Highly Automated Vehicles: Federal Perspectives on the Deployment of Safety Technology

STATEMENT OF JOEL SZABAT
ACTING UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE
UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

HIGHLY AUTOMATED VEHICLES: FEDERAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE DEPLOYMENT OF SAFETY TECHNOLOGY

NOVEMBER 20, 2019

Good morning Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished Members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify on behalf of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) and Secretary Elaine L. Chao about the Department’s efforts to support the safe and full integration of automated vehicles into the nation’s transportation system.

The Department has previously testified about the safety potential of advanced vehicle technologies, including Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) and Automated Driving System (ADS) technologies.  These advanced vehicle technologies have the potential to mitigate crashes associated with irresponsible and often illegal behavior by assuring compliance with traffic laws, eliminating driver distraction, and improving vehicle responses to emergency situations.

At the beginning of this Administration, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) led in the development and publication of Automated Driving Systems 2.0, A Vision for Safety (ADS 2.0). ADS 2.0 improves and refines previous policy and incorporates feedback received through public comments and Congressional hearings. ADS 2.0 supports the safe deployment of automated vehicle automated driving systems (ADS) by providing voluntary guidance that encourages best practices and prioritizes safety.

This focus on safety served as the cornerstone for the Department’s efforts to develop an updated, multi-modal guidance document: Preparing for the Future of Transportation: Automated Vehicles 3.0 (AV 3.0)[1]. AV 3.0 provides a framework and multimodal approach for the safe integration of ADS technology into the Nation’s broader surface transportation system.

The multimodal approach enshrined in 3.0 adds to, the work NHTSA is doing regarding the safety of the vehicles and vehicle equipment by including roads and road users to the automation safety equation. The guidance includes:

1. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) existing authorities around the safe operation of commercial motor vehicles;
2. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) safety authority over public transportation; and,
3. The state and local transportation agencies, whose work is preparing for the impacts of automation on infrastructure.

AV 3.0 also includes other transportation modes at USDOT engaging with vehicle automation, such as the Maritime Administration (MARAD), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Administration (PHMSA), and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which provided input based on its decades of experience with automation in aviation, as aircraft automation provides greater levels of safety and efficiency in aviation operations. Many lessons learned and safety approaches in aviation are considered by the automotive industry.

As described above, the Department involved multiple modes and broad stakeholder groups to establish a holistic and durable framework. In addition, the Department laid out a number of key principles for how to address the public’s concerns regarding the safety, security, and privacy of these technologies.

AV 3.0 provided new safety guidance, building upon what we already knew and expanding it to emerging modes of transportation. It reduced some of the policy uncertainty our partners face as they approach difficult, novel, and complex questions, and outlines the process for working with the USDOT.

So, first and foremost, safety is our top priority. The Department will lead efforts to address potential safety risks and advance the life-saving potential of automation, which will not only protect the public from any potential safety risks but also strengthen public confidence in these emerging technologies. Secondly, we will be technology neutral. The government will not dictate what types of technologies innovators must use to achieve higher levels of safety. We are dedicated to using the 5.9 GHz band for transportation safety purposes, and for near-term innovations such as automation and artificial intelligence, but we do not want to be prescriptive regarding whether they should use Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC), Cellular Vehicle to Everything (C-V2X) or a future 5G technology. While we are “technology-neutral,” we care deeply about safety outcomes and will require proof that a crash-prevention technology works in the most dynamic and complex of transportation scenarios that are most frequent cause of crashes. We support an innovative ecosystem that will produce technology with the best benefits for safety and for crash prevention capabilities, which also delivers congestion mitigation, and deployed.

We will continue to modernize our regulations. NHTSA has numerous ongoing rulemakings related to automated vehicles, and ADAS and ADS technology. FMCSA is also continuing to work on revisions to it regulations, while FHWA is working to update the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices to take into account AVs.

We are preparing proactively for automation. This includes not only the work of updating regulations, but also thinking through the potential workforce impacts and training needs, working with industry and stakeholders to describe the capabilities and limitations of the technologies, and identifying and managing data needs while ensuring privacy and addressing security impacts.

And, finally, we seek to ensure that people understand that the Department is seeking to provide additional options for safe transportation, including emerging and non-traditional modes driven by innovation. We must prepare for a future where there are traditional vehicles driving side-by-side with vehicles that include many different types of advanced technologies, some with no human driver at all.

One of the most tangible outputs of AV 3.0 to date has been the $60 million Automated Driving System Demonstration Grants in federal funding announced by Secretary Chao on September 18, 2019. The Department received 73 applications[2] for these grants, and awarded eight grants in seven states. These grants focus on the ability to demonstrate these technologies safely, so that people can see, touch, and learn about them. It is our hope that the more Americans can engage with these technologies, the more comfortable they may become with them. The ADS Demonstration Grants also required applicants to bring together partnerships in the community that harness the collective expertise, ingenuity, and knowledge of multiple stakeholders to support technology deployment and understanding. This ensures that there is a level of education and comfort with the types of demonstrations envisioned. The awards also focus on generating the types of data that may be useful to the Department as it evaluates the safety of AV. The ADS Demonstration Grants are required to generate the data that may someday help safety experts, economists, or regulatory lawyers focusing on future regulatory paths.

Accessibility also remains a key area of focus for the Department. One of the important documents for laying the groundwork for our accessibility initiatives prior to AV 3.0 was the publication by our Bureau of Transportation Statistics of Travel Patterns of American Adults with Disabilities.[3] This report identified that most Americans will have a disability at some point in their lifetime, whether it's visual, auditory, cognitive, or mobility-related, or through the challenges of becoming older. Automated vehicle technologies can open new labor opportunities, or help people connect with their families and communities. As the Department works through its initiatives, we continue to encourage the industry to focus on a vision of universal accessibility and universally designed products that accommodate individual preferences and abilities. The Department will protect the ability of consumers to make the mobility choices that best suit their needs. We will support automation technologies that enhance individual freedom by expanding access to safe and independent mobility to people with disabilities and older Americans.

One of the ways the Department is focusing on accessibility and working proactively with stakeholders is through the Inclusive Design Challenge, which Secretary Chao announced October 29, 2019 at the Access and Mobility for All Summit. This challenge, which will make up to $5 million in cash prizes available, was developed alongside innovators, people with disabilities and advocacy groups, to support the development of vehicle design solutions to enable accessible automated vehicles. The Department aims to increase availability and decrease cost of aftermarket modifications that improve accessibility of vehicles today and spark development for future automated vehicles.

The Department has also been working with partners across the Federal government, industry, labor, and the public on the potential impacts of Automated Vehicle Technologies to the American workforce. The Department is conducting a study alongside the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Commerce to address issues pertaining to the workforce with the introduction and adoption of automation, primarily focused on impacts to commercial motor vehicle and transit bus operators. The study focuses on labor force transformation/labor force training, technology, operational safety, and quality of life.

The AV 3.0 document continued this conversation, noting that this is not the first time the Department has faced concerns over people losing their jobs because of automation. The FAA has dealt with this question going back decades, as auto-pilot technologies developed. These concerns were understandable, but today we see that pilots are still very highly valued, very highly respected, and well-paid, and there is still a shortage of airline pilots. Automation improved their lives in many ways, notably improving safety and the quality of their jobs. While we cannot predict the development of automated trucking technologies, we've seen similar issues in the past and we must learn from these experiences.  

As we look at all the AV-related actions across the government, we have asked ourselves how to best ensure they are aligned, complementary and non-duplicative. We are doing this in two ways.

First, the USDOT is working hand-in-hand with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to catalogue and align all of the activities among all of our Federal partners to ensure they are aligned under one set of principles. There are over 30 Federal agencies working in this area, with actions and authorities that can help provide a full understanding of the U.S. government’s investments and engagements with the technologies. There is great value in bringing together this information in one place so that all partners – Congress, Federal, State, local, tribal, industry, advocacy groups and the public – can have a better understanding of the entire ecosystem.

Second, work continues on a comprehensive plan for the safe and full integration of automated vehicle technology into our national transportation system. As part of any comprehensive plan, one must envision the end state, compare it to the current situation, and outline the actions that the Department needs to take to support this future. As envisioned in AV 3.0, the foundation for this document will be the Department’s approach to safety.

The Department looks forward to continuing to work with the Committee and the Congress to provide feedback and technical assistance on any automated vehicle-related bills or provisions. The Department has appreciated the opportunity to work closely with our Congressional partners on ongoing legislative development, as well as focusing the regulatory updates, policy initiatives, and research needed to enable a future with a safer and more efficient transportation system for all. 

Thank you, and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

###

Commercial And Passenger Vessel Safety: Challenges And Opportunities

STATEMENT OFRICHARD A. BALZANO

DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR

MARITIME ADMINISTRATION

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

HEARING ON “COMMERCIAL AND PASSENGER VESSEL SAFETY: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES”

November 14, 2019

Good afternoon, Chairman Maloney, Ranking Member Gibbs, and members of the Subcommittee.  Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on the Maritime Administration’s (MARAD) role in promoting the safety and security of U.S.-flag commercial vessels.  Secretary Chao’s number one priority is safety, and that focus extends to MARAD’s programs.  Safe operation of MARAD’s National Defense Reserve Fleet (NDRF) and Ready Reserve Force (RRF), the privately-owned commercial Maritime Security Program (MSP) and Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) fleets, and all other U.S.-flag vessels is critically important to our maritime industry.  MARAD is actively engaged with U.S.-flag commercial vessel operators to alert them to security threats and collaborate with them on emerging technologies and best practices to improve safety at sea.  MARAD also plays an important role in educating and training U.S. mariners to ensure they are ready to face the challenges of living and working at sea, which includes encountering sometimes hazardous environments.

Mariner Training

The marine environment can be dangerous by its very nature, so a well-trained workforce is critical to safe vessel operations.  MARAD educates and trains U.S. merchant mariners at the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy (USMMA) and facilitates mariner education through the support we provide to the State Maritime Academies (SMAs).  The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) establishes training requirements that maritime academies must meet, and the USMMA and the SMAs modify their curricula accordingly.  In addition, MARAD encourages the academies to incorporate lessons learned from real world incidents. 

At the academies, deck and engineering cadets must complete training and assessments required to obtain USCG Unlimited Licenses as 3^rd Mate and 3^rd Assistant Engineer and the corresponding international Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping endorsements as well. These training courses and assessments take place during the academies’ four-year curricula.  In addition to classroom and practical training ashore, cadets and midshipmen receive hands-on shipboard training on commercial vessels, the academies’ training vessels, or a combination of both. 

For example, cadets at the USMMA receive formalized safety training throughout the curriculum.  They learn everything from first aid and the proper use of personal safety equipment to aquatic survival and firefighting.  As part of their education and training, USMMA cadets spend one year working and learning at sea on commercial U.S.-flag vessels, most of which are either MSP vessels or ships operated by the Military Sealift Command and crewed by civilian mariners.  The cadets are integrated into the crews aboard these ships, which are actively engaged in commerce around the globe.  Building on knowledge from the classroom, this first-hand experience solidifies the best working practices onboard the vessels, including safe vessel operations.

Cadets at the SMAs receive most of their at-sea training aboard vessels MARAD provides.  One of the ways MARAD supports quality training for these cadets is providing them with safe and modern training vessels. Congress has appropriated funds the past two years to replace the oldest vessels in the aging training vessel fleet.  The new training ships will provide state-of-the-art platforms to allow for future mariners to keep up with the ever-evolving global maritime industry.  The new vessels have been designed specifically to provide a robust training environment including a second bridge, multiple simulators, and laboratories and classrooms designed to provide focus on specific curricula.  While these vessels will primarily be used by SMA cadets, we anticipate that USMMA cadets will also gain required sea time aboard them.

Maritime Security

In addition to supporting U.S. mariner training, MARAD supports DOD strategic sealift requirements through our Government-owned vessels in the NDRF and RRF, as well as through assured access to commercial vessels in the MSP and VISA program.  Security is a major concern for mariners who operate our ships and those who operate the broader commercial fleet.  While we stay abreast of maritime security threats to our own assets, which include piracy, terrorism, criminal activity, or cyber-attack, MARAD also provides U.S.-flag vessels with timely information on those threats through interagency coordinated Maritime Alerts and Advisories.  MARAD cooperates with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security, as well as the Intelligence Community, in providing those advisories.  MARAD is also DOT’s principal coordinator for maritime domain awareness functions and serves as a key facilitator between maritime industry and government agencies providing expert maritime security advice and assistance on issues involving the global maritime transportation system.

Moreover, the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2010 (CVSSA) directed DOT to ensure proper and accurate reporting of incidents occurring on cruise vessels. This information is collected from the FBI and made publicly available on the Department’s website on a quarterly basis. The CVSSA also permitted MARAD to create a Training Provider Certification Program to help certify companies that provide commercial CVSSA training to cruise vessel members. Since its creation in 2015, this voluntary program has certified that training provided by these companies adheres to the training standards and curricula jointly developed by the U.S. Coast Guard, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and MARAD. These training standards are enforced by the Coast Guard and include ensuring proper maintenance of video surveillance systems, displaying U.S. Embassy and Consulate information, and adhering to fire safety and emergency requirements for passengers. 

