National Transportation Safety Board: Issues Related to the 2010 Reauthorization
Published: 2010-01-27T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), whose reauthorization is the subject of today's hearing, plays a vital role in advancing transportation safety by investigating accidents, determining their causes, issuing safety recommendations, and conducting safety studies. To support the agency's mission, NTSB's Training Center provides training to NTSB investigators and others. NTSB's 2006 reauthorization legislation mandates an annual review by GAO, and from 2006 through 2008, GAO made 21 recommendations to NTSB that address its management, information technology (IT), accident investigation criteria, safety studies, and Training Center use. This testimony addresses NTSB's progress in implementing GAO's recommendations that it (1) follow leading management practices, (2) conduct aspects of its accident investigations and safety studies more efficiently, and (3) increase the use of its Training Center. The testimony also discusses (4) changes NTSB seeks in its 2010 reauthorization proposal. This testimony is based on GAO's assessment from July 2009 to January 2010 of plans and procedures NTSB developed to address these recommendations. NTSB provided technical comments that GAO incorporated as appropriate.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: NTSB has fully implemented or made significant progress in adopting leading management practices in all areas where GAO made prior recommendations. Since 2008, NTSB has revised several of its planning documents, including its agencywide strategic plan; improved information security; and obligated money to implement a full cost accounting system. NTSB has also taken steps to improve the diversity of its workforce and management. However, women and minorities were less well represented in NTSB's fiscal year 2008 workforce than in the federal government, and no minorities are among NTSB's 15 senior executives. A lack of diversity among top managers can limit the variety of perspectives and approaches to policy development and decision making at an agency. With the adoption of criteria for selecting highway and marine accidents to investigate, NTSB has established criteria for all transportation modes. NTSB is also streamlining and increasing its use of technology in closing out recommendations. NTSB has three safety studies in progress and would like to broaden the term "safety studies" to include not only its current studies of multiple accidents, but also the research it does for other, smaller safety-related reports and data inquiries. NTSB has continued to increase the use of its Training Center--from 10 percent in fiscal year 2006 to 80 percent in fiscal year 2009. As a result, revenues have increased and the center's overall deficit has declined from about $3.9 million in fiscal year 2005 to about $1.9 million in fiscal year 2009. In its 2010 reauthorization proposal, NTSB seeks substantive changes to its existing authorizing legislation, including explicit statutory authority to investigate incidents in all modes and reduced statutory requirements for investigating rail and maritime accidents. Both changes would increase NTSB's investigatory discretion. Such discretion would allow NTSB to select incidents with the greatest potential to improve safety, yet decisions based on discretion may be less transparent than those based on criteria. Striking the right balance between discretionary and criteria-based investigations will be important to ensure that NTSB's resources can be used for the work with the greatest potential to enhance transportation safety.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: We appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today as you consider  the reauthorization of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).  NTSB is a relatively small agency that has gained a worldwide reputation  as a preeminent investigator of transportation accidents. With a staff of  about 400 and a budget of $98 million for fiscal year 2010, NTSB is  charged with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United  States and selected accidents in other transportation modes, determining  the probable causes of these accidents, making recommendations to  address safety issues identified during accident investigations, and  performing transportation safety studies. To support its mission, NTSB  built a Training Center that opened in 2003 and provides training to NTSB  investigators and other transportation safety professionals.
As the share of federal resources used to address the nation’s long-term  fiscal imbalance and other national priorities grows, funding for increases  in the budgets of individual agencies becomes more uncertain. It is  therefore critical for NTSB to use its resources as efficiently as possible to  carry out its mission. In 2006, we conducted a broad review of the agency’s  management practices, examined how it carried out its activities related to  accident investigations and safety studies, and analyzed whether its  Training Center was cost-effective. Since then, we have reviewed NTSB  as mandated in the agency’s 2006 reauthorization legislation, and, in total,  we have made 21 recommendations in these areas. In addition, in recent  years, other entities have conducted reviews and made recommendations  to NTSB related to information security practices and financial  management. Our testimony addresses NTSB’s progress in (1) following  leading practices in management areas such as strategic planning, human  capital management, information technology (IT), and financial  management; (2) increasing the efficiency of activities related to  investigating accidents, issuing recommendations, and conducting safety  studies; and (3) increasing the use of its Training Center. In addition, the  testimony provides our observations on changes NTSB seeks in its 2010  reauthorization proposal.
