[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
METRO: REPORT CARD
FOR AMERICA'S SUBWAY
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 22, 2019
__________
Serial No. 116-66
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Reform
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: http://www.govinfo.gov
http://www.oversight.house.gov or
http://www.docs.house.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
38-303 PDF WASHINGTON : 2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND REFORM
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York, Acting Chairwoman
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Jim Jordan, Ohio, Ranking Minority
Columbia Member
Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri Paul A. Gosar, Arizona
Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts Virginia Foxx, North Carolina
Jim Cooper, Tennessee Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia Mark Meadows, North Carolina
Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois Jody B. Hice, Georgia
Jamie Raskin, Maryland Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
Harley Rouda, California James Comer, Kentucky
Katie Hill, California Michael Cloud, Texas
Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Florida Bob Gibbs, Ohio
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Peter Welch, Vermont Clay Higgins, Louisiana
Jackie Speier, California Chip Roy, Texas
Robin L. Kelly, Illinois Carol D. Miller, West Virginia
Mark DeSaulnier, California Mark E. Green, Tennessee
Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota
Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands W. Gregory Steube, Florida
Ro Khanna, California Frank Keller, Pennsylvania
Jimmy Gomez, California
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
David Rapallo, Staff Director
Wendy Ginsberg, Subcommittee Staff Director
Joshua Zucker, Assistant Clerk
Christopher Hixon, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
Subcommittee on Government Operations
Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia, Chairman
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Mark Meadows, North Carolina,
Columbia, Ranking Minority Member
John P. Sarbanes, Maryland Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Jackie Speier, California Jody B. Hice, Georgia
Brenda L. Lawrence, Michigan Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin
Stacey E. Plaskett, Virgin Islands James Comer, Kentucky
Ro Khanna, California Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Stephen F. Lynch, Massachsetts W. Gregory Steube, Florida
Jamie Raskin, Maryland
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on October 22, 2019................................. 1
Witnesses
Mr. Paul Wiedefeld, General Manager and Chief Executive Officer,
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Oral Statement................................................... 7
Mr. Paul Smedberg, Chair, Board of Directors, Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Oral Statement................................................... 8
Mr. Geoffrey Cherrington, Inspector General, Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
Oral Statement................................................... 10
Dr. David L Mayer, Chief Executive Officer, Washington Metrorail
Safety Commission
Oral Statement................................................... 11
Written opening statement and statements for the witnesses are
available on the U.S. House of Representatives Document
Repository at: https://docs.house.gov.
Index of Documents
----------
Documents entered into the record during this hearing and
Questions for the Record (QFR's) are listed below/available at:
https://docs.house.gov.
* Unanimous Consent: Prepared Opening Statement of Majority
Leader Steny Hoyer.
* Unanimous Consent: Prepared Opening Statement of Rep. Glenn
Grothman.
* Unanimous Consent: Prepared Opening Statement of Mr.
Cherrington.
* ``Metro's Pensions are not the problem'', Washington Post,
September 22, 2018; submitted by Chairman Connolly.
METRO: REPORT CARD
FOR AMERICA'S SUBWAY
----------
Tuesday, October 22, 2019
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Government Operations
Committee on Oversight and Reform
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:09 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn Office Building, Hon. Gerald E. Connolly
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Connolly, Norton, Sarbanes,
Raskin, Massie, Grothman, Comer, and Steube.
Also present: Representatives Hoyer, Wexton, and Trone.
Mr. Connolly. The subcommittee will come to order.
Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the committee at any time.
The subcommittee is assessing the operations and management
of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metrorail
system. And before I recognize myself and the ranking for an
opening statement, we are graced to have the majority leader of
the House of Representatives with us, and I want to defer to
him for his opening remarks should he choose.
Mr. Hoyer. You are very kind, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very
much. As you know, I have been working on the Metropolitan
Transit system, and when I first ran for office in 1966, which
is about when we started, Carlton Sickles was a candidate for
Governor. I ran on his ticket. He was one of the fathers, one
of the parents of the Metropolitan Transit System. Then when I
came to Congress, I worked very closely with Frank Wolf to
ensure that the system was completed. And I am pleased to be
here. Thank you very much for your courtesy, Mr. Chairman.
All of us continue to be deeply saddened, of course, by the
loss of our colleague and friend, and a great American, and a
great member of this body, Elijah Cummings. We worked closely
together on so many things. I know that this committee mourns
his loss deeply.
I appreciate the opportunity to join the members of this
subcommittee today to ensure that Congress is conducting its
proper oversight of the Metro system, which serves our Nation's
capital and the greater Washington region, part of which I
obviously represent. I am proud to represent many of its
suburban communities in Maryland, the district home to 62,000
Federal employees, many of whom rely on Metro to commute to
their place of employment every day. Approximately one-third of
Metro's riders, of course, during peak hours are Federal
workers, and the majority of Metrorail stations serve Federal
facilities, making the system a critical lifeline for our
Nation's government workers.
So many of our predecessors with whom I have worked, in
particular, Mr. Lehman from Florida who chairs the
Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, viewed our
subway system as America's subway because not only because a
lot of Federal workers us it, but extraordinarily millions of
tourists use our system as well. The efficient and responsive
operations of our government depends on ensuring that the
Federal employees of the Greater Washington Metropolitan Area
have a safe, reliable, and effective transit system.
In the past few years, we have seen major improvements in
safety and reliability, though, of course, there is much still
to be done. I find it very reassuring that Mr. Wiedefeld, our
leader, has been working closely with Raymond Jackson, the new
president of the ATU Local, that they have been able to improve
the relationship between WMATA and its workers. After all, both
the administration and those who implement the policies on a
daily basis are critically important in improving and
maintaining safety in our system. I appreciate that very much,
and I know riders will appreciate it as well.
Mr. Chairman, I was proud to work closely with Mr.
Wiedefeld, and with the union, and with commuter advocates to
introduce legislation in 2017 with your partnership and others,
Ms. Norton and others from our region, to provide congressional
authorization for the Metro Safety Commission and to support
its work. Safety for riders and employees must remain Metro's
No. 1 priority. That is why I am committed, Mr. Chairman, as I
know you are, as I know Ms. Norton is, and I know the members
of this committee on both sides of the aisle are committed to
pursuing continued improvements in safety and reliability.
I thank the witnesses. Mr. Chairman, before you came in, I
had the opportunity to say hello to them individually, and I
thank them for coming here today to share an update with the
subcommittee and with the Congress. I look forward to
continuing to work with my colleagues, with Metro, with the
workers union, and with riders' advocates to ensure that Metro
continues improving and can achieve the highest standards of
safety and reliability. As you probably know, Mr. Chairman, the
head of our transit system, Mr. Wiedefeld, was in Maryland for
a long period of time and did an outstanding, extraordinary job
there. I know Mr. Sarbanes knows that as well. But I thank you
for this opportunity to be here at this important hearing.
Mr. Connolly. We thank the distinguished majority leader,
and also just thank him for his consistent ongoing leadership
and support for Metro. It has not been uncritical, but it has
been essential, and he has helped educate our colleagues in
Congress as to the fact that it isn't just any transit system.
It is the national capital transit system serving the capital
of the free world. We have certain obligations to make sure
that there is a partnership between this body and Metro, and
Steny Hoyer has just been a pivotal figure in making sure that
happens over the years. Thank you.
Mr. Hoyer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Connolly. The chair now recognizes himself for an
opening statement.
Today this subcommittee continues its oversight of WMATA. I
say ``continues'' because this is an issue that Ranking Member
Meadows championed when he was chairman of the subcommittee.
Mr. Meadows convened hearings on WMATA in the wake of Carol
Glover's tragic death in the L'Enfant Plaza tunnel fire, after
the East Falls Church derailment, and amidst crises in system
leadership, safety, and customer confidence. Mr. Meadows put
the spotlight of this subcommittee on WMATA against the
backdrop of seemingly daily track fires and when all the lights
were blinking red.
I want to thank Mr. Meadows and my colleagues on the other
side of the aisle for their bipartisan concern and commitment
to making it better. Together we have been supportive of
General Manger Paul Wiedefeld's reforms to the system,
including his efforts to place a premium on safety and to
combat a culture of mediocrity by holding bad actors
accountable and demanding better service to customers.
Mr. Wiedefeld implemented the safe track blitz on safety
improvements, led the effort to secure expanded maintenance
hours, terminated track inspectors who falsified track
inspection reports, and has increased annual capital
investments. Some of these initiatives have not been popular,
but these improvements coincide with increases in on-time
performance, customer service ratings, and ridership, trends we
must strive to continue.
Despite improvements, areas of concern, including a recent
train collision, remain. These lingering problems demand
continued attention. The newly certified Washington Metrorail
Safety Commission was on the scene of a train collision near
Farragut West earlier this month. Congress was instrumental in
establishing this new safety oversight body, and I was glad to
help in leading that effort with Majority Leader Hoyer and
others. I believe Barbara Mikulski played a key role in that,
the senator, at the time, from Maryland, and, of course, the
delegate, our colleague, Eleanor Holmes Norton from Washington,
as well.
WMATA is expected to take possession of the 23-mile Silver
Line extension of Metro to Washington-Dulles and International
Airport in late 2020. The OIG, the Office of Inspector General,
however, released two management alerts raising concerns about
construction deficiencies on the project, and warning of the
extraordinary cost, maintenance, and operational issues that
would arise if those concerns were not properly addressed. We
cannot allow shoddy construction by cost-cutting contractors to
saddle Metro and its ridership with long-term costly
maintenance problems. I know we are eager to hear how that is
being resolved. That is not WMATA's problem yet, but it is a
problem unaddressed we otherwise inherit.
