STATEMENT OF

VICTORIA COX,
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR NEXTGEN AND
OPERATIONS PLANNING SERVICES, AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

ON

AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL MODERNIZATION AND NEXTGEN:
NEAR TERM ACHIEVABLE GOALS,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

MARCH 18, 2009.

Chairman Costello, Ranking Member Petri, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the current state of the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) efforts on air traffic control modernization and the near term goals of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen). 

Defining NextGen:  The Basics

NextGen is a wide-ranging transformation of the entire national air transportation system to meet future demand and support the economic viability of the system while reducing delays, improving safety, and protecting the environment.  NextGen will change the way the system operates – reducing congestion, noise, and emissions, expanding capacity and improving the passenger experience.  NextGen is a highly complex, multilayered, long-term evolutionary process of developing and implementing new technologies and procedures.  NextGen is not a single piece of equipment or a program or a system that will instantaneously transform the air transportation system.  NextGen builds on legacy systems to increase capability in today’s National Airspace System (NAS), adds new performance-based procedures and routes, and ultimately delivers programs that transform the NAS.  NextGen takes advantage of new technology that is similarly being used to transform our personal lives and the way we do business, such as GPS, analog-to-digital, and network to network data sharing.

Defining NextGen:  The Need

Although it is extremely safe, the current system is not performing adequately. Our preeminence as a nation in air transportation is not assured.  NextGen is needed to bring to air transportation the same twenty-first century processes that give operations in other industries reliability, flexibility, and predictability.

Even in the face of falling demand and reduced capacity, we’ve seen congestion continue in our busiest airspace.  We know that we must be poised to handle future demand that will surely return as the nation’s economy improves.  In fact, the aviation sector will be an important factor in the nation’s economic recovery.  In 2006, the FAA's Air Traffic Organization reported that civil aviation accounted for 11 million jobs and represented 5.6% of the Gross Domestic Product; and, according to the FAA's calculations using U.S. International Trade Commission's reported trade data statistics, at $61 billion, aerospace products and parts contributed more to the positive balance of trade than any other sector - $32 billion more than the next highest contributor.

NextGen must also address the constraints that will be levied on the air transportation system by environmental impacts from aircraft noise and emissions and concerns about energy.  Increased efficiency with NextGen operations will lead to reduced fuel consumption resulting in lower carbon emissions.  NextGen investments in engine and airframe design and alternative fuels will produce the changes needed to reduce the environmental impact of aviation.

NextGen will also increase the safety of an already exceedingly safe system.  NextGen further enables FAA’s transition from traditional forensic investigations of accidents and incidents with a prognostic approach to improving safety.  NextGen promotes the open exchange of pertinent safety information to continuously improve aviation safety.

NextGen:  Organizational Structure

As the Members of this Committee are well aware, in December 2003, Congress enacted Vision 100 (Public Law 108-176) and established, within the FAA, the Next Generation Air Transportation System Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO).  Since its founding in 2004, the JPDO has produced a national vision statement, a multi-agency research and development roadmap, a description of operational concepts to meet system performance requirements, a multi-agency enterprise architecture, and – in 2008 – an integrated work plan. 

The integrated work plan captures at a high level the NextGen planning of all the JPDO partner agencies – the Department of Transportation (DOT), the Department of Defense (DoD), the Department of Commerce (Commerce), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).  With the delivery of the integrated work plan, the JPDO has produced the major deliverables required by Vision 100.  JPDO must continue to work with the partner agencies to maintain an updated integrated plan, and agencies must move forward with implementation.

A year ago, we received several recommendations from varied sources about how we should deliver NextGen.  The Senior Policy Committee of the JPDO asked us to accelerate NextGen, to shift from concept development to execution.  Stakeholders continually asked for a single point of accountability for NextGen.  Industry wanted more focused oversight by FAA of JPDO deliverables; and most experts recognized that the Air Traffic Organization (ATO), as the operator of the national airspace system, has ultimate responsibility and accountability for NextGen implementation in that system. 

In response to these recommendations, the NextGen and Operations Planning Organization, under my leadership as a Senior Vice President in the Air Traffic Organization, was made accountable for delivering NextGen to the National Airspace System, the NAS.  I am responsible for implementation of all elements of NextGen and have authority over all matters related to FAA NextGen research, technology development, acquisition, integration, and implementation including allocation within the FAA of NextGen budgets.  My organization is made up of offices focused on NextGen delivery including the NextGen Integration and Implementation Office.  This Office manages the integration of all NextGen activities within the FAA, ensuring that the planning and programming of the NextGen portfolio is coordinated across the FAA and with external stakeholders.  It also develops and publishes the FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan and manages NextGen portfolio performance. 

The Director of the JPDO continues to provide vital assistance to the government-wide implementation of NextGen by encouraging and facilitating cooperation among partner departments and agencies and sponsoring industry participation in NextGen planning and development.  JPDO also continues to develop a long-term vision for the air transportation system and aligns the necessary cross-departmental research to support that vision. 

The FAA has maintained the NextGen Review Board and the NextGen Management Board, the governance structure that we put in place with the decision to use the successful Operational Evolution Partnership (OEP) as our framework for achieving NextGen.  The NextGen Management Board is chaired by the Deputy Administrator and composed of FAA Associate Administrators, the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) Chief Operating Officer, ATO Senior Vice Presidents, the Director of the JPDO and representatives of the National Air Traffic Controllers Association (NATCA) and the Professional Aviation Safety Specialists (PASS). This is the Agency’s senior governing body for NextGen.  The NextGen Review Board - composed of FAA executives - looks at more technical issues including approving and prioritizing NextGen activities and making funding recommendations. So, we have a structure in place designed to achieve the NextGen vision and provide a steady stream of improvements to the air transportation system.

Impact of Executive Order 13479

This Executive Order, “Transformation of the National Air Transportation System,” expressed Executive Branch support for the national air transportation system policy set forth in Vision 100.  The order outlines functions of the Secretary of Transportation and the Senior Policy Committee (SPC) and specifies mechanisms to strengthen their role and elevate accountability.  These mechanisms include establishing a staff within the DOT to support the Secretary and SPC in their NextGen duties, assuring that maximum value is obtained from the participation of the department and agency heads on the committee.  They also include establishing an advisory committee to provide advice to the Secretary and SPC on the implementation of NextGen in a safe, secure, timely, environmentally sound, efficient, and effective manner.

The Order does not change the fundamental roles and responsibilities of the JPDO.  The JPDO will continue to facilitate, coordinate and support cooperation among the partner departments and agencies.  The JPDO will continue to manage the agenda for the JPDO Board and to gain private sector input through the NextGen Institute.  The JPDO will also continue to be instrumental in the development of issues and topics for SPC attention.  Because the coordination staff serves as a liaison between the Secretary and the partnering agencies, the staff will serve as an effective and efficient means of elevating JPDO interagency issues for attention.

NextGen:  Progress to Date

The FAA officially began its development of NextGen in fiscal year 2007 by identifying and funding two transformational programs:  Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B) and System Wide Information Management (SWIM).  From that $109 million investment in 2007, and supported by sound evaluations and planning, FAA funding for NextGen grew to $202 million in fiscal year 2008 and $688 million this fiscal year.  The fiscal year 2010 budget includes approximately $800 million for NextGen. The detailed planning results that are published in the January 2009 National Airspace System Enterprise Architecture (NASEA) and FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan support these funding numbers.

Moreover, this past year, we have seen the contributions to NextGen resulting from cross-department and cross-agency cooperation increase significantly. Through the cross-agency support provided by the JPDO and its SPC:

• FAA established a government-wide Safety Management System standard for implementation at the agencies;
• NextGen’s collaborative weather initiative includes the active participation of Departments of Commerce, Defense and the FAA;
• FAA and NASA are working to establish a research consortium to accelerate development of lower energy, emissions, and noise technologies;
• DoD has established a net-centric division within the JPDO and is working with the FAA and other partner agencies on net-centric information sharing;
• FAA is working on integrated aviation surveillance with DoD and DHS; 
• DoD formed an office within the Air Force to act as their coordinating office for all NextGen matters;
• DoD, DHS and FAA jointly invested in a demonstration of Network Enabled Operations technology;
• FAA, NASA, DOC, and USDA endeavors to foster sustainable alternative fuels; and
• JPDO has facilitated technology transfer from NASA to FAA with the formation of Research Transition Teams.

We have continued to make significant progress in the implementation and use across the FAA of the NAS Enterprise Architecture (NASEA) as a mechanism for governing the evolution of the current NAS to NextGen.  The NASEA, published in January of this year, lays out important, detailed information, on the NAS mid-term architecture.  This mid-term focus is a key step in the FAA’s ability to move forward with NextGen implementation.  Our progress in implementing and upgrading the NASEA as part of continuous improvement initiatives was a key factor in this year’s removal of the FAA from the GAO’s High Risk List. 

Another product of the past year is the publication by the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) of a report titled “Identifying the Workforce to Respond to a National Imperative…the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen).”  The study behind the report was commissioned by the FAA with the objective of identifying skill sets needed by the non-operational (acquisition) workforce to design, develop, test, evaluate, integrate, and implement NextGen systems and procedures and the strategies to obtain the needed skills.  FAA is currently in the process of determining how to implement the NAPA recommendations.

Last year, FAA conducted preliminary modeling of a series of NextGen capabilities.  Preliminary results showed that by 2018 total flight delays will be reduced by 35-40 percent, saving almost a billion gallons of fuel.  This is compared to the “do nothing” case, which shows what would happen if we operate in 2018 the same way as today.  The current model includes approximately one third of the planned NextGen improvements.  As our model matures we expect that benefit values will increase.  Bottom line:  by 2018, total flight delays and fuel use will be significantly reduced, while more flights can be accommodated.

FAA is working closely with all aspects of the aviation community to make NextGen a reality.  We’re partnering with several of the nation’s air carriers for trials and demonstrations; we’re engaging with universities like Embry Riddle. The FAA has established an integrated demonstration capability in Florida where, working with a wide range of government, university and industry partners, we are evaluating NextGen technologies.  We’re working with airport authorities, manufacturers and with government bodies and industry from around the world.  We are collaborating with JPDO Working Groups, RTCA, and other industry groups to integrate stakeholder requirements into government commitments.  

NextGen transformational programs made significant advances over the past year. ADS-B has been deployed in southern Florida and is being deployed in the Gulf of Mexico, where we have never had radar coverage.  In December, FAA achieved its In-Service Decision for ADS-B in southern Florida.  Achievement of this major milestone clears the way for national deployment of broadcast services.  The National Aeronautics Association recognized ADS-B last year by presenting the ADS-B team with its Collier Trophy.  This award is given yearly for “the greatest achievement in aeronautics or astronautics in America with respect to improving the performance, efficiency and safety of air or space vehicles.”  The Collier award is generally recognized as the epitome of aviation innovation and excellence.

The SWIM program, Data Communications, and NAS Voice Switch achieved major acquisition milestones, and NextGen Network Enabled Weather (NNEW) conducted demonstrations of the integration of weather data into automated decision support tools.  This is a necessary step in the realization of improved management of weather in the NAS.

The latest version of the FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan was published in January 2009.  This edition of the plan focuses on answering five fundamental questions: What does NextGen look like in 2018; what aircraft avionics are needed to support operations in 2018; what benefits will be delivered by 2018; what is the FAA specifically committed to deploy in the near-term that makes the most of existing resources; and what activities are underway to support future capabilities?

While the focus of the FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan is on the mid-term, the plan, coupled with the NAS Enterprise Architecture, provides a picture of near-term (2009-2013) deliverables.  FAA’s near-term NextGen implementation efforts are targeted across three broad areas: airfield development, air traffic operations, and aircraft capabilities. Together, these efforts will increase capacity and operational efficiency, enhance safety, and improve our environmental performance.  We are moving forward with a dual-pronged approach: maximizing the use of untapped capabilities in today’s aircraft and ground infrastructure, while working aggressively to develop and deploy new systems and procedures that will form a foundation for more transformative capabilities that will be delivered in the mid-term.  We believe this approach allows both government and industry to extract the greatest value from existing investments, while positioning the industry to gain exponential benefits in the mid-term and beyond.

NextGen is reaping the benefits originated under the OEP.  New runways provide significant capacity and operational improvements.  In November 2008, three major new runways opened:  at Seattle-Tacoma, Washington Dulles, and Chicago O’Hare International Airports.  The Seattle runway is expected to cut local delays in half by increasing capacity in bad weather by 60 percent, while the new runway at Dulles will provide capacity for an additional 100,000 annual operations.  The new Chicago runway, which added capacity for an additional 52,300 annual operations, is a part of the greater O'Hare Modernization Program (OMP) that will reconfigure the airport's intersecting runways into a more modern, parallel layout.  The OMP will substantially reduce delays in all weather conditions and increase capacity at the airfield, allowing O'Hare to meet the region's aviation needs well into the future.  Looking forward for the next five years, the FAA has additional runway and taxiway improvement projects planned at a number of airports, including Charlotte, Dulles, Houston, Denver, Philadelphia, and, as mentioned, Chicago.

While airfield improvements offer significant capacity increases, they alone are not enough to address current problems at certain airports, or the growth in demand we expect in the future.  New technology and procedures can help us gain extra use from existing runways.

Today, capacity for closely spaced parallel runway operations (CSPO) is dramatically reduced in poor visibility conditions.  We are working on capabilities that allow for continued use of those runways in low visibility conditions by providing precise path assignments that provide safe separation between aircraft assigned on parallel paths, restoring capacity and reducing delays throughout the system.  In November 2008, we published a national order that allows us to safely reduce separation between aircraft approaching parallel runways at Boston, Cleveland, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Seattle.  In good visibility Seattle’s pair of parallel runways, together, could handle roughly 60 operations per hour; poor visibility conditions cut that rate in half.  Even in poor visibility, the new order now safely allows a rate of about 52 operations per hour, a significant improvement for the airport and its users.  We are also beginning to see similar benefits in Boston.

This order is a first step in a phased approach for safely increasing the use of CSPOs through a combination of procedural changes and new ground and aircraft equipment.  Down the road, new rules for CSPOs could give airports more design flexibility so that they can safely build runways more closely together, increasing their capacity within their existing boundaries, providing better service to their communities without requiring additional land.

Performance-based navigation is another building block for NextGen.  Performance-based routes and procedures result in shorter distances flown, which add up to both fuel and time savings.  Fuel savings equate to reduced emissions, enhancing environmental performance.  Safety is increased as air traffic operations become more predictable. Performance-based navigation includes Area Navigation (RNAV) and Required Navigation Procedures (RNP), which allow equipped aircraft to fly more direct and precise paths, reducing flight time and fuel use, as well as localizer performance with vertical guidance (LPV) procedures, which can increase access to airports, especially in low visibility conditions.

Advances in performance-based navigations procedures and routes allow for optimal use of airspace.  The FAA maximizes the use of airspace, especially in congested areas, through targeted airspace and procedures enhancements.  Continuing work in the New York area includes integration of RNAV procedures, relocation and expansion of airways, airspace reconfiguration, and creation of optimal descent procedures.  In the Chicago area, the FAA is adding departure routes and changing procedures to allow for triple arrivals.  In southern Nevada, the FAA is optimizing existing airports and airspace.  Houston will also see additional departure routes and arrival procedures, along with improved procedures to avoid severe weather.

Operators like Southwest Airlines recognize the value of performance-based navigation.  The airline made the business decision early last year to equip its entire fleet for RNAV and RNP procedures. The company envisions building a network of RNP routes for their system.  Southwest believes its $175 million investment can be recouped within the next three to five years because of the operational efficiencies RNP offers.  We are currently working with Southwest on a pilot project to build RNAV/RNP routes between Texas’ Dallas Love Field and Houston Hobby airports.

Today, more than three-quarters of commercial aircraft are equipped for RNAV, and almost half of these are equipped for RNP precision procedures.  Likewise, more than 20,000 aircraft are equipped for LPVs.  This level of equipage provides an excellent opportunity for the aviation community use what it already has to produce ever-greater benefits.  FAA has responded:  last year the agency beat its own goals, publishing more than 600 performance-based navigation procedures and routes, versus our goal of almost 400.  The FAA plans to keep up this pace each year for the next four years.

Because the realization of NextGen benefits is integrally linked to how quickly the airlines equip their aircraft, it is imperative that the FAA work closely with industry on NextGen deployment.  As such, the FAA has established a NextGen Implementation Task Force under the auspices of the Air Traffic Management Advisory Council that serves as a federal advisory committee to the Air Traffic Organization.  The task force will provide recommendations on how to move forward together on implementation. FAA’s governing principles for accelerating equipage, published in the January 2009 FAA’s NextGen Implementation Plan, provide a starting point for this work.  These principles focus on mitigating the risk for early adopters of NextGen avionics, while providing the maximum operational benefits in the airspace where they’re most needed.  They also focus on international interoperability, and incentivizing the equipage of aircraft that meet the agency’s evolving environmental standards.  The Task Force will deliver recommendations to the FAA in August 2009.

Our current national airspace system is safer than it has ever been.  However, new means are required to ensure this remains the case as we transform the NAS.  NextGen will continue that trend in the face of increasing traffic and the introduction of very light jets, unmanned aerial vehicles, and commercial space flights.  To continue to minimize risk as we introduce a wave of new systems and procedures over the next decade, the aviation community will continue its move to safety management systems and other aspects of proactive management, where trends are analyzed to uncover problems early on.  This allows preventive measures to be put in place before any accidents can occur.  An important part of NAS modernization, the FAA’s Aviation Safety and Information Analysis and Sharing program (ASIAS), provides a suite of tools that extract relevant knowledge from large amounts of disparate safety information.  ASIAS also helps FAA and our industry partners to monitor the effectiveness of safety enhancements.  In use today, ASIAS will ensure that the operational capabilities that produce capacity, efficiency and environmental benefits are first and foremost inherently safe.  ASIAS has already demonstrated the ability to measure the performance of safety solutions to known problems, such as Loss of Control, Controlled Flight Into Terrain, Runway Incursion, Approach, and Landing Accident Reduction.  Additionally, ASIAS has demonstrated the ability to detect new safety issues, such as terrain avoidance warning system alerts (TAWS) at mountainous terrain airports and identify solutions that have the potential to virtually eliminate these threats.  Between now and fiscal year 2013, the FAA intends to increase the number of databases ASIAS can access; expand ASIAS to include maintenance/air traffic information; increase membership by adding regional air carriers; increase community stakeholders to include general aviation, helicopter and military; and increase the automated search capabilities.

The primary environmental and energy issues that will significantly influence the future capacity and flexibility of the NAS are aircraft noise, air quality, global climate effects, energy availability, and water quality.  Aviation accounts for approximately three percent of direct greenhouse gas emissions, and national and international concerns about climate impacts could constrain the industry in the future, if not properly addressed.  An environmental management system approach will be used to integrate all environmental and energy considerations into core NextGen business and operational strategies. 