Technology and Innovation to Improve Maritime Safety

Safety regulations do not always keep pace with new technologies and practices.  As a result, national and international industry-developed consensus standards often fill the gap.  MARAD collaborates with the USCG, maritime industry, and scientific and technological innovators to develop voluntary consensus standards that guide equipment requirements and usage.  For example, in response to the surge in interest to use liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a marine fuel, MARAD led the development of standards for LNG transfer hoses and associated equipment.  MARAD also uses its RRF and training vessels as platforms to demonstrate innovations in safety technology, including anti-snapback mooring lines and marine evacuation systems, where existing equipment poses risks to mariner safety.

MARAD is currently working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) on a project to automate weather reporting from vessels.  After prototype testing on MARAD vessels, automated weather stations are being installed on U.S.-flag ships for further demonstration and validation.  These systems report weather data at three minute intervals through the ship’s automated identification system (AIS).  Additional weather data obtained from ships much more frequently should improve weather forecasting and warnings, and hence improve vessel operational safety.  Pairing this system with other on-board Global Positioning Systems (GPS) applications may also assist in detecting GPS spoofing (e.g., altering vessel location information), which is a growing cyber security threat.

The U.S. maritime workforce is a critical component to our Nation’s economic and national security.  Recognizing this, MARAD is looking at advances in remote operations that help to reduce hazards to mariners.  MARAD recently partnered with industry to demonstrate remote operation of a spill response vessel that can help minimize mariner exposure to toxic chemicals.  Similar remote technologies could be used in other areas where mariner risks are high, such as emergency response or vessel inspections.  Remote systems also have a role to play in preventing intrusion and monitoring risks during maritime operations.  MARAD is exploring additional applications of data driven systems particularly in enhancing engineering and navigation systems. 

Conclusion

MARAD looks forward to continued collaboration with our Federal partners and the maritime industry to improve vessel safety and security.  I appreciate this subcommittee’s interest and support for the U.S. merchant marine and am happy to answer any questions you may have.

2018 FAA Reauthorization Progress

STATEMENT OF JOEL SZABAT
ACTING UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEFORE THE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION
2018 FAA REAUTHORIZATION PROGRESS
SEPTEMBER 26, 2019

Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you to the Committee and to Congress for passing the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act last fall and for inviting me to testify on behalf of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). The more than 550 sections of the Act cover a wide range of aviation issues, many supporting Secretary Chao’s first priority of safety and the Department’s mission to provide the safest and most efficient airspace in the world. Our team is working to accomplish the directives Congress set forth in the Act, which provided the stability and direction needed to continue the important missions we oversee on a day-to-day basis and to address new challenges.

Despite the government shutdown last winter and our ongoing response to the fatal accidents and grounding of the 737 MAX, we have made great progress on the safety, civil rights, and consumer protection provisions of the Act. We identified more than 360 deliverables for the Department, and, while we have not been able to address all of the deliverables simultaneously or meet all the requirements in this first year, the Department has demonstrated unwavering commitment to the provisions of the Act. We will continue to deliver on the goals and realize the vision of this Committee and this Congress as a whole.

With many different mandates, each meriting timely completion, the responsible course of action is to distribute and schedule the work in a way that reflects the key principles of our mission. This also must be done without disrupting ongoing work in matters of safety, policy, oversight, and operations.

Working with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), our other modal administrations, and other agencies as necessary, we have addressed safety, accessibility and consumer rights, and a stronger, more efficient infrastructure. We have also advanced the integration of new technologies into the airspace that hold promise for improved safety, accessibility, and economic opportunity, such as Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). I am sure the members of this Committee share these goals, and I look forward to discussing some of our achievements to date.

Safety

DOT takes pride in our extremely successful safety record and appreciates the additional authorities and measures taken in this latest reauthorization to continue that legacy. We have already responded to Reauthorization requirements to establish new offices to deal with important issues, such as oversight of delegated authorities, (e.g. Organization Designation Authorizations), consumer advocacy, and support of our Nation’s spaceports.

To help maintain the safety of passengers with respect to lithium batteries, the FAA and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) are taking action to implement Reauthorization provisions. We have harmonized domestic regulations with the ICAO Technical Instructions, begun working with stakeholders to identify and mitigate risks, and established inter-governmental and industry working groups to provide research, evaluation, and safety recommendations for the safe air transportation of lithium batteries.

The Reauthorization has also augmented our work in maintaining the world’s safest airspace through the formation of several new advisory bodies and mechanisms. For example, the Secretary has already created task forces such as the Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee. The continued authority and certainty provided by the Reauthorization has been helpful in allowing us to continue to provide the world’s highest expectation of safety for the flying public.

These efforts are taking place in the context of evaluating Boeing’s 737 MAX aircraft for clearance to fly in the United States. As the Secretary has said repeatedly, the 737 MAX will not return to service until the safety experts at the FAA have determined it is safe to fly. The Secretary and the FAA Administrator have called for multiple objective and substantive reviews of the FAA’s certification process and its analysis of the 737 MAX safety issues and potential resolutions. The issues with the 737 MAX are now being reviewed, studied, and addressed by the NTSB, the Special Air Certification Committee convened in March, the DOT Inspector General, an interagency Technical Advisory Board, the Joint Authorities Technical Review Team, various Congressional committees, and others. We will continue this important work, including ongoing coordination with other nations' safety certification authorities.

Consumer Advocacy

The Department is also actively working to implement the many aviation consumer protection and civil rights provisions of the Act, and we are doing it with the help of the people whose voices need to be heard. The Act requires us to establish four advisory committees, develop seven mandatory rulemakings, consider four discretionary rulemakings, and conduct twelve studies, reports or other tasks. Here are some highlights of our accomplishments.

Key mandates in the Reauthorization include establishing an Aviation Consumer Advocate within DOT to assist consumers in resolving airline service complaints filed with the Department, to identify actions the Department can take to improve the resolution of airline service complaints and enforcement of aviation consumer protection rules, and to identify regulations and policies that can be amended to resolve airline service complaints more effectively. In March 2019, we selected Blane Workie, Assistant General Counsel for the Department’s Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, to serve as the Aviation Consumer Advocate. To help her fulfill the responsibilities of the Aviation Consumer Advocate, Ms. Workie has already established two new positions in her office – Director of Consumer Advocacy and Director of Civil Rights Advocacy.

Approximately a month after the passage of the bill, DOT reconstituted the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC) and established the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force (Task Force) as an ACPAC Subcommittee. The first ACPAC meeting was scheduled for January 16, 2019, but had to be canceled because of the government shutdown. The meeting was then held in early April, and focused on the transparency of airline ancillary service fees, involuntary changes to travel itineraries, and the operation of the Task Force. The work of the ACPAC is ongoing.

Also, the Task Force members have been actively exploring how best to address and prevent incidents of sexual misconduct on board aircraft. The Department is very committed to addressing the problem of in-flight sexual misconduct and assault to provide a safe flight in every sense of the word. The Task Force members have already met five times this year in one or two-day meetings that occurred in April, May, June, July and September. The work focused on training, reporting, and data collection regarding incidents of sexual misconduct. As part of their duties, Task Force members have heard and reviewed first-hand accounts from passengers and flight attendants who have experienced sexual misconduct onboard commercial aircraft. We expect the Task Force to conclude its work this calendar year.

Accessible Air Service

The Reauthorization also contains several provisions requiring DOT to review its Air Carrier Access Act regulation and take certain actions as appropriate. For example, section 433 directs us to consider developing specific recommendations regarding improvements to wheelchair assistance by U.S. airlines, and how airline training programs can address consumer complaints regarding wheelchair assistance. Section 434 requires us to develop the "Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill of Rights." As required by section 440, we will also review, and if necessary, revise regulations to ensure that passengers with disabilities receive dignified, timely, and effective assistance from trained personnel. We will also require training to occur on an annual schedule for personnel charged with providing physical assistance to passengers with disabilities.

We have already started the process of reviewing the regulations to determine what actions need to be taken in these areas. We look forward to consulting with stakeholders, including disability organizations, airlines, and their contractors. We also just established the Air Ambulance and Patient Billing Advisory Committee (AAPB Advisory Committee) and the Air Carrier Access Act Advisory Committee (ACAA Advisory Committee). Both necessitated issuing of notices to find the best-suited members, and both committees are now in place. The active ongoing work of the Department in forming and engaging with these committees as well as with ACPAC, reflects our commitment to protecting the rights of air travelers, to human dignity in general, and to the American ideal of balanced representation.

The AAPB Advisory Committee will make recommendations regarding disclosure of charges and fees for air ambulance services and insurance coverage, as well as consumer protection and enforcement authorities of both DOT and State authorities, and the prevention of balance billing to consumers. The ACAA Advisory Committee will identify and assess barriers to accessible air travel, determine the extent to which DOT is addressing those barriers, recommend improvements, and advise the Secretary on implementing the Air Carrier Access Act. We will announce the date of the first meeting of the AAPB Advisory Committee as well as the first meeting of the ACAA Advisory Committee after coordinating with the advisory committee members.

Consumer-Focused Regulation

The Department is committed to enhancing consumer protection and access in the aviation sector. We believe that there should be no more regulations than necessary, and those regulations should be straightforward, clear, and designed to minimize unnecessary and costly burdens on aviation stakeholders. During the past year, we made strides in implementing the consumer protection and access rulemaking mandates in the Reauthorization. These rulemakings are all identified in the Department’s upcoming fall Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions as actions we plan to issue in the near and long term. Among these rules are regulations that would issue guidance on cell phone communications on aircraft, require refunds to customers for services not received, require minimum customer service standards of large ticket agents, and streamline the consumer complaints process.

The Reauthorization also prohibits U.S. and foreign airlines from denying boarding to a revenue passenger traveling on a confirmed reservation, or involuntarily removing that passenger from the aircraft once the passenger has checked in for flight before the check-in deadline, and his or her boarding pass has been collected or accepted by the gate agent.

We will also be issuing a proposed rule related to traveling by air with service animals. There is rising concern that passengers are increasingly bringing untrained emotional support animals onboard aircraft – which could put the safety of crewmembers and other passengers at risk. Our rulemaking will define "service animal," develop minimum standards for what is required for service animals and address the issue of emotional support animals. Last year, DOT published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on service animals, and we plan to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking later this year. We want individuals with disabilities to continue using their service animals, while also maintaining safety and reducing the likelihood that other passengers will be able to falsely claim their pets are service animals.

Innovation and Infrastructure

We remain in close communication with industry, international regulatory bodies, and the public when it comes to the technology that is promising to reshape aviation as we know it - Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS). We are entering the final year of the President’s Integration Pilot Program, where we have been working steadily with industry, State, local, and tribal governments to enable unique operations, and more importantly, to uncover the key issues we face as a Nation in adapting a disruptive, but promising technology into a complex, highly coordinated airspace system. We continue to receive recommendations from the Drone Advisory Committee (DAC), our test sites, our centers of excellence for research, standards bodies, and international partners on what the focus of our work should be and the next steps that will continue UAS integration on a larger scale.

We are engaging with the public through the rulemaking process and the DAC. Earlier this year, we published our proposed amendment to Part 107 that will allow for limited, safe operations over people, flights at night, and easier ways for Part 107 pilots to remain current in their certifications. We are working with our intergovernmental partners and the Office of Management and Budget to publish a proposed rule that will establish remote identification requirements for UAS. This will be a key milestone in promoting the safe operations of UAS as we continue to work with industry to develop the technologies that will enable routine beyond-visual-line-of-sight (BVLOS) and truly integrated operations. These advances offer significant new opportunities, and we will continue to work with the public and all relevant government and industry partners to realize these milestones.

We are doing more than rulemaking. Under Section 349 of the Act, we opened airspace authorizations to recreational flyers of UAS for quick, automated access to airspace. We are establishing a framework for broad, electronic testing that will make UAS instructions more accessible, and more understandable to more potential flyers, than ever before. This year, the FAA granted the first air carrier certification to a commercial drone operator for package deliveries in rural Christiansburg, Virginia, and other similar certifications will follow. The Department has not only been innovating the way forward, but we have been collaborating, building consensus, and constructing UAS solutions that promote safety, security, and responsibility, along with greater UAS operations.

We also have a responsibility to invest in our Nation’s infrastructure, and the funding for grant programs, including the Airport Improvement Program, in the Reauthorization will help to provide the best possible environment and experience for travelers to small and large airports. We have already implemented all of the statutory changes to the Essential Air Service (EAS) Program and the Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP), and we have a keen interest in administering these small community programs as effectively as possible.

Conclusion

While we have not yet completed all of our obligations under the Reauthorization, we have demonstrated our commitment to meeting them, and we have the right principles in place to accomplish the work. On behalf of the Secretary, I assure you that we will continue our diligent work and push forward, collaboratively, to achieve the safe, accessible vision for aviation that Congress set forth as a shared ideal in the Reauthorization. I am happy to join Dan Elwell and our staff to answer any further questions you may have on these provisions.

Thank you all for your time and attentiveness.

