resources efficiently and to the FAA to operate more efficiently, as stakeholder involvement can help us ensure that we are concentrating on services that the customer wants and is willing to pay for.

Mr. Chairman, with a comprehensive plan in place, cooperative initiatives underway, and thanks to the tools provided to us by this Committee, we are ready for the spring and summer travel season. This completes my statement. I will be happy to answer your questions at this time.

Commercial Space Transportation

STATEMENT OF

MARION C. BLAKEY,
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

AVIATION SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

FEBRUARY 9, 2005

Chairman Mica, Mr. Costello, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Good afternoon. It is a pleasure to be here today at the Subcommittee’s first hearing of the 109^th Congress. Today I would like to provide a brief overview of the Federal Aviation Administration’s activities in overseeing the commercial space transportation industry. Specifically, I will address how we plan to implement the most recent changes that Congress enacted in December, and how we see the future of this growing industry. But first, I wish to offer my congratulations to the new Members of the Subcommittee. I would also like to extend my best wishes to the new Ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee, Mr. Costello. Congressman Costello has been a valuable Member of this Committee since his election to Congress. I look forward to working with all of you, as well as the returning Members of the Subcommittee, on the important agenda ahead of us. Secretary Mineta and I truly value our partnership with Congress and the work we do together to make our nation’s aviation and space transportation systems the safest and most efficient in the world.

Commercial space transportation is an increasingly important part of our nation’s transportation system. Last year, the FAA completed a study examining the contributions of commercial space transportation, and other industries that are linked to space transportation. We found that in 2002, commercial space transportation and enabled industries created more than $95 billion in economic activity, $23.5 billion in earnings, and 576,400 jobs. Commercial space launches deliver communications, weather and science satellites to orbit. Satellite communications are integrated now into our daily lives, providing us with television, access to the Internet, credit card purchasing, and digital radio.

The timing of this hearing is particularly appropriate given that tomorrow is the opening of the FAA’s annual Commercial Space Transportation Conference here in D.C. This event will feature remarks by some of the key individuals in both industry and government and will include panels on the X Prize and Beyond, Emergent ELV Technologies, Regulating Outside the Box, Space and Air Traffic Management, and Educating Tomorrow’s Engineers.

The FAA’s Commercial Space Transportation Office is responsible for protecting public health and safety through the licensing and regulation of commercial space launches and reentries and the operation of launch and reentry sites. Our Commercial Space Office encourages, facilitates and promotes commercial launches and reentries and to facilitate the strengthening and expansion of the U.S. space transportation infrastructure. As always, our first priority is the safety of the public at large.

The Commercial Space Office was originally established in 1984, by President Reagan, following the passage of the first law governing the commercial space industry. It was located at that time in the Office of then Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole. The Office was later transferred to the FAA in 1995. The Office licensed its first launch of an expendable, vertically launched rocket in 1989. Since then there have been 168 licensed launches by U.S. companies such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Orbital Sciences, and most recently Scaled Composites. Headed by Mr. Burt Rutan, Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne was the first private, manned vehicle to reach space. While the FAA does not license launches performed by and for the U.S. government—we do work very closely with our colleagues at NASA and the Air Force to establish seamless safety rules for both government and private launch facilities.

As you may know, commercial space launches are inherently dangerous and risky operations-- a fact that is recognized not just by those who are directly involved but also by the law and regulatory regime that governs the industry. As a result, the approach to safety in the commercial space arena differs from the approach for civil aviation, where safety is achieved with the high reliability of today’s aircraft. The FAA’s safety focus in commercial space transportation has been on protecting the general public and their property from the dangers inherent in such operations. For launches, the safety approach is to contain the hazards. As noted above, rocket failures occur with some regularity. Historically, the failure rate has been approximately 10 percent for licensed launches. The mission of the FAA is to ensure that each rocket that fails has a safety system that ensures no damage is done to life or property on the ground.

Our licensing process includes a pre-licensing consultation period during which our technical team begins a dialogue with launch applicants regarding what they propose and requirements they must meet to receive a license. After this initial dialogue, we proceed to a more comprehensive review and analysis during which we analyze and evaluate every possible aspect of a proposed space launch operation. This includes a policy review, payload review, safety evaluation, financial responsibility determination, and an environmental review. We issue a license only after we determine that an applicant’s launch or reentry proposal will not jeopardize public health and safety, the safety of property, or conflict with U.S. national security or foreign policy interests and obligations.

