[Senate Hearing 116-594]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                        S. Hrg. 116-594

                 NEW ENTRANTS IN THE NATIONAL AIRSPACE:
                    POLICY, TECHNOLOGY, AND SECURITY
                          ISSUES FOR CONGRESS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
                      SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                              MAY 8, 2019

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
                             Transportation
                             
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                             


                Available online: http://www.govinfo.gov

                              __________

                                
                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
52-693 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2023                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                  
               
       SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                  ROGER WICKER, Mississippi, Chairman
JOHN THUNE, South Dakota             MARIA CANTWELL, Washington, 
ROY BLUNT, Missouri                      Ranking
TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska                RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 EDWARD MARKEY, Massachusetts
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          GARY PETERS, Michigan
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
MIKE LEE, Utah                       TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               JON TESTER, Montana
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona
RICK SCOTT, Florida                  JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
                       John Keast, Staff Director
                  Crystal Tully, Deputy Staff Director
                      Steven Wall, General Counsel
                 Kim Lipsky, Democratic Staff Director
              Chris Day, Democratic Deputy Staff Director
                      Renae Black, Senior Counsel
                           
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Hearing held on May 8, 2019......................................     1
Statement of Senator Wicker......................................     1
Statement of Senator Cantwell....................................     2
Statement of Senator Fischer.....................................    31
Statement of Senator Cruz........................................    33
Statement of Senator Peters......................................    34
Statement of Senator Blackburn...................................    36

                               Witnesses

Jay Merkle, Executive Director, Unmanned Aircraft Systems 
  Integration Office, Federal Aviation Administration............     4
    Joint prepared statement of Jay Merkle and Wayne Monteith....     6
Wayne R. Monteith, Associate Administrator, Office of Commercial 
  Space Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration..........    10
Dallas Brooks, Director, Raspet Flight Research Laboratory, 
  Mississippi State University...................................    11
    Prepared statement...........................................    13
Zach Lovering, Vice President, Urban Air Mobility Systems, Airbus    15
    Prepared statement...........................................    16
Eric Stallmer, President, Commercial Spaceflight Federation......    20
    Prepared statement...........................................    21

                                Appendix

Letter dated May 6, 2019 to Hon. Roger and Hon. Marie Cantwell 
  from Marc Rotenberg, President, EPIC; Jeramie Scott, Senior 
  Counsel, EPIC; and Caitriona Fitzgerald, Policy Director, EPIC.    41
Response to written questions submitted to Jay Merkle by:
    Hon. Jerry Moran.............................................    45
    Hon. Marsha Blackburn........................................    45
    Hon. Mike Lee................................................    46
    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    51
    Hon. Brian Schatz............................................    51
    Hon. Tammy Baldwin...........................................    51
    Hon. Jon Tester..............................................    52
    Hon. Jacky Rosen.............................................    54
Response to written question submitted to Wayne Monteith by:
    Hon. Amy Klobuchar...........................................    55
Response to written questions submitted to Eric Stallmer by:
    Hon. Roger Wicker............................................    56

 
                 NEW ENTRANTS IN THE NATIONAL AIRSPACE:
                    POLICY, TECHNOLOGY, AND SECURITY
                          ISSUES FOR CONGRESS

                              ----------                              


                         WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2019

                                       U.S. Senate,
        Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room 
SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Roger Wicker, 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Wicker [presiding], Thune, Cruz, Fischer, 
Gardner, Blackburn, Lee, Young, Scott, Cantwell, Blumenthal, 
Markey, Peters, and Tester.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI

    The Chairman. Good morning. The Committee will come to 
order.
    We convene this morning to discuss the policy, technology, 
and security issues involving the integration of new entrants 
into our national airspace system. So welcome to everyone.
    The United States has the safest and most diverse air 
transportation system in the world. Our national airspace is a 
vital resource and is used by 1.7 million Americans who take to 
the skies every day. Unbelievable.
    Newer operators are poised to take advantage of our 
airspace in exciting ways. The safe and efficient integration 
of new entrants presents formidable challenges.
    I would like to welcome our witnesses for today's hearing. 
They bring a range of government, industry, and academic 
perspectives to these issues.
    We are joined by Jay Merkle, Executive Director of the UAS 
Integration Office at the FAA; Wayne Monteith, Associate 
Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation at the FAA; 
Dallas Brooks, Director of the Raspet Flight Research 
Laboratory at Mississippi State University; Eric Stallmer, 
President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation; and Zach 
Lovering, Vice President of Urban Air Mobility Systems for 
Airbus.
    Last year's FAA Reauthorization Act helped pave the way for 
the new rules recently proposed by the FAA to expand 
opportunities for drone use. The drone community is also eager 
for a rulemaking process regarding remote identification of 
drones, or ``remote ID.'' The remote ID rulemaking will be an 
important milestone because many operational, privacy, and 
security concerns can be addressed by readily identifying each 
object in the sky and its operator. And we certainly hope so, 
and perhaps we will hear an update on the agency's rulemaking 
at this hearing.
    R&D is essential to understanding and mitigating safety 
risks and to improve the performance of systems and operators. 
In partnership with the FAA, our research universities are 
helping to improve air traffic control interoperability, 
safety, pilot training, and drone traffic management systems. 
Managed by Mississippi State University, the ASSURE Center of 
Excellence is comprised of 23 universities tasked with much of 
this research agenda. I would note that those universities are 
represented by seven Senators on this committee. Can you 
imagine? So we will hear about that today.
    The commercial space launch sector is another growing 
industry that requires our attention. Once the domain of 
powerful nation states, the commercial space launch is fast 
becoming an affordable commercial service that may soon include 
space tourism. Rockets must transit the airspace to and from 
space. General Monteith's organization is responsible for 
licensing commercial launch and reentry operations. The 
companies represented by Mr. Stallmer's organization are making 
sure that General Monteith stays busy. So I hope witnesses will 
provide their perspectives on how the FAA can support this 
industry while maintaining a safe and efficient airspace 
system.
    Finally, many companies are developing electrically powered 
aircraft that can quickly take a few passengers between fixed 
spots in a crowded city. And I don't want to be one of the 
people to avail myself of these flying taxis, a promising 
aspiration for many who wish to avoid today's congested 
highways--and who does not?
    However, many technical and policy questions remain for 
what is called ``urban air mobility.'' The Committee is 
interested in hearing from witnesses about some of the future 
possibilities associated with urban air mobility.
    The skies of the future are sure to look different from 
those of today. While there should be concerns with safety, 
efficiency, and security of new technologies, we need to be 
prepared to enable innovation and change.
    Senator Cantwell, what do you say?

               STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON

    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 
holding this important hearing and calling the witnesses this 
morning. And I know we have a busy schedule this morning. So I 
am just going to move right into it.
    Today we are going to hear about the integration of two 
important users to the national airspace system, unmanned 
aerial vehicles, as you were just discussing, and the 
commercial space launch companies. Both are areas of great 
potential and come with unique challenges to be addressed by 
us, the stakeholders, and the FAA.
    In 2017, the U.S. led the world in the number of space 
launches for the first time in almost 15 years. American 
ingenuity and competitiveness put us back on top, and this 
committee has an opportunity to ensure that the bureaucratic 
red tape is not the reason we cede this leadership to space in 
the future.
    Commercial space launch in the United States has seen a 
huge growth over the last decade with new entrants like Blue 
Origin, SpaceX, and others coming online, as well as new large 
satellite constellations. So we can expect that we are going to 
see a continuation of launch activities increasing every year.
    It has been remarkable to watch this growth explode in my 
state of Washington and to see its applications in other parts 
of the United States. Growing the commercial space industry has 
huge implications for both American security and our economy. 
In fact, some estimate that the global industry for space to 
grow from about $360 billion today to over $1 trillion to $3 
trillion over the next 20 years. So huge economic opportunities 
and job creation efforts.
    It will be critical for regulators to make sure we continue 
to facilitate to space in order for this growing industry to 
flourish, while continuing to ensure that U.S. air travel 
remains safe around the world. So that issue--we look forward 
to hearing from our witnesses on how we integrate that in the 
very near term.
    Also, the integration of unmanned aerial vehicles into our 
airspace requires a balancing act between the safety of our 
skies, which we can never compromise on, and the many important 
applications made possible by unmanned aerial vehicles. These 
applications include fighting wildfires, aiding first 
responders, infrastructure inspection, farming and fishing 
issues.
    I think for us in the Northwest we had a tragic train 
accident and it just happened to happen right by Joint Base 
Lewis-McChord. But the fact that we already had an integrated 
response team there and they used drone systems, even though 
the train derailed onto I-5, within 24 hours they were able to 
reopen and move traffic because the drone systeming gave 
everybody the confidence that they had the accident site 
investigation correct. And so that application, in and of 
itself, giving people the ability to get all that accident and 
safety information and then thereby clearing the scene is such 
an important application and I really cheerlead those at home 
who made that application work so cost effectively there.
    So the use of drones can save money. They can improve our 
delivery of systems and improve our quality of life.
    So many on this panel have heard from constituents who are 
working on innovative solutions to existing problems and want 
to develop new markets for unmanned aerial vehicles. And so the 
FAA has had to work to make these applications through a waiver 
process, the use of part 107 for commercial use of small 
drones, and work with the FAA and unmanned aerial vehicle test 
sites.
    So while I know that applications can happen faster than 
our ability to integrate them, implementing them is a very 
important process of meeting these new challenges.
    Right now, for example, the entire industry is waiting for 
the FAA to issue a rule on remote identification standards. So 
these remote ID standards are a critical part to unlocking the 
next area of unmanned aerial vehicle activity. And so we want 
to make sure that we are including this as part of our top 
priorities.
    These new UAS uses that a remote ID is able to maintain and 
help with the safety and identification and to allow the 
unmanned traffic management system to work effectively--I can 
assure you, as I have seen demonstrations of these unmanned 
aerial vehicles, I can just think of all the applications 
immediately that would be helpful, whether that is delivering 
medicine, delivering critical supplies, or even in some of our 
challenging areas of the Pacific Northwest where natural 
disasters are something we have to think about all the time, 
getting the right product and supply into a community can be 
very critical.
    So we look forward to hearing the discussion this morning 
about that rulemaking and where we are.
    So there is plenty of work to be done, and we have a vision 
before us. So in addition to certifying aircraft and the 
rigorous standards to carry passengers, the FAA and the 
industry will need to develop this very reliable traffic 
management system and work with our communities on how to 
integrate our existing infrastructure.
    So I thank all the witnesses for your work and for 
appearing today to discuss how we keep moving forward together. 
Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
    And thank you to our witnesses. We appreciate you all 
agreeing to come 30 minutes early. We were planning to begin 
this hearing at 10. There is a series of five votes beginning 
at 10, and that has thrown our schedule into confusion today. 
But we are going to do the best we can. And I think if we make 
the best the use of the next half hour, we will be in good 
shape.
    So, Mr. Merkle, we will recognize you. Your full statements 
will be included in the record, and if you will limit remarks 
to less than 5 minutes, we would appreciate it. You are 
recognized, sir, Mr. Merkle.

          STATEMENT OF JAY MERKLE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

         UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTEGRATION OFFICE,

                FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

    Mr. Merkle. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member 
Cantwell, members of the Committee.
    Unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS, present a dynamic shift 
in the way people interact with aviation. No longer is aviation 
limited to manned aircraft at airports. With UAS, we see a vast 
increase in possibility for airborne services and benefits, 
ideas limited only by the imagination of a new breed of 
aviator.
    I am pleased to appear before you today to discuss the 
FAA's commitment to keeping pace with this transformation while 
ensuring safety and access for all users of the national 
airspace system.
    Enabling the safe integration of UAS and supporting 
innovation are key priorities of this administration and 
Secretary Chao. The UAS has fundamentally created a dynamic 
change in aviation that we have not seen since the dawn of the 
jet age. The volume of UAS operations has already outpaced 
manned aircraft. That is not surprising given that there are 
nearly four times as many UAS registered as there are manned 
aircraft, and that is just since December 2015 when we first 
started registering the UAS.
    To enable the ever-increasing volume of UAS operations, the 
FAA has a robust program of existing regulations and guidance. 
In addition, we have pending rulemaking actions to address 
public safety and security concerns, enable operations over 
people, and require external markings. The next critical piece 
will be the requirement of universal remote identification or 
ID, which will allow the FAA and our security partners to more 
easily locate a drone operator when necessary. A remote ID 
standard will open the doors to safe, routine advanced 
operations.
    While we undertake these rulemaking efforts, we continue 
working with many stakeholders to actually test the UAS 
operations and perform necessary research. Evaluating actual 
flights of UAS performing different activities and functions 
provides invaluable data and helps identify problems and 
solutions. We do this by partnering with FAA test sites, our 
UAS Center of Excellence, ASSURE, and through Partnerships for 
Safety Program and through initiatives like the UAS Integration 
Pilot Program.
    In 2017, President Trump directed the Secretary of 
Transportation to launch the IPP to safely test and validate 
advanced operations of drones in partnership with State, local, 
and tribal governments. Through the IPP, we are seeing examples 
of these new operations. In Kansas, the State Department of 
Transportation demonstrated the use of these drones for power 
line inspections. In North Carolina, a drone was used to 
demonstrate medical package delivery. Most recently, we granted 
our first air carrier certification for a commercial drone 
operator for package deliveries in Blacksburg, Virginia.
    The FAA's ultimate goal is to safely integrate UAS into the 
NAS. Given the expected volume of drone operations, drone 
traffic management must be automated. We took an initial step 
in that direction by deploying the low altitude authorization 
notification capability, or LAANC. LAANC gives operators the 
ability to request and receive real-time authorization from the 
FAA. A process that previously took weeks now takes seconds. 
LAANC is now live at nearly 300 air traffic facilities covering 
approximately 500 airports and will expand to more than 100 new 
sites this month.
    Overall, UTM is essentially a set of concepts and tools 
being developed by NASA, FAA, UAS operators, and UTM service 
suppliers to safely deconflict and facilitate drone operations. 
Recently Defense, Homeland Security, and other security 
partners have joined the FAA development of the UTM concept in 
support of their missions. Yesterday, we took another important 
step by supporting integration by issuing information to 
airports on how to safely implement UAS detection.
    Throughout our history, the FAA has adapted to changes in 
technology and has successfully integrated new operators and 
operations. We are committed to working with Congress and all 
of our stakeholders to find a solution to our common 
challenges. With the support of this Committee and the 
engagement of our stakeholders, we will continue to safely, 
securely, and efficiently integrate UAS and solidify America's 
role as the global leadership in aviation.
    This concludes my statement. I would be happy to respond to 
any questions you may have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Merkle and Mr. Monteith 
follow:]

 Federal Aviation Administration Joint Statement of: Brigadier General 
     Wayne R. Monteith, United States Air Force (Ret.), Associate 
   Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation and Jay Merkle, 
         Director, Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration Office
    Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, Members of the Committee:

    We are pleased to appear before you today to discuss the 
integration of commercial space transportation operations and unmanned 
aircraft systems (UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS). For the 
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), both commercial space 
transportation and UAS present new challenges as the technology evolves 
and the number of entrants expands. The FAA is committed to keeping 
pace with new entrants while ensuring safety and access for all users 
of the NAS.
Commercial Space Transportation Overview
    The FAA, through the Office of Commercial Space Transportation 
(AST), issues licenses and permits for the launch and reentry of 
commercial space vehicles consistent with public health and safety, 
safety of property, and the national security and foreign policy 
interests of the United States. Congress has directed that AST's 
mission also includes the responsibility to encourage, facilitate, and 
promote U.S. commercial space transportation. These statutory mission 
objectives provide a framework that has proven to be beneficial both to 
the industry and to the American people. Our track record bears this 
out; while the FAA has licensed or permitted over 375 launches and 
reentries since 1989, there have never been any fatalities, serious 
injuries, or significant property damage to members of the public.
    The commercial space transportation industry in the United States 
is dynamic, growing, and evolving. In Fiscal Year 2018, there were 32 
launches and 3 reentries of commercial space vehicles for a total of 35 
licensed activities--a record. For Fiscal Year 2019, we anticipate as 
many as 44 launch and reentry operations--potentially a single-year 
increase of over 25 percent in commercial space activity. As the 
industry continues to grow, the FAA has intensified its efforts to 
fulfill its commercial space transportation mission, maintaining the 
highest level of safety without stifling industry expansion.
Streamlining the Commercial Space Transportation Regulatory Program
    President Trump, through Space Policy Directive 2 \1\, directed the 
Secretary of Transportation to streamline existing launch/reentry 
regulations to create an environment that promotes economic growth, 
minimizes uncertainty, protects safety, security, and foreign policy 
interests, and encourages American leadership in space commerce. This 
directive was well-timed in light of the challenges the FAA faces with 
the current commercial space transportation regulatory framework. 
Current regulations are based largely on Federal launch standards that 
were developed in the 1990s. They are often overly prescriptive and 
seen as a hindrance to innovation. For example, 14 CFR parts 415 and 
417 address the launch of expendable launch vehicles (ELVs) and are 
based on standards developed nearly 30 years ago. Further, the current 
rules are neither streamlined nor consolidated to the extent they 
should be.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/space-policy-
directive-2-streamlining-regulations-commercial-use-space/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Although these separate regulatory parts and requirements satisfied 
the need of the commercial space transportation industry at the time 
they were issued, the industry has changed and continues to evolve. The 
FAA recently published a comprehensive Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM)\2\ that proposes to consolidate, update, and streamline all 
launch and reentry regulations into a single performance-based rule--14 
CFR part 450--to better fit today's fast-evolving commercial space 
transportation industry. Proposed new part 450 will include regulations 
applicable to all launch and reentry vehicles, whether they have 
reusable components or not. The proposed updated rule aligns with the 
Administration's goals of creating an environment that does not 
unnecessarily hinder industry innovation and, most importantly, 
preserves safety objectives without prescribing specific solutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/04/15/2019-
05972/streamlined-launch-and-reentry-licensing-requirements
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keeping Pace with Technological Advancements
    The pace at which the commercial space transportation industry 
continues to change has resulted in an increase in both the complexity 
and the workload for AST. Today's environment has required the FAA to 
reevaluate its commercial space structure in terms of people, 
processes, and tools in order to continue to fulfill the commercial 
space transportation mission. Specifically, Secretary Chao recently 
directed AST to undertake a review and reorganization of the Office to 
maximize efficiencies under a streamlined regulatory regime while 
continuing to prioritize safety. We are currently evaluating options to 
realize the Secretary's vision.
    Other structural changes for AST were recently mandated by Congress 
in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018. Specifically, the Act required 
the Secretary to identify within AST a centralized policy office known 
as the Office of Spaceports to support launch and reentry sites and 
generally support improvement of spaceports. AST is committed to 
improving safety, removing unnecessary barriers to competitiveness for 
spaceports, and helping to ensure that the United States commercial 
space transportation infrastructure finds its right place in the NAS. 
We recognize that spaceports have significant potential to become 
important economic hubs and have already licensed 12 non-Federal 
spaceports. Further, in response to the recent Congressional direction 
on spaceports, we are glad to report that the Spaceports Office has 
been stood-up and is actively working with Spaceport licensees.
    Additionally, as part of AST's continual effort to improve the 
future of space transportation, we continue to engage with our partners 
in academia, industry, and government on research and development 
related efforts related to regulatory streamlining, space policy, 
finance, safety, and innovation. For example, since 2010, AST has 
partnered with the Center of Excellence for Commercial Space 
Transportation, which conducts research in a number of different areas 
including aerospace vehicles, human spaceflight, and aerospace access 
and operations.
Integration of Commercial Space into the National Airspace System (NAS)
    Of the many challenges the FAA faces, integration of commercial 
space transportation operations into the NAS is a top priority. 
Commercial space transportation operations are currently treated as 
``special cases'' in which air traffic controllers block off large 
sections of airspace for extended periods of time for a single launch 
or reentry operation. Although we have safely managed and executed this 
process for many years, it is unsustainable in the long run given the 
expected growth in commercial space transportation operations. 
Moreover, the current manual process is resource intensive, 
inefficient, and susceptible to possible errors. Under these 
limitations, the FAA can only support one mission at a time.
    We are actively working on multiple initiatives to develop 
potential solutions to the issue of how commercial space transportation 
will grow within the NAS alongside commercial and general aviation. We 
are working with the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in 
Atlantic City, New Jersey and recently stood-up the agency's first 
dedicated Commercial Space Integration Lab for concept development and 
prototyping of new technologies that will be leveraged towards 
integrating commercial space transportation into the NAS. This lab 
currently houses our Space Data Integrator (SDI) prototype and a 
prototype aircraft hazard area (AHA) generator, called HRAM (or Hazard 
Risk Assessment Management), which the FAA's NextGen organization has 
developed.
    Additionally, AST continues its work with the FAA's Air Traffic 
Organization and Project Management Organization on developing, 
testing, and implementing the SDI. This safety-based technology, which 
will automate the current manual process, will enable the FAA to track 
a licensed launch or reentry operation as it transitions through the 
airspace. When deployed, this technology will enable the FAA to safely 
reduce the amount of airspace that must be closed to other users and 
more quickly release airspace that is no longer at risk as a mission 
progresses.
    The FAA is fully engaged in balancing the needs of all airspace 
users--including traditional manned aircraft, drones, commercial space 
vehicles, and others. We are making progress with an Aviation 
Rulemaking Committee (ARC) with representation across the spectrum of 
NAS users to address airspace access priorities. The ARC plans to 
provide recommendations that will improve near-term and future 
commercial space transportation operations and their integration into 
the NAS. The ARC's charter is set to expire in November of this year. 
We look forward to receiving the ARC's report and recommendations.
Unmanned Aircraft Systems Overview
    The steady development and expansion of Unmanned Aircraft Systems 
(UAS) has created a dynamic change in aviation that we have not seen 
since the dawn of the jet age. The FAA is committed to supporting this 
change and to working with the UAS community to ensure that this 
technology is integrated into the NAS safely and securely. UAS offer 
expanded capabilities in aviation with a fast pace of innovation and 
increasing volume of operations. For example, the progression of UAS 
innovation and the change in product cycles can generally be measured 
in months, not years. Similarly, the volume of UAS operations is 
outpacing manned aircraft. Currently, there are nearly four times as 
many UAS as registered manned aircraft.
    The new dynamics that UAS bring to the NAS redoubles our focus on 
the safety of all aircraft operations as the FAA's first priority as we 
work on a number of initiatives to support UAS integration. An ongoing 
challenge to UAS integration is the potential for conflict between 
manned and unmanned aircraft. We have continued to engage in outreach 
to UAS operators and the public at large to educate current and 
prospective drone users about their safety responsibilities. Efforts 
such as the ``Know Before You Fly'' information campaign have 
encouraged UAS operators to understand the rules and responsibilities 
for flying an aircraft in the NAS. This campaign and the FAA's related 
work on the ``B4UFLY'' mobile application are bearing fruit; we are 
beginning to see a reduction in the number of reported UAS sightings 
from pilots of manned aircraft.
UAS Rulemaking
    The FAA is focused on enabling an ever-expanding universe of UAS 
operations and capabilities. In order to allow for such operations to 
be conducted safely and securely, the FAA has moved forward with a 
number of regulatory initiatives. Together with the Department's Office 
of the Secretary, the FAA recently published a proposed new rule on the 
operation of small UAS over people.\3\ The proposal seeks to balance 
the need to mitigate safety risks without inhibiting technological and 
operational advances. The FAA also recently published an advanced 
notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public input to identify drone 
safety and security issues and explore ways to mitigate risks UAS may 
pose to other aircraft, people on the ground, or to national 
security.\4\ The FAA's security partners have helped to highlight for 
us some of the important security and public safety questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/13/2019-
00732/operation-of-small-unmanned-aircraft-systems-over-people
    \4\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/13/2019-
00758/safe-and-secure-operations-of-small-unmanned-aircraft-systems
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Additionally, in February 2019, the FAA published an interim final 
rule on external marking requirements for small UAS.\5\ The rule 
requires small unmanned aircraft owners to display their unique 
identifier (registration number) on an external surface of the 
aircraft. Identifiers are assigned by the FAA upon completion of the 
registration process. Small unmanned aircraft owners are no longer 
permitted to enclose the FAA-issued registration number in a 
compartment. Going forward, the ability to remotely identify UAS 
operators will be a crucial stepping stone for UAS traffic management 
and will facilitate what we envision as high volume, safe and secure 
low-altitude UAS operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/02/13/2019-
00765/external-marking-requirement-for-small-unmanned-aircraft
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
UAS Remote Identification
    Congress recognized the importance of remote identification when it 
enacted the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016. That Act 
laid the foundation for FAA's work with operators and our security 
partners to realize the importance of remote identification and to 
reach a consensus on how to address it. More recently, the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2018 provided the FAA with additional authority 
to move ahead with work on universal registration and remote 
identification--both of which are critical to the success of commercial 
UAS operations and UAS integration more broadly.
    Remote identification is fundamental to both safety and security of 
drone operations. Remote identification will be necessary for routine 
beyond visual line-of-sight operations and operations over people, 
package delivery, operations in congested areas, and for the continued 
safe operation of all aircraft in shared airspace. It will also be 
foundational for the advancement of automated passenger or cargo-
carrying air transportation--what is often referred to as Urban Air 
Mobility. From a security perspective, remote identification would 
enable us to connect a drone to its control station location. With 
universal remote identification, the FAA and our national security 
partners will be better able to locate a drone operator, determine if a 
drone is being operated in a clueless, careless, or criminal manner, 
and take appropriate action if necessary. The FAA is committed to 
establishing remote identification requirements as quickly as possible.
UAS Integration Pilot Program
    In October 2017, President Trump directed the Secretary of 
Transportation to launch an initiative to safely test and validate 
advanced operations of drones in partnership with state, tribal, and 
local governments in select jurisdictions--the UAS Integration Pilot 
Program (IPP).\6\ The IPP has been a crucial step in accelerating the 
Department of Transportation's and FAA's UAS integration efforts. The 
goals of the program, which enjoys the participation of 9 different 
communities across the country, are to identify ways to balance local 
and national interests, improve communications with local, state, and 
tribal jurisdictions, address security and privacy risks, accelerate 
the approval of operations that currently require special 
authorizations, and collect data to support the regulatory development 
steps needed to allow more complex, routine low-altitude operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-
memorandum-secretary-transportation/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FAA and the DOT have provided the IPP participants extensive 
technical assistance and guidance to help them better understand safety 
risk management and to navigate the process for obtaining approvals. 
Through the IPP, we are seeing many examples of what will likely become 
common operations. For example, in Virginia, the IPP lead participant 
partnered with a commercial entity to demonstrate the swift package 
delivery of a frozen popsicle to a child in his family's backyard in 
Blacksburg, VA. In Oklahoma, the Choctaw Nation and Oklahoma State 
University demonstrated the use of a drone to rebait feral hog traps in 
remote locations in an effort to find ways to minimize crop damage and 
provide a safer working environment for agriculture workers. In Kansas, 
the State Department of Transportation demonstrated the use of drones 
for power line inspections, and in North Carolina a drone was used to 
demonstrate medical package delivery operations over people at a large 
medical facility. These are only a few of the real-world applications 
for drones.
    The experience gained and the data collected from the IPP will help 
ensure the United States remains the global leader in safe UAS 
integration and fully realizes the economic and societal benefits of 
this technology. In fact, the IPP is already paying dividends on the 
investment. Recently, the FAA granted the first air carrier 
certification to a commercial drone operator for package deliveries in 
rural Blacksburg, Virginia. Although the regulatory framework for 
broader drone operations is not complete, the IPP has helped to inform 
the FAA and drone operators of the extent to which operations can begin 
under existing rules.
UAS Integration into the NAS
    The FAA's ultimate goal is to integrate, not segregate, UAS into 
the NAS. Given the expected volume of drone operations, drone traffic 
management must be automated. The basic rules for small UAS 
operations--14 CFR part 107--set the global standard for integration 
and provided small drone operators with unprecedented access to the 
NAS. Under part 107, drone operators generally must secure 
authorization from the FAA to operate in any airspace where air traffic 
control is providing separation services. To facilitate those 
approvals, we deployed the prototype Low Altitude Authorization and 
Notification Capability (LAANC) at air traffic facilities to evaluate 
the feasibility of a fully automated solution enabled by public/private 
data sharing. LAANC gives drone operators the ability to request and 
receive near real-time response from the FAA to authorization requests, 
which allows operators to quickly plan and execute their flights. Air 
Traffic is also made aware of the locations where planned drone 
operations will take place. This capability alleviates the burden of 
individually processing requests for airspace authorizations by 
providing near real-time authorization--a process that previously took 
weeks, now takes seconds. Based on the prototype's success, LAANC is 
now live at nearly 300 air traffic facilities covering approximately 
500 airports, and will expand to more than 100 new sites this month.
    LAANC is an important foundational step in the implementation of 
UAS Traffic Management (UTM). Overall, UTM is essentially a set of 
concepts and tools being developed by the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration (NASA), the FAA, UAS operators, and UTM service 
suppliers to safely de-conflict and facilitate dense low-altitude drone 
operations. Recently, the Department of Defense, the Department of 
Homeland Security, and other national security partners have joined in 
the development of UTM concepts to support their missions. UTM is not a 
specific equipment system; it will be complementary to the existing air 
traffic management system and will not replace it. Congress granted the 
authority to conduct UTM research and an initial pilot program to NASA 
and the FAA in 2016. While the FAA continues to support the pilot 
program and the final stages of NASA's UTM testing, the FAA is already 
implementing foundational UTM capabilities like LAANC. As part of the 
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, Congress provided continued broad 
authority for UTM implementation, which will allow the FAA to continue 
its important work to balance the needs of all system users and ensure 
that drones are fully and safely integrated into the NAS.
    The FAA's Center of Excellence for Unmanned Aircraft Systems--
Alliance for System Safety of UAS through Research Excellence (ASSURE) 
is also providing the FAA with critical information to support safe and 
secure UAS integration. ASSURE is comprised of 15 of the world's 
leading research institutions, led by Mississippi State University, 
along with 8 affiliate universities. It focuses on research, education, 
and training in areas critical to safe and successful integration of 
drones into the Nation's airspace, including UTM.
    Additionally, the FAA is working diligently to implement the new 
statutory framework governing recreational operations of unmanned 
aircraft contained in section 349 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 
2018. This section provided a limited exception to the FAA rules that 
would otherwise apply to these operations, so long as the operation 
adheres to eight limitations set forth by Congress and does not 
endanger the safety of the NAS. Implementation of this new framework is 
an important focus area for the FAA this year. We appreciate Congress' 
efforts in this area, which will help advance our collective goal of 
safe and secure integration of unmanned aircraft into the NAS.
Conclusion
    Throughout our history, the FAA has adapted to changes in 
technology and has successfully integrated new operators and equipment 
into the NAS. We are committed to working with Congress and all of our 
stakeholders to find solutions to our common challenges. Working 
together, we are confident we can balance safety and security with 
innovation. With the support of this Committee and the robust 
engagement of our stakeholders, we will continue to safely, securely, 
and efficiently integrate commercial space and UAS into the NAS and 
solidify America's role as the global leader in aviation.
    This concludes our statement. We would be happy to respond to any 
questions you may have.

