<DOC>
[110 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:38024.wais]
S. Hrg. 110-186
RISING HIGHWAY FATALITIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before a
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SPECIAL HEARING
APRIL 19, 2007--WASHINGTON, DC
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
38-024 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866)512-1800
DC area (202)512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
__________
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont TED STEVENS, Alaska
TOM HARKIN, Iowa ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
PATTY MURRAY, Washington MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
JACK REED, Rhode Island SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
BEN NELSON, Nebraska LEMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
Charles Kieffer, Staff Director
Bruce Evans, Minority Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on Transportation and Housing and Urban Development, and
Related Agencies
PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chairman
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas
TOM HARKIN, Iowa TED STEVENS, Alaska
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado
THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi (ex
officio)
Professional Staff
Peter Rogoff
William Simpson
Meaghan L. McCarthy
Rachel Milberg
Jon Kamarck (Minority)
Matthew McCardle (Minority)
Ellen Beares (Minority)
Administrative Support
Teri Curtin
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Opening Statement of Senator Patty Murray........................ 1
Opening Statement of Senator Christopher S. Bond................. 4
Statement of Hon. Nicole R. Nason, Administrator, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Department of
Transportation................................................. 7
Prepared Statement of........................................ 8
Highway Safety Challenges........................................ 8
Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Request Summary.......................... 10
Behavioral Safety................................................ 11
Vehicle Safety................................................... 11
National Driver Register......................................... 11
Highway Safety Grants............................................ 12
Support of the President's Management Agenda..................... 12
Statement of Hon. John H. Hill, Administrator, Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration, Department of Transportation.... 13
Prepared Statement of........................................ 14
Safety is Number One............................................. 14
Safety Partnerships With States.................................. 15
TACT Programs.................................................... 15
Safety Grants to States.......................................... 15
Safety at the Border............................................. 16
Safety Through Innovative Technology............................. 16
Safety Priorities--Fiscal Year 2008.............................. 16
Driver Focus..................................................... 17
Bus Safety....................................................... 17
Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 and COMPASS................... 18
Organizational Excellence........................................ 18
Statement of Hon. Mark V. Rosenker, Chairman, National
Transportation Safety Board.................................... 19
Prepared Statement of........................................ 20
Safety Issues.................................................... 21
NTSB Appropriations.............................................. 24
Questions Submitted to Hon. Nicole R. Nason...................... 39
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg............... 39
Questions Submitted to Hon. John H. Hill......................... 40
Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray...................... 40
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg............... 41
Questions Submitted to Hon. Mark V. Rosenker..................... 42
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg............... 42
RISING HIGHWAY FATALITIES
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 2007
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Transportation and Housing
and Urban Development, and Related Agencies,
Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:03 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Murray and Bond.
opening statement of senator patty murray
Senator Murray. We will come to order.
Today, we are going to take testimony on the tragic trend
of rising fatalities on our Nation's highways. Right now, an
average of 119 people die every day in motor vehicle crashes.
That means that every 12 minutes, a father, a mother, a
brother, a sister, or a child is stolen from the American
family.
Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for
Americans between the ages of 3 and 33. They remain one of the
top five leading causes of death for middle-aged Americans.
During our first subcommittee hearing held back in
February, I reminded Transportation Secretary Mary Peters that
when she served as Federal Highway Administrator in 2003, she
noted that there were 41,000 highway fatalities that year. She
concluded that our country was facing a national safety crisis.
Unfortunately, since 2003 the number of annual fatalities has
now risen to 43,400. The crisis has not abated. It has
worsened.
And even more worrisome than the raw number of people being
killed on our highways is the fact that for the first time in
several years the fatality rate--the statistical likelihood
that a citizen will be killed on our highways--has actually
increased. After many years of slow but steady progress, the
numbers are now going in the wrong direction.
If we are going to get back on track to reducing highway
fatalities, it is clear that the old solutions are not going to
be enough. Only half of the States have enacted primary
seatbelt laws. And as we learned in the recent incident
involving our former colleague, Governor Corzine, it is not
enough just to enact primary seatbelt laws. These laws, like
the posted speed limits, need to be respected and enforced.
But there are many other factors that add to our rising
fatality rate. Not enough States are taking repeat drunk
drivers off the road permanently. And not enough States are
requiring safe practices by our motorcyclists.
We need some new and innovative solutions. And the Federal
Government needs to be a partner in these solutions.
I am very disappointed to see that rather than exhibiting
leadership and attacking the problem, the Bush administration
appears to be retreating. A few years ago, the Bush
administration itself established the admirable goal of
reducing the highway fatality rate to 1 per 100 million vehicle
miles traveled by 2008. But rather than put forward bold new
initiatives to reach that goal, the Bush administration has
decided to weaken the goal and delay it until 2011.
Rather than just admitting defeat, the administration
should be redoubling its efforts and putting forward proposals
that will truly alter the behavior of drivers, pedestrians, and
even Federal enforcers and regulators.
Testifying before us this morning are the administration's
two principal point people on highway safety. Nicole Nason is
the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA). John Hill serves as our chief truck
safety official, the Administrator of the Federal Motor Vehicle
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).
I am also pleased that we are joined by Mark Rosenker. He
is the Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB). This is his first appearance before this subcommittee.
The NTSB is probably best known for its work investigating
aviation crashes, but its work in recommending safety
improvements on our highways actually impact a great many more
travelers. The NTSB has no regulatory or enforcement functions,
but they do carry extraordinarily important responsibilities in
investigating accidents and making recommendations for safety
improvements to Federal and State agencies and transportation
operators to ensure a safer transportation network.
When the NTSB makes a recommendation to a Federal agency,
we expect that Federal agency to take notice. And when the NTSB
puts that recommendation on its list of most wanted safety
recommendations, we expect that Federal agency to act promptly.
Finally, when the NTSB determines that an agency's response
to one of their most wanted safety recommendations is
unacceptable, this subcommittee wants answers. We want to know
why the agency is turning a blind eye to the NTSB.
Two of the NTSB's most wanted recommendations have been
directed at Mr. Hill's truck safety agency. And the NTSB has
determined that Mr. Hill's response to both has been
unacceptable. This morning, I want to find out why.
Recently, here in the Washington, DC area, we learned the
tragic results of weak and ineffective truck safety
enforcement. The Washington Post recently revealed the case of
a trucker who had racked up traffic citations in seven States.
In one of those States, the license of the truck driver had
been suspended seven times in 11 years. In fact, he was driving
on a suspended license at the time he crashed into a passenger
vehicle on the Capitol Beltway, killing a 33-year-old father of
two.
The truck driver was cited for reckless driving and he may
face more serious charges as a result of that accident. That
truck driver was in the employ of a trucking company called BK
Trucking. Prior to the accident, BK Trucking firm was already
on the watch list for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration because of an unusually high number of accidents
and deficient inspections.
A little more than 3 weeks before that Beltway accident,
the FMCSA did a full scale compliance review on BK Trucking.
They found a few problems, mostly with log books but otherwise
found no violations that the agency described as critical or
acute. That was before the fatal accident.
Three days after this awful tragedy, the FMCSA paid another
call on BK Trucking and discovered the following violations,
improper lease agreements; lack of compliance with drug and
alcohol testing procedures; using drivers with suspended
commercial drivers licenses; failure to maintain records of
State inspections; maintaining false log books; failure to turn
in log books; and failure to prepare driver inspection reports.
So just 1 month after the FMCSA conducted a compliance
review and found only minimal problems, the agency did another
compliance review and found multiple violations and wrote up
fines totaling $77,000.
Now I do not doubt that the second compliance review
conducted after the fatality was thorough. But I have serious
doubts about the thoroughness of the compliance review that
took place less than 1 month before that fatality. Are we
really supposed to believe that the conditions at that trucking
firm deteriorated so rapidly in just 30 days? How is it that
the first compliance review resulted in no violations, and the
second one, after the fatality, revealed an endless list of
problems, violations and fines?
I suspect the answer to those questions also explains why
the National Transportation Safety Board has determined that
the FMCSA's compliance review process is, in their words,
``ineffective.'' I also suspect it explains why the NTSB has
determined that the FMCSA responses to its recommendations in
this area have been unacceptable.
Let me be clear: Our Nation's economy depends on a safe,
efficient and well-capitalized trucking industry. In my home
State of Washington, our farmers depend on these trucks to get
their agricultural products in eastern Washington across the
Cascade Mountains to the ports of Seattle and Tacoma in a safe
and timely manner.
And American consumers have come to expect a great variety
of options as they peruse the shelves at their retail outlets
and supermarkets. Those goods do not get to those shelves by
magic. They get there by truck.
But just as we need to make a more aggressive posture in
getting people to buckle up their seatbelts, and drink and
drive responsibly, we also need a truck safety agency that will
find the problems with rogue trucking companies before
fatalities occur, not after.
With that, I would like to turn it over to my ranking
member, Senator Bond, for his opening statement.
opening statement of senator christopher s. bond
Senator Bond. Good morning, and thank you, Madam Chair.
I welcome the witnesses and look forward to hearing their
testimony on how the Department of Transportation (DOT)
agencies believe we can make our highways and roads safer.
While we are not the Senate Commerce Committee, who has
legislative oversight over motor carriers vehicle safety and
truck safety, I believe there are ways where we on this
subcommittee can put our limited dollars behind programs that
can and will save lives.
Madam Chair, you have mentioned the distressing number of
bus and truck fatalities of late, and I think it is very
appropriate we focus on highway fatalities and these recent
accidents, further highlighting the need for additional efforts
and better efforts to bring down our Nation's death toll.
It is both the administration's and Congress' duty to
commit to solutions that will reduce highway fatalities of our
Nation's traveling public. The deaths, 43,443 Americans last
year, 2.7 million more injured, cannot be ignored.
I commend the NHTSA and the FMCSA for efforts to reduce the
death toll. I believe we have some success stories, but there
are clearly areas that need improvement.
Unfortunately, we will always face some unnecessary deaths
on our Nation's highways because of human factors, driving and
behavior which are very difficult to prevent. But heavy
criminal penalties should serve as a deterrent to the
individual bad judgments and bad actions that cannot be cured
by regulation or inspection.
I was interested when the DOT announced the final rule on
electronic stability control, or ESC, crash prevention
technology, to make it standard equipment on every new vehicle
sold by 2012. I am sure that Administrator Nason will go into
detail about this lifesaving measure. It is estimated to
potentially save up to 10,000 lives per year.
I applaud this effort and the administration for issuing
this final rule some two years earlier than anticipated.
This technology will be second only to seatbelts, making
our vehicles, our motor vehicles and other forms of
transportation the safest they have ever been in history.
Still, everyone knows the number one safety measure to save
lives is a seatbelt and shoulder harness. Good friends of mine
who are state troopers--and I got to know a lot of them--have
told me that they never unbuckled a dead person from a safety
harness seatbelt. They found lots of dead people who had not
had on belts and restraints.
When I was Governor, I always instructed the troopers
driving me to obey the speed limits, and I always wore a
shoulder harness and a seatbelt, which saved me from serious
injury at a crash involving a driver who ran through a stop
sign and broadsided us. But unfortunately, not everybody has
gotten the message yet.
And on another area, we have seen a significant increase in
the number of fatalities and deaths associated with
motorcycles. Many of my colleagues believe that in order to
save additional lives we must mandate the States to implement
primary seatbelt laws and mandatory motorcycle helmets.
While I believe it is important that people understand the
importance of seatbelts and motorcycle helmets, I have great
questions about the Federal Government sanctioning States in
order to get people to use seatbelts or motorcycle helmets.
Sanctions are essentially Federal blackmail by Congress, who is
telling the State ``We are not going to return the money you
pay into the Federal Highway Trust Fund because we in the
District of Columbia know your job as Governors and State
legislators better than you do.'' Well, that is the purpose of
electing folks at the State and local level, to represent their
constituents in the legislature and in the Governor's office.
When I was Governor, at several points I unfortunately had
to spend a lot of time looking at federally imposed mandates.
Many of them did not make any sense. I will not go into the
list of them here, but they covered a wide range of areas.
I came up here to work with States. I did not come up here
to tell the States ``We are going to withhold your money unless
you take all of our ideas.''
During the debate on safety authorization, there were some
who wanted the Federal Government to impose mandates and
withhold funds to achieve seatbelt enforcement and motorcycle
helmets. They were unsuccessful. I opposed imposing that kind
of Federal mandate.
At the time, only 20 States had primary seatbelt laws in
place. Since then, five States have decided on their own,
without the help of Washington, to adopt primary seatbelt laws.
In addition, section 406 incentive grants have helped to
persuade even hold-out States, like the Live Free or Die State
of New Hampshire, to move toward adopting a primary seatbelt
law. Nationwide, usage rates are 82 percent. And I believe,
based on driver education, these rates will increase even
higher.
I think we need to remember that we cannot make people wear
seatbelts even with primary seatbelt laws. New Jersey had a
primary seatbelt law and regrettably our former colleague,
Governor Corzine might not be in the condition he is in today
had he been wearing his seatbelt and his trooper had been
obeying the speed limit.
My own State of Missouri has made great strides in seatbelt
use, and this has been done without a primary seatbelt law. Our
current use rate is 75.2 percent. And I hope, with education,
we can improve that over time. But whether or not to adopt a
primary seatbelt law in Missouri should be determined by those
people elected by the citizens of our State. I hope they will.
I honestly hope they will.
Despite a Federal repeal of the Federal helmet law in 1998,
Missouri legislators and Governor have chosen to keep our
existing helmet law in place. And I think that was a very good
idea.
In the area of drunk driving safety--drunk driving, SAFETEA
provided an important step in reducing highway fatalities and
injuries. And Congress and the administration have made a
significant commitment to combat drunk driving.
In 2005, only $40 million was provided for incentives for
alcohol-impaired driver counter measures. This year, the
program is receiving $125 million, and will continue to grow
over the life of the bill.
High visibility campaigns and enforcement work effectively
to make people think before they drink and drive. Obviously,
some people are repeat offenders, where alcohol is an illness.
But most people with education and knowledge will understand
the risk drinking poses to themselves and other drivers on the
road.
Since the creation of FMCSA, we have seen a large increase
in resources made available to reduce the number of truck-
related fatalities, and we are beginning to see results. The
truck fatality rate, I understand, is 16 percent less today
than it was 10 years ago. Over that same 10-year period,
vehicle miles traveled had increased by over 24 percent.
Funding for FMCSA, established as a separate administration
on January 1, 2000, has increased from $280 million in 2001 to
$528 million in 2008, or an 89 percent increase for the primary
mission of reducing crashes, injuries and fatalities involving
large trucks and buses.
Like NHTSA, FMCSA is working on a truck vehicle safety
hardening, such as crash avoidance systems, electronic on-board
recorders, where we can monitor the number of hours a truck is
in operation, and whether drivers are meeting their hours of
service requirements.
FMCSA is also awaiting a court review on the hours of
service regulations, which could come any day. This rule is
designed as an enforceable science-based rule to maintain high
safety standards.
I understand they are also working to issue regulations on
medical certification standards, with recent discussions about
special needs drivers. I hope that they will take a look at
whether there is a problem with drivers who cannot or are
unable to follow the laws and the rules of the road. We hope
that preventing medically unqualified drivers from operating
commercial vehicles will be achieved. I know this is on the
NTSB's most wanted list. And I am pleased to see they are
moving quickly.
I also know FMCSA has a 2010 initiative to provide
additional safety requirements going after the worst carriers
and drivers, getting them off the road. It should enable them
to move beyond the current review of 2 percent of all trucks to
a comprehensive review of some 60,000 to 75,000.
