2022-07-18 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Transportation

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP STRAUS - And with that let me describe some of the process today and how will proceed over the course of the oversight process that the committee166 has been requested by the to engage in by the Senate president and the speaker of the house. This is the first hearing we have to invited witnesses today. The Secretary of Transportation and the General manager of the MBTA. They've been very accessible in trying to get this scheduled as I my remarks will show on the housekeeping stuff because of some events yet to occur. I'll describe those in a bit. They have been very good about making themselves available later in the oversight process probably in september if the schedule works out as we expect that they would come back to reasons for that. A couple of weeks ago the committee sent to the administration written document request with a number of items requested and in a number of categories related to this safety issue involving the MBTA.

Some documents have already been provided by the committee that were initially available within their records. Some will be coming247 along. So as that document request is filled out. That's also a reason for us to have the secretary and the General manager back later in the process. In addition, we had invited for today a couple of weeks ago we sent out the request to the Federal Transit Administration that they provide us at least and current update beyond what are in the to safety directives that have been released publicly to date within 24 hours. They declined to participate with us. I think it's been reported publicly. Although I don't have any inside information on this. That the FTAS review is certainly ongoing That it is expected to result in some kind of final report. In august I don't know if that's true but it is true that it is the second reason why the secretary and the general manager have agreed after that report is completed that they would come back and in addition obviously will be re inviting the FDA and hope that we get a different response in terms of their assistance to us.

So then as I say, we have to witnesses today, the secretary and the general manager, we are working to have a second hearing in august with additional Moore I would describe as frontline witnesses in terms of the issues involving safety at the MBTA And look to the fall for further review based on the document production and the FDA is anticipated report before we get going today there are four different records that for those of you followed oversight hearings that the committee has conducted in378 the past on different issues. We do make use and provide access to the public for uploaded documents to the committee website and so the chair and I have been working on these over the last several weeks and so at this point and just recently and I mean within minutes now available on the committee website are some documents, some new, some have been around but are worth looking at again in our view one is the final report from december 2019 by the safety review panel known essentially as the lahood report based on one of the key members of the three member review panel that was engaged in 2019 by the control board at the time.

Additionally uploaded and certainly in the public record but we wanted as much in one location at the committee website on the safety issues as we can developed are the FTA interim safety directives that have been the subject of much discussion and activity within the tea during the last several weeks. So those are available here as well. Another is a committee staff generated document which is a compilation with links to scores of safety reports that have been prepared within the MBTA and filed over since 2018 with the control board and its successor. These are again, they've been in the public realm but we thought it would be helpful to have in one compilation all of these different safety related documents that have been prepared within the tea itself. And the final is and again, it's been I believe in the public realm. Certainly reported in one of the boston daily papers, a statement and cover letter515 by the former chief safety officer of the T. Who was there for about eight years I believe. And that was a statement that was filed about an 80 plus page document with the FTA In 2019.

So that's available again, it may have been read but becomes timely we thought that this would also be here in terms of identifying various safety issues. So I think that's the housekeeping that we have. Our goal today is to will have Couple of opening remarks by the two co chairs and then turn it over to the secretary and the general manager will invite them up for initial statements or presentations that they would like to make on the issue of safety and then at that point will open it up to questions by the committee members. Unlike as people may have been seen at the congressional level, we don't have strict time limits for members in terms of a lot of time for questioning. It's really up to each of our colleagues under the guidance of the presiding chair and will be jointly doing this hearing together back and forth. You see605 there is no actual gavel606 but we're we'll both be managing that and so we certainly expect and we know that our colleagues are here to focus on the safety issues relating to the mbita. So at that I be happy624 to turn it over to my625 co chair to begin any process or opening remarks. Thank you everybody who's attending here and remotely

SEN CRIGHTON - thank you mr Chairman and thank you to this request to testify today. We don't have to be here today. I wish that we could have a public transportation system that is easily accessible, reliable and most importantly, safe. I think all of us here today should riders to have confidence in the system that they utilize every day right now. That confidence in that trust is on shaky ground. It seems like every time we turn around there is a report of another incident at the T. Sometimes it's a collision of trains on the tracks which we hear about instantly from those riders on those trains, but other times its construction incidents which we hear about days later after the details are filtered through an opaque communication channel at the T. And with this administration we're riding the T is there only mode of transit out of disruption and change over the past several years, not just service delays in service reductions, but serious systemic safety violations and concerns to the point where regular riders have expressed fear and concern while boarding their trains.

These persistent and pervasive violations of standard safety protocols have led to derailment, serious injuries and even passenger deaths On April 10 this year. Robinson lilan tragically lost his life in an accident involving735 a red line train. That accident never should have happened. No one should have to fear for their personal safety when boarding and to745 train. Also in april the Federal Transit Authority began its oversight review of safety practices at the752 MBTA. This is a dramatic step. It has only happened one at the time with the Washington metropolitan area Transit Authority metro rail system back in 2019 and this indicates the safety problems at the T have risen to a crisis level. While this administration has shown its willingness to cooperate and take guidance from the FDA, the remedial steps being required. Now our action items that we have known about for many years and failure to comply at this juncture puts us at risk of losing critical federal funding.

While we have experienced unusual times during the COVID-19 pandemic. These issues predate the pandemic in December 2019. A safety review Panel convened by the fiscal management and control Board performed a comprehensive review800 of the safety performance, safety, leadership and culture. The authors of that report. External transportation industry experts summed up their findings with this sentence. Safety is not a priority of the T, but it must be the report also included a roadmap for getting the agency back on track and making safety a core value of the organization. The purpose of our hearing today is to dive deeper into some of these safety concerns. We will be discussing the recommendation of this 2019 safety report on the progress that has been made in implementing these critical recommendations.

As my co chair said, we know that the FTS Work is ongoing and we look forward to reading845 their final report next month and hopefully hearing from representatives from their team and a subsequent hearing. In addition to that report as my co chair also mentioned, we have requested documents from the MBTA. This request was made on friday july 8th859 and on thursday july 14th at 4 59 PM. We received a flash drive with the first round of documentation. Many of these documents that were requested have been previously compiled for ongoing investigations and public information requests. And yet we've only received so far a fraction have always requested. It's disappointing, though not unexpected. We expect to have more information soon and we will address that in the subsequent caring. The committee will be closing closely reviewing the documents we have just received. We look forward to continue discussions once we have had an adequate opportunity to review all of that material. The public deserves answers and they deserve a public transportation system that they can trust with that. I'll turn it over to my co chair for his introductory remarks.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

STRAUS - We are here932 because of what has been um seen, experienced and certainly reported as to an array over years of safety related issues at the to so this is a different process than is normally engaged in with regard to public hearings on legislative proposals and in order to do that adequately. What we hope has been seen is we are going to have the committee develop as a resource for safety related issues975 within the tea and documents have been requested, but also additional sources of information we expect will will come our way and our practices I think is well known in the past is we share what we feel and determined is appropriate with the public as well. So the public record is well served in examining this um very disheartening situation and so do start in the documents that were introduced today. Established something of a baseline in terms of identified issues As of the end of 2019.

So 2.5 years ago in terms of safety issues at the T some people have asked well how is what the committee is1033 going to be engaged in any way different or productive as compared to the federal transit administration. The to examination many know but it's important to repeat that the MBTA is responsible for providing brands it and transportation access in a number of different areas or a number of different modes. The to examination is focused on the subways in this case, but they also have jurisdiction over buses. The Tea is also responsible however, for para transit operations and1072 commuter rail operations and ferry operations. And so a broader examination of the way in which the MBTA is organized has leadership and implementation in safety issues across all of its responsibilities is called for from a legislative standpoint.

The goal, of course at the end is not just a safe system but that the public becomes aware that a safe system is available to them. It does sound sometimes trite to say that safety is priority one, but it really has to be and safety is not an issue that comes up either at some point in a meeting agenda or some part of the day. All of the activities that the tea is responsible to engage in in providing its services to the public and ensuring the safety of its own employees are things that have to be baked into the operations at every1136 point in every respect. And when we've seen over the last1142 2.5 years apart from what was identified in the documents that were uploaded today to the committee website.

Is that almost across the board, in terms of a number of areas, fixed assets of stairways, escalators, track staffing, attentiveness, signal work, the the upgrade of systems throughout the system, the ability and we had this in a red line incident years ago. The ability of a red line train to leave and engage and travel with 50 passengers and no one from the T1186 on board able to stop it only able to stop because of a remote deactivation of the electrical rail, not because somebody was onboard. These things happen and when they happen in so many different areas of the tea operations, something critical, something dramatic is missing and the hope of both of the co chairs and every committee member is that through our examination over these couple of months, uh, we can provide something that is helpful going forward. It's not enough to focus on from one point or another, the specific incident, something deeper has been occurring and we have to find that out. So that from a T operation standpoint, from a legislative response standpoint, we don't go from crisis to crisis because crisis to crisis has horrible consequences of as families tragically have learned over the years.

And so we've already received from the committee from some the the organizations outside state operations that follow these issues and provide helpful input, various recommendations. I would say it may be a little early. Some have told us, some have spoken publicly that they know exactly what the issue is and how to fix it. I admire anybody who knows so much. So early in the process. I think though we have to be a little more humble and get into it as the committee is intending to do and frankly we should be prepared not to just focus on the basic issues of electrical systems tracks and the issues that have been identified but think broader and so a template that I would ask people to think about in terms of how they viewed the tea is one that has been involved over decades in different transportation reform efforts that the Legislature has been engaged in. And what I mean by that is for the public.

The concern1336 is not the bureaucracy that has been set up over well over more than 100 years to deliver these kind of services in massachusetts. But how to provide for a public transportation system. That's not just the t that's the roads and other ways in which people move around the public, doesn't distinguish when they're driving to the station and they may travel on state roads and then accessing the commuter rail system and maybe for the end of their commute, then going on to the subway system. It's one connected transportation system and what we're dealing with now is within that overall transportation system. We have a separate organization, the MBTA, which I would invite people to start asking the difficult question, which is why do we even have the t why don't we have an overall transportation system As an example, I would point1402 to the reform we did 12 years ago in the legislature where we abolished the turnpike authority at one point in time.

Historically, the turnpike authority made sense. It identified, laid out, constructed and operated for many, many years a turnpike system. It had a funding source, it had its own staff, it had its own operations, but at some point it didn't1429 contribute to the functioning in the overall transportation system. It may be and I don't have I don't offer a conclusion at this point. It may be that we are at a similar point with the MBTA that for the sake of the overall transportation system, some of its functions can be performed by other parts of1454 the transportation system. And the final point I'll compare is much of the discussion inevitably that we're going to hear points to staffing and resource issues that came to light In 2015, during the series of snowstorms which crippled the train system and invite people to, if they can look back and recognize that during that entire time the highway division of Mass dot functioned very, very, very well.

