    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

     STARSHIPS AND STRIPES FOREVER_AN EXAMINATION OF THE FAA'S ROLE IN THE
                             FUTURE OF SPACEFLIGHT

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

                                    (117-19)

                                 REMOTE HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                                    AVIATION

                                     OF THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                       TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JUNE 16, 2021

                                   __________

                           Printed for the use of the
                 Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

         Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
         transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                                 transportation

                               ______

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    46-249 PDF           WASHINGTON : 2021

                 COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

      PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
    SAM GRAVES, Missouri                 ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
    DON YOUNG, Alaska                      District of Columbia
    ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas  EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
    BOB GIBBS, Ohio                      RICK LARSEN, Washington
    DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida              GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
    THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky              STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
    SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
    RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois               JOHN GARAMENDI, California
    JOHN KATKO, New York                 HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
    BRIAN BABIN, Texas                   Georgia
    GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana             ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
    DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina         DINA TITUS, Nevada
    MIKE BOST, Illinois                  SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
    RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas           JARED HUFFMAN, California
    DOUG LaMALFA, California             JULIA BROWNLEY, California
    BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas            FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
    BRIAN J. MAST, Florida               DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
    MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
    BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania   MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON,            STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
      Puerto Rico                        SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
    TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
    PETE STAUBER, Minnesota              TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
    TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee              GREG STANTON, Arizona
    DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota          COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
    JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey       SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
    MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi           JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
    TROY E. NEHLS, Texas                 ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
    NANCY MACE, South Carolina           CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
    NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York         CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
    BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas                SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
    CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida           JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
    MICHELLE STEEL, California           CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
                                         KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
                                         MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
                                         NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
                                         MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
                                         TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana

                            Subcommittee on Aviation

      RICK LARSEN, Washington, Chair
    GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana             STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
    DON YOUNG, Alaska                    ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
    THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky              SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
    SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania            KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
    JOHN KATKO, New York                 NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
    BRIAN J. MAST, Florida               HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
    MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin            Georgia
    BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania   DINA TITUS, Nevada
    TROY BALDERSON, Ohio                 SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
    PETE STAUBER, Minnesota              JULIA BROWNLEY, California
    TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee              DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
    JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey       MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    TROY E. NEHLS, Texas                 STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
    NANCY MACE, South Carolina           ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
    BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas                GREG STANTON, Arizona
    CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida           COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
    MICHELLE STEEL, California           CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania, Vice
    SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio)    Chair
                                         ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
                                           District of Columbia
                                         EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
                                         JOHN GARAMENDI, California
                                         PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
                                         Officio)

                                    CONTENTS

                                                                       Page

    Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                     STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Washington, and Chair, Subcommittee on Aviation, opening
      statement......................................................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     2
    Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation,
      opening statement..............................................     4
        Prepared statement...........................................     5
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, opening statement..............................    11
        Prepared statement...........................................    14
    Hon. Brian Babin, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Texas, prepared statement......................................    73
    Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, prepared statement.............................    85
    Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Texas, prepared statement.............................    85

                                   WITNESSES
                                    Panel 1

    Wayne R. Monteith, Associate Administrator for Commercial Space
      Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, oral statement    15
        Prepared statement...........................................    17
    Heather Krause, Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S.
      Government Accountability Office, oral statement...............    20
        Prepared statement...........................................    21

                                    Panel 2

    Salvatore T. ``Tory'' Bruno, President and Chief Executive
      Officer, United Launch Alliance, LLC, oral statement...........    42
        Prepared statement...........................................    44
    Frank DiBello, President and Chief Executive Officer, Space
      Florida, oral statement........................................    48
        Prepared statement...........................................    50
    Captain Joseph G. DePete, President, Air Line Pilots Association,
      International, oral statement..................................    54
        Prepared statement...........................................    56
    Mike Moses, President of Space Missions and Safety, Virgin
      Galactic, oral statement.......................................    62
        Prepared statement...........................................    64

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Statement of Karina Drees, President, Commercial Spaceflight
      Federation, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Rick Larsen.......     7
    Statement of Nicole deSibour Rodgers, Executive Director, 200
      Mile Gateway, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian J. Mast...    86

                                    APPENDIX

    Questions to Wayne R. Monteith, Associate Administrator for
      Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation
      Administration, from:
        Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson...................................    95
        Hon. Nikema Williams.........................................    99
        Hon. Garret Graves...........................................   100
    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Heather Krause,
      Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S. Government
      Accountability Office..........................................   101
    Questions from Hon. Garret Graves to Salvatore T. ``Tory'' Bruno,
      President and Chief Executive Officer, United Launch Alliance,
      LLC............................................................   102
    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Frank DiBello,
      President and Chief Executive Officer, Space Florida...........   103
    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Captain Joseph G.
      DePete, President, Air Line Pilots Association, International..   104

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 June 14, 2021

        SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

        TO:     Members, Subcommittee on Aviation
        FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Aviation
        RE:     Subcommittee Hearing on ``Starships and Stripes
    Forever--An Examination of the FAA's Role in the Future of
    Spaceflight''
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                    PURPOSE

        The Subcommittee on Aviation will meet on Wednesday, June
    16, 2021, at 2:00 p.m. EDT in Room 2167 of the Rayburn House
    Office Building and virtually via Zoom for a hearing titled,
    ``Starships and Stripes Forever--An Examination of the FAA's
    Role in the Future of Spaceflight.'' The hearing will explore
    broadly the future of the U.S. commercial space transportation
    industry, its rapid growth and expansion into human
    spaceflight, and the role of the Federal Aviation
    Administration (FAA) in overseeing and regulating the industry.
    The Subcommittee will receive testimony from representatives of
    the FAA, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), United
    Launch Alliance, Space Florida, Air Line Pilots Association,
    and Virgin Galactic. The FAA and GAO witnesses will testify on
    the first panel, and the other witnesses on the second panel.

                                 I. BACKGROUND

        Commercial space transportation--through the use of orbital
    and suborbital vehicles manufactured, owned, or operated by
    private companies or other non-federal organizations--
    transports objects such as satellites, scientific payloads,
    other cargo, and passengers (referred to as spaceflight
    participants) to, from, and throughout space.\1\ In 2018, when
    the FAA's most recent annual commercial space compendium was
    published, the size of the global space economy--private
    industry revenues and government budgets--was estimated to be
    about $345 billion.\2\ In 2016, the size of the U.S. space
    industry alone was approximately $158 billion, which included
    more than $110 billion in revenues generated by satellite
    services, manufacturing, ground equipment, and launch services,
    and approximately $48 billion spent by the U.S. Government on
    space programs.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ GAO, Commercial Space Transportation: FAA Should Examine a
    Range of Options to Support U.S. Launch Infrastructure, GAO-21-154 at 4
    (Dec. 2020).
        \2\ FAA, The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation:
    2018 at 9-10 (Feb. 2018), https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/
    headquarters_offices/ast/media/2018_AST_
    Compendium.pdf.
        \3\ FAA, The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Transportation:
    2018 at 9-10 (Feb. 2018), https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/
    headquarters_offices/ast/media/2018_AST_
    Compendium.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Commercial space transportation services help fulfill many
    government needs, including supplying the International Space
    Station, deploying classified military and intelligence
    payloads, and supporting reconnaissance and communications
    capabilities.\4\ The commercial launch of satellites broadly
    benefits society by providing a wide range of modern services,
    from television and radio broadcast to high-speed Internet and
    weather information, through the use of communications and
    remote sensing satellites.\5\ Moreover, the commercial launch
    technology is ever evolving; several private companies, most
    notably SpaceX, have developed reusable launch vehicles capable
    of being launched multiple times into space.\6\ This and other
    advances promise to bring down the cost of building and
    launching rockets, thereby reducing barriers to the expansion
    of commercial activity in space.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Morin, Wilson, Space Agenda 2021--Leveraging Commercial Space
    for National Security, Aerospace Corporation--Ctr. for Space and Pol.
    Strategy (Nov. 2020), https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2020-
    11/Morin-Wilson_Leveraging_20201113.pdf.
        \5\ FAA, Space--Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), https://
    www.faa.gov/space/additional_information/faq/ (last visited June 8,
    2021).
        \6\ CNBC, SpaceX Pushes Reusing Rockets Further with Record Sixth
    Landing of a Single Booster, Aug. 18, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/
    08/18/spacex-reuses-and-lands-falcon-9-rocket-booster-for-record-6th-
    time.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                              II. INDUSTRY GROWTH

        The FAA has indicated that the industry has grown steadily
    over the last decade. In total, there have been 403 licensed
    commercial space launches since the first launch in 1989, with
    nearly one half of those occurring in the last ten years alone,
    as depicted in the table below.\7\ This includes a record 39
    licensed launches taking place just in the last year.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ FAA, Commercial Space Data, https://www.faa.gov/data_research/
    commercial_space_data/ (last visited June 5, 2021).
        \8\ Id.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        This trend is expected to continue as the FAA already has
    46 licensed launches scheduled for this fiscal year.\9\ This
    amounts to a nearly 400 percent increase in FAA launch licenses
    between 2015 and 2020.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        From fiscal year 2016 through fiscal year 2021, the FAA's
    commercial space transportation operating budget and staffing
    levels have grown, from $17.8 million and 84 full-time
    equivalents (FTEs) to $27.5 million and 117 FTEs.\10\ The FAA
    has also adopted or plans to adopt numerous measures to
    maximize its use of existing resources, including reorganizing
    lines of business within its commercial space transportation
    office, hiring more personnel, streamlining regulations and
    processes, transitioning from a physical to an online
    application system, and developing and incorporating newer,
    more efficient technologies.\11\ The President's fiscal year
    2022 budget request includes an increase of funding and
    staffing levels to $32.47 million and 108 FTEs, although this
    amount falls below the $64.5 million authorized for the FAA's
    commercial space transportation activities under the FAA
    Reauthorization Act of 2018.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ GAO, Commercial Space Transportation: Improvements to FAA's
    Workforce Planning Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated
    Growth, GAO-19-437 at 8 (May 2019); information received from the FAA,
    email on file with Committee.
        \11\ Id.
        \12\ See FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. 98-575), Sec.
    113(b); 49 U.S.C. Sec.  106(k)(2)(D).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

             III. THE FAA'S ROLE IN COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION

        The FAA, under delegation by the Secretary of
    Transportation, exercises oversight of the commercial space
    transportation industry by authorizing commercial launches and
    imposing narrowly-tailored requirements or regulations to
    protect ``the public, property, and the national security and
    foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial
    launch or reentry activities.'' In addition, as part of its
    mission, the FAA is mandated to ``encourage, facilitate, and
    promote U.S. commercial space transportation.'' \13\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50903.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST)
    is the focal point in the Executive Branch for authorization of
    a proposed commercial space launch. Consistent with its
    mission, AST regulates commercial space transportation by:
        Licensing commercial launches and reentries within
    the United States and those conducted by U.S. citizens anywhere
    in the world;
        Licensing non-federal launch and reentry sites (or
    ``commercial spaceports'') operated within the United States or
    by the U.S. anywhere in the world; \14\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ See Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-575), 51
    U.S.C. Sec.  50904.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Granting experimental permits for the launch of
    suborbital launch vehicles for research and development; \15\
    and
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50906.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Issuing safety approvals for essentially all
    elements used in licensed or permitted launch and reentry
    activities, including launch and reentry vehicles, safety
    systems, processes, services, or personnel.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ See FAA Presentation to Committee Staff, Introduction to the
    Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) at the FAA (Mar. 13,
    2017). See also The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space
    Transportation: 2017.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A. LAUNCH LICENSES

        The FAA may issue a launch license \17\ to the private
    operator of a proposed commercial space launch if the FAA
    concludes that the proposed launch would not jeopardize public
    health and safety or U.S. national security or foreign policy
    interests, or would be inconsistent with U.S. obligations under
    international law.\18\ The FAA recently published a new rule to
    streamline and replace numerous old regulations.\19\ In doing
    so, the FAA seeks to allow launch providers the ability be more
    flexible by: encompassing more types of launch and reentry
    operations; requiring only a single license for all types of
    commercial spaceflight launch and reentry operations; and
    adopting a performance standard over a prescriptive
    standard.\20\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ See 14 C.F.R. Sec.  415.3.
        \18\ 14 C.F.R. Sec. Sec.  415.21; 415.31(a); 415.51.
        \19\ FAA, Fact Sheet--Streamlined Launch and Reentry Licensing
    Requirements (SLR2) Rule (Oct. 15, 2020), https://www.faa.gov/news/
    fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=25400.
        \20\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. SPACEPORT LICENSES

        While many commercial space launches occur at federal
    launch ranges (such as Cape Canaveral Space Force Station) that
    the FAA does not regulate, the FAA does issue licenses to
    nonfederal operators of launch and reentry sites, or
    ``commercial spaceports.'' \21\ There are also different kinds
    of launch ranges depending on type of launch vehicles intended
    to be supported, with some limited in size, and others limited
    on whether they takeoff horizontally (via runway) or vertically
    (via launch pad). There are currently 19 nominal launch and
    reentry sites in the United States, of which 12 are non-
    federal.\22\ In interviewing launch providers about U.S.
    spaceport capabilities and capacity, a GAO report from December
    2020 found that a majority of launch providers feel that the
    current ``U.S. space transportation infrastructure [is]
    generally sufficient [to meet] current requirements.'' \23\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ FAA, Fact Sheet--Commercial Space Transportation Activities
    (June 19, 2020), https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/
    news_story.cfm?newsId=19074.
        \22\ GAO-21-154 at 7-11.
        \23\ Id.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    C. EXPERIMENTAL PERMITS

        The FAA also may issue a permit to the operator of an
    experimental space vehicle. Under this permit, the operator may
    launch a reusable suborbital rocket and return the vehicle to
    Earth, if the proposed operation is necessary for:
        (1)``[r]esearch and development to test new design
    concepts, new equipment, or new operating techniques,'' for
    crew training purposes; or
        (2)to show that the operator complies with the requirements
    above for obtaining a license.'' \24\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \24\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  437.5.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    D. LIABILITY DETERMINATIONS AND INDEMNIFICATION

        The operator of a licensed launch and reentry activity must
    obtain liability insurance or demonstrate financial
    responsibility sufficient to compensate for the ``maximum
    probable loss'' from claims by (1) a third party for death,
    bodily injury, or property damage or loss, and (2) the U.S.
    Government against a person for damage or loss to government
    property resulting from the licensed activity.\25\ The FAA
    performs an analysis to determine the maximum probable loss,
    although commercial spaceflight operators are not required to
    obtain insurance or demonstrate financial responsibility of
    more than $500 million for third-party claims and $100 million
    for U.S. Government claims for property damage.\26\ Federal law
    requires the U.S. Government to indemnify insured operators for
    third-party claims exceeding the $500 million insurance
    requirement, up to $1.5 billion, although to date such
    indemnification has not been necessary.\27\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \25\ 51 U.S.C. 50914(a).
        \26\ Id. at (a)(3).
        \27\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50915(a).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    E. SAFETY APPROVALS AND OVERSIGHT

        In addition to the functions described above, the FAA may
    issue safety approvals for many elements used in licensed or
    permitted launch and reentry activities, including launch and
    reentry vehicles, safety systems, processes, services, or
    personnel.\28\ The FAA also conducts pre-application
    consultations, safety inspections and oversight (i.e.,
    compliance monitoring for FAA-issued licenses and permits),
    environmental reviews, rulemakings, research, and
    infrastructure development.\29\ Licensee and permit holders
    must allow the FAA to place an observer at launch, reentry,
    production facility, or assembly sites.\30\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \28\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50903; 14 C.F.R Sec.  414.
        \29\ FAA, Workload Metrics, Presentation, at 3, on Dec. 12, 2017,
    on file with Committee.
        \30\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    F. PAYLOAD REVIEW

        In general, the FAA is not responsible for licensing or
    otherwise reviewing the payload of a commercial launch if the
    payload is a communications satellite licensed by the Federal
    Communications Commission, a commercial remote sensing
    satellite licensed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA), or owned or operated by the U.S.
    Government.\31\ If a payload does not fall into any of those
    categories, the FAA will conduct a payload review to ensure, in
    coordination with other federal agencies, that the cargo will
    not ``jeopardize the public health and safety, safety of
    property, or national security or foreign policy interest of
    the United States.'' \32\ Most recently, the FAA denied a
    payload review for a Momentus space tug intended to deploy cube
    satellites because of concerns raised by the Department of
    Defense (DoD) relating to the company's foreign ownership.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \31\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  450.43.
        \32\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50904(c).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         IV. SAFETY AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    A. LEARNING PERIOD_MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN FAA REGULATORY ACTIVITY

        Although the FAA regulates the commercial space
    transportation industry to ensure the safety of the general
    public, Congress has established a ``learning period'' for the
    industry, which generally prohibits the FAA from proposing
    regulations for launch vehicle design features or operating
    practices as they relate to launch vehicle passenger or crew
    safety.\33\ The FAA may, however, issue regulations in response
    to either (1) a serious or fatal injury to a person aboard a
    commercial spacecraft or (2) an event that posed a high risk of
    such an injury.\34\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \33\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905(c)(2)(C)-(D), (9).
        \34\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The intent of this moratorium is for the FAA to refrain
    from imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens on the nascent
    commercial human spaceflight industry. The learning period was
    last extended in 2015 and expires at the end of fiscal year
    2023, which coincides with the expiration of the current FAA
    reauthorization law.\35\ Over the next year, several companies
    are expected to be commercially carrying crew and passengers to
    space, which raises the question of whether Congress should
    extend the learning period, let it expire, or find an
    alternative regulatory framework.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \35\ Compendium 2018, at 89. See U.S. Commercial Space Launch
    Competitiveness Act, Pub. L. 114-90, Sec.  111 (2015). Before enactment
    of the legislation, the moratorium would have ended in 2018.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the moratorium, the FAA is working with the
    commercial space transportation industry to facilitate the
    development of voluntary industry consensus standards.\36\ Much
    of this work occurs through ASTM Committee F47 on Commercial
    Spaceflight, which has published four consensus standards and
    is working on more than ten additional standards.\37\ When the
    learning period expires, the FAA is required to take these or
    other consensus standards into account when developing any
    subsequent regulation.\38\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \36\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905(c)(3).
        \37\ ASTM Intl., Committee F47 on Commercial Spaceflight, https://
    www.astm.org/COMMITTEE/F47.htm.
        \38\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905(c)(9).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    B. DUAL MANDATE

        In addition to regulating the safety of the U.S. commercial
    space transportation industry, the FAA is also required to
    ``encourage, facilitate, and promote'' the industry.\39\ The
    FAA operated under a similar ``dual mandate'' with respect to
    civil aviation from its inception in 1958 until 1996, when the
    ValuJet flight 592 accident prompted Congress to eliminate the
    FAA's statutory duty to ``promote'' as well as regulate the
    civil aviation industry.\40\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \39\ Commercial Space Launch Act, Pub. L. 98-575 (1984).
        \40\ Federal Aviation Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-264, Sec.  401
    (1996).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    C. SPACE SITUATIONAL AWARENESS, TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT, AND MISSION
                        AUTHORIZATION

        Presently, the DoD is responsible for providing space
    situational awareness services and information, meaning the
    tracking of space objects and warning satellite operators when
    the possibility of a collision exists.\41\ Collisions between
    objects in space pose a threat to human spaceflight safety and
    the continued operation of satellites due to severe debris
    pollution. For example, in 2009, the collision of an active and
    inactive satellite in orbit occurred at 26,000 mph and created
    almost 2,000 pieces of debris, all of which pose a potential
    threat to another satellite.\42\ To prevent similar collisions
    and provide other future services, there is widespread
    agreement that space situational awareness services for
    civilian satellites should be performed by a civilian
    agency.\43\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \41\ 10 U.S.C. Sec.  2274.
        \42\ Weeden, 2009 Iridium-Cosmos Collision Fact Sheet, Secure World
    Foundation (Nov. 10, 2010), https://swfound.org/media/6575/
    swf_iridium_cosmos_collision_fact_sheet_
    updated_2012.pdf.
        \43\ See Space Situational Awareness: Examining Key Issues and the
    Changing Landscape: Hearing before Comm. on Sci., Space and Tech.,
    Subcomm. on Space and Aeronautics, 116th Cong. 3 (2020) (statement of
    Dr. Brian Weeden) at https://swfound.org/media/206932/
    weeden_house_ssa_testimony_written_feb2020.pdf; Sorge, Ailor,
    Muelhaupt, Space Agenda 2021--Space Traffic Management: the Challenge
    of Large Constellations, Orbital Debris, and the Rapid Changes in Space
    Operations, Aerospace Corporation--Ctr. for Space and Pol. Strategy
    (Sept. 2020), available at https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/
    2020-09/Sorge_STM_
    20200915.pdf; Dominguez et al., Space Traffic Management: Assessment of
    the Feasibility, Expected Effectiveness, and Funding Implications of a
    Transfer of Space Traffic Management Functions, Natl. Acad. of Public
    Admin. (Aug. 2020), https://napawash.org/academy-studies/united-states-
    department-of-commerce-office-of-space-commerce.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Space debris is not just a concern in orbit; an accident
    involving a spacecraft during launch or reentry or a reentering
    satellite could present a serious risk to users of the National
    Airspace System (NAS) as well as people on the ground. One of
    the most visible examples is the wreckage of the Space Shuttle
    Columbia, which broke apart during reentry on February 1, 2003.
    Parts of the shuttle were scattered through East Texas,
    Louisiana, and Arkansas, with one piece of wreckage--an 800-
    pound main engine piece--hitting the ground at nearly 1,400
    miles per hour, and another 600-pound engine component
    impacting the ground with enough force to create a six-foot
    crater.\44\ Most recently, in May 2021, a Chinese Long-March-5b
    vehicle re-entered the atmosphere. The nearly 40,000-pound
    vehicle was one of the largest ever to re-enter the Earth's
    atmosphere on an uncontrolled basis and predicting its incoming
    flight path was near impossible. Pieces of it eventually
    crashed in the Indian Ocean.\45\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \44\ Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Report of the Columbia
    Accident Investigation Board, Vol. I (Aug. 2003), at 46-47, available
    at http://s3.amazonaws.com/akamai.netstorage/anon.nasa-global/CAIB/
    CAIB_lowres_full.pdf.
        \45\ Saphora Smith, Debris from China's Long March 5B Rocket
    Crashes Back to Earth in Indian Ocean, NBC News Digital (May 8, 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While the FAA can close a portion of the U.S. airspace and
    evacuate the surrounding airspace to ensure safety from debris
    during a licensed launch or controlled reentry, it is more
    difficult to take appropriate actions with respect to
    uncontrolled orbital or suborbital objects. Reentering debris
    can pose a significant hazard to aircraft because fragments can
    fall through the airspace over considerable distances and at
    different rates. This creates the risk to an aircraft operating
    in the debris field.\46\ This has led previous administrations
    and some experts to call for new requirements and mission
    authorizations to be placed on launch licenses to further weigh
    other considerations, such as orbit saturation and
    disposal.\47\ Others have called for a civilian agency-led
    warning system, where the federal government would be able to
    better track and predict the trajectories of orbital debris and
    develop the capabilities for a civilian agency to manage and
    disseminate such data.\48\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \46\ William Ailor, Large Constellation Disposal Hazards, The
    Aerospace Corporation (Jan. 2020).
        \47\ Letter from J. Holdren, Dir. Of Office of Sci. & Tech. Pol.,
    to Chairman Thune and Chairman Smith (Apr. 4, 2016).
        \48\ Ailor, Wilde, Requirements for Warning Aircraft of Reentering
    Debris, 3rd Int'l Ass'n for the Advancement of Space Safety (Oct. 21,
    2008).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On June 18, 2018, President Trump issued Space Policy
    Directive-3 (SPD-3), which designated the Department of
    Commerce's Office of Space Commerce as the lead civilian agency
    for the provision of space situational awareness services, the
    establishment of a space traffic management framework, and the
    reduction of orbital debris through preemptive and proactive
    means.\49\ No mention was made of tracking reentering space
    debris to protect NAS users or people on the ground.\50\ In
    2020, the National Academy of Public Administration contracted
    with NOAA to review the Office of Space Commerce and issued a
    report recommending that the office conduct the civilian space
    situational awareness mission.\51\ Although a pilot program for
    such activities was funded in the Consolidated Appropriations
    Act, 2021, no legislation authorizing the Department of
    Commerce to provide space situational awareness services has
    been enacted by Congress.\52\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \49\ Presidential Memoranda, Space Policy Directive-3, National
    Space Traffic Management Policy (June 18, 2018).
        \50\ Id.
        \51\ Dominguez et al., Space Traffic Management: Assessment of the
    Feasibility, Expected Effectiveness, and Funding Implications of a
    Transfer of Space Traffic Management Functions, Natl. Acad. of Public
    Admin. (Aug. 2020), https://napawash.org/academy-studies/united-states-
    department-of-commerce-office-of-space-commerce.
        \52\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260 (2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the issuance of SPD-3 by the previous
    Administration, some have argued that the FAA is better suited
    for providing civilian space situational awareness services.
    The FAA has studied the issue with the DoD for years.\53\ Most
    recently, on September 6, 2016, the Department of
    Transportation transmitted a report outlining the dangers of
    space debris to both existing space assets in orbit and those
    within atmosphere; the FAA's expertise and existing
    relationships that would aid the agency in exceling at managing
    and relaying space situational awareness data; and the
    legislative approval and authorizations needed to do so.\54\
    Some experts have pointed out that the preexisting relationship
    between launch providers and a safety agency is crucial, as it
    also fulfills a long desired state of streamlined federal
    requirements regulated by as few differing agencies as
    possible.\55\ Ultimately, the DoD is able and willing to work
    with whatever civil agency Congress entrusts with this mission;
    while testifying before the Committee on Armed Services in
    2018, Air Force General John Hyten said, ``We need a civil
    agency that is doing that role. Commerce makes sense.
    Transportation makes sense. That is a political decision.''
    \56\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \53\ Hitchens, Will FAA Or Commerce Track Civil Satellites?
    Congress Must Decide--And Soon, Breaking Def. (May 15, 2019), https://
    breakingdefense.com/2019/05/will-faa-or-commerce-track-civil-
    satellites-congress-must-decide-and-soon/.
        \54\ DOT, Report on Processing and Releasing Safety-Related Space
    Situational Awareness Data (Apr. 2016).
        \55\ Lal, Picard, Weeden, Presentation--Approached to Civil Space
    Situational Awareness (SAA), FAA Industry Day--Sci. and Tech. Pol.
    Inst. (Oct. 25, 2016), https://www.faa.gov/about/
    office_org/headquarters_offices/ast/media/
    5_science_and_technology_policy_institute_
    study.pdf.
        \56\ Space Situational Awareness: Whole of Government Perspectives
    on Roles and Responsibilities: Joint Hearing Before the Subcomm. on
    Strategic Forces of the Comm. on Armed Services Meeting Jointly with
    Subcomm. on Space of the Comm. on Sci., Space, and Tech., 115th Cong.
    17 (2018) (statement of Air Force Gen. John Hyten), available at
    https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115hhrg33386/pdf/CHRG-
    115hhrg33386.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On April 16, 2021, Aviation Subcommittee Ranking Member
    Garret Graves and Chair Rick Larsen introduced H.R. 2624, the
    Aerospace Debris Safety Act, which directs the FAA to carry out
    a program to provide space situational awareness services,
    including a public catalog of space objects and emergency
    conjunction notifications for in-orbit space objects. It also
    directs the FAA to develop a system capable of tracking
    reentering space debris and using that space situational
    awareness data to restrict airspace or warn aircraft that may
    be at risk of being impacted by such debris.

    D. HUMAN SPACEFLIGHT

        Human spaceflight is inherently risky. Insofar as a trained
    and competent crew will reduce the risk of injury and damage to
    people and property on the ground, the FAA imposes requirements
    for the qualifications and training of mission crewmembers.\57\
    For example, launch vehicle pilots must have an FAA pilot
    certificate with an instrument rating and must have received
    vehicle and mission-specific training for each phase of
    flight.\58\ A crewmember must also receive training ``in
    procedures that direct the vehicle away from the public in the
    event the flight crew abandons the vehicle during flight'' and
    ``[a]bort scenarios,'' and generally, a crewmember must
    demonstrate the ability ``to safely carry out his or her duties
    so that the vehicle will not harm the public.'' \59\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \57\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  460.5(c).
        \58\ Foust, Virgin Galactic pilots join an exclusive club with FAA
    astronaut wings, SpaceNews (Feb. 10, 2019), https://spacenews.com/
    virgin-galactic-pilots-join-an-exclusive-club-with-faa-astronaut-
    wings/.
        \59\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  460.5(a)(2)(i), (b), (c)(4).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    E. SPACEPORT INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING

        Although commercial spaceports that are co-located with
    airports may receive federal support for airport-related
    infrastructure projects through the FAA's Airport Improvement
    Program (AIP), there is no currently funded federal grant
    program dedicated to supporting commercial spaceports. Between
    2010 and 2020, the FAA awarded 10 AIP grants to two airports
    that also have a launch site operator license, including for
    infrastructure that may support both airport and space
    transportation operations.\60\ Between 2010 and 2012, the FAA
    awarded $1.5 million in Space Transportation Infrastructure
    Matching grants to seven spaceports, although the program has
    not received funding since that time.\61\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \60\ GAO-21-154 at 18.
        \61\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In September 2020, the Commercial Space Transportation
    Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) recommended to the FAA that the
    federal government create a program for funding improvements at
    spaceports.\62\ A COMSTAC working group suggested that such a
    program, run by the FAA's Office of Spaceports, should be for
    capital improvements only, give priority to spaceport projects
    that secure state or local investment, and positively weigh
    existing launch activity at a spaceport in the grant award
    process.\63\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \62\ Letter from James A Hatt, Designated Federal Official COMSTAC,
    to Charity Weeden, Chair COMSTAC (Oct. 9, 2020) (regarding
    recommendations put forth by COMSTAC during the September 2020
    meeting), available at https://www.faa.gov/space/
    additional_information/comstac/media/
    Sept_2020_AST_DFO_Response_to_COMSTAC.pdf
        \63\ Office of Spaceports Recommendation, COMSTAC (Sept. 14, 2020),
    available at https://www.faa.gov/space/additional_information/comstac/
    media/COMSTAC_IIWG_Spaceport_
    Funding_white_paper_14_Sept_2020.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    V. NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM INTEGRATION

        The FAA has the statutory responsibility for ensuring the
    safe and efficient use of the NAS. In the case of commercial
    space launches, the FAA establishes a hazard area each time
    there is a scheduled launch to segregate aircraft from the
    airspace needed for the launch.\64\ The size of this hazard
    area is calculated prior to the launch due to the complexities
    involved, using variables like vehicle size, trajectory, and
    history.\65\ Specifically, the risk to life outside of a hazard
    area must be equal to or less than a one-in-a-million or less
    chance that a piece of debris from a failed space launch
    vehicle would result in an injury to an individual member of
    the public.\66\ Moreover, the hazard area must also be closed
    for a predetermined amount of time, as each launch has too many
    dynamic variables for it to integrate in real time with the
    FAA's existing air traffic control system.\67\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \64\ FAA, Airspace Integration, https://www.faa.gov/space/
    airspace_integration/ (last visited June 4, 2021).
        \65\ GAO-19-437 at 34.
        \66\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  415.35.
        \67\ GAO-19-437 at 34-36.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since the hazard areas tend to be closed for the entirety
    of a launch window, regardless of whether a launch has been
    delayed or, in some cases, has already occurred, inefficiencies
    and delays may propagate for other users of the NAS who must be
    rerouted around said hazard area.\68\ In fiscal year 2017, the
    FAA estimated that 1,200 commercial flights were directly
    affected by licensed launches, which resulted in an additional
    39,000 miles flown, with a majority of these flights being
    directed around Cape Canaveral.\69\ Although it is exceedingly
    rare, the FAA has previously denied a launch license due to the
    proposed timeframe being a ``time of unusually congested
    airspace.'' \70\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \68\ FAA, Airspace Integration, https://www.faa.gov/space/
    airspace_integration/ (last visited June 4, 2021).
        \69\ GAO-19-437 at 36.
        \70\ Id. at 37
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The FAA, working with stakeholders, is engaged in efforts
    to resolve these inefficiencies and better integrate commercial
    space launches into the NAS. For instance, in February 2018,
    the FAA chartered an Aviation Rulemaking Committee to solicit
    recommendations on Airspace Access Priorities to minimize
    disruption by moving from space launch accommodation to
    integration.\71\ In May 2020, the FAA also published a
    Commercial Space Integration into the National Airspace System
    (CSINAS) Concept of Operations (ConOps).\72\ The ConOps
    describes the vision for future commercial space transportation
    operations, with an emphasis on managing the greater
    integration of launch and reentry vehicles as they transition
    through the NAS.\73\ The FAA is also working on the technology
    needed to develop ``time-based procedures and operator mission
    triggers'' to more adaptively and reactively regulate the
    airspace around launches.\74\ This includes new Space Data
    Integrator capabilities, which will receive and distribute
    launch and reentry data for initial use within the NAS and
    allow for improved situational awareness and airspace
    management decision making.\75\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \71\ FAA, Airspace Access Priorities Aviation Rulemaking Committee
    Charter, Feb. 12, 2018.
        \72\ FAA, Commercial Space Integration into the National Airspace
    System Concept of Operations (May 2020), https://www.faa.gov/space/
    airspace_integration/media/Final_CSINAS_
    ConOps.pdf.
        \73\ Airspace Integration, supra note 65.
        \74\ Id.
        \75\ FAA, Fact Sheet--The Space Data Integrator (SDI), (Oct. 16,
    2020), https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/
    news_story.cfm?newsId=23476.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             VI. REGULATORY REFORM

        In February 2018, the newly-revived National Space Council
    (NSC) recommended, among other things, that the FAA's launch
    and reentry licensing standards be streamlined within one
    year.\76\ On May 24, 2018, President Trump signed Space Policy
    Directive-2, instructing the Secretary of Transportation to
    issue a notice of proposed rulemaking revising FAA launch and
    reentry regulations by February 1, 2019.\77\ The directive
    required the Secretary to consider requiring a single license
    for all types of commercial space transportation launch and
    reentry operations, as well as replacing prescriptive
    regulations with performance-based criteria.\78\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \76\ William Harwood, National Space Council Acts to Streamline
    Regulatory Hurdles, SpaceFlight Now (Feb. 22, 2018), https://
    spaceflightnow.com/2018/02/22/national-space-council-acts-to-
    streamline-regulatory-hurdles/.
        \77\ Presidential Memoranda, Space Policy Directive-2, Streamlining
    Regulations on Commercial Use of Space (May 24, 2018), https://
    trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/presidential-actions/space-policy-
    directive-2-streamlining-regulations-commercial-use-space/.
        \78\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In response to Space Policy Directive-2, the FAA
    accelerated its efforts and chartered the Streamlined Launch
    and Reentry Licensing Requirements Aviation Rulemaking
    Committee on March 8, 2018, in order to provide a forum for
    aviation stakeholders to provide input and recommendations.\79\
    The FAA issued a final rule streamlining its launch and reentry
    licensing requirements on October 15, 2020.\80\ Overall, the
    final rule consolidated and revised multiple FAA regulations
    and applied a single set of licensing and safety requirements
    across various types of operations and vehicles, such as
    requiring a single license for all types of commercial
    spaceflight launch and reentry operations.\81\ In doing so,
    Parts 415, 417, 431, and 435 of the Code of Federal
    Regulations, which were predominantly prescriptive, were
    combined into a single performance-based rule, Part 450.\82\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \79\ FAA, Streamlined Launch and Reentry Licensing Requirements
    Aviation Rulemaking Committee Charter, Feb. 12, 2018.
        \80\ Id.
        \81\ Id.
        \82\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Despite the publication of Part 450, additional steps
    remain to fully implement the streamlined launch and reentry
    regulations. Many launch providers continue to operate under
    legacy licenses and have yet to transition to a license issued
    under Part 450. One reason for this is because full
    implementation of Part 450 will depend upon the FAA's
    publication of advisory circulars (ACs) that detail possible
    means of compliance with the regulation and other necessary
    guidance. To date, the FAA has only issued three ACs, although
    it plans to issue additional ACs over the next two years.\83\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \83\ See FAA, Part 450: Means of Compliance Table, https://
    www.faa.gov/space/streamlined_licensing_process/media/
    Part_450_Means_of_Compliance_Table_with_dates.pdf (last visited June
    11, 2021).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   WITNESSES

    PANEL 1

        Wayne R. Monteith, Associate Administrator for
    Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation
    Administration
        Heather Krause, Director, Physical Infrastructure,
    Government Accountability Office

    PANEL 2

        Salvatore T. ``Tory'' Bruno, President and Chief
    Executive Officer, United Launch Alliance
        Frank DiBello, President and Chief Executive
    Officer, Space Florida
        Captain Joe DePete, President, Air Line Pilots
    Association
        Mike Moses, President of Space Missions and Safety,
    Virgin Galactic

    STARSHIPS AND STRIPES FOREVER--AN EXAMINATION OF THE FAA'S ROLE IN THE
                             FUTURE OF SPACEFLIGHT

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 16, 2021

                      House of Representatives,
                              Subcommittee on Aviation,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:04 p.m., in
    room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Rick
    Larsen (Chair of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Members present: Mr. Larsen, Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Kahele, Mr.
    Garamendi, Mr. Stanton, Mr. Graves of Louisiana, Mr. Mast, Mr.
    Perry, Dr. Babin, Mr. Gimenez, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Mr. Payne, Ms.
    Norton, Dr. Van Drew, Mr. Stauber, Mr. Brown, Mr. Johnson of
    Georgia, Mr. Katko, Mr. DeSaulnier, Mrs. Steel, Ms. Williams of
    Georgia, Ms. Davids, Mr. Lynch, Mr. Burchett, and Mr.
    Balderson.
        Mr. Larsen. The subcommittee will come to order.
        First off, I ask unanimous consent that the chair be
    authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's
    hearing.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        And I ask unanimous consent that Members not on the
    subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
    today's hearing and ask questions.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        As a reminder, please keep your microphone muted unless
    speaking. Should I hear any inadvertent background noise, I
    will request the Member mute their microphone.
        A reminder as well: to insert a document into the record,
    please have staff email it to DocumentsT&I@mail.house.gov.
        So good afternoon and I want to welcome today's witnesses
    joining the Aviation Subcommittee's hearing titled ``Starships
    and Stripes Forever--An Examination of the FAA's Role in the
    Future of Spaceflight.''
        Earlier this year, NASA celebrated 60 years since Astronaut
    Alan Shepard made the first U.S. piloted spaceflight in the
    Mercury Freedom 7 spacecraft, and since then space launches in
    the National Airspace System, or NAS, have increased.
        Rigorous subcommittee oversight work helps guarantee U.S.
    aviation and aerospace remains the global gold standard in
    safety by identifying current and anticipated concerns, and
    identifying how Congress, the FAA, and industry and labor
    stakeholders can work together to address these issues.
        The first panel today are representatives of the FAA and
    Government Accountability Office. They will discuss the status
    of Federal regulation and the oversight of the commercial space
    industry, necessary improvements, and the hurdles the FAA faces
    in carrying out its mission to provide the safest and most
    efficient aviation system in the world.
        The second panel will help the subcommittee better
    understand how the industry navigates the current regulatory
    landscape for commercial spaceflight and what is needed in the
    future.
        As chair and as a Member of Congress, I have also made
    improving diversity in the U.S. aerospace industry a priority.
    It is important the subcommittee hearings have diverse
    backgrounds, views, and perspectives at the table. However, in
    many cases, the U.S. transportation workforce lacks the
    diversity that reflects the true diversity of this country, a
    problem that extends to commercial space. So, unfortunately, it
    is not any different in the commercial space sector.
        A recent survey of the aerospace and defense industry found
    that the number of women in the industry is around 24 percent,
    while only 6 percent of respondents identified as a person of
    color, and just less than 8 percent identified as Hispanic or
    Latino. As the industry works to increase the diversity of its
    workforce, I also expect to hear from the second panel today
    how they plan to address this. Until then, we will continue to
    work with stakeholders to find new ways for underrepresented
    groups to participate in the discussion and this industry.
        The first panel today is the FAA and GAO.
        Once the exclusive purview of the Federal Government, space
    launches in the U.S. are now a growing commercial industry.
    With this evolving dynamic has come an accompanying change in
    the role of the Federal Government. FAA is now tasked with
    overseeing not only the NAS and launches that may impact the
    NAS, but also regulations related to launch and spaceport
    licensing and safety regulations.
        Mr. Wayne Monteith, FAA's Associate Administrator for
    Commercial Space Transportation, is here today to discuss these
    issues, as well as FAA's vision for this industry.
        Ms. Heather Krause, the Director of Physical Infrastructure
    at the GAO, is also here today, and Ms. Krause will provide
    GAO's research that has been done on this topic, as well as
    recommendations for both the FAA and the industry.
        [Mr. Larsen's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress
       from the State of Washington, and Chair, Subcommittee on Aviation
        Good afternoon and welcome to today's witnesses joining the
    Aviation Subcommittee's hearing titled ``Starships and Stripes
    Forever--An Examination of the FAA's Role in the Future of
    Spaceflight.''
        This is an overdue discussion on the future of the U.S. launch and
    spaceflight industry and the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA)
    role in oversight of the industry.
        Earlier this year, NASA celebrated 60 years since astronaut Alan
    Shepard made the first U.S. piloted spaceflight in the Mercury Freedom
    7 spacecraft.
        Since then, space launches in the National Airspace System (NAS)
    has skyrocketed.
        The rigorous oversight work done by this subcommittee helps
    guarantee U.S. aviation and aerospace remains the global gold standard
    in safety by identifying issues of concern--current and anticipated--
    and how Congress, the FAA, and industry and labor stakeholders can work
    together to address these issues.
        On our first panel are representatives from the FAA and the
    Government Accountability Office (GAO) to discuss the status of federal
    regulation and oversight of the commercial space industry, necessary
    improvements and the hurdles the FAA faces in carrying out its mission
    to provide the safest and most efficient aviation system in the world.
        The second panel of witnesses will help the subcommittee better
    understand how the industry navigates the current regulatory landscape
    for commercial spaceflight and what is needed in the future.
        One aspect I would like to make note of is that of diversity.
        As Chair and as a Member of Congress, I have made improving
    diversity in the U.S. aerospace industry a priority.
        It is important subcommittee hearings have diverse backgrounds,
    views and perspectives at the table.
        However, in many cases, the U.S. transportation workforce lacks the
    diversity that reflects the true diversity of this country.
        Unfortunately, the aerospace sector is no different. A recent
    survey of the Aerospace and Defense industry found that the number of
    women in the industry is around 24 percent, while only 6 percent of
    respondents identified as a Person of Color and just less than 8
    percent identified as Hispanic or Latino.
        As the industry works to increase the diversity of its workforce, I
    look forward to the day when it is similarly reflected in its
    leadership.
        Until then, I will continue to work with stakeholders to find new
    ways for underrepresented groups to participate in the discussion and
    this industry.
        Once the exclusive purview of the federal government, space
    launches in the United States are a growing commercial industry.
        With this evolving dynamic has come an accompanying change in the
    role of the federal government.
        FAA is now tasked with overseeing not only the NAS and launches
    that may impact the NAS, but also regulations related to launch and
    spaceport licensing and safety regulations.
        I am pleased to have Mr. Wayne R. Monteith, FAA's Associate
    Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, here today to
    discuss these issues as well as FAA's vision for this industry.
        I am also glad to have Ms. Heather Krause, Director of Physical
    Infrastructure at the GAO here today.
        Ms. Krause will provide a wealth of knowledge on GAO's research
    done on this topic, as well as recommendations for both FAA and the
    industry.
        The space launches that will be discussed in this hearing occur at
    various kinds of launch facilities--whether vertical or horizontal--and
    are designed to meet different commercial needs--such as launching a
    GPS satellite into GEO stationary orbit or a new telescope to explore
    space.
        With that in mind, this subcommittee must consider the depth and
    breadth of the industry being regulated.
        One perspective that must be heard is that of existing legacy
    launch service providers. Their experience surrounding long standing
    safety requirements and existing standards is extremely helpful in this
    conversation.
        That is why I am pleased to have Mr. Salvatore ``Tory'' Bruno,
    President and CEO of United Launch Alliance (ULA) here today.
        Mr. Bruno will be able to share insights as to the relationship
    between ULA and the FAA, and what is needed for the future of the
    commercial space industry.
        I look forward to hearing more about what is needed from the FAA to
    support effective, yet efficient launch and spaceport licensing is
    vital to the success of the industry.
        Also important in this discussion is what infrastructure
    investments are needed to continue the safe operation and continued
    growth of the commercial space industry.
        I look forward to hearing from Mr. Frank DiBello, President and CEO
    of Space Florida, for his evaluation of the present and future of FAA
    launch and spaceport regulations.
        FAA is still tasked with maintaining and safeguarding the NAS, in
    addition to its work on commercial space launches.
        Recent figures indicate that the airline industry and passenger
    travel are rebounding from the COVID-19 pandemic.
        The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) screened 2 million
    travelers at airport checkpoints on Friday, June 11--the most since
    March 2020.
        Consequently, it is important to ask how to fully and safely
    integrate growing airspace operations, like commercial space launches,
    with existing airspace users.
        The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) is a thought leader in this
    area. I am glad to welcome Captain Joe DePete, President of ALPA, to
    hear that perspective.
        The perspective of new entrants into the commercial space
    operations field also play a key role in this discussion.
        Companies still in the prototyping or design phase of operations
    view the regulatory landscape in a different light.
        I am happy to welcome Mr. Mike Moses, President of Space Missions
    and Safety of Virgin Galactic, to hear their unique priorities.
        As nascent operations and technologies are integrated into the
    complex national airspace system, the safety of all who fly and those
    on the ground remain the top priority.
        Congress, the Biden administration and the commercial space
    industry and workforce must work together as we embark on the next
    chapter of U.S. aerospace.
        Thank you again to today's witnesses. I look forward to our
    discussion.

