Sea Year

The USMMA’s shipboard training program, or “Sea Year,” exposes Midshipmen to life at sea on board commercial and military vessels and provides cost-effective hands-on seamanship and engineering sea time that meets the requirements to secure USCG mariner credentials.

Midshipmen are required to have 360 days of sea service during their four-year maritime education to obtain their USCG merchant mariner credentials.  Shipping companies and the U.S. Navy are part of a cooperative effort to ensure that a Midshipman’s shore based education is enhanced by the required on-the-job training at sea.

Sea Year is critical to the education and training of Midshipmen at the USMMA, and all training must be conducted in a safe and respectful environment.  In the wake of a series of reports that indicated problems with sexual misconduct and other coercive behaviors, both on campus and at sea, DOT and MARAD leadership suspended commercial Sea Year so we could develop a better understanding of the problem and a strategy to ensure the safety of the Midshipmen.  An independent external consultant assessed the organization and made recommendations in December 20161.

Last year, Secretary Foxx’s decision to stand down commercial sea year over concerns about Midshipmen being subjected to sexual misconduct stirred vocal disagreement from industry leaders. Those same leaders, including many USMMA alumni, worked with MARAD through an extended stand down of Sea Year while the cultural audit was conducted.  A consortium of 14 leading maritime companies came together with MARAD to examine ways to ensure that Sea Year training is conducted in a safe and respectful environment. Just two weeks after the stand down, the consortium brought forth a proposal to address sexual assault and harassment prevention and response.  MARAD and DOT subsequently created the Shipboard Climate Compliance Team (SCCT) to establish standards and collaborate with industry, labor and the consortium, and lay out workable criteria for the companies to achieve those standards.  The SCCT is led by a MARAD Senior Executive Service leader, who is a USMMA graduate.  The team is made up of 10 experienced mariners (four of whom are female), and sexual harassment and sexual assault and civil rights experts.  Working with industry and labor partners, and with assistance from a subject matter expert, the SCCT has established stringent new requirements that companies must meet to be eligible to participate in Sea Year training.  Because of the strong working relationship between MARAD and these maritime leaders, five companies today are already meeting new standards for sea year eligibility and have Midshipmen currently, or preparing to, sail aboard their companies’ vessels.

MARAD’s “Sea Year Eligibility” criteria include the following:

Company-Wide Zero Tolerance Message – Shipping company CEOs will issue an annual company-wide message outlining specific rules for the workplace, strongly stating that sexual assault and sexual harassment, including any retaliation based on a complaint, are unacceptable, and committing the company to eradicate such behavior and enforcing a zero-tolerance policy.

Annual Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Prevention Training Requirement for Crew – Annual sexual assault and harassment prevention training will ensure that crewmembers clearly understand what constitutes sexual assault and sexual harassment, its negative impact, the importance of prevention, and the severe penalties for engaging in prohibited behavior or for failing to report an incident.  All crewmembers will clearly understand their responsibility as supervisors, employees, witnesses, and bystanders. Crewmembers must complete this training prior to Midshipmen arriving on board, or within 72 hours of signing-on, if Midshipmen are already onboard the vessel

Mentors with Enhanced Selection Criteria and Duties – Mentors for each ship play a crucial role in the success and development of cadets.  Per enhanced mentor qualifications, a mentor must certify that he/she does not have any pending complaints or history of violations of any other company’s Sexual Assault Sexual Harassment policies.  The mentor must be of good character, and know, support, and advocate for the company’s sexual assault sexual harassment prevention and response policies. Mentor duties include:

• Helping Midshipmen understand company shipboard policies and procedures, and their roles and responsibilities aboard the ship;
• Serving as a resource for Midshipmen while onboard;
• Being readily available to Midshipmen and seeking to understand each individual’s concerns about their vessel assignment;
• Guiding the Midshipmen in understanding shipboard protocol, sexual assault and harassment prevention and response policies, and expected code of conduct;
• Supporting Midshipmen once they join the crew and helping them transition from their academic learning environment to the professional shipboard setting;
• Encouraging the development of a well-rounded mariner;
• Referring Midshipmen to other resources as needed, such as other crewmembers aboard the vessel, company employees, or Academy personnel; and
• Participating in prescribed sexual assault and harassment prevention and anti- discrimination training and serving as a reporting mechanism for complaints of sexual misconduct.

Accreditation

Actions to improve sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention and response at the Academy also address concerns raised during the Academy’s reaccreditation.  In June 2016, the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE) placed the Academy’s accreditation in warning status because it found that the Academy was not meeting five of MSCHE’s fourteen standards of accreditation. Of the five standards, one pertains to improving sexual misconduct response and prevention and four are related to independent governance at the Academy and returning budget and management authorities to the USMMA as a condition of accreditation.

In 2009, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report that described certain USMMA budget and management problems, which led Congress to require DOT and MARAD to provide additional oversight of the Academy’s budget.  The USMMA had  three Superintendents from 2008 to 2011 trying to fix these problems. Rear Admiral James Helis became Superintendent in 2012 and brought stability and resolution.  By 2014, the GAO reported to Congress that the USMMA had addressed all 47 of the management shortcomings that GAO identified in 2009.  Returning budget and management authorities to the USMMA addresses accreditation concerns and recognizes the tremendous accomplishments by Superintendent Helis and his leadership team.

The Academy remains accredited while we work with MSCHE to address their requirements and recommendations, and we are making good progress.  As recommended by MSCHE, DOT requested relief from legislation that constrains the Academy’s budget. Thanks to the actions of this Subcommittee, one of the two constraints has already been lifted.  MARAD and the Academy are currently working to fill key positions and to return direct reporting authority for human resources, financial management and procurement back to the Academy.  Finally, as noted above, DOT and MARAD are supporting the Academy’s efforts to ensure the safety of its Midshipmen by improving sexual assault and sexual harassment response and prevention on campus and during Sea Year. The Academy has two years to return to full compliance, and we are confident that we will meet that goal and ensure the highest caliber education for the Academy’s Midshipmen.

Statement of

Joseph C. Szabo
Federal Railroad Administrator

Before The

Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
United States House of Representatives

October 14, 2009

Chairwoman Brown, Ranking Member Shuster and members of the Subcommittee: I am honored to appear before you today to discuss one of the most significant new initiatives of President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Secretary of Transportation LaHood – the development of high-speed rail transportation in America, which builds upon the solid foundation laid by Congress last year in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA). In this statement I will touch on the opportunities and challenges we, the Administration, the Congress and a diverse group of stakeholders, face in creating a sustainable program to improve intercity passenger mobility in the United States and what FRA is doing today to make the vision for high-speed rail a reality.

Discussions of high-speed rail tend to begin with the fundamental question: “What is high-speed rail?” Some prefer to define high-speed by peak speed –say 200 miles-per-hour (mph). Some will say high-speed is average speed or trip time. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), in its 1997 report “High-Speed Ground Transportation for America" used a more market oriented definition – that is service that can cost effectively be the preferred option for intercity travel in a specific transportation market. Using that definition, high-speed rail is service that is superior from a time-competitive stand point than air and/or auto on a door-to-door basis. In other words, if I leave my home in Chicago and travel to a meeting in St. Louis and the total trip time by rail is better than flying or driving, then that rail service is high-speed. What that means is that the peak speeds and average speeds of high-speed rail are not one set number but can and should vary by the market served. The speeds needed to effectively serve the Los Angeles to San Francisco market, a distance of 450 miles is different from the speeds needed to effectively serve the market between Washington, D.C. and Richmond, VA., a distance of 90 miles.

In the Administration’s Vision for High-Speed Rail in America we used four definitions for the multiple types of intercity passenger rail that we will see in the future:

• Conventional Rail – Traditional intercity passenger rail services of more than 100 miles with peak speeds in the 79 mph to 90 mph range.
• Emerging High-Speed Rail – Developing corridors of 100-500 miles in length with top speeds in the 90-110 mph range
• High-Speed Rail-Regional – Relatively frequent service between major and moderate population centers 100-500 miles apart with top speeds in the 110-150 mph range
• High-Speed Rail –Express with frequent service between major population centers 200-600 miles apart with few intermediate stops and top speeds in excess of 150 mph.
• Ensure safe and efficient transportation choices. Promote the safest possible movement of goods and people, and optimize the use of existing and new transportation infrastructure.
• Promote energy efficiency and environmental quality. Reinforce efforts to foster energy independence and renewable energy, and reduce pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Build a foundation for economic competitiveness. Lay the groundwork for near-term and ongoing economic growth by facilitating efficient movement of people and goods, while renewing critical domestic manufacturing and supply industries. This strengthening of domestic manufacturing is particularly critical today as evidenced by the severe atrophy affecting the U.S. rail supply industry. A long-term market for railroad equipment, infrastructure and supplies will help rebuild this once proud part of the American economy.
• Support interconnected livable communities. Improve quality of life in local communities by promoting affordable, convenient, and sustainable housing, energy, and transportation options.

Thus, in discussing how we make high-speed rail a reality we need to be talking about a range of technologies and a range of investment options that each have their own sets of opportunities and challenges.

That is not to say that high-speed rail is preferable in all situations to air and/or auto. Indeed each has and will have an important place in the transportation system of our future. High-speed rail will only be successful as part of an integrated, intermodal transportation system that includes effective connections to our transit, highway and aviation systems.

High-Speed Rail – the Opportunities

President Obama proposes to help address the Nation’s transportation challenges by investing in an efficient, high-speed passenger rail network of 100-600 mile intercity corridors that connect communities across America. The vision for high-speed rail aligns well with the Department’s strategic goals:

I wish to offer one of many possible examples where these opportunities come together. FRA has been working with the California High-Speed Rail Authority since 2001 on the planning and environmental review of California’s State-wide high-speed rail initiative. The Final Environmental Impact Statement/Report for the California High-Speed Rail Program has been completed and is available for review[1]. This document is one of the most comprehensive environmental analyses of a new transportation system ever undertaken and helps crystallize the opportunities offered by the development of high-speed rail. Among the benefits of high-speed rail investment when compared to alternatives for meeting the identified travel demand are:

Transportation Investment requirements Avoided

• 2,970 lane-miles of highway construction no longer needed.
• Five runways and 90 gates at airports
• Annual Energy/oil consumption saved
• 6 – 12 million barrels per day
• Annual Air Pollution avoided
• 3.4 – 5.5 million tons of carbon emissions
• 730 tons of PM10
• 1,095 tons of PM2.5
• 3,650 tons of NOx
• 2,190 tons of TOG

Employment

• 168,000 job-years during construction
• 450,000 permanent jobs created from economic effect.

Access to Service

• Major cities in California will be served through downtown intermodal terminals, integrated in the city and region’s public transportation systems.

California happens to be the most recent EIS that FRA has completed on high-speed rail and is used as an illustrative example and should not be construed as an indication we favor one project over another. Such benefits can be realized from proposed high-speed rail projects across the country.

High-Speed Rail – the Challenges

While the potential for high-speed rail is great, so too are the challenges we face in delivering on that potential. FRA sees a number of pressing challenges in developing a successful high-speed rail program:

Safety

FRA’s first and foremost mission is Safety. If high-speed rail is to be successful, it must be safe. Newton’s second law of motion, that force equals mass times acceleration (f=ma) has significant implications for the safety of high-speed rail. When things go wrong at high speed, a derailment as an example, the repercussions can be very significant. Many point to the strong safety record of foreign systems operating primarily on purpose-built infrastructure to draw a conclusion that high-speed rail is inherently safe. That is just not the case. Safety comes from superior design, superior manufacturing, superior operating practices, superior maintenance and above all superior vigilance. At FRA, we call this a strong safety culture. This will be particularly needed in the U.S. where, in most instances, high-speed rail will not begin operations on dedicated right-of-way and infrastructure. Instead, most proposed systems will involve the use of rights-of-way and perhaps infrastructure owned and operated by America’s freight railroads. The co-location of high-speed rail and freight operations raises significant safety issues, not the least of which is determining what point high-speed passenger rail operations need to be separated from freight rail and the nature of that separation. Ultimately this will likely not be a “one size fits all” type determination but reflect such issues as volume of freight and passenger traffic, train, infrastructure condition, etc.

