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

22–395 PDF 2016

EXAMINING THE SAFETY AND SERVICE OF D.C. 

METRO 

JOINT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC ASSETS 

AND THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

APRIL 13, 2016 

Serial No. 114–88 

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 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM 

JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah, Chairman 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan 

PAUL A. GOSAR, Arizona 

SCOTT DESJARLAIS, Tennessee 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas 

CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina 

RON DESANTIS, Florida 

MICK, MULVANEY, South Carolina 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

MARK WALKER, North Carolina 

ROD BLUM, Massachusetts 

JODY B. HICE, Georgia 

STEVE RUSSELL, Oklahoma 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

WILL HURD, Texas 

GARY J. PALMER, Alabama 

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 

MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois 

BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan 

TED LIEU, California 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

MARK DESAULNIER, California 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

PETER WELCH, Vermont 

MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM, New Mexico 

JENNIFER HEMINGWAY, Staff Director 

DAVID RAPALLO, Minority Staff Director 

KATIE BAILEY, Government Operations Staff Director 

ARI WISCH, Professional Staff Member 

WILLIAM MARX, Clerk 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(III) 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC ASSETS

JOHN L. MICA Florida, Chairman 

MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR. Tennessee 

JUSTIN AMASH, Michigan 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin, Vice Chair 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois, Ranking 

Member 

BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey 

MARK DESAULNIER, California 

BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS

MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina, Chairman 

JIM JORDAN, Ohio 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Vice Chair 

TREY GOWDY, South Carolina 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

MICK MULVANEY, South Carolina 

KEN BUCK, Colorado 

EARL L. ‘‘BUDDY’’ CARTER, Georgia 

GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia, Ranking 

Minority Member 

CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York 

ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of 

Columbia 

WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri 

STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands 

STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(V) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 13, 2016 .............................................................................. 1 

WITNESSES 

The Hon. Jack Evans, Chairman of the Board, Washington Metropolitan 

Area Transit Authority 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 9 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 12 

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

Authority 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 16 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 18 

Mr. Christopher Hart, Chairman, National Transportation Safety Board 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 24 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 26 

Ms. Carolyn Flowers, Senior Advisor, Federal Transit Administration, Accompanied by Mr. Matthew Welbes, Executive Director, Federal Transit Administration 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 47 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 49 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
(1) 

EXAMINING THE SAFETY AND SERVICE OF 

D.C. METRO 

Wednesday, April 13, 2016 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND PUBLIC

ASSETS, JOINT WITH THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS, 

COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:28 p.m., in Room 

2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John L. Mica [chairman of the Subcommittee on Transportation and Public Assets] 

presiding. 

Present from Subcommittee on Transportation and Public Assets: 

Representatives Mica, Amash, Duckworth, and DeSaulnier. 

Present from Subcommittee on Government Operations: Representatives Meadows, Walberg, Jordan, Buck, Carter, Connolly, 

Maloney, Norton, and Plaskett. 

Also Present: Representatives Comstock, Hoyer, Delaney, and 

Beyer. 

Mr. MICA. Good afternoon. I’d like to welcome everyone to the 

Committee on Government Oversight and Reform. And we have 

this afternoon a joint subcommittee hearing. The Subcommittee of 

Transportation and Public Assets, which I am pleased to chair, and 

we have our ranking member, Ms. Duckworth; and then we also 

have the Government Operations Subcommittee, which is chaired 

by Mr. Meadows, and Mr. Connolly is the ranking member. 

So I would like to call the meeting to order. And, without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time. 

I would also like to announce the order of business. We’ll first 

hear from the chairs and ranking members, and then we will go 

to questions. And first I will introduce the witnesses and swear 

them in. And we welcome them today. In just a few minutes we’ll 

get to them. So that’s the order of business for the joint subcommittee hearing today. 

And I also would like to note the presence of our colleagues. We 

have Congresswoman Comstock of Virginia. We may expect—I’m 

not sure if he’s going to be here, but we would certainly welcome 

Congressman Steny Hoyer of Maryland. Congressman—is it 

Beyer?—okay—of Virginia and Congressman Delaney of Maryland. 

I’m not sure if Congressman Delaney is here. But I’ll ask unanimous consent that they also be allowed to participate. And, without 

objection, so ordered. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
2 

So while they are not members of the committee, we appreciate 

their participation. The order of business is we’ll go through members of the subcommittee and our OGR committee and then recognize those individuals. I plan to yield some of my opening statement time to Ms. Comstock. And we’ll proceed in that order. 

So today I would like to begin by making some remarks, some 

opening statements, and I’m pleased again to welcome everyone. 

This is not a new kids on the block hearing. This is actually a continuum of hearings that we’ve held. I had the opportunity to chair 

the Transportation Committee and we looked at the problems with 

WMATA and Washington Metro during that tenure. 

On the 12th of January, 2015, last year, we had a horrible incident, an accident in which an individual lost their life in the Metro 

system. I called a hearing February 13 of 2015, that was our first 

OGR hearing, to review what had taken place. We personally visited NTSB. We looked at the problem that was identified. We tried 

to find out what was going wrong at that point, what made that 

incident occur, and then seek remediation. 

We did a second hearing, I might remind members, July 21, 

2015. And I’m very concerned that after talking with Mr. Hart we’ll 

hear from in a while from NTSB, that some of his recommendations, he told me, were passed on from the fatal incident in June. 

I’m not sure if they were taken care of. 

We had the latest incident, we had a shutdown of the system for, 

what, 29 hours, March 16, last month. I gave enough time for folks 

to prepare for this hearing. I wanted to do something immediate. 

We do have some new leadership at WMATA, and I wanted to 

make certain that everyone had time to prepare for this hearing. 

We have a Metro system in crisis in Washington, D.C., and we 

need to find out what has gone wrong, what steps have been taken 

to correct the problems. We need to look at the management restructuring and we need to look at the financial structuring that 

is currently in place. 

There are few transit systems in the United States that receive 

the subsidization that Metro does in Washington. So we need to 

again hold people’s feet accountable and see what’s wrong, look at 

what’s been done, and then look at solutions for the future. That’s 

the purpose of this hearing. That’s what we’re going to do today. 

I’d yield the balance my time to the gentlelady from Virginia, 

Mrs. Comstock. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for yielding. And I’d also like to thank him for this hearing in allowing us 

in the Metropolitan Washington area to join. This is a vitally important issue to my district and to our entire region. 

And I appreciate our new manager. And I’d like to emphasize so 

everyone in the audience does understand that Mr. Wiedefeld is 

the new general manager of Metro. And we appreciate his work 

with us. I know when he first came and met with all of the Washington area, my colleagues, we all emphasized the cultural change. 

And I appreciate how much you are taking that to heart and 

really facing a lot of what you have called the hard truths of the 

system. 

We were together at an event yesterday in Loudoun County and 

I want to say how much people did appreciate again your talking 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
3 

about the many hard truths that we have on how we are going to 

have to deal with this on the long road ahead to regain that public 

trust given we’ve had a dropoff in Metro ridership because of the 

lack of reliability and the increased concerns for safety. 

So I do appreciate the March report where you, yourself, have 

publicly called on Metro to accept these hard truths, and you noted 

that safety culture at Metro is not integrated with operations and 

is not well rooted at all levels. 

I know yesterday when you spoke you talked about how you are 

already eliminating a lot of the silos, because what was happening 

with all the direct reports to you, when something went wrong everyone looked to somebody else. So you really did highlight some 

of those problems well and acknowledged that Metro is actually at 

this time doing less with more, to quote your statement. And in 

nearly 10 years there have been no significant reductions in workforce resulting in redundant positions among back office staff that 

will be abolished through attrition where possible. 

I think it is important to note that you’ve identified sort of in the 

need to modernize this that the back office staff that we might not 

need now needs to be reallocated. We need to have management 

changes there or labor changes, as you noted, that we will probably 

need to change this. We can’t have these redundant positions that 

are unneeded soaking up the resources that we need to put on the 

front line. And I particularly appreciate that you are putting more 

safety resources into all the stations as you’re going through this 

process. 

The organizational span of control we know is too wide, as you 

noted in the meeting we had yesterday, and it is not mission focused. So I appreciate particularly what you have been highlighting 

on the customer focus of Metro and the need to have a much more 

customer-focused workforce and to have that be certainly a top priority. 

I was able to go up to the ROCC recently, the Rail Operations 

Control Center, and I know one of the biggest concerns that I’d had 

when I read articles like the Washingtonian back in December, 

which we have discussed, was the training process. And I noted in 

the recent audit that they also identified the training as a key 

problem area. So any way we can be helping you as you go through 

that process of how we’re going to revitalize and change that training so that we have the best people available so we get the most 

value for the money and resources we’re putting in here. 

So, again, I think the chairman for allowing us to join you here 

today. I thank the general manager for his work, and particularly 

in recruiting the new safety officer that I understand you just announced later, I guess it was a little while after we met yesterday, 

New York City Transit’s Patrick Lavin to now be our new chief 

safety officer. And, of course, never has there been a time when he 

is more needed. 

So I appreciate the opportunity to be with my colleagues today 

and look forward to discussing this more. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentlelady from Virginia. 

I recognize our ranking member, Ms. Duckworth. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
4 

In the United States rail transit ranks among the safest modes 

of transportation. However, as our famed pilot ‘‘Sully’’ Sullenberger 

wisely warned of the commercial aviation industry, and I quote, ‘‘It 

is important not to define safety as the absence of accidents. When 

we’ve been through a very safe period it is easy to think it’s because we’re doing everything right. But it may be that simply we 

are doing some things right, but not everything, and we simply 

can’t relax.’’ 

Unfortunately, a series of rail accidents in our Nation’s Capital 

reminds us of Sully’s statement and how it also applies to mass 

transit. Over the past 7 years, nine passengers and seven employees have been killed on the Washington Metrorail system and 

many more have been injured. Riders have lost confidence in Metro 

and rebuilding trust will require far more from WMATA than simply reminding passengers that driving is far more dangerous than 

riding. 

Of course, Congress must also hold itself accountable for creating 

a weak Federal Transit Administration. Compared to FTA’s DOD 

counterpart, the Federal Railroad Administration, and especially 

the Federal Aviation Administration, FTA lacks the authority, resources, and experience necessary to make sure State safety oversight agencies effectively protect rail transit passengers and workers. 

I’m concerned that the entire rail transit sector may be out of 

step with the positive safety trends experienced by other forms of 

transportation, such as by the global aviation industry. In aviation 

we’ve managed to cut the rate of crashes and fatalities in half between 2000 and 2012. 

Moving forward, rail transit must learn from past experiences of 

other transportation industries. It’s worth remembering the observation from Ms. Deborah Hersman, a former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, who when describing aviation 

sector’s evolution to a more, quote, ‘‘proactive approach to safety,’’ 

grimly noted that in previous aviation eras, and I quote, ‘‘the lessons of accidents used to be written in blood where you had to have 

an accident and you had to kill people to change procedures or policy or training.’’ I fear that her morbid description of aviation’s past 

safety culture sounds all too familiar when examining the challenges currently facing rail transit. 

Nearly a decade has passed since NTSB investigated the 2006 

derailment of a Chicago Transit Authority train. NTSB’s work produced a comprehensive of recommendations for CTA and FTA. According to the accident report, and I quote, ‘‘This accident offers 

many lessons to both CTA and to rail transit systems around the 

country that we have made a number of recommendations to address those issues.’’ For example, they recommended that FTA inform all rail transit agencies of the CTA derailment and, among 

other things, make sure that all rail transit systems have the capability to communicate with passengers during an emergency and 

the ability to remove smoke from tunnels, and this was 10 years 

ago. 

NTSB also found that FTA oversight of the regional transportation authority was, quote, ‘‘inadequate and failed to prompt actions needed to correct track safety deficiencies.’’ 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
5 

Despite NTSB’s clear findings and recommendations produced in 

2006, it became tragically clear on January 12 of 2015 that neither 

FTA nor WMATA implemented reforms to Metro’s procedures, policies, or training to prevent similar incidents a whole decade later. 

Metro could not communicate with passengers during the emergency. Worst of all, Metro’s inability to remove smoke from the tunnel had deadly consequences. My constituents wonder why we even 

spend taxpayer dollars on NTSB investigations if the lessons are 

never learned, let alone acted on, to prevent future accidents. 

Moving forward, there seems to be bipartisan recognition that 

FTA was set up to fail, and I’m pleased that MAP–21 strengthened 

FTA’s authority to enforce critical safety rules. And I thank the 

chairman for his leadership with MAP–21. 

However, we cannot relax. We must examine what further enhancements must be made to FTA’s statutory authorities and explore key issues, such as whether FRA would be a more effective 

safety regulator for Metro. Clearly, there are many lessons FTA 

can learn, and FRA and FAA can teach those lessons. 