We have seen a temporary plateau in the number of related
fatalities, but it is not enough to stay where we are. We need
to bring it down and we hope the agencies can move forward to
reduce the number of fatalities.
The fatalities have decreased as the Motor Carrier Safety
Administration has increased enforcement of its regulations
through compliance reviews and enforcement action.
Investments in state and local law enforcement to go after
our worst offenders has been working, but there is always more
we can do.
I thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Murray. Thank you, Senator Bond.
We will now turn to our three witnesses. And we will begin
with Nicole Nason, the Administrator of the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration.
Before you begin, each of you will have 5 minutes to give
your testimony. We will try and keep you to your timeline, so
we can ask adequate--have adequate time for questions. So that
you know, all of your testimony will be submitted fully for the
record for all of our members.
Ms. Nason.
STATEMENT OF HON. NICOLE R. NASON, ADMINISTRATOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY
ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Ms. Nason. Madam Chairman, Senator Bond, thank you for the
opportunity to testify about the Nation's traffic safety
priorities and NHTSA's budget request for fiscal year 2008.
NHTSA is requesting $833 million for fiscal year 2008, a
net request of $18 million over last year. Because of time
constraints, I would like to speak to three areas today, which
we believe hold great promise to arrest the Nation's rising
highway fatalities: First, NHTSA's work to encourage greater
deployment of crash avoidance technologies; second, our renewed
commitment to end impaired driving; and third, our proposal to
responsibly raise fuel economy standards in a way that does not
decrease safety.
First, I am pleased to report that, earlier this month,
Secretary Peters and I announced the final rule mandating
electronic stability control on all passenger vehicles by 2011.
Due to the hard work of our vehicle safety team at NHTSA, this
rule was finalized nearly 2 years ahead of its statutory
deadline.
Electronic stability control is a revolutionary technology,
because it helps the driver avoid the crash altogether. This
technology is especially effective at reducing rollovers, one
of the most deadly types of crashes, particularly for SUV's.
Each year, 3 percent of traffic crashes involve rollover,
but they count for one-third of all occupant deaths. NHTSA
estimates that ESC will save between 5,000 and 9,600 lives
annually when fully deployed on the fleet. And as Senator Bond
noted, we believe it could prove to be the greatest vehicle
safety innovation since the seatbelt.
Crash avoidance technologies like ECS are just the
beginning of what we hope is a new era in highway safety, where
many crashes and the pain and suffering from those crashes are
prevented outright.
We are also renewing our commitment to reductions in
impaired driving fatalities. Last November, I was honored to be
asked to serve as the honorary chair of the campaign to
eliminate drunk driving by Mothers Against Drunk Driving
(MADD). This new campaign has brought together law enforcement,
auto makers, MADD, and responsible distilled spirits companies
to address this tragic problem.
I have great hopes for this campaign, not only because it
builds on what we know to be effective, vigorous enforcement
coupled with a national media campaign, but also because of its
embrace of alcohol ignition interlocks. These devices, which
are now installed on about 100,000 cars of driving under the
influence (DUI) offenders, prevents the impaired motorist from
driving the car in the first place.
We believe current research can produce a new generation of
the interlocks that will be noninvasive and much more reliable.
Large-scale deployment of this technology coupled with
continued law enforcement offers the very real prospect that
one day drunk driving could be a thing of the past.
Finally, our budget requests an additional $600,000 in
anticipation of conducting a rulemaking to boost passenger car
fuel economy standards responsibly. This proposal has many
benefits over the current flawed system, such as spreading the
regulatory burden among all manufacturers; maintaining consumer
choice; helping to ensure that every type of car, whether
small, midsized, or large, becomes more fuel efficient; and
most importantly, this proposal ends the trade-off between
sacrificing safety for better fuel economy.
Our legislation ends the so-called CAFE safety penalty, by
encouraging auto makers to boost fuel economy not by downsizing
vehicles, but by adding fuel-saving technologies. The 2002
National Academy of Science's study on fuel economy found that
the CAFE statute was responsible in part for an additional
1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in the year 1993, the year
they looked at, because of downsizing and down-weighting of
vehicles.
If the administration's proposal is enacted by Congress, no
longer will increasing passenger car fuel economy mean a
decrease in safety.
Madam Chairman, anything but a reduction in our annual
fatalities is cause for alarm. That is why it is important that
we continue our progress researching and deploying crash
avoidance technologies, while wisely using the resources
provide by Congress under SAFETEA-LU and this subcommittee to
enhance our behavioral programs. These are the best tools that
we have right now to lower fatalities over the long term.
prepared statement
Thank you again. I look forward to working with all of the
members of the subcommittee on this important issue. And I
would be pleased to answer any questions.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Nicole R. Nason
Good morning Chairman Murray, Senator Bond, and distinguished
members of the subcommittee. It is my pleasure to appear before you
today to discuss the President's fiscal year 2008 budget for the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and to highlight
for you some of the initiatives we have underway and planned for 2008.
NHTSA is charged with the responsibility of assuring the safety of
vehicles and drivers on the roadways of America. We appreciate the
support this subcommittee has provided NHTSA in the past by funding our
programs and activities.
highway safety challenges
In 2005, 43,443 people in the United States lost their lives in
traffic-related crashes. Additionally, approximately 2.7 million
individuals are injured in traffic-related crashes annually. Traffic-
related fatalities are the leading cause of death for Americans in age
groups 4 through 34. They also represent a staggering economic cost of
about $230 billion annually, or 2.3 percent of the U.S. gross domestic
product.
The good news for America is that motor vehicles today are the
safest in history. A 2004 study by NHTSA showed that vehicle safety
technologies saved an estimated 328,551 lives from 1960 through 2002.
The annual number of lives saved grew steadily from 115 in 1960, when a
small number of people used seat belts, to 24,561 in 2002, when most
cars and light trucks were equipped with modern safety technologies and
seat belt use achieved 75 percent. Currently seat belt use stands at 81
percent.
To continue to improve the safety of vehicles, I am pleased to
report that earlier this month Secretary Mary Peters and I announced
the release of a final rule to require electronic stability control
(ESC) on all new passenger vehicles starting in 2009, with 100 percent
compliance by 2011. This technology, when fully deployed, has the
potential to save between 5,000 and 9,600 lives annually.
Improving vehicle safety and reducing fatalities and injuries on
the Nation's roads requires a comprehensive approach involving vehicle
regulation, enforcement and behavior modification. Our areas of focus
have been categorized into the following model shown below.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Keeping families safe when they drive is the core of NHTSA's
mission, a goal shared by our local, State and national partners.
Whether a new driver or a seasoned driver, everyone in the family has a
responsibility to do all they can to make each and every ride as safe
as possible. Parents must take responsibility by buckling their
children in age appropriate restraints, and set the example themselves
by buckling up. In February, NHTSA sponsored a public meeting on Lower
Anchors and Tethers for Children (LATCH), furthering our commitment to
ensure that appropriate child safety seats and technologies are
available and properly used. Later this year we plan to host a meeting
on school bus safety to address the safety issues in this important
area.
Parents must remain involved as their children learn to drive.
Obeying speed limits, wearing a seat belt, avoiding driver distractions
and not driving impaired should be standard operating procedure for all
novice drivers. We are seeing very promising safety results from State
graduated licensing programs, but parents continue to be key
contributors to young driver safety by establishing and enforcing
reasonable safety practices.
As drivers mature, NHTSA programs help to promote safety among our
Nation's seniors. Today, 35 million Americans are over age 65. By 2030,
the population of those over 65 is expected to double to 70 million.
NHTSA is developing efforts to maintain personal mobility for as long
as drivers are safe to drive while also providing guidance for medical
professionals and families to help older drivers assess their driving
capability before a tragedy occurs.
NHTSA also supports comprehensive Enhanced 9-1-1 technologies that
provide system-wide improvements for communities to decrease response
time and improve post-crash care. Enhanced Emergency Medical Services
(EMS) technologies mitigate the injuries sustained by individuals in
crashes, increasing the survivability of the incident. Our request
includes $1.25 million to implement the E-911 coordination office and
to provide technical support to the EMS community. Additionally, we
request $250,000 to continue the development of the National EMS
Information System (NEMSIS).
The support of law enforcement is crucial to our mission. We work
closely with State and national law enforcement organizations to find
and share best practices in traffic law enforcement. In this area, we
are planning meetings later this year to address law enforcement
leadership and expanded use of ignition interlock devices as a means of
ridding our highways of impaired drivers.
NHTSA also coordinates with State and local law enforcement and
other safety organizations to develop ways to decrease impaired driving
and speeding, and increase safety belt use. Under SAFETEA-LU's High
Visibility Enforcement programs, we added a third national mobilization
effort starting in December 2006, and we developed a new tag line,
``Drunk Driving. Over the Limit. Under Arrest.'' This is in addition to
the agency's National Click It or Ticket mobilization that occurs each
Memorial Day and the National Impaired Driving Crackdown that begins
every August.
Finally, we strongly support the reform of fuel economy standards
for the passenger car fleet, similar to how we reformed the standards
for the light truck fleet last year. As part of the President's ``20 in
10'' proposal that he outlined in his State of the Union Address, NHTSA
has submitted draft legislation to reform and increase the passenger
corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. We have also requested
$598,000 in additional funding to provide the analysis and rulemaking
support for these changes.
fiscal year 2008 budget request summary
For fiscal year 2008, NHTSA requests $833 million for its motor
vehicle and highway safety programs and activities.
Within the total figure requested, $711 million reflects the
SAFETEA-LU authorized levels of contract authority for the Highway
safety programs, grant programs, and the National Driver Register. The
balance of $122 million reflects our requested level to fund the
vehicle safety programs as contract authority, not general funding as
specified in SAFETEA-LU. Legislation to amend SAFETEA-LU to authorize
contract funding for the vehicle programs has been proposed by the
Administration. This change will allow NHTSA to fund all of its
programs and activities from a single source, the Highway Trust Fund.
This is also consistent with the manner in which the vehicle safety
program was funded in fiscal year 2004-2007.
NHTSA's fiscal year 2008 request is $18 million more than the
President's fiscal year 2007 request. Of this, $16.7 million will be
used to align NHTSA's programs with the SAFETEA-LU authorized funding
levels. The balance of $1.3 million includes increases to several
programs and activities offset by decreases to other programs and
activities. Increases include $1.1 million for research on crash
avoidance technologies, $598,000 for analysis to support a reformed
CAFE standard for passenger cars, $1.0 million for an E-911
implementation office and the National EMS Information System (NEMSIS),
$1.0 million to support NHTSA's priority rulemaking actions and $1.5
million for normal inflation in salaries and administrative areas.
These are partially offset by decreases such as $2.6 million to the New
Car Assessment Program (NCAP) due to the completion of the testing
schedule alignment in fiscal year 2007, and $500,000 to the
biomechanics program due to the completion of work supporting an
upgrade to the side-impact regulation.
behavioral safety
For fiscal year 2008, NHTSA requests $107.75 million for its
Behavioral safety programs and activities. This is $2.5 million above
the fiscal year 2007 President's request, and the same as the level
authorized in section 2001(a)(2) of SAFETEA-LU.
After two consecutive years of decline in overall highway
fatalities and impaired driving fatalities, and having achieved the
lowest recorded fatality rate in history, the highway fatality rate per
100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rose slightly to 1.45 in 2005,
up from 1.44 in 2004. Contributing to this figure is a 13 percent
increase in motorcycle fatalities in 2005, up to 4,553 from 4,028 in
2004. This marks an increase of 115 percent since 1997. NHTSA requests
an increase of $192,000, (or 24 percent) to its motorcycle program
funding to assist in addressing this problem.
While the overall highway fatality rate has increased slightly,
passenger vehicle occupant fatalities dropped by 451, from 31,866 in
2004 to 31,415 in 2005, the lowest level since 1994. The number of
young drivers (16-20) killed declined by 4.6 percent from 3,538 to
3,374, and fatal crashes involving young drivers declined by 6.3
percent from 7,431 to 6,964. The number of children up to age 15 dying
in crashes also dropped from 2,622 in 2004 to 2,348 in 2005.
In fiscal year 2007 and 2008, NHTSA is focusing attention on those
areas that can be most effective in continuing the downward trends
experienced in past years. NHTSA recognizes that success will not be
accomplished by the agency alone, but through the work of our
governmental and non-governmental partners and the everyday behaviors
of our citizens. NHTSA is dedicated to behavioral programs that
encourage citizens to reduce the tragic loss of life on our highways by
simple, controllable actions such as buckling up, ensuring that their
children are buckled up on every trip, not driving when impaired,
wearing a motorcycle helmet that is DOT-compliant and other protective
gear when operating a motorcycle, observing posted speed limits, not
engaging in risky driver behavior and exercising parental
responsibility by taking an active role in the driving education of
teenagers.
NHTSA requests a total of $3.82 million to increase the
effectiveness of its EMS program. For fiscal year 2008, $2.32 million
of this total will be used to maintain the agency's core programs,
which support heightened National EMS leadership through the Federal
Interagency Committee on EMS, as mandated by section 10202 of SAFETEA-
LU, in addition to continuing efforts to improve workforce capabilities
of EMS personnel and assuring consistent nationwide EMS systems aimed
at enhancing post-crash care of crash victims.
vehicle safety
For fiscal year 2008, NHTSA requests $122 million for its Vehicle
safety programs. Within the total of $122 million, NHTSA requests
increases for several program initiatives, such as $1.1 million to
conduct increased research on advanced crash avoidance technologies,
and $1.0 million in support of priority rulemaking activities.
Introduction of technology into the motor vehicle is occurring at
an ever-increasing rate, providing consumers with greater choices in
safety, ease-of-use and entertainment options. In addition to its
traditional vehicle research, rulemaking, enforcement and safety defect
investigation initiatives, NHTSA's Vehicle Safety programs will assess
the lifesaving benefits of these emerging technologies as they enter
into the vehicle fleet in fiscal year 2008 and beyond. The additional
$1.1 million requested for advanced technology research will assist us
in this effort.
As mandated by section 10307 of SAFETEA-LU, NHTSA has published a
rule requiring NCAP ratings on sales stickers of new vehicles,
providing consumers with more information on the safety of new vehicles
at the point of sale. The fiscal year 2008 requested level of $7.9
million reflects the annual cost for testing vehicles under the NCAP
program. The additional funds provided for NCAP in fiscal years 2006-
2007 were to re-align the testing schedule to allow for these sales
stickers on the new vehicles. This alignment will be complete in fiscal
year 2007, negating the requirement for additional NCAP funds in fiscal
year 2008.
national driver register
NHTSA requests $4 million for the National Driver Register program
and associated activities, the same level requested in the President's
fiscal year 2007 budget and authorized in SAFETEA-LU. This program
supports NHTSA's safety mission by providing a credible source of
vehicle driver records for use by State motor vehicle administrators in
determining whether to issue or renew a license and for use by maritime
and airline agencies and private industries. In addition, this
information is becoming increasingly important for security background
checks by the Office of Personnel Management.
highway safety grants
In recognition of the role of the agency in delivering data-driven
programs and countermeasures in highway safety, NHTSA is requesting
funding for its grant programs at the SAFETEA-LU authorized levels. We
request $599.25 million, an increase of $15.5 million above the
President's fiscal year 2007 request. The Act extended several highway
safety grant programs and created several more that will serve to
improve safety, including new programs for safety belt performance
(section 406), motorcycles (section 2010), child safety and booster
seats (section 2011) and data/information systems (section 408).
During fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008, in addition to
implementing the four new grant programs, continued attention will be
given to NHTSA's core grant programs: section 402 Formula Grants,
section 405 Occupant Protection Incentive grants and section 410
Alcohol Impaired Driving Countermeasures Incentive Grants. Combined,
these grant programs will provide States with the resources to
implement strategies based on national data and analysis but tailored
to meet the safety problems of diverse municipalities across the
Nation.