        Mr. Larsen. In the interests of time, because we have
    votes, I will wait on discussing the second panel until we get
    to the second panel.
        And with that, I will now call on the ranking member of the
    subcommittee, Mr. Garret Graves, for an opening statement.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I want to thank Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves, and
    I also want to thank our witnesses for being here today.
        Mr. Chairman, for many years, the commercial space
    transportation industry more than earned the moniker
    ``nascent.'' In fact, in 2011, the FAA licensed only one single
    commercial space launch, but in the past few years, it has been
    transformative. Nearly half of the more than 400 space launches
    licensed by the FAA have occurred since 2011. FAA now routinely
    licenses one launch a week or more. Three American companies
    will be taking passengers into space just this year, with a
    fourth set to join next year. In 2011, there were just over
    1,000 active satellites in orbit. Now there are more than
    3,300.
        What used to be a science project is now a thriving
    transportation industry that transports passengers and hundreds
    of billions of dollars' worth of cargo to and from space.
        As this industry continues to advance, it is important that
    we explore steps we should take to lay the foundation for the
    next decade of growth. The committee's number one priority is
    safety. While spaceflight is an inherently risky endeavor, we
    all know that there is no future for commercial space
    transportation unless launch vehicles are safe.
        Although the FAA has a perfect public safety record for
    commercial space launches, a statutory learning period has
    restricted the issuance of launch vehicle crew and passenger
    safety regulations. This period of time, much like the early
    barnstorming days of aviation, has allowed time to work through
    the complexities of commercial space transportation and develop
    consensus standards.
        After a slow start, the consensus standards work is
    gathering momentum. This policy has been very successful in
    promoting both growth and safety. The learning period expires
    in September of 2023, and Congress will need to decide whether
    to extend the learning period, let it lapse, or find an
    alternative policy solution.
        It is an important question, and I look forward to hearing
    from our witnesses on this issue.
        Adequate resources for the FAA's Office of Commercial Space
    Transportation, AST, and leveraging expertise of the private
    sector are also important issues. While launch cadences have
    increased by more than 400 percent over the last 5 years, AST
    staffing has increased by only 15 percent.
        General Monteith recently led AST through a reorganization,
    and completely revamped the FAA's launch and reentry
    regulations. We should take a hard look at ensuring AST is as
    efficient as possible, that it has access to industry
    expertise, and that FAA resources don't hold the commercial
    space transportation industry back.
        The increased launch cadences are also challenging our
    limited airspace resources. We must ensure that the FAA
    develops the tools and equipment necessary to safely integrate
    commercial space transportation launches into our National
    Airspace System.
        But we cannot focus solely on the safety of our airspace at
    launch; we must also consider its safety when the objects
    return from space. That is why Chair Larsen and I recently
    introduced the Aerospace Debris Safety Act, which directs the
    FAA to establish a system to track reentering space debris,
    block affected airspace, and warn aircraft when such debris may
    pose a hazard. Even small satellites reentering the atmosphere
    can create debris clouds through which aircraft may fly. The
    bill also directs the DOT to provide space situational
    awareness data and services to ensure commercial space
    transportation safety on-orbit and to prevent the potential
    catastrophic collisions of satellites and debris.
        Just this weekend, the G7 recognized the growing issue of
    space debris and the need for a collaborative approach for
    space traffic management. Although some have proposed to place
    these authorities in a different agency, I believe that the FAA
    is the right agency for the job.
        Finally, I am excited to announce I have reintroduced the
    21st Century Aerospace Infrastructure Act, which provides
    infrastructure improvement grants for commercial spaceports.
    These grants will represent an important Federal contribution
    to the capital needs of our national spaceport system and
    leverage State, local, and private investment in these assets.
        Addressing these issues and others is critical to ensuring
    that we maintain our leadership in aerospace. I look forward to
    continuing to work on bipartisan solutions to these questions.
        [Mr. Graves of Louisiana's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Garret Graves, a Representative in Congress
       from the State of Louisiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
                                    Aviation
        Thank you, Chair Larsen, and I also want to thank our witnesses for
    being here today.
        For many years, the commercial space transportation industry more
    than earned the moniker of ``nascent.'' In fact, in 2011 the FAA
    licensed only one single commercial space launch.
        But the last few years have been transformative. Nearly half of the
    more than 400 space launches licensed by the FAA have occurred since
    2011. The FAA now routinely licenses a launch a week or more. Three
    American companies will be taking passengers into space just this year,
    with a fourth set to join them next year. In 2011, there were just over
    1,000 active satellites in orbit; now there are more than 3,300.
        What used to be a science project is now a thriving transportation
    industry that transports passengers and hundreds of billions of
    dollars' worth of cargo to, from, and within outer space. As this
    industry continues to advance, it is important that we explore what
    steps we should take to lay a foundation for the next decade of growth.
        This Committee's number one priority is safety. While spaceflight
    is an inherently risky endeavor, we all know that there is no future
    for commercial space transportation unless launch vehicles are safe.
    Although the FAA has a perfect public safety record for commercial
    launches, a statutory learning period has restricted the issuance of
    launch vehicle crew and passenger safety regulations. This period of
    time, much like the early barnstorming days of aviation, has allowed
    time to work through the complexities of commercial space
    transportation and develop consensus standards.
        After a slow start, the consensus standards work is gathering
    momentum. This policy has been very successful in promoting both growth
    and safety. The learning period expires in September 2023, and Congress
    will need to decide whether to extend the learning period, let it
    lapse, or find an alternative policy solution. This is an important
    question, and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on this
    issue.
        Adequate resourcing of the FAA's Office of Commercial Space
    Transportation (AST) and leveraging the expertise of the private sector
    are also important issues. While launch cadences have increased by more
    than 400 percent over the last 5 years, AST's staffing has increased by
    only 15 percent.
        General Monteith recently led AST through a reorganization and
    completed a revamp of the FAA's launch and reentry regulations. We
    should take a hard look at ensuring that AST is as efficient as
    possible, that it has access to industry expertise, and that FAA
    resources don't hold the commercial space transportation industry back.
        The increased launch cadences are also challenging our limited
    airspace resources. We must ensure that FAA develops the tools and
    equipment necessary to safely integrate commercial space transportation
    launches into our National Airspace System.
        But we cannot focus solely on the safety of our airspace at launch;
    we must also consider its safety when objects return from space. That
    is why Chair Larsen and I recently introduced the Aerospace Debris
    Safety Act, which directs the FAA to establish a system to track
    reentering space debris, block affected airspace, and warn aircraft
    when such debris may pose a hazard. Even small satellites reentering
    the atmosphere can create debris clouds through which aircraft may fly.
    The bill also directs the DOT to provide space situational awareness
    data and services to ensure commercial space transportation safety on-
    orbit and to prevent the potentially catastrophic collisions of
    satellites and debris.
        Just this weekend, the G7 recognized the growing issue of space
    debris and the need for a collaborative approach for space traffic
    management. Although some have proposed to place these authorities in a
    different agency, I believe that the FAA is the right agency for the
    job.
        Finally, I'm excited to announce that I have reintroduced the 21st
    Century Aerospace Infrastructure Act, which provides infrastructure
    improvement grants to commercial spaceports. These grants will
    represent an important Federal contribution to the capital needs of our
    national spaceport system and leverage state, local, and private
    investment in these assets.
        Addressing these issues and others is critical to ensuring that we
    maintain our leadership in aerospace. I look forward to continuing to
    work on bipartisan solutions to these questions.

        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you again, Chairman Larsen,
    and I yield back.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Ranking Member Graves.
        Before I turn to the chair of the full committee, I would
    ask unanimous consent that the written statement prepared by
    the Commercial Spaceflight Federation be entered into the
    hearing record.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        [The information follows:]

         Statement of Karina Drees, President, Commercial Spaceflight
            Federation, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Rick Larsen
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished members
    of the Committee, thank you for accepting the Commercial Spaceflight
    Federation (CSF)'s submission of our members' views on the role of the
    FAA in the future of the U.S. commercial space industry.
        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 U.S. jobs driven
    by billions of dollars in investment. Through the promotion of
    technology innovation, CSF members are guiding the expansion of Earth's
    economic sphere, bolstering U.S. leadership in aerospace, and inspiring
    America's next generation of engineers, scientists, and explorers.
        Commercial spaceflight is achieving the goals set for it by
    bipartisan leaders in Congress and prior Presidential Administrations.
    Those public servants had faith that American entrepreneurship and
    ingenuity could succeed in dramatically improving the safety,
    reliability, capability, and affordability of access to and return from
    space.
        In 2021 we can see that this faith was well-placed. Our industry
    has reclaimed the overwhelming share of the global launch market. U.S.
    spacecraft aboard U.S. launch vehicles successfully resupply the
    International Space Station (ISS) with crew and cargo, filling a vacuum
    left by the Space Shuttle fleet's retirement a decade ago.
        New market entrants with smaller launch vehicle designs are
    allowing climate-measuring and Earth observation spacecraft to
    supplement NOAA and NASA scientific observatories to help us understand
    and protect our environment. A range of new telecommunications
    satellites are providing better and more affordable services, including
    broadband for underserved and rural markets in the United States.
    Scientific experiments built by middle-schoolers and by post-graduate
    researchers are flying to the edge of space on suborbital reusable
    vehicles. And the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's latest Mars lander was
    able to flight-prove its approach and landing sensor package and
    software using a reusable launch vehicle.
        Notably, two decades after Dennis Tito's flight to the ISS and
    nearly 17 years after Scaled Composites won the Ansari X-Prize, self-
    funded citizen explorers will fly commercially to both Earth orbit and
    on suborbital vehicles. The long-awaited era of personal spaceflight
    has finally arrived.
        These achievements were enabled by the stable legal and regulatory
    regimes first put in place by Congress in the Commercial Space Launch
    Act of 1984 (CSLA) and updated regularly thereafter. CSF, in fact,
    recently published a white paper on the topic that elaborates on this
    regime and why it should be continued so that the benefits of growth
    and advancement in spaceflight can continue. But one core assumption of
    the CSLA and U.S. space policy has always been that space
    transportation, while being a nascent transportation mode, is
    dramatically different and distinct from aviation.
                    I. Space Transportation is not Aviation
        The first FAA Associate Administrator for Commercial Space
    Transportation (AST), the late Patti Grace Smith, was fond of saying
    that the FAA was one agency operating under two laws. The air side, or
    Title 49, of FAA manages the system of airports and airspace, and of
    course regulates all participants in aviation, from passengers to
    pilots to operators with one Cessna and airlines with several hundred
    jets. The much smaller space side of FAA, guided by Chapter 509 of
    Title 51, ensures the safety of the uninvolved public and their
    property, protects national policy goals, and enables industry growth
    by providing guidance, licenses, experimental permits, and promotional
    support including R&D.
        Aviation is a common carrier industry with well over a century of
    technological development and 95 years of federal safety regulation.
    Much has changed since the dawn of aviation regulations, but the
    industry's safety record continues to improve while providing Americans
    with unprecedented mobility through safe, affordable travel.
        Commercial space enjoyed its first licensed launch just three
    decades ago. The industry's shift beyond government contractor status
    was initiated a mere two decades ago, thanks in large part to the Air
    Force and NASA procuring launch services, rather than owning and
    operating the physical hardware.\1\ Today, new competing systems with
    diverse technologies and capabilities are maturing and in development,
    offering cheaper and faster access to space for both commercial
    customers and taxpayer-funded federal users.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ This allowed industry to innovate far beyond the heritage of
    ICBMs that became the first generation of expendable launch vehicles in
    the late 1950s and 1960s and influenced designs into the 1990s.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 II. How FAA can help the future of spaceflight
        While aviation safety must continue to be the priority of FAA,
    there are many additional public services that FAA leadership and the
    Office of the Secretary can and should provide to continue the progress
    of the U.S. commercial space transportation industry.
        First and foremost is providing more resources to AST, both
    increased funding and the authority to hire more high-talent staff. AST
    employs a mere 100 of the 45,000 total FAA employees as it continues to
    wrestle with the dramatic growth in licensed and permitted
    spaceflights, and the need to simultaneously reform its public safety
    and related regulations so they are clearer for industry to understand,
    are technology-agnostic and performance-based instead of prescriptive,
    and also more straightforward and efficient to administer. CSF
    recommends an increase of nearly $5 million more than the FY2022
    request to at least $37 million for AST Operations.
        Second, DOT and FAA should provide AST with maximum flexibility in
    hiring both entry-level and mid-career engineers in addition to other
    technical experts who are fluent in the ``NewSpace'' paradigm of
    iterative design, test, operation and evolution of space systems.
    Furthermore, AST should be funded enough to enable a significant
    fraction of its employees to spend up to a year in industry to better
    understand the state of the art and its continuing advancement, or
    otherwise undertake frequent extensive training, site visits, and other
    enrichment opportunities regarding current industry technical practice.
    AST staff must be able to confidently assess the public safety of
    commercial space operations based on actual substance, and not rely
    solely on paperwork compliance.
        Third, the Secretary should be encouraged to make full use of the
    authority granted by this subcommittee in the enacted FAA
    Reauthorization Act of 2018 to expedite the formal aerospace rulemaking
    process when appropriate and to work with both government and industry
    partners through a variety of interactive, transparent, and
    participatory mechanisms that are fully allowed under a broad
    interpretation of the Administrative Procedures Act. The goal should
    always be to try to create a consensus rulemaking to achieve the public
    goal at stake, and only rely on an entirely formal process if informal
    means fail. This is vital considering the need to streamline the
    remaining 14 CFR 400 et seq. now that Part 450 has been published. A
    significant amount of guidance documentation for Part 450 must be
    produced to allow for flexible means of compliance of this and other
    rules. There is no reason why industry cannot help AST draft that
    guidance.
        Fourth, FAA should heed the advice it requested from a prior
    Aviation Rulemaking Committee regarding the issues around better
    integrating more frequent launches from and reentries to more
    geographic locations into its management of the National Airspace
    System. Specifically, the aviation and space transportation industries
    collectively told the FAA two years ago to invest in tools, which would
    give En Route controllers real time information about a launch event,
    including its dynamically changing hazard area, so they could steer air
    traffic around that event, preserving both passenger safety and
    efficient air and space operations. Unfortunately, the new FY2022 FAA
    F&E request cuts this funding and delays any investment decision until
    late next year. Correcting this should be a priority for Administrator
    Dickson, rather than solely Mr. Monteith.
        Fifth, the U.S. space industry is exceedingly dependent on
    modernized infrastructure, particularly that which supports safe
    operation and more frequent usage. Unlike the early decades of
    aviation, when the Federal government provided significant funding for
    the nation's emerging airspace system without charging corresponding
    user fees, no such program exists for commercial space transportation,
    and the burden of creating either public spaceports or private launch
    and reentry sites has been borne entirely by industry and state-and-
    local governments. There is an authorized program in law, but it needs
    updating and actual appropriations, and we would appreciate this
    committee's support of a strong appropriation in FY2022, or the
    inclusion of space transportation infrastructure in the final
    infrastructure legislation that provides resources to DOT and the FAA.
        Sixth, the FAA should continue its technical support of industry's
    development of consensus standards. Of the 89 recommended best
    practices to improve safety, provided by the FAA as prescribed in the
    2015 CSLA, industry will have published or be in the process of
    drafting standards addressing a significant majority of those topics by
    the end of 2021. Additionally, compared to other similarly young
    industries, the commercial space industry is on par if not slightly
    ahead when it comes to creating safety standards. CSF hopes that the
    FAA can continue to help industry fashion standards as quickly and
    thoroughly as possible.
                                III. Conclusion
        This year promises to be yet another breakthrough in U.S.
    commercial space transportation achievement. The future beyond looks
    just as bright, with significant benefits for our economy, our
    scientific, civil space, and environmental enterprises, and our
    national security. Soon nearly anyone who really wants will be able to
    fly themselves, an experiment, or a business idea into space. It is
    CSF's mission to democratize access to space for everyone, and 2021
    will be a seminal year in that vital endeavor.
                                   appendix a
               U.S. Regulation of Commercial Space Transportation
                 Introduction--the Commercial Space Launch Act
    Summary:
        The U.S. Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 as amended (51 USC
    50901 et seq) is the primary law guiding federal oversight, regulation,
    and promotion of the U.S. commercial space transportation industry. The
    law mandates that the Secretary of Transportation ensure that all
    launch and reentry activities shall protect public safety and safety of
    property and support U.S. national security and foreign policy
    interests, and that the Secretary shall issue licenses to U.S.
    applicants who show that they do and will continue to meet those four
    canonical requirements. The proven success of this law--a growing and
    technologically dynamic U.S. industry with no public loss of life or
    significant property loss after 340 licensed commercial launches--has
    been recognized by other nation.
    Background:
        The first successful commercial launch took place in 1982, but the
    attempt required obtaining permission from approximately 40 federal,
    state, and local government organizations. Two years later Congress
    enacted the Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984 to create an enabling
    federal licensing regime under the U.S. Department of Transportation.
    The law requires that the Secretary, or her designee, protect the
    general public and their property, as well as ensure that the proposed
    launch is consistent with U.S. national security and foreign policy
    interests, but then mandates that any applicant who meets (and
    continues to meet) those requirements shall be issued a license to
    conduct a launch. The policy and regulatory framework are therefore
    consciously promotional in character: it encourages Americans to risk
    their money and sometimes their own personal safety to design, build,
    and launch commercial rockets into space.
        The CSLA has been amended several times since 1984: to create a
    third-party liability risk-sharing regime, to cover intact reentries of
    launch vehicles or spacecraft, to license reusable launch vehicles,
    including reusable suborbital rockets, and to expressly authorize
    commercial human spaceflight. Meanwhile, many nations around the world
    have copied the U.S.' legal and regulatory framework to foster their
    own domestic space transportation industries, validating America's
    approach.
        The Secretary's authority and responsibility was delegated by
    administrative action to the Federal Aviation Administration in 1996,
    resulting in the creation of an Office of the Associate Administrator
    for Commercial Space Transportation, which acts on behalf of the
    Secretary, but Congress has never affirmed this delegation in statute,
    other than authorization and appropriation of funding.
    Key Points:
        The Commercial Space Launch Act as amended has enabled both
    early commercial launch vehicles derived from government-led systems,
    and now new generations of launch and reentry systems, including fully
    reusable vehicles, to enter the marketplace because developers enjoyed
    a stable, predictable, and reasonably transparent regulatory
    environment. Given the technical and economic challenges in rocket
    science, this bounding of regulatory risk (while still protecting
    American citizens and interests from harm) gives entrepreneurs and
    investors' confidence that they will get permission to fly.
        Critical to the regulatory regime's enabling nature is its
    exclusive focus on protecting the uninvolved public and their property,
    as well as essential national policy interests (such as treaty
    obligations). Commercial space transportation has never been regulated
    with the goal of the success of the mission. Indeed, space
    transportation continues to be seen as a dangerous and risky activity,
    i.e., not a common carrier mode of transportation with an expectation
    of safety and success for those who choose to participate in the
    activity. Indeed, space transportation customers regularly buy
    insurance to cover the cost of building and launching a replacement
    payload. Market forces therefore reward more reliable (as well as more
    economical) space transportation offerings. In the case of human
    spaceflight, the law requires the fully informed consent of all
    ``spaceflight participants'', and expressly limits regulation for their
    safety to demonstrated hazards, while enabling the Secretary to promote
    higher levels of occupant safety via guidance and information-sharing.
        The CSLA as a legal framework continues to enjoy broad
    approval from industry and other stakeholders and bipartisan support in
    Congress. While the law has been updated several times, its fundamental
    approach has remained consistent for nearly four decades. Importantly,
    the law has remained agnostic about technical approach, allowing for
    significant innovation, new market entries, and robust industry
    competition. The FAA's regulations, on the other hand, have come in for
    more criticism, especially in recent years, for being overly
    prescriptive and internally inconsistent. (See CSF white paper on
    Streamlining Launch and Reentry Licensing Requirements.)
                                   appendix b
     The Commercial Spaceflight Federation's (CSF) FY 2022 Transportation,
      House and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations Priority Requests
    Agency: Federal Aviation Administration
    Account: Operations
    Commercial Space Transportation

    FY22 CSF Request: $37M / FY21 Enacted: $27.56M / FY22 PBR: $32.47M

        Justification: FAA/AST continues to face a rapidly growing
    workload, with an unprecedented number of licensed launches and
    reentries, both by established firms and new market entrants. AST must
    conduct public safety and related analyses of increasingly frequent and
    more diverse launch and reentry activities even as it continues to
    implement the newly published Streamlined Launch and Reentry Licensing
    Requirements rulemaking (and careful transition of heritage launch/
    reentry operators to that new regime), as well as carry out other
    public-safety-related responsibilities. Finally, as industry continues
    to innovate with new vehicle designs, component technologies, and
    operating concepts, AST personnel would greatly benefit from more
    direct exposure and training opportunities regarding industry state of
    the art, using educational partnerships with industry and universities.
        Requested Report Language: The Committee recommends an increase in
    Commercial Space funding within FAA operations expressly for the
    purpose of efficiently and expeditiously processing operator
    applications for licenses and experimental permits to support the
    increasing cadence of commercial space launches and reentries. The
    Committee further recommends that the Office of Commercial Space
    Transportation continue to focus on its public safety mission, instead
    of planning for or pursuing uncertain future regulatory authorities.
    Finally, the Committee directs the Office to use some of the increase
    in funding above the President's request to provide its licensing staff
    with a range of training opportunities in industry state of the art
    technologies and practices.

    Space Transportation Infrastructure Matching Grants

    FY22 CSF Request: $60M / FY21 Enacted: $0 / FY22 PBR: N/A

        Justification: While first authorized long ago, this program has
    not been regularly funded in Presidential Requests, largely because
    high matching requirements make it less attractive than other federally
    funded transportation grant programs. But the growing number of diverse
    space transportation companies entering the marketplace is already
    taxing existing federal and non-federal infrastructure. It is hoped
    that this appropriation will stimulate the Department to begin to meet
    this growing national need to support commercial space transportation
    activities, many of which are in direct service of DOD, NASA, and other
    important federal customers.
        Requested Bill Language: Sec. xxx. For the $60 million appropriated
    within FAA Operations for the program authorized in 51USC511, the
    Secretary may waive the limitations of section (b) of that chapter for
    project grants only for launch or reentry operators and launch or
    reentry site operators, and instead require that at least 10 per cent
    of the total cost of the project will be paid by other sources.
        Requested Report Language: The Committee recognizes that non-
    federal spaceport infrastructure will require additional investment in
    the coming years to match projected launch and reentry demand, and so
    the Committee provides $60,000,000 for the STIM-grant program, which
    was created to provide matching grants for infrastructure projects at
    launch or reentry sites. Given the budget pressure on state and local
    governments as well as private industry considering the COVID-19
    pandemic, the Committee is proposing an Administrative Provision in the
    bill to reduce the matching funds requirement to just 10% for Fiscal
    Year 2022. This will enable federal funds to be used on space
    transportation infrastructure projects which support the national
    interest while also broadly supporting economic recovery.

    Account: Facilities & Equipment
    ATC En Route Programs--Commercial Space Integration

    FY22 CSF Request: $16M / FY21 Enacted: $11M / $6.5M PBR

        Justification: The FAA's Airspace Aviation Rulemaking Committee
    report completed in 2019 strongly recommended that FAA implement
    existing tools for sending real time hazard area information for a
    launch or reentry event via ERAM to en route controllers, allowing them
    to steer air traffic around the space transportation events and
    minimizing disruption to both aviation and space transportation.
    Unfortunately, so far, the NEXGEN organization has only implemented the
    Space Data Integrator to provide basic launch/reentry vehicle data to
    the FAA Command Center. The FY22 PBR indicates that FAA only plans to
    make an investment decision about further tool implementation in June
    of 2022, three years after the FAA's rulemaking committee told FAA to
    focus on integrating hazard data into ERAM.
        Requested Report Language: The Committee repeats its direction that
    the Office of Commercial Space Transportation work with the NEXTGEN
    program to accelerate the further demonstration and operational
    approval of tools to transmit real time hazard area data to en route
    flight controllers to allow for dynamic management of air traffic
    around space launch and reentry activities and includes $15m for Real
    Time Hazard Area Infusion.

    Account: Research, Engineering, and Development
    Research, Engineering, and Development

    FY22 CSF Request: $6M / FY21 Enacted: $5.84M / FY22 PBR $5.75M

        Justification: The FY2021 Conference Statement of Managers referred
    to a need to begin preparing for a potential expiration of limits on
    FAA's authority to regulate occupant safety, but this change is
    speculative, and it would not mandate regulation. Importantly,
    protecting the uninvolved public will remain a statutorily mandated
    paramount priority for FAA licensing of all space transportation
    activities. Furthermore, Congress directed in the Commercial Space
    Launch Competitiveness Act of 2015, and FAA agrees, that they should
    first focus on promoting occupant safety by facilitating the
    development of industry consensus standards based on the new design
    features, innovative technologies, and operating practices of the
    emergent commercial human space flight industry. The recommended
    request below would invest directly in the consensus standards effort
    identified by FAA's Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
    as the agreed-on industry consensus choice for human spaceflight
    standards-writing.
        Requested Report Language: The Committee recommends that the Office
    of Commercial Space Transportation focus its promotion of human
    spaceflight occupant safety on supporting industry-led consensus
    standards development efforts and directs the Office to use at least
    $1m of its RE&D request for an innovative public-private partnership
    for this purpose.

        Mr. Larsen. With that, I will recognize the chair of the
    full committee, Representative DeFazio of Oregon.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks to the
    ranking member for calling today's hearing to hear from the FAA
    and stakeholders on the Government's regulation of industry in
    the future of commercial space.
        This is an important and growing sector, but there are
    three main points that I hope we can move through and hear
    meaningful conversation about during today's hearing. I want to
    hear from each witness their view on these three things: The
    imperative for better integration of launches and reentries
    into the air traffic system; the significant need for
    thoughtful regulation of this blooming largely unregulated
    industry; and the commitment to reducing the environmental
    damage associated with rocket launches.
        We don't have any real recent statistics, but in December
    of 2018, 1,400 commercial flights containing many thousands of
    Americans were detoured 70,000 miles because of a launch. And
    in the future, with more and more launches, I would expect that
    we are going to see more and more delays. And I am not in favor
    of telling people in America who are traveling for pleasure or
    for work or family emergency, whatever reason they are on a
    commercial airplane, ah, sorry, your flight is going to be
    delayed, or, um, you are going to be 1\1/2\ hours late and miss
    your connection because some millionaire/billionaire is going
    to experience 15 minutes of weightlessness. That is not right,
    and I want to see that that does not happen.
        I will give the FAA credit for being conservative in
    determining how much airspace to block off and how long. Safety
    is never subject to negotiation and compromise, and the FAA has
    rightly given these initial commercial space operations a wide
    berth to protect the safety of aircraft and flight.
        However, I understand that in May 2020, the FAA finally
    published the long overdue ``Concept of Operations'' that
    details the vision to better integrate launch and reentry
    vehicles as they transition through the air traffic control
    system. I further understand the FAA is working on a system
    called the Space Data Integrator that will allow for more
    narrowly tailored airspace closures and designations,
    essentially real time, minimizing disruptions caused by
    commercial space activity. I am going to expect an update on
    that today, and I hope that the timeline is very short.
        Second, it is time to end the FAA's dual mandate. I dealt
    with this when I was first a member of this committee. I sat in
    hearing after hearing and raised concerns about the idea that
    the FAA was the regulator and also the promoter of commercial
    aviation, something left over from the Civil Aeronautics Board,
    left over from the dawn of the aviation era in the United
    States.
        I said, well, it is a mature industry, and I think it is a
    problem that you are regulating and promoting. And witness
    after witness from the FAA said, ah, no problem, no problem.
        And then in the year of ValuJet, I tried again to strip out
    the promotion authority. My amendment was not approved. Then we
    were in conference. ValuJet went down. And I wasn't on the
    conference because I was pre-junior, but I got a call saying,
    hey, you know that amendment you had, that thing, where did we
    put it in the bill?
        And this was the old days. If it wasn't in our bill and it
    wasn't in the Senate bill, you put it in the bill. And I said,
    well, it is not conferenceable, it wasn't in either bill. And
    they were, like, don't worry about that. And they stuck it in
    the bill, and we stripped away their promotional authority.
        I intend to soon introduce legislation to do that. NASA can
    promote commercial space. The Commerce Department can promote
    it, whomever. The private sector can promote it themselves. It
    is not up to the FAA to promote commercial space and regulate
    it at the same time in the interests of public health and
    safety.
        I also have a concern that Congress, with the agreement of
    successive administrations and the industry, has prohibited the
    FAA from regulating the design or operation of launch vehicles
    to protect the health and safety of passengers. We had a
    learning period, which was extended to 2023, and that means,
    despite commercial human spaceflight and space tours and soon
    expected to become emerging markets, the FAA's hands will be
    tied. They won't be able to regulate for the safety of the
    flying public. I even have serious concerns that some parts of
    the industry are talking about yet another extension of the
    moratorium.
        And, then, finally, the issue of the environment. I want to
    talk about black carbon, other environmental effects of rocket
    launches. Black carbon is soot, primarily emitted from
    kerosene-fueled rocket engines like SpaceX Falcon 9 or United
    Launch Alliance's Atlas V, and can have a particularly
    detrimental effect on the Earth's upper ozone layer. These
    emissions remain in the stratosphere for 3 to 5 years, so the
    destructive effects aren't short term. At the moment they are
    only 1 percent of the depletion of the ozone. But the industry
    is growing, and it is estimated to grow tenfold in the coming
    years. So does that mean it will deplete 10 times as much of
    the ozone layer?
        And then also, commercial space launch vehicles emit a
    stunning amount of carbon dioxide. The SpaceX Falcon Heavy
    rocket burns 400 metric tons of kerosene and emits more carbon
    dioxide in a few minutes than an average car would in two
    centuries of driving.
        Now, other vehicles are less intrusive on the environment
    because they don't require rockets to leave the atmosphere. One
    flight of the Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo launch, a vehicle
    designed to launch customers to the low stratum of space, is
    only expected to produce about the same amount of carbon
    dioxide as for a business seat returning from London, and
    Virgin Galactic's president of space missions and safety, Mr.
    Mike Moses, is here today, so perhaps he can speak a little
    more about the environmental advantages of this type of launch
    vehicle.
        But, more broadly, I want to hear from our industry
    stakeholders on what the companies are doing to address the
    environmental effects of space operations, because they have to
    be addressed and anticipated in the future.
        These are my chief concerns about the trajectory of this
    growing industry, and I am really looking forward to this
    hearing to enlighten us on a path forward on some of these
    issues.
        [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
          Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves, for calling
    today's hearing to hear from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
    and stakeholders on the growing commercial space industry and the
    government's regulation of that industry, or lack thereof.
        I will make just three main points, and I would like to hear the
    witnesses' views on each of these: the imperative for better
    integration of launches and reentries into the air traffic system; the
    significant need for thoughtful regulation of this blossoming, largely-
    unregulated industry; and a commitment to reducing the environmental
    damage associated with rocket launches.
        First, I want to hear what the FAA and the industry are doing to
    minimize the disruption to the air traffic system associated with
    commercial space launches and reentries. In fiscal year 2017 alone, the
    FAA re-routed 1,200 flights, adding in the aggregate 39,000 track miles
    to their routes, just to accommodate the commercial space industry's
    needs.
        I will give the FAA credit for being so conservative when
    determining how much airspace to block off and for how long. Of course,
    safety is never subject to negotiation or compromise, and the FAA has
    rightly given commercial space operations a wide berth to protect the
    safety of aircraft in flight.
        However, I understand that in May 2020, the FAA finally published
    the long overdue ``concept of operations'' that details the vision to
    better integrate launch and reentry vehicles as they transition through
    the air traffic control system. I also understand that the FAA is
    working on a system called the Space Data Integrator that will allow
    for more narrowly tailored airspace closures and designations of hazard
    areas, minimizing the disruptions caused by commercial space activity.
    I would like an update from our government witnesses on the status of
    deployment of those initiatives so we can ensure that millionaires and
    billionaires flying to space for a photo-op in the future won't
    inconvenience thousands if not millions of airline passengers.
        Second, it's time to end the FAA's ``dual mandate'' of both
    regulating and promoting the commercial space industry. It is an
    anachronism, a paradox, and no serious safety regulator can regulate
    and promote at the same time. A regulator regulates. The FAA used to
    have a similar dual mandate to promote and regulate the airline
    industry. I recognized for years that the FAA's promotion and
    regulation of an industry could not coexist, and I tried for years to
    convince my colleagues in Congress to repeal the promotion authority.
    Tragically in 1996, ValuJet flight 592 went down in the Everglades, and
    only after that horrible tragedy were my efforts vindicated, and I
    championed a provision in the FAA reauthorization that year that ended
    the dual mandate with respect to the aviation industry.
        I intend to introduce legislation soon that ends the FAA's dual
    mandate with respect to commercial space transportation. It's time for
    the FAA to assume the role of a thoughtful, unbiased regulator, and
    leave promotion of the industry to others.
        I would also note that Congress, with the agreement of successive
    presidential administrations and the industry, has prohibited the FAA
    from regulating the design or operation of launch vehicles to protect
    the health and safety of passengers and crew on board space vehicles.
    In 2015, the moratorium--or ``learning period''--on FAA regulation was
    extended to 2023. That means that despite commercial human spaceflight
    and space tourism soon expected to become emerging markets, the FAA's
    hands will be tied: the agency will be unable to fully regulate for the
    safety of those who participate.
        I have serious reservations and concerns about the discussion in
    some parts of the industry to extend the moratorium yet again.
        Finally, I want to talk about black carbon and other environmental
    effects of rocket launches. Black carbon is soot primarily emitted from
    kerosene-fueled rocket engines like SpaceX's Falcon 9 or United Launch
    Alliance's Atlas V and can have particularly deleterious effects on the
    earth's ozone layer. These emissions remain in the upper stratosphere
    for 3 to 5 years, so the destructive effects aren't short-term.
        Although I recognize that rocket launches are currently responsible
    for only 1 percent of the total ozone depletion attributed to human
    causes, each percentage point adds up, and the industry is growing and
    by some estimates may expand by tenfold in the coming years.
        Similarly, some commercial space launch vehicles emit a stunning
    amount of carbon dioxide. For instance, a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket
    burns about 400 metric tons of kerosene and emits more carbon dioxide
    in a few minutes than an average car would in more than two centuries.
        Other vehicles are less intrusive on the environment because they
    don't require rockets to leave the atmosphere. For example, one flight
    of a Virgin Galactic SpaceShip2 Launch--a vehicle that is designed to
    launch customers to the low stratum of space--is expected to produce
    the same amount of carbon dioxide as a business class seat returning
    from London to New York on a commercial airliner. Virgin Galactic's
    president of space missions and safety, Mr. Mike Moses, is with us
    today, so perhaps he can speak more to the environmental advantages of
    this type of launch vehicle.
        More broadly, I want to hear today from our industry stakeholders
    on what their companies are doing to address the environmental effects
    of commercial space operations. Because those effects must be
    addressed, and now.
        These are my chief concerns about the trajectory of this growing
    industry. It's time for the FAA to minimize the disruption caused by
    launches and reentries, for the regulator to regulate, and for
    Congress, the executive branch, and the industry to address the
    measurable--and increasing--environmental effects of space launches.
        Again, I thank Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves for holding
    today's hearing, and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.

        Mr. DeFazio. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the
    balance of my time.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
        And I will welcome the witnesses of the first panel: Again,
    Mr. Wayne Monteith, Associate Administrator for Commercial
    Space Transportation at the FAA; and Ms. Heather Krause,
    Director of Physical Infrastructure of the Government
    Accountability Office. Thanks for joining us today, and we look
    forward to your testimony.
        And without objection, our witnesses' full statements will
    be included in the record. Since that is the case, the
    subcommittee requests you limit your oral testimony to 5
    minutes.
        I will first recognize Mr. Monteith for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Monteith.