    The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Merkle.
    Mr. Monteith.

           STATEMENT OF WAYNE R. MONTEITH, ASSOCIATE

           ADMINISTRATOR, OFFICE OF COMMERCIAL SPACE

        TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

    Mr. Monteith. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, 
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
highlight one of Secretary Chao's top priorities: to ensure 
America retains its leadership in commercial space.
    Safety is at the core of this priority. The FAA's Office of 
Commercial Space Transportation is responsible for issuing 
licenses and permits for the launch and reentry of commercial 
space vehicles, consistent with public health and safety, the 
safety of property, and the national security and foreign 
policy interests of the United States. Our efforts have proven 
beneficial to both the space transportation enterprise and the 
American people, and our track record clearly bears this out. 
While the FAA has licensed or permitted over 375 launches and 
reentries since 1989, there has never been a fatality, serious 
injury, or significant property damage to members of the 
public.
    The commercial space industry in the United States is 
dynamic, growing, and evolving. In Fiscal Year 2018, there were 
a record 32 launches and three reentries of commercial space 
vehicles, for a total of 35 licensed activities. For Fiscal 
Year 2019, we anticipate as many as 44 launch and reentry 
operations, potentially a single year increase of 25 percent in 
commercial space activity.
    As the industry continues to grow, the FAA has intensified 
its efforts to maintain the highest level of safety while 
preparing for the exciting future to come. And we must prepare 
for this future. Current regulations are based largely on 
Federal launch standards that were developed in the 1990s. They 
can be overly prescriptive and seen as a hindrance to 
innovation. Further, the current rules are not consolidated to 
the extent they should be and can be duplicative.
    To rectify this, we recently published a comprehensive 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that will consolidate, update, 
and streamline all launch and reentry regulations into a single 
performance-based rule. This proposed rule will better fit 
today's fast evolving commercial space transportation industry 
in a way that does not unnecessarily hinder innovation. Most 
importantly, the new rules set safety standards without 
prescribing specific solutions.
    The pace at which the commercial space industry continues 
to change and grow has resulted in an increase in both the 
complexity and the workload for the FAA's Commercial Space 
Transportation Office. To address this, Secretary Chao recently 
directed us to undertake a comprehensive review and 
reorganization of the office to maximize efficiencies and 
effectiveness under a new streamlined regulatory regime while 
continuing to prioritize public safety. We are currently 
evaluating options to realize the Secretary's vision.
    Consistent with the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, we 
established an Office of Spaceports to support launch and 
reentry sites and generally support improvements of spaceports. 
I am glad to report this office is already working with 
spaceport licensees, our interagency partners, and the broader 
stakeholder community to chart a path to the future.
    Of the many challenges the FAA faces, integration of 
commercial space operations into the national airspace is a top 
priority. To help address this challenge, we recently stood up 
the agency's first dedicated commercial space integration lab 
for concept development and prototyping of new technologies. 
One of these new technologies is the space data integrator. SDI 
is a safety-based technology that will lay the foundation to 
automate the launch and reentry process. This will enable the 
FAA to track a space mission's progress as it flies through the 
airspace in real time. When deployed, SDI will enable the FAA 
to safely reduce the amount of airspace that must be closed to 
other users and more quickly release airspace that is no longer 
at risk as a mission progresses. We are at the initial stages 
of acquisition and we are exploring potential avenues to 
leverage this capability as quickly as possible. With this 
technology, along with other efforts, we will be able to better 
balance the needs of all airspace users, including traditional 
manned aircraft, drones, commercial space vehicles, and others.
    Thank you very much for your time, and I look forward to 
your questions.
    The Chairman. Thank you very, very much.
    Mr. Brooks.

 STATEMENT OF DALLAS BROOKS, DIRECTOR, RASPET FLIGHT RESEARCH 
            LABORATORY, MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY

    Mr. Brooks. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and 
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify before you today.
    After 35 years in aviation and 15 years working exclusively 
in unmanned systems, it seems a bit strange to be classified as 
a new entrant. But one of the amazing things about this 
technology is that it is ever-innovative, ever-evolving, and 
always new. It is also, I am very glad to share with you today, 
rapidly maturing.
    Over these past 15 years, I have been blessed with an 
amazingly broad and diverse experience in unmanned systems. I 
have had the privilege of leading incredibly talented people in 
America's armed forces, in commercial industry, and at two of 
the nation's top universities for unmanned systems research. I 
have spent two years embedded in the FAA, and I have seen 
firsthand the challenges that our regulators face in deciding 
how safe is safe enough. But most of all, I have seen what 
works and, just as importantly, what does not.
    First, what works is blending innovative unmanned 
technologies with proven aviation practices and a culture of 
safety. At Mississippi State's Raspet Flight Research 
Laboratory we have proven that. We operate the newest, largest, 
and most technically advanced fleet of unmanned aircraft in 
academic use today. Our pilots and maintainers are fully 
qualified and FAA-licensed to fly and maintain both manned and 
unmanned aircraft. We hold FAA approvals to fly in over 6,000 
square miles of national airspace, and we routinely fly in the 
same traffic patterns, using the same procedures, with manned 
aircraft. We get to do this because we demand the same level of 
competence, the same level of professionalism, and the same 
level of safety as any manned aviation organization in the 
country.
    Second, what works are government and academic 
partnerships. At Raspet Flight Research Laboratory, we lead the 
Department of Homeland Security's Common UAS Test Site, an 
expansive facility where we evaluate both established and 
emerging unmanned technologies to better support the brave and 
talented people who patrol our coasts, protect our borders, and 
respond to our national emergencies. Mississippi State 
University also leads the FAA's UAS Center of Excellence, 
comprised of 23 of the world's top unmanned systems researches 
universities. To date, the results from over 20 of our research 
projects are directly informing and improving FAA policy, 
guidance, and rulemaking. No other organization has done more 
and in less time to advance unmanned systems integration than 
the ASSURE Center of Excellence.
    Third, what works is interagency collaboration. For many 
years, I have had the privilege of co-chairing the UAS Science 
and Research Panel, which coordinates and conducts UAS research 
across eight Federal agencies. The SARP, as it is known, brings 
together the technical, policy, and operations experts from 
these organizations to focus on one key problem at a time and 
to resolve it in a year or less. Recently the SARP defined what 
may be the most important number in all of unmanned aviation: 
the minimum safe distance at which UAS may operate in proximity 
to other aircraft. Today, the SARP is tackling how UAS 
operations can be safely enabled at or near our nation's 
airports, and we will be sharing those answers shortly.
    And finally, what works is industry engagement. Both the 
ASSURE UAS Center of Excellence and the SARP routinely 
collaborate with industry to exchange ideas, explore emerging 
technologies, and to ensure that our research results are 
relevant and current. Industry is where innovation happens, and 
we in government should never forget that.
    Now, throughout my testimony, you may have noticed a common 
thread, that focus breeds success. Focused organizations such 
as the Center of Excellence and the SARP have produced the most 
relevant, the most effective, and most substantiated body of 
evidence to support key decisions by both industry and 
government alike. By following our model of scoping and 
prioritizing key problems, selecting team members for expertise 
and effectiveness, and putting strong, accountable leadership 
in place, our nation?s government can achieve more in less time 
and more safely than ever before.
    Members of the Committee, as I close my testimony, I will 
leave you with some specific points where your leadership can 
make a difference.
    First, support what works and question what does not. 
Success in UAS integration has always come in bites, not in 
meals. Those who 15 years ago were trying to solve all of our 
problems at once are still trying. Meanwhile, those teams that 
have focused their energies on specific problems have 
succeeded.
    Second, set deadlines and enforce them. Some of the most 
significant advances in UAS integration have come, not 
coincidentally, following mandates from Congress, mandates that 
were tied to specific, short-term deadlines. The key is in 
scoping legislation to ensure that the goals you set are 
aggressive, yet fair, and that they are achievable safely.
    Third and most specifically, I ask for your support in 
removing unnecessary layers of review from our nation?s 
unmanned systems research programs. Due to a recent policy 
change mandating Department-level review, it now takes up to 
six times longer for the FAA to approve UAS Center of 
Excellence research. Such reviews add no discernable value not 
perceivable effect other than slowing a once efficient process 
from a few weeks to many months.
    Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members of 
the Committee, I thank you again for the opportunity to testify 
before you today. Should you need further details on these or 
other unmanned systems issues, Mississippi State University and 
the Raspet Flight Research Laboratory stand ready to support 
you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Brooks follows:]

 Prepared Statement of Dallas Brooks, Director, Raspet Flight Research 
                Laboratory, Mississippi State University
    Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, members of the Committee, 
thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today.
    After 35 years in aviation, and 15 years working exclusively in 
unmanned systems, it seems a bit strange to be classified as a new 
entrant. But one of the amazing things about this technology is that it 
is ever innovative, ever evolving, and always new. It is also, I'm very 
glad to tell you today, rapidly maturing.
    Over these past 15 years, I've been blessed with an amazingly broad 
and diverse experience in unmanned systems. I've had the privilege of 
leading incredibly talented people in America's armed forces, in 
commercial industry, and at two of the Nation's top universities for 
unmanned systems research. I've spent two years embedded in the FAA, 
and I have seen first-hand the challenges that our regulators face in 
deciding how safe is safe enough. But most of all, I've seen what 
works, and just as importantly, what does not.
    First, what works is blending innovative unmanned technologies with 
proven aviation practices and a culture of safety. At Mississippi 
State's Raspet Flight Research Laboratory, we have proven that. We 
operate the newest, largest, and most technically-advanced fleet of 
unmanned aircraft in academic use today. Our pilots and maintainers are 
fully qualified and FAA-licensed to fly and maintain both manned and 
unmanned aircraft. We hold FAA approvals to fly in over 6,000 square 
miles of national airspace, and we routinely fly in the same traffic 
patterns, using the same procedures, with manned aircraft. We get to do 
this because we demand the same level of competence, the same level of 
professionalism, and the same level of safety as any manned aviation 
organization in the country.
    Second, what works are government and academic partnerships. At 
Raspet Flight Research Laboratory, we lead the Department of Homeland 
Security's Common UAS Test Site, an expansive facility where we 
evaluate both established and emerging unmanned technologies to better 
support the brave and talented people who patrol our coasts, protect 
our borders and respond to our national emergencies. Mississippi State 
University also leads the FAA's UAS Center of Excellence, comprised of 
23 of the world's top unmanned systems research universities who are 
dedicated to solving the FAA's highest-priority challenges in UAS 
safety and integration. To date, the results from over 20 of our 
research projects are directly informing and improving FAA policy, 
guidance and rulemaking. No other organization has done more, and in 
less time, to advance unmanned systems integration than ASSURE Center 
of Excellence.
    Third, what works is interagency collaboration. For many years, 
I've had the privilege of co-chairing the UAS Science and Research 
Panel, which coordinates and conducts UAS research across 8 Federal 
agencies. The SARP, as it is known, brings together the technical, 
policy and operations experts from these organizations to focus on one 
key problem at a time--and to resolve it in a year or less. Recently, 
the SARP defined what may be the most important number in all of 
unmanned aviation--the minimum safe distance at which UAS may operate 
in proximity to other aircraft. Today, the SARP is tackling how UAS 
operations can be safely enabled at or near our Nation's airports--and 
we'll be sharing those answers shortly.
    And finally, what works is industry engagement. Both the ASSURE UAS 
Center of Excellence and the SARP routinely collaborate with industry 
to exchange ideas, explore emerging technologies and to ensure that our 
research results are relevant and current. Industry is where the 
innovation happens, and we in government should never forget that.
    Now throughout my testimony, you may have noticed a common thread--
that focus breeds success. Focused organizations such as the UAS Center 
of Excellence and the SARP have produced the most relevant, most 
effective, and most substantiated body of evidence to support key 
decisions by both industry and government alike. By following our model 
of scoping and prioritizing key problems, selecting team members for 
expertise and effectiveness, and putting strong, accountable leadership 
in place, our Nation's government can achieve more, in less time, and 
more safely, than ever before.
    Members of this Committee, as I close my testimony, I'll leave you 
with some specific points where your leadership can make a difference.
    First, support what works--and question what doesn't. Success in 
UAS integration has come in bites, not in meals. Those who 15 years ago 
were trying to solve all of our problems at once are still trying. 
Meanwhile, those teams that have focused their energies on specific 
problems have succeeded.
    Second, set deadlines--and enforce them. Some of the most 
significant advances in UAS integration have come, not coincidentally, 
following mandates from Congress--mandates that were tied to specific, 
short-term deadlines. The key is in scoping legislation to ensure the 
goals that you set are aggressive yet fair, and that they are 
achievable safely.
    Third, and most specifically, I ask for your support in removing 
unnecessary layers of review from our Nation's unmanned systems 
research programs. Due to a recent policy change mandating Department-
level review, it now takes up to six times longer to approve UAS Center 
of Excellence research. Such reviews add no discernable value, nor 
perceivable effect other than slowing a once-efficient process from a 
few weeks to many months.
    Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell and members of the 
Committee, I thank you again for the opportunity to testify before you 
today. Should you need further details on these or other unmanned 
systems issues, Mississippi State University and the Raspet Flight 
Research Laboratory stand ready to support you.

    The Chairman. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Lovering.

          STATEMENT OF ZACH LOVERING, VICE PRESIDENT, 
               URBAN AIR MOBILITY SYSTEMS, AIRBUS

    Mr. Lovering. Good morning, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member 
Cantwell, and members of the Committee.
    Airbus is honored to participate in today's important 
hearing on new entrants in the aerospace market, and we 
appreciate your interest in the important role of the future of 
our industry. We look forward to sharing Airbus' vision for 
safe urban air mobility, or UAM, and providing a brief overview 
of our efforts to safely integrate new aircraft into the 
national airspace system, or the NAS.
    My name is Zachary Lovering and I am a senior member of 
Airbus' global UAM team based here in the United States. I 
joined three years ago as Chief Engineer and then became 
Project Executive leading the development of Vahana, a self-
piloted electric vertical takeoff and landing, or eVTOL, 
demonstrator aircraft.
    In my current role as the Vice President of UAM Systems, I 
lead the teams that are integrating the various supporting 
systems like air traffic management, vehicles, and 
infrastructure into a single mobility framework to ensure that 
our UAM vision fully lives up to its promise.
    Airbus is a pioneer in the global aerospace industry and 
has a major presence in the United States. In June 2018, Airbus 
created a unit to lead its global UAM activities across the 
company.
    Airbus Urban Mobility is focused on air traffic management, 
on-demand mobility, infrastructure, community integration, 
industry partnerships, and government regulations. The unit 
also steers the development of Airbus? ongoing eVTOL technology 
demonstrators, Vahana, a small tipped wing, self-piloted eVTOL, 
and CityAirbus, a large multi-rotor eVTOL.
    By 2030, over 60 percent of the world's population will 
live in urban areas, and we believe our UAM solutions can help 
cities cope with this massive population growth and better 
connect our urban, suburban, and rural communities.
    The challenge of making the UAM a reality is bigger than 
any one company, and ensuring this industry lives up to its 
promise will require the collaboration of stakeholders inside 
and outside of the aerospace community.
    Over the last few years, Airbus has made steady progress on 
its efforts to re-imagine how aviation safely integrates into 
the NAS. To date, Airbus Urban Mobility has focused on 
demonstrating safe UAM vehicles, building unmanned traffic 
management solutions and services, enabling city integration 
through infrastructure design, exploring tomorrow's UAM 
passenger experience today, and responding to critical policy 
and regulatory gaps with solutions.
    One recent milestones has been demonstrating safe UAM 
aircraft. Since January 2018, Vahana has been flying as a full-
scale demonstrator at the UAS test site in Pendleton, eastern 
Oregon. After nearly 60 full-scale flights and over 1,000 sub-
scale flights, it has recently proven its capability to take 
off vertically and then transition to full wing-borne flight, 
marking the completion of its nominal flight test program.
    In addition, CityAirbus has recently completed its first 
full-scale tethered hovering flight.
    A second milestone achieved recently is our building of UTM 
solutions and services. Airbus continues to directly support 
and build UAS integration solutions with regulators around the 
world. Recently Airbus was approved as an FAA low-altitude 
authorization notification capability, or LAANC, service 
supplier providing automated flight authorizations to operators 
near airports.
    We are also working on exploring tomorrow's UAM passenger 
experience today. Airbus' UAM on-demand helicopter booking 
platform called Voom is busy enhancing current UAM operations 
in both Brazil and Mexico, and is actively pursuing a launch in 
the U.S. market this year. To date, the Voom booking platform 
has enabled thousands of passengers to request a seat on a 
helicopter within minutes.
    Finally, we have been responding to critical policy and 
regulatory gaps with solutions. Airbus UAM is actively working 
with industry to set performance-based standards for future UAM 
operations and collaborating with governments on rulemaking 
efforts to identify solutions for aerospace access, protect and 
avoid technology, spectrum and communications, and more.
    At Airbus we are committed to transforming our cities and 
towns by developing safe UAM solutions that offer a sustainable 
complement to ground transportation. We believe our work is 
meaningful only if it improves our cities and the way we live. 
Our solutions are focused on helping people save time, on 
better connecting cities and regions, and on reducing 
emissions.
    Personally, one of the things that really inspires me to be 
here is ever since I was around the age of 10, I have had a 
love of flying. I built several RC aircraft with my dad. I flew 
them in our backyard, and it has been part of who I am as an 
adult. I knew I wanted to be an aerospace engineer since I was 
a little kid, and that has been my focus my entire life. And I 
am really excited to share my passion for flight by building 
UAM, which has the potential to inspire the joy of flight for 
everyone.
    Thank you again for inviting me here to be a part of 
today's hearing on behalf of Airbus. I look forward to 
answering the Committee's questions. Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Lovering follows:]

