[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 [email protected].
    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 [email protected], 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.