U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

25–716 PDF 2017

WMATA AFTER SAFETRACK 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 29, 2017 

Serial No. 115–5 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

http://www.house.gov/reform 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

Jason Chaffetz, Utah, Chairman 

John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee 

Darrell E. Issa, California 

Jim Jordan, Ohio 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Justin Amash, Michigan 

Paul A. Gosar, Arizona 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 

Blake Farenthold, Texas 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Mark Meadows, North Carolina 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mark Walker, North Carolina 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Will Hurd, Texas 

Gary J. Palmer, Alabama 

James Comer, Kentucky 

Paul Mitchell, Michigan 

Elijah E. Cummings, Maryland, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts 

Jim Cooper, Tennessee 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia 

Robin L. Kelly, Illinois 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 

Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands 

Val Butler Demings, Florida 

Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois 

Jamie Raskin, Maryland 

Peter Welch, Vermont 

Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvania 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

John Sarbanes, Maryland 

Jonathan Skladany, Staff Director 

Rebecca Edgar, Deputy Staff Director 

William McKenna, General Counsel 

Patrick Hartobey, Counsel 

Kiley Bidelman, Clerk 

David Rapallo, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

Mark Meadows, North Carolina, Chairman 

Jody B. Hice, Georgia, Vice Chair 

Jim Jordan, Ohio, 

Mark Sanford, South Carolina 

Thomas Massie, Kentucky 

Ron DeSantis, Florida 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Rod Blum, Iowa 

Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia, Ranking 

Minority Member 

Carolyn B. Maloney, New York 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia 

WM. Lacy Clay, Missouri 

Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan 

Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on March 29, 2017 ............................................................................ 1 

WITNESSES 

Mr. Paul Wiedefeld, General Manager, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit 

Authority 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 5 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 7 

Mr. Mark L. Goldstein, Ph.D., Director of Physical Infrastructure Issues, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 20 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 22 

Mr. Dennis Anosike, Chief Financial Officer, Washington Area Transit Authority 

APPENDIX 

Questions for the Record for Mr. Paul Wiedefeld, submitted by Mr. Meadows, 

Ms. Comstock, and Mr. Connolly ........................................................................ 46 

Keeping Metro Safe Reliable and Affordable ........................................................ 61 

Regional Funding- WMATA GM’s Presentation ................................................... 63 

Congressional Data .................................................................................................. 89 

Total Number of Employees in each Department of Office .................................. 90 

Congressional Data .................................................................................................. 91 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

WMATA AFTER SAFETRACK 

Wednesday, March 29, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:05 p.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Mark Meadows [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Meadows, Hice, Blum, Connolly, Norton, and Lawrence. 

Also Present: Representatives Comstock, Raskin. 

Mr. HICE. The Subcommittee on Government Operations will 

come to order. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare 

a recess at any time. 

For roughly the past year, the Washington Metropolitan Area 

Transit Authority, or WMATA, has been working to respond to a 

serious safety wake-up call. Following a series of smoke- and firerelated incidents that bore unsettling similarities to the deadly 

L’Enfant Plaza incident, WMATA began an aggressive effort to repair the broken system. That effort known as SafeTrack has now 

completed the majority of its scheduled work and is scheduled to 

end this June. 

There are approximately three months until the end of SafeTrack 

and the start of a new effort to remedy WMATA’s problems and redeem the system in the eyes of passengers. Today’s hearing will examine where SafeTrack was successful and where it may have 

failed in order to ensure that the next maintenance effort, 

Back2Good, lives up to its name. 

This month, GAO released its report reviewing what SafeTrack 

did right and where it slipped. That review found that while 

SafeTrack appeared to be meeting repair goals, the planning for 

the program fell short. GAO found that SafeTrack’s repair and 

maintenance efforts were based on incomplete inspection data. The 

result of this was that infrastructure that should have been high 

priority actually slipped through the cracks, creating further safety 

hazards. As a result, serious safety incidents continued to occur, including the East Falls Church derailment. 

As WMATA begins to shift its efforts away from addressing deferred maintenance toward preventative maintenance, it’s important that it apply lessons learned from SafeTrack’s failures. 

WMATA’s troubles are not limited to maintenance alone, however. 

The Back2Good program will focus heavily on integrating 

WMATA’s newest 7000 series cars into its fleet. These new cars 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

will replace some of the oldest and least reliable cars in WMATA’s 

fleet. However, there are serious questions about those 7000 series, 

their reliability, as well as the potential impact they are having on 

the rail infrastructure itself. 

WMATA is also facing a troubling financial future. Recently, 

they adopted a budget for fiscal year 2018, which Mr. Wiedefeld 

characterized as a reality check. While WMATA may have escaped 

a serious financial crisis for the upcoming fiscal year, it did so only 

by the skin of its teeth. Many of the solutions used to address the 

dire financial reality WMATA faced will not be available in the future. 

Rider rates are falling rapidly, and as a result, so too are its incoming revenues. These problems are not going to get better by 

themselves. WMATA must address not only its failing and falling 

revenues, but also its rapidly increasing expenses. 

So I want to thank each of the witnesses for being here with us 

today. I look forward to hearing from you as we work to make 

WMATA safe, secure, and successful for the future. 

And with that, I’ll recognize Mr. Connolly, the ranking member 

of the subcommittee, for his opening statement. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

that very thoughtful opening statement. And I thank my friend, 

Mr. Meadows, the chairman of our subcommittee, for his support 

on exploring this issue and trying to find common ground for solutions. 

And I want to welcome our panel where we can talk about both 

where we’ve been, but more importantly, where are we headed. 

Today, we’ll examine the shortcomings and benefits of the yearlong 

WMATA rehabilitation program known as SafeTrack as outlined in 

the GAO report, which we requested. 

This report called, ‘‘Improved Planning of Future Rehabilitation 

Projects Could Prevent Limitations Identified with SafeTrack,’’ a 

long title, confirmed that SafeTrack will not fix all of WMATA’s 

systemic and organizational deficiencies, nor was SafeTrack intended to. But we should welcome GAO’s assessment that 

SafeTrack demonstrates WMATA’s commitment to preventative 

maintenance, including the repairing of track assets before they 

break and cause more cost and safety impacts. 