In 2009, we are moving forward on a research consortium called Continuous Low Emissions, Energy and Noise (CLEEN), which will allow us to work with industry to accelerate the maturation of technology that will lower energy, emissions and noise.  CLEEN also seeks to advance renewable alternative fuels for aviation.  These fuels not only improve air quality and reduce life cycle greenhouse emissions, but also enhance energy security and supplies.  FAA helped form – and is an active participant in – the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative, or CAAFI.  Alternative fuels will be the “game changer” technology that gets us closer to carbon neutrality.  Assuming funding, significant deliverables in the FY09-13 period include demonstrations of clean and quiet aircraft technologies that can be transitioned into new products and used to retrofit existing products, approval of generic renewable fuels for aviation, and models and guidance to improve our ability to quantify environmental costs and benefits and to optimize solutions, including those to address CO2 and non-CO2 aviation climate impacts.

Next Gen:  Partner Agency Progress and Plans

As noted above, the JPDO facilitates the efforts of the partner departments and agencies to develop and deliver on NextGen. 

In order to effectively manage and foster their cross-agency interactions, the FAA, NASA, and the JPDO constituted four research transition teams (RTT) during this year.  The RTTs build upon the FAA’s prior successful deployments of NASA-developed technologies, such as the Traffic Management Advisor with enhancements for major metropolitan areas and surface management tools.  These teams impact near- and far-term capabilities stretching from the en route airspace to the terminal and surface including traffic flow management.  In the near-term, the FAA is developing implementation requirements through joint demonstrations, such as Three-Dimensional Path Arrival Management, while NASA researchers are gathering data to further extend trajectory based operations through the same demonstration.  By engaging earlier in the research, the FAA and NASA are now able to synchronize their plans to insure that NASA-developed products can be sufficiently matured for mid-term implementation. And in the far-term, the FAA is providing subject matter expertise to help guide the NASA research concepts.

The FAA, NOAA, and the DoD formed a NextGen Executive Weather Panel (NEWP), with senior executive agency principals to guide and review planning, budgeting, and implementation of required NextGen weather capabilities.  The NEWP has provided continuous oversight into the development of an interagency plan to deliver an initial NextGen weather information database with an initial operational capability date of 2013, as well as an integrated strategy to incorporate the weather information directly into legacy and future NextGen systems.  Both plans will be completed this fiscal year and implementation activities have already commenced.

We are working closely with DoD and the DHS through the JPDO on a number of important initiatives.  Among them is the development of the first integrated interagency homeland air surveillance Concept of Operations, or CONOPS, the federal government has ever prepared.  The Air Force is leading the interagency CONOPS effort, with the goal of interagency coordination of capabilities for national surveillance. 

The DoD is leading the NextGen net-centric operations planning and coordination of implementation.  So far, DoD has led development of a mid-term implementation plan for an interagency net-centric capability that is aimed at implementation in the 2012 - 2016 timeframe.  They have also led the demonstration of a limited Services Oriented Architecture information capability that will serve as the foundation for a NAS-wide implementation by 2025. 

The DoD is maintaining and increasing the capabilities of the Global Positioning System (GPS), which is the foundation for NextGen navigation and surveillance.  The continued funding and integrity of the planned launch schedule of the GPS constellation is vital to the nation moving ahead with NextGen.  NextGen could benefit from the potential for greater efficiency of arriving and departing aircraft in all operating environments.  To bolster this, the DoD is actively pursuing the development of the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS). 

FAA is collaborating with the DoD and DHS to support UAS operations in North Dakota from Grand Forks AFB.  An interagency task force is developing a course of action.  All options will be examined:  procedural, technological, airspace.  The task force will also look at using existing techniques in unique ways.  The group is tasked with completing safety analysis and implementing a course of action no later than Summer 2010.

We are pursuing implementation of adaptive and predictable special use airspace.  By leveraging emerging technologies such as ADS-B, Military Airspace Data Entry, etc, the Air Force in coordination with the FAA is pursuing the ability to dynamically define airspace and activate/de-activate only that portion of published special use airspace required for a particular mission.  Additionally, the Air Force and FAA are collaborating on a concept that would allow expansion/relocation of Air Traffic Controlled Assigned Airspace (ATCAA) on a daily basis, to meet changing military training needs and freeing up unneeded airspace to enhance air traffic flow in the NAS.

Over the next few years, the FAA and DHS will develop an Integrated Risk Management System (IRM), which understands and prioritizes the threats, consequences, and vulnerabilities that can be exploited by potential adversaries, and determines which actions can provide the greatest total risk reduction for the least impact on limited resources.  DHS also continues to develop passenger, baggage and cargo screening technologies to more effectively mitigate all known air travel threats.  The new checkpoint evolution concept, including whole body imaging and behavioral pattern recognition, will also aid threat detection.  Cargo screening processes will be enhanced with prevention and detection screening capabilities that require screening prior to entering the air transportation system.  These improvements will be accomplished by expanding and sharing the delivery of passenger, baggage and cargo security information with appropriate transportation stakeholders.

NextGen:  FAA Near-Term Deliverables (2009-2013)

FAA continues to make progress with our transformational programs.  These are the long-lead time acquisition programs.  They are progressing in the acquisition process, laying the foundation for NextGen applications and will reap benefits for years to come.  Of the five initially identified as transformational NextGen programs, ADS-B is most advanced; but all are projecting substantial advances between now and 2013.  A brief description of these programs is shown on Figure 1 (attached). 

Significant planned deliverables for the transformational programs – ADS-B, SWIM, Data Communications, NextGen Network Enable Weather and the NAS Voice Switch – are depicted in Figure 2 (attached).

The FAA is focusing on reaping maximum capability in the near term from existing equipage and infrastructure.  We are also continuing with our pre-acquisition research, analyses and technology development that support concept and requirements development and with our demonstration projects, which further advance the maturity of requirements and contribute significantly to our understanding of future benefits.  Crucial to our analysis efforts is an on-going assessment of critical gaps in FAA and cross-department NextGen architectures and planning.

JPDO completed a gap analysis of NextGen partner agency programs against the Integrated Work Plan.  It identified seven critical interagency focus areas, including various air traffic management research topics, research to mitigate environmental constraints, security risk management, and the verification and validation of complex systems.  FAA was identified as the lead for three of the focus areas, NASA for two, DHS for one, and JPDO for one.  Working with the partner agencies, the JPDO will incorporate operational improvements that address these gaps into the Integrated Work Plan and through the governance process, including the JPDO Board and SPC, will encourage partner agencies to include activities that support these operational improvements in their implementation plans and future year budgets.

FAA has completed a preliminary internal gap analysis against the mid-term NAS Enterprise Architecture that was delivered in January 2009.  This is part of an on-going assessment of critical gaps in FAA and cross-department NextGen architectures and planning.  We will deliver in Fiscal Year 2009 (anticipated August 2009 delivery), a gap analysis that includes requirements for addressing identified shortfalls.

Carefully planned and implemented pre-acquisition activities such as those described above significantly reduce risks in the development and implementation of complex systems such as NextGen. 

As we transition to NextGen over the next few years, we are anticipating noteworthy progress with these activities as depicted in Figures 3 and 4 (attached).

Conclusion

As you can see, we are working steadily and carefully to bring NextGen to fruition.  Our programs are currently on track, our partnerships are strong.  We have mapped out our course and we are moving towards our goals, and we look forward to your continued guidance and oversight as we go forward. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks.  I would be happy to answer any questions you and the Members of the Subcommittee might have.

Figure 1:  Descriptions of NextGen Transformational Programs

• Moves air traffic control from a system based on radar to one that uses satellite-derived aircraft location data
• Aircraft transponders receive GPS signals and use them to determine the aircraft’s precise position in the sky, which is combined with other data and broadcast out to other aircraft and air traffic controllers
• Offers more precision and additional services than radar, such as weather and traffic information.
• When properly equipped with ADS-B, both pilots and controllers will, for the very first time, see the same real-time displays of air traffic, thereby substantially improving safety. 

• Current use of voice communication is labor intensive, time consuming, and limits the ability of the NAS to effectively meet future traffic demand
• Transitions from the current decades old analog voice system to a predominantly digital mode of communication
• Provides data transmissions directly to pilots and their flight management systems, enabling more efficient operations, including trajectory-based routing, that evolve air traffic from short-term tactical control to managing flights gate-to-gate strategically
• Supports safety-of-flight command, control and information services by providing comprehensive data connectivity, including ground automation message generation, transmission and routing
• Automates repetitive tasks, supplements voice communications with less workload-intensive data communications and enable ground systems to use real-time aircraft data to improve traffic management

• Aids in reducing weathers impact in the NAS
• Defines, develops, and provides the FAA’s portion of the inter-agency infrastructure known as the 4-Dimensional Weather Data Cube
• Will provide universal access to global aviation weather information in a SWIM-compatible network

• Replaces the current switch infrastructure of 13 different types of switches, with a single switch architecture that will meet NextGen operations, which require a more agile and flexible voice communication architecture
• Single switch will be able to be re-configured faster than today’s switches allow
• Will be network-capable to allow for the better access to voice communication assets that will be needed for future NAS operations
• Allows for NextGen operations such as load-sharing and load balancing across facilities, airspace sharing, collocations and consolidations, business continuity planning, and virtual tower operations

• Promotes the use of web services to share data between FAA systems, other agencies, and NAS users
• Leverages existing systems and networks, and will be based on technologies that have been proven to reduce cost and risk

Figure 2:  NextGen Transformational Program Deliverables

(FY09-FY13)

Automatic Dependents Surveillance – Broadcast (ADS-B)

• Louisville Service Acceptance Test (SAT)
• Gulf of Mexico SAT
• Philadelphia SAT
• Gulf of Mexico VHF Voice Communications Initial Operating Capability

Data Communications (Data Comm)

• Draft and begin validation of standards for avionics required for Data Comm operations
• Conduct human factors and operations research to develop concept of use for Data Comm

National Airspace System (NAS) Network Enabled Weather (NNEW):

• Demonstration of interagency Net-Enabled data sharing/interoperability
• Finalize Version 2 of the Data and Service Standards for IOC products for the 4-D Weather Data Cube

NAS Voice Switch Activities (NVS):

• Finalize initial requirements document
• NVS draft Specification
• Draft NVS functional architecture
• Legacy case cost analysis

System Wide Information Management (SWIM): 

• Standards/guidance to SWIM implementing programs on SWIM Segment 1 core capabilities
• Service container software to implementing programs
• Code and test of initial Segment 1 capabilities
•  

Conduct analyses and prepare documentation for Final Investment Decision for Segment 2

ADS-B

• Juneau SAT
• Louisville Initial Operating Capability (IOC) of Surveillance Services
• Gulf of Mexico IOC for Surveillance Services
• Philadelphia IOC of Surveillance Services
• Juneau IOC of Surveillance Services
• Final Rule Published
• Critical Surveillance Services In-Service Decision for ADS-B 
• Complete installation of 340 (of 794 total) ground stations

Data Comm

• Screening Information Request (SIR) release for Data Comm Network Service provider acquisition

NNEW

• Data and service standards products that will be used at IOC for the 4-D Weather Data Cube will be mature
• Demonstration of limited 4-D Weather Data Cube functionality including fault tolerance and federation of the registry/repository

NVS

• Initial Investment Decision

SWIM: 

• Final requirements specification for Segment 2
• Final Investment Analysis for Segment 2 capabilities
• System integration and test for Aeronautical Information Management (AIM) portion of Special Use Airspace Automated Data Exchange capability
• Code and test for Integrated Terminal Weather System (ITWS) Data Publication
• Design and prototype for Pilot Report (PIREP) Data Publication
• Code for Initial Flight Data Services
• Requirements analysis for additional Traffic Flow Management (TFM) capabilities
• Requirements definition and prototyping for Terminal Data Distribution System (TDDS)

Data Comm

• Final Investment Decision for Data Comm Network Service provider acquisition
• Contract award for Data Comm Network Service provider acquisition

NNEW:

• Service adapters for selected legacy FAA systems
• Architecture for the 4-D Weather Data Cube

NVS:

• Screening Information Request (SIR) released
• Final Investment Decision
• Contract award

SWIM:

• TFM initial flow object prototype
• ITWS integration and test
• TDDS design
• SWIM Segment 1 capability deployment – Corridor Integrated Weather System (CIWS)

Data Comm

• Final Investment Decision for En Route automation enhancements acquisition
• Task order for En Route automation enhancements acquisition awarded

NNEW:

• Installation of initial set of hardware and software for FAA’s portion of 4-D Weather Data Cube
• Demonstration of full IOC system in preparation for Operational Test & Evaluation (OT&E)

NVS:

• Switch Development/Modification initiated

SWIM:

• SWIM Segment 1 capability deployment – Weather Message Switching Center Replacement (WMSCR)
• TDDS deployment

ADS-B

• Installation completed at all remaining ground stations as well as NAS-wide Deployment of Essential and Critical services

Data Comm

• Training and operations policies developed to support use of Data Comm

NNEW:

• FAA-National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 4-D Weather Data Cube OT&E
• Weather Data Cube IOC

NVS:

• Initial system deployment at selected Key site(s)
• System testing initiation

SWIM:

• SWIM Segment 1 capability deployment - AIM, En Route Automation Modernization (ERAM), TDDS

Fig. 3:  Selected Other NextGen Deliverables

(FY09-FY13)

Alternative Fuel Availability Targets

• 50% FT generic blends including biomass/coal/gas (FT = Fischer-Tropsch process for gasifying material and converting it to fuels)

Gap Analysis & Requirements

High Altitude Airspace Management Program

• Five geographic Q-Route corridors and transition of national playbooks
• National transition from ground-based navaids to area navigation to support foundation for NextGen

High Altitude Airspace Management Program

Improved Special Use Airspace/ATCAA access

• Adaptive airspace trials (2009-2010)

Alternative Fuel Availability Targets

• 100% FT generic including biomass
• 50% Hydrotreated Renewable Jet fuel

High Altitude Airspace Management Program

Navigation Reference System (NRS) Expansion

• Smart expansion to support key applications and NRS/Global Area Reference System integration (2011)

High Altitude Airspace Management Program

NRS Expansion

• Full expansion (2012-2015)

Alternative Fuel Availability Targets

• 100% Hydrotreated Renewable Jet fuel
• Other Biofuel processes

Figure 4: NextGen Research & Demonstration Activities

(FY09-FY13)

3D Path Arrival Management

• This project is a first step toward 4D trajectory operations in the arrival domain. In laymen's terms, this capability at high density airport will provide a means to achieve highly accurate, predictable and fuel efficient routes which will decrease controller and pilot workload, decrease adverse environmental impacts (emissions and noise) while potentially enhancing airport throughput.  Apart from the capability itself, the major product from this project is a complete specification for a 4D trajectory synthesizer based on the NASA En route Descent Advisor which generates the route for the aircraft to fly. This route is then loaded into the aircrafts automation for execution.

4-D Flight Management System (4-D FMS)

• Demo 4-D FMS Trajectory Based Operations (TBO) to reduce pilot and Controller workload and environmental impact.

International Air Traffic Interoperability (IATI)

• Demonstrate potential benefits for oceanic trajectory optimization in terms of fuel savings and emissions reductions through partnerships and collaboration with the international aviation air navigation service providers (ANSPs), airlines and government agencies.  Initial demonstrations being conducted with the Atlantic Interoperability Initiative to Reduce Emissions (AIRE) project.  
•  

International Flight Data Object (IFDO)

• Perform research and demonstrations leading to proof of concept and early implementation of NextGen capabilities such as International Flight Data Object.

Net Enabled Operations (NEO)

• NEO is a network information technology program with a set of spiral developmental efforts (until 2012) directed at developing / leveraging an innovative, effective and efficient system-to-system operational architecture, with supporting procedures to provide the FAA and its interagency partners with an agile, highly connective network for net centric shared situational awareness.

Oceanic Trajectory Based Operations

• Demonstrate potential benefits for oceanic optimization procedures.  Partnerships and collaboration with the international aviation air navigation service providers (ANSPs), airlines and government agencies. 

Staffed NextGen Towers (SNT)

• Field demonstrations will serve to validate the SNT concept and system(s) for the two phased implementation.

Surface Trajectory-Based Operations Project

• Conduct demonstrations and operational evaluations of future NextGen surface capabilities at Memphis, New York (JFK) and Orlando airports.

Tailored Arrivals (TA)

• In the final form, a Tailored Arrival (TA) is a comprehensive method of planning, communicating, and flying highly efficient, thus environmentally friendly, arrival trajectories from cruise altitudes to the runway threshold.  Implementation of TAs at selected coastal airports is planned to occur by early FY-11.  These initial trans-oceanic arrival operations are considered to be an early implementation strategy to realize immediate operational benefits in efficiency and reduced environmental impact. 

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

• Utilize advanced capabilities of UAS community as test for exploring future 4-Dimension (4-D; latitude, longitude, altitude and time) trajectory based concepts and examine potential concepts for wide-spread integration of UAS into future NextGen environment.

3D Path Arrival Management

• Continue flight deck centric and air traffic control centric simulation

4-D Flight Management System (4-D FMS)

• To be determined based on development efforts
• Initial human-in-the-loop simulations

International Flight Data Object (IFDO)  

• Research and Demonstrations continues
• Potential to begin Pacific demonstrations

Net Enabled Operations (NEO)

• As determined from planning in FY-09

Oceanic Trajectory Based Operations

• Initial ADS-B In-trail Procedures, Pre-departure 4-D oceanic trajectory management, Web enabled Collaborative Trajectory Planning (CTP) and Oceanic Air space Management 

Staffed NextGen Tower

• Complete field site preparation and field demonstration

Surface Trajectory Based Operations

• Follow-on spiral demonstrations/evaluation focused on enhancements to surface 4-D Trajectory Based Operations, including taxi conformance monitoring

Tailored Arrivals (TA)

• Resolve issues surrounding implementation and begin transfer of project to implementation / operational organization

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

• Potential for 4-D TBO demonstrations in an operational environment

3D Path Arrival Management

• Complete technical transfer of decision support tools

4-D Flight Management System (4-D FMS)

• Continue proof of concept demonstration/simulation from FY-11

Net Enabled Operations (NEO)

• As determined from planning in FY-09 and FY10

Oceanic Trajectory Based Operations

• Continuing ADS-B In-trail Procedures, Pre-departure 4-D oceanic trajectory management, Web enabled Collaborative Trajectory Planning (CTP) and Oceanic Air space Management 

Staffed NextGen Tower

• To be determined

Surface Trajectory Based Operations

• Follow-on spiral demonstrations / evaluation focused on enhancements to surface 4-D Trajectory Based Operations

Tailored Arrivals (TA)

• Begin full-time operations of TAs at selected costal airports (with oceanic arrivals) around the US

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

• To be determined based on 4-D TBO demonstrations in an operational environment

3D Path Arrival Management

• Further refiner the decision support tool and support investment decision activities.  Complete concept of use document

4-D Flight Management System (4-D FMS)

• Initial implementation

Net Enabled Operations (NEO)

• As determined from planning in FY-09 and FY10

Oceanic Trajectory Based Operations

• Continuing ADS-B In-trail Procedures, Pre-departure 4-D oceanic trajectory management, Web enabled Collaborative Trajectory Planning (CTP) and Oceanic Air space Management 

Staffed NextGen Tower

• To be determined

Surface Trajectory Based Operations

• Follow-on spiral demonstrations / evaluation focused on enhancements to surface 4-D Trajectory Based Operations

Tailored Arrivals (TA)

• Begin full-time operations of TAs at selected costal airports (with oceanic arrivals) around the US

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)

• To be determined based on 4-D TBO demonstrations in an operational environment

3D Path Arrival Management

• ERAM/TMA implementation

4-D Flight Management System (4-D FMS)

• Continue proof of concept demonstration from FY-12

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE RANDOLPH BABBITT,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

ON

THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION’S CALL TO
ACTION ON AIRLINE SAFETY AND PILOT TRAINING.