Capability of the States

A handful of States have been actively engaged in railroad issues for many years. As an example, if you go on the North Carolina DOT website you will see a rail bureau with 60 positions. Unfortunately, States with a strong and experienced rail-oriented institutional structure capable of undertaking the planning, developing the complex relationships, and implementing a complex rail improvement program are the exception rather than the rule. This is understandable. Up until just recently, the Federal role in passenger rail investment was overwhelmingly a bi-polar relationship between FRA and Amtrak. Until enactment of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act last October, there was no statutory role for States in the planning and implementation of intercity passenger rail except for the occasional one-off grant contained in FRA’s annual appropriation. Until February of this year, there was no real funding to go with this authorization. There is now a significant and pressing need to help the States develop and maintain the internal staff resources and capabilities to oversee the management of planning and program implementation of high-speed rail and to be effective negotiators and partners with the various stakeholders that will be essential to successful implementation. Over time, States have developed such resources for the highway and transit programs but rail is sufficiently different that it will take time and effort for many States to develop these skills for rail.

The Status of Planning

The Recovery Act has provided a stark contrast between the established highway and transit programs and the new high-speed rail initiative. States have a well established pipeline of highway and transit projects that have undergone years of planning, design and environmental review. Thus, when the opportunities were offered by the Recovery Act for additional funding, the States were able to turn to a list of highway and transit projects. While some States had undertaken planning and had some projects that could begin in the short-term, most States had not undertaken the development of a detailed service development plan with the accompanying service, or Tier 1 documentation required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the larger development of a high-speed rail corridor. Again this is understandable. While the surface transportation legislation has over the last several decades provided States and regions funding for planning, this planning has been primarily focused on those programs – highway and transit – that offered the potential of a Federal funding partner at the end of the planning process. The States that are better prepared today are those that decided that improved passenger rail was so important to meeting the State’s future mobility needs that they invested substantial State funding in the planning for these new services. The challenge we face with the advent of the high-speed rail program is that there are many States playing catch-up. How can we bring them up to the point that they have a realistic high-speed program plan and implementation strategy so that they too can have the pipeline of rail projects like they have for other forms of transportation?

Freight Railroad Partnerships

America’s freight railroad system is the envy of the world. The Obama Administration is committed to building a world class high-speed intercity passenger rail system but we will not do that at the expense of degrading our world class freight rail system. Until just a couple of years ago, America’s freight railroads were hauling record levels of freight traffic on a system substantially smaller than half a century ago. In a number of critical areas, bottlenecks in rail infrastructure were creating congestion in freight movements. And, as this Subcommittee is well aware, the ability of Amtrak to maintain an on-time reliable service over this intensely used freight system left much to be desired. On a rail infrastructure designed primarily for freight train movements, fast passenger trains can use up more capacity than if those trains were replaced by freight trains. The challenge that we face is how to develop the infrastructure that permits emerging high-speed rail and freight rail to not only co-exist but to find the synergy to keep both world class. This will require a new level of partnerships between the freight railroads and the State promoters of high-speed rail. Several States have recognized the growing benefits that accrue from investment in privately-owned rights-of-way and infrastructure. For many States used to solely investing in publicly owned infrastructure, however, the shift to investing public funds in privately-owned assets may be a new and challenging experience.

The Intellectual Infrastructure

Once the rail industry was a major driving force of the U.S. economy. It employed thousands of planners, engineers and other experts in railroad engineering and sciences. After World War II, as the railroads first slipped into the financial abyss of the 1960s and 1970s and then went through a recovery period by slimming down, the demand for engineers and planners with rail expertise plummeted. A substantial percentage of the experienced people in these professions are approaching retirement. A major challenge that we face today at the advent of the new high-speed rail program is rebuilding this intellectual infrastructure in such diverse areas as track design, signal engineering, track-train dynamics, etc. This will require a new partnership among the Federal and State DOTs, the larger rail industry and the academic community.

Sustainability and Managing Expectations

There have been many efforts to promote development of high-speed rail over the years. Indeed, one of the entities that were merged in 1967 to form the Federal Railroad Administration was the Office of High-Speed Ground Transportation that had been established in the Department of Commerce. To date, however, with a very few notable exceptions, these efforts have not been successful. Secretary LaHood and I believe that if we spend the $8 billion in Recovery Act funds really well on terrific projects that produce real results but the program meets the fate of the previous efforts and does not continue, then we have not been successful. The challenge for us – the Administration and the Congress – is to find a way to make this program sustainable. The model I like to point to is the model developed by President Eisenhower and the Congress of the mid-1950s that led to the successful development of the National System of Interstate and Defense highways – a program that took over four decades to complete.

An integral part of developing a sustainable program will be managing expectations. The interest by the States in the high-speed program far exceeds the funds available today, or next year or over the next five years. But this was true of the Interstate Highway program at its beginning as well. The public support for the program did not wane, in part because our citizens could both see early successes and they knew that eventually the Interstate system would serve them as well. Of all of our challenges, this may be the most important to address.

What FRA is Doing to Make High-Speed Rail a Reality

This past June I had the opportunity to meet with the Subcommittee and review FRA’s progress in implementing the Recovery Act including the “standing up” of the high-speed rail program. At that time I was able to report that we had met the deadlines set in the Recovery Act and published the Obama Administration’s Vision for High-Speed Rail in America (April 2009) and High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program Notice of Funding Availability, Issuance of Interim Program Guidance (June 2009). Both documents are available on FRA’s website: www.FRA.DOT.GOV.

On August 24, we received applications for projects that are “ready to go”, including some projects for preliminary engineering and environmental review, and would be funded from the funds made available under the Recovery Act; projects for high-speed intercity passenger rail planning funded from FRA’s FY 2009 appropriation; and projects for capital improvements funded from FRA’s FY 2009 appropriation. There were a total of 214 applications received, representing projects proposed in 34 States and totaling approximately $7 billion. Those projects have been through a very intense period of first level reviews by staff of FRA along with volunteers from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RIITA) to whom we are grateful for their help. The results of these reviews are presently being evaluated at the senior leadership levels of FRA and the Department.

On September 16 we received expressions of interest for private sector participation in the development of high-speed intercity passenger service pursuant to a notice FRA published last December to implement the provisions of Section 502 of the PRIIA. These applications are currently under review, consistent with the statutory requirement that initial reviews be completed by the Department by mid-November.

On October 2, we received applications for what will amount to commitments to develop specific high-speed rail corridors. Our preliminary analysis shows that we received 45 applications representing 24 States totaling approximately $50 billion. FRA is currently undertaking a triage of these applications to eliminate duplicates and ineligible applicants and projects. Our preliminary review shows that the numbers presented above should be close to the final. Detailed review of applications by panels of FRA staff and volunteers from other modes of the Department will begin in earnest next week.

Our overriding goal in evaluating these applications is the development of a sustainable and truly national high-speed intercity passenger rail investment program. Due to the overwhelming response, our need to assure coordination among the various FRA programs and between the FRA programs and the Tiger Grant program being managed in the Secretary’s immediate office, we will be announcing all awards this winter. Our selections will be merit based and reflect President Obama’s vision to remake America’s transportation landscape.

FRA is also moving forward to addressing the other challenges important to developing a sustainable high-speed intercity passenger rail investment program.

Safety: FRA has recently made available for comment a draft High-Speed Passenger Rail Safety Strategy which is appended to this testimony. The goal of this strategy is to lay out how FRA will: establish safety standards and program guidance for high-speed rail; apply a system safety approach to address safety concerns on specific rail lines; and, ensure that railroads involved in passenger train operations can effectively and efficiently manage train emergencies. This strategy endeavors to achieve uniformly safe rail passenger service, regardless of speed.

Capability of the States: FRA is lucky to have someone like Karen Rae, who has had a long and distinguished career in transportation program management in several States, to play a leadership role in the design of the new high-speed program. Under her leadership we have engaged the States early and often and have committed to a continuing effort on the part of FRA in developing and enhancing the ability of the States to get involved in high-speed rail. Attached to my statement are two unsolicited statements concerning FRA’s outreach activities. I would take particular note of the statement from the chair of the Capitol Corridor (CA) Joint Power Authority that says “We know of no other federal agency that has asked its customers (the states and intercity passenger rail agencies) for comments, suggestions and even criticisms on the HSIPR Program funding applications and award criteria BEFORE (emphasis in original) any awards were made or applications received. This is an excellent example of how government should work ….”

Status of Planning: FRA has on our website a “how to” manual for the development of service development or transportation investment plans. This is based upon FRA’s previous experience in the planning of specific corridors in which all interested parties came to the table to work cooperatively in identifying investment needs. While FRA cannot and should not plan every corridor, we are a resource to facilitate the development of processes that can lead to successful completion of corridor wide service development plan and related environmental documents.

Freight Railroads: Freight railroads will be key to the successful development of high-speed intercity passenger rail in many corridors. Indeed, FRA’s grant guidance requires that applications demonstrate the stakeholders’ commitments, including that of the host railroad/infrastructure owner, to advance the high-speed intercity passenger rail program. FRA believes that there are opportunities to develop constructive partnerships between the freight railroads and States that can address areas of common interest including statutory requirements for positive train control and the safety at highway rail grade crossings. By placing a premium on such cooperative relationships FRA believes that we can facilitate their development. We also see our safety and research activities as complementary parts of this effort.

Intellectual Infrastructure: FRA is very concerned that this Nation has the people that can deliver on a successful high-speed rail program for the foreseeable future. As part of the President’s FY 2010 budget request, FRA proposed that 1% of the high-speed intercity passenger rail funds be available for research. Our first and highest priority for the use of these funds is the establishment of the Rail Cooperative Research Program (RCRP) at the Transportation Research Board of the National Academy of Sciences. The RCRP was authorized in PRIIA as a necessary counterpart to the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). These programs have helped these modes of transportation develop the corps of trained professionals they rely on. We are also exploring other opportunities of using research, including the use of University Transportation Centers managed by RITA to help in this effort.

FRA’s short term needs

As I said in a hearing before you this past June, FRA’s financial assistance staff today is sized for that earlier, quieter era. Even though the PRIIA added a number of responsibilities in the areas of passenger rail and financial assistance to FRA, that Act did not authorize an expansion of FRA’s financial assistance staff. That they have produced high quality products in response to the aggressive schedule in the Recovery Act, is a testament to knowledge, skill and dedication of that small staff. Having said that, we cannot successfully manage the high-speed rail program envisioned by the President and implement the provisions of PRIIA and undertake our other new and expanded financial assistance functions contained in other recent Acts with the present levels of staff and other resources. The President’s FY 2010 budget begins to address FRA’s financial assistance staff and resource needs. I urge members of this Committee to support this request. I will also note that successful implementation of the Recovery Act including oversight of the expenditure of $8 billion, will require that the amount of these funds available for use by the Secretary in project oversight be consistent with the 1% authorized in 49 U.S.C. 24403(b)(1) and not the one quarter of one percent authorized in the Recovery Act.

Conclusion

The FRA of two years from now will be a significantly different agency than you see today. Safety will always be our most important mission, but we will also be playing a leading role in making the investments that position this country’s transportation system for the future. I am incredibly proud to be at FRA today and have an opportunity to lead the dedicated team at FRA through this transformation.

#

[1] Available on the CAHSR website at CAHighSpeed Rail.ca.

STATEMENT OF

REAR ADMIRAL JAMES HELIS,
US MARITIME SERVICE SUPERINTENDENT
UNITED STATE MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
UNITED STATES SENATE

HEARING ON

PREVENTING SEXUAL ASSAULT AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT
THE UNITED STATES MERCHANT MARINE ACADEMY

April 5, 2017

Good morning, Chairman Collins, Ranking Member Reed and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the invitation to testify on the state of the United States Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA or Academy).