      TESTIMONY OF WAYNE R. MONTEITH, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR
           COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL AVIATION
        ADMINISTRATION; AND HEATHER KRAUSE, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL
         INFRASTRUCTURE, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

        Mr. Monteith. Thank you, sir.
        Chair Larsen, Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and
    Ranking Member Graves, thank you for the opportunity to discuss
    commercial space regulation.
        What was once called the final frontier is now well within
    our reach. We thank the committee for its willingness to usher
    in this exciting sector of transportation that, quite frankly,
    was almost unimaginable. The future is here, and with our focus
    on safety and technology, we are indeed turning science fiction
    into real science, albeit rocket science.
        The commercial space transportation industry in the United
    States is thriving at an unprecedented rate. The numbers are
    clear and unambiguous. This year, we will see an increase in
    licensed launches of over 400 percent in just the last 5 years.
    What that really means is we have gone from averaging one FAA-
    licensed launch about every 5 weeks to currently one launch
    about every 5 days.
        As regulators, our focus is on all aspects of this
    burgeoning industry, but especially on safety. We view
    ourselves as a gateway, not a hurdle, a conduit for safe
    progress, not redtape that keeps progress sitting on the launch
    pad.
        In 2018, we started an intensive process to streamline our
    launch reentry regulations so we could create an environment to
    enable economic growth and innovation; minimize uncertainty;
    protect safety, security, and foreign policy interests; and be
    a leader in the commercial space transportation sector.
        To these ends, we published the final rule to streamline
    our primary launch and reentry regulations to a single
    performance-based part to better fit today's fast evolving and
    growing commercial space transportation industry. We are
    currently developing and publishing advisory circulars to
    provide operators with additional guidance on how to meet the
    requirements of this new rule. This guidance includes safety
    procedures and practices for minimizing hazards and enhancing
    safety. Through these proactive efforts, we seek to put real
    action to the Department's mission of developing the safest,
    most efficient, and modern transportation system in the world.
        And we continually analyze the regulatory needs of the
    industry for both public safety and an optimized regulatory
    framework. To that end, we are currently considering
    regulations for orbital debris mitigation during launch and
    reentry operations. This evaluation will include considerations
    of the risk to people on the ground and inform the risk to
    commercial aviation.
        We are not alone in looking to the future. The Commercial
    Space Transportation Advisory Committee, COMSTAC, has
    recommended we specifically consider revising the rules
    regarding financial responsibility, so we will take a hard look
    at part 440.
        This review will help ensure the public has the appropriate
    protections while also evaluating whether or not the rule has
    kept pace with industry. It will make sure the industry has
    clarity and flexibility to achieve the regulatory performance
    objectives without undue burden.
        Spaceports are, in many ways, the front door to this
    industry, and we want U.S. leadership in space and on the
    ground. Without the proper infrastructure, commercial space
    won't have the foundation to make the jump from being a great
    idea to being the consistent, well-established mode of
    transportation we all know it can be. Spaceports aren't just
    for takeoffs and touchdowns. They are also economic and
    technology hubs just waiting to become a success story.
        We have taken action to share information broadly on the
    capabilities of U.S. spaceports. Our web-based spaceport
    directory outlines U.S. spaceport infrastructure and
    capabilities and the services provided by FAA-licensed
    spaceports, Federal launch ranges, and private commercial
    spaceports. We are literally putting spaceports on the map.
        The FAA also considers integrating commercial space
    operations into the National Airspace System a top priority. We
    are actively working on solutions to the issue of how
    commercial space will continue to grow alongside commercial and
    general aviation and drones. For example, we continue to
    develop and implement the Space Data Integrator. This safety-
    based technology, which will automate the current manual
    processes, will enable the FAA to track, in real time, a space
    mission's progress as it flies through the airspace. When
    deployed, this technology will enable the FAA to better manage
    the airspace that must be closed to other users, and more
    quickly release airspace restrictions as a mission progresses;
    in other words, fully integrating commercial space
    transportation into the NAS.
        In short, we are on the fast track to safely integrate
    commercial space into the system while enabling continued U.S.
    leadership in this transportation sector. We will continue to
    assess our entire regulatory framework in light of the
    industry's innovation and growth and look forward to working
    with Congress and industry to strike the appropriate regulatory
    balance; in other words, the right regulations of the right
    scope at the right time.
        Mr. Chair, this concludes my testimony, and I will be glad
    to answer any questions from the committee.
        [Mr. Monteith's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Wayne R. Monteith, Associate Administrator for
        Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration
        Chair Larsen, Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Ranking Member
    Graves, and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
    meet with you today to discuss the topic of commercial space
    regulation. Commercial space activity is in the midst of a significant
    surge. The growth of the industry presents new challenges and
    opportunities as the technology evolves, and the number of industry
    participants expands. The FAA is committed to keeping pace with the
    growth of commercial space transportation, while prioritizing safety
    and ensuring access for all users of the National Airspace System
    (NAS).
                           Commercial Space Overview
        The FAA, through the Office of Commercial Space Transportation
    (AST), licenses and permits 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. The mission AST carries out includes the responsibility to
    encourage, facilitate, and promote U.S. commercial space
    transportation. These statutory objectives provide a framework that has
    resulted in an impressive safety record for a rapidly growing industry.
    The FAA has licensed or permitted over 450 launches and reentries, none
    of which has led to any fatalities, serious injuries, or significant
    property damage to members of the public.
        The commercial space industry in the United States is dynamic,
    growing, and evolving. To illustrate recent growth, during each of the
    fiscal years (FY) 2018 through 2020, the FAA licensed an average of
    over 30 launches/reentries of commercial space vehicles. For FY 2021,
    we have already licensed 48 launches/reentries and expect significant
    growth in commercial launch activity beyond what we experienced over
    the last several years. Or, put another way, a decade ago the FAA
    licensed just a single launch in 2011. Five years ago, in 2016, the FAA
    licensed 11 launches, or about one per month. This calendar year, the
    FAA is averaging more than one licensed launch per week. As the
    industry continues to expand, the FAA has intensified its efforts to
    fulfill its commercial space mission, maintaining the highest level of
    safety without stifling industry growth.
              A Streamlined Commercial Space Regulatory Framework
        In 2018, the FAA began its work to streamline launch and reentry
    regulations to create an environment that promotes economic growth,
    minimizes uncertainty, protects safety, security, and foreign policy
    interests, and facilitates American leadership in space commerce. At
    that time, the existing commercial space regulatory framework was based
    largely on Federal launch standards that were developed in the 1990s or
    earlier, and were often overly prescriptive and a hindrance to
    innovation. Further, the rules were neither streamlined, nor
    consolidated. That regulatory structure may have satisfied the
    commercial space needs then, but the industry has changed substantially
    and continues to evolve. After two and a half years of focused work,
    the FAA published a final rule on December 10, 2020, that consolidated,
    updated, and streamlined all launch and reentry regulations into a
    single performance-based part--14 CFR part 450--to better fit today's
    fast-evolving commercial space transportation industry.\1\ Part 450
    includes regulations applicable to all launch and reentry vehicles,
    whether they have reusable components or not--a change from the prior
    framework. The updated regulations align with the goals of creating an
    environment that does not hinder industry innovation and importantly,
    enhances safety objectives without prescribing specific solutions. The
    commercial space industry provided extensive input during the public
    comment period for part 450, and we are pleased that initial reactions
    to the rule have been consistently positive. Additionally, after the
    rule was released, the FAA held a 3-day workshop and offered one-on-one
    meetings with companies to familiarize them with the final rule. Each
    operator who took advantage of these meetings conveyed that they were
    pleased with the final rule and appreciated our outreach efforts.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/10/2020-
    22042/streamlined-launch-and-reentry-license-requirements
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While the launch and reentry regulations have been published for
    several months and became effective on March 21, 2021, our engagement
    with industry on the requirements of the rules continues. AST has
    issued some advisory circulars to provide additional guidance on how to
    meet the requirements of part 450, and is developing more. We continue
    to engage with operators on specific aspects of part 450 compliance
    during pre-application consultations. Many of the advisory circulars
    that we anticipate issuing will provide detailed guidance for the
    industry on recommended safety procedures and practices for minimizing
    hazards. We expect that there will be launches licensed under part 450
    in the near future.
                        Other Regulatory Considerations
        We are constantly analyzing the regulatory needs of the industry
    for both public safety reasons and to ensure that the commercial space
    regulatory framework is performance-based and does not inhibit the
    health and success of the industry. In support of that effort, the FAA
    is revising the regulations applicable to orbital debris mitigation for
    launch and reentry operations. As part of this work, we are evaluating
    appropriate national and international standards for orbital debris
    mitigation including evaluating the safety risks of uncontrolled
    reentries of space objects. These evaluations will include
    considerations of the risks to both commercial aviation and people on
    the ground.
        Additionally, the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory
    Committee (COMSTAC) has recommended that part 440--Financial
    Responsibility--be reviewed and considered for revision. As part of our
    continuous review of the sufficiency of our commercial space
    regulations, we anticipate that a comprehensive analysis of this part
    would ensure that the right regulations with the right scope are in
    effect at the right time. Such a review would help to ensure that the
    public has the appropriate protections and that industry has clarity
    and flexibility to achieve the regulatory performance objectives
    without unnecessary burdens.
        Part of AST's responsibility is also to monitor commercial space
    transportation licensees to ensure they adhere to the conditions of
    their licenses and comply with the applicable regulatory and statutory
    requirements. In this regard, the FAA has broad authority to suspend or
    revoke a license, and impose civil penalties if necessary. The FAA
    takes our oversight responsibilities seriously to ensure licensees are
    in full compliance.
                              Office of Spaceports
        Keeping up with an industry that is evolving rapidly is a
    challenge. The pace at which the commercial space industry continues to
    change has resulted in an increase in both the complexity and the
    volume of the workload for AST. Some of that complexity has required us
    to make structural changes to better execute our mission. As this
    Committee knows, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 required us to
    identify within AST a centralized policy office to support launch and
    reentry sites and to generally support improvement of spaceports. In
    response to that mandate, the Office of Spaceports was officially
    established in March 2020, and is functioning today. AST is committed
    to removing barriers to competitiveness for spaceports and to helping
    ensure that the United States leads the world in space infrastructure.
    The operation of the first non-Federal spaceport was licensed by the
    FAA in 1994, and there are currently 12 non-Federal spaceports across
    the United States licensed for launch or reentry operations. A
    spaceport license is valid for 5 years and is renewable. While the FAA
    considers many factors when reviewing an application for a spaceport
    license, two of the most important are public safety and environmental
    impact. The FAA carries out a thorough and rigorous application review
    process to make sure we issue a license consistent with our mandate to
    protect public health and safety, safety of property, and the foreign
    policy and national security interests of the United States.
        We recognize that spaceports have significant potential to become
    important economic hubs. For example, of the 47 FAA licensed launches
    this fiscal year, six have occurred at FAA licensed spaceports. As a
    result, the Office of Spaceports has taken action to share information
    on the capabilities of U.S. spaceports broadly. For example, in October
    2020, we published a web-based spaceport directory outlining U.S.
    spaceport infrastructure and capabilities and the services provided by
    FAA licensed spaceports, Federal launch ranges, and private commercial
    spaceports. This directory documents the capabilities of our nation's
    network of spaceports for the commercial space transportation industry,
    as well as U.S. government space users, and may help to serve as a tool
    for the Office of Spaceports to identify future needs.
        The Office of Spaceports is putting spaceports on the map.
    Spaceports or ``Space Launch Activity Areas'' are denoted as rocket
    symbols on aeronautical sectional charts increasing aviator awareness
    of launch or reentry activities in their area. The Office of Spaceports
    is also in the process of publishing additional instructional
    information about Space Launch Activity Areas in the FAA Airman's
    Information Manual that will encourage aviators to check notices to
    airmen in these areas for additional launch or reentry specific
    information. These efforts help to integrate space and aviation
    activities and increase overall safety of the NAS.
        The Office of Spaceports also facilitates FAA review and approval
    of space-related activities at FAA licensed spaceports to enable a
    stronger commercial space transportation industry. These activities
    include rocket engine testing, flight corridor development for
    supersonic, hypersonic, and suborbital space activities, and beta
    testing of new space launch platforms for future use by the commercial
    space transportation industry. Further, the Office of Spaceports works
    to facilitate commercial support for launches from Federal launch
    locations. Finally, the Office of Spaceports is evaluating whether the
    FAA's spaceport regulations (part 420 and 433) for launch and reentry
    sites should also be updated.
                  Integration of Commercial Space into the NAS
        Of the many challenges AST faces, integration of commercial space
    into the NAS is a top priority. Commercial space 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. Although this process is currently manageable, it is
    unsustainable in the long run given the expected growth in commercial
    space launches. Moreover, the current process, while effective, is
    resource intensive and inefficient. Launch teams voluntarily provide
    real-time information concerning the status of a launch or reentry
    vehicle either over the telephone or over an internet connection. Under
    these limitations, launch teams can only support one mission at a time.
        In AST, we are actively working on solutions to address how
    commercial space will grow within the NAS alongside commercial and
    general aviation. Our vision of spaceport operations is that they
    should be able to operate either co-located with airports or in close
    proximity to them. To this end, we are working on multiple initiatives.
    We worked with the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic
    City, New Jersey to build the agency's first dedicated commercial space
    integration lab for developing and prototyping technologies that will
    be leveraged towards enhancing commercial space operation awareness to
    better manage the NAS. Additionally, AST continues its work with the
    FAA's Air Traffic Organization on the Space Data Integrator technology.
    This safety-based technology, which will automate the current manual
    processes, will enable the FAA to track a space mission's progress as
    it flies through the airspace. When deployed, this technology will
    enable the FAA to better manage the airspace that must be closed to
    other users and more quickly implement and release airspace
    restrictions as a mission progresses. At the FAA, we recognize that our
    role is not just limited to the safety of the airspace--but to ensure
    equal access to it as well. We are fully engaged in balancing the needs
    of all airspace users--including traditional manned aircraft, drones,
    commercial space transportation, and others.
                                   Conclusion
        In closing, the FAA is committed to effectively carrying out its
    responsibilities for public safety and the health of the commercial
    space transportation industry. We will continue to assess our entire
    regulatory framework in light of the industry's growth and look forward
    to working with Congress and industry to strike the appropriate
    balance. This concludes my testimony, and I will be glad to answer any
    questions from the Committee.

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Monteith.
        The Chair will now recognize Ms. Krause from the GAO for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Krause. Chairman Larsen, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking
    Members Graves and Graves, and members of the subcommittee,
    thank you for the opportunity to discuss today's commercial
    space transportation industry and FAA's role.
        Since FAA first assumed regulatory responsibility in 1995,
    this industry has experienced substantial growth, especially in
    the more recent years. Over time, commercial launch providers
    have made hundreds of launches involving carrying astronauts
    and supplies to and from the International Space Station, and
    delivering thousands of satellites that support global
    television, high-speed internet, weather forecasts, and much
    more.
        In 2020, FAA oversaw a record number of launches and
    reentries. These operations are forecasted to grow as new space
    applications emerge, such as human space tourism, and demand
    continues to increase for services that depend on space
    transportation.
        My testimony today is based on our work since 2006 on FAA's
    efforts to respond to the changing commercial space
    transportation environment. It focuses on three areas: One,
    FAA's efforts to update regulations; two, challenges FAA faces
    regulating an industry that continues to grow and evolve; and,
    three, steps FAA has taken to help ensure it is positioned to
    respond to industry changes.
        First, industry developments have necessitated that FAA
    review and update its regulations. Most recently, FAA focused
    on its launch and reentry licensing regulations, consolidating
    multiple regulations and replacing prescriptive requirements
    with a performance-based regulatory framework to help better
    accommodate industry changes. Given that focus, FAA placed on
    hold revisions to other regulations, including those related to
    site operator licensing, which has been in place since 2000,
    and financial responsibility, which ensures a balance of risk
    between the Federal Government and launch companies, and
    contain key elements not updated since 1988. FAA plans to
    prioritize and review these regulations following its licensing
    efforts, which aligns with the recommended priorities of its
    industry advisory committee.
        As FAA adapts its regulations, it also faces ongoing
    oversight challenges. One key challenge we previously
    identified is whether and when to regulate the safety of crew
    and spaceflight participants. While companies have announced
    plans to take tourists to space within the next several years,
    FAA is prohibited by statute from regulating current passenger
    safety before 2023, except in response to events that caused or
    posed a risk with serious or fatal injury.
        In its February 2019 report to Congress, FAA concluded that
    no commercial human spaceflight activities had advanced to a
    stage that would necessitate a new safety framework. However,
    in anticipation of the moratorium expiring, FAA has taken some
    steps, including working with industry, to develop and
    disseminate human spaceflight best practices.
        In addition, the rise of space tourism may require
    reexamination of FAA's dual role of overseeing the safety of
    commercial space launches and promoting the industry. A 2008
    statutorily mandated report concluded that there was no
    compelling reason to remove FAA's promotional role through
    2012, but recommended that DOT periodically review its dual
    role, specifically for safety and promotion of human
    spaceflight. Given the time passed since the last examination
    and the moratorium on regulating spaceflight safety is due to
    expire, such a review may be warranted.
        Finally, FAA has taken some steps to help the agency keep
    pace with industry changes. For example, in response to
    recommendations we made in 2015 and 2019, FAA assessed its
    workforce to identify skills and competencies that are needed
    and is improving its workload projections to better account for
    the full range of its regulatory activities. Such efforts are
    critical for ensuring FAA strategically aligns its workforce
    with evolving industry demands.
        FAA has also made progress in developing procedures,
    technologies, and industry coordination to reduce
    inefficiencies and safely integrating commercial space users
    into the National Airspace System. These efforts are promising,
    but full and efficient integration of all users of the National
    Airspace System is years away and will require continued work
    and focus.
        In closing, the commercial space transportation industry
    provides services that are essential to many aspects of
    Government, business, and society, and these services are
    expected to increase. FAA's role is fundamental to the
    continued safe growth of the industry. It is critical for FAA
    to maintain progress, and ensure its efforts anticipate and
    respond to industry changes.
        This concludes my statement. I look forward to answering
    your questions.
        [Ms. Krause's prepared statement follows:]

           Prepared Statement of Heather Krause, Director, Physical
             Infrastructure, U.S. Government Accountability Office
                        Commercial Space Transportation
    faa continues to update regulations and faces challenges to overseeing
                              an evolving industry
    What GAO Found
        The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recently updated and
    streamlined its launch and reentry licensing regulations but has made
    less progress on other key commercial space transportation regulations.
    The new licensing regulations, issued in December 2020, replaced
    prescriptive requirements--in which a certain technology or action was
    required--with a performance-based regulatory framework, which provides
    applicants flexibility in how they achieve required outcomes, such as a
    specific level of safety. Given its focus on the licensing regulations,
    FAA placed on hold revisions to other regulations governing commercial
    space transportation--revisions which, according to FAA officials, are
    warranted given the industry's evolution. For example, FAA has not yet
    begun to revise its financial responsibility regulations, which require
    launch companies conducting FAA-licensed launches to purchase insurance
    to cover damage to third parties in case of a launch mishap. According
    to FAA officials, revising these regulations is their next planned
    rulemaking and when finalized, will respond to GAO's recommendations to
    improve FAA's methodologies for evaluating and calculating potential
    third-party losses from launch and reentry mishaps and help ensure the
    federal government is not exposed to greater liability than expected.
        FAA also faces ongoing challenges regulating an evolving industry.
    In particular, as GAO previously reported, FAA continues to face the
    challenge of whether and when to regulate the safety of crew and
    spaceflight participants. While some companies have announced plans to
    take tourists to space within the next several years, FAA is prohibited
    by statute from regulating crew and passenger safety before 2023,
    except in response to events that caused or posed a risk of serious or
    fatal injury. However, FAA has taken some steps in anticipation of the
    expiration of the statutory moratorium, such as working with its
    industry advisory committee to develop and disseminate human
    spaceflight best practices.
        FAA also has taken some steps to help the agency keep pace with
    changes in the industry. For example, in response to recommendations
    GAO made in 2019, FAA recently assessed its workforce to identify
    skills and competencies that are needed among its workforce and is
    working to improve its workload projections to better account for the
    full range of its regulatory activities and the timeline of its
    licensing process. Such efforts are critical for ensuring FAA can
    better anticipate and respond to the growing and evolving commercial
    space industry and FAA's emerging workforce needs.
                                   __________
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
    Subcommittee:
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify today on developments in
    the commercial space transportation industry and the Federal Aviation
    Administration's (FAA) oversight. Since 1995, when FAA first assumed
    regulatory responsibility for commercial launch companies and operators
    of launch sites, the industry has experienced substantial growth and
    evolution.\1\ Over the years, commercial launch providers have made
    more than 400 launches and reentries carrying astronauts and supplies
    to and from the International Space Station and delivering thousands of
    satellites to space that support global television, high-speed
    Internet, weather forecasts, and much more. Globally, commercial launch
    providers generated an estimated $5 billion in revenue in 2019, up from
    about $2.4 billion in 2012. FAA has licensed an increasing number of
    launches since 2015--an average increase of 41 percent year-over-year
    as of December 2020.\2\ In addition, FAA reports that the number of
    unique commercial launch providers holding, modifying, or potentially
    seeking an FAA license has increased from 23 in August 2015 to 39 in
    June 2021. FAA and the commercial space transportation industry itself
    forecast continued growth and evolution as new space applications
    continue to emerge, such as human space tourism, and demand continues
    to increase for large constellations of small satellites that depend on
    space transportation services.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-575, 98
    Stat. 3055, established commercial space launch responsibilities with
    the Department of Transportation, which were subsequently transferred
    to FAA.
        \2\ According to FAA officials and several industry stakeholders,
    the on-going Coronavirus 2019 global pandemic has had minimal effect on
    the commercial space transportation industry.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        My testimony today focuses on (1) FAA's efforts to update
    regulations governing commercial space transportation, (2) challenges
    FAA faces regulating an industry that continues to grow and evolve, and
    (3) steps FAA has taken to help ensure it is positioned to meet the
    needs of the evolving industry. This statement is based largely on our
    work since 2006 on industry developments and challenges faced by
    FAA.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ See, for example, GAO, Commercial Space Launches: FAA Needs
    Continued Planning and Monitoring to Oversee the Safety of the Emerging
    Space Tourism Industry, GAO-07-16 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 20, 2006);
    Federal Aviation Administration: Commercial Space Launch Industry
    Developments Present Multiple Challenges, GAO-15-706 (Washington, D.C.:
    Aug. 25, 2015); Commercial Space Launch Insurance: FAA Needs to Fully
    Address Mandated Requirements, GAO-18-57 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 16,
    2018); and Commercial Space Transportation: Improvements to FAA's
    Workforce Planning Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated
    Growth, GAO-19-437 (Washington, D.C.: May 23, 2019).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To conduct our prior work, we reviewed relevant statutes and
    regulations. We also reviewed FAA documents on its oversight of the
    commercial space transportation industry and interviewed officials from
    the responsible FAA organizations, most notably the Office of
    Commercial Space Transportation (AST). In addition, we interviewed a
    range of industry stakeholders to discuss the industry's growth and
    evolution, as well as to obtain their perspectives on FAA's oversight.
    More detailed information on our objectives, scope, and methodology can
    be found in each of the reports.
        For this statement, in June 2021, we interviewed FAA officials
    about recent FAA actions, including those to address the
    recommendations in our prior reports, as well as developments in the
    industry. We also reviewed applicable FAA regulations and documents
    produced by FAA's Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
    (COMSTAC)--a group of industry members and others who provide FAA with
    information, advice, and recommendations related to commercial space
    transportation.
        We conducted the work on which this testimony is based in
    accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
    standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
    sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
    findings and conclusions based on audit objectives. We believe the
    evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
    conclusions based on our audit objectives.
                                   Background
        Space transportation is the movement of objects, such as satellites
    and vehicles carrying cargo, scientific payloads, or passengers, to or
    from space. In the United States, commercial space transportation is
    carried out using orbital and suborbital launch vehicles owned and
    operated by private companies referred to as commercial launch
    providers.\4\ A site operator is the entity that hosts the launch (or
    reentry, or both) of the launch vehicle from its launch site. Almost
    all launch site operators are either commercial launch providers or
    state or municipal government entities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Orbital launch vehicles are those launched with enough velocity
    to achieve orbit around the Earth. Suborbital launch vehicles are those
    that reach space but do not have sufficient velocity to achieve orbit.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation
        Within FAA, AST is responsible for regulating the U.S. commercial
    space transportation industry to oversee and coordinate the conduct of
    commercial launch and reentry operations, and to protect the public
    health and safety, safety of property, and national security and
    foreign policy interests of the United States. AST conducts its
    oversight mainly by licensing or permitting commercial launch and
    reentry vehicle operations and non-federal launch sites, as well as
    conducting safety inspections of licensed launch providers and site
    operators. AST is also charged with encouraging, facilitating, and
    promoting the industry.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  401.3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition, to assist in the development of the commercial space
    launch industry, the federal government shares liability risks for
    losses from damages to third parties or federal property. AST is
    responsible for determining maximum probable loss (MPL), which is the
    greatest dollar amount of loss for bodily injury or property damage
    that is reasonably expected to result from a licensed or permitted
    activity. This MPL determination forms the basis for financial
    responsibility requirements AST issues in a license or permit order.\6\
    The federal government is potentially liable for damages above the MPL,
    subject to appropriation, up to $3.36 billion in 2021 (the equivalent
    to $1.5 billion in 1988).\7\ Anything above this amount is the
    responsibility of the launch or reentry licensee, which may seek
    additional insurance but is not required to under federal law.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ As part of a launch license, FAA requires launch companies to
    purchase insurance to cover losses to third parties or damage or loss
    to U.S. government property in the event of a commercial launch or
    reentry accident. 51 U.S.C Sec.  50914; 14 C.F.R. Sec. Sec.  440.5,
    440.9. FAA calculates the insurance amount to reflect the maximum
    probable loss that is reasonably expected to occur because of a mishap
    that results in (1) third-party damage, including deaths and injuries
    on the ground and damage to property caused by anything that resulted
    from a launch or reentry, and (2) damage to government property. 14
    C.F.R.Sec.  440.7.
        \7\ Since 1988, the federal government has sought to assist in the
    development of the commercial space launch industry by sharing
    liability risks for accidents leading to damages to third parties or
    federal property and personnel. This risk-sharing arrangement requires
    that commercial launch providers purchase insurance against claims by
    third parties and for loss or damage to federal property and personnel
    up to a maximum probable loss (MPL) amount.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AST's workforce size and operations budget has increased over
    recent years (about 34 percent and 66 percent, respectively, since
    2016) to help accommodate growth in the industry and AST's workload
    (see table 1). DOT is also requesting an increase of almost $5 million
    for AST's FY2022 operations budget to support the anticipated growth
    within the commercial space transportation industry.

         Table 1: Office of Commercial Space Transportation Staffing and
                    Operations Budget Fiscal Years 2015-2021
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Operations
                      Fiscal year                     Full time   budget (in
                                                      permanent   millions)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    2015...........................................          81       $16.61
    2016...........................................         106       $17.80
    2017...........................................         106       $19.83
    2018...........................................          97       $19.70
    2019...........................................         108       $24.95
    2020...........................................         108       $26.04
    2021...........................................         109       $27.56
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \\Source: GAO presentation of Federal Aviation Administration data / GAO-
      21-105268

    Industry Trends
        In addition to the increasing number and frequency of launch and
    reentry operations, industry developments, according to FAA officials,
    necessitate that FAA amend its regulations and adjust its workforce
    skills and competencies. For example, more commercial providers are
    introducing reusable elements into the design of their vehicles where
    one part or all of the launch vehicle returns to a runway or landing
    pad. AST found that these new vehicles rendered some parts of its
    regulations on reusable launch vehicles-originally established in 2000-
    obsolete, and required revisions to portions of its launch vehicle
    licensing regulations.\8\ In addition, companies are developing new
    technologies, such as autonomous flight safety systems, which allow the
    flight of a launch vehicle that is off course to be aborted \9\ without
    humans taking action, and new launch vehicle propulsion systems, which,
    according to FAA officials, require specific AST workforce skills or
    expertise to evaluate certain launch license applications.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ 14 C.F.R. pt. 431 addresses the requirements for obtaining a
    reusable launch vehicle mission license. The FAA amended its
    regulations to establish these operational requirements in November,
    2000. Commercial Space Transportation Reusable Launch Vehicle and
    Reentry Licensing Regulations, 65 Fed. Reg. 56,618 (Sept. 19, 2000).
        \9\ 14 C.F.R. Sec.  401.7 states that ``[f]light abort means the
    process to limit or restrict the hazards to public safety, and the
    safety of property, presented by a launch vehicle or reentry vehicle,
    including any payload, while in flight by initiating and accomplishing
    a controlled ending to vehicle flight.''
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We have previously reported that commercial launch providers have
    also been testing reusable suborbital launch vehicles intended for
    human space tourism, which are now expected to launch soon.\10\ These
    vehicles include horizontal hybrid suborbital launch vehicles, such as
    Virgin Galactic's SpaceShipTwo, and vertical reusable suborbital launch
    vehicles, such as Blue Origin's New Shepard. Blue Origin recently
    announced that its first flight with a commercial customer is scheduled
    for July 2021, and Virgin Galactic is planning to launch its first
    commercial customers in 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ In May 2020, for the first time since NASA's space shuttle was
    retired in 2011, astronauts were launched from U.S. soil to the
    International Space Station. While not an FAA-licensed launch, NASA
    coordinated with FAA. NASA also has plans to partner with a private
    launch company to fly tourists to the International Space Station
    planned for later 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As the number of launches and reentries continues to grow, the
    number of operators of launch and reentry sites that FAA has licensed
    to host commercial launches has also increased. In 2006, FAA had
    licensed six launch site operators. By December 2020, FAA had licensed
    site operators for 12 U.S. launch sites, with nine additional entities
    seeking licenses for 11 prospective U.S. launch sites. As we reported
    in 2020, despite the increase in the number of licensed site operators,
    the majority of FAA-licensed commercial launch operations take place at
    seven sites that do not require an FAA site operator license; that is,
    at exclusive-use launch sites where a single company conducts launches
    either at its privately owned and operated site or at an exclusive-use
    launch complex that is on or co-located with a federal range. FAA
    officials told us that exclusive-use launch sites do not require a site
    operator license, as public safety requirements are met through that
    single launch provider's launch license.\11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ GAO, Commercial Space Transportation: FAA Should Examine a
    Range of Options to Support U.S. Launch Infrastructure, GAO-21-154
    (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 22, 2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     FAA Recently Streamlined Its Launch and Reentry Regulations but Less
      Progress Has Been Made on Other Key Commercial Space Transportation
                                  Regulations
    FAA Issued a Final Rule for Launch and Reentry Licensing in December
            2020
        In response to a May 2018 Presidential Directive,\12\ AST
    accelerated its approach to updating its launch and reentry licensing
    regulations and issued a final rule in December 2020 that streamlined
    those regulations in two key ways.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ In May 2018, a Presidential Directive was issued that
    addressed both the timing and content of FAA's regulatory updates. The
    directive contained a deadline to publish a proposed regulation for
    public comment by February 1, 2019.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The rule consolidated multiple regulatory parts to create a
    single licensing regime for all types of commercial space flight launch
    and reentry operations.
        The rule replaced prescriptive requirements--in which a
    certain technology or action is required--with a performance-based
    regulatory framework, which provides applicants flexibility in how they
    achieve required outcomes, such as a specific level of safety.

        With few exceptions the final rule's requirements are in
    effect,\13\ though FAA is still finalizing most of its guidance
    materials, the purpose of which is to provide transparency and help
    licensing applicants understand the new requirements. As of June 8,
    2021, all new applicants for a launch or reentry license will be
    required to meet the requirements in the final rule.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ Streamlined Launch and Reentry License Requirements, 86 Fed.
    Reg. 13,448 (Mar. 9, 2021). Companies holding an active launch or
    reentry license at the time the final rule was issued will be
    considered in compliance with the rule and may continue to operate
    until their current license expires, for up to 5 years from the
    effective date of the rule. Streamlined Launch and Reentry License
    Requirements, 85 Fed. Reg. 79,566, 79,569 (Dec. 10, 2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As of June 2021, AST had held some industry workshops on the new
    requirements and had finalized three of the nearly two dozen total
    advisory circulars (i.e., guidance documents) that it plans to issue by
    the end of 2022.\14\ FAA officials told us that they also meet
    individually with license applicants to provide guidance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ In June 2021, FAA officials told us that 10 advisory circulars
    are undergoing internal review and that they plan to issue them in
    September 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FAA Has Plans to Update Other Key Commercial Space Transportation
            Regulations
                Financial Responsibility Regulations
        To date, FAA has made little progress in improving its methodology
    for calculating potential third-party losses from launch and reentry
    mishaps and updating its related financial responsibility
    regulations.\15\ The federal government's shared liability risk for
    licensed operations is an important element to promote the commercial
    space launch industry as the government bears a portion of the risk for
    third-party damages and losses to government property and government
    personnel resulting from potential space launch accidents. In 2012, we
    made one recommendation for FAA to address weaknesses in that
    methodology, which FAA subsequently addressed.\16\ However, subsequent
    recommendations we made related to the methodology have not been
    addressed. In November 2015, the U.S. Commercial Space Launch
    Competitiveness Act (CSLCA) was enacted, which required FAA to evaluate
    its MPL methodology and report the results of that evaluation to two
    committees of Congress.\17\ In 2017, we reported that FAA had not
    updated the value the MPL assigned to a casualty--a key component of
    the MPL methodology--since 1988, and recommended FAA do so, which the
    agency has yet to address.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \15\ 14 C.F.R. pt 440 establishes financial responsibility and
    allocation of risk requirements for any launch or reentry authorized by
    a license or permit issued by FAA.
        \16\ GAO, Commercial Space Launches: FAA Should Update How It
    Assesses Federal Liability Risk, GAO-12-899 (Washington, D.C., Jul. 30,
    2012).
        \17\ U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act, Pub. L. No.
    114-90, Sec.  102(b), 129 Stat. 704, 705 (2015).
        \18\ GAO, Commercial Space Launch Insurance: Weakness in FAA's
    Insurance Calculation May Expose the Federal Government to Excess Risk,
    GAO-17-366 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 23, 2017).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In 2018, we again reported on several weaknesses in FAA's
    evaluation and MPL methodology and made four additional recommendations
    to FAA to address these weaknesses.\19\ For example, we found that FAA
    had not updated or reviewed the appropriateness of the probability
    threshold that determines the balance of risk between launch providers
    and the federal government since the 1990s. As of June 2021, FAA has
    not yet addressed our recommendations. By not resolving these issues,
    FAA lacks assurance that launch companies are purchasing the
    appropriate amount of insurance and that the federal government is not
    exposed to greater liability than expected.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ GAO-18-57.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FAA continues to postpone its efforts to address these issues while
    it focuses its resources on its streamlined launch and reentry
    licensing rulemaking. While FAA agreed with our recommendations in 2017
    and 2018, FAA officials told us in June 2021 that to fully address the
    recommendations they need to undertake a financial responsibility
    rulemaking. FAA officials said updating the financial responsibility
    regulations is the next new rulemaking effort they plan to begin. This
    approach is consistent with COMSTAC's recommendation that FAA
    prioritize supporting the industry's transition to, and compliance
    with, the streamlined launch and reentry licensing regulations first,
    followed by updating the regulations governing financial
    responsibility. FAA tasked COMSTAC with recommending improvements to
    the financial responsibility regulations by fall 2021.
                Launch Site Operator Licensing Regulations
        FAA officials told us in December 2020 that they recognize that the
    site operator licensing regulations,\20\ which have been in place since
    2000, need to be reviewed and potentially amended to ensure that they
    are appropriate for the current state of the commercial space
    transportation industry.\21\ We also reported at that time that
    industry stakeholders had differing views on FAA's existing launch site
    operator licensing regulations. For instance, some stakeholders told us
    that FAA was using its limited resources to review license applications
    for sites that may not be desirable to current launch providers because
    the proposed sites were too close to populated areas, which could
    result in higher MPLs and make the launches more expensive than at
    other sites. Other stakeholders disagreed, stating that sites with FAA-
    licensed operators not currently hosting launches may nonetheless be
    suitable for future operations, such as human transportation, depending
    on the market's evolution. An industry rulemaking committee convened by
    FAA also raised concerns that the site operator licensing regulations
    do not adequately consider a site's proximity to congested airspace or
    noise effects on communities.\22\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ 14 C.F.R. Sec. Sec.  420, 433.
        \21\ GAO-21-154.
        \22\ In December 2020, we reviewed issues related to space
    transportation infrastructure and made a recommendation that FAA should
    examine a range of potential options to support space transportation
    infrastructure and that this examination include a discussion of trade-
    offs. GAO-21-154.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FAA officials in June 2021 confirmed that they plan to initiate the
    site operator licensing rulemaking after they complete their efforts
    related to the streamlined launch and reentry licensing rulemaking and
    update the financial responsibility regulations, which aligns with
    COMSTAC's recommended rulemaking priorities for FAA.
                Orbital Debris Mitigation Regulations
        In 2013, FAA began efforts to revise its launch and reentry
    licensing regulations governing the steps a launch provider must take
    to prevent launch vehicle stages that are ``expended'' or discharged
    from the vehicle as it gains altitude and speed from generating
    dangerous orbital debris. FAA officials told us they put this effort on
    hold when they began working with other agencies to update the U.S.
    Government Orbital Debris Mitigation Standard Practices, which they
    completed in 2019. FAA officials told us they plan to align their own
    regulations with those practices under a separate rule to be finalized
    in the next few years.\23\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \23\ While FAA regulates the mitigation of orbital debris for
    launch vehicles and intact re-entry, many stakeholders have recently
    raised concerns about potential orbital debris from growing
    constellations of small satellites and that the U.S. approach to
    tracking increasing numbers of satellites and other space objects is
    limited in its ability to address current and future risks, such as
    catastrophic collisions. For instance, while 52 small satellites were
    launched globally in 2012, 389 were launched in 2019, increasing the
    potential of a satellite to collide with another space object and
    create debris. The Federal Communications Commission and the National
    Oceanic Atmospheric Administration also possess regulatory authority to
    mitigate such debris for non-government entities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          FAA Faces Ongoing Challenges Regulating an Evolving Industry
    Compliance Oversight and Enforcement Approaches
        Industry growth may present challenges to AST's approach to
    overseeing compliance and enforcement. AST oversees launch and reentry
    operators' compliance with applicable laws, including licensing
    regulations, and the terms of the license or permit. It does so mainly
    through safety inspections before, during, and after FAA-regulated
    operations that can impact public safety and the safety of property. In
    2015, FAA shifted its agency-wide enforcement policy to emphasize
    collaboration with industry participants and use of compliance actions,
    such as counseling or training, to address violations.\24\ AST is also
    party to a 2000 memorandum of agreement with the National
    Transportation and Safety Board and a 2021 memorandum of agreement with
    NASA, both covering issues related to public and human spaceflight
    safety for commercial space transportation activities, including
    efforts in accident investigations. In light of the growing number and
    diversification of launch and reentry operations and locations, AST's
    approach to overseeing compliance and enforcement may warrant
    review.\25\ We plan to begin a requested review of safety oversight of
    commercial space activities later in 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \24\ FAA also continues to use more punitive enforcement actions,
    including assessing civil penalties and suspending a person's or
    entity's certificate, when it finds that a commercial space operator is
    not in compliance with statutory or regulatory requirements. We have
    previously reported on issues related to FAA's enforcement policy. See
    GAO, Aviation Safety: Actions Needed to Evaluate Changes to FAA's
    Enforcement Policy on Safety Standards, GAO-20-642 (Washington, D.C.:
    Aug. 18, 2020.
        \25\ For example, in December 2020, a commercial launch provider
    launched an uncrewed spacecraft for a test flight from its private site
    after AST denied the company a safety waiver that would have allowed it
    to exceed the maximum public risk allowed by regulations. Shortly after
    landing, the launch vehicle exploded, with damage limited to the test
    site.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regulation of Safety for Human Spaceflight Participants
        As we previously reported, FAA continues to face the challenge of
    whether and when to regulate the safety of crew and spaceflight
    participants, such as space tourists.\26\ While several companies have
    announced plans to take tourists to space within the next several
    years, FAA is prohibited by law from regulating crew and passenger
    safety before 2023, except in response to events that either caused a
    serious or fatal injury or contributed to an unplanned event during a
    commercial human space flight that posed a high risk of causing a
    serious or fatal injury.\27\ To date, one fatal accident occurred in
    2014 involving a crew member of a spaceflight undertaken by a private
    company and licensed by FAA. According to FAA officials, FAA could
    promulgate regulations if such an event occurred, but under the
    moratorium, it would be limited to the design feature that caused the
    accident.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \26\ GAO-07-16; GAO-15-706; and GAO, Commercial Space: Industry
    Developments and FAA Challenges, GAO-16-765T (Washington, D.C.: Jun.
    22, 2016).
        \27\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905(c)(2)(C)-(D). This moratorium was
    established in statute in 2004 and set to expire in 2012, to allow the
    industry grow. The U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act,
    enacted in November 2015, extended the moratorium to October 1, 2023.
    Pub. L. No. 114-90, Sec.  111, 129 Stat. at 709-11.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FAA is required to periodically report to specified congressional
    committees on metrics that could indicate FAA's and the industry's
    readiness to transition to a safety framework that may include
    regulating crew, government astronauts, and spaceflight participant
    safety.\28\ In the most recent report, submitted to Congress in
    February 2019, FAA concluded that no commercial human spaceflight
    activities had advanced to a stage that would necessitate a new safety
    framework. FAA's next and final report is due by March 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \28\ 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905 (c)(6)-(7).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        FAA has taken some other steps in anticipation of the expiration of
    the moratorium. For example, in 2014, FAA published a document
    providing a compilation of performance-based recommended practices for
    commercial human spaceflight. FAA also tasked COMSTAC to formulate
    human spaceflight best practices to guide the industry. In September
    2020, COMSTAC determined that published voluntary standards for
    commercial human spaceflight safety were in minimal use by the U.S.
    commercial industry and that the development of such standards, as in
    other industries, has been slow. COMSTAC recommended FAA evaluate
    several of the standards as potential inputs to future regulations and
    guidance. COMSTAC also recommended that FAA form an industry rulemaking
    committee to help focus industry efforts on voluntary standards
    development, apply relevant lessons learned, and to inform future
    spaceflight safety regulations. In June 2021, FAA officials told us
    that they plan to implement COMSTAC's recommendations when they begin
    their rulemaking effort assuming the moratorium expires.
             FAA Has Taken Some Actions to Keep Pace with Industry
    AST Is Improving Its Workforce Planning to Meet Its Own and Industry's
            Evolving Needs
        AST has made strides in more strategically aligning its workforce
    with evolving industry demands. With the anticipated continued growth
    and development of new technologies and types of launches and
    supporting infrastructure, it is vital that AST ensure that the size,
    composition, and skills of its workforce are aligned with its projected
    workload, both the amount and type of work. In response to a
    recommendation we made in 2015, AST took steps to better understand how
    it uses its staff resources, including developing indicators for
    workload activities, such as inspections and consultations with
    potential applicants, in addition to the number of launches
    licensed.\29\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \29\ GAO-15-706.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AST has taken additional steps to more strategically plan for its
    future workforce needs since 2015, including some in response to four
    recommendations we made in 2019.\30\ For example:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \30\ GAO-19-437.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        AST recently assessed the workforce to identify skills and
    competencies that are currently needed among its workforce as well as
    specific competency areas that may be needed in the future to meet
    AST's growing and evolving workload, which addressed one of our
    recommendations. Using that information, AST officials told us that
    they developed strategies to address skill gaps, which include training
    and development for its current workforce, and enhancing collaboration
    with other FAA offices and the space industry to gain insight into the
    latest advances and changes in commercial space transportation.
        Since 2015, AST also has improved its workload projections
    to better account for the full range of its regulatory activities and
    the timeline of its licensing process. In June 2021, officials told us
    that they extended their current 2-year workload projections out to 5-
    years, to better anticipate and respond to emerging workforce needs.
    Officials also told us that by summer of 2021, they plan to finalize a
    more robust set of metrics for the entire office's workload to help AST
    determine its appropriate workforce size and composition, which would
    address an additional recommendation.

        While AST has taken steps to strategically plan for its future
    workforce needs, continuing its efforts to strategically plan for its
    workforce needs will help position FAA to meet the needs of the
    evolving industry.
    FAA is Taking Interim Steps to Reduce Inefficiencies in the National
            Airspace System, but Full Integration Is Still Years Away
        The continuing growth in the number of launches places a premium on
    FAA's ability to safely and efficiently integrate commercial space
    users into the National Airspace System. However, we reported in 2019,
    that both FAA officials and selected industry stakeholders said FAA's
    current approach is inefficient.\31\ FAA officials, for example, told
    us in 2019 that when a space launch occurs, they have closed the
    airspace in the surrounding area to commercial airlines and other
    airspace users for longer than may have been needed and included a
    larger area of airspace to ensure public safety. The resulting
    inefficiencies have included flight delays for airlines and
    difficulties for launch providers to secure launch windows--the period
    of time in which the launch or reentry is expected to occur.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \31\ GAO-19-437.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since our 2019 report, FAA has made progress in its development of
    procedures, technologies, and industry coordination that are designed
    to reduce some of the inefficiencies experienced to date. For example:
        In May 2020, FAA updated its prior 2014 Concept of
    Operations for commercial space integration. The 2020 update describes
    the document as a high-level, long-term vision to help guide FAA in
    integrating space launches into the National Airspace System.
        FAA reported that in October 2020, it began using data-
    driven air traffic control procedures for Atlantic Route air traffic
    around Cape Canaveral, Florida, where more than 80 percent of the 2020
    FAA-licensed launches from U.S. launch sites occurred. According to FAA
    officials, these procedures help air traffic control coordinate when to
    implement and release the airspace closure to other uses, ultimately
    reducing aircraft delays and reroutes caused by space launches.
        In June 2021, FAA officials told us they the agency plans
    to begin implementing a technology that it developed called the Space
    Data Integrator, which is able to receive real-time data on a launch
    vehicle's position and movement to improve situational awareness of
    launch activities in the airspace. FAA officials told us other
    technologies planned for implementation in the coming years may enable
    air traffic control to calculate a dynamic hazard area for a launch,
    rather than the static hazard areas that result in larger, longer
    airspace closures.
        FAA officials told us that in summer 2021, they plan to
    stand up its first of a planned series of collaborative decision-making
    committees to establish a forum in which commercial space, aviation,
    and airport representatives can work together to improve how commercial
    space transportation activities are integrated into the National
    Airspace System. The first committee will focus on data-sharing,
    including how to standardize and formalize data and make it available
    to more airspace users.