The report identified some concerns with SafeTrack, both in 

planning and implementation, and I might add, communication 

with the public and local leaders. While preparing for SafeTrack, 

WMATA did not collect adequate data on the condition of rail and 

nonrail assets, did not consider the cost or potential impact on safety outcomes or alternatives—of alternatives to SafeTrack, and provided limited advance notice to local stakeholders about the significant disruption SafeTrack that would cause. 

However, WMATA has improved. The collection and monitoring 

of work performance data enhanced communication with local jurisdictions, established independent reviews of SafeTrack, and has 

responded quickly to concerns raised by its safety regulator, the 

FTA. 

I look forward to hearing from WMATA, GAO, and my colleagues 

on ways in which we can promote the adoption of GAO’s recommendations as we move forward. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

We should also use this opportunity to examine the broader challenges facing the Nation’s transit system and better understand the 

resources urgently needed to reestablish Metro as a safe, reliable 

transit system that serves the people of the metropolitan capital region, the Federal workforce, and the 19.3 million visitors who come 

to the Nation’s capital every year. 

It should come as no surprise that a congressional committee 

tasked with ensuring the efficiency of the Federal Government and 

the safety of its workforce has vested interest in the success of this 

transit system because it delivers more than one-third of our Federal workforce to work every day. 

In March 2016, when Metro announced it would shut down for 

24 hours to conduct emergency inspections, the first question on everyone’s mind was how will the Federal Government operate? The 

Office of Personnel Management, what would it do to accommodate 

the closure? Unlike any other transit system in the United States, 

that was a question we had to ask. 

The Federal Government is the primary stakeholder in this transit system, and I certainly look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ensure that that Federal workforce and that Federal support for Metro is commensurate to its 

fundamental reliance on the system. We’re the biggest beneficiaries. 

For several years now, WMATA has been a system in crisis, all 

lights blinking red. The lack of a strict safety culture has resulted 

in derailments, falsified track inspection reports, fires, major track 

defects, and has actually claimed lives. Reliability concerns and the 

crisis in customer confidence are depressing ridership, as the chairman indicated, by a magnitude that is driving down national transit ridership numbers now. And new fare increases, coupled with 

service cuts, are expected to claim as many as 14 million trips in 

fiscal year 2018. 

Members of the WMATA board of directors at times seemed to 

have been incapable of resuscitating, much less managing Metro. 

As someone who has spent more than 22 years working on Metrorelated issues, including rezoning property around Metro stations 

to maximize their potential, approving local operating subsidies, 

helping create local tax districts to fund construction of the Silver 

Line, it has been personally painful to me to watch the dysfunction 

at Metro imperil the transit system our region takes so much pride 

in. And I want to see a restoration of the competence in the system. 

General Manager Wiedefeld deserves credit for taking decisive 

action to promote system safety. After successive asset failures in 

the spring of 2016, he implemented a 24-hour shutdown of the system and later unveiled SafeTrack. By the end of SafeTrack, 

WMATA will have completed 3 years of maintenance in 1 year, including the replacement of 50,000 rail ties. 

In the wake of the March 15 shutdown, I cautioned Mr. 

Wiedefeld that this cannot be the answer long term. You get to 

shut down the entire system once, but you don’t get to do it again, 

at least with any credibility, and I know he agreed. 

The completion of SafeTrack, a new industry standard preventative maintenance program, the Back2Good program, and the soon 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

to be established Metro Safety Commission must cure what ails 

Metro’s safety culture. 

But let me end on this. All of this is important, and we still have 

to address other safety things not addressed by SafeTrack, like you 

pointed out, Mr. Chairman, the safety of the existing railcar fleet. 

But in the long run, stability to Metro is going to be about financial 

stability. Can we have a stable, dedicated source of revenue that 

will allow general managers in the future and boards to make enlightened decisions that anticipate our needs in the future? The tin 

cup approach to financing Metro has to end. It doesn’t work anymore. 

Right now, Metro is dependent on two sources of revenue: Increasing operating subsidies from the contract members, not including, unfortunately, the Federal Government, and secondly, fare 

rate increases. And there’s a limit to that elasticity demand. 

And so I look forward to this conversation today because I think 

there are some profound questions we have to face far beyond 

SafeTrack, though that’s important. And I think you’ve touched on 

a lot of them, Mr. Chairman, and I certainly look forward to working with you, as well as my friends on the other side of the aisle, 

to find a solution of the Nation’s capital metro system. 

I yield back. 

Mr. HICE. I thank the gentleman. 

The chair notes the presence of one of our colleagues from the 

House of Representatives. We appreciate very much your interest 

in the topic today and welcome your participation. 

I would ask unanimous consent that Mr. Raskin from Maryland 

be allowed to fully participate in today’s hearing. And without objection, so ordered. 

Glad to have you today. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, could I also ask that Mr. Delaney 

of Maryland be added to that list as well? 

Mr. HICE. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. 

Mr. HICE. Yes, sir. 

We’ll hold the record open for 5 legislative days for any members 

who would like to submit a written statement. 

We’ll now recognize our panel of witnesses. I’m pleased today to 

welcome Mr. Paul Wiedefeld, the general manager of Washington 

Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; Mr. Dennis Anosike, chief financial officer of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority; and Mr. Mark Goldstein, Dr. Goldstein—thank you for joining us—director of physical infrastructure issues for the U.S. Government Accountability Office. 

We welcome each of you and appreciate your participation. 

Pursuant to committee rules, all witnesses will be sworn in before they testify. So if you would, please stand and raise your right 

hands. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you’re about 

to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

Thank you very much. You can be seated. 

Please let the record reflect that the witnesses answered in the 

affirmative. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

In order to allow time for discussion, we would appreciate very 

much if you would please limit your testimony to 5 minutes. Your 

entire written statement will be made part of the record. 

And with that, Mr. Wiedefeld, we will get started. I’m honored 

to recognize you for 5 minutes. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF PAUL WIEDEFELD 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Good afternoon, and thank you, Vice Chair Hice 

and Ranking Member Connolly and members of the subcommittee. 

I am Paul Wiedefeld, general manager and CEO of WMATA, 

known as Metro. With me today is Metro CFO Dennis Anosike. 