The entire state wasn't crippled during those snowstorms. So within mass dot we do have the ability to run good transit systems, good transportation systems. So we really do have to I think if we're being serious here and hope to end up with something useful to the public and to the future safe operations, we do have to in my view, examine how the Tea operates in this in this world, do they? You'll hear much discussion about the conflict between the capital budget and the operating budget. Is the treaty really qualified going forward to be running a capital operation or as exists already should mass dot itself other parts of mass dot be handling the capital work as is going on with some of our new commuter rail construction underway. So I hope people1555 do not shy away from asking the difficult questions that this is simply a matter of fixing1560 and tweaking here and there some budget issues within the tea or things like that.1567 I hope we won't be shy about thinking in a big way about how to provide safety for the future.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

JAMEY TESLER - SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION - Thank you. I just want to thank the committee. Our plan is just to provide very brief remarks, I'm going to provide some very quick opening remarks, turn to the GM and then certainly spend as much time as possible with questions today. So thanks again, Chair Crighton, Chair Straus and members of the committee. Thank you all for the opportunity to be here today to testify as we all worked towards the same goal which is a safe and reliable as we. As move forward in these hearings, I want to reassure you that safety is paramount at the to and remains the top priority. We have welcomed the oversight of national experts, the federal transit administration and their safety1673 inspection and are pleased to show the public the findings, the solutions and the mechanisms that we have and will put in place to deliver a better healthier MBTA.

In 2019, the fiscal and management control board recognize the need to identify areas for safety improvements and how to implement best practices used nationally and we made a deliberate decision then to ask for help.1699 Led by national transportation safety experts, including former United States Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, former acting FDA Administrator and transit operations veteran, Carolyn Flowers and former new York city transit president and career safety expert Carmen Bianco, they formed the 2019 safety review panel that undertook a complete and transparent review of the MBTA safety practices. This external and independent panel was formed by the FMCB in the MBTA new outside agency or governing body directed to the the T to Commission the safety panel report.

The MBTA and the FMCB accepted the safety panel's report in December 2019 and the current MBTA board of directors reflects the implementation of their findings. In particular, the 2019 safety review panel noted that the FMCB lacked any members with operational safety experience. As a direct result and thanks to work with the committee in the Legislature, the current board includes members with transit safety expertise, Director Scott Darling and Mary Beth Mellow who also serve on the MBTA Safety and health and environment safety subcommittee. The MBTA has completed or are in the process of completing all of the 2019 reports, recommendations and 61 corrective actions in order to continue working towards a better T, our ongoing cooperation with the FDA and this committee will greatly aid a critical agency that faces historic challenges exacerbated by the pandemic including massive staffing, ridership and budget challenges.

These challenges come as a result of decades of under or disinvestment in the system. For the five years prior to 2016, the T spent less than $3 billion dollars total and this is on capitol and that included not only fixing the system but also expansion projects. Since fiscal 16, the T has invested almost $8 billion dollars into new tracks, cars and signals. In recent years, we have made significant gains in upgrading and repairing our assets, large station and track projects but so much more needs to be done. Catching up on1849 decades of under investment and deferred maintenance will take time, it cannot and will not happen overnight or1856 even in just a few years. But we are committed to doing the work and putting the right steps in place to ensure it gets done and that we can deliver the best T for both our riders and employees.

Since the winter of 2015, the Commonwealth has made significant gains in repairing1872 our transportation systems, our transit system and this work has enabled us to ask for more help by having the capacity to responsibly deliver it. We are happy to go through the recommendations one by one, both within the 2019 safety review panel and the FDA special directives to the MBTA and explain in detail what corrective actions have been taken in are underway. Fixing the MBTA remains a collaborative effort and we welcome this committee and the legislature's interest in making the nation's oldest transit network world class. I want to thank you, again and turn to the general manager for his remarks.

STEVE POFTAK - MBTA - Thank you, Secretary and thank you to Chairman Crighton, Chairman Straus and the members of the committee both present here in person and virtually for the opportunity to address all of you today. As the oldest transit system in the country, the MBTA is a system of1933 incredible complexity. Every day, the hardworking and dedicated employees of the to provide service to over 600,000 customers across a vast system utilizing almost 3000 different vehicles to provide that service. Over the past several months, the MBTA has faced a series of incidents that have raised concerns about the safety of the system and I acknowledge that some of those incidents have had tragic results and I again extend deep condolences to1962 the affected families on behalf of myself personally and all of the employees at the MBTA.

I want to confirm to all of our customers that the MBTA system is safe just as the FDA noted when they handed down the initial safety management inspection notice that the transit is among the safest forms of transportation and that there is nothing in their inspection thus1990 far that should cause people to be deterred from using the T. That said, we can and will do better. I am committed just as I know all of the employees of the MBTA are committed to continuing to make the T a safer and more reliable transportation system. We take our role in our rider's lives seriously. We get people where they need to go, to grocery stores, medical appointments, to classes, we do it through blizzards, during parades on holidays and the MBTA did it through a pandemic that forced us to continually pivot on a sometimes day to day basis, rethinking our transit services as our ridership plummeted but all the while with the goal of providing a safe and reliable trip to the riders who depended on us and who continued to ride even through the depths of the pandemic.

I understand the frustration of our riders, I am a rider of the T myself. We acknowledge that safety incidents have occurred and that our service levels are not where they want them to be due to staffing challenges. Safety has been and used to be our top priority. I began my day today as I begin every Monday, personally addressing all the new hires at the MBTA and I close with one message that safety is the highest priority of the MBTA and safety must be at the forefront of every employees thinking while they're at their job, while they are at the MBTA property. As the Secretary noted, in 2019, the fiscal and management control board commissioned a report with the full support of MBTA management by the safety review panel.

One of the report's findings was that the MBTA's safety management system was lacking. Every day after that report, we have continued to steadily implement and improve our safety management system and best practices and that's something that I would be happy to review with this panel in much greater detail either this hearing or at any future hearing you wish to have. As much as we embraced the safety review panel in 2019, we fully2117 embraced the safety management inspection process. Right now, we are meeting with the FDA at some level at the to on an almost daily basis, not only to respond to their directives but share information with them to make sure we are on the right path as we respond with corrective action plans they've pointed out through their four special directives, some places where we have fallen2140 short and we2141 have already begun to take action on the basis of those special directives.

The FDA told us on June 15th that we had an issue at the OCC with overstaffing. By June 19th, we had implemented a fatigue management plan for our operations control staff that managed2159 their hours work in a way that is consistent with our heavy rail motor persons. We have already addressed the first of four specific areas of track improvement that were needed allowing us to lift a speed restriction and saving our range of line riders a minute. We have launched a hiring blitz for the operations control center with a $10,000 sign on bonus. We fully embrace the FDA safety management inspection and we can look forward to continuing to work with them. One of the areas that has been brought to light has been the staffing challenges we face here at the MBTA and this is not a uniquely MBTA issue.

We've seen our peer agencies across the country struggle with this. We have frankly seen in the public sector in many different venues; healthcare, education struggle to staff up ranks and this is one that we will continue2212 to work on. We have formally submitted three of the four corrective action plans all on time, according to the FDA's deadline, we will be submitting the last one on Wednesday again on time according to the deadline. Right now, we anticipate the full funding needs for these corrective action plans to be approximately 300 million dollars in costs. I know the breaking news I heard last night, there's some money in the conference committee that you will be examining today.

We also anticipate that the Governor will file for some part of the solution in Fy 22 close out supplemental budget. I will leave it to folks in different parts of the state and Public service to figure out how we reconcile all these different ideas but I wanted to put out there at least the need for approximately $300 million in cost to address the FDA directives. At the T, we recognize the important role we play in the daily lives of communities we serve. We know the transit services we provide are critical. Modernizing and upgrading the T including areas related to safety does take2287 time. but we are continuing to make progress.

Safety is our number one priority at the MBTA and we fully support all opportunities including this forum to review our practices and make changes become a safer organization. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak. I look forward to continuing to partner with the Legislature as we advance these initiatives at the T and to share more about our progress in making the MBTA a safer place. Thank you.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP STRAUS - Again, I just have questions in four areas or four questions in terms of the subject area and then I want to be mindful of2340 other people's time needs. So you you referred to the response to date to the FTA Interim directives and I think it was just mentioned that with the announcement late yesterday and to be taken up later today by the House and the Senate, there's additional appropriation money to be made immediately available upon the Governor's signature for the estimated response of2376 the interim directives. I take it as a given based on the kinds of questions and inquiries that the FTA has continued to make since completion of the interim directives that internally based on what they are asking about, based on what they're looking at, based on where the FTA is devoting resources, probably as we speak, you should have a pretty good idea as to the kinds of further responses that we should expect in terms of safety responses. Despite today's additional appropriation to meet the interim, my question then on this first subject is how much more money do you anticipate will be required to meet the balance of at least where FTA's inquiries have taken2434 you so far?

POFTAK - Thanks for the question, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps it's helpful to sort of frame up the trajectory of the safety management inspection in order to clarify how to answer the question. The FTA has undertaken a safety management inspection which they notified us of on June 15th. They have said, and we have said in2459 the public domain that the expectation is that that report will be delivered sometime later in August but not reserving the right that it perhaps may take longer. They also said that in the course of doing their inspection, if they found any issues that was urgent enough, that it felt like it should not wait until the issuance of the final report, that they would notify us. And they have done this through the issuance of the four special directives which again, sorry, I got my timetable on the special directives came out on June 15th, my apologies.

They have reserved the right to issue additional special directives, which they may do. I do not currently have any visibility as to whether or not they will and then we anticipate that the final report will have a series of additional findings that we will have to address with another set of corrective action plans as we have submitted corrective action plans in response to the special directives. So I do not have great visibility as to the sort of the scope and depth of the response that will be needed to some of those additional findings which will be in the report. So I think right now, I don't have the visibility that I think you wish I had and I frankly wish I had in terms of being able to identify what additional costs would be, I will say I think there will be additional costs and I think they will be significant. I can't discern the actual, you know, and anything would be pure conjecture on my part.

STRAUS - So let me ask you my first unfair question of the day, what topics specifically have they been focusing2563 on in their further review since the2566 release of the interim directive?

POFTAK - They have been, I think, you know, in terms of the feedback we've gotten, I think they continue to2578 take a look at our staffing levels, not only at the operations control center more broadly and I think that is something that we have acknowledged at the MBTA is a challenge. We have a plan, you know, we have a plan right now to attempt to hire 2000 people next year in an effort to address this. One of our struggles have been that we have, we have consistently hired below budget,2606 the money is there, it is that we are having difficulty attracting employees. We have entered into a new contract with our major unions.2615

We have increased the level of signing bonuses, the most dramatic of which I just shared with you, $10,000 bonus to become a dispatcher at the operations control center. Nevertheless, we are at a moment in time in this labor market and I think particularly in the public sector labor market where we continue to face tremendous constraints.

STRAUS - I'll move on. The second area I wanted to identify and it has nothing to do with the current review is that when within the Lahoud report, which was provided in December 2019 and I've always assumed there were early drafts, so it wasn't a total surprise to the T itself. One of the constant themes that's identified there is that there was, my term, a mismatch or a misdirection in terms of2673 devotion of resources to capital infrastructure type projects versus Operations. So since that was flagged 2.5 years ago and just around the time that the General Manager started in the position, what has been done since December 2019 to correct that mismatch of either too much to capital or too much to operations or not enough to both.

