Department of Transportation and related agencies appropriations for fiscal year 1994 : hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, One Hundred Third Congress, first session, on H.R. 2490/2750 ...

772 Pages·1993·23.4 MB·English

by  United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Appropriations. Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies

y
y\\ S. Hrg. 103-291, Pt. 3
Senate
Hearings
B^fi^fl the Committee on Appropriations
^
Y4.AP
6/2;S. HRG. 103-291/
PT.3
Departneot of Transportation and Re. ..^^B
of
Department
and Related
Transportation
Agencies Appropriations
Fiscal Year 1994
1 Q ^^ CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
H.R. 2490/2750
PART 3 (Pages 1673-2435)
SUBMITTEDQUESTIONSANDSTATEMENTS jf^iltf^UCf^i UfUUDUh^ir^t
APR 1 9 19W

S. Hrg. 103-291, Pr. 3
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELAT-
ED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR HSCAL
YEAR 1994
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
H.R. 2490/2750
AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANS-
PORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
SEPTEMBER AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
30, 1994,
PART
3 (Pages 1673-2435)
Submitted questions and statements
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
U.S. GSOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
68-626cc WASHINGTON : 1994
ForsalebytheU.S.GovernmentPrintingOffice
SuperintendentofDocuments,CongressionalSalesOffice.Washington,DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-043689-3
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE. Hawaii MARK 0. HATFIELD, Oregon
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South CaroUna TED STEVENS, Alaska
J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, Louisiana THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi
PATRICKJ. LEAHY, Vermont ALFONSE M. D'AMATO, New York
JIM SASSER, Tennessee ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
DENNIS DeCONCINI, Arizona PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico
DALE BUMPERS, Arkansas DON NICKLES, Oklahoma
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey PHIL GRAMM, Texas
TOM HARKIN, Iowa CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
BARBARAA. MIKULSKI, Maryland SLADE GORTON, Washington
HARRY REID, Nevada MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
J. ROBERT KERREY, Nebraska CONNIE MACK, Florida
HERB KOHL, Wisconsin CONRAD BURNS, Montana
PATTY MURRAY, Washington
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
James H. Enoush, StaffDirector
Mary S. Dewald, ChiefClerk
J. Keith Kennedy, Minority StaffDirector
Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey, Chairman
ROBERT C. BYRD, WestVirginia ALFONSE M. D'AMATO, New York
TOM HARKIN, Iowa PETE V. DOMENICI. New Mexico
JIM SASSER, Tennessee MARK O. HATFIELD, Oregon
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
Professional Staff
PatrickJ. McCann
Peter Rogoit
Anne M. Miano (Minority)
Administrative Support
Joyce C. Rose
(II)
CONTENTS
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
Page
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 1674
Federal Railroad Administration
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 1824
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 2061
Office of Inspector General
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 2225
Research and Special Programs Administration
Questions submittedby SenatorLautenberg 2265
Questions submittedby SenatorGorton 2297
St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
StatementofStanfordE. Parris,Administrator 2298
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 2300
RELATED AGENCIES
ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE
BOARD
Preparedstatement 2332
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 2339
PANAMA CANAL COMMISSION
StatementofMichael Rhode,Jr..AssistanttotheChairman and Secretary .... 2383
StatementofGilberto Guardia,Administrator 2391
Questions submittedbySenatorLautenberg 2404
(III)