Our testimony is based on our analysis of policies and procedures that  NTSB developed in response to our recommendations and to the  recommendations of the independent auditors of NTSB’s information  systems. To perform our analysis, we reviewed NTSB’s agencywide, IT,  and human capital strategic plans; office operating plans, and other  relevant documents. We also visited the NTSB Training Center;  interviewed NTSB’s Chief Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and  other agency officials; and updated information we have reported since  2006 (see app. I for a list of our prior work). In addition, we performed  limited testing of NTSB’s laptop computers. In our analysis, we classified  NTSB’s progress in implementing a recommendation as limited when the  agency was in the early planning stages and documents or milestones for  actions did not exist or the agency did not follow leading practices.  Recognizing that many recommendations may take considerable time and  effort to fully implement, we classified NTSB’s progress in implementing a  recommendation as significant if the agency had taken steps beyond the  early planning stages toward addressing the concerns. For example, NTSB  might have developed documents or policies that, for the most part,  followed leading practices. We classified a recommendation as fully  implemented when NTSB had fully implemented plans or processes that  followed leading practices. NTSB provided technical comments on a draft  of this statement that we incorporated as appropriate. Finally, we  reviewed NTSB’s reauthorization proposal and made observations where  appropriate. We conducted this performance audit from July 2009 to  January 2010 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing  standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to  obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for  our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe  that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings  and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
subsections: section_title: NTSB Has Made Progress in All Management Areas, but Further Actions Are Needed to Fully Implement Some Recommendations
paragraphs: Overall, NTSB has fully implemented or made significant progress in  following leading management practices in all eight areas that our  recommendations addressed in 2006 and 2008—communication, strategic  planning, IT, knowledge management, organizational structure, human  capital management, training, and financial management. We made 15  management recommendations in these areas based on leading agency  management practices that we identified through our governmentwide  work. Although NTSB is a relatively small agency, such practices remain  relevant. Figure 1 summarizes NTSB’s progress in implementing our  management recommendations.
NTSB had fully implemented three of our management recommendations  as of our report in April 2008—our recommendations to (1) facilitate  communication from staff to management, (2) align organizational  structure to implement a strategic plan, and (3) correct an Antideficiency  Act violation related to purchasing accidental death and dismemberment  insurance for employees on official travel. In addition, NTSB has made  further progress on eight of our management recommendations since  2008. First, it fully implemented our recommendations on communication  by reporting to Congress on the status of our recommendations by  including the actions it has taken to address them in its Annual Report to  Congress. In addition, it has fully implemented our recommendation on  strategic planning by linking all five mission areas in its goals and  objectives and seeking external stakeholder comments. NTSB has also  taken steps to implement all three of our IT-related recommendations:    NTSB has fully implemented an IT strategic plan that addresses our  comments. Moreover, in compliance with the Federal Information Security  Management Act of 2002 (FISMA), NTSB has undergone annual  independent audits, hiring outside contractors to perform security testing  and evaluation of its computer systems.
We performed limited testing to verify that NTSB has implemented our  recommendation to install encryption software. Agency officials  confirmed, however, that while encryption software is operational on 410  of the agency’s approximately 420 laptop computers, the remaining  laptops do not have encryption software installed because they do not  include sensitive information and are not removed from the headquarters  building.
NTSB has made significant progress in limiting local administrator  privileges while allowing for employees to add software and print from  offsite locations as necessary.
NTSB has also drafted a strategic training plan that, when finalized, would  address GAO guidance on federal strategic training and development  efforts and establish the core competencies needed for investigators and  other staff. In addition, two modal offices have developed core curricula  that relate specifically to their investigators.
In addition, NTSB obligated $1.3 million in September 2009 to the National  Business Center—an arm of the Department of the Interior that provides  for-fee payroll services to federal agencies—to develop a full cost  accounting system for NTSB based on a statement of work. NTSB officials  said that the first phase of the cost accounting system will be implemented  late in fiscal year 2010. When the system is completed to permit recording  of the time and costs of investigations and other activities, including  training, this action will fully implement our recommendation.
The remaining four management recommendations have not yet been fully  implemented. However, NTSB has initiated actions that could lead to their  full implementation. For example, NTSB has continued to improve its  knowledge management by developing a plan to capture, create, share,  and revise knowledge, and the agency is deploying Microsoft SharePoint®  to facilitate the sharing of useful information within NTSB.