Implementation of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018

STATEMENT OF DANIEL K. ELWELL
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FAA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2018
SEPTEMBER 26, 2019

Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) ongoing work to implement the provisions of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (2018 Act or Act).  The 2018 Act is a wide-ranging reauthorization measure that provided the FAA with a host of critical new authorities and responsibilities on a broad range of aviation issues including enhancing safety, improving infrastructure, and enabling innovation. Although the 2018 Act reauthorized aviation programs for five years, the vast majority of the specific mandates require FAA action within the first year.  The Act’s focus on the first year of the reauthorization period, as well as other challenges that the FAA has encountered since enactment, has required the FAA to prioritize its implementation strategy.  Despite these challenges, I am pleased to report that the FAA has made substantial progress on fulfilling the congressional mandates in the Act, and I would like to summarize for you some of the FAA’s accomplishments.  

Aircraft Certification & Flight Standards

The regulations and policies that guide the FAA’s approach to aircraft certification and flight standards have evolved over time in order to adapt to an ever-changing industry, and to ensure that safety is always our first priority.  Continuous improvement is an integral component of the FAA’s safety culture and we are committed to learning from our experiences and using what we’ve learned to improve our process.

• Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee. The 2018 Act requires the Secretary of Transportation to establish a Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee (SOCAC) to advise the Secretary on policy-level issues facing the aviation community related to FAA safety oversight and certification programs and activities.  The Act further requires the new advisory committee to focus on a number of specific aspects of the FAA’s safety oversight role including, for example, organization designation authorization (ODA). 

  Secretary Chao this summer announced the appointment of 22 members to the advisory committee.[1]  The SOCAC consists of members representing stakeholders from across the aviation sector.  Additionally, the Secretary created a Special Committee within the structure of the SOCAC to specifically review FAA procedures for the certification of new aircraft.[2]  Through this framework, leading outside experts will help determine if improvements can be made to the FAA’s aircraft certification process.  As Secretary Chao emphasized, safety is the number one priority of the Department.  The FAA embraces meaningful oversight to make air transportation safer.  We welcome the work of the SOCAC and the Special Committee and look forward to reviewing their recommendations.

• Organization Designation Authorization Office.  The use of delegation, in some form, has been a vital part of our Nation’s aviation safety system since the 1920s.  Congress has continually expanded the designee program since creation of the FAA in 1958, and it is critical to the success and effectiveness of the certification process.  In March 2019, consistent with requirements under the 2018 Act, the FAA formally established the Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) Office within the Office of Aviation Safety.  This Office will ensure consistency of ODA oversight functions.  It will facilitate standardized application of policy, ensure the proficiency of ODA staff in executing oversight processes, monitor risk and performance issues, and facilitate continuous improvement of ODA program performance. 

• Aircraft Certification Performance Objectives and Metrics.  The 2018 Act requires the FAA to establish, in conjunction with the SOCAC, aircraft certification performance metrics and to apply and track the metrics for both the FAA and industry.  After a months-long effort to develop the metrics, the FAA, in collaboration with the Safety Oversight and Certification Aviation Rulemaking Committee (SOC ARC), established a list of 14 metrics in August 2019.  The FAA is prepared to track the metrics after coordinating with the SOCAC at their initial meeting in November 2019.  We expect that tracking these metrics will allow the FAA to identify inefficiencies, increase accountability, and improve safety. 

• Flight Standards Performance Objectives and Metrics.  The Act also requires FAA to establish, in conjunction with the SOCAC, flight standards performance metrics.   In August 2019, the FAA established the Flight Standards Transparency, Performance, Accountability, and Efficiency (FST PAcE) Aviation Rulemaking Committee.  This rulemaking committee has been tasked to make recommendations concerning the performance metrics for both the FAA and industry.

Aviation Safety

The 2018 Act is the most comprehensive aviation reauthorization measure enacted in over 30 years.  In addition to the 33 separate FAA rulemakings required under the Act, Congress also required the FAA to create new Aviation Rulemaking Committees (ARCs) and to task the existing Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) with specific responsibilities concerning various aviation safety objectives.  The list below provides a glimpse into some of the important work the FAA has accomplished in this area since enactment. 

• Flight Attendant Duty/Rest Period.  Ensuring that crewmembers are properly rested is a critical component of aviation safety.  In April 2019, the FAA initiated a rulemaking in accordance with the 2018 Act, to modify applicable rules to require a minimum rest period of 10 hours for any flight attendant scheduled to a duty period of 14 hours or less.[3]  In support of this effort, the FAA drafted an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that concluded OMB review last week and will be published soon.  [A1] We expect the process will provide us with data from aviation stakeholders and the general public to assist us in developing the proposed rule.

  Additionally, on June 18, 2019, the FAA published information to advise the industry of the flight attendant fatigue risk management plan requirements contained in the 2018 Act.  The FAA is actively receiving and reviewing air carrier flight attendant fatigue risk management plans.[4]

• Designated Pilot Examiners.  On June 20, 2019, the FAA directed the ARAC to review all regulations and policies related to designated pilot examiners.[5]  Through the ARAC, the FAA will gather recommendations on regulatory and policy changes necessary to ensure that an adequate number of designated pilot examiners are deployed and available to perform their duties to meet the growing needs of the public.

• Secondary Cockpit Barriers.  The 2018 Act requires the FAA to issue an order requiring the installation of a secondary cockpit barrier on each new aircraft that is manufactured for delivery to a passenger air carrier in the United States operating under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.[6]  The FAA is committed to implementing this requirement.  On June 20, 2019, the ARAC accepted an FAA tasking to provide recommendations regarding implementation of this provision.  The FAA looks forward to reviewing the ARAC’s recommendations and moving forward on this mandate.   

• Pilot Duty/Rest Period.  On May 21, 2019, the FAA established the Part 135 Pilot Rest and Duty Rules Aviation Rulemaking Committee. [7]  The 2018 Act requires the FAA to convene the committee to review, and develop findings and recommendations regarding, pilot rest and duty rules under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.

• Emergency Evacuation Standards.  On April 24, 2019, the FAA established the Emergency Evacuation Standards Aviation Rulemaking Committee.  This ARC will provide a forum for affected parties to discuss and provide recommendations to the FAA on certification of emergency evacuation systems, designs, and procedures.[8]  The formation of the ARC is a significant step forward in fulfilling the requirements under the 2018 Act to review and report on cabin evacuation procedures. 

• Safety Critical Staffing.  The 2018 Act requires the FAA to update its safety critical staffing model.  The staffing model is an important mechanism to help determine the number of aviation safety inspectors needed to fulfill the FAA’s safety oversight mission.  The staffing model has been updated and new staffing forecasts have been developed.  The FAA’s Aviation Safety Workforce Plan was delivered to Congress in March 2019.[9]

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

The 2018 Act devoted considerable attention to the FAA’s continued work on the integration of UAS into the National Airspace System (NAS).  The points below highlight some of the Agency’s important work in this area.  

• Remote ID.  To further the overall objective of integrating UAS into the NAS, Congress recognized the importance of remote identification when it enacted the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016.  That Act laid the foundation for the FAA’s work with operators and security partners to realize the importance of remote identification and reach a consensus on how to address it.  More recently, the 2018 Act provided the FAA with the authority to continue its work on this important issue.   In May 2019, the FAA published a notice implementing the 2018 Act’s legislative exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft.[10]  Additionally, in July 2019, the FAA expanded the Low Altitude Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC) system to include recreational flyers.[11]  This action increased the safety of the NAS and the ability of recreational UAS operators to gain rapid authorization for access to controlled airspace nationwide.  Further, the 2018 Act provided clarity on the requirements for recreational UAS operations and has allowed the FAA to move ahead with work on UAS registration and remote identification—both of which are critical to the success of commercial UAS operations and UAS integration more broadly. 
  
  Remote identification is fundamental to both safety and security of UAS operations.  Remote identification will be necessary for routine beyond visual line-of-sight operations, operations over people, package deliveries, operations in congested areas, and the continued safe operation of all aircraft in shared airspace.  It will also be foundational for the advancement of automated passenger or cargo-carrying air transportation, which is often referred to as Urban Air Mobility.  With remote identification, the FAA and our national security and public safety partners will be better able to identify a UAS and its operator, assess if a UAS is being operated in a clueless, careless, or criminal manner, and take appropriate action if necessary.  Remote identification is the FAA’s highest priority UAS-related rulemaking effort.  A draft Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on this subject is presently in Executive Branch clearance.

• Carriage of Property by Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems.  Congress also recognized, in the 2018 Act, the growing potential of UAS to deliver cargo.  In particular, the Act requires the FAA to update existing regulations to authorize the carriage of property by operators of UAS for compensation or hire in the United States.  The FAA has been working closely with the participants in the UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP) to accelerate safe UAS operations.  The IPP has evaluated a host of operational concepts including operations at night, over people, beyond the pilot’s line of sight, and package delivery.  This work is ongoing, and the FAA is currently meeting the intent of the mandate through an exemption process.  Earlier this year, the FAA granted the first air carrier certification to a commercial UAS operator for package deliveries in rural Blacksburg, Virginia.  Although the regulatory framework for broader UAS operations is not complete, the IPP has helped to inform the FAA and UAS operators of the extent to which operations can begin under existing rules.

• Local Public Safety Engagement on UAS Operations.  The 2018 Act directed the FAA to develop a comprehensive strategy to support and provide guidance for state and local public safety partners to identify and respond to threats posed by UAS as well as opportunities to use UAS to enhance the effectiveness of first responders.  The FAA has made a substantial and continuing effort to make the information needed by Federal, state and local entities readily available.  The FAA has assembled a great amount of useful and easily accessible information on its web page dedicated to public safety and government UAS issues.[12]  Here, government stakeholders can find information on how to operate UAS, how to start a UAS public safety program, and information on waivers and authorizations supporting emergency UAS operations.  The website also provides guidance on understanding local authority and the handling of UAS sightings and reports of non-compliant UAS operations.  The FAA’s informational toolkit consists of videos, guidance, and other resources that can assist local law enforcement agencies in their handling of situations involving UAS, including a public safety engagement plan.[13]   Throughout this information, the FAA has sought to emphasize that: (1) flying UAS is a regulated activity and there are Federal rules for flying UAS legally and safely; (2) flying at night, too close to people, or in restricted or controlled airspace is generally prohibited without FAA authorization; (3) the small UAS rule—part 107 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations—provides the framework for routine, low-altitude small UAS operations; and (4) FAA’s Law Enforcement Assistance Program (LEAP) can help local public safety partners distinguish between what is and is not allowed under Federal rules. 

Airports

In keeping with this Administration’s goal of improving our Nation’s airport infrastructure, the 2018 Act prioritized efforts to improve airport infrastructure planning and development.  The FAA is making continuous progress in carrying out the congressional mandates contained in the Act.  Some of the more important initiatives that the FAA is working on include the following:

• Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Streamlining.  In the 2018 Act, Congress directed the FAA to expand the streamlining concept for PFC applications to all eligible airports (no longer limiting it to just non-hub primary airports).  The FAA is making excellent progress in developing a proposed approach to a new pilot program, while also identifying opportunities to improve the existing process in the interim.  This potential approach would yield near-term benefits for the Nation’s airports, while also providing the necessary data to support the regulatory changes that are still required under the statute.  It will also help the FAA address concerns expressed by the airline community.

• Airfield Pavement for Non-Primary Airports.  The 2018 Act authorized states to request the use of highway specifications for airfield paving and construction if aircraft serving the airport do not exceed 60,000 pounds and safety would not be affected.  The FAA’s draft guidance on this provision is nearing completion and we anticipate that this authority will create some opportunities for capital cost reductions without eroding safety.  Additionally, as required by the Act, the FAA stands ready to provide technical assistance to any state that may want to develop alternative airport pavement standards where local conditions and locally available materials may make this desirable.

• Contract Towers.  The FAA is making significant progress in implementing the 2018 Act concerning the processing of new applications to the Contract Tower program and benefit-cost analysis of contract towers. In June 2019, the FAA re-opened the applications for new towers to the program.  To date, we have received nine applications for entry into the program.  In accordance with congressional direction, the FAA has conducted updated benefit-cost analyses for existing cost-share participants and will notify sponsor airports of the results by the end of September. 

  In addition, the FAA is making significant progress on implementing the 2018 Act’s elimination of the $2 million cumulative Airport Improvement Program (AIP) cap, and authorization for the FAA to use resources from the Small Airport Fund (a key component of the AIP) for eligible contract tower projects.  The FAA has moved swiftly to implement these changes with updated guidance, and is working with potential recipients of these funds for high-priority tower projects.

• Limited Land Use Regulation for Airports.  As part of the 2018 Act, Congress imposed limitations, with certain exceptions, on the FAA’s authority to regulate an airport’s acquisition, use, lease, encumbrance, transfer, or disposal of land and facilities.  Implementation of this section is a high priority for the FAA.  We have already identified more than 25 projects where airports have been able to move forward with minimal FAA involvement.  These early examples have provided valuable information that is helping the FAA to develop guidance to ensure that the provision is consistently implemented.   