Additionally, the requested level includes the fully authorized
funding of $29 million for the high visibility enforcement campaigns.
NHTSA will conduct three campaigns annually and the additional funds
above the fiscal year 2007 requested level represent the SAFETEA-LU
authorized funding level to provide three campaigns.
Finally, grant administrative expenses are requested at the
authorized level of $18.25 million. These funds cover a proportionate
share of NHTSA's salaries and administrative costs in support of the
highway safety grant programs; provide full funding for the annual
National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS) and provide partial
funding for the Highway safety research program.
support of the president's management agenda
NHTSA continues to fully support all of the initiatives contained
in the President's Management Agenda (PMA). As evidenced by our fiscal
year 2008 congressional justification, NHTSA assures a direct linkage
of plans, programs and budgets, one of the most important tenets of the
PMA. NHTSA is a data-driven and science-based agency. Funding and
program decisions are based on maximizing lives saved and reducing the
severity of injuries and supporting DOT and NHTSA goals and objectives
in quantifiable ways.
In partnership with the other trust-funded DOT agencies, NHTSA has
enjoyed a ``clean'' unqualified audit opinion for 8 years in a row. In
response to recent OMB guidance on internal controls (Circular A-123),
NHTSA has initiated an aggressive internal management control program
to fully document all processes and activities, identify any weaknesses
and mitigate them to acceptable risk levels.
NHTSA also fully participates with the Department to implement
technology where it sees benefits. Included are recent efforts to
automate the procurement, invoicing, payroll, personnel and travel
activities in conjunction with other DOT agencies. Also, NHTSA recently
integrated all its desktop support, e-mail, and infrastructure within
DOT's common operating environment in anticipation of the move to the
new DOT headquarters building. Future efforts will include integration
and standardization of grants processing and administration as well as
document management. All IT investments made by NHTSA are reviewed and
approved by a senior management governance structure to assure optimal
use of the limited investment funding and full integration within the
DOT infrastructure.
conclusion
Previous safety efforts by NHTSA, such as identifying safety
technologies, issuing safety rules, modifying driving behaviors and
educating the public on motor vehicle safety have significantly reduced
the safety problem over time. These efforts have also resulted in motor
vehicles today that are the safest in history and behaviors that are
the safest in history, such as near record seat belt usage. Still, with
over 43,000 annual deaths resulting from motor vehicle crashes, NHTSA's
work is far from complete. Accordingly, we respectfully request support
for the President's budget so our life-saving work may continue.
Senator Murray. We will now hear from John Hill, the
Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN H. HILL, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL
MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Mr. Hill. Good morning, Chairman Murray, Ranking Member
Bond, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for inviting
me to testify before you today.
I am pleased to describe how the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration is working to make the Nation's highways
safer.
The good news is that the past 2 years we, as a Nation,
achieved the lowest truck fatality rate in 30 years. This means
that despite trucks traveling more miles, over 7 percent in the
past 5 years, the proportion of fatalities is down. However, we
know that despite these gains, we are not seeing a drop in
overall fatalities. To meet this daunting challenge, we are
finding innovative ways to increase safety on our Nation's
highways.
We initiated a program recently in cooperation with the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration called Ticketing
Aggressive Cars and Trucks, or TACT, which was carried out in
the State of Washington.
Working with the State Trucking Association, troopers
conducted a high visibility enforcement campaign to reduce
unsafe driving behavior in and around large trucks. The program
included a high profile media campaign to build awareness and
educate drivers about the hazards of driving around commercial
motor vehicles.
Based upon TACT's success, FMCSA will expand the program to
selected States with the highest fatality and crash rates. In
fact just this month, I traveled to Kansas to assist in the
announcement of the Kansas Highway Patrol's Trucks on Patrol
for Safety, or TOPS, Program based directly on the success of
the TACT model that we used in Washington.
We now have 22 States conducting some form of non-
commercial vehicle program using the SAFETEA-LU provisions that
were enacted in 2005.
We will also work with our stakeholders from the trucking
and motor coach industries and the many committed safety
advocate organizations to find innovative solutions. We will do
this through our newly chartered advisory committees, the
Commercial Driver's License Task Force and the Motor Carrier
Safety Advisory Committee.
FMCSA's fiscal year 2008 budget reflects that safety is our
number one priority. The largest share, $489 million or 93
percent, focuses directly on enforcement programs to reduce
large truck and bus crashes.
In addition to our own efforts, we partner with the States
by providing them grants to enforce commercial truck and bus
safety laws, with special attention to motor coach companies
and carriers registered as hauling hazardous materials.
Of the $489 million, $300 million will go to grant
programs, including more than $202 million for Motor Carrier
Safety Assistance Program grants; $32 million for border
enforcement activities; and $25 million for improvement of CDL
activities.
FMCSA's oversight programs are producing results. In fiscal
year 2006, FMCSA and our State partners conducted over 15,000
compliance reviews. These compliance reviews resulted in the
initiation of more than 4,000 enforcement actions. FMCSA found
over 1,000 companies deficient to the extent we placed their
operations out-of-service. And we estimate that the compliance
reviews conducted in 2004 resulted in over 2,700 fewer crashes,
nearly 2,000 fewer injuries, and over 100 fewer fatalities.
In addition to conducting review of carrier operations,
FMCSA and our State partners conducted over 3 million roadside
inspections of high risk carriers' vehicles during fiscal year
2006. As a result of these inspections, approximately 220,000
drivers were removed and placed out of service until serious
violations could be remedied, while approximately 547,000
unsafe vehicles from our highways were also removed.
Again, we know from previous analysis that roadside
inspections prevent crashes and save lives. We estimate that
the roadside inspections conducted in 2005 resulted in over
18,000 fewer crashes, approximately 13,000 fewer injuries, and
approximately 700 fewer fatalities.
While we recognize there is still much work to be done to
make our highways safer, we believe safety results from these
programs.
Madam Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation for all
that this subcommittee has done in supporting our agency. In
our 7 years as an independent agency, we have made strides
toward reducing fatalities and injuries on our Nation's
highways. Your continued investment in the agency will result
in added safety emphasis on our Nation's highways.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I look forward to working with you and achieving our mutual
goals and would be happy to respond to your questions.
Thank you.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Hill.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. John H. Hill
Good Morning Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Bond, and Members of
the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify before you. I am
pleased to describe how the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA) is working to make the Nation's highways safer as it relates to
commercial vehicle operations. The good news is that for the past two
years, we as a nation achieved the lowest large-truck fatality rate in
30 years. However, we know that despite these gains, we are not seeing
a drop in overall fatalities. This means that despite more trucks
traveling more miles--over 7 percent in the past five years--the
proportion of fatalities is down.
To meet this daunting challenge we are innovating. We will increase
our effectiveness and efficiency and we will continue to leverage the
talents and resources of our State partners. We will also work closely
with our stakeholders from the trucking and motorcoach industries, and
the many committed safety advocate organizations through our newly
chartered advisory committees, the Motor Carrier Safety Advisory
Committee and the Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Task Force.
safety is number one
The largest share--$489 million or 93 percent--of our budget
focuses on reducing large truck and bus crashes. In addition to our own
efforts, we partner with the States by providing them grants to enforce
commercial truck and bus safety laws, with special attention to
motorcoach companies and carriers registered as hauling hazardous
materials.
FMCSA's oversight programs are producing results. In fiscal year
2006, FMCSA and our State Partners conducted 15,177 compliance reviews.
These compliance reviews resulted in 4,195 enforcement actions being
initiated. FMCSA found 1,035 companies deficient to the extent that we
placed their operations out-of-service. We know from analysis of our
compliance review programs that after a compliance review, carriers
improve their safety operations. We estimate that the compliance
reviews conducted in 2004 resulted in over 2,700 fewer crashes,
approximately 1,900 fewer injuries, and over 100 fewer fatalities.
In addition to conducting reviews of carrier operations, FMCSA and
our State partners also conducted over 3 million roadside inspections
of high risk carriers' vehicles during fiscal year 2006. As a result of
these inspections, we placed approximately 220,000 drivers out-of-
service until serious violations could be remedied. We also removed
approximately 547,000 unsafe vehicles from our highways. Again, we know
from previous analysis that roadside inspections prevent crashes and
save lives. We estimate that roadside inspections conducted in 2005
resulted in over 18,000 fewer crashes, approximately 13,000 fewer
injuries, and approximately 700 fewer fatalities.
While we recognize there is still much work to be done to make our
highways safer, FMCSA is proud of the safety impact resulting from
these programs.
safety partnerships with states
In SAFETEA-LU Congress provided us new authority to allow Motor
Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) Grants to be used for traffic
enforcement on commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) without an accompanying
safety inspection. The authority also allows reimbursement of traffic
enforcement against non-CMVs when such actions are necessary to improve
CMV safety (i.e., cars driving unsafely around trucks).
This new direction is consistent with the findings of FMCSA's long-
term crash causation studies, and other similar studies, that have
identified driver behavior as the leading causal factor in all crashes.
It also addresses findings in those same studies that identify the non-
CMV driver as the causal factor in a majority of CMV/non-CMV crashes.
By expanding this traffic enforcement authority, FMCSA and its State-
partners are able to reach out to a broader population of law
enforcement organizations in an effort to improve delivery of the
program and achieve FMCSA's goal of reducing fatal crashes.
tact programs
In cooperation with the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, we recently piloted the Ticketing Aggressive Cars and
Trucks or ``TACT'' program in the State of Washington. Working with the
State trucking association, troopers conducted a high visibility
enforcement campaign to reduce unsafe driving behavior in and around
large trucks. The program included a high profile media campaign to
build awareness and educate drivers about the hazards of driving around
commercial motor vehicles.
The first TACT pilot program was successful in large part due to
the cooperative efforts of DOT, State, and local law enforcement
agencies that were involved. The evaluation showed a considerable
reduction in unsafe driving behaviors on the designated enforcement
corridors. Based upon its success, FMCSA will expand TACT to selected
States with the highest fatality and crash rates. In fact just this
month, the State of Kansas begins its Trucks on Patrol for Safety
(TOPS) program based directly on the success of TACT in Washington.
These programs demonstrate the effectiveness of combining high-
visibility enforcement with education and communication. FMCSA will
print and disseminate the TACT ``How to Guide'' to State agencies
nationwide and encourage all MCSAP States to adopt this successful
program or some form of non-CMV enforcement as allowed in SAFETEA-LU.
safety grants to states
In fiscal year 2008, FMCSA will provide $300 million in grants,
including the Border Enforcement Grants Program to the following areas:
--$202 million for Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP)
Grants enabling States to conduct more than 2 million roadside
driver and vehicle inspections and more than 5,000 compliance
reviews. This includes $29 million to be used towards 28,500
State-conducted New Entrant Audits as authorized by SAFETEA-LU;
--$25 million for improvement of State CDL activities to prevent
unqualified drivers from being issued or maintaining a CDL;
--$5 million for management and operations of the Performance
Registration Information Systems and Management (PRISM)
program, linking State commercial motor vehicle registration
systems with carrier safety performance data to identify unsafe
commercial motor carriers and prevent them from registering
their vehicles;
--$25 million for the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and
Networks (CVISN) grants towards improving the exchange of
safety information, electronic screening of trucks and buses at
the roadside and the administration of interstate credentials;
--$3 million for safety data improvement grants which are vital for
the correct identification of high risk carriers; and
--$8 million for modernization efforts of the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS).
safety at the border
We have a stringent safety plan in place to ensure that trucks from
Mexico that enter the United States under our limited, year-long
demonstration program are safe to make deliveries. Our plan includes
conducting safety audits in Mexico before the company is granted
authority to operate beyond the current 25-mile restricted border zone.
The trucks must be insured by a U.S.-licensed insurance firm and they
must meet all U.S. safety standards. And, as we already do now at
border crossings, we will continue regular inspections of vehicles and
drivers.
In addition, our fiscal year 2008 budget request includes $32
million for the Border Enforcement Grants Program which will support
State efforts, along with our own Federal force, to enforce compliance
by foreign carriers with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations,
operating authority requirements, and insurance rules. We estimate that
the States will conduct approximately 350,000 vehicle and driver
inspections at the Northern and Southern Borders as well as an
estimated 30,000 driver license/authority/financial responsibility
checks at the border. Close cooperation between Federal and State
agencies will continue to be necessary to ensure safe and secure cargo,
vehicles, drivers, and authorized carriers cross our international
borders.
safety through innovative technology
FMCSA is working with the States and partners in private industry
to advance innovative safety technologies that have the potential to
reduce serious injury and fatal crashes involving large trucks. We
recently tested and evaluated a number of these on-board safety systems
and the data is impressive.
Roll stability control systems and electronic stability control
systems are two different types of automated control systems that
reduce the vehicle's throttle and apply brakes without driver
intervention to decelerate the vehicle if a high rollover risk is
detected. Crashes caused by excessive speed in curves, evasive
maneuvers, and loss of vehicle control are typical conditions that are
often addressed by stability control systems. The system tested was
estimated to potentially reduce about 20 percent of rollover crashes
that are caused by driving too fast around a curve. And it could
potentially reduce roadway departures by about 33 percent. Presently,
we are aware of about 40,000 units of this technology being sold.
Another technology--with approximately 70,000 units distributed--is
a forward collision warning system. When a large truck with the system
approaches a slower moving vehicle, urgent warnings are issued from the
system. The purpose of these warning systems is to improve driver
behavior, by providing feedback about safe following distances to
drivers. Our recent field test showed that this system helped drivers
reduce rear-end collisions by approximately 21 percent, and drivers who
used the system maintained longer following distances between their
vehicle and a vehicle in front.
Finally, lane departure warning systems warn drivers if they are
about to deviate from the lane. Our field test showed that the systems
have the potential to reduce 21 percent to 23 percent of single vehicle
roadway departure crashes.
safety priorities--fiscal year 2008
Our fiscal year 2008 funding request will provide the necessary
resources to implement key priorities to increase safety including: (1)
continuing our focus on driver safety in all programs, by conducting
even more driver roadside enforcement and inspections in cooperation
with our State and local partners; (2) intensifying our focus on
motorcoach safety by prioritizing our Motor Carrier Safety Assistance
Program and Federal activities in this area, while also focusing
enforcement efforts on higher risk curbside bus operators; (3) testing
our Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010 initiative, which will provide a
new approach to the safety fitness rating--and allowing a broader
enforcement exposure to the motor carrier industry; and (4) optimizing
our organizational structure to increase efficiency and give the
American taxpayers the biggest safety increase possible for their
investment in FMCSA.
driver focus
Recent studies, including FMCSA's Large Truck Crash Causation Study
(LTCCS), continue to emphasize the part that drivers play in crash
causation and avoidance. In the LTCCS, commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
driver action or inaction was determined to be the ``critical reason''
for the crash in 87 percent of the crashes where the crash was
attributed to the CMV. In fiscal year 2008, FMCSA will address driver
safety knowledge ``gaps'' found by a Technical Working Group of
government and private partners. We will hold public listening sessions
and a major public conference to define what actions will address these
knowledge gaps and obtain stakeholder commitments to partner with FMCSA
to implement the action items quickly and efficiently. FMCSA will also
work with our State partners to ensure that they conduct more driver
inspections at the roadside as specified in their respective Commercial
Vehicle Safety Plan (CVSP).
Our focus on drivers also includes initiatives to improve oversight
of medical conditions that affect CMV safety. These initiatives will
increase safety by helping to reduce the number of driver's who have
medical conditions which adversely impact their ability drive safely.