        The progress FAA has made is promising, but full and efficient
    integration of all users of the National Airspace System is years away
    and will require continued work and focus.
    FAA Has a Dual Role of Industry Promotion and Safety
        The industry's evolution, particularly with respect to the rise in
    space tourism, may require a reexamination of FAA's dual role of
    overseeing the safety of commercial space launches while also promoting
    the industry. In 2006 and 2009, we stated that FAA's dual role could
    give rise to a potential conflict of interest as the space tourism
    sector develops, but found no evidence that FAA's promotional
    activities--such as sponsoring an annual industry conference and
    publishing industry studies--conflicted with its safety regulatory role
    at that time.\32\ A 2008 statutorily required DOT-commissioned report
    similarly concluded that there was no compelling reason to remove FAA's
    promotional role in the near term (through 2012), but recommended that
    DOT periodically review its dual role specifically for safety and
    promotion of human space flight.\33\ We again emphasized in 2009 that
    FAA and Congress must remain vigilant that an inappropriate
    relationship between FAA and the commercial space launch industry does
    not occur.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \32\ GAO-07-16 and GAO, Commercial Space Transportation:
    Development of the Commercial Space Launch Industry Presents Safety
    Oversight Challenges for FAA and Raises Issues Affecting Federal Roles,
    GAO-10-286T (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 2, 2009).
        \33\ Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004, Pub. L. No.
    108-492, Sec.  3, 118 Stat. 3974, 3982.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In June 2021, FAA officials told us that while they agree that a
    reassessment may be appropriate in time, they do not think such an
    assessment is currently warranted. They also explained that promoting
    the industry was in their view related to their role in ensuring that
    industry participants understand relevant regulatory requirements and
    that FAA takes regulatory and other actions consistent with the still-
    developing nature of the industry. Nonetheless, given that 13 years
    have passed since DOT last examined its dual role and that the
    moratorium on DOT regulating the safety of crew and spaceflight
    participants is due to expire in 2023, a reexamination of DOT's dual
    role may be warranted as the industry continues to evolve.
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
    Subcommittee, this completes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to
    respond to any questions that you or other Members of the Subcommittee
    may have at this time.
                     GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
        GAO staff who made key contributions to this testimony are Susan
    Zimmerman (Assistant Director), Gretchen Snoey (Analyst-in-Charge),
    Catherine Colwell, Camilo Flores, Joshua Garties, Delwen Jones, Maureen
    Luna Long, Maria Mercado, Josh Ormond, Patrick Ward, and Elizabeth
    Wood.

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Ms. Krause. I appreciate that very
    much.
        And now we will turn to Member questions for panel 1. And
    with that, the Chair recognizes the chair of the full
    committee, Mr. DeFazio from Oregon.
        Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman.
        Mr. Monteith, and I mentioned it in my opening remarks, we
    had heard, I think, first at a hearing in 2016 about the
    development of the Space Data Integrator. It is now 2021. And
    yet, the officials have told the GAO that they still plan to
    begin implementing this technology.
        Can you give me a timeline for where this is in
    development, and when we can expect it?
        Mr. Monteith. Sure, I can give you a little bit of an
    overview of it, but not a specific timeframe.
        One of the things that I did when I joined the FAA a little
    over 2 years ago was took this program, which had been
    developed by my organization, and had not made a whole lot of
    progress, and asked our Chief Operating Officer, Teri Bristol,
    to take this task on.
        She has, and we have seen tremendous growth or progress in
    the development of the system, so much so that we expect in the
    next few months to have the first operational test of it.
        Now, the system has been operating in a shadow mode, and we
    expect, like I said, in the next few months, to have the first
    operational test, and we will be taking live data, ingesting it
    into our system, with the goal of reducing the airspace that
    must be segregated, and really integrate commercial space into
    the system.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK. I think that is absolutely critical as we
    are going to have more and more launches, and we don't want to
    be diverting and delaying flights for people who can't afford
    $500,000 for a ticket.
        And, Ms. Krause, as I mentioned at the beginning, I
    stripped away FAA's dual mandate for commercial aircraft.
    Unfortunately, it took a horrible tragedy for people to admit
    that it was a problem and accept my amendment. And you did
    state that a reexamination dual role may be warranted as the
    industry continues to evolve.
        Could you just elaborate a little bit on why you think we
    need to reexamine?
        Ms. Krause. Yes. The last review, as I mentioned in my
    opening statement, was in 2008, where DOT concluded that there
    was no compelling reason to remove the promotional role from
    FAA through 2012. It also--that report recommended that they
    periodically review the promotional role and safety role,
    particularly as it relates to human spaceflight. And, so, given
    the time that has passed since that review and developments in
    the industry, as well as the moratorium expiring, another
    review may be warranted.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK. And the FAA hasn't revisited this in that
    interim period?
        Ms. Krause. Not that I am aware of, no.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK. Is that correct, Mr. Monteith, that you
    haven't revisited this as was recommended that you should
    periodically look at it?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, I don't believe we have formally
    revisited it, but we do pay attention to this.
        Mr. DeFazio. Uh-huh.
        Mr. Monteith. We look at our ``encourage, facilitate,
    promote.'' Everything is based on safety, safety standards, and
    cooperation and coordination with the industry. And we don't
    really do promotion in the form of marketing.
        Mr. DeFazio. Yes. But the concern is, like when the FAA
    starts talking about Boeing as a customer, and we find undue
    influence over the inspectors, and we find managers overruling
    people who found critical problems with the MAX and
    subsequently people died.
        It is a creep that can happen. And it is just--you know,
    they are not customers. The commercial aviation industry is a
    regulated entity, and we will have to be watching commercial
    space very closely.
        And, finally, the chair and I wrote a letter on March 25
    regarding the SpaceX launching without authorization. What has
    SpaceX done to deal with the operational concerns you had, and,
    essentially, the cultural issues that you flagged? Are you
    satisfied that they are now fully compliant and they are
    cleaning things up?
        Mr. Monteith. Yes, sir, I am. And we would not have cleared
    them to start flight operations again, had I not been confident
    that they had modified their procedures effectively and
    addressed the safety culture issues that we saw during the
    events of Starship Serial No. 8 or SN8.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Larsen. The Chair recognizes Mr. Graves of Louisiana
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        General Monteith, for several years now, Congress has had a
    lot of discussion about which civil agency should be
    responsible for the provision of space situational awareness
    services. We haven't come to a decision yet, and I am curious
    of your thoughts in response, and if you think the FAA would be
    able to execute that mission if Congress decided that it should
    be a responsibility?
        Mr. Monteith. Sure. Great question.
        From my perspective, the most important thing is that
    whichever civil agency is tasked with this responsibility, it
    is done right, and so that likely means that a change in
    statute and a sufficient budget to get the job done. If
    Congress were to decide that this is a responsibility for the
    Department of Transportation, I am confident that the FAA would
    step up to the plate and we could accomplish the mission.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        Another question for you. Another concern we have, as I
    covered in the opening statement, was the reentry of space
    debris. If that mission--and then, of course, the impact on
    airspace and aircraft--if that mission were ultimately given to
    the FAA, do you think that AST and the Air Traffic Organization
    would be capable of working together to accomplish that
    mission, or administer it?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, if Congress did task us with that
    mission, I am confident that while it is difficult, that with
    the appropriate authorization and appropriation, we would get
    it done. And I can tell you the relationship that we have with
    the Air Traffic Organization, there is no daylight between Teri
    Bristol and I on how we consider the safety of the NAS and
    integrating commercial space into the NAS. We are full partners
    with the Air Traffic Organization.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        With the bulk of part 450 rulemaking behind us, there are a
    lot of other commercial space transportation regulations that
    may need similar revisiting, may be outdated or overly
    burdensome.
        Are there any of them that come to mind for you in terms of
    ones that you think deserve revisiting or would be a priority?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, we are evaluating that. As I mentioned
    in my opening statement, we are ready to press forward with the
    orbital debris rule, which really concerns upper stages and
    debris coming off of upper stages. Secondly, we want to take a
    real hard look at part 440, financial responsibility, as
    recommended by COMSTAC. And then we also know that we do need
    to look at our spaceport regulations, which really have not
    kept up with the state of the industry.
        But as a regulator, I think it is important for us to
    continually look at these and not wait 20 years to repromulgate
    a regulation that has grown stale.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        As you know, in 2018, the committee provided the Secretary
    with the authority to create aerospace rulemaking committees.
    Will the FAA consider asking the Secretary to convene an ARC
    for commercial space transportation rulemakings to help the FAA
    develop proposed rules?
        Mr. Monteith. In a word sir, yes. I think it is critical
    that we have full industry involvement as we develop these
    regulations, and a full public comment period so we can have
    the best, most effective, and efficient regulations that we can
    possibly develop.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thanks.
        Last one for you, General, and I appreciate your answers.
        As I covered in my opening statement, there has been--
    during the commercial human spaceflight learning period,
    industry is supposed to be working towards sort of a consensus
    on safety standards. As I said, the momentum appears to be
    moving in the right direction.
        Where do you think the focus over the next 24 months or so
    should be for those efforts?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, you know, I understand why the learning
    period was established when it was; but as was previously
    mentioned, with three companies likely flying commercial
    spaceflight participants this year, and a fourth next year, I
    think the landscape is changing, and I think it is important
    that we relook at some of those restrictions or, in this case,
    the moratorium.
        I also think that even with no change there, we still need
    to continue pressing forward to develop those consensus
    standards and to refresh our guidelines for commercial human
    spaceflight.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Mr. Graves.
        I now recognize myself for 5 minutes, and the first
    question is for Ms. Krause.
        The FAA has taken steps to reduce inefficiencies in the
    NAS. In your testimony, you say this progress is promising but
    full integration is years away. In your opinion, has the
    progress made by FAA been sufficient? And what are the hurdles
    to that?
        Ms. Krause. Back in 2019, we had done a review looking at
    integration efforts and certainly heard from both industry and
    FAA an acknowledgment that their current approach was creating
    inefficiencies. I think since we have done that work, FAA has
    taken a number of steps, both on the procedural and developing
    technologies, as well as starting to work through some bodies
    to do additional industry coordination, and those are what I
    mean in terms of ``promising.'' Those are the types of things
    that are needed to really get us closer and move towards more
    full integration in the NAS.
        Mr. Larsen. So the FAA has given you a date of this summer,
    I guess, which is just a few days away, to stand up the first
    of a series of committees to establish a forum for integration
    of the NAS with commercial space activities. What is an
    appropriate timeline for other needed committees or activities
    in this area?
        Ms. Krause. That is a timeline that would have to be worked
    closely with both FAA and sort of the industry in figuring out
    all of the different components that need to come together. It
    is a complex issue to work through, and technologies and
    systems need to be further developed so that there is better
    data to be able to assess risk and look at opportunities to
    further create efficiencies as well as safely integrating
    different aircraft in the NAS.
        Mr. Larsen. And then as well, can you be clearer--it is in
    your written testimony, I wasn't quite sure from your oral
    testimony, about the FAA's role prior to 2023 in looking at the
    safety of crew and spaceflight participants? Should they get
    some work done now in the event of action? Are they not allowed
    to take action before then? Can you be clearer about that?
        Ms. Krause. Sure, absolutely.
        I think the regulations allow them to respond to issues
    where if there is an accident or a mishap, they can look at the
    issue of the design that caused that. There are also things
    that the FAA can do and is doing in terms of working with
    industry to develop best practices that they can disseminate
    amongst the industry as well as was discussed, consensus
    standards, that I think will really help inform where things
    might head should the moratorium expire.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        Mr. Monteith, the FAA is responsible for clearing the NAS
    for military and other Government launches. Is there anything
    different you are expecting with commercial launches in terms
    of either process or--I guess, mainly process? Are there
    lessons to be learned from that that will be applied
    specifically to commercial launches?
        Mr. Monteith. Yes, sir, there will. And it will actually
    be--it can be applied in both directions. And even though Space
    Data Integrator is just getting ready to do the first
    operational test, the Air Traffic Organization has already been
    leaning forward and implementing concepts like time-based
    launch procedures. We know there are specific events during a
    launch countdown that trigger timelines to launch.
        Using that information, the ATO can adjust the airspace
    that is restricted and reduce the amount of restricted airspace
    and the time that it is actually restricted.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        Before I turn to Mr. Perry, I just want to let folks know
    we are supposed to have our first votes between 2:40 and 2:50,
    or something along those lines, and there are going to be
    several votes. I am still trying to determine whether we should
    just plow through this or recess; but when I decide, I will let
    you know.
        So with that, I will turn to Mr. Perry for 5 minutes from
    Pennsylvania.
        Mr. Perry. I thank the chairman.
        Mr. Monteith, the Biden administration has requested a
    nearly $5 million increase in the budget for the operations
    account of the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. What
    is your plan to prioritize these funds towards licensing
    efforts to ensure that the office is in compliance with the
    statutory time limits for launch licensing in the Commercial
    Space Launch Act?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, I appreciate the question.
        We have taken a look at every function that we have in the
    office to maximize our efficiency and effectiveness. We are
    hiring to our full authorized level this year. For the first
    time in the history of the office, we have actually been able
    to sustain over 100 full-time employees, and our efforts are
    geared primarily toward that licensing effort.
        We have been very successful thus far, but as we have
    identified earlier, just since this time last year, our launch
    cadence has doubled in just 1 year, and, so, we have got a lot
    of work ahead of us, and we are being proactive, as proactive
    as we can, to lead turn this problem so we do not become the
    impediment to industry.
        Mr. Perry. Well, then on--yes, just stay with me here.
        On a similar note, what efforts have you taken to date to
    ensure compliance with the statutory requirements related to
    timely and responsive license review and approvals? And what
    are the office's future plans to improve timeliness and
    responsiveness?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, if I understand the question correctly,
    it is a 180-day statutory requirement to have a license
    evaluated once it is determined to be complete. And I can only
    think of currently, I believe, one license where that did not
    occur, and that had to do with the environmental review
    process.
        Mr. Perry. OK. All right.
        And continuing on, the Trump administration required the
    Department of Transportation to rewrite the launch and reentry
    rules after nearly two decades of almost no modification. The
    industry is moving quickly and innovating at a speed to which
    the Federal Government, quite honestly, is probably
    unaccustomed, including developing unique and untraditional
    launch systems.
        How is the FAA working with the industry to ensure that the
    new part 450 will accommodate innovation and advancement
    without hindering the industry?
        Mr. Monteith. Thank you, sir.
        First and foremost, part 450 was written to be performance-
    based as opposed to prescriptive, which it was in the past,
    which really put a damper on innovation. We have worked with
    industry on part 450. The feedback we have gotten from
    industry, we have got a full 3-day workshop on the new 450
    itself, got very positive feedback, and that workshop was with
    industry. We have also done the same thing, a 1-day workshop
    with the international partners, and we are working with
    industry as we develop--right now, it is 27 advisory circulars
    that will help guide them through and provide a means of
    compliance for specific parts of part 450.
        Mr. Perry. So, in keeping kind of with that theme, what do
    you think needs to be done to facilitate further mutually
    beneficial cooperation between the agency and industry? Do you
    feel that there are any barriers hindering those efforts?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, I don't believe there are barriers. We
    have open and honest communication with our industry partners,
    and the industry companies know that I am always available to
    take their calls and talk to them and discuss any concerns they
    have about either the way we conduct business or the regulatory
    way ahead.
        Mr. Perry. Well, sir, thank you for your service. I notice
    that you commanded the 45th Space Wing in Florida. During your
    time there, you oversaw the very first rocket landing, which
    has since occurred more than 80 times. A reusable rocket, as
    well as other industry-led innovative technologies and launch
    systems, continue to drive down the cost of space access
    delivering tangible benefits to the American consumer, the
    economy, and our national security.
        Give me a background. Can you elaborate in the short time
    we have left on the importance of these innovations in
    supporting our national security and economic circumstances?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, if we want to stay the world leader in
    this transportation sector, innovation is critical, just like
    STEM is, and diversity is as well. I oversaw the first 23
    booster landings, and I can tell you personally it is a game
    changer.
        Mr. Perry. Well, thank you.
        And I yield back the balance of my time.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Representative Perry.
        The Chair now recognizes Representative Payne from New
    Jersey for 5 minutes.
        Representative Payne.
        Mr. Payne. Mr. Chairman, if I could yield and come back at
    a later time?
        Mr. Larsen. All right. It is possible, but you might want
    to take this opportunity now just in terms of--if not, we will
    go to Mr. Brown.
        All right. We will go to Mr. Brown from Maryland for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Brown?
        You are on mute, Mr. Brown.
        Representative Brown, you are on mute.
        [Pause.]
        OK. Representative Payne, you have 5 minutes right now if
    you want them.
        Mr. Payne. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        First of all, let me thank you for having this hearing and
    I wanted to ask--can you hear me?
        Mr. Larsen. You are good, you are good.
        Mr. Payne. I am sorry.
        Mr. Monteith, commercial space exploration is the next
    frontier of American discovery, but it is our responsibility to
    ensure that it is conducted with safety at the forefront. FAA
    and NASA have regulations and norms developed over decades to
    ensure safe and orderly operations. Commercial spaceflight is
    the only sector in its second decade of operations, and we must
    make sure that this safety culture can overcome the move-fast-
    and-break-things mantra of startups.
        Based on the FAA and NASA approach to safety, how do we
    instill those values in the commercial space transportation?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, that is a great question.
        And from my perspective, these companies, while they are
    trying to go quick, they are safe. At the heart of their
    business, they are concerned about safety. If we get any
    inkling that they are not concerned about safety, that is when
    we step in.
        The FAA has licensed 404 launches, commercial launches
    since our inception, and we have never had a fatality or
    casualty or serious injury to the uninvolved public. And that
    doesn't mean things haven't gone wrong. About 15 percent of our
    flights we declare a mishap; in other words, something didn't
    quite go wrong. Some of them, sometimes it is an engine that is
    not working quite right. Sometimes it is very spectacular that
    you will see across the internet. But what every single one of
    those mishaps has in common is they failed safely and nobody
    was injured.
        So safety, as my Administrator says, is our North Star, and
    we stay laser focused, my entire team, on the safety of what is
    inherently a dangerous operation every single day, sir.
        Mr. Payne. I, like other members on this committee,
    represent a district that contains a major airport. How does
    the FAA plan to deal with an increasing number of space
    launches to avoid major service disruptions and safety concerns
    related to air travel?
        Mr. Monteith. Yes, sir. We work hand in hand with our
    counterparts, and I meet personally with my peers, both the
    Chief Operating Officer and the head of airports, as we work
    through these. We also have our teams. Anytime a license
    application or a concept for a launch operator comes in, we
    work throughout that entire process with our counterparts
    within the FAA to make sure that, to the extent that we can,
    that these operations are integrated and at the foundation,
    they are always, always, always safe.
        So, for instance, you would not expect to see an operation,
    say, in the middle of the country that is launching Saturn V-
    type rockets.
        Mr. Payne. All right.
        Mr. Monteith. Because we are working together to ensure
    that that doesn't happen.
        Mr. Payne. Excellent.
        Ms. Krause, to develop eventual regulation of commercial
    space transportation, Federal agencies will need relevant
    information and studies of pertinent issues. What areas in
    commercial space transportation need further investigation and
    evaluation? And how can Congress help in these efforts?
        Ms. Krause. Thanks for the question.
        One area we have looked at in the past is FAA's workforce
    and AST's efforts to make sure that they have the skills in
    place. That is an area to continue to have attention on, and I
    know FAA continues to evolve and monitor and kind of ongoing
    analysis of how their workforce is ready. So, that is something
    to really pay attention to, because you need the skills in
    place in order to carry out, respond to, and adapt to changes
    in the industry.
        I also mentioned it may warrant another review of the dual
    mandate as the industry develops, and particularly as the human
    spaceflight industry continues to develop.
        Mr. Payne. Thank you.
        And, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your patience, and I yield
    back.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Representative Payne.
        We are going to try to keep going here, and if
    Representative Steel is available for questions.
        Representative Steel?
        [Pause.]
        And Representative Balderson. Is Representative Balderson
    available?
        [Pause.]
        All right. I am going to ask the ranking member unanimous
    consent--we do have a few folks on this side of the aisle who
    are here for questions, can I get them started? I know it is
    out of order. So that is an OK from the ranking member?
        So I will go with Mr. Kahele.
        Mr. Kahele. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to our witnesses
    today for participating in this very important conversation.
        I guess my question would be for Mr. Monteith. Similar to
    the previous question, maybe mine will touch more on the
    regulatory framework. On page 6 in your testimony, you
    described commercial space operations as currently being
    treated as a special case in which air traffic controllers
    block off large sections of airspace for extended periods of
    time for a single launch.
        As the number of commercial space operation grows
    exponentially, maybe explain a little differently than your
    previous explanation about the next steps for the FAA in terms
    of the regulatory framework. I know from your testimony, 14 CFR
    part 450 was adopted. But how do you see the integration of
    commercial spaceflight and the regulatory aspect of it and that
    evolution, to integrate it into the National Airspace System?
        When I look at this, I think of the challenges that we had
    and still have in integrating unmanned aircraft systems into
    the National Airspace System. So could you discuss a little bit
    of your thoughts on that aspect?
        Mr. Monteith. Yes, sir. And I appreciate the question.
        As I stated in my oral testimony, integration of commercial
    space into the NAS is a top priority for the FAA, and with the
    development of the Space Data Integrator, it is more about
    technology and capability than it is about a new regulatory
    framework.
        As we started this journey, the amount of time it took
    between when we realized a rocket had a mishap or a
    catastrophic anomaly, to when we could actually get commands to
    the flight deck, took historically 14 to 18 minutes, which is
    why we had to separate, or segregate, the very large swath of
    airspace for a significant amount of time.
        When SDI is completely implemented, right now the goal is,
    because we are using a machine to a machine as opposed to
    manual inputs, that goal will be less than 1 minute which
    really, at that point, gets you to where you are truly
    integrating the airspace for these complementary operations.
        Mr. Kahele. What do you think, as the commercial space
    operations and industry grows, obviously, there are more
    preferred and desired locations for space launches, typically
    Florida--Cape Canaveral and California--Vandenberg. Are there
    other areas of the country that we are looking for an increase
    in commercial space launches, or are there areas that we can
    fairly say this is where it would be most highly concentrated
    and, therefore, affecting the commercial aircraft activity in
    those areas?
        Mr. Monteith. Yes, sir. You know, there are more optimal
    locations to have a spaceport at. Of course, being on the coast
    is one because of down range debris, closer to the Equator, so
    you use the rotation of the Earth as an energy boost to get
    into geosynchronous orbit where our communication satellites
    are, our big ones are. So there are certainly optimal places.
        Right now, we are not at capacity, but at some point with
    these locations that you mentioned, we will be at capacity.
    Right now, we currently have 12 FAA-licensed spaceports. I
    believe five are actively conducting launch operations, so we
    have seven that are still waiting for launch operators to come
    to their facilities.
        But I see this industry is, if anything, accelerating
    versus going down, which I believe it will be even more
    critical to take a look at our spaceport infrastructure to
    ensure that it can handle the growth, and that we can remain a
    global leader in this transportation sector, sir.
        Mr. Kahele. If one of those licenses does not exist of
    those 12 licensees, do you--and how do you foresee Hawaii
    playing a role in commercial space launch future activities?
        Mr. Monteith. Well, sir, since I grew up on Oahu, I would
    love to see a spaceport in Hawaii just personally, but there
    are opportunities, of course, all consistent with safety and
    our environmental regulations, that would allow us to put,
    particularly on areas with plenty of coast like Hawaii has,
    could potentially support a spaceport operation.
        Mr. Kahele. All right. Thank you so much. Mahalo.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        And the Chair calls on Mr. Garamendi for 5 minutes.
        I would note--just a heads-up--although there are 4 minutes
    and 30 seconds left in the vote, a total of 56 people total
    have voted.
        So, Mr. Garamendi, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Two sets of questions. One is, who pays for all this, the
    commercial space operators or the taxpayers? I am going to let
    that one hang there. I don't think that the answer is going to
    be found in this hearing, but I think it needs to be out there.
    This is going to become much more expensive as more and more
    spaceflights occur.
        Secondly, this is an issue, Mr. Chairman, that you and I
    may know a little bit about, or maybe we don't know enough
    about it. In 2018, General Hayden said that space awareness,
    that is, what is going on in space, space junk, space
    satellites, all that, could be handled by a nondefense
    Government agency.
        More recently, in fact, it has been in the last 3 or 4--
    within the last 3 months, this issue has come back. And the
    last I heard from the military is maybe not. Maybe the
    Department of Defense needs to stay on top of this issue for a
    whole variety of reasons, many of which you and I have heard on
    the Armed Services Committee.
        I think this issue remains unresolved, despite President
    Trump's 2018 directive. I would like to see more discussion
    about this. I would like to hear from the Department of Defense
    as they view this matter and the more recent Space Command and
    Space Force that now exists. So I am going to let it go at
    that.
        These are two questions that are out there. If any of the
    witnesses have an answer, good. Otherwise, you and I are going
    to leave and vote.
        Did I see the chairman leaving? He ran away, did he?
        If either of the witnesses want to respond, who pays, and
    does this space situational awareness reside in the Department
    of Defense or Congress?
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, having done that mission when I was in
    the Air Force, I can tell you, while I was in, the discussions
    made perfect sense that some of this could definitely be
    offloaded to a civil organization.
        The Department of Defense will still continue to get
    exquisite space situational awareness data. The issue is
    whether or not they can ingest all of the commercially
    available data that is out there right now, because of the
    restrictions on what their systems also do from a defense
    perspective.
        On the civil side, you can ingest all of that data and
    provide more accurate location of where satellites are so that
    you can start walking down a path where you can better have
    collision avoidance for these objects on orbit.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Stanton [presiding]. Thank you very much.
        Are there any of our GOP colleagues logged on at this
    point? My understanding is there is not, but I want to ask to
    confirm. Any Republican Members available to ask questions?
        All right. If not, I will proceed with my own questions
    then, and this is a continuation of some questions that were
    asked earlier by Chairman DeFazio. These are for Associate
    Administrator Monteith and Ms. Krause.
        Through its licensing authorities, the FAA is required to
    ensure and protect public health and safety, national security,
    and foreign policy interests of the United States. Yet, at the
    same time, the FAA is required to encourage, facilitate, and
    promote the commercial space transportation industry. And so
    this creates a dual mandate for the organization.
        So following up on Chairman DeFazio's questions, I want to
    hear each of your own individual views about this dual mandate
    and how this dual mandate best serves or can it serve the
    interests of the Federal Government, commercial space launch
    industry, and, most importantly, the American people.
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, if you would like me to start, what I
    would say--and we take both of those mandates seriously, but
    for me, it is an if/then. If the first is accomplished, we are
    able to do the second, because everything evolves around
    safety.
        And so when we encourage and facilitate this industry,
    really, from my perspective, it is more about facilitation. It
    is ensuring that we have got the right regulations or the right
    scope at the right time to ensure safety, while also allowing
    these companies to innovate and grow and continue to lead on
    the global stage.
        We don't do, quite frankly, a whole lot of encouraging. And
    for promotion, it is all about promoting safety standards and
    consensus standards and working with industry for that, as
    opposed to what would traditionally be considered potentially
    marketing, which we really don't do.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you.
        Ms. Krause, could I get your answer on the issue of the
    dual mandate that is currently in place?
        Ms. Krause. Sure. I mean, we have previously emphasized
    that it is important that both FAA and Congress remain
    vigilant, ensuring that there is no inappropriate role between
    FAA and the commercial space industry. As I had mentioned
    earlier, the last review of looking at the dual role was back
    in 2008, where it concluded that there was no compelling reason
    to separate out the promotional role from FAA for 2012.
        But, really, given the changes that there have been in the
    industry, as well as the moratorium expiring and the
    recommendation coming out of that report to periodically review
    this, we think that taking another look at this issue may be
    warranted.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much.
        Over the last decade, there has been a steady growth in the
    industry in the number of launches licensed by the FAA. Just 5
    years ago, there were nine launches. Last year, there was a
    record 39, representing a nearly 400-percent increase since
    2015. This year, 39 launches have been licensed to date, and we
    are only midway through the year. In addition to the increase
    in launch licenses, the number of launch companies, especially
    for small satellites, is growing.
        I want to ask each of you about workforce issues associated
    with this exponential growth in the industry. Is the FAA
    workforce keeping pace with this growth, and what has been the
    overall impact on the FAA's operations and licensing activities
    in light of this fast growth? And that is for either witness.
        Mr. Monteith. Sir, so far, we have been able to keep up,
    but it is a challenge. I can tell you from the skill sets that
    we need that are mostly STEM-related, we are just one of many
    organizations that are looking for the same small pool of
    talented individuals.
        Of course, you have got industry that frequently can offer
    more compensation. And on the Government side, while it is
    great and exciting to be a regulator, I have to compete against
    NASA, the Air Force, and now the U.S. Space Force.
        But with all that said, what we offer is the ability for
    folks to come in and learn the entire industry. And then either
    they will stay with us for 20 or 30 years or potentially go to
    industry and take our safety foundation with them and the
    understanding of why regulations are important.
        But as we continue to grow, I see this as becoming a
    greater and greater challenge for all of us if we cannot solve
    the problem we have with not enough folks in STEM.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you, Mr. Monteith.
        Ms. Krause, any thoughts about workforce issues as it
    relates to the growth in this industry?
        Ms. Krause. Yes, that is an issue we have looked at closely
    and have identified some opportunities for FAA to more
    strategically manage its workforce and be in a position to
    respond to changes in the industry. The FAA has responded to
    those recommendations and continues to work on them. Things
    like having a better sense of the time that their staff is
    using and what kind of time is being spent on different
    activities as well as the skills and competencies that are
    needed.
        But, we are looking for FAA to really follow through on the
    other recommendations, which is understanding workload metrics,
    projections, so that they can get these people on board and
    trained up and ready to respond to changes in the industry.
        Mr. Stanton. I want to thank both of our panelists in the
    first panel for your important testimony here today. Your
    contribution to today's discussion has been very informative
    and very helpful.
        Because votes have been called, we have an eight-vote
    series right now, some of our colleagues were not able to ask
    questions of the first panel. So, as a result, the committee is
    going to stand in recess until 5 minutes after the end of the
    last vote series today. We hope it is around 5:15, and at that
    point, we will call upon the second panel.
        I apologize. I have been told that my colleague,
    Congressman DeSaulnier, is on and ready to ask questions of our
    first panel. I appreciate that. And at that point, we will
    stand in recess.
        Congressman.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. I am fine, Mr. Chairman. If you want to go
    to recess, I can wait. Whatever is more convenient for you and
    the staff.
        Mr. Stanton. The issue would be, if we recess, we are going
    to release these two witnesses.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. OK.
        Mr. Stanton. So if you want to ask questions of these
    witnesses, do it now. And then, otherwise, we can hold off till
    the second panel later.
        Mr. DeSaulnier. I will hold off till the second panel.
    Thank you so much.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you, Congressman.
        We stand in recess until 5 minutes after the end of the
    last vote.
        [Recess.]
        Mr. Larsen [presiding]. I call the committee back in from
    recess to continue the hearing on FAA's important role,
    critical role in commercial space launch.
        We are going to move to the second panel, and I am going
    to--just a heads-up. We are between a series of votes, so we
    have a little bit of time right now for this work, and we will
    go until the next round of votes is called. But we have a
    little bit of time. I just want to let folks know that.
        So I would note that space launches can be vertical or
    horizontal. They are designed to meet different commercial
    needs, such as launching a GPS satellite into geostationary
    orbit or a new telescope to explore space. With that in mind,
    this subcommittee must consider the depth and the breadth of
    the industry being regulated.
        Launch providers who have been in the business for some
    time have developed longstanding safety requirements and use
    existing standards, and that knowledge will be extremely
    helpful.
        That is why I am pleased to have on this panel Mr.
    Salvatore Bruno, the president and CEO of ULA, or United Launch
    Alliance. And I look forward to hearing from Mr. Bruno about
    what is needed from the FAA to support effective yet efficient
    launch and spaceport licensing and how vital that is to the
    success of the industry.
        Mr. Frank DiBello, president and CEO of Space Florida, is
    on the panel, and we will hear from him. I would like to hear
    from him his evaluation of the present and future of FAA launch
    and spaceport regulations.
        Recent figures indicate that the airline industry and
    passenger travel are rebounding from the COVID-19 pandemic. So
    consequently, it is important to ask how to fully and safely
    integrate growing airspace operations, like commercial space
    launch, with existing airspace users. I am glad, therefore, to
    welcome Captain Joe DePete of the Air Line Pilots Association
    to hear that perspective.
        And the perspective of new entrants into the commercial
    space operations field also play a key role in this discussion.
    I am happy to welcome Mr. Mike Moses, the president of Space
    Missions and Safety of Virgin Galactic, to hear their unique
    priorities.
        So as nascent operations and technologies are integrated
    into the complex National Airspace System, the safety of all
    who fly and those on the ground remain a top priority. This
    Congress, this administration, the industry, and the workforce
    must work together to move forward as we embark on the next
    chapter of U.S. airspace.
        And I would note, before I go to the witnesses, that this
    committee takes this oversight very seriously. We do not
    believe that we have jurisdiction over space, but you have to
    travel through airspace to get to space, what I like to think
    of as our space to get to space. And so this is why this
    hearing is so critically important to hear about the FAA's role
    and to hear about how the industry is working with the FAA and
    what needs to be better to ensure that the controlled airspace
    and the National Airspace System is controlled in a safe manner
    that facilitates the industry.
        That was, for the record, the conclusion of my opening
    statement from previously. And so I want to just move now to
    the panelists, and the first panelist will be Mr. Bruno of
    United Launch Alliance.
        Mr. Bruno, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF SALVATORE T. ``TORY'' BRUNO, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
    EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UNITED LAUNCH ALLIANCE, LLC; FRANK DiBELLO,
     PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SPACE FLORIDA; CAPTAIN
       JOSEPH G. DePETE, PRESIDENT, AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION,
    INTERNATIONAL; AND MIKE MOSES, PRESIDENT OF SPACE MISSIONS AND
                        SAFETY, VIRGIN GALACTIC

        Mr. Bruno. Thank you.
        Chairman Larsen, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Members Graves,
    and members of the subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity
    to speak on a matter of vital importance to our Nation: the
    FAA's role in promoting U.S. commercial space transportation,
    ensuring public safety, and protecting the national security
    and foreign policy interests of the United States.
        I am privileged to represent United Launch Alliance's
    talented and dedicated team of women and men who are at the
    forefront of our industry. As president and CEO of ULA, it is
    my responsibility to be laser-focused on providing reliable,
    affordable, and especially safe space transportation services.
        Having an unmatched record of 100 percent mission success
    across 144 launches for the Department of Defense, NASA, and
    commercial customers, ULA occupies a unique position and
    perspective in U.S. space transportation. Today, these missions
    launch on our Atlas V and Delta IV rockets, and soon, we will
    debut the innovative Vulcan Centaur.
        U.S. leadership in space can only be maintained with an
    increasingly successful domestic commercial space
    transportation industry. That fact underscores the truly
    enormous importance of the FAA's licensing of launch, reentry,
    and spaceports, while protecting national security and public
    safety. It is important to recognize that safety is as much in
    the interest of the commercial space transportation industry as
    it is in the interest of the general public.
        Any loss of life, damage to property, or environmental
    degradation caused by space launches, reentries, or spaceport
    activities could harm our entire industry by reducing public
    and political confidence, which could lead to increased
    restrictions and related costs. This, in turn, would have an
    adverse impact on the commercial space and our overall national
    interest, as space transportation would become more constrained
    and expensive.
        I am happy to report that the ULA safety record remains
    impeccable. The recent streamlining of launch and reentry
    regulations is a landmark example of how the FAA has
    contributed to the advancement of U.S. commercial space
    transportation, while maintaining safety as paramount and
    protecting our national security and foreign policy interests.
        In order to maintain the integrity of the licensing
    process, we need effective enforcement. It may not be obvious,
    but the FAA has never denied an operational launch license. If
    the FAA has a concern with a ULA license, they promptly let us
    know, and we make sure the issue is resolved well in advance of
    launch.
        These regulations exist for a reason. Space launch is not
    as easy as we make it look. These are incredibly complex
    machines of enormous destructive potential. Industry is
    naturally going to trend towards pushing the boundaries, so it
    is vital that Congress provides FAA the support it needs to
    conduct effective oversight and enforcement of the licensing
    process. Responsible operators will comply with FAA regulations
    and licenses. Those who do not should face enforcement and
    impactful consequences.
        Other issues the FAA will play a role in addressing include
    human spaceflight safety, the integration of the National
    Airspace System, the protection of the orbital regime, and the
    protection of air traffic from an increase in reentering space
    debris. I address these topics further in my written testimony.
        In closing, I wish to express my appreciation for your
    focus on the FAA and U.S. commercial space transportation. Your
    dedicated attention to this vitally important matter is
    indispensable to ensuring the continued support of Congress for
    the FAA and our industry.
        Again, thank you for inviting me to testify today. I look
    forward to answering all of your questions.
        [Mr. Bruno's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Salvatore T. ``Tory'' Bruno, President and Chief
                 Executive Officer, United Launch Alliance, LLC
                                  Introduction
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
    Subcommittee--thank you for this opportunity to speak on a matter of
    vital importance to our nation--the Federal Aviation Administration's
    (FAA) role in promoting U.S. commercial space transportation, ensuring
    public safety, and protecting the national security and foreign policy
    interests of the United States. I am privileged to represent United
    Launch Alliance's (ULA) talented and dedicated team of women and men,
    who are at the forefront of our industry. As President and CEO of ULA,
    it is my responsibility to be laser-focused on providing reliable,
    affordable, and safe space transportation services.
        To develop our launchers and deliver payloads to space, ULA
    maintains major assets across the United States. We staff employees at
    facilities in Denver and Pueblo, Colorado, Decatur, Alabama, and
    Harlingen, Texas where we conduct sophisticated launch vehicle
    engineering, testing, manufacturing, assembly, and integration. At Cape
    Canaveral Space Force Station in Florida and Vandenberg Space Force
    Base in California, we conduct payload integration and launch
    operations. I am extremely proud of ULA's dedicated workforce. Many of
    our employees are represented by the International Association of
    Machinists and Aerospace Workers and the United Automobile, Aerospace
    and Agricultural Implement Workers of America.
        ULA also partners with thousands of suppliers across the country in
    nearly every state. By working with these suppliers--many of which are
    small businesses--ULA plays a critical role in assuring a highly
    productive and competitive U.S. space industrial base.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                Mission Success
        Having an unmatched record of 100 percent mission success across
    144 launches for the Department of Defense, NASA, and commercial
    customers, ULA occupies a unique position in U.S. space transportation.
    Since its formation in 2006, ULA has launched satellites for GPS,
    communications, weather forecasting, Earth science, planetary
    exploration, missile warning, and intelligence, among other purposes
    that are critically important to our nation. Today, these missions
    launch on our Atlas V and Delta IV rockets, and soon we will debut the
    innovative Vulcan Centaur.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        ULA remains the only launch provider capable of meeting all
    national security launch needs. For many years, the Department of
    Defense has entrusted ULA with delivering its most important national
    security payloads to space. The United States Space Force's recent
    selection of ULA as the nation's ``best value'' provider, chosen to
    launch 60 percent of all national security payloads from 2022-2027,
    reaffirms ULA's trusted position.
        ULA's Atlas, Delta, and heritage rockets have enabled NASA science
    missions to travel to every planet in the Solar System, the Sun, and
    beyond. In 1962, when John Glenn became the first U.S. astronaut to
    orbit the Earth, he rode aboard an Atlas rocket. Today, ULA's rockets
    send cargo to the International Space Station as part of the Commercial
    Cargo program and will soon carry our American astronauts there aboard
    Starliner as part of the Commercial Crew program. It is worth noting
    that launches in support of Commercial Cargo and Commercial Crew are
    FAA licensed launches.
        Every single successful U.S. mission to Mars has arrived safely
    thanks to a ride from ULA's Atlas, Delta, and heritage rockets. With
    the benefit of ULA's launch services, NASA's Perseverance and Ingenuity
    are achieving major technical breakthroughs and making exciting new
    discoveries on Mars. In doing so, NASA is inspiring America's youth to
    pursue science, technology, engineering, and math--collectively known
    as STEM--and demonstrating that the United States remains the global
    leader of space exploration, outpacing China's aggressive space
    program, which is a major component of the Chinese Communist Party's
    ambition to supplant U.S. global leadership and replace democracy with
    authoritarianism as the global model for governance.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        ULA has many commercial customers who rely on ULA to successfully
    place satellites in orbit. These commercial launches represent major
    investments and business opportunities that yield essential services
    and generate economic growth, as well as augment capabilities of our
    dedicated national security and civil space assets. Our upcoming
    launches will support numerous commercial customers serving various
    markets. ULA's upcoming first flight of Vulcan Centaur will carry the
    first American commercial vehicle to the lunar surface as part of
    NASA's Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS) program. In addition to
    science payloads, the vehicle will carry the STEM projects of American
    and international students.
        As Vulcan nears operation, ULA is beginning the transition from
    Atlas V and Delta IV. Vulcan incorporates important technical
    innovations--many tested on our existing vehicles to optimize
    development--which enables ULA to meet its goal of offering launches at
    a significantly lower cost, while maintaining maximum reliability,
    thereby expanding opportunities for the commercial development of
    space. More than thirty Vulcan launches are already on our launch
    manifest.
                       Commercial Space Launch Licensing
        Though sometimes overlooked, the success of U.S. commercial space
    transportation has become integral to that of our civil and national
    security space programs. In a geopolitical environment characterized by
    a renewed competition for global power, the United States cannot afford
    to relinquish its leadership position in space. That leadership can
    only be maintained with an increasingly successful domestic space
    transportation industry. That fact underscores the enormous importance
    of the FAA's licensing of launch, reentry, and spaceports, while
    protecting national security and public safety.
        When conducting space launches for commercial customers, ULA seeks
    a license from the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation
    (AST). The Atlas V and Delta IV rockets were both commercially
    developed in the late 1990s to rely on a burgeoning commercial market.
    In fact, at the time it was assumed U.S. government launches would make
    up a tiny minority of the launch manifest. Because of this, our launch
    operators are experts on the licensing process. When the FAA began work
    on a major update to the licensing process in 2018, ULA played an
    integral role in providing industry feedback on how to streamline
    existing rules in a way that would ignite the commercial launch
    industry while maintaining safety as the number one priority of the
    agency.
        The future success of the U.S. commercial space transportation
    industry depends upon the efficiency and effectiveness of FAA
    licensing. I applaud the organization for rising to the challenge by
    finding ways to reduce regulatory burdens and their attendant costs, in
    addition to assigning the highest priority to safety and protecting
    national interests.
        It is important to recognize that safety is as much in the interest
    of the commercial space transportation industry as it is in the
    interest of the general public. Any loss of life, damage to property,
    or environmental degradation caused by space launches, reentries, or
    spaceport activities could harm our entire industry by reducing public
    and political confidence, which would lead to increased restrictions
    and related costs. This, in turn, would have an adverse impact on
    commercial space and our overall national interest as space
    transportation becomes more constrained and expensive. I am happy to
    report that the ULA safety record remains impeccable.
        The success of our industry can be clearly measured by the increase
    in licensed space operations. In 2011, there was only one licensed
    commercial space launch, while in 2020 that number grew to 39. Beyond
    evincing our industry's success, this measure emphasizes the need for
    regulators to adapt. The FAA responded boldly to the need for a
    constructive, forward-leaning approach to the escalating demand for
    launch and reentry licenses. The organization's streamlining of launch
    and reentry regulations is a landmark example of how the FAA has
    contributed to the advancement of U.S. commercial space transportation,
    while maintaining safety as paramount, and protecting our national
    security and foreign policy interests. This followed reorganizing FAA/
    AST along functional lines to increase accountability, retool internal
    processes for effectiveness and efficiency, and hire additional staff
    with the right skills to meet future demands.
        In a world marked by economic competition, changing climate, health
    emergencies, and international political, military, and intelligence
    challenges, the new FAA regulations (Part 450) enable our industry to
    adopt innovations that will catalyze growing contributions to the
    economy, environment, health, safety, and security of the United
    States. These Part 450 regulations include flexible, performance-based
    criteria in place of the formerly cumbersome, prescriptive
    requirements. ULA participated actively in the regulatory process and
    we are gratified that the company's comments, along with those of other
    thoughtful stakeholders, were well received by the FAA.
        In order to maintain the integrity of the licensing process, we
    need effective enforcement. It may not be obvious, but the FAA has
    never denied an operational launch license. If the FAA has a problem or
    concern with a ULA license, they promptly flag the issue, and we make
    sure the issue is resolved well in advance of launch. These regulations
    exist for a reason; space launch is not as easy as we make it look.
    Industry is naturally going to trend towards pushing the boundaries, so
    it is vital that Congress provides FAA the support it needs to conduct
    effective oversight and enforcement of the licensing process.
    Responsible operators will comply with FAA regulations and licenses.
    Those who do not should face enforcement and impactful consequences.
           Integrating Spaceflight into the National Airspace System
        The FAA has encouraged commercial space transportation and air
    transportation to work together in the interest of a safe and efficient
    National Airspace System (NAS). Despite grappling with the challenges
    posed by NAS' multiple uses, the progress already made is noteworthy.
        With this kind of record at the FAA, it is incumbent upon the
    commercial space transportation industry not only to comply fully with
    regulations, orders, and guidance, but also to cooperate actively with
    the FAA and to accord its talented, dedicated, and hardworking women
    and men the respect and appreciation they so greatly deserve.
        As we look forward to the not-so-distant future, the FAA's rising
    challenges are inevitable. Commercial launches and reentries will
    continue to increase in frequency and complexity, and numerous
    spaceports will be added, which will occupy an ever-widening expanse of
    the NAS. The emergence of commercial human spaceflight will entail new
    risks and opportunities, requiring the FAA's close attention. Likewise,
    the FAA will have to weigh carefully the environmental factors on land
    and in air, sea, and space, which attend the growth of commercial space
    transportation.
                   Protecting Earth Orbit--A Natural Resource
        There has been much attention devoted, especially lately, to the
    sustainability of the orbital regime; and rightly so. The advent of
    vast constellations of satellites in Low Earth Orbit has brought new
    opportunities to daily life here on earth, but has raised concerns
    about the increased risks of collisions and consequent debris. This
    could threaten the safety of astronauts and space objects. Moreover, it
    could further complicate the transit of launch vehicles and payloads,
    the safe disposal of rocket stages, and even render the affected orbits
    unusable for decades. The physical density of certain mega-
    constellations, along with autonomous, unpredictable, and undisclosed
    repositioning of spacecraft, could make certain orbital altitudes too
    crowded for use by other spacecraft and limit the practical launch
    access to fly through these shells to adjacent orbits.
        On the other side of the equation, the benefits of satellite
    constellations are evident, and there are promising technologies for
    on-orbit satellite servicing and active removal of dead spacecraft and
    other orbital debris. However, those capabilities may not be sufficient
    to adequately address the impending problems, at least not for the
    foreseeable future. As a launch provider, we have a vested interest in
    protecting the orbital regime so we can continue launching responsible
    customers to space. One way ULA remains proactive on this front is by
    safely disposing of our second stage rockets by placing them in a
    graveyard orbit or conducting a controlled reentry where most of the
    stage disintegrates over the remote, deep ocean.
        In accordance with its statutory mandate, the FCC has strongly
    promoted the deployment of mega-constellations, with a focus on their
    benefits. The attention of other government organizations to the
    potentially negative impacts of mega-constellations is a welcome
    development, and I hope and expect that the FAA will lend its
    expertise. I would argue the FAA has a statutory role in this matter
    due to its charge to protect national security and national airspace
    users from reentering debris. We can't put national security satellites
    into orbit if we can't get there in one piece.
        Foreign governments and multilateral organizations also have
    important roles to play. The United States does not have a monopoly on
    satellite constellations, and accordingly, the existing international
    rules of conduct for space activities must be revisited and new ones
    considered for this burgeoning area. I note that China plans to deploy
    13,000 satellites in LEO and is providing robust funding and other
    government support to bring that about. Considering these
    circumstances, it is profoundly in the interest of the U.S. government
    to lead the way in confronting these issues with the invaluable work of
    the FAA.
                          Enabling Regulatory Success
        When addressing the roles and responsibilities of the FAA, its
    relationship with commercial space transportation stakeholders, and the
    performance of its missions, it is important to recognize the
    outstanding contributions of the Commercial Space Transportation
    Advisory Committee--COMSTAC. ULA is represented on the Committee, so I
    take a special interest in its accomplishments and ongoing projects,
    from which the FAA, industry, and the public all benefit.
        But, most important of all to the success of the FAA in regulating
    and promoting U.S. commercial space transportation is the foundational
    role of Congress. U.S. commercialization of space transportation has
    been possible only because Congress has remained committed to ensuring
    that our nation enjoys the countless, vitally important benefits
    enabled by this fast-growing industry, while maintaining safety as the
    highest priority and protecting our national security and foreign
    policy. The increased demand for licensing of launch, reentry, and
    spaceports must be matched by augmented administrative resources if
    commercial space transportation is to continue its rapid advance in the
    national interest. Accordingly, I, like others in the industry,
    strongly support the Fiscal Year 2022 budget request for increased
    funding for FAA/AST.
        In closing, I wish to express my appreciation for your focus on the
    FAA and U.S. commercial space transportation. Your dedicated attention
    to this vitally important matter is indispensable to ensuring the
    continued support of Congress for the FAA and our industry. Again,
    thank you for inviting me to testify today. I look forward to answering
    your questions.