         Prepared Statement of Zach Lovering, Vice President, 
                   Urban Air Mobility Systems, Airbus
    Good morning Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members 
of the Committee. Airbus is honored to participate in today's important 
hearing on new entrants in the aerospace market and we appreciate your 
interest in the future of our industry. We look forward to sharing 
Airbus' vision for Urban Air Mobility (UAM) and providing a brief 
overview of our efforts to safely integrate new aircraft into the 
National Airspace System (NAS).
    My name is Zach Lovering and I'm a senior member of Airbus' global 
UAM team based here in the United States. I joined Airbus three years 
ago as a Chief Engineer and then Project Executive leading the 
development of Vahana, a self-piloted electric vertical take-off and 
landing (eVTOL) demonstrator aircraft. In my current role as Vice 
President, UAM Systems, I lead the teams that are integrating all the 
individual systems, like air traffic management, vehicles, and 
infrastructure, into a single mobility framework, to ensure our UAM 
vision fully lives up to its promise.
About Airbus
    Airbus is a pioneer in the global aerospace industry and has a 
major presence in the United States. We design, manufacture, and 
deliver industry-leading commercial aircraft, helicopters, military 
transports, urban mobility systems, unmanned aircraft systems (UAS), 
satellites and launch vehicles, as well as provide data services, 
navigation services, secure communications, and other solutions for 
customers on a global scale.
    More than 50 years ago, Airbus opened its first production line in 
Grand Prairie, TX and today operates three other major production 
facilities in Mobile, Alabama; Columbus, Mississippi; and Exploration 
Park, Florida. Airbus spends approximately $15 billion each year with 
U.S.-based suppliers in over 40 states, supporting more than 275,000 
U.S.-based jobs. Over the next 12 months, Airbus plans to add 1,000 new 
jobs and invest approximately $500 million in new facilities.
Airbus UAM
    In addition to our growing business in the U.S., Airbus' teams in 
California, New York, Oregon, and Washington D.C. are working to build 
sustainable and safe UAM solutions to transform our local communities 
for the better. In June 2018, Airbus created a Unit to lead its global 
UAM activities across the company. Airbus Urban Mobility is focused on 
on-demand mobility, unmanned traffic management, infrastructure and 
community integration, industry partnerships, and government 
regulations. The Unit also steers the development of Airbus' ongoing 
eVTOL technology demonstrators Vahana, a small tilt-wing self-piloted 
eVTOL, and CityAirbus, a multi-passenger self-piloted eVTOL. By 2030, 
over 60 percent of the world's population will live in urban areas and 
we believe our UAM solutions can help cities cope with this massive 
population growth and better connect our urban, suburban and rural 
communities. For Airbus, UAM is not just about developing new vertical 
take-off and landing vehicles. In some ways, that's the achievable part 
for a company like Airbus with deep experience designing, 
manufacturing, and certifying aircraft. The real challenge is safely 
and securely integrating this new class of vehicles in the urban 
environment with public and regulatory acceptance.
    By pushing the limits of technology in the fields of connectivity, 
artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, and electric propulsion, 
our aim is to create a seamless multi-modal air and ground transport 
network for cities. Emerging technology such as digital design and 
manufacturing, automated composite production, and 3D printing, will 
allow us to build and test UAM vehicles efficiently and affordably. 
Advanced avionics and new approaches to air traffic management are 
maturing and will be used to further safety and efficiency for unmanned 
airspace operations in the NAS. Citizens today are increasingly 
connected and welcome on-demand services to better navigate congested 
cities. This on-demand and sharing economy is encouraging us to explore 
business models to realize the future potential of UAM today.
    The challenge of making UAM a reality is bigger than any one 
company. And ensuring this industry lives up to its promise will 
require the collaboration of stakeholders inside and outside of the 
aerospace community.
    Over the last few years, Airbus has made steady progress on our 
efforts to reimagine how aviation safely integrates into the NAS. To 
date, Airbus Urban Mobility is focused on demonstrating safe UAM 
vehicles, building unmanned traffic management (UTM) solutions and 
services, enabling city integration through infrastructure design, 
exploring tomorrow's UAM passenger experience today, and responding to 
critical policy and regulatory gaps with solutions. Some recent 
milestones include:

   Demonstrating Safe UAM Vehicles: Since January 2018, Vahana 
        has been flying a full-scale demonstrator at the Pendleton UAS 
        Test Range in Eastern Oregon. After nearly 60 full scale 
        flights and over 1000 subscale flights, it has recently proven 
        its capability to take off vertically and then transition to 
        full-wingborne flight, marking the completion of its nominal 
        flight test program. In addition, CityAirbus has recently 
        completed its first full-scale tethered hovering flight.

   Building UTM Solutions & Services: Airbus continues to 
        directly support and build UAS integration solutions with 
        regulators around the world. Recently, Airbus was approved as a 
        Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Low Altitude 
        Authorization and Notification Capability (LAANC) service 
        supplier providing automated flight authorizations to operators 
        near airports.

   Exploring Tomorrow's UAM Passenger Experience Today: Airbus' 
        UAM on-demand helicopter booking platform called Voom is busy 
        enhancing current UAM Operations in both Brazil and Mexico and 
        is actively pursuing a launch in the U.S. market this year. To 
        date, the Voom booking platform has enabled thousands of 
        passengers to request a seat on a helicopter within minutes.

   Responding to Critical Policy & Regulatory Gaps with 
        Solutions: Airbus UAM is actively working with industry to set 
        performance-based standards for future UAM operations, and 
        collaborating with governments on rulemaking efforts to 
        identify solutions for airspace access, detect and avoid 
        technology, spectrum and communications, and more.
Airbus UAM Value Chain
    Airbus is exploring a portfolio of safe and secure products and 
services, because we believe that UAM is about more than just the 
vehicle. This Airbus UAM value chain includes, but is not limited to, 
vehicle development, UTM solutions and services, community integration 
and infrastructure, and passenger experience.
Demonstrating Safe UAM Vehicles--CityAirbus & Vahana
    Vahana is a demonstrator focused on advancing self-piloted, eVTOL 
flight. We envision Vahana being used by travelers and everyday 
commuters as a cost-comparable replacement for short-range city 
transportation methods like cars or trains. It uses eight electric 
motors and a tilt-wing configuration to enable both hover and cross-
city range on battery power alone. A core premise of this demonstrator 
is that self-piloted operations will allow us to achieve higher safety 
and will also allow more vehicles to share the sky. Vahana follows 
predetermined flight paths with only minor deviations if obstacle 
avoidance is needed. Also, this vehicle could be used to transport 
heavy cargo, as a medevac service, or even to deploy emergency 
operations centers at disaster sites.
    On January 31, 2018 Vahana successfully completed its first full-
scale flight test, reaching a height of 16 feet (5 meters) before 
descending safely. Since then, we've completed nearly 60 successful 
test flights at the Pendleton UAS Test Range that include all flight 
tests associated with the mission we intended to perform at the outset 
of the project. Additional tests are being conducted as we speak to 
study maneuvering capabilities, noise, and the self-piloted hazard 
detection features. The ability to test here in the U.S. is critical to 
maturing the vehicle and we applaud Congress for their continued focus 
on UAS research and test sites.
    In addition to Vahana, Airbus has another demonstrator called 
CityAirbus. CityAirbus, is a self-piloted eVTOL designed to carry up to 
four passengers over cities in a fast, affordable, and environmentally 
friendly way. CityAirbus will transport passengers on fixed routes from 
hub to hub (e.g., city to airport or vice versa). In May 2019, the team 
completed their first tethered hovering flight.
Building UTM Solutions & Services
    The aerospace industry is moving quickly to innovate with new 
aircraft types, sizes, and flight capabilities. In 2017, the number of 
registered UAS in the U.S., including both commercial and consumer, 
eclipsed one million--more than double the number of general aviation 
aircraft in the U.S. To support this growth, a more modernized and 
scalable solution to airspace management is needed.
    Through research, simulations, and industry collaboration, Airbus 
is building digital air traffic management solutions to enable the next 
age of aviation. Under the umbrella of Airbus Urban Mobility, our UTM 
team is designing, developing, and building the solutions necessary to 
allow these new aircraft, including new UAM vehicles, to safely 
integrate into the NAS. Airbus' UTM solutions are already beginning to 
integrate with today's Air Traffic Management (ATM) through efforts 
like the FAA LAANC program to help UTM service providers such as Airbus 
provide FAA authorizations for flights near airports. Our UTM solutions 
are also being used to enable beyond visual line of sight operations 
and advanced use cases like package delivery.
    In September 2018, Airbus released ``Blueprint for the Sky'', a 
roadmap for the safe and efficient integration of UAS and other self-
piloted aircraft into our airspace. The document outlines policies that 
can help government regulate new operations and ensure that air 
transport remains as safe tomorrow as it is today. The Blueprint was 
reviewed by leading industry experts from the Massachusetts Institute 
of Technology, the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, 
Stanford University, the World Economic Forum and more.
Enabling Community Integration through Infrastructure Design
    The Airbus Urban Mobility Unit is also actively exploring mobility 
solutions to enhance a city's existing network for the benefit of its 
citizens and determining what additional infrastructure, like takeoff 
and landing areas (e.g., vertiports), would be required. By using city-
level data and powerful modelling tools, Airbus can simulate mobility 
patterns of people and design convenient, sustainable systems that 
could seamlessly integrate into an existing city infrastructure. To 
help government and industry partners better integrate future mobility 
services and address energy consumption demands, the Airbus Urban 
Mobility team is also working to streamline the exchange of mobility 
data and strengthen the digital infrastructure in our increasingly 
connected cities.
Exploring Tomorrow's UAM Passenger Experience Today
    Through its in-market booking platform Voom, Airbus provides an on-
demand helicopter mobility service that allows passengers to request a 
seat on a certified helicopter within minutes. Voom has provided 
thousands of passengers the opportunity to fly efficiently in congested 
cities and is laying the groundwork for Airbus' longer-term vision of 
UAM using eVTOL vehicles supported by the necessary infrastructure. 
Voom has proven to be a fantastic mechanism to glean key insights into 
the potential of the on-demand air mobility market and passenger 
preferences, and Airbus Urban Mobility is collecting those insights to 
advance vehicle development.
    Voom currently offers its services in Sao Paulo and Mexico City, 
and is exploring expansion in the U.S. soon. By providing a more 
efficient transportation option to daily commuters, Voom aims to 
address mobility challenges in some of the world's most congested 
cities.
    For the foreseeable future, the cost of helicopter travel can be 
better optimized. This is why we are exploring other types of UAM 
vehicles and operations to lower costs and enable future city dwellers 
the ability to affordably take advantage of UAM. Over time competition 
and will lower costs and allow UAM to evolve into a broad solution for 
a diverse set of passengers.
Responding to Critical Policy & Regulatory Gaps with Solutions
    As we explore the full value chain to build UAM solutions and 
services, we are leaning into the many policy and regulatory areas this 
innovation can impact. Our team is actively working on solutions across 
a plethora of policy areas including but not limited to certification, 
safety & security and public acceptance.

   Certification: Promulgated in 2016, the ``Revision of 
        Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and 
        Commuter Category Airplanes'' (or Part 23) is a key enabler and 
        viable pathway to certifying UAM aircraft in the U.S. The 
        revision ``provides greater flexibility to applicants seeking 
        certification of their airplane designs, and facilitates faster 
        adoption of safety enhancing technology in type-certificated 
        products while reducing regulatory time and cost burdens for 
        the aviation industry and FAA'' \1\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Revision of Airworthiness Standards, 81 Fed. Reg. 96573.

   Safety & Security: Airbus' dedication to safety is reflected 
        across the company's operations to build UAM solutions to 
        connect our urban, suburban and rural communities. Our approach 
        to UAM Security is directly inherited from the company's 
        experience in managing security for large aircraft and 
        helicopters. Our approach is risk based, holistic and will 
        extend through the lifecycle of our UAM products including 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        supply-chain and manufacturing.

   Public Acceptance: Buy-in from regulators and local 
        communities is critical to scaling UAM and advancing UAS 
        operations. Airbus is a proud participant of the FAA's 
        Integrated Pilot Program (IPP) with North Dakota and Virginia, 
        and leader of the UAM Initiative of the European Innovation 
        Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities. These community-
        centric and citizen-driven initiatives help governments and the 
        private sector better address local concerns well in advance of 
        scaled operations.
Conclusion
    At Airbus, we're committed to transforming our cities and towns by 
developing UAM solutions that offer a sustainable complement to ground 
transportation. We believe our work is meaningful only if it improves 
our cities and the way we live. Our solutions are focused on helping 
people save time, on better connecting cities and regions, and on 
reducing emissions.
    Thank you again for inviting me to be part of today's hearing on 
behalf of Airbus. I look forward to answering the Committee's 
questions.

    The Chairman. Mr. Lovering, I found model airplanes 
frustrating as a boy.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I moved in a different direction.
    Mr. Lovering. I have crashed quite a few of them myself.
    The Chairman. Mr. Stallmer.

            STATEMENT OF ERIC STALLMER, PRESIDENT, 
               COMMERCIAL SPACEFLIGHT FEDERATION

    Mr. Stallmer. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Wicker, Ranking 
Member Cantwell, and distinguished members of the Committee, 
thank you for inviting the Commercial Spaceflight Federation to 
summarize the state of the U.S. commercial space industry and 
highlight our members' engagement on airspace optimization and 
regulatory reform issues.
    CSF members are responsible for the creation of many 
thousands of high-tech jobs driven by billions of dollars of 
investment. Today's commercial space transportation industry is 
growing in frequency of operation and diversity of 
capabilities. More launches and reentries entails more 
efficient integration of space flight into the national 
airspace system, requiring coordinated efforts between the U.S. 
Government and industry to find the solutions that mitigate 
impacts while preserving safety.
    Because the NAS is a shared public resource, it is open to 
all. CSF is actively working with other NAS users to promote 
the new airspace tools and operational improvements that will 
optimize the use of the NAS in a safe and efficient manner. 
Those efforts are the major focus of my testimony today.
    As already noted, 32 commercial launches and 14 reentries 
transited the NAS in 2018. To put that in perspective, in a 
given year approximately 15.5 million flights operate in the 
NAS. So while 32 is a significant increase over the 12 launches 
that we had just 5 years ago, we have a long way to grow to 
become even 1 one-thousandth the size of aviation.
    Unfortunately, the obsolete approach that we use to protect 
the air traffic from space launches and reentries can have an 
outsized impact on aviation. Specifically, the FAA uses 
decades-old analysis and air traffic control tools to segregate 
the airspace around a launch or reentry. Simply stated, we 
close too much airspace for too long without providing real-
time information about the launch and reentry to the air 
traffic controllers. Instead of closing large blocks of 
airspace for hours, we could close smaller blocks that move 
along with the space vehicles.
    To fix this, we need to solve these problems. Obsolete 
tools that dictate a safety area around a launch or reentry are 
too conservative and cannot update during flight, the air 
traffic control systems that cannot accept data on the position 
and velocity of the space vehicles and a lack of tools for 
space operators to share and compare their launch and reentry 
schedules to the aviation schedules to minimize conflicts. We 
are eager to work together across industry to address these 
challenges. In fact, we already have.
    Since early 2018, I have co-chaired the FAA's Aviation 
Rulemaking Committee, or ARC, on airspace access with 
representatives from the airlines, the pilots, airports, 
business aviation, and many other stakeholders, plus large and 
small commercial space operators and spaceports. While it was 
initially suggested that we try to prioritize aviation and 
space activities, we quickly decided that we needed to optimize 
our use on the shared resource rather than cut back on either 
sector's growth. Since then, we have come a long way and our 
final report should be ready in the next few months.
    CSF's own priorities for actions and investment that the 
FAA should pursue in collaboration with industry align well 
with much of the work we have done with the ARC. My written 
testimony identifies numerous tasks that the FAA should 
undertake, but let me try to boil it down to just one summary 
proposal.
    The FAA must immediately develop and implement tools and 
capabilities that transform air traffic management during 
launch and reentry from segregation to integration with 
separation assurance. As NAS users from aviation and space have 
worked together over the last year, we see that accelerating 
next generation air transportation systems, or NextGen, is 
central to achieving a more integrated and safe and efficient 
use of the NAS. The ARC's recommendations, once released, must 
be pursued expeditiously as NextGen priorities. They cannot be 
added to a long list of to-dos that will take a decade or more 
to complete. The FAA needs to utilize other transactional 
authorities and other innovative procurement methods to 
dramatically accelerate these critical improvements to airspace 
management.
    The goal from the CSF perspective is to get the FAA to the 
point where it can adapt, move, and innovate quickly enough to 
keep up with the advancements of the traditional piloted 
aviation, commercial space flight, and other NAS users. Given 
the importance of aviation to our space and our economy, our 
freedom, and our national security, we have to find a way for 
the FAA to move much faster and get ahead of industry rather 
than struggling to catch up.
    In my written testimony, I have provided an update on the 
status of the NPRM to streamline the launch and reentry 
regulations that General Monteith had touched on and also 
discussed the value of suborbital platforms supporting national 
STEM and workforce development priorities.
    In conclusion, these are exciting times in commercial space 
flight. We should all be proud of what American companies are 
achieving. The challenges we face today are not small, but we 
have the opportunity and the ability to solve them in a 
thoughtful and timely manner. We look forward to continuing to 
work with you to promote the safety, increased access to space, 
and the advancement of the commercial space industry.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cantwell, I appreciate your 
invitation to testify before the Committee today. Thank you for 
your attention. I look forward to any comments or questions you 
may have.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Stallmer follows:]

            Prepared Statement of Eric Stallmer, President, 
                   Commercial Spaceflight Federation
    Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Cantwell, and distinguished members 
of the Committee: thank you for inviting the Commercial Spaceflight 
Federation (CSF) to present our members' views on the state of the U.S. 
commercial space industry. We also appreciate the opportunity to 
highlight our members' engagement with various regulatory reform 
efforts that are underway and other policy issues facing our industry.
    CSF is the leading national trade association for the commercial 
spaceflight industry, with more than 85 member companies and 
organizations across the United States. Founded in 2006, CSF is focused 
on laying the foundation for a sustainable space economy and 
democratizing access to space for scientists, students, civilians, and 
businesses. CSF members are responsible for the creation of thousands 
of high-tech jobs driven by billions of dollars in investment. Through 
the promotion of technology innovation, CSF is guiding the expansion of 
Earth's economic sphere, bolstering U.S. leadership in aerospace, and 
inspiring America's next generation of engineers and explorers.
    Prior to our country's successes over the last decade in capturing 
a majority share of the commercial space launch market, the majority of 
launches in the United States were undertaken by the U.S. Government. 
With increased commercial launch and reentry activities the need to 
more efficiently integrate our activities into the National Airspace 
System (NAS) has led to coordinated efforts within the U.S. Government 
and industry to find solutions that mitigate impacts while promoting 
safety. Of course, since rockets and balloons predate airplanes, these 
are not new entrants to the NAS, simply a changing economic landscape 
that is vibrant, growing, creating jobs and establishing American 
leadership. This economic growth leads some to believe that an obsolete 
NAS will become congested, inefficient, and perhaps less safe.
    Because the NAS is a shared public resource, we are eagerly working 
with other NAS users to promote technology tools and operational 
improvements that will optimize the use of the NAS in a safe and 
efficient manner. Those efforts are the major focus of my testimony 
today.
I. Commercial Space Today
    This year, the United States commercial space industry is poised 
for another record-setting year. Last year, U.S. commercial space 
companies achieved an unprecedented 32 licensed orbital and suborbital 
launches as well as 14 licensed reentries. The majority of those 
licensed activities were attributable to SpaceX, which conducted 21 
launches that involved 12 first stage landings. 2018 also saw the first 
commercial launch of Rocket Lab's Electron, and the first licensed 
flights to space of two American suborbital reusable launch vehicles, 
Blue Origin's New Shepard and Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo. I 
emphasize the word licensed, because a license allows the company to 
earn revenue from the flight, unlike an experimental permit.
    Today's commercial space transportation industry is growing in 
frequency of operation and in the diversity of capabilities offered. In 
addition to smaller suborbital launch vehicles and medium, heavy and 
super-heavy-lift launch vehicles, many of which are reusable, we now 
have a broad range of smaller orbital launchers entering the 
marketplace to give smaller satellites a dedicated ride to space.
    This year the U.S. conducted a successful flight qualification 
mission of the first of two independent commercial crew vehicles being 
developed in partnership with NASA, and we expect to see another this 
fall. Two suborbital operators are likely to fly spaceflight 
participants for revenue by the end of the year. With a lot of hard 
work and some luck, U.S. astronauts will launch to the International 
Space Station again from U.S. soil in the next twelve months. As of 
today, we have already had 11 commercial launches this year.
    Much of this progress may seem sudden, but is the culmination of 
years of policy work in Washington and high-tech manufacturing efforts 
across the country. Blue Origin was founded in 2000, SpaceX in 2002, 
and Virgin Galactic in 2004. Vector Space's innovative small launch 
vehicle has its roots in many years of amateur rockets built and 
launched by university students. These companies and many others are in 
fact decade-plus ``overnight successes'' facilitated by efforts to 
provide a regulatory environment that is focused on protecting the 
uninvolved public without stifling the industry.
II. Optimizing the Transit of Airspace by Launch/Reentry Operators
    In the past few years, the increasing frequency of space launch and 
reentry activities, along with the emergence of new entrants to 
aviation, has raised congestion and safety concerns among some 
traditional aviation stakeholders. It is important, though, to keep the 
number of launches and reentries in context with the level of aviation 
activity in the NAS. As already noted, there were 32 commercial 
launches and reentries that transited the NAS in 2018. In a given year, 
approximately 15.5 million flights transit the NAS. So while 32 is a 
significant increase over the 12 launches 5 years ago, it is barely a 
blip on the radar.
    While there has been great progress in traditional aviation and 
commercial space transportation, like new entrants, drones, and 
personal air vehicles--all good and desirable developments--that 
progress is highlighting the need to improve the hardware, software, 
and human systems that manage the NAS. In particular, the way that we 
restrict airspace around launch or reentry events--an approach called 
``segregation''--is an inefficient use of the airspace.
    Historically, going back to the 1960s with the dawn of the space 
age, we closed large blocks of airspace around launches to keep 
airplanes and their crew and passengers far away from any potential 
catastrophic accident. Today we should be capitalizing on improved 
modeling and airspace control capabilities, instead, we continue to use 
out-dated approaches and systems that look essentially the same as 
those used in the 1960s. Those systems do not reflect the diversity of 
vehicles and operations that exist today, much less the innovation and 
industry expansion we expect over the next decade.
    The problem is with the space launch risk analysis and air traffic 
control tools that the FAA uses to close airspace. Those tools are 
decades old, and not designed for today's aviation or space 
transportation needs. Stated simply, we close too much airspace, for 
too long, without real-time information available to air traffic 
controllers regarding the status of the launch or reentry. To improve 
the situation, we need to invest in fixing the following problems:

   Obsolete tools that dictate the safety area around a launch 
        or reentry--they are overly conservative and not dynamic;

   The air traffic control systems' inability to accept data on 
        the position and velocity of space vehicles; and

   The lack of a tool for space operators to share and compare 
        their launch and reentry schedules to aviation schedules to 
        minimize conflicting operations.