Finally, WMATA recently underwent immense upheaval on its
governing Board. Former Board chairman, Jack Evans, violated
the public trust as well as the WMATA Board code of ethics, and
has become a walking billboard for the ethically challenged.
Mr. Meadows and I, and Mr. Jordan, have acute concerns about
the damage done by Mr. Evans and the Board's mishandling of the
ethics complaints. The opacity of the Ethics Committee process
and Mr. Evans' actions to threaten and intimidate WMATA staff,
including the general counsel who was investigating his ethical
behavior, did not inspire public confidence in the Board. We
hope our witnesses can help the subcommittee and the public
understand how new ethics reforms address these lapses so that
they will not be allowed to recur.
I believe the ranking member and I both appreciate how
essential WMATA is to the operation of the Federal Government.
In recognition of the special responsibility the Federal
Government has to help America's subway, my Republican
predecessor and former chairman of this committee, Tom Davis,
led the effort to secure dedicated Federal funding for WMATA.
It was a Republican idea. And I do appreciate that this year's
budget request upholds this bipartisan and longstanding funding
commitment. It is not often I find myself praising anything in
the Trump budget, but in this one case, I do. They provided
full funding for what we call PRIIA.
The Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008
established the successful Federal, state, and local
partnership under which the Federal Government provides $150
million a year in capital funding, which is matched dollar for
dollar by the three local compact members, Maryland, D.C., and
Virginia. Without continued Federal participation, however,
this successful capital funding stream would unravel, leaving a
massive shortfall in WMATA's budget and paralyzing this
critical transit system.
That is why I and other members of the D.C. area
delegation--in fact, all of the other members of the D.C.
delegation--introduced the Metro Accountability and Investment
Act, or MAIA. The bill would authorize the $150 million in
annual capital funding for 10 more years, contingent on the
local jurisdictions bringing in matching dollars. But in
addition to that capital funding, the Federal Government would
for the first time provide $50 million a year for WMATA's
annual operating costs, $10 million of which would be provided
to the Office of Inspector General for its functions.
This is important because the Federal Government in one way
is a free rider. We do not subsidize the operations of Metro.
The compact members do. We are, in fact, the only compact
member--the Federal Government--that does not pay a subsidy for
operations. This would begin a downpayment on the Federal
Government actually being a full partner at the table.
The $200 million in annual capital and operating funding
authorized by MAIA would be conditional upon reforms that
strength WMATA oversight. For example, Metro would be required
to provide the inspector general with independent budget,
procurement, and hiring authorities, making independent legal
advice available to the OIG, and improving transparency of
corrective actions. The OIG and any organization has to be pure
as the driven snow, and the reforms outlined in MAIA would help
ensure that the work of the IG is above reproach and
independent of the transit system it oversees.
It would authorize a second tranche of dedicated Federal
capital funding subject to certain additional conditions,
including safety and reliability certifications and
improvements. Additionally, the bill would require local
jurisdictions to keep their promises to escalate their
contributions to WMATA capital costs. We should expect the
Federal Government to take commensurate steps while WMATA
continues to improve system performance.
We cannot afford a death spiral of disinvestment and
declining service for a transit system that gets our Federal
work force to work every day, and that serves the tens of
millions of Americans and non-Americans who come to visit the
Nation's capital every year. We must use an incentive approach
to invest in this essential transit system and hold the system
accountable to providing safer and more reliable service. This
subcommittee will continue to provide strict oversight of
WMATA, and I want to thank, again, my ranking member, Mr.
Meadows, and his stand-in, Mr. Grothman, for their support on a
bipartisan basis.
With that, I recognize the member for his opening
statement.
Mr. Grothman. First of all, I would like to thank you for
holding the hearing. I know we are off to a little bit of a low
start here, so I am not going to go through my entire opening
statement. I will just say one more time, this is maybe the
first time this subcommittee has met since Congressman Cummings
passed away, so I give my condolences to the Cummings family.
And without objection, I will submit the prepared opening
statement to the record.
Mr. Grothman. I am glad that we all agree that you
shouldn't, and we look forward to talking about that we
shouldn't be using our public position to personally enrich
ourselves. We are going to talk about that a little bit today,
and I look forward to hearing from the other witnesses. So with
that, I yield back.
Mr. Connolly. I thank my friend from Wisconsin, and I thank
him for his kind remarks about the loss of our dear friend. He
was very much loved on both sides of the aisle, and I know that
he would say the work doesn't stop, and you need to continue.
Maybe that is the best way we honor the memory of Elijah
Cummings.
I see that our colleague from the 10th congressional
District of Virginia, Ms. Wexton, has joined us. Thank you, Ms.
Wexton. Without objection, the gentlelady is authorized to
participate in today's hearing fully.
Hearing none, the chair now calls on the distinguished
Congresswoman from the District of Columbia, Ms. Norton, for
five minutes for an opening statement.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I echo
your remarks on Mr. Cummings, who I am used to seeing sitting
exactly where you are sitting today.
You and I are in an unusual position because we are chairs
equally. We are chairs of subcommittee which equally have
jurisdiction over the Washington Metropolitan Transit System. I
had been waiting to make sure that the appropriations came
through, and I am pleased that the Senate and the House bills,
as well as the President's budget, do have that appropriation,
which I think speaks volumes to the importance of WMATA. You in
your capacity as chair of Government Operations, me in my
capacity as chair of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit,
have a special obligation to Metro for the country, for this
region, for our respective districts, all of which are
particularly dependent on Metro.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to emphasize, because I think it
is too seldom done, recent very encouraging developments at
Metro. We have at Metro a declining ridership. That is true of
these transit systems across the country, but Metro is, again,
attracting riders, and anybody who understands climate change
or congestion in this region has go to applaud that. Metro has
also implemented an extensive safety and maintenance work plan
for which we are very grateful, and now has a very impressive
weekday on-time performance of 90 percent. It is in the
interest of the Federal Government to do all we can to keep
spurring these important developments.
The Washington Metro Safety Commission was also certified
this year, allowing the Commission to take on direct oversight
of safety at Metro in place of the Federal Government. All
those improvements, it seems to me, deserve the applause of
this committee. For the chairman's constituents and mine, of
course, Metro ties together entire neighborhoods.
But equally important, Metro has created a really
irreplaceable transit network on which the Federal Government
depends every day every bit as much as our constituents. You
have heard the numbers. One-third of the peak commuters are
Federal employees. Of course, I say the more the merrier to get
traffic off the road. Over half of Metro stations serve Federal
facilities, and look how important they are: the Pentagon, the
Smithsonian, which is, of course, part of the tourist mecca for
the Nation's capital and the region, the Census Bureau. It
serves the Internal Revenue Service, and, of course, the U.S.
Capitol itself. Neither the Federal Government nor the regional
economy would be possible today without Metro. Perhaps there
was a time, but no longer.
Congress does have a duty to examine Metro's operations to
make sure that our dependency and the dependency of the region
and that Nation is well placed. Mr. Chairman, though, we must
not forget our ongoing obligation to hold Metro to the highest
safety standards. We still mourn the loss of those injured and
killed during the Red Line crash of 2009 and the L'Enfant Plaza
incident of 2015, even more recently. Seven of the 9 who died
in the Red Line crash were D.C. residents. Proper safety
protocols and regular maintenance can help reduce the
likelihood of such tragedies. In addition to considering
operational safety, we must maintain vigilance, and I would be
remiss if I did not mention cybersecurity threats and the risk
they pose to this system.
I look forward to today's testimony and very much
appreciate our witnesses for coming forward, and you, Mr.
Chairman, for holding this hearing.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the distinguished Congresswoman from
the District of Columbia, and we continue to hope D.C. voting
rights and statehood move forward.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Connolly. Just a paid advertisement there. Now let me
introduce our panel. We have, of course, the general manager
and chief executive of Metro, Paul Wiedefeld. Welcome, Mr.
Wiedefeld. We have the new chair of the Metro Board, an old
friend and colleague from the city of Alexandria, Paul
Smedberg. We have Geoffrey Cherrington, who is the inspector
general of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
And finally Dr. David Mayer, who is the chief executive officer
of the Washington Metrorail Safety Commission, the very
commission a number of us played a role in trying to get
established and up and running.
I would ask each of our witnesses to summarize their
testimony. You have got five minutes, but you don't need to
read to us. We can listen as fast as you can speak. Mr.
Wiedefeld.
STATEMENT OF MR. WIEDEFELD, GENERAL MANAGER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Mr. Wiedefeld. Good afternoon, Chairs Connolly and Norton,
members of the subcommittee, and members of the National
Capital Area regional delegation. I am Paul Wiedefeld, general
manager and CEO of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit
Authority, commonly referred to as ``Metro,'' and I thank you
for the opportunity to testify today at this important
oversight hearing of Metro. I also want to thank Chairs
Connolly and Norton and the members from the National Capital
regional delegation for their leadership in supporting
dedicated Federal funding to Metro.
As you know, as has been stated, Metro plays a critical
role in the Capital Region, transporting roughly 1 million
passengers a day, and as was mentioned, a third of those being
Federal employees. Also important to note that if there were an
emergency and we needed to evacuate the District, obviously
Metro would play a large part in that as well.