Since I appeared before this committee on December 2, 2016, 

Metro continues to make progress on our top three priorities, which 

are to improve safety, service reliability, and fiscal management. In 

particular, I am especially pleased with our advancements in implementing corrective action plans and recommendations of the 

FTA and the NTSB and the results we’re seeing from SafeTrack. 

As you know, SafeTrack accelerates 3 years’ worth of work into 

approximately 1 year. Twelve of the 16 SafeTrack surges have been 

completed, and the work that has been accomplished under 

SafeTrack has been significant. 

For example, over 28,000 wooden ties have been replaced, which 

is more than was done in the past 2 years alone. Over 20,000 linear feet of grout pad have been replaced, which would have taken 

2-and-a-half years to accomplish. In addition to the track work that 

is the primary focus of SafeTrack surges, we are working across the 

system to address issues like the water intrusion in the Red Line. 

As a result of these actions, we reduced track-related delays by 

7 percent in 2016, including delays caused by smoke, fire, and arcing insulators. To sustain this progress, at the conclusion of 

SafeTrack, we will begin an industry standard preventive maintenance program to further reduce service disruptions due to track 

failures and create opportunities to identify and repair track problems before they disrupt daylight time rail service. 

I want to thank the GAO for their highly professional manner in 

which it conducted its review of SafeTrack. As noted in our letter, 

we—which accompanied the GAO report, Metro concurs with the 

findings and conclusions in the report and is already working to 

address the recommendations. 

However, we are concerned that the report does not accurately 

reflect the true level of crisis and urgent safety challenges the 

agency was facing almost 1 year ago. Metro needed to make realtime decisions to address urgent NTSB recommendations and FTA 

safety directives. We moved swiftly and worked closely with FTA 

on the SafeTrack plan and schedule. 

Turning to our financials. Last week, the Metro board approved 

the fiscal year 2018 capital operating budgets. We closed a projected $290 million shortfall with management actions to improve 

efficiency and reduce Metro’s head count, reductions in rail and bus 

service, fare increases, and increased local jurisdiction funding. The 

fiscal year capital budget builds on the success of improved investments with $1.2 billion in critical safety and reliability work. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

As you may recall, in recent years, the agency was not spending 

all of its funding program for capital projects. In fiscal year 2015, 

it spent only 65 percent. In fiscal year 2016, this was improved to 

85 percent. And in the current year, we will be spending 100 percent of the program capital dollars. The PRIIA commitment of $150 

million from the Federal Government, matched by $50 million from 

each of the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and 

the District of Columbia, represents approximately 25 percent of 

Metro’s capital budget. 

Due to this generous support of the Congress, new safe and more 

reliable trains are serving more customers. Over the past year, we 

have delivered over 300 new railcars, 7000 railcars, going from 8 

to 20 cars per month. 

With the approval of the fiscal year 2018 budget, we need to turn 

our attention to addressing Metro’s long-term financial challenges. 

Recognizing that we are at a critical juncture, I have already begun 

to determine Metro’s capital and operating requirements going forward and will come out with those next month. We have been and 

will continue to work with the stakeholders in the region as we 

move forward in solving some of the long recognized financial 

issues facing the agency. 

Finally, while my written testimony provides more detail, I 

would like to highlight our Back2Good initiative, which focuses on 

actions to improve the customer experience and reliability of service. 

We have established specific performance measures, which I will 

hold all Metro employees accountable for achieving. For example, 

our goal is to reduce passenger offloads dueto railcar failures by 25 

percent. We will do this by increasing the number of 7000 series 

trains while retiring the 1000 and 4000 series, our oldest, least reliable, and a safety concern by the end of 2017, and focusing the 

remaining legacy fleet to—focusing on the remaining legacy fleet to 

reduce delays associated with propulsion, doors, and brake issues. 

Another goal is to reduce customer delays from track defects by 

50 percent. This will be done as we complete SafeTrack and improve and move forward with that preventive maintenance program. 

I will close by thanking Congress for your continued support of 

Metro through Federal funds, particularly the PRIIA funds, which 

are invested in long-deferred improvement to the system. You have 

my full commitment that I will continue working to get Metro back 

to good. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Wiedefeld follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 25716.001
8 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 25716.002
9 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 25716.003
10 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 25716.004
11 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 25716.005
12 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 25716.006
13 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 25716.007
14 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 25716.008
15 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 25716.009
16 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 25716.010
17 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 25716.011
18 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 25716.012
19 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 25716.013
20 

Mr. HICE. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Anosike, do you have any oral statement that you would like 

to make? 

Mr. ANOSIKE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the 

invitation. I look forward to the questions from the committee. 

Mr. HICE. Okay, sir. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Goldstein, you’re recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MARK L. GOLDSTEIN, PH.D. 

Mr. GOLDSTEIN. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman, and thank you, 

Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee. Good afternoon. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on GAO’s recent review of 

WMATA’s SafeTrack initiative. My testimony is based on a report 

we issued earlier this month. 

Recent inquiries into WMATA’s Metro rail system have revealed 

a range of serious safety issues. In response to some of these 

issues, as well as the backlog of track maintenance, WMATA announced in May 2016, it was undertaking SafeTrack, a large scale 

rehabilitation project. The SafeTrack project is overseen by FTA. 

GAO was asked to review a range of safety and oversight issues 

regarding WMATA. This report examined the extent to which 

WMATA’s planning and implementation of SafeTrack was consistent with leading project management practices, as well as steps 

taken by FTA to oversee SafeTrack. 

In our review, we found the following: First, WMATA’s planning 

of SafeTrack did not fully align with leading project management 

practices. While WMATA generally followed leading practices to coordinate with stakeholders, it did not comprehensively collect and 

use data on the condition of its assets, analyze project alternatives, 

or develop a project management plan before starting work. 

WMATA did not follow these practices because it believed it needed 

to start work immediately to address critical safety issues. 

Although WMATA inspected track assets when planning 

SafeTrack, those inspections were not comprehensive and did not 

collect data on the condition of all track infrastructure, such as all 

interlockings where trains crossed from one track to another. As a 

result, WMATA’s decision makers may not have had sufficient information to develop project objectives and to properly prioritize 

SafeTrack work. 