The mission of the Academy is to educate and graduate licensed merchant mariners and leaders of exemplary character who will serve America’s marine transportation and defense needs in peace and war. Each year the Academy graduates highly-qualified U.S Coast Guard (USCG) credentialed mariners committed to serving the Nation as officers in the Armed Forces and the Merchant Marine.

The Academy provides a comprehensive four-year leadership development experience.  All graduating Midshipmen will receive a Bachelor of Science degree, a USCG-issued Merchant Marine officer’s license, and a commission in an Active or Reserve Component of one of the Armed Forces.  They can meet their service obligation in one of two ways: twenty to twenty- five percent will choose to serve five years on Active Duty as an officer in any branch of the Armed Forces, while the remaining majority of the class will sail for five years as a Merchant Marine officer on US-flagged commercial ships or with a Federal agency, which can include the Military Sealift Command or the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration.

The Academy’s mission begins with the men and women who pass through its gates in late June to begin their four-year journey.  The Academy has a highly competitive and selective admissions process. Candidates must have a strong academic record and demonstrate superior character and leadership potential through their participation in co-curricular activities, athletics, and community service.  They must meet rigorous medical and physical fitness qualifications for military service.  And they must receive a nomination from a Member of Congress or qualify for one of fifty direct appointments by the Secretary of Transportation by demonstrating qualities deemed to be of special value to the Academy.

I believe that enhancing the diversity of the Regiment of Midshipmen will strengthen our efforts to improving the campus culture, which in turn is critical to eliminating sexual assault, sexual harassment, and other coercive and unacceptable behaviors.  Over the past six years the quality and diversity of the incoming classes has improved considerably.  Comparing the classes of 2014 and 2020, the most recently admitted, we saw the mean score on the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) improve from 1215 to 1280. The percentage of women admitted rose from 12.9 percent to 19.7 percent.   Admission of individuals who represent racial minorities similarly rose from 15.2 percent to 24 percent.  Other indicators of the quality of our incoming candidates include class rank and grade point average, as well as candidates who have held key leadership positions in student government, athletics, and co-curricular and community activities.  We are pleased with the progress we are making and expect to see continued improvements in the quality and diversity of future classes.

My top strategic priorities for the Academy are preventing sexual assault and sexual harassment and other coercive behaviors, reaccreditation by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), continuing our work to modernize and renovate campus infrastructure and facilities, and strengthening Midshipmen leadership development.  I will focus my testimony today on sexual assault and harassment prevention and reaccreditation.

Sexual assault and sexual harassment are unacceptable behaviors that have no place at any institution of higher education, especially one committed to developing our Nation’s future leaders.  I am committed to the elimination of sexual assault and harassment on our campus and, until we reach that goal, improving the environment at the Academy so that victims are comfortable reporting all incidents and confident that Academy personnel will respond appropriately to reported incidents.   The steps we have taken since 2012 to address sexual assault and harassment are included in our annual reports to Congress. We welcomed an evaluation of our programs by the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Inspector General in FY 2013 and FY 2014, which provided another set of eyes on our programs and useful recommendations which we have implemented.  In addition, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, P.L. 114-328, requires the DOT Inspector General to report, by March 31, 2018, on the effectiveness of the sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention and response program (SAPR) at the Academy. The Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) continues to administer the Service Academy Gender Relations (SAGR) Survey in even numbered years, and conducts focus groups with Midshipmen, staff and faculty in odd-numbered years as they do for the other four Federal Service Academies.  Additionally, the results of the study commissioned by the Department of Transportation in 2016 on the Academy culture have been reviewed, and we are incorporating the suggestions across campus.

At the Academy, we established a multi-disciplinary Sexual Assault Review Board (SARB), which meets monthly, to provide executive oversight and procedural guidance for the SAPR program by reviewing ways to improve processes, system accountability and victim access to quality services.  The SARB has implemented standard operating procedures for Investigating an Unrestricted Report of Sexual Assault and Processing a Restricted (confidential) Report of Sexual Assault, and Maintenance of Restricted and Unrestricted Reports.

In FY 2012, USMMA hired its first Sexual Assault Response Coordinator (SARC).  The SARC resides at the Academy, and is available to Midshipmen 24/7 through a victim hotline.  Victims are provided with information and referrals, and assistance in obtaining any necessary medical or mental health treatment at the Academy or at an appropriate facility in the local community and/or victim advocacy agency.  Victims have access to confidential (restricted) reporting through the SARC, Health Clinic counseling staff, the Chaplain and a small number of specially trained staff and faculty victim advocates.  The Academy works closely with the local victim advocacy agency to provide an additional confidential reporting option.  A victim may also make an unrestricted report, which will result in the initiation of a criminal and administrative investigation.

The SARC, working with the Superintendent, Commandant and Dean of Academics, has significantly improved training across the Academy aimed at the prevention of sexual assault and sexual harassment.  Faculty and staff receive mandatory training annually.  Incoming Midshipmen receive mandatory training in the first three weeks in small group settings (20-25 midshipmen per training) covering the topics of sexual assault, sexual harassment, dating violence, stalking, and bystander intervention.  Beginning with the Class of 2019, we increased training to three hours from the one hour that previous classes received. The SARC and Commandant continue to provide quarterly training throughout each Midshipman’s academic career in both small and large group settings.  The SARC and the Department of Professional Development and Career Services provide special training sessions prior to departure for Sea Year (sophomores spend four months at sea and juniors spend eight months at sea). Training focuses on where to seek help or assistance (captain, designated person ashore, SARC’s 24/7 hotline), situational awareness, risk reduction, and bystander intervention.  In 2016, the Academy adopted the Green Dot Bystander Intervention Program, which teaches students to identify volatile situations in which there could be the possibility of sexual violence and to defuse those situations through diversion or distraction.  In addition, the SARB recently decided to increase our training on sexual assault and proper conduct for Midshipmen prior to their departure for sea training this summer.

Our survey results since 2012 indicate that Midshipmen have much better awareness and understanding of sexual assault and sexual harassment, and appreciate the commitment of everyone from the Secretary of Transportation through MARAD, the Academy’s senior leadership, and Midshipmen Regimental officers to eliminate this scourge from the Academy. We are extremely disappointed that we are not seeing a decrease in incidents in the survey results.  In 2016, we redoubled our efforts to address this problem.

As a first step, we began drilling down into the available data and feedback from the Advisory Board and our own conversations with Midshipmen.  It became clear to me that we needed to more closely examine the Sea Year and its potential effects, as that is the component of our program that sets USMMA apart from the other federal service academies. MSCHE affirmed this concern in their report last year, highlighting a need for the USMMA to address the issues of sexual assault and harassment at sea and on campus. After further analysis and discussion among the senior leadership at USMMA, MARAD, and DOT, as MARAD Executive Director Joel Szabat discussed in his testimony, former Secretary Foxx decided to stand down sea year training until procedures were in place to better assure a safe climate for our Midshipmen. The combined efforts of USMMA, MARAD, DOT, and industry and labor resulted in the certification process described by Mr. Szabat, which we have now implemented.

In addition to the sea year stand down, Secretary Foxx directed a deep dive into USMMA culture to identify other factors that could be contributing to our challenges with sexual assault and harassment and other unacceptable behaviors.  The study has provided useful analysis that will inform our way forward.

While we have implemented policies and programs based on best practices adopted in the military and higher education, we have not seen the results we desire or expect. The core issue we must address—that we are now addressing—is the very culture of USMMA. We must take actions to transform the USMMA culture such that every Midshipman is respected, valued, and can develop to her or his fullest potential to serve the Nation as a leader of exemplary character. The entire USMMA community must have zero tolerance for sexual assault and sexual harassment, retaliation, bullying, hazing, coercion, victim blaming, and alcohol misuse/abuse. Leadership, staff, faculty, and Midshipmen must all unite to eliminate this behavior and support victims, and hold those who violate Academy core values and standards accountable for their actions, when incidents take place.

We are hiring two Victim Advocate-Educators who will assist the SAPRO director in planning and executing training and providing victim services. We have also added a sea year coordinator to the SAPRO.

Additional steps we have taken over the past six months include a reintegration program for Midshipmen when they return from sea and the addition of mandatory online interactive sexual assault and alcohol abuse prevention training.  A special team made up of staff, faculty, and Midshipmen participated in a cultural change conference at the US Air Force Academy in February 2017 and are now drafting a comprehensive campaign plan to transform USMMA culture.  The Deputy Superintendent led an effort which has produced a comprehensive and integrated Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Framework.   A committee also has begun work to overhaul sea year policies and all training in preparation for sea year.

In addition to the efforts to improve the Sea Year training experience, the USMMA has developed a comprehensive plan to reduce sexual assault and sexual harassment on campus. The USMMA Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program has significantly improved training across the Academy aimed at the prevention of sexual assault and sexual harassment, including online prevention training, case studies, videos, social media, professional speakers and small groups.  Actions taken by the USMMA have included installation of new emergency call boxes and security cameras, improvement of the security guard force, implementation of a 24/7 hotline for reporting inappropriate behaviors, and victim assistance in obtaining medical or mental health treatment. Efforts will continue to improve upon the SAPR Program as the USMMA implements recommendations from the cultural audit and responds to feedback from Midshipmen.

The Academy’s work to improve sexual assault and sexual harassment prevention and response addresses one of the recommendations made by MSCHE, which accredits the Academy’s academic degrees.  In June 2016, MSCHE placed USMMA in a warning status because USMMA was not meeting five of MSCHE’s fourteen standards of accreditation.  We are presently taking action to meet the requirements identified by MSCHE to be granted full accreditation. Actions taken over the past year include MARAD’s establishment of the Maritime Education and Training Executive Review Board (METERB), which serves as a formal governing and oversight body for USMMA; requesting and receiving relief from Congressional legislation constraining the Academy’s budget during the interim Continuing Resolution period; developing templates for budget development and tools for linking resources with the Strategic Plan; filling key job positions and requesting that MARAD return direct reporting authority for human resources, financial management, and procurement back to the Academy; ensuring the safety of Midshipmen from sexual assault and sexual harassment by initiating a culture change campaign; and ensuring Midshipmen safety at sea by vetting maritime companies through MARAD’s Shipboard Climate Compliance Team to determine if they have adequate policies and procedures in place to prevent sexual assault and harassment from happening, and are ready to respond if an incident does occur.

Statement of

Joseph C. Szabo
Administrator
Federal Railroad Administration

To

The Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety and Security
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate

June 23, 2009

Chairman Lautenberg, Senator Thune, and members of the Subcommittee: I am honored to appear before you today on behalf of President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Secretary of Transportation LaHood, to discuss one of our Administration’s most important initiatives – the development of high-speed rail transportation in America. To supplement this testimony, I wish to incorporate by reference two recent publications of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA): Vision for High-Speed Rail in America (April 2009) and High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program Notice of Funding Availability, Issuance of Interim Program Guidance. (June 2009). Both documents are available on FRA’s website: www.FRA.DOT.GOV.

America faces a new set of transportation challenges - creating a foundation for economic growth in a more complex global economy, promoting energy independence and efficiency, addressing global climate change and environmental quality, and fostering livable communities connected by safe and efficient modes of travel. The existing transportation system requires significant investment simply to rebuild and maintain critical infrastructure and modernize aging technologies. Meeting our 21^st century challenges will require new transportation solutions as well.

The Obama Administration believes that our transportation investment strategy must address several strategic goals in the coming years:

• Ensure safe and efficient transportation choices. Promote the safest possible movement of goods and people, and optimize the use of existing and new transportation infrastructure.
• Build a foundation for economic competiveness. Lay the groundwork for near-term and ongoing economic growth by facilitating efficient movement of people and goods, while renewing critical domestic manufacturing and supply industries.
• Promote energy efficiency and environmental quality. Reinforce efforts to foster energy independence and renewable energy, and reduce pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.
• Support interconnected livable communities. Improve quality of life in local communities by promoting affordable, convenient, and sustainable housing, energy, and transportation options.