In April 2008, we reported that NTSB had made significant progress in  implementing our human capital planning recommendation by issuing a  human capital plan that incorporated several strategies on enhancing the  recruitment process. However, we also said the plan was limited in some  areas of diversity management. As we have previously reported, diversity  management is a key aspect of strategic human capital management.  Developing a workforce that includes and takes advantage of the nation’s  diversity is a significant part of an agency’s transformation of its  organization to meet the challenges of the 21st century. The most recent  version of NTSB’s human capital plan establishes goals for recruiting,  developing, and retaining a diverse workforce, and NTSB provided  diversity training to 32 of its senior managers and office directors in May  2009. Table 1 compares the diversity of NTSB’s fiscal year 2008 workforce  with that of the federal government and the civilian labor force.
As the table shows, the percentages of NTSB’s fiscal year 2008 workforce  that were women and minorities were lower than those of the federal  government. Under the Office of Personnel Management’s regulations  implementing the Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program,  agencies are required to determine where representation levels for  covered groups are lower than for the civilian labor force and take steps to  address those differences.
Additionally, as of fiscal year 2008, 9 percent of NSTB’s managers and  supervisors were minorities and 24 percent were women (see fig. 2).  Furthermore, according to NTSB, none of its current 15-member career  Senior Executive Service (SES) personnel were members of a minority  group, and only 2 of them were women. As we have previously reported,  diversity in the SES corps, which generally represents the most  experienced segment of the federal workforce, can strengthen an  organization by bringing a wider variety of perspectives and approaches to  policy development and decision making.
NTSB has undertaken several initiatives to create a stronger, more diverse  pool of candidates for external positions. These initiatives include the  establishment of a Management Candidate Program that has attracted a  diverse pool of minority and female candidates at the GS 13/14 level.  NTSB’s Executive Development Program focuses on identifying  candidates for current and future SES positions at the agency. Despite  these efforts, NTSB has not been able to appreciably change the diversity  profile of its senior management.
NTSB’s current workforce demographics may present the agency with an  opportunity to increase the diversity of its workforce and management.  According to NTSB, in 3 years, more than 50 percent of its current  supervisors and managers will be eligible to retire, as will over 25 percent  of its general workforce. Furthermore, 53 percent of its investigators and  71 percent of those filling critical leadership positions are at least 50 years  old. Although actual retirement rates may be lower than retirement  eligibility rates, especially in the present economic environment,  consideration of retirement eligibility is important to workforce planning.
section_title: NTSB Has Made Its Selection of Accident Investigations More Efficient, but Reporting Can Be Improved
paragraphs: We previously made four recommendations to NTSB to improve the  efficiency of its activities related to investigating accidents, such as  identifying criteria for selecting which accidents to investigate and  tracking the status of its recommendations, and increasing its use of safety  studies (see fig. 3).
NTSB is required by statute to investigate all civil aviation accidents and  selected accidents in other modes—highway, marine, railroad, pipeline,  and hazardous materials. Since our April 2008 report, NTSB has fully  implemented our recommendation to develop transparent policies  containing risk-based criteria for selecting which accidents to investigate.  The recently completed highway policy assigns priority to accidents based  on the number of fatalities, whether the accident conditions are on NTSB’s  “Watch List,” or whether the accidents might have significant safety  issues, among other factors (see fig. 4). For marine accidents, NTSB has a  memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the U.S. Coast Guard that  includes criteria for selecting which accidents to investigate. In addition,  NTSB has now developed an internal policy on selecting marine accidents  for investigation. This policy enhances the MOU by providing criteria to  assess whether to launch an investigation when the Coast Guard, not  NTSB, would have the lead. In April 2008, we reported that NTSB had also  developed a transparent, risk-based policy explaining which aviation, rail,  pipeline, and hazardous materials accidents to investigate.
The remaining three recommendations have not yet been fully  implemented. However, NTSB has initiated actions that could lead to  closure of two of the recommendations. NTSB’s deployment of an  agencywide electronic information system based on Microsoft SharePoint  will allow NTSB to streamline and increase its use of technology in closing  out recommendations and in developing reports. When fully implemented,  this system should serve to close these two recommendations.