Though WMATA developed three alternatives for SafeTrack, it 

did not determine the costs or impacts of each alternative or assess 

them to determine which approach may have resulted in greater efficiencies, lower costs, or less disruption for riders in local jurisdictions. 

Before WMATA began SafeTrack, it lacked a comprehensive 

project management plan, which is a key tool to ensure a project 

is completed on time, within budget, and according to quality 

standards. WMATA does not have a policy that requires and includes relevant procedures for how to carry out these planning activities for large scale projects. Without such a policy and procedures, WMATA lacks a framework plan to do future projects so 

that they achieve their objectives. 

We also found out WMATA’s implementation of SafeTrack generally did align with leading project management practices. SpecifiVerDate Nov 24 2008 15:04 Jun 23, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\25716.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
21 

cally, WMATA officials collected information on the work being performed during SafeTrack. WMATA officials also collected lessons 

learned during and after each surge and used those lessons during 

subsequent maintenance and planning efforts. 

Additionally, WMATA developed new organizationwide quality 

control and assurance programs and a framework, and is implementing them for the first time through SafeTrack. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This concludes my testimony. I’ll be 

happy to respond to any questions that you have. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Goldstein follows:] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
22 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 25716.014
23 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 25716.015
24 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 25716.016
25 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 25716.017
26 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 25716.018
27 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 25716.019
28 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 25716.020
29 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 25716.021
30 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 25716.022
31 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 25716.023
32 

Mr. HICE. Thank you very much. 

As we begin our questions, I would like to begin by recognizing 

myself for 5 minutes. 

Mr. Wiedefeld, one of the areas of great concern and interest, 

frankly, to me is the fatigue management policy. Can you explain 

what that is and why it was put in place? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. Basically, we’re following the lead of other 

major transit or transportation industries, which is not to have the 

workforce just work continuously, particularly as there are overtime opportunities and things of that sort. So what we have implemented is a policy in effect that on the seventh day you had to take 

a day off. We just feel that’s consistent with the overall culture 

we’re trying to create in the agency, and we think it’s, you know, 

the right thing to do for our employees and our passengers. 

Mr. HICE. Okay. So—and that’s good. Not to work 7 days in a 

row, you certainly don’t want, but doesn’t that create some problems with overtime? How does it work as it relates to overtime? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It does create some problems. Right now—the 

policy was actually established by the board. The contract that we 

have with our employees allows the most senior person to get that 

work. We have been going—we have not been giving that work to 

that person, again, for the safety reasons perspective. So we are actually in a—we’re taking it to court. We lost in a grievance to an 

arbiter on that issue, and we are taking that to court to see if that 

can be overturned. 

Mr. HICE. Okay. So a person works 40 hours a week, whatever, 

then we’re talking overtime, and you are required then to go to the 

most senior people first to offer overtime. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. If they don’t want to do it, you go to the next senior 

person and work your way down. Okay. What happens, is there— 

that senior person, do they still receive payment? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We have been paying them, because in the contract we are required to do that. But again, from a safety perspective, again, we made the judgment that we thought it was more important for safety to pay that person not to work that seventh day 

and then go to the next person in seniority. 

Mr. HICE. So you pay the person not to work. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. And then you have to pay someone else to work. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. So you’re paying time-and-a-half to not work and then 

time-and-a-half for someone else to work. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. All right. That, to me, helps explain some budgetary 

problems. I think it probably does to all of us. 

A January presentation on the 2018 budget indicates roughly an 

$81 million—you’re anticipating $81 million in overtime cost. Is 

that correct? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. Can that be corrected, adjusted? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It can be, and we’re working on that. We’re 

doing a number of things. One is to get that ruling overturned 

where we don’t have to offer that work. The other is, we are focusVerDate Nov 24 2008 15:04 Jun 23, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\25716.TXT APRIL

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
33 

ing on absenteeism, workers’ comp, long-term absenteeism, and 

overtime, in general. 

But I do have to say, overtime in the transit industry is a standard. You anticipate overtime. There is rationale for it. You have 

two big peak periods that you have to meet, and in fact, it’s a financially good decision to pay overtime rather than bring in more 

people and all the associated—costs associated with that, particularly in terms of post-employment benefits and things of that sort, 

and pensions. 

So it is a standard within industry to use overtime, but we have 

to use it very tightly. And the key is, in our business, if someone 

doesn’t show up, you basically have to get someone to run that 

route or drive that train, and you go to overtime. So you want to 

make sure that you’re having people show up for work. So making 

sure that they’re not calling in sick. Obviously, they can call in 

sick. 

Mr. HICE. So absenteeism is a problem? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It is an issue that I’m focusing on to bring that 

down, yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. All right. Well, how are you going to bring it down? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We actually wrote a new policy on March 1, 

which basically outlines how many, quote, unexcused absences, 

meaning you call up and you’re sick. You’re allowed to get sick, but 

after so many, basically we can start to do discipline. We also—— 

Mr. HICE. And what is that discipline? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Up to termination. 

And then the other thing we’ve done is to make sure that supervisors, for anyone that’s out for more than 2 days, then it has to 

go to medical, another supervisor making those decisions to grant 

additional days off for sickness, so things of that sort that we’re 

trying to tighten up on. 

Mr. HICE. What would you say is your biggest challenge in controlling staffing cost? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think that one of the biggest challenges we 

have is to continue to meet the customer demands with the limited 

dollars we have. I mean, we went through quite a discussion in 

terms of reducing hours of service to do the preventive maintenance, and we went through a very hard discussion in terms of 

having to cut back services for people that need transit to get to 

work, to get to do their lives. So that is probably the biggest challenge, is not having enough finances to support what the community is asking us to do. 

Mr. HICE. Okay. 