Since the last report to the committee, Metro is safer,
it's more reliable, and our financial house is in order. In
terms of the safety of Metro, since Fiscal Year 2017, track
infrastructure incidents, such as speed restrictions or
derailments, are down 87 percent. Track electrical fires,
insulator and cable fires are down 35 percent, and passenger
offloads, one of the most frustrating things for our customers,
are down 50 percent. And this summer, we successfully rebuilt
crumbling and unsafe platforms at six stations south of Ronald
Reagan National Airport, the most complex project we've done
since the construction of the system.
In terms of service reliability, reliability of the
Metrorail is driven by three factors. It is driven by the power
and signaling system, meaning third rail cabling of the
switches, and our track infrastructure ties and running rail,
and the rail cars themselves. We've implemented the agency's
first-ever preventive maintenance program to achieve and
maintain a state of good repair focusing on the power and track
infrastructure. With regards to rail cars, more than half of
our fleet is now comprised of the 7000 series cars that are
five times more reliable than the older cars.
By focusing on these areas, service reliability has
improved significantly. In 2019, Metrorail's on-time
performance reached its highest level in seven years. This
increased reliability combined with customer service
initiatives has resulted in Metrorail year-over-year ridership
gains of nearly 30 percent compared to 2018.
In terms of fiscal management, let me first give the
committee some context on the size of the financial commitment
to the Metro system and how it's funded. Our current operating
budget is just under $2 billion, funded entirely by the
combination of local and state funds from the District of
Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. There are no Federal funds
supporting the operating budget. The operating budget is
managed very tightly, as we required, to manage the budget to
no more than a 3-percent growth in the operating subsidy from
funding partners at the state and local level. This has
resulted in management-related reductions totaling $186 million
over the last three years, and is a constant focus on reducing
costs and seeking means to increase revenues.
Metro's capital budget for Fiscal Year 2020 is just over
$1.7 billion, with Federal funds accounting for roughly 29
percent of the budget at $500 million. This Federal funding
comes from two sources. Approximately $350 million comes from
Federal formula funds and grants, and $150 million comes from
their PRIIA funding, as the chairman mentioned. It's worth
noting, again, that the $150 million in PRIIA funds is matched
dollar for dollar by the state and local funds from the
District, Maryland, and Virginia.
Since we last met, Metro's total capital program has grown
significantly as a result of state and local governments
supporting passage of the dedicated funding for Metro that
provides an additional $500 million dollars annually to meet
the state of good repair. To meet these critical safety and
maintenance needs, our focus has been on delivering the
increased capital program. I am pleased to report that in
Fiscal Year 2019, 99 percent of the $1.5 billion budget was
delivered as compared to four years ago when the Authority was
investing only 65 percent of what was requested. I'm also
pleased to report that we just received another clean audit for
Fiscal Year 2019.
In closing, progress at Metro in the areas of safety,
service reliability, and fiscal management would never have
been possible without the ongoing Federal support and the
support of our jurisdictional partners in Virginia, Maryland,
and the District of Columbia. So once again, I want to express
our thanks for the bipartisan support of PRIIA and thank the
Administration for including the funding in the President's
budget request for the last two years.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you. You are a model for us all. You
had 50 seconds left. Let's see if our recovering politician can
do equally as well. Mr. Smedberg, welcome.
STATEMENT OF PAUL SMEDBERG, CHAIR, BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Mr. Smedberg. Good afternoon, Chairman Connolly,
Congressman Grothman, subcommittee members, and members of the
National Capital regional delegation. I am Paul Smedberg,
chairman of the Board of WMATA. I appreciate the opportunity to
be today to discuss the Board's goals and priorities. I also
want to acknowledge and thank the members of the National
Capital regional delegation for their unwavering support.
It is truly an honor to have been elected chair of the
Metro Board, and as I take on this new role, I am focused on
the future, and I would like to highlight my priorities going
forward: ethics reform, PRIIA funding, customer-focused
improvements, Office of the Inspector General.
First, I would like to address the recent actions of the
WMATA Board as a followup to the ethics investigation into
former Board chair, Jack Evans. Following the investigation and
report to the WMATA Board Ethics Committee, we determined the
matter was resolved and no longer presented an issue under the
ethics code as written at that time. But I and my colleagues on
the Board recognize that there was room for improvement and
greater transparency, and that is why my first priority as
Board chair was to lead adoption of revised ethics codes soon
after the Board's August recess.
On September 26, 2019, the Board unanimously adopted a
revised Board ethics code that strives to ensure greater
transparency, accountability, and clarity. Some key changes
include reported violations of Board or undisclosed conflicts
of interest by a Board member will be referred to the WMATA
inspector general for investigation. A written summary report
of the investigation must be provided to the full Board.
Determination of the Board, whether a violation or not, will be
considered in public session, and the Board will vote on a
written Board resolution regarding the investigation.
There is no distinction between an actual and apparent
conflict of interest, instead one definition requiring all
conflicts to be similarly addressed. A conflict of interest
arises whenever a Board member's ability to perform his or her
duties fairly and objectively would be compromised. The amended
annual disclosure form requires additional reporting of, A,
clients or vendors of a Board member, Board member's employer,
and, B, businesses or persons that a Board member or a
household member provide services, such as legal, auditing,
consulting, et cetera. This revised ethics code will provide
all Metro stakeholders with the assurance that the Metro Board
has in place an ethics code that will provide guidance and
transparency to current and future Board members.
Second, authorization of Federal dedicated funding. As
chairman of the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, I
worked closely with elected officials in Richmond to support
the historic legislation providing $500 million in dedicated
funding for WMATA. However, our funding work isn't finished,
and there is a lot at stake in terms of safe and reliable
service now and in the future, and we need our Federal partners
to recommit. As you know, the Federal Government depends on
WMATA to get Federal employees to work, and to provide access
to Federal agencies, and to support the Federal Government in
times of an emergency.
Customer-focused improvements. We will soon begin Metro's
Fiscal Year 2021 budget process, which will focus on continuing
the work to make strategic investments in our capital program
and support improved capital planning. Our policy decisions
will focus on continuing the service reliability turnaround we
are experiencing, and responsiveness to customers. The Board
will consider fair policy that addresses the needs of the
agency and maintains affordable fares.
Last, Office of the Inspector General. In 2006, the
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board of
directors established by resolution the Office of Inspector
General. This independent office reports to the Board and
replaced the Board of Audits and Inspections that reported to
the general manager. The inspector general is the Authority's
lead for the review of WMATA's operational integrity,
prevention and detection of fraud and abuse within the
administration. The Board has also paid close, careful
attention to the provisions of the PRIIA bill led by Chairman
Connolly.
Over the past two years, the new IG and the Board of
directors have worked closely and collaboratively to strengthen
and ensure the IG is operationally independent. Steady budget
increases have been approved annually to facilitate better OIG
work, including increased staffing levels for special agents,
criminal analysts, and forensic auditors. Exceptions to WMATA
policies for the OIG are now permitted and are handled on a
case-by-case basis where the OIG can demonstrate a bona fide
business reason that would assist the effectiveness of the OIG.
An attorney has been hired to provide legal advice to the OIG.
This attorney reports directly to the IG, not WMATA's general
counsel or management. Separate office space has been created
for the OIG staff outside the main headquarters building. The
Board's executive committee is responsible for oversight of the
OIG's work. The Board will continue to consult with the IG on
the resources that he believes are necessary to strengthen the
work of that office.
And finally, Chairman Connolly, the Board is also looking
forward to providing policy guidance on longer-term issues in a
number of areas, including technology advances, responses to
climate change, and addressing the new regional mobility
paradigm.
Thank you for this opportunity to be with you here today. I
will be pleased to answer your questions.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Chairman Smedberg.
Mr. Cherrington?
STATEMENT OF GEOFFREY CHERRINGTON, INSPECTOR GENERAL,
WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Mr. Cherrington. Chairman Connolly, Congressman Grothman,
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for
inviting me today to discuss the role of the OIG at WMATA. I've
submitted a written statement and ask that it be entered into
the record.
Mr. Connolly. Without objection.
Mr. Cherrington. Sir?
Mr. Connolly. Without objection.
Mr. Cherrington. Thank you, sir. The WMATA OIG is an
independent and objective unit that conducts and supervises
audits, program evaluations, and investigations relating to
WMATA's activities and detects and prevents fraud and abuse in
WMATA activities. It keeps the Board fully and currently
informed about deficiencies in WMATA activities along with the
necessity for and progress of corrective action.
As you know, the WMATA OIG is not a Federal OIG. We're not
covered by the provisions of the Inspector General Act of 1978,
as amended. Our authority derives from the WMATA compact and
the 2006 resolution by the WMATA Board of directors.
Before my appointment as WMATA inspector general, however,
I had over 32 years of law enforcement experience, including a
combat tour in the first Gulf War. Twenty-two of those years
were in the Federal inspector general community where I held
senior executive and investigative positions in the OIGs of the
Departments of Defense, State, Agriculture, and the General
Services Administration. Since assuming office in April 2017, I
have modeled the WMATA OIG after the Federal inspectors general
to the extent possible.