NTSB has also made significant progress in implementing our  recommendation to increase its use of safety studies, which are multiyear  efforts that result in recommendations. They are intended to improve  transportation safety by effecting changes to policies, programs, and  activities of agencies that regulate transportation safety. While we, the  Department of Transportation, and nongovernmental groups, like  universities, also conduct research designed to improve transportation  safety, NTSB is mandated to carry out special studies and investigations  about transportation safety, including studies about how to avoid personal  injury. Although NTSB has not completed any safety studies since we  made our recommendation in 2006, it has three studies in progress, one of  which is in final draft, and it has established a goal of developing two  safety study proposals and submitting them to its board for approval each  year. NTSB officials told us that because the agency has a small number of  staff, it has difficulty producing large studies in addition to processing  many other reports and data inquiries. NTSB officials told us they would  like to broaden the term “safety studies” to include not only the current  studies of multiple accidents, but also the research done for the other,  smaller safety-related reports and data inquiries. Such a term, they said,  would better characterize the scope of their efforts to report safety  information to the public. NTSB also developed new guidelines to address  its completion of safety studies.
section_title: NTSB Has Increased Use of the Training Center
paragraphs: We made two recommendations for NTSB to increase its own and other  agencies’ use of the Training Center and to decrease the center’s overall  operating deficit (see fig. 5). The agency increased use of the center’s  classroom space from 10 percent in fiscal year 2006 to 80 percent in fiscal  year 2009. According to NTSB, it has sublease agreements with agencies of  the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to rent approximately three- quarters of the classroom space located on the first and second floors. The  warehouse portion of the Training Center houses reconstructed wreckage  from TWA Flight 800, damaged aircraft, and other wreckage. The Training  Center provides core training for NTSB investigators and trains others  from the transportation community to improve their practice of accident  investigation. Furthermore, NTSB has hired a Management Support  Specialist whose job duties include maximizing the Training Center’s use  and marketing its use to other agencies or organizations. The agency’s  actions to increase the center’s use also helped increase Training Center  revenues from about $635,000 in fiscal year 2005 to about $1,771,000 in  fiscal year 2009. By reducing the center’s leasing expenses—for example,  by subleasing classrooms and office space at the center to other  agencies—NTSB reduced the Training Center’s annual deficit from about  $3.9 million to about $1.9 million over the same time period.
NTSB has made significant progress in achieving the intent of our  recommendation to maximize the delivery of its core investigator  curriculum at the Training Center by increasing the number of NTSB- related courses taught at the Training Center (fig. 6). For example in 2008,  49 of the 68 courses offered at the Training Center were solely for NTSB  employees.
NTSB has fully implemented our recommendation to increase use of the  Training Center. NTSB subleased all available office space at its Training  Center to the Federal Air Marshal Service (a DHS agency) at an annual fee  of $479,000. NTSB also increased use of the Training Center’s classroom  space and thereby increased the revenues it receives from course fees and  rents for classroom and conference space. From fiscal year 2006 through  fiscal year 2009, NTSB increased other agencies’ and its own use of  classroom space from 10 to 80 percent, and increased revenues by over  $1.1 million. For example, according to NTSB, it has a sublease agreement  with DHS to rent approximately one-third of the classroom space. NTSB  considered moving certain staff from headquarters to the Training Center,  but halted these considerations after subleasing all of the Training Center’s  available office space. NTSB decreased personnel expenses related to the  Training Center from about $980,000 in fiscal year 2005 to $507,000 in  fiscal year 2009 by reducing the center’s full-time-equivalent positions  from 8.5 to 3.0 over the same period. As a result of these efforts, from  fiscal year 2005 through fiscal year 2009, Training Center revenues  increased by 179 percent while the center’s overall deficit decreased by 51  percent. (Table 2 shows direct expenses and revenues for the Training  Center in fiscal years 2004 through 2009.) However, the salaries and other  personnel-related expenses associated with NTSB investigators and  managers teaching at the Training Center, which would be appropriate to  include in the Training Center’s costs, are not included. NTSB officials told  us that they believe the investigators and managers teaching at the  Training Center would be teaching at another location even if the Training  Center did not exist. Once NTSB has fully implemented its cost accounting  system, it should be able to track and report these expenses.
section_title: Requested Changes in NTSB’s Authority Would Provide Statutory Authority to Investigate Incidents and Reduce Required Accident Investigations
paragraphs: As part of the reauthorization process, NTSB has proposed both  substantive and technical changes to its existing authorizing legislation.  Among the substantive changes sought by NTSB are the statutory  authority to investigate incidents in addition to its current authority to  investigate accidents in all transportation modes and to reduce its  current requirements for investigating rail and maritime accidents. Figure  7 illustrates the five transportation modes for which NTSB has  investigative authority. The proposed technical changes would serve  various purposes, including clarifying particular provisions contained in  NTSB’s current authorizing legislation.