I’m going to now recognize Mr. Connolly, the ranking member, 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to say to 

the chairman, I think his questions are quite pertinent on personnel, but I also want to say Mr. Wiedefeld is the first general 

manager, in my memory, who has had the intentional fortitude to 

impose discipline. So workers have been held account for misdeeds, 

inspectors who falsified inspection safety inspections have been 

fired, operators who blew through red lights after being cautioned 

to pay attention have also been held accountable, up to and including termination. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
34 

We, I think most of us up here, on a bipartisan basis, want to 

strengthen your ability, not on an arbitrary basis, not in any way 

to compromise due process, but we feel, I think on a bipartisan 

basis, people need to be held accountable. And there is a personnel 

problem on Metro. When we look at various problems, we’ve got a 

financial problem, that has to be addressed. We’ve got an operational problem in terms of physical infrastructure, which we’re 

working on. We also have a workforce issue, and that workforce 

has been allowed to, I think, slip, and—but I’ve got to give Mr. 

Wiedefeld credit. He’s the first general manager, in living memory, 

to have the willingness to expend political capital to address those 

issues. And I would hope, on a bipartisan basis, we help strengthen 

his ability to do that. 

I don’t know if you want to comment on that, Mr. Wiedefeld. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. No. The accountability starts with me, sir, 

and—but I expect that from everyone that works at Metro. 

Mr. CONNOLLY.Right. 

Mr. Goldstein, we requested a GAO report, and we thank you for 

getting back to us in a timely fashion. And—but there’s a little bit 

of a sense in the report, and I don’t even mean this inferentially 

critical, but you almost could write in a perfect world. They didn’t 

come up with a business plan that normally would be expected. We 

should have, in advance, had certain standards in place and practices in place. We should have had the FTA reviewing it before we 

did it and all that. 

But my sense from Mr. Wiedefeld and Metro was they determined that the situation they inherited was sufficiently dire that 

we couldn’t exactly do that perfectly. We didn’t have another 6 

months, because public safety was at risk and that was the urgency of the moment. And so, yeah, we were willing maybe to not 

have everything in place we would ideally like in order to proceed. 

Your comment. 

Mr. GOLDSTEIN. Sure. I understand that point, and we certainly 

discussed it with Metro for quite some time. We don’t disagree that 

there wasn’t a major safety problem. I ride the Red Line every day. 

I certainly want a safe train myself. 

But I also—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. No wonder GAO is so critical of Mr. Wiedefeld. 

He rides on that Red Line. 

Mr. GOLDSTEIN. Well, it’s only between Medical Center and 

Friendship Heights, really, that I worry. 

But I think that’s also not prudent or appropriate to embark on 

any major capital project, spending up to $130 million without a 

plan. A lot of this wasn’t news. There’s a whole alphabet soup of 

agencies and organizations that have been providing Metro with 

safety violations and recommendations for a long time for living 

memory, really, as you call it. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Right. 

Mr. GOLDSTEIN. And so it’s a surprise that there was no planning, on the shelf even, that you could use, that the kinds of information that they had was not sufficient. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Wiedefeld, do you want to respond to that? 

That’s a fair point. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
35 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It is. But in what I saw at the time, what I’ve 

said is I started November 30. If I had known what I know now, 

I would have started November 30. We were at that state. I could 

not live with myself not doing something as quickly as we could. 

I’m a planner by training. I mean, my degree is in that, I understand that, and I appreciate that, but with what I had in front of 

me, I felt I had to move and move very quickly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Now, one of the things that I want to make sure 

you have an opportunity to address is, SafeTrack is one thing, but 

that’s only about sort of the innards and the rails. It’s not about 

the railcars, and yet 60 percent of the safety incidents or accidents 

that have occurred actually involve railcars, not the rails themselves, and I wonder if you could address that. 

And secondly, doesn’t that underline the criticality of PRIIA 

funding continuing so we can afford and—stay in our line in the 

queue and afford to replace the cars the chairman talked about correctly, that have to be replaced? There’s a safety and reliability 

issue. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Exactly. The track work we’ve been doing—we 

have been doing on the worst of the worst, and we’ll continue to 

work on the track work, and that’s part of the preventive maintenance program. But at the end of the day, for the customers, as we 

get that better and better, it’s the railcar experience. So, for instance, offloadings, or delays caused by failing railcars. 

The 7000 series is key to solving that. We’ve already seen that, 

so it’s important. That is funded by the PRIIA dollars, so it’s important that we keep those flowing into the system. That also gets rid 

of the 1000 series, which is the one that NTSB says we need to get 

off the property as soon as possible, so we’ll do that by the end of 

2017, and also the 4000 series, which is our least performing car, 

but also has safety-related issues. By getting both of those out of 

the system, we will both improve safety and increase the reliability. We also can manage the fleet totally differently. 

Right now, we have to what we call belly those cars, those series. 

We have to put them in between cars that don’t have the safety 

issues. So every night we go through this tremendous, you know, 

three-level chess of rearranging the entire fleet. By getting those 

out of the system, we can start running consistent consists, meaning all 6000s, all 5000s, and all 7000s, and that will improve the 

overall performance of it, as well as even the communication to our 

customers through the PA system on the cars. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I know my time is up, but you 

raised a point. I wonder if on behalf of the two of us we could just 

ask Mr. Wiedefeld to address, because it didn’t get addressed, 

which was there seems to be a problem with the weight or the configuration of the 7000 cars on the rail tracks, which I think the 

chairman raises a very good point, I’ve heard it, too. If the chairman would indulge, following up on his own question. 

Mr. HICE. Sure, if you would. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Okay. Yes. I mean, the 7000s are slightly heavier than the other fleet, but remember, you know, the weight of the 

cars changes during the day. So you could have an 8000 series of— 

or 8000 car train with 6000 series and have much more weight, depending on the time of day. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
36 

So what we’ve done is we’ve actually gotten an independent analysis, particularly on the acoustic side and on the weight side to find 

out, because we’ve gotten some issues in some communities both in 

terms of noise and vibration. So we have gotten some—an outsider 

to basically take a look at that, and we’re working with the little— 

our local communities to literally to go into their houses and monitor what is the base and then do that. As soon as we find out what 

if—what in and if there are issues there, we will address them. But 

so far, that car has performed very, very well. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you. 

Mr. HICE. You’re welcome. 

I would ask unanimous consent that Representative Comstock of 

Virginia be allowed to fully participate in today’s hearing. Without 

objection, so ordered. 

We welcome you. Thank you for your interest in the topic today. 

At this time, I’d like to recognize the real chair of this Subcommittee on Government Operations, Chairman Meadows. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank each of you 

for being here. 