SEPTEMBER 23, 2009.

Chairman Costello, Ranking Member Petri, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) Call to Action on airline safety and pilot training. As you know, on June 15, 2009, we made this call to action to encourage the aviation industry in this country to come together to share their best practices across the board and implement actions we know can improve safety. History has shown that we are able to implement better safety improvements far more quickly and effectively when we work together on problems and their solutions. We have received a wealth of information from the Call to Action, and we are taking several steps to use that information to make the industry and traveling public safer.

To start, we had several short-term actions that we wanted to achieve in June and July of this year. These included:

Flight and Duty Time Rulemaking: As a result of the Call to Action, FAA made the creation of a new flight and rest rule based on fatigue science a high priority, with an aggressive timeline. FAA chartered an aviation rulemaking committee (ARC), which began meeting in July 2009. The ARC, which consisted of representatives from FAA, industry, and labor organizations, was charged with producing recommendations for a science-based approach to fatigue management by September 1, 2009. I am pleased to report to you that the ARC met its charge and that we are currently reviewing its recommendations. Although our review is ongoing, I would also like to share with you how pleased I am with the work that we accomplished in the ARC. While some details remain unresolved, the ARC gave us a broad philosophical framework that will form the basis for our NPRM.

Focused Inspection Initiative: Recognizing the urgency of proposals in the Call to Action, FAA required its principal operations inspectors for part 121 carriers to conduct a focused program review of air carrier flight crewmember training, qualification, and management practices.

The focused inspection initiative has two parts. The first part of the initiative required FAA inspectors to meet with the carrier’s director of operations, director of safety, and company officials responsible for flight crewmember training and qualification programs. The purpose of these meetings was to determine the carrier’s ability to identify, track, and manage low-time flight crewmembers and those who have failed evaluation events or demonstrated a repetitive need for additional training. Inspectors also looked at whether the carrier adopted the suggestions in Safety Alert for Operators (SAFO) 06015 to voluntarily implement remedial training for pilots with persistent performance deficiencies. The meetings were to occur as soon as possible, but no later than July 15, 2009. I am pleased to report that all of these reviews have been completed.

As a result of these meetings, our inspectors found that about two-thirds of the carriers operating under the traditional regulatory requirements for pilot training and checking (i.e. carriers that do not participate in an Advanced Qualification Program) had systems in place to identify and manage low-time flight crewmembers and those with persistent performance problems. We strongly encouraged carriers without such systems to establish them. For those who will not commit to implementing these systems, we will increase oversight to ensure their training and qualification programs meet regulatory requirements.

The second part of the initiative is currently underway. Inspectors are conducting additional inspections to validate that the carrier’s training and qualification programs meet regulatory standards in accordance with FAA guidance materials, including, among other items:

·      Review the entire performance history of any pilot in question;

·      Provide remedial training as necessary; and

·      Provide additional oversight by the certificate holder to ensure that performance deficiencies are effectively addressed and corrected.

We expect to complete the second part of the focused inspection initiative by September 30.

Training Program Review Guidance: Using results from initial elements of the focused inspection initiative, FAA will provide guidance material on conducting a comprehensive training program review. This guidance will describe the training program review in the context of a safety management system and its role in a corporate safety culture.

Although our original goal (as indicated in the Action Plan) was to develop this document by July 31, we have postponed development of the Training Program Review Guidance for two reasons. First, the Action Plan indicates that we will use the results of FAA’s focused inspection initiative in developing the material. Although FAA inspectors completed Part I by July 15, Part II (which calls for a more in-depth review of training) is not slated to be complete until September 30, as stated above. Second, we found that the initial July timeframe would not allow us to benefit from suggestions and ideas developed in the series of Call to Action safety forums held around the country in July and August.

Once FAA inspectors complete the second part of the focused inspection initiative, we will analyze this information, along with ideas gathered from the regional safety forums, and begin developing the SAFO. As we may want to provide time for industry comment, our goal is to complete it by December 31.

Obtain Air Carriers’ Commitment to Most Effective Practices: To solidify oral commitments made at FAA’s June 15 Call to Action, I sent a letter to all part 121 operators and their unions and requested written commitments to adhere to the highest professional standards, with specific commitments on the following key topics:

·      Pilot Records: While Congress is working to amend the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 and the FAA amends Advisory Circular 120-68D, I asked that air carriers immediately implement a policy of asking pilot applicants for voluntary disclosure of FAA records, including notices of disapproval for evaluation events.

·      FOQA and ASAP: I asked that air carriers who have not done so, establish flight operations quality assurance (FOQA) and Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) programs and develop data analysis processes to ensure effective use of this information.

I can tell you that of the responses we have examined so far, carriers have overwhelmingly indicated a willingness to make the commitments I have requested - this includes responses from those who have already done so. But not everyone has responded yet. We have reiterated to these airlines the importance of responding to my request. Our final findings and recommendations resulting from this effort will be summarized in the final report on the Call to Action that will be published by the end of the calendar year.

Labor Organizations: I asked labor organizations for their commitment in the following areas:

·      Establish and support professional standards and ethics committees to develop peer audit and review procedures, and to elevate ethics and professional standards.

·      Establish and publish a code of ethics that includes expectations for professional behavior, standards of conduct for professional appearance, and overall fitness to fly.

·      Support periodic safety risk management meetings between FAA and mainline and regional carriers to promote the most effective practices, including periodic analysis of FOQA and ASAP data with an emphasis on identifying enhancements to the training program.

The initial responses have been informative. As with the air carrier responses, we have not heard from everyone. We will continue to track responses to this request and will include the results findings and recommendations we will be making as we wrap up this Call to Action with a report later this year.

Mentoring: To address issues in the professional standards and flight discipline area, FAA developed and sought industry comments on the prospect of creating a range of mentoring programs. I am still very much in favor of mentoring, but there is no question that it is also one of the most challenging concepts to address. We found this to be true during the discussions held at Call to Action safety forums around the country. Still, these discussions have produced some interesting and potentially promising ideas. For example:

·      Establishing Joint Strategic Councils within a “family” of carriers (mainline and regional partner(s)). This approach could lead to individual as well as corporate mentoring relationships.

·      Using Professional Standards Committee Safety Conferences to provide opportunities for two-way mentoring – a very good reminder that good ideas are not unique to larger mainline carriers.

·      Exploring mentoring possibilities between air carriers and university aviation programs.

We will be looking more closely at these ideas as we analyze data gathered from the forums and develop a mentoring guidance document for industry comment.

Regional Safety Forums: Beginning in July, FAA conducted a series of regional safety forums to discuss the Call to Action initiatives, listen to stakeholder comments, and seek ideas for and commitments to additional actions in the areas in which FAA is already taking specific action. By the end of August, FAA held 12 well-attended forums in the following locations:

The Call to Action also included several intermediate term actions, intended for completion in the August-December 2009 timeframe. These include:

Crew Training Requirements: At the time we initiated the Call to Action, the FAA already had an NPRM open for comment, intended to enhance traditional training programs for crewmembers and dispatchers by requiring the use of flight simulation training devices for flight crewmembers, and including additional training requirements in areas critical to safety. The public comment period closed on August 10 with over 3000 pages of comments. FAA is reviewing these comments and is committed to applying the resources necessary to complete a final rule on an aggressive timeline. The final rule will be consistent with the philosophy of enhancing the quality and effectiveness of training rather than focusing on traditional quantitative measures such as total flight time.

One of the things that the Call Action has also shown a light on is the issue of varying operational experience. We do not believe that simply raising quantity – the total number of hours of flying time or experience – without regard to the quality and nature of that time and experience – is an appropriate method by which to improve a pilot’s proficiency in commercial operations. For example, a newly-certificated commercial pilot with the minimum number of hours might be limited to certain activities until he or she could accumulate the type of experience deemed potentially necessary to serve as a first officer for an air carrier. Such experience would need to include training and operational experience in the multi-pilot environment, as well as training and exposure to icing, high altitude operations and other areas common to commercial air carrier operations.

Guidance to Inspectors on Safety Oversight: Consistent with the report of the Independent Review Team on Managing Risks in Civil Aviation, on which I served, FAA’s Aviation Safety organization included scenario-based training in safety oversight as part of the August All-Managers Conference. This training was intended to address issues raised in the report, including:

·      Management of varying regulatory interpretation styles within the inspection workforce;

·      Methods for harmonizing extremes in regulatory application; and,

·      Methods for optimizing the regulatory effectiveness and coherence across a diverse team of inspectors.

Final Report: By December 31, FAA will finalize a report summarizing our findings and recommending additional action items based on the Call to Action meeting, regional safety forums, results of the focused inspection initiative, and other actions. The report will include performance metrics for auditing and assessing progress.

While these are the steps we have and will be taking, I want to point out the biggest factor affecting safety: professionalism in the workplace. Safety begins at the top, but whether one has a wrench in his or her hand, sits at a yoke or carries a clipboard, wears a headset or works in the galley, safety is everyone’s responsibility. In spite of this, we have not seen the required level of professionalism consistently from the aviation industry across the board. Although professionalism prevails in the vast majority of the aviation workforce, it is not uniform throughout the industry. The standards are the same, the training is the same, but the mentality is not the same, and this is what we have to change.

One aspect of professionalism that needs further review is the professional responsibility of pilots to report for duty ready to fly. This can be a challenge for those who commute from one city to their work domicile in another. One of the things that requires further analysis is the effect commuting has on fatigue for crew members. As I have alluded to in the past in front of this Committee, one of the challenges with commuting is that it is virtually impossible to regulate fatigue as it relates to commuting. Who can say that someone who commutes for an hour on the shuttle from DC to NY (or a two-hour flight from Chicago, for that matter) arrives to work less rested than someone who lives in the greater NY metropolitan area, but drives three hours through a snowstorm from Connecticut to arrive at JFK? Who can mandate that no pilot’s child ever gets sick and needs an emergency room visit in the middle of the night, just hours before that pilot is supposed to go on duty? This is where professionalism – taking responsibility for showing up fit for duty – has to govern.

Those who have captured the essence of the professionalism need to have opportunities in and out of the cockpit to pass it on. Experience is a wonderful teacher, and there is no substitute for learning at the hands of someone who has already been there. The inexperienced people in the system need to meet the ones who have been around the block. They need to seek them out and mine whatever golden nuggets they have. That is one of the main reasons I think we need to see more mentoring throughout the industry.

I also think that we need to see greater use of the tools at hand like safety management systems across the board. It is often difficult to spot a trend with a slope that has only three data points on it. Safety management systems can help us plot more points and produce better information to help us make the right safety decisions.

When people know that they can raise their hand and say, “Hey, I think there’s a problem here,” it is then, and only then, that we are able to move forward in safety. If you have a situation where someone raises a hand and then is punished for doing so, all you have done is encourage silence. When you make silence the rule, when sweeping issues under the rug becomes the status quo, you have a recipe for disaster.

Unfortunately, we also need to recognize a basic truth here: we cannot regulate professionalism. No matter how many rules, regulations, advisories, mandatory training sessions, voluntary training sessions, it still comes down to the individual – the individual pilot, mechanic, technician, or controller.

Mr. Chairman, Congressman Petri, Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE RANDOLPH BABBITT,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

ON

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009. 

JUNE 25, 2009.

Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica, and Members of the Committee:

I welcome the opportunity to testify today on the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) progress in implementing our responsibilities under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA or Recovery Act).  It is a pleasure to appear with my fellow modal representatives from the Department of Transportation (DOT) to outline our achievements in meeting the very challenging deadlines that the ARRA established.  We believe this is a real success story.  Under Secretary LaHood’s “Tiger Team” effort, the Department has established a rigorous approach to implementing and overseeing the funds made available by Congress.  This morning I will first briefly outline the requirements of the Act for FAA’s programs and then provide the Committee with the status of our efforts so far in putting these funds to work on worthwhile airport projects and air traffic facilities and equipment projects that are putting people to work on improving and strengthening the Nation’s aviation infrastructure. 

Just a little over four months ago, Congress passed and President Obama signed ARRA into law.  The Act provides a total of $48.1 billion for DOT’s transportation programs.  The purposes of the law are clear:  to preserve and create jobs; promote economic recovery; and invest in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits.  The Act also makes clear that Congress and the President want strong and tough oversight of the use of the stimulus funds.  All Federal agencies are charged with managing and expending economic recovery funds so as to achieve the purposes of the Act, including commencing expenditures and activities as quickly as possible consistent with prudent management.

Of the $48.1 billion appropriated to DOT, the FAA received a total of $1.3 billion for aviation infrastructure improvements.  $1.1 billion of that amount was for grants to individual airport owners for airport development such as runways, taxiways, aprons, airfield lighting, terminal buildings and high priority safety or security equipment.  The remaining $200 million was provided for the FAA’s Facilities and Equipment program to help upgrade FAA’s power and navigation systems and modernize air traffic facilities.

Airport Project Funds

Under the FAA’s normal Airport Improvement Program (AIP), funding is made available to the FAA from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and is authorized as contract authority.  Much of this funding is distributed through grants based on a statutory formula.  A portion of AIP is made available through discretionary grants.  AIP grants are subject to various eligibility and program management requirements under title 49, United States Code. 

On the other hand, the ARRA funds were made available to FAA from the General Fund, and, while they were not specifically authorized under title 49 for projects under the AIP, the ARRA statute clearly indicated that the stimulus funds for airport purposes were to be administered as discretionary funds and be subject to the requirements applicable to the normal AIP.  This means that all normally required grant documentation and filing applies to the administration of ARRA projects; and all normal AIP grant conditions, certifications and assurances apply, including grant assurances related to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) participation.  The ARRA also contains express Buy American and Federal wage rate requirements.  As discretionary grants, the stimulus funding is not subject to AIP formulas, apportionments, or minimum set-asides.

Another noteworthy distinction is that there is a 100% federal share for the ARRA airport grant program, meaning that there is no local match required for airport grants issued under the Act.  Under normal AIP, the local match would be 5 to 25% of eligible project cost.

As this Committee is well aware, the Recovery Act sets forward some very specific timelines for award and project completion.  For FAA, half of the $1.1 billion made available for airport grants--$550 million--was required to be awarded within 120 days of enactment of the Act, or by last Wednesday, June 17, 2009.  On behalf of the President, Secretary LaHood, and the hard-working FAA airport staff, I am very pleased to report that we not only met that milestone, we exceeded it and actually awarded $ 725 million, or 66% by the June 17^th deadline.  This funding is going directly into the economy now and making a difference both in the short term supporting as many as 7,900 jobs as well as the long term with high value infrastructure improvements.

Under the terms of ARRA, the remaining funds must be awarded within one year of enactment of the Act, or by February 16, 2010.  Consistent with the goal of the Recovery Act to put these funds to work as quickly as possible, FAA’s internal objective is to have at least 90% of the airport grant funding, or $988 million, awarded before the end of this fiscal year.

The ARRA funds will be generally available through September 30, 2010, for recovery and reobligation.  Thereafter any remaining unobligated funds return to the U.S. Treasury. 

With regard to how we selected projects for these grant funds, we distributed the ARRA funding to airports under the same, audit-tested criteria as the existing AIP discretionary grant program.  We determined the distribution of funds through our existing allocation process and national priority system.  The airport community is very familiar with these standards and processes.  In contrast to other ARRA transportation funding programs where funds are delivered by formula to States and local governments ahead of actual project selection, our ARRA airport grant program requires that projects be designed and bid before grant awards.  While there may be more time upfront required for planning and bidding airport projects before the funding is released, this pays off ultimately because project construction can begin shortly after grant award.  This system results in planned, ready-to-go projects of lasting value. 

With FAA’s grant process as the guiding beacon, FAA identified a candidate pool of the highest priority projects by region, and distributed a tentative funding allocation to the nine FAA Regions to allow each Region to initiate the four-step grant process described above.  Additionally, FAA took specific action to assure that ARRA funds were directed to the highest priority projects that could meet the time schedule and “readiness standards” required, as noted above.

First, within the existing statutory priorities, preference was given to those projects that demonstrated they had or were able to meet all statutory requirements necessary to proceed, i.e. that they were truly “ready-to-go”.  For purposes of ARRA administration, “ready-to-go” was defined as a project that:

• had an environmental determination;
• had received all requisite airspace approvals;
• appeared on the candidate Airport’s approved Airport Layout Plan;
• if required, had a completed FAA-approved benefit-cost analysis;
• had design substantially complete;
• would be bid prior to the time of grant award; 
• would be able to issue a “Notice to Proceed” to the contractor within 30 calendar days of a Grant Offer;
• had the airport sponsor’s respective certifications as to bid and anticipated Notice to Proceed; and
• was expected to be completed in two years, or no later than February 16, 2011.

Next, project selection for ARRA funds was based upon existing statutory priorities as detailed within our normal AIP criteria, known as the National Priority Rating (NPR) System.  The NPR system is a numerical model that is one of several tools we use to prioritize airport development.  The values generated by the model serve to categorize airport development in accordance with agency goals and objectives.  The model generates values between 0 and 100 with 100 generally being the most consistent with agency goals.  In general, in order to ensure that ARRA funding benefited the highest priority needs quickly, we considered funding only those projects scoring a 62 or higher on this scale (compared to the regular AIP where funding can be directed to projects scoring lower on the scale).  