I have been able in practice to operate independently of
WMATA management, in most respects thanks to strong support
from the current Board of directors, especially Chairman Paul
Smedberg, and GM/CEO Paul Wiedefeld. As a result, my office has
had some success in pursuing our top priorities of safety,
cybersecurity, and procurement improvements in WMATA
operations. At the same time, the only statutory provisions for
WMATA IG are in the compact. They're very general. They would
provide scant protection to IG independence and objectivity if
a future Board or senior management were to alter their
policies or practices regarding the IG.
My written statement describes in more detail the key
challenges facing my office in the area of statutory
independence, in particular, regarding our lack of law
enforcement authority, lack of procurement, hiring, and other
administrative authorities, and lack of budgetary independence.
Despite the challenges, we've achieved notable results in
Fiscal Year 2019, identifying $36 million in questioned costs
or funds put to better use, issuing 96 contract audit reports,
finding $9-and-a-half million in possible savings, contributing
to six criminal proceedings--four indictments, two
convictions--and issuing 11 reports of investigation, five
management alerts and three management assistance reports. I've
coordinated early on with Dr. Mayer and the Safety Commission,
and we both have vowed to work together and collaborate on
safety issues affecting WMATA.
That concludes my prepared remarks. I'd be happy to answer
any questions.
Mr. Connolly. You are a star. Two minutes left. Whatever he
wants, make sure he gets it.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Connolly. Dr. Mayer?
STATEMENT OF DAVID MAYER, Ph.D., CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
WASHINGTON METRORAIL SAFETY COMMISSION
Mr. Mayer. Chairman Connolly, Ranking Member Meadows,
Congressman Grothman, and members of the subcommittee, first, I
want to express our condolences for the loss of Chairman
Cummings last week. Second, thank you for having the WMSC
before you to testify, and thank you, all of you, who were
instrumental in standing up the WMSC. Finally, I want to
recognize WMATA for its willingness to work with the new safety
oversight framework.
I was managing director of the NTSB during the
investigation of the Fort Totten collision. I'm well aware of
the complexities of Metrorail and its importance to this
region. I'm also a customer and personally depend on Metro.
It's as WMSC CEO and with that perspective that I appear before
you today.
I wish to briefly highlight some key points. We are the
independent state safety oversight agency, or SSOA, for
Metrorail. In 2012, Congress bolstered the requirements for
transit oversight nationwide, and in 2016, FTA regulatory
action triggered a 2019 congressional deadline for each state
with a rail transit agency to establish a strengthened SSOA. As
the new SSOA framework developed, it became apparent by the
2015 L'Enfant smoke event that Metrorail faced urgent safety
challenges. The investigation found many deficiencies, and the
FTA took direct charge of safety oversight.
In 2017, the region took steps to establish an independent
SSOA and to respond to the issues raised by L'Enfant. Virginia,
Maryland, and D.C. enacted identical legislation establishing
the WMSC, which Congress ratified, granting the WMSC
significant enforcement and access powers. The jurisdictions
appointed commissioners who elected Christopher Hart as chair.
I joined as CEO in 2018. In March 2019, the FTA officially
certified our oversight program, returning the WMATA's safety
oversight to the region. We are fully up and running. The
legislation provides extensive authority, which we use to carry
out six core functions that I'll briefly touch on.
We require WMATA to conduct thorough investigations of
safety incidents. Ultimately, we own the investigations. If the
reports meet our standards, our commissioners will adopt them.
Otherwise, we require WMATA to resolve any issues. So far that
process has worked. We've adopted 17 investigative reports of
public meetings, which we've held monthly since March. We
inspect tracks, and structures, and rail cars, and have carried
out observations on trains and in the rail control center.
We've undertaken 57 risk-based inspections since we were
certified in March, pointing out deficiencies and verifying
fixes.
We conduct safety audits. We expect to present our track
audit findings in the coming weeks, and our second audit will
focus on protecting track workers. In the months ahead, we'll
audit operator and controller performance, traction power, and
even elevators and escalators. We oversee corrective action
plans, or CAPs. When certified, we integrated 101 CAPs the FTA
had been overseeing into our framework. Many predated the FTA's
assumption of safety of oversight. Since certification, we've
found WMATA has taken acceptable action to warrant closure of
39 CAPs, and based on our own investigations, we're issuing new
findings that will necessitate some new CAPs.
Like all our functions, transparency is critical. I'm happy
to report that as of today, our document with CAP updates, our
CAP tracker, is now on our public website to help the public
evaluate progress. We assess emergency preparedness. L'Enfant
was a wakeup call that WMATA and its regional partners needed
to improve how they handled emergency response procedures, and
it appears that WMATA has made significant strides through
drills and exercises.
Our last core function is safety certification of major
capital projects. That means ensuring WMATA best uses safety
engineering practices. This function will be carried on Silver
Line Phase 2, where we provide a second set of eyes and will be
part of the decision to open the extension. In carrying out
other key tasks, we've built a tremendous relationship with
WMATA's inspector and have worked with his office on several
matters.
I'll close with a mention of a collision that occurred on
October 7 at 12:54 a.m. Two eastbound trains that were not
carrying passengers collided between Foggy Bottom and Farragut
West. This incident highlights how we participate in
investigations, our oversight of CAPs, and our commitment to
transparency. Of course the investigation is ongoing.
We will continue our safety oversight efforts as I've
detailed them today, and I look forward to keeping you informed
and to your questions. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, Dr. Mayer. Thank you all so much
for your testimony. I am going to yield my first five minutes
of questioning to the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin, who
has to be out of here by 3 o'clock.
Mr. Raskin. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your
kindness in doing that. Thank you all for your testimony. I
will just preface my questions by saying I am a huge champion
of the Metro. I was growing up here when it as built, and so I
went to my first party on the Metro. I went to my first prom on
the Metro. Had my first date on the Metro. I am somebody deeply
invested in its success, and I want to bring it back to its
glory days.
Let me start with this question. It has been three years
since Metro cut back to the nighttime hours from midnight to
11:30 on the weekdays and then 3 a.m. to, I think, it is 1 a.m.
And I still hear from constituents who are working late, you
know, hotels, restaurants in the thriving, you know, nighttime
sector that we have now, for whom this is a problem. What is
the timetable or schedule for getting back to the earlier
nighttime hours, Mr. Wiedefeld?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Yes. Just to put it in context, that was in
place to deal with preventive maintenance that we never did, so
that was very important. We are making great progress. We will
be preparing our budget next month. We want to get back those
hours as quickly as we can, but we cannot do it at the expense
of keeping the system safe and keeping to that maintenance
schedule that we need to have. So I am hoping to bring certain
things to the table in our budget to start to bring back those
hours because, again, that is what we want to do as quickly as
we can and as quickly as it is safe to do it.
Mr. Raskin. Good. Mr. Chairman, you will recall that there
was an effort at the hearing that Congressman Norton chaired
for us on D.C. Statehood to essentially justify the
disenfranchisement and nonrepresentation of people in
Washington by virtue of alleged ethics violations at WMATA, and
potential political corruption by a D.C. councilman. And to my
mind, this transparently political argument depends on theories
of guilt by association, and collective guilt, and mass
punishment that are totally antithetical to our notions of
individual responsibility and also democratic representation in
government.
Having said that, we have a responsibility to conduct
oversight over WMATA, and the chair, Mr. Evans, resigned from
the Board after the Board Ethics Committee found that he had
knowingly violated the WMATA code of ethics. He apparently lied
about his work on behalf of private clients and the subsequent
ethics investigation into his self-enrichment. As troubling as
his behavior was, we were also focused on the complete
breakdown in the transparency and integrity of the Board's own
ethics process. So what I would like to understand today is
what happened and how that process became so dysfunctional, and
how the reforms recently adopted will prevent similar problems
from happening again.
Mr. Smedberg, I am going to run through some of the lapses
in the ethics process as I understand them and then ask you to
explain to the committee how the new reforms address them.
First, there was no report or timely statement issued at the
end of the investigation to let the public know what had
transpired and how the Board planned to address Mr. Evans'
actions. How did this happen, and how did the reforms address
the problem?
Mr. Smedberg. Congressman, the Ethics Committee came to a
determination, and we determined that the issue was resolved,
and that was allowed under the current code at the time. But
myself and other members of the committee realized that that
was not probably good for the organization and the Board moving
forward, and that we needed----
Mr. Raskin. And not good for the public.
Mr. Smedberg. Right, and the public, that we needed reform,
and we needed greater transparency. That is why I pushed for
the reforms and had the full support of the Board. As I said in
my opening statement, I outlined some of the key things. I
think a couple I want to highlight again, first all conflicts
will be referred to the IG. The IG will then make a
determination whether it was a violation or not. That written
summary will be public, will be discussed by the Board and
acted on by the Board in public. So that is, you know, direct
attempts to address a lot of the concerns that you----
Mr. Raskin. Got you.
Mr. Smedberg [continuing]. and a lot of other people have
had.
Mr. Raskin. Several of the members, including Mr. Evans,
made false statements in public about the adjudication of the
investigation and its contents. How would your reforms address
and prevent a repeat of that?
Mr. Smedberg. Again, I think having the IG report out,
bring the report to the Board in public and having the Board
discuss whether there was a violation or not in that written
summary in public, I think, will help address----
Mr. Raskin. Okay. And finally--I can get one more in here--
the subject of the investigation apparently threatened and
intimidated staff to influence the outcome of the Ethics
Committee process. How would the reforms address something like
this from happening?