POFTAK - First I think we have continued our effort to hire more operations staff to support capital projects and then also be available to do the necessary work in2716 operations. I think that you know be quite transparent, that has been an ongoing challenge and that will2722 be part of our hiring effort in order to hire up. We have made greater use of longer term shutdowns which lowers the amount of operations support staff that is needed. Essentially, we need the same amount of operations support staff to do a two hour overnight project as you do to do a two week project. Then the third piece is we have consistently focused when we've done these longer term shutdowns, not only on doing piggyback work as we call it which is essentially operations staff getting into the closed reservation to do additional work but much of this capital work is indeed maintenance work.

As an example, we've shut down the B branch of the green line for a number of days. The work that's being done there is track replacement and also the beginning of the wayside installation of the Green line train protection system which will stop these collisions we've had. So much of the capital work has the effect of improving the general maintenance level of our assets.

TESLER - Can I also add? One of the things I think I would know just to pick up on your point of the operating budget, the MBTA and recognizing all the challenges, including those that that we both have stated, you're well aware of on the committee, and the headwinds we face sometimes right now in the employment market. The MBTA grew last fiscal year, that ended last month. The MBTA grew by over 100 people. The MBTA has made the investment in the operating budget to grow but we have faced challenges on the hiring side. So we have2824 had to change practices. The GM covered some of those here, it's recognized that the market has changed since the pandemic, but the Investment has been there and will be there to grow significantly to address that point in that balance between the capital and the operating budget.

I think it's worth noting also, which committee is well aware of, is2847 that that was December 2019 and certainly the operations went through meaningful changes and meaningful challenges that we had to confront during the pandemic. So we have grown, we have grown this past year and if you look, I think there's information in the panel report and some of the other documents that you have cited, some of the years earlier, the MBTA was not growing but recently we have grown and so I think that's important when it comes to that balancing act between operating capital.

STRAUS - So within this same topic, let me preview or let me jump into something that I discussed in my opening remarks about capital versus operations and on some individual2895 projects that the distinction isn't clear, but generally we do have these two broad areas. Three years plus ago, I think the former Secretary made a request to the control board which the control board agreed that with respect to the construction, the capital project, something like the project I follow for South Coast rail, the T not be the agency building that rail project and instead became something of a client and the broader Mass DOT undertook the capital project of building South Coast Rail which is on construction schedule within budget.

So given the remarks I made in the opening, I'd offer this question to either of you, should the T going forward think2957 of itself as an operations entity and less of a capital project entity maybe too broad, sometimes conflicting tasks at least according to the LaHood report is too much for this organization?

and let's not hear from everybody here will take the perilous approach of answering2984 before my boss and hopefully our answers are somewhat consistent.

POFTAK - I think there is the opportunity for kind of horses for courses here that there are moments where the T has utilized outside entities to manage projects. In the case of South Coast Rail, we used Mass DOT to do some of the early work and to do some of the work that I would say was particularly in their wheelhouse in terms of bridges and culverts. Since then, the T has taken management of South Coast Rail in the house and is now building it. But I think there is the opportunity for us to be creative and to be thoughtful when that approach works.3023 I would say to the extent that there is work being done on the existing system, the importance of integration with operations is critical and the participation of MBTA personnel is safety critical, that, you know, the T turns off the power and turns the power back on and ultimately the buck, we have lots of private contractors come on to our reservation to do the work.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

TESLER - I think Chairman also, which you are well aware of, I think another model to just to consider which we've used to address some of this is when we face considerable challenges with the green line extension. We did a third way as opposed to either Mass DOT or T, what we really built a separate purpose built organization for the life of that project with its own structure and resources and leadership which overall we think has worked3103 has contributed to its ability to move forward even in the face of some of the challenges of the pandemic. So for large capital projects, I think there's a couple ways to segment those to provide resources so it does not become competitive with the other day to day needs of the T.

I think though the General Manager touched on a critical distinction some of the day to day track work that is in the capital area that we need to do that is consistent with the FDA directives is core day to day functioning of the T and probably best remains there. But as we go forward, some of these larger projects might be some opportunity to think about and I would know we're going to be in four or five years, a federally competitive environment where we are seeking funds. So the ability to look multimodally and organized multimodally might provide some advantages too. So I think there's some interesting models to look at their as we compete for funds.

STRAUS - My third question areas in the last two very safety specific as I think is appropriate. One of the uploaded documents today and now on the committee website is the statement and I invite people to read it in terms of some dramatic contentions with regard to safety operations up to a point in 2019 before the individual was terminated and that involves the position of the Chief safety officer within the T. Given the contents of at least the contentions and I'm not asking you to comment on them at this point anyway, should the position of the Chief safety officer actually be subject3219 to discipline by the General Manager of the T?

Because after all that person by definition is asked to be sometimes in conflict in pointing out safety considerations, so should that person, if they are truly independent and invited and expected and required by federal regulation to issue corrective action plans and as I say, often in conflict with other managers at the T, why is that person going forward or should that person going forward be subject to discipline at least job performance like that discipline?

POFTAK - A couple of things just to set the context. There is a document of some length you said, I think 82 or 100 pages, that document has not been adjudicated or it's not clear to me how much of that is factual. There was a much briefer of complaint filed with OSHA, that OSHA did not take any action on. So there has been no action taken on that allegation. To the broader question, the general manager, I am the accountable executive at the MBTA, I am the final signatory of all documents, safety plans representations to the FDA. Right now, we are reporting on a daily basis, the schedule, the work schedules of people at the operations control center in order to ensure that we are complying with our fatigue management program.

I believe that I am the individual, there should3337 not be an individual who is independent of the3339 organization. We are all accountable for safety. Obviously, our chief safety officer, Ron Esther who joined us, I'm going to get this wrong, I believe in August of 2020 after a distinguished career at the Chicago Transit Authority bringing with him a tremendous amount of transit knowledge which was one of the findings in the safety review panel. Ron is sort of, I think the beginning of a thoughtful answer to some of the challenges that safety review panel3370 posed to us. He's someone that I am a communication with regularly and listen to intently but in the answer to your question that it truly is the General manager's responsibility.

STRAUS - So let me ask and I guess I'm a little bit surprised, that statement which was submitted to the FTA, it may have also been shared with I don't know but from the public reports at the time I think in the globe that was shared with the FTA and I and I believe like stand to be corrected internally within Mass DOT, I am not going to put anyone on the spot, one of the identified recipients is in the room right now. So let me ask you have either of you read that 80 page statement prior to today? Because again whether it's true or not, there are such serious contentions about safety operations that I would think and assume and expect that some internal review would have taken place about the things that are said there. Have either of you read it? And was there a response internally how to handle the allegations in that document?

POFTAK - Yes, it was red and we had discussions contemporary with its public issuance. A number of us are principles in the document itself myself included, and, you know, my conclusion is that and again, this was 2019, I want to say June-July 2019 when this was issued, that the allegations in there were without merit. I think the fact was that there was no finding, there was a whistleblower complaint filed with OSHA. OSHA chose to take no action indicates some support from my position.

STRAUS - I'll leave it at this, I will note at least my reading the record some of the statements in their our recap not attributed to that, but are almost identically identified as findings in the LaHood report. So I wouldn't be so dismissive of the allegations at this point, but I have a feeling we'll hear more about this. My final question is, for many years, the item known as positive train control has been an issue within the T and the system at large and around the country. When will we have that safety mechanism to control the speed of trains, when will we have that within the T?

POFTAK - Positive train control in its definition applies to commuter rail, that system is installed and positive train control is in place across the commuter rail system. We are now in the process of installing automatic train control slightly different system and have to drag into the grip admire here but I don't want to be, in very simple terms, positive train control requires periodic engagement by the train operator or the train will stop. Again, very vulgar terms. Think about it on your if your automobile required you to3584 push a button every 30-60 seconds and if you failed to push that button, your car would stop, that's how positive train control works on the commuter rail system.

Automatic train control again to use the car analogy would be if your car was governed by the speed limit, the posted speed limit wherever you were driving, so regardless of how much you applied the accelerator, if the3607 speed limit is 30, you're only going 30 miles an hour. Automatic train control, it's installed on the south side of the commuter rail system. We're in the process of working our way and I'm trying to see if there's any Newburyport Rockport Line members of this committee, if you've gone through a number of delays this spring, that's to install automatic train control. So I hope that is responsive.

STRAUS - If I am wrong, but obviously it will be clear, but we have had reviews for and if I have the terminology of train control, two thirds correct within the subway system, however, and that I believe again, I could be mistaken, but there were two different evaluated vendors, the T hired a consultant, it was back and forth months of review,3660 whatever was spent but when will we have that train control system on the subway system?

POFTAK - Got it. We will have the Green Line. The other lines have a train control system in place. The green line is the place where we are currently in the process of installing what we call the green line train protection system, it's technically different than positive train control, but I don't want to get hung up on that, I think your intent is when are we going to have the full control of those trains? That will be done by the end of 2023. That is something that we advanced earlier this year,3701 we put additional money in place so that we could pull that in. Right now, if I may continue the car analogy, right now, the Green line operates as you do in your automobile, it is dependent on you the driver when you see a red light to stop the green line train protection system will put in controls where drivers will not be able to violate red lights and there will also be a form of speed control in place.

The reason it is more difficult to do it on the green line than it was on the other lines3733 and then it was on the commuter rail is most of our train protection systems are built for long trains that we keep far apart. We essentially keep them in separate parts of the track, those of you who take the green line think about standing in park street where you have multiple trains coming in rapidly behind one another and that we're running a number of trains on the system, we may on a on a full Rush our we're running 14 trains on3762 the orange line all the way from Oak Grove down the forest hills. On the Green line. We may be running something on the order of 60 to 70 trains, so the technical demands of the Green line are just fundamentally different and that's why it has taken what I think is too long, given that the original findings came in the 2008-2009 era. My engagement with the T started in 2015 and we have been trying to get this over not only the technical hurdle but now the installation hurdle. We've put it in3796 place, it will be in place by the end of 2023.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN CRIGHTON - Mr. Secretary, Mr. GM, my first question deals with trust and transparency. I think we can all agree that both of those are crucial to having the highest level of trust from our public trust that they can safely get from point A to point B and that trust cannot exist without knowing that the T is being fully transparent and honest with its riders. I assume you both agree with that sentiment. Back in May, there was not one, not two, but three separate derailments in construction cars during the blue line maintenance work. It took five days before the T let the public know just about the first of the derailments. Keep in mind, this is at a time during increased scrutiny by the FTA among others.

Mr. General manager, when you were first asked why it took so long or when you asked rather not first why it took so long for that information be made publicly in a press conference on May 16th, you responded, 'I'm sharing3887 with that with you now. I don't know the strategy of not doing it previously but I was wasn't involved with that.' Now I make public statements fairly regularly. Sometimes words are exactly don't3899 come out the way we want them to don't express what we're trying to say. This statement does seem to3903 reflect what was later reported by Taylor Golden in the boston globe after a foia request where she received extensive documentation and correspondence between the T, administration and DPU.