This committee should play an important role in helping reform 

spread across agencies in all levels of government. We must also 

never forget the bottom line. At the end of the day, the millions of 

Americans that rely on mass transit care very little about which 

Federal agency is overseeing which State entity. Passengers simply 

want peace of mind that their local mass transit system will transport them safely to work and back home to their families. I look 

forward to hearing from our witnesses about how we can achieve 

this goal. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentlelady. 

Let me recognize the chair of the Government Operations Subcommittee, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Meadows. 

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

leadership on requesting this hearing. 

And thank each of you, many of you for coming back another 

time to address an issue that is important. 

Obviously, the D.C. Metro system transports nearly 200 million 

riders annually. These are not just only the hard-working citizens 

and Federal employees of the District, but people from all across 

the country who come here to visit and look at and enjoy America’s 

treasures and the monuments that are here. 

The Washington Metro was once the gold standard of public 

transit, but in recent years it’s become synonymous with several 

other words: poor service, delays, and rampant safety concerns. 

And in many ways this just adds to the unfortunate situation that 

WMATA riders find themselves today. This hearing focuses on the 

efforts that WMATA has sought to address some of the issues surrounding the safety and delays in general service and to work towards making sure that our D.C. Metro system will once again deserve the moniker that it is indeed the best transit system in the 

country. 

The Metrorail system recently celebrated its 40th anniversary. 

And while any system that has been in service for that length of 

time is bound to experience its fair share of maintenance problems, 

the WMATA Metrorail system seems to be plagued by dangerous 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
6 

and systemic problems. In the past few years WMATA has experienced a large number of significant accidents and passenger safety 

events. And certainly we can all remember not too long ago, in 

2015, when one passenger was killed due to the electrical cable fire 

that sparked an arcing incident. That obviously is still under investigation and still being dealt with. It resulted in a large amount of 

smoke-filled rail cars. 

I was surprised to find that that event was just not unique, it 

was unique in that we had a tragic loss of life. But in talking to 

some of my staff, I found that we’ve had smoke-filled cars and 

other potential problems even more between that event and the one 

that obviously has brought us here to this additional hearing today. 

Following the July—I mean the 2015 incident, NTSB undertook 

an investigation and issued an urgent safety recommendation that 

WMATA needed to address the related electrical cables to prevent 

further fire hazards. Just last month an electrical cable at the 

McPherson Square Metro Station experienced the same type of arcing incident that we had previously identified. The fact is that this 

same type of fire hazard is continuing to result and a major firerelated incidence raises questions as to the effectiveness of 

WMATA’s safety efforts and the agency’s oversight of WMATA. 

In response, WMATA and the general manager—the new general 

manager, as my colleague pointed out—closed the Metrorail system 

for 29 hours to conduct an emergency safety inspection. And this 

emphasis on safety certainly is a step in the right direction for 

WMATA and to get back on track the Nation’s premier public transit system. It created unbelievable chaos within the city on that 

particular day. I think many people experienced unbelievable hours 

of traffic jams that they would not normally have experienced just 

because of that shutdown. 

Safety does come first, but it also shows the importance of this 

rail system to this city and the way that we do work. And so it is 

a must that we have to address this. 

Beyond the safety-related issues, WMATA seems to be besieged 

by miscommunication and backbiting sometimes between the operational controls represented by the general manager’s office and 

the policy controls represented by the WMATA Board. This issue 

was particularly visible in the aftermath of this McPherson incident where there seemed to be a public disagreement between the 

Board and the general manager as it relates to the action necessary to get WMATA back in a state of good repair. 

So I look forward to each one of your testimonies today, working 

with the witnesses to not only address the safety concerns that 

have really affected WMATA, but also to create a unified face for 

a system that we need to help restore the confidence and trust for 

those that use the system each and every day. 

So I’d like to thank our witnesses for attending today’s hearing, 

for taking to the time to work with this committee to ensure that 

when WMATA celebrates its 50th anniversary it can do so and that 

we can celebrate it as being the best transit system in America. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
7 

Let me first now recognize the ranking member of the Government Operations Subcommittee, the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. 

Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. If I can do a unanimous consent before my time 

starts, Mr. Chairman, I have a statement to be entered in the 

record, I ask unanimous consent, on behalf of our colleague, Chris 

Van Hollen of Maryland, who has been a longtime supporter—and 

sometime critic—of Metro and been a great partner. 

Mr. MICA. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the chair. 

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to revisit the safety 

and service challenges faced by the Washington Metro system. I’ve 

spent 21 years of my life working on Metro-related issues, first as 

a member of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, then as 

chairman, and now as a Member of this body. No one is more disheartened than I with the current unacceptable state of affairs. 

In the wake of January 2015 tragedy at L’Enfant Plaza, we held 

two hearings in which I said Metro was facing multiple crises, a 

crisis in leadership, a crisis in safety, a crisis in commuter and 

stakeholder confidence, and a crisis in funding. 

Let me start with the most significant improvement, which is the 

November hiring of General Manager Paul Wiedefeld. His hiring 

was long overdue as Metro went 10 solid months without a permanent general manager. I think most observers agree he is proving 

to be the right leader at the right time to help get Metro back on 

the right track. 

I rode the Orange Line with Mr. Wiedefeld through northern Virginia in January so he could hear firsthand from riders about their 

safety and reliability concerns. And because the gods were on our 

side that day, we encountered two cracked rails in the process, 

leading to many delays. 

Mr. Wiedefeld recently issued a customer accountability report in 

which he lays out the hard truths about safety, reliability, and 

basic customer service, coupled with more than 50 actions he and 

the agency will begin to take to address those. Of course, that’s in 

addition to the urgent safety recommendations made by the NTSB 

as part of its ongoing investigation into the L’Enfant Plaza tragedy. 

In addition, the FTA, which conducted its own safety management inspection, now has assumed safety oversight for Metro, has 

91 of its own corrective actions. 

I know the new general manager agrees that safety ought to be 

priority number one. Since our last hearing, two additional incidents have rattled riders and further eroded confidence. First, a 

train derailed in the early morning hours of August 6 on the Orange, Blue, Silver Lines between Federal Triangle and Smithsonian. The train, which was not carrying passengers yet, derailed 

due to a defect in the rail line, a wide gap, previously detected, but 

misreported and unfixed. 

Then Metro suffered a gut punch on March 14 with another electrical arcing incident, this time on the Orange, Blue, Silver Lines 

at McPherson Square. Thankfully, the incident also occurred before 

the system opened, but was a disturbing safety shortfall that 

should have been identified and fixed immediately following the 

tragedy at L’Enfant Plaza. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
8 

It would seem Mr. Wiedefeld shared that assessment, prompting 

him to take the extraordinary and unprecedented step of closing 

the entire Metro system for 24 hours in order to allow for emergency inspection of all such cables. Though it created a significant 

challenge for the region’s commuters and the Federal Government, 

which encouraged employees to use unscheduled leave and 

telework for the day, I support the general manager’s decision on 

that one-day closure, although I caution against prolonged closures 

in the future. It served as an overdue shot across the bow to the 

entire workforce at Metro that a culture of mediocrity is no longer 

acceptable. 

What has been particularly frustrating with each of the safety investigations is the revelation that Metro does, in fact, appear to 

have good policies and procedures in place, they are just not followed, they are not implemented, something I know Mr. Wiedefeld 

aims to rectify. 

In addition, shuttering the system serves as a welcome message 

to riders, if you can call it that, welcome that is, that somebody is 

finally taking their safety and reliability concerns seriously and demanding accountability within the system. 

As part of his internal assessment of Metro, I have encouraged 

Mr. Wiedefeld to make significant personnel changes, and I’m 

pleased by yesterday’s announcement about the hiring of a new 

chief safety officer. Further, those responsible for allowing these 

issues to languish should step down or be removed. 

Given all of this, it should be no surprise that Metro ridership 

has declined by 6 percent and 12 percent on weekends. In response, 

Metro hired a consultant to conduct a top-to-bottom review of its 

operation. The McKinsey & Company report offers a blueprint for 

both strategic short-term fixes that could be applied immediately 

along with more long-term recommendations. 

My time is running out, Mr. Chairman, in this opening statement, but I know we will discuss financing as part of this hearing, 

and I will hold off on that part of my statement until we get to that 

round. Thank you. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman. 

And members will have 5 legislative day for anyone who wishes 

to submit a written statement. In agreement with the minority, 

that is so ordered. 

Mr. MICA. We are now pleased to turn to our panel of witnesses. 

And again I want to welcome you. 

Let me first introduce the Honorable Jack Evans, chairman of 

the Board of Washington Metro Transit Authority. 

Mr. Evans. 

We have Mr. Paul Wiedefeld. He is the new general manager of 

the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. 

Welcome, sir. 

We’ve got the Honorable Chris Hart. He’s chairman of NTSB, 

National Transportation Safety Board. 

And we have Ms. Carolyn Flowers, senior advisor at the Federal 

Transit Administration. And I guess you’re new to that position, 

but we also have accompanying you Mr. Matthew—is it Welbes? 

And he is executive director of Federal Transit Administration. 

And we may call on you because of your expertise. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
9 

So I’d like to welcome all of our witnesses. 

The order of business is such that we allow you about 5 minutes. 

Some of you have been here before, some of you haven’t. We’d like 

you to summarize your testimony, hopefully in that time. If you’d 

like additional information or statements or data to be submitted, 

just ask through the chair or a member and we’ll be glad to do 

that. 

Now, this is an investigations and oversight committee of Congress, so we do swear in all of our witnesses. So I’d like you to 

stand if you would, please. Raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are 

about to give before this committee of Congress is the whole truth 

and nothing but the truth? 

Let the record reflect that all of the witnesses answered in the 

affirmative. 

Again, I want to welcome our chair of WMATA, Mr. Evans, and 

we’ll recognize you first. 

WITNESS STATEMENTS 

STATEMENT OF JACK EVANS 

Mr. EVANS. Thank you. Well, good afternoon. My name is Jack 

Evans, and I’m chairman of the Board of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, better known as Metro. And I also 

for the last 25 years have represented Ward 2 on the Council of 

the District of Columbia. And I want to thank you, and appreciate 

the opportunity to testify before you today on what is the most critical issue facing our region. 

And, first, Chairman Mica, I want to acknowledge your enormous 

commitment and leadership in the transportation field throughout 

this country. 

And, Chairman Meadows, on behalf of the residents of the District of Columbia, I want to thank you for coming to the State of 

the Union speech by our Mayor, State of the District speech, And 

we appreciate your support of the District. 

And our Ranking Member Duckworth, as a graduate of the Elliott School of International Affairs at The George Washington University, we know you’re very familiar with the District of Columbia. 

And certainly last, Ranking Member Connolly, I want to thank 

you for your constant support and advocacy for Metro. 

I want to thank all of you. And certainly I want to recognize and 

thank my Congresswoman, Eleanor Holmes Norton, who has done 

a fabulous job representing our region here. 

I want to give you a little background so you know where I’m 

coming from here. I moved to Washington, D.C., as a summer internal in 1976. I had an opportunity to ride Metro when it first 

opened. And you’ve heard my comment before, it was a shining 

new Metro system reminding us all of ‘‘The Jetsons,’’ remember the 

TV show, George Jetson, and there it was. 

I moved here in 1978 permanently, rode Metro throughout the 

1980s and 1990s. In 1993 joined the Board of Metro and served on 

the Board from 1993 to 1999, twice as chair of the Board. 

When I left Metro in 1999, the end of 1999, it was a shining example of regional cooperation and, as has been mentioned, was the 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
10 

envy of transit systems throughout the country. I rejoined the 

Board in January of last year and I was outraged—and I want you 

to know this—at what I had found. Fifteen years after I left the 

system the finances were in chaos and the operations were just behind it. 

What happened? How did we get here? 

First, we have to realize something, I want everybody to recognize this. Metro is all of us. It’s not just Paul and I. Metro is everyone in this room. And we have to take responsibility for this system 

and get it fixed. Because we talked about who rides Metro, with 

200 million people ride Metro a year, District, Virginia, Maryland 

residents. Twenty-two million people visit this region every year. 

And 35 percent of our riders are Federal workers. Fifty percent of 

the Federal workforce rides Metro. That’s all of you, that’s all of 

us, and it’s an important thing to remember for later in my comments. 

So what are we dealing here? We’re dealing with operation, and 

Paul is going to talk about that. He’s going to talk about how we 

got to where we are and what we’re going to do to fix it. But I can 

say one thing. We have years of neglected maintenance, and the 

idea of fixing this by working 3 hours at night and on the weekends is not working. We need a better plan. 

Now, the finances. Even if this system were operating like a 

clock, it will never survive under the financial structure that we 

have in place right now. Quickly, we get our money from two areas, 

$1.8 billion budget, $90 million from the farebox, $900 million from 

the region. Okay? 