Mr. Smedberg. Well, I think they are, you know, again
sending things to the IG for independent review outside of the
committee process where staff was involved and helping organize
things, I think, is going to go a long way. And, again,
reporting out to the Board in public with a written summary,
you know, I think, and that is our attempt to address that
issue.
Mr. Raskin. I appreciate that. My time is up. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Smedberg. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the gentlemen. Mr. Grothman?
Mr. Grothman. Yes, I just have a few questions here. First
of all, when you look at the statement, in the last two years,
and this is for Mr. Wiedefeld. In the last two years, pension
contributions have gone up 21 percent. I would like to ask why
the big increase, and what type of pension plan are we giving
the employees.
Mr. Wiedefeld. The pension system that we have, we have two
parts of it. One is for represented employees, meaning they are
unionized, and non-represented employees. So the represented
employees are through a CBA, collective bargaining agreement.
That is how that has been established over decades. We
negotiate that every so often. There are certain things that we
try to get as part of that process, and there are certain
things that the representatives----
Mr. Grothman. We only got five minutes. What is the plan?
What are the benefits? When is the expected retirement?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Retirement is they basically get a portion.
Like most pension plans, it is based on how many years you work
there, a portion of your salary. It is multiplied out. It does
allow, for instance, that you can apply overtime toward that
number. That is part of the contract. It requires the employee
to contribute roughly three percent. That is part of the
contract. So those are some of the----
Mr. Grothman. And what is the benefit? What is the benefit?
Mr. Wiedefeld. It is a salary, in effect, a salary going
forward based on, again, there are multipliers----
Mr. Grothman. Yes, I know. We get a benefit here.
Mr. Connolly. Excuse me. In other words, defined benefit.
Mr. Grothman. Compute it. Tell us what it is. When is the
expected retirement? What is the average payout for somebody?
You know, it shouldn't be that difficult. If I make $60,000 a
year for 30 years there, what is my benefit?
Mr. Wiedefeld. It would be about, that would be around
$40,000, I believe, but I will get back to you with the exact
number on that.
Mr. Grothman. How many years do you have to work to get a
full benefit?
Mr. Wiedefeld. It varies. It depends. I can get you all the
details of the pension plan. I don't have all the details----
Mr. Grothman. Okay. Well, why the 21 percent increase? What
is the deal here? Why do we have a 21 percent increase in the--
--
Mr. Wiedefeld. I am not sure what that is referring to.
Mr. Grothman. It says, ``Pension contributions have risen
over $32 million, a 21 percent increase since Fiscal Year
2017.'' That would be in two years a 21 percent increase in
pension contributions. Is that accurate or not?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Again, I am not sure what you are referring
to, but I would have to followup on that.
Mr. Grothman. Well, somebody wrote it here. Okay. Recently,
D.C. decriminalized what I think they refer to as fare evasion,
which I take it to mean jumping these things. I ride the Metro,
but at least somebody puts down here it costs us $36 million a
year. Do you think that is true?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Our estimates are in that range, yes.
Mr. Grothman. Okay. Could you comment on giving up $36
million? I always love riding the Metro. It is a blast. But I
know some people don't like to ride it or they say ``you are
riding the Metro.'' And I suppose that is because they think it
is, I don't know, dangerous or something. I think fare jumping
sometimes intimidates people or they don't like it. Could you
comment on the idea that we are decriminalizing fare evasion,
which apparently causes some people to think that a higher
number of people are going to, you know, jump over there and
ride the train when they shouldn't? Could that result in less
people wanting to ride the cars, and also your $36 million a
year, could you comment on that?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Yes. The decriminalization we did not
support. It is not consistent across the region. Maryland and
Virginia all have different ways that they deal with fare
evasion. We wanted it consistent for our police and for our
passengers, but, you know, the District decided that is what
they wanted to do.
Mr. Grothman. Okay. It is too bad, and I am not a
Congressman who travels abroad a lot. About 15 years ago I went
to Taiwan, and it was such an overwhelmingly law-abiding city,
and I hope we try to make our capital as law abiding as
possible. It should be kind of the star jewel of the United
States. Next question. As far as percent of operating costs
paid by fares, could you compare the Washington system to
Chicago, say, or some other? We will say Chicago.
Mr. Wiedefeld. Sure. We are one of the highest. We recover
roughly 42, I think it is about 42 percent out of the fare box.
I think the average in transit systems is in the 30's, low
30's.
Mr. Grothman. Here it says, and maybe the people that give
me this information aren't right. Operating revenues only cover
22 percent of the total budget. Is that accurate or they are
making that up when they----
Mr. Wiedefeld. I don't think that is accurate.
Mr. Grothman. Okay. Okay. Well, there is my time, and thank
you giving me an extra 10 seconds.
Mr. Connolly. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Grothman. At this
time, I will enter into the record on the subject of Metro's
pensions an article from the Washington Post by Freddy Kunkle a
year ago, last September, September 22, that talks about the
pension issues at Metro.
Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Connolly. The gentlelady from the District of Columbia.
Ms. Norton. I want to thank my friend from the region, Mr.
Connolly, again, for this very important hearing. Again, I want
to congratulate you, Mr. Wiedefeld, for the progress that Metro
has made under your leadership. That is what I tried to
emphasize in my own remarks.
I have a question for Mr. Mayer about cybersecurity. Mr.
Mayer, I am not alone among Members of Congress who have
expressed concerns about the purchase of Metro cars, about 800
of them, from China. We are concerned it would give an avenue
for espionage into our transit system. And many of our security
experts, of course, come to work every day to the capital on
that transit system. So, well, I guess perhaps Mr. Cherrington
is who I should ask this question. Does the purchase of Chinese
rail cars pose a security concern to you or to anyone you know
of?
Mr. Cherrington. Ms. Norton, it does pose a concern. I
can't tell Metro what to buy and where to buy it, but I have
raised the red flag on particularly buying these cars from
China. I would say the company that sells them undercuts all
the competitors in the United States and around the world. I
believe they do that for a reason. We issued a management alert
regarding this. We believe that whenever a subway system runs
underneath something, particularly as critical as the Nation's
capital, the seat of power in the world, and all the targets
here, we are concerned that it can be controlled by a third
party or outside of the Metro system.
We can't guarantee that it would, but we have raised the
alarm bells that it may, and we believe a state-owned agency
that is selling it that doesn't have the best track record for
cybersecurity certainly could do that. Now, it may never
happen, but we have raised the alarm bells. And, yes, if you
ask if we are concerned, the OIG is concerned, yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. I appreciate that response. I do believe it is
your professional duty to raise those concerns, and I do want
you to know that Congress is hearing those concerns. Do you
plan to audit or investigate this planned purchase?
Mr. Cherrington. Yes, ma'am. We audit all of the major
purchases anyway. We are looking at overhead costs, the
contractings that are in the contract. We also made a
recommendation to the general manager, which he accepted, to
make sure that cybersecurity provisions are in the procurements
before they are even let out so that we are protected that way.
But, yes, that is something that we are going to be tracking
closely, whatever the general manager decides to do.
Ms. Norton. How about you, Mr. Smedberg? Do you or other
Board members have concerns about the purchase of Chinese rail
cars for a system here in the Nation's capital?
Mr. Smedberg. We had been briefed----
Ms. Norton. Would you please turn on your mic?
Mr. Smedberg. I am sorry, Congresswoman. We had been
briefed, but this is an active procurement, and the Board has
delegated the authority to the general manager in this regard.
You know, we have confidence in he and his senior team who are
leading this effort.
Ms. Norton. Thank you. I am pleased that all of you are
alerted to the possible risks posed. Mr. Mayer, I note that
there have been a number of corrective actions--101, that is a
lot--when you inherited from FTA the safety commission that has
been a major concern here in the Congress, and you closed 39.
You had worked on 32. But I have got to note the Farragut West
train collision on October 7, so recently. Have you prioritized
that? You had not gotten to that matter. Have you prioritized
this among your remaining corrective action plans?
Mr. Mayer. Our focus has been on assessing each of the
corrective actions, ensuring that the deliverables are well
understood by both parties, and also working with WMATA to set
reasonable timelines for the completion of each of the CAPs.
Ms. Norton. Well, suppose an accident--I just talked about
one--occurs. Does that cause you to change your priorities?
Mr. Mayer. I asked my staff on the day after the accident
to take a look at the entire body of CAPs to identify any CAPs
in the list that could prevent train-to-train collisions. That
work is ongoing, and we will report out on it in a couple of
weeks at our next public meeting.
Ms. Norton. Well, I wish you would get back to us on any
priorities you make when there are accidents or incidents on
the system as you go about your work. And I thank the gentleman
for----
Mr. Connolly. I thank the gentlelady and thank her for her
leadership. Is Mr. Sarbanes coming back? In his absence, the
chair is happy to call on the gentlelady from Virginia, 10th
District, Ms. Wexton. Welcome.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for yielding
and for inviting me to participate in this hearing. I feel like
I am back on the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission
where I served for five years when I was in the state
legislature. I was glad to hear you bring up the dedicated
funding for state for good repair and maintenance, which was a
long time coming obviously. I was very proud to vote for that
as well as the safety commission.
Metro is vital to the success and growth of Northern
Virginia and the daily operation of the Federal Government.