In addition to licensing launches, the FAA is also responsible for licensing and regulating the operation of launch sites. We have licensed four launch sites in the U.S. – in California, Florida, Virginia, and Alaska. Last year, we added a fifth—the Mojave Airport in California, which is a dual use facility. In fact, it is the first inland launch site in the country to receive a license. States are increasingly interested in hosting a launch site because they see spaceports as potential sources of future economic growth. We are currently in discussions with Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas about their license applications. In the future, we anticipate there will be a network of non-federal launch sites throughout the U.S.

During the 20-year history of the government’s oversight of commercial space launches, there have been no launch accidents that have resulted in loss of life, serious injuries, or major property damage. While there have been rocket launch failures, where, for example, the rocket malfunctioned or had to be destroyed deliberately because it veered from its intended trajectory, or where a satellite payload was not successfully inserted into orbit, the uninvolved public was still protected. We believe that this is an impressive safety record that speaks to the skill, dedication, and commitment to safety of the FAA’s team, our industry partners, and of our government partners like NASA and the Air Force.

One of the key ways the U.S. supports the commercial space industry is through a statutory risk-sharing program between private industry and the federal government. It consists of three major components: (1) liability and government property insurance that is obtained by the launch operator; (2) cross-waivers of liability; and (3) provisions for payment by the government of third-party liability claims in excess of required liability insurance, up to $ 1.5 billion, as adjusted for inflation. This liability risk-sharing arrangement was recently extended by Congress through 2009 with a provision for a comprehensive study on whether this program could be eliminated and what alternatives there are to maintain a viable and competitive U.S. industry. Because of the excellent safety record of the industry, the indemnification provision has never been invoked.

Let me now briefly discuss FAA’s recent commercial space activities. Last year the FAA licensed 14 commercial launches, the most since 1999 and more than what both NASA and DOD launched in 2004. These included five Atlas launches, three Sea Launch missions, one Taurus Launch, and five launches by SpaceShipOne. The industry is continuing to develop and evolve to an era of reusable launch vehicles, suborbital launch vehicles and, most recently, personal human spaceflight.

You may recall that last June, we all witnessed the first privately funded launch of a manned vehicle into space. Before that day, the commercial space industry dealt only in unmanned vehicles. Burt Rutan and his team at Scaled Composites accomplished this historic feat. Mike Melville piloted SpaceShipOne--traveling to an altitude of 337,500 feet and reaching the X-Prize threshold of space. The FAA’s Associate Administrator, Patti Grace Smith, presented Mr. Melville with the first FAA-issued commercial astronaut wings. A few short months later, on October 4^th, I had the privilege of awarding the next set of wings to Astronaut Brian Binnie. Astronaut Binnie’s flight on SpaceShipOne was the flight that won the $10 million Ansari X-Prize, which was awarded to the first company to launch a vehicle that carried the equivalent of three persons on board and returned twice within a two-week span.

Mr. Rutan and his team earned the respect and admiration of the entire country with the accomplishment. I am also proud of the exceptional licensing and safety work done by our FAA team, which included not only staff from our Commercial Space Office, but also experts from our Aviation Safety Organization and from our Air Traffic Organization. Our people worked tirelessly with Mr. Rutan’s company throughout the development of SpaceShipOne to enable these historic flights and to fully protect the American public.

SpaceShipOne marked the beginning of a new chapter in commercial space transportation. A new generation of vehicles shows the potential for the development of a space tourism industry. Congress recognized this new beginning in passing last December the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004, designed to promote the development of human space flight. It does so by giving the FAA responsibility over the safety of the crew and passengers. Under a new regulatory regime, paying passengers, deemed “space flight participants,” will now be able to fly into space on board commercial space vehicles after such passengers are informed of and assume the significant risks of the venture. The new legislation sets an ambitious schedule for issuing rules on commercial human space flight. The FAA’s staff are already working on rules for experimental permits called for by the new law and for rules on medical and training requirements for crew and space flight participants.