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
        Now, the Chair will recognize Mr. Frank DiBello, president
    and CEO of Space Florida. You are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. DiBello. Chairman Larsen, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking
    Member Graves, and distinguished members of the subcommittee,
    thank you for this invitation. I am honored to share a Florida
    perspective on a topic of great importance to our State and to
    the Nation's leadership in space transportation.
        Space Florida is a public corporation and independent
    special district established to strengthen Florida's leadership
    in aerospace research, investment, exploration, and commerce.
    We actively support development of space transportation assets
    at the Cape Canaveral Spaceport and at other designated
    spaceport territories in the State.
        Florida hosts 4 of the 12 licensed commercial spaceports,
    and since 1989, has hosted over half of all FAA-licensed
    launches. Of the 31 licensed launches so far this year, nearly
    60 percent were launched from privately developed or operated
    facilities at the Cape Canaveral Spaceport, which includes the
    Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station.
        Since January, launches from the Cape have demonstrated a
    cargo-lifting capability of over 400 metric tons to orbit.
    Further, 50 or more launches a year from Florida will soon
    become the norm, and future projections far exceed that number.
        Years ago, Florida recognized its future and designated
    space transportation a distinct element of its strategic
    intermodal system. Space transportation is critical to our
    economy. Yet we recognize it is still an emerging industry and
    requires care in allowing new systems entering the market to
    operate within a flexible regulatory framework. The FAA must
    continue to develop and maintain this framework to support U.S.
    industry growth in the face of global competition.
        With Florida's launch activity and busy air traffic
    corridors along our coast, we urge continued and increased FAA
    effort in technology and airspace management development to
    advance safe and efficient integration of space transportation
    with commercial aviation.
        Florida is already providing an operational environment
    where industry and FAA can develop and mature improvements to
    future systems and procedures.
        It is also worth noting that thanks in major part to more
    than $1.5 billion in commercial spaceport investment by Florida
    and its industry partners, we now have a landscape of new and
    redeveloped launch and landing capability on sites once used
    solely for Government systems.
        States have a clear role to play in the evolution of U.S.
    space transportation capability. National Space Transportation
    Policy directs Federal agencies to provide access to launch
    ranges, purchase U.S. space transportation services, and
    refrain from activities that preclude, discourage, or compete
    with U.S. commercial space providers.
        These policies foster renewal and growth in America's space
    launch capability, but vital supporting ground infrastructure
    has not kept up at the same pace and is essential for future
    spaceport operations.
        The U.S. Department of Transportation should embrace space
    transportation as yet another modal element that is critical to
    the economic and security well-being of the Nation, and ensure
    that these categories of supporting ground infrastructure are
    included in the Nation's infrastructure investment planning.
        We urge Congress to authorize and fund a program aimed at
    enabling America's space transportation leadership. Such a
    program should be funded on a recurring basis and provide
    assistance to sites with demonstrated need by operational
    activity or market demand to advance objectives of national
    strategy.
        In 2018, the FAA chartered an Aviation Rulemaking Committee
    to provide input on streamlined regulations for commercial
    space transportation. Space Florida was honored to participate.
    While our industry continues to evaluate how the revised
    regulations will affect operations, there still remains much to
    be done.
        We recognize that the FAA must adapt and grow its workforce
    to meet evolutionary regulatory changes. I want to commend the
    progress made by Associate Administrator Monteith in
    reorganizing and staffing to respond to these rapidly growing
    industry needs.
        In this context, we believe FAA should focus on protection
    of the uninvolved public, people, and property, outside the
    controlled boundaries of a Federal, State, or private launch
    site. Launch site operators could assume greater responsibility
    for regulating activities of spaceport personnel both directly
    and not directly participating in the licensed activity,
    allowing greater FAA attention to the public outside the
    spaceport fence line.
        Continued U.S. leadership depends on a regulatory structure
    that achieves public safety, while remaining flexible, to
    enable new technologies and operational approaches that advance
    U.S. capabilities.
        I urge this committee to ensure that FAA engages in this
    unique industry in future rulemaking early and often, so that
    companies most knowledgeable about risks and the technologies
    involved can help inform development of FAA rules that both
    regulators and operators will live and succeed by.
        Thank you again for the opportunity. I look forward to your
    questions.
        [Mr. DiBello's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Frank DiBello, President and Chief Executive
                             Officer, Space Florida
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished members
    of the subcommittee, thank you for the invitation to testify before you
    today. I am honored to appear alongside my esteemed industry
    colleagues, to share with you a Florida perspective on this topic of
    crucial importance to our nation's leadership in space transportation.
    I applaud your leadership and willingness to examine a broad range of
    issues regarding the role of the FAA in regulating and enabling space
    transportation, and the importance of smart investments by all in
    growing the U.S. space transportation infrastructure to compete
    successfully in this global enterprise--an enterprise exceeding $400
    Billion in annual revenues.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Space Report 2020: The Authoritative Guide to Global Space
    Activity, Space Foundation
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Background
        Space Florida is a public corporation and Independent Special
    District of the State of Florida, established by an act of the Florida
    Legislature in 2006 to strengthen Florida's position as a global leader
    in aerospace research, investment, exploration, and commerce \2\. To
    that end, it is the intent of the Legislature that Space Florida serve
    as the single point of contact for state aerospace-related activities
    with federal and state agencies, the military, and the private sector.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Chapter 331, Part II Florida Statutes
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As Florida's aerospace industry development organization, we are
    committed to attracting and expanding the next generation of space
    industry businesses. Our team fosters the growth of a sustainable and
    world-leading aerospace industry in Florida, and supports the
    development of the Cape Canaveral Spaceport and other spaceport
    territories around the state. We accomplish this mission by
    implementing strategies and utilizing financial and other development
    tools designed to foster the growth of Florida's aerospace industry:
        Developing a master plan for growth and development of the
    Cape Canaveral Spaceport, and a statewide spaceports systems plan to
    guide development of a network of commercial spaceports and the
    supporting freight, logistics and supply chain infrastructure around
    Florida
        Partnering with NASA and the U.S. Space Force to make
    underutilized federal assets or assets no longer needed for mission
    purposes at Kennedy Space Center and Cape Canaveral Space Force Station
    available to commercial customers of the Cape Canaveral Spaceport
        Supporting infrastructure development to enable growth of
    commercial space companies at the Florida spaceports, aided by Florida
    Department of Transportation's Spaceport Improvement Program
    infrastructure funding
        Providing appropriate financing structures to enable growth
    of aerospace companies around Florida by constructing new facilities
    and acquiring machinery and equipment
        Increasing capital sources available to growing Florida
    aerospace companies through capital acceleration events conducted with
    the Florida Venture Forum and other financial institutions
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      Map of Cape Canaveral Spaceport tenants, with Space Coast Regional
                      Spaceport and Cecil Spaceport inset

    Florida's Place in 21st Century Commercial Space Transportation and the
                                   FAA's Role
        Florida was where the nation entered the global commercial market
    for space transportation, beginning with the Government's launching of
    the earliest commercial telecommunications satellites. In 1998,
    Spaceport Florida's Cape Canaveral Spaceport launch site was used for
    the first launch from an FAA-licensed, state-operated site.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation database of
    licensed launches; 2017 Cape Canaveral Spaceport Master Plan
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Today, Florida hosts four of the FAA's 12 licensed commercial
    spaceports \4\ and a corresponding majority of the launch licensing
    demand on the FAA. Of the licensed U.S. launches thus far this year,
    nearly 60% lifted off from privately developed and operated facilities
    at the Cape Canaveral Spaceport \5\, the state's statutory designation
    of the territory comprised of the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station
    and the Kennedy Space Center \6\. Since the beginning of the FAA launch
    licensing program in 1989, Florida has accounted for more than half of
    this launch activity \7\. Landings are also becoming commonplace,
    adding to the activity at the spaceport.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ FAA Office of Spaceports
        \5\ FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation database of
    licensed launches
        \6\ Chapter 331, Sec. 304 (1), Part II Florida Statutes
        \7\ FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation database of
    licensed launches
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        It should be apparent then why Florida designated space
    transportation as a distinct modal element of its statewide Strategic
    Intermodal System, almost two decades ago. Space transportation is
    critical to our state and our country's inter-connected networks of
    air, maritime, and surface transportation. Just over the past six
    months, launches from the Cape have demonstrated a capability of
    lifting nearly 400 metric tons \8\ of cargo into space. This may not
    seem like a lot of freight to the experts who are familiar with the
    metrics of U.S. seaport shipping, domestic air freight movement, or the
    volume of cargo hauled across our National Highway System. But this
    concentration of space launch capacity, all enabled by a growing fleet
    of commercially owned and operated U.S. launch providers, is unmatched
    anywhere else on the planet. It offers America a significant advantage
    as the international competition for economic and military dominance in
    space accelerates.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ 45th Space Launch Delta manifest; commercial launch provider
    vehicle payload capacity
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The launch cadence has increased dramatically over the last few
    years, with 20 launches in the last six months and 24 additional
    launches projected by the end of the year. 50+ launches a year for
    Florida will become the norm, with future projections far exceeding
    that number \9\. Yet, this is still an emerging industry, and requires
    care in allowing new systems entering the market to operate with a
    flexible regulatory framework. Accordingly, the FAA's challenge in
    effectively applying this framework and meeting an increasing cadence
    is placing new demands on its human and technical resources. Further,
    despite the efforts of the FAA and the other installation owners at the
    U.S. Eastern Range, not all overlapping and duplicative rule sets have
    been eliminated. While these streamlining efforts are continuing, as
    long as duplication and overlap continues, there will be an unnecessary
    burden on all parties, burden that does nothing to enhance public
    safety.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ 45th Space Launch Delta launch data and forecast
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With Florida's increasing share of FAA licensing activity, coupled
    with the heavily-used domestic and international air traffic corridors
    along our coast, Space Florida urges an increased FAA effort in
    technology development and deployment to advance the safe and efficient
    integration of routine space transportation with commercial aviation.
    Florida is already providing an operational environment where industry
    working with FAA can identify and mature improvements to existing
    systems and procedures. We are eager to support further FAA focus in
    this area.
     Commercial Space Transportation Infrastructure: Role of USDOT and the
                                      FAA
        The final Space Shuttle launch took place 10 years ago this July.
    In the past decade, there have been more launches of commercially owned
    and operated launch vehicles than there were Space Shuttle launches
    during that 30-year program. This commercial success has been enabled
    by more than $1.5 Billion in commercial spaceport investment by Florida
    and its industry partners \10\. This investment has produced a
    landscape of new and redeveloped launch complexes on sites once used
    for Government systems. It has also brought new manufacturing and
    support facilities operated by or for the commercial providers and
    customers.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Florida Department of Transportation/Space Florida rollup of
    34 major projects funded with over $312 million from Florida's
    Spaceport Improvement Program combined with over $1.26 billion in
    private contribution from industry participants in the program since
    July 2011 (FY 2012). Does not include more than $450 million in Space
    Florida-facilitated private financing for commercial spaceport
    investments prior to the end of 2012.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Cape Canaveral Spaceport has emerged as the world's busiest
    commercial spaceport. This success validates the wisdom of a national
    space policy that promotes the participation of state governments to
    facilitate private sector investment and operation of space
    transportation infrastructure. States are powerful tools, with unique
    capabilities not found in federal agencies. To meet the challenge of
    assuring US leadership in the commercial marketplace, in exploration,
    and in national security space, this nation must bring all of its
    capacity to the contest. The metrics of commercial launch activity in
    Florida highlight the space mission outcomes of that policy: more than
    two dozen missions to the International Space Station, including the
    return of U.S. human spaceflight from American soil; hundreds of
    satellites serving global user markets for telecommunications,
    navigation, and other services; and new capabilities and services in
    support of NASA, U.S. Space Force, and international demand for space
    access.
        The 2013 National Space Transportation Policy, which remains in
    place, directs federal agencies to facilitate access to the launch
    property on its ranges, purchase and use U.S. commercial space
    transportation capabilities and services, and refrain from activities
    that preclude, discourage, or compete with U.S. commercial space
    transportation activities \11\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ National Space Transportation Policy, 2013. Accessed through
    the Department of Commerce
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While these policies have been very successful in renewing
    America's space launch capacity with commercial capabilities, the
    common use infrastructure that is vital to connecting these
    capabilities to the required support infrastructure has not kept up at
    the Cape and other locations around the country. Much of the property
    is still owned and operated in large measure by the Government, or by
    other public entities. The US Government should consider enabling the
    private partnership redevelopment of infrastructure at individual sites
    it no longer needs, upkeep of aging road and utility networks, and
    development of increased commodities and services needed for these
    commercial providers.
        It is time for a strategic and effective infrastructure policy and
    program to grow the nation's commercial space transportation system.
    The U.S. Department of Transportation and the FAA should embrace space
    transportation as another modal element critical to the well-being of
    the nation's economy by including space transportation in the nation's
    infrastructure investments.
        Space Florida was a successful applicant for a USDOT $90 million
    Infrastructure for Rebuilding America (INFRA) Grant to enable the
    replacement of NASA's failing 1964 bridge over the Indian River \12\, a
    primary surface transportation route used to transport both freight and
    people to the entire Cape Canaveral Spaceport. Florida's Department of
    Transportation and Space Florida are providing the non-federal match
    for this new asset as well as a connector highway to Space Florida's
    space commerce park located on NASA property.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ INFRA Grant Award, announced July 25, 2019 by the US
    Department of Transportation
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We join with many of our colleagues in the commercial space
    transportation industry--licensed commercial spaceports and operators,
    including those using their own private sites--in calling on the
    Congress to authorize and fund an infrastructure program aimed at
    enabling America's space transportation leadership. We believe such a
    program should be adequately funded on a recurring annual basis,
    prioritize grant funding for sites where there is a demonstrated need
    by operational activity or clear market demand, and advance the
    objectives of a national strategy. Florida has employed such approaches
    in its own Spaceport Improvement Program. We would be happy to lend our
    experience and discuss this further with the Committee if helpful.
        In reviewing the GAO report on commercial space transportation
    infrastructure \13\, we agree with its findings that a broader
    consideration of approaches and funding sources other than those
    existing programs initially identified by the FAA is not only
    appropriate and timely, but necessary for the U.S. to sustain its
    leadership.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ Commercial Space Transportation: FAA Should Examine a Range of
    Options to Support U.S. Launch Infrastructure, GAO report 21-154,
    released December 22, 2020
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Why FAA's Role in Assuring Public Safety for People and Property Must
                                  Be Retooled
        Just as we concur with the GAO's findings regarding the FAA's need
    to find new approaches to enabling infrastructure, we also concur with
    its findings that the FAA must adapt and grow its workforce to meet the
    challenges of a dynamic and rapidly expanding space industry. I want to
    acknowledge the progress that has been made by Associate Administrator
    Monteith in reorganizing and staffing to respond to these challenges.
    It is no easy task he has. We know that the successful implementation
    of new performance-based rules, and the ongoing revolution in emerging
    space technologies require the right people with the right skills doing
    the right jobs in the most efficient and effective manner possible.
        The Federal Aviation Administration chartered the Streamlined
    Launch and Reentry Licensing Requirements Aviation Rulemaking Committee
    (ARC) in 2018 to provide a forum to discuss current and potential
    future regulations setting forth procedures and requirements for
    commercial space transportation launch and reentry licensing for the
    FAA's consideration. The FAA tasked the ARC to develop recommendations
    for a performance-based regulatory approach in which the regulations
    state safety objectives to be achieved, and leave design or operational
    solutions up to the applicant. Space Florida was honored to participate
    in this activity. Along with the rest of our industry, we are
    continuing to evaluate how the new Part 450 regulations will affect our
    ability to increase the operational density (geographic proximity) and
    intensity (frequency of operational activity) of space transportation
    operations at the Cape. We are keenly aware that the FAA's elaboration
    on how spaceports and operators may meet the new regulations through
    acceptable means of compliance will depend on the content of many
    Advisory Circulars which still need to be produced.
        We continue to believe, as do many of the commercial operators we
    served on the ARC with, that the FAA should focus its public safety
    efforts on protection of people and property outside the controlled
    boundaries of a federal, state, or private launch site and redefine its
    safety role when it comes to regulating the activities of personnel
    that are not directly participating in a licensed activity, such as
    neighboring operators, or others on a space launch facility. That would
    mean a greater role and responsibility for the site operators to
    mitigate hazard risks to their employees and vendors.
        The competitiveness of the U.S. in the international rivalry for
    space dominance depends on ensuring a regulatory structure that
    achieves its focus on public safety, while retaining the flexibility to
    enable new technologies and operational approaches to advance U.S.
    space transportation capabilities. Rulemaking is a lengthy process with
    long-lasting consequences. It is imperative to hear from all involved
    stakeholders to ensure we can get it right. For all future rulemaking
    and associated regulatory processes, I urge this Committee to ensure
    that the FAA engages with this unique industry early and often, so that
    the companies most knowledgeable about the risks and technologies
    involved can do their best to help inform the development of the FAA
    rules that all, regulators as well as operators, will have to live by.
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. I
    look forward to your questions.

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much, Mr. DiBello.
        I now turn to Captain Joe DePete, president of the Air Line
    Pilots Association, International.
        Captain, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. DePete. Thank you, Chairman Larsen and Ranking Member
    Graves and members of the subcommittee. I am Captain Joe
    DePete, president of the Air Line Pilots Association,
    International, which represents more than 59,000 pilots who fly
    for 35 airlines.
        Now, let me make clear that ALPA supports a safe
    integration of new and expanding users of the national
    airspace, including commercial spaceflight operations. As the
    world's largest nongovernmental aviation safety organization,
    we are equally committed to ensuring that new entrants do not
    create new risks.
        U.S. air transportation is the safest in the world, and
    this subcommittee's leadership is among the reasons why.
    Another reason is the highly unionized U.S. aviation workforce
    that has put safety first over the past century of flight.
        As ALPA celebrates our 90th anniversary, we recognize our
    responsibility to share the lessons pilots have learned and
    make certain that the United States continues to put safety
    first in the national airspace, a critical component of U.S.
    transportation infrastructure.
        The FAA forecasts an increase in U.S. launch activities by
    as much as 100 percent by 2025. In response, the FAA must build
    upon a pattern of collaboration by the aviation and aerospace
    sectors.
        For years, ALPA has facilitated data sharing between the
    aviation and aerospace industries. For example, ALPA and the
    Commercial Spaceflight Federation held a 2019 symposium that
    culminated in a joint statement affirming that both sectors
    would work towards a common goal. ALPA believes, now more than
    ever, that the FAA, industry, and labor can work together to
    create a national space integration strategy.
        In 2018, ALPA issued a white paper that called for such a
    strategy to include establishing a proactive, risk-predictive
    safety culture in spaceflight operations through safety
    management systems for manufacturing, operations, and spaceport
    licensing; creating commercial astronaut licensing and training
    standard that align with those of other professionals who
    operate in the national airspace; and developing orbital debris
    reentry standards for planned and unplanned reentries that
    could affect public safety.
        To that end, I would like to state ALPA's support for the
    Aerospace Debris Safety Act. A national strategy will enable
    all airspace users to create a shared mental model for the
    future. In the meantime, the FAA can enhance collaboration,
    without additional funding or authorization, by creating an
    advisory structure that brings together commercial space,
    drone, and aviation operators, which all use the airspace but
    currently provide input separately.
        By creating a national integration strategy, the FAA will
    also reduce emissions. We urge the FAA to renew and review
    launch and mission standards and consider lower emission fuels.
        As the United States continues to segregate rather than
    integrate commercial space, we needlessly increase emissions
    during launches by forcing aircraft to fly around segregated
    airspace or wait until it reopens. Right now, airline pilots
    already face operational issues involving spaceflight, as
    recently demonstrated by uncontrolled space debris reentry
    events.
        We believe the FAA must take actions, including
    establishing launch planning and recovery standards, creating
    standards to make certain that very large pieces of space
    debris reenter at a predefined location and time, and requiring
    notification of pilots, airlines, and controllers not directly
    involved in a space launch about the risk level changes in that
    airspace.
        ALPA recognizes that uncontrolled space debris reentry is,
    of course, a global safety issue, and we recently sent a letter
    to the ICAO Secretary General, calling for international
    actions to be taken.
        As we consider the promise but also the challenges of
    increased spaceflight, the aviation and aerospace sectors have
    a proven model to follow to ensure safety. Through the
    Commercial Aviation Safety Team, labor, airlines,
    manufacturers, industry, and the FAA have collaborated to
    address risk in aviation with remarkable success. A similar
    data-driven, risk-based construct will help create a proactive
    safety culture for commercial spaceflight as well.
        Thank you for the subcommittee's recognition of the crucial
    role airline pilots play in maintaining the safety of air
    transportation as we continue to drive the U.S. public health
    and economic recovery, keep supply chains open, and safely
    transport our passengers.
        Thank you very much for the opportunity today.
        [Mr. DePete's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Captain Joseph G. DePete, President, Air Line
                       Pilots Association, International
        On behalf of the Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA),
    I want to thank you, Chairman Larsen and Ranking Member Graves, for
    inviting me to testify on the very important role that the Federal
    Aviation Administration (FAA) has in the future of spaceflight. My name
    is Captain Joe DePete, and I serve as the president of ALPA. ALPA is
    the largest airline pilot union in the world, as well as the largest
    nongovernmental aviation safety organization in the world, with a
    history of safety advocacy spanning more than 90 years.
        ALPA's focus on spaceflight operational integration has been
    ongoing for more than five years and our primary focus is on ensuring
    that no new risks to airline operations are introduced by space
    operations. Based on recent events, there is a lot of work that needs
    to be done very quickly by the FAA in cooperation with other parts of
    government to ensure that the skies occupied by airline traffic remain
    safe, as the frequency of commercial space operations continue to
    climb.
                  Collaboration with Commercial Space Industry
        ALPA is a tremendous supporter of our Nation's commercial space
    industry. I am proud of the role that we have had in increasing
    collaboration that has occurred between the space and airline industry
    stakeholders. ALPA has worked particularly hard to reach across the
    aisle and engage in meaningful discussions with the commercial space
    industry members represented by the Commercial Spaceflight Federation
    (CSF). We have also worked to bring other aviation industry
    representatives into the discussion. Our interactions were brought onto
    a more public stage in October of 2019, when ALPA and the CSF jointly
    held a 1-day symposium called Safe Skies for All: Introducing
    Spaceflight Into Our Skies. The culmination of that day was a joint
    statement on the need to collaborate and work as two separate
    industries towards a common goal. We said:

            ALPA and CSF vow to continue to work together to improve the
            commercial aviation and space community's understanding of each
            other's technologies, operations, and constraints; to explore
            potential solutions to conflicting demands for airspace; and to
            advocate for optimized use of airspace around launch and
            reentry activities. We agree that the status quo cannot
            continue and the private sector must help the FAA innovate to
            minimize any negative impacts of the growing commercial
            aviation and space industries. As leaders of our respective
            industries, ALPA and CSF have taken cooperative action to solve
            these problems. We're working with colleagues and other key
            stakeholders to improve how we operate today, as well as
            advocating for investments in new air traffic control tools
            that will better optimize airspace while preserving safety as
            we enjoy future growth in both air and space transportation.

        It is with this continued spirit of collaboration that I sit here
    today and share with you, our thoughts on the FAA's role in the future
    of commercial spaceflight.
                    Space Launch Activities Forecast to Rise
        During the 2020 global pandemic, the FAA continued to approve
    commercial space launches, most of which depart and fly over oceanic
    airspace. However, domestic sub-orbital launches are expected to
    commence in the near future and each launch will require the FAA to
    protect large swaths of airspace just in case a space operation fails
    to achieve its planned operation.
        The rate of rocket launch activities is accelerating. Worldwide,
    the number of space launches increased by 54%, from 74 launches in 2010
    to 114 launches in calendar year 2020 \1\. This trend is expected to
    continue through the 2020s, with the FAA Office of Commercial Space
    forecasting a further increase between 36% to 100% in the U.S. alone by
    the fiscal year 2025. Industry estimates are even higher with a fiscal
    year 2025 growth of 177% over 2020 \2\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.spacelaunchreport.com/logyear.html
        \2\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/
    media/Commercial_Space.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I would like to discuss three areas with you today. From an airline
    pilot perspective, they are the three most pressing safety issues that
    need to be addressed by the FAA. I believe that it is very important
    that the FAA take both strategic and tactical leadership actions on
    these critical safety concerns.
           A Systematic Space Integration Strategy Is [Still] Needed
        In our 2018 white paper, Addressing the Challenges to Aviation from
    Evolving Space Transportation, we highlighted the numerous challenges
    that the tremendous growth in commercial space operations will present
    to the nation, including space operator approval, spaceport licensing,
    regulations for spacecraft crew and participants, spacecraft design
    standards, and other critical areas. It is ALPA's belief that the
    number of commercial space launches and recoveries will rapidly
    escalate in the next ten years, and that the U.S. will lead by example
    in successful commercial space operations that are safely-integrated
    with the commercial aviation industry. Our carefully chosen words at
    that time still ring true today:

            The FAA needs a comprehensive plan to integrate commercial
            space operations and avoid major disruptions for the other
            users of the NAS as the demand for access to the NAS for
            commercial space operations increases. As commercial space
            operations increase, and as the commercial space operations
            locations continue to expand . . . [there is a need] to reduce
            NAS impacts while maintaining a high level of safety. At some
            point, segregation of commercial aviation operations from
            commercial space operations will not be a viable solution.

        In the years that have passed since ALPA penned those words, we
    have seen some progress in the most publicly visible ``pain point'' for
    the traveling public: launch induced delays. We have seen the space
    industry and the FAA work to create systems and procedures to better
    disseminate information for air traffic controllers and airline
    operations centers, and we have seen a high degree of launch vehicle
    performance and reliability as American astronauts have resumed their
    travel on American rockets. All of these positive steps are evidence of
    continuous improvements of spaceflight accommodation. However, ALPA has
    not seen any of the much needed steps by the FAA, to start the
    integration process. We believe that now more than ever, a
    comprehensive strategy is needed, so that we do not lose sight of the
    ultimate goal. Areas that must be addressed in this strategy, include:
        A comprehensive system safety performance framework
    including both hardware and software standards designed for normal and
    non-normal operations.
        Safety Management System for manufacturing, operations, and
    spaceport licensing.
        A comprehensive plan for airspace management coordination
    tools and capabilities
        Orbital debris reentry standards as well as a comprehensive
    plan for when orbital debris may impact aviation operations.
        Astronaut licensing, training and recurrency standards
    associated with the operation in the National Airspace System

        We are concerned that without a strategy, safety risks may either
    be under-rated or unidentified altogether. However, it is important to
    note that we are not asking the FAA to regulate the Commercial Space
    industry as if they are starting from square one or to dramatically
    impose severe constraints. The industry is very successful at what they
    do, and each successful rocket launch proves this point. Instead, we
    are encouraging all stakeholders to jointly develop and define a goal
    for the future and then ensure that each decision point made along the
    way is consistent with that envisioned operational future. If we do not
    have a common goal in mind, and if it is not a shared goal, then we
    cannot create a shared mental model of the various strategies that we
    can collectively and individually use to reach the envisioned level of
    safety with full operational integration.
                 Creating a Shared Mental Model on Integration
        There is another aspect of strategic thinking that I know the FAA
    can immediately implement, without any funding or authorization:
    Establish an overarching integration advisory structure. I realize that
    we are discussing the topic of space operations today. However, I
    believe that the FAA needs to hear from the breadth of our Nation's
    airspace operators from a single vantage point on integration of all
    types of aircraft and spacecraft. I also believe that the aviation and
    space segments need to create a ``shared mental model'' where there is
    broad agreement on how the airspace will be used in the future. But we
    cannot create a shared mental model if we do not get all of the players
    together, along with the FAA, at the same table.
        It strikes me as odd that the FAA's various operational advisory
    committees do not interact with each other. They are by definition,
    segregated. This segregation into narrow focus areas includes
    commercial space, drones and aviation. Each industry segment has their
    respective advisory committee including the Commercial Space
    Transportation Advisory Committee (COMSTAC), the Drone Advisory
    Committee (DAC), and the NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC). However
    these segregated committees never interact, or step back to see how
    their needs affect other airspace operators. We need de-segregation of
    the airspace user community.
        If the FAA were to establish a broader integration committee, it
    would also mean that they should cross-pollinate the commercial space
    industry into mainstream aviation industry advisory committees. I will
    forever remember my first visit to the Commercial Space Transportation
    Advisory Committee (COMSTAC) meeting in the gallery as a member of the
    public. At that meeting I took the opportunity to share my belief that
    we are stronger working together than we are working independently. I
    shared my passion for a proactive safety risk mitigation philosophy
    instead of the reactive or forensic based safety advancement model. I
    was able to share the facts about how much safer the airline industry
    has become with proactive, data-driven safety risk analysis. I was very
    excited when multiple COMSTAC members engaged in a discussion that was
    neither scheduled nor scripted. We took the time to collaborate and
    began developing a common understanding of each industries airspace
    needs and safety requirements. That left a very distinct feeling of
    hope and optimism that someday we will all be working together to
    achieve incredible results that are mutually beneficial to all
    Americans now matter what their airspace needs would be.
        In my time serving as ALPA president and before that, as First Vice
    President and National Safety Coordinator I have had the privilege of
    serving on numerous Federal Advisory Committees and I fully support an
    integrated group of stakeholders who jointly need to be tasked by the
    FAA to provide valuable feedback on important safety and operational
    topics relevant to all airspace users. It's our recommendation that the
    FAA:
        Identify a means by which to obtain an integrated set of
    industry recommendations on how to successfully achieve future
    operations.
        Review the structure of the current committees and find a
    way to develop recommendations with an underlying assumption that the
    FAA will continue to oversee the operations of all aircraft and
    spacecraft in the National Airspace System (NAS), which will continue
    to be a national resource to be shared by all.
        Seek input on a consensus based strategic plan with a
    target date for commercial space integration that allows the Commercial
    Space operators to ``file and fly'' without segregation / sterilization
    of airspace areas.

        I believe that these strategic steps are the right steps for the
    FAA to take in support of the future of our country and our country's
    airspace system.
                         Focus on Environmental Impact
        It should not need to be said, that there is critical work to be
    done immediately to limit the environmental impact from commercial
    space operations. While the focus on environmental impact may not have
    been considered a significant concern in the past when space operations
    were less frequent, the increased frequency of the launches today
    dictates a necessity to address the environmental impacts associated
    with commercial space launches. Many rocket launches utilize fossil
    fuels, and the carbon emissions from a rocket launch are easily
    measurable. They can be reduced through an increased focus on
    environmental impacts. With rocket launches combined with the added
    fuel burn required by aircraft due to flight diversions around airspace
    designated for rocket launches, the total impact of space operations
    should be recognized and address as part of the FAA's focus going
    forward. Developing alternative fuel strategies in addition to
    developing and implementing the Commercial Space integration strategy
    as quickly as possible is critical. We must not allow any airspace user
    to be given a ``hall pass'' on this important topic.
                               Near-Term Concerns
        In addition to the strategic activities that we believe the FAA
    should be fostering, I would also like to take a few minutes and
    highlight real-world examples of operational issues that airline pilots
    must contend with today, that have not been an issue until relatively
    recently.
                      Uncontrolled Rocket Re-Entry Events
        Two recent uncontrolled and unscheduled space debris re-entry
    events have exposed a troubling trend. The events include a March 25,
    2021 Space-X Falcon 9 second stage re-entry over the Northwestern
    United States and Southwestern Canada, and a Long March CZ-5B-Y1 rocket
    on May 9, 2021, in the Indian Ocean. In the span of just 45 days, many
    tons of rocket components have re-entered the atmosphere as out-of-
    control space debris, putting many lives at risk. This includes those
    lives that were in-flight on airline aircraft and were likely unaware
    of the potential danger that they might encounter. Only after the re-
    entry had occurred, did the real safety threat become much more
    obvious.
        In the case of the Space-X re-entry, we know that the second stage
    did not have sufficient propellant left to have a controlled de-orbit,
    and therefore Space-X lost control of the booster, which was left
    orbiting the earth for weeks (not hours or days) before its re-entry.
    There was ample time to evaluate and plan for any potential risks
    resulting from the unplanned re-entry. Despite the second stage design
    to minimize debris, several components did survive re-entry and
    impacted the ground.
        In the days following the March 25 re-entry, several pieces of the
    Space-X second stage were recovered, and some of them reportedly
    weighed upwards of 300 pounds (136.7 kg). We are unaware of any
    warnings or cautions issued by Space X, or either of the Air Navigation
    Service Providers (ANSPs) in the U.S. or Canada, once it was known that
    the re-entry could occur in continental U.S. and Canadian airspace. We
    are also unaware of any warnings issued by public safety agencies to
    generally alert the global aviation community in advance of the event.
        The second re-entry event involved a Long March CZ-5B-Y1 rocket,
    which was among the 10 largest pieces of human-made space debris to
    ever re-enter the earth's atmosphere. The rocket booster re-entered
    over the Indian Ocean approximately 50 minutes earlier than the final
    prediction provided by The Aerospace Corporation. If it had re-entered
    15 minutes later than predicted, it would have occurred over central
    Florida. If re-entry had occurred 105 minutes later than predicted, it
    would have been over Washington, DC, and much of the continental U.S.
    in the moments before that.
        In May 2020, a similar Long March CZ-5B-Y1 rocket also re-entered
    the atmosphere and like the Space-X Falcon 9, some of the booster
    components fell all the way to the ground, within the Republic of Cote
    d'Ivoire. Publicly available news reports indicate that another CZ-5B-
    Y1 booster will be used in the near future, and a re-entry event like
    the May 9 event will occur again.
        Publicly, news agencies and experts report that this rocket booster
    is not equipped with the capability to ensure that its re-entry can be
    controlled, or even accurately predicted.
        The airline industry long ago realized that the ``big sky theory''
    was not an acceptable collision risk mitigation strategy, and yet there
    seems to be an ongoing view that the ``big sky theory'' is an
    acceptable risk for space debris re-entry. The problem becomes even
    more apparent when looking at the forecast for increased future
    launches.
        Thus, the two uncontrolled re-entry events and the risk they pose
    to aviation are noteworthy, given the strong safety record the airline
    industry in the U.S. has worked so hard to achieve. Although neither
    event created an aviation or ground-related casualty, several issues
    have been identified by ALPA that we believe are a global threat to
    aviation safety and need to be addressed by the FAA.
        The need for standards for launch planning and recovery, as
    well as risk mitigation, should unplanned events occur during the
    launch and recovery.
        The need for standards for space debris that at a minimum,
    includes ``design for demise'' requirements, as well as vehicle design
    requirements to ensure that very large pieces of space debris are
    controllable enough to ensure that the re-entry occurs at a pre-defined
    location and time.
        The FAA and their government agency partners need to
    greatly increase information dissemination before and during re-entry
    events, so that aviation operations have adequate advance notice, as
    well as ongoing updates on the re-entry data as it becomes available.
    Even if there are ``design to demise'' plans in place, the risk of an
    unanticipated space debris reentry needs to be communicated. If
    necessary, the FAA air traffic control should direct pilots away from
    possible areas at risk to collisions from components that are falling
    through the airspace, during the re-entry.