We currently have three major initiatives under way:
Medical Review Board
Under this initiative we will revisit all of our regulations in the
medical arena to ensure they reflect the most recent scientific
information. The Medical Review Board is a five-member panel of
experts, authorized by SAFETEA-LU, who advise FMCSA on medical
standards and emerging medical issues. We announced the selection of
the MRB members last year and the Board will be holding its fourth
public meeting later this month. On the Board's agenda right now are
diabetes, cardiovascular issues and Schedule II medications.
National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners
Our second initiative, also supported by SAFETEA-LU, is the
establishment of a National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners.
The Registry will provide a list of medical examiners who are
authorized to perform the physical qualification examination of the
more than 6 million truck and motorcoach drivers operating in
interstate commerce. Our goal is to maintain ongoing competency of
medical examiners through training, testing, certification and
recertification. This will ensure that medical examiners fully
understand, and stay current with, medical standards.
Merger of the CDL and Medical Certificate
This initiative would merge truck drivers' medical information with
the CDL data system. Under the new system, when a driver gets his or
her medical certification it would be sent to the State's division of
motor vehicles, which would then be required to show on the CDL that
the driver continues to be medically certified. If a driver's medical
certificate expired, the State would be required to downgrade the CDL
until the driver provided proof of his or her medical qualifications to
operate commercial vehicles in interstate commerce.
CDLIS Modernization
FMCSA continues to work cooperatively with the States to implement
a variety of activities designed to advance the agency's driver safety
goals and effectively implement the program enhancements included in
SAFETEA-LU. These efforts include the modernization of CDLIS to enable
FMCSA and the States to take advantage of new technological advances
and expand CDLIS storage capacity while increasing performance,
responsiveness and adaptability to meet current and future
requirements; development of CDL learner's permit rule to establish
uniform procedures for State issuance of learner's permits and CDLs,
including Social Security Number verification requirements and fraud
prevention initiates; and establishment of the CDL Task force to enable
us to take advantage of the knowledge, experiences, and energies of the
varies interest groups to identify ways to improve the effectiveness of
the CDL program.
bus safety
Several high profile, and tragic, incidents underscored for all of
us the importance of bus passenger safety. Even so, we should keep in
mind that mile for mile, motor coaches are the safest form of
commercial passenger transportation. Buses account for more passenger
traffic in the United States than all other commercial modes of
transportation combined. In response to recent motorcoach incidents,
FMCSA has increased its bus safety enforcement activities by
prioritizing MCSAP and Federal activities in this area; by improving
the method for selecting passenger carriers to inspect; by performing
more compliance reviews of bus companies; and by improving training for
motorcoach drivers.
In fiscal year 2006 FMCSA and our State partners conducted over
125,000 bus inspections. In 2007 we will conduct a compliance review of
every motor coach operator that has not been rated.
In addition, FMCSA has taken important steps to focus on enforcing
regulations that apply to curbside bus operators that provide fixed-
route service among major cities in the northeast such as New York,
Boston, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC. FMCSA and a coalition of
State and local police agencies have formed a strike force performing
inspections at the roadside and compliance reviews and enforcement
actions against these companies. This initiative will continue into
2008.
comprehensive safety analysis 2010 and compass
Every organization should continuously strive to improve how it
does business, and FMCSA is no exception. In fiscal year 2008, FMCSA
will be midway through development of its Comprehensive Safety Analysis
(CSA 2010) effort, which will lead our agency into a more extensive,
effective and efficient approach to carrying out compliance and
enforcement programs. The goal of CSA 2010 is to touch more regulated
entities through a broader array of enforcement and educational
interventions while optimizing FMCSA resources.
While CSA 2010 looks to improve the way that we do business,
COMPASS is our program that looks to align and improve our Information
Technology (IT) systems. COMPASS will allow FMCSA to take advantage of
the opportunities that today's technology has to offer to improve
access to information and accelerate data quality improvements to
Federal and State roadside inspectors, auditors and safety
investigators. Both of these programs are multi-year efforts designed
to bring about better execution of programs, tax dollars savings and
most importantly to save lives by reducing the number of crashes.
organizational excellence
Although a young agency, we recognize the importance of continuous
improvements brought about through assessing our strengths and
weaknesses. In addition to modernizing processes and procedures,
another agency priority is to scrutinize our organizational structure
to look for ways to improve our organizational effectiveness. As
priorities change, the structure of FMCSA must change as well in order
to achieve maximum safety results. Every facet of the agency will be
reexamined to deliver improved performance within the boundaries of the
agency's resources.
FMCSA dedicates approximately 5.2 percent of its budget to
Organizational Excellence which addresses improving the internal
workings of the agency. FMCSA will undertake activities for continuous
organizational improvement. Our organizational improvement activities
will result in a more highly-trained and motivated workforce, enhanced
cost-control measures, and improved decision-making processes, leading
to more successful completion of our mission objectives. In addition,
these activities make the agency a significant contributor to DOT's
achievement of a ``green'' rating for elements of the President's
Management Agenda (PMA).
conclusion
Madam Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation for all that this
committee has done in supporting FMCSA. In our seven years as an
independent modal agency within DOT, FMCSA and the dedicated men and
women of State and local law enforcement agencies, Departments of Motor
Vehicles, State DOTs, and other State and local partners have made
great strides toward reducing fatalities and injuries on our Nation's
highways. Your continued investment in the agency will result in added
safety emphasis on our Nation's highways. I look forward to working
with you to achieve our mutual goals and would be happy to respond to
any questions you may have. Thank you.
Senator Murray. I will now hear from Mark Rosenker,
Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK V. ROSENKER, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD
Mr. Rosenker. Good morning, Chairman Murray, Ranking Member
Bond. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to present
testimony on behalf of the NTSB.
It is my privilege to represent an agency that is dedicated
to the safety of the traveling public. I am particularly proud
to lead the Safety Board because when tragedies occur and the
public begins to question their confidence in our
transportation systems, the Safety Board helps restore that
public confidence. It does that by conducting thorough,
objective investigations and making recommendations to fix the
system so similar tragedies will not happen again.
For example, when the Big Dig tunnel ceiling panels
collapsed in Boston last year, Congress immediately turned to
the Safety Board to investigate this tragedy because of its
reputation for thorough independent investigations. This
accident occurred on July 10, 2006 when a section of the I-90
connector tunnel became detached and fell onto the roof of a
sedan, killing one of two occupants. A total of about 26 tons
of concrete and suspension hardware fell onto the vehicle.
Highway accidents present their own challenges and unique
opportunities for the Board. Every day there are approximately
19,000 accidents on our Nation's highways, causing over 43,000
fatalities and 3 million injuries each year.
The economic cost of these accidents is estimated to be
about $231 billion a year, or over $800 for every person living
in the United States.
In contrast to other modal investigations, virtually all of
the 7 million highway accidents are investigated at the State
and local level. Because of the Board's small size, our
effectiveness depends upon our ability to select the most
appropriate accidents and issue safety recommendations that
will make a substantial contribution to the safety of our
nation's highway system.
Last year, we highlighted the following highway safety
issues: Motor coach fires; motor coach maintenance and
oversight by FMCSA; cell phone use by bus drivers; median
barriers; toll plaza designs; collision warning systems for
trucks; highway vehicle and passenger vehicle incompatibility;
highway construction oversight; and motorcycle safety.
Let me just touch on a few of these issues. The Board
addressed the motor coach issue in the 2005 accident
investigation near Dallas, Texas, where a motor coach was
carrying elderly evacuees away from the predicted path of
Hurricane Rita. Twenty-three elderly passengers were unable to
escape the fire and died.
As a result of its investigation, the Board made a number
of recommendations to NHTSA: The first, develop a fire
protection standard for motor coach fuel systems; two, develop
a fire detection system to monitor the temperature of wheel
well compartments; and, three, evaluate motor coach emergency
evacuation designs by conducting simulation studies and
evacuation drills.
We also adopted a recommendation to FMCSA to continue to
gather and evaluate information on the causes, frequency, and
severity of bus and motor coach fires, and to conduct an
ongoing analysis of that data. As a result of this
investigation, the Board also highlighted shortcomings in the
oversight of the motor coach industry.
The Board concluded that FMCSA's compliance review system
does not effectively identify unsafe motor carriers and prevent
them from operating.
On September 12 and 13 of last year, the Safety Board held
a public forum on motorcycle safety. Recent data indicates that
the increase in fatalities among motorcycle riders far exceeded
that of any other form of transportation. In 2005, 4,553
motorcyclists died in crashes. And the rate of motorcycle
fatalities has increased by more than 25 percent since 1997.
The goal of the forum was to gather information about
ongoing motorcycle safety research and initiatives, as well as
safety countermeasures that may reduce the likelihood of
motorcycle accidents and fatalities. Finally, I am very, very
optimistic that recent developments in technology will help us
move beyond crash mitigation and enter a new era where
technology will help us prevent accidents from occurring in the
first place.
Areas where the Board has already made recommendations
involving new technologies include the use of electronic
onboard recorders to increase the compliance of commercial
drivers with the hours of service regulations; collision
warning systems for trucks to help prevent rear-end collisions;
and finally, electronic stability control for passenger
vehicles to help drivers maintain control of their cars.
PREPARED STATEMENT
In conclusion, we have a great mission at the NTSB. We
enjoy an excellent reputation and have accomplished much during
our 40 years that we have been in business. I am very proud to
work with the dedicated men and women of this agency. I have
said this before and I will continue to say it: They are the
best of the best.
I would be delighted to respond to any of your questions.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Rosenker.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Mark V. Rosenker
Good morning Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Bond, and Members of
the Subcommittee. Thank you for allowing me this opportunity to present
testimony on behalf of the National Transportation Safety Board
regarding the agency's appropriation needs for fiscal year 2008. It is
my privilege to represent an agency that is dedicated to the safety of
the traveling public.
The NTSB is an independent Federal agency charged by Congress with
investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and
significant accidents in other modes of transportation--railroad,
highway, marine, and pipeline, and issuing safety recommendations to
prevent future accidents. The Safety Board also oversees the assistance
to victims and their families following commercial aviation accidents
and also acts as the Court of Appeals for airmen, aviation mechanics
and mariners whenever certificate action is taken by the Administrator
of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or the U.S. Coast Guard
Commandant or when civil penalties are assessed by the FAA.
Since its inception in 1967, the Safety Board has investigated
about 130,000 aviation accidents and thousands of surface
transportation accidents. In addition, the Safety Board has issued more
than 12,600 safety recommendations in all modes of transportation with
an 82 percent acceptance rate for our recommendations.
Let me say that our Nation's transportation system is very safe,
and the men and women who work hard every day to operate the
transportation system and keep it safe have our sincere admiration and
appreciation. That said, the Safety Board is committed to the idea that
there is always room for improvement. For this reason, we conduct
careful, scientific investigations of transportation accidents to
determine how the transportation system can be made even safer.
This winter, the Board held public meetings (known as ``Sunshine''
meetings) to complete our investigations of the motorcoach fire on
Interstate 45 near Wilmer, Texas during the Hurricane Rita evacuation;
the 2005 head-on collision of two freight trains in Anding,
Mississippi; the crash of Pinnacle Airlines flight 3701 at Jefferson
City, Missouri, and the 2006 engine room fire aboard the commuter ferry
SPV Massachusetts in Boston Harbor. Also, we held Sunshine meetings for
the crash of Circuit City Cessna 560 at Pueblo, Colorado and the Bali
Hai Bell 206 and Heli-USA Aerospatiale AS350 helicopter accidents in
Hawaii.
On March 27, 2007, we held a public forum on runway incursions, a
particularly important item on our list of Most Wanted Transportation
Safety Improvements. In the months ahead, my colleagues and I will hold
Sunshine meetings to conclude several important investigations,
including the October 2006 accident that killed New York Yankees
pitcher Cory Lidle and a pilot-rated passenger; the Chalk's Ocean
Airways seaplane accident that killed 20 people in Miami, Florida; and
another the derailment of a Chicago Transit Authority Blue Line train;
and our investigation of last year's tunnel ceiling collapse of the I-
90 connector tunnel that killed a motorist in Boston, Massachusetts.
As required by international agreement, the Board often sends
investigators to other countries to investigate aviation accidents.
When a U.S.-manufactured, U.S.-registered, or a U.S.-operated aircraft
is involved in an accident in a foreign country, the Safety Board leads
the U.S. participation in the investigation. Each year, our
investigators participate in about 20 major foreign aviation accidents.
For example we are participating in an investigation involving the
September 29, 2006 midair collision in Brazil between a Boeing 737-800
operated by Gol airlines and an Embraer Legacy 600 business jet owned
and operated by Excelair of Long Island, New York. And since the
beginning of the calendar year, 3 Boeing 737s have crashed in
Indonesia. Of those three airplanes, two were being operated by Adam
Air, and one by Garuda airlines. Because the airplanes involved in
these accidents were certificated and manufactured in the United
States, we are leading the U.S. efforts to investigate these accidents.
safety issues
I would like to begin by discussing safety issues that relate to
the transportation modes that are represented here today.
Last year, the Safety Board testified before the House Committee on
Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality, regarding
the safety benefits of excess flow valves (EFV) on natural gas
distribution pipelines. EFVs are an effective way to save lives and
protect property, and the Safety Board has long advocated their use.
The Board is pleased with the passage of legislation last year
mandating the installation of EFVs on natural gas pipelines serving
single-family residential housing, and we look forward to the safety
improvements that will result.
As in other transportation modes, the Board has called upon the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to set working
hour limits for pipeline controllers. Such limits, if based on fatigue
research, circadian rhythms, and sleep and rest requirements, could
reduce the number of accidents caused by human fatigue.
The Safety Board has recently addressed a number of important
highway safety issues. These include highway median barriers, toll
plaza designs, collision warning systems, vehicle incompatibility,
highway construction oversight, cell phone use by bus drivers, and
motorcoach occupant protection.
On March 2, 2007, our investigators were at the scene of a
motorcoach accident in Atlanta that involved a baseball team from
Bluffton University in Ohio. The motorcoach took an exit ramp from the
left lane, failed to stop at the end of the exit ramp, collided with
and overrode a concrete bridge rail, and fell 30 feet to the highway
below. Seven occupants were killed. That investigation continues.
Because some of the occupants were ejected or partially ejected from
the vehicle, safety issues in the investigation will likely include
topics such as improved occupant protection, window glazing, emergency
exit design, and stronger motorcoach roofs. All these topics have been
addressed in prior safety recommendations to the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).
Additionally, on September 23, 2005, a fire engulfed a motorcoach
being operated by Global Limo Inc. The bus was carrying 44 residents
and staff from an assisted-living facility in Bellaire, Texas away from
the predicted path of Hurricane Rita near Houston, Texas, many of which
were not ambulatory. Twenty-three elderly passengers were unable to
escape the fire and died.
Our investigation revealed that Global Limo Inc. was in violation
of several safety regulations before the accident. For example, the
company did not ensure that their drivers were properly licensed to
drive motorcoaches and also did not retain vehicle maintenance and
repair records as required by Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
(FMCSRs). In addition, there was no maintenance program to properly
service the vehicle. The lack of such a program directly contributed to
this catastrophic fire and loss of life.
Also contributing to the accident was the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration's (FMCSA) ineffective compliance review system,
which provided inadequate safety oversight of this passenger motor
carrier. The Board concluded that FMCSA's current process does not
effectively identify unsafe motor carriers and prevent them from
operating. In fact, despite many driver and vehicle safety violations,
FMCSA had rated Global as ``satisfactory'' prior to the accident. The
Board reiterated its long-standing recommendation to FMCSA to change
the safety fitness rating methodology so that either adverse vehicle or
driver performance problems alone are sufficient to result in an
overall unsatisfactory rating for a carrier.
