(Source: Associated Press) 

WASHINGTON — The nation’s air traffic control systems are vulnerable to cyber attacks, and support systems have been breached in recent months allowing hackers access to personnel records and network servers, according to a new report.

The audit done by the Department of Transportation’s inspector general concluded that although most of the attacks disrupted only support systems, they could spread to the operational systems that control communications, surveillance and flight information used to separate aircraft.

 The report noted several recent cyber attacks, including a February incident when hackers gained access to personal information on about 48,000 current and former FAA employees, and an attack in 2008 when hackers took control of some FAA network servers.

Auditors said the Federal Aviation Administration is not able to adequately detect potential cyber security attacks, and it must better secure its systems against hackers and other intruders.

“In our opinion, unless effective action is taken quickly, it is likely to be a matter of when, not if, ATC (air traffic control) systems encounter attacks that do serious harm to ATC operations,” the auditors said.

In response to the findings, FAA officials stressed that the support systems and traffic control networks are separated. But they agreed that more aggressive action should be taken to secure the networks and fix high-risk vulnerabilities.

According to the report, the FAA received 800 cyber incident alerts during the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, 2008, and more than 150 were not resolved before the year finished. Fifty of those, the auditors said, had been open for more than three months, “including critical incidents in which hackers may have taken over control” of some computers.

Officials tested Internet-based systems that are used to provide information to the public such as communications frequencies for pilots, as well as internal FAA computer systems. The tests found nearly 4,000 “vulnerabilities,” including 763 viewed as “high risk.” The vulnerabilities including weak passwords, unprotected file folders, and other software problems.

The weaknesses could allow hackers or internal FAA workers to gain access to air traffic systems, and possibly compromise computers there or infect them with malicious codes or viruses, the audit warned.

 (Source: The Transport Politic)

State Senate finally comes to agreement on system’s adequate funding; will vote today

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which has been threatening huge fare increases and drastic cuts in service, will be able to rest easy tonight, because its multi-billion-dollar budget deficit will be covered by a new, more stable source of revenue: a region-wide payroll tax. There will be no bridge tolls, but a small fare increase. Though this is no panacea, and more funding is still needed, but this is huge news for New York City and means that the city will continue to be able to offer its citizens high-quality transit at a reasonable price.

The solution — held up for weeks by the demands of a few Democrats in the Senate (no members of the GOP are willing to vote for the program) — was found by agreeing to reimburse school districts that are affected by the tax. 

According to Gotham Gazette (via 2nd Ave Sagas), the plan to be voted on this afternoon will raise a total of $2.26 billion a year for the transit agency. This plan will cover the $1.8 billion MTA’s budget gap for FY 2009 and the $2 billion gap for 2010 as well as provide a small amount for capital expenditures. The New York Timesclaims that the taxes will be enough to cover the first two years of the agency’s 2010-2014 capital program. The state is likely to have to get going over the next few months to shape a funding system for necessary subway and commuter rail repairs as well as expansion needs.

Here are the basic conditions:

• 34¢/$100 payroll tax in all 12 MTA counties, with no differences between them (meaning people in Manhattan pay the same amount as people in Nassau County, even though people in the former clearly are more likely to take advantage of the transit system than those in the latter): $1.5 billion/year.
• 10% fare increase, will likely raise the cost of a single ride to $2.25 from $2 today; monthly unlimited cards will go from $81 to $89: $500 million/year.
• 50¢ surcharge on taxi rides: $85 million.
• $25 vehicle registration fee on the MTA region: $130 million.
• Increase on car rental fee: $35 million.
• Increase on driver’s license fee: $10.5 million.

The plan also foresees fare hikes of 7.5% in 2011 and 2013 to keep up with inflation.

As reported in yesterday’s post, the House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman, Subcommittee Chairman Edward J. Markey, Chairman Emeritus John D. Dingell, Congresswoman Betty Sutton, Congressman Jay Inslee, and Congressman Bart Stupak reached an agreement on a “Cash for Clunkers” program that will help the auto industry while cleaning our air. This agreement is based on H.R. 1550, introduced by Congresswoman Sutton, and H.R. 520, introduced by Congressman Inslee.  The fact sheet published on the Committee’s website offers the following detail:

Consumers may trade in their old, gas-guzzling vehicles and receive vouchers worth up to $4,500 to help pay for new, more fuel efficient cars and trucks. The program will be authorized for up to one year and provide for approximately one million new car or truck purchases. The agreement divides these new cars and trucks into four categories. Miles per gallon figures below refer to EPA “window sticker” values

• Passenger Cars: The old vehicle must get less than 18 mpg. New passenger cars with mileage of at least 22 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new car is at least 4 mpg higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new car is at least 10 mpg higher than the old vehicle, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Light-Duty Trucks: The old vehicle must get less than 18 mpg. New light trucks or SUVs with mileage of at least 18 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 2 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new truck or SUV is at least 5 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Large Light-Duty Trucks: New large trucks (pick-up trucks and vans weighing between 6,000 and 8,500 pounds) with mileage of at least 15 mpg are eligible for vouchers. If the mileage of the new truck is at least 1 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $3,500. If the mileage of the new truck is at least 2 mpg higher than the old truck, the voucher will be worth $4,500.