Right now what I’m dealing with, I have a $2.5 billion—let me 

repeat that—$2.5 billion unfunded pension liability problem. Next 

year’s budget, starting out of the box we’re $100 million short because we balanced this year’s budget with $100 million of one-time 

money. Add on to that increasing costs, we’re $150 million dollars 

short right out of the box. 

And I have an $18 billion deferred capital maintenance problem. 

This is the maintenance that Paul is going to talk about that needs 

to be done. It is the new cars that we have to buy. And it’s systematic problems like the Roslyn bottleneck that prevents us from getting trains across the river and into the District. All has to be 

fixed. 

So what are our solutions here? Number one, we need the Federal contribution on the operating side. We need $300 million from 

the Federal Government. How do I get that number? $900 million 

divided by 3, $300 million, each jurisdiction is giving that. The Federal Government needs to do that as well. Remember, you paid for 

two-thirds of the system. You put $6.9 billion into the system. You 

have to help us, otherwise we can’t survive. 

Secondly, we need a regional funding source—and bear with me 

as I run out of time—we need a regional funding source. We’ve 

been talking about it since 1993 when I first joined the Board. This 

committee had a hearing, here it is, 2005. You spent your whole 

time talking about a regional funding source and nothing ever happened. I need a billion dollars a year from the region. And if the 

region won’t do it, let me just float this idea with you all, the TenVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
11 

nessee Valley Authority, a Federal agency set up by all of you in 

order to collect money. 

So let me conclude with this. I’ve been the finance chair in the 

District of Columbia for 17 years, okay? We were here in 1995 with 

a city that was bankrupt. Without Federal assistance—and Eleanor 

Holmes Norton was the leader on this, and you remember this— 

without Federal assistance, we would not have made it. The Federal Government assumed a $10 billion unfunded pension liability 

that the District of Columbia had and paid for our prisons and our 

judicial system, giving us the breathing room we needed as a city 

to survive and become what I would say is one of the most dynamic 

cities in America today who has the best financial picture. 

So that’s what I’m asking you for today. We are in this together. 

We need your help. So thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Evans follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
12 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 1 here 22395.001
13 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 2 here 22395.002
14 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 3 here 22395.003
15 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 4 here 22395.004
16 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman. 

Let me now recognize the general manager of WMATA, Mr. 

Wiedefeld. 

Welcome, and you’re recognized. 

STATEMENT OF PAUL WIEDEFELD 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 

having me today. I’ll be very brief. 

But since I’ve come on board 4 months ago a big part of my time 

has been spent reaching out to the stakeholders, the customers, the 

employees, particularly the frontline employees, elected officials, 

and business community, and I’ve gotten a firsthand experience 

from using the system, obviously from listening to them, and then 

basically walking the tunnels, walking the bus garages, and maintenance facilities. I’ve learned a lot, I’ve learned a number of the 

issues that we have, and I’ve learned about a number of opportunities we’ve had. 

Unfortunately, during this time I’ve also had to make some very 

difficult decisions, the first one dealing with the blizzard that we 

had that hit the region and second one is the cable fire at McPherson Square. Both of those decisions were driven by my commitment 

to safety for our customers and our employees, and that’s why I 

made those decisions. 

In the near term my priorities remain to be safety, service reliability, and getting our fiscal house in order, as the chairman just 

mentioned. Last month, as was also mentioned, I put out a report, 

a customer accountability report, which basically outlines a number 

of actions, just based on my short time here, of things that I want 

to do and things I’ve heard and what we learned from McKinsey 

and other sources. 

The purpose of that report is to be transparent, but more important is to be accountable to the public and for the managers to be 

accountable, and it’s basically setting that bar, and that’s exactly 

why that was done, and it will continue to grow. 

And although the actions I’ve taken I think reflected a different 

management approach and the start of a change of culture here, 

there is still quite a long way to go, and this is where I need the 

stakeholders in this region to basically support me to get there. 

I think we need to step back and look at what we’ve been doing 

in terms of particularly the maintenance of the system. We’ve gone 

from crisis to crisis. We tend to deal with things one off and that 

just cannot go on. We have created a program to try to do the improvements which basically were not getting done. It is inefficient. 

We are impacting our customers day to day, on weekends, and 

we’re suffering from that. 

So I will be coming out in the very near future with a new program to get at these issues and get the system up to the state it 

should be, and then we’ll continue to maintain it from there. The 

solutions won’t be easy, and so I’m not going to sugarcoat it, that 

is for sure, but I think there are things that we have to do to get 

to where we want to be. 

Let me close by saying last month we celebrated the 40th anniversary of the system and it is something to celebrate for sure. 

Over the last 40 years Metro has played a central role in transVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
17 

forming this region into one of the most dynamic regions in the 

world for sure. It’s shaped the land use, it’s become the backbone 

of our economic development, it’s played a central role in meeting 

the mobility needs of residents and visitors alike, moving 1.2 million passengers a day, and it is supportive of our metagoals, particularly in the air quality arena. 

In short, Metro has been and will remain the critical economic 

growth and quality of life in this region, will support it. But it is 

therefore time for us to be realistic to address the challenges we 

are facing as a region to make the Metro system great again, challenges that, in my opinion, must be met given Metro’s vital importance to the region today and tomorrow. 

Thank you for your attention. I do want to take a moment, 

though, to thank our regional congressional delegation for their 

support. I also want to thank the chairman, Chairman Mica, Congressman Connolly, and Congresswoman Comstock, for the help in 

supporting the efforts to reach the agreement on the cellular phone 

installation. So I really do appreciate that. 

I’ll be glad to answer your questions later. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Wiedefeld follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
18 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 5 here 22395.005
19 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 6 here 22395.006
20 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 7 here 22395.007
21 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 8 here 22395.008
22 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 9 here 22395.009
23 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 10 here 22395.010
24 

Mr. MICA. Thank you. And we’ll hold questions until we’ve heard 

from all the witnesses. 

Mr. Hart is the chairman of the NTSB. 

Welcome back, and you’re recognized, sir. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER HART 

Mr. HART. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Mica, Chairman Meadows, Ranking Member Duckworth, and Ranking Member 

Connolly, members of the subcommittees, and others who are 

present here today. Thank you for inviting me today to testify on 

behalf of the NTSB. 

The NTSB has completed its investigation into the January 12, 

2015, electrical arcing and smoke incident near WMATA’s L’Enfant 

Plaza Station that has been referred to several times today. The 

board is expected to approve the final report at its public meeting 

on May 3. As I reported to you last year, our investigation revealed 

that some electrical connections associated with power to the third 

rail were improperly constructed and installed without sealing 

sleeves. The absence of sealing sleeves can create the potential for 

electrical short-circuiting, which results in fire and smoke events in 

the system. 

Nearly a month after the L’Enfant Plaza accident we examined 

electrical components from a smoky vent in the tunnel near Courthouse Station and found that those cable connections were also 

missing sealing sleeves. 

Most recently, we were informed by WMATA last month of an 

arcing event at the McPherson Square Station and we were invited 

to view some of the damaged electrical components. We observed 

that the damage to the traction power electrical components were 

similar to that of the L’Enfant Plaza Station accident. One cable 

connector assembly and portions of the cables had been vaporized 

by the intense heat, as was a portion of the third rail cover board 

similar to the L’Enfant Plaza Station accident. 

In June 2015, we recommended that WMATA inspect the cable 

connector assemblies and ensure that they are constructed and installed in accordance with WMATA’s specifications, which includes 

sealing sleeves. It is clear that the cable connector assemblies at 

the McPherson Square Station had not been modified as a result 

of our June 2015 recommendations. 

What is unclear is whether these connectors had been inspected, 

and if so, how that inspection was conducted and recorded. We are 

anxiously awaiting WMATA’s report on its progress in implementing this recommendation. 

Since 1982, the NTSB has investigated 13 accidents involving 

WMATA. More than half of those investigations have occurred 

since 2006. Or L’Enfant Plaza investigation has illustrated once 

again that rail transit accidents continue to cause injuries and 

deaths and that more effective oversight of rail transit is necessary. 

That is why we included improved rail transit safety oversight in 

our 2016 most wanted list of transportation safety improvements. 

Inadequate transit safety oversight can result in many types of 

safety hazards that are allowed to develop and persist and as such 

constitute systemic hazards. The physical hazard that led to the 

L’Enfant Plaza Station accident is present systemwide. That is why 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
25 

the NTSB issued urgent safety recommendations to the Secretary 

of Transportation in September 2015 urging that DOT seek authority from Congress to designate WMATA as a commuter authority 

so that the Federal Railroad Administration can exercise direct 

safety oversight. 

The Secretary’s response to our recommendation acknowledged 

that the Tri-State Oversight Committee, or TOC, lacked sufficient 

resources, technical capacity, and enforcement authority to provide 

the level of oversight needed to ensure safety at WMATA. However, 

he disagreed with our recommendation to transfer safety oversight 

of WMATA to the FRA and instead determined that the FTA, the 

Federal Transit Administration, would begin increased oversight 

and would directly enforce and investigate the safety oversight of 

WMATA. 

While we can all agree that the current oversight of WMATA by 

the TOC is insufficient, we are concerned that the FTA’s safety 

oversight for this rail transit property is not equivalent to that provided for other similar properties or heavy commuter rail. FTA has 

very limited ability to oversee WMATA effectively. 

Our concerns are substantiated by the fact that the FTA has no 

prior experience in direct safety oversight or as a State safety oversight agency, has limited staff to carry out the function, and does 

not have the authority to levy civil or individual penalties in response to safety deficiencies. 

Every day millions of people use rail transit to go to or from 

work, home, or other destinations. In the case of WMATA Metrorail, ridership is critical to the effective operation of all branches 

of the Federal Government, as evidenced by the recent unprecedented shutdown of the system for 1 day. That is why it is so important for WMATA and rail transit systems nationwide to be subject to competent oversight bodies that have standards and rules 

along with the power to enforce those rules. Although each system 

has unique equipment, operating environments, and challenges, all 

need strong safety oversight to continue safe operations. 

Thank you for providing the opportunity to testify before you 

today. I look forward to responding to your questions. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Hart follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
26 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 11 here 22395.011
27 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 12 here 22395.012
28 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 13 here 22395.013
29 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 14 here 22395.014
30 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 15 here 22395.015
31 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 16 here 22395.016
32 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 17 here 22395.017
33 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 18 here 22395.018
34 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 19 here 22395.019
35 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 20 here 22395.020
36 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 21 here 22395.021
37 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 22 here 22395.022
38 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 23 here 22395.023
39 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 24 here 22395.024
40 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 25 here 22395.025
41 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 26 here 22395.026
42 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 27 here 22395.027
43 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 28 here 22395.028
44 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 29 here 22395.029
45 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 30 here 22395.030
46 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 31 here 22395.031
47 

Mr. MICA. Thank you, Mr. Hart. 

And I’ll recognize Ms. Flowers with FTA at this point. 

You’re recognized. 

STATEMENT OF CAROLYN FLOWERS 

Ms. FLOWERS. Chairmen Mica and Meadows, Ranking Members 

Duckworth and Connolly, and members of the Committee, thank 

you for inviting me to discuss the Washington Metrorail system. 

At the FTA, the safety of public transportation passengers and 

workers is our single highest priority. Transit is among the safest 

ways to travel in communities throughout this country. However, 

here in Washington, D.C., serious incidents, crashes, and safety 

lapses have highlighted the need for change and improvement. 

In 2012, with the passage of MAP–21, Congress granted FTA the 

authority to oversee the safety of public transportation through the 

existing State safety oversight agency structure. Since then, FTA 

has reorganized and significantly strengthened safety staffing and 

oversight functions that take on the new Federal oversight role. 

Each transit agency is still responsible for inspecting its own infrastructure and conducting the necessary training to keep their 

services safe. FTA oversees the State Safety Oversight Agencies, or 

SSOAs, which in turn provide day-to-day oversight of real transit 

safety. That leaves FTA with the ability to shape nationwide safety 

standards, to issue directives, and to step in where those SSOAs 

are not able to do so. 

After the tragic January 2015 L’Enfant Plaza smoke incident, 

FTA exercised our safety authority by conducting a safety management inspection of Metrorail and Metrobus, which resulted in 54 

safety findings. Our inspection report identified numerous deficiencies and operational concerns. 

In October 2015, Secretary Foxx instructed FTA to temporarily 

assume the responsibilities of the local SSOA, the Tri-State Oversight Committee, or TOC, which has lacked adequate enforcement 

authority. 

Since last fall, FTA’s been on the site at Metro providing direct 

safety oversight of Metrorail. Our safety team is comprised of subject matter experts from across the Department. This team has 

transit industry knowledge and expertise, technical ability, and enforcement power to improve Metrorail safety. 

Over the past several months, on a daily basis, we have conducted inspections and investigations and verified corrective actions. As of last week, FTA had conducted 107 inspections that covered track, Rail Operations Control Center, vehicle and systems 

maintenance, automatic train control, and traction power. During 

these inspections we identified 229 defects, requiring 66 remedial 

actions by Metro. In addition, we are directing 140 open investigations. 