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RE-
LATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1994
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
SUBMITTED QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS
The following testimonies and responses to submitted questions
for the record were received by the Subcommittee on Transpor-
tation and Related Agencies for inclusion in the record. The sub-
mitted materials relate to the fiscal year 1994 budget requests of
the following agencies.
(1673)
1674
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LAUTENBERG
FAA'S PLAN TO CONSOLIDATE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: FAA has looked at three basic
alternatives for consolidation: (1) a "full
consolidation" into 27 facilities, (2) a "moderate
consolidation" of about 53 facilities, and (3) a "limited
consolidation" with about 200 facilities, including 9
consolidated terminal approach control (TRACON)
facilities. FAA has notified the Office of the Secretary
of Transportation (OST) that it wants to proceed with the
limited consolidation plan.
When will FAA deliver to the Congress the plan to
consolidate ATC facilities?
ANSWER: The Report to Congress "Plan for Limited
Consolidation of the National Airspace System" is in the
Office of the FAA Administrator for final approval before
being sent to the Secretary of Transportation.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Why did FAA fully develop and
evaluate only the moderate and limited consolidation
alternatives?
ANSWER: The full consolidation option was fully
evaluated and shown to be unacceptable from an operational
perspective, particularly in the area of vulnerability.
Other alternatives were initially evaluated and three were
fully developed. We believe these evaluated alternatives
represent the full spectrum of consolidation.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Why did FAA not develop and
evaluate other alternatives between the moderate and
limited consolidation alternatives?
ANSWER: FAA evaluated all three alternatives. The
number of consolidated facilities is not intended to be
rigid. The intent of Limited Consolidation is to
establish a policy framework and criteria allowing
consolidation where and when it is needed.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Is the FAA still leaning toward
a limited consolidation of ATC facilities?
ANSWER: The FAA and the Department of Transportation
have agreed on limited consolidation as the ATC system
architecture of the future.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Will this limited consolidation
change the technical complexity and equipment requirements
of some Capital Investment Plan projects, such as the
Advanced Automation System and the Voice Switching and
Control system? If so, please specify all such projects
and describe the technical impact that limited
consolidation will have on them, as well as the cost and
schedule implications.
1675
ANSWER: The limited consolidation decision will not
materially affect the design of either the AAS or VSCS
other than a moderate down sizing. However it does cha,nge
the quantity of systems necessary. The original plan
required the purchase of 23 systems to be installed in the
ACF's. Under the limited consolidation plan, the FAA will
buy 22 en route systems for the 22 ARTCC's, plus between 5
and 9 systems for the newly established Metroplex Control
Facilities.
No schedule impact is expected to either the AAS or
VSCS programs due to limited consolidation. In both AAS
and VSCS, additional systems are required (27 to 31 versus
23) and total F&E costs are likely to increase. However,
because these systems will be smaller in size, that
increase will not be linear. FAA is still working
detailed cost estimates for the AAS and VSCS impacts.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Is this a limited consolidation
an end-state, or does the FAA plan to further consolidate
ATC facilities in the future?
ANSWER: Limited Consolidation is an open
architecture system. The degree of consolidation can
increase to meet future demands of the air traffic system.
When a facility is due for modernization or significant
financial investment must be made at that facility,
consolidation options will be studied for feasibility.
Consolidation or co-location of terminal facilities other
than MCFs is possible as needs arise. Establishment of a
MCF will require that site-specific analyses be done to
prove the consolidations are cost beneficial and
operational advantages will occur. There are no current
plans to consolidate terminal facilities into Area Control
Facilities (ACFs) .
AUTOMATED TERMINAL RADAR SYSTEM UPGRADES
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: FAA is requesting $23.6 million
in its fiscal year 1994 request to purchase ARTS IIIEs for
the Dallas/Fort Worth and Southern California TRACONs.
FAA has also funded an ARTS HIE for the new Chicago
TRACON in a separate budget line item. ARTS HIE system
may be replaced with Terminal Advanced Automation System
(TAAS) when it comes on line; altogether, TAAS will be
installed at 9 or 10 large TRACONs under FAA's limited
facility consolidation plan. However, ARTS HIE provides
some capabilities over and above TAAS. For example,
ARTS HIE can handle 600 flight plans as compared with 480
with TAAS. ARTS HIE can also take on additional
improvements, such as the Terminal Air Traffic Control
Automation (TATCA) enhancements.
How long will the ARTS HIE systems at Chicago,
Dallas/Fort Worth, and Southern California be operational
before they are replaced by TAAS?
ANSWER: The FAA developed the plan to install ARTS
IIIEs at the largest TRACONs beginning in 1994 to solve
serious capacity shortfalls that were projected to occur
before installation of AAS equipment. Prior to the
limited consolidation decision the FAA was planning on
delivering TAAS systems (option on AAS contract) to the
1676
largest TRACONs beginning in the year 2000. This would
have produced a operational life for ARTS HIE of
approximately 5 years. As part of the limited
consolidation decision the FAA has advanced the schedule
for TAAS by 2 years to 1998 thereby replacing the
ARTS HIE at the first delivery site 2 years earlier.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Can ARTS HIE be cost-effective
given the likely short period of time it will operate
before being replaced by TAAS?
ANSWER: The ARTS IIIEs will be installed at Chicago
and Dallas/Fort Worth because of serious capacity and
functional shortfalls that can not wait until TAAS
implementation for resolution even on the accelerated TAAS
schedule. The cost of potential system delays caused by
these shortfalls far exceeds the cost of ARTS HIE at
these sites. Moreover, since the ARTS HIE system has a
useful life of at least 10 years, it can be relocated to
one of the larger TRACON's that could benefit from the
increased capacity of the ARTS-HIE and the display of
Center TRACON Automation System (CTAS) data.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: Has FAA considered ARTS HIE as
a long-term alternative to TAAS for large TRACON's? If
not, why?
ANSWER: Yes, the ARTS HIE has been considered as an
alternative for TAAS for the Metroplex Control Facilities
(MCF's) but was not found to be satisfactory for several
reasons. First of all, the ARTS HIE which is large
enough for several of the large TRACON's (Chicago,
Dallas/Fort Worth) does not have sufficient capacity to
handle the larger MCF's which are a combination of several
large TRACON's. For example. Southern California TRACON
(SCT) will require 2 ARTS IIIE's to handle the traffic
load in 1998. Secondly, the larger MCF's are comparable in
size and complexity to the Area Control Facilities (ACF's)
and therefore warrant the robust, high availability system
offered by the AAS program (i.e., TAAS for MCF's and ACCC
for ACF's). The AAS provides state-of-the-art functions
and capabilities including electronic flight data,
improved tracking and color displays. Finally using TAAS
for the MCF's provides commonality of hardware and
software in the major FAA facilities and provides an
upgrade path to ACCC if it is subsequently determined that
some en route function like flight data processing and
Automated En Route Air Traffic Control (AERA) would be
useful in an MCF in a large geographic area.
SENATOR LAUTENBERG: What quantitative and
qualitative advantages does FAA believe TAAS has over and
above the ARTS HIE?
HIE
ANSWER: A qualitative comparison of TAAS/ARTS
system features includes the following:
1. TAAS is more available than ARTS HIE.
2.TAAS is highly fault tolerant/ARTS HIE is fault
recoverable.