A New Transportation Vision. President Obama proposes to help address the Nation’s transportation challenges by investing in an efficient, high-speed passenger rail network of 100-600 mile intercity corridors that connect communities across America. High-speed intercity passenger rail (HSIPR) is well positioned to address many of the nation’s strategic transportation goals:

Safe and efficient transportation options. Rail is a cost-effective means for serving transportation needs in congested intercity corridors. In many cases, modest investment on existing rights-of-way can result in HSIPR service with highly competitive trip times, while also providing ancillary benefits to energy-efficient freight rail service. HSIPR also has a strong track record of safety in the United States and overseas. In Japan, for instance, the Tokaido Shinkansen trains have operated without a derailment or collision since the inception of operations in 1964.

Foundation for economic competitiveness. America’s transportation system is the lifeblood of the economy. Providing a robust rail network can help serve the needs of national and regional commerce in a cost-effective, resource-efficient manner, by offering travelers and freight convenient access to economic centers. Moreover, investments in HSIPR will not only generate high-skilled construction and operation jobs, but it can potentially also provide a steady market for revitalized domestic industries producing such essential components as rail, control systems, locomotives, and passenger cars.

Energy efficiency and environment quality. Rail is already among the cleanest and most energy-efficient of the passenger transportation modes. A future HSIPR network using new clean diesel and electric power can further enhance rail’s advantages.

Interconnected livable communities. Rail transport has generally been associated with “smart growth” because it can foster higher-density development than has typically been associated with highways and airports. Rail is uniquely capable of providing both high-speed intercity transportation and its own efficient local access and egress system. For example, in the Boston Region, Amtrak’s Acela serves two downtown stations connected to public transit – South Station and Back Bay – as well as a suburban station near Route 128. Yet just a few miles down the line to the west, Acela achieves speeds up to 150 miles per hour.

Developing a comprehensive high-speed intercity passenger rail network will require a long-term commitment at both the Federal and State levels. The President proposes to jump-start the process with the $8 billion down payment provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) and a high-speed rail grant program of $1 billion per year (proposed in his fiscal year (FY) 2010 budget).

A major reshaping of the Nation’s transportation system is not without significant challenges. After decades of relatively modes investment in passenger rail, the United States has a dwindling pool of expertise in the field and a lack of manufacturing capacity. Federal and State Governments face a difficult fiscal environment in which to balance critical investments priorities, and many will have to ramp up their program management infrastructure. The country’s success in creating a sustainable transportation future, however, demands that we work to overcome these challenges through strong new partnerships among State and local governments, railroads, manufacturers, and other stakeholders, along with the renewed Federal commitment proposed here.

The near-term investment strategy seeks to:

• Advance new express high-speed corridor services (operating speeds above 150 mph on primarily dedicated track) in select corridors of 200-600 miles.
• Develop emerging and regional high-speed corridor services (operating speeds up to 90–110 mph and 110-150 mph respectively on shared and dedicated track) in corridors of 100-500 miles.
• Upgrade reliability and service on conventional intercity rail services (operating speeds up to 79-90 mph).

This near-term strategy emphasizes making investments that yield tangible results within the next several years, while also creating a “pipeline” that enables ongoing corridor development.

Proposed Funding Approach. In order to meet the goals of the Recovery Act while initiating a transformational new program, we propose to advance four funding “tracks”:  

• Projects. Provide grants to complete individual projects that are “ready to go” with preliminary engineering and environmental work completed.
• Corridor programs. Enter into cooperative agreements to develop entire phases or geographic sections of corridor programs that have completed corridor plans and service level environmental documentation, and have a prioritized list of projects to meet the corridor objectives; this approach would involve additional Federal oversight and support.
• Planning. Enter into cooperative agreements for planning activities using FY 2009 appropriations funds, in order to create the corridor program and project pipeline need to fully develop a high-speed rail network.
• FY 2009 Appropriations Funded Projects. As an alternative for projects that would otherwise fit under Track 1, but for State applicants offering at least a 50 percent non-Federal share of total project financing, enter into grants with more simplified terms, including more time to complete the project, than required under Track 1.

As President Obama outlined in his March 20, 2009, memorandum, Ensuring Responsible Spending of Recovery Act Funds, program evaluation will be based on “transparent, merit-based selection criteria.” Criteria will include:

• Public Benefits. The extent to which the project or corridor program provides specific, measurable, achievable benefits in a timely and cost-effective manner, including: (1) contributing to economic recovery efforts, (2) advancing strategic transportation goals (outlined above), and (3) furthering other passenger rail goals articulated in the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 (PRIIA).
• Risk Mitigation. The extent to which the project or corridor program addresses critical success factors, including: (1) fiscal and institutional capacity to carry out projects, (2) realistic financial plans for covering capital and operating costs, (3) formal commitments from key stakeholders (e.g., railroads and participating States), and (4) adequate project management oversight experience and procedures.

As provided for in the Recovery Act and PRIIA, the universe of potential applicants is limited to States, groups of States, and under some circumstances, Amtrak. The focus on State-based passenger rail investment decisions is new for FRA. It is abundantly clear that success, which I take to mean a sustainable program delivering true transportation benefits in a cost-effective, environmentally positive and energy efficient manner, can only be achieved through the development of new partnerships between FRA and the tates and regions.

Finally, the President’s high-speed rail initiative will transform FRA as an agency in many ways. In the more than 25 years that I have known of FRA, it has been a safety agency that also gave Amtrak its annual grant. In my mind, safety will always be FRA’s top priority. But we now have a new, and very important financial assistance mission with a new set of partners and stakeholders. While high-speed rail is an important part of this new mission, so too are our expanded relationship with Amtrak, the new grant programs authorized over the last couple of years and our credit assistance program.

FRA’s financial assistance staff today is sized for that earlier, quieter era. Even though PRIIA added a number of responsibilities in the areas of passenger rail and financial assistance to FRA’s mission, that Act did not authorize an expansion of FRA’s financial assistance staff. That they have produced high quality products in response to the aggressive schedule in the Recovery Act is a testament to the knowledge, skill and dedication of that small staff. Having said that, we cannot successfully manage the high-speed rail program envisioned by the President and implement the provisions of PRIIA and undertake our other new and expanded financial assistance functions contained in other recent Acts with the present levels of staff and other resources. The President’s FY 2010 budget begins to address FRA’s financial assistance staff and resource needs. I urge members of this Committee to support this request. I will also note that successful implementation of the Recovery Act, including oversight of the expenditure of $8 billion, will require that the amount of these funds available for use by the Secretary in project oversight be consistent with the 1% authorized in 49 U.S.C. 24403(b)(1) and not the one quarter of one percent authorized in the Recovery Act.

In closing, let me restate the obvious, these are exciting times at FRA and the Department of Transportation. Long-serving staff at FRA have told me that they have never before seen the level of Administration support for rail programs that they see today from President Obama, Vice President Biden and Secretary LaHood. But if our efforts are to be successful, we will need Congressional support too. I look forward to working with the members of the Congress in general and this Committee in particular to help this nation reap the numerous benefits offered by high-speed rail.

#

STATEMENT OF

JOEL SZABAT
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR TRANSPORTATION POLICY
U.S DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONTRACTING AND TECHNOLOGY
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 12, 2009

Ensuring Stimulus Contracts for Small and Veteran-Owned Businesses

Chairman Nye, Ranking Member Schock, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting the U. S. Department of Transportation (DOT) here today to discuss how small businesses may benefit from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

On February 17^th, 2009 President Obama signed the ARRA appropriating $48.1 billion to the Department of Transportation. Of that amount, DOT has already apportioned $26.6 billion in highway funds, and $7.5 billion in transit money, to states and local transit agencies. This week we are releasing another $2.4 billion in grants to airports and Amtrak.

A critical part of this effort is to apportion funds to the states and other DOT recipients promptly and efficiently so jobs can be created to stimulate economic activity at the state and local levels. As part of our commitment, and under the leadership of Secretary LaHood, in less than three weeks, some contracts funded through ARRA have been awarded, and work is underway.

Under two separate and distinct programs within DOT, there are contracting and subcontracting opportunities for small and disadvantaged businesses. Opportunities are available under our federal financial assistance to state and local transportation agencies (formula and other grant funds) via the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program and through DOT’s direct contracting process (small business program).

Small Business Strategy -- Direct Contracting

Small businesses are the backbone of our economy, employing about half of all private sector employees and paying for nearly 45% of the total U.S. private payroll. DOT has developed a successful program designed to increase the number of federal competitively awarded contracts to small businesses by maximizing opportunities and promoting the use of small businesses in DOT contracts.

DOT is a leader in Federal Government procurement. It has developed a culture that has demonstrated its commitment to small and disadvantaged businesses. In 2008, DOT spent $5.1 billion in direct contracting, of which over $1.7 billion went to small, women-owned, veterans, service disabled veterans and disadvantaged businesses.

The DOT Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization (DOT/OSDBU) strategy has shown significant success. The DOT small business program is implemented under the leadership of the OSDBU and encompasses all small businesses, including small and disadvantaged, women-owned, veteran-owned, service-disabled veteran-owned, and Historically Underutilized Business Zone certified firms.

The program is supported at the highest level of the organization and reflected in the DOT strategic and performance plans. The Transportation Acquisition Manual and the Transportation Acquisition Regulations reinforce written policies and procedures for use by the DOT Operating Administrations (OAs) to implement small business contracting activities.  Each OA has at least one small business specialist to assist small businesses seeking contracting opportunities with DOT.

Small Business Strategy -- Formula Funds

The DBE program, enacted in 1983 as part of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982, was designed as a vehicle to increase the participation by minority business enterprises in federally assisted state and local contracts. Three major DOT operating administrations are involved in the DBE program: the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Transit Administration.

In Fiscal Year 2008, DOT distributed more than $40 billion in formula and other grant funds, which resulted in over $30 billion in contracting and subcontracting opportunities for small and disadvantaged businesses. DBEs were awarded $3.3 billion in contracts, representing over 11% of the total DOT assisted contracting.

The DOT is working together with the states to monitor the funds distributed under ARRA. A number of reporting tools are being developed in accordance with the Recovery Act to meet the various requirements in the legislation, including the number of jobs created. In addition, OSDBU intends to coordinate the development of a web based reporting tool to allow recipients to report DBE achievements into a centralized database.  This will allow DOT to better assess the impact of ARRA and monitor DBE awards or commitments and payments.

Implementation of Recovery Act

DOT will distribute about $35 billion in ARRA appropriated infrastructure funds, which are subject to the same DBE program requirements as non-ARRA formula funded projects. DOT recently issued guidance to program administrators suggesting steps to take to mobilize underutilized DBE capacity that may be needed to meet increased demand fueled by the ARRA. . States, airports and transit agencies must meet the same DBE requirements for ARRA resources as they do for normal formula funded programs. Based on our history with existing programs, we expect the ARRA to generate nearly $3 billion in additional contracting and subcontracting opportunities for DBEs.

Included in the Recovery Act is $20 million for DBE bonding assistance for transportation projects that are specifically funded through ARRA.

To disseminate information about the DBE bonding assistance program, DOT OSDBU will develop an in-house outreach campaign at the state and local level to promote and distribute information related to this program. This campaign will be a joint effort between DOT and state DOTs, Office of Civil Rights at the state and local levels, and other government agencies such as Small Business Administration, Minority Business Development Agency, and others. Part of our communication effort to disseminate information to small business will be coordinated through the nine Small Business Transportation Resource Centers (SBTRCs). OSDBU has established cooperative agreements with business organizations across the country to assist small businesses.

In the context of the DBE program, only firms certified as DBE under Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations parts 26 (49 CFR 26)  are counted. DOT recently issued guidance to program administrators reemphasizing the applicability of the DBE program to any additional funding received under ARRA.