In late March, FTA initiated a three-part safety blitz, which is 

an intensive, targeted series of inspections that focused on three 

areas: red signal overruns, track integrity, and rail vehicle security. 

The FTA role is temporary. FTA’s role in direct safety oversight 

is temporary. It is critical that Maryland, Virginia, and the District 

of Columbia join together to create an SSOA with adequate authorities and resources. Secretary Foxx urges in actions and words 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
48 

that the three jurisdictions come together with all haste to create 

the Metro safety commission that the local jurisdictions first outlined 6 years ago. 

In closing, as the former CEO of the Charlotte Area Transit System and the COO of the Los Angeles Metro system, I know that 

it is a challenge to balance safety and service demands, but keeping people safe is not a choice. For our part, FTA took action to 

focus on Metrorail safety condition as both an urgent and critical 

problem requiring immediate and decisive action. FTA’s oversight 

activities focus on Metrorail’s serious safety needs for the short 

term, and we continue our work with the local jurisdictions to establish a new and effective SSOA for the long term. 

Thank you for calling this hearing. And together with FTA’s executive director, Matt Welbes, I look forward to answering your 

questions. 

[Prepared statement of Ms. Flowers follows:] 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
49 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 32 here 22395.032
50 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 33 here 22395.033
51 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 34 here 22395.034
52 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 35 here 22395.035
53 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLERInsert offset folio 36 here 22395.036
54 

Mr. MICA. I thank all of our witnesses for their testimony. 

I’m going to dive right into questions. I want to separate my 

questions into two part. First, I want to talk about the incident of 

January 12, our subsequent hearing on February 13. Then I want 

to look at the overall picture of Mr. Evans said the crisis and chaos 

in Metro. 

So, first of all, after the incident we held a hearing. Mr. Hart and 

I went down personally, inspected the cable, we identified what we 

thought was the problem. You’ve identified it again here today. 

Then you told me you gave recommendations to WMATA by June. 

Is that true? 

Mr. HART. Correct. 

Mr. MICA. Okay. And I just heard you, Ms. Flowers, you’ve given 

a number, you’ve verified deficits, safety deficits. When did you 

first give them? Did you go in—do you recall when you went in 

after the January death? 

Ms. FLOWERS. So we went in June of last year. 

Mr. MICA. You gave them to them in June last year. Okay, we’ve 

got two nodding heads here. 

I have a problem because the current WMATA director, administrator, manager is not there then. But the first thing you would 

have done—and I’m not the sharpest electrical engineer on the 

block—is go in and change out those cables that we saw were 

shorted that didn’t have proper seals and that were arcing. Can 

you tell us what was done, Mr. Acting General Manager or Mr. 

Evans? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I can tell you, 65 percent of them are done. 

Mr. MICA. Were they done after June, and to what date? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. That’s to date. 

Mr. MICA. To date, okay. But they’re still not done? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. That’s correct. 

Mr. MICA. And we think the arcing was also the problem of the 

smoke and why you shut it down March 16, right? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Right. I’m not sure yet—— 

Mr. MICA. So there’s about 35 percent undone of the cables. 

Okay. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes. 

Mr. MICA. I got involved in this after that because we found out what we asked you to do years ago and promised you $150 million, 

$1.5 billion to get the communications and some other things, 

that’s our contribution to capital improvements, was only done at 

the station. That’s why we probably lost that life, because they 

couldn’t communicate. 

You’ve been there now a short time. Is the communications, wireless communications agreement finalized to finish it? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, it is. 

Mr. MICA. It is, okay, and that’s underway. When do you anticipate that that would be done? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. What we’re doing is we’re doing a 1-mile section 

in a tunnel as a pilot. 

Mr. MICA. When is the finish date? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. What we are going to do is after we see how we 

are trying to do that, then we are going to come out with the schedule based on that, because we don’t—— 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
55 

Mr. MICA. You think it will take a year. You don’t know. You’re 

going to see what it takes to do a mile at a time. 

Mr. EVANS. No, I’m going to do—we’re going to do a mile as a 

pilot. 

Mr. MICA. With 118 miles that we have. 

Mr. EVANS. No, we’re going to do a mile as a pilot, and then 

we’re going to come out with a schedule based on what we learn 

from doing it for that mile. 

Mr. MICA. We need to restore public confidence. They can get— 

people can get on that and have no rescue means. At least they 

have their personal communication device that doesn’t work within 

the tunnels. It may work in the stations, as we saw, but somebody 

died. 

Okay, so that needs attention, that’s part of what I wanted resolve and threatened to withhold money if we didn’t get something 

done. 

This money game is mind-boggling. I asked what’s WMATA’s unliquidated balance in open grants and money coming from the Federal Government as of the 18th of March. It’s $783 million. It’s not 

like they don’t have the money. Last year, in 2015, they had $485 

million available. They had the money available, what they have 

is incompetence, not to get the job done. 

Now, you’re new kid on the block and we’re counting on you. But 

I want people fired, I want something done. Now, we got—you got 

the communication system underway. We’ve got to resolve the arcing. The arcing causes smoke and people die and the thing is in 

chaos. You closed it down for 29 hours. You have falling ridership 

and you have increasing operational costs, I see here. 

Okay, let me—this burns me. 

Now, this caused me to go deeper into your finances. I heard you, 

Mr. Evans, and you gave a nice presentation. I was here in 1995 

when we put the control board in, we disbanded the District government. You were running three-quarters of a billion dollars in 

debt—three-quarters of a billion dollars in debt. You add all kinds 

of unfunded liabilities, pensions, everything. It was the most 

screwed-up mess I’ve ever seen in business or government. 

What’s your current surplus in the District? What are you running, half a billion, $500 million? 

Mr. EVANS. Right now we have $2.17 billion in our reserve funds 

and we run about—— 

Mr. MICA. Okay, well, let’s step up to the plate. You’re dealing 

with people who are broke. I’m telling you I am not going to bail 

you out. I am not going to support bailing out the District of Columbia. 

Mr. EVANS. You’re not bailing us out. 

Mr. MICA. It is bailing out. Look at the operational. I compared 

Chicago, 75 percent of the capital funds come from local and State 

money. In SEPTA, Pennsylvania, 61 percent, WMATA 44 percent. 

Nobody gives more money for capital improvements, nobody has 

more money available than you all have available. So, again, please 

don’t come here. There’s lots of money available. What we don’t 

have—we have money available, we don’t have leadership, we don’t 

have management. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
56 

And these people need to step up to the plate. Virginia needs to 

step up to the plate, Maryland needs to step up to the plate, and 

the District with that huge surplus now needs to step up to the 

plate. You sure as heck ain’t going to get it out of my folks. And 

the improvements can be made. 

So no other system in the country has the kind of resources into 

it. And if you to divide, don’t divide by three, let’s divide by four 

and have everybody step up to pay for it. 

So I’m not making—I’m not here to make up for bad management. I’m not here to make up for a poor safety record. I’m not 

here to make up for a lack of action. And you, who was it, was it 

the new general manager, when I saw the liability, you mentioned 

the liability for pension and unfunded benefits in a multibillion 

area. Isn’t that true? 

Mr. EVANS. $2.5 billion. 

Mr. MICA. Yeah, that’s huge, that’s huge. That also needs to be 

addressed and it doesn’t need to be bailed out by the Federal taxpayer. 

So I’ve spoken my piece. If you know me, I do that, and then I 

act, and I will act to make certain that we get this in order. 

I wish you well, Mr. General Manager. We’ll work with you, we’ll 

give you all the tools. You have money available. You need to get 

in there, fire people, I think you’re doing some of that, and get that 

place in order. 

With that, I yield to the ranking member. 

Ms. DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I, again, want 

to thank you for holding this very important hearing. I’d like to 

yield the remainder of my questioning time to the gentleman from 

Virginia, Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank my friend. And I thank Mr. Mica for his 

passion. But as that passion cools he has asserted Virginia has to 

step up to the plate. And I would remind my friend he doesn’t want 

a burden on his people, he said. Well, I don’t want a burden on 

mine. And in Virginia we pay the subsidy, my local taxpayers. So 

when you say a bailout, my constituents hear something quite different. And I hope you will keep that in mind. As you care about 

your people, Mr. Beyer, Mrs. Comstock, and I care about ours, because we foot the bills in Virginia, not the State. And we’re quite 

sensitive to the fact that we already pay high subsidies and we already have one of the highest farebox recovery rates in the country 

because we don’t have a dedicated source of revenue and the Federal Government does not provide operating subsidies. 

Mr. EVANS. Not a penny. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Not one penny. It is the only compact member 

that doesn’t provide a penny. 

Do you want me to yield, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. MICA. Just two things. I’ll put in the percentage that is paid 

for capital. And then I think—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Capital is different than operating. 

Mr. MICA. Well, most of their problems are capital. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. No, clearly their problems are operational, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. MICA. Yeah. And, again, you can see what is put in. Operational, there is about 2 percent from the District. And I will give 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
57 

you the fact that some other jurisdictions we found have as much 

as 6 percent, but they take certain money and put it into operations that we’ve allowed. And we’ve done that also in times of financial distress. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Reclaiming my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would just say, you know, where you stand is where you sit. 

Where my constituents stand is that the Federal Government gets 

a free ride every day on Metro, because it doesn’t pay operating 

subsidies. And as Mr. Evans indicated, that costs our jurisdictions 

in Virginia about $300 million a year. And You can make all the 

hay you want out of the fact that the Federal Government provides 

150 million in operating capital, and that did not come without 

strings. That had to be matched dollar for dollar by the three jurisdictions over and above their operating subsidies and we had to 

give up voting seats on the governing board of Metro. 

And by the way, the Federal representatives are not limited to 

only capital issues when they vote. They get a free vote on the operating side of the house and they don’t pay for it. So it’s a matter 

of perspective. 

Having said that, I certainly associate myself with the remarks, 

your remarks, Mr. Chairman, about past management and about 

operating difficulties and holding people accountable. And I am 

deeply concerned that given the depth of the problems, that people, 

frankly, examples are going to have to be made out of some people, 

and I don’t just mean the senior management. And I think the 

chairman and I share that view. It’s gotten to that point that if 

we’re going to reassure public confidence we have to hold people accountable at every layer of the organization, because that is one of 

the crises we face, public confidence, for good reason. 

Mr. Hart, in your recommendations inter alia, you recommended 

that the safety oversight be done by the FRA, not the FTA. Is that 

correct? 

Mr. HART. That’s correct. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Why did you arrive at that conclusion? 

Mr. HART. We were looking for an immediate solution. The FTA 

can eventually do the kinds of things the FRA does now. For example, the FRA has rules to have people to inspect to see whether the 

rules are being met, and they have people to enforce if the rules 

are not being met. The FTA can have that eventually but doesn’t 

have it today. That’s what we’re looking for as an immediate solution, an immediate interim solution to respond to the reality. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Ms. Flowers, you’re not the director of the FTA, 

you’re a senior advisor? 

Ms. FLOWERS. I’m currently the lead at FTA. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. The lead. 

Ms. FLOWERS. Yes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And you came with Secretary Foxx from Charlotte? 

Ms. FLOWERS. I came after Secretary Foxx. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. After. So do you have the capability that the 

NTSB recommended? 

Ms. FLOWERS. We feel that we do have the capability. We agree 

with NTSB that action was needed to improve oversight of 

WMATA and that—— 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
58 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Ms. Flowers, I’m running out of time. So forgive 

me. I’m not trying to be rude. But we had deaths. We had accidents. We had people injured. Mr. Hart’s NTSB said, Look, no fooling around. Safety is number one. We need the FRA and its resources and capabilities because the FTA doesn’t have it right now. 

Ms. FLOWERS. You gave us statutory authority and oversight of 

public transportation. And you also, in the FAST Act, strengthen 

our authority—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Ms. Flowers, I’m very well aware of what we did 

in the statute. I’m talking about capability today. And that’s what 

the NTSB—that’s what it took cognizance of which is why it didn’t 

recommend that your agency have safety oversight. And yet, the 

Secretary decided to overrule or ignore that recommendation. 

Ms. FLOWERS. Sir, we have, on our staff, regulatory experience 

from FRA and FAA. Our head of—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Regulatory? 

Ms. FLOWERS. Yes. From regulatory agencies who have safety experience at FAA and FRA. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. What’s that got to do with whether you’ve got the 

ability to hone in on, you know, cable covers that could arc? Who 

cares about regulatory authority? 

Ms. FLOWERS. We have just completed a safety blitz of our track 

inspection on WMATA, and we’ve done verification—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Oh, you did? 

Ms. FLOWERS. Yes. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. So on the day, Mr. Wiedefeld, what was the day 

we shut down for the whole 29 hours? 