        It is important to recognize that this is not just an issue that we
    must face as a Nation, it is a global issue. Therefore, last month I
    sent an urgent letter of request to the ICAO Secretary General with
    many of these same facts and concerns, and I asked the Secretary
    General to begin work immediately to address the global risks to
    passengers and flight crews from space debris reentry. I continue to
    anxiously wait for a response. A copy of the letter is included at the
    end of my statement.
          Elevated Levels of Risk in the Vicinity of Space Operations
        As discussed earlier, prior to each rocket launch, the FAA air
    traffic controllers work to clear the airspace in the vicinity of the
    launch pad and under the rocket's planned flight path to orbit. The
    airspace is also sterilized for any of the boosters that return to
    earth, as part of the rocket operation. The size and duration of the
    airspace is relative to the size and complexity of each rocket launch
    operation.
        The FAA has recently implemented an airspace risk mitigation
    procedure called Acceptable Level of Risk (ALR) \3\. In the simplest of
    terms, ALR reduces the volume of airspace that is segregated based on
    the results of mathematical risk analysis, which shows that risks of
    exposure to a rocket mishap is acceptable based on the time an aircraft
    will operate in areas of higher risk and potentially be exposed to
    rocket debris. While this is not a secret policy change, the FAA does
    not sufficiently notify pilots, airlines, or controllers not directly
    involved in a space launch of these changes in risk levels of airspace
    near the rocket launches, rocket reentry, launch trajectory zones, or
    of off-nominal events. Additionally, the FAA does not provide pilots or
    dispatchers with maps, coordinates or other details about the ALR
    airspace zones in which there is a reduced level of safety.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ For a description of the FAA ALR see the document at the
    following web link: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
    handbooks_manuals/aviation/risk_management/media/2018-04-27-
    FAASRMGuidance-ALR_signed_508.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ALPA has raised questions and have expressed concerns on numerous
    occasions, about the lack of information disseminated to line pilots
    about ALR operations, and the increased level of risk that pilots are
    being asked to accept, most of the time unbeknown to them. ALPA
    believes operators of the NAS (pilots and controllers) need to be
    provided with ALR related information prior to every flight that will
    be exposed to ALR operations, and we believe that the FAA needs to
    publish clear guidance on the ALR operations so that pilots can make an
    informed decision about their flight's exposure to the ALR airspace
    area. ALPA recommends that the FAA:
        Develop and distribute educational materials, as well as
    update the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM) explaining the ALR
    concept, the risks that the FAA has identified when operating in the
    ALR airspace and describe the type of air traffic control services
    available to pilots should the need arise. The FAA should also include
    instructions on how pilots can elect to avoid the ALR airspace if they
    prefer.
        For each rocket launch that utilizes ALR airspace risk
    mitigation procedures, publish Notices to Airmen with graphical
    depictions and information that can be displayed on a map, of the ALR
    airspace area that includes relevant navigation airways and waypoints,
    so that pilots, dispatchers, and airlines can evaluate the risks to
    their flight, by understanding the size, location and duration of the
    time they are operating in ALR airspace.
        Ensure that air traffic controllers have adequate tools and
    capabilities to provide flight crews with air traffic services for all
    operations in the vicinity of rocket launches, reentries, and during
    off-nominal events.

        I often refer to ALPA members as ``front line workers.'' Whether
    they are working day-in and day-out during a global pandemic and the
    risks to their heath during their work day, or whether they are flying
    in ALR airspace or in a portion of the sky where there is the potential
    for rocket debris re-entering the atmosphere above them, airline pilots
    are continuously focused on ensuring that their passengers, cabin crew
    members, and cargo reach their destination safely. However, ALPA pilots
    are not alone in this effort to achieve the highest levels of safety.
    Instead, airline pilots rely on air traffic controllers, dispatchers
    and our fellow crew members in the cabin to help us safely complete
    each and every flight. The need for information dissemination across
    all of these worker groups is critical, and until we have a solid
    framework in place to ensure every user of the airspace is aware of the
    risks of a space debris reentry, and understands ALR operations and
    their expected roles, we believe that the FAA has important steps to
    take immediately. We should not be allowing any airspace operator to be
    unaware of either of these very important safety issues.
                                   Conclusion
        The level of safety that the traveling public has come to expect
    cannot be maintained in the future world where rocket launches are
    expected to be a frequent occurrence across our great nation, without a
    strategy to get us there. It's a very important step to take. But while
    we work on that strategy, we urgently need to work on the exchange and
    dissemination of what I would consider to be mission-critical
    operational information. The uncontrollable re-entry of a large piece
    of space debris into the atmosphere over domestic airspace, and the ALR
    airspace concept are two very appropriate examples of the type of
    information that would be very beneficial to pilots who are striving to
    complete their safety mission.
        ALPA stands by as a committed, willing partner as we continue to
    chart a path on these very important topics into the future. We
    appreciate your recognition of the unique and critical role played by
    pilots and all airline workers to safely maintain our air
    transportation system, support our national economy, and position both
    the aviation and the space industry for seamless operations in the
    future. Along with these suggestions, please accept our offer to
    provide the necessary personnel from ALPA to assist the FAA in these
    activities. I firmly believe that the FAA is well-positioned to
    immediately address the issues. I stand firm in the belief that through
    collaboration and a common goal to achieve the highest possible safety
    levels, that the space community and the aviation community can rise
    above the challenges we are currently facing to the benefit of all
    humanity. Thank you for your continued oversight of this very important
    topic.
                                   attachment
                                                          May 14, 2021.
    Dr. Fang Liu,
    Secretary General,
    International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), 999 Robert-Bourassa
            Boulevard, Montreal, Quebec H3C 5H7 Canada.
        Dear Secretary-General Liu:
        The Air Line Pilots Association, International (ALPA), representing
    the safety interests of over 59,000 professional airline pilots flying
    for 35 airlines in the United States (U.S.) and Canada, has closely
    monitored the rapid increase in global space operations. Our focus on
    space flight operational integration has been ongoing for more than
    five years and our concerns are primarily focused on ensuring that no
    new risks to airline operations are introduced by space operations.
    Based on recent events, we believe that there is a lot of work that
    needs to be done very quickly and I ask that International Civil
    Aviation Organization (ICAO) take leadership on this critical safety
    concern.
        Two recent uncontrolled and unscheduled space debris re-entry
    events have exposed a major risk. The events include a March 25, 2021
    Space-X Falcon 9 second stage re-entry over the Northwestern United
    States and Southwestern Canada, and a CZ-5B-Y1 rocket on May 9, 2021,
    in the Indian Ocean. In the span of just 45 days, many tons of rocket
    components have re-entered the atmosphere as out-of-control space
    debris, putting many lives at risk. This includes those lives that were
    in-flight on airline aircraft and were likely unaware of the potential
    danger that they might encounter. Only after the re-entry had occurred,
    did the real safety threat become much more obvious.
        In the case of the Space-X re-entry, we know that the second stage
    encountered a mechanical difficulty and was adrift, orbiting the earth
    for weeks before its re-entry. There was ample time to evaluate and
    plan for any potential risks resulting from the unplanned re-entry.
    Despite the second stage design to minimize debris, several components
    of the Falcon 9 did survive re-entry and impacted the ground.
        In the days following the March 25 re-entry, several pieces of the
    Space-X second stage were recovered, and some of them reportedly
    weighed upwards of 300 pounds (136.7 kg). We are unaware of any
    warnings or cautions issued by Space X, or either of the Air Navigation
    Service Providers (ANSPs) in the U.S. or Canada, once it was known that
    the re-entry would occur in continental U.S. and Canadian airspace. We
    are also unaware of any warnings issued by public safety agencies to
    generally alert the global aviation community in advance of the event.
        The second re-entry event involved a CZ-5B-Y1 rocket, which was
    among the 10 largest pieces of human-made space debris to re-enter the
    earth's atmosphere. The rocket booster re-entered over the Indian Ocean
    approximately 50 minutes earlier than the final prediction provided by
    The Aerospace Corporation. If it had re-entered 15 minutes later than
    predicted, it would have occurred over central Florida. If re-entry had
    occurred 105 minutes later than predicted, it would have been over
    Washington, DC, and much of the continental U.S. in the moments before
    that.
        In May 2020, a CZ-58-Y1 rocket also re-entered the atmosphere and
    like the Space-X Falcon 9, some of the booster components fell all the
    way to the ground, within the Republic of Cote d'Ivoire. Publicly
    available news reports indicate that another CZ-5B-Y1 booster will be
    used in the near future, and a re-entry event like the May 9 event will
    occur again. Publicly, news agencies and experts report that this
    rocket booster is not equipped with the capability to ensure that its
    re-entry can be controlled, or even accurately predicted.
        The airline industry long ago realized that the ``big sky theory''
    was not an acceptable collision risk mitigation strategy, and yet there
    seems to be an ongoing view that the ``big sky theory'' is an
    acceptable level of risk for space debris re-entry. The problem becomes
    even more apparent when looking at the forecast for future launches.
    Worldwide, the number of space launches increased by 54%, from 74
    launches in 2010 to 114 launches in 2020 \4\. This trend is expected to
    continue through the 2020s, with The U.S. Federal Aviation
    Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space forecasting a further
    increase between 36% to 100% in the U.S. alone by the fiscal year 2025.
    Industry estimates are even higher with a fiscal 2025 growth of 177%
    over 2020 \5\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.spacelaunchreport.com/logyear.html
        \5\ https://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation/aerospace_forecasts/
    media/Commercial_Space.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Thus, the two uncontrolled re-entry events and the risk they pose
    to aviation are noteworthy, given the strong global safety record the
    global aviation industry has worked so hard to achieve. Although
    neither event created an aviation-related casualty, several issues have
    been identified by ALPA that we believe are a global threat to aviation
    safety and need to be addressed by ICAO.
        The need for globally accepted standards for launch
    planning and recovery, as well as risk mitigation, should unplanned
    events occur during the launch and recovery.
        The need for globally accepted standards for space debris
    that at a minimum, includes ``design for demise'' requirements, as well
    as vehicle design requirements to ensure that very large pieces of
    space debris are controllable enough to ensure that the re-entry occurs
    at a pre-defined location and time.
        States need to greatly increase information dissemination
    before and during the re-entry events, so that aviation operations have
    adequate advance notice, as well as ongoing updates on the re-entry
    data as it becomes available. If necessary, actions by ANSPs should be
    taken so that aircraft are cleared from possible areas at risk to
    collisions from components that are falling through the airspace,
    during the re-entry.

        Along with these suggestions, please accept our offer to provide
    the necessary personnel from ALPA to assist you in this activity. I
    firmly believe that ICAO is in the best position to immediately address
    this critical aviation safety issue. I stand firm in the belief that
    through collaboration and a common goal to achieve the highest possible
    safety levels, that the global aviation community can rise above the
    challenges we are currently facing, to the benefit of all humanity. I
    look forward to hearing from you soon.
            Respectfully,
                                        Capt. Joseph G. DePete,
                 President, Air Line Pilots Association, International.

    cc:Captain Jack Netskar, President of IFALPA
    cc:Mr. Juan Carlos Salazar, ICAO Secretary General Effective August 1,
    2021
    cc:Mr. Sean E. Doocey, U.S. Representative to ICAO

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Captain DePete.
        I now want to turn to Mike Moses, president of Virgin
    Galactic.
        Mr. Moses, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Moses. Thank you, Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member
    Graves, Chairman DeFazio, and members of the Aviation
    Subcommittee and staff, for the opportunity to testify to you
    all today.
        I am the president of space missions and safety for Virgin
    Galactic. I joined the company in 2011, following a career at
    NASA, where I worked on the space shuttle program, starting at
    Mission Control in Houston, and then eventually leading shuttle
    processing activities from the Kennedy Space Center.
        My tenure there at NASA gave me perspective, insight, and
    experience for operations planning and safe execution of human
    spaceflight, which is my top responsibility here at Virgin
    Galactic.
        Today, I would like to highlight the important policies
    that apply to Virgin Galactic and the commercial spaceflight
    industry that will help prioritize safety, while promoting
    growth of the industry.
        Virgin Galactic was founded as the world's first commercial
    space line in 2004, with the ambitious mission of flying
    private astronauts to space. Our mission is to open frequent
    access to space, while safely delivering a transformative
    spaceflight experience to our astronauts.
        Our system consists of two vehicles that take off and land
    on a runway rather than a launchpad. The mother ship is a
    purpose-built jet aircraft with the job of carrying the
    spaceship to a launch altitude at 50,000 feet. The spaceship
    launches from there and transports six customers and scientific
    research safely and routinely to space and back.
        Our system is suborbital. So while we do not enter orbit
    around the Earth, our astronauts will experience several
    minutes of weightlessness as they float freely about the cabin,
    taking in the amazing views of Earth.
        We have had three spaceflights so far, most recently last
    month. And our company's North Star is and always will be
    safety, a mindset that we know is shared throughout the
    commercial space sector and by my fellow panelists. In fact, we
    are immensely proud that our latest flight to space from New
    Mexico marks the 400th launch licensed by the FAA, maintaining
    their perfect public safety record.
        The U.S. is a global leader in commercial spaceflight, and
    the industry has indeed seen significant growth in the past
    decade. The success is intentional, made possible by the
    leadership, decisionmaking, and action of the Congress and
    Federal agencies. Policies such as the learning period,
    informed consent, and risk-sharing liability regime have led
    the way for this explosive growth, without compromising safety
    or innovation. Now is the time to build on that solid
    foundation to ensure continued success, particularly as we now
    look to taking humans to space.
        Commercial human spaceflight still is in its infancy. To
    date, we have only had Virgin Galactic's three suborbital
    missions and SpaceX's three human orbital Government missions
    that have flown humans.
        A major step in building upon the foundation was the part
    450 regulations to streamline into a single licensing regime.
    As Virgin Galactic and other companies work through these new
    regulations, we need to have the FAA with the resources
    required to continue its track record of excellent industry
    support in order to address unforeseen issues that may arise
    from this new regime quickly and in a manner that will not
    impact their protection of public safety nor delay commercial
    business.
        On the safety front, the FAA regularly engages industry
    through an advisory committee called COMSTAC. As a current
    member of that committee myself, I am proud to share that we
    work closely with the FAA on the development of voluntary
    industry consensus standards, including those related to human
    spaceflight. One such effort is via ASTM, who are actively
    developing and publishing standards.
        Together, the industry is constantly innovating safety
    systems, designs, and operations. And while all this progress
    is beneficial, as noted earlier, the industry still is in its
    early days, and more time is needed to have informed
    discussions on what regulatory framework should look like in
    the future to support human spaceflight, looking beyond just
    public safety. Extending the learning period would allow these
    discussions to take place in Congress, in partnership with
    industry and the FAA.
        Finally, as this committee is definitely aware, efforts to
    address our Nation's infrastructure and development and
    maintenance are underway, and space must definitely be part of
    that discussion. Protecting and improving that infrastructure
    is critical to life in the 21st century.
        This is an exciting time, not only for Virgin Galactic, but
    for the entire industry, as we mark milestones towards human
    spaceflight. The committee's tireless work and progress on
    aviation and aerospace regulation is imperative and very much
    appreciated. We often call out the innovation that is occurring
    in spaceflight technology, but innovation can and should be
    applied to the policies that shape the sector as well.
        We look forward to continuing to work closely with all of
    you in the pursuit of these highest levels of safety and
    innovation. Thank you for the time, and I am happy to answer
    questions during the Q&A.
        [Mr. Moses' prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Mike Moses, President of Space Missions and
                            Safety, Virgin Galactic
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, members of the Aviation
    Subcommittee and staff, and my fellow panelists, thank you for the
    opportunity to provide testimony for this hearing, ``Starships and
    Stripes Forever--An Examination of the FAA's Role in the Future of
    Spaceflight.''
        I am the President of Space Missions and Safety for Virgin
    Galactic. I joined the company in 2011 following a career at NASA.
    While at NASA I worked as a flight controller on the Shuttle program
    and then later as a Flight Director at NASA Johnson Space Center where
    I led teams of flight controllers in the planning, training, and
    execution of space shuttle missions. Afterwards, I served at the
    Kennedy Space Center as the Launch Integration Manager, leading the
    space shuttle program activities for vehicle processing from landing
    through launch. My tenure at NASA has given me the perspective,
    insight, and experience for operations planning and safe execution of
    human spaceflight which is my top responsibility at Virgin Galactic. I
    am also proud to be currently serving as a member of COMSTAC, the
    Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee, which acts to
    support the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation and the FAA
    Administrator.
        In my testimony today, I'd like to provide an overview of Virgin
    Galactic, our accomplishments, and our future plans. In addition, I
    will discuss current industry regulations, and the future needs of
    those regulations to address continued growth and safety of the
    industry, as well as its role in the global competitiveness our
    industry faces. Specifically, I'll outline how the learning period
    affects our sector, the needs of commercial space integration into the
    airspace system, FAA licensing requirements, our space support
    vehicles, and space infrastructure.
                             About Virgin Galactic
        Virgin Galactic was founded as the world's first commercial
    spaceline in 2004 with the ambitious goal of flying private astronauts
    to space. Founded by Sir Richard Branson, we are a vertically
    integrated U.S. aerospace company headquartered in California and New
    Mexico with a mission of opening access to space to change the world
    for good.
        Our fleet is based on the historic SpaceShipOne vehicle--which was
    the first private space vehicle to safely carry human beings into
    space, which it did in 2004, claiming the Ansari X PRIZE. Virgin
    Galactic's vehicles were designed with the intention of opening
    frequent access to space and providing a transformational spaceflight
    experience to our astronauts. Our system is suborbital--it allows our
    astronauts to journey to space, beyond the Earth's atmosphere, and
    experience several minutes of floating freely about the cabin, out of
    your seat, experiencing zero-gravity and witnessing the incredible
    views of Earth from space. Our suborbital spaceflight system consists
    of two vehicles: Mothership (pictured in Figure 1) is a four-engine,
    dual-fuselage jet aircraft capable of high-altitude heavy lift
    missions. And our SpaceShip class of vehicles, which are suborbital
    spaceplanes carried by the mothership and designed to transport people
    and scientific research safely and routinely to suborbital space and
    back.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 Figure 1: Mothership Carrier Aircraft, VMS EVE

        Our current spaceship in flight test is SpaceShipTwo, VSS Unity
    (shown in Figure 2). Our SpaceShips are flown by two experienced pilots
    and can carry up to six spaceflight participants or about 1000 pounds
    of science and technology research experiments to space altitudes where
    they will have exposure to 3-4 minutes of a high-quality microgravity
    environment. To date, we have flown to space three times from two
    states, all of which carried NASA Flight Opportunities Program research
    experiments on board. Virgin Galactic's spaceship is the only human-
    rated, crew-piloted suborbital system in the world. We provide our
    customers with a transformational experience to gaze down at our Earth
    and take in all the inspiration that our planet can offer. In addition,
    Virgin Galactic also provides spaceflights that can be used for
    professional astronaut training, as well as research, education, and
    other industrial applications to develop and test new applications and
    technologies.

                       Figure 2: SpaceShipTwo, VSS Unity

        On March 30, 2021, Virgin Galactic rolled out our second spaceship
    and the flagship of the next generation of the SpaceShip fleet--
    SpaceShip III, VSS Imagine (pictured in Figure 3). VSS Imagine was
    manufactured in our Mojave, California, facility and will begin its
    flight test program this summer from Spaceport America--our operational
    headquarters in New Mexico--with powered flights following next year.
    As VSS Imagine begins its test program, manufacturing will progress on
    VSS Inspire, the second SpaceShip III vehicle, bringing the total
    number of spaceships within the Virgin Galactic fleet to three. The
    introduction of the SpaceShip III class of vehicles is an important
    milestone in Virgin Galactic's multi-year effort that targets flying
    400 flights per year, as these new vehicles were designed specifically
    to increase performance and reduce the time needed between flights.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                      Figure 3: SpaceShip III, VSS Imagine

                              Industry Regulations
        The commercial space industry has seen significant growth in the
    past decade. The U.S.-based space sector is made up of companies with
    private and public financial backing working on a myriad of missions
    including human spaceflight, satellite constellations, and beyond Low-
    Earth Orbit (LEO) operations, expanding the potential of exploration
    once again with lunar missions, Mars landers and rovers, and recently
    announced Venus missions. Many of these goals are through public-
    private partnerships as well as through industry-driven ambitions.
        The Commercial Space Launch Act of 1984, as amended and re-codified
    at 51 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  50901-23, authorizes the Department of
    Transportation to oversee, license, and regulate commercial launch and
    reentry activities. In 1995, the Federal Aviation Administration's
    (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST) was created after
    the Secretary of Transportation delegated the authority to exercise
    oversight responsibilities of these activities to the FAA
    Administrator. FAA AST's regulatory authority over commercial launch
    and reentry activities is prioritized to protecting public safety,
    national security, and U.S. foreign policy interests. This regulatory
    approach is necessary to encourage the emerging commercial space
    industry while prioritizing the safety of the public. These principles
    continue to be important for the development of the commercial space
    industry today.
                                 FAA Licensing
        Space Policy Directive 2 (SPD-2), released in 2018, called for the
    Executive Branch agencies to review existing regulations and ensure
    rules are not duplicative while continuing to promote economic growth,
    advance national security and foreign policy goals, and encourage U.S.
    commercial space leadership. In response to SPD-2, the Department of
    Transportation, through FAA AST, conducted a rulemaking effort on
    launch and reentry licensing for commercial space transportation
    vehicles. The new Part 450 regulations aimed to consolidate multiple
    regulatory parts to create a single licensing regime for all types of
    commercial spaceflight launch and reentry operations with the goal of
    replacing prescriptive requirements with performance-based criteria.
    Currently Virgin Galactic is operating under a Part 431 Operators
    License, originally issued on July 26, 2016.
        While Virgin Galactic supports these streamlined regulations--
    moving toward performance-based metrics as opposed to prescriptive--it
    should be noted that further evaluation of the regulations will occur
    as new and existing launch operators update their licenses and there is
    still work to be done. Specifically of concern to suborbital operators
    like Virgin Galactic, the new Part 450 regulations combined previous
    regulations and added an additional layer of intricacy typically seen
    for larger, more complex systems used for orbital spaceflight. However,
    the FAA has always been an important partner for industry and has shown
    willingness to work with the commercial sector on issues that arise
    during the licensing process as long as it does not compromise their
    primary public safety objective. As Virgin Galactic and all launch
    operators work through the new Part 450 regulations, we encourage the
    FAA to continue its channel of open dialogue and discussion for
    addressing inadvertent issues that may arise in a new regulatory regime
    quickly and in a manner that does not delay or impact commercial
    business.
                              The Learning Period
        In the act of passing and re-authorizing the Commercial Space
    Launch Act, Congress acknowledged that the current emergence of the
    commercial human spaceflight industry is in a dynamic, iterative, and
    development cycle, and is not yet ready for the full-scale regulation
    that characterizes today's commercial air travel. Understanding that it
    is impossible for regulators to create effective and efficient
    regulations for diverse, innovative vehicles without sufficient data,
    Congress created a regulatory learning period during which FAA may
    regulate for the safety of the public, or in response to an incident.
    The rationale was that ``FAA regulatory burdens on the relatively new
    and rapidly evolving commercial space launch industry could slow
    innovation, particularly when it remains to be clear which areas the
    FAA should regulate.''
        This learning period was initially enacted in 2004 to ensure that
    industry had time to develop and create a sufficient database of
    knowledge on which to base future commercial space regulations. Due to
    the technical and economic challenges of spaceflight and the industry's
    emphasis on safety, commercial space companies did not progress as
    quickly as was once envisioned. Congress correctly acknowledged that
    the learning period did not fully accomplish its intended purpose and
    extended it--most recently with the Commercial Space Launch
    Competitiveness Act (CSLCA), which extended it to Oct. 1, 2023. Before
    the learning period sunsets, Congress should work with industry to
    determine if sufficient experience, data, and metrics are available to
    define those areas most critical to regulate to meet Congress' public
    policy objectives.
        In Title 51 U.S.C. Sec.  50905(c)(6), Congress directed the FAA to
    submit a report specifying key industry metrics that might indicate a
    proper level of maturity for the commercial space industry to be fit
    for regulation. Section 50905(c)(7) of that same legislation also
    directed the FAA to submit another report every two years on ``the
    commercial space activities most appropriate for regulatory action, if
    any, and a proposed transition plan for such regulations.''
        On October 20, 2017, the FAA submitted its first report to Congress
    specifying the key metrics that may indicate the commercial space
    sector's readiness for regulations. The FAA divided the indicators into
    three sets. The first set of indicators looks to the industry's
    readiness to enter a safety framework by focusing on the purpose for
    which people are flying, the size and complexity of the industry, and
    its safety. The second set are indicators of the industry's progress in
    developing a safety framework and focuses on voluntary safety
    reporting, voluntary consensus standards, and compliance. The final set
    of indicators relate to the FAA's readiness to enter into a safety
    framework and focuses on the FAA's authority and expertise.
        There are several core premises that underlie the FAA's indicators:
        1.The human spaceflight industry must continually improve its
    safety performance.
        2.The safety framework should grow and mature as the industry does.
        3.As the purpose of space travel evolves from adventure, to
    occupation, and on to transportation, the public's expectation of
    safety increases.

        Both the identified indicators and their underlying premises are in
    line with Congress' intention, noted in 51 U.S.C. Sec.  509019(a)(15):

            ``[t]he regulatory standards governing human spaceflight must
            evolve as the industry matures so that regulations neither
            stifle technology development nor expose crew, government
            astronauts, or spaceflight participants to avoidable risks as
            the public comes to expect greater safety for crew, government
            astronauts, and spaceflight participants from the industry.''

        On February 26, 2019, the FAA submitted its reports on the
    commercial human spaceflight activities most appropriate for regulatory
    action. The FAA concluded in that report that ``[b]ased on the
    readiness indicators provided in FAA's October 2017 report to Congress,
    there are no commercial human spaceflight activities that are ready for
    a new safety framework that may include regulatory action.'' In fact,
    the FAA accurately recognized that ``[a]t this point in the commercial
    human spaceflight industry's evolution, transition to a new safety
    framework might stifle technology development.''
        Since that report, there have been multiple exciting developments
    in the commercial spaceflight industry, but industry has not quite
    achieved the levels described in the indicators. On May 22, 2021,
    Virgin Galactic's VSS Unity flew to space for the third time in total,
    and the first from our operational headquarters at Spaceport America in
    New Mexico. This made the Land of Enchantment the third state in the
    history of the United States to send humans into space. With this
    achievement, we are on the precipice of commercial service and it is
    more important than ever that we focus on that mission. Until we have a
    data set of additional successful flights, new regulations could be
    unintentionally burdensome and potentially stifle development at this
    critical juncture for companies such as ours.
        Moreover, the size and complexity of the industry is still
    maturing. For suborbital flights, the industry only has one horizontal
    launch suborbital company, Virgin Galactic, and one vertical launch
    suborbital company, Blue Origin. So far, Virgin Galactic has only had
    three human suborbital flights to space, while Blue Origin plans to
    have its first suborbital flight with humans in the coming months.
    While new entrants with financial backing are joining the commercial
    industry every year, the current very limited frequency of human
    spaceflight is an indicator that the sector is still developing.
        Most importantly, we also want to emphasize that the spaceflight
    companies themselves hold a vested interest in safety and safe
    performance. Virgin Galactic's North Star has been and always will be
    safety--a mindset shared throughout the commercial space sector. Our
    latest flight to space from New Mexico marked the 400th FAA-licensed
    launch maintaining the FAA's perfect public safety record.
        As a member of COMSTAC's Safety Working Group, I am proud to share
    that we are working closely with the FAA regarding the development of
    commercial spaceflight voluntary industry consensus standards. In
    September 2020, COMSTAC's Safety Working Group made multiple
    recommendations to COMSTAC regarding this topic, highlighting the
    importance of this topic to everyone involved in our industry. We are
    currently focused on soliciting industry feedback to update supporting
    documents from FAA that industry will need upon conclusion of the
    learning period. Some of this information is almost two decades old and
    needs significant attention.
        ASTM International is a leading standards development organization
    with over 120 years of experience. They currently have upward of 12,500
    published standards across a wide array of industries. ASTM's F47
    Committee on Commercial Spaceflight was initiated a few years ago and
    Virgin Galactic has been an active participant since the committee's
    inception. F47 is comprised of a variety of experts from government,
    industry, and academia. To date, they have published four standards,
    one pending a vote, seven that will be up for ballot by the end of the
    year, and five still under review. Out of the seventeen standards that
    are currently published or under consideration, eleven are related to
    human spaceflight standards.
        Simultaneously, the Commercial Spaceflight Federation, which has
    over 70 member companies, has been working diligently to pursue ever-
    higher levels of safety and share best practices and expertise
    throughout the industry.
        While all this progress has been beneficial, more time is needed to
    increase the overall standards framework. Given the diversity of
    vehicles and services within the industry, achieving helpful and
    applicable standards requires significant resources and collaboration.
    For human spaceflight alone, we have systems that launch vertically,
    horizontally, and even balloons that slowly ascend high into the
    atmosphere. With committees, advisory groups, and organizations
    actively working with the FAA to establish commercial spaceflight
    safety standards, the industry is constantly innovating safety systems,
    designs, and operations. Continuing informed discussions about the
    learning period is imperative to allow the industry and regulators to
    develop a safety framework that will best protect the health and safety
    of crew, government astronauts, and spaceflight participants while also
    ensuring our industry is the global leader in commercial space. It is
    without question that the learning period has enabled the commercial
    space industry to innovate for safety more quickly than they would if
    early regulations not based in industry data were in place. The
    learning period has given FAA the opportunity to collaborate with
    industry so that both FAA and industry are better able to achieve the
    highest levels of safety. Therefore, Congress should continue to engage
    with industry and the FAA to create a versatile regulatory framework
    that will optimize safety standards and maintain our current high
    levels of innovation.
                   Commercial Space Integration into Airspace
        Our commercial base of operation in New Mexico is located within
    White Sands Missile Range's restricted airspace, thus our impact on
    airspace and air traffic during our launches is minimal.
        While all commercial space launch vehicles are different,
    commercial space operations are not currently a large user of the
    National Airspace System (NAS), but these operations serve very
    important functions in our nation's commerce, civil, and national
    security priorities. Furthermore, because both their speed and their
    direction of flight are so different from aircraft, rockets and
    spaceplanes typically occupy the NAS for only a few minutes or even
    seconds per flight, rather than lingering or passing through the
    airspace for hours at a time. However, as the industry's launch cadence
    increases, it drives the need for efficient and streamlined processes
    for continued seamless integration into the airspace. This will require
    investment in efficient, effective processes and technical tools such
    as the Space Data Integrator and others. In addition, the Next
    Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) is key to coordinating
    use of the NAS between all users. Programs developed to fix these
    problems are available, however they must be prioritized, funded, and
    integrated into the current system. Upgrades such as these will allow
    the FAA to manage the interactions between space and aviation users of
    the NAS in the most effective, efficient manner possible while
    minimizing mutual impacts.
                             Space Support Vehicles
        As mentioned earlier in this testimony, Virgin Galactic operates a
    hybrid vehicle system, consisting of both an aircraft and spacecraft.
    During operations when Virgin Galactic has no intent to launch, such as
    pilot training flights on our Mothership or glide flights without a
    rocket motor with our spaceship, we operate under a FAA-issued
    Experimental Airworthiness Certificate. Our Mothership is a unique
    aircraft that has an operating ceiling higher than typical commercial
    airliners. While Mothership's primary purpose is to support the launch
    of our SpaceShip, its unique capabilities have garnered interest from
    both the civil and national security research community for alternative
    uses. While Mothership provides a unique platform, developed as part of
    a spaceflight system that is not accessible in typical commercial
    services, we are currently unable to support these communities' R&D
    without filing a petition for an exemption to the rule that restricts
    carriage of property (experiments) from compensation or hire. In
    addition to these research-related aviation activities, the Mothership
    also can support multiple other roles related to spaceflight
    activities, such as pilot and customer training and technology
    demonstration. In 2018, the Commercial Space Support Vehicle Act was
    passed as part of FAA Reauthorization bill which allows for Space
    Support Vehicle flights for hire, if the flight relates to launch and
    reentry purposes, such as training or technology development. We
    recommend Congress continue to encourage the use of ``Space Support
    Vehicles'' to allow for R&D only these unique vehicles are capable of.
                         International Competitiveness
        The United States is the world leader in developing a thriving and
    growing commercial space sector. As other countries' space programs
    grow, so do their commercial space industries, and while we value our
    partnerships with our space allies, it is also necessary for the United
    States to remain a global leader. As we learned with airspace
    requirements, when the United States sets standards, other countries
    follow. The United States should set a precedent when creating a
    regulatory environment that prioritizes safety, while encouraging,
    facilitating, and promoting the growth of the nation's space industrial
    base. The FAA should continue to engage internationally to create
    streamlined regulatory environments that do not create burdensome and
    duplicative requirements to operate overseas. This will encourage
    growth and use of the U.S. space industry globally--with countries
    utilizing the U.S. space sector instead of creating competing
    industries.
        Moreover, both the House and Senate introduced legislation to
    compete internationally with countries who put billions of dollars into
    their STEM education and fields in order to create a new generation of
    technical thinkers and leaders. Virgin Galactic values our engineers,
    mathematicians, scientists, and technical employees. We simply could
    not do business without them and need a pipeline of future hires for
    our business to be successful and to compete on a global scale.
                       Space and Spaceport Infrastructure
        Improvements to our nation's infrastructure are currently under
    negotiation by this committee and others in Congress as well as the
    administration. We have observed proposed inclusion and improvement
    projects across both public and private sectors. Many sectors include
    traditional infrastructure: highways, bridges, dams; as well as new
    designations of infrastructure: broadband access, childcare, and
    schools. However, it is very important that space be included in
    discussions regarding infrastructure as improvement resources and
    programs are formulated. Protecting and improving space infrastructure
    is critical to life in the 21st century and should be prioritized.
    Having secure space infrastructure is a key enabler of military
    operations, banking operations, GPS, and a host of applications and
    services most Americans take for granted. Likewise, launch sites and
    spaceports are key to maintaining and improving our space ecosystem.
    The commercial space industry values its partnerships with entities in
    increasingly diverse fields and markets that seek to access space and
    who otherwise could not without the versatile vehicles, satellites,
    launch facilities, and research capabilities offered by this industry.
        To further support space infrastructure, we should consider
    enhancing support for commercial spaceflight launch facilities to
    ensure reliable and redundant access points to space. Airports benefit
    greatly from Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants, which are
    awarded for the planning and development of public-use--and in some
    cases, to private owners and entities--airports to improve runways and
    facilities as they service the aviation industry and the American
    economy. Spaceports have similar needs when it comes to maintaining and
    improving infrastructure. Different from airports, however, modern U.S.
    spaceports are ``flexible'' in that they support various vertical and
    horizontal launch systems that require unique infrastructure elements.
    However, spaceports are not eligible for AIP grants and there are
    currently no other forms of federal transportation grant programs
    available to them. Efforts to address this problem are ongoing and
    include innovative new funding mechanisms such as that proposed by
    Ranking Member Garret Graves last Congress (H.R. 7313).
        Virgin Galactic supports the of inclusion of the space sector as
    infrastructure and we look forward to continued discussions around
    providing adequate support, as well as federal support for the launch
    facility infrastructure needed to keep the United States competitive as
    the global space economy continues to grow.
                                   Conclusion
        This is an exciting time for not only Virgin Galactic, but for the
    entire industry as it continues to mark milestones in human
    spaceflight. The Committee's tireless work and progress on aviation and
    aerospace regulation is imperative and much appreciated by the public,
    those of us in this room, our companies, and stakeholders. Thank you
    for holding this important hearing and I look forward to working with
    the Committee and to answer any questions.

        Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
        And I want to thank everyone for meeting the 5-minute
    timeline or beating the 5-minute timeline as well.
        We are going to go now to Member questions, and we are
    going to start with kind of--going to reverse a little bit only
    to do a little bit of makeup from the first panel and because I
    ran out of Members to ask questions.
        So I am going to first ask Representative Babin to be
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Dr. Babin. You are very kind. Thank you very much, Mr.
    Chairman. I appreciate that.
        I want to just say thank you very much to you folks for
    allowing me to come in here and to speak. I have got a definite
    vested interest in this from my district. But I want to say
    thank you, to begin with, Chairman Larsen and Ranking Member
    Graves, for letting me join your hearing today.
        I have a question that I would like to ask of Mr. Moses
    from Virgin Galactic. So, Mike, if you are hearing, commercial
    human spaceflight operates under a regime known as informed
    consent. Spaceflight participants are made aware of the risky
    nature of spaceflight and undertake the activity full knowing
    those risks.
        This is similar to skydiving, or BASE jumping, scuba
    diving, paragliding, rock climbing, big wave surfing, back-
    country skiing, and many other high-risk activities. And to
    further understand these risks, Congress prohibited the FAA
    from issuing commercial human spaceflight regulations so that
    the community could gather data from flights to inform future
    decisions.
        The industry has not advanced as fast as it was assumed
    when this learning period was implemented, which has led to
    additional extensions to gather this necessary data. In the
    meantime, the industry has made progress on developing
    nonbinding consensus-based standards and best practices.
        As you discussed a little bit, but also, can you further
    discuss how Virgin Galactic integrates these standards and best
    practices into your operations without the need for more
    regulations? If you could answer that, please.
        Mr. Moses. Sure thing, Representative Babin, I would be
    happy to. So I think it is important to maybe start by
    recognizing the framework that was originally built by the
    Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act back in 2004 by Congress
    itself is actually functioning exactly as designed. They
    innovated and came up with the policies of informed consent, of
    the learning period, and of other things. And the record has
    shown that launches have been safe, innovation has been fast
    and rapid, and things are progressing well. So I think it is
    important to just recognize how well things are working.
        So that doesn't mean we stagnate there. We need to keep
    moving forward. I think the informed consent regime is an
    excellent tool that allows us, in this nascent stage of
    development, to be able to handle the risks that spaceflight
    poses to customers and to others while protecting the
    uninvolved public. And as a mechanism, it appears appropriate
    for now.
        Eventually, you would look to a stage where commercial
    spaceflight transportation evolves to the scale of aviation,
    commercial aviation, where an informed consent regime is
    probably no longer necessary, but at this stage, I believe that
    is fairly relevant.
        Virgin Galactic definitely takes the lead by joining
    industry with developing these standards that we are using, the
    voluntary consensus standards. And I think one of our
    challenges there is recognizing the diversity of types of
    vehicles being used. You have balloon launches, vertical
    launches, flyback boosters, horizontal launches, and space
    planes.
        And while regulating the outcome of a system is definitely
    a performance-based regulation, definitely required, regulating
    the means of how you got that outcome can really stifle that
    development and kind of limit an operator from challenging
    themselves to find new ways to achieve that same safety level.
        So I think these standards being done by industry are very
    valuable for now, and we need to continue to progress. I think
    we are definitely seeing, just like we see an increase in
    launch cadence, an increase in the maturity of those standards
    and readiness to head towards regulation with some of them.
        Dr. Babin. All right. Thank you very much. I really
    appreciate that, Mike.
        I have the distinct honor of serving as the ranking member
    of the Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee of the House Science,
    Space, and Technology Committee. Before that, I was the
    chairman of the subcommittee for 4 years. And I also represent
    Johnson Space Center, the home of NASA's historic Mission
    Control. Because of this, I am keenly aware of the fact that
    the Department of Transportation plays a very important role in
    enabling American leadership and innovative industries like the
    commercial space launch industry.
        The Science, Space, and Technology Committee has a long
    history of conducting thorough oversight of AST and the overall
    commercial space industry to ensure the safety of the
    uninvolved public and the sustained American leadership in this
    industry, just as this committee has a long and rich history of
    aviation oversight.
        Going forward, the Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee will play an important role in further enabling the
    integration of commercial space activities into the National
    Airspace System. Coordination by this committee with other
    committees of jurisdiction will certainly ensure that our
    Nation remains the leader in commercial space launch operations
    going forward. I trust that we all share these goals and look
    forward to coordinating efforts going forward.
        And, with that, I would ask unanimous consent, Mr.
    Chairman, to add this entire statement. I didn't have time to
    read the entire statement. I want to introduce this for the
    record, if you don't mind.
        Mr. Larsen. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Brian Babin, a Representative in Congress
                            from the State of Texas
        I have the distinct honor of serving as the Ranking Member of the
    Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee of the House Science, Space, and
    Technology Committee. Before that, I was the Chair of the Subcommittee
    for four years. I also represent the Johnson Space Center, home of
    NASA's historic Mission Control Center. Because of this, I am keenly
    aware of the fact that DoT plays an important role in enabling American
    leadership in innovative industries like commercial space launch.
        In 1984, House Science, Space, and Technology Committee leadership
    drafted the Commercial Space Launch Act, which authorized the Secretary
    of DoT to license private sector launch operations. Similarly, the
    Commercial Space Act of 1998, the Commercial Space Launch Amendments
    Act of 2004, and the U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act
    of 2015 reinforced and further fostered the growth of this industry.
        While America's commercial space launch industry has demonstrated
    robust, safe, and reliable capabilities for several decades, leadership
    in the future will depend on innovation, adaptation, and evolution.
    That is why Congress tasked the Department with the dual roles of both
    regulating and promoting the industry, a tension that results in a
    balanced and measured relationship between the public and private
    sector.
        It is also why Congress limited the Department's authority to
    protecting the uninvolved public, and why it mandated a learning period
    before promulgation of spaceflight participant regulations.
        Independent advisory bodies have consistently recognized that space
    launch is an inherently risky endeavor. The Columbia Accident
    Investigation Board found that `` . . . all human spaceflight must be
    viewed as a developmental activity. It is still far from a routine,
    operational undertaking.'' While great strides have been made, and the
    commercial launch of payloads appear to be increasingly more routine,
    the commercial human spaceflight industry is still in its infancy.
        Additional regulations at this point would stifle innovation;
    export technology, talent, and tax dollars overseas; and undermine
    American leadership in space, which is a critical domain for national
    security in the future.
        The FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation (AST)
    appropriately balances the goals of protecting the uninvolved public
    and ensuring the vibrancy of the U.S. commercial launch industry. AST
    has sufficient authority to fulfil its statutory direction to license
    and permit launches and reentries without the need for expanded
    regulations or the implementation of more draconian oversight
    requirements on license and permit holders. AST's compliance monitoring
    and enforcement is designed to modify licensee behavior to comply with
    federal safety regulations.
        AST also has various enforcement tools at its disposal to ensure
    safety of the uninvolved public. Most notably, AST has the authority to
    prohibit future launches and rescind licenses. Recent actions by AST
    and licensees demonstrate the sufficiency of these existing compliance
    and enforcement tools.
        The Science Committee has a long history of conducting thorough
    oversight of AST and the overall commercial space industry to ensure
    the safety of the uninvolved public and sustained American leadership,
    just as this Committee has a long history of aviation oversight. Going
    forward, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee will play an
    important role in further enabling the integration of commercial space
    activities into the National Airspace System.
        Coordination by this Committee with other Committees of
    jurisdiction will ensure that our nation remains the leader in
    commercial space launch operations. I trust that we all share these
    goals and look forward to coordinating efforts going forward.