• Work Trucks: Under the agreement, consumers can trade in a pre-2002 work truck (defined as a pick-up truck or cargo van weighing from 8,500-10,000 pounds) and receive a voucher worth $3,500 for a new work truck in the same or smaller weight class. There will be a finite number of these vouchers, based on this vehicle class’s market share. There are no EPA mileage measures for these trucks; however, because newer models are cleaner than older models, the age requirement ensures that the trade will improve environmental quality. Consumers can also “trade down,” receiving a $3,500 voucher for trading in an older work truck and purchasing a smaller light-duty truck weighing from 6,000 – 8,500 pounds.

Here is a PDF copy of the Fact Sheet:

GM adds shift at Oshawa to keep up with Camaro demand…enough that GM has asked workers at the assembly plant in Oshawa, Ontario, to work through the week of June 29, which had previously been scheduled as mandatory time off. Furthermore, Camaro orders are expected to be strong enough to keep the Oshawa plant’s flex line humming along on Saturdays in June, July and August, and that means overtime fo…

 Rumormill: Buick Astra coming in 2011?…products from GM‘s European Opel division are reports from GM Inside News indicating that a small car based on the Astra platform – initially planned for the now-defunct Saturn brand – has been transferred to Buick’s entry-level luxury division.Assuming these rumors are true, we can expect to see the new Buick in North America in late 2011 as a ..

REPORT: Renault after Saturn, Geely after Saab …deal with GM would allow Renault and its South Korean subsidiary, Samsung Motors, to sell its wares in the States though the existing retailers, possibly marketing the new vehicles as Saturns and building some of the vehicles using the General’s underutilized plants. How the deal would flesh out financially remains to be seen, but there’s a chan…

 (Source: Reuters) 

WASHINGTON- The U.S. government would overhaul how it plans and manages big-ticket highway and transit projects in an ambitious proposal being drafted by a senior Democratic lawmaker who oversees transportation.

 House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar told the Reuters Infrastructure Summit on Tuesday that his plan would reorganize the U.S. Transportation Department in order to streamline infrastructure spending programs.

“It’s a complete restructuring of the thought process, the delivery system, the delivery mechanism, and the funding for it,” Oberstar, from Minnesota, said in his Capitol Hill office.

Oberstar’s proposal would be the centerpiece of a six-year highway and transit construction bill Congress will consider this year.

He estimates funding at $450 billion, but the figure has not been finalized. Oberstar, who will manage the highway bill in the House, hopes to propose his plan in the coming weeks.

The Senate is working on its own version.

The Oberstar measure would retain current federal funding sources as well as give more spending discretion to states. In addition, it would make room for private investment in infrastructure programs.

Lawmakers face a September 30 deadline to pass a long-term spending blueprint for new U.S. highway construction, road and bridge repair, and public transit.

That legislation, known as the highway bill, would be separate from the economic stimulus bill passed in February that provides $48.1 billion for transportation.

The current highway/transit construction law was approved in July 2005 with a price tag of $286.4 billion. That amount was considered by many in Congress and industry as inadequate to upgrade the country’s aging transportation infrastructure.

Industry leaders are pressing for the next bill to exceed $500 billion.

Highway spending is funded through a federal trust which draws from taxes on motor fuels. But recent shortages in gas tax receipts due to higher pump prices that have reduced driving and more fuel-efficient vehicles have prompted calls to find alternatives.

Oberstar’s plan would keep the Highway Trust fund, but would allow states to determine their spending priorities.

“They’ve had these responsibilities. They’ve just been straight-jacketed,” Oberstar said about the states. “We’re going to give the states broad discretion.”

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Glenn Havinoviski, Columnist @ ITS Virginia)

Glenn N. Havinoviski is an Associate Vice President and ITS Group Director for HNTB Corporation in Arlington, Virginia.  In his recent column on ITS Virginia’s quarterly Newsletter, Glenn discussed his views on the stimulus funding towards transportation projects and their impact on ITS, jobs, etc.  Here is an excerpt from the PDF version attached here.  

You gotta hand it to the new President. In less than four weeks,he got his way, running roughshod over a political opposition unableto develop or convince others of their own vision and ideas. Uncle”O” signed into law a $785 billion stimulus, an ode to the power ofhope, change and the ability to print lots of money. In Virginia alone,some $700 million will be provided for “shovel-ready” transportationprojects, to be selected in the next few weeks by state officials.Among those projects will be several initiatives related to trafficmanagement, operations and ITS. While the purpose of the stimulusis first and foremost the creation of new jobs, closer to home I knowit may preserve some existing jobs.While I believe this example of Federal largesse will end upbeing more a historical exception rather than the rule, we’ve alreadythrown a like amount at the banks and the struggling auto industry,courtesy of Mr. Obama’s wayward predecessor.So far, it is unclear what that money has gotten us. Banks stillwon’t make loans, GM still can’t sell cars, and too many bank executivesare still partying in Vegas and elsewhere. The toxic assets arestill toxic, and still dwindling in value, seemingly by the hour.