Ms. FLOWERS. March 16. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. March 16. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. March 16. The day before the holy day. So—St. 

Patrick’s Day. Did you have people in Metro inspecting the cables 

along with Metro? 

Ms. FLOWERS. When we did our safety management inspection, 

we did identify issues with—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. No, ma’am. My question—that’s not my question. 

On the 16th of March, for that 29-hour period, since you’ve got the 

responsibility, God knoweth why, since it should have been to FRA, 

but Secretary Foxx decided to ignore or overrule that recommendation, were you in the tunnels inspecting these cables that could arc, 

smoke and cause deaths and injury? 

Ms. FLOWERS. We were not in—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. You were not in the—— 

Ms. FLOWERS. But—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. So one of the most important safety issues we’re 

facing in an unprecedented move, shutting down the whole system, 

hard to find in any other transit system in America, the FTA, 

which claimed authority, overruling the NTSB by the Secretary of 

Transportation, you were not there? 

Ms. FLOWERS. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. And we’re supposed to have confidence in your 

ability, while you’re lecturing Maryland, D.C., and Virginia to get 

their act together in the talk, you’re nowhere to be seen on the day 

in question when we’re trying to deal with a major, imminent, potentially life-threatening safety issue? 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
59 

Ms. FLOWERS. Would you like to know what we did? 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Well, I’d like to know where you were on the 

16th before you tell me what you did. 

Ms. FLOWERS. Okay. On March 16, we were working with 

WMATA over the telephone, talking to them about what they were 

doing. We did oversight of their inspection the night before, we 

talked to them. And we used the information to verify what they 

were doing. And we also are now conducting our own blitz of the 

system, of their tracks. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I’m sure it gave great comfort to Metro that you 

were verifying over the phone what they were doing. 

My time has expired. Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MICA. Thank you. Mr. Meadows yields me 15 seconds just to 

say that, Mr. Connolly, they had between a half a billion and threequarters of a billion dollars sitting in the bank to make the repairs 

that Ms. Flowers or FTA and Mr. Hart said were necessary last 

year after somebody died and we told them to do something about 

it and held a hearing. So it’s not a question of money. It’s a question of management and somebody doing something. And let me 

yield back to Mr. Meadows. 

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

We’ve got two different issues here. One is a safety and a deferred 

maintenance issue. The other is a management issue. And so I 

want to try to address both of those. Mr. Hart, I think we have 

some pictures here that maybe we can put up. If you can explain 

to the committee the pictures, I guess, of that particular picture 

with—I guess they’re jumper cables. Is this where the issue is? 

Now, I need the picture of the jumper cables, please, sir. Right 

there on the—right there in front of you. That one. 

Mr. HART. Yes. These are the cables that provide propulsion 

power to the third rail. So this is—we are talking about serious 

electricity here. What we saw was that there is a fiberglass sleeve 

around there that needs a sealing sleeve on the fiberglass boot. Let 

me call it a boot. The fiberglass boot needs a sealing sleeve to keep 

stuff from coming inside where the connection is. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So basically, an insulator to keep it from arcing? 

Mr. HART. Well, it’s an insulator to keep contamination from getting into the connection so that—because the contamination can 

form an arcing path to cause short circuits. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So is this the only place where you can 

have an electrical problem that would create smoke in the tunnel? 

Mr. HART. There are probably a number of other places. The 

insulators, for example, if they get contamination down in the 

insulators, then the electricity can arc from the third rail down to 

the ground. So there are several places where it can happen. What 

we saw in L’Enfant Plaza was specifically from the cables. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So if we’re going to inspect this and if 

we’re really looking—and I see the general manager is wanting to 

step in. Go ahead. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Just to clarify, that is one potential source of 

arcing. The cables also, if they are in the wrong direction, if they 

are laying on the ground, that is a—it’s built on a floating slab, the 

rail is, which means it can move. And if that cable is laying on conVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
60 

crete and over time that rubs, basically it can fray it and open it 

that way. So there’s a series of things that can happen. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, I guess, here’s my concern is from what I’m 

coming to understand, that the jumper cables are not the only 

source of potential problem. And yet it appears that when we had 

the inspection, it was a jumper cable-only checklist. Who made that 

decision? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. We made that decision because the issue was at 

McPherson, it was a jumper cable issue. And that’s where you do 

get the arcing from. You’re going to get it from, in effect, some sort 

of cable situation where, in effect, you have a third rail that’s 

steel—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So, Mr. Hart, would you agree that that is adequate enough that if we put in we’re only looking for jumper cables 

that that’s satisfactory from a safety standpoint? 

Mr. HART. Our recommendation addressed all cables. Jumper cables, power cables. All cables, not just jumper cables. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So why would we only look at jumper 

cables? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I think it’s a terminology. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Because that’s—well, no, it says right here, and, 

Mr. Chairman, I ask that we submit this for the record. 

Mr. MICA. Without objection, so ordered. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Because it says ‘‘Only jumper cables shall be inspected,’’ exclamation point. So, like, don’t look at anything else 

other than jumper cables. And if you’re saying that there are other 

sources, why would we only look at the jumper cables? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Because I think, again, I think it’s a terminology issue. Those what you see there with the big orange boots 

are what people generally are calling jumper cables. But if you recall, when we came out the next day and we showed the one cable 

that was frayed, that wouldn’t have been termed a jumper cable. 

That’s where you have two pieces of steel that there’s a space of 

an inch, in effect, so that you can—so with temperature changes 

it can move. And that is a much smaller cable that goes back. 

Didn’t have the big orange boots. So we weren’t just looking at the 

orange boot cables. We were looking at any cable—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So what you’re saying is the language on here 

only looking at jumper cables really didn’t mean to only look at 

jumper cables. It meant to look at anything electrical. So your 

sworn testimony here today is they looked at all electrical—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. They looked at electrical cables that closed any 

gap between third rail. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So let me go on a little bit further. 

Mr. Evans, your solution, and I’ve read a few of the articles, and 

I hear your testimony today. So let me make sure I understand. 

You need another $1.2 billion in operating revenue. Is that correct? 

Is that your testimony? 

Mr. EVANS. We need—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. 300,000 times 4, $1.2 billion. 

Mr. EVANS. Right now we have $900 million. We need another 

$300 million from the Federal Government for $1.2 billion in operating on the one side. And—— 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
61 

Mr. MEADOWS. So you’re only saying an increase of $300 million—— 

Mr. EVANS. Correct. 

Mr. MEADOWS. —but you want the Federal Government to pay 

the $300 million? 

Mr. EVANS. Yes. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So why, if you’re dividing the others by three or 

four, why would it only come from the Federal Government? Is that 

budget autonomy? 

Mr. EVANS. Right now, each jurisdiction pays approximately $300 

million. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Right. 

Mr. EVANS. The Federal Government is a full partner. A fourth 

partner that pays zero. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, according to your testimony, we actually, I 

guess, when we originally put in this system, we were more than 

a full partner. We paid two-thirds of the capital improvements 

originally. Is that correct? 

Mr. EVANS. Yes, you did. That’s right. The Federal Government 

paid two-thirds of the cost to build this system. On the operating 

side, though, they do not contribute and had never contributed. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. And so you’re saying it needs another 

$18 billion, with a B, in terms of—— 

Mr. EVANS. $18 billion, yes. Capital money. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So let me make sure I understand this. Your plan 

to fix this system is to give WMATA $18 billion and close down the 

system for 6 months in order to have a good system. Is that the 

best—— 

Mr. EVANS. No. That’s not my plan. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, I mean, it’s $18 billion. And I guess you 

were quoted as saying: Close it down for 6 months, which when I 

heard that, I could think of traffic jams for 6 months, and it didn’t 

sit well with me. 

Mr. EVANS. Congressman, let me just say this: If you want me 

to come up here and give you good news, I’ll be glad to do that. 

But if you want to hear what we really need to do, that’s the only 

reason I’m here. And if you give me 30 seconds, I’ll just tell you 

why I’m here. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Where’s the $18 billion going to be—you 

know, if you want to get testy about it, Mr. Evans, let me just say, 

I’ve got the numbers. And if you’re looking at increasing the operating revenue the way that you’re talking about, you become the 

most expensive operating system, more expensive than Chicago, 

more expensive than New York, more expensive than Pennsylvania. So why would you have the highest operating cost out there? 

I mean, what would justify that? So if you want to look at numbers, let’s look at them. 

Mr. EVANS. We’re the second largest transit system in America. 

So that justifies—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, New York is higher. Chicago is higher. 

Mr. EVANS. And if you have the opportunity to travel the world 

as I have, you go to Beijing, Shanghai, Paris, London, Moscow, and 

see a world-class system. This system has become an embarrassVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
62 

ment in the Nation’s capital. And we are all in this together, 

and—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Those are all Communist countries, Mr. Evans. 

Mr. EVANS. Paris, London, Communist countries? 

Mr. MEADOWS. You said Beijing, Shanghai, and Moscow. 

Mr. EVANS. I said Beijing, Shanghai, Moscow, Paris, and London. 

They are capital cities. And if we want a world-class system like 

they have, the federal governments in those countries pay for all 

of the system. All I’m asking from you is $300 million, which is 

your fair share, given the fact that we transport 50 percent of your 

workforce every day. Do you want them to be safe? Do you want 

this to be reliable? Or do you just want to leave here like we did 

in 2005 and do nothing? And if we do that, next time something 

happens, I’m blaming it on you guys. Because we need your help. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Sir, you’re the one that’s been on the board. So 

how can you blame us? You’re the ones making the decisions. 

Mr. EVANS. I’ve been on the board a year. When I left this place 

15 years ago—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. Since this has all happened. 

Mr. EVANS. It is not operating well now. And we need the resources in addition to the wherewithal. 

Mr. MEADOWS. When can you get this committee a full breakdown of how that money will be spent? 

I yield back. 

Mr. EVANS. Within a week. But you will never—let me just say 

this: You’re never going to have a better chance. You have a chairman and myself who has done this for years. You have a general 

manager who is as capable as anybody has ever been. If we leave 

here today and do nothing, and, Mr. Chairman, when you’re saying 

you’re not going to give us a dime, really? Is that what you’re saying? We need resources for this system. This is your system. This 

is my system. You’re going to put your kids, your parents, on this 

system that is a system like it is today? Really? Give me a break. 

We really have to step up. I have reports here from 2010, 2011, 

2005, 2005, where we have done nothing. We cannot leave here and 

do nothing again. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentleman and I will put in the record the 

balances that have been unexpended which have been verified by 

you all that are available. It was a half a billion almost last year. 

485,783 as of 2 weeks ago. So the money is there. The management’s lacking. 

Mr. Connolly, you’re recognized. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you. I’m going to yield to my good friend, 

Eleanor Holmes Norton, while reserving my 5 minutes. Thank you. 

Ms. NORTON. I thank my friend. As to who needs Metro and who 

ought to pony up, just let me say that when Metro shuts down, the 

Federal Government shuts down. And we’ve had evidence of that 

through the gazoo recently. So just try getting along without Metro, 

I’ll say to my colleagues, if you want a Federal Government at all. 

I just want to clarify what Mr. Evans says, because it was perfectly true. The pension liability was pre-home rule liability. So it 

wasn’t the District of Columbia’s liability at all. It’s liability because of the Federal Government didn’t give us control over our 

own local jurisdiction, and, therefore, it was due then and they had 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
63 

to pay it. As for—the Federal Government gave D.C. not one thin 

dime. It does—did agree to pay for State functions, because the 

District is the only city that has any responsibility for State functions. So just clarifying, I agree with what Mr. Evans has said. 

Now, look, I want to focus on the fact that for the first time in 

its history, as I understand it, this system, Metro, is doing shortterm borrowing in order to get operating funds. Isn’t that true, Mr. 

Wiedefeld? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Yes, it is. 

Ms. NORTON. And you have a rollover of this borrowing of about 

a half a billion dollars at this point. Isn’t that true? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. In that range, yes. 

Ms. NORTON. So I want everybody to understand what this 

means. You’re borrowing just to keep the system running. And 

we’ve got to face this fast. Now, on top of that, Ms. Flowers, 

WMATA was put under handwritten drawdown restrictions. That 

is to say, to get any of the Federal money due you, you’ve got to 

turn in by hand the voucher, in effect. Now, look, I don’t have any 

problems with that because of what FTA found in terms of controls. 

And so, I understand it, in the beginning, when I’ve been having 

written correspondence with FTA because it looks like we are 

through this process until we get to validation. 

So it looks like you have done your due diligence. But in the 

process, and this is why I’m talking about going forward, in the 

process, you have so delayed WMATA getting funds due it that it 

has had to go and do short-term borrowing, from bad to worse. 

That is why I have asked for another form of monitoring. I don’t 

care what it is, just so it is streamlined and doesn’t leave WMATA 

waiting 10 or more days to get money that the Congress has already allocated to it. 