As a result, the vast majority of the funding allocations, over 80%, are for enduring, high quality, high priority airside infrastructure to preserve the nation’s airports’ runways taxiways and aprons necessary for the landing, take-off  and surface movement of the country’s civil aircraft fleet.  The balance of the ARRA funding is for renovation or replacement of aging terminal buildings at smaller commercial airports, new airport construction, safety and security projects, and various high priority obstruction removal, lighting and guidance signage installation projects.

We did not provide ARRA funding to any project that was planned for funding in Fiscal Year 2009.  These projects were not considered for Recovery Act funding because the legislation requires that economic recovery funds supplement and not supplant planned expenditures from regular AIP grants, airport-generated revenues or from other State and local sources for airport development activities.  The Recovery Act also directed that priority be given to projects that could be completed within two years of the date of enactment of the Act, or Feb 17, 2011.  FAA interprets the term “completed” as when construction or acquisition of equipment is finished as determined by a final project inspection. 

In addition to time deadlines, “supplement and not supplant” criteria, and the NPR model, and in keeping with the intent of the law to create jobs throughout the United States, FAA was mindful of one final consideration.  FAA monitored the allocation of ARRA funding to guide the distribution so as to attempt to reflect historical patterns of regular AIP grants, including sensitivity to geographical distribution and by types of airports (general aviation versus commercial service).  In fact, the announced projects represent ARRA funding in every State for airport grants.

Finally, FAA targeted airports with projects that addressed airport safety and security, preserving aging infrastructure, reducing runway incursions, increasing capacity, and mitigating environmental impact of aviation.  The FAA also targeted several special emphasis investments that will greatly benefit local communities such as Runway Safety Areas (RSA), airfield pavement rehabilitation projects, and non-hub terminal projects that represent aging facilities in smaller markets that are difficult to fund through local fees and charges.

For example, we are providing ARRA funding to:

• Improve the Runway Safety Areas at Pauls Valley Municipal Airport in the City of Pauls Valley, Oklahoma.  This project will enhance safety at the airport and is expected to create or sustain 18 jobs.
• Sound attenuate educational areas within the Hitch Elementary School in Chicago, Illinois.  This project will improve the learning environment of students by reducing aircraft noise inside the school and is expected to create or sustain 65 jobs.
• Construct a new airport that will primarily serve air ambulances and medical aircraft that support the Rosebud Indian Heal Service Hospital in Mission Sioux, South Dakota.  This project is expected to create or sustain 45 jobs.
• Construct a replacement passenger terminal at MBS International Airport in Saginaw Michigan to replace the existing terminal that has outlived its useful life and has become extremely costly to maintain.  The ARRA funding provided is expected to create or sustain 138 jobs.

Facilities and Equipment Funds

As noted at the outset, in addition to the $1.1 billion for airport projects, the Recovery Act made available an additional $200 million for FAA’s Facilities and Equipment (F&E) program to support FAA infrastructure modernization and sustainment.  F&E projects represent the necessary facilities and equipment, as the name implies, to support air traffic operations.  The funding is being used to replace airport traffic control towers, improve air route traffic control center buildings, replace and improve power systems and implement navigation and landing system components.  Specific examples include:  replacement of elevators and exterior structural walls at many of our en-route centers, installation of instrument landing and runway lighting systems, replacement of components such as lamp monitoring equipment, fuel storage tank replacements, installation of equipment for grounding, bonding, and lightning protection, replacement of engine generator and power supply systems, and replacement of heating/ventilation/air conditioning systems for unmanned navigation equipment shelters.  These projects save the agency money because of the increased energy efficiency and decreased maintenance and repair costs.

In accordance with the allocation of the F&E funding set out in the Recovery Act, the distribution of the $200 million will be as follows:

• Power Systems                             $50 Million     90 Sites
• ATCT/TRACON Facilities           $80 Million     3 Towers being replaced
• ARTCC Modernization                 $50 Million     18 Centers
• Navigation/Landing Facilities        $20 Million     145 Sites

For F&E, we do not have specific requirements that are applicable to the airport grant funds (i.e. the requirement to obligate 50% within 120 days).  However, F&E obligations using ARRA funds through June 17, 2009 were $47.9 million.  We project an additional $30.2 million by the end of this month and our plan calls for total obligations of $129.47 million by September 2009, $158.16 million by March 2010, and $200 million by July 2010.

All of these projects are work that the agency had planned.  That is, they were part of our corporate work plan; the ARRA funding allows us to accelerate the plan.  We are using many existing FAA contracts that were originally competitively awarded, to accomplish the work and begin the projects quickly.  The major advantage of having Recovery Act funds for F&E is that we are able to accelerate needed improvements to our facilities or start replacement projects sooner.  We look forward to reaping the benefits of such projects, including greater energy efficiency and cost savings resulting from the extension of the operating life of our facilities.

Transparency Is Paramount

All funds issued under this Act are subject to extraordinary scrutiny with strict reporting requirements.  Under our oversight system and schedule, airport project grant recipients must submit periodic reports to the FAA on the use of Recovery Act funds no later than 90 days (5/18/09), 180 days (8/16/09), one year (2/17/10), two years (2/17/11), and three years (2/17/12) after the date of enactment of the Recovery Act.  These reports will be collected and compiled by the FAA and transmitted through the Department to Congress and include the following:

• the amount of Recovery Act funds appropriated, allocated, obligated, and outlayed;
• the number of projects that have been put out to bid and have been awarded;
• where work has begun and been completed;
• the amount of Recovery Act funds associated with such projects;
• estimates of jobs created or sustained, including job years created and the total increase in employment since the date of enactment;
• actual expenditures by each grant recipient from economic recovery funding; and
• actual expenditures as compared to the level of expenditures that were planned to occur during such time as of the date of enactment of the Act.

Currently, FAA is making all ARRA program information publicly available by posting the information on the FAA Recovery Act website as updated project information becomes available for both airport and Facilities & Equipment projects.  The information available for the public includes the amount of Recovery Act funds received, expended, and obligated, on a project basis.

In addition, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has recently issued guidance for ARRA recipient reporting data that must be submitted to OMB each quarter.  The first cycle for this recipient reporting will begin in October 2009.  The reporting requirements include a detailed list of all projects for which Recovery Act funds were expended or obligated, and detailed information on subcontracts or subgrants awarded by the recipient.  FAA has ensured that the provisions for outreach and education, and data collection associated with those requirements were put in place.

To ensure that the grantees were aware of these additional reporting requirements and to ensure compliance, FAA included special conditions within each grant and contract requiring this reporting as a condition of acceptance.  Similarly, the Facilities and Equipment prime contractors have been directed to complete a Monthly Prime and Subcontractor Employment Report for each project location. This guidance was incorporated into FAA’s Acquisition Management System (AMS) on March 31, 2009.  Each existing contract and future contract that uses ARRA funding contains the AMS job reporting requirements. 

Finally, before issuing the first grant, FAA conducted proactive outreach to external stakeholders and the Office of the Inspector General through meetings and conferences throughout the country to ensure all parties were committed to the processes necessary to meet the ARRA objectives of timely, high priority and transparent project development.  As a result, FAA published specific written guidance for airports and the public that detailed how FAA intended to implement the effective administration of ARRA grants.

Conclusion

In slightly over 120 days since the FAA received its $1.1 billion allotment of ARRA funds for airport infrastructure improvements, FAA has identified and announced tentative funding (subject to timely receipt of construction bids) for nearly all of the funding available by ARRA.  Because of the long lead time associated with constructing complex airport infrastructure projects, the vast majority of the highest priority, ready-to-go projects had already been identified in FAA’s 3-5 year Airport Capital Improvement Plan.  This reflects well on the long history of project planning coordination between individual airport sponsors and the FAA.  

The FAA also continues to proceed rapidly with deploying the Recovery Act’s facilities and equipment funding to accelerate projects that will generate environmental improvements, cost savings, and improved facility conditions for our employees.  We are doing all of this transparently, and cognizant of ARRA’s primary short-term goal:  to put people back to work across the country.

Mr. Chairman, the FAA is proud of what we have accomplished to date.  We are in the midst of millions of dollars of bids being received daily.  The bidding process is robust and the savings resulting from excellent bid results is allowing us to stretch the dollars--to fund even more ARRA projects then originally expected.  We thank you for your support in this effort and will continue to keep you informed about our progress.

That concludes my prepared statement.  I would be happy to answer any questions you and the Members of the Committee may have.

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE RANDOLPH BABBITT,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

ON

REGIONAL AIR CARRIERS AND PILOT WORKFORCE ISSUES. 

JUNE 11, 2009.

Chairman Costello, Ranking Member Petri, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) role in the oversight of air carriers.  Let me begin by saying that we at the FAA mourn the tragic loss of Colgan Air Flight 3407 deeply.  This is an agency dedicated to aviation safety; any loss is felt keenly by us all.  Likewise, our sympathies go out to the families and loved ones of the passengers and crew of Air France Flight 447.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted a public hearing May 12-14, 2009 on the Colgan Air crash.  Several issues came to light regarding pilot training and qualifications, flight crew fatigue, and consistency of safety standards and compliance between air transportation operators.  Given that the NTSB has not yet concluded its investigation, I cannot speak today to any of the potential findings.  I can, however, outline for you the FAA’s oversight responsibility with regard to safety oversight of operators, pilot training and qualifications, and flight and duty times for flight crew, and my focus on aviation safety as my top priority.

One Level of Safety

In the mid-1990s, the FAA revised its regulations on air carrier safety standards to reflect “one level of safety,” requiring regional air carriers to operate under the same rules and at the same level of safety as their major airlines counterparts.  I am proud to say that while I was president of the Air Line Pilots Association, I led the efforts on working with the FAA to make these changes.

Now, all air carriers that operate aircraft with 10 or more seats are required to meet the same safety standards and are subject to the same level of safety oversight across the board.  Specifically, the air carriers are required to comply with the regulations embodied in Part 121 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (Part 121).

FAA safety oversight for these carriers is conducted through the comprehensive Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS).  ATOS has three fundamental elements: design assessment, performance assessment, and risk management.

• Design assessment ensures an air carrier’s operating systems meet regulatory and safety standards.
• Performance assessments confirm that an air carrier’s operating systems produce intended results, including mitigation or control of hazards and associated risks.
• Risk management process identifies and controls hazards and allocates FAA resources according to risk-based priorities.

Under ATOS, FAA’s primary responsibilities are:  (1) to verify that an air carrier is capable of operating safely and complies with the regulations and standards prescribed by the Administrator before issuing an air carrier operating certificate and before approving or accepting air carrier safety programs; (2) to re-verify that an air carrier continues to meet regulatory requirements when changes occur by conducting periodic safety reviews; and (3) to continually validate the performance of an air carrier’s approved and accepted programs for the purpose of continued operational safety.

Pilot Training and Qualifications

The FAA offers several types of pilot certification.  The typical FAA certification progression for an airline pilot is Private Pilot (a license to fly oneself and others, without charge, under Visual Flight Rules), Commercial Pilot (a license needed to fly for compensation or hire as a second in command), and Airline Transport Pilot (a license to fly as a captain for an airline), with an Instrument Rating (a rating that one is proficient at using instrument navigational aids and other avionics) usually added to the Private Pilot certificate.  For each level of pilot certification, the individual must demonstrate aeronautical knowledge as well as flight proficiency.  Each new level of certification requires the satisfactory completion of the previous rating.  In other words, it is not permissible for an individual to receive a Commercial Pilot certificate without first completing the requirements of the Private Pilot Certificate.  For airline pilots to be captains of aircraft larger than 12,500 pounds, or any jet aircraft, they must complete specialized training for the specific aircraft and test for a type rating in that aircraft. 

The requirements for each of these pilot certifications, including the Instrument Rating, are summarized below:

1.  Private Pilot                      (Minimum of 40 hours at certification)

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      Complete a comprehensive ground school and pass a written test composed of at least the following: aircraft systems, weight and balance, aeronautical charts, Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs), airport operations, national air space, emergency procedures, communications, and navigation requirements. The ground school must be conducted by an authorized instructor.   

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 40 hours, composed of at least 20 hrs from an approved instructor, 10 hrs of solo, 3 hrs of night time, and 5 solo hrs of cross country.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.

2.  Commercial Pilot              (Minimum of 250 Hours)                   

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      FARs, accident reporting procedures, aerodynamics, meteorology, weather reports and forecast, safe operations of the aircraft, weight and balance, performance charts, aircraft limitations, aeronautical charts, navigation, aeronautical decision making, aircraft systems, maneuvers procedures and emergency operations, night and high altitude operations, and operations in the national airspace system.

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 250 hours to include day, night and flight by reference to aircraft instruments.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.

3.  Instrument Rating

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      Must complete ground training on instrument flight conditions and procedures.  Pass an aeronautical test composed of the following:  FARs, Air Traffic Control (ATC) system, instrument procedures, Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) navigation, instrument approach procedures, use of IFR charts, weather reports and for casts, recognition of critical weather situations, aeronautical decision making, and crew resource management.

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 50 hrs cross country as Pilot in Command (PIC). 40 hours of actual or simulated flight time, 15 hrs with an authorized instrument instructor.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.               

4.   Airline Transport Pilot     (Minimum of 1,500 Hours)    

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      FARs, meteorology, Knowledge of effects of weather, general weather and Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) use,  interpretation of weather charts, maps and forecasts, operations in the national airspace system, wind sheer and micro burst awareness, air navigation, ATC procedures, instrument departure and approach procedures, enroute operations, airport operations, weight and balance, aircraft loading, aerodynamics , aircraft performance, human factors, aeronautical decision making, and Crew Resource Management (CRM).  Must pass an FAA test on these subjects.

b.  Flight proficiency               1500 hours total time.  500 hrs cross country, 400 hours night time.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator on the maneuvers required by the FAA’s Airline Transport Pilots Practical Test Standards.

In addition to these FAA certifications, airline pilots receive initial and additional recurrent training through the air carriers for whom they work.  These training programs are evaluated and approved by the FAA.  An air carrier training program contains curricula, facilities, instructors, courseware, instructional delivery methods, and testing and checking procedures. These training programs must meet the requirements of Part 121, the regulations for commercial air carriers, to ensure that each crewmember is adequately trained for each aircraft, duty position, and kind of operation in which the person serves. An air carrier or operator’s training program is divided into several categories of training that are specific to the operator, and which may include initial training for new hires, initial training on equipment, transition training, upgrade training, recurrent training, and requalification training. 

Training programs are approved by the FAA in two stages:  initial training approval and final approval.  Initial approval consists of a thorough review by the Principal Operations Inspector (POI) for that carrier of the training program to ensure that all applicable requirements of Part 121 have been met and are covered in the training program. Once initial approval is granted by the POI, the POI will observe several training classes, which include ground training and flight (simulator) training.

The quality of the training is determined by an evaluation of passing scores of the pilots.  Direct observation by the POI of testing and checking is an effective method for determining whether learning has occurred.  Examining the results of tests, such as oral or written tests or flight checks, provides a quantifiable method for measuring training effectiveness.  The POI must examine and determine the causal factors of significant failure trends.  The POI periodically monitors the training and evaluates failure rates to determine whether the training program continues to comply with FAA standards, and also evaluates the program.

On January 12, 2009, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding upgraded training standards for pilots, flight attendants and dispatchers.  This proposal is the most comprehensive upgrade to FAA training requirements in 20 years and was drafted working with an Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) that included pilots, flight attendants, airlines, training centers, FAA, and others.

While aviation has incorporated many technologies over the years to prevent accidents by addressing findings from NTSB accident investigations, human factors remain a source of risk.  Improving human performance is a central element to improving safety.  Thus, the FAA proposal is aimed at using best practices and tools to help pilots, flight attendants, and dispatchers (1) avoid the mistake and (2) respond better if there is a mistake made.

The aviation industry has moved to performance-based training rather than prescriptive training to reflect that the way people learn has changed.  New technology, particularly simulators, allows high-fidelity training for events that we never could have trained to in the past using an aircraft, e.g., stall recovery.  We now have qualitative measures to measure actual transfer of knowledge.  We can determine proficiency based on performance, not just on the number of hours of training.  While the major airlines are already doing this type of training, our proposed rule incorporates best practices and tools so that all operators will use the upgraded standards.

One of the pilot training issues that has arisen in the wake of the Colgan Air investigation is that of failed check rides and whether air carriers are informed of a pilot-applicant’s failures.  A check ride is a practical examination given by an FAA check airman or airline employer that checks or tests the proficiency of the pilot to perform certain skills.  Under the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA), air carriers must obtain the last five years’ performance and disciplinary records for a prospective pilot from their previous employer.  These records would include information regarding initial and recurrent training, qualifications, proficiency, or professional competence including comments and evaluations made by a check airman. 

PRIA also requires carriers to obtain records for a pilot from the FAA.  FAA records regarding pilot certification are protected by the Privacy Act of 1974.  However, PRIA requires carriers to obtain a limited waiver from prospective pilots allowing for the release of information concerning their current airman certificate and associated type ratings and limitations, current airman medical certificates, including any limitations, and summaries of closed FAA legal enforcement actions resulting in a finding by the Administrator of a violation that was not subsequently overturned.  Although PRIA does not require carriers to obtain a release from prospective pilots for the entirety of the pilot’s airman certification file, including Notices of Disapproval for flight checks for certificates and ratings, FAA guidance suggests to potential employers that they may find this additional information helpful in evaluating the pilot.  In order to obtain this additional information, a carrier must obtain a Privacy Act waiver from the pilot-applicant.

Pilot Fatigue

Another one of the concerns that has come out of the NTSB’s investigation is the issue of pilot fatigue and what factors may contribute to pilot fatigue.  This is an area of particular interest to me.  The FAA regulates flight and duty limitations for all Part 121 pilots conducting domestic operations.  The “crew rest” elements of the regulation are designed to mitigate chronic and acute fatigue, primarily through limitations on flight hours and defined hours of rest relative to flight hours.  For example, the regulation outlines:

• No more than 30 flight hours in any 7 consecutive days
• At least 24 hours of consecutive rest during any 7 consecutive days
• Varying rest requirements relative to hours flown in any 24 hour period

The rule also defines rest period activities and prohibitions, and provides provisions for circumstances under which flight time limitations can be exceeded, such as in adverse weather operations.  As of late 2000, an FAA legal interpretation clarified that under these rules a pilot crew member, flying under domestic flight rules, must “look back” 24 hours and find eight hours of uninterrupted rest before beginning any flight segment.

Pilots also have a regulatory responsibility to not fly when they are not fit, including being fatigued.  Thus, while the carrier schedules and manages pilots within these limitations and requirements, the pilot has the responsibility to rest during the periods provided by the regulations.  The FAA has long held that it is the responsibility of both the operator and the flight crewmember to prevent fatigue, not only by following the regulations, but also by acting intelligently and conscientiously while serving the traveling public.  This means taking into consideration weather conditions, air traffic, health of each flight crewmember, or any other circumstances (personal problems, etc.) that might affect the flight crewmember’s alertness or judgment on a particular flight.