DOT also had issued guidance regarding the eligibility of service disabled veteran owned business and encouraging their participation in the DBE program. DOT is considering expanding its guidance regarding the use of the small business set-aside as it pertains to the DBE program.

Because small businesses are critical in stimulating economic growth and creating jobs,  DOT encourages small business participation in all its grants. Recipients will be required to report small business participation through special ARRA reporting vehicles.

As part of the implementing guidance provided to the OAs for all ARRA procurement actions, DOT’s Senior Procurement Executive issued specific guidance instructing the OAs to ensure maximum opportunities for small businesses to compete in contracts resulting from the ARRA.

DOT actively reaches out to the small business community. For example, in Fiscal Year 2008 DOT OSDBU participated in more than 11 Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) related events and actively reached out to SDVOSB organizations to provide a supportive environment for them to present their capabilities to DOT and to learn about contract and subcontracting opportunities. DOT OSDBU actively participated in the National Veterans Conference sponsored by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to provide technical assistance and workshops to SDVOSB and veteran owned business on how to market their products and services to federal agencies, specifically to DOT. We continued to encourage the use of SDVOSB set-asides in DOT contracts through the small business review process and individual interaction with procurement officials. The DOT/OSDBU strategy has shown significant success.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I will be happy to answer any questions.

STATEMENT OF

PETER M. ROGOFF, ADMINISTRATOR
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

HEARING ON

PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING THE
AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009

June 25, 2009

Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) progress in implementing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act). In the 16 weeks since this hallmark legislation was enacted, FTA has been working hard to deliver funding to support the economic recovery, build public transportation for the future, and do so expeditiously and with unprecedented transparency and accountability. Today, I want to share with the committee how Recovery Act funds have helped local communities and what FTA has been able to accomplish so far in carrying out Recovery Act mandates.

Across the nation we are seeing Recovery Act funds used to create and preserve jobs, save energy, and enrich the lives of people in communities by improving their public transportation systems, and as Secretary LaHood said, “The Recovery Act is working for America.  It is far more than a set of federal statistics.  It’s a testament to our ability to put government to work for the people, and lay the groundwork for a brighter future for all of us.” We are hearing from people about their success in putting Recovery Act dollars to work for transit in their communities.

For example, Advance Transit provides fixed route transit services in the Greater Hanover-Lebanon area in New Hampshire and Vermont.  This transit agency originally planned to move forward with only phase one of a plan to fully expand its bus maintenance and operations facility. The plan called for a three-phase build-out for maximum utilization of the lot. Upon learning of the possibility of funding under the Recovery Act, Advance Transit made plans to complete building phases one and two, which would allow it to nearly double the bus maintenance area and improve the bus operations function. A large part of the phase two project is adding energy efficiency enhancements for the building envelope, a photovoltaic array for electric production, a rainwater and snowmelt harvesting solution for its bus washing facility, and a LEED Silver Certification as a green building. Advance Transit estimates that the solar array will allow it to offset nearly 44 percent of its projected electric use. The “R” values for the building will be improved by 25 percent in the existing structure, which may be enough to offset the cost of heating the additional space. The plan calls for a complete update to the HVAC systems and the addition of computer controls to provide maximum efficiency. According to Advance Transit, Recovery Act funds will allow it to maximize cost advantages in two ways. First, combining phase one and two into a single construction project enables it to reduce costs involved in mobilization for contractors and for the tie-in costs to the existing structure. Second, the energy enhancements to the existing structure and the additional efficiency elements of the new structure will mean lower operating costs for many years to come.

Another example comes from Philadelphia where the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority or SEPTA plans to launch an ambitious make-over of regional rail stations. We learned that “more than 50 of SEPTA's 151 functioning stations are to be replaced, rebuilt, repaired, or at least repainted in the next five years. For some, it will be the first attention since they were built over a century ago.” Worth noting is the Tulpehocken and Carpenter stations where business developers would like to lease the stations because “for more than nine years, that train station has meant more than just a train station. The coffee shop there has become the heart of the community.” Recovery Act funds mean that the Tulpehocken station and its inbound passenger shelter will get $1.3 million, with the goal of converting the long-uninhabited station into an office and residential space.

Finally, in Idaho, where transit advocates have long fought to build a strong base, the Governor there has approved the use of more than $8.7 million in Recovery Act funds to put more Idahoans to work and improve rural transportation options. The Governor projects that the public transportation projects are calculated to generate or preserve approximately 155 jobs working on a range of projects including a new transit center in Victor, bike and pedestrian paths in Ponderay, and increased transit services in several communities that depend on tourism to support their economy.

Recovery Act funds are making a difference and FTA is proud to support the efforts of transit agencies across the country like ones mentioned above. We believe the Recovery Funds made available for public transportation – $8.4 Billion – created an extraordinary opportunity that FTA has executed enthusiastically in partnership with local transit authorities. The agency worked overtime to stand up the six different public transportation programs, meeting or beating statutory deadlines to make Recovery Act funds available to transit providers and States. Shortly after the Recovery Act’s passage, FTA established a standing internal workgroup comprised of Senior Executives and staff with expertise in financial, policy, planning and environmental requirements, communication, and program implementation to anticipate issues and develop guidance to our grantees. That effort produced guidance to our grantees covering a range of topics to assist them with navigating the Act’s requirements. We accomplished this through a new FTA webpage (www.fta.dot.gov/economicrecovery) that is devoted to Recovery Act issues and through the publication of guidance in the March 5, 2009 Federal Register notice, which also allocated Recovery Act formula resources. Our outreach efforts didn’t end there; we also participated in numerous webinars, attended conferences to present our Recovery Act implementation strategy, and hosted video-conference training for FTA staff to ensure a common understanding of the Act’s requirements and a consistent approach on implementation. Our collaborative efforts have paid off as FTA works with its grantees to approve grants quickly for meritorious transit projects that are “ready-to-go” and will provide long-term investments in livable communities. I want to acknowledge and express thanks for the extraordinary efforts of FTA’s career staff who have worked many long hours to ensure that grantees have the information they need to successfully apply for Recovery Act funds.

In addition to managing FTA Recovery Act resources, FTA plays an active role on the Secretary’s Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery team, or TIGER team, which coordinates and oversees the Department’s responsibilities and reports regularly to the Secretary. We also provide staff expertise to the Secretary for the $1.5 billion discretionary grants program for surface transportation infrastructure projects that will have a significant impact on the Nation, a metropolitan area, or region. Because of the potential complexity of a multi-modal grant program, FTA is proud to be part of the extensive review process for those grant proposals and we will work with the Secretary to ensure that those grants are wise investments of taxpayer dollars and awarded as expeditiously as possible to create and preserve jobs.

In fact, the collaboration between FTA and transit providers nationwide has been instrumental in keeping implementation on track. These efforts are delivering public transportation investments. Of the $8.34 billion of Recovery Act funding provided to FTA, $1.79 billion has been obligated already and another $5.72 billion in grants currently are in process for obligation in the near term. In addition, $51.3 million in Recovery Act flexible surface transportation funds have been transferred from the Federal Highway Administration to FTA for public transportation projects. These transfers reflect decisions by States and local authorities to use Recovery Act dollars available for highways or transit for transit projects in their respective locales.

FTA estimates, based on the grants that are currently in process, that approximately 4,000 new transit vehicles will be purchased or on order by this September. Many of these vehicles will help bring the Nation’s transit system closer to a state of good repair by replacing overage vehicles, which will reduce maintenance costs of our transit systems and provide cleaner and more comfortable rides to transit customers. A number of these vehicles will also go toward expanding transit service, providing more transportation choices to families in urban and rural communities across the country.

The Recovery Act sets aggressive deadlines for the obligation of transit funds. FTA has focused on delivering the funds to grantees for sound public transit investments. The Recovery Act calls for the obligation of 50 percent of transit formula dollars in specific geographic areas within 180 days of apportionment, which means by September 1, 2009. The Act requires FTA to withhold a specified portion of funds from areas that do not meet the September 1st deadline.

The September 1 deadline is 68 days away. Right now, 31 of the 204 urbanized areas and States that received urbanized area formula funds have met the 50 percent obligation requirement; ten of the 54 States, territories, and possessions that received non-urbanized area formula funds have met the requirement; and eight of the 39 urbanized areas receiving fixed guideway formula funds have met the deadline. At this time, FTA is working closely with grantees to meet the targets with sound transit investments. FTA is monitoring the obligation rates regularly, identifying problems early, communicating with grantees frequently, and solving issues that are identified.

FTA is also making solid progress on awarding Recovery Act funds for discretionary public transportation programs. The Recovery Act provided $750 million for capital investment grants, known as New Starts and Small Starts; $17 million to invest in our Tribal Transit program; and $100 million to a new program called the Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction -- also known fondly as the “TIGGER” program.

New Starts

The Recovery Act appropriated $750 Million for Capital Investment Grants.  The funds are for major capital projects eligible under the discretionary section 5309 New Starts/Small Starts program, with statutory priority given to projects already under construction or that could obligate funds within 150 days of enactment of the legislation.

FTA announced its allocation of these funds in the Federal Register on May 11, 2009, based on an analysis of construction schedules and cash flow needs of New Starts and Small Starts projects currently under construction.  In the Federal Register notice, FTA indicated that it may de-obligate and reallocate any funds that are not disbursed by May 11, 2010.

Ten of the projects awarded funds have existing Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGAs) under the New Starts program, and one project is a current Small Start. All are able to use the funds for projects under construction promptly.  The amounts allocated under the Recovery Act did not increase the total Federal investment in these FFGAs. However, the accelerated payout of the Federal New Starts commitment allowed for transit agencies to expedite local projects. In addition, the allocation approach maximized the New Starts commitment authority created by the Recovery Act. A total of $1.5 billion in New Starts and Small Starts commitment authority was created by FTA’s allocation. This has allowed FTA to make New Starts funding commitments that would have otherwise been impossible. The American people will see more, better transit projects sooner because of the Recovery Act.  

Tribal Transit

The Recovery Act set aside 2.5 percent of the funds appropriated for the Section 5311 program to be distributed to Indian Tribes under the provisions of FTA’s Tribal Transit Program.  FTA published a Federal Register notice on March 23, 2009, announcing the availability of $17 million in Recovery Act funding and specifying the unique requirements under the Recovery Act.  Tribes responded to the notice by submitting over 70 applications for funding with a total value of $55 million by the May 22, 2009, deadline.
 
FTA also published an annual Notice of Funding Availability for the FY 2009 Tribal Transit Program ($15 million) on April 29, 2009.  The annually appropriated funds can be used for operations and planning, in addition to capital assistance, while Recovery Act funds can only be used for capital assistance.  Applications for the annual program are due June 29, 2009. FTA will coordinate its review of tribal applications under the Recovery Act and the annual program to maximize the opportunities for Tribes and avoid redundant funding.  Selections under both programs will be announced in the Federal Register, we hope before the end of the fiscal year. 

TIGGER

Additionally, FTA published a Federal Register notice soliciting proposals for the $100 million in TIGGER program funds on March 24, 2009. Proposals for TIGGER program funds were also due on May 22, 2009. FTA has received 200 proposals identifying 450 possible projects and requesting over $1.56 billion in funding. FTA plans to announce successful applicants by the end of the fiscal year.

FTA has taken steps to provide effective management and oversight of these Recovery Act funds, to ensure that the funds provided by Congress are used efficiently, effectively, and to provide maximum benefit to the public. The Recovery Act provides FTA with $64.3 million in combined oversight and administrative funding to support the economic recovery effort, or approximately $16 million per year over the next four years.  FTA has developed a strategy which combines adding term staff appointments with contractor resources to ensure the public transportation Recovery Act funds meet their intended purposes. FTA is in the process of hiring staff, principally in the regions, to accommodate the large influx of additional grants and capital focused projects.