Have we got a monitoring system that will allow them to do 

some form of technical drawdown, rather than the hand drawdown 

given the fact that you’ve gotten through all of the controls, except 

waiting for it to be validated? I’m not asking for no monitoring. Do 

you understand? I’m just asking that you not throw this system 

deeper into debt than they already are, because if they’re borrowing just to keep the operation going, that looks like what we 

usually see when somebody’s about to go out of business. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. If I could just clarify, it’s on the capital side, not 

the operating side. It’s on capital funds is what we’re talking about. 

Ms. NORTON. My understanding was that for the first time you 

had borrowed—I mean, you’re always borrowing—I’m talking about 

short-term funding, Mr. Wiedefeld. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. No, it is. It’s short-term funding, but it’s for the 

capital program, because we don’t have the electronic—what’s 

called ECHO, the electronic ability to bring down the dollars. 

Ms. NORTON. But you’ve not done short-term borrowing before? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Not that I’m—— 

Ms. NORTON. As far as I’m told, never in the history. So whatever it goes to, they’re rolling it over. They can’t pay it. So I’m trying, for short term, a way to get to partial solution, short term, 

here’s the money the Federal Government says we owe you. How 

close are we getting to a streamlined approach, Ms. Flowers? 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
64 

Ms. FLOWERS. We’ve been working close with Mr. Wiedefeld to 

go through a validation process. And I think we are getting closer. 

Ms. NORTON. When do you think—I understand this is costing 

them money, interest. So I think it’s a perfectly valid question to 

say give us a date since, they’ve done everything you said do except 

have it validated when the—when they can get their money in the 

old fashion—or the new fashion way. Excuse me. You know, when 

will that be, Ms. Flowers? And when can you get me a date on 

that? 

Ms. FLOWERS. I’m going to defer to Mr. Welbes, who’s been working with WMATA and our region to work on this restricted drawdown process. 

Mr. WELBES. Congresswoman Norton, over the last 2 years, we 

paid $845 million to Metro. And Metro brings us their request for 

payment. As long as they have—— 

Ms. NORTON. Sir, I asked you a very specific question. My time 

is running out. What—when will they get off of this short-term— 

I’m sorry, this—these restrictions that are putting it more heavily 

into debt? 

Mr. WELBES. So we’re doing testing and validation. We just 

agreed in the last month to the testing and validation plan. And 

in the coming months, we’ll make sure that Metro’s engaged, doing 

the financial activities that we requested in our oversight review. 

But during 2016, it is possible, if Metro fulfills the requirements, 

that they could move off of restricted drawdown, but it will be up 

to Metro. 

Ms. NORTON. I’m going to ask you to submit to the chairman 

within 30 days a date where you—proposed date when you think 

that WMATA will no longer be put on these kinds of restrictions 

that keeps it from getting money owed it. 

I want only to say to my good friend, Mr. Evans, this notion 

about, which I would certainly agree with, to create a dedicated 

funding source, it’s become a mantra. I’m asking you, Metro, somebody, put a proposal on the table. Nobody is going to do anything 

about dedicated funding until somebody just puts something on the 

table for others to react to. I think that would move the ball along. 

And I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MICA. I thank the gentlelady. We’ve exhausted the Republicans on our side. So I’ll yield to Ms. Comstock, and then we’ll go 

to Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I didn’t know it was that easy to 

exhaust the Republicans. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. I’m still here, Jerry. 

Mr. MICA. You got this one, even with all my Italian energy. Go 

ahead. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. After seeing a little 

bit of the back and forth here, one of the things I’d like to recommend to all of my colleagues here is to focus on our new general 

manager here, who has really set out some good things that we all 

can agree on. So we can—there’ll be time later for some of the food 

fights and some of the things we’ve seen here. But I think where 

we need to focus right now is on what Mr. Wiedefeld has focused 

on. And I think a lot of our colleagues, on a bipartisan basis, agree 

on that. So I would encourage everybody as we go forward on this, 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
65 

let’s work on all the things we agree on first before we start any 

of these fights. 

And in that effort, I wanted to ask Mr. Wiedefeld on—and I appreciate what Mr. Evans said about you as capable as anyone who 

has ever been here. And you certainly demonstrated that from the 

beginning as we have been talking about this. You cited that over 

10 years, there have been no significant reductions in force, resulting in redundant positions among back office staff that should be 

abolished. What can we do to immediately abolish some of those? 

Because some of those huge costs that we’re going to have on pensions are going to be coming from some of these redundant positions that are unnecessary. 

So I appreciate that you’re trying to, you know, minimize the 

problem here. What do you need from us, if anything from us, that 

we can help you immediately remove those redundant positions, 

put people where they need to be, and fire the people, and I appreciate my colleague, Mr. Connolly, talked about firing. When you 

fire somebody for direct wrongdoing, you know, there’s some savings in our pension costs right there. Because I think the taxpayers 

thinking that those people who caused all these problems and for 

10 years didn’t do anything, and have ignored all of these things 

over and over, those people need to be fired and we need to be taking the action that helps you, you know, change this system, the 

cultural change, I think you are very committed to, that we see in 

your positive action here. 

And I would very much like to work with you and my colleagues 

on that type of positive action as quickly as possible if you can 

identify some of those ways to make it quicker. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I have already done—you know, started moving 

that direction. I have done some personnel changes. I’ve reorganized the agency. And I’ve made it very clear to everyone, particularly the all at-will employees that basically this is the way we operate. And if you don’t understand that, then it is not a good fit 

for either one of us. So that is progressing. I’m not going to get into 

individual personnel issues here. But that is progressing. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. And I would mention, I know in the audit, the 

HR department seemed to be one of the departments that isn’t 

working very well. And then, again, basic things like the maintenance department, and I quote from the report, they didn’t have 

simple things like repair kits with necessary parts for common repairs, like things that you have—the maintenance office, whoever’s 

been running the maintenance office that didn’t go and put those 

repair kits, that they have to be told build repair kits with necessary parts for common repairs, you know, any auto body shop 

knows that, and that the person who is running this—— 

So let’s—I think it’s very helpful if we see people like that moving on and putting capable people to do those kind of basic repairs, 

HR people who understand how to move these people along and get 

them—because the audit really shows the problem is execution. We 

all have identified the problems, and now you’ve been brought in 

to execute. And you set out some really good ideas on executing. 

But if you’re not able to move the deadwood out, then that execution is going to be a real problem. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
66 

So let us help you move that deadwood along. I think you’ve seen 

today, bipartisan agreement on the faster you can get that deadwood out, we’re going to be able to help you a lot more. And—but 

if you have a little—anything more. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. No, I totally agree. What I’m telling you is I’m 

moving in that same direction right now. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you. And since I have a little bit of time 

left, then, on the HR front, have there been any changes at this 

time in the human resources department? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Actually, yes, in terms of, one of the issues that 

I had is a lot of these different parts of the agency were buried 

under operations, for instance. So I’ve pulled that all apart and I 

have created a—basically an internal support group that has auditing, procurement, which is the other issue tied to the maintenance 

issue, HR, and labor, and have that under a separate group that 

basically is under a new leadership right now. And they’re digging 

into all those issues, both on what we learned from the consultant 

and what we bring to the table. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Okay. Because I know we had asked some questions, and I don’t want to—you know, I appreciate some of the people we’ve been waiting to get responses from, I think, are in the 

HR area. We’ve been asked, you know, basic information like absentee reports, because some of the concern that we heard were a 

lot of absentee, and as a result, then people get a lot of overtime. 

That overtime is added to their pension. So if you have this whole 

little system that can all work, Hey, I’ll take off today. You can 

take off next week. We both get overtime and we both get a bigger 

pension and get to retire earlier, that’s not a good game that we 

need to be playing. And I think a lot of those problems can be 

worked out there if we have a really good HR department. And I— 

since I haven’t gotten the answers on that, I’m assuming that’s a— 

continues to be a problem. So thank you for addressing that. 

Mr. MEADOWS. [Presiding.] I thank the gentlewoman for her insightful questions, and certainly for the answers. The chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia, the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Government Operations, Mr. Connolly. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I thank the chair. Mr. Evans, Chairman Mica 

talked about $783 million as if you’ve just—you’re sitting around 

watching soap operas and eating bon bons, and allowing $783 million to just accumulate. And you got plenty of money. Isn’t there 

a difference between, say, obligated funds and expended funds? 

Mr. EVANS. Yes, there is, Congressman. And what the chairman 

was referring to, I don’t know if he knew that, was obligated funds. 

They’re already obligated. They’re not anything new that we can 

use for other things. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. How much of the 783, either you or Mr. 

Wiedefeld, is, for example, for the purchase and delivery and ultimate expenditure for new 7000 Series cars from Kawasaki? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I don’t have those dollar figures off the top of 

my head. But the point that you’re making is a lot of those are tied 

to very big purchases, whether it’s bus purchase, 7,000 series. And 

some of the issues that we’ve had with the cash flow of that is 

when the tsunami hit Japan, that impacted Kawasaki, who was 

the provider of that. And that slowed that up. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
67 

In a major bus purchase that we had there was—a company 

went out of business. So that slowed those dollars up. So that—and 

I think FTA can attest to that. That is—I think we’re in the range 

of what other transit—— 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I just would urge you quickly to help dispel this 

myth of you’re sitting on a lot of capital you don’t know what to 

do with. It is actually good and prudent management not to pay 

your bills until the product or service has been delivered, and has 

met your specifications with respect to quality, especially given the 

fact that the reason we’re purchasing new rail cars is, among other 

reasons, safety. The new cars aren’t going to pancake like Series 

1000 cars, which affected lives in the first fatal accident. And so 

I just—I think we have to really get the data out there, you know, 

so that we dispel this myth that you’re sitting on a mountain of 

capital. Why should we give you more? 

Mr. EVANS. Mr. Connolly, that’s so important too. Because this 

is obligated money. We need new capital money. I mentioned the 

Rosslyn bottleneck. Right now we can run 23—20 trains in an hour 

through the Rosslyn bottleneck. The capacity is going to have to be 

40 trains an hour if we’re going to make this a reliable system. We 

are going to have to build a new tunnel. And it’s going to cost billions of dollars to do it. Otherwise, we are going to have a system 

that is not reliable and it’s going to take forever to get anywhere. 

This is just one example of many that we need these capital dollars 

for. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. And by the way, another thing, Mr. 

Wiedefeld, when you’re getting back to us on explaining the 783, 

it would also be useful to know how we compare to other transit 

systems that receive Federal grants in terms of spend-down rate. 

Because I think we’re in the same ballpark. I don’t think we’re particularly different. And that might come as news obviously to some 

of my colleagues. 

At this point, I’m going to yield to my friend, Mr. Delaney from 

Maryland, the balance of my time. 

Mr. DELANEY. Thank you. So the scale of this failure at Metro 

is almost unimaginable. And it’s become a national embarrassment. 

And I agree with my colleagues that it’s a management problem. 

And I agree with Mr. Evans that the system’s been underinvested 

in and it continues to be underinvested in. But what we haven’t 

talked at all about is the board and the governing system. Because 

you can only blame management for so long. Ultimately a board, 

a fiduciary board, is responsible. And this enterprise has had a fiduciary board for a long time. If this was any other enterprise 

other than Metro, the board would have been dismissed, discharged 

completely and new boards would have been appointed. 

Mr. Evans, do you believe that the board of Metro, if you had to 

certify, like public companies have to do with, for example, their 

audit committee chair, that the board members have deep experience in operations and financial management of sophisticated transit systems, or have tremendous experience in creating systems of 

accountability and metrics for their management teams? Do you 

feel like you could certify that the individuals who sit on this 

board, and I look at some of the board committees, they have a 

safety committee. Obviously, they completely failed. There’s a fiVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
68 

nance committee. Complete failure. Customer service committee. 

Complete failure. There’s a real estate committee. Maybe they did 

their job. I can’t really speak to that. 

But it just seems to me that, at some point, we have to ask hard 

questions about who’s actually on the board of this organization? 

What is their experience? Are they just people who, you know, get 

these positions because of political paybacks and they know nothing about transit or transportation or operations? I mean, why 

aren’t we getting the absolute best-proven executives in the Washington region, people who run some of the most successful enterprises. You know, not small little enterprises, but big enterprises. 

Do we have a governance problem that goes to the board? Do the 

people on the board know what they’re supposed to do? 

And are they the kind of people where you would put up their 

resumes and say, There’s no better person in the country for, you 

know, who’s chairing my finance committee. There’s no better person in the country chairing my customer service committee. There’s 

no better person in the country chairing my safety committee. Is 

that the kind of board that is governing this? Or is that really the 

problem? 

Mr. EVANS. No, that is not the type of board that is governing 

this. So let me address this quickly. We have a 16-member board 

which is way too big. Organization should have 16 members like 

the Kennedy Center. People raise money, but they don’t run an organization. When I was on last time we had 12, it was too big. And 

then they added four Federal representatives couple years ago. It 

is unwieldy, to say the least. 