As a result of its investigation, the Board made a number of
recommendations to the NHTSA to develop a fire protection standard for
motorcoach fuel systems, and develop fire detection systems to monitor
the temperature of wheel well compartments. We also asked FMCSA to
continue to gather and evaluate information on the causes, frequency
and severity of bus and motorcoach fires, and conduct ongoing analysis
of that data. Finally, the Safety Board asked NHTSA to evaluate
motorcoach emergency evacuation designs by conducting simulation
studies and evacuation drills.
In another recently completed accident investigation, the Board
focused on cell phone use by bus drivers. On the morning of November
14, 2004, a motorcoach was traveling on the George Washington Memorial
Parkway in Alexandria, Virginia, as it approached an overpass. The bus
driver passed low clearance warning signs, and did not move to a lane
with adequate clearance. The bus struck the underside of the bridge.
The bus driver was talking on a hands-free cellular telephone at the
time of the accident. Of the 27 passengers, 10 received minor injuries
and 1 sustained serious injuries.
The Safety Board believes that, except in emergencies, operators of
commercial passenger-carrying vehicles and school busses should be
prohibited from using cellular telephones while transporting
passengers, and has called upon FMCSA to publish regulations to that
effect. The Safety Board has also made significant progress in the
States on child booster seats, primary seat belt laws, teen driving and
hard-core drinking and driving.
The Safety Board recently testified before the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure regarding the reauthorization of the
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). Among the issues the Board has
been particularly concerned about is human fatigue, which has been
identified as a safety issue in many railroad accidents over the years,
including the June 28, 2004, accident in Macdona, Texas. That accident
resulted in the deaths of three people from chlorine gas inhalation.
Many accident investigations have identified human performance failures
related to fatigue, medical conditions such as sleep apnea, the use of
cell phones, the use of after-arrival track warrants in dark territory,
loss of situational awareness, and improperly positioned switches as
causal to railroad accidents. Human fatigue was on the Safety Board's
Most Wanted List of Safety Recommendations but removed when the FRA
stated it did not have the statutory authority to regulate hours of
service. The Safety Board has testified before Congress that the FRA
should be given the statutory authority to regulate these hours of
service. We understand the FRA is seeking such authority.
There are technological solutions that have the potential to reduce
the number of serious train accidents by providing redundant systems to
protect against human performance failures. One of these technologies
is positive train control (PTC). The implementation of PTC systems has
been on the Board's Most Wanted list for 17 years. Its objective is to
prevent train collisions and over-speed accidents by requiring
automatic control systems to override mistakes by human operators.
While there has been some progress by some railroads, we note that PTC
systems are needed on railroad systems across the entire United States.
As in other transportation modes, hours of service regulations are
also a safety issue for marine. The Board called upon the U.S. Coast
Guard (Coast Guard) to establish scientifically based hours of service
regulations for maritime workers. The Coast Guard has sponsored
research in fatigue and developed its Crew Endurance Management (CEM)
system based on its research. The CEM system helps manage the risk
factors that can lead to human error and performance degradation in
maritime work environments.
Additionally, the Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of
2004 allows the Coast Guard to set maximum hours of service for towing
vessel operators based on the results of a demonstration project using
the CEM system on towing vessels. The demonstration project was
completed in 2005, and a report of the results was submitted to
Congress a year ago. The report revealed promising results in terms of
reducing fatigue-related risks. In addition, a Commandant Instruction
issued in March of last year states that ``Commanding officers and
officers-in-charge shall . . . implement a CEM program to manage
endurance risk at their unit.'' The Safety Board would like to see the
Coast Guard take the remaining action on this recommendation by issuing
formal fatigue management regulations for all domestic operators.
Finally, I would like to address several important aviation safety
issues, including runway incursions, fuel tank flammability, icing and
flight recorders.
In March 1977, in what remains the world's deadliest aviation
accident, two passenger jumbo jets collided on a runway at Tenerife,
Canary Islands. That accident resulted in the deaths of 583 passengers
and crew. The deadliest U.S. runway incursion accident was a collision
between a USAir 737 and a Skywest Metroliner commuter airplane at Los
Angeles International Airport in February 1991, killing 34.
Most recently, in July 2006, at O'Hare International Airport, a
United 737 passenger jet and an Atlas Air 747 cargo airplane nearly
collided. The 747 had been cleared to land and was taxiing on the
runway towards the cargo area when the 737 was cleared to take off on
the intersecting runway, over the 747. The pilot of the United 737
passenger jet took evasive action by lifting off early. A collision was
avoided by less than 200 feet.
A total of 21 runway incursion recommendations have been on our
Most Wanted List of Safety Recommendations; only one recommendation
remains open. That recommendation urges the FAA to ``require, at all
airports with scheduled passenger service, a ground movement safety
system that will prevent runway incursions; the system should provide a
direct warning capability to flight crews. In addition, demonstrate
through computer simulations or other means that the system will, in
fact, prevent incursions.''
The FAA has taken action to inform pilots and controllers of
potential runway incursions, improve airport markings, and install the
Airport Movement Area Safety System (AMASS) and Airport Surface
Detection Equipment Model X (ASDE-X). These systems are an improvement,
but are not sufficient as currently designed to prevent all runway
incursions.
The runway incursion rate in the United States has not appreciably
changed over the past 4 years, and stands at about 5.2 runway
incursions per 1,000,000 tower operations, despite these improvements.
The issue is one of reaction time. Safety Board investigations have
found that AMASS is not adequate to prevent serious runway collisions,
because too much time is lost routing valuable information through air
traffic control. In recent incidents, AMASS did not alert controllers
in time to be effective, and the situations were instead resolved by
flight crew actions that sometimes bordered on heroics, or luck.
On Tuesday, March 27th, the Safety Board held a public forum on
runway incursions. Thirty years after the terrible accident in
Tenerife, runway incursions remain a major safety issue in aviation.
Since 1989, aircraft fuel tank explosions have resulted in 346
fatalities. On July 17, 1996, Trans World Airlines, Inc. (TWA) flight
800, a Boeing 747-131, crashed in the Atlantic Ocean near East
Moriches, New York. All 230 people on board were killed. The Safety
Board found that the cause of the accident was an explosion of the
center wing fuel tank, resulting from ignition of the flammable fuel/
air mixture inside the tank. The source of ignition for the explosion
could not be determined with certainty; however, the source was most
likely a short circuit of electrical wiring associated with the fuel
quantity indication system.
The investigation of the TWA flight 800 accident and assistance on
2 fuel tank explosions overseas found that a fuel tank design and
certification philosophy that relies solely on the elimination of every
ignition source, while accepting the existence of fuel tank
flammability, is fundamentally flawed because experience has
demonstrated that it is impossible to eliminate all potential ignition
sources. Further, the risk of explosion exists for all fuel tanks, not
just center or fuselage fuel tanks. The Safety Board believes that
operating transport-category airplanes with flammable fuel/air vapors
in fuel tanks presents an avoidable risk of explosion. Our
recommendation asks the FAA to give significant consideration ``to the
development of airplane design modifications, such as nitrogen-inerting
systems and the addition of insulation between heat-generating
equipment and fuel tanks. Appropriate modifications should apply to
newly certificated airplanes and, where feasible, to existing
airplanes.'' In 2002, the FAA developed a prototype inerting system
that could be retrofitted into existing airplanes.
The comment period on the FAA's notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) for the flammability reduction installation is now closed and
the Board is awaiting a final rule.
Another issue concerns the safety of aircraft operating in icing
conditions. Aircraft icing issues have been on the Safety Board's Most
Wanted List since 1997. The recommendations to the FAA include the need
to expand the icing certification envelope to include freezing drizzle/
freezing rain and mixed water/ice crystal conditions, as necessary;
revise regulations to ensure that airplanes are properly tested for all
conditions in which they are authorized to operate, or are otherwise
shown to be capable of safe flight into such conditions; conduct
additional research with the National Air and Space Administration
(NASA) to identify realistic acceptable ice accumulations; and ensure
turbopropeller-driven airplanes meet the requirements of the revised
icing certification standards.
Aircraft icing is a threat to both general and commercial aviation
pilots. As recently as January 2, 2006, an American Eagle Saab-Scania
SF340 encountered icing conditions during the en route climb after
departure from San Luis Obispo, California. The airplane departed
controlled flight at an altitude of about 11,500 feet mean sea level
and the flight crew recovered control of the airplane at about 6,500
feet. There were no injuries to the 29 persons on board and the
airplane did not sustain any damage. The airplane rolled to 86 left
wing down and then 140 right wing down. The loss of control lasted
about 50 seconds, and the airplane lost 4,000 feet.
A final issue affecting aviation safety is that of flight
recorders. The Safety Board has investigated numerous accidents in
which turbine-powered aircraft did not have either a cockpit voice
recorder (CVR) or a flight data recorder (FDR) at the time of the
accident. One such investigation involved a crash in Minnesota that
killed 8 people including Senator Paul Wellstone.
The Safety Board has investigated several events in which the
aircraft was not required to be equipped with a flight recorder, but a
CVR was installed voluntarily on the aircraft. Data from these CVRs has
provided invaluable information during its investigations.
Specifically, in the initial phase of an investigation, CVR data may
reveal operational issues that are not readily apparent from the
physical evidence found at an accident site, enabling the Safety Board
to narrow the focus of its investigation and issue safety
recommendations quickly to prevent similar accidents. In some
instances, CVR data may be the sole source of evidence for a probable
cause determination.
Considering the number of accidents occurring in smaller aircraft,
the Safety Board has identified the need to install crash-protected
recording devices on all turbine-powered aircraft. Despite the clear
advantages of requiring both a CVR and an FDR on smaller aircraft, the
Board recognizes the economic impact and consequently has proposed that
all smaller turbine-powered aircraft be equipped with a single crash-
protected recorder--a video image recorder--which is less expensive
than two recorders. Such recorders obtain not only audio information
like that from CVRs, and event data like that from FDRs, but also
information about the environment outside the cockpit window.
ntsb appropriations
Mr. Chairman, ranking member, and members of the committee, I have
been talking about the safety of our Nation's transportation system. As
I said, it is for the most part a safe and effective system. There are
improvements that can be and should be made, but the American people
already have every right to feel confident in our transportation
system.
One of the reasons for this confidence is a small but very
effective independent board that was created 40 years ago this month by
the U.S. Congress. The Congress believed that a healthy, vital
transportation system was important to the American people and to all
aspects of its economic system.
This board is now recognized as a leader in accident investigation
and transportation safety, both here and around the world. The NTSB has
been asked to assist on hundreds of foreign accident investigations and
has been the model for similar agencies in several other countries as
they improve the oversight and safety of their transportation systems.
I think that you can tell I am very proud to serve as the Chairman
of the National Transportation Safety Board. I am proud of the work
that we do; I am proud of what the Board has accomplished, and I am
also very proud to work with the dedicated men and women of the agency.
I have said this before, and I will say it again, ``They are the best
of the best.''
During the last two years, my colleagues and I have made a number
of improvements at the Safety Board. We have energized and involved the
management team that now leads the Board's strong pool of technical
professionals. Recently, with input from all ranks, that team produced
a new Strategic Plan for the agency. Each executive now has a
performance plan that is linked to our Strategic Plan. The last two
years have brought significant improvements to the Safety Board, and we
want to continue that positive momentum, but we will need your help and
your support to do so.
This agency has measurably improved its efficiency and throughput
during the last two years. In fiscal year 2005, the Members of the
Safety Board received 120 voting items from the staff. In fiscal year
2006, my colleagues and I received 168 such items (an increase of 40
percent), and the staff has presented almost 100 voting items so far in
the first half of fiscal year 2007. In fiscal year 2005, the Board
considered 12 accident reports and studies and we issued 120 safety
recommendations. In fiscal year 2006, we considered 21 accident reports
and studies, and we issued 167 recommendations. So far this fiscal
year, we have considered 12 accident reports and we have issued over 70
safety recommendations. What's more, since the beginning of fiscal year
2005, the Board has held 9 public hearings, forums, and symposiums on
such topics as runway incursions, motorcycle safety, and positive train
control.
Better management has made our agency more efficient during a time
of declining resources. The number of products we produce has
increased, but our staff is now working at full capacity. Of course,
this is a good thing, but there is a troubling side to this. With an
investigative staff stretched as it is, we will not be well positioned
to conduct multiple, simultaneous complex investigations.
Our staffing numbers have been declining over the last five fiscal
years. In fiscal year 2005, the Safety Board received an appropriation
of just over $76 million, which enabled us to fund 418 FTEs. In fiscal
year 2006, after recision, the Board's appropriation was less than the
year before. That year, in order to absorb the increased cost of pay
raises, benefits and other costs, we were forced to allow attrition to
shrink our ranks to 387 FTEs, a reduction of 31 positions.
To help us better manage this drop, we created a human capital
plan. This plan allowed us to focus on hiring investigators to fill our
most critical needs. The Safety Board has carefully managed its
resources, and--like many agencies--has done more with less, but there
is a point where we will simply stretch staff too thin.
This year, the Safety Board received an appropriation of $79.3
million under a continuing resolution. This represents a $3.3 million
increase over the prior year, and I assure you we are very grateful to
this subcommittee for providing us such an increase because we entered
the year in a critical condition. Although this funding level will not
permit us to grow beyond 396 FTEs this fiscal year, it will permit us
to hold steady through the year.
About 90 percent of the Board's annual budget is spent on salaries,
benefits and fixed expenses such as rent and telecommunications. That
leaves the remaining 10 percent available for mission related
activities, travel, training, equipment and information technology.
Each year, due to pay raises and inflation, the cost of agency salaries
and fixed expenses grows by more than $3 million, regardless of our
appropriation level.
The President's budget requests $83 million for the Safety Board
for fiscal year 2008. However, our best estimates indicate that our
salaries and fixed costs will grow by a little over $3.6 million in
fiscal year 2008. Consequently, $83 million will enable us to fund
those increases, but we will need to hold staffing at the current level
for yet another year under such a budget.
Most people believe that the Safety Board is much larger than it
actually is. They think that 1,000 or 2,000 people would be necessary
to do all of the work that we do. So, they are shocked when they learn
the Board has fewer than 400 people--but 400 very dedicated people.
Although these people are willing to work very long hours at accidents
and keep their skills current, there is only so much they can do.
As I said earlier, most of our funding is used to pay personnel,
and what we need now is personnel. The Board needs people with
particular and special skills to keep up with the new technologies that
are constantly changing and developing. For example, until fairly
recently, all planes were made of aluminum. Now, new airliners are made
with composite materials, the failure of which requires different
testing methods and investigative procedures. The Safety Board needs
additional investigators to handle the possibility of increased
accidents after the introduction of a projected large number of very
light jets (VLJ) that are expected to enter the service over the next
few years. The introduction of VLJs into the national airspace system
may require a significant use of investigative resources. Although
small, the VLJs and their operation are complex and will require
essentially a full team of investigators to address issues that may
arise in composites, turbine engines, single pilot operations, Part 135
operations, FAA oversight and air traffic control. Special attention is
also given to new types of aircraft as they enter the commercial fleet.
Further, we have been without a senior fire and explosion investigator
for over 4 years, leaving us extremely vulnerable to inadequate
coverage in any fire related investigation. Additionally, we cover the
entire country with only one fully staffed railroad Go-Team.
The Safety Board is a unique agency, and many of our investigators
are highly specialized. They are not interchangeable. Someone who is
trained in aircraft jet engines does not have the skills required to
investigate the operation of railroad signals. Not only must we hire
specialists with expert-level skills, new specialists must work with
the Board for some time to fully understand the complexities of our
accident investigations. When we are not able to hire, we lose that
educational process that is so very important to new investigators.