Silver Line Phase 1 has already given my constituents who live
in and around Tysons Corner, McLean, and Reston access to
Metro. And once Phase 2 is completed, constituents in my home
of Loudoun County will have easy access to the District, and
D.C. residents will find it easier than ever to travel to
Dulles Airport or job centers in Northern Virginia. But despite
this great potential, as we have discussed here today, the
Silver Line faces many current and future challenges that need
to be addressed in order to ensure that Metro is safe,
reliable, built to last, and affordable and accessible to all.
Now, with regard to that affordability, there have been
reports of potential fare increases being considered in the
near future. Given that WMATA factors mileage into its fare
schedule and that those riders who are boarding the system at
Wiehle and traveling into D.C. are already paying the maximum
fare, Mr. Wiedefeld and Mr. Smedberg, can you tell me, A, if
fare increases are being considered, and if they are, what
impact do you think that would have on the maximum fare for
those folks who are traveling on Phase 2 of Silver Line?
Mr. Wiedefeld. The Board does have a policy of visiting
fare increases every two years. We have not done one for more
than period, so obviously every year when we prepare the
budget, we look at that. And whether or not we would then also
adjust the CAP would be another issue associated with that. Our
biggest focus, though, is getting people to use the SmartTrip
cards and providing a discount for that even if we were to
increase fares because that is really the best way to use the
system for us, both operationally and efficiency wise, rather
than collecting lots of dollars if everyone, more people get to
use the Smart Card. So we tend to give benefits for people that
do that. So as we explore our budget for next year, that is one
of the things we will be considering so it doesn't penalize
people for using the system. The more you use the system, the
more of a discount, in effect, that you get.
Ms. Wexton. Very good. Now, has WMATA considered other
revenue sources, such as advertising or new parking passes or
things like that as a way to not have to increase fares?
Mr. Wiedefeld. We do. Under the three-percent subsidy cap,
the current budget year we have to come up internally, in
effect, with $37 million. So that is exactly what we are
looking at is obviously more efficiencies and then also ways to
generate revenue, non-fare revenue. So it is advertising. Quite
a bit there. Potential naming rights, things of that sort. And
then just thinking out of the box in total about joint
development is obviously another avenue for us as we do that.
So all those things are the things that we have in the works,
and I believe you will see more of that in the very near
future.
Ms. Wexton. Very good. Thank you.
Mr. Smedberg. And, Congresswoman, just what the general
manager said. You know, the Board is supportive given the cap,
the three-percent cap, you know, looking at innovative ways to
bring new revenue in in addition to bringing in new riders. The
Silver Line Phase 2 is obviously going to be important to that
ultimately, but just continuing the improvements and safety and
reliability of the system, the customer experience, bringing
riders back in is also part of that formula as well.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you very much. And, Mr. Cherrington, I
want to draw your attention to your two management alerts, one
from August 16, 2019, having to do with the results for core
testing of concrete panels, and the other from August 19, 2019,
having to do with the track ballast at the railyard. In these
management alerts, you brought up that you had some
recommendations, and that you were recommending that WMATA not
accept either the railyard or the concrete panels at the above-
ground stations unless and until everything was fixed. What
confidence do you have that MWAA and Capital Rail constructors
and the other contractors are doing what they are supposed to
be doing since that time?
Mr. Cherrington. Congresswoman, we issued the two
management alerts to provide to the general manager. He asked
us to look at this back in August 2018, to conduct an
independent review not only of the concrete but also of any
other issues we found. Those were two that we found. We
immediately notified the general manager.
Our experts' report should be out within a couple of
months, with the final recommendations on what we should or
should not do. That means if this spray actually penetrated the
concrete and if it can hold, and all subsequent spraying of
that maintenance over the years, how that is going to take
place, how much it is going to cost, and also if the ballast
can be recondition and if it has been safety utilized.
So we hope to have our final report out with the
recommendations, like I said, within hopefully less than two
months, depending on any unforeseen events.
Ms. Wexton. Well, thank you. I just would caution WMATA
against accepting the project without assurance that it really
is built to last, because even if we take some money now and
put it an escrow account there is no guarantee that the
subcontractors and contractors will be around when we need to
take advantage of that.
Mr. Cherrington. We understand completely. Thank you,
ma'am.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. The chair heartily agrees with the
gentlelady. We must--we can't allow that.
Ms. Wexton. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you for bringing that up.
The gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes.
Mr. Sarbanes. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to
thank all of you for coming today and giving us this update on
the progress that WMATA is making. I think in many respects, at
a time when we are seeing these nationwide decreases in the use
of public transit, you all managed to flip the script. And I
know in some ways that is just about getting back to an earlier
baseline. But to be able to do that in the face of these
trends, I think, is very commendable.
Mr. Wiedefeld, you had said that for the first eight months
of 2019 Metrorail provided 2 million more trips compared to the
same period last year, this in spite of the fact that we had a
shutdown of the Federal Government and we had a summer shutdown
of service south of Reagan National Airport. So that is a very
commendable achievement.
One of the phrases, actually, that Elijah Cummings used all
the time was that we should be effective and efficient. That
was his favorite phrase. Probably in the context of this
hearing and some of the testimony we have gotten he would say
an ethical, ``effective, efficient, and ethical.'' I think that
WMATA is leaning into all of those attributes as an
organization right now.
But Mr. Wiedefeld, speak to both the--my sense, and maybe
you can just expand on this, is that the increased
favorability, trust, whatever it is that is the best way to
describe how people view--how the riders view the system, that
the gains you have made there are a combination of real
improvements, and if you would like to speak to some of those I
encourage you to emphasize that again.
But also, the candor with which you have pursued things,
because I think that just the way a dog can smell fear, a
commuter can smell when they feel like they are not being
leveled with, in terms of safety issues, in terms of how long
something is going to take to get done.
And just the mere fact of trying to be transparent, calling
it like it is, saying to people, ``Well, if we are going to do
X it means we are going to have to suffer Y for a certain
period of time, but X appears to be something you value so we
are going to go do that, and it is going to hurt.'' Just that,
in and of itself, has helped to improve the image of WMATA. I
credit you with a lot of that, because I have seen the work you
have done wearing other hats in the past.
But talk, if you would, to that in particular, that idea of
being candid, being transparent, being as honest as you
possibly can, every single day, with the challenges that are
faced. Because we have found it refreshing, in terms of the way
you have come and presented, but I imagine that your riders are
finding it refreshing as well. It is a tough standard to stick
with every single day. So you add a burden to your job
description when you invite that but I think it makes a huge
difference.
Mr. Wiedefeld. Thank you, Congressman. One of the biggest
things that we did as an agency, literally from the ground up,
was that we put safety above service, and we believed it. So
what you have seen play out is that we make decisions based on
that first, and to be frank, that is not historically what we
were doing, because of the pressures to put service out there,
whether it was putting service out there that shouldn't be put
out, whether it is putting out hours of service at the expense
of maintenance and safety. And I think, unfortunately, we had
gotten to a point where we had lost the credibility in the
community, and we had to focus on rebuilding that credibility
by doing what we said we were going to do.
It is painful. The hours is one example of that. The
platform work, where we had to shut down platforms. We do--we
are constantly communicating with our customers. We did focus
groups when we started the Back to Good initiative, and we took
some heat for calling it Back to Good versus Back to Great, or
something else. But literally they said to us, ``Do not tell us
that, because we know what this system was. We lived it for 20,
30 years, where there were no issues. And we have seen it
decline. So don't tell us that you are going to get back there
because we know you are not going to get there. Get us back to
good.'' So that terminology literally came from our customers.
So we want to keep that. You know, it is something that we
have to constantly remind ourselves that the customers have a
certain view and that is what we should be focusing on. It is
not my view. It is not necessarily other pressures that we get.
But what does the customer really want? They want it safe and
they want it reliable, and that is what we continue to focus
on.
Mr. Sarbanes. Well, if I had a choice between a slow that
said ``Make WMATA Great Again'' or ``Wait and Make WMATA Good
Again,'' I would choose the latter.
I yield back.
Mr. Connolly. I thank the gentleman, and I have got to say,
maybe that is a catchy phrase. It is reminiscent of Garrison
Keillor's Lake Wobegon days, where the local grocery was called
Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery. I don't think we want to settle
for that. We will get back to good but we want to get to
excellent.
I want to ask a series of rapid-fire questions for the
record, and I thank you, Mr. Sarbanes, for joining us today.
Let me begin with maybe the easiest. Mr. Smedberg, what is
the position of the Metro Board with respect to the MAIA
legislation I described, that now has the unanimous support of
the National Capital Region Delegation?
Mr. Smedberg. We support the bill 2520.
Mr. Connolly. Excellent answer. Would it make a difference
getting the Federal Government--two, among others, but, well,
maybe three things new in that bill. One is to power the IG and
give him some money out of the operating subsidy we provide.
Good thing?
Mr. Smedberg. Good thing.
Mr. Connolly. We also provide an additional pot of capital
funding, contingent inter alia on safety certification
measures. Would that also be a helpful thing, from your point
of view, over and above the basic $150 million PRIIA funding?
Mr. Smedberg. That would be a good thing.
Mr. Connolly. Another good thing. And then just the general
concept of the Federal Government finally stepping up and
providing some subsidy, operating subsidy for the first time.
Any views on that?
Mr. Smedberg. That would not only be a good thing, that
would be a great thing.
Mr. Connolly. Great thing. Getting from good to great
there, Mr. Wiedefeld. Okay.
