December 11, 2006
Docket Management Facility
U.S. Department of Transportation
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Nassif Building, PL-401
Washington, DC 20590-0001
(Download in Adobe PDF format)
RE: Federal Transit Administration Docket Number 2006-25471
Dear Docket Clerk:
On behalf of the more than 1,500 member organizations of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), I write to provide comment on the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Notice and request for comment concerning the proposed safety and security management circular, published October 11, 2006, at 71 FR 59853. We respond below to the issues raised in the Notice and draft circular referenced in the Notice.
About APTA
APTA is a non-profit international trade association of more than 1,500 public and private member organizations, including transit systems; planning, design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; and state associations and departments of transportation. More than 90 percent of Americans who use public transportation are served by APTA member transit systems.
General Comment
APTA agrees with the underlying premise of FTA's efforts in this area - safety and security concerns must be considered throughout the project planning process. We also agree that project managers should address these concerns in a consistent, verifiable, and systematic way to ensure safety and security are integrated into all aspects of projects. We believe, however, that the approach detailed in the draft circular front-loads too much analysis and study into the earliest stages of project planning and thus introduces unnecessary soft costs and delay into processes already dogged by too much of both.
Front-Loaded Analytical Requirements
As drafted, the circular appears to require an inordinate amount of information and detail at an extremely early stage of the planning process. For New Starts, a substantial portion of the information required is normally and prudently developed during the Preliminary Engineering (PE) phase. The proposed circular would instead require the information as a prerequisite to entering PE. Although discussed in terms of a plan to address safety and security issues, the requirements seem to actually require somewhat detailed analysis of potential hazards and vulnerabilities. We believe this front-loading would lead to expensive analysis of concerns that may not even materialize as a project advances, adding yet another soft cost to project development. Additionally, this front-loading would further delay entry into PE, contrary to ongoing efforts to reign in the ever expanding time involved in project planning. Delay, of course, equates to increased project costs.
This situation calls for flexibility on FTA's part. An alternative approach that would accomplish the safety and security goals without sacrificing time and schedule or further limiting projects otherwise ready to enter PE would be to review sponsoring agencies' project management policies, industry standards, and regulatory requirements. Incorporating these standard approaches into the Safety & Security Management Plan (SSMP) will satisfy virtually all safety and security concerns of projects in their infancy. As project planning matures, perhaps to a 60% design, project-specific safety and security issues can be identified and addressed as project milestones with a reasonable likelihood that the efforts will contribute to the actual project built. This is preferable to addressing specific issues at little more than the conceptual stage.
Different Project Types Require Different Information
While we understand the desire for consistency, FTA must acknowledge the substantial differences between New Starts projects and modernization of existing systems or other projects that may call for a Project Management Plan. Similarly, FTA must acknowledge the substantial differences between rail transit projects (which already incorporate planning quite similar to that describes in the draft circular) and commuter rail or bus facility projects. The latter are heavily influenced by industry standards and/or regulatory requirements that dictate much of the design and execution of projects. These standards and regulations already account for recognized hazards and vulnerabilities and are, in many cases, designed specifically to respond to them. APTA believes these vastly different characteristics call for different levels of analysis throughout the planning process and FTA must build this flexibility into its circular.
FTA Must Guard Against Practical Difficulties
Expanding the breadth of FTA review of projects at the earliest stages invites practical difficulties. Without definitive guidance, we believe there is a significant possibility of an agency receiving conflicting or unduly duplicative guidance and requirements from State Safety Oversight Agencies and FTA's Project Management Oversight (PMO) contractors. Projects that have adequately dealt with safety and security concerns could be delayed by these conflicts, creating another opportunity for schedule losses and cost increases. Moreover, reference of safety and security management plans to PMO contractors even before a project enters PE creates a substantial likelihood that those PMO contractors would be disposed to require overly extensive analysis of potential hazards and vulnerabilities before reporting the projects ready to enter PE. No oversight contractor would wish to be seen as lax on safety or security and the result would be a tendency to err on the side of caution, expense, and delay.
Final Comment - FTA Must Protect Against Delay in the New Starts Process
The New Starts process is already a cumbersome one. FTA has recognized the seemingly ever-expanding time required for a project to progress as well as the cost pressures inherent in delay and has used recent rulemaking efforts to reverse this troubling trend. With the number of New Starts projects in the pipeline a mere fraction of what it was ten to fifteen years ago, FTA must be mindful of anything that will keep projects from entering PE. We urge FTA to adopt our recommendations to incorporate reliable, consistent safety and security analysis in transit projects while avoiding further constriction of the New Starts pipeline.
APTA appreciates FTA's continuing efforts to provide for the safety and security of the riding public and is glad to be a partner in those efforts. For additional information or questions concerning our comments, please contact James LaRusch of APTA's Government Affairs Department at (202) 496-4808 or email jlarusch@apta.com.
Sincerely yours,
William W. Millar
President
WWM/tjj
Some of these pages may include links to documents in the Adobe PDF format. Please download the Adobe PDF reader if you have not already done so.