With approximately one-third of our staff eligible to retire within the
next five years, it is essential that we take the proper steps now to
replace these highly skilled, technical and experienced professionals.
In closing, I want to assure the members of this subcommittee that
my fellow board members and I are most appreciative of your support
this fiscal year and in prior years. As you begin to make
appropriations decisions for the coming year, we hope you will keep in
mind the importance of this small and effective agency to the safety of
our Nation's transportation system.
I would be delighted to respond to any questions you may have.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hill, in my opening statement, you
heard me talk about the tragic accident that took the life of
one man and injured two others on the Capitol Beltway last
month.
Your agency uses compliance reviews in order to keep unsafe
trucks and unsafe truckers off of our Nation's highways. Back
in February, you did a compliance review of BK Trucking because
they were on your watch list for far too many accidents. The
review that occurred at that time found almost no problems,
resulted in no fines or penalties. And then after that fatal
accident, your people went back and found the carrier using a
driver with a suspended CDL, failures to maintain State record
checks, falsified log books, multiple failures to keep driver
vehicle safety records.
As I asked in my opening statement, are we to believe that
all of those violations occurred in 1 month?
Mr. Hill. Madam Chairman, thank you for that question. I am
aware of the issue. I have been briefed on it, and I do have
some response to it.
I think the first thing I would say to you is that there
has been considerable criticism about the SafeStat system in
recent years, as you are probably aware. And I think in this
case, we indicated that the SafeStat system did identify this
carrier as being a problem. It was primarily because of high
crash incidents that we found that we went in to examine the
carrier initially.
The second thing is that the CDL system is supposed to be
recording driver convictions and problems and taking action. So
the CDL system also has its part.
The piece that I am very concerned about and share with
your frustration is that when we went into the carrier's
business on February 25, basically the owner of the company
told us that he had 8 drivers, and there were really 23, he
withheld that information from us. And so the driver who was
involved in the fatal crash was an owner/operator who was
really under the employ of this carrier and should have been
counted as a part of the driver's ongoing activities.
Unfortunately, he withheld that information from our
investigator.
He showed us lease agreements that our investigator looked
at but did not properly identify, that these were, in fact,
under the employ of the carrier. And so we have to take an
internal look at what we are doing with these safety
investigators and finding these owner/operators. And that is a
deficiency that I am prepared to address. I am going to be on a
conference call tomorrow with all of our field staff and
leadership and we are going to address this issue.
What really should have happened is that the driver should
have notified his carrier. His carrier should have then stopped
him from driving. That did not take place. In fact, the owner
of the company told us that in the second review we did in
April that he withheld intentionally this information from us.
Senator Murray. Well, in both documents that you supplied
to my office, as well as to what you just said, you are saying
that the owner of BK Trucking lied to your investigators,
basically. Your investigators asked for records on 15 drivers
since your agency's database said that they worked for BK
Trucking, and the owner told your investigator that the
database was in error, and the drivers did not formally work
for BK Trucking. And that was the end of the conversation.
I have to ask: When trucking companies that are on your
watch list tell your investigators their data is wrong, do your
investigators just take their word for it?
Mr. Hill. In this case, the investigator looked at the
lease agreements. They wanted to see independent verification.
Lease agreements are fairly detailed documents. And the
investigator read through them and did not see the kind of
requirements that should have been found in the investigation.
Yes, that is a deficiency in our process, but I would not blame
it on the compliance review, a CR process. I think it was an
issue that we need to address in this particular investigation.
Senator Murray. Do you know why there was not a further
investigation since this company was on your watch list and
records were different according to your records and their
records, why it was not investigated further? It appears that
your investigators just accepted the owner's words on this.
Mr. Hill. Our investigator looked at the lease agreements
and did not believe that the owner/operators were, in fact,
under the carrier's responsibility, and that was an erroneous
assumption. They should have investigated it further or asked
for further assistance. We are going to address that issue.
Senator Murray. And then they did not. They did not
investigate it any further after that?
Mr. Hill. No, not until April after we went in the second
time.
Senator Murray. After the accident.
Mr. Hill. That is correct.
Senator Murray. Roger Scofield was the BK truck driver that
was involved in that crash. Was he one of the drivers for whom
your investigator at the first compliance review was seeking
information?
Mr. Hill. I do not know whether his name was one of them,
but he was certainly a part of that 15 drivers that you
referenced in your question to me. He was a part of that 15
owner/operators that was not provided to us on the February
compliance review that you indicated.
Senator Murray. Well, it just--he had so many traffic
violations and suspensions, how did that escape the attention
of your inspectors?
Mr. Hill. Well, we were aware of numerous inspections being
attributed to certain drivers, but we have to make sure that
the driver works for the carrier in question. And I am telling
you that we were not able to make that connection due to the
lease agreements that we looked at.
Senator Murray. And no red flags went off for anybody?
Mr. Hill. Yes. That is why the investigator brought it up
to them, because the red flags were there because of these
numerous inspections.
Senator Murray. So what happened when you went in, red
flags and then nothing, and then there is a fatal accident?
Mr. Hill. Well, what I am explaining to you is that the
safety investigator tried to make the determination that these
particular drivers worked for this----
Senator Murray. Was that an ongoing process that was
occurring when the fatal accident occurred, or was that----
Mr. Hill. I do not know the answer to that. I will have to
find out and get back to you.
Senator Murray. Okay. I would like to know the answer to
that.
Mr. Hill. Okay. Sure.
Senator Murray. Mr. Rosenker, your agency issued
recommendations saying that the compliance review system had to
be dramatically improved because it was not being successful in
identifying and taking these unsafe drivers and their companies
off the road. But those recommendations were made back in
February 1999. That was more than 7 years ago. And they have
been on your most wanted list since the year 2000, and you have
categorized the FMCSA's response as unsuccessful.
Based on your agency's findings, is this case with the BK
Trucking more than--the exception or more the rule?
Mr. Rosenker. I am hesitant to say it is more the rule, but
I will tell you that this is not an accident that we chose to
investigate so I do not have all of the facts.
Senator Murray. Okay.
Mr. Rosenker. In fact, I would have to have the facts in
order to be able to give you a good answer on what really
happened there and does that represent what we see in other
accidents.
Senator Murray. Well, let me ask you: Do you believe that
the FMCSA's inspectors are too dependent on information
provided by the trucking companies themselves?
Mr. Rosenker. Yes, I do believe that.
Senator Murray. Well, can you share with this subcommittee
what immediate improvements you want to see to the compliance
review and enforcement systems?
Mr. Rosenker. This is a very challenging issue, given the
numbers of people that are at FMCSA that do this kind of work.
It is extremely difficult to find all of the bad actors that
are on the roads today. There needs to be, perhaps, a total
overhaul of the system so that we can do a better job of
beginning to understand where the bad actors are and how we can
enforce the action to get them off the road.
Senator Murray. All right.
Mr. Rosenker. This is, unfortunately, a very, very large
problem that has to be dealt with.
Senator Murray. So you would say that the BK Trucking
accident is just symbolic of a larger problem, I assume?
Mr. Rosenker. Exactly.
Senator Murray. Okay. Thank you.
Senator Bond.
Senator Bond. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Chairman Rosenker, I gather you--I did not catch the exact
number, but 460 motorcycle deaths, was it somewhere in that
range----
Mr. Rosenker. For which accidents are you talking about
regarding fatalities?
Senator Bond. On motorcycles, motorcycle deaths, yes.
Mr. Rosenker. Approximately 4,500. I will give you the
exact figure.
Senator Bond. 4,500?
Mr. Rosenker. Yes sir.
Senator Bond. Okay. 4,500 deaths in 1 year on--for
motorcyclists without helmets. Do you have figures on how many
severe brain injuries with permanent impairment occurred in
addition to that 4,500?
Mr. Rosenker. Now, Senator Bond, I would not suggest that
every single one of the 4,553 that died on a motorcycle were
not wearing helmets. Many may have been wearing helmets and
died from other injuries.
Senator Bond. I see.
Mr. Rosenker. So as far as the numbers that deal with
paralyzing injuries or brain-damaged injuries, I could get that
number. I do not have that handy.
Senator Bond. If it is readily available, I would be very
interested in that.
Mr. Rosenker. Yes, sir.
Senator Bond. I also understand that insurance companies,
used to or formerly made a strong push in State legislatures
for helmet laws, but do I understand that has slacked off
recently? Is there less activity for that?
Mr. Rosenker. I could tell you that I began in this safety
community back in the seventies when we had safety helmet use
laws. And there were significantly more States that had them at
that time than they do today. And there are a number of reasons
why they do not require safety helmets. But, in fact, we have
seen an increase because of, one, an increased ridership; and,
two, issues of safety helmet use.
Senator Bond. About some 115 percent increase, something
like that.
Mr. Rosenker. A significant increase, yes, sir.
Senator Bond. All right. Administrator Nason, you stated
very clearly in your testimony the safety penalty that came
from raising the CAFE standards beyond that achievable by
technology, anywhere from 1,300 to 2,600 in 1 year. If Congress
were to pass a CAFE bill this year with a mandated increase in
CAFE standards beyond available technology, could I assume then
that we should expect a similar safety penalty, that is, a rise
in fatalities?
Ms. Nason. Yes, Senator. Thank you. We are very concerned
about the safety penalty with a straight increase in CAFE. We
would anticipate that there would be an exacerbation of the
problem.
The penalty is because--and I note that it is not our term;
it is the National Academy of Science's term and we are just
borrowing it--occurs generally because the least expensive way
to meet CAFE is to produce many more smaller, lighter vehicles
which, unfortunately, crashing into the larger, bigger vehicles
is exacerbating the problem we already have of the difficulties
between the two, so----
Senator Bond. Madam Administrator, the last time I checked
on it, I found that--I believe I was told that somewhere
between 40 and 60 percent of those fatalities occurred not in
collisions with other larger vehicles, but were single-car
crashes. So the--it is not just that they are smaller than
other vehicles on the road. They are more dangerous when they
go off the road, hit a pole, or flip over. Is that fair?
Ms. Nason. That is true. We are worried about both
compatibility and single vehicle crashes, particularly
rollovers.
Senator Bond. One of the things I was interested in--and I
am a little bit confused--but under section 406, the States can
spend all but $1 million on highway construction programs. In
the section 148 of the Highway Safety Improvement Program,
States can flex 10 percent into safety programs, including
behavioral, that is, ``Use your seatbelts.''
But I am told that from the States, that even though they
could use this--these flex funds for safety belt enforcement,
they are using--most of them are using these funds for
additional highway construction, rather than improving the use
of safety belts. What is your finding in that area?
Ms. Nason. Well, it certainly depends on the State.
Senator Bond. But how often is that being----
Ms. Nason. For the 406 grants, we found the vast majority
of the funding that the States are getting actually is being
used for behavioral programs. It is close to 70 percent of the
funding. That is their choice. We are very pleased to see that,
but----
Senator Bond. Yes. Under 148 they are apparently not using
it.
Ms. Nason. Right.
Senator Bond. Do you have any comments on that, Chairman
Rosenker?
Mr. Rosenker. As far as the use of safety belts?
Senator Bond. Yes.
Mr. Rosenker. We have seen compliance up to 82 percent. It
is the Board's position that all States should have primary
safety belt use laws. When I began back--I keep talking about
three decades ago--it almost sounds like I am back during the
Model T days--but unfortunately----
Senator Bond. I started even before then, so do not tell me
about Model T days. I was there with the horse and buggy.
Mr. Rosenker. I was part of the original group that began
the safety belt use law advocacy program. And I can tell you
that when we started to talk about that concept, back in the
mid-seventies, people thought in terms that we were invading
their castle. Their car, itself, was their own domain, and they
had their own decision-making capability. Back during that
period, 55,000 Americans were dying on our highways.
Tremendous progress has been made. The combination of
safety belt use laws, the combination of new systems with
airbags, the combination of, in fact, much better automobiles
that we are operating today have brought that number down. But
I really believe, sir, if we can get to 50 States that require
the use of the safety belt, we can bring that number down
substantially.
Senator Bond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Madam Chair?
Senator Murray. Mr. Hill, I am going to return to you. I
understand that you are working on a new program called CSA
2010----
Mr. Hill. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Murray [continuing]. That is supposed to address
some of the NTSB's concerns and criticisms. But I also
understand that the soonest that you are going to be able to
fully deploy this system is in 2010, and that is 11 years after
the NTSB first issued their recommendations.
I wanted to ask you: Why does it take your agency 11 years
to respond to this urgent--what I see as really urgent safety--
these urgent safety recommendations?
Mr. Hill. Well, Madam Chairman, I joined the agency in
2003. And when I came, I was greeted with a package of
information, something called the Compliance Review Work Group.
This was basically a study that began as a result of the 1999
recommendation and had been somewhat inactive. And so my
predecessor and I revitalized that group and tried to figure
out exactly what we need to do to come into compliance with the
NTSB recommendations.
Since that time, we looked at the report from that earlier
study group that had completed the Compliance Review Work Group
analysis, and we just felt like that we needed to look at the
compliance review differently. We needed to have a bigger
experience, a bigger footprint with the motor carrier industry.
We did not see the compliance review in its current format
achieving that, so we felt it needed to be changed
significantly.
Whenever you develop a national program affecting 700,000,
potentially, motor carriers, it involves significant outreach.
We have been having public listening sessions to make sure that
we are communicating with the public, and how this will affect
them.
We also have been trying to work with our State partners
who do the majority of the motor carrier safety assistance
program work through the grants. And we have included them in
our work groups.
And then the next big piece is that we are going to do a
demonstration of this. We are going to practice this----
Senator Murray. What timing is this, do you think?
Mr. Hill. Next year. Next year, 2008, fiscal year 2008.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, what are you doing right now to
ensure that unsafe drivers and vehicles are removed? You are
waiting for studies and reviews and all kinds of things. Is
there anything you are currently doing to try----
Mr. Hill. We----
Senator Murray [continuing]. And remove unsafe drivers?
Mr. Hill. We are initiating rulemakings to implement this
Comprehensive Safety Analysis 2010. Right now, we are
developing the regulatory text and background material for
that. And, second, we are going to--we have already identified
four States that we plan to use this CSA 2010 approach in next
year.
Senator Murray. Next year?
Mr. Hill. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Murray. Okay. Well, let me broaden this a little
bit. During this subcommittee's hearing on cross-border
trucking with Mexico, I mentioned that we need to focus on the
safety of all trucks, not just Mexican trucks. And the
administration has argued that we need not worry about the
safety of Mexican trucks crossing the border because, contrary
to what we experienced five years ago, the out-of-service rate
for Mexican trucks is now down to between 21 and 23 percent,
which they say is about the same as we experience with the
United States trucks.
Well, I want to talk for a second about what an out-of-
service rate of 21 percent really means. That means that when
Federal and State officials inspect trucks and their drivers on
the road today, on the roadside, more than one out of every
five are in such deficient condition that they are ordered off
the road immediately. Can you imagine how we would react if it
was found that one out of every five passenger jets was
routinely found unfit to fly? You know, I find that really
startling.
And, Mr. Hill, I want to ask you, do you consider an out-
of-service rate of more than 20 percent to be an acceptable
rate for our domestic trucking fleet?
Mr. Hill. No, Madam Chairman, I do not consider that to be
the case. I would just say to you that when I came to the
agency in 2003, I was concerned about the involvement of our
State partners in the compliance review process. At that time
we had about 3,700 reviews being done by States and a limited
number of States involved in that process. I have really been
working to outreach with the States to include more of them.