    We are eager to work together across industries to address these 
challenges.
III. To Successfully Integrate Launch and Reentry Operations into the 
        NAS, the Following Tools are Necessary
    Instead of closing large blocks of airspace for hours, it should be 
possible to dynamically manage air traffic around a launch or reentry. 
That requires real time safety area calculation and information flow, 
including the current position and velocity of the launch vehicle, to 
individual en route air controllers, so they can release airspace 
immediately behind the launch vehicle as it flies.
    Since early 2018 I have co-chaired the FAA Aviation Rulemaking 
Committee (ARC) on Airspace Access with representatives of airlines, 
pilots, airports, business aviation, and many other stakeholders, plus 
many large and small commercial space operators and the most active 
spaceports. While the FAA originally wanted us to attempt to prioritize 
aviation and space uses of the airspace, we quickly realized that we 
needed to integrate and optimize our use of the shared resource rather 
than cutting back on either sector's growth.
    I won't tell you that the past year and a half has been easy. 
Leaders in both industries have often struggled to understand each 
other's priorities and perspectives, and even our respective 
vocabularies. But with that said we have come a long way, and our final 
report should be ready in the next few months.
    More specifically, CSF recommends the following actions and 
investments by the FAA in collaboration with industry, which aligns 
well with a lot of the work we've done in the ARC. The FAA should:

   1.  Immediately emphasize and accelerate efforts to efficiently 
        integrate space vehicle operations into the NAS.

   2.  Establish a space operations committee (including operators, 
        Department of Defense, and NASA) to recommend appropriate 
        information to be exchanged with the FAA for more dynamic 
        airspace management and situational awareness.

   3.  Establish a Steering Committee to provide ongoing input to the 
        FAA as NAS improvements are developed and implemented.

   4.  Invest in developing tools and capabilities that will enable a 
        future NAS state where air traffic management shifts from 
        segregation to integration with separation assurance.

   5.  Implement the ability to create dynamic airspace areas on 
        controller automation systems that can be conflict probed.

   6.  Implement decision support tools in automation systems for air 
        traffic controllers and traffic managers.

   7.  Develop procedures and training to enable future automation 
        capabilities.

   8.  Further develop its Hazard Risk Assessment and Management (HRAM) 
        capability and make that tool available to ATC to allow for 
        dynamic airspace management.

   9.  Implement and enable a capability, such as the Space Data 
        Integrator (SDI) that allows space operators to share telemetry 
        data with ATC systems and use that tool to supply telemetry to 
        HRAM and other automation platforms as necessary.

  10.  Implement a NAS operational airspace utilization assessment for 
        both planning and post analysis capability and make it 
        available to operators online.

  11.  Require minimum advanced notification times prior to an event 
        requiring Special Access Airspace (SAA).

  12.  Ensure sharing of real-time status of the vehicle for both pre-
        and post-launch.

  13.  Implement procedure updates for tactical information exchange 
        between operators and FAA regarding on-time operations to 
        enable more dynamic airspace activation/deactivation.

    As the NAS using industries have begun working more closely 
together, it is clear that the Next Generation Air Transportation 
System, or NextGen, is central to a more integrated, safe, and 
efficient use of the NAS. The recommendations I just enumerated are an 
obvious part of the NextGen portfolio. But it is not sufficient to just 
add them to a to-do list that will take a decade or more to complete. 
The FAA needs to utilize its Other Transactions Authority (OTA) and 
other innovative procurement methods to dramatically accelerate these 
critical improvements to airspace management.
    While these tools are being developed, there are things that space 
operators can do to help aviation operators minimize system delays 
during launch and reentry events. If FAA/AST were to create an 
integrated schedule of licensed or permitted launches and reentries, 
industry could authorize FAA/AST to share much of that information a 
few months, rather than about ten days, with aviation operators. The 
benefit of earlier notice is that aviation operators can still 
reallocate their crews and airplanes to create some slack in higher 
value scheduled flights that are more vulnerable to delays.
    Ultimately, however, the challenge is getting the FAA to the point 
where it can adapt, move, and innovate quickly enough to keep up with 
the advancement of aviation, commercial spaceflight, and new NAS 
entrants. Given the importance of aviation and space to our economy, 
our freedom, and our national security, we have to find a way to help 
the FAA to move much faster and get ahead of industry, rather than 
struggling to catch up.
IV. Scaling Launch and Reentry Regulation
    Today's launch and reentry rates, together with innovative 
operations and increased industry diversification, are bringing to 
light new challenges. The first of these is the obsolete, burdensome, 
and duplicative body of regulations for launch and reentry. Today's 
rules were mostly crafted in the 1980s and 1990s, and they take a very 
narrow, prescriptive approach that does not support innovation in 
technology and operations, including changes that improve safety, 
efficiency and industry growth.
    Thanks to leadership from the President, Vice President, National 
Space Council, Secretary of Transportation, and senior FAA officials, a 
much-needed reform process has begun. Last March an Aviation Rulemaking 
Committee (ARC) was chartered on Streamlining Launch and Reentry 
Licensing Requirements. This was critical because many industry experts 
believed that the best way to rewrite these regulations would be via a 
negotiated rulemaking.
    The resulting Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to streamline 
the launch and reentry regulations is now open for comment. The goals 
for the NPRM were outlined in Presidential Space Policy Directive No. 2 
(SPD-2). It stated, in part:

    The Secretary of Transportation shall consider the following:

        (i) requiring a single license for all types of commercial 
        space flight launch and re-entry operations; and

        (ii) replacing prescriptive requirements in the commercial 
        space flight launch and re-entry licensing process with 
        performance-based criteria.

    Importantly, neither SPD-2 nor the resulting NPRM has changed the 
level of safety applied to spaceflight activities. Nobody in industry 
(or government) is asking for a lower level of safety. The goal of SPD-
2 and the NPRM is only to streamline the regulatory process and create 
a performance-based approach to regulating an innovative, evolving 
industry while making it even safer.
    We complement the FAA for getting the proposed rule out fairly 
quickly, delayed only by the government shutdown. Unfortunately, 
instead of a giant leap, the FAA seems to have taken only a half step 
towards the regulatory regime America needs to enable the growth and 
diversity of new space transportation providers and users. The 580-page 
NPRM grants industry 60 days to provide comments, which might be 
possible if the industry's input through the ARC were more fully 
reflected in the NPRM, and if all referenced material were included 
(advisory circulars are referenced but not provided). Unfortunately, 
inputs that reflected the position of a majority of industry members 
were not included; therefore, many CSF members have requested an 
extension of the comment period to fully review and provide substantive 
comments and recommendations.
    In assessing the NPRM so far, the draft rule fails to achieve the 
key objectives of SPD-2 and industry's highest priority: streamlined, 
performance-based rules that accommodate all licensed launches and 
reentries at all operating locations, including Federal ranges.
    Historically, AST's regulations have been very specific and 
prescriptive for expendable launch vehicles. The regulations have taken 
a more general approach for reusable vehicles that examines the safety 
of the system as a whole. The rules for expendable rockets were written 
that way partly because they were based on, or referenced, the Air 
Force's detailed procedures at the Federal ranges, which go back to the 
days of the earliest ballistic missiles.
    Importantly, the ARC had stipulated in its report that the FAA 
needed to rewrite the terms of their partnership with the Air Force to 
meet Congress' and industry's call for singular regulatory authority 
for public safety that would apply the same approach to launch sites on 
Federal ranges and those in other locations. The ARC's recommendations 
reflect Congressional action on this issue in recent legislation, 
including the Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (CSCLA) of 
2015 and the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act. Under the CSLCA, 
the Department of Transportation is supposed to have sole Federal 
jurisdiction over space launch and reentry. The Air Force (USAF), 
acting as a landlord, can prescribe safety rules for ground operations, 
but is not supposed to have duplicative authority or promulgate 
duplicative (and potentially conflicting) regulations. The NPRM does 
not address duplicative requirements imposed by the USAF on commercial 
space operations.
    CSF members believe it would be tremendously helpful if the FAA 
were to reconvene the ARC to provide feedback on the NPRM, currently 
the FAA has said it has no plans to do so. To be sure, industry 
appreciates all of the support for regulatory reform from so many 
policymakers in Congress and the Executive Branch, and we do thank the 
FAA for their incredible hard work over the past year-plus with the ARC 
and the draft rule. We are hopeful that our requests for more time to 
review and comment will be granted. The importance of this rulemaking 
process cannot be overstated and we are ready to engage to ensure that 
the rules are optimized for protecting the public and ensuring an 
efficient launch and reentry licensing regime.
V. Suborbital Platforms Support National Priorities
    Recently, a few public critics have written off suborbital reusable 
launch vehicles' operations in the NAS as just providing adventure 
rides for millionaires. Nothing could be further from the truth. 
Commercial suborbital platforms aren't a nuisance to the Nation or the 
NAS; they're a national asset, supporting national priorities. 
According to the National Academies of Science, ``[S]uborbital 
[platforms] play a vital and necessary strategic role in NASA's 
research, innovation, education, employee development, and spaceflight 
mission success, thus providing the foundation for achievement of 
agency goals.'' This principle has application and implication that 
extends beyond NASA, and extends to national priorities and goals. More 
specifically, the growing number of commercial launch platforms:

  1.  Expand hands-on STEM engagement and training for students;

  2.  Enhance scientific understanding of the Earth and the Universe;

  3.  Increase hands-on training opportunities and workforce 
        development experiences for the next generation of space 
        scientists and engineers;

  4.  Improving program management by flight-testing new technologies 
        and techniques relatively inexpensively;

  5.  Expand economic activity--Creating a pipeline for commercial 
        economy Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) and on the International Space 
        Station (ISS);

    Expand hands-on STEM engagement and training for students. The 
growing number of commercial space companies providing cost-effective 
and frequent access to the spaceflight environment is making it easier 
for students to participate in hands-on STEM engagement and training. 
For example, in 2017, a Cumberland Elementary School second grade 
class, led by eight-year-old Yashi Varma, wanted to create a science 
project to test whether fireflies glow in space.\1\ And that's just 
what they did. Yashi and her classmates teamed up with their local 
university, Purdue University, and built an experiment using a $7 
``Launchbox.'' \2\ In December 2017, Yashi and her classmates' 
experiment flew on a Blue Origin New Shepard suborbital launch, and 
conclusively showed that fireflies do glow in space. Following their 
successful mission, Yashi and her classmates turned their science 
project into a political science project, and successfully petitioned 
to make the firefly the official state insect of Indiana. In March 
2018, Governor Eric Holcomb signed legislation designated the firefly 
as the state insect.\3\ This was all made possible at the cost of 
$5,300 \4\ to design, build, and fly the firefly experiment to space. 
That's the amount raised from a couple of weekend bake sales or 
raffles. Although there is only one member from Indiana on this 
Committee, I share this story as an example of opportunity: every 
classroom, in every state, can now have a space program, and they 
should. CSF and our members look forward to working with you in the 
upcoming NASA Authorization to make that a reality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See: Meghan Holden, Journal & Courier, ``Second graders' 
experiment will launch into space,'' May 2017. Available at: https://
www.jconline.com/story/news/education/2017/05/24/second-graders-
experiment-launch-into-space/102083064/
    \2\ See: Purdue University, ``Purdue School Launchboxes available 
to send school experiments into space,''July 2018. Available at: 
https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2018/Q3/purdue-school-
launchboxes-available-to-send-school-experiments-into-space.html
    \3\ See: Scott Miley, News and Tribune, ``Score one for the kids: 
Say's firefly dubbed state insect.'' Availableat: https://
www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2018/Q3/purdue-school-launch
boxes-available-to-send-school-experiments-into-space.html
    \4\ See: Meghan Holden, Journal & Courier, ``Second graders' 
experiment will launch into space,'' May2017. Available at: https://
www.jconline.com/story/news/education/2017/05/24/second-graders-
experiment-launch-into-space/102083064/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Enhance scientific understanding of the Earth and the Universe. The 
growing number of commercial space companies providing cost-effective 
and frequent access to the spaceflight environment is enabling a 
greater scientific understanding of our Earth and the universe. For 
example, commercial suborbital platforms are enabling scientists to 
better study and understand the Earth's upper atmospheric conditions 
(90 kilometers and above), which we know little about due to lack of 
access to this region, which was too high for balloons and too low for 
spacecraft.\5\ In fact, we know more about the upper atmosphere of 
Saturn's moon, Titan. Now, commercial suborbital vehicles are enabling 
new scientific study of that region, along with other areas. Overall, 
the National Academies of Science has found, ``[S]uborbital [platforms] 
enable important discoveries in science, rapid response to unexpected, 
episodic phenomena, and a range of specialized capabilities that enable 
a wide variety of cutting edge research in areas such as Earth 
observations, climate, astrophysics, and solar-terrestrial 
observations, as well as calibration and validation of satellite 
mission instruments and data.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ See Tim Fernholz, ``Three minutes of microgravity is worth the 
cost of a small house, if you're a scientist.'' Quartz. January 12, 
2018. Available at: https://qz.com/1174480/blue-origins-new-shepard-
and-virgin-galactics-spaceshiptwo-put-science-in-space-for-three-
minutes-and-thats-a-game-changer/
    \6\ See: National Academies of Science (NAS), ``Revitalizing NASA's 
Suborbital Program: Advancing Science, Driving Innovation, and 
Developing Workforce,'' 2010. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/
catalog/12862/revitalizing-nasas-suborbital-program-advancing-science-
driving-innovation-and-developing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Increase hands-on training opportunities and workforce development 
experiences for the next generation of space scientists and engineers. 
The growing number of commercial space companies providing cost-
effective and frequent access to the spaceflight environment is 
enabling greater hands-on training opportunities and workforce 
development experiences for the next generation of space scientists and 
engineers. The National Academies of Science has found, ``[S]uborbital 
[platforms] provide effective, hands-on, engineering and management 
experience that transfers readily to NASA spaceflight missions. These 
opportunities, which provide for cradle to grave hands-on mission 
experiences and training for students, researchers, principal 
investigators, project managers, and engineers, are vital to future 
space endeavors.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ See: National Academies of Science (NAS), ``Revitalizing NASA's 
Suborbital Program: Advancing Science, Driving Innovation, and 
Developing Workforce,'' 2010. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/
catalog/12862/revitalizing-nasas-suborbital-program-advancing-science-
driving- innovation-and-developing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This point was driven home in a recent NASA Office of Inspector 
General report outlining key factors contributing to NASA's project 
management challenges, ``[M]ost [NASA] project managers and senior 
officials we spoke with said that experience and on-the-job training 
were keys to a project manager's ability to manage cost, schedule, and 
performance goals. In that regard, managers described NASA's small 
projects [e.g. NASA's Flight Opportunities Program] as invaluable for 
developing management skills and learning the key elements of project 
management, including making appropriate trade-offs among cost, 
schedule, and performance goals when necessary.'' \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ See: The Honorable Paul K. Martin, NASA Office of Inspector 
General (OIG), ``NASA Cost and ScheduleOverruns: Acquisitions and 
Program Management Challenges,'' June 2018. Available at: https://
oig.nasa.gov/docs/CT-18-002.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Improve program management by flight-testing new technologies and 
techniques relatively inexpensively. The growing number of commercial 
space companies providing cost-effective and frequent access to the 
spaceflight environment is improving program management by flight-
testing new technologies and techniques relatively inexpensively. The 
National Academies of Science has found, ``[S]uborbital [platforms] 
provide essential technical innovation and risk mitigation that benefit 
spaceflight missions through the development and demonstration of 
technology and instruments that later fly on NASA spacecraft.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ See: National Academies of Science (NAS), ``Revitalizing NASA's 
Suborbital Program: Advancing Science, Driving Innovation, and 
Developing Workforce,'' 2010. Available at: https://www.nap.edu/
catalog/12862/revitalizing-nasas-suborbital-program-advancing-science-
driving-innovation-and-developing
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The importance of early technology risk reduction through flight-
testing was driven home in a recent NASA Office of Inspector General 
(OIG) report outlining key factors contributing to project management 
challenges: ``The technical complexity inherent in NASA projects 
remains a major challenge to achieving cost and schedule goals, with 
project managers attempting to predict the amount of time and money 
needed to develop one-of-a-kind, first-of-their-kind technologies 
instruments, and spacecraft. NASA historically has underestimated the 
level of effort needed to develop, mature, and integrate these 
technologies, as well as account for the extensive pre-launch testing 
required to reduce risk and increase the likelihood that the 
technologies will operate as designed in space.'' \10\ Increased 
flight-testing on low-cost commercial suborbital platforms will help 
address this problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\ See: The Honorable Paul K. Martin, NASA Office of Inspector 
General (OIG), ``NASA Cost and Schedule Overruns: Acquisitions and 
Program Management Challenges,'' June 2018. Available at: https://
oig.nasa.gov/docs/CT-18-002.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Expand economic activity--creating a pipeline for commercial 
economy Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) and on the International Space Station 
(ISS). One of the Nation's top priorities is to facilitate a robust, 
sustainable U.S. commercial presence in LEO and on the ISS, which is 
underpinned by the need for a growing sphere of microgravity economic 
activity. Commercial suborbital capabilities play a critical role in 
creating this microgravity demand pipeline by providing low-cost 
platforms to conduct vital technology development and research. Any 
successful strategy to create a robust economy in LEO should position 
commercial suborbital capabilities as a critical component.
Conclusion
    These are exciting times in commercial spaceflight. We should all 
be proud of what American companies are achieving--we are establishing 
our Nation as the clear leader in space exploration and development. 
The challenges we face today are not small, but we have the ability and 
opportunity to address them in a thoughtful and impactful manner given 
Congress' and the Administration's support.
    As we prepare to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 
moon landing, CSF members are honoring the past by working to fully 
realize a revolution in access to space that will open the space 
frontier to the American people and their enterprises. We look forward 
to continuing to work with this body to promote safety, reliability and 
the advancement of the commercial space industry.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cantwell, I appreciate your invitation 
to testify before the Committee today. Thank you for your attention, 
and I look forward to your questions.
                                 ______
                                 
                                Appendix
             The Commercial Spaceflight Federation's (CSF)
       FY 2020 Transportation, House and Urban Development (THUD)
                    Appropriations Priority Requests

Project Title: Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST)
Agency: FAA
Account: Operations
Request Amount: $25.6M
Report Language:
The Committee directs the Office of Commercial Space Transportation to 
continue to prioritize licensing and regulatory streamlining 
activities. The Committee urges the Associate Administrator to complete 
negotiations with the Department of Defense to ensure that the 
Secretary of Transportation will be responsible for public safety 
during licensed and permitted launch and reentry operations on Federal 
ranges, with the Department of Defense maintaining responsibility for 
public safety during ground operations.

Project Title: Commercial Space
Agency: FAA
Account: Facilities and Equipment
Request Amount: $33M
Report Language:
Continuing growth in the U.S. commercial space industry requires the 
urgent modernization of decades-old methodology for maintaining public 
safety in airspace around commercial space launches and reentries. The 
Committee directs the Associate Administrators for NexGen and for 
Commercial Space Transportation to work collaboratively and exercise 
the FAA's broad authority to use other transactions and other 
innovative partnership methods to accelerate the development and 
certification of tools for en-route real-time tracking, calculation and 
display of the flight path and dynamic hazard areas for space launch 
and reentry activities on air traffic controller screens.

Project Title: Commercial Space Transportation Safety
Agency: FAA
Account: Research, Engineering and Development
Request Amount: $6M

Project Title: Space Transportation Infrastructure Matching (STIM) 
Grants Program
Agency: FAA
Account: Space Transportation Infrastructure Matching (STIM) Grants 
Program
Request Amount: $10M
Report Language:
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation (AST) maintains the Space Transportation Infrastructure 
Matching (STIM) Grants Program for the purpose of ensuring the 
resiliency of the space transportation infrastructure in the United 
States. The U.S. Congress mandated the Grant Program under Sec. 51 
Chapter 511 Space Infrastructure Matching Grants. This legislation 
authorizes the use of Federal monies in conjunction with matching 
state, local and private funds to complete technical and environmental 
studies and design and construction of space transportation 
infrastructure, including real property to meet the needs of the United 
States commercial space transportation industry.

    The Chairman. Thank you very much to all of you. You sped 
through it and the vote has not yet begun. So we got a little 
time here.
    Let me start with you, Mr. Brooks. I found it interesting 
that you speak approvingly of congressional mandates, 
particularly with regard to specific short-term deadlines. And 
you look askance at some bureaucratic requirements that you are 
compelled to comply with. So let me ask you to expand on this, 
and then I will see if anyone else on the panel wants to 
respond.
    You say there are unnecessary layers. Give us examples of 
that. And you say it now takes up to six times longer--six 
times longer--to approve UAS Center of Excellence research 
because of a recent policy change. What happened there and what 
do we need to do?
    Mr. Brooks. First, I will point out that the UAS Center of 
Excellence was the fastest standup of a center of excellence in 
history. We literally did it in about four and a half months 
from the date of award to our first contracts.
    The Chairman. Good for you.
    Mr. Brooks. So we have been moving very, very, very 
quickly, and we tend to push on others to try to match our 
pace.
    In this particular case, FAA had sole review for our 
research project's approval, funding streams, things of that 
nature, and we could normally--once we decided on the content 
of a project, we could run that through the approval wickets in 
a matter of weeks.
    Recently, there has been a move that the Department of the 
Transportation has now exercised their right to review all 
projects in all of the centers of excellence, and all of a 
sudden, our approval process has been delayed up to many 
months. So far, we have not seen any substantive changes due to 
this review. So I do question the value in the absence of some 
concrete examples of how they were made better. We know what we 
need to do. We need to do it quickly, and we are anxious to 
move forward to do that. And we think that one way to help is 
to remove some of these layers.
    The Chairman. Were these being reviewed at the FAA level 
and then kicked up to----
    Mr. Brooks. They were previously reviewed and approved at 
the FAA level, and now they go through a second level of review 
at the Department level.
    The Chairman. OK. Mr. Merkle, is that an unnecessary step, 
and do we need to fix that?
    Mr. Merkle. I would be happy to get with you and your staff 
and explain the details.
    The Chairman. OK. But do the best you can in about 60 
seconds.
    Mr. Merkle. As a recipient of the research of ASSURE, we 
are a sponsoring office and we are also one of the recipients 
of the ASSURE research, and we greatly benefit from what they 
do. So we too share the desire to be as effective and timely as 
possible. And sometimes the grant process, based on the number 
of grants being processed at any one time or the complexity of 
the grants, takes a little bit longer.
    But again, as for all the details of the review process, I 
do not actually own that, but I would be happy to get back with 
you and explain it.
    The Chairman. OK. Well, we have the testimony, verbal and 
written, that there is no discernible value added, but it is 
taking six times longer. That is the sort of thing that this 
committee might be able to help with as a matter of oversight. 
But I am sure there are people on the other side who think this 
is valuable and contributing to safety.
    Mr. Merkle. There are.
    The Chairman. So, Mr. Brooks, what works and what does not 
work? Can you give us an example of finding something that does 
not work?
    Mr. Brooks. So to expand on one of my earlier comments, 
when you want to get something done quickly, you want a highly 
confident streamlined team that is focused on an issue at a 
time. The SARP has done that, the Center of Excellence has done 
that, and a few other organizations have managed to solve some 
really big problems very quickly. As an old friend of mine used 
to say, when you try to boil the ocean, it takes a very, very 
long time.
    And our initial approach years ago was to do just that. We 
would try to solve all the problems at once. We would build 
incredibly large committees, hundreds of people. And as you 
well know, past a certain critical mass, that completely stalls 
all innovation and momentum.
    I think that we have proven through the SARP, through the 
Center of Excellence, and a few other great organizations that 
a concentrated effort, let us rack our problems, hit the top 
priority ones first with a concentrated effort and start moving 
down because those wins enable us to fly more and more. When we 
fly more and more, we collect more data. We understand what is 
truly safe. And so by focusing on specific problems like we did 
with the SARP, go tell us how closely an unmanned system can 
operate in proximity to another aircraft, what is safe and what 
is not.
    The Chairman. What is the answer to that?
    Mr. Brooks. So for a small UAS operating in proximity to a 
manned aircraft, that is about 2,000 feet laterally, sir.
    The Chairman. 2,000 feet laterally.
    Mr. Brooks. Yes.
    The Chairman. Thank you very much.
    Senator Cantwell.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are so 
many issues to discuss. So I thank the witnesses again for 
their testimony and illuminating how we move forward. I think 
someone could write a chapter just on this, how the Federal 
Government and innovation work together to move forward, 
because I think this is like just one of the early examples of 
how challenging this is going to be and how important it is to 
get it right. So everybody said very illuminating things. So 
thank you for that.
    Switching to--well, let me start with space launch and the 
issues related to that. So, Mr. Monteith, how are we working to 
integrate these issues particularly as it relates to the Air 
Force and Air Force launching sites? Because the FAA, under 
Title 51, the Department of Transportation has sole Federal 
jurisdiction over space launch. The Air Force acting as a 
landlord has prescribed safety rules as well. So I want to make 
sure that we are unifying requirements in a process so that we 
can prioritize safety and make sure that we are getting all of 
this coordinated.
    And how are we supposed to look at the commercial aviation 
implications? Obviously, launch activity takes place when it is 
ready. Right? And so you have weather conditions. You have 
issues, but shutting down the airspace also has implications. 
We had an incident in the Northwest where during one of our 
Presidential visits to the state, a float plane did not 
register and flew into Seattle airspace at the same time as the 
Presidential visit. And then there was the launch of the 
aircraft from Portland thinking that we were under some sort of 
potential threat. So we have had to work very hard to make sure 
that aviation industry was not impacted every time a President 
came to Washington State. Being able to fly float planes in and 
out of Lake Washington is just pretty standard.
    So this whole issue of how to integrate the commercial 
travel with space launch, which is not always predictable--so 
how do we get a more unified process here and get input from 
those individuals so that we are not shutting down airspace of 
commercial aviation travelers for three hours at a time?
    Mr. Monteith. Senator Cantwell, thank you for the question.
    I will take the second part first on the integration of 
commercial space into the national airspace. We also understand 
how important it is for everyone to be able to operate safely 
through the national airspace with minimal disruption to each 
mode of transportation.
    With that in mind, we are working as an agency on a space 
data integrator which will, when fully implemented, will take 
the amount of time it currently takes to inform a flight crew 
that there is a hazardous operation--in this case, it would be 
an unexpected break-up in flight of a rocket vehicle, which is 
why we close down large portions of the airspace because debris 
may fall for up to 20 minutes. That process right now, because 
it is not automated, takes anywhere from 14 to 20 minutes. We 
are developing a program that will potentially eventually take 
that notification time to under a minute. Once you have that 
kind of dynamic management, you can close--or you reduce the 
amount of closures not only from a size perspective but from a 
time perspective because you do get that dynamic response and 
your telemetry is coming down in real time.
    Senator Cantwell. I look forward to hearing more about 
this. I think the complexity here is going to be pretty great 
because, again, I just do not think people know exactly when 
you are going to launch. So I do not know if that means we are 
going to move to more remote locations as opposed to being in 
more dense population areas.
    But I want to use my final minutes here. Mr. Merkle, do you 
think we are going to make this July 21 deadline for the remote 
identification rule?
    Mr. Merkle. We are working toward that. We have dedicated a 
large number of resources to not only the rule but to 
developing the standards that support the rule and beginning to 
implement the infrastructure simultaneously. So we are working 
on the policy, the regulatory, the infrastructure build-out, 
which we have a request for information to build a cadre of 
industry to come in and partner with us to build it and also 
the standards.
    Senator Cantwell. So the answer to that was yes.
    Mr. Merkle. The answer is we are still working to that 
schedule, yes.
    Senator Cantwell. Thank you.

                STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM NEBRASKA

    Senator Fischer [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Cantwell.
    Mr. Merkle, section 2209 of the FAA Extension Safety and 
Security Act of 2016 directs the FAA to set up a process by 
which operators of fixed site facilities could petition the 
agency to prohibit UAS operations over-critical infrastructure. 
And critical infrastructure includes fixed site facilities such 
as energy production and transmission facilities and railroads.
    Can you provide an update on the FAA?s efforts to implement 
this provision?
    Mr. Merkle. I would be happy to, Senator.
    First, in the area where those facilities are government 
facilities, we can use existing authorities, and we have made 
great progress in mapping those out.
    The next piece that needs to come to fruition is we need to 
generate a rule around this and the associated infrastructure 
and policies to support it. One of the things we anticipate is 
there will be a great number, thousands and thousands, of 
potential requests for these restrictions. So we are working on 
the processes for how we would manage that.
    And we also think that as we move toward remote 
identification, that it will also be helpful in making sure 
that as people begin to operate, we can enforce what we 
implement in 2209.
    Senator Fischer. Has the FAA received applications to 
prohibit UAS operations? And if so, have you granted those?
    Mr. Merkle. In the case of local incident commanders and in 
support of public safety missions, we routinely implement 
those. There are some cases where some companies have requested 
general flight restrictions that not only pertain to UAS but 
they pertain to manned aircraft as well, and we have 
implemented those as well.
    Senator Fischer. Have you taken any other steps to prevent 
unauthorized operations, whether it is over-critical 
infrastructure or near-critical infrastructure?
    Mr. Merkle. We have. As of yesterday, we announced new 
information for airports and how they can effectively use 
counter-UAS technologies to detect at airports and implement a 
process for rallying local public safety response and the 
airport and the FAA all together as a coordinated response.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you.
    Mr. Merkle, agriculture is increasingly utilizing new 
technology in innovative ways and that includes the adoption of 
UAS. What are some of the unique characteristics FAA has 
learned about ag operations with UAS either through the part 
107 process or the integration pilot program?
    Mr. Merkle. Well, I am very happy to report that since we 
have implemented part 107, agricultural operations have become 
very routine, particularly visual line of sight. We are also 
working through partnerships for safety and other programs, 
including the integration pilot program, enabling beyond visual 
line of sight operations for agriculture as well.
    Senator Fischer. I have heard directly from farmers and 
ranchers about the increased usage of UAS and how helpful it is 
for their businesses, for their operations. Do you hear 
directly from them as well?
    Mr. Merkle. We do, and they seem very pleased. They seem to 
be able to operate much more in conformance with what their 
mission needs are today. And as they identify new needs, we are 
working with them to identify new ways to approve their 
missions.
    Senator Fischer. Have you reached out to any ag groups 
specifically in trying to provide information to them, to 
educate them on rules and regulations that are out there 
besides providing them with that information, to also get that 
feedback?
    Mr. Merkle. We have. We have reached out to agriculture 
through a number of means. We have a series of webinars for 107 
operators that help them understand how to best operate under 
part 107. We have also reached out either directly through 
their associations or through companies that work with them and 
helping them understand how to build their operations.
    Senator Fischer. Thank you.
    Senator Cruz.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. TED CRUZ, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cruz. Thank you very much.
    Welcome to each of the witnesses.
    Let me start, Mr. Stallmer, with a couple questions for 
you. As you note in your testimony, although the number of 
launches has increased in the past 5 years from 12 to 32, that 
number pales in comparison to the roughly 15.5 million flights 
that transit the national airspace in a given year.
    Given this dramatic disparity in frequency, as well as the 
maturity of the traditional aviation sector as compared to the 
commercial space flight sector, does it make sense in your 
judgment to treat commercial space flight exactly the same as 
traditional aviation for the purpose of national airspace 
integration?
    Mr. Stallmer. Thank you very much for that question, 
Senator.
    I think at the time, no. I do not think they can be 
compared the same. And let me give you a few quick examples.
    In the past week alone, out of Texas, in western Texas, 
Blue Origin recently launched and landed their New Shepard 
launch vehicle, a vehicle that was not around 6 years ago--5 
years ago.
    SpaceX has just recently launched a mission to the 
International Space Station carrying cargo to the International 
Space Station.
    A year and a half ago, SpaceX launched a Falcon heavy 
launch vehicle that landed two boosters successfully back to 
Earth. This had never been done before.
    We have new entrants that are--I should not say new 
entrants, but new concepts, new capabilities that are entering 
the market at a rapid pace that are all very unique. So the 
maturity of our industry--although we are making rapid 
advances, I do not think that we should fall under the same 
guidelines and rules that an industry that has been a very 
robust industry for the past 50 or 60 years fall under those 
same rules.
    So I think it takes a little more time. I like the regime 
that we have right now with the FAA's Office of Commercial 
Space Transportation, the licensing procedures, the permitting 
procedures, and how they have been working with industry and 
regulating industry. I think that is the ideal approach as it 
is a crawl, walk, run. The industry is doing outstanding, but 
there is a lot of unique entrants into the industry and it is 
only going to continue to grow. And we need that support to 
help it continue to grow.
    Senator Cruz. Mr. Monteith, as you note, title 51 in the 
U.S. Code directs the Secretary of Transportation to, 
``encourage, facilitate, and promote commercial space launches 
and reentries by the private sector.'' How important is that 
statutory mandate, and how does DOT go about complying with it?
    Mr. Monteith. Thank you, Mr. Senator.
    First off, I would tell you that the best way for us to 
enable, facilitate, and promote the industry is to ensure that 
we have the right regulations at the right scope at the right 
time. The worst thing we can do for this industry is over-
regulate to the point where we are not increasing effectiveness 
of public safety, but we are creating hurdles to either new 
innovative technologies or putting undue bureaucratic overhead 
on our existing companies.
    As far as what we call EFP specifically, the way that we in 
the Department carry out those responsibilities are primarily 
through our engagement with industry, with organizations like 
Mr. Stallmer's. And that way we understand what industry is 
doing. We listen to their concerns, where we should focus, and 
quite frankly, where we can get better in our processes 
primarily related to the length of time it takes to license an 
operation without compromising safety.
    Senator Cruz. Mr. Lovering, according to a report published 
by Deloitte in July 2018, the market for vertical takeoff and 
landing vehicles is burgeoning at a meteoric rate. The report 
estimates that the market will be worth $21 billion by 2035. 
The report also states that the global unmanned traffic 
management market is expected to grow at a compounded annual 
growth rate of over 20 percent from 2019 to 2025, all of which 
will mean more jobs and more opportunity for Americans.
    Mr. Lovering, in your judgment, how will the growth in the 
UAS market benefit Texas and the Nation more broadly?
    Mr. Lovering. Thank you, Senator Cruz.
    UAM, while it is focused today on launching urban access to 
the skies, this is just the beginning. So in your state, in 
particular, we have already seen a lot of activity around 
Dallas and an interest there. There are, obviously, lots of 
other cities that will be very interesting for us to explore. 
And I think while in the beginning we are looking at having 
city integration for these services, as battery technology 
improves, as the battery costs come down, we are looking at 
being able to expand this to more and more areas. So maybe we 
will start off in urban areas but then eventually suburban and 
rural areas. So we are really seeing this as being able to 
access a wider range of people in the cities and also in rural 
areas.
    Senator Cruz. Thank you.
    The Chairman [presiding]. Thank you very much, Senator 
Cruz.
    Senator Peters.

                STATEMENT OF HON. GARY PETERS, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MICHIGAN

    Senator Peters. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you to our witnesses here today.
    I want to follow up--my first question follow up on some of 
the discussion I heard with Senator Fischer related to the 
agricultural sector. And so my question is to you, Mr. Merkle.
    I am certainly glad the FAA has established a Drone 
Advisory Committee to better inform agency policies. And as you 
are well aware, three out of four American farmers are now 
using UAS.
    I am working on some legislation to make sure that on that 
advisory panel that we are hearing directly from the 
agricultural industry, as well as forestry and other areas. 
Would you support adding members to the Drone Advisory 
Committee from rural America, particularly agriculture and 
forestry?
    Mr. Merkle. In the composition of the Drone Advisory 
Committee, we support having a broad range of users and 
manufacturers, operators. So it is really up to the Congress 
and the Secretary how that is composed, but we do support a 
broad representation. We have a very rich representation from 
state, local, and particularly public safety right now.
    Senator Peters. Right. So I gather from your testimony you 
would be supportive of making sure there is adequate rural 
representation on that board if Congress decides?
    Mr. Merkle. We definitely support a very broad range of all 
the users to make sure everyone is at the table and all the 
voices are heard.
    Senator Peters. Great. Thank you.
    General Monteith, questions for you. As we have talked 
about the increase of launches as we continue to put more 
vehicles into space, my question for you is, is there 
sufficient Federal support for commercial space launch 
facilities? So, for example, is the FAA looking at how the 
demand for launches is expanding and consider whether or not we 
have adequate facilities around the country to launch the 
increased traffic that we are seeing?
    Mr. Monteith. Thank you, Senator Peters, for your question.
    I believe we do. Within my office, we license not only 
launches and reentries, we also license spaceports in the 
United States. We currently have 12 licensed spaceports, four 
that are launching rockets at this time. And recently we have 
stood up an Office of Spaceports so that we can better 
consolidate our efforts within my office to ensure that we are 
working with the appropriate stakeholders that currently exist 
and also to ensure that we have streamlined processes to 
evaluate and license prospective spaceport applicants.
    Senator Peters. So that is my next question. The Michigan 
Launch Alliance is looking at siting a launch facility for 
polar orbits in northern Michigan but also a launch over some 
restricted airspace which, from a safety perspective, would 
make a lot of sense to get into those polar orbits.
    What support does the FAA offer to spaceport activity like 
we are seeing standing up in Michigan?
    Mr. Monteith. So, sir, interestingly I am going up there in 
a couple of months to speak at an event and directly talk to 
the folks who are proposing this.
    But within my office, we offer what we call pre-application 
discussions. So we work with potential spaceport applicants to 
help them navigate through the system and help them understand 
what will be required for us to effectively evaluate a license.
    Senator Peters. Very good.
    Just a quick question for you, General Monteith. As we are 
all well aware, 50 years ago two Americans made a giant leap 
for mankind and humankind when they landed on the Moon. I think 
if you are looking at numerous public and private missions that 
are now being planned to go back to the Moon, it is a very 
exciting time for space exploration.
    But I also believe that it is probably important that we 
protect and preserve the honor of that Apollo 11 landing site. 
I know there are some NASA recommendations to preserve that 
site as additional missions go to the Moon. Would you support 
codification through legislation to protect the Apollo 11 
landing site for future generations?
    Mr. Monteith. Sir, I think it is important that we protect 
all of our historical sites, whether it is on the Moon or it is 
here on Earth. Things like the Apollo moon landing, the first 
only occurs once, and I think it is critical around the globe 
that we understand that and we preserve those types of unique 
locations.
    Senator Peters. Thank you. I appreciate your testimony.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Peters.
    Senator Blackburn.

              STATEMENT OF HON. MARSHA BLACKBURN, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

    Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, Mr. Brooks, I want to say a welcome to you. As a 
Mississippi State grad, I am delighted to learn a little bit 
about the Raspet Center of Excellence--or the ASSURE Center of 
Excellence I think it is actually and the work that you all are 
doing there. I will say this. You probably have plenty of open 
space around you that you can do this experimentation. And we 
thank you for the work specifically that you are doing that 
encourages protecting our coast and our borders and supporting 
our men and women in uniform who are trying to protect this 
nation?s borders. So we thank you for that.
    Mr. Merkle, I want to talk with you a minute about the 
Memphis, Shelby County UAS integration pilot program. We all 
know that the Memphis airport, in partnership with FedEx which 
is collocated there at the airport, are doing some work. They 
have done some advanced drone operations and some beyond the 
visual line of sight operations over people and operations at 
night. And they are testing the use of drones for aircraft 
inspections and security and perimeter surveillance there. We 
also have the National Guard that is located on that same 
field. And I think it is really quite impressive what they are 
doing. You have got about 240 flights a day, 4.3 million metric 
tons of cargo, and they are processing about 475,000 shipments 
per hour there at the Memphis airport.
    So we are a year into this program, and what has the FAA 
learned from this program and the data that has been gathered 
from it?
    Mr. Merkle. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    As you mentioned, at Memphis airport, Shelby County, we 
have made some tremendous strides, and I think it is a great 
example of how we can quantify the benefits of UAS. So the one 
specific example of visual inspection of aircraft--it took up 
to 3 hours to inspect one of those cargo jets, and now it takes 
less than an hour. And it is also a benefit to human safety in 
that people do not have to crawl around on the aircraft, and 
now the drone can do that.
    So at Memphis and our other IPP sites, we are really 
starting to see the data roll in in three areas: one, enabling 
more and more complex operations. So the initial operations 
that we have are starting to bring in data for more and more 
complex operations. And in conjunction with the research that 
is done at ASSURE, we had a very important approval of a 
national-wide waiver for an insurance company to be able to do 
inspection of post-disaster and go in, as a result of some of 
the work they did after Hurricane Florence. That is another 
example. And so beyond visual line of sight work, detect and 
avoid work, all of these things--technologically how do we 
better integrate into the airspace system.
    And now that we have flights, we are also starting to see 
community-wise, what does this mean to a community. So now we 
can interact with a local community and collect data on how do 
you----
    Senator Blackburn. Yes. Let me ask you this. What do you 
see as the next step applications for the technology and for 
the data? You just mentioned moving to communities. So where do 
you think this is going to take you?
    Mr. Merkle. So let us start with communities. Engaging a 
community early and actively engaging them is a very good way 
to ensure that the operations get up and running and are 
supported by the community. Community engagement is vital. So 
that is also informing how we do airspace access for those 
aircraft as well. And it alleviates the community's concerns 
about airspace access.
    I think the next place we are going technologically for 
integration into the NAS, which is our main goal, is beyond 
visual line of sight and more and more complex operations for 
beyond visual line of sight, kind of working off those gates 
that have been holding us to this longer mission.
    Senator Blackburn. I have one other question that I will 
submit for the record for you to answer, but it deals with 
adequate spectrum for the national airspace system. I think 
that for many of us who do policy work in this area, assuring 
that we are going to have the available spectrum to meet the 
needs is something that is important.
    I yield back.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Blackburn.
    Mr. Merkle, how is the FAA's current UAS rulemaking effort 
going, and are you able to give us a date on when you will 
release remote ID?
    Mr. Merkle. Thank you for the question.
    Our current plan for remote ID is to release it in July. It 
is July. And we are working currently to ensure that we keep 
the policy component, along with the standards component and 
the remote ID infrastructure component, all developed and 
harmonized.
    The Chairman. Very good. That is helpful information.
    Let me ask you, Mr. Merkle, do you have access to other 
testimony? I do not know. Do we make written testimony 
available?
    Mr. Merkle. No, Senator, I did not----
    The Chairman. OK. You know what?
    Mr. Stallmer, on about the fourth page of his testimony, 
lists a number of things the FAA should do--13 recommendations. 
So you have not read them, and I guess it would take too long 
to read them all.
    How are you working with people like that on suggestions 
that they are making like establishing a space operations 
committee, establishing a steering committee to provide ongoing 
input to the FAA and NAS, and invest in developing tools and 
capabilities that will enable a future NAS state where air 
traffic management shifts from segregation to integration? What 
do you think about those?
    Mr. Merkle. I would actually ask my colleague to answer 
that question.
    The Chairman. OK. Mr. Monteith, you are a better person to 
ask certainly.
    Mr. Monteith. Senator Wicker, I have reviewed Mr. 
Stallmer's suggestions, and I would say that we currently work 
with industry and will continue to work with industry to be 
good regulatory partners with them. Some of the items that he 
brings up we are already working on, and the others we will 
continue to address.
    The Chairman. OK. You know, I think what I will ask you to 
go on the record for those 13 suggestions. If you would just go 
ahead and respond on the record within a week or so, that would 
be helpful.
    Mr. Lovering, by the time I get through working at night, 
usually the expressway is cleared. But on those occasions when 
I have got to get my little Honda on the expressway and head to 
the 14th Street Bridge along about 6 or 6:30, it is pretty 
crowded.
    I would really like to get on some sort of hovercraft 
somewhere around the Russell Building and land on some sort of 
pad, say, near Old Town. When am I going to be able to do that? 
When are American citizens in urban areas going to be able to 
do that? And is it going to be completely safe? Will it be 
affordable to regular working Americans?
    Mr. Lovering. Thank you, Chairman Wicker.
    Personally I would love nothing more than for you to take 
that trip with us as well.
    Roughly in terms of timeline for when this is all going to 
roll out, we are looking at mid to late 2020s practically. 
Frankly, though, especially leaning in our 50-year history of 
developing safe and certified and secure aircraft, we are going 
to take the time we need to ensure these vehicles are safe 
before they are flying people.
    The Chairman. Well, that is a good idea. I like ``mids'' 
better.
    So is it going to be affordable? How in the world will the 
average working American be able to afford such a thing?
    Mr. Lovering. I have two perspectives on that. So first, I 
think one example--it is not exactly these electric airplanes 
quite yet, but we do have our Voom helicopter operations 
currently operating in two cities outside the U.S. We are 
launching here in the U.S. this year. But it is an app on your 
phone and it connects you to a helicopter. And the price that 
you pay for that kind of trip is roughly the equivalent of a 
Lyft premium ride service. It will be a little bit more than 
expensive, almost like an expensive taxi effectively.
    But we are expecting all these costs to come down quite 
rapidly. One of the reasons that we find that these type of 
operations are expensive today is because we do not get that 
many flight hours per year out of these aircraft, but as 
operations scale up, the flight hours that are being flown by 
these vehicles increase dramatically which lowers a lot of the 
prices. There are a lot of fixed prices in there that you have 
to amortize.
    The Chairman. So where can I do that now?
    Mr. Lovering. Today you can do it in Sao Paulo, Brazil; 
Mexico City, Mexico; and then we are going to be launching in 
San Francisco this year.
    The Chairman. Maybe we need to have a field hearing.
    [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you very much for being 
here. As I said before, we were thrown into a little confusion 
because of the scheduling of a series of five votes. But I want 
to say how much I appreciate each of you coming.
    We are going to close the hearing now, and let me note that 
the hearing record will remain open for two weeks. During this 
time, Senators are asked to submit any questions for the 
record. Upon receipt, the witnesses are requested to submit 
their written answers to the Committee as soon as possible, 
perhaps by tomorrow afternoon. No as soon as possible.
    We very much appreciate you coming. Thank you for adjusting 
to our schedule.
    And unless my staff tells me otherwise, we are adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 10:44 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                            A P P E N D I X

                      Electronic Privacy Information Center
                                        Washington, DC, May 6, 2019

Hon. Roger Wicker, Chairman,
Hon. Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member,
U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Wicker and Ranking Member Cantwell:

    In advance of the upcoming hearing on ``New Entrants in the 
National Airspace: Policy, Technology, and Security Issues for 
Congress'' \1\ we write to inform you of EPIC's ongoing work to 
establish privacy safeguards and identification requirements for the 
deployment of drones in the National Airspace (NAS). The Federal 
Aviation Administration (FAA) must: 1) issue regulations on drone 
privacy, and 2) mandate the remote identification of drones. Further 
delay jeopardizes the security, safety, and privacy of Americans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ New Entrants in the National Airspace: Policy, Technology, and 
Security Issues for Congress, 116th Cong. (2019), S. Comm. on Commerce, 
Sci., and Trans., https://www.commerce.senate
.gov/public/index.cfm/2019/5/new-entrants-in-the-national-airspace-
policy-technology-and-security-issues-for-congress (May 8, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EPIC is a public-interest research center established in 1994 to 
focus public attention on emerging privacy and civil liberties issues. 
EPIC has taken a particular interest in the unique privacy problems of 
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs or ``drones''), has petitioned the FAA 
to establish limits on surveillance by drones, and has sued the FAA for 
its failure to establish privacy safeguards to protect Americans.\2\ 
EPIC sued the FAA for the agency's failure to establish drone privacy 
safeguards.\3\ EPIC has also filed suit to enforce the transparency 
obligations of the Drone Advisory Committee, a body created by the FAA 
to study and make recommendations on U.S. drone policy.\4\ That FAA 
committee has routinely ignored its own survey data that makes clear 
that Americans are concerned about the surveillance risks associated 
with drones.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ EPIC v. FAA, No. 15-1075 (D.C. Cir. May 10, 2016); See also 
Domestic Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) and Drones, EPIC, https://
epic.org/privacy/drones/; See also EPIC, EPIC v. FAA, Challenging the 
FAA's Failure to Establish Drone Privacy Rules, https://epic.org/
privacy/litigation/apa/faa/drones/.
    \3\ EPIC v. FAA, https://epic.org/privacy/litigation/apa/faa/
drones/.
    \4\ EPIC v. Drone Advisory Committee, https://epic.org/privacy/
litigation/faca/epic-v-drone-advisory-committe/.
    \5\ Drone Advisory Committee survey, EPIC (obtained via FOIA), 
https://epic.org/privacy/litigation/faca/epic-v-drone-advisory-
committe/Drone-Advisory-Committee-survey-sept-2016.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EPIC has also pursued several open government matters regarding the 
FAA's decision making process, which appears intended to purposefully 
avoid the development of meaningful privacy safeguards.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ EPIC FOIA: Drone Industry Cozied Up to Public Officials (Dec. 
21, 2016), EPIC, https://epic.org/2016/12/epic-foia-drone-industry-
cozie.html; EPIC v. Department of Transportation--Drone Registration 
Task Force, EPIC, http://epic.org/foia/dot/drones/taskforce/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerial Drones: A Unique Privacy Threat
    Drones pose a unique threat to privacy. The technical and economic 
limitations to aerial surveillance change dramatically with the 
advancement of drone technology. Small, unmanned drones are already 
inexpensive; the surveillance capabilities of drones are rapidly 
advancing; and cheap storage is readily available to maintain 
repositories of surveillance data. A Pew Research Center survey found 
that a majority of Americans object to drones flying near private 
homes.\7\ However, in recent years individual drone use has soared, and 
the FAA predicts that 7 million drones will be sold by 2020.\8\ As 
drone use increases so do the risks to privacy and safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ Paul Hitlin, 8 percent of Americans say they own a drone, while 
more than half have seen one in operation, Pew Research Center (Dec. 
19, 2017), https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/12/19/8-of-
americans-say-they-own-a-drone-while-more-than-half-have-seen-one-in-
operation/.
    \8\ FAA Aerospace Forecast: Fiscal Years 2016-2036, FAA, 2016, 
https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/media/
FY2016-36_FAA_Aerospace_Forecast.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Drones are now regularly equipped with high definition cameras that 
increase the ability of a user to conduct domestic surveillance.\9\ The 
DJI Inspire 2 is a high-end, commercially available hobbyist drone 
about the size of a small desktop printer and weighs less than eight 
pounds, yet it can transmit high definition video to an operator over 
four miles away and can live-stream that video.\10\ Even lower-end 
hobbyist drones costing less than $100 can stream live video. The 
Hubsan X4 H502E DESIRE, a drone that can fit in the palm of your hand, 
utilizes a front facing high definition camera with 720P resolution 
that can stream live video up to 200 meters away.\11\ Drones can be 
used to view individuals inside their homes and can facilitate the 
harassment and stalking of unsuspecting victims.\12\ Drones can also be 
modified with tools that can enable them to gather personal information 
using infrared cameras, heat sensors, GPS, automated license plate 
readers, and facial recognition devices.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by EPIC, Mar. 8, 2012, 
https://epic.org/apa/lawsuit/EPIC-FAA-Drone-Petition-March-8-2012.pdf; 
Univ. of Wash. Tech. and Pub. Policy Clinic, Domestic Drones: Technical 
and Policy Issues 12 (2013), https://www.law.washington.edu/clinics/
technology/reports/droneslawanpolicy.pdf.
    \10\ DJI, Inspire 2, http://www.dji.com/inspire-2/info#specs.
    \11\ Hubsan, X4 H502E DESIRE, https://www.hubsanus.com/shop/
h502e.html.
    \12\ Petition for Rulemaking Submitted by EPIC, supra note 8.
    \13\ Id.; Ciara Bracken-Roche et al., Surveillance Studies Centre, 
Surveillance Drones: Privacy Implications of the Spread of Unmanned 
Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in Canada 46 (Apr. 30, 2014), http://
www.sscqueens.org/sites/default/files/Surveillance_Drones_Report.pdf; 
Mary Papenfuss, Utah Couple Arrested Over `Peeping Tom' Drone, 
Huffington Post (Feb. 17, 2017), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/
peeping-tom-drone_us_58a6847fe4b045cd34c03e56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Drones also pose risks to security and cybersecurity. Close calls 
between drones and traditional aircraft have risen significantly as 
their use becomes more widespread.\14\ Furthermore, the very features 
that make drones easy to operate also make them susceptible to 
cyberattacks.\15\ Hackers have the ability to exploit weaknesses in 
drone software to take over operation of a drone and access the camera 
and microphones.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Alan Levin, Drone-Plane Near misses, Other Incidents Surge 46 
percent in U.S., Bloomberg (Feb. 23, 2017), https://www.bloomberg.com/
news/articles/2017-02-23/drone-plane-near-misses
-other-incidents-surged-46-in-u-s.
    \15\ Dom Galeon, As Drones Become Tools of War, Companies Turn to 
Hacking Them, Futurism (Feb. 20, 2018), https://futurism.com/drone-
hack-technology; Kacey Deamer, How Can Drones Be Hacked? Let Us Count 
the Ways, Live Science, Jun. 10, 2016, http://www.livescience.com/
55046-how-can-drones-be-hacked.html.
    \16\ Wang Wei, You Can Hijack Nearly Any Drone Mid-Flight Using 
This Tiny Gadget, The Hacker News (Oct. 27, 2016), http://
thehackernews.com/2016/10/how-to-hack-drone.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The United States Defense of Department is well aware of the risks 
of commercial drones. According to an internal memo, dated May 23, 
2018, from the Secretary of Defense regarding Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 
Systems Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities, the ``DoD Inspector General 
found that DoD has not implemented an adequate process to access 
cybersecurity risks associated with using commercial-off-the-shelf 
(COTS) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS).'' \17\ As a consequence, the 
Secretary instructed:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\ Haye Kestello, Department of Defense bans the purchase of 
commercial-over-the-shelf UAS, including DJI drones effective 
immediately, DroneDJ, July 7, 2018, https://dronedj.com/2018/06/07/
department-of-defense-bans-the-purchase-of-commercial-over-the-shelf-
uas-including-dji-drones/

   ``Effectively immediately, you must suspend purchases of 
        COTS UAS for operational use until the DoD develops a strategy 
        to adequately assess and mitigate the risks associated with 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        their use.

   ``(U/FOUO) In addition you must suspend the use of COTS UASs 
        until the DoD identifies and fields a solution to mitigate 
        known cybersecurity risks.''

    The DoD decision follows a letter to the Secretary from Senator 
Chris Murphy outlining concerns about drones manufactured by DJI, the 
largest distributor of commercial drones in the United States.\18\ 
According to Senator Murphy, at least three separate agencies have 
found that the commercial unmanned aerial systems (UAS) from the 
Chinese drone manufacturer pose a potential national security threat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Senator Chris Murphy, Following Security Threats, Murphy Calls 
on Sec. Mattis to Ban Defense Department Use of Foreign-Made Commercial 
Drones: These vulnerabilities pose a tremendous national security risk 
. . . and without a trusted domestic source of unmanned aerial systems, 
we will continue to be vulnerable.'' (May 8, 2018), https://
www.murphy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/following-security-
threats-murphy-calls-on-sec-mattis-to-ban-defense-department-use-of-
foreign-made-commercial-drones-and-instead-support-us-drone-
manufacturers
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The privacy risks of drones, as well as the safety and security 
vulnerabilities, underscore the need for the FAA to develop drone 
privacy regulations. We urge the Committee to press the FAA to issue 
regulations on drone privacy, particularly following a ban by the 
Department of Defense on the purchase and use of commercial-off-the-
shelf drones.
The FAA Has Failed to Implement the Requirements of the FAA 
        Modernization Act
    The FAA has failed to take the action mandated by Congress. The FAA 
Modernization Act required the FAA to create a Comprehensive Plan to 
integrate drones into the National Airspace and subsequently conduct a 
notice and comment rulemaking. In the Plan, the FAA identified privacy 
as an important issue to address, acknowledging that ``as demand for 
[drones] increases, concerns regarding how [drones] will impact 
existing aviation grow stronger, especially in terms of safety, 
privacy, frequency crowding, and airspace congestion.'' \19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\ Joint Planning and Dev. Office, Fed. Aviation Admin., Unmanned 
Aircraft Systems (UAS) Comprehensive Plan: A Report on the Nation's UAS 
Path Forward 4 (2013), https://www
.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agi/reports/media/
UAS_Comprehensive_Plan
.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Under the FAA Modernization Act, Congress required the FAA to 
implement the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan via a public 
rulemaking within 46 months of the enactment of the Act. The FAA 
identified privacy as an important issue directly related to domestic 
drones, yet the agency has failed to address privacy in the agency's 
only public rulemaking on drones in the National Airspace.\20\ Indeed 
it has been over 60 months and the FAA has failed to implement the 
rulemaking that addresses the issues identified in the Comprehensive 
Plan, including privacy, as required by Congress.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ Operation and Certification of Small Unmanned Aircraft 
Systems, 81 Fed. Reg. 42,063 (June 28, 2016) (codified at 14 C.F.R. 
pts. 21, 43, 61, 91, 101, 107, 119, 133, and 183).
    \21\ FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, Pub. L. 112-95 
Sec. 332, 126 Stat. 73-75.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA Has Failed to Conduct the Required Drone Privacy Report
    Soon after the FAA's Comprehensive Plan identified privacy as an 
important drone integration issue, the agency was ordered by Congress 
to conduct a drone privacy report, which the agency failed to do. In 
the 2014 Consolidated Appropriations Act, Congress required the FAA to 
conduct a drone privacy study, stating:

        Without adequate safeguards, expanded use of UAS and their 
        integration into the national airspace raise a host of concerns 
        with respect to the privacy of individuals. For this reason, 
        the FAA is directed to conduct a study on the implications of 
        UAS integration into national airspace on individual 
        privacy.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ See Explanatory Statement, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 
2014, H.R. 3547, 113th Cong., Division L at 6 (Jan. 14, 2014), https://
www.congress.gov/congressional-record/2014/01/15/house-section/article/
H475-2

    The report specifically required the FAA to study ``how the FAA can 
address the impact of widespread use of UAS on individual privacy as it 
prepares to facilitate the integration of UAS into the national 
airspace.'' \23\ The report was to be submitted to Congress within 18 
months of enactment of that appropriations bill and completed ``well in 
advance of the FAA's schedule for developing final regulations on the 
integration of UAS into the national airspace.''\24\ Nearly 63 months 
since the bill was enacted, the FAA has failed to produce the report. 
Furthermore, EPIC obtained documents through a Freedom of Information 
Act request that suggested that the FAA has no intention of complying 
with Congress' directive to produce a report.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ Id.
    \24\ Id.
    \25\ https://epic.org/privacy/litigation/apa/faa/drones/EPIC-16-07-
20-FAA-FOIA-20160921-Production.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    EPIC urges this Committee to ask the FAA why the agency has failed 
to take steps to protect the public from the privacy risks posed by 
drones. Any privacy and security risks are no longer hypothetical and 
the longer the FAA waits to issue comprehensive privacy rules, the 
longer the public is at risk.
Remote Identification of Drones
    The Federal Aviation Administration recently published an interim 
final rule that will require a visible registration number on the 
exterior of drones.\26\ Previously, registration numbers could be 
hidden inside drones. While EPIC agrees external marking are preferable 
to hidden identifiers, EPIC said the rule did not go far enough. In 
comments to the FAA, EPIC wrote, ``Because drones present substantial 
privacy and safety risks, EPIC recommends that the FAA require any 
drone operating in the national airspace system to broadcast location 
when aloft (latitude, longitude, and altitude), course, speed over 
ground, as well as owner identifying information and contact 
information[.]'' \27\ EPIC also suggested the agency require operators 
register and broadcast surveillance capabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ External Marking Requirement for Small Unmanned Aircraft, 84 
Fed. Reg. 3669-3673 (Feb. 13, 2019), https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2019/02/13/2019-00765/external-marking-requirement-for-small-
unmanned-aircraft.
    \27\ Comments of EPIC et al., to the Federal Aviation Admin., 
External Marking Requirement for Small Unmanned Aircraft (Mar. 15, 
2019), https://epic.org/apa/comments/EPIC-Coalition-Comments-FAA-Drone-
ID-Mar2019.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As Senators Thune and Markey wrote to the FAA last week ``remote 
identification will enhance safety, security, and privacy.'' \28\ The 
Senators noted that the FAA was to issue regulations or guidance on 
remote identification by July 2018, but, nearly a year after that 
deadline, no such regulations or guidance has been issued by the FAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ Letter from Sen. Edward J. Markey and Sen. John Thune to the 
Honorable Elaine Chao, Secretary, U.S. Dept. of Trans. (Apr. 29, 2019), 
https://www.markey.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Remote 
percent20Indentification.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Currently, individuals cannot hold drone operators accountable 
because it is essentially impossible to identify the drone or the 
operator of a drone. The modified registration scheme proposed by the 
FAA still does little to solve this problem. Solutions exist.\29\ To 
increase accountability of drone operators, the FAA Reauthorization Act 
of 2018 requires the FAA to consider and develop remote identification 
for drones.\30\ As the FAA Aviation Rulemaking Committee Working Group 
1 pointed out, ``placing a sticker or FAA registration number on the 
UAS will not provide remote ID and tracking, as it would be nearly 
impossible to read a registration number on a UAS that is more than a 
few feet away.'' \31\ Passive identification does not go far enough--
the FAA must require active remote identification. The FAA should 
mandate remote identification and ensure also that drones routinely 
broadcast course, location, and other relevant operational information. 
Drones should simply not continue to fly above the laws that protect 
public safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ See, e.g., Isabella Lee, FAA Issues Request for Information 
(RFI) from Industry Partners Interested in Developing Remote ID and 
Unmanned Traffic Management (UTM) Systems (Jan. 24, 2019) https://
uavcoach.com/remote-id-faa-rfi/(``Remote ID development and testing has 
already begun in the private and commercial sector.'').
    \30\ See Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act of 
2018, Pub. L. No. 115-254, Sec. 376(b)(2), (c)(3)(A) 132 Stat. 3186, 
3305-06 (2018) (directing the FAA to develop a plan for the 
implementation of unmanned aircraft systems traffic management (UTM) 
services that, inter alia, permit the testing of remote identification 
and that assess the risks raised and mitigation means required to 
remotely identify drones).
    \31\ Aviation Rulemaking Comm., Fed. Aviation Admin., ARC 
Recommendations Final Report: Appendix B Working Group 1 Report 42 
(2017), https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/committees/
documents/media/UAS%20ID%20ARC%20Final%20Report%20with%20Ap
pendices.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee should urge the FAA to complete a rulemaking on 
remote ID and to include privacy considerations in that rulemaking.
Conclusion
    We ask that this letter be entered in the hearing record. EPIC 
looks forward to working with the Committee on these issues of vital 
importance to the American public.
            Sincerely,

/s/ Marc Rotenberg
Marc Rotenberg
EPIC President

/s/ Caitriona Fitzgerald
Caitriona Fitzgerald
EPIC Policy Director

/s/ Jeramie Scott
Jeramie Scott
EPIC Senior Counsel

  
                                ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jerry Moran to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Question 1. The ability to fly drones beyond visual line of sight 
is the key to unlocking the true potential of the drone revolution. The 
possibilities that this new technology presents seems endless, but are 
currently limited by the inability to utilize their full potential. 
Current waivers in the UAS Integration Pilot Program enabling beyond 
visual line of sight activity rely heavily on ground-based radars. 
However, the idea that ground-based radars are the only means of 
supporting beyond visual line of sight drone flights is simply not 
scalable.
    Director Merkle, what means of detection and surveillance other 
than ground-based radars are predicted to support beyond visual line of 
sight drone flights?
    Answer. Operators who want to fly beyond line-of-sight UAS 
operations must know where their aircraft is, and be able to 
dynamically react to and potentially avoid other air traffic in the 
process. There are various technologies under development to support 
these critical safety and security requirements. We evaluate all 
potential technology solutions for their ability to mitigate the risks 
associated with BVLOS operations based on technology agnostic 
performance standards. The FAA is focused on supporting the development 
of UAS Traffic Management (UTM) capabilities, such as remote 
identification, to facilitate the use of such technologies.

    Question 2. Is the FAA researching these alternative technologies 
or do you see technological solutions emerging from industry that offer 
a near-term solution?
    Answer. The FAA is one of several NASA partners, along with 
industry representatives, working to develop technologies and 
requirements for a UTM ecosystem. The FAA is particularly focused on 
remote identification requirements, and in December 2018, we released a 
request for information (RFI) for remote ID data sharing solutions. The 
FAA firmly believes that technological solutions will emerge from 
industry in the near term that can meet the safety standards needed to 
ensure safe beyond visual line-of-sight UAS operations.

    Question 3. How do you envision UTM enabling beyond visual line of 
sight operations in the Integration Pilot Program and beyond as a 
solution to replace or augment the current need for visual observers 
and an extensive network of expensive ground-based radars?
    Answer. This summer, NASA is conducting a series of UTM test 
demonstrations, as part of its ongoing work with the FAA to explore 
potential UTM solutions. The FAA is also conducting ongoing UTM 
research and testing through three of its UAS test sites. That work is 
helping to inform and enable some IPP activities, but may not be ready 
to provide an advanced UTM solution for the IPP participants before the 
end of the program in October 2020. However, a number of IPP 
participants are currently exploring a variety of related technology 
and procedural solutions that may enable more complex beyond visual 
line-of-sight operations before the end of the program.
                                 ______
                                 
  Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Marsha Blackburn to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Question 1. In the UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system, drones will 
be transferring data between vehicles, between vehicles and the UTM, 
and with end users of the technology. Given the complicated nature of 
this ecosystem, we need to ensure that there's enough flexibility to 
handle the sheer quantity of unmanned vehicles, especially when 
considering how to bring in data from fixed points in the area to help 
maximize their efficiency and efficacy.
    Mr. Merkle, what are the FAA's plans for ensuring that adequate 
spectrum is available for the emerging technologies in the National 
Airspace System?
    Answer. For UAS operating in a UTM environment, the FAA has left 
the choice of method of communication between drone and operator to the 
manufacturer and the operator, respectively. This approach aligns with 
the rapid introduction of small UAS and the desire of the larger 
community to not hinder use and innovation by treating these new 
entrants as traditional aircraft with specified communication 
requirements. This is also in keeping with the operational paradigm 
that ATC will not directly interact with UAS or the operator. 
Communications in all but the rarest circumstances will be by automatic 
information exchanges over a ground-based Internet communications. 
Hence, there are no spectrum requirements for the FAA's interaction 
with operators.

    Question 2. Are there specific bands that you have in mind that 
these technologies will operate on?
    Answer. There is no consideration of using aviation-protected 
spectrum for UTM.

    Question 3. Has the FAA considered testing spectrum-sharing models 
to aid in making decisions on utilizing licensed and/or unlicensed 
spectrum?
    Answer. This is not a consideration given the communication policy 
for small UAS.
                                 ______
                                 
      Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mike Lee to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Question 1. We are approaching the one-year anniversary of the 
FAA's formal rollout of the UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP). One of 
the stated objectives of the IPP was to ``test and evaluate various 
models of State, local, and tribal government involvement in the 
development and enforcement of Federal regulations for UAS 
operations.'' This includes the testing of ``reasonable time, place, 
and manner limitations on low-altitude UAS operations.'' In light of 
the IPP's near one-year anniversary, can you tell me specifically how 
the FAA has tested reasonable time, place, and manner limitations?
    Answer. To date, none of the IPP Lead Participants have proposed or 
requested time, place and manner restrictions.
    Fundamentally, it is the FAA's responsibility to manage the 
airspace. All stakeholders, including states and localities, should 
have a voice, and the FAA has always accommodated the needs of local 
communities to the maximum extent possible, while balancing aviation 
safety, national security, air commerce, and citizens' rights to 
airspace access.
    A good example of that is our existing special provisions for local 
emergency responders to contact the FAA and request to close off UAS 
operations in a particular area because of an accident, hazard, or 
police action. We would generally take that action in order to create a 
safe operational response environment for law enforcement to conduct 
its vital public safety mission.
    In other situations, such as the aftermath of a hurricane, we 
facilitate and enable many local drone operations to survey 
infrastructure damage and conduct other types of damage assessment. We 
see those types of interactions continuing and the IPP program is 
already helping us learn how those interactions should continue in the 
future.

    Question 2. What outreach have you conducted to gain the input of 
State, local, and tribal governments?
    Answer. The IPP is an ongoing partnership with the state, local and 
tribal governments who are known as the Lead Participants in the 
program. The IPP program managers and other FAA officials have daily or 
weekly contact with their Lead Participants counterparts. In addition, 
there are workshops and periodic Focus Meetings where all of the Lead 
Participants come together to discuss their progress, as well as common 
challenges and solutions. The FAA has asked the nine Lead Participants 
several times specifically whether they had any interest in time, place 
and manner restrictions, and to date, none have chosen to pursue those 
options.

    Question 3. What are your specific plans for future time, place, 
and manner limitations before the IPP expires?
    Answer. We expect to continue our ongoing dialogue with the Lead 
Participants about those options, but to date, they have indicated they 
have been able to pursue their missions without them.

    Question 4. How are you encouraging the testing of time, place, and 
manner limitations?
    Answer. As mentioned, we are continuing our dialogue with the Lead 
Participants about situations in which those types of restrictions 
might be helpful or appropriate.

    Question 5. Low-altitude drone operations are now a major focus for 
States who are rightly concerned about issues related to property 
rights, land use, zoning, trespass, privacy, and local police matters. 
Each of these issues are traditionally within the jurisdiction of a 
State by nature of their inherent police powers.
    Can you identify the limits to the FAA's authority in relationship 
to a State's police power?
    Answer. States and local jurisdictions have legitimate concerns 
about UAS operations, involving such areas as security, privacy, 
trespass, and enforcement. Laws traditionally related to state and 
local police power--including land use, zoning, privacy, trespass, and 
law enforcement operations--generally are not subject to Federal 
regulation.
    While the case law is clear that state and local governments may 
not regulate aircraft safety or the efficiency of the airspace, 
including flight operations, they may regulate aviation outside of 
these areas. Goodspeed Airport, LLC v. East Haddam Inland Wetlands and 
Watercourses Commission, 634 F.3d 206 (2d Cir. 2011); Skysign 
International, Inc. v. City and County of Honolulu, 276 F.3d 1109 (9th 
Cir. 2002). Under the current Federal statutory and regulatory 
framework, there is room for state and local governments to have some 
impact on UAS operations. For example, they have authority to regulate 
the placement of aircraft (including UAS) landing areas, which Federal 
courts have acknowledged as a legitimate land use and zoning power. In 
addition, state or local governments would be able to regulate certain 
uses of UAS through the application of existing voyeurism or other 
privacy laws for example, or to prevent use of UAS to photograph 
outdoor crime scenes where ground-based photographers were required to 
remain behind police lines. Also, if an operator of a UAS was 
endangering the lives of persons on the ground, then the local 
government would be able to apply existing reckless endangerment or 
similar laws against the operator.
    In the Goodspeed case, Connecticut statutes and municipal 
regulations required a local airport to obtain a permit before removing 
trees on protected land that were interfering with a runway approach 
path. The court held that the state laws were not preempted by Federal 
aviation law, because those generally-applicable laws did not come 
within the scope of the preempted field--aviation safety--in either 
their purpose or in their effect. The lower court pointed out that the 
``courts have long distinguished between state laws that directly 
affect aeronautical safety, on the one hand, and facially neutral laws 
of general application that have merely an incidental impact on 
aviation safety.'' Goodspeed, 681 F.Supp.2d 182, 201-202 (D. Conn. 
2010). The Second Circuit upheld the lower court, finding that 
``[a]lthough we hold that Congress has indicated its intent to occupy 
the entire field of aviation safety, the generally applicable state 
laws and regulations imposing permit requirements on land use 
challenged here do not, on the facts before us, invade that preempted 
field.'' Goodspeed, 634 F.3d 206, 212 (2d Cir. 2011). The decision was 
consistent with an amicus brief filed by the United States at the 
court's request.
    Similarly, in Skysign, a question was raised regarding Federal 
preemption of state and local regulation of aerial advertising in light 
of the Federal Government's responsibility for air traffic governance. 
The court held that Federal aviation regulations relating to air 
traffic, the flight of aircraft, safe altitudes, and for protection of 
individuals and property on the ground did not ``preclude local 
regulation [signage ordinance] with an identical purpose that does not 
actually reach into the forbidden, exclusively Federal areas, such as 
flight paths, hours, or altitudes.'' Id. at 1117. The United States 
filed an amicus brief at the request of the court and supported a 
finding of no preemption.