        Dr. Babin. OK. With that, I yield back. And I just want to
    thank you again for your kindness.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        The Chair now recognizes myself for 5 minutes for
    questions.
        First question is for Captain DePete. Captain DePete, how
    long have you been a pilot?
        Mr. DePete. I have been a pilot for 40 years, Mr. Chairman.
    I started out in the Marine Corps and then in the commercial
    airlines.
        Mr. Larsen. And in commercial airlines, what is the highest
    you have ever flown a commercial airplane?
        Mr. DePete. Probably around 37,000 feet, 42,000 feet,
    somewhere in that range.
        Mr. Larsen. And how much higher than that does the FAA
    control the airspace?
        Mr. DePete. Well, the positive control airspace goes all
    the way to 400, I believe.
        Mr. Larsen. OK, OK. So about 40,000 feet.
        So, in your testimony, you mentioned yourself as a pilot.
    You mentioned air traffic control and air traffic controllers,
    all these folks who are involved in the airspace currently, as
    well, not just involved, but ensuring that it is operated
    safely. Is that about right?
        Mr. DePete. That is correct.
        Mr. Larsen. So you also highlighted systemic space
    integration strategy. And my opening comments for this
    particular panel were about the airspace between the ground and
    getting to space, the FAA does need to have a positive control
    of that. And integrating these launches through that airspace
    that is already being used is pretty critical, and it seems the
    FAA has a role in that.
        Mr. DePete. Absolutely.
        Mr. Larsen. So getting back to Representative Babin's
    statement about coordination between committees, I think is
    absolutely right on, very critical, but also shows the need for
    the committee here as well to ensure that the FAA's--and FAA's
    safety mission--has a place in these discussions as we move
    forward. Would you agree with that? Am I off base?
        Mr. DePete. I would, sir. And I believe, you know--I have
    got experience on the NAC and the DAC. I don't belong to the
    COMSTAC. But I found it rather ironic that we are--you know,
    our goal is to end segregation and enter into a time period in
    the future where we have full integration, yet the individual
    committees actually do their work relatively segregated. So it
    is my----
        Mr. Larsen. Can I just comment? I wrote a note from
    Representative Babin's statement. That stovepipe, you know,
    jurisdiction goes well past our time here in Congress,
    Representative Babin, and probably we do need to sort that out.
        So thank you, Captain.
        I want to go to Mr. Bruno. Your testimony references the
    update to the licensing process that the FAA began in 2018. And
    you applaud the FAA for streamlining the rules.
        How have these changes in rules directly impacted ULA
    launches in terms of timing and frequency?
        Mr. Bruno. Yes, I would like to acknowledge the
    collaboration approach that the FAA has taken with industry.
    They have, as has been mentioned before, shifted from a
    prescriptive set of requirements to obtain a license to one
    that is performance-based, and this has allowed us to achieve
    the safety that they identify by different means, more
    efficient and responsive to our customers' desires. Again, the
    safety standards are [inaudible]. We have been given the
    freedom to innovate to achieve it.
        Mr. Larsen. Your testimony also makes mention of the
    thousands of suppliers and partners that you partner with in
    the U.S. And we have made and I have made support for the
    aerospace workforce a priority for the subcommittee.
        What can the subcommittee and DOT and FAA be doing to
    encourage growth in this specific portion of the supply chain?
        Mr. Bruno. That is a great question, sir. It takes many,
    many people to design and build a rocket. We would like to see
    as much of that content done domestically in the United States.
    It protects us, not only in terms of our workforce and our
    talent, but also in terms of our intellectual property, an
    environment where China has shown significant aggression in
    acquiring intellectual property, not only through what you
    might think of as traditional means, through hacking or old-
    fashioned espionage, but more often now through economic means,
    by infiltrating the supply chain, by purchasing companies
    outright or by investing in companies in order to achieve
    influence and access to their intellectual property and ours.
        So I would ask Congress to create a means for allowing it
    to be more robust in keeping China out of that supply chain.
        Mr. Larsen. OK. Finally, I have run out of time, but I am
    going to just take a prerogative here. At the beginning of the
    hearing several hours ago, in my opening statement, I mentioned
    the importance of diversity in aviation, the diversity in
    aerospace, and the diversity that we ought to be seeing in
    commercial space as well.
        In the future, this committee will be doing a hearing on
    diversity in the aerospace workforce. And whether or not any of
    you all are requested to be on the panel, I do want you all to
    take a hard look at whether your company or representing
    industry, or in the case of Space Florida, a public corporation
    as you see yourselves, I want you all to take a hard look at
    the actions you are taking to increase the diversity within the
    aerospace workforce, especially as it applies to your portion
    and commercial space, and offer that written testimony to the
    committee so--again, if you are not on the panel itself.
        And I hope you do take advantage of that opportunity. It is
    critical. The demographics of the United States are changing,
    and we need to change with it and we need to ensure an access
    opportunity in these growing industries throughout the country,
    and we need to do our part.
        So, with that, I want to now recognize Representative
    Graves of Louisiana for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Chairman, I want to ask a question of Mr. Bruno.
    Chairman Larsen and I recently introduced the Aerospace Debris
    Safety Act, which tasks the FAA with various missions,
    including tracking reentering space debris and working to
    mitigate the risk to aircraft operating in potentially
    hazardous airspace.
        Have you seen the legislation, and can you offer any
    feedback to us on that?
        Mr. Bruno. I have, sir. And I want to commend your
    leadership on this. This is an excellent first step.
        What we want to appreciate is that we have talked about
    overload debris and reentry for many years, but it was always
    tomorrow's problem. With the implementation of our first mega-
    constellation in LEO, I can tell you that that problem has
    arrived today.
        The quantity and frequency of orbital debris reentry in the
    coming months and years will increase by at least a factor of
    10. And so this legislation that asks the FAA to significantly
    increase the precision and availability of tracking data will
    allow us a very, very important tool in now space- and air-
    integrated traffic management.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        Mr. Moses, you note in your testimony that you agree that
    regulatory standards governing human spaceflight must evolve as
    the industry matures so that regulations neither stifle
    technology, innovation, development, nor expose the crews to
    avoidable risk.
        What do you believe is the best way to meet that objective?
        Mr. Moses. Well, I think one of the things we have
    recognized in our work with COMSTAC and industry is that trying
    to acquire a one-size-fits-all set of standards or
    implementation will prove to be very challenging for
    implementation.
        An example there is just within our own system. We use
    horizontal stabilizers and vertical stabilizers like an
    aircraft would, which don't exist on capsules or vertical
    launch rockets. And so standards that apply to one don't
    necessarily apply to another.
        So step back for a second and find those common areas where
    you do have that commonality. Propellant handling, ground
    systems, environmental control systems, those are common across
    most vehicles. So let's start with those standards, get
    agreement on those, get industry sharing, industry reporting,
    start with regulation there.
        And so I think a ``one bite of the elephant at a time''
    type of approach is the right way to get standards into the
    mainstream.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        Mr. DiBello, in your testimony, you talk about commercial
    spaceflight as effectively being a form of transportation. And
    there is a line in your testimony where you say: ``Space
    Florida urges an increased FAA effort in technology development
    and deployment to advance the safe and efficient integration of
    routine space transportation with commercial aviation.''
        Could you comment on that a little bit and how you see that
    relationship, I guess, evolving? As I mentioned in my opening
    statement, you have just seen an extraordinary increase in the
    number of commercial spaceflights.
        Mr. DiBello. Certainly. We have seen both an increase in
    the number of spaceflights, but, more broadly, as we look at
    the horizon for the future, we are seeing an increase in the
    types of platforms that will be flying. And commercial industry
    is introducing and advancing technologies very rapidly and
    adapting them very rapidly.
        So what we are seeing with respect to integration in the
    national airspace is that we need to take advantage of the
    capabilities that can be put into the vehicles themselves to
    know where they are and the increases in safety, the
    diagnostics, knowing what is happening to the platform on the
    fly so that many of those things can be fixed on the fly as
    software fixes, and take advantage of those to inform what we
    are doing as they transit the airspace.
        The second is awareness and communications. We have the
    capability today to significantly improve communications and
    awareness of what is happening in spaceflight so that we can
    effectively narrow the launch window, the time in which the
    launch space has to be closed.
        And there is no reason why--as an example, a vehicle gets
    to 60,000 feet oftentimes in anywhere from 90 seconds to 2
    minutes, but returning, it passes through the airspace in 60
    seconds. So there is no reason in the world why we can't more
    effectively integrate, use the data system, the space data
    system that General Monteith is putting into place, and work
    with much narrower windows to increase the volume of both
    launches and the ease on the air traffic control system.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Great. Thank you.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        The Chair now recognizes Representative Brown of Maryland
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your
    holding this hearing on this very important topic today. It has
    been a long day, and I thank our participants, our panelists
    for sticking in there with us.
        Like you, Mr. Chairman, I too believe that Congress and,
    more specifically, the Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee, plays a critical role in the future of the emerging
    commercial space industry as well as in ensuring our national
    security. I also see the FAA playing a critical role in both of
    those as well.
        Mr. Bruno, you mentioned--so my question is for you--in
    your written testimony that, and I quote from your written
    testimony: ``Foreign governments and multilateral organizations
    also have important roles to play. The United States does not
    have a monopoly,'' you wrote, ``on satellite constellations,
    and accordingly, the existing international rules of conduct
    for space activities must be revisited and new ones considered
    for this burgeoning area,'' and ``it is profoundly in the
    interest of the U.S. Government to lead the way in confronting
    these issues with the invaluable work of the FAA.''
        Can you expand on the importance of the FAA's role in
    international cooperation and protecting access to low Earth
    orbit?
        Mr. Bruno. Yes, sir, absolutely. It is important to
    understand that space is a global commons. What any actor does
    in space affects all of us. Satellites orbit the entire Earth.
    They do not stay only over our airspace.
        We are seeing the first large impacts of the new
    proliferated LEO or mega-constellations that promise such great
    benefits to us but also present these new challenges. For the
    first time, we have a constellation on orbit which is
    physically dense and will impact our launch access to orbits
    that are just above or just adjacent to it.
        China has also announced plans to place a similar
    constellation in orbit which is several times larger. So not
    only will we need to be concerned about our own industry and
    our own operators behaving in a responsible fashion, we must
    have agreements, international agreements and standards of
    behavior that we all abide by, especially our peer competitors,
    potential competitors like China as well as other countries.
        I would also want to add, building on something Mr. DeFazio
    introduced, that yes, we have seen a very large increase in
    launch rate recently. I would want the committee to understand
    that that increase is almost entirely due to lifting the
    current mega-constellation which is now being populated in
    orbit. And then each of those extra, if you will, launches
    carry dozens and dozens of spacecraft.
        So while we have a concern with air traffic during ascent,
    we have a much more physically crowded region within what we
    traditionally already call the congested space in LEO, which
    will lead to a very high rate of deorbiting spacecraft in just
    a handful of years as they begin to reach the end of their
    life.
        Mr. Brown. So, Mr. Bruno, as you consider how to best
    protect the orbital environment, the orbital environment
    through tools such as space situational awareness, two
    questions: What are some of the factors you consider, and what
    is the significance to national security in not having a robust
    Federal Government presence?
        Mr. Bruno. I will answer the second part first. We pass
    through this lowest layer, this relatively dense now shell of
    LEO spacecraft to carry our national security payloads to do
    their vital work for the United States. If we can't lift them
    to space, they can't do their work. It is literally that
    simple.
        And in terms of how we manage that problem, we will need to
    manage the physical density of these constellations. We are
    going to require more precise tracking that is near real time
    of where the objects are. That will require cooperation from
    the operators, because these spacecraft often have the ability
    to autonomously move in their orbit to avoid colliding with one
    another, which is a good thing, but we can't leave the Air
    Force and Space Force to simply monitor and hope to notice the
    movements and then later reposition where they think they are.
        And then, finally, we really truly need these operators to
    plan on controlled deorbits. It is not just the issue of how
    many things are deorbiting through the airspace, it is also
    important that they be controlled so that they do not reenter
    in a way that can harm the public, but also so that they
    reenter in a predictable way.
        A controlled deorbit is steep, rapid, predictable, precise,
    and known in advance. An uncontrolled deorbit is a wide-
    sweeping arc that has great uncertainty all the way down to
    impact. So we need those things, in cooperation, between
    [inaudible].
        Mr. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Bruno.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Larsen. The gentleman's time has expired.
        We are going to go with Representative Van Drew. Is
    Representative Van Drew up?
        Yes. There you are. Representative Van Drew, you are
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Dr. Van Drew. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for
    appearing before the Subcommittee on Aviation to discuss the
    exciting area of commercial space.
        The United States has been leading space exploration since
    the very beginning. Whether we were landing on the moon, or
    building a global satellite, telecommunications network, our
    country has accomplished incredible goals in space.
        We find ourselves in a new era of American leadership in
    space. American development of reusable rockets offers the
    potential for far more efficient space exploration, and even
    civilian passenger transportation. As this new industry grows,
    we need to ensure that it is properly meshed with the existing
    national airspace. Safety needs to be the absolute, the
    absolute top priority in everything that we do.
        In that line, I have several questions for Captain DePete
    of the Air Line Pilots Association. First of all, if you had
    just one recommendation on a single action that the FAA should
    take in order to support space operations into the future, what
    would that one action be?
        Mr. DePete. Thank you for the question.
        Without a doubt, that is an easy one for me. It would be to
    pull together the individual committees of the NAC, the DAC,
    and the COMSTAC that deal with the airspace users and meld them
    into a single advisory integrated system.
        Currently right now, much of the work is being done
    segregated. There is very little topic matter being discussed
    in those committees regarding commercial space, except in the
    COMSTAC, and I think that would go a long way, because together
    with that, I think it would lead towards more of a development
    of a safety culture, which I think is the beginning to really
    reaching full integration.
        Dr. Van Drew. Well, thank you. And that sounds like a good
    recommendation, by the way.
        Does the FAA give pilots information about space debris
    that may be entering the atmosphere above them as they are
    actually flying through the air?
        Mr. DePete. No, sir. And thank you for bringing that up.
        Look, our number one priority of my members is safety. That
    is what our union was founded on. They have the regulatory
    responsibility and the professional duty to ensure the safe
    conduct of a flight, and it is absolutely essential, they have
    a need to know about the areas of risk that they enter.
        Currently standing right now, other than NOTAMs, which is
    another whole subject--I know Representative Stauber has a lot
    to say about those as well, and so do we, but there isn't
    really any kind of real-time information, and it is hard for a
    pilot in command to make informed decisions without being aware
    that he may be entering an airspace that is elevated in risk.
    So, it would be very helpful. We really need to tackle that
    problem.
        Dr. Van Drew. Any sense why they don't do it?
        Mr. DePete. Well, I will let the FAA----
        Dr. Van Drew. Answer for themselves? Right?
        Mr. DePete. Well, I just believe there is a lot of low-
    hanging fruit out there that could be used right now help do
    it. I know that the SDI was mentioned, the Space Data
    Integrator recently, previously on the first panel, and one of
    the frustrations that I have is that currently the data that
    comes from the SDI, after many years, I mean, this is a known
    problem, it has to be manually entered into the air traffic
    controller's screen to enable them to do that, to pass the
    information along to us. That needs to be automated. That is an
    easy one. I think that is a pretty easy fix, and I think we
    could fix that, and that would go a long way.
        Dr. Van Drew. Good.
        One more. I have heard you talk about safety management
    systems for the airlines several times. Do commercial space
    operators use safety management systems as well?
        Mr. DePete. No, sir, but they absolutely should. And,
    again, I don't think you can get there from here, unless you do
    that, and if you really--if you are targeting full integration,
    the thing about a safety management system is--I think we
    should talk about safety culture first, because that is the
    part that has--that is the foundation, and that is the way
    safety is perceived, valued, and prioritized within an
    organization from the top on down. And it empowers people to
    report issues, to communicate freely about safety issues. It
    affects the attitudes and the beliefs and the behaviors, and
    that is the foundation for a safety management system, which is
    a more formalized adoption through tools and procedures for a
    structured safety program.
        So without that, that is how the airlines got into the
    situations where they are right now, and why our system is so
    safe.
        Dr. Van Drew. Good, which is what we want. Safety is number
    one.
        Mr. DePete. Yes, sir.
        Dr. Van Drew. Captain, I appreciate your testimony.
        Mr. DePete. Thank you.
        Dr. Van Drew. And, Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you, Representative Van Drew.
        The Chair now recognizes Representative Johnson of Georgia
    for 5 minutes.
        Representative Johnson, you are recognized.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
    holding this hearing, and thank you to the witnesses for your
    time and your testimony.
        ``The cosmos,'' as Carl Sagan once said, ``is all that is
    or ever was or ever will be,'' end quote. Today, our curiosity
    about the cosmos has led us to pursue human spaceflight, adding
    to the lexicon words like ``spaceport'' and ``orbital debris.''
    As we embark on this new frontier, we must prioritize safety,
    equitable access, and diligently pursue limited environmental
    impact.
        Mr. DiBello, as the single point of contact for State
    aerospace-related activities, Space Florida is, in many ways, a
    gatekeeper to space industry businesses. Your testimony states
    that part of your mission is to support infrastructure
    development and enable growth of commercial space companies.
        Has Space Florida made a concerted effort to engage
    historically disadvantaged businesses? And, if so, what has
    come of that engagement?
        Mr. DiBello. Most certainly we have. And I can tell you
    that we engage regularly, just as we lead with infrastructure
    for the commercial companies, we also are concerned with the
    whole ecosystem that supports the development of spaceport and
    spaceport operations.
        A key element of that is the workforce. So we put a lot of
    effort into working with the State university system, the
    community colleges, the technical trade schools, and ensure
    that programs exist, whether they be curricular focused on
    needed space skills, and, first of all, that they exist; and,
    secondly, that they are really open to the variety of
    constituencies that really want to work in the space field.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, I think I would like to ask,
    what steps will Space Florida take to ensure that minority-
    owned and women-owned businesses are not disadvantaged in
    accessing the enormous opportunity and resources that the new
    commercial space industry presents?
        Mr. DiBello. Well, I can tell you that the industry
    recognizes that women and minorities oftentimes make up better
    than 50 percent of the classes that we look at in the
    universities, community colleges----
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, I am talking about
    businesses.
        Mr. DiBello. I understand.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. I am talking about money now.
        Mr. DiBello. Yes, but the businesses recognize that many of
    those students are in the upper third of their class. So we
    engage actively in building training facilities and
    infrastructure that can, in fact, be industry-guided to attract
    those students into their workforce, and give them a hand, a
    direct hand on acquiring the kind of talent that they need----
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Right. Thank you, sir. I want to
    move on.
        Mr. DiBello. It is in their best interest to do that.
    Please.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. I want to move on to my next
    question. Thank you.
        Mr. Moses, at NASA you played an integral role on spaceship
    missions during ascent, orbit, and entry operations. As such,
    you must have had an unparalleled insight into the experience
    of astronauts, many of whom are changed by their travel to
    space. One such change is a new-found appreciation that humans
    are earthlings above all else.
        Can you please speak to how the ability of everyday humans
    to travel to space could allow us to reimagine ourselves beyond
    racial, economic, and nationalistic divisions, and see one
    another as, first and foremost, human?
        Mr. Moses. Representative Johnson, that is an amazing
    question. You have written one of the tenets of our company's
    foundational values.
        We really believe the opportunity to go see Earth from
    space, witness no borders, no boundaries, the thin boundary of
    the atmosphere, the fragility of the Earth's ecosystem, and
    that we are all humans on one plant headed in one direction is
    a really transformative experience. And the more people that
    can experience that, they will bring back to their daily lives,
    they will integrate that into their culture, their business
    dealings, their education, and soon, we will become a space-
    faring nation, a space-faring global economy, and a people that
    will look past those differences and see the commonality.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. OK. I thank you for that answer.
        Mr. Bruno, your testimony makes reference to the
    geopolitical dynamics at play in the human spaceflight
    industry.
        How can the [inaudible] further bolster its presence in
    spaceflight while mitigating and [inaudible] competition and
    fostering collaboration?
        Mr. Bruno. Sorry, sir, I lost your audio at about the word
    ``mitigate.''
        Mr. Larsen. I am sorry. This is the chair, Mr. Johnson.
    Your time has expired. But if you could get that question to
    the committee, we can get it to Mr. Bruno for the record.
        Mr. Johnson of Georgia. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you.
        The Chair now recognizes Representative Steel of California
    for 5 minutes.
        Representative Steel, you are recognized.
        Mrs. Steel. Thank you, Chairman Larsen and Ranking Member
    Graves, and thank you for all of the witnesses staying late
    today and joining us and really appreciate it.
        Southern California and California as a whole has a long
    history in aerospace and continues to be a leader in this
    field. Today, as we look to the near future, my State and
    private-sector entrepreneurs, businesses, and manufacturers in
    aerospace are making great progress on the innovative
    technologies that will continue to radically transform
    commercial space travel.
        The FAA plays an important role in encouraging,
    facilitating, and promoting the commercial space transportation
    industry, while ensuring safety through permitting and
    licensing. I believe we must continue to work to take advantage
    of the innovations being achieved by private-sector
    entrepreneurs to lead us into the future of spaceflight by
    ensuring efficiency in permitting, while also protecting the
    safety of our communities and that the innovation in this field
    will help advance the entire aviation industry.
        My first question was, the Biden administration requested a
    $5 million increase in the budget for the operational account
    for the Office of Commercial Space Transportation, but General
    Monteith already answered that.
        So I am going to go straight to the second question to all
    of the panelists, how might commercial space research and
    development be used to add ongoing aviation R&D, and enable
    future high-speed aviation and transportation solutions and
    means connecting between both learning and commercial space R&D
    and regular traditional aviation, and how they can work
    together where they can find the common ground to improve
    across all types so we can make flights faster, and how are we
    going to do this so that we work together?
        Mr. Bruno. I will start, Representative Steel, by saying
    that the FAA has already started on a track of very good and
    productive collaboration with industry on solutions that are
    performance-based, and that will be a significant enabler of
    that activity.
        There is one other point I would like to make relative to
    General Monteith's earlier testimony on talented workforce,
    where he talked about the need to have a close relationship
    with industry and with universities so that there is adequate
    talent within the FAA to do their mission. I would hope that
    the committee would understand that this problem is more
    difficult than simply STEM, and simply having engineers who
    move into the aerospace profession, and some of them going into
    the FAA. The safety discipline within rocketry is highly
    specialized, highly narrow, and there is a limited number of
    personnel across the industry and within the FAA who have those
    skills that are not taught in the universities, but, rather,
    taught in industry and at the FAA. And anything that Congress
    can do to support the FAA's opportunity to develop and attract
    that talent will benefit all of us.
        Mrs. Steel. Thank you.
        Mr. Moses. And, Representative Steel, I will be happy to
    maybe address how the technology innovation between spaceflight
    and aviation potentially marries in the future and highlight
    what my fellow panelists and other members of the subcommittee
    have highlighted, that the integration of the airspace into a
    single common user, single common source, is highly critical
    for that.
        You can imagine a system--one of the reasons our company
    pursues horizontal launch from aircraft is we see a much
    simpler integration into the airspace for future transportation
    of high-speed systems. And, so, getting those steps made now
    for how airspace is deconflicted, times are kept short,
    interactions are made very efficient, is critical for those
    future innovations and technology developments for aviation.
        Mr. DePete. I would like to----
        Mr. DiBello. I would like to, if I may----
        Mr. DePete. Go ahead.
        Mr. DiBello [continuing]. Add to that if I can.
        In response to the question, clearly, the industry has been
    advancing technologies across the world. Space is hard, and as
    we advance technologies which enable us to do things in space,
    many of those do flow across a horizontal industry and infuse
    themselves into what we know about aviation. But the big
    advantage is the fact that space assets have become
    increasingly more vital to management of not only our airspace,
    but things in space to things in the air, things on the ground
    and in our back pockets, that this integration that is
    occurring and connectivity that is occurring and the amount of
    data that are being gathered by the thousands of satellites
    that are now up there and will be put up there will enable them
    to have access to the data and the awareness and communications
    mechanisms that it needs to fully integrate the space and air
    together.
        Mr. Larsen. The Representative's time has expired.
        Mrs. Steel. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Larsen. Thank you very much.
        I want to thank the panel for joining us today and thank
    you for your patience. I won't apologize for Congress
    exercising its basic constitutional duty of voting today. I
    know it was inconvenient for you to wait around. But I guess
    the payoff is the value of your testimony was very important,
    is very important for us, as we continue to look at ensuring
    the safe integration of commercial space into a very busy FAA-
    controlled airspace.
        So with that, again, I want to thank the panel and each of
    the witnesses. I ask unanimous consent that the record of
    today's hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses
    have provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to
    them in writing. I also ask unanimous consent that the record
    remain open for 15 days for any additional comments and
    information submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in
    the record of today's hearing.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        And with that, the committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 6:37 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                           Submissions for the Record

                                  ----------

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
         from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Larsen and Ranking Member Graves, and thank you to
    our witnesses for being here today.
        I'm pleased the Chair has called this hearing to discuss FAA's
    oversight of the commercial space transportation industry.
        Although this sector has only existed since 1984, it has reshaped
    our national economy and changed the way we think about the future of
    transportation.
        With 12 licensed commercial launch and reentry sites, 24 launch and
    reentry licenses issued, and 46 authorized experimental launches
    conducted just during Fiscal Year 2020 to 2021, this is an exciting
    time of progress and innovation in this sector.
        As commercial space transportation grows in frequency and diversity
    of operations, it is critical that this committee continue to exercise
    oversight over the FAA to ensure it is fulfilling its responsibilities
    as the regulator and airspace manager.
        I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how they think
    FAA is doing when it comes to overseeing this expanding aerospace
    sector, planning for safe and growing airspace integration, and what
    lies ahead in maintaining our competitive advantage.
        Thank you, Chair Larsen. I yield back.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Texas
        Thank you, Subcommittee Chairman Larsen and Ranking Member Graves
    for holding today's hearing and assisting our committee to examine in
    an in-depth manner the future of the U.S. commercial space
    transportation industry, and the role of the FAA in overseeing and
    regulating this rapidly expanding industry. I would also like to thank
    our outstanding witnesses for testifying before us today.
        Today's hearing is a topic of considerable interest as commercial
    spaceflight is a growing sector of our nation's civil space activity.
        Our discussion this afternoon is important in informing the
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's oversight of the national
    airspace system, given that both government and commercial spaceflight
    must coordinate their flights through the national airspace system.
        The FAA's role in the safe integration of new entrants into the
    airspace system is of heightened importance. Commercial spaceflight
    activities are expected to increase, along with those of aircraft
    systems without a crew. In addition, urban air mobility and advanced
    air mobility will also come online in the future. To that end, I'm
    pleased that the FAA and NASA have a strong partnership on research and
    development to facilitate the safe integration of these systems into
    the airspace system.
        Commercial spaceflight is a topic with which I am very familiar.
    The Science, Space, and Technology Committee that I chair has
    jurisdiction and oversight over commercial space, commercial space
    transportation, and the FAA's Office of Commercial Space
    Transportation. I'm pleased that the legislation this committee passed
    37 years ago with the ``Commercial Space Launch Act,'' and its many
    updates and amendments, have led to the development of a safe, growing,
    and successful commercial spaceflight industry. The statute includes
    regulation of third-party safety and a shared government-industry
    indemnification and liability regime.
        Growth in commercial spaceflight is leading to opportunities and
    challenges that the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will be
    reviewing, particularly at this time given that commercial human
    suborbital and orbital spaceflight are now on the verge of being
    realized. With those developments, as chair of the Science, Space, and
    Technology Committee, I plan to lead the committee into taking an
    active role in considering relevant policy on commercial human
    spaceflight safety, and hope to partner and work in close collaboration
    with my colleagues here today on the future of commercial spaceflight
    policy and address some of the serious challenges, including safety and
    others, that the industry faces as outlined by our witnesses today.

      Statement of Nicole deSibour Rodgers, Executive Director, 200 Mile
            Gateway, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian J. Mast
        Chairman Larsen, Ranking Member Graves, and distinguished members
    of the Committee, thank you for accepting the 200 Mile Gateway's
    submission of our views on the role of the FAA in the future of the
    U.S. commercial space industry.
        The 200 Mile Gateway is a not for profit organization promoting the
    investments and infrastructure of the aerospace and defense industries
    in the 200 Mile Gateway region that stretches from Jacksonville,
    Florida to Charleston, South Carolina. This region is rich with
    commercial space interest and history. Back in the 1960s, the world's
    most powerful rocket motor was fired in Camden County on the proposed
    site of Spaceport Camden (license expected this summer). Our region is
    also home to Cecil Spaceport and is proximate to Cape Canaveral. We are
    also home to fourteen military installations, more than 30 airports
    (including 4 commercial airports), four major ports, two commercial
    railroads and sit directly on the I-95 corridor.
        As we look to the future of housing both a horizontal and a
    vertical spaceport in our region and serving the larger commercial
    space industry given our synergistic proximity to Cape Canaveral, we
    share the Committee's interest in the role that the Federal Aviation
    Administration (FAA) must play in the future regulation and oversight
    of the emerging and booming commercial space industry. We must be
    forward thinking, responsible and innovative. The FAA must retake its
    ownership over the regulation and management of commercial space in
    order to be the responsible steward of both progress and the National
    Air Space (NAS).
     I: Stewardship of the National Air Space Requires Innovation Not Just
                              Increased Headcount:
        One of the most important roles of the FAA oversight of commercial
    space in the near term is NAS Integration and reducing the amount of
    air space and duration that must be closed during each licensed launch.
    I think we can all agree that the current model of air space closures
    is not sustainable. FAA-licensed (FAA) launches cause a significant
    impact to our aviation industry:
        In FY 2017, about 1,200 commercial airline flights were
    directly affected resulting in additional 39,000 miles.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ GAO Report 19-437, Improvements to FAA's Workforce Planning
    Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated Growth, May 2019, p
    34.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Single space launches resulted in 3,000 total minutes of
    delay per launch.
        Airlines currently estimate the delay cost to the airline
    at $74.20 per minute \2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Airlines for America. (2019). U.S. Passenger Delay Costs
    [online]. Available at: https://www.airlines.org/dataset/u-s-passenger-
    carrier-delay-costs (Accessed: 26 November 2019).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The direct cost to airlines is $222,600 per launch.
        Adding the additional cost of lost productivity time at $49
    per hour there is another $245,000 in economic costs imposed on the
    competing airspace users.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Tinoco, Janet K., et al. An Introduction to the Spaceport
    Industry: Runaways to Space. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 2020, pg
    12.

        The FAA must look at all options for addressing NAS Integration
    with an open mind and, we, the 200 Mile Gateway, believe that merely
    increasing headcount and funding is not the solution. Currently the FAA
    is exploring two technology strategies for managing NAS Integration--
    the Space Data Integrator (SDI) and Hazard Risk and Management (HRAM).
    SDI follows old models of the way the FAA has always done things and
    assumes the telemetry data analysis and vehicle tracking must be done
    at the agency level thus justifying increased headcount. However, SDI
    requires companies to feed significant amounts of raw proprietary data
    to the FAA SDI during each launch so that the analysis can then be run.
    By contrast, an HRAM model allows companies to protect the integrity of
    their vehicle design data, be continually running analysis and feeding
    HRAM information directly to the ATC and into the cockpit of every air
    craft.
        HRAM is a prototype tool to aid in improving the efficiency
    of the National Airspace System around launch and reentry vehicle
    operations.
        The concept focuses on integrating Space Vehicle and
    aircraft operations, rather than segregating them.
        HRAM enables reactive separation (if pilots see a dangerous
    situation they can avert) in the case of vehicle failure.
        The tool is designed to automatically interface with other
    systems: space vehicle data as input and air traffic systems as output.
        It thus incorporates logic to appropriate process and
    maintain state (common) knowledge of complex space missions during
    flight.
        Within seconds, the tool computes the hazard volumes
    associated with a failure, accounting for potential lack of information
    of failure response.
        This allows real-time aircraft maneuvering to avoid an
    actual debris field, instead of segregation from the area where a
    debris field may occur.
                      II: FAA Must Innovate to Anticipate
        Innovators in the commercial space industry have made reusability a
    priority in the future of rocket development. The recent out of control
    Chinese rocket that created panic in all those managing the worldwide
    airspace further highlighted the need for the United States to lead on
    innovative tools to predict and track both rogue and planned re-entries
    to mitigate risk.
        Fortunately, one of the tools already being examined for NAS
    Integration can do just that. HRAM has the capacity to more accurately
    and precisely predict reentry points allowing for more accurate air
    space management and risk mitigation. We have included with this
    testimony a video demonstration of HRAM's predictive capabilities. The
    AST is stretched thin as it is and managing the anticipated increase in
    scheduled launches plus adding the management of re-entry for each
    launched rocket will far exceed current capabilities and capacity.
    Leveraging HRAM technology will help improve efficiency and workload
    management for AST, improve safety, mitigate risk, reduce the impact of
    costly air space closures and ensure that the ATC, pilots and launch
    operator all have the same information in real time.
        Since 2012, licensed activities increased 1,000% and AST's
    budget and staffing increased roughly 40 percent.
        Moreover, we are now looking at another potential increase
    of 100-500% in commercial launch activity by 2021 while our staff may
    only increase about 20 percent.
        Making this period even more interesting is the significant
    uptick in the complexity and variability of proposed launch and reentry
    vehicles.
        We also expect a commercially viable human spaceflight
    participant landscape involving space tourism that could lead to 100+
    flights per year.
     III: Promoting a Truly Private Sector Commercial Space Industry--FAA
            Should License All Aspects of Commercial Space Launches
        The second critical area that FAA must prioritize in order to
    responsibly steward growth in the commercial space industry is to
    reclaim oversight responsibility over launch and range operations. The
    FAA must provide an avenue for private sector service providers to
    enter that market by creating a regulatory licensing and vetting
    protocol allowing for such companies to offer their services as an
    alternative to the Air Force. The current system of commercial launches
    being managed by the Air Force on an as-available capacity is
    unsustainable and contrary to U.S.C. 51. As section 50501 of U.S.C. 51
    states ``the availability of commercial launch services is essential
    for the continued growth of the United States commercial space
    sector.'' As the National Space Program continues its own growth
    trajectory and the Air Force must prioritize its resources and efforts
    there-in, the Air Force cannot be the only option for commercial
    launches or it will stymie growth in that sector. Additionally,
    providing a path for private sector launch operations ensures
    compliance with section 509 of U.S.C. 51 (see appendix), enhances the
    viability and attractiveness of the additional commercial spaceports
    the FAA has and will license that are not co-located with Federal
    Ranges. We also encourage this committee and the FAA to expand the use
    of the ODA vetting and licensing process to the commercial space sector
    to allow for vetted launch and range operators to support the AST in
    meeting their 180 day launch license issuance requirements by
    authorizing private sector review and approval of license applications
    according to the stringent ODA process. We encourage the FAA to
    incorporate the recommendations of the Department of Transportation
    Inspector General's office with regards to future ODAs when
    establishing a protocol for commercial space.
        Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member and Members of the Committee,
    thank you, again, for the opportunity to share testimony with you on
    the priorities for the FAA in commercial space. The 200 Mile Gateway is
    excited and energized by the growth, innovation and opportunity in this
    sector and the opportunity it provides for the companies, employees and
    citizens in our region. The commercial space industry should be
    appropriately regulated and licensed to be a vibrant private sector and
    the FAA should look to innovative technology solutions and private
    sector partnerships to improve safety and meet the demands of the
    future rather than hold on to historic modus operandi. We look forward
    to serving as a resource to the Committee, the FAA and the industry in
    promoting opportunity and improvements in the commercial space sector.
                                   Appendix:
    HRAM Background and Demonstrations:
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Legend
    Yellow Icon--location of object at predicted reentry time
    Orange Line--area of visibility at the predicted reentry time for a
    ground observer
    Blue Line--ground track uncertainty prior to predicted reentry time
    (ticks at 5-minute intervals)
    Yellow Line--ground track uncertainty after predicted reentry time
    (ticks at 5-minute intervals)
    White Line--day/night divider at predicted reentry time (Sun location
    shown by White Icon)
    Pink Icon--vicinity of eyewitness sighting
    Note: Possible reentry locations lie anywhere along the blue and yellow
    ground track

    Long March 5-B HRAM Visualization 8 May (Post-Processed)
    HRAM demonstration:
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    FAA Historical and Predicted Growth in AST Operations
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Commercial Spaceports not co-located with Federal Ranges:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Spaceport                              State
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Pacific Spaceport Complex.................  Alaska
    Colorado Air and Space Port...............  Colorado
    Space Florida Launch & Landing--Wilson....  Florida
    Cecil Air and Space Port..................  Florida
    Space Coast Regional Airport..............  Florida
    Spaceport Camden (license pending)........  Georgia
    Space America.............................  New Mexico
    Oklahoma Space Industry Development         Oklahoma
     Authority.
    Houston Spaceport.........................  Texas
    Midland Spaceport.........................  Texas
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Definition of Organization Designated Authorizations:

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
     U.S.C.: CHAPTER 509_COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH ACTIVITIES
    Amendments
    Pub. L. 111-314, 4(d)(2), (3), Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3440, transferred
    analysis for chapter 701 of Title 49, Transportation, and renumbered as
    analysis for chapter 509 of this title and renumbered items 70101 to 70105,
    70105a, 70106 to 70109, 70109a, and 70110 to 70121 as 50901 to 50923, respectively.
    Pub. L. 108-492, 2(c)(26), Dec. 23, 2004, 118 Stat. 3982, added item 70105a.
    Pub. L. 106-405 3(b), Nov. 1, 2000, 114 Stat. 1752, substituted ``Office of Commercial
    Space Transportation'' for ``Authorization of appropriations'' in item 70119.
    Pub. L. 106-391, title III, 322(d), Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1598, added item 70109a.
    Pub. L. 105-303, title I, 102(a)(1), Oct. 28, 1998, 112 Stat. 2846,
    substituted ``launches, operations, and reentries'' for ``launches and operations'' in item
    70104, ``launches, operation of launch sites and reentry sites, and reentries'' for ``
    launches and operation of launch sites'' in item 70108, inserted ``or reentries'' after
    ``scheduled launches'' in item 70109, and added items 70120 and 70121.
    Pub. L. 103-429, 6(78), Oct. 31, 1994, 108 Stat. 4388, made technical amendment to
    chapter heading.

    50901. Findings and purposes

    (a) Findings._Congress finds that_
    (1)the peaceful uses of outer space continue to be of great value and to offer
    benefits to all mankind;
    (2)private applications of space technology have achieved a significant level of
    commercial and economic activity and offer the potential for growth in the future,
    particularly in the United States;
    (3)new and innovative equipment and services are being sought, produced, and offered by
    entrepreneurs in telecommunications, information services, microgravity research, human
    space flight, and remote sensing technologies;
    (4)the private sector in the United States has the capability of developing and providing
    private launching, reentry, and associated services that would complement the launching,
    reentry, and associated capabilities of the United States Government;
    5)the development of commercial launch vehicles, reentry vehicles, and associated
    services would enable the United States to retain its competitive position internationally,
    contributing to the national interest and economic well-being of the United States;
    (6)providing launch services and reentry services by the private sector is consistent with
    the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and would be
    facilitated by stable, minimal, and appropriate regulatory guidelines that are fairly
    and expeditiously applied;
    (7)the United States should encourage private sector launches, reentries, and associated
    services and, only to the extent necessary, regulate those launches, reentries, and
    services to ensure compliance with international obligations of the United States and
    to protect the public health and safety, safety of property, and national security
    and foreign policy interests of the United States;
    (8)space transportation, including the establishment and operation of launch sites,
    reentry sites, and complementary facilities, the providing of launch services and
    reentry services, the establishment of support facilities, and the providing of support
    services, is an important element of the transportation system of the United States,
    and in connection with the commerce of the United States there is a need to develop
    a strong space transportation infrastructure with significant private sector involvement;
    (9)the participation of State governments in encouraging and facilitating private sector
    involvement in space-related activity, particularly through the establishment of a space
    transportation-related infrastructure, including launch sites, reentry sites, complementary
    facilities, and launch site and reentry site support facilities, is in the national interest
    and is of significant public benefit;
    (10)the goal of safely opening space to the American people and their private commercial,
    scientific, and cultural enterprises should guide Federal space investments, policies,
    and regulations;
    (11)private industry has begun to develop commercial launch vehicles capable of carrying
    human beings into space and greater private investment in these efforts will stimulate
    the Nation's commercial space transportation industry as a whole;
    (12)space transportation is inherently risky, and the future of the commercial human
    space flight industry will depend on its ability to continually improve its safety
    performance;
    (13)a critical area of responsibility for the Department of Transportation is to
    regulate the operations and safety of the emerging commercial human space flight
    industry;
    (14)the public interest is served by creating a clear legal, regulatory, and safety
    regime for commercial human space flight;
    and
    (15)the regulatory standards governing human space flight must evolve as the
    industry matures so that regulations neither stifle technology development nor
    expose crew or space flight participants to avoidable risks as the public
    comes to expect greater safety for crew and space flight participants from
    the industry.
    (b) Purposes._The purposes of this chapter are_
    (1)to promote economic growth and entrepreneurial activity through use of the
    space environment for peaceful purposes;
    (2)to encourage the United States private sector to provide launch vehicles,
    reentry vehicles, and associated services by_
    (A)simplifying and expediting the issuance and transfer of commercial licenses;
    (B)facilitating and encouraging the use of Government-developed space technology; and
    (C)promoting the continuous improvement of the safety of launch vehicles designed
    to carry humans, including through the issuance of regulations, to the extent
    permitted by this chapter;
    (3)to provide that the Secretary of Transportation is to oversee and coordinate
    the conduct of commercial launch and reentry operations, issue permits and commercial
    licenses and transfer commercial licenses authorizing those operations, and protect
    the public health and safety, safety of property, and national security and
    foreign policy interests of the United States; and
    (4)to facilitate the strengthening and expansion of the United States space
    transportation infrastructure, including the enhancement of United States launch
    sites and launch-site support facilities, and development of reentry sites,
    with Government, State, and private sector involvement, to support the full
    range of United States space-related activities.

    (Pub. L. 103-272, Sec. 1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1330, Sec. 70101
    of title 49; Pub. L. 105-303, title I, Sec. 102(a)(2), Oct. 28, 1998,
    112 Stat. 2846; Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a), Dec. 23, 2004, 118 Stat.
    3974; renumbered Sec. 70101 then Sec. 50901 of title 51, Pub. L. 111-
    314, Sec. 4(d)(2), (3)(A), Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3440.)