Mr. Wiedefeld, thank you for your continued service in trying to 

make sure that WMATA is once again returned to greatness. And 

so I just want to thank you there. I’ve got a few questions that I 

want to jump into right away. 

But before I do that, obviously, Mr. Connolly is keenly interested 

in this, and he’s right. I’m willing to support his efforts to make 

sure that we get this right, and that means potentially expending 

political capital in ways that I wouldn’t normally spend them in an 

effort to make sure that this transit system serves the Federal 

workforce and the greater metropolitan D.C./metropolitan area in 

a way that it should. 

And so I reaffirm that commitment to my good friend, Mr. 

Connolly, and as well reaffirm that to Ms. Comstock, who is here. 

There is not a time that goes by where she doesn’t urge me, I will 

say it in a nice term, to actually stay engaged with regards to the 

transit system. 

But, Mr. Wiedefeld, part of the—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Can I just say to my friend, I thank him so much 

for his commitment. 

Mr. MEADOWS. And you have it. Thank you. Thank you. 

The fiscal 2018 budget, I think, in the shortfall that’s there, 

you’ve identified, I guess, 800 positions to be eliminated. Is that 

correct? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MEADOWS. And so in doing that, are these positions currently occupied or vacant? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It’s a combination. The 800 are some primarily 

management first, and they were vacancies where I could find vacancies, but there were also filled jobs. And then the remaining 

portion of them will be as we cut service, because in the budget, 

we do actually cut some rail service and some bus service, so that 

will be the operators associated with that and some of the supervisors. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So as we look at that, most of those— 

those 800 positions that you will eliminate, it doesn’t get you all 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
37 

the way from an operational standpoint to where you need from a 

budget standpoint. Is that correct? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. No, sir. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So the shortfall that we’re looking at will be potentially how many dollars? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. In fiscal year 2019? 

Mr. MEADOWS. Yeah. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We don’t have that identified. I’m coming out in 

April with my estimate both on capital and operating looking forward with 2019 and into the future, so I will be putting out—that 

out shortly. But the reality is, is I will continue to look for ways 

to save dollars and be more productive, but the margins are getting 

smaller, smaller where I can impact that. 

Just given the nature of the business, we’re a labor-intensive 

business because we need the people out there. We’re an energyintensive business both in terms of electricity and diesel, and we’re 

a capital-intensive business. That’s what we do. And then on top 

of it, we’re a 40-year-old business that needs that reinvestment. So 

all those, I think, need to be considered together as we look forward to the future of this agency. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, and we’re willing do that, and I’m committed to both of my colleagues from Virginia to do that, as well 

as some of the colleagues from Maryland as well, and Eleanor 

Holmes Norton. 

However, I guess my concern is, is we need to put it in separate 

buckets, because right now, we’ve got a capital investment that is 

needed, and certainly I see that. Those numbers can be all over the 

board in terms of what is needed and what would translate into a 

safe system. And yet the operating concern, it looks like we’re on 

a trajectory that will not correct itself without unbelievable fare 

hikes or some kind of systemic changes. Would you agree with 

that? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. The cost curve on the operating side exceeds what we can anticipate from many type of revenues. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So if that’s the case, I guess one of your partners 

would be the transit union, Amalgamated Transit Union. How have 

they reacted to some of your cost-cutting policy endeavors to date? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Generally, obviously, they’re concerned, but I 

can tell you a lot of the line employees understand what we’re 

doing. They’ve been around for a number of years. They’ve seen 

some of the conditions we’ve gotten to. So I think overall supportive 

of what we’re trying to do, but clearly—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So let me ask it in a different way that’s probably 

a little bit less diplomatic. In what ways are the unions providing 

a speed bump for actually getting this fiscal house—or getting our 

fiscal house in order? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think they will be coming out, my understanding is, tomorrow with their plans to try to help on this—in 

this area. We continue to reach out to the union to work together 

on solving these issues, because we’re not going to solve them, either one of us independently. We have to work through these together. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So with that being said, and with the 

chairman’s indulgence, I’ll close out here. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
38 

My big concern, and this is the message that needs to be taken 

back to your board, obviously to the unions, to each one of you that 

are here representing WMATA, is that it is going to take a joint 

combined effort to get this right. 

I’m willing to help in a bipartisan way. I think the members of 

this committee are willing to help in a bipartisan way from a congressional standpoint, but I don’t want to feel like I’m getting way 

out on a limb and not having a willing partner. And so that message needs to go to everyone, if you catch the drift. 

And in doing so, if they’re willing to do that, I’m willing to actually make a commitment. I get more complaints about WMATA 

in—here in the District than anything else, and it’s normally on a 

day where we’ve got a line down or somebody—and yet at the same 

time, I think we’ve got to make a real commitment to get it right. 

I’m a huge fan of yours. I will take one issue. A $400,000 video 

was not well timed. And I’m just saying, when you look at a 

Back2Good video and you’re spending those kind of dollars when 

we’re not back to good yet, your marketing people anticipated in a 

way that they shouldn’t have, being a marketing guy. I’ll leave the 

WMATA up to you. Maybe check with us next time on the marketing before you get it good. Okay? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your 

support. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Would my friend—I just can’t resist in listening 

to him. There was an old song by the Kingston Trio about the Boston transit system called, ‘‘Charlie and the MTA,’’ and the line was: 

‘‘Did he ever return? No, he never returned, and his fate is still unlearned.’’ And we don’t want to descend to that level. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I yield back. 

Mr. HICE. And we appreciate the gentleman sharing the line 

rather than singing it for us. We’re grateful for that. 

Just out of curiosity, how do your labor costs compare with other 

transit systems? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think they’re pretty average. I mean, the reality is, when we negotiate contracts, we are compared to other 

properties. That’s how those contracts are developed. We are within 

range. Some things are below, some things are above. We’re probably a little bit on the higher end because of the economy of this 

region, you know, and the wealth of this region for sure. But just 

to give you a sense, you know, an operator with—like a bus operator, a rail operator with 30 years here makes just about $70,000, 

just to give you a sense. 