    Question 6. Is there a point in the air as you approach the ground 
where the domain is more traditionally viewed as under the State's 
jurisdiction? In the FAA's view is this authority only feet above the 
ground? Inches above the ground?
    Answer. State authority to regulate aircraft safety and the 
efficiency of the airspace does not depend on altitude; while states 
may regulate pursuant to their police powers, the case law is clear 
that they cannot regulate aircraft safety and efficiency of the 
airspace at any altitude. Goodspeed Airport, LLC v. East Haddam Inland 
Wetlands and Watercourses Commission, 634 F.3d 206 (2d Cir. 2011); 
Skysign International, Inc. v. City and County of Honolulu, 276 F.3d 
1109 (9th Cir. 2002); Air Transport Association of America v. Cuomo, 
520 F.3d 218, 224 (2d Cir. 2008); National Helicopter Corp. v. City of 
New York, 137 F.3d 81, 92 (2d Cir. 1998).

    Question 7. There have been a number of concerning reports where 
drones are seen flying in airspace where they are not authorized to 
be--over sports stadiums, smuggling contraband into prisons, and near 
airports.
    Do you think full and safe drone integration is possible without 
the ability of State/local police to take real-time action to safeguard 
the public?
    Answer. Local authorities have a range of recourse in response to 
persons operating UAS in an unsafe manner in their jurisdictions. 
Localities can prohibit take-offs and landings of aircraft in their 
jurisdictions; hence, it is possible to prohibit such activities in and 
around public gatherings. The FAA also has published a media toolkit to 
assist local jurisdictions in their duties to protect public safety and 
the FAA also works with localities to facilitate a better understanding 
of the division of authorities between them and the FAA. The FAA 
strongly recommends proactive local public communication, education, 
and outreach. We have a wide-range of resources available on the 
FAA.gov/UAS website to support both the use of drones and response to 
unauthorized drone activity by law enforcement.
    The FAA also utilizes the relationships that our Law Enforcement 
Assistance Program (LEAP) Agents have developed with Federal, State and 
Local law enforcement agencies to inform and assist in the awareness of 
UAS security related best practices and counter-UAS (C-UAS) 
implementation initiatives. We continue to work closely with the law 
enforcement community to investigate and enforce the unlawful operation 
of UAS.
    Due to the spectrum-related impacts of many C-UAS systems, some 
current C-UAS technologies pose a potential risk to safety-of-life 
systems, specifically Air Navigation Services critical infrastructure 
and on-board avionics. In particular, C-UAS technologies can impact 
air-ground communications, Global Positioning System (GPS) dependent 
navigation, and other surveillance systems. The operational use of C-
UAS in the National Airspace System also poses an indirect risk to 
persons and property on the ground or other aircraft in flight 
depending on how the drone responds to the C-UAS technology--such as 
reacting unpredictably when control links are disrupted. Lastly, some 
C-UAS systems can interfere with authorized or compliant drone activity 
that may be occurring in proximity to the unauthorized drone.
    Many C-UAS technologies were designed for military use abroad--a 
context in which collateral impacts are not a significant concern. It 
is vital that C-UAS systems be tested in civil environments to 
determine both the impacts on the NAS and other critical systems as 
well as efficacy--especially before approximately 18,000 independent 
law enforcement agencies across the country have the authority to 
deploy C-UAS.
    We believe the most appropriate path, at this time, is to focus on 
implementation of the UAS mitigation authority granted to DOD, DOE, DOJ 
and DHS, and analyze the results of UAS detection and mitigation 
testing that FAA and our national security partners are planning and 
conducting. The development of standards for the use of C-UAS 
technology is also critical.
    Under Sec. 1602 of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, Congress 
authorized mission-specific testing and use of C-UAS systems by DOJ, 
specifically for the protection of penal, detention and correctional 
facilities and operations conducted by the Federal Bureau of Prisons. 
The FAA is working closely with DOJ in executing this mission.
    Under Sec. 1602 of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act, DHS and DOJ 
are authorized to provide support to State, local, territorial, or 
tribal law enforcement; upon request of the chief executive officer of 
the State or territory; to ensure protection of people and property at 
mass gatherings. The supported event must be limited to a specified 
time-frame and location, within available Federal resources, and 
without delegating any authority under this section to State, local, 
territorial, or tribal law enforcement.
    As we conduct U.S. civil testing and implement the C-UAS 
authorities granted to DOD, DOE, DOJ and DHS, we are gaining 
experience, refining concepts of operations, and hopefully will see 
improved C-UAS systems with less potential for airspace safety impacts. 
This work is necessary prior to considering expanded C-UAS authorities 
in the future.
    The FAA has existing authorities and tools to restrict operations 
over certain kinds of events and locations right now. Events of 
national significance often designated as National Special Security 
Events (NSSEs) or Special Event Assessment Rating events include events 
such as the Super Bowl; and the FAA has a standing so-called stadium 
temporary flight restriction that restricts flight over stadiums during 
major league baseball, NFL, NCAA, and motor speedway events.
    With respect to smaller events, we envision the future suite of 
Unmanned Traffic Management (UTM) services, which will include remote 
identification and dynamic airspace management, may allow for real time 
restrictions over smaller gatherings and enable security partners to 
provide direct operator notification as well as locate an operator of a 
suspected unauthorized UAS operation.

    Question 8. How does the FAA believe local police or other non-
federal police should respond to any drone related incidents that arise 
in low-altitude airspace?
    Answer. As with all ground-based threats, State and local law 
enforcement are often the first to respond to a potential safety or 
security risk--like a UAS flying over a filled parking lot before a 
football game. We recognize that local law enforcement is critical to 
any UAS response plan. The FAA has a wide-range of resources available 
on the FAA.gov/UAS website to support response to unauthorized drone 
activity by law enforcement, including pocket cards, videos, and 
webinars. The previous response (#7) provides detail on how local law 
enforcement and the FAA can, and in many instances already do, work 
together to respond to UAS-related incidents. There are some types of 
detection systems that are legal for state and local governments--and 
even the private sector--to use now in order to identify unauthorized 
UAS and, in some cases, the location of the operator. However, we 
strongly recommend two actions to any organization considering use of a 
UAS detection system:

  1.  Consult legal counsel that is familiar with Federal surveillance 
        and communications laws to ensure the selected detection system 
        is, in fact, legal to use; and

  2.  Validate vendor-published system performance specifications. Many 
        systems are tested in highly controlled environments and not in 
        RF-rich operational environments. Accuracy of detection 
        information, which is highly-susceptible to interference or 
        distortion, is critical to operational response. In early May 
        2019, the FAA published an information package for airport 
        sponsors containing useful information about UAS detection 
        systems and how to coordinate with the FAA. Much of that 
        information is useful to entities considering how to identify 
        and respond to unauthorized UAS operations outside the airport 
        environment as well.

    Question 9. On May 7, 2019, the FAA released a statement on UAS 
detection systems at airports. The FAA statement noted that ``The FAA 
does not support the use of counter-UAS systems by any entities other 
than Federal departments with explicit statutory authority to use this 
technology, including requirements for extensive coordination with the 
FAA to ensure safety risks are mitigated.'' \1\ In light of recent 
events at Gatwick, airport authorities are rightly concerned about 
safety and security threats posed by malicious or reckless drones used 
on or near airports. If the FAA does not support the use of detection 
systems or counter-UAS systems used by anyone other than an authorized 
Federal department, what recourse does an airport sponsor have right 
now to address these safety and security concerns at an airport?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=93726
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Answer. Only four Federal departments (the Departments of Defense, 
Justice, Homeland Security, and Energy) can legally use counter-UAS 
mitigation systems--defined as those that disrupt, damage, destroy or 
take control of a UAS posing a threat. The statutes granting such 
authority limit use of C-UAS systems to protect specific types of 
facilities, missions, operations, and assets under specified 
conditions, depending on the authorizing statutory language. The FAA 
was given relief from certain specific statutes, but only for testing 
impacts and performance of UAS detection and mitigation systems at 
airports--not for operational use. All other federal, state, local, and 
private sector entities are subject to applicable Federal laws with 
respect to the acquisition, testing, or use of C-UAS mitigation 
systems, including, but not necessarily limited to various criminal 
provisions of title 18 U.S.C., as well as relevant state and local 
laws.
    In terms of detection systems, there are some technologies that can 
be used by federal, state, local, and private sector entities to detect 
and track UAS--although not all forms of detection technology are 
clearly legal for use without statutory authority. However, planning 
and coordinating the use of UAS detection technology necessitates close 
collaboration to ensure security needs are balanced with airspace 
safety and efficiency.
    On May 7, FAA published information to support airport sponsors 
decision-making related to testing and/or deployment of UAS detection 
systems at their airports. It is available on the FAA website at 
https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/#SafetyGuidance. The FAA is 
working with airport operators who are considering installing UAS 
detection systems or have already installed such systems on or near 
their airports--including assessing possible interference or 
obstruction impacts. We are assisting with development of risk-based 
operational response plans to make sure a safety hazard is not created 
by trying to address a perceived UAS risk. FAA expects to provide 
supplemental information related to UAS detection system coordination 
as we refine our processes and procedures for safe UAS detection system 
use and coordinated operational response at or around airports. The FAA 
is currently compiling a supplemental checklist of planning factors to 
consider and key contacts at its national headquarters, with which 
airport authorities can work in support of our common goal of safety in 
the National Airspace System.
    In that May 7 correspondence, the FAA also provided information 
regarding the steady state use of counter-UAS (mitigation) technologies 
at or around airports. These systems could pose an aviation safety risk 
by interfering with aircraft navigation and air navigation services 
infrastructure. The FAA does not support the use of counter-UAS 
mitigation systems by any entities other than Federal departments that 
have complied with strict statutory requirements, including extensive 
coordination with the FAA to ensure safety risks are mitigated.
    We are also working with our Federal partners, major airports, and 
industry stakeholders to develop a pre-planned Federal response to 
supports a persistent threat at a Core 30 airport. The goal is to 
identify the UAS operator(s) and end the disruption of airport 
operations as quickly and safely as feasible.

    Question 10. Last month, the FAA granted Google's Wing the first 
FAA air carrier certification for drone deliveries.
    Is the process that the FAA used to approve Wing for air carrier 
operations, the process that FAA intends to proceed with for future 
drone delivery services?
    Answer. Yes. Each applicant presents a different concept of 
operations and safety case, but we are using lessons learned from 
Wing's part 135 certification process to inform future part 135 
approvals for drone delivery. Wing chose to pursue its own part 135 
certificate, but several other companies participating in the IPP have 
chosen to partner with an existing part 135 certificate holder or enter 
into partnerships with existing certificate holders that have the 
expertise to obtain a part 135 certificate.

    Question 11. Has the FAA studied how this certification process 
could act as a barrier to entry for smaller market participants?
    Answer. We have not conducted any specific studies, but we are well 
aware that the part 135 certification process may appear daunting to 
smaller companies. We believe the lessons learned from the Wing 
certification and a number of other ongoing UAS part 135 certification 
projects will help us streamline the process for drones and 
significantly reduce the burden for smaller companies.

    Question 12. What is the FAA doing to reduce regulatory barriers in 
this process in order to facilitate competitive markets in this 
industry?
    Answer. As mentioned in the previous answer, we believe we can 
significantly streamline the process to reduce the regulatory burden, 
as we gain more experience with issuing part 135 certificates for drone 
deliveries. With regard to enabling specific types of drone operations, 
we are also encouraging data-sharing and the development of standards 
for risk mitigation such as the one for drone parachutes that may 
greatly reduce the need for companies to conduct their own testing.
    The FAA is generally focused on developing performance-based rules 
and policy that do not prescribe specific technologies or mitigation 
techniques to reduce risk. This means an applicant can propose a wide 
range of mitigations in furtherance of its safety case. The FAA is 
currently developing a UAS-specific Safety Risk Management (SRM) Order, 
which provides guidance to FAA employees reviewing UAS operational 
applications about how to evaluate an applicant's safety case. This 
Order, which will be made public, will also help applicants of all 
economic means better understand what information to provide to the FAA 
in order to demonstrate how their UAS operations can be conducted 
safely in the national Airspace System.

    Question 13. Did the FAA consult with any affected communities, 
local government agencies, or individual property owners prior to 
issuing Wing's air carrier certificate? If yes, what are the specifics 
on how the consultation process is conducted?
    Answer. The FAA does not generally conduct community outreach as 
part of the certification process, but is working very closely with 
Wing and Virginia Tech on an extensive community outreach plan before 
Wing begins any actual operations. Because this certification was 
conducted through the UAS IPP, the Virginia Innovation and 
Entrepreneurship Investment Authority was intimately involved in the 
effort as well.

    Question 14. Is there any specific feedback from the local 
community or government that the FAA used to alter the authorization 
for delivery operations?
    Answer. We will closely monitor the feedback Wing receives from its 
upcoming community outreach in August to determine whether there is a 
need to mitigate any risks of any aspects of Wing's operations. The FAA 
will be especially mindful of whether community concerns exist with 
regard to Wing's operations.

    Question 15. Is there a process in place for promptly responding to 
community complaints generated by drone delivery operations? Does the 
FAA have a process in place for a homeowner to make requests that a 
drone not fly over their private property? Would you honor such a 
request if made?
    Answer. Wing is planning to set up a website specifically to engage 
the community on its delivery operations and provide channels for the 
community to make comments or complaints. Based on its previous 
experience in Australia, Wing has indicated that it is prepared to try 
to address any community concerns. In addition, the FAA operates a 
support center that will be prepared to answer questions, field 
complaints, and channel questions or callers to the appropriate people, 
if community members choose to contact the FAA instead.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to 
                               Jay Merkle
    The Northland Community and Technical College in Thief River Falls, 
Minnesota, offers the first unmanned aerial systems (UAS) maintenance 
training program in the country, which is helping to prepare students 
for in-demand jobs.
    Question. Do you anticipate a need for new employees trained in UAS 
technology to avoid a skills gap in the aviation industry?
    Answer. The development of any new technology typically triggers 
the need for skilled workers. Congress recognized this in the Federal 
Aviation Administration's (FAA) 2018 Reauthorization Act, calling for 
actions to support the education of UAS professionals through Sections 
631 and 632 in the Act. The FAA is actively engaged with UAS industry 
and approximately 50 community college stakeholders from across the 
country and is working to develop a plan to address requirements 
contained in Sections 631 and 632. This plan, which leverages existing 
UAS-related training and certification programs to develop curricula 
for community college and four-year academic institutions, is 
anticipated to be in place by the end of CY 2019.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Question 1. What data does the FAA have on the expected community-
wide noise levels of commercial drones?
    Answer. Currently, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has 
limited data on UAS noise levels that does not sufficiently inform an 
understanding of the expected community-wide noise levels of commercial 
drones. However, as part of the UAS Integration Pilot Program (IPP), 
the FAA is working to obtain additional UAS noise level data.

    Question 2. Do actions need to be taken to understand how noise 
will increase due to drones?
    Answer. Utilizing any noise-related data obtained through the UAS 
IPP and applying data from the FAA's forecast of drone operations will 
provide a general understanding of how drone-related noise issues may 
be perceived by the general public. The FAA is considering conducting 
additional research on UAS noise in the coming years.

    Question 3. Are there any efforts at the FAA to understand the 
health effects of drone noise? Will this be included as part of the 
safety standards development?
    Answer. While there are no efforts specifically aimed at 
understanding the health effects of drone noise, pursuant to section 
189 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, FAA will be conducting a 
study on the health impacts of noise from aircraft flights on residents 
exposed to a range of noise levels. FAA anticipates this study will 
inform our understanding of the potential health impacts of all 
aviation noise, including drone noise.

    Question 4. When we get to the point at which commercial drone 
traffic is common, how will different operators be prioritized in the 
air space?
    Answer. This is a critical question for UAS integration, and we are 
actively working this issue on several fronts. The National Aeronautics 
and Space Administration's UAS Traffic Management (UTM) research 
initiative is focused on a variety of issues regarding all manners of 
drone traffic, including the interaction between manned and unmanned 
traffic. This is not, however, a problem we are going to solve by 
ourselves--it requires input from all national airspace system (NAS) 
stakeholders, including the manned aviation industry, to determine how 
the current Air Traffic Management (ATM) system will interact with UTM. 
The foundation of any UTM solution will be remote identification, which 
will enable other technologies that will be part of the UTM system. The 
FAA recognizes the importance of remote identification and is working 
on a proposed rule that is scheduled to be published in September 2019.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Tammy Baldwin to 
                               Jay Merkle
    The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 included an initiative to 
support workforce needs related to the rapidly growing use of unmanned 
aircraft systems in industry and government. Section 631, which I 
worked to include in the bill, directs the establishment of a process 
to designate consortia of public, 2-year institutions of higher 
education as Community and Technical College Centers of Excellence in 
Small Unmanned Aircraft System Technology. This process was to be 
established not later than 180 days after the enactment, a deadline 
which has now passed.
    Question. Please provide me with the status of implementation of 
Sec. 631, Community and Technical College Center of Excellence in Small 
Unmanned Aircraft System Technology and Training.
    Answer. The development of any new technology typically triggers 
the need for skilled workers. Congress recognized this in the FAA 
Reauthorization Act of 2018, calling for actions to support the 
education of UAS professionals through Sections 631 and 632 in the Act. 
The FAA is actively engaged with UAS industry and approximately 50 
community college stakeholders from across the country and is working 
to develop a plan to address requirements contained in Sections 631 and 
632. This plan, which leverages existing UAS-related training and 
certification programs to develop curricula for community college and 
four-year academic institutions, is anticipated to be in place by the 
end of CY 2019.
                                 ______
                                 
     Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jon Tester to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Agricultural Sector Represented on Drone Advisory Committee. The 
agriculture sector is one of the fastest growing adopters of drone 
technology in the United States.
    Question 1. Will DOT/FAA commit to ensure the Drone Advisory 
Committee membership reflects the diverse and broad interests of 
stakeholders and user communities by including a representative from 
the agriculture community?
    Answer. The FAA is committed to maintaining a broad and diverse 
representation of the Drone Advisory Committee (DAC) stakeholders. The 
DAC membership and membership balance plan are approved by the 
Secretary of Transportation. The Secretary recently made new selections 
for DAC membership and they held their first meeting on June 7.
    DAC members continue to include representatives from states, 
including IPP lead participant, the Kansas Department of Transportation 
(KDOT). KDOT's Director of Aviation and UAS, Bob Brock serves on the 
DAC. UAS manufacturer and operator PrecisionHawk is involved in the 
agricultural sector. The company's CEO, Michael Chasen, was named the 
new chairman of the DAC by the Secretary.
    During the next review of candidates to fill DAC vacancies, 
consideration will be given to including a DAC member from the 
agriculture community.
    Agricultural community representatives are welcome to attend DAC 
meetings as they are open to the public, except as provided by section 
10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA).

    Partnering with Industry on UAS Infrastructure Buildout. With 
regard to UAS infrastructure buildout, Mr. Merkle stated ``we have a 
request for information to build a cadre of industry to come in and 
partner with us to build it.''
    Question 2. Please expand upon this statement and provide 
information about FAA's process for determining which industry 
representatives/firms will be/are involved and their role.
    Answer. In December 2018, the FAA issued a Request for Information 
(RFI) to establish an industry cohort to explore potential 
technological solutions for remote identification of unmanned aircraft 
(Remote ID). The RFI reflected that the FAA would establish the 
technical framework and criteria for Remote ID Unmanned Aircraft System 
Service Suppliers (USS) and provide supporting data to airspace users 
as necessary for collaboration and safe operations. The FAA plans to 
work with industry to build as much of the remote identification 
infrastructure as we can in advance of finalization of the remote 
identification rule. More specifically, we will establish a cooperative 
data exchange mechanism between the FAA and the Remote ID USSs. 
Addressing the data exchange issues in advance of the final rule will 
ensure that the infrastructure is in place so that once the rule in 
finalized, the timeline for actual implementation of the rule will be 
reduced. Responses from the RFI are being evaluated.

    UAS Remote Identification Rulemaking. Remote identification of 
unmanned aircraft systems is essential for secure operations and is 
critical for addressing improper drone operations and accountability. 
With rapidly expanding deployments of unmanned aircraft systems, the 
need for Federal UAS guidelines becomes more urgent.
    At the Senate Commerce Committee May 8, 2019 hearing, FAA officials 
stated multiple times that FAA is working toward the schedule of a July 
21 release of a proposed UAS rule and further noted that FAA is 
simultaneously working on the rule, standards that support the rule and 
implementation of the infrastructure build-out.
    Question 3. Is FAA confident it will issue a rule by July 21?
    Answer. The FAA is working on a notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) on remote ID, which is currently scheduled to be published in 
September 2019.

    Resources to Assist Farmers' Use of Drones. Drones, which can 
gather real-time information about plant conditions, stressed areas, 
pest infestation and plant growth, offer farmers a cost-effective way 
to monitor crops.
    Question 4. Given that use of drones for agricultural purposes is 
designated a commercial activity, what is FAA doing to facilitate 
farmers undergoing operator training in order to obtain a remote pilot 
certificate or provide informational resources about available 
operators for hire?
    Answer. The FAA has a number of online resources on our website 
that are targeted specifically to get new drone operations up and 
running. In addition, we have a number of informational or ``How To'' 
videos on the FAA's YouTube channel that focus on more specific topics 
including operational requirements and airspace familiarization. The 
FAA's FAASTeam also provides a number of online resources to prepare 
prospective remote pilots to pass the certification exam that part 107 
requires. In addition, pilots who already hold another type of pilot 
certificate only need to complete training under part 107 to obtain a 
remote pilot certificate. Such pilots can also take advantage of the 
resources the FAA provides for remote pilot education.

    Foreign Manufacturer's Dominance in U.S. Drone Market. The demand 
for drones by U.S.-based commercial and recreational users in the 
United States is rapidly expanding. The number one supplier of drones 
in the U.S. market is the Chinese company DJI or Da-Jiang Innovations. 
Industry analysts estimate that DJI has captured up to 85 percent of 
the commercial drone market in the United States.
    Question 5. Given drones' expanding scope of applications and field 
of operations, is FAA looking at the security implications of a Chinese 
company's near absolute dominance as a supplier in the U.S. drone 
commercial market?
    Answer. FAA considers cyber and data security risks and mitigations 
in every aspect of our mission, including as they apply to aircraft 
certification and systems, as well as protection of our own air 
navigation services infrastructure. While UAS are aircraft, they are 
also like so many highly computerized devices we use in our 
professional and personal lives that can collect data and connect to 
the Internet where information systems and data can be vulnerable to 
misuse if they are not adequately protected. UAS operators, just like 
computer users, need to be aware of what data is on their system and 
consider what level of protection it should be afforded. The FAA 
strongly recommends that anyone flying a UAS read the user licensing 
agreements on their drones and assess whether the data access, sharing, 
and protection policies the manufacturer has in place are adequate or 
whether their data sensitivity necessitates additional protection from 
disclosure and misuse. The FAA is also looking at agreements the Agency 
has with non-federal UAS service suppliers to ensure protection of data 
and transparency about how that data is used.