• Airport Firefighting.  The 2018 Act enacted limitations on the FAA’s authority to require the use of certain firefighting chemicals.  In particular, starting three years after the date of enactment, the FAA is prohibited from requiring the use of fluorinated chemicals to meet performance standards for firefighting agents.  The FAA is making great progress in both the development of a facility to conduct live firefighting agent testing and, in its collaboration with other agencies, to advance identification and evaluation of alternative firefighting agents.[A2]   In the meantime, we have also implemented short-term changes to reduce the release of fluorinated chemicals into the environment by airports, including the approval of three testing systems that do not result in the external discharge of fluorinated chemicals.  We also issued guidance to airports alerting them to their ability to use Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funds to purchase these testing systems. 

Hazardous Materials in Air Transportation

Within the Department of Transportation, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has the primary responsibility for establishing multi-modal regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, to include establishing rules for the classification, containment, and communication of the presence of hazardous materials.  PHMSA is leading critical lithium battery regulatory initiatives prescribed by the 2018 Act and the FAA is working to ensure compliance with air transport safety regulations as well as conducting a public awareness campaign.

• Lithium Battery Safety Working Group and Safety Advisory Committee.  PHMSA is establishing a working group to promote and coordinate efforts related to the safe manufacture, use, and transportation of lithium batteries and cells. PHMSA is also establishing a lithium ion and lithium metal battery air safety advisory committee to facilitate communication between manufacturers, air carriers, and the Federal Government regarding the safe air transportation of lithium ion and lithium metal cells and batteries and the effectiveness and economic and social impacts of the regulation of such transportation.

• FAA Cooperative Efforts to Ensure Compliance with Safety Regulations.  In support of the broader hazardous materials safety effort, the FAA focuses on conducting oversight of the integration of hazardous materials safety measures into the aviation transportation system.  Accordingly, the FAA is leading efforts, consistent with the 2018 Act requirements, to improve interagency and international cooperative efforts to ensure compliance with safety regulations for air transport of lithium batteries. 

• Undeclared Hazardous Materials Public Awareness Campaign.  The FAA launched a new website that provides stakeholders— including shippers, air carriers, and the traveling public—with a one-stop shop they can easily access to find information and answers to their questions.[14]  The FAA recently provided Congress with an update of our public awareness campaign to reduce undeclared dangerous goods in air commerce.  The FAA is also participating in an industry/government/labor coalition that meets regularly to strategize on improvements to the messaging and other tools that industry uses to educate their customers on the proper procedures for transporting hazardous materials by aircraft.  Additionally, the FAA is supporting a PHMSA-led public education campaign known as “Check the Box” to increase public awareness of the risks associated with undeclared shipments of hazardous materials.[15]

Innovation

This Administration has made it a priority to engage with new and emerging technologies and enable innovation wherever possible.  Innovations in aviation and aerospace have benefitted our economy, transformed the way we travel, helped the environment, and saved lives. In the 2018 Act, Congress recognized the importance of innovation and the FAA is working to foster it while maintaining the safety of the NAS. 

• Supersonics.  In the 2018 Act, Congress supported FAA leadership on the creation of policies, regulations, and standards to enable the safe and efficient operation of civil supersonic aircraft. As part of the FAA’s efforts to implement this authority, the FAA in June 2019 published an NPRM intended to clarify and streamline the procedures for special flight authorizations for supersonic aircraft.[16]  The FAA is currently reviewing the comments we received on the NPRM and consider this rulemaking to be one of the FAA’s first actions in a continued and concerted effort to advance the operation of civil supersonic aircraft consistent with our other statutory and international obligations concerning noise and emissions. 

• Noise.  Over the decades, the aviation industry has made significant progress in the development of technology to reduce noise from aircraft.  Congress and the FAA have worked closely on this continued effort and the FAA is currently working to complete the noise-related requirements contained in the 2018 Act.  One provision directs the FAA to complete a study on the potential health and economic impacts of overflight noise.  The FAA recently awarded a $1.7 million grant to university members from the FAA’s Air Transportation Center of Excellence for Alternative Jet Fuels and the Environment in order to carry out the study.  The Act also required the FAA to designate a regional ombudsman for each of the FAA’s regions to act as a liaison with the public on issues of noise, pollution, and safety.  The FAA elected to designate our community engagement officers as the regional ombudsman.  They are in the process of being on-boarded and trained.  The FAA will announce the individuals as soon as training is completed, which we anticipate will be in October of this year.  The FAA is constantly working to foster better communication between the Agency and affected communities.

• Commercial Space.  The commercial space transportation industry in the United States is innovative, dynamic, and growing.  In Fiscal Year 2018, there were 32 launches and 3 reentries of commercial space vehicles for a total of 35 licensed activities—a record.  For Fiscal Year 2019, we had 32 licensed and permitted operations.  We are forecasting 35 to 54 licensed or permitted operations in Fiscal Year 2020, and between 33 and 56 licensed or permitted operations in Fiscal Year 2021.  In anticipation of this expected growth, the FAA has intensified its efforts to fulfill its commercial space transportation mission, maintaining the highest level of safety without stifling industry expansion and innovation.  Congress has recognized the importance of this growing industry and the 2018 Act called for the FAA to stand up an Office of Spaceports within the FAA’s Office of Commercial Space Transportation.  That Office of Spaceports is up and running and we are actively working with Spaceport licensees and stakeholders.  Additionally, although not mandated in the 2018 Act, the FAA is engaged in an important rulemaking to streamline existing launch/reentry regulations to create an environment that promotes economic growth, minimizes uncertainty, protects safety, fosters security, aligns with foreign policy interests, and encourages American leadership in space commerce.[17]The commercial space transportation market is changing rapidly and our regulatory process needs to keep up in order to protect public safety while enabling U.S. industry to innovate. We are currently analyzing industry comments to determine the best path forward to complete the rule.[A3] 

• Cyber Testbed.  Cybersecurity has become a significant component of nearly every modern aviation technological development.  The 2018 Act required the FAA to develop a cyber testbed for research, development, evaluation, and validation of air traffic control modernization technologies to ensure that they are compliant with FAA data security regulations before they become operational.  The FAA completed this action and the Cybersecurity Test Facility (CyTF) is now operational at the William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey.  The CyTF provides the FAA with an adaptable cybersecurity test environment to evaluate technologies prior to their integration into the National Airspace environment.  The facility is also used for the cybersecurity training of the FAA workforce.  Also, as part of an additional cybersecurity requirement under the Act, the FAA is updating its overall Strategic Cybersecurity Plan.  The Agency’s Cybersecurity Steering Committee has completed the yearly update, and we expect to publish the FAA’s 2020 - 2025 cybersecurity strategy in the coming weeks.

Conclusion

Chairman Larsen, I want to assure you, and each member of the Subcommittee, that the FAA is fully committed to carrying out the provisions of the 2018 Act as quickly as possible.  The FAA takes the congressional direction we receive very seriously and our employees work hard to achieve the mandated goals and directives.  We have to ensure, however, that the substance behind each requirement is not sacrificed in a rush to declare completion.  We are confident that we are making substantial and meaningful progress and we fully intend to keep Congress apprised of that progress on a regular basis.  This concludes my statement and I will be glad to answer your questions.   

###

FAA Aviation Certification

STATEMENT OF DANIEL K. ELWELL
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
OVERSIGHT HEARING: FAA AVIATION CERTIFICATION
SEPTEMBER 25, 2019

Chairman Price, Ranking Member Diaz-Balart, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to speak with you about the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) certification process.  The FAA’s aircraft certification processes are well-established, thorough, and have consistently produced safe aircraft designs.  Our aviation safety record in the United States bears this out; since 1997, the risk of a fatal commercial aviation accident in the United States has been cut by 94 percent.  And in the past ten years, there has been one commercial airline passenger fatality in the United States in over 90 million flights.  But one fatality is one too many, and a healthy safety culture requires commitment to continuous improvement.

The regulations and policies that guide our approach to aircraft certification have evolved over time in order to adapt to an ever-changing industry, and to ensure safety is always our first priority.  Continuous improvement is an integral component of the FAA’s safety culture and we are committed to learning from our experiences and using what we’ve learned to improve our process.  With that as the basis for our approach to certification, I would like to outline for you the significant aspects of FAA’s certification process and the recent initiatives that have been put in place to review our processes and procedures.  

Aircraft Certification

Information sharing is a cornerstone of aviation safety and has significantly contributed to the United States outstanding safety record.  One of the FAA’s core functions, aircraft certification, has always relied on the exchange of information and technical data.  The FAA certifies the design of aircraft and components that are used in civil aviation operations.  Some version of our certification process has been in place and served us well for over 60 years.  This does not mean the process has remained static.  To the contrary, since 1964, the regulations covering certification processes have been under constant review.  As a result, the general regulations have been modified over 90 times, and the rules applicable to large transport aircraft, like the Boeing 737 MAX, have been amended over 130 times.  The regulations and our policies have evolved in order to adapt to an industry that uses global partnerships to develop new, more efficient, and safer aviation products and technologies.  What has not changed is that, for any new project, the FAA identifies all safety standards and makes all key decisions regarding certification of the aircraft.

The use of delegation has been a vital part of our safety system, in one form or another, since the 1920s.  Congress has continually expanded the designee program since creation of the FAA in 1958, and it is critical to the success and effectiveness of the certification process.  Under this program, the FAA may delegate a matter related to aircraft certification to a qualified private person.  During the past few years, Congress has endorsed FAA’s delegation authority, including in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, which directed the FAA to delegate more certification tasks to the designees we oversee.

Delegation is not self-certification; the FAA retains strict oversight authority.  The program allows the FAA to leverage its resources and technical expertise while holding the applicant accountable for compliance.  The FAA reviews the applicant’s design descriptions and project plans, determines where FAA involvement will derive the most safety benefit, and coordinates its intentions with the applicant.  When a particular decision or event is critical to the safety of the product or to the determination of compliance, the FAA is involved either directly or through the use of our designee system.

In aircraft certification, both individual and organizational designees support the FAA.  The aircraft certification process has four stages: (1) certification basis; (2) planning and standards; (3) analysis and testing; and (4) final decision and certification of design.  The FAA determines the level of involvement of the designees and the level of FAA participation needed based on many variables.  These variables include the designee’s understanding of the compliance policy; consideration of any new and novel certification areas; or instances where adequate standards may not be in place.  The work FAA delegates primarily relates to analysis and testing.  About 94% of work in this area is delegated, and that work involves lower risk and routine items.  The FAA does not delegate the other functions.  The FAA determines the certification basis, identifies the standards, and makes all key and final decisions.  

The Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) program is the means by which the FAA may authorize an organization to act as a representative of the FAA under strict FAA oversight.  Currently, there are 79 ODA holders.  ODA certification processes allow FAA to leverage industry expertise in the conduct of the certification activities and focus on important safety matters.  The FAA has a rigorous process for issuing an ODA and only grants this authorization to mature companies with a proven history of designing products that meet FAA safety standards.  ODA holders must have demonstrated experience and expertise in FAA certification processes, a qualified staff, and an FAA-approved procedures manual before they are appointed.  The FAA delegates authority on a project-by-project basis, and the manual defines the process and procedures to which the ODA must adhere when executing the delegated authority.  The ODA holder is responsible to ensure that ODA staff are free to perform their authorized functions without conflicts of interest or undue pressure.

There are many issues that will always require direct FAA involvement, including equivalent level of safety determinations, and rulemakings required to approve special conditions.  The FAA may choose to be involved in other project areas after considering factors such as our confidence in the applicant, the applicant’s experience, the applicant’s internal processes, and confidence in the designees. 

Something that is not well understood about the certification process is that it is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that an aircraft complies with FAA safety regulations.  It is the applicant who is required to develop aircraft design plans and specifications, and perform the appropriate inspections and tests necessary to establish that an aircraft design complies with the regulations.  The FAA is responsible for determining that the applicant has shown that the overall design meets the safety standards.  We do that by reviewing data and by conducting risk-based evaluations of the applicant's work. 

The FAA is directly involved in the testing and certification of new and novel features and technologies.  When a new design or a change to an existing design of an aircraft is being proposed, the designer must apply to the FAA for a design approval.  While an applicant usually works on its design before discussing it with the FAA, we encourage collaborative discussions well in advance of presenting a formal application.  Once an applicant informs the FAA of the intent to develop and certify a product, a series of meetings are held both to familiarize the FAA with the proposed design, and to familiarize the applicant with the certification requirements.  A number of formal and informal meetings are held on issues ranging from technical to procedural.  Once the application is made, there is a structured way of documenting the resolution of technical, regulatory, and administrative issues that are identified during the process. 

Once the certification basis is established for a proposed design, the FAA and the applicant develop and agree to a certification plan and initial schedule.  In order to receive a type certificate, the applicant must conduct an extensive series of tests and reviews to show that the product is compliant with existing standards and any special conditions, including lab tests, flight tests, and conformity inspections.  These analyses, tests, and inspections happen at a component-level and an airplane-level, all of which are subject to FAA oversight.  If the FAA finds that a proposed new type of aircraft complies with safety standards, it issues a type certificate.  Or, in the case of a change to an existing aircraft design, the FAA issues an amended type certificate.

737 MAX Post-Grounding Actions

The crashes of two Boeing 737 MAX airplanes in five months placed a spotlight on safety and FAA’s approach to oversight of those we regulate.  With respect to the certification of the 737 MAX, the facts are these: it took five years to certify the 737 MAX.  Boeing applied for certification in January 2012. The certification was completed in March 2017.  During those five years, FAA safety engineers and test pilots put in 110,000 hours of work, and they flew or supported 297 test flights. 