Well, thank you, because we need to know that we do have
Metro--the local support for this bill moving forward, if we
are going to make a case. But I personally have long believed,
as a local official, the Federal Government is a free rider. It
doesn't provide operating subsidies and everyone else has to
basically underwrite Federal employees using metro.
Mr. Smedberg. And as you know, Mr. Chairman, in Virginia,
in particular, the localities are the ones that pick up the
lion's share----
Mr. Connolly. Exactly.
Mr. Smedberg [continuing]. as you are well aware.
Mr. Connolly. Unlike Maryland.
Mr. Smedberg. And having the Federal piece there is vitally
important for, so the general manager, his team, can really
continue the safety, reliability, and the maintenance issues.
Mr. Connolly. Exactly. Now let me you, Mr. Smedberg, and
you, Mr. Cherrington, just some quick questions of Mr. Evans.
We can't ignore this subject. It seems to me--and I think to my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle, l'affaire Evans, as
chairman of the Metro Board, really revealed some weaknesses in
internal governance. No checks and balances on ethical
behavior, no commitment to transparency, in terms of an
investigation in the findings, no clear disciplinary measures
in place when an ethical infraction is found.
In this case we had a situation where, from the beginning,
the process was flawed, not documented, not carefully recorded
and reported. There were lies about what the report did and did
not find, and initially he was cleared. There was nothing--not
true. There was another member of the Metro Board, also from
D.C., who decided his role was to be protector of the gentleman
accused of ethical violations. And really, there were no
automatic penalties. Ultimately the gentleman under pressure
resigned.
But that suggests to me a system that is woefully
inadequate, in terms of self-policing, and what goes wrong with
that is loss of confidence. We don't need that right now,
especially up here, where, you know, Ms. Norton and I and Ms.
Wexton and others are trying to build support among our
colleagues for why this Metro system is different. It needs the
full support of the Federal Government. That incident didn't
help anything. It is more than tell me it has gotten better.
Specifically, is my delineation of what happened a fair
account, Mr. Cherrington, and are you, as the IG, confident
that measures are now in place that that couldn't happen again?
Mr. Cherrington. Yes, Mr. Chairman, and, yes, we are
confident.
Mr. Connolly. Very good. Thank you very much. Do you want
to expand?
Mr. Cherrington. Sir?
Mr. Connolly. Do you want to expand on, well, like what?
Why should we be confident?
Mr. Cherrington. Because we believe the OIG can objectively
and independently conduct any ethical investigations of Mr.
Evans or any in the future, and we can also trace back and look
at any policies from the past or in the future.
Mr. Connolly. But that is your office. What about the--
wasn't there like an ethics committee, Mr. Smedberg----
Mr. Smedberg. Yes.
Mr. Connolly [continuing]. of the board?
Mr. Smedberg. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Connolly. And it completely fell down on the job,
didn't it?
Mr. Smedberg. Well, I am not sure we completely fell down
on the ground. We did do an expedited review. We had findings.
As a committee we came together on consensus on one of the
findings. But we did realize, as you have highlighted in some
of your comments there, that there were deficiencies in the
process, and we admit that and accept that. And the effort over
the summer, working with the general counsel and others, we
reviewed what other systems do in the ethics area, and we
looked for best practices. The reforms that we put together and
brought forward to the board and that were ultimately approved
we think are going to set a very high standard for us in terms
of accountability, transparency.
In addition to what is outlined, the ethics forms that we
fill out annually have been changed, are more specific in
nature. Getting rid of any definition of actual versus apparent
conflict, erasing that, including household members, the
definition of household members.
Mr. Connolly. Let me ask you, Mr. Smedberg, is there a
provision now so that if there are serious charges like that
against a member of the board that member of the board, without
prejudice, steps aside pending adjudication of those charges?
Mr. Smedberg. Yes. There would be--that person would step
aside if he or she would----
Mr. Connolly. Which is not what happened in the Evans case.
Correct?
Mr. Smedberg. Correct.
Mr. Connolly. All right. Is that new? Is that provision
new?
Mr. Smedberg. Well, there would be--well, that was already
in the code. There was no real specific, as to what happens in
that regard. We would certainly be open to--you know, they
would--we assume they are going to step aside during any ethics
investigation. The current code does not prevent them from
participating in other board-related matters, but as it relates
to the specific ethics review or violation, or potential
violation, that person would step aside, or would recuse
themselves.
Mr. Connolly. I guess I want to be reassured that, God
forbid, but if be the chairman of the board, for the sake of
the organization that chairman steps aside pending adjudication
of the issues.
Mr. Smedberg. Yes. I mean, we would be open to, you know,
exploring that option, in a broader context, not just the
review of the ethics committee.
Mr. Connolly. Yes. I highly commend it to you, because
yours is not just one audience.
Mr. Smedberg. Right.
Mr. Connolly. It just is essential that the person we are
dealing with, you know, be above reproach.
Mr. Smedberg. Understand.
Mr. Connolly. And let me ask you, Mr. Cherrington, while we
are talking about this, you have been the IG since 2017.
Mr. Cherrington. Yes, sir.
Mr. Connolly. Have you seen improvements in WMATA with
respect to your office and how you interact with management and
the board?
Mr. Cherrington. Well, I have always had good interaction
with board and with Mr. Wiedefeld, so as far as personalities
and getting along, that has never been a problem. So to say has
that improved? I would say it still remains very good.
As far as practice and procedures, policies, of things that
we have audited or investigations we have had that followed up
on, to my understanding the last 2 1/2 years Metro management
has accepted all of the recommendations that we have made.
There have been a lot of policy changes based on that. There
has been a lot of positive change. So short answer, yes, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. You have adequate resources with which
to conduct your work.
Mr. Cherrington. Yes, sir. We do now, because of the
relationship we have, but that needs to be institutionalized,
in Federal law or otherwise. It needs to be sound in Federal
law so that my successors and so the future--so if there a
change of board management, change of Metro management, they
can't make policy changes.
Mr. Connolly. Well, as you know, in the MAIA bill that the
regional delegation unanimously supports, we have designed $10
million of the $50 operating subsidy for your office, to
address the very point you make.
Mr. Cherrington. Yes, sir, and we appreciate the support.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. Mr. Mayer, a final line of questioning
on safety, for the record again. First of all, do you agree
that if people are discovered to have falsified safety records,
whose job it is to inspect safety, that they are a--they are
disqualified from employment at Metro, or ought to be?
Mr. Mayer. I don't want to give a weasel-y answer because
obviously Metro has got to be responsible for its own H.R.
responsibilities. If employees are properly trained and they
know how to do the job and they are willfully disregarding it,
then there has to be accountability.
Mr. Connolly. Hm. It sounds bureaucratic. I mean,
accountability--like what?
Mr. Mayer. Oh, I would agree with it.
Mr. Connolly. I mean, we have had deaths on the system.
Mr. Mayer. If someone is properly trained and willfully
disregards procedures and it leads to something like that,
absolutely, they should not be working at Metro.
Mr. Connolly. So you would back Mr. Wiedefeld in seeking
disciplinary action against such individuals.
Mr. Mayer. Yes, I would.
Mr. Connolly. Without prejudging.
Mr. Mayer. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. But, I mean, if it is clear--we have the
evidence. Mr. Wiedefeld had the intestinal fortitude to try----
Mr. Mayer. Oh, absolutely.
Mr. Connolly [continuing]. to deal with that so that we
weed that out and we set a standard that says you can't do
that.
Mr. Mayer. Absolutely. I don't mean to appear----
Mr. Connolly. Okay.
Mr. Mayer [continuing]. I----
Mr. Connolly. Because I think the public needs that
reassurance.
Mr. Mayer. Absolutely. And I support him on that. Generally
speaking, discipline is not something that is in the lane of
safety.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. Did you look at the October 7 incident,
in which two Metro trains collided?
Mr. Mayer. Yes. My staff and I were onsite during that
Monday morning. We have--are working with Metro. The
investigation is ongoing. The day after the accident I called
for an engineering summit to be held. That was held Thursday of
last week. I am very appreciative to the number of WMATA staff
that came. We had a very candid discussion about some of the
CAPs that exist, some of the engineering approaches, and we are
working now to digest that information. And, of course, Metro
is investigating the accident under our overall oversight.
Mr. Connolly. There were printed reports that the cause of
the accident was human, that it wasn't due to some electrical
failure or, you know, signal failure. It actually was a human
failure. Can you confirm that?
Mr. Mayer. Well, you know, human factors are a factor in
most every accident, at some level. The trains in the Metro
system are currently in manual operation, so if a train is
going to move it must be under the operator's command. So, yes,
I don't want to get into trying to blame a particular operator
or a particular action, because I am interested in systemic
fixes and systemic solutions.
But, yes, human factors are very active in the
investigation.
Mr. Connolly. Well, let me just say, Dr. Mayer, in a system
that is trying to recover ridership, and that has lost a lot of
ridership because of loss of confidence, in safety, No. 1,
reliability, No. 2, I just think--I would commend to you,
speaking a little bit more forthrightly and directly, I don't
know that the public would understand your last answer. But the
public needs to, and we need to either tell them, ``You know,
we can't give you a good answer,'' or give them a reassuring
answer. But it has got to be forthright so that people know the
system is or is not safe.
I don't want to think I take my life in my hands every time
I take a Metro ride, and we have got some--we have had deaths
in the system.