   Is FAA engaging other Federal national security agencies on 
        this topic?
    Answer. Yes, the FAA works closely with our Federal national 
security partners on cyber and data security threats and risks, 
including those related to UAS. The FAA, along with the Departments of 
Defense and Homeland Security, are currently partnering on the Aircraft 
Cybersecurity Initiative, which includes UAS-focused efforts as part of 
its 2019 work plan.

    Length of Controllers' Workweek. Experts cite that mandatory six-
day workweeks for controllers is a major challenge to operating the 
National Airspace System efficiently and safely.
    Question 6. What does it take to pare back to five-day workweeks 
for controllers?
    Answer. The FAA restricts the number of hours a controller can work 
in a day, and controllers must have at least one day off (24 hours) at 
least once every seven days--meaning they cannot work more than six 
days in a row. Certain facilities, however, are experiencing lower 
certified professional controller levels largely due to retirements. At 
those facilities, some controllers are working six-day workweeks to 
meet the operational needs and delivery of services. We have increased 
our emphasis on training our newly hired air traffic control 
specialists so they will be fully certified in their positions, which 
will allow us to decrease the occurrence of six-day workweeks.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Jacky Rosen to 
                               Jay Merkle
    Included in last year's FAA reauthorization bill that was signed 
into law was language that stated that the FAA shall ``streamline to 
the extent practicable the approval process for test ranges when 
processing unmanned aircraft certificates of waiver or authorization 
for operations at the test sites.'' Based on my conversations with 
industry stakeholders back home in Nevada, I am hearing that FAA has 
not indicated that it will be streamlining its waiver applications, as 
the law now requires.
    Question 1. Can you commit today to following the language of the 
reauthorization by streamlining the approval of applications for 
operations at test sites?
    Answer. The FAA is fully committed to streamlining operational 
approvals for UAS Test Site operations, and meets weekly with several 
test sites, including Nevada, to ensure they have access to the 
regulatory expertise and process information they need to submit high 
quality applications in a timely manner. This ensures that the Test 
Sites get the approvals they need to meet their scheduled commitments.
    Part of the topography of a state we need to consider when testing 
UASs, besides tall structures and buildings, is also the presence of 
mountain ranges. Nevada happens to be the most mountainous state in the 
lower forty-eight, and the City of Reno is an example of the challenge 
of testing UAS technology in all types of terrain. As Reno continues to 
expand its UAS footprint, ``beyond visual line of site'' operations 
will surely be necessary for the full integration of UAS.
    In addition, the test sites provide a vital resource to innovate by 
offering services to conduct more advanced UAS flight testing. Their 
expertise is being utilized with several UAS Integration Pilot Program 
(IPP) participants, as well as the UTM Pilot Program.

    Question 2. How is the FAA helping test sites advance beyond visual 
line of site operations?

   Have you provided, or will you provide, guidance to test 
        sites regarding beyond visual line of site operations, and can 
        you explain how one would get this type of waiver?
    Answer. The FAA meets with the test sites regularly, often on a 
weekly basis, to ensure they have access to the regulatory expertise 
and process information. The FAA also holds two Technical Interchange 
Meetings (TIMs) with the Test Sites every year, during which FAA 
subject matter experts brief the Test Sites on all new policy 
developments, process changes, and other integration activities, to 
ensure they have the latest information and can discuss their specific 
operational needs with the regulators. We have provided guidance 
regarding all manner of operations, including beyond visual line-of-
sight (BVLOS) and over people, to ensure the Test Sites understand the 
regulatory options for pursuing these types of operations.

   When will you be releasing more information on beyond visual 
        line of site?
    Answer. The FAA is working on a UAS-specific safety risk management 
Order that will provide a framework to evaluate applications for 
waivers and exemptions to conduct novel operations, including BVLOS. 
This Order will permit consistent evaluation of safety information and 
establish criteria for risk-based agency decisions. We anticipate 
issuing the Order, which will be available on FAA.gov, prior to the 
close of FY 2019.
    The FAA currently considers applications for BVLOS under existing 
regulations using waivers and/or exemptions. Guidance for waivers is 
available on the FAA's website and through the DroneZone portal. 
Exemptions are considered on the basis of the safety justification an 
applicant makes and are specific to the operator's operational concept; 
however, both the applicant's petition and the FAA's analysis and 
decision are published on the regulatory docket for others to evaluate.
    The FAA has enabled multiple limited BVLOS operations that have 
been based on operational constraints and low risk areas. We are 
actively working towards gathering more information on technological 
solutions that will allow for UAS to detect and avoid other aircraft. 
Remote ID will be a major foundation for the ``detect'' piece of that 
effort.
    Further, the FAA is actively working across numerous programs, 
including our Integration Pilot Program, our Partnership for Safety 
Plan (PSP) Program, the UAS Test Sites, the UAS Center of Excellence, 
and others, to enable BVLOS operations in a safe and secure manner. The 
FAA intends to provide robust, flexible rules and policy, to support 
scalable operations such as BVLOS in the future.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Question Submitted by Hon. Amy Klobuchar to 
                             Wayne Monteith
    In Fiscal Year 2018, the United States saw a record 32 launches and 
3 reentries of commercial space vehicles. In Fiscal Year 2019, the FAA 
anticipates as many as 44 launch and reentry operations--a potential 
increase of over 25 percent.
    Question 1. What steps is the FAA taking to improve its processes 
and adapt to rapidly changing commercial space technology?
    Answer. We recognize that our current processes are not sufficient 
to meet the needs of the future. Several efforts are currently underway 
to address the anticipated growth in both licensing activities and 
operations in coming years. Our office has been working diligently over 
the last year to consolidate and update existing regulations to respond 
to the evolution in the commercial space transportation industry we are 
seeing today. After gathering industry input, we published a proposed 
rule in April that aims to consolidate, update, and streamline all 
launch and reentry regulations under one single, performance-based 
regulatory framework. We believe this construct will ensure public 
safety, while also accommodating innovative technologies and 
approaches. Once final, this rule will allow for the differentiation 
between types of vehicles and operations, licensing of multiple 
launches from multiple locations under a single license, and 
incremental submission of applications.
    In addition to these regulatory reforms, we are also reviewing our 
internal processes to enable more effective and efficient evaluation 
and issuance of licenses, providing appropriate safety oversight and 
ensuring greater accountability. This review includes initial work to 
assess how we can more fully automate the licensing process.
    At the same time, we are also using Lean Transformation principles 
to improve our internal evaluation processes as well as supporting 
business processes. These principles will better enable our ability to 
assess new technologies and procedures that will likely be introduced 
through performance-based standards.
    As part of that process, we are reorganizing the Office of 
Commercial Space Transportation. While the organization has done and 
continues to do great work to meet the demand of industry, the office 
developed at a time when commercial space was a far different activity 
than it is today. We are examining how best to position and align our 
people, processes, technology, and organization to best support a 
rapidly changing industry and our new proposed streamlined licensing 
rulemaking.
    We are also working to streamline processes at Federal ranges. As a 
first step, we are working with the Department of Defense and NASA to 
prioritize standards and requirements to use these as a basis for our 
next generation site licensing framework. We want to ensure that we 
understand the fundamental requirements needed at these sites, so that 
we can preserve critical range assets and effectively streamline 
regulatory requirements on commercial operators, as we move towards a 
new paradigm in oversight of commercial launches at Federal ranges.
    Finally, we are taking steps to engage more fully with industry as 
we move toward more effective integration of operations into the 
national airspace system. We believe that industry may already have 
systems that can be leveraged to potentially reduce the lengthy 
acquisition and implementation timeframes.

    Question 2. What steps is the FAA taking to maintain high safety 
standards for the commercial space industry in light of this 
accelerated growth?
    Answer. The primary mission of the Office of Commercial Space 
Transportation is the safety of the uninvolved public. The FAA must 
also consider the safety, capacity and efficiency of the national air 
transportation system. In over forty years, no individual not directly 
involved in a launch or reentry has died or been injured in a 
commercial space transportation accident. To maintain this safety 
record as we move to a more performance-based oversight, we will 
continue to use the ground, flight, and system safety standards that 
have proven effective in the past. We also believe that new 
technologies and procedures will help us to more safely and effectively 
integrate commercial space transportation operations into the U.S. 
National Airspace System.
    We are also enlisting industry in this area. The Commercial Space 
Transportation Advisory Committee--COMSTAC--has a safety working group 
that, among other things, is looking at how industry can provide safety 
data to enable us to analyze potential problems and fix them before 
they occur. This is modeled on the aviation community's voluntary 
safety reporting effort and we believe it will work as well with the 
commercial space industry.
                                 ______
                                 
    Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Roger Wicker to 
                             Eric Stallmer
    Question 1. Respond to the recommendation to ``Immediately 
emphasize and accelerate efforts to efficiently integrate space vehicle 
operations into the National Airspace System (NAS).''
    Answer. FAA has successfully integrated space vehicle operations 
into the NAS, and continues to develop tools and processes to integrate 
future operations more efficiently.
    The FAA works with launch site operators, commercial launch and 
reentry vehicle operators, air carriers, and other government agencies 
such as the Department of Defense before and during each launch and 
reentry. FAA minimizes the effects of these operations on the NAS using 
a variety of techniques, such as dynamically tracking and rerouting 
only those aircraft that might be affected by potential debris, opening 
up portions of hazard areas as they become safe, and maintaining 
communications with all stakeholders during operations.
    In 2014, the FAA created the Joint Space Operations Group at the 
FAA Air Traffic Command Center in Warrenton, VA. This group includes 
both aerospace engineers with subject matter expertise in space 
operations as well as air traffic specialists, operators, ATC 
facilities, and other stakeholders to develop airspace management 
plans. The group works together to support space operations and manage 
the airspace as actual operations occur. This group supports each 
launch and reentry, monitoring operations progress and standing ready 
to lead the FAA response to contingencies. The Challenger Room where 
these operations are housed is the first dedicated operational space 
for integrating commercial space operations into the airspace.
    In addition, the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in 
Atlantic City, NJ, stood up the agency's first dedicated commercial 
space lab in 2016 to develop concepts and prototypes for new 
technologies that can help better integrate commercial space into the 
NAS. This includes the Space Data Integrator prototype, which has been 
instrumental in validating the FAA's foundational requirements to 
integrate commercial space into the NAS. The goal of this prototype is 
to demonstrate how to automate several of FAA's current manual 
processes for coordination during commercial space launches and 
reentries. It is currently the only FAA system capable of acquiring and 
displaying launch/reentry data to the FAA's Joint Space Operations 
Group. We work with industry partners such as SpaceX and Blue Origin to 
demonstrate capability during launch/reentry operations. Once 
operationalized, this system will enable FAA to safely reduce the 
amount of airspace that must be closed to other users, respond to off-
nominal scenarios and during normal operations, and release airspace 
that is no longer at risk as the mission progresses.
    The FAA is exploring approaches and capabilities required to 
produce real-time Aircraft Hazard Areas (AHAs). FAA has developed the 
Hazard Risk Assessment Management (HRAM) prototype to demonstrate that 
the time required for AHA calculation and display could be reduced from 
several minutes to seconds. The FAA has integrated the HRAM prototype 
with the SDI prototype in the Commercial Space Lab at the Tech Center 
in Atlantic City, demonstrating its capability in a beta-test ``shadow 
mode'' during live SpaceX and Blue Origin operations.
    Finally, the FAA has created the Commercial Space Transportation 
Executive Working Group, made up of senior executives across the agency 
who meet regularly to discuss cross-cutting initiatives associated with 
commercial space. This group plays a crucial leadership role in 
developing new commercial space integration initiatives, such as the 
recent Commercial Space Integration into the NAS Concept of Operations 
document.

    Question 2. Respond to the recommendation to ``Establish a space 
operations committee (including operators, Department of Defense, and 
NASA) to recommend appropriate information to be exchanged with the FAA 
for more dynamic airspace management and situational awareness.''
    Answer. FAA currently works with all the stakeholders listed, both 
before and during launches and reentries, to ensure the exchange of all 
needed information. For example, prior to each operation, the Joint 
Space Operations Group exchanges information with stakeholder and 
Department of Defense representatives at the Command Center, in the 
form of operation-specific Airspace Management Plans. These plans are 
also briefed on Operational Planning Teleconferences. Beyond these 
efforts, we look forward to working with the Commercial Spaceflight 
Foundation and other stakeholders to identify additional data that may 
be used to enhance situational awareness for all stakeholders.

    Question 3. Respond to the recommendation to ``Establish a Steering 
Committee to provide ongoing input to the FAA as NAS improvements are 
developed and implemented.''
    Answer. Based on the results of the Airspace Access Priorities 
Aviation Rulemaking Committee, the FAA is considering the need for a 
new Steering Committee. Such a committee may be redundant, however, 
because the FAA currently works with all stakeholders, including major 
stakeholders in commercial space transportation before and during 
launches, to ensure that all needed information is exchanged. Further, 
the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) 
provides an additional avenue for input to the FAA on this subject. The 
recent addition of representatives from Airlines for America and the 
Airports Council International--North America has increased COMSTAC's 
focus on these issues.

    Question 4. Respond to the recommendation to ``Invest in developing 
tools and capabilities that will enable a future NAS state where air 
traffic management shifts from segregation to integration with 
separation assurance.''
    Answer. The FAA envisions the shift from segregation to integration 
as an evolution, enabled over time by a number of key factors. New 
tools and capabilities are important enablers of dynamic airspace 
management, and the FAA is exploring the use of non-traditional 
acquisition approaches and public-private partnerships to leverage 
capabilities and resources that already exist in the commercial space 
and aviation industries to increase the pace of integration. Close 
collaboration across these industries and government agencies will be 
critical to success. New policies, procedures, training, and 
regulations will also be needed. But just as critical, the launch and 
reentry vehicles must become increasingly more reliable, and the manner 
in which they are operated must become increasingly more predictable. 
The FAA has developed a Commercial Space Integration into the NAS 
Concept of Operations document that describes this evolution. We 
anticipate releasing it for public comment in 2019.

    Question 5. Respond to the recommendation to ``Implement the 
ability to create dynamic airspace areas on controller automation 
systems that can be conflict probed.''
    Answer. In 2019, the FAA initiated a new program called Space 
Integration Capabilities (SIC). This program will develop a series of 
work packages that will increase the Air Traffic Organization's 
technical capabilities for integrating commercial space into the NAS. 
Work Package 1 contains a number of elements, including a ``rapid 
aircraft hazard area'' (AHA) ingestion capability that will build upon 
the Space Data Integrator's capabilities, extending the distribution 
and display of aircraft hazard areas from the Traffic Flow Management 
System (TFMS) to controller automation systems, such as the En Route 
Automation Modernization (ERAM) and Standard Terminal Automation 
Replacement System (STARS). Real-time hazard area volumes will be 
integrated into existing NAS systems. Once displayed on automation 
systems, a controller will be able to address these airspace areas in 
the same manner as other special activity airspaces, including 
capabilities for conflict probing.

    Question 6. Respond to the recommendation to ``Implement decision 
support tools in automation systems for air traffic controllers and 
traffic managers.''
    Answer. In 2019, the FAA initiated a new program called Space 
Integration Capabilities (SIC). This program will develop a series of 
work packages that will increase the Air Traffic Organization's 
technical capabilities for integrating commercial space into the NAS. 
Work Package 1 contains a number of elements, including a decision 
support and hazard mitigation of affected aircraft capabilities. 
Traffic managers and controllers will receive automatic, advanced 
notifications of airspace activation and deactivation, further enabling 
time-based flow management procedures. In the event of a launch or 
reentry vehicle failure, controllers will receive recommendations for 
prioritizing response actions and conflict-free resolutions based on 
the changing nature of risk to each aircraft. The SIC Work Package 1 is 
scheduled for an Investment Analysis Readiness Decision in 2019.

    Question 7. Respond to the recommendation to ``Develop procedures 
and training to enable future automation capabilities.''
    Answer. For any development of new capabilities, and for 
significant enhancements of existing capabilities, the FAA must review 
and revise its procedures. Changes to procedures prompt training for 
the users of these capabilities. These activities are part of the FAA's 
normal processes.

    Question 8. Respond to the recommendation to ``Further develop its 
Hazard Risk Assessment and Management (HRAM) capability and make that 
tool available to ATC to allow for dynamic airspace management.''
    Answer. In 2014, the FAA developed a Hazard Risk Assessment and 
Management (HRAM) prototype to facilitate a series of human-in-the-loop 
tests conducted in the NextGen Integration and Evaluation Capability 
(NIEC) lab at the Tech Center in Atlantic City. These sophisticated 
series of tests used actual controllers in simulated ATC environments 
to successfully validate the responsive approach to airspace management 
during launch and reentry operations. The HRAM prototype was a key 
component of these tests, providing a capability to generate an AHA in 
real-time in just a few seconds, versus current toolset, which requires 
several minutes to complete the same computation. The FAA is exploring 
the development of a Real-time Aircraft Hazard Area (AHA) Generator 
capability as a second phase of the Space Data Integrator (SDI) 
program. The HRAM prototype represents one of several means to 
implementing the necessary capability that the FAA continues to 
explore. The second phase of the SDI program is scheduled for an 
Investment Analysis Readiness Decision in 2019.

    Question 9. Respond to the recommendation to ``Implement and enable 
a capability, such as the Space Data Integrator (SDI) that allows space 
operators to share telemetry data with ATC systems and use that tool to 
supply telemetry to HRAM and other automation platforms as necessary.''
    Answer. The FAA began the Space Data Integrator (SDI) project in 
2014, developing a proof of concept system that it has exercised in 
``shadow mode'' during ongoing launch and reentry operations. The SDI 
capability will receive launch and reentry vehicle data from available 
sources, including telemetry, process the data for ingestion in to FAA 
systems, and display it for use by the Joint Space Operations Group and 
traffic management coordinators at affected ATC facilities in 
maintaining situational awareness. A Real-time Aircraft Hazard Area 
(AHA) Generator capability, such as the Hazard Risk Assessment 
Management (HRAM) prototype, will rely on an SDI capability for 
required inputs. The FAA's Traffic Flow Management System (TFMS) and 
other systems will also rely on an SDI capability for input. The FAA is 
currently exploring options to accelerate deployment of the SDI.

    Question 10. Respond to the recommendation to ``Implement a NAS 
operational airspace utilization assessment for both planning and post 
analysis capability and make it available to operators online.''
    Answer. Currently, pre-mission planning is a serial process, which 
addresses airspace considerations very late, when few options remain 
available to explore alternatives in the timing and duration of 
operational windows. These plans are often distributed within days or 
hours of the operation, when other stakeholders can no longer consider 
adjustments in response to the operation. In the future, the FAA 
envisions a collaborative process, built on capabilities already in use 
by the commercial space and aviation industries, to ``trial-plan'' 
operations against system constraints, take advantage of flexibility 
where it is available in operational window timing and duration, and 
distribute plans amongst all stakeholders much earlier, when 
adjustments are still possible. Post analysis capability will provide 
quantitative metrics for use in future optimization of this process. 
The FAA is conducting early concept development of pre-mission planning 
and post-mission analysis capabilities. The FAA anticipates that 
collaborative decision making and associated cross-industry forums will 
provide opportunities for significant industry participation in vetting 
these concepts and bringing existing capabilities to the table.

    Question 11. Respond to the recommendation to ``Require minimum 
advanced notification times prior to an event requiring Special Access 
Airspace (SAA).''
    Answer. The FAA recognizes that other NAS users require advanced 
notification of launch and reentry operations in order to consider and 
implement changes to their plans. Under some situations, Notices to 
Airmen may not provide sufficient notice. To address this need, the 
Joint Space Operations Group distributes airspace management plans to 
stakeholders several days in advance of the operation. Further, in the 
days and hours prior, the Command Center publishes advisories and 
discusses its plans on Operational Planning Teleconferences. Going 
forward, the FAA will continue to work with all stakeholders to 
evaluate and adjust timelines as needed.

    Question 12. Respond to the recommendation to ``Ensure sharing of 
real-time status of the vehicle for both pre-and post-launch.''
    Answer. The Joint Space Operations Group currently utilizes 
hotlines during launch and reentry operations to receive and distribute 
operational status information. A requirement for the use of a hotline 
is being included in the letters of agreement between site and vehicle 
operators and ATC that are required for licensing and permitting of 
commercial space operations. Going forward, a Space Data Integrator 
(SDI) capability will supplement this information and automate its 
distribution to stakeholders.

    Question 13. Respond to the recommendation to ``Implement procedure 
updates for tactical information exchange between operators and FAA 
regarding on-time operations to enable more dynamic airspace 
activation/deactivation.''
    Answer. The Command Center is in the process of implementing time 
based flow management procedures for launch operations from the East 
Coast. These procedures will use the timing of key events in the 
countdown and execution of launches to initiate reroutes and release 
airspace back to normal use. A requirement for the use of a hotline 
between the vehicle operator and ATC is a key enabler of these 
procedures. Going forward, the FAA envisions Space Data Integrator 
(SDI), Real-time Aircraft Hazard Area (AHA) Generation, and Space 
Integration Capabilities further enabling more dynamic airspace 
activation/deactivation.
    FAA is moving toward successfully integrating space vehicle 
operations into the NAS, and continues to develop tools and processes 
to more efficiently integrate future operations.
    The FAA works with launch site operations, commercial launch and 
reentry vehicle operators, air carriers, and other government agencies 
such as the Department of Defense before and during each launch and 
reentry. FAA minimizes the effects of these operations on the NAS using 
a variety of techniques, such as dynamically tracking and rerouting 
only those aircraft that might be affected by potential debris, opening 
up portions of hazard areas as they become safe, and maintaining 
communications with all stakeholders during operations.
    In 2014, the FAA created the Joint Space Operations Group at the 
FAA Air Traffic Command Center in Warrenton, VA. This group includes 
both aerospace engineers with subject matter expertise in space 
operations as well as air traffic specialists, operators, ATC 
facilities, and other stakeholders to develop airspace management 
plans. The group works together to support space operations and manage 
the airspace as actual operations occur. This group supports each 
launch and reentry, monitoring operations progress and standing ready 
to lead the FAA response to contingencies. The Challenger Room where 
these operations are housed is the first dedicated operational space 
for integrating commercial space operations into the NAS.
    In addition, the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in 
Atlantic City, NJ, stood up the agency's first dedicated commercial 
space lab in 2016 to develop concepts and prototypes for new 
technologies that can help better integrate commercial space into the 
NAS. This includes the Space Data Integrator prototype, which builds 
foundation for integrating commercial space into NAS. The goal of this 
prototype is to demonstrate how to automate several of FAA's current 
manual processes for coordination during commercial space launches and 
reentries. It is currently the only FAA system capable of acquiring and 
displaying launch/reentry data to the FAA's Joint Space Operations 
Group. We work with industry partners such as SpaceX and Blue Origin to 
demonstrate capability during launch/reentry operations. This system 
will enable FAA to safely reduce the amount of airspace that must be 
closed to other users, respond to off-nominal scenarios and during 
normal operations, and release airspace that is no longer at risk as 
the mission progresses
    The FAA is exploring approaches and capabilities required to 
produce real-time Aircraft Hazard Areas (AHAs). FAA has developed the 
Hazard Risk Assessment Management (HRAM) prototype to demonstrate that 
the time required for AHA calculation and display could be reduced from 
several minutes to seconds. The FAA has integrated the HRAM prototype 
with the SDI prototype in the Commercial Space Lab at the Tech Center 
in Atlantic City, demonstrating its capability in a beta-test ``shadow 
mode'' during live SpaceX and Blue Origin operations
    Finally, the FAA has created the Commercial Space Transportation 
Executive Working Group, made up of senior executives across the agency 
who meet regularly to discuss cross-cutting initiatives associated with 
commercial space. This group plays a crucial leadership role in 
developing new commercial space integration initiatives, such as the 
recent Commercial Space Integration into the NAS Concept of Operations 
document.

                                  [all]