I used to work in State law enforcement. I am committed to
traffic safety. That is all I have done my entire life. And we
are now up to 45 percent, nearly 46 percent more compliance
reviews being done by States than were being done in 2004. We
are making progress. In some cases, States have to change their
legislation in order to do compliance reviews but we are making
progress.
We have improved the number of roadside inspections to over
3.2 million last year. That is up about 7 percent since 2004.
Senator Murray. And of those roadside inspections, the
compliance rate is one out of five.
Mr. Hill. That is correct. However, I would just point out
to the subcommittee that these inspections typically are
targeted inspections. In other words, we have developed
information tools to identify the worst carriers coming
through, so that when they inspect, they are typically not
inspecting a random sample. They are inspecting the worst
carriers coming through because of the indications they have
that this particular vehicle needs to be inspected.
Senator Murray. Mr. Rosenker, do you think a 21 percent
rate is acceptable?
Mr. Rosenker. We think it is unacceptable. Obviously, we
would like to see that number come down. And, frankly, the only
way you can get it to come down is by serious enforcement and
penalties that, in fact, are commensurate with bad performance.
Short of that, I cannot tell you how to go about doing
that, other than additional people involved in the enforcement
aspect of this issue.
Senator Murray. Is there any other mode of transportation
where we accept a 21 percent noncompliance?
Mr. Rosenker. Not that I know of, Madam Chair.
Senator Murray. Well, I just have to say that I am deeply
concerned about this, Mr. Hill. I heard your comment that you
are targeting trucks, but I--all of us travel on our freeways
and highways. We are coming up on the summer season again when
families are on the road, and I think it is incumbent upon all
of us to ask what we are doing for our part to increase the
safety.
And, you know, as long as the firms think that it is going
to be a long time before they are inspected or they do not have
to, you know, deal with this, their bottom line for their
industry makes them further--slide further and further away
from where they need to be. And I think this is something that
all of us have to really, really focus on.
Senator Bond has gone to another subcommittee hearing, and
I think I will have a few more questions here, and I think I
will--let us see.
Let me go back to my opening statement where I talked about
the recent highway fatality data that was released by DOT that
I thought should be pretty disturbing. The number of highway
fatalities grew to over 43,400, at a rate of 1.45 fatalities
per 100 million vehicle miles. Travel--that figure represents
the highest number of fatalities since 1990.
Back in February when Secretary Peters was here, I told her
I was really disappointed with that. And rather than taking
strong action, it appeared to me that the agency was really
weakening its goal to reduce the fatality rate. And she
responded by saying, ``I have heard you this morning about how
important this is. I promise you I will personally go back and
redouble our efforts to work on these safety issues.''
Ms. Nason, can you tell me since that hearing in February
what changes have been made in your agency that reflect the
redoubling of efforts that the Secretary spoke about to our
subcommittee?
Ms. Nason. Yes. Thank you, Chairman Murray.
The increase, as you noted, is not just an increase in the
number of actual fatalities, but also the increase in the rate.
And for an agency whose mission is to save lives and prevent
injuries, this is extremely distressing. When we look at the
data and see what we have done and where we have not been
successful, it requires us to dig a little deeper, which is
what we have done, to try to determine where we have had
successes and where we have had failures.
And the place where we know we have had success is
passenger occupant vehicle fatalities. The place where we have
the most control over the car is the place where we are
actually seeing a decrease in fatalities. And we do believe we
will get to 1.0 for occupant deaths.
The place where we have not had success is particularly
with motorcycles, as you've noted, and also with pedestrians.
And Secretary Peters is an avid rider, as you know, and she has
also experienced a terrible crash on a motorcycle.
And she has come back to us to say--Senator Bond asked the
fatality number for motorcycles, and it's 4,553. It is up from
4,028. So it is, essentially, 500 additional fatalities from
the year before. That is very distressing for the agency to
see.
One of the things she has done just in the last few weeks
after her hearing is call on the motorcycle industry itself to
work more closely with the Department and to provide free or
substantially reduced cost helmets and training, because we
have multiple problems when we look at motorcycle fatalities,
which is clearly where we need to see an increase in
improvement, where we have seen the increases.
We have alcohol-related fatalities on motorcycles up higher
than passenger cars. We have one in four motorcyclists who are
not properly licensed. They go out; they buy the bike; they
ride it out onto the highway. Nobody checks for an endorsement.
And we are also seeing a great increase in older riders.
And by ``older riders,'' I mean people who had bikes in their
twenties and got off the bikes for a variety of reasons, had
families, bought cars. Now, they have more disposable income.
They are getting back on the motorcycles. We have seen a 400-
percent increase in fatalities in riders 55 and older.
So what we have done to try to reach our 1.0 goal, as you
say, is we have had to push it out a little bit, which we are
concerned about--but we wanted to be honest and say we knew we
were not going to make it--and to look at where we can try to
make improvements. And those are the areas that we are
specifically targeting to try to hit 1.0 in the years to come.
Senator Murray. Do you think just the price of a helmet is
keeping people from buying one when they buy an expensive bike?
Ms. Nason. Well, some of the helmets are actually very
expensive. They are several hundred dollars. So it is one
issue.
The other thing she has said, though--and we have heard
this even from the rider community--is rider training. I have
taken the rider training course, for example. We had a separate
course done for some of us at DOT. It is very difficult to get
into some of these courses, particularly during the summer when
people go out and buy a motorcycle.
And a lot of States just do not have the availability for
rider training; or they have it, but it is really pricey. And a
lot of the motorcyclists think, ``I do not need to spend $800
to go learn how to ride my bike. It is just like getting back
on a bike. I have done it before. I can do it again. I do not
need it.''
So part of her call is not just helmets, which are
important, but also rider training, which is an area where we
think we need to focus a lot more time and energy.
Senator Murray. Mr. Rosenker, I see you nodding.
Mr. Rosenker. I would agree. In fact, many, many years ago,
I also was with the Motorcycle Safety Foundation, and we began
the serious curriculum development to teach teachers how to
ride and teach the program.
I would also add that perhaps it is beyond the regulatory
issue. I would encourage the manufacturers of automobiles and
motor vehicles to begin the process of looking at and
installing technologies which, in fact, can help us prevent the
accident.
Electronic stability control was in a number of vehicles
long before the NHTSA chose to regulate it into existence as
standard equipment. So I want to applaud the manufacturers that
are beginning to look at these things, but I would also
encourage them to go even further, not wait for regulations.
Safety sells. I really believe that, and I think the
marketplace proves that. Many, many, many cars have new
technologies which, in fact, are extremely valuable in helping
to prevent accidents.
So we can encourage the manufacturers. And maybe it is time
to look at other measures which may be tax credits. We look at
that for cars that deal in fuel efficiencies. Why do we not do
so toward policies that may encourage us to buy safer
automobiles and get that same type of credit?
In the long term, the insurance companies will pay out
less. Our medical bills will be significantly lower and, in
fact, we will begin to drop those accident numbers down from 7
million accidents, 3 million injuries, and 43,000 fatalities.
Technologies are out there, and if we seriously begin to
develop and implement them, we can begin to drop those numbers
significantly.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much for that.
Senator Bond and I both mentioned the accident involving
our former colleague, now Governor Corzine. And I hope that
really serves as a wake-up call to all of us about the
importance of wearing seatbelts.
NHTSA's own data suggests that over 5,000 additional lives
could have been saved in 2005 alone if all motor vehicle
occupants had been wearing their seatbelts.
In my home State of Washington, we have a primary seatbelt
law, and it has drastically improved seatbelt use, which
increased by almost 14 percent since we enacted that back in
2002. But I--you know, I see that only half the States now have
primary seatbelt laws.
I see, Mr. Rosenker, that the enactment of primary seatbelt
laws is on the NTSB's most wanted list, requiring action by
States. Tell us what you think about the pace at which States
have been adopting these laws.
Mr. Rosenker. I believe it is too slow. We have seen proof
positive of the value of a safety belt along with an air bag.
The system itself helps to significantly reduce fatalities and
the number of serious injuries that we had seen years and years
ago before these systems were developed.
So people that do not use these technologies, people that
are driving without their belt are really being extremely
foolish. We have seen what happened with Governor Corzine. I
believe when he goes back to the Governor's mansion and begins
to carry out the duties of the Governor of New Jersey, he will
become a very, very strong advocate for the use of safety
belts. And I will be, hopefully, calling him to enlist his
support.
Senator Murray. Very good. All right. We have heard a
little discussion about the electronic stability controls. Mr.
Rosenker, you talked about that.
Ms. Nason, your agency announced that it is going to be
mandating some of these new safety technologies, is that
correct?
Ms. Nason. Yes.
Senator Murray. I understand that you are giving
manufacturers until 2012 to enact that. Why such a lengthy
amount of time if clearly this is something that is going to
save lives?
Ms. Nason. We had originally proposed a 30 percent, 60
percent, 90 percent, and then 100 percent implementation rate.
And the 100 percent would be every vehicle on the road, a
Malibu to a Lamborghini. And after we looked at the technology,
we looked at the studies that have been done around the world,
not just by NHTSA. We looked at the NTSB's recommendations.
When we came out with a final rule, we upped the
implementation rate significantly. It is, we believe, very
aggressive. So instead of 30, 60, 90, we have gone to 55, 75,
95. And then----
Senator Murray. Even though it is 46 percent today who
already have it as either standard or optional equipment, so
moving to 50 does not seem like a huge hurdle.
Ms. Nason. Right. It is 46 standard or optional, as you
say. I think we thought it was about 40 for the new vehicles
this year standard. And so even, we thought, getting to 55 was
still going to be a challenge.
There were some vehicles that we believe were never going
to get there. In other words, we never thought there was going
to be 100 percent implementation, if we did not mandate it. So
from 40 to 55 percent and then up to 75 the following year, we
knew was going to be a challenge for the manufacturers.
But because this life-saving technology is so important,
and it is not--we are seeing it on SUVs, for example, and we
are seeing it on high-end vehicles, but I believe there was one
minivan that we saw that had the technology offered. And that
is a place, obviously, where people are putting their children.
Senator Murray. Yes.
Ms. Nason. It is--that was what concerned us. We were not
seeing it in the small vehicles, and we were not seeing it in
all the family-type cars that we needed it in, which is why we
upped the implementation.
And we do think that we were being fairly aggressive. We
know there are some manufacturers who will have some challenges
meeting it, but we thought it was important enough that we push
harder than we originally proposed.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hill, you mentioned in your testimony
that this technology can be especially effective for trucks,
keep them from flipping. Why are you not mandating this for
trucks?
Mr. Hill. Madam Chairman, I would just say a couple of
things about that. First of all, we are actively in the process
of researching to make sure that we understand what is going on
and trying to collect data to understand the cost benefit
analysis that would be required for any kind of a rulemaking
effort. Then we are working closely with NHTSA. This is
something that we are planning to do with them in terms of our
large truck research program.
And one of the things that we are moving forward on in
technology enhancement is improving the braking distance of
trucks. Thirty percent greater braking capacity is what we are
putting out in terms of rule with NHTSA, to try to look at
improving the braking distance of trucks.
As far as the rollover stability, what I have been doing is
talking about it with State partners and the industry to
encourage adoption of these technologies.
Senator Murray. Are we seeing that anywhere in States?
Mr. Hill. We are. There are several States. Not so much as
far as a legislative fix, but in terms of industry, we are
seeing several thousands of these units. I am talking in the
order of anywhere from 20,000 to 40,000 of these units being
deployed, depending on the kind of technology.
Senator Murray. It seems to me this is one area where a
Federal mandate will make a difference--I see Mr. Rosenker
nodding--because States will just say, ``Well, these trucks
travel across our borders,'' and it will be the, you know,
argument that, you know, ``We can't mandate because they go
from Idaho to Washington in an hour.'' So would not a Federal
mandate on this move this much quicker?
Mr. Hill. Well, a Federal mandate would certainly put it on
everyone's radar screen much more quickly, but in terms of
developing that kind of a rulemaking I am going to have to make
sure that we have the right kind of research in place to move
forward with it, and----
Senator Murray. And you don't think----
Mr. Hill [continuing]. We are in the process of----
Senator Murray [continuing]. The research is available?
Mr. Hill. Well, I do not think----
Senator Murray. Mr. Rosenker.
Mr. Hill [continuing]. It is complete yet. I think we are
still developing it.
Senator Murray. Okay.
Mr. Rosenker. As it relates to electronic stability control
and crash avoidance technology, we have seen demonstrations of
it. They seem to work fairly well. As a matter of fact, they
even have some technologies which will assist the trailer
itself from rolling over. So we are impressed with what we have
seen. We would encourage, as I said earlier, the manufacturers
to begin to put these kinds of equipment in voluntarily.
Now, I recognize that it does add some costs to it. But as
we continue to put more and more of these vehicles out, the
economies of scale take over and bring down the cost of
electronic stability control to a minimal expense.
Senator Murray. Okay. Let me change topics for a minute.
Back in 2004, one of my constituents--her name was Maria
Federici--nearly lost her life when she was struck in the head
by an unsecured piece of wood that came flying off a truck that
she was following on a freeway. That impact was horrendous. She
crushed her face, left her blind.
And since this accident occurred, Washington State enacted
legislation called Maria's Law to increase the penalties for
unsecured loads. That law established an education campaign to
help raise awareness about this issue. And I know this is not a
problem just exclusive to Washington State, but one that can
impact lives all across our country.
The AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety conducted a study on
this issue and reported that, nationwide, 25,000 accidents are
caused by road debris which kills nearly 100 people every year.
Ms. Nason, are you familiar with this issue or that study?
Ms. Nason. Yes, I am familiar with the issue, Madam
Chairman. We keep track for our FARs, for our fatality
analyses, of fatalities as a result of falling debris.
Unfortunately, what we find is in some cases, in many
cases, the driver continues on, either unaware----
Senator Murray. Exactly.
Ms. Nason [continuing]. That the material has fallen or
very deliberately trying to leave the scene. So--and in some of
those cases, the fatalities are not coded in the exact same
way. They are coded as a fleeing--driver struck and fled the
scene. So I would have to go back and just check our data to
make sure that we have the best numbers. I cannot exactly
confirm for you that exact number.
Senator Murray. Well, I think all of us have driven down
the freeway trying to maneuver out from behind a truck with an
unsecured load, and there is a good reason for that. So I would
like to have you come back to me and tell me if your agency is
looking at any ways on issuing some guidelines on unsecured
loads.
I know my State took action on this. And I would encourage
you to look at their law, and perhaps some other ways that you
can work to help bring up awareness of this issue for everyone
involved.
Ms. Nason. Absolutely.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hill.
Mr. Hill. Madam Chairman, I would just say to you that we
at FMCSA did develop a uniform load securement policy change in
the last 2 years and designed it to be harmonious with Canada
and for it--to make it an international standard. And it did
significantly increase the requirements for load securement. In
fact, it created a little bit of consternation. The industry
felt like we had gone too far. But we felt load securement was,
in fact, a problem. It was a safety problem. It needed to be
addressed. So we did enact further penalties. And the
Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance has adopted that as a part
of their out-of-service criteria.
Although I do not have the data in front of me, we do put
several thousand trucks out of service because of this, and I
can provide you with that information.
Senator Murray. I appreciate that very much.
Mr. Hill. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Murray. One last topic, on electronic onboard
recorders--because, Mr. Rosenker, I know that at one time your
agency advocated the use of these onboard recorder devices as a
way to give motor carrier safety inspectors a failsafe way to
determine whether truckers were violating the hours of service.
I think you mentioned this in your testimony. And I think these
devices are now being commonly used throughout Europe.
Last year, the DOT inspector general pointed out that hours
of service violations account for 30 percent of all acute and
critical violations. Does your agency still advocate for use of
these devices?