Mr. Mayer. Absolutely.
Mr. Connolly. This is not a theoretical question.
Mr. Mayer. We share your value of transparency. We will be
transparent.
Mr. Connolly. Well, I would urge you to speak
transparently.
Mr. Mayer. I will do my very best, sir.
Mr. Connolly. Thank you, because I think the public is
counting on you, and we are counting on you.
Mr. Mayer. Your words mean a great deal and we will take
them to heart.
Mr. Connolly. Okay. I see my good friend from Maryland, Mr.
Trone, has arrived, and the chair now recognizes Mr. Trone for
five minutes of questioning.
Mr. Trone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon. One
hundred seventy-four million riders. Wow. I mean, it is local
riders but it is also tourists. I mean, you guys are the face
of our Nation's Capital, and it is really important that it is
not just the stations and the rail cars, but the real face is
the team, the people--the workers, the management, et cetera.
So there have been a number of issues regarding that face,
that faces our customer-facing area. So, Mr. Wiedefeld, what
steps have you done to improve service? Let's talk about that a
while.
Mr. Wiedefeld. In terms of service or----
Mr. Trone. Customer service.
Mr. Wiedefeld [continuing]. customer service. Yes. First
and foremost, I think we have to recognize what our employees--
they do a tremendous job, the vast majority of them, on
customer service, to the point where they literally save
people's lives. They put themselves in danger to do that. That
happens on a regular basis, and just recently it happened
several times in the last month, or the last two months. So I
have to commend our workers, because they do that every day.
When we don't have workers that do not perform to that we
basically direct them, this is the way--what is expected of
you, and if not then we go down a path that they do not belong
with us. They have chosen not to bind to our culture of
customer service and that this probably isn't the place for
them. So we continue to do that.
We are working very closely--as you can imagine, we have
very work force, from a representative work force. We are
working very closely with leadership in the union area to work
through all types of issues. One of the biggest issues that our
bus operators have is just some of the issues they deal with,
day to day, in some of the communities they serve, how they are
treated, and get them to basically not take the bait. Right?
They are not there to do that. They are there to serve the
community. And things of that sort. We reach out to the
community itself, to have them respect our operators,
particular the face-to-face instances.
So there are a number of things like that. But, you know,
they are professionals, and we want to treat them like
professionals, but then we expect them to act like
professionals and perform like professionals. So it is a two-
way street to get better customer service.
Mr. Trone. So how many total workers do you have in the
system, full-time equivalents?
Mr. Wiedefeld. 12,000.
Mr. Trone. And in the last 12 months, how many of those
were terminated for customer service issues?
Mr. Wiedefeld. I don't know specifically for customer
service, but we have certain rules that they break them. It
averages around 3 percent, in that range, if I recall.
Mr. Trone. Three percent for termination, for----
Mr. Wiedefeld. For termination, on an ongoing basis, for
things that occur.
Mr. Trone. How many different mistakes do they have to make
before they are actually terminated?
Mr. Wiedefeld. It varies. There are certain things we call
cardinal rules. If you break them, that is it. You are done. So
we have a series of those. But we obviously have a process we
have to go through, but if you break a cardinal rule that is
something that immediately occurs.
Mr. Trone. So that speaks to the standards. What are some
of the other--what are some of the key standards that you have,
these cardinal rules?
Mr. Wiedefeld. You cannot lie to us, for instance, when we
have an investigation. We need to know the truth right away,
and that is one of our major cardinal rules. Obviously you
can't use a phone. You can't obviously come in--you know, you
can't do certain things, obviously, with alcohol. All those
types of things are immediate things. There are certain things
that you just cannot do that if they are--they are primarily
safety related. Anything that puts yourself and/or other
employees or customers at danger is immediate.
Mr. Trone. Is there anything that is purely service
related, how we talk and face our customer and deal with our
customer----
Mr. Wiedefeld. Not an immediate----
Mr. Trone [continuing]. with respect and dignity?
Mr. Wiedefeld. Not an immediate firing for something like
that, but basically you do, in effect, collect points for
something like that, and that would be something we would deal
with as well.
Mr. Trone. Okay. GAO reported, in September 2018, that
WMATA implemented two employee performance management systems,
but these systems lack key elements of effectively design
systems, and that WMATA has failed to implement comprehensive
policies and procedures for its performance management system.
And the example was that GAO reviewed 50 performance
evaluations, and 20 percent--that is a pretty big number--20
percent included scoring errors where the rating was completely
inconsistent with the supporting review.
GAO reported three recommendations and all of them are
still open. Where are we at there?
Mr. Wiedefeld. We have automated that entire process. We
basically put in that any salary increase that someone would be
eligible for is dependent upon basically submitting that
performance plan, that basically is monitored on a regular
basis throughout the year, and then that becomes, basically,
the benchmark upon any salary adjustment that you might have.
So it was both automated and made real in terms of salary
adjustments.
Mr. Trone. What I worry about is that ensuring that the
performance management actually is not just simply a check-the-
box type thing, and that the Metrorail employees get legitimate
reviews and document success and deficiencies. You know, I come
out of the business world and I had like 7,000 team member in
my company. What is the most important day for any team member
is the day of your annual review. And you should be celebrated
to talk about the things that are excellent, that you have
done, and lots of atta-boys, but we also have to be just
honest, not critical but honest about where we had some--we
could do better. But a check-the-box destroys the entire
system. And then there is no possibility for the organization
to rise in customer service.
Mr. Wiedefeld. I agree, and that is why we changed it, the
things that we put in place.
One of the things we have done is historically, in a lot of
government jobs, everyone gets the same sort of raise, the
reality is. We changed that. Basically, we give each manager a
pool of dollars, and basically that pool then is--so if you
have someone who is here, here, and here, you have to choose.
So if someone needs work, they need to get to work, their
salary is going to reflect that, their adjustment. If someone
is in the middle, that is fine. But to get at a higher end you
have to show that.
So again, it is just not a blanket, everyone gets two
percent or something like that. We have changed that way of
thinking, again, to drive home what is it that your goals are
for the year and are you achieving them? That is going to drive
what you get, in terms of a salary adjustment.
Mr. Trone. So what is the average salary adjustment,
percentage-wise, with that system?
Mr. Connolly. You may answer the question, but the
gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Wiedefeld. About 2 1/2 percent, in that range.
Mr. Trone. Thank you.
Mr. Connolly. Would the gentleman yield for a question?
Mr. Trone. Yes.
Mr. Connolly. You come from a business background.
Mr. Trone. Yes, sir.
Mr. Connolly. How important is customer service to the
success of the enterprise?
Mr. Trone. It is everything. I mean, we measure our
customer service in my company. We have 200-and-some stores. We
literally measure it every single month, and that helps drive
the team members' bonus systems. So the store management team,
it is not just EBITDA but it is how we take care of the
customer. That is how we live and die. You know, price--anybody
can compete on price. You can compete on selection. But it is
customer service that is the key.
Mr. Connolly. In retail business, my understand is
something like this, that the average happy customer tells six
people about that experience, positive experience, but the
average unhappy customer tells like 20.
Mr. Trone. They tell everybody.
Mr. Connolly. Yes.
Mr. Trone. Sure.
Mr. Connolly. So, obviously, the name of the game is to
have a lot more happy customers, because it is harder to
buildup that goodwill, and the more you have unhappy customers,
the more by word-of-mouth, the enterprise suffers, people don't
want to use it.
Mr. Trone. We use something called an NPS, a Net Promoter
Score, and it is how much your customer is willing to promote
your business. So we will rank ourselves with, you know, Trader
Joe's, and Walmart will be at the bottom. And someone like
Trader Joe's will be at the top.
Mr. Connolly. So I couldn't agree more with my friend, and
I know Mr. Wiedefeld knows, I have talked about it, and I have
talked about what had crept up as becoming a culture of
mediocrity, and with respect to customer services, sometimes
indifference. And not everybody. Some people are very dedicated
to their mission. They wake up every morning and whistle while
they work. But not enough of them.
I think it has a lot to do with the enterprise. We are
dealing with fundamentals like safety, but if you want to bring
back ridership and rebuild confidence, I have got to know that
I am dealing with a friendly work force that cares about me as
a passenger, and, by the way, is trained in safety procedures
so that when something goes wrong, the conductor or somebody on
that train knows what to do, besides telling people, ``I don't
know what to do.'' And all too often, in safety incidents,
frankly, the feedback we get from citizens or riders is that
some of the Metro personnel were of no help at all, and we
can't have that either. They have got to see themselves as a
resource in the event of something emergent.
So I thank my friend for bringing it up, because I think we
have got to focus on that as something that is key to
revitalizing and optimizing the comeback we are seeing. There
are a lot of hopeful signs, not least because, you know,
management has paid attention. But there is a long way to go in
the area of customer service. I thank my friend for pointing it
out.
With that I--oh, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Hoyer's,
the Majority Leader, full statement be entered into the hearing
record. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Connolly. I want to thank our witnesses for their time
today. Without objection, all members will have five
legislative days within which to submit additional written
questions, if they choose, for the witnesses, to go through the
chair, which will be forwarded to the witnesses for their
response. And I would ask all of our witnesses in the event
that you get such questions that you respond as expeditiously
as you possibly can.
With that we are--what?
Without objection, Mr. Trone has been recognized to
participate in this hearing, after the fact. So ordered.
We are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:42 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]