As part of the FAA’s commitment to continuous improvement, we both welcome and invite review of our processes and procedures.  A number of reviews and audits have been initiated to look at different aspects of the 737 MAX certification.  After the FAA grounded the 737 MAX, Secretary Chao asked the Department of Transportation’s Inspector General to conduct an audit of the certification for the 737 MAX, with the goal of compiling an objective and detailed factual history of the activities that resulted in the certification of the 737 MAX aircraft.  Secretary Chao also announced the establishment of an expert Special Committee to advise the department on aviation safety oversight and certification programs, including a review of the FAA’s procedures for the certification of new aircraft.  The Special Committee has been formed within the structure of the Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory Committee (SOCAC).  Established by Congress in the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, the SOCAC is an independent panel that will advise the FAA more broadly on aircraft and flight standards certification processes, oversight of safety management systems, risk-based oversight efforts, and utilization of delegation and designation authorities. Secretary Chao recently announced that the SOCAC’s 22-member panel will include officials from Delta Air Lines, GE Aviation, United Airlines, Bell Helicopter Textron, Garmin, Wing Aviation LLC, Pratt & Whitney (a unit of United Technologies Corp), and Gulfstream (a unit of General Dynamics Corp), as well as union, airport, and trade association officials.

The FAA established a Joint Authorities Technical Review (JATR) to conduct a comprehensive review of the certification of the automated flight control system on the Boeing 737 MAX.  The JATR is chaired by former National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Chairman Christopher Hart and comprises a team of experts from the FAA, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the aviation authorities of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates. 

Additionally, the FAA met with safety representatives of the three U.S.-based commercial airlines that have the Boeing 737 MAX in their fleets, as well as the pilot unions for those airlines.  This meeting was an opportunity for the FAA to hear individual views from operators and pilots of the 737 MAX as the agency evaluates what needs to be done before the FAA makes a decision to return the aircraft to service in the United States.  In keeping with the FAA’s longstanding cooperation with its international partners, the FAA also hosted a meeting of Directors General of civil aviation authorities from around the world to discuss the FAA’s activities toward ensuring the safe return of the 737 MAX to service.  We continue to be in frequent communication with the international aviation safety community and are working closely with our counterparts to address their concerns and keep them informed of progress.

The FAA also initiated a multi-agency Technical Advisory Board (TAB) review of Boeing’s software update and system safety assessment in order to determine compliance.  The TAB consists of a team of experts from the U.S. Air Force, NASA, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, and the FAA.  None of the TAB experts have been involved in any aspect of the Boeing 737 MAX certification.  The TAB is charged with evaluating Boeing and FAA efforts related to the software update and its integration into the flight control system.  The TAB will identify issues where further investigation is required prior to approval of the design change.  The JATR is looking broadly at the original certification of the 737 MAX flight control system, while the TAB is evaluating Boeing’s proposed technical solutions related to the two accidents.  The TAB’s recommendations will directly inform the FAA’s decision concerning the 737 MAX fleet’s return to service.

The FAA is following a thorough process, not a prescribed timeline, for returning the 737 MAX to passenger service.  We continue to evaluate Boeing’s software modification and we are still developing necessary training requirements.  The 737 MAX will not return to service for U.S. carriers and in U.S. airspace until the FAA’s analysis of the facts and technical data indicate that it is safe to do so.

This concludes my statement.  I would be happy to respond to your questions.

Oversight of the Federal Transit Administration's Capital Investment Grant Program

STATEMENT OF
K. JANE WILLIAMS
ACTING ADMINISTRATOR
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HIGHWAYS & TRANSIT
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 16, 2019

Good morning Chairman Norton, Ranking Member Davis, and Members of the Subcommittee. I would also like to recognize Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Sam Graves. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today to report on the Federal Transit Administration’s Capital Investment Grants (CIG) program.

FTA’s mission is to improve public transportation for America’s communities. Since 1964, FTA has partnered with state and local governments to create and enhance public transportation systems. Today, FTA invests more than $13 billion annually to support and enhance rail, bus, ferry, and other transit services. This investment has helped modernize public transportation and extend service into large and small urban areas as well as rural communities across our nation.

The CIG program began as a loan program for transit projects in the 1960s. Today, the CIG program, authorized at $2.3 billion a year, is the Department’s largest discretionary grant program.

Today’s CIG program funds capital investments in heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, and bus rapid transit. These are high-impact, capital-intensive projects that receive substantial local and national attention. In fact, the CIG program accounts for approximately 20 percent of FTA’s annual appropriation but generates more scrutiny than all of our other programs combined.

My testimony today focuses on the Department’s track record in advancing CIG projects and dispelling misinformation about DOT’s current management of the program. First, let me summarize some of the important work FTA has accomplished under this Administration.

Departmental Priorities

In addition to funding projects through the CIG program, we have focused our attention on Secretary Chao’s three major priorities: safety, innovation and infrastructure investment.

As Chairman Norton and other Members are aware, FTA certified the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission (WMSC) as one of the 31 State Safety Oversight Agencies for states with rail transit last spring, ahead of the April 2019 statutory deadline. The WMSC certification allowed FTA to transfer direct safety oversight of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s (WMATA) Metrorail system to the WMSC after nearly four years of direct safety oversight authority by FTA. You will recall that the Department assumed direct safety oversight of WMATA in 2015 following serious safety lapses, including a smoke incident in which one passenger was killed and several injured.

FTA issued eight directives with 289 corrective actions; conducted four safety investigations focused on track integrity, stop signal overruns, traction power electrification, and vehicle securement; and completed more than 1,200 inspections. FTA partnered with WMATA General Manager Paul Wiedefeld to bring about significant systemic safety improvements across the WMATA system before transferring oversight to the WMSC. FTA continues to provide annual funding and technical assistance to the WMSC.

When I began my tenure at FTA in August of 2017, there was not one single State Safety Oversight Program certified by FTA. Thanks to the hard work of our team at FTA and action by our state partners, all 31 SSO programs are now certified.

FTA has continued to support transit across the nation, awarding more than $15 billion dollars in grants, including funding for bus fleet modernization, state of good repair needs, and planning for Transit-Oriented Development.

For example, last fall FTA awarded $12 million in Bus and Bus Facilities grants to Central Illinois. As Ranking Member Davis is aware, the grants enabled Illinois transit agencies to modernize bus fleets, improve service and enhance safety for riders.

Transit riders in Texas also benefited from an FTA Bus and Bus Facilities grant last year. A $7 million grant to the Texas Department of Transportation replaced older buses that exceeded their useful life in rural areas throughout the state. The grant, combined with matching funds, will replace more than 250 buses and bring the rural fleet in line with standards for state of good repair.

FTA supports Secretary Chao’s priority to advance innovation in transportation through a $15 million Integrated Mobility Innovation (IMI) discretionary grant program, which will fund some of the most promising new technologies. We expect the IMI program will help deliver new forms of mobility such as car-sharing services and automation to help meet transit rider expectations and increase ridership. 

About the CIG Program

The CIG program funds the construction of transit projects that have completed a statutorily defined multi-step, multi-year process.  As required by law, a proposed project must be evaluated and receive an overall rating by FTA based on both the project justification and the local financial commitment criteria at several points during the process. A project must receive a “Medium” or better overall rating to advance to the next step in the process, including before it can be considered for a construction grant agreement.

The CIG program is one of the government’s most complex and rigorous grant programs. Depending on the size and complexity of the project and the degree of local consensus, the process to reach a grant award can take on average two to four years, with the pace primarily depending on actions by the local project sponsor. Adding to the challenge, since 2013 the number of projects seeking funding has increased 112 percent, from 25 to 53. These projects have also increased in cost as well, with 31 percent of New Starts and Core Capacity projects currently in the program requesting more than $1 billion in CIG funding.

Successes

I have heard concerns expressed about FTA’s current approach toward the CIG program. Some say FTA has slowed the number of signed construction grant agreements compared to previous Administrations.

That, however, is not true. During the first two years of this Administration FTA advanced more CIG projects than the previous Administration’s first two years in office – an apt comparison given that every new Administration faces a transition period.

During the first two years of this Administration – beginning January 21, 2017 through the end of 2018 – FTA signed 13 CIG construction grant agreements totaling $3.3 billion in funding. In the same period during the previous Administration – January 21, 2009 through the end of 2010 –10 construction grant agreements were signed totaling $1.08 billion in funding.

We are continuing to process projects through the CIG program in accordance with the law and Congressional intent.

In 2017, the FTA executed three construction grant agreements: the Caltrain commuter rail electrification project in San Francisco, the Maryland Purple Line light rail project and the Ft. Lauderdale Wave Streetcar (although, ultimately, the Wave Streetcar project was cancelled by the local sponsor and withdrawn from the CIG program).

In 2018, FTA executed ten construction grant agreements, including eight Small Start agreements: for the Laker Line bus rapid transit (BRT) system in Grand Rapids; the Jacksonville First Coast Flyer BRT; the SMART Regional Rail in San Rafael, California; the Prospect MAX BRT in Kansas City; the Everett Swift BRT line and the Tacoma Link light rail extension in Washington State; the IndyGo Red Line BRT in Indianapolis; and the Albuquerque Rapid Transit BRT in New Mexico.

We ended the year by signing two Full Funding Grant Agreements: for the Santa Ana Streetcar in Orange County, California, and the Lynnwood Link light rail in Seattle. The Lynnwood Link Full Funding Grant Agreement was one of the agency’s largest in recent history, and included the most funding during my FTA tenure, providing $1.17 billion dollars to Sound Transit to help expand its light rail system. In addition, the project received a $658 million USDOT Build America Bureau Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan.

Lynnwood Link provides a good comparison to the previous Administration as well. From the time FTA received a complete information package from the project sponsor, it took FTA 133 days to complete the statutorily required evaluations and reviews to execute the Lynnwood Link grant award. That is the same amount of time the previous Administration took to complete the Los Angeles Westside Section 2 subway grant award. Both were large, complicated projects submitted by experienced project sponsors seeking CIG funding and TIFIA loans concurrently.

In 2019, we executed a construction grant agreement for the Minneapolis Orange Line BRT project, and a Full Funding Grant Agreement for Dallas Area Rapid Transit’s Core Capacity project.

Overall, since this Administration began through the end of June, FTA has executed 15 CIG grant agreements – for five New Starts and Core Capacity projects and 10 Small Starts projects throughout the nation totaling approximately $3.5 billion dollars in transit infrastructure investment.

That investment has continued this year, and FTA now has committed approximately $7.6 billion toward 25 new projects. To detail just this year’s investment, in 2019, FTA has allocated funding for the following new projects:

• Phoenix, AZ South Central light rail extension ($100 million)
• Jacksonville, FL Southwest Corridor BRT ($16.6 million)
• Reno, NV Virginia Street BRT Extension ($40.4 million)
• Albany, NY River Corridor BRT ($26.9 million)
• Portland, OR Division Transit BRT ($87.4 million)
• Seattle, WA Federal Way light rail extension ($100 million)
• Spokane, WA Central City Line BRT ($53.4 million)
• San Francisco, CA Transbay Corridor ($300 million)
• Los Angeles County, CA Westside Subway Section 3 ($100 million)

In addition to providing funding, FTA continues to work with project sponsors through the CIG process. For example, FTA has moved 18 projects into the first phase of the CIG program, the Project Development phase, during this Administration (1/21/17 through 6/30/2019); and advanced seven projects into the Engineering phase, including New York’s Canarsie power improvements project, Durham, NC light rail, Los Angeles Westside Subway Section 3, Phoenix South Central light rail, Seattle’s Lynnwood Link light rail, San Francisco Bay Area’s Transbay Corridor subway project and the Dallas platform extensions project that we advanced to a Full Funding Grant Agreement. FTA also approved 22 letters of no prejudice, which allow projects to proceed with initial construction activities using non-federal funds while retaining eligibility for future reimbursement should a CIG grant be awarded.

It is important to note that the President’s FY 2020 budget request supports the CIG Program. The FY 2020 budget proposal contains $1.5 billion dollars in funding for the CIG Program, including $500 million for potential new Capital Investment Grant projects that may become ready for funding during FY 2020, including Expedited Project Delivery (EPD) projects. In addition, the FY 2020 request includes $500 million in Transit Infrastructure Grants that would reinvest in existing transit assets, including fixed-guideway and buses and related equipment. This new funding would come from the General Fund, which competes across the entire government for funding. It also balances the need to expand with the importance of maintaining current systems in a state of good repair and modernizing bus fleets and facilities.

FTA also made significant progress in implementing the EPD pilot program. The program encourages collaboration between public and private entities to leverage federal expenditures on major transit infrastructure projects. The law limits the total federal contribution to 25 percent or less of the total project cost. With the federal government contribution maxed at 25 percent, the law indicates FTA must perform expedited reviews of project justification and local financial commitment and accelerate grant award decisions.

The law allows the award of up to eight grant agreements, and FTA received expressions of interest from four agencies representing seven projects. We are moving forward with discussions with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority in San José for the BART Silicon Valley Phase II subway project. We are also continuing to work with the other project sponsors as their projects may become ready for an agreement under the program.

