[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]