Advocates of this new law were concerned that “over-regulation” by the Federal Government might stifle development of new launch vehicles. Today’s commercial space innovators have been compared to the barnstorming aviators that created the foundation for what is now the safest form of transportation. Like those early pioneers, the innovators of today need an environment that will allow them to develop the spacecraft of the future. We agree that government regulation should not be the enemy of innovation, particularly where design concepts and standard are unknown. At the dawn of aviation, industry pioneers were left to create aircraft designs without benefit of government oversight. The government requirements for building or designing an aircraft date from 1926, more than 20 years after the Wright Brother’s historic flight. Ensuring safety often is an evolutionary process. Part of the improvement to safety involves the simple result of mitigating risks and learning from mistakes.

Government oversight of civil aviation evolved as the aircraft industry developed. Likewise, government oversight of commercial space transportation must also evolve appropriately as the industry matures. This may mean permitting more risk now to those who choose to assume those risks in order to achieve an ultimately safer, more advanced launch vehicle. At the same time, the new law does not disturb the FAA’s current authority to fully protect the safety of the uninvolved public. I assure you, we will continue to take that responsibility very seriously in conducting our licensing and permitting reviews under the new law.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, let me say a few words about the current economic condition of and outlook for the industry. In the orbital segment of the industry, there has been a downturn in the launch of expendable launch vehicles (ELV’s) from 2000 to the present. Today, the supply of available launch vehicles internationally has increased while demand has not. As a result, launch prices have dropped compared to the mid-1990s. In addition, U.S.-manufactured launch vehicles have to compete against low-cost Russian rockets. At this time, the future outlook for 2004-2013 is for only slight growth in the expected demand for commercial launch services.

We see future potential growth in the suborbital segment of the industry, as new U.S.-built vehicles are developed to meet the demand for human space travel and tourism. As noted above, SpaceShipOne’s five launches have led the way. Additional entrepreneurs are expected to enter the market. For example, Sir Richard Branson, owner of Virgin Airlines, announced plans to fly customers into space aboard a fleet of five passenger rockets on a service he will call Virgin Galactic. We understand he plans to lease or buy these spacecraft from Scaled Composites, no doubt a welcome investment for the innovative American company.

In conclusion, I want to assure the Committee that the FAA will continue to strive to be proactive, vigilant, and responsive to the needs of the commercial space transportation. We will create a sound regulatory framework that protects public safety while enabling the industry to manage risk, evolve its technology, and bring its products to the global marketplace with appropriate regulatory oversight. As Secretary Mineta recently said before the Aero Club here in Washington: “The first rule, to quote an old adage, is ‘do no harm.’ This means that your government will not stand in the way of airlines as they seek to innovate. It means giving the fledgling commercial space industry the freedom to develop, and I am very pleased that we now have a streamlined legislative foundation in place to support this exciting new area of transportation.” I agree with the Secretary.

That concludes my prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any questions you and the Members of the Subcommittee may have.

Airspace Redesign Over Southern California and Runway Incursions at Los Angeles International

STATEMENT OF

BILL WITHYCOMB,
REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
WESTERN PACIFIC REGION,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
AVIATION SUBCOMMITTEE

AIRSPACE REDESIGN OVER SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
AND RUNWAY INCURSIONS AT LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL

ON MARCH 20, 2006.

Chairman Mica, Members of Congress

I am pleased to welcome you to southern California and to discuss with you aviation issues that are important to this region. Specifically, you have asked that I update you on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) airspace redesign efforts in southern California and the status of ongoing efforts to reduce runway incursions at the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The FAA is well aware of the importance of southern California to the effectiveness of the overall national airspace system (NAS). We are working on these issues and several others to preserve the safety and efficiency that is critical to not only the citizens of California, but the nation as a whole.

The airspace over southern California is highly complex. It includes high volume traffic in the north – south corridors, military airspace and eight busy airports located in close proximity to one another. There are over two million operations a year in approximately 10,000 miles of airspace. Post September 11, the total annual operations for the region remain lower than pre-September 11 levels, especially with respect to operations at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). In recent years, the number of annual operations has remained fairly constant and the number of delays has decreased, but FAA anticipates that there will be significant growth in the area that must be factored into future planning.