In that reporting, it reflects an organization in administration whose strategy seems to have prioritized messaging and public relations over transparency. The documents included in the July 6th story detailed the internal3933 discussions after much back and forth and there's an extensive list but I'm not going to read through it here today to respect to my colleagues and many more questions we have here, but after much back and forth about what to tell the public, it was ultimately decided by the Governor's Office to limit the statement to say just that there have been delays in construction on the blue3955 line project. As the MBTA previously announced, they will continue to keep customers updated on impacts of the service, there is no mention at all and they're about derailments.

My question to you is to the general manager is why would the Governor's office or any entity really wanted to withhold derailment information to the public and what good does it do to keep the public in dark?3983 In3983 your3983 prior testimony, you had referenced this may have been specific to the question by the chair, but you are the accountable executive, you are the final signatory, so the bigger question I guess is why then, was that the Governor's call in the first place about what public safety information we should be sharing with our riders as well as with legislators. The question is, who is calling the shots at the T? Is that you, Mr. GM? Is it you, Mr. Secretary or is it the Governor?

POFTAK - I'm in charge of the MBTA. I take responsibility for the actions of the MBTA. I think in the particular case, you referenced, you know, my focus was on getting the capital work done, making sure that it was done safely, understanding that extending the extending the diversion as we had to do by a number of days, the number of days escaped, but I'm sure a number of our representatives who represent blue line communities and know that tens of thousands of people were impacted was trying to make sure that that work got done and that we were able to restore service.

The communication aspect of it, I concede did not get my full attention. I also think there is a critical distinction to4061 be drawn between a construction cart that obviously had some type of fault that was causing it to derail... there was coordination sort of around transparency, make sure that we could get the work done and get service back as soon as it was possible.

CRIGHTON - You had around getting service back obviously someone represents constituents that use the system. You know, we want that service back to the same end. I guess just to touch on the revenue train versus construction train, you're under investigation by the FTA. It has been stated by members of your team that the FTA as well as DPU don't differentiate between derailment, derailment is a derailment, whether it's a big derailment, smaller derailment, regardless of the equipment, so I would just point that out there. I think the public deserves to know when any safety issue occurs in particular derailment regardless of the car served there.

Again, it goes back to that issue of trust.4145 You know, we are at a time where we're trying to return riders to the, to the system after the pandemic. We're trying to bring them back when you have public advertising campaigns I see every day on my drive in and I appreciate that we need to bring them4159 back but they will never come back if they can't trust that they are getting all4163 the information and even when it's dealing with the construction car, if you're a T rider, you have to wonder how often are these issues not reported fully to the public. Just back to, you know, the accountability and I appreciate you taking that level of accountability as a General Manager, I would just again circle back to the4183 Administration's role, the Governor's role in that line of decision making.

Why then, if you are in charge,4188 did you need to seek permission for, you know, it's messaging or announcements and how often does this administration, I guess impact have the ultimate say, which they did in this case, even though at the end of the day, the buck stops with you as you have said.

POFTAK - I think there is a level of alignment with mass4209 dot and other parts4211 of the administration, around communications, In terms of operational decisions, operational decisions are made by the MBTA.

TESLER - As the General Manager stated, during that period of time and I think as you, Chairman, your constituents experienced, we had closed the blue line for a significant and intense period of work which had been delayed and so the coordination piece there is really vital because it impacts the highway system, the tunnel system, the whole transportation system and so during those days, what we're trying, my sole interest is making sure that the dates that we give when we change the dates and how to extend that closure, were going to work from the standpoint of the public. We did not want to extend that again, it's really challenging for all us to do so and has implications on all of our other assets that are operating the environment.

As you4268 know, we're headed into some Sumner schedule closings and that coordination was really vital. So some of that communication work is essential, we need to be making sure we're thinking consistently about our whole network and system and that when dates are being extended, that those dates are able to4286 follow through, the public needs to trust that those dates. When we say we failed to meet a deadline, if we extend it, that the next deadline we're going to be, we need to make sure4296 we have the date right.

CRIGHTON - Thank you. I won't belabor the point, but just, you know, I appreciate the complexities around all the closures and the work to do there, the rescheduling all that you have mentioned the trust of the public. I think it would have been pretty straightforward to tell the public, that there were three derailments, that they were not on revenue cars, but rather on construction vehicles and that we're continuing to look at the causes and4321 what our approach is etc. That's the transparency I think they expect. I would ask the direct question to both of you in the future, can we expect that decisions around announcements to the public will be made at your level Mr. GM and not funneled upward through the channels of the Government's press team and can we expect timely announcements of public safety failures at the T?

POFTAK - You can expect timely and transparent announcements from the T on what's happening. I think we will continue to coordinate as the Secretary said, we will continue to coordinate with the administration.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN KEENAN - Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you gentlemen for coming here today to talk about the MBTA. I can tell you, last week I can remember when but either Wednesday or Thursday I was on the platform of Walsh station and the announcement came4400 on that one of the new red line trains was arriving and since I was on the platform, I was excited about it. My excitement was then tempered rather quickly by an older gentleman and his wife who commented to me, I hope it's safe. I think that sums up why we're here today.

So that that couple can feel safe going to wherever they were going and I'm not sure where it was, they were on the train until Park Street and I will tell you also that after having assured them that it was safe, I kept my fingers crossed and that's not born out of experience because I have been a regular red line rider for most of my life, as I like to say, I went to high school, college law school, grad school and to the State House on the red line. So it wasn't born out of experience, but born out of the uncertainty at this stage as to exactly what riders can expect from the MBTA. In my life time of use, I've always found it to be safe and I tried to convey that, but I did have my fingers crossed hoping that nothing would happen because I would feel terrible that these people getting on this new train would experience something that they shouldn't.

So that's kind of the context of of how I look at this and I know there's been a lot of talk about the December 9th, 2019, the LaHood Report. I've looked at that looked at the report that has come out recently from the feds about with therefore recommendations as to what has to be4509 done most quickly and there's a lot of technical jargon lexicon in those documents and it focuses an awful lot on getting to the point of addressing from my perspective, some of the mechanical issues they have to be addressed. When I look at the whole report, the LaHood report, I get through all of that and I come to the section that I think is most important and it will be the thrust of my question.

The LaHood report and I'm going to quote a few sections includes these statements. Leadership feels somewhat defeated, helpless and in some cases hopeless. We heard countless situations, where employees, requests for needed safety equipment or support went unanswered. Leadership hasn't identified or attempted to open channels of communication with the workforce. While it is excellent to build this team and I think this is important given the comments and I hope that there will be about 2000 employees hired relatively quickly, while it is excellent to build this team, little, if any time has been invested to help them aboard or assimilate them into the agency's mission or understand its safety practices.

In conversations with motor persons, it became evident again, that they could not identify a specific individual as their immediate supervisor nor was there any indication that supervision was performing routine ride checks to gauge the caliber of individuals, employees performances. Current culture of blame and retaliation is impeding the T's ability to achieve a greater level of risk management, it was identified as a blame culture. Many safety issues today most likely go unreported by the workforce. Blame and retaliation culture,4635 the4635 impact4635 of this lack of trust resulting from blame and retaliation has caused employees to stay quiet when they see hazards and unsafe conditions on the property.

Then the nickel statement which has been referenced, there is a line in their, this is the gentleman asserts that the MBTA represents a hostile coercive and toxic work environment that is prone to offensive behavior, causing many workforce employees to feel uncomfortable, scared or intimidated in their place of employment. In the context of safety, employees working in this antagonist environment did not feel safe to report health or safety concerns for fear of retribution. So while there is an awful lot of conversation about control systems4685 and rail repairs and signal repairs, all4690 of which is incredibly important, my question goes to the report and the section titled, Safety Culture and what has been done to improve safety culture at the MBTA.

We can spend money, billions of dollars as we have on capital improvements, we can spend hundreds of millions4716 of dollars as we have on operational improvements but all of those are only as good as the culture and the people working within the culture to make sure that those investments are worthwhile investments. So my question is, what has4733 changed since December 9th of 2019 at the MBTA in terms of its4739 culture to ensure the legislature and the citizens of the commonwealth that the billions of dollars that have been invested and we'll continue to be invested are going to result in a safer. MBTA?

POFTAK - Thank you for that question because I think it's really important. We can talk about the technical stuff, we can talk about the money that needs to be spent, I can give you numbers on track4769 maintenance, we can do all those things but it's not enough. One of the things the 2019 report was a definite wake up call that we4778 needed to change the culture of the T, we needed to listen to our employees, we needed to hear what they were telling us and we needed to take action and that's what we started to do in 2019 and I assure you we are not done. So I'm not here to assert that everything that you've related from that safety panel report is no longer true and doubtless, if you look hard enough, you can surely find employees who would share with you that we continue to face challenges.

That said, we have taken a lot of actions to try to improve the culture at the T. It is a huge organizations, 6400 employees, as I said, across five different modes in multiple locations. It's a big battleship to turn around, we're not4821 going to turn it around in a month in4823 a day, a month a year, but we needed to start and we did in 2019. First, we created venues to listen to employees.4831 I've held a number of town halls that employees were invited to. I think one of the things we found in the town halls, the first time we did it and this is in to remember December 2019, we did the first of these town halls in, into the teeth of Covid. The first one, we did look a lot like that4848 with 80 people on it up on the screen, we gradually evolved into running the town halls where everyone's name was blanked out and all the questions went through a google form, so that was fully anonymized.

No one's face on the screen asking questions and we got a lot better, we got a lot more challenging questions, but we got questions, we got feedback from employees. Another number of other ways that we listen to employees, we have a no meeting day once a month where our management, our operations management, employees are out in the field, visiting facilities, riding the system talking to people, I've encouraged my4888 senior team to be out riding the system. I ride the system regularly. You know, if4893 I'm waiting for a bus in the upper upper bus way at Forest Hills, I'm getting a lot of feedback from employees. People see me and they seek me out.

One of the other more formalized ways is we have been promoting, we've had it for a long time, but we really started promoting an earnest safety hotline where employees could report safety issues anonymously. It is monitored throughout the day, it4917 is4917 reviewed by senior management, including myself every day, and I also do an overview every week of what comes through that safety hotline and I'm pleased to report is going to sound a little counterintuitive, I'm pleased to report, we're actually getting more calls about issues to the safety hotline than when we started. I view that as a positive, I view that as employees feeling when they report issues, these issues will get addressed as opposed to, you know, I think the feeling in the beginning was, you4949 may as well, you know, throw it off4951 the four river bridge because no one's going to act on it.

I think people feel like it is getting a response and we need to have that positive feedback loop over and over and over. One of the ways we do that is by communicating more with our employees. You know, we put in things and much of this is in the safety review panel report. Some of this may sound sort of like small beer, but it's all critically important. We have a quarterly newsletter now that gets sent to the home of every employee in that newsletter. Every quarte, we elevate and highlighted employee who brought an important safety issue to light and we celebrate that employee, not as a problem who you know, retaliate against, but as someone who did the right thing and someone who is a real hero of the agency and deserving of recognition.

We're also doing a lot more around employee appreciation. We have yearly employee appreciation where we go out, get everybody either breakfast or lunch. Again, senior executives, I took a shift for breakfast, I took a shift for lunch out there thanking people one on one, so we do that. We really ramped up the level of safety promotion we do. We have regular campaigns around safety issues. We're in the process of installing screens in all of our major facilities so that as employees are sitting taking a break, there's a screen showing them information about the T, providing information about safety. We are also in the field of safety promotion regularly, doing safety flashes on issues.