The FAA has initiated a number of fatigue mitigation efforts in recent years:

• The FAA took steps in 2006 to address fatigue mitigations for Ultra-Long Range flights (more than 16 hours of flight time) and associated extended duty times.
• The FAA held the 2008 Aviation Fatigue Management Symposium to provide the industry the latest information on fatigue science, mitigation, and management. (Symposium proceedings are available on www.faa.gov.) 
• The FAA is in the process of writing an Advisory Circular regarding fatigue that incorporates information from the Symposium.

However, because piloting is a highly mobile profession, one of the persistent challenges is that pilots are often domiciled in places that are hundred of miles from the airlines’ bases of operations, e.g., the pilot lives in Los Angeles but is based out of the airline employer’s Atlanta operations.  This means that the pilot’s “commute” is a five hour plane ride.  Though the commuting pilot is riding in the jump seat or in a passenger seat, she is not technically considered to be on duty during that time.  Whether this has an impact on pilot fatigue is something that the FAA continues to monitor and examine to determine whether it is an appropriate area for regulation.

As the NTSB moves forward on its investigation and presents its findings, the FAA continues to examine the facts that are coming to light.  We continue our vigilance in assessing the safety of our system and taking the appropriate steps to improve that.  While we are in an extremely safe period in aviation history, the Colgan Air accident and the loss of Air France 447 remind us that we cannot rest on our laurels, that we must remain alert and aware of the challenges in our aviation system, and that we must continue to work to enhance the safety of the system.  This is a business where one mistake is one too many.

Chairman Costello, Ranking Member Petri, Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks.  Thank you again for inviting me here today to discuss the FAA’s role in the oversight of air carriers.  I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE RANDOLPH BABBITT,
ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION OPERATIONS, SAFETY, AND SECURITY,

ON

AVIATION SAFETY:  FAA’S ROLE IN THE OVERSIGHT OF AIR CARRIERS. 

JUNE 10, 2009.

Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me here today to discuss the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s) role in the oversight of air carriers.  Let me begin by saying that we at the FAA mourn the tragic loss of Colgan Air Flight 3407 deeply.  This is an agency dedicated to aviation safety; any loss is felt keenly by us all.  Likewise, our sympathies go out to the families and loved ones of the passengers and crew of Air France Flight 447.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) conducted a public hearing May 12-14, 2009 on the Colgan Air crash.  Several issues came to light regarding pilot training and qualifications, flight crew fatigue, and consistency of safety standards and compliance between air transportation operators.  Given that the NTSB has not yet concluded its investigation, I cannot speak today to any of the potential findings.  I can, however, outline for you the FAA’s oversight responsibility with regard to safety oversight of operators, pilot training and qualifications, and flight and duty times for flight crew, and my focus on aviation safety as my top priority.

One Level of Safety

In the mid-1990s, the FAA revised its regulations on air carrier safety standards to reflect “one level of safety,” requiring regional air carriers to operate under the same rules and at the same level of safety as their major airlines counterparts.  I am proud to say that while I was president of the Air Line Pilots Association, I led the efforts on working with the FAA to make these changes.

Now, all air carriers that operate aircraft with 10 or more seats are required to meet the same safety standards and are subject to the same level of safety oversight across the board.  Specifically, the air carriers are required to comply with the regulations embodied in Part 121 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (Part 121).

FAA safety oversight for these carriers is conducted through the comprehensive Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS).  ATOS has three fundamental elements: design assessment, performance assessment, and risk management.

• Design assessment ensures an air carrier’s operating systems meet regulatory and safety standards.
• Performance assessments confirm that an air carrier’s operating systems produce intended results, including mitigation or control of hazards and associated risks.
• Risk management process identifies and controls hazards and allocates FAA resources according to risk-based priorities.

Under ATOS, FAA’s primary responsibilities are:  (1) to verify that an air carrier is capable of operating safely and complies with the regulations and standards prescribed by the Administrator before issuing an air carrier operating certificate and before approving or accepting air carrier safety programs; (2) to re-verify that an air carrier continues to meet regulatory requirements when changes occur by conducting periodic safety reviews; and (3) to continually validate the performance of an air carrier’s approved and accepted programs for the purpose of continued operational safety.

Pilot Training and Qualifications

The FAA offers several types of pilot certification.  The typical FAA certification progression for an airline pilot is Private Pilot (a license to fly oneself and others, without charge, under Visual Flight Rules), Commercial Pilot (a license needed to fly for compensation or hire as a second in command), and Airline Transport Pilot (a license to fly as a captain for an airline), with an Instrument Rating (a rating that one is proficient at using instrument navigational aids and other avionics) usually added to the Private Pilot certificate.  For each level of pilot certification, the individual must demonstrate aeronautical knowledge as well as flight proficiency.  Each new level of certification requires the satisfactory completion of the previous rating.  In other words, it is not permissible for an individual to receive a Commercial Pilot certificate without first completing the requirements of the Private Pilot Certificate.  For airline pilots to be captains of aircraft larger than 12,500 pounds, or any jet aircraft, they must complete specialized training for the specific aircraft and test for a type rating in that aircraft. 

The requirements for each of these pilot certifications, including the Instrument Rating, are summarized below:

1.  Private Pilot                      (Minimum of 40 hours at certification)

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      Complete a comprehensive ground school and pass a written test composed of at least the following: aircraft systems, weight and balance, aeronautical charts, Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs), airport operations, national air space, emergency procedures, communications, and navigation requirements. The ground school must be conducted by an authorized instructor.   

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 40 hours, composed of at least 20 hrs from an approved instructor, 10 hrs of solo, 3 hrs of night time, and 5 solo hrs of cross country.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.

2.  Commercial Pilot              (Minimum of 250 Hours)                   

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      FARs, accident reporting procedures, aerodynamics, meteorology, weather reports and forecast, safe operations of the aircraft, weight and balance, performance charts, aircraft limitations, aeronautical charts, navigation, aeronautical decision making, aircraft systems, maneuvers procedures and emergency operations, night and high altitude operations, and operations in the national airspace system.

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 250 hours to include day, night and flight by reference to aircraft instruments.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.

3.  Instrument Rating

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      Must complete ground training on instrument flight conditions and procedures.  Pass an aeronautical test composed of the following:  FARs, Air Traffic Control (ATC) system, instrument procedures, Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) navigation, instrument approach procedures, use of IFR charts, weather reports and for casts, recognition of critical weather situations, aeronautical decision making, and crew resource management.

b.  Flight proficiency               Minimum of 50 hrs cross country as Pilot in Command (PIC). 40 hours of actual or simulated flight time, 15 hrs with an authorized instrument instructor.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator.             

4.   Airline Transport Pilot     (Minimum of 1,500 Hours)    

a.  Aeronautical knowledge      FARs, meteorology, Knowledge of effects of weather, general weather and Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) use,  interpretation of weather charts, maps and forecasts, operations in the national airspace system, wind sheer and micro burst awareness, air navigation, ATC procedures, instrument departure and approach procedures, enroute operations, airport operations, weight and balance, aircraft loading, aerodynamics , aircraft performance, human factors, aeronautical decision making, and Crew Resource Management (CRM).  Must pass an FAA test on these subjects.

b.  Flight proficiency               1500 hours total time.  500 hrs cross country, 400 hours night time.  Pass a flight check administrated by the FAA or designated evaluator on the maneuvers required by the FAA’s Airline Transport Pilots Practical Test Standards.

In addition to these FAA certifications, airline pilots receive initial and additional recurrent training through the air carriers for whom they work.  These training programs are evaluated and approved by the FAA.  An air carrier training program contains curricula, facilities, instructors, courseware, instructional delivery methods, and testing and checking procedures. These training programs must meet the requirements of Part 121, the regulations for commercial air carriers, to ensure that each crewmember is adequately trained for each aircraft, duty position, and kind of operation in which the person serves. An air carrier or operator’s training program is divided into several categories of training that are specific to the operator, and which may include initial training for new hires, initial training on equipment, transition training, upgrade training, recurrent training, and requalification training. 

Training programs are approved by the FAA in two stages:  initial training approval and final approval.  Initial approval consists of a thorough review by the Principal Operations Inspector (POI) for that carrier of the training program to ensure that all applicable requirements of Part 121 have been met and are covered in the training program. Once initial approval is granted by the POI, the POI will observe several training classes, which include ground training and flight (simulator) training.

The quality of the training is determined by an evaluation of passing scores of the pilots.  Direct observation by the POI of testing and checking is an effective method for determining whether learning has occurred.  Examining the results of tests, such as oral or written tests or flight checks, provides a quantifiable method for measuring training effectiveness.  The POI must examine and determine the causal factors of significant failure trends.  The POI periodically monitors the training and evaluates failure rates to determine whether the training program continues to comply with FAA standards, and also evaluates the program.

On January 12, 2009, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding upgraded training standards for pilots, flight attendants and dispatchers.  This proposal is the most comprehensive upgrade to FAA training requirements in 20 years and was drafted working with an Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC) that included pilots, flight attendants, airlines, training centers, FAA, and others.

While aviation has incorporated many technologies over the years to prevent accidents by addressing findings from NTSB accident investigations, human factors remain a source of risk.  Improving human performance is a central element to improving safety.  Thus, the FAA proposal is aimed at using best practices and tools to help pilots, flight attendants, and dispatchers (1) avoid the mistake and (2) respond better if there is a mistake made.

The aviation industry has moved to performance-based training rather than prescriptive training to reflect that the way people learn has changed.  New technology, particularly simulators, allows high-fidelity training for events that we never could have trained to in the past using an aircraft, e.g., stall recovery.  We now have qualitative measures to measure actual transfer of knowledge.  We can determine proficiency based on performance, not just on the number of hours of training.  While the major airlines are already doing this type of training, our proposed rule incorporates best practices and tools so that all operators will use the upgraded standards.

One of the pilot training issues that has arisen in the wake of the Colgan Air investigation is that of failed check rides and whether air carriers are informed of a pilot-applicant’s failures.  A check ride is a practical examination given by an FAA check airman or airline employer that checks or tests the proficiency of the pilot to perform certain skills.  Under the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA), air carriers must obtain the last five years’ performance and disciplinary records for a prospective pilot from their previous employer.  These records would include information regarding initial and recurrent training, qualifications, proficiency, or professional competence including comments and evaluations made by a check airman. 

PRIA also requires carriers to obtain records for a pilot from the FAA.  FAA records regarding pilot certification are protected by the Privacy Act of 1974.  However, PRIA requires carriers to obtain a limited waiver from prospective pilots allowing for the release of information concerning their current airman certificate and associated type ratings and limitations, current airman medical certificates, including any limitations, and summaries of closed FAA legal enforcement actions resulting in a finding by the Administrator of a violation that was not subsequently overturned.  Although PRIA does not require carriers to obtain a release from prospective pilots for the entirety of the pilot’s airman certification file, including Notices of Disapproval for flight checks for certificates and ratings, FAA guidance suggests to potential employers that they may find this additional information helpful in evaluating the pilot.  In order to obtain this additional information, a carrier must obtain a Privacy Act waiver from the pilot-applicant.

Pilot Fatigue

Another one of the concerns that has come out of the NTSB’s investigation is the issue of pilot fatigue and what factors may contribute to pilot fatigue.  This is an area of particular interest to me.  The FAA regulates flight and duty limitations for all Part 121 pilots conducting domestic operations.  The “crew rest” elements of the regulation are designed to mitigate chronic and acute fatigue, primarily through limitations on flight hours and defined hours of rest relative to flight hours.  For example, the regulation outlines:

• No more than 30 flight hours in any 7 consecutive days
• At least 24 hours of consecutive rest during any 7 consecutive days
• Varying rest requirements relative to hours flown in any 24 hour period

The rule also defines rest period activities and prohibitions, and provides provisions for circumstances under which flight time limitations can be exceeded, such as in adverse weather operations.  As of late 2000, an FAA legal interpretation clarified that under these rules a pilot crew member, flying under domestic flight rules, must “look back” 24 hours and find eight hours of uninterrupted rest before beginning any flight segment.

Pilots also have a regulatory responsibility to not fly when they are not fit, including being fatigued.  Thus, while the carrier schedules and manages pilots within these limitations and requirements, the pilot has the responsibility to rest during the periods provided by the regulations.  The FAA has long held that it is the responsibility of both the operator and the flight crewmember to prevent fatigue, not only by following the regulations, but also by acting intelligently and conscientiously while serving the traveling public.  This means taking into consideration weather conditions, air traffic, health of each flight crewmember, or any other circumstances (personal problems, etc.) that might affect the flight crewmember’s alertness or judgment on a particular flight.

The FAA has initiated a number of fatigue mitigation efforts in recent years:

• The FAA took steps in 2006 to address fatigue mitigations for Ultra-Long Range flights (more than 16 hours of flight time) and associated extended duty times.
• The FAA held the 2008 Aviation Fatigue Management Symposium to provide the industry the latest information on fatigue science, mitigation, and management. (Symposium proceedings are available on www.faa.gov.) 
• The FAA is in the process of writing an Advisory Circular regarding fatigue that incorporates information from the Symposium.

However, because piloting is a highly mobile profession, one of the persistent challenges is that pilots are often domiciled in places that are hundred of miles from the airlines’ bases of operations, e.g., the pilot lives in Los Angeles but is based out of the airline employer’s Atlanta operations.  This means that the pilot’s “commute” is a five hour plane ride.  Though the commuting pilot is riding in the jump seat or in a passenger seat, she is not technically considered to be on duty during that time.  Whether this has an impact on pilot fatigue is something that the FAA continues to monitor and examine to determine whether it is an appropriate area for regulation.

As the NTSB moves forward on its investigation and presents its findings, the FAA continues to examine the facts that are coming to light.  We continue our vigilance in assessing the safety of our system and taking the appropriate steps to improve that.  While we are in an extremely safe period in aviation history, the Colgan Air accident and the loss of Air France 447 remind us that we cannot rest on our laurels, that we must remain alert and aware of the challenges in our aviation system, and that we must continue to work to enhance the safety of the system.  This is a business where one mistake is one too many.

Chairman Dorgan, Senator DeMint, Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks.  Thank you again for inviting me here today to discuss the FAA’s role in the oversight of air carriers.  I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.

STATEMENT OF

DR. GEORGE C. NIELD,
ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR
COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS,

ON

THE OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION’S
FISCAL YEAR 2012 BUDGET REQUEST,

MAY 5, 2011.

Chairman Palazzo, Congressman Costello, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me to participate in this hearing on the activities of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST).  This is my first opportunity to speak to many of you, so I am particularly pleased to be here.  I know the subcommittee is specifically interested in the Administration’s FY 2012 budget, and our request to fund AST’s current and future programs. I look forward to answering any questions you may have about our request.  I would also like to take this opportunity to update the subcommittee on some of our recent activities, to highlight some of the changes to our industry during the past year, and to offer a view of the future – what’s on the horizon as we transition to a new commercial space transportation industry.

The Office of Commercial Space Transportation

The Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) was established by Executive Order in 1984 and was located in the Office of the Secretary of Transportation. In November of 1995, the office was transferred to the FAA, where today it is one of the agency’s four lines of business, along with the Office of Aviation Safety, the Office of Airports, and the Air Traffic Organization.

There are three sectors that comprise space activities in the United States: the civil sector, which is overseen by NASA; the military sector, for which the Department of Defense has responsibility; and the commercial sector, which is the purview of the FAA. In accordance with federal statute, it is the mission of AST to ensure protection of the public, property, and the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry, and to encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space transportation. While we take all of our statutory charges seriously, our top priority is safety. To carry out our safety responsibilities, we develop and issue regulations; grant licenses, permits, and safety approvals; and conduct safety inspections during every licensed or permitted launch. To date, we have an unblemished safety record: 204 safe launches, without any loss of life, serious injuries, or significant property damage to the general public.

We are also responsible for licensing the operation of launch and reentry sites or “spaceports,” as they are popularly known.  Since 1996 we have licensed the operation of the California Spaceport at Vandenberg Air Force Base; Spaceport Florida at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station; the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia; Mojave Air and Space Port in California; Kodiak Launch Complex on Kodiak Island, Alaska; the Oklahoma Spaceport in Burns Flat, Oklahoma; Spaceport America near Las Cruces, New Mexico; and Cecil Field in Jacksonville, Florida.

Development of these sites is necessary for the growth and success of the industry. For that reason, last year the FAA awarded grants for spaceport development. While the amounts were modest, the investments will facilitate safety and growth of future spaceport development and should ultimately inspire additional private investment in commercial space transportation.

Commercial space transportation research efforts were enhanced last year by the establishment of the Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Transportation, led by New Mexico State University, Las Cruces.  The other institutions that comprise the center include Stanford University; the Florida Institute of Technology in Melbourne; the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology in Socorro; the University of Colorado at Boulder; the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston; and the Florida Center for Advanced Aero-Propulsion — a research consortium made up of the University of Florida, Florida State University, and the University of Central Florida.  The Center of Excellence is a partnership between academia, industry, and government, and will carry out research necessary to maintain U.S. leadership in commercial space transportation technology and safety.

Additionally, the FAA, maintains important relationships with our interagency partners.  We continue our partnership with the Air Force through our Common Standards Working Group where we coordinate on safety issues for expendable launch vehicles. We also work with the White House, NASA, and the Departments of Commerce, State, and Defense in the development of interagency policy for the industry, including the National Space Policy. We consult with the State Department regularly to promote our commercial space transportation guidance abroad.

The Administration’s 2010 National Space Policy establishes specific goals to begin managing space traffic, rather than just monitoring it. Space Traffic Management would enable us to obtain knowledge of the orbital environment, track space traffic and debris, and increase safety in the orbital environment. The FAA will play a central role in developing new national Space Traffic Management capabilities, along with the Departments of Defense, State, and Commerce; the Office of the Director of National Intelligence; NASA; and the Federal Communications Commission. This collaboration will provide global benefits.

Today and Moving Forward

As FAA continues the work of overseeing and assisting the safe development of the commercial space transportation industry, the space community as a whole finds itself at a crossroads. Last month, we celebrated the 50^th anniversary of human space flight. Next month, NASA will conduct its final space shuttle launch. While this is a bittersweet event for all space enthusiasts, it is also an exciting time and an opportunity to begin the next chapter in space access, travel, and development. After the completion of Atlantis’ final mission, NASA is planning to rely on private industry to launch cargo, and eventually crew members, to and from the International Space Station (ISS), thereby enabling NASA to focus its attention on exploring the solar system.  It will be the FAA’s responsibility to license and regulate those commercial launches to the ISS.