A total of $125 million dollars has been appropriated for the EPD Program in fiscal years 2019 and prior.

Challenges

FTA is moving projects through the CIG program in accordance with the statutory requirements. The timing of construction grant awards depends heavily on project sponsors completing necessary work to meet those statutory requirements. The anticipated schedule for signing construction grant agreements can, and often does, change as project sponsors work to complete the myriad of requirements in law, regulation, and guidance for receipt of CIG funds.

In short, FTA does not sign construction grant agreements committing millions or billions of federal dollars until we have assurance from the project sponsor that all non-CIG funding is committed, all critical third-party agreements are complete, and the project’s cost, scope, and schedule are considered firm and final.

Frequently, we see proposed CIG projects delayed by challenges at the local level. Those challenges might include a lack of local consensus on project scope such as disputes over the location of proposed stations or alignments, or whether lines will run above or below ground – decisions that have huge budget implications and can often lead to litigation. For example, the Fort Lauderdale Wave Streetcar and the Durham, NC light rail projects were withdrawn due to challenges at the local level. The Maryland Purple Line construction grant award was delayed for a year by a series of court actions taken by local project opponents.

Another complicating factor is whether the project sponsor can secure all needed non-CIG funding, whether from other federal, state, local, or private sources.

Delays can also occur as part of the project sponsor’s procurement process or when a project sponsor changes its approach to construction.

This is a complicated process that relies on a number of actions and approvals at the local level and, as such, it is important to note that schedules for large capital projects can – and do – shift.

Program Policies
The CIG program fosters highly successful federal-local partnerships that positively impact millions of Americans across the country.

Last summer, in an effort to be transparent, FTA issued a Dear Colleague letter to remind project sponsors about the policies underpinning the CIG program and the rationale behind funding decisions. The letter emphasized the need for a firm local financial commitment and project readiness before a construction grant agreement could be awarded and recommended a balanced approach of local and state funding alongside federal grants and loans. We also reminded project sponsors that innovative approaches, including value capture, private contributions and public-private partnerships, could help them meet the matching funds requirements.

Although FTA has never required project sponsors to seek a lower CIG share, we have over the years, across multiple administrations, encouraged project sponsors to consider a more balanced local share to better leverage federal dollars to invest in additional projects throughout the nation. The statute requires that FTA consider the extent to which the project has a local financial commitment that exceeds the required non-government share of the cost of the project.  

In short, we want to ensure projects that are funded with taxpayer dollars are sound investments completed on time and within budget.

Also last summer, FTA updated the procedures it uses to review capital cost estimates. The law requires FTA to consider both project readiness and associated risk in evaluating projects for funding through the CIG program. The agency’s diligence in administering the program helps ensure that federal funds allocated to projects will be protected from the risks of cost overruns and schedule delays that CIG projects have often experienced.

Undertaking an analysis of project risk earlier in the process permits FTA and project sponsors to identify strategies to mitigate and reduce potential cost increases, ensuring that cost projections are realistic, the public knows what they are supporting, and that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely. The public, our shared constituents, expects us to deliver projects on time and within budget. Effective analysis and the mitigation of risk earlier in the CIG process, before FTA locks in the CIG contribution, provides the best way, short of a guarantee, to meet our public obligation.  

Simply put, it’s good governance.

Identifying risk earlier in the process also benefits project sponsors because it requires them to develop more realistic financial plans to pay for a project or identify changes to the design or project management to save costs when there is still time to implement such changes.

FTA intends to continue to evaluate each CIG project on its individual merits, consistent with the discretion afforded by law. FTA regularly engages with stakeholders in local communities, across the transit industry, and with our Congressional colleagues on the CIG program.

Conclusion

In conclusion, FTA will continue to process projects through the Capital Investment Grants program in accordance with the law. We remain committed to our mission to improve public transportation for America’s communities. I look forward to working with this Committee and each of you. I’m happy to answer any questions you may have.

Tribal Transportation: Self-Governance Program

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF  
ERIN KENLEY 
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION  
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE  
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, 
SUBCOMMITTEE FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 11, 2019

Chairman Gallego, Ranking Member Cook, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide this written statement for the record for your hearing on Tribal Infrastructure.  The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has a long history of working closely with Tribal governments, and I am proud of the relationships that we have built.  We are committed to partnering with Tribes to address their transportation needs.  I would like to update you on a number of efforts we have underway.

TRIBAL SELF-GOVERNANCE

The Department of Transportation (Department) is working to establish the Tribal Transportation Self-Governance Program created by section 1121 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act.  This program will establish a new option for Tribes to receive transportation funding via a compact and funding agreement negotiated between the Department and an eligible Tribe that elects to participate in the self-governance program.  The Department of the Interior and the Indian Health Service already have self-governance programs.

However, because the Department does not carry out services or activities on behalf of, or for the benefit of, Indian Tribes, the focus of the rulemaking to implement the program has been on eligibility, internal Departmental operations to provide flexibility and alleviate administrative burdens, and implementing those provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act that address self-governance, while acknowledging the Department’s inherently Federal functions.

We have made significant progress in implementing this program, consistent with our goal to provide maximum participation of Tribes in the development and management of transportation programs on Tribal lands.  To date, the Department has preliminarily identified a large number of formula-funded, discretionary, and competitive grant programs that may be included in a self-governance annual funding agreement.  The Department recognizes the sovereignty of Tribal governments and respects Indian self-determination and Tribal self-governance.  The Department is committed to upholding the Federal Government’s unique trust responsibility by honoring the government-to-government relationship between the United States and federally recognized Indian Tribes.  The Department’s goal is to continue to engage Tribal leaders to develop, to the maximum extent possible, a consensus self-governance regulation that adequately addresses the concerns of the Federal government and Tribal leaders.

Negotiations

In mid-2016, the Department began to implement the congressional directive to promulgate regulations to carry out a Tribal transportation self-governance program by convening a negotiated rulemaking committee composed of 18 Tribal and seven Federal representatives. The rulemaking committee met five times in 2016, four times in 2018, and twice this year to develop recommendations and proposed regulatory text for consideration by the Secretary.

Following enactment of H.R. 6414 (Public Law 115-235), which extended the statutory deadlines for rulemaking, the Department engaged the services of facilitators from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) to assist the committee in its negotiations.  The committee agreed to focus its efforts on discussing goals, intent, and concerns related to the program and its implementation, while charging a smaller, drafting work group to develop recommended language for consideration by the full committee.  The FMCS is also facilitating the work of this drafting group.

The drafting group met multiple times this spring to develop a proposed rule.  An additional plenary meeting was held last month, where the proposal was presented for consideration by the full committee.  The Department expects to issue a proposed rule this fall.

SAFETY ON INDIAN ROADS

Safety is the Department’s top priority and I am committed to enhancing transportation safety for Tribal communities.  As stated in the August 2017 Tribal Transportation Strategic Safety Plan, prepared by the Tribal Transportation Safety Management System Steering Committee, despite known underreporting, data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) showed 3,278 available fatality reports in Tribal areas during the five-year period from 2010-2014.  This is not acceptable.  We must improve transportation safety in Tribal areas.  FHWA is committed to working with our Tribal partners, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and other Federal agencies, States, and other public organizations to identify and implement solutions to address this important issue.

FHWA Programs

Tribal transportation facilities are essential to providing safe and adequate transportation to and within Tribal land.  A number of FHWA programs support Tribal transportation.  Some examples are detailed below.

Tribal Transportation Program

The Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) provides funding for projects to provide safe and adequate transportation and public road access to and within Indian reservations, Indian lands, and Alaska Native Village communities.  The TTP provides funding to improve transportation for all 573 federally-recognized sovereign Tribal governments and is the largest Federal Lands Highway program. The program is jointly administered by FHWA and the BIA. We work together to partner with Tribes and provide robust training and technical assistance to support Tribes in enhancing Tribal transportation.

In addition to promoting safety, the TTP contributes to the economic development, self-determination, and employment of Indians and Native Americans.  While the vast majority of TTP funds are distributed to Tribes via Tribal shares determined by statutory formula, the program includes a set-aside for the TTP Safety Fund (TTPSF), which makes funds available to Tribes through a competitive, discretionary program.  The TTPSF supports the Department’s safety priority and emphasizes the development of Transportation Safety Plans, which play a critical role in determining how to best address transportation safety needs.   One example of the way TTPSF funds benefit Tribes is a project funded by the TTPSF and TTP Tribal shares.  Using these funds, the Citizen Potawatomi Nation in Oklahoma designed and constructed a pedestrian pathway providing safety access between the Tribal area and the nearby city of Shawnee.

In addition to the TTPSF set-aside, the TTP includes a set-aside for the TTP Bridge Program, which addresses the important issue of bridge safety by providing resources for planning, design, engineering, preconstruction, construction, and inspection of bridge projects.  Tribes apply for these bridge funds, and, after a completed application package is received and accepted by FHWA, applications programmed for funding are placed in either a preliminary engineering or construction queue.  Applications are ranked and prioritized based on established criteria and those applications not funded remain in the queue and carry over from fiscal year to fiscal year until funded.

The TTP also includes a set-aside for Transportation Planning, which funds Tribal transportation planning activities.  The stated purpose of transportation planning is to fulfill goals by developing strategies, including strategies to address public safety, to meet transportation needs.

Not only has the TTP program improved safety, but it has also made infrastructure improvements in Tribal areas that are critical for survival.  For example, the Gwich’in people who live in the Yukon Flats area of Alaska make a living from hunting and selling handicrafts.  Their subsistence depends on these hunts, fishing, berry picking, and firewood gathering which was, just barely, facilitated by a bridge with a National Bridge Inventory (NBI) sufficiency rating of 4.8.  The bridge was closed to all traffic in 2013, greatly impacting the Gwich’in people. However, because of an FHWA Accelerated Innovation Deployment grant and the TTP Bridge Program, it was replaced with a Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System and bridge and reopened in October 2017.

Highway Safety Improvement Program

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a strategic, data-driven program that improves safety on all public roads, including roads in Tribal areas.  The program’s purpose is to achieve a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries.  HSIP funds have been used for a number of safety-related projects in Tribal areas.  For example, the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe in Washington State made safety realignments to the intersection of US-101 and Chicken Coop-Zaccardo with a project that combined TTPSF funds and Washington’s HSIP program funds.

Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects Program

The Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects (NSFLTP) Program provides funding for the construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of nationally-significant projects within, adjacent to, or accessing Federal and Tribal lands.  Congress funded this program for the first time in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2018 and provided additional funding in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019.  Consistent with the statutory selection criteria established in the FAST Act, evaluation of applications for this program includes consideration of the extent to which the project furthers the goals of the Department, including safety.  Priority was also given to large-scale projects with estimated construction costs of $50 million or more.  Last month, the Department selected six projects valued at $321.4 million for the first awards under this program.  The Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community is one of the applicants whose project was selected.  This project will widen and upgrade existing Pima Road to improve operations and safety.  Additionally, another selected project, in Utah, will benefit the Navajo Nation by making improvements to SR-262 and SR-162.

Tribal Technical Assistance Program

In addition to the programs described above, the Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) provides centralized delivery of highway-related training, technical assistance, and technology transfer to Tribes.  The TTAP operates five Virtual Centers of Excellence (CoE), each staffed with subject matter experts to provide training and technical assistance in their specialty areas.  One of the five CoEs is specifically focused on safety.  FHWA is committed to providing effective technical assistance to Tribes and is evaluating the centralized delivery model launched in 2018 over the course of a two-year pilot.  Through May 2019, a total of 3,360 training hours have been delivered under the pilot.  This is a 76 percent increase over the five-year average of training hours delivered from 2012 through 2016.  
In addition to the programs described above, some Tribes have benefitted from State planning and investment decisions with a State’s Federal-aid highway program funding.  FHWA will continue to work with our Tribal partners as we administer these programs and work together to achieve enhanced safety for all Tribes.

Tribal Transportation Safety Reports to Congress

Congress recognized the need to address Tribal transportation safety in the FAST Act.  Section 1117 of the FAST Act directed the Secretary to: (1) submit to Congress a report describing the quality of transportation safety data collected by States, counties, and Indian Tribes for transportation safety systems and the relevance of that data to improving the collection and sharing of data on crashes on Indian reservations, and (2) complete a study that identifies and evaluates options for improving safety on public roads on Indian reservations and submit to Congress a report describing the results of the study.

Tribal Governments & Transportation Safety Data

In order to evaluate the quality of transportation safety data, FHWA utilized a survey developed by the Tribal Transportation Safety Management Steering Committee (SMS Committee).  FHWA has played a key leadership role in this committee, which it co-chairs with the BIA. The goal of the SMS Committee is to prevent and reduce fatalities and injuries associated with the use of Tribal transportation facilities.  The SMS Committee members include representatives from Tribal governments and Federal agencies, including FHWA’s Office of Tribal Transportation, Office of Safety, and Resource Center.