Mr. HICE. I’d like to see a comparison, but—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HICE. —at this point the chair recognizes Ms. Norton for 5 

minutes. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I do appreciate 

your work and the work of my good friend, Mr. Connolly, in keeping this matter before the Congress. 

I note that our real chairman, shall we call him, said this was 

a joint effort. So I do want to, before I get to my question, indicate 

that there is a missing partner. Let’s just call him a free rider, the 

Federal Government. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
39 

Every other actor that depends on Metro contributes to WMATA. 

I don’t know how long the Federal Government thinks it can get 

away without doing so, but I can tell you this: The only business 

or enterprise I know that closes down when WMATA closes down 

is the Government of the United States located here in this region. 

And I just think that is an elephant in this room. 

There’s another—I want to welcome all of you. I do want to get 

a little deeper into the long-term financial needs. 

Mr. MEADOWS. The gentlewoman said an elephant in the room. 

She’s not being partisan, is she? 

Ms. NORTON. Indeed, I was referring to my friendly elephants. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I’m about to start singing. 

Ms. NORTON. The circus is in town everybody. 

The—page 5 has your operating budget in some detail. It really 

isn’t any narrative on your long-term needs, and yet this is not a 

new issue. Staff went back and looked back over 40 years, found 

in 1979, and here’s the language that WMATA risked being in a, 

quote, continuing financial crisis. If that hasn’t come to—if that 

has hasn’t come to be, nothing else had. So that’s 40 years ago. 

Then if we go back 11 years, to 2004, the narrative gets to be 

a systemic service meltdown condition as early as 3 years from 

now. Well, 3 years from then was 2007, and so I don’t know if meltdown has been going on all that time or not, but, you know, the 

metaphors are all over the place. And of course, the metaphor of 

the day is death spiral. 

And that’s about raising fares, it’s what you’re doing, cutting 

services, that’s what you’re doing. That wasn’t always the case 

back in 1979, that kind of juxtaposition, but that’s where we are 

today. 

You don’t use those hyperboles, and here I’m quoting from your 

written testimony, Metro’s unsustainable cost model. Isn’t that the 

same thing, all—all language aside? Isn’t that the same thing as 

a death model—a death spiral, your notion of an unsustainable cost 

model? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think what I was—what I was referring to 

there is that that can be solved through additional jurisdictional 

contributions. I mean, there’s other ways, you know, that could be 

solved, but I just don’t think that’s sustainable to keep going back 

to the local jurisdictions, keep going back to the riders, and we 

have to think of this differently. 

Ms. NORTON. You know, wait a minute, the riders are different 

from the local jurisdictions. You don’t think it’s sustainable to go 

back, for example, to the local jurisdictions and say give us a model 

that would be essentially a tax dedicated to WMATA? Have you 

asked for that? Do you think that’s what the local jurisdiction 

should be doing? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Sure. What I was referring to is that the current model is not sustainable. Where, as Congressman Connolly 

was talking about—— 

Ms. NORTON. But I’m saying, then you named—you know, you 

named a couple of actors. I’m asking about the actor that you actually go back to, which is WMATA members themselves, or the 

three jurisdictions. I’m asking you whether you think some form of 

dedicated payment, you can call it whatever you want to, I’ll call 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
40 

it a dedicated tax, is what is needed for a sustainable model for 

running this system. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think we do need a sustainable source of revenue for going forward in the system, yes. 

Ms. NORTON. So that you wouldn’t have to every year go back to 

and ask for. I thank you. 

Now, you are doing very well in cutting, and you have said that 

some of these positions that you are cutting are filled and some are 

not. So what—so you haven’t gotten to layoffs yet. Is that what 

you’re telling us? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Oh, no, we have had layoffs. 

Ms. NORTON. And those have been almost entirely in management positions? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. When do we cut to the quick and you get to layoffs 

for operating personnel? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It starts before July 1, before we basically start 

to pull down the service. 

Ms. NORTON. So there will be layoffs—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. —in personnel who operate this system beginning 

with the next budget? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Ms. NORTON. How much money? I do want to ask you, before my 

time runs out, I wrote you a letter regarding something that surprised me, and I understand you’re working on it, but I need to 

bring it to your attention, that on the DBE, and we just passed the 

FAST Act, that’s my other committee, and that’s disadvantaged 

businesses. This is required by the Federal courts, that you cut 

that from a goal of 22 percent to 15 percent. I really do need an 

explanation for that, and I don’t require it today, but I needed to 

bring it to your attention. 

Finally, how much would it take on an annual basis, giving what 

you know now, and let’s project 5 years, would it take to run a system that is well run and continues to update its maintenance? How 

much would that system cost us? Surely we have a 5-year, at least, 

projection. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Right. And that is what I’m coming out in April 

with, which is both the short term, next 3 years, and out to a 10- 

year. 

Ms. NORTON. So that would let us know how much money we 

need in the large? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. NORTON. Thank you. That would be very useful to know, 

then we’d face some realistic figures. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HICE. I thank the gentlewoman. 

The chair now recognizes Mrs. Comstock for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be able to visit with you here today. 

I know about—I guess probably about a year ago when we were 

addressing these concerns at the beginning of the process, we 

talked about the—using outside contractors and how that might be 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
41 

able to generate some savings as we were trying to get more of this 

work done in a quick timeframe. 

Are you able to report examples of how that was utilized and 

what kind of savings you saw? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We have been using it extensively on the 

SafeTrack program. We’ve had a number of contractors there. 

We’ve had a number of contractors that come in to basically do 

track inspection, help us with track inspection. We continue to 

bring in contractors to look at different things that we currently do 

to see if there’s better ways to do them either within the existing 

framework or other frameworks. 

We’re in the procurement process for removing some of the Metro 

access to a private vendor or potential for private providers to—— 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Where is that in the process, because I know we 

talked about that last year? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We’ve gotten the bids in and we’re reviewing 

them. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. So when would we have—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Next month or two. You know, there’s sometimes you go back and forth, you ask them questions, so depends 

on how much time they need for some of those questions. So we’ll 

continue to do that. 