Throughout the past 50 years, NASA has become the world leader in human spaceflight, amassing vast experience and a wonderful track record in space travel. There is no equal. Similarly, during the past 50 years, the FAA has achieved a stunning record of safety in commercial aviation.  We are now leveraging that half-century of experience and safety acumen in our regulation and oversight of the commercial space transportation industry.

Working in tandem, the FAA and NASA can bring best practices and our best experiences to bear on the future development of a safe and robust commercial space industry for our nation – a priority of the Administration.  Working with NASA and other experts, we can ensure the United States maintains its leadership role as human space flight becomes a reality for the commercial industry and private sector development increases to meet demand.

One of the concerns we have heard expressed, and which members of this subcommittee may share, pertains to the demand for commercial launches to low Earth orbit: Is there a market? What does that market look like now and in the future? Is it sustainable?

To answer these questions, Congress directed NASA, in coordination with the FAA, to conduct an assessment of the potential non-Governmental market for commercially-developed crew and cargo transportation systems and capabilities. Assessments by NASA and the FAA reveal a diversity of opinion among the space community regarding the size of the non-Governmental market, as well as the price of a ticket to space. These assessments also show, however, that government investment in the commercial space industry is vital to ensuring market sustainability. NASA investments to date have paid huge dividends for industry, providing new capabilities and enabling the development of new, lower-cost launch systems. Multiple American companies – including small, entrepreneurial enterprises and large, established aerospace corporations – have announced that they are ready, willing, and able to meet NASA’s future needs, as well as those of non-Governmental customers.

The future of cargo and commercial crew transportation to low Earth orbit is a coming reality, but the largest near-term expansion in activity will be in suborbital spaceflight.  In calendar year 2010, there were four licensed launches: two Falcon 9 test fights and two satellite deployment missions—a Delta II and a Delta IV.  That same year saw the first licensed reentry, of SpaceX’s Dragon capsule.  Though this activity is light, these were important missions – all were successful.  In FY 2012, we anticipate more than 100 licensed launches. Granted, most of those will be suborbital launches, but that is still quite a change.  This dramatic increase in launch numbers will provide the FAA and the space community with important data and facilitate significant improvements throughout the industry.

The President’s FY 2012 Budget

The Administration’s FY 2012 budget request for AST totals approximately $26.6 million and provides for 103 full-time employees (FTEs), at a cost of approximately $15.8 million. The office's request for non-pay activities totals approximately $10.8 million. The request includes base funding of $15.4 million plus programmatic increases of $11.23 million and 32 FTEs to develop and implement additional safety processes and requirements specifically for commercial human spaceflight and space traffic management, as well as to incentivize advancements in low-cost access to space.  Key outputs of the request include a projected 6 license and permit applications, 40 launch or reentry operations inspections, 8 launch site inspections, 5 environmental assessments, plus new rulemaking products, the Commercial Space Flight Technical Center, and the Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Transportation.

Commercial Space Flight Technical Center

As outlined above, the Administration’s FY 2012 budget request for AST includes funds for a Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center. In anticipation of the commercial cargo launches to the ISS which are scheduled to begin this year and with plans for eventual commercial crew missions, it will be vitally important to enhance and ensure the highest levels of safety for commercial spaceflight operations. The staffing and activities planned for the Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center will provide the detailed engineering and operational expertise that will be required to oversee the emerging commercial spaceflight industry.

Specifically, the Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center will perform several functions: spaceflight safety, including safety inspections, and accident prevention and investigation activities; spaceflight engineering and standards, to be developed in cooperation with both NASA and the industry, for spacecraft, spaceports, flight crew and passengers, and aerospace technicians; range operations, including planning for future upgrades; and space traffic management, including interagency coordination and information sharing concerning space situational awareness, orbital debris, and collision avoidance advisories.

By co-locating the new Center at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, we hope to benefit from the contributions of a significant number of highly-skilled aerospace workers who will be seeking employment during the next 12 months. Additionally, this co-location will allow the FAA and NASA to further strengthen our partnership by developing a knowledgeable and experienced staff to regulate future commercial space operations, and to develop the technical standards that will be needed for this emerging and critically important industry.

Although the relationship between the Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center and NASA will be vital, the Center will not duplicate NASA functions. NASA has a separate mission and is focused on operation of the International Space Station, development of a new Heavy-Lift vehicle, and exploration of the solar system. The FAA is a regulatory agency and has the statutory responsibility to oversee commercial space launches and reentries, and to ensure public safety during these operations. Establishment of the Commercial Spaceflight Technical Center will enable the FAA to strengthen its partnership with NASA, drawing on NASA’s expertise and experience in space operations and human space flight to augment the FAA’s experience in licensing and regulating commercial launches to develop a highly-skilled cadre of commercial space hardware and operations experts.

Low-Cost Access to Space Incentive

The FY 2012 budget request also includes $5 million to incentivize advancements in the commercial space transportation industry. The Low Cost Access to Space Incentive program will provide a $5 million award to the first non-governmental team to develop and demonstrate the capability to launch a 1-kilogram cubesat to orbit using a reusable launch system. 

The high cost of access to space has long been a major obstacle for civil, military, and commercial space programs.  The dream of low cost, fully reusable space launch systems has recently been demonstrated by the X-Prize competitions, but only to suborbital space.  This competition will achieve significant reductions in the cost of getting satellites, and eventually people, to orbit.

The competition will take its place in the longstanding tradition of prize competitions, such as the AnsariX Prize won by Scaled Composites SpaceShipOne (2004) and the Orteig Prize won by Charles Lindbergh (1927). These awards can lead to significant accomplishments in transportation, and the use of prizes has been very successful in enabling government and industry to come up with innovative solutions to challenging problems.  This incentive will increase the number of scientists and innovators addressing the specific problem of reusable, orbital space launch systems, and is of sufficient size to attract the investment and commitment of companies who are capable of winning the prize.

Preparing for the Future

The FAA stands ready to meet the changes and challenges we know are coming.  The industry has made significant strides toward a future that will make increasing demands on the FAA’s role as a regulator.  As activities expand in the marketplace, our role will amplify as well. To this end, we are constantly looking ahead.

In the coming months and years, it may be necessary to revisit some of the statutes and regulations that govern the commercial space launch activities of the FAA. Specifically, the FAA’s legislative authority will require expansion to ensure public safety in space and on Earth, as the commercial space flight evolves.  Potentially, there will be a need for greater regulatory authority in the areas of transportation on orbit as well as launch and reentry.  In addition, the FAA’s licensing authority will also require revision to include all operations associated with commercial hybrid launch systems and to cover all commercial cargo vehicles intentionally returning to Earth, regardless of whether they return substantially intact. We welcome the opportunity to work with Congress on these priorities.

In this time of challenge and opportunity, the FAA is mindful of our many responsibilities, and we look forward to working with this subcommittee as we tackle the challenges of shifting cargo and crew launches to the commercial sector and opening space for tourism and point-to-point transportation. The commercial space industry is ready to expand – and with your support, we are ready for lift-off.

Chairman Palazzo, Congressman Costello, and Members of the Subcommittee, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.

Statement of

Dr. Lourdes Maurice, 
Executive Director of the Office of Environment and Energy,
Office of Policy, International Affairs, and Environment,
Federal Aviation Administration

before the

Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation’s
Aviation Subcommittee

hearing on

"Aviation Fuels: Needs, Challenges, and Alternatives."

July 28, 2011

Madam Chair, Senator Thune, and Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for inviting me to testify before you today on “Aviation Fuels: Needs, Challenges, and Alternatives.” I am the Executive Director of the Office of Environment and Energy for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).  In that role, I also serve as the environmental team co-leader for the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI).  I am pleased to speak to the Subcommittee today about the development and deployment of sustainable alternative jet fuels.

Today, commercial aviation faces a number challenges--fuel cost, environmental impacts and energy security--that sustainable jet fuels can help to address. Fuels that are derived from biomass may offset a portion of the carbon produced by the aircraft as well as mitigate air quality issues such as emissions of sulphur and particulate matter.  And domestic alternatives to petroleum jet fuel can expand and diversify the jet fuel supply and contribute to price stability and supply security.

Industry, government and academia all need aviation to get these fuels off the drawing board and into the gas tank.  Indeed, the Future of Aviation Advisory Committee, which was founded by Transportation Secretary LaHood in 2010, singled out aviation fuels and the environment in one of its recommendations.

I believe that today’s hearing is well timed.  Aviation continues to make enormous progress in identifying, testing, and approving alternative jet fuels for use by commercial airlines.  As you may know, the FAA has the responsibility to make sure that any aircraft, aircraft engine or part, or fuel that is used in aviation is safe and performs to set standards.  In partnership with industry, we have identified a number of alternative jet fuels (including sustainable jet fuels) that can replace petroleum jet fuel without the need to modify aircraft, engines, and fueling infrastructure.  These are often referred to as “drop in” fuels.  Drop-in fuels are a near-term solution to addressing aviation environmental and energy challenges, and enable us to maintain the existing commercial airline fleet.

The aviation sector is well positioned to adopt alternative fuels and is in fact beginning to do so.[1]  Moreover, this effort is critical to achieving the level of environmental and energy performance that will allow sustained growth of the nation’s aviation system. FAA has set an aspirational target for use of 1 billion gallons of alternative jet fuel per annum by 2018.

Overview of FAA Role and Activities

Alternative jet fuels are a key component of the FAA’s environmental and energy approaches for Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen).  Over the past 5 years the FAA has taken a comprehensive approach, in cooperation with other departments and agencies, industry, and academia to address barriers, and enable the adoption, production, and end use of sustainable jet fuels in commercial jet aircraft.  Beginning in 2006, we have worked with industry and government partners through CAAFI to address the business, research and development, environmental, and certification issues related to creating “drop-in” sustainable jet fuels for today’s commercial aircraft.

The FAA’s role has been multifold.  It includes support of fuel properties and performance testing and demonstration; facilitation of fuel approval by the industry standard setting organization, ASTM International; conducting environmental measurements and analysis; and facilitating information exchange among industry and government stakeholders as a co-sponsor of CAAFI.  FAA has worked in partnerships with the Department of Defense (DOD), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Department of Energy (DOE), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of State (DOS), Department of Commerce (DOC), and the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to advance technical research and development, as well as environmental, fuel standard setting, and deployment efforts needed to support sustainable alternative fuels for jet aircraft.

The FAA’s Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) program, as well as NextGen investments in environment and energy research, are vehicles available to address the certification and environmental issues of alternative fuels. We appreciate the Subcommittee’s support for these efforts.

Fuel Approvals

FAA does not directly approve jet fuel.  Rather the FAA approves aircraft to operate on fuel whose quality and safety is managed by industry-developed specifications, such as ASTM International.  FAA personnel and funding have, however, been crucial to facilitation of this specification development process at ASTM International.  The ASTM alternative jet fuels standard (also known as Specification D7566) was first issued in September 2009 and at that time approved use of blends of up to 50% synthetic fuels made via the Fischer-Tropsch process, which produces synthetic fuels from feedstocks including coal, natural gas or biomass.[2]  The specification is structured to allow for the addition of new fuels as they are qualified for use. The writing of the specification and its revisions are accomplished via a collaborative and consensus driven process that is facilitated by FAA’s leadership of the CAAFI certification and qualification team.

On July 1, 2011, the aviation community reached a major milestone when ASTM International approved a revision of the D7566 specification to add alternative jet fuels made from bio-derived oils.  Known as HEFA (hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids) jet fuels, they can be made from renewable plant oils such as camelina, jatropha, and algae or waste fats which are then mixed with petroleum jet fuel up to a 50% blend level.  This represents the culmination of more than 3 years of collaborative work by FAA, DOD, and industry, including the engine and aircraft manufacturers, airlines, and fuel suppliers. The approval assures the safety and performance of the fuel and is enabling, for the first time, the commercial use of biofuel by airlines globally.

HEFA was the second alternative jet fuel to be approved for use by ASTM since 2009, but it will not be the last.  Cooperative testing of additional advanced alternative jet fuels is already underway by FAA, DOD, and industry.  From FAA’s perspective, this is part of a strategic approach to approving as many commercially viable and environmentally sustainable alternative jet fuel options as possible.

Some of the fuel testing to support approval is being done through the FAA’s CLEEN program.  CLEEN supports maturation of green engine and airframe technologies and development and testing of alternative fuels.  Under the CLEEN program, FAA leverages the Federal investment by partnering with industry.[3]  For example, CLEEN has supported the Boeing Company to conduct aircraft fuel system materials compatibility testing of HEFA fuels.  With Honeywell, we are testing the use of fully renewable jet biofuels.  With Rolls Royce, we are doing fuel property, performance and engine testing to support evaluation of early stage, promising novel sustainable jet fuels.

Through the Department of Transportation/Research and Innovative Technology Administration’s (DOT/RITA) Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center), the FAA will shortly be announcing grant awards to benchmark fuel quality control procedures, to conduct engine durability tests with alternative fuels, and to perform key testing to support qualification and certification of novel jet biofuels from alcohols, pyrolysis, and other processes.  These are intended to support the next round of fuel approvals that are currently targeted to begin in 2013.

Environmental Assessment

In addition to certification and qualification of fuels, FAA is working to improve our understanding of the environmental benefits and impacts of alternative jet fuels.  The U.S. has National Ambient Air Quality Standards for particulate matter emissions, and 44% of our 50 largest airports reside in areas of non-attainment.  Common to all alternative fuels under consideration is their potential to reduce particulate matter emissions.  Working with NASA, we have obtained direct measurements of in-service aircraft engines that clearly validate these benefits.

Through the Partnership for AiR Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction (PARTNER) Center of Excellence, FAA is funding assessments of emissions for alternative fuels including sustainable jet fuels.[4]  The National Academies of Science’s Airports Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) is supporting a project to understand the costs and the potential air quality benefits of alternative jet fuel use at commercial airports.

Reducing aviation’s contribution to carbon dioxide emissions and climate change impacts are key potential benefits of alternative jet fuels.  Measuring those benefits requires quantifying the full life cycle emissions from alternative fuel production, distribution, and operation.  The FAA and the U.S. Air Force are jointly funding the development of greenhouse gas life cycle analyses (LCA) through the FAA’s PARTNER Center of Excellence.[5]Results show that certain alternative jet fuels could realize CO2 lifecycle reductions as high as 80 percent.  We continue to work and consult with EPA, DOE and a team of researchers to improve and broaden these analyses.  The CAAFI Environment team, which FAA co-leads, is similarly involved in coordinating a broad group of experts to look at sustainability questions such as water use, food versus fuel, and invasiveness to provide insight into how sustainability certification may be conducted. And, through Volpe Center grant awards mentioned above, the FAA will support evaluation of biofuel sustainability criteria.

Key Recent Developments

A review of recent developments will give you a sense of the tremendous momentum behind alternative jet fuels and demonstrate the broad industry and interagency cooperation and innovative partnerships that are providing the push. 

Jet Biofuels Approval and Flights

The July 1^st 2011, ASTM International approval of HEFA alternative jet fuels made from bio-derived oils was a landmark. This has been followed by the first commercial service flights with HEFA biofuels by four airlines in Europe and has energized plans for possible production and fuel purchase agreements here in the United States.

Paris Air Show Alternative Aviation Fuels Showcase

In June 2011, the FAA and CAAFI worked with the Department of Commerce to showcase alternative jet fuel suppliers and U.S. and international airlines as a central event at the Paris Airshow.  The event included visits of support by Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, FAA Administrator Babbitt, Acting Secretary of Commerce Sanchez, and Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack.  It was successful in focusing the attention of the biofuels and agriculture communities and the media on the need and opportunity presented by aviation.  Significant industry highlights at the airshow included the announcement by 7 U.S. airlines of negotiation with biofuel supplier Solena for 16 million annual gallons of fuel from waste in Northern California and two successful transatlantic biofuel flights to the airshow by Honeywell and Boeing.

U.S. – Brazil Partnership for the Development of Aviation Biofuels

During President Obama’s visit to Brazil in March 2011, the United States and Brazil announced the creation of a “Partnership for the Development of Aviation Biofuels” under the Memorandum of Understanding between the United States and Brazil to Advance Cooperation on Biofuels signed on March 9, 2007.  The FAA is a key participant and is engaged with the DOD, DOE, USDA, and other federal departments and agencies to identify and carry out cooperative activities with Brazilian counterparts under this MOU.  This agreement represents cooperation by the world’s two largest biofuels producers and two important aviation States to support the development of sustainable jet fuels.  It builds upon and will leverage existing collaboration with Brazil already underway via CAAFI.

FAA and USDA Partnership to Develop Renewable Jet Fuels

In October 2010, the FAA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) signed a 5 year agreement that creates a framework of cooperation between FAA’s Office of Environment and Energy, the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and the USDA Office of Energy Policy and New Uses (OEPNU).  Under the partnership, the three offices bring together their experience in research, policy analysis and air transportation to assess the availability of different kinds of feedstocks that will be needed by biorefineries to produce sustainable jet fuels.  The collaboration has created the feedstock readiness level (FSRL)[6] tool, developed by the USDA and FAA to enable the determination of the stage of readiness of agricultural or forest-based feedstock for the production of commercial and military aviation biofuels.  A public version is expected to be released soon.

Farm to Fly Partnership Formed between Airlines, USDA, and Boeing

In July 2010, the USDA joined with CAAFI sponsor Air Transport Association of America (ATA) and the Boeing Company in a resolution to “accelerate the availability of sustainable aviation biofuels in the United States, increase domestic energy security, and establish regional supply chains and support rural development.”  The agreement included the formation of a “Farm to Fly” working group that is identifying opportunities for accelerating a domestic jet biofuel production industry and supporting economic development in rural communities.  This is a promising innovative effort that can further the interests of U.S. agriculture and U.S. aviation.

Challenges Ahead

To achieve the successful development and deployment of sustainable jet fuels in commercial aviation, we view the following areas as hurdles, as well as opportunities for future focus: 

We must foster the development and production of appropriate feedstocks for aviation biofuels.  Expanding the number and availability of crops appropriate for jet fuel conversion and optimizing their production are necessary to reduce costs, enable commercial deployment, and maintain sustainability.  Our work with the USDA on the feedstock readiness level is a promising start, and we expect to continue to build on this collaboration.

We must continue to support the development, testing and approval of advanced biofuel conversion processes for high energy “drop in” hydrocarbon biofuels.  Our past successes with Fischer-Tropsch and HEFA fuels would not have been possible without the leadership and contributions of the FAA, and this level of support must be maintained to move forward with new renewable and sustainable jet fuels.   In addition to the CLEEN program and Volpe Center grant awards, the FAA resources will need to be allocated to support the ASTM International process to qualify and approve these new fuels.  Investments by DOE, USDA, and DOD’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) in these areas have been and will continue to be crucial.  FAA must continue to work with DOD to coordinate the qualification and certification testing of both commercial and military fuels to make the best use of our limited resources.