So I'd be happy to come back and give you kind of a more probably better organized comprehensive answer, I've only touched on a couple of the items, but we understand that we need to change the culture in this organization and we've taken a number of steps to do it, but it's going5071 to take and I think we have a real opportunity, right. I talked to you, one of the things I instituted right after the December 2019 report was what I said in my5080 opening statement, I show up at new hire orientation at 9:00 AM and I talk to them about the MBTA, I talk to them about the importance of safety and we talk about potentially hiring 2000 employees next year.

That's the moment to get people right, that is the moment as they started at the organization to emphasize that safety is a priority, so that's just another one of the steps and again, probably give you a better organized answer with a little preparation. The work is by no means done but I thank you for raising the question because it's incredibly important work.

TESLER - I would just also to build off where the General Manager is and I would center in the committee as a whole, would point to page 45-47 in the panel report because they both had the comments, you said they had specific findings and specific recommendations and that has been the road map. The General Manager gave you a lot of detail about the day to day things we're doing but they fall within the ambit of these specific recommendations here that as an organization, as a board and as a subcommittee on safety, this is our5146 road map that we've been given to change the culture from the panel to address the concerns you raise. There are a number of specific recommendations here, eight culture recommendations and so that is the specifics in addition to the General Manager said that's what we're following.

KEENAN - Mr. Chairman, thank you and I appreciate what you have provided in terms of improving the culture. I view that as the most critical issue here and my concern is and this isn't criticism, just an observation that we still need an anonymous safety channel. You know, anonymous safety hotline for people. I guess we all know that the culture has changed to a better level when we no longer need an anonymous safety hotline for employees but5213 they feel comfortable each day when they see something that is not safe that they are able to raise their hand or raise it to the proper authority. Not fear retaliation, not fear the need to go to an anonymous safety hotline and feel that their voice is being heard.

I think we're getting closer to that having visited a couple of facilities over the years, that was the sense I was getting but I just like to really highlight that I don't think that can happen fast enough. The sooner that anonymous safety hotline is gone and replaced with an ability of an employee within the normal don't job that they do that they feel comfortable raising their hand, I think it's critically important. So I thank you for your focus on that and hopefully that will continue to be a major focus going forward that we don't get lost in the money, on the capital side versus the operational side. Again, all that very, very important but I think the culture side is every bit as important. Thank you.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP CAPANO - Thank you. I thought that was a great question by Senator Keenan and I was glad to hear the response. People need to feel that work, they need to feel like they're not fault finding, they are fact finding trying to make it a safer place and without having you5424 know in order to be proactive, I mean that has to be ingrained in the culture like I think was stated earlier. But just to take off on a little5434 bit too, also a lot of times for my past work, I worked at general electric for 27 years and I know that maintenance issues turn into safety issues and in order to get to the causes of a lot of the safety problems, you have to have that culture instilled in people.

So in other words, if a panel falls at a rail station and you go and you fix the panel, you're treating the effects, but what about the rest of them? Do you get to that? Do you have the maintenance people to do that5475 kind of thing? I know5476 just, I'll just mention when, and I'm sure there's problems everywhere else. There's a whole stretch on the commuter rail where the fence is completely come down behind vocational Technical institute, from the overgrowth of everything on the tracks and on the other side, there's a tree that fell down into somebody's yard. So, I mean, other people looking at this, I can't imagine no one's ever said anything before. I know it's been called in before. So, you know, whether it's getting to the cause of what's going on in the rail station or subway station or an incident like that or, or something like that that's going on.

Do you have the people that can take care of that? Is there somebody looking at that? Because I think that, you know, until you can get to that point, all the, you know, you can satisfy a mandate, maybe from the FTA or from other safety protocols, but unless you can get to that point, there's not going to be an impact with the public, they're just not going to say, they see what they see every day, unless you can get to that point where people, uh notice that things are changing, um, there's going to be an issue with safety. It's not imagine it's it's real and you know, it's been going on for a long time. If you don't take care of something year after year, after year after year, it becomes a problem when it wasn't originally a problem in the beginning. So I would just like a comment on that a little bit.

POFTAK - Thanks for the question. You said by the Lynn Voke Tech, so we will take a look at that specifically. But your question is more systemic, right? Sort of who's keeping track of this? Do you have the people to do it?

CAPANO - Yes, general question, I mean, that's been reported numerous times. So, you know, if you can take care of it, it would be great but I'm just trying to state the case here.

POFTAK - You know, I'm sure there's many more examples of that and I think there's two dimensions to the question, right? There's a staffing issue and then there's a systems issue and I think right now, we are struggling with the staffing issue. We have approximately 800 open positions, some of whom would be engaged in the type of work you're talking about, engineering and maintenance. The other challenge embedded in the staffing issue, which isn't visible to most people is in an average year lately, about 500-700 people retire from the5638 T. So When the secretary says, we added 100 people last year, we actually added 800 people last year but the net number is only plus 100.

So we have a tremendous challenge in staffing that is only exacerbated by the environment that we're currently working in but5657 we5657 have those positions, those positions are identified, they are funded, we're trying to hire them, we have doubled the size of our HR staff, we're also going to bring in additional third parties to do recruiting, to try to get to that staffing level. Then the next level is systems. We are building out our asset management system, we have a presentation tomorrow at the board of directors meeting on our progress towards reaching that. There are places I feel, I'm a little surprised to hear about the tree because5688 I feel for instance, in commuter rail, vegetation management is one of those places where we have put a lot of work into making sure that we are managing the vegetation.

I know the line, the line most proximate to me probably hadn't been cleared properly of vegetation in about 20 years and who came in and to some criticism from the neighborhood that, you know, we're taking down trees that have been there for 20 years but were necessary to keep the system safe. That's one small slice of the pie, right? There's assets all over the place, you know the stations I think we're evolving to the point where will have an asset management system that will allow us to get on these issues as opposed to continually being in reactive mode.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN LESSER - Thank you, Chair Straus, thank you, Vice Chair Keenan and Chair Crighton. I just want to go back to the line of questioning that chair Crighton had about the blue line derailment and the delays there because right now all we really have to go off of as a committee is the Boston globe story that came out, that talked about the derailment and the communication on those derailment. So I just want to ask some factual questions so that we can set a record about what happened if that's okay, with the permission of the Chairs, thank you. I do want to start by saying that you know, I'm grateful and I admire both of your work and your dedication to the T and to the transportation system in Massachusetts across the board, I think that's unquestionable. I do want to publicly thank, Secretary Tesler for coming to Western Mass recently to celebrate the Berkshire flyer, so just so that we have all this on the same page. The blue5804 line was shut down for scheduled maintenance tunnel repairs and track replacement from April 25th to May 8th, is that correct?

POFTAK - I will defer to the Senator's memory of the record that that sounds roughly consistent. I don't have at my fingertips what exactly.

LESSER - We'll assume the initial schedule.

TESLER - I know it was extended. I was just going to say the important note is there was a planned closure which was extended.

LESSER - So the extension happened twice; first, until May 13th and then through May 17th, so it was a total 23 day shutdown or?

POTFAK - Sounds about right.

LESSER - Okay. So the shutdowns were extended both times due to three separate derailments of construction, I understand it was construction vehicles not a passenger train but there were three separate derailments that caused5863 the two extensions?

POFTAK - I would say it's a5868 larger issue than that. I think there were some unforeseen site conditions, I think5875 there was also I think several situations where the sort of there was a conflict between the AS built and MBTA standards that had to be reconciled in order in order for5888 us to feel that the that the repairs were made at the appropriate level. So I am not contesting5896 what you're saying but I'm just saying that there's a greater,

LESSER - Okay, that makes sense. So it wasn't a direct causal really. It wasn't that the derailment caused the extension but it was part of the so

POFTAK - It surely contributed to the extension, I don't confess that at all, but it was not the sole reason for it.

TESLER - But in short, there was contracting team hired to complete5922 a certain level5923 work which the T had not been able to accept and needed to have extended time. You're going to get some of the reasons why it was not accepted and also some of the reasons for that delay but the short answer was, there was a specific goal and amount of work that was expected to be done that had not been completed.

LESSER - So I just want to get out and again building off of the questions that Chair Crighton had been asking, why it took so long to announce the information about those derailment. So on May 7th, after the5955 first construction vehicle derailed my understanding and our committee's understanding is that the5960 MBTA did not issue a statement, our understanding is that no statement was issued because after the first derailment the shutdown was not going to be extended, is that right? There was no public statement after the first derailment?

POFTAK - Again, I think you might be, I don't contest your point but I don't have the same5984 granular recollection that you do.

LESER - Then on May 8th, there was the second vehicle derailed the construction vehicle and the MBTA announced that5995 the Blue line shutdown would be extended until May 13th but that announcement did not make mention of the May 7th or the May 8th derailments. The MBTA's May 8th statement said to complete additional work and finish scheduled work, Blue Line services will continue to be suspended until Friday, May 13th.

POFTAK - That sounds consistent.

LESSER - So why was the derailment omitted? I guess I think this is part of the issue we've said about the culture of safety. You've said repeatedly that6033 safety is the most important, why would you issue a to a one sentence statement when a when a derailment happened that would in theory be of interest to6044 riders?

POFTAK - Again, you know, I think our primary focus was obviously, that the6051 work gets done and get safe, get done safely and then as a secondary close second, but as a secondary matter that we get service back to our customers as soon as possible. You know, I think this panelists pointed out that we could have been clearer and more detailed in our explanation. I also think there were a number of factors that were driving that delay, not solely the derailment, so we didn't think it necessary at the time. As you noted it again, it was a construction cart, not a revenue vehicle, not a piece of heavy equipment.

LESSER - So I'll kind of move through6090 this because I know there's a lot6091 of more questions asked. Then on May 9th, the third derailment occurred and reporters started to ask questions about derailment on the Blue line and at that time, the MBTA press team did not reveal any of the derailments on May 9th after the 3rd construction car or construction vehicle derailment happened.

POFTAK - I think that's accurate. Again, I don't have absolute recall of what what statement, if any, was made on May 9th, if indeed there was one.

LESSER - Okay. Then on May 11th, again, this is from the Globe reporting, which is why we want to just confirm it with everyone, you wrote to the Deputy Press secretary of the MBTA in an email and you asked can we rewrite the6138 statement that they were preparing with less detail and that cannot go out until I notify SCC, which I assume is Secretary Tessler and and Buckley presumably referring to the Governor's chief of staff. So why again, why did you at that point after there had been three derailments and there are now multiple extensions of the of the shutdown of the line. Why wouldn't you want to just provide more detail to the public about why the delay was happening?

POFTAK - I guess at that point in time, it was my judgment that the critical factor was that there was an additional delay. Again, I think the point the point is being made right now that the you know the construction cart derailments are of significant gravity, that they should be disclosed, and, you know perhaps that was my error at that moment in time.