The survey developed by the SMS Committee was made available to all federally-recognized Tribes and the States in which those Tribes are located.  The survey responses were analyzed to evaluate the quality of existing Tribal transportation safety data, opportunities for improved data collection, options for paperless reporting, and uses of crash data.  Based on that analysis, in May 2017, FHWA delivered to Congress the report required pursuant to section 1117(b) of the FAST Act:  Tribal Governments & Transportation Safety Data.

As stated in the May 2017 report, many Tribes are not adequately represented in State and national crash databases that often drive policy, program, and project decisions because some crash data is not shared with State governments.  Additionally, some incidents are undocumented.  The report noted that Tribes and States identified several barriers inhibiting the sharing of crash data, including Tribal-State communication, resources required to collect and share crash data, and Federal policy for crash reports.

The May 2017 report included many actions DOT agencies would take to improve the quality and availability of safety data in Tribal areas.  Consistent with these recommendations, FHWA continues to accept any form of crash data from Tribes when evaluating applications for TTPSF grants and has encouraged Tribes to conduct a self-assessment of traffic records and submit the assessment with their grant applications if formal documentation of crashes is not available.  FHWA also provides assistance as requested to encourage Tribal involvement in performance measure establishment.

Additionally, in coordination with FHWA, NHTSA updated their Traffic Records Program Assessment Advisory to include multiple references to Tribal governments.  This Advisory provides guidance on different assessment processes States may utilize to evaluate their State’s highway safety data and traffic records system.  The inclusion of references to Tribal governments in the Advisory will encourage new conversations about partnering with Tribes as States review their safety data systems.  In addition to coordinating within the Department, FHWA is involved in ongoing coordination with the Department of the Interior (DOI) to address standardizing collection of crash data by DOI law enforcement and continues to work as part of the SMS Committee to improve Tribal transportation safety.

FHWA will continue its efforts and partnerships to improve collection and sharing of safety data so that Tribes are better able to address safety issues through strategic safety planning and implementation.  Improved data collection and sharing also has the potential to afford Tribes improved access to funding opportunities, as analysis of information available via State and national crash databases can inform project decisions, such as the selection of roadway safety improvements through the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP).

Options for Improving Transportation Safety in Tribal Areas

In August 2017, the SMS Committee published the Tribal Transportation Strategic Safety Plan (Safety Plan), addressing topics selected based on review of multiple data sources.  Based on this plan, in January 2018, FHWA delivered to Congress the report required pursuant to section 1117(c) of the FAST Act:  Options for Improving Transportation Safety in Tribal Areas.  This report summarizes the topics addressed in the Safety Plan, separated into two categories:  priority and additional topics.  The priority topics are those which data indicates are national-level issues or which help establish data driven decision-making frameworks, while additional topics may be emerging issues or may be identified by a Tribe through analysis of incident history.  The priority topics identified in the January 2018 report are:  (1) Transportation Safety Decision Making Process; (2) Crash Data Collection, Sharing, and Analysis; (3) Occupant Protection, Child Passenger Seats, and Helmets; (4) Roadway Departure; (5) Impaired Driving; (6) Pedestrians; and (7) Availability of Public Safety Services.  In addition to identifying these priority topics, the report discusses strategies identified in the Safety Plan that Tribes may utilize to improve transportation safety, and recognizes that a Tribe’s unique incident history and local knowledge may identify other priority areas for which other strategies should be considered.

FHWA is promoting the priority topics identified in the January 2018 report at regional and national conferences and encouraging Tribes to consider these topics as they develop and update Tribal Transportation Safety Plans.  FHWA is committed to finding additional ways to encourage and assist Tribes with these topics and intends to partner through the SMS Committee to identify additional ways this can be accomplished.

In addition to identifying priority topics and strategies to address them, the January 2018 report identifies general options for Federal agencies to improve transportation safety in Tribal areas.  FHWA is already executing many of these recommended options, for example, by accepting the best available data when evaluating applications for TTPSF grants; fostering good relations and facilitating communication between Tribes and States; providing training, technical assistance, and resources to support Tribes in addressing safety issues; and continuing to actively collaborate with Tribal and Federal agency partners, including the BIA, in the SMS Committee.  FHWA will continue to look for additional opportunities to partner with Tribes, the BIA and other Federal agencies, and other organizations to enhance Tribal transportation safety.

The State of the Rail Workforce

Statement of Ronald L. Batory, Administrator
Federal Railroad Administration
U.S. Department of Transportation

Before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
 The Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials

The State of the Rail Workforce

June 20, 2019

Chairman Lipinski, Ranking Member Crawford. and Members of the Committee . . .

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today to discuss rail safety and the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) role in ensuring the safety and efficiency of our nation’s rail system.  The mission of FRA is to enable the safe, reliable, and efficient movement of people and goods for a strong America, now and in the future.  With Secretary Elaine L. Chao’s leadership, FRA executes its mission in many ways.  FRA enforces critical safety regulations and partners with industry to develop and promote both regulatory and non-regulatory solutions to safety issues.  FRA also seeks to manage federal investments in rail infrastructure in a cost-effective and efficient manner, and pursues research and development to advance innovative technologies and best practices in railroad operations and maintenance.  With a cadre of almost 400 railroad safety inspectors across the nation, FRA not only conducts traditional safety inspections and investigations, but FRA inspectors also forge strong collaborative relationships with railroad employees and seek opportunities to partner with those employees to ensure the safest rail working environment possible.

In recent years, we have seen great advances in railroad safety – both the train accident rate and the railroad employee injury rate have declined.  Despite these advances, rail accidents and employee injuries do occur.  FRA considers one rail accident or one employee injury one too many.  As the demand for both freight and passenger rail transportation in the U.S. grows, FRA recognizes its responsibility to ensure rail operations are the safest they can be, not only for the traveling public and the communities through which railroads operate, but also for the highly skilled employees who work diligently on the rail system every day. 

Safety is FRA’s top priority.  FRA believes safety and innovation go hand-in-hand.  From implementation of Positive Train Control (PTC) technology, to proactively addressing safety risks through our voluntary close call reporting program, to initiatives addressing the persistent challenges of grade crossing safety and the prevention of trespassers on railroad property, FRA believes both people and technology play critical roles. 

FRA addresses safety risks using a risk-based, proactive approach, focusing resources on the top safety issues while continuing innovative research to further advancements in rail technology and investing in rail infrastructure.  Last week, FRA announced the selection of $326 million in grant funds under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements grant program, with significant investments directed towards grade crossing, track, signal, and bridge improvements.

Today, I would like to highlight the top safety issues FRA is prioritizing – PTC, trespassing prevention, grade crossing safety, and FRA’s Close Call Reporting Program (commonly referred to as C³RS).

Positive Train Control

Railroads’ successful implementation of PTC remains at the top of our agenda.  As I’ve said before, implementation of PTC in rail operations represents the most fundamental change in rail safety technology in a century.  PTC uses industry-designed emerging technologies to monitor speed and automatically stop trains to prevent specific human-error accidents.  With the Secretary’s leadership, we have prioritized grant programs for PTC and helped railroads make significant progress towards full PTC implementation on the required main lines.  As of March 31, 2019, PTC systems were in operation on over 48,000 of the nearly 58,000 route miles subject to the statutory mandate – with the majority of implementation occurring in the last two years.  All 41 railroads subject to the statutory mandate complied with the December 31, 2018, requirements prescribed under the PTC Enforcement and Implementation Act of 2015.  Specifically, four host railroads fully implemented FRA-certified and interoperable PTC systems on their required mainlines by December 31, 2018, and the other 37 railroads sufficiently demonstrated they met, and in many cases exceeded, the six statutory criteria necessary to qualify for an alternative schedule and sequence to reach full implementation by December 31, 2020.   

With approximately 20 months remaining until the statutory deadline, the Department and FRA will continue to provide extensive technical assistance and perform comprehensive oversight, to both host and tenant railroads, and hold each railroad accountable for the timely implementation of an interoperable PTC system on all lines subject to the statutory mandate.  Following the series of PTC symposia held throughout 2018, FRA has already held two of six collaboration sessions planned in 2019-2020.  These sessions bring together stakeholders to share best practices and jointly address key challenges.  FRA PTC field staff continue to prioritize technical assistance based on each of the 37 host railroads’ risks to full implementation, with a specific focus on testing, revenue service demonstration and interoperability.   In support of our FRA PTC field staff, and to support railroads interoperability challenges, this summer FRA plans to meet with each of the 101 Class II and III tenant railroads required to implement PTC by their host railroad to offer technical assistance with respect to PTC system implementation. 

Trespassing Prevention and Grade Crossing

Also at the top of FRA’s agenda is the prevention of trespassing incidents on railroad property and increasing grade crossing safety.  Trespassing on railroad property is the leading cause of all rail-related deaths in the United States.  Grade crossing incidents are the second.  Together, over the past 10 years, they have accounted for more than 95% of all rail-related fatalities.  One of my top objectives this year is to lead, promote, and strengthen efforts among all public, private, and government stakeholders to increase awareness of grade crossing safety issues and trespasser prevention strategies.  Preventing trespassing and improving grade crossing safety is critical not only to save the lives of those involved, but also to help ensure railroad employees do not needlessly have to suffer the severe psychological and emotional consequences such incidents may cause.

Trespassing Prevention

Last year, at Congress’s direction, FRA developed a national strategy to prevent trespassing incidents.  FRA’s strategy recognizes that trespassing is a complex problem and solutions will necessarily differ based on localized circumstances.  FRA identified the top 10 U.S. counties with the most railroad trespasser casualties in recent years.

FRA’s strategy focuses on four strategic areas: (1) data gathering and analysis; (2) community site visits; (3) funding; and (4) partnerships with affected stakeholders.  Success of our national strategy, however, depends on meaningful input and participation by all stakeholders – including State and local governments, railroads, labor organizations, and the public – as well as the availability of funding.

FRA intends to hold trespasser prevention summits in each of the top 10 counties identified.  The summits will include local community leaders, law enforcement, the railroads operating in and through the county, the public, and FRA, with the goal of identifying trespassing hotspots within the community, developing local improvement recommendations for trespass mitigation and fatality prevention, assisting with trespasser prevention outreach campaigns, and ensuring all stakeholders are equipped with the necessary information on the availability and process for applying for various forms of FRA grants and other funding. 

Improving Grade Crossing Safety

Highway-rail grade crossing incidents are the second leading cause of rail-related deaths, accounting for approximately 30 percent of all rail-related fatalities and are the top cause of all railroad accidents.  Increasing grade crossing safety will not only reduce the number of fatalities, but it will also improve the safety and efficiency of the rail transportation network.  FRA expects the risk of highway-rail grade crossing incidents to grow as both train and highway traffic increases during the next decade.

In October of last year, the Department hosted the first Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety and Trespass Prevention Summit.  The event brought together safety advocates, railroads, labor organizations, law enforcement, and both Canadian and U.S. transportation officials to exchange ideas and begin developing best practices on implementing a coordinated national response to the growing problem of trespassing incidents on railroad property and to increase grade crossing safety.  At the conclusion of the Summit, FRA committed to hosting a series of listening sessions to identify technology to improve the functioning of grade crossing warning systems and safety, as well as barriers to implementation.

This past spring, FRA hosted those listening sessions.  We brought together railroads, labor organizations, signal equipment manufacturers, trade and advocacy groups, technology companies, and representatives from federal, state, and local governments to discuss ways of improving grade crossing safety through technology.  Participants discussed demonstrated and emerging technologies that could be used to improve grade crossing safety and ideas for needed regulatory changes to help field new grade crossing technology.  Ideas included both highly complex technological improvements and lower tech improvements.  FRA is using all the information and ideas gathered through this symposium to develop a three-year plan to improve grade crossing safety.  We will hold a follow-up symposium this fall to continue the dialogue with all stakeholders.  We will continue to collaborate with our modal partners including the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, to provide ongoing assistance to all stakeholders, and develop and promote new tools and resources to support grade crossing safety.

Confidential Close Call Reporting System (C³RS)

C³RS is a voluntary FRA program enabling participating railroads’ and their employees to improve the safety culture of their organizations and to proactively identify and address safety issues before accidents occur.  For properly reported and qualifying close calls, employees are protected from company discipline, and both employees and railroads are protected from FRA enforcement.  Root cause analysis is conducted on individual close call events, and collectively, safety hazards are identified.  Railroads are then empowered to develop solutions to proactively mitigate or eliminate the identified hazards, thus avoiding the costs and often devastating consequences of an accident or incident.

FRA first piloted the C³RS program in 2007 with the train, yard, and engine craft employees of 4 railroads.  Since then, the program has grown to 15 railroads with over 23,000 employees involved from all crafts. 

On participating railroads, several tangible safety improvements have resulted from the C³RS program thus far.  Most notably, derailments caused by human factors are down 41 percent and derailments caused by run-through switches are down 50 percent.  The program has also led to more qualitative benefits such as improved collaboration between labor and management on safety improvements, and in several instances, the discovery of multiple factors playing a role in a single event, leading to more systemic corrective actions.  This level of collaboration and data analysis is often stifled in the traditional environment of railroad discipline.

FRA is actively working to increase railroad and employee participation in the program and to identify alternative funding sources for the program.  Specifically, FRA is evaluating ways to allow industry to provide funding for the program and how to potentially leverage machine learning technology to effectively automate the processing of close call reports in the future. 