In June 2004, FAA published a report entitled, “Capacity Needs in the National Airspace System: An Analysis of Airport and Metropolitan Area Demand and Operational Capacity in the Future.” It identified a need for additional capacity in southern California in the 2013 to 2020 timeframe. This is premised on the anticipated growth of both the population and wealth of the region in addition to the expectation that the use of very light jets will increase and that there will be more low cost operations. Because the airports in the region are land locked, the opportunity for capacity expansion lies largely in airspace redesign. Unlike other parts of the country where FAA has worked on airspace redesign because of existing congestion problems impacting the NAS, this is not yet the case in southern California. Therefore, we have the opportunity to get out in front of the problem instead of waiting for the situation to develop.

In order to prepare for the future, FAA has identified four program projects to support anticipated growth; southern California redesign, central California redesign, bay to basin redesign, and high altitude redesign. For purposes of this hearing, I will focus on the planned southern California redesign.

The southern California redesign has three parts that will ultimately result in a four to twelve million dollar annual savings due to reduced delays and additional throughput. The first part of the project has largely been completed. It optimizes the departure and arrival flows of LAX. In September of 2004, FAA modified the LAX departure climb to permit a steady climb to more than 5,000 feet. Previously, the aircraft would climb then level off, then climb and level off. This change reduced the number of LAX departure transmissions with air traffic control because it was a single direction to climb steadily. It also removed an offshore conflict with a north - south route flown by general aviation aircraft. In February of this year, FAA announced the LAX arrival enhancement which will become operational in April. This will permit aircraft to follow the same path over the ground, but on a lower gradient which will result in arrivals being quieter, burning less fuel, and producing less wear and tear on the aircraft.

The second part of the redesign is the actual redesign of the airspace. The goal here is to take a “complete clean sheet” view of the airspace to determine how things should look if we were starting from scratch. At the center of the redesign would be how best to feed aircraft into LAX. The traffic at other airports would be optimized as they fit into the plan for LAX. This redesign project is very ambitious and it will take several years to scope, design and conduct the required environmental analysis and review before implementation can take place. As this Committee is well aware, projects of this size and sensitivity must achieve industry and community consensus in order to be successfully implemented. There is a lot of work ahead to make this happen, but we believe it is an important and necessary investment in the future.

The final piece of the southern California redesign project focuses on arrival enhancement into San Diego. The airspace around San Diego is complicated by military operations being conducted in the area. New training needs have resulted in FAA working with our military partners to maximize the efficiency and safety of this shared space. Ultimately, we would like to conduct a more thorough analysis and redesign of this airspace to meet the anticipated long term needs of both commercial and military operations.

Turning now to runway incursions, I want to emphasize that reducing runway incursions is not just an FAA priority at LAX. We have been working hard to reduce the most serious runway incursions around the country. As outlined in the FAA Flight Plan 2006-2010, the FAA is developing a range of initiatives from airport design concepts to surface movement procedures. Related efforts address the errors committed by pilots, air traffic controllers, and airport-authorized vehicle operators and pedestrians. We have set performance targets and we are holding ourselves accountable for meeting those targets. We are working hard and making progress, but we are not there yet.

We have made important progress over the last few years, especially in reducing serious Category A and B runway incursions by more than 40 percent since FY 2001. In FY 2005, we had a total of 327 runway incursions. Twenty-nine of those were Category A and B incursions, which is less than 10 percent of the total. In terms of error types, there were 169 pilot deviations, 105 operational errors/deviations, and 53 vehicle/pedestrian deviations. While pilot deviations are the most common type of runway incursion, they accounted for only 31 percent of serious incursions in the past fiscal year. Operational errors/deviations, on the other hand, accounted for only 32 percent of total deviations, but 55 percent of serious deviations which represents a notable change in the distribution of runway incursion types with respect to severity. These are the types of statistics our runway incursion safety team continuously analyzes in order to understand where our efforts will have the greatest impact in reducing risk.

FAA is working closely with other airport sponsors to address runway incursions. Late last year, Administrator Blakey met with the City of Los Angeles and discussed the chronic runway incursion problem at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). In fiscal year 1998, there were 12 runway incursions at LAX. Since then, we have made some progress. In fiscal year 2000, there were 10 runway incursions, 9 in 2003, and 8 last year. We see an improving trend, but there is still risk so we need to continue to reduce runway incursions at LAX as well as other airports around the country.