LESSER - Then the very next day on May 12th, the MBTA and the DPU which is the safety regulator drafted statements that did mention all three derailments when the MBTA's press team shared their draft with the Governor's office. They proposed an entirely new statement that did not mention any derailments, is that correct?6213 So another day went by and actually the MBTA suggested mentioning the derailments and mentioning those derailment was removed.

POFTAK - I think that's accurate.

LESSER - Because the Governor's statement said there have been delays in construction on the Blue line project as the MBTA has previously announced. The MBTA will continue to keep customers updated on impacts to service. So I'll just there's more here but I just kind of cut to the chase because it's important for the record. Has there been political interference in the communication that the provides riders?

POFTAK - No, I don't believe there has been. I think there's always more detail we can potentially provide and so I think at some point, one makes a judgment and I think, we do coordinate just so we have a standard set of alignment but no, I don't view it as political interference.

LESSER - Moving forward, does the MBTA and Mass DOT6274 commit6274 to provide full and transparent and timely information about derailment of any type to the public, especially if they cause shutdowns of lines which creates massive inconvenience for thousands and thousands of people?

TESLER - The key point there is timely so there's always a balance here and taking away from the specific what I continue to learn, is when things take place, making sure we slow down and have accurate information. So a lot of times, the details follow, there are investigations that are underway. Sometimes with some of the things we're talking about, they involve the DPU, sometimes they involve internal resources investigating, sometimes they involve federal resources and so I just want to, but that in context, it depends what we're6326 talking about because they're sometimes either constraints on what we can say, particularly if there's NTSB or federal investigations, there's a role to play there.

So what you said, I would agree with but I think that there is a very careful balance between speed and accuracy and transparency really is the right balance between both. We want to get the facts and state them right one time and sometimes when we are in an intense period of either work or projects or a lot events are happening, all the facts are not available to us and it's important for us to make sure we get it right. So there's been times where we have said things and had to change them over time and that is an equal mistake to the challenges that we6378 are6378 pointing out here and so I just want to make sure that that that's understood.

LESSER - That's understandable and I'll turn it back over. I just want to conclude just bringing it back to the specific issue on the blue line. It seems like you had prepared a statement announcing the reasons for the delays which were the three derailments and then that statement was clipped to be much more basic and frankly less informative to the public. Was the reason for that because you were requested to clip it or6409 was or was there a different reason?

POFTAK - You know, as I said before, I think my energy was focused on kind of primary and secondary priorities, this was a tertiary priority. I made the decision not to push back on what was said and I think that's a contestable decision, but it didn't at that moment in time was not my first or second priority.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CRIGHTON - I think we've spoken at length about the Blue line derailment issue, but in terms of communications and transparency, there are other issues that have recently come up as well. So, on April 14th, Mr. GM, the FTA sent a letter to you informing you that they'd like to conduct a safety management inspection on transit maintenance, is that accurate?

POFTAK - Yes, it is.

CRIGHTON - But it wasn't until later again when Taylor Donovan reported both the letter investigation on May 9th that the public was made aware of the probe. Is that accurate?

POFTAK - Roughly.

CRIGHTON - So I guess, you know, I don't want6494 to belabor the point, but we have close to a month delay of an announcement pertaining to safety issues at the T, I think for folks in the general public, you read about government all the time bureaucracies, you see the acronyms investigating one entity or another to make it lost in the shuffle but I think it's important for everyone to realize that when the FTA comes in, it is very serious. We referenced before that. It's only happened on one other occasion, that this could lead if we're not compliant to up to 25% of our federal funding being lost and also Receivership and and other issues there. So, it's a very serious thing,6528 I just want to make clear to the public and yet we were not or the public was not informed between April 14th and then May 9th. I welcome response but I just wanted to make that point, I don't want to belabor it.

TESLER - I appreciate the point and I would note, again, I think it's we continue to learn and continue to address some of the feedback and comments we're getting today. But this is a federal partner agency, they sent that letter, they notified a number of parties beyond just the MBTA directly because it is their matter in their investigation. Our tendency is to defer to them and speak about the scope of their investigation, we were learning in real time too. I think that that is something that as we move forward with this and including today, we have, I didn't learn and adjust that approach but I think in the first few days of getting that letter, we were deferential to them as a federal agency with the resources to explain and answer questions as the scope of the thing to want to speak to the scope of it.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CRIGHTON - So did the FDA ask you not to speak or was it just that you did not want to announce that?

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

POFTAK - To amplify what the Secretary said, in our engagement with both the FDA and the NTSB. We have let them take the lead in terms of disclosure. I don't recall any specific with any specific discussion with the FDA, where they said you may not, but we did allow them to take the lead on disclosure. I know they provided briefings, I've only the briefings were opaque to me, but it became clear to us at some point that the Legislature was not included in those briefings. I know some municipal officials were, I know some of the6660 of the federal delegation staff were.

I think we operated under the assumption that there would be some communication with the Legislature, I don't think there was and I've, in subsequent conversations, I've heard from at least one member of this committee, their displeasure about learning this in the newspaper and I'm hopeful that we've been proactive particularly around the special directives in terms of communicating about this, not only publicly, but to this committee as well.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

STRAUS - I guess my question then is, what wouldn't have shown up in a records request, of course, can I ask either of you, did anyone in the Governor's office have a telephone conversation with either of you suggesting to either delay or not make an announcement on the derailments?

TESLER - I had said earlier and I want to say again. The only discussions at all because I don't normally participate in my role in any of these communications, I was concerned because real time we were extending a closure and my interest was making sure that there was a plan to get the project done and that the project dates were accurate. That's the only conversations that I recalled during that period of time.

POFTAK - I don't have any recollection of any such conversation. As noted, there's a lot of complexity of the situation that was very fluid but I don't I don't believe there was any such conversation.

STRAUS - So if I can't impose then on the Secretary, who did you speak with in the Governor's office?

TESLER - I don't remember that I did, I know I spoke to the general manager and I remember speaking about when the project, I was informed that it was going to be delayed and so I wanted to know what the date and why should believe the date would get done. That's the conversation I remember, I don't remember any conversations.

STRAUS - Man or a woman?

TESLER - I spoke to the General Manager.

STRAUS - So neither of you spoke to anyone by telephone to someone in the Governor's office?

TESLER - Again, that period of time, and my role is relatively limited in these things, so I'm not sure. If I would have spoken to somebody, it probably would have been Tim Buckley, I don't recall if I did. Again, we have done diversions before and closed, this did not get done on time, that was very disappointing, I was very disappointed to a lot of riders and it was very disappointing that it was ongoing and during this period of time there was no clarity as to when it will get done. So I recall a number of conversations um and I'm not sure of all of them, the only conversations, but I recall the variety of conversations was about when the work would be done and not the details of the reasons why, because I don't normally participate in that.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP TUCKER - Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that,6908 and thank you gentlemen for being here. I want to preface my very brief, just one question by saying, I understand the complexities of trying to maintain in large aging complex system, but it6920 seems that most of our maintenance is done in a reactionary way rather than proactive. I started in preparation for the hearing today, started looking at the maintenance issues that have really created a domino effect when cars have to be taken out6935 of service as recently as July 8th, apparently there was some battery issues, there was, I read what looked to be two different versions of this. It said that it was battery failures due to overcharging and WCBB had an expert on this, said it was actually explosions.

So I'll leave that to the experts but it just seems that these nuts and bolts failures. Right before that in May, the Orange line had a braking system failures, cars being taken out of service creating a domino effect and I have to tell you, as a state Rep and I'm sure that every one of my colleagues will tell you they've had the same experience and that is getting complaints from the public in real time. We're getting Facebook messages, text messages, I'm sitting on the blue line, I'm sitting on the new6987 report line, they're telling us it's a signal failure, and its because of the weather. People are very frustrated. And when I got over these last few winters, I know there's been some challenges.

What we're hearing from the public is it's new England, how did the T not prepare for whether related issues and I will say that when I do contact your staff, they are extremely responsive, they get back to me to get to the bottom of it and I do appreciate that, but the public frustration is very, very high. My question is the balance of maintenance seems to be very reactive, I'm wondering what we're doing in a proactive way to the extent that you can with the staffing issues and with funding issues to try to7029 get out ahead of these things. I've seen where cars have been delivered and in a very short time but taken back out of service again, it almost seems like that there is a failure of visioning to look forward for what probably every other system can at least expect to happen when you have a system the way we have it here.

POFTAK - Okay, you've asked an important and complicated7053 questions, let me break it down into a couple of pieces. First, to the extent you're hearing from constituents, please encourage them7059 tweet at at MBTA, we have a team of public information officers who are incredibly patient and tireless sitting in our operations control center, seeing the scroll of people tweeting at the MBTA and we actively use that as a management tool to dispatch, put in work orders, dispatch people, identify trouble spots because there are moments in time where the commuter who is being affected is the first one to know about what's going on. So I encourage you to send people in that direction because we've built a resource to utilize that.

Your point is well taken on much because of the age of our system, much of and we'll just sort of confine this to7102 vehicles for the time being, a lot of the maintenance is reactive because of some of the age of some of the cars that we have. The previous thought process was built around a midlife overhaul. It's sort of, you would run the vehicles and then you would do7118 a major midlife overhaul. What we are doing with our new fleets is called reliability centered maintenance and it is in place on7127 the blue line and I think those of you with experience of the blue line, those are newer vehicles, but we are also trying to keep those baseline maintained as opposed to doing kind of big tranches of maintenance as we go and we think that's a much better way and we think that the numbers bear that out and we're putting that work in7146 place with the new vehicles on the red and orange line as well.

The third thing you talked about is the fact7154 that we've had to take the new vehicles on the Orange line and the red line out of service several times and I would defend that practice as one, the most prudent thing to do from7167 a safety perspective, we have consistently aired on the side of safety and proactively taken those vehicles out of service rather than sort of just try to push it and keep them going. We want to make the right decision for safety. We also think it is the right decision for the long term interests of the Commonwealth. We are eventually going to have 404 new vehicles on the red and orange line. To the extent that we identify problems now and fix them so that the remaining cars don't have those problems, we think that's the right way to go about it.

So I know it's inconvenient, I hate to7205 see those cars go out of service, but we do think it's in the best long term interests and we've seen other properties that have also struggled with vehicle delivery and we want to get those cars and service as quickly as possible, we want them to be as safe as we can be. So, I think there is a little bit of attention, I think, the right thing to do in the long term is actually to pull them out of service when we do have a problem, identify the problem and fix it, which we've been able to do in every case.

TUCKER - So if I may, Mr. Chairman, just one follow up and I appreciate that and I agree wholeheartedly on pulling them out for safety issues, but the fact that new vehicles which are incredibly expensive having these issues early on, is that a failure of selection, procurement, something has gone wrong and I agree with you on pulling for safety, no question, but something has gone wrong here then.

POFTAK - I think what you are seeing is, obviously, we have teams in place that are inspecting these vehicles and we changed, you know, we obviously alter our inspections when we see a problem that we didn't identify originally. I think you've seen other properties that are going through the same issues accepting new vehicles is incredibly, these are incredibly complex vehicles, you know, the, the sort of the older model of just kind of a purely mechanical system. This is a high tech operating machine and they just have such a degree of complexity that, that there are challenges and accepting them, it's our job to work through those challenges. We're also able to do some new and interesting things with these vehicles.