FTA has developed an oversight strategy that recognizes the risks of this funding program. Grants funded with Recovery Act resources are 100 percent federal share. The additional funds made available create opportunities for grantees, who may attempt types of projects typically not undertaken by the grantee -- such as a capital construction project or major rehabilitation. Even transit’s largest grantees will need to be cautious as they add significant Recovery Act funds to their 2009 work programs. We recognize the need for strong and comprehensive oversight of these funds.  FTA has developed Recovery Act-specific oversight strategies that address these unique vulnerabilities associated with Recovery Act recipients and sub-recipients. We are augmenting our oversight program and technical assistance efforts to accommodate the Recovery Act program. In some cases, we have supplemented our standing reviews, such as our Triennial and State Management Reviews, with Recovery Act program questions. In some cases, we are developing spot reviews to focus on high risk areas. Moreover, we have integrated DOT-wide risk identification and risk mitigation strategies into our existing well-established oversight program plans.

We have made strong efforts to pro-actively assist grantees in fully understanding compliance and reporting requirements.  As part of this proactive technical assistance effort, we are developing targeted and customized oversight workshops that will address historically problematic compliance areas as a way to mitigate risk early on.  Further, we have strengthened our current oversight workshops and training sessions by inviting the Office of Inspector General to provide training on ways to identify and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. FTA is about to roll out a course designed to help the smaller transit agency execute a construction project. We are making the course available state by state, on an as requested basis. FTA also maintains an extensive website, with a query function and multiple questions and answers posed by users. Through these and other efforts, FTA is ensuring effective oversight so that projects funded by the Recovery Act are held to the highest standard of transparency and accountability that has been set forth by President Obama and Secretary LaHood.

I join Secretary LaHood in recognizing that the Recovery Act is more than statistics. Recovery Act funds are enabling transit agencies across the country to enrich the lives of people in their communities and provide local jobs. We knew that Recovery Act investments would make a difference and I applaud this committee, the Congress, and President Obama for making the investment in transit. I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

STATEMENT OF

DAVID J. RIVAIT
ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

MAY 13, 2009

Good afternoon Chairman Cummings, Ranking Member LoBiondo, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for inviting me to discuss the budget priorities of the Maritime Administration (MARAD) for 2010. I am pleased to appear before you to describe how the President’s budget request will support maritime transportation, contributing to improving this Nation’s economy, environment, and security. For 2010, MARAD requests appropriations of $346 million.

MARAD 2010 program initiatives are highlighted by a $15 million Presidential Initiative for integrated maritime transportation planning between DOT and DHS, a $12 million program increase for U.S Merchant Marine Academy operations and capital improvements, and a $1.1 million increase in funding to support the State Maritime Academies. We are also focused on administering the Small Shipyard grant program, which has expanded tenfold in FY 2009 with American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding.

Another priority emphasis for our agency is our coordination with industry, U.S. Government agencies, the military, and international parties on anti-piracy efforts. Before addressing the specifics of our 2010 budget proposal, I wanted to take a moment to review our activities in this area.

PIRACY

Together with the U.S. Coast Guard, Department of State, Department of Defense, and other government partners, MARAD is working directly with the maritime sector in coordinating government/industry anti-piracy efforts, including the use by industry of best management practices that reduce the risk of successful piracy attack. Our engagement has resulted in issuance of industry best practices, systematic dissemination of anti-piracy information, and increased coordination and communication between commercial vessels and naval authorities.

We are working in close coordination with other government agencies on a range of anti-piracy initiatives. MARAD and the Office of Naval Intelligence are publishing piracy advisories and alerts for the benefit of industry. We are continuously updating our website and electronic system “MARVIEW”, providing information to commercial shipping, and continuing to improve vessel tracking and projected schedules in the Horn of Africa region by collaborating with the U.S. flag industry and the National Maritime Intelligence Center. And, with the Military Sealift Command and the Navy Criminal Investigation Service, MARAD has developed “Anti-Piracy Assistance Teams” to provide advice on improving anti-piracy physical and operational security measures.

MARAD has been actively engaged in the work of the international cooperation mechanism known as the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia, which has four constituent Working Groups. The United States is the assigned lead for Working Group #3, which focuses on industry self-awareness and outreach. The Maritime Administration has been co-leading the efforts of the working group in close collaboration with the Coast Guard. The principal output to date has been the development and dissemination of anti-piracy Best Management Practices. MARAD is also coordinating with the International Maritime Organization’s Marine Safety Committee, and other groups.

ECONOMIC GROWTH AND RECOVERY

Serving one of the most pressing national priorities, in 2010, MARAD plans to devote $59 million, or approximately 17 percent of the agency request, to programs focused on reducing congestion, expanding global connectivity, and advancing economic growth. This compares with the 2009 enacted budget of $144 million, which included $100 million in ARRA funding.

MARAD’s programs also help strengthen and improve the Marine Transportation System, relieving pressure on highways by helping to increase the use of our nation’s waterways. As waterborne transport provides a cost-effective transportation alternative, it can help impact congestion in other transportation modes, and significantly reduce fuel consumption per ton-mile, with a related carbon footprint reduction. It can reduce the cost of goods consumers use every day, and contribute to improving quality of life. The MARAD 2010 program also includes a Presidential Initiative for integrated maritime transportation planning with the Department of Homeland Security to inform development and modernization of intermodal freight infrastructure linking coastal and inland ports to highway and rail networks.

Presidential Initiative: Secure and Efficient Intermodal Freight Infrastructure at Coastal and Inland Ports Initiative

The MARAD 2010 program is highlighted by the Presidential Initiative for the Secure and Efficient Intermodal Freight Infrastructure at Coastal and Inland Ports. A program increase of $15 million is requested for this initiative, which is aimed at supporting integrated planning between the DOT and DHS in the area of maritime transportation. The initiative will advance the development and modernization of intermodal freight infrastructure, linking coastal and inland ports to highway and rail networks. These funds will be administered in partnership with the DHS to support studies and joint planning that considers the interdependencies between strategic port security requirements and system throughput, support marine highway transportation database and research development, and advance the Maritime Safety and Security Information System, a global vessel tracking system used by DHS, DOD, DOT, and other federal agencies.

Assistance to Small Shipyard Grants

In FY 2009, Congress provided $17.5 million and an additional $100 million in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to support capital improvements at qualified shipyards to improve the ability of domestic shipyards to compete for domestic and international commercial ship construction. The total funding represents over a tenfold increase to our program. Our deadline for receipt of ARRA shipyard grant applications was April 20, and we have received a very significant response. We are reviewing applications now, and plan to have all grants awarded and the full amount obligated by August 17, 2009. The deadline for award of the $17.5 million is July 9, 2009, and these funds will be fully obligated by that date. As the focus of our FY 2010 grant program will be on the administration and oversight of the FY 2009 grant awards, no funding is requested for shipyard grants in FY 2010.

Maritime Guaranteed Loan Program (Title XI)

Title XI offers loan guarantees for shipyard modernization projects and for building vessels in U.S. shipyards. The FY 2010 request provides $3.6 million, an increase of $0.1 million over the FY 2009 enacted, to maintain the administration of the Title XI guaranteed loan portfolio. No subsidy funds are requested for FY 2010.

Ocean Freight Differential

The Ocean Freight Differential program is an important component of the Cargo Preference program. The MARAD request includes an estimated $175 million in new borrowing authority for 2010 to pay the Department of Agriculture’s Commodity Credit Corporation to offset the additional cost to ship humanitarian food aid cargo on U.S.-flag vessels.

SECURITY, PREPAREDNESS, AND RESPONSE

Security, preparedness, and response is the agency’s priority mission, and commands the largest share of the budget request – $265.6 million or 77 percent, representing an increase of $0.2 million over 2009. The agency’s activities focus on developing and maintaining a vital and viable U.S. merchant marine for commerce, emergency response, and national security. The budget request will support three agency programs contributing to defense mobilization and emergency response readiness: United States Merchant Marine Academy, State Maritime Academies, and Maritime Security Program. MARAD’s programs help ensure the readiness of sealift capacity to respond to national crises and DOD mobilizations. The U.S. Merchant Marine Academy and State Maritime Academies educate and graduate merchant marine officers ready to serve the maritime industry and Armed Forces. The Maritime Security Program sustains a fleet of commercial vessels capable of supporting national security and federal emergency response requirements.

United States Merchant Marine Academy

The U.S Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) has been an area of focus for the agency. Providing support and oversight to restore and strengthen USMMA programs and processes is a Maritime Administration management imperative. And, heightening the profile and prestige of the Academy is a priority of Secretary LaHood. In 2009, MARAD took positive steps to address and remediate a number of identified internal control issues, including: conversion to Civil Service of staff previously funded by non-appropriated funding instrumentalities, and the appointment of an Assistant Chief Financial Officer (CFO) at the USMMA reporting to the MARAD CFO. In 2009, MARAD provided Congress with an operating plan providing transparency as to how appropriated funds are expected to be expended by the USMMA.

The agency’s 2010 budget request for $74.4 million will support the continued improvement of USMMA management. The request includes a program increase of $12 million, of which $4.8 million is for Academy Operations and $7.2 million is for the Capital Improvement Program.

The increase in Academy Operations will compensate for non-appropriated funding sources no longer available for mission-related activities, and will establish for the Academy a sufficient appropriated funding base. MARAD’s request includes $0.8 million for the services of an Architecture/Engineering firm to support a blue ribbon panel of experts who will continue work started in 2009 to examine the Academy’s long-term capital improvement needs. This panel will make their recommendations for an updated capital improvement master plan to the Secretary of Transportation.

The requested increase of $7.2 million for capital improvements will augment capital investment funding to $15.4 million, allowing for significant deferred renovations of Mallory Pier, which is the main ship mooring pier and provides protection for all training vessels and other waterfront facilities. The deteriorated condition of the pier could present safety implications if not remedied.

State Maritime Academies

The 2010 request for the State Maritime Academy (SMA) program includes $15.6 million, an increase of $1.1 million from the FY 2009 enacted level. MARAD’s 2010 request includes funds for: (1) annual direct payments to each of the six state maritime academies, (2) the Student Incentive Payment (SIP) program, and (3) payment of maintenance and repair costs for training ships on loan to the state academies. Of the $15.6 million request:

• $2.4 million will be paid directly to the SMA for maintenance and support, a payment of $400,000 to each school in 2010.
• $2.0 million will fund the SIP program, for which the annual incentive payment per cadet will be $8,000 in 2010.
• $11.2 million will fund maintenance and repair costs for Federally-owned training ships on loan to the various state academies.

The state academies regard the SIP Program as among the most important recruiting tools to encourage state maritime academy cadets to pursue careers as Civil Service Mariners. We expect the authorized increase in SIP payments from $4,000 per year to $8,000 to increase interest in the program. This major improvement positions the program for a successful 2010.

Maritime Security Program

The Maritime Security Program (MSP) is the agency’s largest appropriated program. The primary purpose of the MSP is to provide the DOD with assured access to commercial U.S.-flag ships and related intermodal systems, as well as a pool of trained U.S. mariners available to support national security requirements during war or national emergency. MSP vessel participants also deliver cargoes supporting overseas deployments of U.S. forces. The DOD Surface Deployment and Distribution Command reports that since September 11, 2001, U.S.-flag commercial ships have delivered over 425,000 twenty foot equivalent units (TEUs) of containerized equipment and supplies to support U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. MSP ships have also supported the rebuilding of Iraq. For 2010, the MARAD request of $174 million will fund 60 ships in the MSP fleet in at the authorized level of $2.9 million per ship. Funding at this level will enable DOT to continue to maintain a U.S.-flag international trade merchant fleet crewed by U.S. citizens to serve the Nation’s commercial and national security needs.

ENVIRONMENT

MARAD environmental programs are aimed at reducing pollution and the adverse environmental effects of maritime transportation and facilities on communities and livability; focusing on obsolete vessel disposal, reducing marine air emissions, and treating ballast water. The 2010 request includes $19 million, or 5% of the agency’s request.