Roughly 80 percent of runway incursions at LAX occur on the south side of the airport. It is important to note the current airfield layout was designed to accommodate jetliners that were in service over 40-years ago. The City completed Master Plan for LAX identifies changes in the airfield layout to resolve this problem.

On May 20, 2005, FAA issued its Record of Decision for the City’s Master Plan. In August FAA issued a grant to the City for approximately $38.8 million for the relocation of the southern most runway and the addition of a new parallel taxiway at LAX. This project is expected to significantly reduce runway incursions at LAX. Last month FAA provided an additional $29.5 million for the runway relocation. The City has an aggressive schedule for the project and should be commended for this vital safety initiative and encouraged to expedite the project to the greatest degree possible.

Overall, we are taking a proactive approach to address operational vulnerabilities through awareness, education, procedures, airport infrastructure, and surface technology initiatives. The FAA has worked with external organizations, airport officials, and safety experts to increase surface safety awareness on a national level. We have developed and promoted runway safety training material in conjunction with organizations such as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Air Safety Foundation and the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA). Efforts have included the creation of an interactive Web-based program to inform pilots about preventing runway incursions. The program, accessible from both the FAA, AOPA, and ALPA web sites, provides an introduction to runway incursion risk, information about airfield signs and markings, and strategies for enhanced position awareness and improved cockpit management. Throughout the program, various quizzes, tasks, and information visualization tools offer an interactive learning experience.

In addition to the work we are doing with LAX, we have identified what we refer to as the Focus-35 airports. These are airports, LAX included, that reported the most runway incursions from FY 2001 to 2004. During that period, the Focus-35 airports handled 20 percent of all NAS operations yet accounted for 41 percent of all runway incursions (565). Through airport infrastructure and safety management programs, some of these airports have successfully reduced the number of runway incursions in the last year or two. The Focus-35 airports accounted for 39 percent of the Category A and B runway incursions. However, the number of such incursions decreased by 71 percent, from 24 to seven, from FY 2001 to 2004. Continued implementation of risk mitigation strategies at the Focus-35 airports offers the most immediate opportunity to continue to reduce the severity, number, and rate of runway incursions in the NAS.

BRAC's Impact on Traffic Congestion and Quality of Life in Northern Virginia

Statement of

The Honorable Jeffrey N. Shane
Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy
United States Department of Transportation

Before the

Committee on Government Reform
United States House of Representatives

Field Hearing on

BRAC's Impact on Traffic Congestion and Quality of Life in Northern Virginia

August 31, 2006

Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure today to represent Acting Secretary Maria Cino and the Department of Transportation to discuss with you the potential impacts on traffic congestion in our region that may result from implementation of the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) Commission report requirements.

Introduction

According to the BRAC Commission, 31 Department of Defense (DoD) installations in the Commonwealth of Virginia will realign. As a result, we believe several local installations will experience significant transportation impacts, including: Fort Belvoir, the U.S. Marine Corps Base at Quantico, and Fort Lee in Petersburg. Approximately 22,000 Federal jobs will be moving to Fort Belvoir. According to the Army, the preferred land use plan locates 18,000 of those jobs at the Engineer Proving Ground area, which is in the northwest quadrant of the I-95 and Fairfax County Parkway interchange. The remaining jobs will be in areas of Fort Belvoir south of U.S. 1.

In addition, the Federal work force will be increased at the U.S. Marine Corps Base at Quantico (preliminary estimate of 3,000 government employees). BRAC actions will also increase the Federal workforce at Fort Lee by an estimated 7,300 employees.

Government officials also expect a substantial number of off-installation support and retail jobs to be created at Fort Belvoir, at Quantico, and at Fort Lee.

The Virginia Division Office of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has been following the Defense Department’s plan very closely to determine the BRAC impacts on current and planned transportation projects.

Coordination with Army Officials

A working group, with members from the Army, Virginia Department of Transportation Northern Virginia District, Fairfax County, FHWA Federal Lands Highway Division, and a number of consultants working with DoD, has been established to review the transportation impacts of the Fort Belvoir expansion.