Mr. Rosenker. Yes, we do. We believe that with the new
technology, you will get a significantly more honest picture of
what the drivers are doing. We are interested in the hours of
service compliance because fatigue, unfortunately, has played
too great a role in motor coach and truck accidents that we
have investigated.
So we believe by a much tighter method of enforcement, and
these electronic devices, in fact, would be right now the way
we see it, a failsafe device that would provide significant
data to any enforcement agency that wished to pull someone over
and take a look at how long they had been operating. We want to
make sure that drivers/operators have at least 8 hours of sleep
or at least 8 hours of potential sleep during the 10 hours rest
after their ability to drive for 11 hours.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hill, your agency only requires those
for people who are repeat violators.
Mr. Hill. We have put forth a notice for the proposed
rulemaking that would call for both--that is correct, repeat
violators and also provides some incentives, that is correct.
And it has just closed on the comment period, I think,
yesterday. And we have had 800 comments to the docket so far,
so we know this is going to be a very interesting debate. And
we are going to move forward with it.
Senator Murray. Yes. I understand the arguments on all
sides and the privacy issues and people's concerns, but a truck
driver who is fatigued does not just impact himself or the
trucking company. He impacts all of us as citizens. And so I
encourage you to keep moving forward and look forward to
hearing what you have to say after that.
Mr. Hill. Yes, Madam Chairman.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Murray. I believe there are no other members who
are coming to this subcommittee at this time. I thank all of
our witnesses for taking the time to be here.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Departments for response subsequent to
the hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Hon. Nicole R. Nason
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
Question. Do you believe that all new school buses should be
manufactured with 3-point seat belts to protect our children?
Answer. School bus transportation is the safest form of highway
travel. It is far safer than riding in a passenger vehicle, walking, or
bicycling. Each year to and from school and school-related activities
result in about 450,000 school buses traveling some 4.3 billion miles
and transporting 23.5 million children.
NHTSA is considering whether school buses could be made even safer
with 3-point seat belts. An important issue in this decision is whether
3-point seat belts would reduce seating capacity and force children to
use a less-safe alternative mode of transportation to get to and from
school. NHTSA needs to involve State and local officials in this
process, since they are most familiar with the school travel in their
school districts and the relative risks of each. NHTSA will host a
public meeting focused on seat belts on school buses in Washington, DC
on July 11, 2007.
Following that public meeting, NHTSA will issue a proposal in early
2008 to improve protection on school buses. This proposal is expected
to include higher seat back requirements and other changes to improve
the occupant protection system, called ``compartmentalization,'' that
has been required in school buses for the last 30 years. The proposal
will also include NHTSA's position on seat belts on school buses.
Question. Since the Federal all-rider motorcycle helmet requirement
was repealed in 1995, motorcycle fatalities have skyrocketed. How much
do these motorcycle crashes cost our society in terms of medical care,
legal costs, and lost productivity?
Answer. In 2005, over 4,500 motorcycle riders were killed and
roughly 90,000 were injured in motorcycle crashes. Motorcycle
fatalities have more than doubled since 1995 as motorcycle
registrations have increased dramatically. In addition, helmet use has
steadily declined since 2000, making the large influx of new riders
less likely to survive a crash. NHTSA estimates that wearing a helmet
increases the chance of surviving a crash by 37 percent
In order to estimate the cost of injuries in motorcycle crashes,
NHTSA is examining our databases to derive the incidence of injuries of
differing severities. Motorcycle rider injuries are contained in our
General Estimates System (GES), which categorizes injuries according to
a generic police reported coding system (KABCO) that is not directly
compatible with the coding system used for stratifying the cost of
crash related injuries. We are developing a motorcycle rider specific
translator to express the GES motorcycle injuries in their crash cost
equivalent counts. We apologize for not having a final answer, but we
are in the process of completing this analysis and will forward the
results to you very soon.
______
Questions Submitted to Hon. John H. Hill
Questions Submitted by Senator Patty Murray
Question. Mr. Hill, last year the DOT Inspector General conducted
an audit of FMCSA to assess the progress that has been made in the
motor carrier safety program. One of the issues that the IG raised was
the need for FMCSA to close loopholes that allowed repeat violators to
escape maximum penalties.
Congress gave FMCSA the authority to use these maximum fines in
order to target these repeat offenders. FMCSA pointed out some of the
problems associated with implementing the IG's recommendations in full,
largely related to how violations were documented and the ability of
the agency to maintain some discretion in how to work with motor
carriers to resolve problems short of issuing penalties. However, in
understanding that repeat violators were remaining on the road, often
having dangerous consequences, FMCSA agreed to alter its policies.
Question. Mr. Hill, I understand that your agency has worked with
the IG to develop a policy and implement a plan to rectify the issues
that were identified. Has that policy been finalized and implemented?
Answer. The policy has been drafted and FMCSA is prepared to
implement the Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) recommendations.
However, the agency is awaiting the findings of a recent GAO audit of
the FMCSA's enforcement program. The GAO is expected to recommend
further changes to FMCSA's current policy (section 222 of the Motor
Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999).
The OIG agreed that it was reasonable for the FMCSA to delay
implementation of the OIG recommendation to modify its current section
222 policy. It will allow the agency time to determine how OIG's
recommendations will fit with the changes GAO may recommend.
What the OIG said
The Office of the Inspector General recommended that FMCSA
strengthen its repeat violator policy by developing a procedure to
count all acute and critical violations discovered during a compliance
review and formally admitted to in writing as a ``strike.''
Under the current policy, FMCSA only counts violations for which
enforcement action is initiated as ``strikes.''
What the revised policy will do (as it now stands)
The agency will include all critical and acute violations found
during a compliance review and formally admitted to in writing by a
responsible company official, during the close-out of the compliance
review as a ``strike'' for purposes of MCSIA section 222.
Even if the investigator does not intend to take enforcement action
against the motor carrier, he/she will be required to list all acute
and critical violations discovered during the compliance review and
document at least one count per regulatory Part. If the carrier
formally admits to the violation(s), the admission will become a
``strike'' in the carrier's history.
If the motor carrier does not admit to the violation(s), the
investigator will prepare a Notice of Claim (NOC), which will include
one acute or critical violation discovered per Part. The NOC can be
zero dollars; however it will be considered a ``strike'' once the case
is closed under appropriate circumstances.
Question. Given that your operations rely heavily on field staff to
enforce its laws, what steps have you taken to ensure that these
policies are implemented and not just identified on paper?
Answer. As with every enforcement and compliance policy, field
staff are directly involved in their development. With regard to the
changes proposed to the section 222 policy, a working group--consisting
of field and headquarters employees--has jointly developed this revised
policy. By participating in this effort, the agency can ensure that the
policy is workable and will be effective. In addition, FMCSA plans to
provide in-depth training for safety investigators so they will be able
to uniformly implement the revised policy.
FMCSA information systems and software programs will be modified to
accommodate, and to a large extent automate, the new policy. This will
also assist the field staff in their work and ensure the policy is
implemented.
Finally, as compliance reviews and enforcement cases are developed,
FMCSA Division and Field Administrators will be monitoring the quality
of the compliance reviews and enforcement cases to ensure the policy is
being followed.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
Question. Administrator Hill, given the similarity between the
administration's current and previous proposals to change the hours of
service laws for truck drivers, what are the agency's plans if your
current proposal gets struck down again by the Federal court?
Answer. The FMCSA believes it would be inappropriate to discuss how
the agency would respond to an adverse decision from the Court.
The agency will work with the General Counsel of the Department of
Transportation and the Department of Justice to identify legal options
for ensuring that appropriate HOS requirements are in place in the
event the Court overturns all or part of the rule.
Question. Mr. Hill, I understand that your agency is taking initial
steps to prevent medically unqualified drivers from operating
commercial vehicles. What progress is being made, and when can we
expect these programs to be fully operational?
Answer.
Merger of Medical Certification & Commercial Driver's License (CDL)
On November 16, 2006, FMCSA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) which would establish a standard for State driver
licensing agencies to record interstate CDL holders' medical
certification to operate a commercial motor vehicle on the driving
record of each individual who applies for or renews an interstate CDL.
The information can be accessed through the Commercial Driver License
Information System (CDLIS), a national pointer system linking
individual State CDL databases together.
States would be required to verify the driver has a certificate as
part of all CDL issuance and renewal processes, and motor carriers
would verify medical certification of drivers as part of hiring and
annual driving record reviews. The rulemaking would enable State
traffic enforcement agencies to verify the medical certification status
of CDL holders as part of each driver contact during roadside
inspections. The rulemaking would require States to downgrade
interstate CDL holders' licenses if the driver fails to renew the
medical certificate in a timely manner.
Integrating medical certification verification and documentation
into the State-administered CDL program would improve highway safety by
preventing medically unqualified individuals from obtaining or renewing
CDLs. It would also make it possible for enforcement personnel to
electronically verify whether a driver is currently medically
certified, and thus place drivers operating CMVs without current
medical certification out-of-service. The comment period for the NPRM
closed on February 14, 2007. The FMCSA is currently reviewing the
comments to the docket to determine the next step in the rulemaking.
National Registry of Medical Examiners
In response to section 4116 of SAFETEA-LU, FMCSA will publish an
NPRM to establish and maintain a national registry of medical examiners
that are qualified to perform examinations of CMV drivers and issue
medical certificates. The Agency would remove from the registry the
name of any medical examiner that fails to meet or maintain the
qualifications established by FMCSA for being listed on the registry.
The Registry would provide a list of medical examiners who are
qualified to perform the physical qualification examination of the more
than 6 million truck and motorcoach drivers operating in interstate
commerce. The goal is to maintain ongoing competency of medical
examiners through training, testing, certification and recertification.
This would ensure that medical examiners fully understand the standards
that we have in place and that they are staying current with standards
as the rules change. The list of certified medical examiners would be
easily accessible to CMV drivers and motor carriers so they could
locate the ones that are closest to them and send their drivers to
those locations.
The FMCSA plans to publish the NPRM requesting public comment on
the rulemaking later this year.
______
Questions Submitted to Hon. Mark V. Rosenker
Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
Question. Do you believe that all new school buses should be
manufactured with 3-point seat belts to protect our children?
Answer. School buses are one of the safest forms on transportation
on the road today. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), school buses transport 23.5 million children to
and from school every year covering 4.3 billion miles. Unfortunately,
on average, six school age passengers die in school bus crashes every
year.
Lap-shoulder belts are an important form of occupant protection for
many vehicles including passenger cars and light trucks. Large school
buses are unique in both their design and their operating environment.
Large school buses are bright yellow and are equipped with flashing
lights and a stop arm. Rules govern travel around a school bus loading
or unloading passengers. Large school buses also have specific
regulations governing roof and body strength. In addition, current
school bus designs use a form of passive occupant protection called
compartmentalization. On school buses, compartmentalization provides a
protective envelope consisting of strong, closely spaced seats that
have energy-absorbing seat backs. Compartmentalization functions well
for a variety of school aged children ranging from the kindergartener
to the high school senior.
Despite the excellent safety record of large school buses, the
Safety Board has investigated several accidents resulting in the loss
of life of school bus passengers. These accidents typically involved a
side impact collision with another large vehicle or a rollover. In
these accidents, passengers did not remain completely within the
seating compartment and therefore did not benefit from
compartmentalization. So whenever school bus passengers remained within
the seating compartment (and away from the intrusion area) during the
accident sequence, they were less likely to be seriously injured than
passengers who were either out of the compartment before the collision
or who were propelled from the compartment during the collision.
The Safety Board believes that current compartmentalization is
incomplete because school bus passengers are not protected in severe
side impacts and in rollovers. Specifically, the Safety Board requested
that NHTSA develop occupant protection performance standards specific
to large school buses addressing frontal impacts, side impacts, rear
impacts and rollovers and to ensure that all new occupant protection
systems on large school buses meet this minimum level of protection.
The specific type of occupant protection device was not specified by
the Board but the Board believes that the protection must be designed
as a total system, taking into consideration the vehicle design, seats,
sidewalls, etc. Therefore, in general, unless the entire system is
taken into consideration, just adding seatbelts to an existing school
bus could potentially create as many problems as it appears to solve.
Question. Are you satisfied with the progress the FMCSA is making
on their effort to prevent medically unqualified drivers from operating
commercial vehicles?
Answer. The Safety Board has long had an interest in the link
between commercial driver fitness and transportation safety. Following
its investigation of a 1999 motorcoach accident involving a medically
unfit driver that resulted in 22 fatalities, the Safety Board issued 8
recommendations to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA) outlining a comprehensive medical oversight program for
interstate commercial drivers. As an indication of the importance this
issue holds with the Board, these recommendations have been on the
Board's Most Wanted list for 3 years.
Although the FMCSA has made acceptable progress on one of these
recommendations, the remaining 7 recommendations have been classified
by the Board as unacceptable. The FMCSA published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) in November 2006 to amend the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Regulations to merge information from the medical certificate
into the commercial driver license (CDL) process. In our February 13,
2007 response (enclosed), the Board acknowledged that the NPRM
attempted to address 2 of our recommendations, but in general failed to
establish a comprehensive medical oversight program as recommended by
the Safety Board. In the Board's opinion, neither this NPRM nor any
other publicly announced FMCSA initiatives, create a process to review
or track medical certification examinations or decisions, or to create
a mechanism for reporting medical conditions identified between
examinations.
The Safety Board is convinced that for any commercial driver
medical oversight program to be effective, a systematic approach is
necessary that addresses all of the issues conveyed in the eight
recommendations.
Question. Since the Federal all-rider motorcycle helmet requirement
was repealed in 1995, motorcycle fatalities have skyrocketed. How much
do these motorcycle crashes cost our society in terms of medical care,
legal costs, and lost productivity?
Answer. The NTSB has not independently assessed the costs
associated with motorcycle crashes. Nevertheless, we have been able to
gather the following government and private research data.
The February 2007 NHTSA Traffic Safety Facts on Motorcycle Helmet
Use Laws (DOT HS 810 726W) states that NHTSA estimated that motorcycle
helmet use saved $1.3 billion in 2002, and that an additional $853
million would have been saved if all motorcyclists involved in fatal
crashes had worn helmets. We contacted NHTSA and learned that their
2002 estimates are their most recent cost estimates for motorcycle
crashes.
Dr. Ted Miller, Director of the Public Services Research Institute
at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, presented 2005
data on the cost of motorcycle crashes and the effects of helmets on
costs at the NTSB Public Forum on Motorcycle Safety held September 12-
13, 2006. According to Dr. Miller, in 2005 there were 110,000
motorcyclists involved in police-reported motorcycle crashes, with
motorcycle crash injuries costing $17.5 billion including costs of
medical treatment, lost work, and quality of life. Although non-
helmeted motorcyclists accounted for only 40,000 (or 36 percent) of the
total motorcyclists involved in crashes, they accounted for $12.2
billion (70 percent) of the costs. Dr. Miller also estimated the 2005
average cost per crash-involved motorcyclist as $71,000 for helmeted
and $310,000 for non-helmeted motorcyclists. In Dr. Miller's slides, he
also cites a number of other studies that have compared crash costs and
hospitalization costs for helmeted and non-helmeted riders. The costs
vary by study but consistently show that non-helmeted crashes cost more
than helmeted crashes
The slides from Dr. Miller's presentation at the NTSB Public Forum
on Motorcycle Safety and the forum transcript are available at: http://
www.ntsb.gov/events/symp_motorcycle_safety/symp_motorcycle_safety.htm.
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
Senator Murray. And this subcommittee now stands in recess
until Thursday, April 26, when we will take testimony from the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
[Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., Thursday, April 19, the hearing
was concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]