The next hurdle is accurately quantifying environmental impacts.  Assessments of both air quality and greenhouse gas life cycle emissions impacts must continue to be timely and thorough as new fuel options emerge.  For example, FAA, in collaboration with EPA and NASA, needs to populate emissions prediction models with measured emissions data for emerging sustainable jet fuels.  Acquiring such data is empirical in nature and requires significant testing and investment.  Reducing the uncertainties associated with land use changes, fertilizer use, and impacts on the quality and quantity of water resources, greenhouse gas inherent in-life cycle analyses (that is, from harvest to processing to transport and use of the sustainable jet fuels) will also require significant effort and investment.  The collaboration of all stakeholders involved is needed to ensure an agreeable and accurate framework.  We must continue to facilitate defined national and international sustainability criteria and Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) methodologies to provide certainty and compatibility regarding how fuels will be judged and accepted.

The final hurdle is the lack of jet biofuel infrastructure investment by private industry.  The economic slowdown diminished the ability and interest of conventional investment sources to respond to the opportunities that aviation uniquely provides.  However, we believe that successful production facilities can be built with relatively modest investment at locations which combine feedstock availability, existing biofuel infrastructure, need for air quality gains, access to airports and U.S. airlines eager to use sustainable jet fuels.  Progress being made by the Farm to Fly effort and via USDA, DOE and DOD programs suggest that early deployment may be close at hand, but will continue to require near term support.

Aviation’s dependence on high-density liquid hydrocarbon fuels for the foreseeable future is perhaps unique.  Unlike surface transportation, we won’t have an electric option in the near future.  Another unique characteristic of U.S. commercial aviation is concentrated fueling infrastructure, where 80% of all jet fuel is used in only about 35 locations, i.e., at our busiest airports.  Airports also provide an opportunity for distributing the co-products of sustainable jet fuel production (such as diesel) due to the many different fuel users on airports. The National Academies of Science’s ACRP is sponsoring projects to assess the opportunity presented to airports of alternative fuel production and distribution. These realities of dependence and concentrated infrastructure should lead to aviation becoming a “first mover” in the deployment of alternative fuels.  A final plus is the enthusiasm and commitment of the aviation industry to pioneer sustainable alternative jet fuels. 

The nation has often counted upon the skills of the aerospace industry to lead the way in technical innovation.  Renewable jet fuels offer the opportunity to team aerospace science and technology efforts with those of agriculture, energy, and environment to address the challenges that we face. 

Madam Chair and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify on how the aviation community is leading the way to develop and realize the potential of emerging aviation sustainable jet fuels.  This completes my prepared remarks. I welcome any questions that you may have.

STATEMENT OF

THE HONORABLE MICHAEL P. HUERTA,
DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION,

ON

THE BENEFITS OF THE NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM,

OCTOBER 5, 2011.

Chairman Petri, Congressman Costello, Members of the Subcommittee:

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the benefits of the Next Generation Air Transportation System, or NextGen.  This is my first appearance before this Committee since starting at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and I am pleased to have the opportunity to get to know you all.

We recognize that we need to change the FAA internally to best serve the future needs of our nation’s air transportation system. This means realigning some functions in order to better handle the enormous transformation to NextGen.  Congress approved the reprogramming request we submitted this summer to change our reporting structure and implement other organizational changes. This is a critical step in moving forward with the changes that will lay the foundation for our success as an agency in the next 15 years.

The reprogramming approval allows us to create a NextGen office that will report to me. It also allows us to create an Assistant Administrator for NextGen. I’m very pleased that Vicki Cox is serving in this position. Together, we are setting the strategic direction for NextGen and continuing to raise NextGen’s profile within the FAA and within the aviation community. While much of NextGen involves the air traffic control function, it also involves much more than that and needs the involvement and focus of every FAA office going forward.

We have also established the NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC), a broad-based, senior-level advisory panel to which we turn for expertise and guidance. One of the first actions we requested of this new committee is to form a working group to develop recommendations on outcome-based performance metrics for NextGen.  We look forward to the NAC’s involvement in bringing all of the stakeholders together.

NextGen Defined

NextGen is a comprehensive overhaul of our National Airspace System (NAS) to make air travel more convenient and dependable, while ensuring your flight is as safe and efficient as possible. In a continuous roll-out of improvements and upgrades, the FAA is building the capability to guide and track air traffic more precisely and efficiently to save fuel and reduce noise and pollution. NextGen is a better way of doing business – for the FAA, the airlines, the airports, and the traveling public.  It’s better for our environment, better for efficiency and flexibility, better for safety, and better for the economy and the traveling public.

As recently as 2009, civil aviation contributed $1.3 trillion annually to the national economy, and constituted 5.2 percent of the gross domestic product according to FAA’s recent report on the economic impact of civil aviation. It generated more than 10 million jobs, with earnings of $397 billion.  NextGen is vital to protecting those contributions. The current system simply cannot accommodate anticipated growth in the aviation industry.  Congestion continues to increase at many of our nation’s busiest hub airports, a problem that will only be exacerbated now that traffic levels are starting to rebound from the impact of the economic recession.

Between 2007 and 2011, approximately $2.8 billion has been appropriated for NextGen.  We estimate the development of NextGen will require between $20 and $27 billion in FAA funding from 2012 to 2025.  And just last month, the President requested $1 billion in the American Jobs Act for Next Gen to support applied research, advance development, and implementation of engineering solutions for NextGen technologies, applications and procedures.   

What are we getting for our money?  Our latest estimates show that by 2018, we will recoup our investment and NextGen air traffic management improvements will reduce total delays, in flight and on the ground, about 35 percent, compared with what would happen if we did nothing. The delay reduction will provide $23 billion in cumulative benefits through 2018 to aircraft operators, the traveling public, and the FAA. We will save about 1.4 billion gallons of aviation fuel during this period, cutting carbon dioxide emissions by 14 million tons.

Let me highlight some examples of where NextGen is already improving safety and adding real dollars to the bottom line:

• Using Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), a GPS-based technology, aircraft are able to fly more safely and efficiently in previously challenging areas.  ADS-B equipped helicopters flying over the Gulf of Mexico are benefiting from radar-like air traffic services for the first time.  ADS-B radio stations deployed along the shoreline and on oil platforms blanket the area with air traffic surveillance, increasing the safety of all operations.  This same surveillance improves efficiency in the Gulf through more direct routing of ADS-B equipped helicopters, reducing both their operating cost and environmental impact. In Colorado, new surveillance technologies are enabling controllers to track aircraft flying through challenging mountainous terrain.  Currently, over half of the ADS-B ground infrastructure has been deployed.
• Southwest Airlines started using GPS-based Required Navigation Performance (RNP) approaches at a dozen airports this year. The airline says that it could save $25 for each mile they save by using a shorter route.   
• Alaska Airlines has been a leader in using RNP approach procedures at Juneau International Airport. They can fly precisely through mountainous terrain in low visibility conditions thanks to the higher navigational accuracy of GPS. The airline estimates it would have cancelled 729 flights last year into Juneau alone due to bad weather if it were not for the GPS-based RNP approaches.
• In Atlanta, Delta Airlines reports saving 60 gallons of fuel per flight by using more efficient descent procedures we have designed under NextGen. Aircraft descend continually to the runway with engines idle, as opposed to descending in a stair-step fashion and using the engines and burning fuel to power up at each level-off point.
• UPS, with the help of the FAA, is equipping its fleet with NextGen technology to help save time and money as pilots transport goods in and out of their hub.  UPS estimates that it will save between 25% and 30% in fuel burn on arrival.
• We have conducted Initial Tailored Arrival (ITA) flight demonstrations, at San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Miami.  ITAs are pre-negotiated arrival path through airspace of multiple air traffic control facilities; they limit vectoring and minimize the time the aircraft spends maintaining level flight during its descent. ITAs differ from other types of Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs) in that they are assigned by controllers to specific approaches and tailored to the characteristics of a limited number of FANS-equipped aircraft types – 747s, 777s, A330s, A340s and A380s. We estimate that the 747s saved an average of 176 gallons of fuel per arrival in ITAs and 78 gallons per flight in partial ITAs, compared with conventional approaches. For 777s, the corresponding savings were 99 gallons in full ITAs and 43 gallons in partial ITAs.

We anticipate seeing other benefits shortly.  The “Greener Skies over Seattle” initiative should save literally millions of gallons of fuel annually, cut noise and decrease greenhouse gas emissions.  The FAA estimates that airlines using RNP procedures at Seattle Tacoma International Airport will save several millions of dollars per year at today’s fuel prices. And that number is only going to get larger as more airlines equip. With the “Greener Skies over Seattle” initiative, aircraft will emit less carbon dioxide – about 22,000 metric tons less per year. That’s like taking more than 4,000 cars off the streets of the Seattle region. 

These are just a few of the benefits that we are seeing already from our investments.  But, we cannot afford to be short-sighted.  A true transformation in the way we deliver air traffic services takes planning and time.  Let me now turn to a discussion of some of he longer-range benefits. 

NextGen Benefits:  Safety

NextGen operational capabilities will make the NAS safer. ADS-B improvements in situational awareness – on the ground and in aircraft – will increase controllers’ and pilots’ individual and combined ability to avoid potential danger.  Among other benefits, this could provide valuable time savings in search and rescue efforts.  Appropriately equipped aircraft will be able to receive information displayed directly to the flight deck information about nearby traffic, weather, and flight-restricted areas.

More precise tracking and information-sharing will improve the situational awareness of pilots, enabling them to plan and carry out safe operations in ways they cannot do today. Air traffic controllers will become more effective guardians of safety through automation and simplification of their most routine tasks, coupled with better awareness of conditions in the airspace they control.  Additionally, NextGen will facilitate the implementation of Safety Management System processes for the air traffic controllers' use.
Advances in tracking and managing operations on airport surfaces will make runway incursions less likely. Fusing surface radar coverage from Airport Surface Detection Equipment-Model X (ASDE-X) with ADS-B surveillance of aircraft and ground vehicles will increase situational awareness, particularly when linked with runway status lights. Collaborative decision making will increase everyone’s understanding of what others are doing.

Starting with pre-takeoff advisories, departure instructions and reroutes for pilots, we will use data messages increasingly instead of voice communications between pilots and controllers, reducing opportunities for error or misunderstanding. Voice channels will be preserved for the most critical information exchange.

NextGen Benefits:  Environmental

As with safety, our work to enhance aviation’s influence on the environment also benefits – and is a beneficiary of – NextGen. The operational improvements that reduce noise, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions from aircraft are the tip of the FAA’s environmental iceberg. Equally important are the other four-fifths of the agency’s environmental approach – aircraft and engine technology advances, sustainable fuels, policy initiatives and advances in science and modeling.

Environmental benefits of operational improvements are simple and direct. When we improve efficiency in the NAS, most of the time we save time and fuel. Burning less fuel produces less carbon dioxide and other harmful emissions. Some of our NextGen improvements, notably landing approaches in which aircraft spend less time maintaining level flight and thus can operate with engines at idle, reduce ground noise too. But operational benefits go only so far; their net system-wide effect can be offset by growth of the aviation system.

To accommodate system growth, we are supporting development of aircraft, engine and fuel technology. In 2009, we established the Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise program to bring promising new airframe and engine technologies to maturity, ready to be applied to commercial designs, within five to eight years. Similarly, we are part of a government-industry initiative, the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative, to develop sustainable low-emission alternative fuels and bring them to market.

We have developed and are using the NextGen Environmental Management System (EMS) to integrate environmental protection objectives into NextGen planning and operations. The EMS provides a structured approach for managing our responsibilities to improve environmental performance and stewardship. We also are analyzing the effect on aviation environmental policy and standards, and of market-based measures, including cap-and-trade proposals.

NextGen Benefits:  Airports

Many airports will benefit from substantial improvements in efficiency, access, surveillance, environment and safety. Surveillance, situational awareness and safety will improve at airports with air traffic control radar services as we deploy ADS-B ground stations across the NAS and update our automation systems, and as operators equip their aircraft for it. The FAA also plans to publish Wide Area Augmentation System Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance approach procedures for all suitable runway ends by 2016.

We are making important progress on a number of efforts to show how better situational awareness and pacing on the ground will give operators and the traveling public more reliability and save them time, while also managing environmental impacts. We can cut fuel consumption and emissions by reducing the time and number of aircraft idling on taxiways waiting for takeoff, or for open gate slots upon arrival. Also, we can reduce equipment wear – stop-and-go accelerations are hard on engines and other parts, and they also emit significant additional amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

A major success in 2010 was the minimal disruption that occurred during a four-month runway resurfacing and widening project in one of the nation’s busiest airspaces. The longest runway at New York John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK) had to be expanded to accommodate new, larger aircraft. The project also included taxiway improvements and construction of holding pads. To minimize disruption during construction, JFK’s operators turned to a collaborative effort using departure queue metering, in which each departing aircraft from JFK’s many airlines was allocated a precise departure slot and waited for it at the gate rather than congesting taxiways. The procedure limited delays so well, it was extended after the runway work was completed.

NextGen Benefits:  Flight Operations

All aircraft operators in the NAS will benefit from two major categories of improvements – efficiency and capacity, and access. Much of the time, efficiency and capacity go together. When we reduce the distance needed for the safe separation of aircraft, reduce delays from weather and other disruptions, and increase flight-path and procedures options for controllers as they maintain the flow of traffic, we improve capacity as well. Surface initiatives make important contributions across the board – they improve situational awareness and safety, they reduce fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions and they reduce tarmac delays. By improving the efficiency of surface operations, they increase capacity.

Access issues center on runways at major airports, affecting mainly airlines, and airports and airspace that lack radar coverage, a problem for general aviation. NextGen will improve efficiency in operations that involve closely spaced parallel runways and converging and intersecting runways. Area Navigation and Required Navigation Performance (RNAV/RNP) will improve efficiency and capacity in departures and approaches. For general aviation, ADS-B will enable controllers to track properly equipped aircraft in non-radar areas covered by ADS-B ground stations. General aviation operators equipped for ADS-B In will receive traffic and weather information directly in the flight deck, providing them with greater situational awareness. Wide Area Augmentation System Localizer Performance with Vertical Guidance approach procedures will give properly equipped aircraft Instrument Landing System (ILS)-like capability at non-ILS airports. Through our new NAV-Lean process, we are streamlining the development and implementation for new procedures to ensure that users can take advantage of new navigational procedures and their benefits as quickly as possible. We hope to accelerate design and implementation of RNAV/RNP procedures and optimized descents to achieve their benefits sooner rather than later.

Optimization of Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex (OAPM) is a systematic, integrated and expedited approach to implementing Performance Based Navigation (PBN) procedures and associated airspace changes, which was developed in direct response to RTCA Task Force 5 recommendations on the quality, timeliness, and scope of metroplex solutions.  OAPM focuses on a geographic area, rather than a single airport.  It considers multiple airports and the airspace surrounding a metropolitan area, including all types of operations (air carrier, general aviation, military, etc.), as well as connectivity with other metroplexes. 

The OAPM process uses two types of collaborative teams including FAA and industry partners.  Study Teams recommend conceptual airspace and procedure solutions, and then Design and Implementation (D&I) Teams design, refine, review, and implement those recommendations within a near-term three-year timeframe.  To date, 21 Metroplex sites have been identified and prioritized with input from FAA and industry.  Five sites have completed Study Team activities and potential benefits ranging from $6M to $26M per year have been identified at each site.  The Washington, DC and North Texas sites have initiated D&I activities, and D&I activities have been approved for two additional sites (Charlotte and Northern California).  Two additional Study Teams are currently active in Atlanta, and Southern California, and expect to release their findings and recommendations shortly.

NextGen Benefits:  Next Steps

In order to achieve these benefits, we know that we need to continue working with our partners in the aviation community.  Making sure that we are all on the same page about our expectations, our obligations, and our capabilities is essential to the successful planning, development, and execution of NextGen.

The FAA continues to expand its work on demonstrations, trials and initial deployment of NextGen systems and procedures. NAS operators and users – particularly participants in the demonstrations and trials – are benefiting from them. But there is a chicken-and-egg nature to the economic and policy decisions that will have the most influence over the extent and timing of future benefits.

On the one hand, achieving NextGen’s benefits depends heavily on aircraft operators and other stakeholders investing in the avionics, ground equipment, staffing, training and procedures they will need to take advantage of the infrastructure that the FAA puts in place to transform the aviation system in the coming decade and beyond. On the other hand, the willingness of operators and other stakeholders to make these investments depends critically on the business case for them – analyses of how valuable these benefits will be, and that they have confidence that the FAA can deliver the infrastructure in the time frames and manner required for those benefits to be realized.

When costs are clear but benefits are even a little bit cloudy, there is an information gap that the FAA must help fill. We try to do this in two ways. First, we conduct broad, system-level analyses, estimating how integrated NextGen benefits will develop and grow over a period of years. This work draws on modeling and simulations of how NAS operations will change and what effects the changes will have. The FAA must continue to work closely with the aviation community to ensure these benefits are well understood by those who need to invest in NextGen.

Second, we conduct a wide range of demonstrations and operational trials of specific NextGen systems and procedures. These demonstrations, conducted in real-world settings by operations and development personnel using prototype equipment, are invaluable.  They provide all of the stakeholders with the opportunity to see the very real benefits that NextGen can bring.  They mitigate program risks and show us whether we are on the right track in our technical approaches. They provide valuable insight into how equipment should be designed for operability, maintainability and a sound human-automation interface. And they are instrumental in advancing our understanding of the benefits to be gained from the capabilities being demonstrated.

Information from the demonstrations also helps us refine our models of NAS operations and how these operations will change, and thus our overall estimates of NextGen benefits. Further, it provides direct measurements of the ways specific NextGen capabilities can benefit NAS stakeholders and the public, enabling stakeholders to improve their own estimates of the benefits and costs of buying equipment for NextGen, and to be more confident of their analyses. 

In an interconnected world, one aviation system cannot succeed on its own.  Each system is a function of the next. All of the major systems need to work in harmony.  In March 2011, the FAA finalized an historic collaborative agreement with Europe to ensure that our future systems—NextGen and SESAR—are fully harmonized.  We have five working groups and more than two dozen specific harmonization programs to ensure that all the small pieces work together. This collaboration has begun in earnest and will continue until the job is done. 

We are closely aligning the work we do on NextGen and SESAR with International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Block Upgrade Initiative. The goal is to identify suites of technology and procedural changes that can be packaged in such a way as to be accessible world wide for improvements in air traffic safety, efficiency and decreased environmental impact.    

The FAA is working towards greater harmonization of airspace through efforts like the Aviation Cooperation Program for the Mid-Americas and Caribbean.  Our hope is to use private and public resources to enhance aviation safety and efficiency across 21 countries. 