The Master Plan for the Fort Belvoir development, including the Environmental Impact Statement, will not be finished until the summer of 2007; however, the working group is reviewing a desired concept and has developed a preliminary list of transportation improvement projects for the region. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc. (PBS&J) and Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP are responsible for master planning, design, engineering and program integration of the Fort Belvoir realignment.

Virginia Transportation Projects Linked to BRAC

There are several projects underway in the Northern Virginia metropolitan areas linked to the BRAC plans:

Richmond Highway - Telegraph Road Connector

FHWA's Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) is conducting the planning and environmental work for the proposed Richmond Highway-Telegraph Road Connector and administering the project through the Department of Army (DA) Defense Access Road Program. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), and Fairfax County are assisting in the study and design development.

Though not directly BRAC-related, this project would restore much-needed capacity between Richmond Highway (U.S. Route 1) and Telegraph Road (VA Route 611) across Fort Belvoir. DoD restricted public access to Beulah Road and Woodlawn Road (within Fort Belvoir) following the events of September 11, 2001. These roads linked U.S. Route 1 and Telegraph Road. DoD is committed to funding two travel lanes, with the project being designed to ultimately include a four-lane roadway. Based upon anticipated funding the project is being planned in phases: 1) the two-lane connection, 2) the four-lane connection with intersection improvements at the termini, and 3) Telegraph Road improvements at the northern termini to complete the four-lane connection between Beulah and Franconia Road.

Increased traffic associated with the BRAC only amplifies the need to complete all phases of this project. VDOT is currently looking at BRAC-related traffic impacts along U.S. 1 and I-95 in this area.

Fairfax County Parkway

The final planned section of the Fairfax County Parkway is seen as a key entrance to the Engineer Proving Ground area where it is understood that a majority of the BRAC relocations will be placed. The required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) studies have been completed by FHWA and VDOT, but old ordnance and other contamination from a two-mile stretch of highway that runs through the Engineer Proving Ground at Fort Belvoir must be removed prior to commencing construction. Negotiations between DoD and VDOT concerning this removal are ongoing.

Quantico and Petersburg Areas

BRAC impacts are not seen to be as extreme in Quantico. DoD anticipates adding only 3,000 jobs here, but any increase is of concern in this already congested I-95 corridor. The Fredericksburg metropolitan planning organization (MPO) recently passed a resolution to study the need for a new interchange at Telegraph Road just south of the Prince William/Stafford County line. This study has not yet begun.

FHWA Virginia Division Office Actions

The FHWA Virginia Division will continue to follow the BRAC plans and staff has been assigned to work proactively in the following areas:

Ensure transportation issues including impacts on highway safety are considered in any Environmental Documents for BRAC installations.
Consider BRAC in the Interstate 95/395 HOT Lanes Project.
Determine impacts at the Interstate interchange leading to the U.S. Marine Corps Base at Quantico.
Ensure BRAC issues are considered in the regional planning process.
Coordinate meetings between BRAC officials and members of the VDOT and FHWA Virginia Division leadership team.
Track current and planned projects associated with BRAC, such as the Fairfax County Parkway project, and provide technical assistance to VDOT or the military as requested.

Federal Transit Administration

The Department is pursuing a multi-model approach to addressing BRAC impacts. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) will work with FHWA to coordinate transportation services that will be needed as a result of any BRAC relocations within the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.

FTA will assist the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and local transportation providers to coordinate future transit service enhancements and expansions to serve the growing transit market resulting from the BRAC relocations.

As the master plan becomes more fully developed, local transit agencies including the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority, the Fairfax Connector, Alexandria Dash, the Virginia Railway Express, and other transportation providers will participate in the planning process to identify potential new transit services.

FTA encourages local agencies to implement transit supportive site design for the proposed new construction, and identify opportunities for transit oriented development that will increase accessibility to transit services.

National Congestion Initiative

Any potential increase in traffic congestion that could result from the BRAC realignment will remain a major area of concern for the Department. Congestion is one of the most prominent threats to the continued effectiveness of our highway system and, in many ways, our quality of life. In many respects, the nation's transportation system has become the victim of its own success. Our growing economy and standard of living have created a demand for travel and movement of goods that is increasingly difficult to meet. We know that reducing traffic congestion is crucial for Northern Virginia, for the entire Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and across the country, because congestion wastes fuel, wastes time, and robs the economy of productivity. Congestion costs Americans an estimated $200 billion a year. Consumers lose 3.7 billion hours and waste 2.3 billion gallons of fuel sitting in traffic jams.