Ship Disposal

Of the 2010 request of $15 million for the Ship Disposal program, $12 million will support the disposal of obsolete ships in the National Defense Reserve Fleet. Due to the presence of onboard hazardous materials such as residual fuel, asbestos and solid polychlorinated biphenyls on these ships, they must be disposed of properly. Expedited disposal of obsolete ships lessens environmental risk and makes sense not only from the standpoint of avoiding possible harm to the environment, but also in terms of reducing costs. Environmental cleanup costs after a hazmat discharge incident are often far higher than the cost of proper and timely disposal. The budget request is expected to support the removal of 15 obsolete vessels from the inventory in 2010, providing for domestic dismantling contracts, artificial reefing, deep sinking, vessel sales and donations, and vessel export for recycling (if available).

The 2010 budget request also includes $3 million in funding to continue nuclear license management for the inactive Nuclear Ship SAVANNAH. The budget will support the continued maintenance and safeguarding of the SAVANNAH nuclear plant, and technical actions to keep the vessel into conformance with Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards.

Environmental Programs

The impact of marine transportation on the human and natural environment has become more evident particularly in port and coastal communities, which are feeling the brunt of environmental quality impacts from marine transportation activities. At the same time, marine transportation is expected to grow considerably due to increased use of our nations waterways for freight and passenger movement. Marine-related environmental impacts will therefore become more profound. The environmental impacts of marine transportation must be adequately anticipated and addressed or they will adversely affect the nation’s economic growth and the quality of life of our port communities. The MARAD 2010 program will work toward the reduction of port and vessel air pollution, further critical multi-modal transportation research to reduce environmental pollution, implement initiatives to reduce the agency’s carbon footprint, and advance ballast water treatment technologies.

Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation for the opportunity to present and discuss our program initiatives for 2010, and for the Committee’s continuing support for maritime programs. We will continue to keep this Committee apprised of the progress of our programs in these areas in the coming year, including our efforts working with other agencies on anti-piracy issues.

I look forward to working with you on advancing maritime transportation in the United States, and am happy to respond to any questions you and the members of this Committee may have. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE JOHN D. PORCARI
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

November 19, 2009

Chairman Towns, Ranking Member Issa, and Members of the Committee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the jobs reporting process for transportation programs under Section 1512 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act).  

Let me begin by sharing information about our progress in implementing this historic legislation.  The Department of Transportation (DOT) received $48.1 billion in resources to support infrastructure improvements and create and sustain jobs throughout the transportation sector.   In the 38^th week following enactment, DOT has obligated a total of $30.3 billion on more than 10,000 projects nationwide.  Nearly 6,500 projects are underway or completed.  The Federal Aviation Administration has issued 321 grants for 99% of the $1.1 billion provided for airport projects.  The Federal Highway Administration has authorized more than $20 billion in funding for over 8,500 projects representing 77% of the total funds provided to States.  The Federal Transit Administration has awarded 700 grants totaling $8.0 billion and has already reported $1.2 billion in outlays.  The Maritime Administration’s Small Shipyard grants have been awarded to 70 separate projects.  

In addition, work is underway to prepare for the award of the $8 billion the Recovery Act provided for High Speed Passenger Rail.  The applications process has closed and the Federal Railroad Administration has been reviewing and evaluating all of the applications received.  On a parallel track, we are internally reviewing the applications for the $1.5 billion provided to the Department in Discretionary Grants.  We expect to award these grants ahead of the February 17^th deadline. Overall, the Department has made substantial progress in implementing the Recovery Act and the Secretary and I are very proud of these accomplishments.

Recovery Act funds are improving our transportation infrastructure while putting people back to work in cities and counties throughout the Nation.   As I travel around the country, I have talked with construction workers who have shared with me how difficult it was before being employed on Recovery Act projects to provide for their families. 

This program has been an economic lifeline for people like Brandon Nesler, a construction site foreman from Wisconsin who was laid off last year after 18 years of service, until a Recovery-funded project put him back to work full-time overseeing grading work on  I-94.

Alison Barber, a new college graduate with a degree in construction management, had few job prospects until a construction company hired her as a full-time foreman on a major road project in Colorado.

These workers, and many thousands like them, can look forward to a paycheck and ensure that their families have the resources they need. 

There’s no question the Recovery Act is working as intended, putting Americans to work while making long-term investments in our infrastructure. Equally important is DOT’s commitment to ensuring that all funds are spent wisely, that the program meets all Federal reporting requirements, and that we are able to share accurate information with the American people about our progress. 

The Recovery Act requires, among other things, that funding recipients provide independent reports of the numbers of direct jobs created or retained and other project-related information.  Recipients are also responsible for reporting direct jobs from any sub-recipients (for example, sub-contactors in the case of construction projects). 

Section 1512 of the Act requires recipients to report this information as of September 30, 2009 and then again at the end of each subsequent quarter through Fiscal Year 2010. 

Given that this reporting process was new for the recipient community, the Department of Transportation began an outreach effort to assist its recipients with understanding and implementing the reporting requirements.   DOT staff reached out to State Departments of Transportation, affected Transit and Airport Authorities, shipyard recipients, and Amtrak to assist them in understanding the reporting guidelines provided by the Office of Mangement and Budget. DOT staff engaged with their respective stakeholders to provide clarifying information.  We also conducted a series of webinar and other training sessions to provide recipients with information needed to comply with the Section 1512 requirements.  DOT staff confirmed that the recipients could properly register in the reporting sytem and provided troubleshooting services to those encountering difficulty.  Our technical assistance effort focused heavily on the OMB methodology for counting jobs to make sure those entering data understood the information being soughts. DOT staff continued to provide support to the recipients until the reporting database was closed on October 20th.   Even before the offical deadline was reached and continuing until October 29th, DOT staff reviewed the data for obvious errors and ommissions.   While DOT staff could not directly correct the data, they contacted recipients about potential problem areas so that as many corrections as possible could be entered before the reporting system was closed.  

As a result of these efforts, the grantee recipient community for DOT reported 45,250 direct jobs created or retained so far. Contractors reported more than 1,000 additional jobs. More than 96% of the recipient community sucessfully reported their data in the reporting system.  The majority of those who did not report encountered problems with accessing the reporting system.  To our knowledge there were no transportation-related noncompliant recipients. 

We did identify one serious error in the process.  One State Department of Transportation erroneously coded its reports to the  Veterans Administration rather than to DOT. Furthermore, two States submitted a single 1512 report for all their ARRA projects. This error accounts for 831 projects of the 924 missing project reports expected in the Federal Highway Administration’s recipient community.  

Overall, we are pleased with the intial Section 1512 reporting and anticipate even more success in future quarterly reporting.   We are in the process of contacting the receipient community to identify any difficulties that could be addressed in the next reporting cycle.  In additon, we are asking for their help in identifying  recommended process improvements and “lessons learned” to simplify future reporting.  

As we begin planning for the next Section 1512 reporting cycle in January 2010, we will build upon our initial training and outreach efforts to help ensure success with the future recipient reporting endeavors. 

This concludes my testimony and I will be pleased to answer your questions. 

STATEMENT OF JACQUELYN PATILLO

ACTING CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MANAGEMENT, ORGANIZATION, AND PROCUREMENT

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 19, 2009

Madam Chairwoman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today to discuss the state of federal information security, and the Department of Transportation’s efforts to comply with the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA).

I currently serve as the Department’s Acting Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Acting Senior Agency Official for Privacy (SAOP).

The Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) has operational responsibility for the Departmental network and communications infrastructure, as well as providing shared services for the Office of the Secretary and for an increasing share of employees in the DOT Operating Administrations as they transition towards use of DOT shared infrastructure services.

The DOT CIO’s office also has overall responsibility for the Department’s FISMA program and the cyber security posture of DOT networks and information systems.  As part of those responsibilities, we must maintain situational awareness of the vulnerabilities and activities on DOT networks and systems, but also seek to mitigate identified vulnerabilities prior to exploitation in order to minimize risks to DOT, Federal, state, local, and to the extent practicable, private systems and data.  Where previously we might have limited our focus to just DOT systems and data, in today’s world of rapidly evolving threats, interconnected systems, shared services, telework, and cloud computing, vulnerabilities and risks on a given network or system have the potential to impact upon the other networks and systems to which it may interface or be connected.

It is in that context that I come to you today to discuss DOT’s FISMA program and progress towards compliance, peer-to-peer (P2P) software, and the recent report from the DOT Office of the Inspector General on FAA web application security. 

FISMA Status and Progress

DOT is currently working to make improvements from its 2007 FISMA grade, and the DOT Inspector General’s 2008 evaluation of the DOT cyber security program as “not effective.”  We developed a corrective action plan to address the recommendations made by the Inspector General, instituted regular internal coordination with the DOT Operating Administrations to monitor and drive progress, and reallocated existing personnel and resources to focus on key areas for improvement such as certification and accreditation, verification and validation, and awareness training.  

We also have work underway to better define processes, procedures, and metrics for the DOT security program so as to ensure that processes are repeatable, measurable, and sustainable.  In doing so, we are seeking to institutionalize these changes within DOT to improve both current and future FISMA performance and compliance, and enhance the resiliency of the program, while retaining sufficient flexibility for evolution of the program as requirements change.  We are also actively participating in the White House cyber-security review and expect to implement guidance and recommendations from that effort as they are approved.

Cyber Security Improvements and Institutionalizing Change

On this front, in 2008 the DOT Secretary cemented the role of the DOT Cyber Security Management Center (CSMC) as the DOT enterprise Security Operations Center (SOC) agent for to the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT) at the Department of Homeland Security, and established a governing Board of Directors to oversee operations and the strategic direction of the Cyber Security Management Center (CSMC). This action consolidated DOT’s cyber security detection, protection, analysis, and response, and cyber security situational awareness in one entity, which streamlined incident handling and improved the detection of unauthorized activities on DOT networks.

Similarly, a pilot implementation of Network Admission Control (NAC) has become an integrated component of the remote access solution for teleworkers and staff working remotely who access the DOT Headquarters network. This Network Admission Control (NAC) technology permits us to establish policy requirements for computers connecting to the network remotely.  This allows DOT to check computers at the periphery before they are allowed access to the internal network.  This mechanism checks – among other things – the presence of up to date virus protection, and the existence of peer-to-peer software on the computer requesting access to the DOT network.  DOT policy prohibits the use of peer-to-peer software on any DOT asset or computing resources.  Computers that fail to meet the requirements are either denied access completely, or are redirected to an isolated web site where patches and updated security software may be downloaded to become compliant.

This capability is also useful in addressing vulnerabilities with employee personal computers used for telework.  While we do not scan personal computers used for telework at a detailed level, we can ensure that minimum security requirements are met.  This capability was used during the Conficker incident earlier this year to ensure that computers connecting remotely through the DOT secure remote access (SRA) and virtual private network (VPN) systems had active local firewalls installed, and an active antivirus solution. We will be evaluating means to extend this capability to provide coverage at all points of entry into the DOT network.

Building upon Network Admission Control (NAC) and the Cyber Security Management Center (CSMC), we have continued our implementation of the Federal Desktop Core Configuration (FDCC), a configuration standard for Microsoft Windows computers published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

Inspector General’s Report on ATC Web Application Security

On the subject of the DOT Office of the Inspector General’s report on its “Review of Web Application Security and Intrusion Detection in Air Traffic Control Systems”, we view the report and its recommendations as instructive not just for the Federal Aviation Administration, but for the other Operating Administrations in DOT and other federal agencies with complex information systems or critical infrastructure responsibilities. The reduction of vulnerabilities in our networks and systems, and mitigation of significant risks is a continuous process that evolves continuously as threat capabilities are ever changing.  It requires constant vigilance and skilled individuals using the latest tools to reduce the risk of an attack, and to minimize any implications from an attack, should one occur, whether it comes from inside or outside of our networks.

We take our responsibility for cyber security seriously, and are appreciative of the renewed management attention that the Inspector General’s report has drawn to areas where there are fresh opportunities for improvement.