The proposed substantive change that would allow NTSB to investigate  incidents would affect all modes by providing explicit authority to  investigate not only accidents, as currently prescribed, but also “incidents  not involving destruction or damage, but affecting transportation safety, as  the Board may prescribe or Congress may direct.” This addition does not  set forth specific criteria for selecting incidents to investigate, thereby  increasing the agency’s discretion. According to NTSB, this change would  codify the agency’s current practice in all modes. For example, NTSB  investigated and reported the facts of the Northwest Airlines overflight of  Minneapolis, Minnesota, on October 21, 2009, even though it did not meet  the statutory definition of an accident.
Other proposed substantive changes would reduce NTSB’s current  requirements for investigating maritime and rail accidents. Specifically,  one change would eliminate the current requirement for NTSB or the  Coast Guard to investigate all accidents involving public vessels or any  other vessel and would provide discretion to determine whether and  which of these accidents to investigate. Similarly, another proposed  change would limit NTSB’s responsibility for investigating rail accidents  by establishing more stringent criteria for triggering the requirement to  investigate. However, the proposed criteria do not include definitions of  certain terminology and would thus effectively give NTSB the discretion to  decide which rail accidents to investigate.
Giving NTSB expanded investigatory discretion with the explicit authority  to investigate incidents without specific criteria, while simultaneously  limiting requirements for rail and maritime investigations, would allow the  agency to use its professional judgment to determine which investigations  would have the greatest potential to improve safety and make the most  effective use of its resources. At the same time, however, it is important  that NTSB be transparent in providing information about investigation  criteria in order to assure Congress and the public that the agency’s  resources are being used to address priorities in accordance with its  mission. Striking the right balance between discretionary and criteria  based investigations will be important to ensure that NTSB’s resources can  be used for the work with the greatest potential to enhance transportation  safety.
Other proposed substantive changes are intended to more clearly define  NTSB’s and the U.S. Coast Guard’s respective roles and responsibilities for  maritime accident investigations, which are currently governed by a  December 2008 MOU with the Coast Guard and jointly issued  regulations. These changes could affect a number of existing agreements  and the current governing framework, as well as the agencies involved.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to  respond to any questions you or other Members of the Subcommittee may  have at this time.
section_title: Contacts and Acknowledgments
paragraphs: For further information on this testimony, please contact Gerald L.  Dillingham, Ph.D. at (202) 512-2834 or by e-mail at dillinghamg@gao.gov or  Gregory C. Wilshusen at (202) 512-6244 or wilshuseng@gao.gov.  Individuals making key contributions to this testimony include Keith  Cunningham, Assistant Director; Lauren Calhoun; Peter Del Toro; George  Depaoli; Elizabeth Eisenstadt; Fred Evans; Steven Lozano; Mary Marshall;  Charles Vrable; Jack Warner; and Sarah Wood.
section_title: Appendix I: Related GAO Products
paragraphs: National Transportation Safety Board: Reauthorization Provides an  Opportunity to Focus on Implementing Leading Management Practices  and Addressing Human Capital and Training Center Issues.  GAO-10-183T. Washington, D.C.: October 29, 2009.
National Transportation Safety Board—Application of Section 1072 of  the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act (41 U.S.C. 254) to Real  Property Leases. B-316860. Washington, D.C.: April 29, 2009.
National Transportation Safety Board: Progress Made in Management  Practices, Investigation Priorities, Training Center Use, and  Information Security, but These Areas Continue to Need Improvement.  GAO-08-652T. Washington, D.C.: April 23, 2008.
National Transportation Safety Board—Insurance for Employees  Traveling on Official Business. B-309715. Washington, D.C.: September  25, 2007.
National Transportation Safety Board: Observations on the Draft  Business Plan for NTSB’s Training Center. GAO-07-866R. Washington,  D.C.: June 14, 2007.
National Transportation Safety Board: Progress Made, Yet Management  Practices, Investigation Priorities, and Training Center Use Should Be  Improved. GAO-07-118. Washington, D.C.: November 22, 2006.
National Transportation Safety Board: Preliminary Observations on the  Value of Comprehensive Planning, and Greater Use of Leading Practices  and the Training Academy. GAO-06-801T. Washington, D.C.: May 24,  2006.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the  United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety  without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain  copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be  necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.