Going forward, FRA is prioritizing the expansion of the C³RS program, along with other industry partnerships designed to ensure a transparent sharing of information among all stakeholders and enabling the effective identification, analysis, and mitigation or elimination of risks throughout the rail operating environment.

Conclusion

FRA has a responsibility to the public, to railroad employees, and to railroads themselves to lead industry to the next generation of safety improvements.  FRA is committed to continuing to work with all stakeholders to achieve this new level of safety.  This next generation of safety improvements will necessarily involve change.  One constant that will remain, however, is FRA’s commitment to working with all stakeholders to achieve this new level of safety.  FRA recognizes the unique position of railroad employees in ensuring safety both now and in the future.  FRA safety inspectors are “on the ground” throughout the United States.  While they are responsible for conducting periodic inspections for compliance with FRA’s safety regulations and conducting accident investigations, they are also prime points of contact for railroad employees to share any concerns, suggestions, or ideas related to railroad safety.  FRA has long-established processes and procedures in place to ensure the anonymity of any individual sharing safety concerns with the agency.

I believe that with clear and open communication and a commitment to safety among all stakeholders – including FRA, railroad employees, and railroad management – our nation’s rail industry can become safer and stronger than ever before.

Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Standards for Light-Duty Cars and Trucks

Testimony of
Heidi King, Deputy Administrator
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

 Committee on Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce
Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change
United States House of Representatives
Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Standards for Light-Duty Cars and Trucks

10:00 AM - June 20, 2019

Thank you Chairwoman Schakowsky, Chairman Tonko, Ranking Member McMorris Rodgers, and Ranking Member Shimkus.

This year is the 10-year anniversary of the first proposed National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) national corporate average fuel-economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas program.  Last year, NHTSA and EPA together proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule to establish new fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for model year (MY) 2021–2026 passenger cars and light trucks.

These standards are important to all Americans because they will determine what new passenger cars and light trucks will be available to carry our families to work and school, to haul goods on our farms and ranches, to travel across this great country’s mountains and in its cities in good weather and bad.

The regulatory action responds to the commitment made by the Agencies in the joint 2012 final rule, where NHTSA promised that “NHTSA’s rulemaking, which will incorporate findings from the midterm evaluation, will be a totally fresh consideration of all relevant information and fresh balancing of statutory and other relevant factors in order to determine the maximum feasible CAFE standards for MYs 2022–2025.” EPA similarly committed to a mid-term evaluation of the greenhouse gas standards for those model years.

After fresh consideration of relevant information, the Agencies explained in the proposed SAFE Vehicles Rule that many of the predictions made years ago were likely incorrect. Thus, information currently available suggests that the CAFE standards previously set for model year 2021 are unlikely to be maximum feasible, and the greenhouse gas standards previously set for MY 2021 are unlikely to be appropriate under the Clean Air Act. The Agencies sought comment on a range of potential standards for MY 2021 through 2026.

In the Energy Policy Conservation Act, as amended by the Energy Independence and Security Act, Congress directs NHTSA to determine the maximum feasible level of fuel economy standards for each model year, considering four statutory factors: 1) technological feasibility, 2) economic practicability, 3) the effect of other motor vehicle standards of the Government on fuel economy, and 4) the need of the United States to conserve energy.  In addition, NHTSA considers other relevant factors, such as the effect of the CAFE standards on motor vehicle safety.

Consistent with that framework, my colleagues at NHTSA and EPA are working together to ensure that this important rule will rely on the best possible engineering and economic information, data and science, and that we review the comments thoroughly in order to assure a final rule that is reasonable, appropriate, transparent, and consistent with the law given current facts and conditions.

I assure you, the SAFE Vehicles Rule will establish maximum feasible standards to which vehicle manufacturers must comply; the SAFE Vehicles rule contains no language that would prevent any auto manufacturer from designing and building next-generation highly fuel-efficient vehicles, including hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, battery electric vehicles, hybrids, and plug-in hybrids in response to market demands. I am excited – we are all excited -- to witness the expansion of the diverse designs and power trains, providing more consumer choice.

We have been working to address questions raised in the earlier rulemakings with respect to the potential impact of this important rule on safety of the motoring public.  

• We know that newer cars are safer and cleaner than older cars.
• We also know that consumers can choose whether to keep their older car or to purchase a newer, safer, cleaner car. This is particularly relevant since there are already more cars than adults in our country – about 270 million cars and 260 million adults, which translates to about 240 million licensed drivers.
• Overly ambitious standards that dramatically increase the price of a new car can be counterproductive and hinder safety by discouraging people from replacing their older cars with cleaner, safer, newer cars.

And this important rulemaking comes along with concerns that we are facing an affordability crisis in the new car market.  The average price of a new vehicle continues to break records—exceeding $37,000 in both April and May, according to Kelley Blue Book.  New vehicle prices have risen 29% in the past decade, despite median family income growing only 6% during that period, according to Edmunds.  Continuing to increase prices due to regulatory burdens will price more and more consumers out of safer, cleaner, and more efficient vehicles.

And as fuel economy continues to improve, the incremental gains realized by consumers diminish.  This is because fewer gallons are saved from incremental improvements.  If a person who drives 15,000 miles per year in a 15-mpg truck decides to trade it in for a new 20 mpg truck, they will see their fuel consumption drop from 1,000 gallons to 750 gallons — saving 250 gallons annually. But somebody trading a 30-mpg car they drive 15,000 miles per year for a 40-mpg car reduces consumption from 500 gallons/year to 375 gallons/year — only 125 gallons even though the mpg improvement is twice as large.  And going from 40 to 50 mpg only saves 75 gallons/year.  Yet, each additional fuel economy improvement becomes much more expensive as the low-hanging fruit of low-cost technological improvement options are picked.

All of this comes after years of significant fuel economy improvements.  Today, automakers are struggling to meet the existing standards.  EPA’s latest “Trends Report” showed that despite record fuel economy gains, all but three of the thirteen major automakers failed to meet their performance targets for the 2017 Model Year and were forced to spend credits they had previously earned or acquired additional credits from competitors. 

The fundamental principles remain:  Newer cars are safer and cleaner than older cars.  Consumers are more likely to upgrade to newer, cleaner, safer cars if costly regulations don’t raise the price beyond consumers’ means.

Thank you for hosting this important hearing and I look forward to your questions.

Short Sea Shipping: Rebuilding America’s Maritime Industry

STATEMENT OF MARK BUZBY
ADMINISTRATOR
MARITIME ADMINISTRATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

HEARING ON “SHORT SEA SHIPPING: REBUILDING AMERICA’S MARITIME INDUSTRY”

June 19, 2019

Good afternoon, Chairman Maloney, Ranking Member Gibbs and members of the Subcommittee.  I appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the Maritime Administration’s (MARAD) efforts to foster, promote and develop short sea shipping in the United States through the America’s Marine Highway Program (AMHP).

The Marine Highway System consists of our Nation’s navigable waterways including rivers, bays, channels, the Great Lakes, the Saint Lawrence Seaway System, coastal, and certain open-ocean routes.  These navigable waterways touch 38 states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.  The purpose of the AMHP is to further incorporate these waterways into the overall U.S. transportation system, especially where marine transportation services are the most efficient, effective, and sustainable transportation option.

Congress established the AMHP through the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, P.L. 110-140.  Recognizing the potential in the program, in following years Congress expanded and modified the program.  The Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012, P.L. 112-213, expanded the program to include efforts to increase the utilization and efficiency of domestic freight and passenger transportation on Marine Highway Routes between U.S. ports.  The National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2016, P.L. 114-92, broadened the definition of short sea shipping to include more kinds of cargo and cargo or freight vehicles carried aboard commuter ferry boats.

Purposes of the America’s Marine Highway Program

The AMHP is intended to, among other things, reduce travel delays caused by congestion, cut greenhouse gas emissions, conserve energy, improve safety, and reduce landside infrastructure costs.  Marine transport of goods offers a safe and efficient option for shippers as reflected in the tables below:[1]

Congestion on our surface transportation system significantly impacts our economic prosperity and quality of life.  One study estimates that in 2014 congestion cost America’s urban commuters an estimated $160 billion in wasted time and fuel; trucks account for $28 billion of this cost. [1]  Overall, the volume of imports and exports transported by our freight system is expected to more than double over the next 30 years. This will have implications for ports, which handle approximately 70 percent of America’s international trade by volume.[2]  Most of this additional cargo will ultimately move along our surface transportation corridors, many of which are currently at or beyond capacity.  Expanding existing or establishing new marine highway services on commercially navigable waterways is a cost-effective way to meet our freight transportation needs and relieve landside congestion.

The AMHP consists of three elements: Route designation, project designation, and grants.

Marine Highway Routes

Marine Highway Routes are commercially navigable coastal, inland, and intracoastal waters of the United States as designated by the Secretary. This includes connections between U.S. ports and Canadian ports on the Great Lakes-Saint Lawrence Seaway System, and non-contiguous U.S. ports. Marine Highway Routes are a component of the Nation’s surface transportation system. Public entities may apply to MARAD at any time to request that the Secretary of Transportation designate (i.e., establish) a Marine Highway Route. To be eligible for designation, at a minimum a route must relieve landside congestion along coastal corridors or promote short sea transportation, as well as meet AMHP objectives described in regulations.[3]  As of this month, DOT has designated 25 Marine Highway Routes comprising a significant portion of our navigable waterways.[4]  The Marine Highway Routes are numbered akin to the interstate highways that they generally parallel.  The latest route to be designated, the M-H1, are the waters in and around Hawaii.

Marine Highway Projects

Marine Highway Projects are planned or contemplated new services, or expansions of existing services, on designated Marine Highway Routes, that seek to provide new modal choices to shippers, reduce transportation costs, and/or provide public benefits, which include reduced air emissions, reduced road maintenance costs, and improved safety and resiliency impacts. These projects represent concepts for new, or expansion of existing, marine highway services that have the potential to offer public benefits and long-term sustainability without long-term Federal support.  The desired outcome is that designated projects will help start new businesses or expand existing ones to move more freight or passengers along America’s navigable coastal, inland, and intra-coastal waters.  The AMHP publicizes a semi-annual “Call for Projects.”  In response, applicants propose projects and the Secretary of Transportation may designate qualified projects as “Marine Highway Projects.”

Marine Highway Grants

Competitive grants form the third component of the AMHP.  Only Marine Highway Projects designated by the Secretary are eligible to apply for Marine Highway Grants.  Grantees may use the funds to develop and expand the availability of documented vesselsand port and landside infrastructure. Only projects the Secretary designates are eligible to apply for Marine Highway Grants.  Either the grant applicant, or private entities with endorsement by the applicant, are eligible to apply for grant funding.  There are currently 25 designated projects.[5]

To date, DOT has awarded $24 million in Marine Highway Grants supporting six new and two existing marine highway services.  In two instances, we funded vessel construction.  In another case, interest from users on the inland waterways spurred Taylor Manufacturing of Louisville, MS, to engineer a “negative drop” reach-stacker used to load containers into river hopper barges; that equipment had previously only been available from foreign sources.

The AMHP is clearly having an impact. Metrics we gather to measure that impact include the number of truck road miles that have been eliminated.  Using Federal Highway Administration formulas, MARAD estimates the public benefits of funded projects in dollars.  In FY 2016 AMHP grant-funded services moved 35,215 twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs) by water saving approximately $1.5 million in road maintenance and congestion costs.  These savings were from the M-64 Express Marine Highway Service, running between Hampton Roads and Richmond, Virginia, the only grant funded marine highway service operating in the United States at that time.  That number has continued to increase.  In FY 2017 savings calculations were an estimated $3.6 million and increased to more than $4.9 million in FY 2018.  This positive momentum is a result of additional new services being added:  the Baton Rouge to New Orleans Service and the New York Cross Harbor Service.  While the numbers may be small relative to the initial grant, the equipment will operate for decades in most cases, and the reductions in infrastructure damage, emissions, and fatalities will be felt for years.

Actions that could expand the America’s Marine Highway Program’s reach

We manage the AMHP with an eye toward innovation and constant improvement. To that end, we are considering specific ways MARAD can maximize the program’s effects.  First, we are exploring opportunities with other Federal entities to transport federally-owned or generated cargo using a short sea transportation project when practical or available.  We are also exploring partnerships with the EPA’s Ports Initiative and Smart Way Programs, and other such programs, to tout the efficiencies and environmental benefits of utilizing the Marine Highway System.  Finally, MARAD has been proactive in engaging with local and regional officials, and private entrepreneurs, in analyzing specific logistical challenges where a waterborne solution may offer the best and most sustainable approach.

CONCLUSION

We are proud of the effect that the AMHP has had and are excited about the momentum it is building in the interest of national security, economic success, and the lives of the American people, but we are not done.  We will continue to support innovation through the AMHP.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the AMHP and MARAD’s efforts to expand short sea shipping opportunities. I appreciate the Subcommittee’s continuing support for maritime programs and I look forward to working with you on advancing maritime transportation in the United States.  I will be happy to respond to any questions you and the members of the Subcommittee may have.

ATTACHMENT 1

ATTACHMENT 2

List of Designated Marine Highway Projects