With these facts in mind, Secretary Mineta announced in May the Bush Administration's "National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America's Transportation Network"--a national congestion relief initiative. The Congestion Initiative provides a clear plan for Federal, State, and local officials to follow as we work together to maximize the valuable tools Congress provided in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) for improving operation of our surface transportation system, encouraging the development and deployment of new technologies and construction methods, and expanding opportunities for private investment in transportation infrastructure.

A significant part of the Congestion Initiative focuses on our largest metropolitan areas, including the Washington area. We will seek Urban Partnership Agreements with areas that offer the most promising results in, for example, traffic affected, lessons learned, and models for other regions. These agreements will embrace several proven, effective strategies, including variable priced tolling programs designed to spread traffic flows throughout the day to get more out of existing highways, additional express bus and bus rapid transit service that take advantage of the free-flow conditions generated by variable pricing, and expanded use of telecommuting and flexible work schedules by major regional employers.

The Congestion Initiative will also encourage States to pass legislation giving the private sector a broader opportunity to invest in transportation. Virginia has been a leader in Public-Private Partnership (PPP) enabling legislation, passing a Public-Private Transportation Act in 1995. The Virginia legislation takes one of the more comprehensive approaches to enabling PPPs.

The application of advanced technology or Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is critical to improving productivity of our existing transportation assets. The Congestion Initiative calls for widespread deployment of new operational technologies and practices that can unblock chokepoints. One example is the establishment of a national 3-digit telephone number for traveler information, 5-1-1, which gives callers information about local road and traffic conditions by dialing an easy-to-remember number, and our current efforts to promote the deployment of 5-1-1 services. As a result of these efforts, we expect 5-1-1 service to be available to half the nation by the end of this year. Services like 5-1-1 give motorists the information they need to make better choices about the routes they take, helping them save time by avoiding traffic tie-ups. The 5-1-1 service has been available Statewide in Virginia since February 2005. In addition, there is an emerging, vibrant private market sector devoted to packaging and distributing real time traffic information to travelers in major metropolitan areas across the country. We expect the efforts of these companies, including PPPs, to improve the traveler information experience for daily travelers.

The Department will also accelerate the development of three to five multi-State, multi-use transportation corridors that have the greatest potential to relieve traffic congestion based on current and projected growth. We will work with the States on new financing models for multi-State projects. We are also assisting the States in implementing SAFETEA-LU provisions directed at improving materials, contracting, and construction techniques for Federal-aid highways.

At the Department, we expect every part of the Congestion Initiative that isn't already underway will be underway before the end of the year. We have the tools, the technology, the plan, and the commitment to reduce congestion both in this region and across the country.

Conclusion

The Department is fully engaged with Federal, State and local officials to collect and analyze the data necessary to assess impacts on transportation from the BRAC realignments. We will continue to work closely with the appropriate officials to implement timely and effective responses to these impacts. Our efforts, I can assure you, will involve a multi-modal approach.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the Department's actions in response to the BRAC recommendations. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

« First
‹‹
…
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
…
››
Last »

Subscribe to Testimony

Testimony

In This Section

Transforming the FAA: A Review of the ATO

Rebuilding Highway and Transit Infrastructure on the Gulf Coast Following Hurricane Katrina

FHWA Response to Hurricane Katrina

October 6, 2005

Introduction

Pre-Hurricane Activities

Response Immediately after Hurricanes

Recovery

Future Preventative Actions

Stewardship and Oversight

Conclusion

The Security of our Nation's Passenger and Freight Railroad Network

FRA’s Role in Railroad Security

Safety Issues

Aviation Safety in Alaska

AVIATION CAPACITY AND CONGESTION CHALLENGES - SUMMER 2005 AND FUTURE DEMAND

Commercial Space Transportation

Airspace Redesign Over Southern California and Runway Incursions at Los Angeles International

BRAC's Impact on Traffic Congestion and Quality of Life in Northern Virginia

Virginia Transportation Projects Linked to BRAC

U.S. Department of Transportation

Want to know more?