One of the things we've done now we are in the process of adding a module to the software on these vehicles where we can now monitor the batteries in real time so that if there's ever a problem with the battery again, getting out of a specific temperature range is immediately available to us. We are in the process of implementing that, but these are much more complex, we couldn't do that on our older vehicles, so, I mean, I know that's a little bit of a hand waving excuse, it is simply a very complex, both mechanical and electronic product and I don't think we are dissimilar from other7343 properties in terms of having these types of challenges.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN MORAN - Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair and I appreciate this forum. I saw Senate President Emeritus Chandler was here who is also very interested in transportation and it brings to mind, I want to thank the secretary for helping the RTA with a very safety oriented issue on data breach with private information and with its own risk, so thank you for that. But my question has to do with with something I believe it was Chair Straus mentioned which is we want riders back. I mean safety is paramount, but we want a system that works for everyone here, particularly considering the fact that we are coming out of Covid, we're trying to do so in a responsible way with respect to the climate and I handle district that has towns on both sides of the Cape Cod Canal including Plymouth where we had a commuter rail shutdown temporarily during COVID and then a terrific announcement that we were reopening, its right at the center of a 40 yard developed and then I just read in the local paper a couple of days ago, would have had no information otherwise that it's going to be shut down again.

So again, my constituents who have doctor's appointments, tourism based economy, we're trying to change behavior and as we look at the safety elements, we also have to consider the financial responsibility of having a system that people want7460 to use, they want to use it safely, of course, but we want something7465 that all people in the state can have access to and use. So my question is, what kind of consideration is being given to ridership going forward particularly in more of the outskirts, around Boston because, you know, it's just second to safety, that's something that we should be dealing with at the same time. So thank you very much.

POFTAK - I thank you for the question and obviously, our priority here is safety, but service is also, you know, is literally in our value, safety is our primary first value and then service is next. So you know, one of the things we've tried to do on commuter rail specifically to attract folks to come back and ride is this hourly clock face service, we call it, where you have consistent service throughout the day on an hourly basis. This proven very popular. What we're seeing is the division between the peak and the off peak is a lot less. We're seeing lots more weekend riders, in fact, on a number of our roots, I think it's six of the routes that operate on the weekend.

We're actually above pre Covid levels now, in absolute terms, they weren't huge numbers, but we're seeing ridership above pre Covid levels on the weekend, so we think that is positive. I think the specific concerns related to Plymouth station in Kingston station is because it is not kind of a linear route, we can't run that hourly clock face service and service both stations. I think that is an ongoing quandary for our service planning people and I know that is a very active discussion, but7579 we think in general the clock face service is appealing to folks, particularly that, particularly the 9:00 to 5:00, commute is not necessarily the dominant commute. Now, I know plenty of people who will come into the office for a series of meetings, go home in sometime mid afternoon and then do meetings for the rest of the day.

The other approach we have taken is to offer some different fair products, we've reduced on a limited basis, some fares on the bus and transit system, but we are also offering a five day flex pass on the commuter rail system, which is really intended to be a transition between the single ride pass and7617 the monthly pass. The monthly pass that may have made a lot of sense for folks when they were commuting 20 days a week, may not make sense of them anymore and the five day flex pass is a package of 5, one day passes at a 10% discount that can be used within 30 days.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

MORAN - Just on that point, if I7639 may, Chair? Sure, I'm a little more focused on what do we see in the plan to, to get the station open again. So thank you.

POFTAK - I know7658 that is an active discussion, I think the problem is how do we operate the clock face service that has proven very popular given the geometry of those routes. I know there's been a discussion with, I don't know if it was suspended at some point, I have taken the LaNatra bus from Plymouth center to Kingston station. I don't know if there's any, I know there's been7679 some discussions about potentially resuming that I know that's not necessarily the answer you wanted to hear, but it is, it is something I'll take back to my service planning team and communicate your wishes as well.

TESLER - I wanted to just add here too, which I think Chair Straus did say at the beginning, but I think it bears noting when we talk about safety and the commuter rail arena. Twofold, there was a lot of specific comments in the in the 2019 safety panel report about the differences7711 in the system. We have challenges across all of our modes, but there was, I think the Chair's point that there are a variety of different things that the T provides and they have different safety systems and in the case of commuter rail Cahill, this is a contractor and FRA has oversight. I would also note that at least for now that the FTA safety management inspection has a different scope. So again, safety is paramount across all of the T's modes.

There are issues, challenges and work to do to improve our safety system and our safety culture across all modes but I think it just bears noting and I wanted to bring us back to that as we continue to try to rebuild ridership and we have some issues to follow up, Senator, with you in particular that you've raised in Plymouth um that we do have different issues and challenges going on across our different modes and they are differently situated.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP KERANS - Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your questioning and helping to shed light on this report. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, Mr. GM. You know, I follow this as most people as a reader of the globe and reading the LaHood report in preparation for today, it's really pretty stunning just because there's an exhaustive list of very specific list of recommendations to make these changes and I want to thank everyone with gratitude to everyone for their focus on maintenance and so forth. I do want to turn again for a second to culture and to me um the focus groups with employees were pretty damning where people were saying they don't treat people with respect.

I stopped calling maintenance after the third time. They tell people to just tweet to get resolution on a safety issue or to raise a safety issue. So I'm just wondering the importance of this breaking down of silos, lots of references to7860 this, all these little distinct operations. So what are the impediments that are getting in the way of your disassembling those silos? And I'm wondering too, how much of your work is contracted out by consultants? Whether maintenance, whether safety and engineering, can you expand on that?

POFTAK - I would be happy to come back and give you an accounting of that. I don't have off the top of my head, I can't give you kind of a percentage or dollar volume. I can say that we have invested extensively in our internal resources. I think in rough numbers, December 2019, we were probably around 25 FPs in the safety department. We are now at 40 FTS with 12 posted vacancies. We believe as as an outcome of the special directives and the the safety management inspection that that number will continue to increase significantly, so we've really invested internally. We do have our own internal maintenance of way department. We also use outside contractors as a way to get to get additional work done.

We are planning to our maintenance of way and then I think one of the one of the special directives is telling us allow those maintenance of way employees to be more efficient, more effective by giving them more access to the track. So I don't have a specific answer in terms of dollars or percentages but I don't want to leave you with the impression that we have created a dependency on outside consultants, we are investing internally.

KERANS - If I could, Mr. Chair? Thank you. I guess I'm7981 more than a dollar amount I think is the relationship and how they integrate into the organization and how that would impact your efforts to make your safety employees thoroughly embedded in the organization with the respect. Breakfast with the GM is a nice thing to do but to me, the report spoke very directly to listening to and hearing from the employees in the field. So I guess I would just appeal to you to do more of that and to do it rapidly and that would include perhaps reviewing your consultant contracts8029 to say how do we hold them8033 to account.

TESLER - We appreciate the feedback and suggestion and I8040 think the comments and the pieces that you're pulling out from the 2019 report, we certainly, but I think it's important to note which I note at the beginning is this is a group of people we hired to directly hear from those focus groups that they did, to get that feedback because we wanted the best practices to make the changes in the culture that your questions go right at. So this is something that the leadership of the FMCB at the time and the MBTA wanted, knew we8073 had to make changes, knew that they were best practices nationally and sought out some of the feedback over 2.5 years ago8080 to make sure that we had a strategy to make those changes. So I think it's just important to point out the findings in there8091 is what we wanted so that we could change it.

KERANS - Have you set a deadline for yourselves to know, we will improve and we'll measure it and we'll do it by a date certain?

TESLER - GM, you can maybe address this too. I think that there are sort of two kinds of recommendations of the 61. Some are specific actions and we show those and we track those and dashboard on those, some like culture are an ongoing, they are in every day. It takes time to change culture. So there's no, you know, day that you can tangibly do that. It's a long term commitment that's an everyday and constant and goes for years. So I think it's harder with something to commit to a day that you're culture is different as opposed to recognize it takes a commitment that is durable and long term to make that change. But I8148 know a lot has gone into how we scorecard and track this.

POFTAK - Yes, I think this is sort of the classic organizational behavior issue, right? The hard things are easy, the soft things are hard, right? We track8160 on a monthly basis. A number of key statistics, some of which are required by the FDA, some of which are not. We track a number of key statistics against a goal on how we're performing safety wise on light rail, heavy rail and bus. We presented publicly at the board of directors subcommittee meeting, we answer questions why is this in the red, why has this been a sustained issue?

We have a great8188 deal of focus on that. It's a lot harder to measure cultural issues. One kind of crude measure for me is the use of the safety hotline. The fact that more people are using the safety hotline on a regular basis says that that is a good thing culturally, if people feel8206 like they can bring problems to this level and that they can be solved. I think the vice chairs8212 admonition that can we get to a day where people don't feel like they have to use a hotline, they don't have to use it anonymously and that they have a system that is closer to them, that they can solve those problems and I don't disagree with that admonition and I think for us it is ongoing work to to listen to employees to make employees feel valued and appreciated. There's a dearth of measurable outcomes here around culture and it's also work that's never done there, you don't declare the culture is fine, let's move on to other issues.

CRIGHTON - Thanks thank you representative, just a few points and questions to build off questions from Representative Kerans as well as Vice chair earlier And I appreciate all the efforts that you've made since 2019 and also recent with the FTA in terms of changing network culture at the work on the safety hotline, you know being more available, you know communicating regularly with your workforce and you just said you know you want to let your workforce know that they are appreciated, they need to be appreciated, they need sorry secretary going forward for the microphone closer your workforce needs to be appreciated, they need to be heard but they also need to have the protections and and safety standards applied to them as we're looking to do for the entire system.

So, in the 2019 report8308 in the most recent FDA investigations, they have highlighted both reports exposed that personal protective equipment or PPE is not being provided and used in a manner that ensures safety for everyone. So in the report, it said, while at a live derailment site, a panel member observed the following very few individuals other than management wearing helmets or eye protection. Many of the frontline employees were engaged in activities such as removing tracks, which covers or repositioning rear ailing equipment without wearing work gloves. Additionally, the employees at the derailment site had on a wide variety of footwear.

MBTA management at the site did not raise any exceptions to these circumstances. Now, that's just one example while the experts were on site, and the FTA directives, you know, their finding one was MBTA is not established, consistent PPE requirements for right of way access. And the directive was to establish such personnel is inclusive of all employees, contractors, oversight or other individuals who have access to these facilities. Now, I think everyone in the world this point familiar with PPE wasn't acting and widely used before, but we know how important it is for safety for preventing accidents.

I ask this and I'm not trying to be cute, but how hard is it at this point to make our workforce aware of wearing proper helmets, you know, goggles, gloves, footwear, all the things to keep themselves. How hard is it to establish those protocols if they're not and also to enforce it at all levels?

POFTAK - Yes, let me, there's two elements to this. One is compliance and when one is consistency. What you read from the report from 2019 is a compliance issue that there are folks who are not wearing proper PPE and I think that still happens. We have an auditing system in place where our safety department goes out and audits, work sites and actively re instructs people if they are not wearing proper PPE. We obviously, you know, we procure as much PPE as needed for specified tasks and make it available to equipment. I have more PPE in my personal possession than I care and my family cares to recount.