With the horrendous transportation funding cut-backs at thestate level and limited support from elected officials, VDOT hasbeen forced to create an austere vision, one which emphasizesoperating what we have, as opposed to ramrodding a programcontaining projects which in many cases have been deferred acrossseveral lifetimes. The new-look Federal government may be seekingto bankroll a future transit and clean-energy vehicle utopia. But Virginia, as with many other states, has been economically forcedto be more pragmatic with their own money and make very hardbut practical choices.

With all the excitement over a suddenly activist Federal government,what is in danger of getting lost in the mix has been theprogress made in the last decade toward innovative use of resources- including partnerships to leverage both government and privateinvestment, using tolling and road pricing both as revenue streamand as demand management tool, and development of a networkof vehicle-roadside communications for both safety and mobilityapplications.Such approaches to transportation improvements heavily dependon collection and monitoring of real-time information, alongwith electronic payment services and dedicated short-range communications(DSRC). They also create new opportunities for jobs,as well as new markets for information and technology services.No question that they could benefit from, but are not completelydependent on, the largesse of the young handsome Uncle “O” anda largely (but not completely) sympathetic Congress. “

(Source: Times Online, UK)

China demonstrated its growing naval confidence again in the latest standoff between American and Chinese ships.

Photo Courtesy: Frederic J Browne/EPA

The fifth such incident in two months occurred on Friday in the Yellow Sea when a US Navy surveillance ship turned its fire hoses on two Chinese fishing vessels.

A spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that the American ship was operating in China’s exclusive economic zone without permission and had violated Chinese and international laws. “We express our concern about this and demand the US side take effective measures to ensure a similar incident does not happen again,” he said.

The USNS Victorious, an ocean surveillance ship designed for anti-submarine warfare and underwater mapping, was conducting what the Pentagon called routine operations in the waters between China and the Korean peninsula. The Chinese vessels came within 100ft (30 metres) of the vessel.

The Pentagon, which accused five Chinese fishing vessels of harassing another US surveillance ship in the South China Sea near Hainan island in March, cited the incident as an example of unsafe Chinese seamanship.

The Chinese vessels did not withdraw until after the Victorious had sounded an alarm and a Chinese military ship, identified by the Pentagon as WAGOR 17, arrived in response to the call for assistance. It shone a light on the fishing vessels until they left.

The Pentagon earlier played down the confrontation, striking a more low-key tone than during the incident two months ago.

A spokesman for the US Defence Department suggested that the United States was looking to avoid the kind of angry exchanges that followed the March incident. He said: “We will be developing a way forward to deal with this diplomatically.”

It was not the first time the Victorious had encountered Chinese boats. On April 7 and April 8, Chinese-flagged fishing vessels approached the ship and the USNS Loyal as they operated within China’s 200-mile economic zone.

(Source: Autobloggreen)

The nail in the coffin of corn-based ethanol might be made of water. The magazine Environmental Science & Technology has published an article that pegs the amount of water needed to make enough corn ethanol to move a vehicle one mile at 50 gallons. That’s pretty high. 

ES&T calculated the amount of water needed to grow the corn as well as the water that is affected by agriculture. From the article:

As biofuel production increases, a growing need exists to understand and mitigate potential impacts to water resources, primarily those associated with the agricultural stages of the biofuel life cycle (e.g., water shortages and water pollution) herein referred to as the water footprint.

The worst case scenario, ES&T found, would be irrigated sorghum grown in Nebraska and turned into ethanol. This would use up to 115 gallons per mile. Corn grown there would require 50 gallons of water per mile. Say good-bye to “food vs. fuel,” say hello to “Drink or drive.”

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Guardian & Photograph: Chris Radburn/PA)

The chief executive of the company that installs the majority of speed cameras on Britain’s roads was banned from driving for six months today after admitting driving at more than 100mph.

Tom Riall, the boss of Serco‘s civil government division, which supplies and installs the Gatso fixed radar cameras to police forces, was travelling at 102.9mph on the A14 in Newmarket, Suffolk, just before 1pm on 4 January, magistrates in Sudbury heard. The speed limit on the dual carriageway is 70mph.

Riall, 49, had two other driving convictions from the last three years, including another speeding offence, the court heard, meaning the six-point penalty imposed by magistrates took him past the 12-point mark, incurring the ban. He was also fined £300.

Riall, who took part last year in a road safety campaign called Safe Drive Stay Alive, told the court he would like formally to apologise, saying: “In my role I am all too aware of the consequences of speeding.” Riall said he was driving to visit friends in Newmarket before a business meeting in Norwich and the road was clear.

He asked magistrates not to impose a ban, saying it would cost about £30,000 to employ drivers to take him on business trips during the six months, and that the speeding offence had already caused “some considerable personal embarrassment”.

He said: “Of course, while I have had a number of fixed penalty notices in the past, this is the first time I have exceeded the speed limit to this degree.” The magistrates rejected this, saying a six-point penalty was fair.