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Historical and Revision Notes
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Source (Statutes
             Revised Section          Source (U.S. Code)       at Large)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    70101(a)........................  49 App.: 2601.....  Oct. 30, 1984,
                                                           Pub. L. 98-575,
                                                           Sec. Sec. 2, 3,
                                                           98 Stat. 3055;
                                                           Nov. 16, 1990,
                                                           Pub. L. 101-611,
                                                           Sec. 117(c), (d),
                                                           104 Stat. 3202.
    70101(b)........................  49 App.: 2602.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In subsection (a), before clause (1), the words ``and declares'' are
      omitted as surplus.
    In subsection (b), before clause (1), the word ``therefore'' is omitted
      as surplus.

                                   amendments
        2010--Pub. L. 111-314 successively renumbered section 70101 of
    title 49 and section 70101 of this title as this section.
        2004--Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a)(1), inserted
    ``human space flight,'' after ``microgravity research,''.
        Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a)(2), struck out
    ``satellite'' after ``providing private'' and substituted
    ``capabilities of'' for ``services now available from''.
        Subsec. (a)(10) to (15). Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a)(3)-(5), added
    pars. (10) to (15).
        Subsec. (b)(2)(C). Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a)(6), added subpar.
    (C).
        Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 108-492, Sec. 2(a)(7), substituted ``issue
    permits and commercial licenses and transfer'' for ``issue and
    transfer''.
        1998--Subsec. (a)(3). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(A), inserted
    ``microgravity research,'' after ``information services,''.
        Subsec. (a)(4). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(B), inserted ``,
    reentry,'' after ``launching'' in two places.
        Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(C), inserted ``,
    reentry vehicles,'' after ``launch vehicles''.
        Subsec. (a)(6). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(D), inserted ``and
    reentry services'' after ``launch services''.
        Subsec. (a)(7). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(E), inserted ``,
    reentries,'' after ``launches'' in two places.
        Subsec. (a)(8). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(F), (G), inserted
    ``, reentry sites,'' after ``launch sites'' and ``and reentry
    services'' after ``launch services''.
        Subsec. (a)(9). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(H), (I), inserted
    ``reentry sites,'' after ``launch sites,'' and ``and reentry site''
    after ``launch site''.
        Subsec. (b)(2). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(J), inserted ``,
    reentry vehicles,'' after ``launch vehicles'' in introductory
    provisions.
        Subsec. (b)(2)(A). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(K), struck out
    ``launch'' before ``licenses''.
        Subsec. (b)(3). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(L), (M), inserted
    ``and reentry'' after ``conduct of commercial launch'' and struck out
    ``launch'' before ``licenses''.
        Subsec. (b)(4). Pub. L. 105-303, Sec. 102(a)(2)(N), inserted ``and
    development of reentry sites,'' after ``launch-site support
    facilities,''.
                                    findings
        Pub. L. 106-405, Sec. 2, Nov. 1, 2000, 114 Stat. 1751, provided
    that: ``The Congress finds that--
          ``(1)a robust United States space transportation industry is
    vital to the Nation's economic well-being and national security;
          ``(2)enactment of a 5-year extension of the excess third party
    claims payment provision of [former] chapter 701 of title 49, United
    States Code [now 51 U.S.C. 50901 et seq.] (Commercial Space Launch
    Activities), will have a beneficial impact on the international
    competitiveness of the United States space transportation industry;
          ``(3)space transportation may evolve into airplane-style
    operations;
          ``(4)during the next 3 years the Federal Government and the
    private sector should analyze the liability risk-sharing regime to
    determine its appropriateness and effectiveness, and, if needed,
    develop and propose a new regime to Congress at least 2 years prior to
    the expiration of the extension contained in this Act [see Tables for
    classification];
          ``(5)the areas of responsibility of the Office of the Associate
    Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation have significantly
    increased as a result of--
            ``(A)the rapidly expanding commercial space transportation
    industry and associated government licensing requirements;
            ``(B)regulatory activity as a result of the emerging commercial
    reusable launch vehicle industry; and
            ``(C)the increased regulatory activity associated with
    commercial operation of launch and reentry sites; and
          ``(6)the Office of the Associate Administrator for Commercial
    Space Transportation should continue to limit its promotional
    activities to those which support its regulatory mission.''

                                    Appendix

                                  ----------

        Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Wayne R. Monteith,
     Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, Federal
                            Aviation Administration

        Question 1. Mr. Monteith, this Subcommittee's role focuses on
    managing the safe integration of commercial spaceflight through the
    national airspace system. Ms. Krause's written statement notes, ``full
    and efficient integration of all users of the National Airspace System
    is years away and will require continued work and focus.'' How are you
    working with the FAA on this integration and with which element of FAA
    are you coordinating?
        Answer. We have worked with the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical
    Center in Atlantic City, New Jersey to build the agency's first
    dedicated commercial space integration lab for developing and
    prototyping technologies that will be leveraged towards enhancing
    commercial space operation awareness to better manage the NAS.
    Additionally, AST continues its work with the FAA's Air Traffic
    Organization on the Space Data Integrator technology. This safety-based
    technology, which has automated the previous manual processes, will
    enable the FAA to monitor a space mission's progress as it flies
    through the airspace. When deployed, this technology will enable the
    FAA to better manage the airspace that must be closed to other users
    and more quickly implement and release airspace restrictions as a
    mission progresses.
        In addition to the initiatives above, the FAA's Air Traffic
    Organization is also working on two techniques to reduce the impact of
    commercial space launches on aviation.
        Time Based Launch Procedures (TBLP) have been implemented
    for launch and reentry operations at Kennedy Space Center/Cape
    Canaveral Air Force Station (KSC/CCAFS). TBLP utilizes existing Traffic
    Flow Management procedures and processes to more efficiently manage
    operations at KSC/CCAFS. Where appropriate, TBLP will be expanded to
    other spaceports and federal ranges this year.
        Dynamic Launch and Reentry Windows (DLRW) procedures have
    been developed for KSC/CCAFS. DLRW utilizes mission triggers in launch
    and reentry operator mission processes to gain further efficiencies in
    addition to those afforded by TBLP. Where appropriate, DLRW will be
    expanded to other spaceports and federal ranges this year.

        Question 2. Mr. Monteith, Ms. Krause's written statement refers to
    a 2021 memorandum of agreement with AST and NASA regarding public and
    human spaceflight safety for commercial space transportation and also
    accident investigations. I'd like to request a copy of this Memorandum
    be sent to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology to support
    our oversight and policy work on AST, commercial spaceflight, and
    commercial spaceflight accident investigation.
        Answer. We have enclosed a copy of the memo with the responses to
    these QFRs.

        Question 3. Mr. Monteith, there has been mention by a few of the
    witnesses here today about the necessity of ``the Federal Aviation
    Administration growing its workforce'' to meet the rapidly expanding
    industry needs, and I am wondering if, in conjunction with that need,
    there has been discussion within the FAA about ensuring that minorities
    will be included in this future labor force? Do you now or will you
    reach out to HBCU's, particularly those that specialize in the STEM
    fields, as partners?
        Answer. Yes, there absolutely has been not only discussion, but
    action at the FAA to reach out to HBCUs. The FAA fully supports
    Presidential Executive Order #13779--The White House Initiative to
    Promote Excellence and Innovation at Historically Black Colleges and
    Universities. The FAA HBCU Initiative Team has supported White House
    HBCU Week for several years, last year hosting a virtual career fair
    booth, and this year we are hosting a workshop on opportunities for
    HBCUs at the FAA on September 8, 2021. And we plan to participate in
    the Initiative's Career Fair on September 9, 2021.
        The FAA HBCU Initiative Team is an agency-wide effort that supports
    the workforce development needs of the FAA by attracting and retaining
    a diverse and skilled workforce to proactively address transformative
    technological challenges, in not just aviation and commercial space
    transportation, but also drones, cybersecurity, and data evaluation. In
    addition, the team is working to increase HBCU participation in grants,
    research and college initiative programs in collaboration with the FAA.
        We also have a robust corporate recruitment plan, which includes
    specific outreach to eleven HBCUs based on STEM, Aviation, and
    Aerospace program offerings. These efforts include: participation in
    career fairs; building relationships with academic departments and
    Career Centers; and outreach to diverse student organizations on
    campus.
        Since this past spring, we have focused efforts at the following
    HBCUs:
        1.Bowie State University
        2.Delaware State University
        3.Florida Memorial University
        4.Johnson C. Smith University (Added mid-Spring; will be included
    in Fall)
        5.Hampton University
        6.Howard University
        7.Morgan State University
        8.Norfolk State University
        9.Tennessee State University
        10.Texas Southern University
        11.Tuskegee University

        In addition, the FAA places a very high priority not only on
    inspiring the aerospace workforce of the future, but on ensuring that
    our workforce is one that is diverse and representative of our nation's
    population. One of the four main goals of the FAA's Science Technology
    Engineering and Math Aviation and Space Education (STEM AVSED)
    corporate strategy is to ensure that all students, regardless of race,
    gender, geographic location, physical disabilities, and financial
    background have access to pathways to aerospace careers. As an example,
    our Adopt-a-School program--that targets schools that have majority
    underserved and/or underrepresented populations--will kick off this
    school year and will introduce 4th grade students to various aerospace
    careers and concepts, including commercial space.
        Lastly, the FAA is looking forward receiving the report from the
    Youth Access to American Jobs in Aviation Task Force, which will
    include recommendations on how to ensure a more diverse aerospace
    workforce moving into the future. We are certainly doing our part to
    participate in this program, and I fully support its work.

                                   __________
                   memo referenced in response to question 2:
    Memorandum of Understanding Between the National Aeronautics and Space
       Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration Regarding
           Achievement of Mutual Goals in Commercial Space Activities
        The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (``NASA'') and
    the Federal Aviation Administration (``FAA''), through this Memorandum
    of Understanding (``MOU''), affirm their intent to continue their
    longstanding partnership on mutually beneficial commercial space
    activities in furtherance of U.S. national space policy and commercial
    space transportation-related interests. In this MOU, NASA and the FAA
    may be individually referred to as a ``Party'' and collectively
    referred to as the ``Parties.''
    I. Background
        NASA and the FAA have enjoyed a successful and longstanding
    relationship in support of both Parties' efforts to bring commercial
    crew and cargo activities to fruition as well as bolstering the pace
    and scope of American aerospace innovations. This cooperation was
    highlighted by the successful Commercial Crew Program's demonstration
    and operational missions to the International Space Station, which
    greatly benefitted from several years of effective cooperation between
    NASA and the FAA. The close partnership between NASA and the FAA has
    afforded the Parties the opportunity to further other activities in
    their respective mission areas based on experiences and lessons learned
    through this partnership.
        NASA and the FAA also have a strong existing relationship on
    commercial suborbital spaceflight whereby NASA's Flight Opportunities
    program relies on FAA licensing and regulations when fulfilling its
    mission of facilitating rapid demonstration of promising technologies
    for space exploration, discovery, and the expansion of space commerce
    through suborbital testing with industry flight providers. NASA's
    Flight Opportunities program also has provided test flights for FAA-
    sponsored safety enabling technologies, in particular through the FAA's
    Center of Excellence for Commercial Space Transportation. Recently,
    NASA and the FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation collaborated
    on developing the framework for flying NASA-sponsored spaceflight
    participants on commercial suborbital flights, allowing researchers
    from industry and academia to propose to fly with their NASA-sponsored
    payloads for the first time. NASA is also collaborating with the FAA on
    commercial suborbital spaceflight activities through the Commercial
    Crew Program's Suborbital Crew (SubC) efforts to extend suborbital
    space transportation capabilities for NASA astronauts and other NASA
    personnel. NASA seeks to enter into public-private partnerships to
    improve airspace, passenger, and crew safety while enhancing the
    capabilities of commercial suborbital point-to-point spacecraft.
        NASA and the FAA have complementary and interdependent interests in
    (1) creating a robust commercial space industry to achieve safe,
    reliable, and cost-effective access to space, and (2) enhancing the
    competitiveness, safety, and affordability of American aerospace
    capabilities including next-generation capabilities such as suborbital
    spaceflight systems. Continuing this partnership is critical to
    achieving the goals and objectives of multiple U.S. space policies,
    including the 2020 National Space Policy and Space Policy Directives 1,
    2, and 3.
    II. Scope
        This MOU is intended to support commercial space activities related
    to the transport of government and non-government passengers, cargo,
    and payloads for both orbital and suborbital missions in a safe, cost-
    effective manner that avoids conflicting requirements and multiple sets
    of standards. The MOU is also intended to advance U.S. Government and
    commercial interests in developing a prosperous American commercial
    space industry. In support of these goals, the Parties intend to
    exchange knowledge and best practices and may pursue collaborative
    commercial aerospace-related activities in a variety of areas
    consistent with each Party's mission and applicable law.
        Areas in which the Parties seek to work together to continue their
    successful cooperation and pursue new collaborations include but are
    not limited to:

        Launch and Reentry Industry Framework

          +Provide a stable framework between NASA requirements and FAA
    regulations for the U.S. space launch industry, including human
    spaceflight, that is transparent, avoids conflicting requirements and
    multiple sets of standards, and encourages growth and innovation.
          +Increase transparency during the license review process by
    developing applicant guidance in the form of an Advisory Circular and
    interagency standard operating procedures for when agencies may seek
    additional information.
          +Develop and foster best practices for spacecraft conjunction
    assessment and on-orbit operations, including large constellations.
          +Advance the interests of those supporting private astronaut
    missions by collaborating to ensure consistency between NASA contract
    or agreement requirements and FAA statutes and regulations.
          +Advance the interests of U.S. commercial launch operators
    responsible for transporting domestic and international partner
    astronauts on suborbital crewed missions, as well as missions to low-
    Earth orbit (``LEO,'' including to the International Space Station, and
    future private sector free-flying platforms).

        Medical

          +Through their respective Chief Health and Medical Officer and
    Federal Air Surgeon or their designees, seek to share de-identified
    spaceflight clinical medical data, information, and knowledge on the
    biomedical (physiological and pathological) effects of orbital and
    suborbital spaceflight (long and short-duration) among occupants of
    space vehicles and space habitats, including post-flight medical
    aspects.

        Safety

          +Advance both public safety and human spaceflight safety.
          +Coordinate on lessons learned from mishap investigations.
          +Coordinate on an approach for sharing safety data with the
    public to enhance understanding of the known risks of space.
        Suborbital Spaceflight

          +NASA seeks to work with and rely on FAA regulation and licensing
    of commercial suborbital spaceflight transportation providers to
    strategically invest in and facilitate rapid demonstration of promising
    space technologies including point-to-point transportation, test and
    qualify spaceflight hardware, and conduct human-tended microgravity
    research, astronaut training, and human spaceflight activities.
          +Seek out areas for collaborative research opportunities, jointly
    and with academia or industry when practical, to advance technologies
    and scientific knowledge that will benefit the commercial space
    transportation industry.
          +NASA and the FAA seek to advance the interests of a commercial
    suborbital point-to-point pilot program with designated spaceports,
    airspace design, sequencing, launch and landing windows, etc.

        Individual Preparation for Human Spaceflight

          +Collaborate on best practices for familiarization of
    participants with spaceflight safety factors (individual, operational,
    and environmental), individual evaluation/selection techniques, and
    personal qualifications for orbital and suborbital flights.
    III. Collaboration on Specific Activities
        The roles and responsibilities of each Party for specific
    activities will be documented in non-binding Joint Program Management
    Plans at the program level if needed. Should both Parties agree to
    enter into binding obligations in connection with the activities
    described in this MOU, the Parties will negotiate and enter into
    separate agreements, fully independent of this MOU, and as permitted by
    and in accordance with law and the respective Parties' policies and
    processes.
    IV. Authority
        The FAA is entering into this MOU under the authority of 49 U.S.C.
    106(l) (6) and 106(m).
    V. Points of Contact
        The following personnel are designated as the Points of Contact
    between the Parties in the performance of this MOU:

    Technical Points of Contact

    NASA

    Philip McAlister
    Director, Commercial Spaceflight Development Division
    Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate
    [Email and phone number omitted from published record]

    Christopher Baker
    Small Spacecraft Technology and Flight Opportunities Program Executive
    Space Technology Mission Directorate
    [Email and phone number omitted from published record]

    FAA

    Randy Repcheck
    (A) Exec Dir, Office of Operational Safety
    Office of Commercial Space Transportation, FAA
    [Email and phone number omitted from published record]

    Administrative Points of Contact

    NASA

    Jennifer Troxell
    Senior Interagency Programs Specialist
    Office of International and Interagency Relations
    [Email and phone number omitted from published record]

    FAA

    Pam Underwood
    Director, Office of Spaceports
    FAA Office of Commercial Space Transportation
    [Email and phone number omitted from published record]
    VI. Miscellaneous
        A.NASA and FAA agree that the information and data exchanged in
    furtherance of the activities under this MOU will be exchanged without
    use and disclosure restrictions, unless required by law in accordance
    with restrictive markings on the information or data. Each party shall
    take appropriate measures to protect proprietary, privileged or
    otherwise confidential information obtained as a result of its
    activities under this MOU.
        B.This MOU is strictly for the management and planning purposes of
    each of the Parties.
        C.This MOU does not support an obligation of funds, nor does it
    constitute a binding commitment upon either Party or create any legal
    rights or obligations for either Party.
        D.Nothing in this MOU shall be interpreted as limiting,
    superseding, or otherwise affecting a Party from conducting normal
    operations or making decisions in carrying out its mission and duties.
        E.This MOU does not limit or restrict the Parties from
    participating in similar activities or arrangements with other
    entities.
        F.Each Party shall be responsible for any and all expenses incurred
    by that Party relating to this MOU, and neither Party will be
    responsible for any expense incurred by the other Party unless
    specifically agreed to in writing, separate from and independent of
    this MOU.
        G.Administration of this MOU and coordination of subsequent NASA-
    FAA agreements for activities identified in section II of this MOU will
    be the responsibility of the offices identified as the ``Administrative
    Points of Contact'' in section V of this MOU.
        H.Either Party may unilaterally terminate this MOU upon ninety (90)
    calendar days written notice to the other Party.
        I.This MOU becomes effective upon the date of the last signature
    below (``Effective Date'') and shall remain in effect until either (a)
    a Party decides to terminate its participation according to Section VI
    (H) of this MOU, or (b) ten (10) calendar years from the Effective
    Date, whichever comes first.
        J.Any modification to this MOU will be executed in writing and
    signed by an authorized representative of NASA and the FAA.
    VII. Signatures
        The respective authorized officials of each organization hereby
    execute this MOU on the date set forth below.
                                             James Bridenstine,
          Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
                                                 Date: January 4, 2021.
                                                 Steve Dickson,
                        Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration.
                                                 Date: January 4, 2021.

      Questions from Hon. Nikema Williams to Wayne R. Monteith, Associate
      Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation
                                 Administration

        Question 1. Everything I do in Congress is to give the people of
    Georgia's Fifth District a seat at the table. As we discuss the
    development of commercial space transportation, we need to center the
    needs of our constituents in the conversation.
        To start, I'd like to get more information on how more frequent
    commercial space transportation can be harmonized with the transition
    to a carbon-neutral economy.
        Mr. Monteith, in what ways can the Federal Aviation Administration
    provide leadership toward use of sustainable fuels in commercial space
    transportation, and what environmental significance would this have as
    commercial space transportation grows?
        Answer. The FAA can provide leadership toward the use of
    sustainable fuels by continuing to make informed decisions about the
    potential environmental effects of: (1) issuing vehicle and launch site
    operator licenses and permits, and (2) greenhouse gas emissions and air
    quality. To that end, the FAA is supportive of this Administration's
    efforts to provide guidance on assessing greenhouse gas emissions and
    climate change effects in the National Environmental Policy Act
    process.
        The FAA also provides leadership in the development and use of
    sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) that are replacements for kerosene jet
    fuels. To the extent that commercial space providers are utilizing
    kerosene as their energy source, FAA's ongoing efforts could be
    leveraged to support sustainable fuels in commercial space. FAA
    initiatives on SAF focus on:
        Safety testing and evaluation of candidate SAFs in
    partnership with industry to enable addition to the ASTM International
    jet fuel specification which allows for commercial aviation use of the
    fuel in turbine engines.
        Analysis of environmental, economic and supply potential
    through the FAA's ASCENT Center of Excellence University research
    consortium to understand the opportunities to reduce costs and enable
    expansion of supply.
        Coordination among government, academic and aviation
    industry stakeholders to address challenges and engage with the
    emerging alternative jet fuels industry through FAA participation on a
    federal SAF interagency working group and through FAA sponsorship of
    the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative.

        The FAA is committed to fulfilling directives from the President's
    recent Executive Orders addressing climate change and environmental
    justice.

        Question 2. You also mentioned in your testimony that the Federal
    Aviation Administration has a key role to play in ensuring equal access
    to the airspace.
        Can you tell us more about the Federal Aviation Administration's
    goals to ensure the needs of users in the national airspace system are
    safely and effectively balanced with those of the space industry? How
    can achieving efficiency in balancing these needs serve everyday people
    and their needs from the transportation system in general?
        Answer. The FAA strives to reach the next level of safety and
    efficiency and to demonstrate global leadership in how we safely
    integrate new users and technologies into our aviation system. We are
    currently working to integrate several new and innovative users into
    our National Airspace System (NAS), commercial space, unmanned aircraft
    systems, and advanced air mobility.
        Integrating commercial space into the NAS safely and effectively is
    how we can best ensure that the needs of all users of the NAS are met.
    Commercial space operations are currently treated as ``special cases''
    in which air traffic controllers block off sections of airspace for
    extended periods of time for a single launch. Although this process is
    currently manageable, it is unsustainable in the long run given the
    expected growth in commercial space launches.
        We are actively working on solutions to address how commercial
    space will grow within the NAS alongside commercial, general aviation,
    and other new entrants so that the flying public is inconvenienced as
    little as possible, while also ensuring that the commercial space
    industry and its jobs and missions do not flee overseas.
        AST continues its work with the FAA's Air Traffic Organization on
    the Space Data Integrator technology. This safety-based technology,
    which has automated the previous manual processes, will enable the FAA
    to monitor a space mission's progress as it flies through the airspace.
    When deployed, this technology will enable the FAA to better manage the
    airspace that must be closed to other users and more quickly implement
    and release airspace restrictions as a mission progresses.
        In addition, the FAA's Air Traffic Organization is also working on
    two techniques to reduce the impact of commercial space launches on
    aviation.
        Time Based Launch Procedures (TBLP) have been implemented
    for launch and reentry operations at Kennedy Space Center/Cape
    Canaveral Air Force Station (KSC/CCAFS). TBLP utilizes existing Traffic
    Flow Management procedures and processes to more efficiently manage
    operations at KSC/CCAFS. Where appropriate, TBLP will be expanded to
    other spaceports and federal ranges this year.
        Dynamic Launch and Reentry Windows (DLRW) procedures have
    been developed for KSC/CCAFS. DLRW utilizes mission triggers in launch
    and reentry operator mission processes to gain further efficiencies in
    addition to those afforded by TBLP. Where appropriate, DLRW will be
    expanded to other spaceports and federal ranges this year.

        At the FAA, we recognize that our role is not just limited to the
    safety of the airspace--but to ensure equal access to it as well. We
    are fully engaged in balancing the needs of all airspace users--
    including traditional manned aircraft, drones, commercial space
    transportation, and others.

       Questions from Hon. Garret Graves to Wayne R. Monteith, Associate
      Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation, Federal Aviation
                                 Administration

        Question 1. Gen. Monteith, a much-touted feature of the new launch
    rules are the incremental review processes that allow applicants to
    advance new concepts, critically important for companies advancing the
    state of the art for space launch. How is implementation of this
    incremental review going? Are there some good examples to point to of
    this is opening new doors to innovation?
        Answer. Incremental review allows FAA to make determinations
    earlier in the licensing process, benefiting the industry by reducing
    regulatory uncertainty and providing increased transparency with
    incremental approvals ahead of a determination on the license in its
    entirety.
        The FAA accepted its first incremental review approach on June 3,
    2021. FAA is working with several other applicants who have expressed
    interest in submitting their application using incremental review. The
    new streamlined launch and reentry rules allow an applicant to submit
    an application for a safety review in modules using an incremental
    approach approved by the FAA. An applicant must have its incremental
    review approach approved by the FAA so that the FAA can ensure that the
    modules can be reviewed independently and in a workable order under an
    agreed time frame.
        FAA designed the new launch and reentry rules to allow for
    innovation in several ways. In addition to incremental review,
    performance-based rules give industry greater flexibility to develop
    new means of compliance that meet their objectives while maintaining
    public safety. The new rules offer alternatives to flight abort and
    flight safety analysis requirements based on demonstrated reliability,
    use of equivalent level of safety for the measurement of a high
    consequence event, and by allowing application process alternatives as
    agreed to by the FAA.

        Question 2. Gen. Monteith, the flexible approach taken by writing
    performance-based new rules creates a lot of room for applicants to
    bring forward innovative plans for safe launch to the FAA to evaluate
    and render decision. What is the status of the advisory circulars that
    help applicants understand what might be approved? How can stakeholders
    weigh in on the content of these advisory circulars, both before and
    after their publication?
        Answer. The advisory circulars (AC) are being written and
    coordinated as expeditiously as possible. Two ACs have been published,
    with eight more projected to be published and available for stakeholder
    use by 30 September 2021.
        Stakeholders have several means to weigh in on the AC prior to
    publication. The Common Standards Working Group (FAA, NASA, and USSF)
    review and provide comments on all ACs prior to final review and
    publication of each AC. All stakeholders can view the list of published
    and planned ACs on the FAAs external website (https://www.faa.gov/
    space/streamlined_licensing_process/media/Part_
    450_Means_of_Compliance_Table_with_dates.pdf) and provide input to the
    FAA on any of the ACs--either prepublication or after they are
    published. After publication, the FAA seeks public comment on each
    document and will issue an updated version if warranted based on
    comments received. Each guidance document also contains a feedback form
    with instructions on how to provide feedback at any time. At the end of
    every published AC is this statement: ``If you find an error in this
    AC, have recommendations for improving it, or have suggestions for new
    items/subjects to be added, you may let us know by (1) emailing this
    form to ASTApplications@faa.gov, or (2) faxing it to (202) 267-5450.''
    We review and adjudicate all recommendations and will promptly issue a
    revision to incorporate improvements, additions, or to correct errors.

    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Heather Krause, Director,
         Physical Infrastructure, U.S. Government Accountability Office

        Question 1. Ms. Krause, this Subcommittee's role focuses on
    managing the safe integration of commercial spaceflight through the
    national airspace system. Ms. Krause, in your written statement you
    note, ``full and efficient integration of all users of the National
    Airspace System is years away and will require continued work and
    focus.'' How are you working with the FAA on this integration and with
    which element of FAA are you coordinating?
        Answer. Our 2019 report \1\--issued in response to the most recent
    request we received to review these and other issues--identified
    actions FAA was taking to increase efficiency of how launches are
    integrated into the National Airspace System. In doing this work, we
    found that various offices within FAA were supporting efforts that
    included, but were not limited to, developing new technologies;
    assessing potential changes to policies, procedures, and regulations;
    and coordinating with aviation- and space-industry stakeholders. For
    example, FAA's Air Traffic Organization, Office of Commercial Space
    Transportation, Office of Airports, and Office of NextGen played a part
    in identifying and developing steps--outlined in two internal FAA
    documents--to help guide the development and implementation of its
    actions related to integrating space launch and reentry operations. As
    part of our 2019 report, we did not make any recommendations on FAA's
    ongoing actions related to airspace integration.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Commercial Space Transportation: Improvements to FAA's
    Workforce Planning Needed to Prepare for the Industry's Anticipated
    Growth, GAO-19-437 (Washington, D.C.: May 23, 2019).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since that time, we obtained some updated information on FAA's
    progress in making operational changes to increase efficiency. For
    example, FAA reported that on June 30, 2021, it activated the use of
    its Space Data Integrator (SDI) prototype that provides real-time
    situational awareness of a launch vehicle, including position,
    altitude, speed, and if the vehicle deviates from its expected launch
    path. FAA reported that SDI allows FAA to safely reopen the airspace
    more quickly and reduce the number of aircraft and other airspace users
    affected by a launch or reentry. Although these developments are
    promising, given the complexity of monitoring space launches through
    the National Airspace System, it will be important for FAA to maintain
    vigilant oversight of its SDI efforts to ensure the program's benefits
    are realized in a timely manner.

        Question 2. Ms. Krause, regarding launch licenses, your written
    testimony stated that ``Industry growth may present challenges to AST's
    approach to overseeing compliance and enforcement.'' What, in your
    view, are the safety implications of these challenges?
        Answer. AST's role as a regulator of commercial space launch
    providers is fundamental to the continued safe growth of the industry.
    With the anticipated continued growth and development of new
    technologies and types of launches and supporting infrastructure, it is
    vital that AST ensure that the size, composition, and skills of its
    workforce are aligned with its projected workload, including the amount
    and type of work. AST has made strides in more strategically aligning
    its workforce with evolving industry demands. For example, in response
    to one of the four recommendations we made in 2019, AST assessed its
    workforce to identify skills and competencies that are currently needed
    among its workforce as well as specific competency areas that may be
    needed in the future and reported that it developed strategies to
    address any workforce skills gaps.
        It will be important for AST to follow through on its other planned
    efforts in response to our recommendations to ensure it can oversee the
    safe growth of the industry. For example, AST should continue:
        1.developing workload metrics that encompass the whole office and
    would allow AST to determine an appropriate workforce size and
    composition; and
        2.working with FAA's Office of Labor Analysis to extend AST's
    workload projections to a 5-year time period and to include an approach
    to address uncertainty.

        AST's approach to overseeing compliance and enforcement mainly
    consists of safety inspections before, during, and after FAA-regulated
    operations that can impact public safety and the safety of property. In
    light of the growing number and diversification of launch and reentry
    operations and locations, AST's approach to overseeing compliance and
    enforcement may warrant review. AST announced in July 2021, that it is
    increasing its safety inspection staff and recently opened a field
    office in Houston, Texas, to, according to the agency, allow it to more
    effectively and efficiently monitor the on-going testing programs and
    planned space tourism operations in Texas and New Mexico. We plan to
    begin a review of FAA's safety oversight of commercial space activities
    at the request of this committee later this year.

       Questions from Hon. Garret Graves to Salvatore T. ``Tory'' Bruno,
       President and Chief Executive Officer, United Launch Alliance, LLC

        Question 1. Can you please describe how a launch window is
    determined? Are there instances where reducing the launch window to
    accommodate air traffic is possible? What are the downsides to reducing
    a launch window?
        Answer. Launch windows are determined directly by the orbital
    destination of the spacecraft, not by the convenience of the launch
    provider. Any given orbital destination dictates the targeted time of
    day of the launch. This is a precise moment. The launch window, or span
    of time before and after this instantaneous moment, is determined by
    the physics of the destination orbit and the performance of the rocket.
    The most common duration of a launch window is between 30 and 90
    minutes. This span of time is essential in order to reliably launch on
    any given day. Unlike an aircraft, a Space Launch Vehicle cannot fly
    around or over thunderstorms. It cannot lift off if there is lightning
    within several miles of the pad or cumulus clouds overhead because of
    the catastrophic risk of a lightning strike to a rocket carrying
    upwards of a million pounds of highly explosive propellants. Most
    launches occur from the Cape Canaveral Space Force Station, a location
    infamous for its inconsistent weather. Additionally, a SLV is a very
    complex, twenty to thirty story tall machine that must be loaded with
    extremely cold cryogenic propellants, who's thermodynamic state is
    precisely controlled by complex ground systems. Given the delicate and
    complicated nature of these processes, along with the critical nature
    of often unique payloads, it is not uncommon for a countdown to be
    paused while an unexpected issue is safely worked through. When a
    countdown is recycled due to weather or a technical issue, it typically
    takes 15 to 20 minutes to recycle the count after resolution or
    clearing of the skies. A significant curtailment of the available
    launch window would leave a launch without an adequate opportunity to
    work around weather or technical issues and result in frequent scrubs.
    This will lead to multiple days of air traffic disruptions and millions
    of dollars of expense as launch crews extend and propellants are lost.

        Question 2. In your testimony, you talk about various forms of
    reentry. Can you please describe the differences between controlled and
    uncontrolled reentry of satellites or rocket bodies?
        Answer. Because the reentry into the Earth's atmosphere of objects
    that do not fully burn up in the process poses risks to human
    populations, critical infrastructure, and the natural environment, it
    is important to design, engineer, test, and operate those objects, so
    as to ensure that their reentry is controlled to eliminate or minimize
    those risks.
        In a controlled reentry, a spacecraft or rocket stage is still
    operable and will use thrust to position itself in a way that its
    reentry is relatively planned and predictable. In most cases, these
    reentries will take place over remote ocean areas. Saving fuel to
    control a reentry incurs a cost on the operator, but it is a price
    worth paying to protect the orbital environment and ensure our use of
    space.
        Uncontrolled reentries take place because an operator has lost
    control of their spacecraft or rocket stage. Usually this is due to a
    lack of fuel or some type of malfunction. In this scenario, the
    spacecraft or rocket stage is at the mercy of gravity and could reenter
    over a populated area, and it is very difficult to predict where the
    reentry will occur until minutes ahead of time. We saw this recently
    with the reentry of a Chinese Long March 5B. Uncontrolled reentries
    propose a low but very real risk to people on the ground and users of
    the National Airspace System. In some cases, uncontrolled reentries can
    even pose risks to astronauts and the International Space Station
    (ISS), particularly when we are dealing with low earth orbit satellites
    positioned at a higher altitude than the ISS.

     Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Frank DiBello, President
                   and Chief Executive Officer, Space Florida

        Question 1. Mr. DiBello, in your written testimony you ``call on
    Congress to authorize and fund an infrastructure program aimed at
    enabling America's space transportation leadership.'' What do you think
    the necessary funding numbers should be, and do you believe there is
    congressional or political receptivity to making this type of
    investment and finding a source to pay for it?
        Answer. Thank you for your question, Congresswoman Johnson. To
    remain competitive in an increasingly contested global space market in
    which China and others have become increasingly emboldened, the US must
    invest in our space transportation infrastructure. Tomorrow, the House
    Space Subcommittee is holding a hearing entitled, ``Enabling Mission
    Success From the Ground Up: Addressing NASA's Urgent Infrastructure
    Needs'' (emphasis added). Beyond federal assets, we know that the
    availability of state, local, and privately-operated launch and reentry
    sites across our nation make the US space transportation system
    stronger and better able to adapt to industry innovation and changing
    global markets, and offer the US government new opportunities for
    meeting its space lift needs.
        In the State of Florida, space has long been designated as a mode
    of transportation, which has allowed our organization to partner with
    private capital markets to invest in infrastructure improvements at the
    Cape and elsewhere around the state. However, the network of commercial
    and privately-operated spaceports extends across our country, beyond
    Florida to Texas, California, New Mexico, Alaska, Oklahoma, and
    Colorado. Our engagement with our colleagues in this emerging U.S.
    spaceport system convinces us there is broad political receptivity to
    making investments in these non-federal assets that strengthen our
    nation's leadership in the exploration and practical use of space.
        The aviation industry began with significant and intentional
    government support before the marketplace was mature enough to generate
    revenue to support airport improvements. Space Florida is aware that
    this is a sensitive topic for some, and we feel strongly that all
    stakeholders should be consulted to find the best way forward. Whatever
    the solution decided upon by stakeholders, the importance of timely
    investment in space infrastructure cannot be overstated.

    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Captain Joseph G. DePete,
             President, Air Line Pilots Association, International

        Question 1. Captain Joseph G. DePete, your testimony details
    serious concerns about safety, not only for pilots but for the millions
    of people in our nation and throughout the world. You mention, among
    other concerns, examples of various pieces of out of control, falling
    debris, some of which weigh tens of thousands of pounds and are moving
    at very, very fast speeds. So, I am wondering, in your communications
    with the FAA, private sector industry leaders, and in your recent
    letter to the International Civil Aviation Organization's Secretary
    General, Dr. Fang Liu listing your concerns, what kinds of responses
    have you received? Do the stakeholders seem to be taking safety
    concerns seriously and do you believe they have plans to confront these
    very serious safety issues in their future work?
        Answer. Thank you for your follow-up questions regarding our
    testimony on the Subcommittee on Aviation hearing, ``Starships and
    Stripes Forever--An Examination of the FAA's Role in the Future of
    Spaceflight''. I am writing this letter in response to those questions.
    Communications with the FAA, Aviation Stakeholders and the Commercial
            Space Industry.
        ALPA regularly attends several FAA and private sector industry
    venues such as the Commercial Space Transportation Advisory Committee
    (COMSTAC). This committee, established under the authority of the
    Department of Transportation (DOT), provides information, advice, and
    recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation through the Federal
    Aviation Administration. ALPA attends the COMSTAC as a member of the
    public.
        There does not appear to be adequate representation or a broad
    official voice for the traditional aviation industry on the COMSTAC,
    with the exception of Airlines for America (A4A). The COMSTAC primarily
    focuses on the regulatory requirements to gain access to the National
    Airspace System (NAS) as well as the system requirements for commercial
    space vehicles.
        ALPA also participates on FAA Safety Risk Management (SRM) Panels
    for operational issues impacting the NAS, including commercial space
    launch. Previously, ALPA and industry stakeholders held positions as
    voting panel members on SRM panels. The FAA's decision several years
    ago to exclude external stakeholders as voting panel members has
    reduced the voice and opinions of stakeholders external to the FAA
    significantly. Without an active vote, traditional aviation
    stakeholders' recommendations are heard but often discounted by the
    voting panel members. Our concerns have been echoed by other aviation
    stakeholders, both in the detail of how FAA manages launch and recovery
    operations, as well as the higher level concerns about participation on
    Safety Panels.
        FAA and commercial space committees and workgroups often lack
    transparency. The majority of the FAA commercial space committees or
    workgroups are internal groups within FAA Lines of Business (LOB) or
    FAA and the commercial space private sector which ALPA does not have
    access to. Proprietary information is usually cited as the reason
    provided to external stakeholders for exclusion from the ongoing
    dialogue between the FAA and the commercial space operators.
    ICAO industry response (Dr. Fang Liu)
        On May 14, 2021, I sent a letter to ICAO secretary general Dr. Fang
    Liu calling attention to the threat posed by the reentry of debris from
    orbit as commercial space operations continue to grow in frequency
    and--in recent months, two uncontrolled reentries of rockets.
        In the letter, I urged ICAO to work with the United Nations to
    develop global standards for launch planning and recovery, to promote
    standards for vehicles that are designed to burn up entirely upon
    reentry, to work with national regulators and air navigation service
    providers to provide timely warning of any reentry, and to have
    procedures to route aircraft away from potential reentry hazards.
        Dr. Fang Liu, ICAO Secretary General, responded to my letter
    assuring me that ``the primary objective of ICAO remains the safety of
    international civil aviation''. Dr. Liu highlighted ICAO's involvement
    with civil aviation authorities, air navigation service providers, and
    inter-governmental organizations in accordance with Assembly Resolution
    A40-26 and the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Space. However, the
    response lacked detail how ICAO provides specific guidance that
    prevents future events like those that I highlighted in my testimony.
    Are stakeholders taking safety concerns seriously.
        While the commercial space industry and FAA state that safety is a
    priority, we are concerned that their response to commercial space
    transportation safety is inadequate. There still seems to be the
    consensus that the ``big sky'' theory is acceptable. What I mean is
    that there is a small likelihood of a collision between rocket debris
    and an air carrier aircraft, simply because there is so much airspace.
    Many believe the risk is acceptably small. However airline operations
    abandoned this belief long ago after several mid-air collisions, and
    Congress has required all commercial airliners to carry equipment to
    avoid a mid-air collision for nearly 30 years \1\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See Regulatory History section, https://
    www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/11/01/01-27340/collision-
    avoidance-systems
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        On December 9, 2020 SpaceX tested their Serial Number 8 (SN8)
    Starship prototype at their Boca Chica, Texas facility--which was
    conducted in violation of its launch license issued by the FAA \2\.
    Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX and the company's Chief Executive Officer
    (CEO), admonished the FAA (via Tweet) as hindering progress of the
    commercial space industry. As you may be aware, the spacecraft exploded
    during the landing sequence, spreading debris into the air and
    surrounding community. I'm sure you would agree that this was a serious
    violation of safety and undermined FAA's authority in this area.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://spacenews.com/spacex-violated-launch-license-in-
    starship-sn8-launch/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        A significant element in the discussion on the level of safety of
    commercial space operations, is that Commercial Space uses a different
    safety standard than aviation. In commercial space there is an
    ``expected casualty'' limit for an uninvolved member of the public
    should be no greater than 1 in 10,000 flights, with a risk to any
    individual not exceeding 1 in 1 million. In contrast, aviation's target
    level of safety is that a fatality should not occur more often than 1
    in 1 billion, or 1000 times more stringent.
        If commercial space were isolated and had no impacts on aviation,
    this might be acceptable. The problem is that commercial space and
    aviation operations share the same limited resource, the national
    airspace.
        In an attempt to reconcile this difference, the FAA has introduced
    increased risk to traditional NAS stakeholders under the Acceptable
    level of Risk (ALR) concept. The concept initially managed the
    increased risk through exposure to potential falling debris based on a
    space vehicle's trajectory. The concept was recently revised and now
    allows the aircraft to operate along the same trajectory/flight path of
    the space vehicle. In the event of a debris generating event,
    commercial airline aircraft will have to rely on ATC procedures and
    capability to clear the impacted airspace before falling debris reaches
    the aircraft.
        The FAA currently does not plan to notify aircraft of the
    possibility of debris hazard under this new concept, and therefore
    pilots and operators will be unable to take action on their own to
    avoid this additional risk.
    Plans to confront safety issues in their future work:
        The FAA has started to focus more on integration of space
    operations as evidenced by the May 2020 space integration Concept of
    Operation. The FAA envisions real-time analysis and data sharing
    between commercial space operators and the FAA because the FAA will
    have telemetry information from the spacecraft which will allow them to
    calculate hazard areas in real-time as the spaceflight progresses. FAA
    would clear aircraft from the airspace that will be used by the
    spacecraft, as well as the immediate surrounding area where a
    spacecraft mishap would result in a serious hazard.
        If a spacecraft mishap occurs, the immediate surrounding area would
    already be clear of aircraft. The FAA would then take actions in real
    time to move aircraft using real-time calculations away from where
    spacecraft debris would fall. This capability is predicated on reliable
    and real-time communications of spacecraft telemetry.
        It is further assumed in the FAA Concept of Operations that
    airworthiness standards would be issued by the FAA, allowing the
    reliability of spacecraft to also be taken into consideration. Without
    the airworthiness standards for the spacecraft to help reduce the
    likelihood of catastrophic events, it is unlikely that integration of
    commercial space operations can be achieved.
        ALPA is ready and willing to assist the FAA as it evolves the
    management of space launches, so that a single level of safety can be
    provided at all times.