Latin America has invested in modern navigational equipment and it has improved safety and efficiency. Some of the items we are talking about include upgrading low level and en route radar and enhancing weather radar. We also need to incorporate new technology for airports, such as runway status lights.   We envision ADS-B from the Yucatan Peninsula to the northern region of South America.  We want to use a system of data communications to cut down on misunderstandings on the radio.

Finally, in Asia, harmonization is moving forward through efforts like ICAO’s recent Seamless Air Traffic Management Symposium in Bangkok. Participants brainstormed about ways to remove international barriers that exist today in order to make a truly seamless airspace across Asia and the Pacific.

As you can see, we are working steadily and carefully to bring NextGen to fruition.  We have mapped out our course and we are moving towards our goals, and we look forward to your continued guidance and oversight as we go forward. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks.  I would be happy to answer any questions you and the Members of the Subcommittee might have.

STATEMENT OF

MARGARET GILLIGAN,
ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR AVIATION SAFETY,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE ON

THE INCLUSION OF BIOMETRIC IDENTIFIERS ON PILOTS LICENSES,

APRIL 14, 2011.

Chairman Mica, Congressman Rahall, Members of the Committee:

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today on the issue of embedding biometric data on pilot certificates.  I know that this issue has been of significant interest to Chairman Mica, as I have had several meetings with him on this topic.  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has received statutory direction on pilot certificates in the past as their potential use by other agencies was identified.  I know that FAA has not acted on these directions as quickly or comprehensively as this Committee intended, but I would like to outline what FAA has done in this area and how we intend to move forward.

The FAA issues 23 different types of airman certificates.  In addition to pilot certificates, these include certificates for mechanics, dispatchers, parachute riggers, and air traffic controllers.  The original purpose of a pilot certificate, and the only purpose for many years, was to document that the holder met the aeronautical knowledge and experience standards established for both the certificate level and any associated ratings listed.  The certificates, used for decades, worked effectively for their intended purpose. 

In the late 1980s, agencies with mandates other than aviation safety began to see potential misuse of pilot certificates as law enforcement agencies engaged in activities related to the war against drugs.  In 1988, the Drug Enforcement Assistance Act required FAA to begin the process of phasing out paper certificates and replacing them with tamper resistant certificates, in an attempt to reduce pilot certificate fraud and enhance law enforcement.  At that time, this was an extremely significant undertaking, affecting tens of thousands of individuals.  Since October 2002, the FAA has required a pilot to carry a valid Government issued photo I.D. in addition to a pilot certificate while exercising the privileges associated with the certificate.  While, as of April 2010, all pilots have plastic certificates, the effort is ongoing with respect to other certificate holders.  We currently anticipate that all other certificate holders will have enhanced certificates by March 31, 2013. 

After the tragic events of September 11, 2001, with aviation playing such a central role in the disaster, additional uses for pilot certificates were identified.  As mentioned above, the requirement that pilots carry a government issued photo I.D. assumed that each FAA inspector who asked for pilot credentials could confirm the person about to fly was qualified and competent.  In addition, if a pilot leased an aircraft, the fixed base operator could confirm both the pilot’s identity and his other qualifications. 

The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA) imposed additional requirements on the physical license, including that it be tamper resistant and include a photograph and/or biometric identifier of the pilot.  The certificates were also required to be capable of accommodating a biometric identifier, such as a digital photo or fingerprint, or any other unique identifier FAA deemed necessary 

FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in November 2010 that proposed to require that all pilots, including student pilots, possess the new certificates with a digital photo, widely acknowledged as a biometric identifier.  The comment period for this rulemaking closed in February of this year.  We are currently working to finalize this rulemaking within a year.  Due to the broad scope and economic impact of the rule, the FAA proposed to phase-in the requirement over a five-year period.  However, FAA expects that most airline pilots and flight instructors will have the new certificate within two years and that most other active pilots will have the new certificate within three years of the issuance of the final rule.  FAA recognizes this timeframe is not consistent with IRTPA direction, which called for FAA to begin issuing the modified certificates in 2005.  The FAA NPRM was crafted in a way to ensure compliance with IRPTA in the most cost effective an efficient manner, and we are in the process of carefully considering comments related to this NPRM to make sure that the goals of IRPTA are met in the final rule. 

With respect to biometric standards, the FAA understood that other government agencies, including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) developed those standards  The FAA has been, and continues to be hopeful not to duplicate, interfere, or supersede efforts either with respect to standards or implementation.  We all support the goal of enhancing aviation security and maximizing resources in order to achieve a single, universal security credential incorporating biometric data that meets a common standard.  To the extent that it is practical and/or feasible, we will continue to consider how this security credential could interface with existing safety credentials.  In addition, we continue to work with TSA on a proposal to establish a universal ID for the transportation workforce. 

Understanding how best to move forward to improve the use of biometric data to ensure the security of the pilot community and enhance aviation security overall will require coordination among government agencies in cooperation with airlines and industry trade associations.  There is an ongoing dialogue designed to minimize duplicative efforts and to take advantage of differing areas of expertise.  FAA recognizes the advantages of developing security enhancing uses for airmen biometrics and we pledge to make use of the technology as soon as it is reasonably feasible to do so.  We look forward to working with this Committee as our efforts progress.

This concludes my prepared remarks.  I will be happy to take questions at this time.

STATEMENT OF

VICTORIA COX,
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR NEXTGEN AND
OPERATIONS PLANNING SERVICES,
AIR TRAFFIC ORGANIZATION,
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION,

BEFORE THE

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE AND AERONAUTICS, ON

A REVIEW OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION’S RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM,

FEBRUARY 16, 2011.

Good morning, Chairman Palazzo, Congressman Costello, and Members of the Subcommittee.  I am Victoria Cox, Senior Vice President for NextGen and Operations Planning Services in the Air Traffic Organization of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).  It is a pleasure to meet the new Members of the Subcommittee today and I look forward to working with all of you.  It saddens me to miss Congresswoman Giffords here, having appeared before her last year, and we at the FAA join the rest of the nation in keeping her recovery in our thoughts.

Research and development has been essential and necessary to aviation since the beginning.  Where would we be without the Wright Brothers’ studies and experiments on the dynamics of flight?  The FAA's research, engineering and development (RE&D) program carry this legacy forward as aviation continues to thrive and change.

Aviation is a vital national resource for the United States.  The aviation industry alone directly employs 1.1 million people and supports more than 11 million jobs in related industries and through spending by direct aviation employees.  Altogether, this represents 6% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP).  In addition to the support it provides for commerce, jobs, and economic development, we cannot forget aviation’s integral role in law enforcement, emergency response, and in the national defense and security of the homeland.  These benefits of the aviation industry require that America’s air transportation system remains the best in the world.

But being the best has a price.  To maintain leadership requires constant introduction of new technologies and procedures, innovative policies, and advanced management practices into the aviation system.  In order to do that, we need to make sustained investments in advanced research and technology development.  A robust RE&D program allows for cost-effective implementation of viable new technologies and capabilities through concept development, testing, early risk identification and mitigation. 

There’s an incomplete understanding of what the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is and what it can do.  The concept is simple: NextGen is a set of technologies, processes, procedures and policy that together will revolutionize how people fly.  It is a radical departure from the ground-based radar of years gone by, a shift toward satellite control and navigation.  It is a game changer for the controller, the pilot, and the passenger.  With the technology and procedures of NextGen, we can help turn that around.  But we are well aware that is not the whole story.  If we want to get maximum return on the investment, if we want to support unconstrained market growth in aviation, we must take an aggressive approach to upgrading our infrastructure to maximize the benefits of NextGen.  At some point, keeping the legacy systems going becomes more costly than replacing them with new technologies.

To that end, we have developed a research portfolio that will address today’s needs while laying the foundation to address the needs of the future for NextGen.  The FAA’s research and development is geared to practical applicability.  While we are developing NextGen with an eye towards the long-term transformation of the air traffic control system, we are evolving the system in the near-to mid-term as well, as my testimony will highlight later.  FAA efforts focus on the period between now and 2018.

FAA’s research portfolio is divided into related fields.  Our core and NextGen RE&D funding includes research that supports aviation safety and regulatory processes. Other research and development activities are aimed at introducing innovative new technologies into the air transportation system that will deliver future operational improvements envisioned for NextGen. 

Our Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping (ATD&P) work is funded in the Facilities and Equipment (F&E) appropriation.  It further develops products resulting from FAA RE&D investments as well as research transitioned from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and other sources of basic and fundamental research. ATD&P activities include development of detailed mid-term operational concepts, concept validation studies, human factors analyses and requirements for individual systems based on those concepts, and validation prototypes and demonstrations.

NextGen System Development is funded in the F&E appropriation and supports the transition from RE&D to advanced technology development through activities such as concept modeling, system level requirements development, assessments of human performance and integration with technologies, and development of environmental management methodologies.  

Research and development performed by MITRE’s Center for Advanced Aviation System Development (CAASD) directly supports needs of FAA research and development programs that can uniquely be provided by this Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC). 

Finally, research and development is also funded by the Airport Improvement Program (AIP).  There are two components:  first the Airport Technology Research Program addresses the research and development needs of the Office of Airports in the areas of airport pavement, rescue and firefighting, wildlife hazard mitigation, runway surface technology, and visual guidance.  The results of this research are used to update guidance material, manuals, and technical specifications that airports rely on when expending AIP funds.  Second, the Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) is funded by the Airport Improvement Program (AIP).  ACRP is an industry-driven, applied research program that develops near-term, practical solutions to problems faced by airport operators.  The FAA sponsors ACRP, and the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies manages the program.  Contractors who are selected on the basis of competitive proposals conduct the research.

FAA takes seriously the need to continue to improve environmental performance in order to sustain aviation growth.  The FAA and aviation industry agree that environmental impacts will constrain NextGen if they are not effectively managed and mitigated.  Technological advances in engine, airframe, and fuels technologies offer the greatest improvements and will keep the U.S. globally competitive.  We have partnered with industry in our Continuous Lower Energy, Emissions and Noise (CLEEN) technology program to develop new technologies to reduce aircraft noise, emissions, and fuel burn, and to advance sustainable alternative aviation fuels. 

Engine and airframe technologies will offer the greatest long term benefit but these new technologies must be coupled with efficient procedures, particularly in the near term.  Thus, we are implementing new Optimized Profile Descents (OPDs) at nine locations including Los Angeles, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Diego, Honolulu and Anchorage.  In addition, eight OPD projects are presently under development in the NAS including Seattle, St. Louis, Louisville, Charlotte and Memphis. Traditional approaches require a plane to follow a stair-step pattern of arrival – descending and leveling off several times before landing.  Each time a pilot has to stop descending and resume level flight, they have to throttle up the engines.  These OPDs allow planes to continually descend to the airport from high altitudes without having to level off, or step down, at interim altitudes.  This process of continuous descent results in significant fuel savings and a reduction in radio communications – especially, in complex, busy airspace around major airports. 

Sustainable alternative fuels development and deployment offer prospects for environmental improvements, energy security, and economic stability for aviation.  We’re working cooperatively with the industry through the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) to develop “drop-in” fuels.  We achieved approval of a synthetic fuel in 2009 (ASTM D7566), the first new fuel standard in decades.  We are on track to achieve a fuel standard that will allow a 50% blend of a synthetic fuel with jet fuel this year.

We do want to point out that we are not alone in these efforts.  We are committed to working smarter and more leanly, and to that end, we are partnering with others to leverage their knowledge and resources to augment ours.  We engage with industry via advisory boards and with a multitude of international organizations. The Joint Planning and Development Office (JPDO) facilitates partnerships across the government agencies including FAA, NASA and the Departments of Defense, Commerce and Homeland Security. The JPDO supports the future vision for NextGen by developing the long-term research plan for improvements that extend beyond the 2018 planning window that is FAA’s focus.

Through our coordination with our internal and external partners, we have been able to identify research gaps, reduce duplication of efforts, and leverage available resources.  One of our most important research partners is, of course, NASA.  That agency’s contributions to our research and development are of such vital importance that, as of January 2011, we have assigned an FAA liaison to NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate (ARMD) to identify research and development collaboration opportunities and ensure stronger and timely coordination between FAA and NASA.

One of the many ways we partner with NASA under the auspices of the JPDO is on a series of Research Transition Teams (RTT).  Four pilot RTTs were initiated in 2007 to ensure that research and development needed for NextGen implementation is identified, conducted, and effectively transitioned to the implementing agency.  These include:

• Integrated Arrival/Departure/Surface
• Efficient Flow into Congested Airspace
• Dynamic Airspace Configuration
• Flow-Based Trajectory Management

Both NASA and FAA collaborated through these RTTs to conduct joint research, simulation, and field trials of NextGen technologies.  Through this interaction selected algorithms have been transferred from NASA to the FAA, along with research results to inform the implementation process of the given technologies. 

We are also partnering with NASA on our NextGen Human Factors Research Coordination Plan.  Our work began in September 2010 and we anticipate that the final product will be published this month by the JPDO.  This product will describe key coordination activities recommended by Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Department of Transportation’s Office of the Inspector General, namely: identification of initial focus areas for research, establishment of methods for leveraging past and current human factors research, and creation of an inventory of existing facilities for human factors research.  The coordination process leverages GAO-recommended best practices to help enhance and sustain collaboration among Federal agencies.  This is an aggressive renewed effort to formalize existing human factors research coordination process between FAA and NASA, and begins an annual coordination process between our two agencies to review planned research efforts, identify gaps, monitor and evaluate progress, and report results.

NASA also is a vital collaborator with the FAA in its Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emission Reduction (PARTNER) Center of Excellence supporting development of aviation technologies and operational procedures to reduce fuel burn and environmental impacts due to noise and emissions.

On the Department of Defense side, we have an Air Force Research Lab (AFRL) Liaison to FAA for NextGen.  In 2010, the Air Force assigned a NextGen research liaison to FAA to work closely with researchers to identify opportunities to leverage relevant research, laboratory capabilities and expertise available within AFRL.  Our joint goal is to advance the air traffic management research and technology required for FAA to implement our National Airspace System (NAS) mid-term capabilities as defined in the Enterprise Architecture and the NextGen Implementation Plan (NGIP).  The ARFL Liaison partnership, in particular, has helped advance Human Factors, Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) and sustainable alternative fuels work.

Finally, we work closely with the JPDO to continue to define our future needs and priorities.  The JPDO works to mitigate research and development risk for 2025 by analyzing various issues, such as:

• UAS and other advanced technologies that will require careful transition and ultimately lead to NAS integration
• Trajectory Based Operations
• Potential environment constraints.

The JPDO works with FAA to coordinate development of information data sharing standards, models, and integration of advanced aviation weather forecasts into air traffic control tools.  I am pleased to report that our efforts have been paying off.  In Fiscal Year 2010, we have completed several research and development efforts in the safety arena.  In partnership with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s National Weather Service, FAA has developed the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model, an operational next-generation numerical weather prediction system designed to serve both operational aviation forecasting and atmospheric research needs. FAA-funded researchers also developed the Graphical Turbulence Guidance (GTG) product which provides contours of weather turbulence potential out to 12 hours.  The current product, GTG2, operationally implemented on Aviation Digital Data Service in FY 2010, provides forecasts for clear air turbulence from 10,000 - 45,000 feet.  The Congressional Joint Economic Committee estimates that air traffic delays cost the U.S. Economy over $41 billion in 2007, of which 70% are related to adverse weather - and as the demand for air traffic grows, air traffic delays and the associated economic toll will only increase.   We have determined that 2/3rds of these weather related delays are avoidable with more accurate and better integrated weather information for decision-making, potentially reducing the number of delays by 46% and saving $19 billion annually.  The FAA, NOAA and other partners are working to realize these savings and accommodate the expected demand growth.

In partnership with the Air Transport Association’s Human Factors Committee and Alaska Airlines, we completed beta testing of new training material and procedures to improve safety in Airline Maintenance and Ramp Operations.  FAA developed Front Line Manager Best Practices Quick Reference Guide (FLM QRG) to assist air traffic front line managers in preventing errors through performance management. FLM QRG provides helpful information on topics such as communications, improving performance, training, and leadership.

In the NextGen arena, we have completed a Wake Turbulence Separation Safety Risk assessment to reclassify all B757s in the same weight class and harmonize the weight boundary between the US Heavy and Large from 255,000 to 300,000 lbs, thus harmonizing with ICAO.  This successful change was implemented April 8, 2010.  The completion of the Wake Turbulence Safety Risk assessment for the B787 Dreamliner has been submitted to the FAA Safety Management System for adoption. and we have ongoing work with the B747-8 and A380 in response to satisfying the NTSB recommendation A-94-056.  These efforts address the need to mitigate the risk for wake turbulence through the development of safe wake separation standards prior to entry into service of new aircraft and to continue this evaluation early in the service life.

We have completed Human-in-the-Loop Simulations and flight trials for the 4-Dimensional (4D) Flight Management System (FMS) Trajectory-Based Operations (TBO) and partnered with Alaska Airlines to conduct 4D FMS TBO Initial Flight Trials at Seattle.  In response to the RTCA Task Force 5 recommendations, FAA has partnered with Federal Express and Delta Airlines to field test the Collaborative Departure Queue Management surface management system at Memphis and Orlando.  We completed initial investigations, including Human-in-the Loop simulations, into application of Data Communications in the terminal domain, and conducted Staffed NextGen Tower proof-of-concept field demonstrations at Dallas Fort Worth Airport in August 2010.  Finally, in partnership with Customs and Border Protection (CBP), we conducted flight trials with CBP’s Predator UAS system at Cape Canaveral to investigate potential solutions to help with integration into the NAS.  This is the first in a series of progressive demonstrations that are planned for next year, with an expanding list of partners.  Each of these accomplishments takes us step-by-step closer to realizing the full benefits of NextGen.

In the airport environment, I am pleased to report that we have developed a new FAA Wildlife Website/Database with a cell phone application for reporting wildlife strikes.  Additionally, we have installed a pilot Runway Status Light (RWSL) system at Boston-Logan Airport aimed at investigating RWSL applicability for intersecting runways. We conducted Human-in-the-Loop simulations using Converging Runway Display Aid (CRDA) at Newark Airport.  Finally, we have recently completed installation of prototype Low Cost Ground Surveillance systems at Spokane, WA; Manchester, NH; and San Jose, CA.  These cost effective systems offer the potential to provide an added layer of safety by giving air traffic controllers basic ground surveillance for aircraft and vehicles operating on runways and adjacent taxiways, where current radar-based ground surveillance is not available.

As our recent accomplishments illustrate, our approach to research and development with an eye toward maintaining our leadership in aviation while leveraging our partnerships to maximum effect is bearing fruit.  As the aviation industry continues to evolve and change, it is vitally important that our country leads the world in this sector.  I look forward to working with this Congress to ensure that we do.

This concludes my prepared remarks.  Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you.  I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.