Mr. DELANEY. But your average corporate board is probably a 

dozen board members? 

Mr. EVANS. That’s just too many. And secondly, Congressman, 

your point is well taken. No. People don’t come there with enormous experience. Some do. We have one or two people who have 

worked in the transit industry for a while. But most people don’t. 

And they’re there for a whole variety of reasons. Sometimes they’re 

there because nobody else would come, believe it or not. And so 

that’s what you have as a board. 

Secondly, it’s never been clear what the board does. In the past, 

this committee has criticized the board for being too involved in the 

general manager’s business. Then there was an opportunity the 

board was not at all involved in—— 

Mr. DELANEY. But that’s—sorry to interrupt, but that’s why you 

need a good board. 

Mr. EVANS. Correct. 

Mr. DELANEY. Right? Because a good board knows what their job 

is. Right? They look at the CEO, or the manager of the enterprise. 

And they say, These are your goals. If you don’t reach them, we’re 

going to make a change. Right? And they have committees that ask 

the right questions and make sure things are happening. I mean, 

it seems to me as part of whatever has to be done to fix this system, which will involve more capital, there has to be a serious conversation about completely reconstituting this board and making 

sure these are not just political appointees who may have very good 

community relations, and I’m not trying to underestimate that. But 

actually getting some people sitting around the table who know 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
69 

what they’re doing. Right? Because we can’t be sitting here looking 

at pictures of jumper cables, right, in Oversight. I mean, there has 

to be a management structure and a governing structure that 

works. And this is—you know, we talk about management, we talk 

about underinvestment, but, I mean, one of the biggest embarrassments, in my opinion, you could have in this town is to have been 

on this board of this thing for the last 10 years because you’ve utterly failed. 

Mr. EVANS. And let me just point out to you, I have with me one 

of my many reports. January 7, 2011, Transforming Governance of 

the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. This is a report on how we should completely redo the board, 2011, 5 years 

ago, and nothing happened. And so your point is absolutely welltaken. But the problem is you have four jurisdictions. Nobody’s 

willing to give up anything. And so anytime we bring up this idea 

of changing the board, everybody backs away from it. So you’re 

right. We need to do something here. Because this is—— 

Mr. DELANEY. So whatever this Congress does to address some 

of these problems, I think we should be putting on the table ensuring that real board members, who—again, under Sarbanes-Oxley, 

if you run a public company, and you’re the chair of the audit committee, the board has to certify that the person is an expert at 

audit committee-related matters for whatever that company does. 

And we need that kind of certification for these board members so 

we can get real governance of this—— 

Mr. EVANS. Mr. Congressman, I’ll say this: Can anybody up here 

name the four Federal board members? 

Mr. DELANEY. Well, I just looked them up. So I—and I looked at 

their backgrounds. And admirable people who have done good 

things in the community, but I would not—if I to certify, the question I asked you, I could not certify that any of these people are 

experts, being a steward and a fiduciary of the Federal Government’s money, the State of Virginia’s money, the State of Maryland’s money and the money of the District of Columbia. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, which has 

long ago expired, the gentleman from Maryland makes a very good 

point. But I would caution my colleagues that Federal law cannot 

dictate who is on the board of Metro, nor can Federal law tell the 

paying jurisdictions who they get to appoint to Metro. If Federal 

law wants to do that, Federal law has to pay the bills. And that 

was the point I made earlier. We are AWOL. We don’t pay an operating subsidy. And, therefore, we must tread lightly in telling Virginia, Maryland, and D.C. who and what will serve on the board. 

And that is something we’re going to have to grapple with. Because 

this is not a Federal entity. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. And the chair now recognizes the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Beyer, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BEYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Wiedefeld, there’s a 

recent story in the Post summarizing how the Blue Line riders 

have felt for years about the way they’ve been treated compared to 

riders in the rest of the system. And obviously, my friend, Chairman Evans’ comments about closing the Blue Line for 6 months 

perhaps got even people more excited and upset. But they do have 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
70 

legitimate complaints. And a lot of it has to do with the capacity 

of the Rosslyn tunnel, a major choke point. But what can we do 

now before we get all this additional infrastructure money to help 

those Blue Line riders? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I am taking a look at that to see if there’s other 

ways we could provide that service, you know, and how we’re managing the three lines there. So it’s a technical exercise, because 

anytime you do that—so I will be coming out in the near future 

with that. 

Mr. BEYER. All right. Thank you. Chairman Evans, you made a very strong case for a Federal operating subsidy, the $300 million, 

to match what Maryland, D.C., and Virginia put in right now. But 

you also mentioned the search for a regional funding source, $1 billion a year. What did you have in mind? Or do you have any models out there? 

Mr. EVANS. Yes. What we need to do is in the region, and other 

States have dedicating funding sources for their transportation systems. They use a sales tax. Some use a gas tax, a combination of 

the two, a property tax. But no other transit system is operating 

in a multi-jurisdictional area. That, therein, is the problem. So Virginia, Maryland, and D.C. have to agree on what kind of a funding 

source, tax, fee, whatever you want to call it. And is it gas? Is it 

sales? Is it income? Is it property? Or a combination of those? And 

we have just not been able to do it, which is why suggested, I was 

just reading history, the Tennessee Valley Authority, where in the 

Roosevelt era, the Federal Government superimposed on Tennessee, Arkansas, and everybody this taxing district used to build 

the dams for the Tennessee River. I haven’t done anything beyond 

that. But I’m frustrated with the local jurisdictions’ inability to 

deal with this. And so I go back to the Federal Government. Maybe 

they can help us out. My whole point is this: We need help at 

Metro. And if we don’t get it, if we don’t get it, we are going to be 

in serious trouble beyond where we are now. 

Mr. BEYER. Thanks. General Manager Wiedefeld, The Washingtonian ran this amazing story back in December about, quote, ‘‘The 

Infuriating History of How Metro Got So Bad.’’ And a lot of the 

story focused on WMATA’s real operations control center. And basically, air traffic control system for the whole system. And they 

talked about an environment where training materials were out of 

date, factually incorrect. Place that was hostile to new hires. Place 

where control center workers routinely worked 12-hour days in 

order to get the overtime. And the NTSB preliminary report was 

very critical of the way the control center responded at that smoke 

incident back in January 2015. So all these things wrap around 

culture. What can you tell us to give us some hope that you’re making changes within the control center, and a culture that’s responsive and performs well, executes well? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Right. There’s two aspects to it. One is, I mentioned I did a reorganization. So I changed how that reporting relationship goes so that I can get more focus on that part of the operation. As Ms. Flowers mentions, the FTA’s there on a regular basis 

making sure that they’re playing by all the rules and, you know, 

following all the procedures they’re supposed to do. The larger 

issue that you talk about, it’s not confined just to the rail operation 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
71 

center, which is this cultural issue that was brought up in The 

Washingtonian Magazine. What I have found is a strong disconnect 

between management and the frontline employees that has, you 

know, evolved over years where people feel, in effect, 

disenfranchised. They don’t feel a part of the business. They don’t 

feel the pride in the business. They don’t feel the commitment in 

it. 

And, so, that’s what I am focusing on to get the frontline people 

and the managers to understand that if they do not tap into that 

resource, you know, their job is to bring that resource up, not push 

it down. And if they can’t do that, then they—it gets back to Congresswoman Comstock’s issue. If they cannot do that, then they 

cannot work here. Because that is what we need to get this organization in the direction we need to get it in. 

Mr. BEYER. Great. Thank you. Thank you and good luck. 

Ms. Flowers, in Mr. Hart’s NTSB report, you know, we—obviously, NTSB had recommended the railways take over the safety 

aspect. Secretary Foxx gave it back to FTA. I’m quoting. He says, 

the FTA—this is from NTSB. ‘‘The FTA has very limited ability to 

oversee the WMATA effectively. It has no prior experience in direct 

safety, oversight, or as an SSOA. Has limited staff to carry out the 

functions. Doesn’t have the authority to levy civil or individual penalties,’’ et cetera. How do you respond to all these, sort of documented criticisms of why you’re not the right agency to do these 

safety oversights? 

Ms. FLOWERS. Well, first of all, we’re on the job and doing the 

job. And, you know, we do have enforcement power. Most importantly, we have the ability to direct WMATA to take action, corrective action, when there are safety infractions. We also have the 

ability now to withhold funds, as much as 5 percent to 25 percent 

of the funds, to compel them to take corrective action. 

On the experience side, we feel we have the technical competence. We have put together an organization that has experience 

from FAA and FRA. And we have the resources. Secretary Foxx 

took a one DOT approach. He leveraged resources from across the 

Department to augment the oversight effort. We have people working with us from FRA, NHTSA, Motor Carriers, and the Office of 

the Secretary. 

I know that NTSB is concerned about whether we can sustain 

this. But we do have additional budgetary authority to augment 

our safety operations. And we think that the response was the appropriate risk. We needed to act quickly. FTA had the statutory authority, and FRA did not have the statutory authority at this time 

to oversee commuter rail. I mean, FRA had the statutory authority 

for commuter rail but not for urban public transit. 

Mr. BEYER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. The chair recognizes the 

ranking member for a followup question. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. I’m just going to ask one question and then yield 

to Mrs. Comstock. 

Ms. Flowers, you just told my colleague, Mr. Beyer, that you 

have the statutory authority to even withhold funds, 5 to 15 percent. And, in fact, you have threatened to do that if the three jurisVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:40 Dec 06, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\22395.TXT APRIL

AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
72 

dictions do not form this oversight committee in a certain course 

of time. Is that correct? 

Ms. FLOWERS. That’s correct. One year. February of next year. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. All right. Have you taken cognizance of the legislative schedules of the two respective states, Maryland and Virginia? 

Ms. FLOWERS. Yes, we have. And what we would like to see as— 

and we’re continuing to provide technical assistance and work with 

the three jurisdictions, what we’d like to see is this move forward 

rather than actually take action to withhold funds. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. I support what you’re trying to do, and I 

support the pressure you’re putting on them. But one little word 

of caution. Be aware of the difference in the legislative schedules 

so that we’re not asking them to do something they can’t possibly 

do within their legislative calendar. 

Ms. FLOWERS. And I just want to say we could rather than 

would. 

Mr. CONNOLLY. Okay. Thank you very much. And thank you for 

yielding. 

Mr. MEADOWS. The chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Virginia, Mrs. Comstock, for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you. And I thank the ranking member 

for—as a former member of the Virginia State Legislature, we are 

only there January through February or March sometimes. So that 

had some impact this year also, as we were trying to take some action. So thank you. And I also wanted to mention that Congressman Wolf had been up here, my predecessor, today, and this 

board—he—I mentioned we were having a Metro hearing. And he 

raised the same issue that Mr. Delaney raised on the board. So appreciate the honesty, Mr. Evans, in terms of looking at the expertise there, and obviously, there’ll be challenges there to look at 

that, but I do agree with Mr. Delaney that that needs to be looked 

at more thoroughly. 

I wanted to, again, return to some of the good management ideas 

I think our new general manager is focused on, just to get them 

on the record here. Because yesterday, you had talked about things 

like looking at Paratransit and how we can save money there. And 

I don’t know if maintenance might be an area too that can be 

outsourced. But could you maybe detail, for the record, so we have 

some of these I think good positive ideas that again things that 

we’ll probably all share and have in common and can improve? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Sure. Yes. There are a number of things that I 

think that we could do more efficiently by getting out of them, to 

some degree, because it’s not core to our mission. So, for instance, 

parking, obviously it does feed our system. We have 60,000 parking 

spaces. But, you know, that’s not the core thing that we wake up 

every morning worried about. And I think that’s an opportunity for 

private sector to do that, for instance. The Paratransit, again, we 

have a model that, you know, has—it’s been around for years. But 

I think in today’s technology, that there’s opportunities to do that 

to make sure that we don’t take anything away from any of our 

customers, but actually give them alternatives that, for us, will be 

cheaper and for—— 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
73 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. And I think yesterday you had cited that the 

average cost for Paratransit is $50—— 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Close to $50. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. And so you were already identifying other ways, 

particularly on short trips where we could save money with sort of 

the on-demand economy and probably be more efficient for some of 

the users. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. More efficient. And right now, you have to give 

a 24-hour notice for your trip. A lot of times you have travel with 

other people. There’s other alternatives. You can just call up and 

it can happen very quickly and with just you. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. We can welcome the Uber economy to Metro. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Not one vendor. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. On demand. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. Right. The headquarters building is another opportunity, I believe, just in terms of the number of people we have 

there, and do we need that many people in a prime location. You 

know, I—basically I’m looking at that as well. On the maintenance 

side, on the fare collection side, I think, again, there’s opportunities 

to—where it makes more sense to have other resources applied 

there, that’s what we should do. So I’ll continue to do that. 

