Mass Transit Grants

UMTA Needs to Increase Safety Focus at Local Transit Authority Gao ID: RCED-90-41 December 1, 1989

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the Urban Mass Transportation Administration's (UMTA) oversight of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), focusing on: (1) trends in SEPTA safety conditions; (2) UMTA monitoring of SEPTA transit system safety; and (3) factors UMTA considered in approving grant assistance to SEPTA.

GAO found that: (1) UMTA primarily provided mass transportation assistance through its Section 3 Discretionary Grant and Section 9 Formula Grant programs, with SEPTA receiving 27 section 3 grant obligations totalling $339 million, and 10 section 9 grant obligations totalling $398 million, between fiscal years 1984 and 1988; (2) SEPTA reported a total of 23,328 accidents, resulting in 19,491 injuries and 137 fatalities, between 1984 and 1988; (3) SEPTA safety data indicated safety improvements and fewer accidents in its commuter rail and rapid rail systems, but an increase in accident and injury rates for its motor bus, trolley bus, and street car operations; (4) although UMTA believed that section 22 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 provided it with broad authority regarding transit safety, UMTA oversight did not adequately assess the SEPTA safety conditions, did not collect complete accident, injury, and fatality data, did not emphasize safety in its triennial review of SEPTA operations, and limited its section 22 safety investigation to one of three SEPTA rapid rail lines; (5) UMTA had little assurance that its grants were being used to improve safety conditions, since it did not consider safety in reviewing or approving the SEPTA annual program of projects; (6) SEPTA did not implement a formal project planning process that assessed the safety importance of proposed projects until 1989; and (7) UMTA could not explain why its grant funding decisions differed from SEPTA project priorities, since it did not document its selection criteria for grant awards.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.