You know, I think there are opportunities to do things a lot 

smarter, be more productive, and some of it with our own forces 

and some of it with outside sources. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Are you able to provide us with some numbers 

on that and documents? For example, we did this on track work, 

are we talking about saving thousands, millions, what kind of savings? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I can pull together what—how much we’ve applied towards it and sum up productivity from it. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Okay. Because, you know, I mean, I have heard 

still some frustration with some of our localities and folks who 

were looking at, you know, as they’re going to, you know, be dealing with some of the costs coming their way, and the counties that 

enough isn’t going on in this way. And if there’s something that’s 

preventing you from being able to do, you know, whether it’s current existing contractor or whatever it is, it would be helpful to 

identify that for us, because they’re saying they don’t see that happening. 

So do you have anything I can tell them to assuage their concerns? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think, you know, we have to—we also have to 

live within the contract bounds that we have, and we have to live 

within some Federal regulations and law, so we have to do it within that context. But I am not—you know, I have been open to if 

there is an opportunity to use and it makes business sense to use 

private sector, then we do it and—— 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Can you give us an example of some of them 

that have been done? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Well, I mean, the biggest would be the track. I 

mean, we’re spending, I don’t know the numbers off the top of my 

head, but tens of millions of dollars in the—on the private sector 

to do that work. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
42 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. It’s all private sector? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. But not at this point? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Not all. Again, we continue to use our own people, but we supplemented that extensively with the private sector. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Okay. Well, that would just be helpful maybe 

comparing what the costs of those outside contractors are versus 

the legacy staff that are doing things, and if that provides us some 

point of comparison, that would be helpful. 

Also, in terms of using technology in order to help bring costs 

down, do you have any examples of how you’ve been able to do 

that, and again, if there are any limitations and you’re utilizing 

new technologies? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We are using technologies and we’re exploring 

some others, particularly, you know, with iPhones and things of 

that sort now for recording data that we’re getting in realtime, and 

then obviously to monitor it and do things of that sort. We’ve 

reached out and, actually, we’re working with the Network Rail, 

which is the company that runs London’s system where they move 

to that, for instance, on their track inspection. 

We’re very interested in the technology advances on track inspection, really, whether it’s vehicles that take pictures and are constantly monitoring to how you’re entering data when you’re physically out there. All that is some of the things that we’re exploring 

right now. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. So are we not—like what percent of that work 

in evaluating the track is done sort of pen and pad still or on paper 

versus technologically—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Sure. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. —recording it for posterity? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Well, it is recorded for posterity, but a lot of it 

is done in paper initially, so that’s why we want to get out of that 

if we can. But also we have vehicles that ride the system now that 

are basically X-raying the tracks, for instance, in the—— 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. But of the people—because we had—you know, 

when we had the hearing and everyone was finger pointing that, 

well, they made me—remember at the last hearing we had, a witness said that they were forced to submit a false report or that people were—I guess not the witness, but they were saying that’s what 

they had heard. I think it was the—a union member said they were 

filing false reports because they were being told they had to. 

And then on the other side, you know, we had no record of it. 

So are we resolving that? So instead of all these back and forths 

and who said what and lengthy, costly investigations, do we just 

have a way of recording these things as they happen so that there 

is really no room to lie? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. No. We do, and we did it. I mean, that’s how— 

that’s what supported some of the actions that I took. I needed that 

information to support it. You know, whenever I let someone go, I 

have to be able to support it, and so we had that information. We 

had to do our homework to make sure it was done well so that we 

could support the decision we made, but as you recall, we terminated almost half of that division. 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
43 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. No. And I appreciate it, and I know you did a 

lot of hard work on that, but it seems, because of not using technology, it took a lot longer in terms of investigating it instead of 

saying, well, let’s roll the videotape. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. That’s a good point. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. You know, when we have—you know, when 

you’re playing a game and you got to look back and you have the 

videotape sitting there, you can see in or out of the lines. And I 

think if we have technology to do that, that’s—so it will be helpful 

for us if we could like see that in action. If you can just provide 

us perhaps, provide the committee a video showing how this is 

being done and implemented so we can actually see what’s really 

happening and how in the future we won’t be able to have that finger pointing, we’ll actually know if somebody did their job on Tuesday or Wednesday or Thursday or if they didn’t do it at all. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I know that there are some members who wanted to be here and because of other committee assignments couldn’t, and I know we’re going to have a few days to submit questions for the record. I will also be submitting some questions, so we don’t do a second round, but on what does good look 

like as we move forward in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HICE. You’re welcome, and there will be additional questions. 

And I ask unanimous consent that members have 5 legislative days 

to submit those questions for the record. And without objection, so 

ordered. 

I do want to thank each of our witnesses for your participation. 

Thank you for taking time to be with us today. 

If there’s no further business, without objection, the subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 3:01 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 


KING-6430 with DISTILLER

KING-6430 with DISTILLER
(45) 

APPENDIX 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD


KING-6430 with DISTILLER
46 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 25716.024
47 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 25716.025
48 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 25716.026
49 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 25716.027
50 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 25716.028
51 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 25716.029
52 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 25716.030
53 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 25716.031
54 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 25716.032
55 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 25716.033
56 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 25716.034
57 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 25716.035
58 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 25716.036
59 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 37 here 25716.037
60 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 38 here 25716.038
61 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 39 here 25716.039
62 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 40 here 25716.040
63 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 41 here 25716.041
64 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 42 here 25716.042
65 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 43 here 25716.043
66 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 44 here 25716.044
67 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 45 here 25716.045
68 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 46 here 25716.046
69 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 47 here 25716.047
70 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 48 here 25716.048
71 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 49 here 25716.049
72 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 50 here 25716.050
73 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 51 here 25716.051
74 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 52 here 25716.052
75 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 53 here 25716.053
76 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 54 here 25716.054
77 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 55 here 25716.055
78 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 56 here 25716.056
79 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 57 here 25716.057
80 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 58 here 25716.058
81 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 59 here 25716.059
82 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 60 here 25716.060
83 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 61 here 25716.061
84 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 62 here 25716.062
85 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 63 here 25716.063
86 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 64 here 25716.064
87 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 65 here 25716.065
88 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 66 here 25716.066
89 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 67 here 25716.067
90 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 68 here 25716.068
91 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 69 here 25716.069
92 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 70 here 25716.070
93 

Æ 


KING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 71 here 25716.071