Mrs. COMSTOCK. Thank you. And I really appreciate it and just 

wanted to highlight some of those things. Because I think there’s 

been some really good thought that the general manager has already put into this where I think we will find a lot of common 

ground, and maybe we can focus on those things first, bring the 

cost down and minimize some of the other problems and costs that 

we’re dealing with so we can have a more civil discussion on that 

when we have actually solved a lot of these problems, have a very 

functioning system, and I appreciate your taking that approach as 

you proceed through, so thank you. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentlewoman. Let me follow up a little bit on what my good friend, Mr. Connolly, was saying with regards to jurisdiction. 

Ms. Flowers, I don’t know that you were necessarily the best 

group, and I really care a lot about Secretary Foxx. In fact, I consider him a personal friend. I don’t know that it was necessarily 

the right decision. But here is my whole point on this. Mr. Hart 

and Ms. Flowers, we’ve got to get this system in a place where 

you’re not at a hearing talking about the safety of this system. You 

know, so while it may be germane today, I’m hopeful that in the 

very near future it will not be a discussion that even comes up. You 

know, we talk about Uber a little bit. You know, I’ve got staff members now taking Uber and other forms of transportation to get to 

work who used to take the Metro, just because they can’t count on 

it anymore. We’ve got to stop that. I mean, just pure and simple, 

we have to stop that. 

Mr. Evans, you started out your testimony by talking and acknowledging the service that many of us have provided, whether 

it’s attending the State of the District meeting as you mentioned 

with me. I want to acknowledge your service, I guess it’s to Ward 

2 and your service there, and certainly say thank you. There’s no 

tougher job than local politics. And so I want to acknowledge that. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
74 

I guess the fundamental question is how many more hearings are 

we going to have before we fix the problem. You know, this now 

makes my fourth, either hearing or round table or meeting, that 

we’ve had on a mass transit system that I don’t ride, you know, 

that the vast majority of people use here in the Federal Government. And whether it’s 50 percent or 60 percent. You know, even 

if it’s higher than that, we’ve got to get it right. And by getting it 

right, I need to figure out who’s in charge. Because is it a 16- or 

14-member board? You know, is it the new general manager? Is it 

the coalition of people that put forth the people who actually sit on 

the board? Who’s in charge? Who owns it? 

You know, Mr. Evans, I think in your written testimony it says 

that you want to make it clear that you don’t own the Metro and 

that Paul doesn’t own the Metro. But somebody has to own the responsibility. And, I guess, that’s what I’m getting to. Who is it? 

Who do we hold accountable for a system that has deferred maintenance and is not safe? Who is that? 

Mr. EVANS. It’s myself and Paul. We are the two people who are 

in charge of Metro today. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. You can’t have two leaders. So ultimately 

where does the buck stop? 

Mr. EVANS. Paul is in charge. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. So if Paul makes a decision that the board 

doesn’t agree with, what happens to Paul? 

Mr. EVANS. We haven’t faced that yet. 

Mr. MEADOWS. But you will. I mean, listen, this is a big problem. 

It’s taken 40 years to get here. Deferred maintenance. You’ve been 

on the board three times? Is this your third tour of duty? 

Mr. EVANS. Twice. Second tour of duty, yeah. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So as we look at this, it’s going to happen where the board thinks one thing and Paul, as the expert, 

thinks something else. So if Paul does that, does he get fired? 

Mr. EVANS. No. That would be my position as chairman of the 

board, but I am only one board member. But in that situation, I 

would defer to the general manager, who I believe has the expertise that the rest of us on the board do not have. 

And so, the close-down is a good example. We discussed it, and 

then I turned to Paul and said, What do you want to do? And he 

said, Close it down. And everybody got on board. And I believe that 

that’s how this will operate. Keep in mind, we have nine out of 16 

new board members. This isn’t the board of a year ago. And I believe it’s a better board than we’ve had in a long time. And we support the general manager. And what he’s doing he is assessing the 

system—just to answer your longer question. He’s going to come 

back in 6 weeks with a plan to fix this. And then we, as a region, 

are going to have to decide how to implement the plan. 

The question you haven’t asked me today is about the 6 months 

and Blue Line. And so I’ll address that. What we have to do is 

come up with a plan to fix this. It’s like a bridge going into Georgetown that I have to fix. All right? It’s about to fall down. If we close 

it entirely, I can do it in 6 months for $5 million. If we do half, 

it’s going to take me 18 months and $12 million. If I do it a lane 

at a time, it’s even worse. It’s convenience versus safety versus 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
75 

time versus money. And we as a region have to decide that. Closing 

something for 6 months is a bad idea. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Well, yeah. Let me just jump in here. And so let 

me—if I haven’t been clear before, let me be clear. Closing the Blue 

Line for 6 months is not an option. 

Mr. EVANS. Not an option. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Do you understand that? 

Mr. EVANS. No, I understand that. 

Mr. MEADOWS. And you’ll take that to the board, that it’s not an 

option. 

Mr. EVANS. Absolutely. But what we’re doing now is also not 

working, which is the other extreme. Three hours at night, and on 

the weekends single tracking. So somewhere between those two extremes we have to come up with—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. You know, I’m a numbers guy, and I agree with 

you, because I went through and looked at the traffic and how people—and actually had the staff, and they looked at all those numbers. And actually, we could close down the Metro on the Blue Line 

maybe at 10 o’clock at night, work all through the night, and have 

it back up by 5 a.m. The next morning. Have a normal work period. 

Do more work on Saturdays and Sundays. I mean, I’ve looked at 

it. And the number of people that you affect is infinitesimal compared to the 200 million that travel. So when we make those kinds 

of statements, I can tell you that Jerry and I—and it really affects 

him. Because I can tell you, I’m not going to be getting calls in 

North Carolina about the Metro in D.C. being down. Jerry will. 

Barbara will. And so when that happens is you got to understand 

that, you know, what we endured for 26 hours will be multiplied 

times 6 months, it’s just not an option. And so, but you made a 

statement, Jack, that you said ‘‘we.’’ All right? So is it him or is 

it we? Who’s in charge? Because ultimately, what I’ve got to get to 

is, I want the next person that’s sitting here to be able not only 

to certify that it’s safe, but they made all the instructions. And if 

they’re asking for money that we have given them, the additional 

resources that they need to do that, and so you’re saying that he 

can make the tough decisions, and if he does, the board’s not going 

to fire him. Or at least you as the chairman are not going to recommend that? 

Mr. EVANS. That’s correct. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. Thank you. All right. So let me go to 

you, Mr. General Manager. As you’ve looked at this system, how 

much deferred maintenance should have been done that wasn’t 

done? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I don’t have a numeric, but I think—again, I 

think the approach is part of the issue, the way we’ve been trying 

to it, what you just talked about. You know, I just ran the numbers. We—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. So how many jumper cables were replaced between the death that we had in 2015 and literally, the other day 

when you closed the system down? How many jumper cables were 

replaced? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. The number of the sleeves were 65 percent. But, 

again, that’s part of the issue that I’ve had is we tend to do things 

around a particular issue and not look at this thing together. So, 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
76 

for instance, going out and replacing all the sleeves on the boots, 

that was dealing with one issue. That was not dealing with the 

issue of a cable that’s lying on the ground. That’s not dealing with 

a cable that’s lying in moisture. That’s not dealing with drains that 

aren’t working which creates those issues. And that’s where we got 

to come at this thing and not just the boot. 

Mr. MEADOWS. So why would you say that those assessments 

haven’t been done? Because when we had an unbelievable horrific 

tragedy that happened, I mean, everybody came. You know, we all 

came to a meeting. I mean, we were determined to get this fixed 

right away and get it done. And yet, what I heard from your testimony earlier was that we’re going to wait to do another mile of 

tests to figure out—okay. I’m seeing a shaking head no. So I must 

have misheard that. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. That was the cell phone issue. That was a cell 

phone issue. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Oh, okay. All right. 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. That’s a totally different issue. No. What I’m 

doing right now, based on what happened 3 weeks ago, is I’m looking from L’Enfant Plaza to 3 weeks ago. What did we do? Who did 

what? So I’m going to get to that issue, like what was done there? 

People had to do certain things. And did they do it—did they do 

it—did we do it poorly? What did we learn and then what did we 

put in place and did that occur on the day of—at McPherson 

Square. Then—and so there’s three things going on. It’s what happened in that 14 months? What happened on this incident? And 

then what are we going to do going forward? So, for instance, we’ve 

already initiated a new team that goes out every day basically and 

looks at the cables. So we weren’t doing that before. Now we do it, 

in effect—they do the entire system—it takes them a month to do 

the entire system. So in effect, we’re doing that every day. We’re 

going out and checking that. We weren’t doing that before. So I already put those things in place. But even that, I’m not sure that’s 

all we can do. You know? And that’s why it’s got to be part of this 

overall plan where we come out and we say, All right. We’re going 

to fix the track. We’re going to fix the cable. The power cables. 

We’re going to fix the drainage system. We’re going to fix those 

things as we go out there rather than keep coming back and forth 

and dealing—running off and doing this, running off and doing 

that. 

Mr. MEADOWS. All right. So how do you respond to the criticism 

that there is a culture within the WMATA family that does not 

really emphasize safety or service? Is there a culture? Is that an 

accurate statement? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. It is. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Well, part of fixing a problem is recognizing that you have one. And so I would just say thank you for 

your candor and your honesty. Mr. Evans, thank you for your leadership on the board. I have a request of the two of you, and I’d like 

you to answer it verbally, if you would. If you find that there are 

board members that are trying to exert their influence over the 

general manager, Mr. Evans, are you committed to at least letting 

either me or the ranking member know that that is happening? 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
77 

Mr. EVANS. Yes, I am. And if I do find that, I will act myself, 

but I will also—— 

Mr. MEADOWS. I believe that. I believe that. And to you as a general manager, if you find that there is impediments to you getting 

this restored and up to speed from a safety and service standpoint, 

and that you’re getting undue political influence from the board, 

and I use the word ‘‘political’’ because there will be differences of 

opinions, are you committed to let the ranking member and I and 

this committee know? 

Mr. WIEDEFELD. I will let you know, but it will be after the fact, 

because I won’t be here any longer. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Okay. Well, enough said. Well, I want to thank 

each of you for your testimony. I want to recognize the ranking 

member for a brief closing statement. 

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

your support and collaboration. I know it’s there, even though you 

represent North Carolina, not the National Capital. But all of us, 

as Mr. Evans indicated, must take ownership for the National Capital Transit System. You know, you were asking what happened, 

and my legislative director and I came up with a way of putting 

it, which is we have witnessed a maddeningly decade-long descent 

into mediocrity, where it’s imbued the entire workforce. I only work 

8 or 9 hours, and if it doesn’t get done in that timeframe, that’s 

somebody else’s problem. Customer is unhappy? So what. Answering a question? Not my job. And just as Mr. Evans indicated, it’s 

everybody’s concern. Within the workforce, everything is 

everybody’s job, I mean, at a certain level, especially when it comes 

to public safety. And what worries me about this deterioration are 

the implications of it. This is Washington, D.C. This is the capital 

of the superpower elect. It is always going to be a target, tragically, 

for bad people wanting to do bad things. And we cannot allow the 

deterioration of our Metro system to become the soft underbelly of 

any target in the future. 

Tens of thousands of lives every day depend on that safety and 

that reliability in some fashion. And so the stakes are even higher, 

frankly. After tragic attacks in Europe, what more do we need by 

way of warning that this isn’t just a nice thing to do? This isn’t just 

us being anal retentive because we want a cleaner Metro system. 

It’s about the security and welfare of our country. And Metro is a 

very important part of that calculus. So it behooves all of us to find 

swift and efficacious solutions to the problems we’ve identified 

today. And, again, I thank my good friend from North Carolina for 

his indulgence and for his support. 

Mr. MEADOWS. I thank the gentleman. 

I want to thank each of you. We have a task ahead of us, and 

that task is monumental in ways. 

Mr. Evans, you talked about the fact when it was originally put 

in place it was the modern era of ‘‘The Jetsons.’’ I’m old enough to 

remember ‘‘The Jetsons.’’ So as we look at that, we’ve gone from 

‘‘The Jetsons’’ to Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. 

It’s time to bring it back to a point of honor and a standard of 

which not only your constituents, but Mrs. Comstock’s constituents, 

Mr. Connolly’s, and all of those that are around can be proud of 

it. I’m committed to work in a bipartisan manner to do that. 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER
78 

I’m afraid the general manager, it’s going to end in your portfolio 

to fix. And so what I would like is within the next 90 days is an 

update on what has been done, what is going to happen in the next 

90 days. I think it would be prudent if you have a 90-day update 

as we look at this. And before we make any long-term decisions on 

what is closed or not closed, I’d ask that we really get some input 

from those who benefit from this system each and every day. 

Mr. MEADOWS. Thank each of you. 

If there is no further business before the committee, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the subcommittees were adjourned.] 

Æ 


AKING-6430 with DISTILLER