We will be working with the FAA CIO to ensure that the corrective actions to address the issues identified in the report are appropriately implemented.  Where there are opportunities to leverage activities, solutions, or lessons learned to the benefit of other DOT programs, we will work with the FAA CIO and the Operating Administration CIOs to deploy solutions across the DOT enterprise in order to minimize risks to all connected systems and stakeholders.

Challenges Remain

As DOT continues to make improvements in cyber security and privacy, we know much remains to be done.  Partnerships between the public and private sector to develop more intuitive and proactive mechanisms for dynamic prevention and detection of harmful behavior will facilitate a paradigm shift from a reactive mode to a more dynamic and proactive one.

Summary

In conclusion, I would offer that the Department of Transportation has achieved considerable progress in securing its networks against intrusions and cyber attacks.  Nonetheless, there is no reason to celebrate, nor time to rest.  Every day we are encountering new threats and new risks, and the capabilities for increasingly sophisticated attacks on critical information technology infrastructure continues to grow. The issues we face are larger than individual departmental CIOs and their staffs. Making progress towards greater network and computer security will be dependent upon effective leadership, both within agencies, and across the Federal government.  Staying at least one step ahead of the next cyber attack will require vigilance rooted in a highly skilled IT workforce using the most capable and effective tools available from the private sector.  Finally, our networks require the resilience and capabilities to ensure that any intrusions that do occur are promptly detected, quickly and effective dealt with, and the vulnerabilities that enabled the intrusion are swiftly remediated.

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to comment on these important topics, and I look forward to answering any questions that you may have.

STATEMENT OF

LYNNE OSMUS,
ACTING ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

ON

THE FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

FEBRUARY 11, 2009.

Chairman Costello, Congressman Petri, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to be a part of your discussion about the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).  We at the FAA, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) as a whole, look forward to working with this Committee and the new Congress on achieving a robust, multiyear bill that will help ensure the safety of the flying public and efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS).  This is an exciting time in our Nation’s history, as a new Administration takes the reins and establishes its policies.  With new Members in Congress as well, fresh ideas and innovative approaches to challenging problems are sure to come.  As Acting Administrator, I look forward to facilitating that as much as possible.

FAA reauthorization is a priority for the Department.  As the new Administration settles in and continues to get its policy team in place, we will have the opportunity to analyze the Committee’s proposal and develop an Administration position on FAA reauthorization.  There is a challenging legislative agenda this session and circumstances have dictated that during this first month of the Administration, the legislative focus be on the economic stimulus package.  I can assure you, though, that the Secretary views the aviation reauthorization as one of his top legislative priorities.  In the meantime, please accept my gratitude on behalf of the Administration for your efforts in moving the FAA’s reauthorization forward.  There is a consensus in the aviation community, and certainly in the FAA, that multiple, short-term extensions as we have had in the last 18 months are burdensome and disruptive, and do not permit the careful planning and efficient execution that is necessary for successful infrastructure and technology programs.

Secretary LaHood has demonstrated that the FAA is at the top of his list of priorities.  He visited FAA headquarters twice in his first week as Secretary, meeting first with the executive management team, and then holding a town hall meeting where all employees were invited to attend.  In addition to the overflow crowd in the FAA auditorium, the town hall was shown via video broadcast to other FAA offices. 

The Secretary has indicated several times in his confirmation hearing and to FAA employees that one of his immediate goals is to fill the position of FAA Administrator, in order to move forward as quickly and seamlessly as possible.  He has expressed that the new Administrator will be one who can advance the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) and refine benchmarks for the program for the next five to eight years.  The Secretary has also noted that one criterion for a successful FAA Administrator is someone with the people skills to resolve outstanding labor issues, something to which many Members of this Committee are also committed.  I am also confident that any new Administrator will work closely with the Committee to ensure these goals are part of any future aviation legislation.

Secretary LaHood has also established four primary areas of focus for the DOT and FAA:  safety, economy, sustainability, and livability.  At the FAA, our highest priority is always safety.  It is our mandate and it is our passion.  We are currently in the safest period in commercial aviation history, and every day, every hour, we are doing everything we can to make sure that continues.  Secretary LaHood intends to continue that legacy.

Even with the strong safety record aviation is currently enjoying, we are continuing our efforts to make the system even safer.  For example, the FAA is making it a priority to reduce the number of runway incursions—and we are seeing strong results.  There were no serious runway incursions in the first quarter of fiscal year 2009 — not a single Category A or B event during 12.8 million aircraft operations.  Category A and B runway incursions are the most serious, in which a collision was narrowly avoided or where there is a significant potential for a collision.  Category C and D incidents present no immediate safety consequences to the public.

This phenomenal achievement is the direct result of a focused commitment at all levels of the aviation industry – from management at airports, airlines, and the FAA to pilots, mechanics, vehicle operators, and air traffic controllers.  Between fiscal year 2000 and the close of fiscal year 2008 on Sept. 30, 2008, serious runway incursions have decreased by 63 percent.  All categories of runway incursions were down slightly for the first quarter of fiscal 2009 versus the same period a year earlier – 224 in 2009 compared to 226 in 2008.

Runway safety initiatives include enhancements to airport markings, signage and lighting; implementation of new technology such as runway status lights and cockpit moving map displays; and increased runway safety training and awareness among pilots, air traffic controllers and airport vehicle drivers.  We have accelerated our runway status lights program, and the systems are scheduled to be installed at 22 of the nation’s busiest airports by FY 2011. 

In these challenging economic times, we must also consider our aviation infrastructure.  As the Secretary has noted, transportation infrastructure is a substantial part of the Administration’s economic recovery plan, and he is making the successful implementation of that initiative one of his top priorities.  New infrastructure investment pays enormous short- and long-term dividends, creating economic and social benefits for generations.  The Secretary has also committed to supporting investments that will help bring the country’s transportation assets up to a state of good repair.

We have only to look as far back as last November for a prime example.  That was when we commissioned three new runways in a single day – at Washington Dulles, Chicago O’Hare, and Seattle-Tacoma (Sea-Tac) International Airports.  Spanning a total of more than 25,000 feet, these three runways are expected to increase capacity at these major airports, as well as significantly reduce delays.  The new runways at Dulles and O'Hare have the potential to accommodate more than 150,000 additional annual operations in the NAS (100,000 at Dulles and 52,000 at O’Hare), while we expect delays to decrease at both airports.

The Sea-Tac runway is expected to significantly reduce weather-related delays that have plagued the airport.  Because of low clouds — which occur about 44 percent of the time — the airport is often confined to using one arrival stream instead of two.  The introduction of a third runway will allow Sea-Tac to handle two simultaneous staggered arrival streams in poor weather.  This translates into as many as eight additional on-time arrivals per hour.  

While we are looking to improve economic development, we must also give priority attention to environmental stewardship – the Secretary’s sustainability priority.  Increases in air transportation demand will place significant environmental pressures on the national airspace system.  Environmental protection that allows sustainable aviation growth is a key goal, and we have placed addressing environmental issues at the heart of NextGen.  We have a plan that offers a systematic approach that builds on better science and improved decision support tools, advanced air traffic procedures, enhanced aircraft technology, sustainable alternative fuels, and policies to address environmental challenges.  Advances in aircraft technology and renewable fuels are essential if we are to provide solutions for the energy and climate challenges for the U.S. aviation system.  The close partner to this sustainable development is livability, the fourth area of this Administration’s priorities.  In aviation, this entails a commitment to the flying public to continue to focus on the safety, convenience, and confidence of the traveling public, with minimal environmental impacts on our communities.

With these priorities on the table, the DOT and FAA are poised to move forward.  But while we have new leadership still to come, we are not content simply to sit back. 

Just two weeks ago, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) removed the FAA's air traffic control modernization program from its High Risk List (HRL) for the first time in 14 years.  The HRL identifies Federal programs and operations that the GAO deems as high risk due to their greater vulnerabilities to fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement.  The FAA was initially placed on the HRL in 1995 due to our poor track record of program deployment and cost over-runs.  The GAO noted that management focus and willingness to attack and rectify our shortcomings were the reasons that it felt comfortable removing FAA modernization from the High Risk List.  The GAO also noted our plan to continue improvements into 2009.

Also this January, testing for NextGen is accelerating with an agreement to equip US Airways aircraft with GPS-based Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast.  The FAA partnership with US Airways and Aviation Communication and Surveillance Systems will equip 20 US Airways Airbus A330s with ADS-B avionics for tests at Philadelphia International Airport.  ADS-B allows aircraft to be tracked by satellite rather than radar, allowing more precise information to boost safety and ease congestion. ADS-B uses GPS to broadcast the position and intent of an aircraft to air traffic controllers and other pilots.

Under the agreement, the A330s will use both ADS-B “In” and ADS-B “Out” signals.  ADS-B “In” is information sent into the cockpit, and will be used to evaluate potential safety improvements on the airport surface; ADS-B “Out” involves an aircraft broadcasting information, such as its location, out to ground stations and other aircraft, allowing controllers to separate traffic.  In 2007, FAA issued a proposed regulation that, if finalized, would require ADS-B “Out” equipment on all aircraft operating in certain classes of airspace within the NAS by 2020.  FAA has yet not issued a regulation proposing a timeframe for the adoption of ADS-B “In”.

On January 30, we published an updated NextGen Implementation Plan that details our strategies for accelerating NextGen operational capabilities in the 2012-2018 mid-term timeframe.  Implementing NextGen over the next 10 years will enable significant safety, environmental, and operational improvements.  This is clearly seen through our initial NextGen demonstrations, operational trials and deployments.  This early work has also provided invaluable data and insights to allow FAA to use the power of modeling and simulation to assess the integrated NextGen benefits across a range of future scenarios.

Our preliminary modeling of a series of NextGen capabilities shows that by 2018 total flight delays may be reduced by 35-40 percent, saving almost a billion gallons of fuel.  This is compared to the “do nothing” case, which shows what would happen if we operate in 2018 the same way as today.  The current model includes one-third of the NextGen changes.  It is important to note that our modeling and simulation results are preliminary, and as the model matures the FAA expects these benefits values will increase.  

As NextGen planning evolves, we may reduce uncertainty in our assumptions and we may develop and validate additional modeling capability for currently un-modeled NextGen capabilities, such as improved traffic flow around adverse weather.  Because NextGen benefits are integrally linked to equipage rates, it is imperative that the FAA works closely with all aspects of the aviation community on NextGen deployment.

Finally, no organization is successful without its most valuable asset – its workforce.  Controller hiring is up and we have a record number of applicants.  While our historical hiring goal was a “one-for-one” model (one new hire for every one retirement), beginning in 2004, we increased our hiring targets to prepare for the anticipated retirements in the next decade.   We've hired 5000 new controllers over the past three years.  We exceeded our hiring goals for FY 2008, and we are on track to meet our end of year hiring goal in FY 2009.  New controllers are completing their training faster – in fact, we anticipate that 1000 new hires will complete training to reach full certification this year, compared to 762 last year.  Controller retirements have also leveled out and are trending below what we had projected for this year. 

For the past several years we have also enjoyed increased hiring in the Aviation Safety organization.  Through those hires, we have been able to support certification of new products and new operators – while assuring the continued operational safety of all those who hold FAA certificates.  But we will never have enough people to be present at the operation of every aircraft or the turning of every wrench.  That’s why we need to rely on voluntary reporting systems – where pilots, mechanics, flight attendants and operators can tell us what they’re seeing in the system that may introduce risk.  I know this Committee identified some concerns over our management of voluntary reporting systems.  We have improved those processes and will continue to do so.  You have our commitment that they will be used to enhance safety – and not abused by anyone in the system.

As you can see, we are still actively moving forward on all key areas.  The FAA is a growing, learning organization, dedicated to the safety of the traveling public and the efficient operation of the NAS.  We look forward to supporting the new President’s agenda for aviation, a new FAA Administrator, and to working with this Committee and the rest of the Congress on FAA reauthorization legislation.  In the meantime, we remain focused on our duties to ensure aviation safety and efficiency. 

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Petri, Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks.  I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.