We make PPE available to everyone who needs it. So I think we need to continue to work on that compliance issue and part of that is culture, right? Part of that is a culture of, hey, I'm going to protect myself. I want everyone around me to be protected. We all wear the right protective equipment because it's the right thing to do. So part of that is culture having people want to wear8474 PPE and then part of that is compliance. You need to wear PPE and you will either be disciplined or sent home if you're not wearing proper PPE, which has happened in some cases. The other element which the FTA highlights is consistency.

We are working to both reconcile differing PPE standards across our different departments while also keeping in mind that everyone isn't required to wear the maximalist PPE, right? Only someone doing welding needs to wear welding gloves, right? You wouldn't have someone who's flagging a train where welding gloves. But I think what they're observing is our Transportation Department has has one set of PPE standards which is consistent with their work, right? They're typically not on the right of way, whereas our maintenance of way folks are power folks have a different level and I think what they're highlighting8532 is the fact that you go to a site, you see people from different departments, they're wearing different levels of PPE.

It suggests either we need to have some kind of uniform standards. I think in particular, one of the elements we're going to look at is footwear. We need people to have regulation footwear in almost every circumstance. So you highlight a really important and recurring issue that we are attacking from a couple of different directions.

CRIGHTON - I appreciate that and appreciate focused on it. You know, looking at the timeline, it was 2019 when the report came out, you know, you would think over the course of the last 2.5-3 years that these would be in place, but you're working on it, I appreciate that. I think it just speaks overall to be number one as we've said time and time again today, safety has to be the top priority, but also when you're looking to recruit and retain and8584 hire and have this robust workforce and a pipeline there, those folks need to know that their safety as a worker is value and I think it certainly could speak to some of the other cultural problems that we've had here today.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP WHIPPS - Thanks, Chair Crighton and Chair Straus. I want to thank Rep Kerans for raising the issue about consultants. I had a similar question after reading in the LaHood report that MBTA brought on a consultant to perform an independent evaluation that resulted in them identifying track defects that had already been documented and reported by our own track inspectors and had not been properly addressed. So I am really interested in learning if who is being hired, how are they being integrated for your questions? What are their tasks and what are8639 we spending on those consultants. So I would really appreciate that follow up from you.

POFTAK - Thank you. Yes, I would be happy to follow up with the specifics, I think in general, what you're referring to I believe is8652 the track inspections that we put in place after the 2019 which is a yearly cycle of having an outside consultant, an outside set of eyes come in and inspect our tracks. It's another level of scrutiny on the system and we did it in response to the findings of the safety review panel just to give us a higher level of assurance that we're catching everything that needs to be caught but I understand the intent of the question.

WHIPPS - Mr. Secretary, in your opening remarks, you noted that the MBTA has completed or is in the process of implementing the 34 recommendations and 61 corrective actions. Can you be more specific about what recommendations and corrective8694 actions are still outstanding in addition to the safety culture recommendation that Chair Straus mentioned?

TESLER - Specifically you're talking about this point, the 2019? Okay, and the GM has it right here, so I'm going to8713 probably get some help with the specific numbers. But just to sort of set it up, there are a range of different findings and then specific recommendations beneath8725 them. I think it's 34 and 61 is the number and we track those in different ways. So we don't see those as sort of done and over we look those more sort of color coded green or yellow meeting ongoing or or not started and those are regularly updated on the staff level and on a subcommittee level, safety subcommittee which we created late last year with the new board to dig into these issues.

So, yellow doesn't mean you know, trouble, it just means ongoing and we see a lot of these are paramount commitment to safety that are ongoing. So culture is a forever commitment, we will never be done, we're going to keep working on it as long as we can. So, specific numbers and again we do report on this regularly, so I am going to see if my colleague here has a number that we can give you if not we can certainly give you sort of our scorecard as we do these publicly at the board meeting. So, the implementation status. So, as I said, we sort of have two standards; either in progress and because some of these are ongoing and should be ongoing and implemented.

So let me do them by category, the way that the panel did it. Financial review, we see four different specific actions there, corrective actions and they are in progress. We see on safety assurance, there are 10 different corrective actions, seven in green, three in what we call in progress, yellow. Safety culture, there are 16 specific recommendations, 12, we believe are in green for we believe are in progress. Safety policy, and again, these are July 22, so this is what we internally sort of track. Safety policy, there's 11, 7 in green, four ongoing. Safety promotion, 8 specific, so six in green, two ongoing. Safety risk management, 12 specific recommendations. 12 and green.

So I think that's a total of six. So you know that looks about 17 that are still ongoing, the rest, we believe are green and in good shape. Again, we don't see that as a reflection of trouble or concern necessarily that they are in progress. We see that though, things like finance and things like8881 culture are going to be an ongoing and durable commitment that requires time.

WHIPPS - So several of these were on hold, there was a red category, what8892 happened8892 to the red category? Has there been a change in your reporting?

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

POFTAK - I guess there was some in red in the April report8910 and if my memory serves, one of them involved having new hires visit facilities which we have not been doing really during Covid. We don't necessarily want a lot of8925 unnecessary foot traffic in facilities. I think as we head into this endemic phase, I think that is something that we will revisit. Also because we do have a vaccine mandates in place that's consistent with the state mandate. There were several in red related to zero based budgeting. We have conducted what I would say is a bottoms up review of the number8953 of employees that we believe we need. I don't know, whether it meets the pure zero-based budgeting standard, I think was the back and forth. I mentioned we have roughly 800 vacancies right now.

A number of those vacancies are related to positions where we've done kind of the bottom up analysis. I was a member of the Legislature's Commission on zero-based budgeting, so I feel I have some grounding in this activity. I think what we've done is in I think in compliance with the spirit of what we were asked to do and I think we were sort of discussing formally. Have we have literally done what it said? I think we've accomplished the intent, we know how many people we want to hire in these departments.9000 We've put in motion in place the hiring plan and we have budgeted for that. I think with the additional staffing that we've identified related to the special directives, I think we will increase the number of folks that we need but to my recollection, that was most of the ones in red but probably at the envelope of my recall from April.

WHIPPS - Yes, there were three with the financial review, one with safety culture. So it sounds like what you're saying is since April, you have started to take action on the financial review, the three financial review recommendations and the one safety culture. So those are now in progress but only started in April.

POFTAK - Yes.

WHIPPS - Okay. I want to thank Chair Crighton for noting the seriousness of the FTA findings because of the potential loss of federal funding. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 did include $30.5 billion dollars for public transportation systems. No match was required, these were 100% federal funds free money. One of the ARPA funding streams was for operations and I noted that Massachusetts was not on the list of recipients of awardees, ranging in the hundreds of millions of dollars. I'm just wondering why that is?

POFTAK - Because we were not for that specific round of funding. If I recall is consistent with the one you're referring to. We were not actually eligible for those additional funds. I'm trying to remember the specific circumstances, there had to be some level of spending and I can give you a more articulate response because I asked the same question sort of why didn't9107 we get the money, because we did not have any spending that was eligible for this type of reimbursement. I think if we had been perhaps less fiscally prudent in the moment, we may have actually been eligible for this funding but I think we made what I think was the fiscally prudent choice at the time and thus were not eligible, but I want to assure this committee, we have a team9132 that works on all federal grant applications.

I think9138 right now this is a moment in time where as you noted, there's billions of dollars available, not all of it, not all of the things we are eligible for flowing through the FTA, there's lots of other grant programs and other places and we are actively reviewing those and I get a monthly report as does the board on what grants are in process, where are we in the decision phase and what have we actually gotten through the door? So it is going to9166 be an important source of funding for us going forward and we are very actively competing for all the federal dollars we can get.

WHIPPS - It would be helpful to get feedback on why we were9177 not eligible for those funds.

POFTAK - If you will let me give you a very, very specific answer because it's a question I asked as well.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

WHIPPS - I was wondering about the 100 plus days that it takes to hire at the MBTA, that was noted in the SRP and given the hiring blitz that you9197 are currently undertaking. Whether or not it still takes over 1009201 days to hire someone?

POFTAK - That is something we're actively working on. We have re engineered a number of our processes to try and make it faster just9212 because the MBTA historically has had a long line of people who wanted to work there and a lot of the processes were set up to kind of manage that flow. As opposed to the economy we're in right now, right, where people, there's very, there's a limited number of folks who are out there looking for work and they're getting multiple job offers almost in real time. So we've got to be more nimble and and more competitive. Some of the delays in our processes are inevitable because we are hiring for safety sensitive positions.

So in many cases, you need to go through driving records, you need to go through quarries, you need to be drug tested. I'm randomly drug tested every year, just like every other employee and a safety sensitive position. There's some things you need to do, there are some things where we're just inefficient and we have a whole team hard at work trying to root out those inefficiencies. I think maybe one of the most promising examples of rooting out those inefficiencies is we did a one day hiring blitz for bus operators, I want to say we did it in April where we brought all of the different tests that you need to do. We brought our occupational health service, we brought our workforce assessment, we brought our intake interview, so we literally had people come through the door, go station to station and at the end of the process, get hired and start training at the next available training. That's only a one off, right? We need to fix the processes But I think we are in alignment in our HR Department in making the process more efficient. 100 days is way too long, particularly in this economy.

WHIPPS - So that was identified in 2019 and right now today you don't have an estimate on how many days it's taking if we knew in 2019 that it was 100 plus days we needed to make progress on that. Have we made progress?

POFTAK - We have made progress, we do have very granular data by position9333 by position and by month how long it's taking. Again, I don't have that off the top of my head but again it's something we'd be happy to happy to provide.

TESLER - I would note the things that really are going to make a difference, the GM touched on a few I would add which was mentioned earlier as we've invested in the HR and the talent acquisition team, those are the places particularly in growth mode which the MBTA is9360 in9360 and net grew last year and we have ambitious needs to grow this year. Investing in that HR team is one of the most immediate ways to bring down at that time to hire to help all these different procedural pieces. So that team again has been a significant area of focus in investment over the last few9382 months and I think that's going to yield significant benefits as we move forward.

WHIPPS - I'm just concerned as you are trying to get more people on board if this continues to be an issue, we're looking three months down the line before you're even able to get the person on board that you want to hire, so that clearly is a problem. Then my final question is besides the outstanding FTA safety inspection report that is currently going to be delivered in august, we think, are there any other active FTA reviews that are currently underway or in process?

POFTAK - Active FTA reviews? Not to my knowledge. Around safety, we have an9427 ongoing dialogue with them on a number of issues. They are a they are a significant funder of the, I'm trying to be very precise in this answer because I don't want something that is a technically a review to pop up and make it sound like I've deliberately obscured something. We have ongoing discussions with them about the progress of the Green line extension project and from time to time suggest changes to the agreement that they that they review and oversee. We have active discussions with them about federal funding and the various programs that are eligible for federal funding.

Again, most of these are, I would say highly procedural in nature, but you use the word review and I'm trying to be extraordinarily careful, nothing related to safety. Then we are also engaged with them across a number of accessibility issues. We have ongoing dialogue not on the safety side of the house but on the civil rights side of the house.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE