    [House Hearing, 119 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                       DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND
                       HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
                    RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                     HEARINGS

                                     BEFORE A

                               SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                             HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                  FIRST SESSION
                                  ______________

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, AND
              HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES

                         STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas, Chairman

      HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky		JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina,
      JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida		  Ranking Member
      TONY GONZALES, Texas			MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
      RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana		BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
      JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona		NORMA J. TORRES, California
      DAVE P. JOYCE, Ohio			PETE AGUILAR, California
      STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma,		ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
        Vice Chair
      DALE W. STRONG, Alabama

      NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full
    committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking
    minority member of the full committee, are authorized to sit as members
    of all subcommittees.

                           Doug Disrud, Avery Pierson,
                      Andrew Giacini, and Nathan Silverstein
                                Subcommittee Staff
                                __________________

                                      PART 2
                                                                       Page
      Federal Aviation Administration................................     1
      U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development...............    61

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                ___________________

              Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
      61-855	             WASHINGTON : 2026
    _______________________________________________________________________

                       HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                                    ----------
                          TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman

      HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky,
        Chairman Emeritus
      ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
      MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
      JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
      KEN CALVERT, California
      MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
      STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
      CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
        Tennessee
      DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
      ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
      MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
      DAVID G. VALADAO, California
      DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
      JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
      JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
      BEN CLINE, Virginia
      GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
      ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
      TONY GONZALES, Texas
      JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
      MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
      MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
      RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana
      ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia
      STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
      SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
      JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
      JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
      CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina
      MARK ALFORD, Missouri
      NICK LaLOTA, New York
      DALE W. STRONG, Alabama
      CELESTE MALOY, Utah
      RILEY M. MOORE, West Virginia

      ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut,
        Ranking Member
      STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
      MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
      JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina
      SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
      BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
      DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
      HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
      CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
      MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
      GRACE MENG, New York
      MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
      PETE AGUILAR, California
      LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
      BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
      NORMA J. TORRES, California
      ED CASE, Hawaii
      ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
      JOSH HARDER, California
      LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
      SUSIE LEE, Nevada
      JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
      MIKE LEVIN, California
      MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
      VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
      FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
      MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ,
        Washington
      GLENN IVEY, Maryland

                    Susan Ross, Chief Clerk and Staff Director

                                       (II)

       DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
                    RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026

                                  ----------

                                               Wednesday, June 4, 2025.

                        FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

                                    WITNESS

    MR. CHRIS ROCHELEAU, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL AVIATION
        ADMINISTRATION
        Mr. Womack. This hearing will come to order. It is 10
    o'clock. And as per our disciplined approach, we like to start
    things on time around here. I know that runs a bit counter to
    some of the other activities of the Congress, but not here.
        Today we welcome testimony from Chris Rocheleau, Acting
    Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
        Administrator Rocheleau, thank you for joining us today as
    we review the FAA's budget request for the coming fiscal year.
        We have seen air travel rebound since the pandemic with
    passenger numbers now consistently exceeding pre-pandemic
    levels across our aviation system.
        Aviation remains a critical driver of economic growth.
    Commercial aviation contributes more than a trillion dollars to
    our economy, and new technologies promise to deliver more
    opportunities while improving the quality of life for all
    Americans.
        I am particularly excited to see how advancements in the
    aviation sector provide more opportunities in areas of high
    growth, like the district that I represent in northwest
    Arkansas.
        However, rapid growth brings challenges, and we have seen
    that very subject in the last few months. We must acknowledge
    the recent aviation accidents that have renewed scrutiny of our
    safety systems. The tragic crash that occurred on January 29 at
    Reagan National is still fresh on our minds--a sobering
    reminder of the real-life consequences when multiple parts of
    our National Airspace System falter.
        Incidents like this, along with the Alaska Airlines door
    plug failure, multiple near misses in the air and on the
    ground, and a slew of general aviation accidents, make it clear
    that our work to strengthen oversight, training, and
    coordination is far from finished. Safety must remain our
    shared, unyielding priority.
        Our airspace is becoming more crowded and more complex. The
    infrastructure we rely on is reaching the end of its useful
    life.
        This committee must take a hard look at how we fund the
    maintenance and replacement of infrastructure and equipment
    that create the backbone of our aviation system. We must work
    together to ensure that all aviation can flourish while
    maintaining the highest possible standards of safety and
    efficiency for the millions of passengers who fly every day.
        Your extensive aviation experience will be vital as we
    navigate these issues together. I know a safe and efficient
    National Airspace System is your number one priority. It is
    also ours.
        The President's request for FAA is $22 billion, a 5 percent
    increase above the enacted 2025 level, with much of the
    increase going toward operations and facilities and equipment,
    including your new Project LIFT, which I am sure you will tell
    us about in your testimony.
        However, this budget doesn't contemplate the scale of
    improvements Secretary Duffy has announced that are necessary.
    More detail and information will be required for us to fully
    consider this eventual request. We cannot repeat the NextGen
    boondoggle where we allowed a program to drag on for decades
    while technology outpaced its implementation.
        If this committee is asked to consider additional funding,
    with the expectation the FAA can complete procurement or
    deployment through innovative contracts, the FAA must do better
    than it did under IIJA. From that bill, $2.5 billion for
    facilities and equipment remains unobligated.
        Mr. Rocheleau, as we develop our 2026 bill, I intend to
    work with you, your colleagues at the FAA, and Secretary Duffy,
    along with the aviation community, to ensure that we continue
    to support the safest, most complex aviation system in the
    world.
        Mr. Administrator, I look forward to our discussion today
    and hearing from you about the FAA's current and pending work.
    We want to know how you plan to modernize the air traffic
    system, address staffing challenges, and encourage safety
    advancements and innovation. I am confident that we can work
    together to support the critical missions of the Federal
    Aviation Administration.
        Now I would like to recognize my good friend and the
    ranking member from South Carolina, Mr. Clyburn, for his
    opening remarks.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And welcome, Acting Administrator Rocheleau. I want to
    thank you for your service as you assume leadership of the FAA
    under very difficult circumstances.
        The purpose of today's hearing is to examine how the FAA is
    using its current resources and the proposed fiscal year 2026
    funding to advance aviation safety.
        As Chair Womack just mentioned, last month we had an
    opportunity to discuss with Secretary Duffy some of the
    administration's proposed investments to modernize the air
    traffic control system.
        The discussion centered around the air traffic control
    modernization plan released last month by this administration.
    While the plan is a great conversation starter, it ignores the
    realities of cuts to FAA's staff, fair competition, overall
    cost, and most importantly, how we pay for it.
        The FAA's 2026 budget request provides nominal increases to
    backfill the air traffic controller workforce and sustain the
    FAA's aging facilities and technology, all of which I support.
        While there are proposed resources set aside for
    modernizing the FAA, I am concerned that they come at the
    expense of advancing FAA's aviation safety research,
    engineering, and development programs, which are essential
    investments to determine the best modernization and safety
    solutions for the National Airspace System.
        And though the 2026 budget request proposes hiring up to
    2,500 new air traffic controllers, it does not consider
    challenges with academy success or retention rates and early
    retirements among our existing controllers workforce.
        Meanwhile, with the constant shifts in tariffs, America is
    losing the confidence of our partners to deliver and improve
    the air traffic control system and cost-effective aviation
    manufacturing.
        American businesses, including manufacturers and suppliers,
    face uncertainty and increased costs as they are left in the
    dark. Thousands of jobs, many in high-skilled manufacturing and
    engineering, depend on the ability of United States aircraft
    manufacturers and suppliers to access global markets on fair
    and reliable terms. This is especially true for manufacturing
    in my own district and home State of South Carolina.
        Our aviation supply air system requires certainty from our
    global partners and the trust that we can deliver state of the
    art transportation and airports.
        Mr. Secretary, I strongly support robust investments in
    aviation, but we need to know that the administration's
    supplemental air traffic control plan and budget request is
    backed by action and based on current realities.
        I remain concerned that we have yet to see the full
    potential of existing FAA resources being used to address our
    most immediate threats brought forward by aging technology and
    staffing shortfalls at the FAA.
        Mr. Chairman, it is our duty on this subcommittee to
    continue helping the FAA modernize the air traffic control
    system, and in a year where we need to see more robust
    investments in FAA my hope is that it does not come at the
    expense of strengthening safety for other modes of
    transportation or keeping our seniors and working families
    housed.
        I look forward to learning more about how we can work
    together to support the advancement of the FAA. I look forward
    to hearing your testimony and yield the balance of my time.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Clyburn.
        We are joined today by the overall chairman of the House
    Appropriations Committee, my good friend, Tom Cole, even though
    he is still writhing a little bit in pain from a pair of very
    difficult losses by the Oklahoma Sooners this weekend in
    baseball and softball, though your gymnastics program is still
    world class.
        The Chairman. Thunder looks pretty good too.
        Mr. Womack. And Thunder is not bad, yeah.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for joining us today, and I will
    recognize you for any opening comments you would like to make.
        The Chairman. Well, thank you. And since you brought up an
    unrelated matter, I just want to explain those two untimely
    losses by our OU women.
        We had won the World Series four consecutive times. Of
    course, it is hosted in Oklahoma City. And so we got the team
    together and said, if we win every year, they are just going to
    quit coming. So maybe we need to lighten up, let somebody else
    slip through once, and then you young ladies--because it is a
    pretty new team. Six new starters out of nine. We graduated a
    class that had won the championship every single year they were
    in college. So we are going to let Texas Tech or Texas enjoy
    one and then they will come back and we will start all over
    again.
        But thank you. I am awfully proud of those young women.
    They are amazing.
        First, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it, Chairman
    Womack.
        And thank you, Ranking Member Clyburn.
        Welcome, Administrator Rocheleau, and thank you for coming
    before us today and, honestly, for your decades of public
    service in uniform and as a career civil servant as well. We
    appreciate it. And in the private sector. But you have been
    around aviation for a long time, done a lot of great things for
    our country, and I think you were a superb appointment.
        As we start the fiscal year, Mr. Administrator, I am
    focused on providing effective fiscal support to the FAA. We
    know you need resources to ensure the safety of our national
    airspace, support American manufacturers and innovators, and
    invest in infrastructure that improves the efficiency and
    reliability of our aviation system.
        This subcommittee will support your efforts as we develop
    our fiscal year 2026 budget. This will include addressing some
    of our aging air traffic infrastructure that is no longer
    sustainable in its current form and could become an operational
    risk.
        I will reiterate what Chairman Womack stated earlier: Our
    commitment to safety and security will be steadfast and
    unified.
        We will begin to do this within the confines of the
    President's budget while we wait to receive your broader air
    traffic control proposal.
        Now, as you know, air traffic infrastructure isn't the only
    challenging aspect of our National Airspace System. Personnel
    levels are also a systemic concern, and in particular the men
    and women who control our skies that are trained at the sole
    FAA Academy, located in Oklahoma City.
        The training provided in Oklahoma City is unmatched, and I
    appreciated having the opportunity to speak with you several
    weeks ago about your efforts to improve the completion rate of
    the talented students who attend the academy.
        As we discussed, the academy must be successful, and to be
    successful it must be properly resourced with the latest
    technology and the best instructors.
        In fiscal year 2024, while I was privileged to be the
    chairman of this subcommittee, I worked to ensure the academy
    received a significant increase for air traffic and technical
    operations training enhancements to strengthen the air traffic
    control system for our trainees.
        This committee also ensured that in our final fiscal year
    2025 appropriation, we provided funding to train an additional
    2,000 air traffic controllers, and I understand your budget
    request for fiscal year 2026 contemplates pushing that number
    potentially to as high as 2,500.
        As we advance the fiscal year 2026 appropriation, I look
    forward to working with you and the administration and my
    colleagues on both sides of the aisle to fund critical safety
    missions and transportation infrastructure needs for the
    country.
        With that, let me just add, this is a genuinely bipartisan
    subcommittee. All of us are in the skies together. We all have
    friends and family that are flying. We all are concerned about
    rail safety. We are concerned about road safety.
        And so I don't find much partisan division here. It is
    really more about figuring out, as Mr. Clyburn said, the
    ranking member, what is the right thing to do here? What are
    the investments we should be making? And for that we are going
    to rely very heavily on your judgment and your recommendations,
    and one way or another, we are going to make the investments
    that we need to make.
        Again, I don't like to look at what we did in 2024 and 2025
    as kind of one-hit wonders. They need to be a sustained process
    of investment and improvement that is going to stretch over a
    number of years.
        And I couldn't be prouder of the members of this
    subcommittee on both sides of the aisle, because I know they
    have got that kind of commitment. I have worked with a lot of
    them in different capacities before.
        So I think we have the opportunity in this subcommittee to
    do something really significant to improve the lives of the
    American people and the safety of the American people, and I
    think it is something we can do in a bipartisan fashion. So we
    look forward to your leadership and your cooperation in helping
    our committee get to where it needs to go.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I will yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I associate myself
    with your remarks. It is a shared responsibility and we have a
    lot of work to do to ensure the safety of the flying public.
        Mr. Rocheleau, your full written testimony will be inserted
    into the record. The chair will now recognize you for your
    opening comments before we move to questions and answers.

                      STATEMENT OF CHRIS ROCHELEAU

        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
        Chairman Cole, Chairman Womack, Ranking Member Clyburn, and
    members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
    discuss the Administration's Fiscal Year 2026 budget request
    for the Federal Aviation Administration.
        The FAA's mission is to provide the safest, most efficient
    aerospace system in the world. To fulfill this ongoing
    responsibility, the President's budget invests in the future of
    the National Airspace System--or as we refer to it, the NAS--by
    requesting $22 billion in the 2026 fiscal year. When coupled
    with the $5 billion in previously enacted advance annual
    appropriations, this $27 billion commitment will enable the FAA
    to fund critical investments needed to keep pace with industry
    and enhance the safety and efficiency of our National Airspace
    System.
        As part of the Administration's broader modernization
    effort to build a state of the art air traffic control system,
    the FAA is requesting a historic $4 billion for our Facilities
    and Equipment account to enable the agency to address emerging
    challenges and technological advancements while preserving the
    integrity of longstanding capabilities.
        The President's budget includes a $1 billion request to
    accelerate the modernization of the FAA's telecommunications
    infrastructure. The current infrastructure is dependent on
    outdated technology, which is facing discontinuance from
    service providers and serves as a significant operational risk
    to NAS services.
        The agency has pivoted to a new initiative to transition
    rapidly and safely from point-to-point, hardwired circuits into
    a modern Internet Protocol-based telecommunications network.
        This new initiative, spearheaded by Secretary Duffy under
    President Trump's leadership, will ensure longstanding
    stability and the operational efficiency needed to both support
    existing operations and future needs and to meet ever-evolving
    cybersecurity and resiliency requirements.
        The President's budget also requests $450 million to
    initiate the Radar Replacement Program, a multi-year effort to
    replace the FAA's aging radar systems.
        The FAA owns and operates hundreds of radar systems that
    are essential detection and monitoring tools for air traffic
    controllers. These critical systems are facing more frequent
    structural deficiencies and maintenance-related issues as they
    get older, causing increased outages, delays, and risks to the
    system.
        The Radar Replacement Program will invest in more advanced
    radar technology to enhance surveillance capabilities and avoid
    delays for the flying public.
        The FAA is in the midst of a multi-year hiring and training
    surge to ensure we have the level of certified air traffic
    controllers needed to meet current and future traffic demands.
        In February, Secretary Duffy announced our plan to increase
    recruitment of the best and the brightest air traffic
    controllers by streamlining the hiring steps and increasing the
    starting salary for academy trainees by 30 percent.
        This budget request includes $97.3 million to further
    supercharge the controller workforce and train up to 2,500 new
    air traffic controllers in fiscal year 2026.
        To achieve this goal, the FAA is filling every seat at the
    Academy, bolstering the Enhanced Air Traffic Collegiate
    Training Initiative, and offering more opportunities for
    experienced military controllers to join our workforce.
        By addressing the ongoing air traffic controller shortage
    through this multi-pronged approach, the FAA is working to
    improve staffing levels and increase the safety of the NAS.
        Members of the committee, every day the FAA manages more
    than 45,000 flights that connect almost 20,000 U.S. airports,
    and I appreciate the President and the Secretary's strong
    support as I proudly lead the dedicated men and women of the
    FAA.
        This budget request upholds our commitment to maintain the
    safest airspace in the world by investing in our Nation's
    infrastructure and our workforce to meet the challenges of
    tomorrow.
        We look forward to your support in ensuring the United
    States remains a global leader in aviation.
        I thank you for the opportunity to be here today, and I
    look forward to your questions.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Womack. Thank you very much. As I said, your full
    written testimony will be included in the record. And we will
    now begin a period of questions and answers.
        We will, again, enforce a five-minute rule here, so members
    are advised to get as quickly to your questions as you possibly
    can so that you can maximize the amount of time we have
    available.
        I am going to recognize myself for five minutes.
        The House and Senate provided about $3.6 billion in our
    fiscal year 2025 bills. They never got across the finish line.
    So the CR that we are currently under froze this level at $3.2
    billion, I think another reason why we should not be living on
    continuing resolutions. We lose ground.
        Now, the question about sustainability versus
    modernization. Unfortunately, you can't do one exclusively.
    Secretary Duffy has outlined his plans for modernization, but
    you still have to operate a system that you currently have.
        How does that work? And how difficult will it be for us to
    achieve the overall goals of modernization while at the same
    time providing the sustainable safety systems that we currently
    have in place? And how is the FAA best equipped to do that?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir, for the question.
        Our budget request, in fact, incorporates the needs to
    continue to sustain what we have in place today. But, clearly,
    we have seen evidence where the equipment today is, as I stated
    in my testimony, starting to degrade in our ability to operate
    the system, and we see outages and delays associated with that
    equipment.
        I am confident in our ability to maintain the system. In
    fact, I would just share with you all that we had a record-
    breaking Memorial Day weekend with respect to our ability to
    manage safely the operations in the National Airspace System.
        And at the same time, it is imperative that we invest in
    the future of our air traffic system. We are spending over 90
    percent of our funding right now just on maintaining, sometimes
    band-aiding some of the equipment that we have.
        And so the Secretary's bold vision, under, obviously, the
    President's direction, is to make sure that we are able to
    build a new air traffic system to manage what we are dealing
    with today and the increase in traffic, safely, and at the same
    time anticipate the needs going forward like drone integration,
    advanced air mobility, and the like.
        The budget that we are proposing today sustains the
    operations that we have and at the same time enables our
    success in the future as we think about the new systems that we
    need to come online.
        Mr. Womack. You mentioned the $4 billion that is in the
    request for facilities and equipment. How much of that is
    strictly sustainability versus how much of that is actually
    going to go toward the overall cost associated with full
    modernization?
        Mr. Rocheleau. You referenced earlier the Project LIFT. One
    billion dollars of our request is going to go directly to
    advancing in an expedited fashion that transition from what we
    call copper wire, or TDM, to an internet protocol-based, or
    fiber optic transition, that will enable the resiliency, the
    efficiency of the system, and the ability to make sure that as
    we increase operations that we will be able to do that in a
    consistent manner without the outages and the struggles that we
    have been facing as we have seen in the news just recently.
        Mr. Womack. Given your time at the FAA, going all the way
    back to nearly the turn of the millennium when we started this
    NextGen project, and we have spent billions of dollars on
    NextGen, how would you grade--and you heard in my testimony or
    in my opening remarks about the fact that we got bogged down
    and the speed of technology was not matching the speed of our
    ability to improve--if you were giving a letter grade to the
    NextGen project, how would you grade it? And how much of that
    $14 billion that we spent on NextGen could have been better
    spent? Put it that way.
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would certainly agree with the premise
    that it could have been better spent. As I think about the
    advancements, today we do have systems in place that NextGen
    generated like Data Comm, which is texting between controllers
    and the pilots. Some of those capabilities came online.
        At the same time, let's recognize that, for a variety of
    reasons, that vision was not fully realized, which is why I
    pivot to what we are trying to do now with this new and bold
    plan.
        When we think about the future, when we think about what we
    are sustaining today and where we need to go with respect to
    new technologies, safety technologies and efficiency
    technologies, this is what we are looking for as we think about
    this new air traffic modernization plan.
        Mr. Womack. You didn't give it a letter grade. But can I
    assume that you are not advocating that it be on the honor
    roll?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I can agree to that.
        Mr. Womack. Fair enough.
        Mr. Clyburn.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        [Inaudible] which is a relatively small State, but in my
    congressional district you are going to find Shaw Air Force
    Base, headquarters to the Ninth Army--or the Ninth Air Force--
    and headquarters to the Third Army. We have the Marine Air
    Station, the Columbia Airport, the Charleston International
    Airport.
        All of those air traffic controllers have been in to visit
    with me about the challenges that they have trying to maintain
    safety with the way things are currently organized or being
    implemented, and they are really concerned about the shortages,
    the resignations, the problem we have getting trained air
    traffic controllers up to snuff.
        How do you plan to do more with less?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would start by saying I believe the FAA
    can be a more efficient organization. That is the charge to me
    by the Secretary, and I believe we can accomplish that goal. We
    have an amazing, amazing workforce that comes to work every
    day, as I mentioned. During the Memorial Day holiday is one
    example of that.
        But to the center of your question, what we are talking
    about is the ability to continue to sustain what we have today
    and at the same time accelerate, whether it is on the
    controller workforce--and by the way, it is not just the
    controller workforce. We are also talking about maintainers,
    safety inspectors, engineers, all of the people that go into
    our ecosystem to make sure there is a safe and efficient air
    transportation system.
        And while we are looking at the workforce piece of it, we
    are also looking at modernizing the equipment that is so
    essential to what your constituents are talking about with
    respect to safe and efficient airspace in the system.
        We are approaching it from a multi-pronged approach. Part
    of it has to do with the workforce. And, again, supercharging
    the controllers is so critical to our ability to manage the
    traffic we have today and what we expect to see in the future.
        Mr. Clyburn. Well, looking at your plan, I am still trying
    to figure out the budget numbers. And the amount of money being
    requested to do this seems not to line up with the amount of
    work that you have got to do, especially in keeping with all of
    the--or the lack of numbers coming into the system. And I have
    not seen what I consider to be a definitive plan on how you are
    going to increase the number of air traffic controllers. I
    forgot the number. Some ungodly number in terms of the
    shortages that we currently have.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        This year we are projecting to need 2,000 air traffic
    controllers through our system. Just a few months ago we
    realized we may not hit that. Thanks to the Secretary and his
    leadership, we have supercharged that, so we will get 2,000
    people into the training academy--which, by the way, Chairman
    Cole, is a gem for us when we think about what we are talking
    about there in Oklahoma City and the ability to put controllers
    through that system.
        As it relates to the technology plan, again, the billion
    dollars is to make sure that we have that resiliency in the
    fiber optics so that there is good connectivity between the
    facilities themselves, and then the additional moneys would go
    to, in fact, accelerating the Radar Replacement Program.
        When we talk about the larger plan that the Secretary so
    artfully outlines, it is going to be critical that we work with
    Congress to understand, to lay out our plan.
        So going from TDM to IP, from copper wires to fiber optics,
    to new radar replacements, new radios for the controllers so
    they can talk to the pilots, and then, of course, facilities,
    all of those things are going into this approach to modernize
    the airspace system.
        Mr. Clyburn. Well, thank you.
        My time is almost expired, but I would like to know at some
    point, Mr. Chairman, whether or not we plan to utilize those
    colleges and universities to supplement that which I know is
    great training out of Oklahoma City. However, in terms of
    numbers, the volume we need, I think we ought to take a look at
    those colleges and universities.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Womack. I thank the ranking member.
        I now recognize the chairman of the Appropriations
    Committee, Mr. Cole from Oklahoma.
        The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And I probably shouldn't say this before I get into my
    questions in front of somebody as shrewd as my friend the
    ranking member, but when I think ahead about negotiations that
    will come if we are going to avoid a CR and get to a successful
    conclusion, I always look, where are the things in common that
    the two sides can set aside differences on and come around? I
    think this is one of those things.
        Mr. Clyburn. Absolutely.
        The Chairman. We are all very interested in what it takes
    to fly safely. It is important commercially. It is much more
    important, obviously, in terms of lives.
        So I would just advise you and advise our former colleague
    to be ready to take advantage of that opportunity down the
    road. This is one where we will work together and try and make
    a significant investment to move us materially toward the goals
    that you have outlined.
        Your budget proposal increases the Facilities and Equipment
    account in order to upgrade the system for air traffic
    facilities. Does your request include improvements at the
    academy to ensure that the students are actually training on
    the equipment that you intend for them to be using in the years
    ahead?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, it does. In fact, as we talked
    about recently, our effort to supercharge the hiring through
    the academy with controllers, what we have been able to do--
    and, again, giving credit to the Secretary for accelerating and
    encouraging us to work hard--we didn't think we were going to
    hit the 2,000 controllers this year. So we have shortened the
    time frame by which we hire those controllers--academy
    attendees--through the system by five months.
        In fact, as a quick story, as we look for the best and
    brightest, we had an individual recently that in 44 days, from
    start to finish, got into the Academy, got an Academy start
    date.
        So that system is really working. Now, that is not going to
    be the case for everyone, but that is encouraging there.
        The budget request we have does, in fact, accommodate and
    consider what we want to do with respect to getting up to 2,500
    people through the Oklahoma City academy this year in addition
    to the enhanced CTI trainings that we are doing with
    universities around the U.S.
        The Chairman. That is terrific.
        Just toward that goal of reaching 2,500, when you and I had
    our visit, we also talked about the failure rate, because we
    lose about a third of those students over the course of their
    studies.
        In some ways you expect that. It is a pretty rigorous, very
    demanding profession. What might look attractive at the
    beginning as you get into it may not be your cup of tea as you
    understand how difficult and challenging this job is.
        But having said that, I am curious about, number one, as
    you stair step up anything additional you need. And, again, I
    am like you, I commend the Secretary for increasing that pay
    and making this a more attractive option for the kind of people
    we want coming there.
        But what are you thinking about doing in addition to help
    those students that are there so that we have a higher success
    rate and don't lose them?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question.
        As part of this initiative, I would highlight two efforts
    that we put in place there.
        First and foremost, in the first roughly five weeks of
    training, there is a basic course--what we will call Air
    Traffic 101--that we do not need certified professional
    controllers to teach.
        And so, there we have an ability to bring in professional
    instructors to help that. So, we are augmenting the instructor
    workforce at the Academy, and we think that will be helpful for
    the evaluation period as people get closer to graduation.
        In addition to that, one of the things that the Secretary
    had heard in his recent visit back to Oklahoma, was that some
    of the students were looking for a little extra time on the
    weekend for training.
        And so we are now offering tutoring on the weekend with the
    use of high-definition simulators, which is going to improve
    the graduation rate probably up to 30 percent. Because at the
    end of the day, to get the throughput, to get the controllers
    to the boards that we need, we want to make sure that that
    failure rate of roughly 35 percent these days, because it is an
    incredibly demanding profession, that we get that down to, say,
    25 percent, maybe even lower than that.
        Through those two initiatives alone, we are trying to make
    sure that we get a better throughput and a better graduation
    rate.
        The Chairman. That is great.
        Well, my time is almost up, and I certainly respect the
    chairman on that. Just one thing: it is not a question, but I
    am sure you are thinking, given the fact that you are going to
    increase, as you implied, the number of instructors. Because if
    we are going to move it up, you have got to have more people on
    the ground. You are comfortable you can do that? And that is
    basically a yes or no.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        The Chairman. Okay. Thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Womack. I thank the gentleman from Oklahoma.
        And not to belabor the point necessarily on air traffic
    control, but it is one thing to get a certified air traffic
    controller, but it is a whole nother thing to certify them or
    to prepare them for whatever assignment they are going to get.
    And that could be a pretty lengthy process as well. Is that
    correct?
        Mr. Rocheleau. That is correct, sir. It can take anywhere
    from two to three years to get a certified professional
    controller through the system and qualified at the facility
    they are going to be working at.
        Mr. Womack. Mrs. Torres.
        Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
        And thank you for being here also.
        As I mentioned to Secretary Duffy a few weeks ago, we are
    seeing a troubling rise in near misses, including navigation
    systems shutting down themselves while a plane is attempting to
    land. These are serious close calls that could have ended in
    terrible disasters.
        These aren't isolated incidents. They signal a deeper issue
    with the FAA's ability to provide the strong, consistent safety
    oversight that our aviation system demands.
        Pilots today are operating in increasingly complex
    conditions where even small breakdowns--mechanical issues,
    miscommunication, ground movement risks--can easily escalate a
    situation. It is a lot of stress for them.
        That is why we need an FAA that is fully staffed, well
    supported, and fully focused on its mission. That is protecting
    lives. I assume that continues to be its number one mission.
        Acting Administrator, you recently said in a town hall that
    the FAA will be leaner, and that statement in the current
    environment is a little bit alarming. A leaner FAA raises real
    concerns about the capacity and readiness.
        You took some responsibility for what was missed in the
    recent DCA incident, saying: ``I take that seriously and I take
    that on myself. I returned to the FAA just two months ago and I
    care about the National Airspace System for safety and the
    workforce.''
        I sent you my questions in advance so that there would be
    no concerns or mistakes. What immediate steps is the FAA taking
    to reduce near misses and protect safety on the ground and in
    the air?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question.
        Yes, first and foremost, let me just start by saying the
    system is incredibly safe, and that matters to me personally,
    it matters to my leadership team that I meet with on a weekly
    basis, and it matters to the 45,000 people that come to work
    every day for the FAA.
        As it relates specifically to what we are doing now, as a
    result of the tragic crash of American Airlines 5342 a few
    months ago, we initiated a very aggressive effort to look
    across the Nation for what we refer to internally as hot spots
    at 20 locations around the Nation to ensure that we were
    picking up on the data that we may have missed previously. We
    are using new tools like AI and machine learning.
        Mrs. Torres. But safety incidents, sir, haven't stopped. So
    what can we aggressively change today, yesterday, tomorrow to
    stop these incidents, these near misses?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I will give you three quick examples.
        First and foremost, Las Vegas, Nevada. We identified early
    on that the vertical and lateral boundaries for helicopters and
    fixed-wing (traffic) were not where they needed to be. And
    traffic advisories calling out controllers to pilots to telling
    them about helicopters in the area that was something else we
    did immediately when we identified those issues.
        In the L.A. Basin we are looking at the mix of traffic
    there between helicopters and fixed-wing in some of the more
    dense air traffic areas there.
        And then finally in Alaska, where weather is so important
    to the people in Alaska, we are testing new technologies to
    bring additional satellite weather into that area too.
        Mrs. Torres. Have you raised these concerns with the
    Secretary?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I talk to the Secretary regularly and he has
    impressed upon me----
        Mrs. Torres. But specifically on these issues that you
    identified?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes. Yes, we have.
        Mrs. Torres. Okay. So how is the FAA reassuring our pilots
    and our crews and passengers that every aircraft is held to the
    highest safety standard?
        Mr. Rocheleau. And I really appreciate that, because in
    addition to what we call this hot spots review, we actually had
    a series of engagements with the community.
        The first one was general aviation, business aviation. Then
    we moved to the helicopter community. Then we moved to ramp
    workers to make sure the airport safety on the ground was well
    done. And then we just finished recently with the airlines
    themselves.
        So, we have engaged directly with the operators within the
    system.
        Mrs. Torres. I am very concerned about the software
    mechanics, engineers, whatever we want to call them, the people
    that are working on the system that was launched in the 1970s.
    You can't bring in a modern worker to replace that worker.
        And I think I am out of time. So you and I will continue
    this conversation in the next opportunity.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Be happy to.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Strong.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairman Womack and Ranking Member
    Clyburn, for holding this hearing today.
        I would also like to thank the subcommittee staff for their
    hard work. It does not go unnoticed.
        Mr. Rocheleau, thank you for being here today.
        My district in north Alabama is home to Huntsvillle
    International Airport. I am proud to say Huntsville has been
    named the best small airport in the country for the second
    consecutive year.
        Airports can find it difficult to plan long-term
    infrastructure projects when they don't have clarity on funding
    timelines or FAA approvals.
        Mr. Administrator, has the FAA considered establishing
    response deadlines for project approvals, allowing them to move
    forward if no determination is issued within a set time frame?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. I know by law--and let me just
    say, I have been to Huntsville a number of times, both in the
    Air Force and within the FAA, and it is amazing how Huntsville
    has grown.
        With respect to timelines specifically, reauthorization
    requires that deadline to be 45 days. In addition to that, we
    have the NEPA requirements, which is a year for an
    environmental assessment and then two years for the EIS, the
    environmental impact statement, and we work closely to that
    within the Airports division.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you.
        I serve as the co-chair of the Army Aviation Caucus
    alongside Ranking Member DeLauro. I would like to express my
    deepest sympathies for those impacted by the horrific collision
    at DCA on January the 29th.
        In the aftermath, the Army's use of Automatic Dependent
    Surveillance-Broadcast--affectionately known as ADS-B--
    transponders and information communicated to the DCA air
    traffic control has come under focus.
        Reports from more recent close calls have highlighted that
    even through Army aircraft have been transmitting ADS-B
    information and haven't deviated from approved flight paths,
    air traffic control has issued go-arounds to commercial
    airliners because they have been unsure of the helicopter's
    position.
        Mr. Administrator, does air traffic control utilize ADS-B
    data for deconfliction of aircraft at DCA? If so, is it the
    sole means of tracking aircraft or does it use a mix of
    different systems?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. We use a mix of systems. We use
    ADS-B. We also use radar. And we use visual separation as well,
    as appropriate.
        Mr. Strong. Does using the mixed systems, does this create
    an ability or degrade ATC's ability to ascertain the aircraft's
    position?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I think the multiple systems offer the
    controllers the ability to manage the air spaces as efficiently
    but safely as possible.
        Mr. Strong. Despite previous actions to increase funding
    for the FAA's Office of Commercial Space Transportation, the
    industry still faces long delays in licensing for launch and
    reentry.
        What is the FAA's strategy to streamline licensing while
    maintaining public safety? Are there any specific tools or
    systems the FAA is investing in to ensure regulations don't
    ground our space industry?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am very excited about the commercial space
    industry, and it is certainly one of the areas that I have been
    focused on in coming back to the agency. We did 142 launches
    last year. We are expecting close to 200 this year. And it is
    really an exciting time.
        With regard to what we are using to streamline, we recently
    issued Part 450 and we are working with the space operators to
    better understand how we can do that more efficiently going
    forward.
        And with respect to airspace, we use what we call the Space
    Data Integrator. Our air traffic people work very closely with
    the launch operations to make sure that we can minimize the
    time that we need to open the airspace for the launches so that
    we can have smooth transitions between commercial airlines and
    commercial space launches.
        Mr. Strong. What steps is the FAA taking to integrate space
    launches into the national airspace center effectively? I know
    you have mentioned a couple there.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        The Space Data Integrator that is located out at the FAA's
    Command Center is really a key element of that, because as we
    see normal air traffic operations within the system and we see
    the increase in space launch operations, we want to make sure
    we deconflict, first and foremost, and second, minimize the
    impact to the traveling public through airlines.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you.
        I know that Chairman Cole and Chairman Womack mentioned
    this. You look at this budget, it is not a budget that is
    divided partisan. Four billion for equipment account. One
    billion for modernization of telecommunication network, Radar
    Replacement Program, hiring and training, add 2,500 new ATC.
    That is what America is looking for. We want to be sure it is
    safe. I thank you for your efforts.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Quigley.
        Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Administrator, how many total FAA employees have taken the
    President's early retirement opportunity?
        Mr. Rocheleau. How many total employees?
        Those numbers are not finalized yet, largely because we are
    processing through what we call DRP 2. We had our first tranche
    of people that came through, and I believe that was roughly 700
    that applied for the DRP. And now we are going through that
    process for the second one.
        We will roll those numbers up as we go through. I am in
    constant contact with my leadership team to understand what the
    impacts of those will be.
        And I would just note that in a number of those cases we
    have been able to talk to people who have expressed interest
    and negotiate their time if they, in fact, do want to leave.
        Mr. Quigley. But for air traffic controllers, for example,
    they have been saying that there have been no cuts to them, but
    how many have taken early retirement?
        Mr. Rocheleau. There have absolutely been no cuts, and the
    controllers themselves are not eligible. They are not eligible
    for early retirement.
        If anything, what the Secretary and I have done is
    incentivized the people who are retirement eligible. So, if you
    have done 25 years and you are 51, 52, 53 years old, we are
    giving those senior controllers that we need right now another
    20 percent increase to their base salary just to stick around
    for another couple or three years.
        Mr. Quigley. I just wanted to confirm that, because we have
    heard there have been no cuts to air traffic controllers. The
    concern is we have heard that there have been cuts to those
    workers who help specifically some of the critical safety
    functions that support the front-line workers.
        With the dismissal of probationary employees and early
    retirement buyout program, we are hearing that about 12 percent
    of the aeronautical information specialists have left the FAA
    or are poised to leave. These are informational specialists who
    update charts, maps, and key data after disruption or
    disturbances in airspace like weather or a collision.
        This is accurate we have been told and how do you plan to
    make up for those losses?
        Mr. Rocheleau. So, again, we have not stopped hiring any
    safety critical positions, any of them. And the people----
        Mr. Quigley. But those people have left or are leaving, so
    you are lower than where you were.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Sir, there are people that support the
    critical safety positions, and that is part of the ongoing
    assessment that I do with my leadership team to make sure that
    if we have people that have accepted early retirement that we
    are managing through that to ensure that there are those
    services to our controllers and our maintenance people and the
    like.
        Mr. Quigley. How do you do that? If you have lost 12
    percent of the people who do those critical functions, who is
    doing it in the meantime?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Well, there are a few ways. First and
    foremost, we are assessing how we are doing that and what can
    we do better.
        For instance, going from a paper-based process to an
    electronic-based process, that is one of them. Making sure that
    we are hiring for critical safety positions and leveraging the
    talent that we do have that is staying and making sure that
    they can both do the critical safety functions as well as those
    support functions.
        Mr. Quigley. And, respectfully, you call them critical
    safety functions. Wouldn't it make more sense to have a plan,
    an assessment of how to replace them or how to phase them out,
    rather than just do this so dramatically at the start? It is
    sort of managing your own crisis rather than planning to
    implement a program like this.
        Mr. Rocheleau. We have been very intentional on how we work
    through this, recognizing that, as I mentioned, there are some
    people that may express interest in leaving earlier, and we can
    sit down with them and work through what that timeline looks
    like, so we can plan for what is behind them.
        And I would just say this. The people that are leaving,
    while we will miss them because they have been amazing public
    servants, there are a lot of talented people right behind them
    that are going to come in and pick up the pace.
        Mr. Quigley. I just have to belabor it. Wouldn't it have
    made more sense to have those discussions, see who is going to
    take this up, plan on who is going to take their place, and
    phase it in as you go through this rather than do the cuts and
    then come back and figure out how do we manage that?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Even though we may look back and may have
    approached it a different way, there was an opportunity to
    allow people to leave that wanted to leave and at the same time
    negotiate with them for a smooth transition.
        Mr. Quigley. I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Chairman Rogers.
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        The Secretary's new state of the art air traffic control
    system is long overdue. It seems like it is almost every other
    day that we are having some problem with air traffic control in
    this country with souls in the air under our care.
        This plan is holistic and it is big and it is expensive:
    replacing antiquated telecommunications with new fiber,
    wireless, and satellite technologies at over 4,600 sites;
    25,000 new radios; 475 new voice switches; and so on and so
    forth; replacing 618 radars, which are past their life cycle
    already; addressing runway safety by increasing the number of
    airports with a service awareness initiative to 200; building
    six new air traffic control centers for the first time since
    the 1960s; replacing towers and TRACONs; installing new modern
    hardware and software for all air traffic facilities to create
    a common platform system throughout towers, TRACONs, and
    centers; and then the special problems in Alaska with adding
    174 new weather stations just in Alaska. This is a huge
    undertaking at great cost.
        I have got a mechanical question that Chairman Womack
    opened up. How are you going to do this? Are we going to build
    a new system separate and apart from the present system and one
    day when you get the new one built you will switch one to
    ``on'' and the other one to ``off''? How is that going to work?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. And there is no
    doubt we are looking for a real investment in this. And I
    believe it is a true investment in the U.S. and the future when
    I think of the aviation industry as an economic generator of
    over a trillion dollars and 10 million U.S. good-paying jobs.
        As it relates specifically to our plan that you so well
    outlined, a big piece of that is being able to sustain the
    operations we have today. I can talk a little bit about Newark,
    where we are transitioning from the copper wires, the old-
    fashioned telephone lines, over to fiber optic cables. That is
    just one example of where we are taking what we have in place
    and we are transitioning into a new system as it relates to
    radars and facilities.
        All of those things are going to be part of this where we
    continue to operate the system safely every day, and then we
    switch over, as you described, into these new modern systems
    with intentional, deliberate testing to make sure the
    redundancy and the resiliency is there to ensure the safety of
    the traveling public.
        Mr. Rogers. Would you be using some equipment under the
    current----
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am sorry, what equipment?
        Mr. Rogers. Will you be mixing in pieces from the new
    system to the old system and vice versa?
        Mr. Rocheleau. The whole idea is to replace the system, but
    that is going to take some time to get there. Yesterday we
    issued a request for information for the best and brightest
    companies to come in and help us do that transition. I think
    that is a real opportunity for us.
        But the plan, as we described it earlier, is to essentially
    continue to operate the system as we do today and then switch
    over to the new technologies.
        Mr. Rogers. So it will be all new equipment----
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Rogers [continuing]. In the new system, none of the
    old?
        Mr. Rocheleau. No more floppy disks or paper strips.
        Mr. Rogers. So you will turn the switch to ``on'' and take
    the shovels and do away with the old system?
        Mr. Rocheleau. It is a little more complicated than that,
    but we will switch it over to the new system.
        Mr. Rogers. All right. Good luck.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Rogers. Thank you. Yield back.
        Mr. Womack. And they will be doing it while you are in the
    air, Mr. Rogers, I am pretty confident.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, sir.
        Good morning to you.
        I have a couple of questions that have to do with the
    Newark airport. I also have some questions regarding just air
    traffic controllers in general.
        Could you just tell me, what is the starting salary for an
    air traffic controller?
        Mr. Rocheleau. It really depends on the facility. We bring
    them in as an Academy student in roughly that $45,000 to
    $60,000 range. As I mentioned earlier, we have incentivized new
    Academy people to join us with a 30 percent increase.
        But when you get to a facility, it really depends on the
    facility. It can range anywhere from the 60s and 70s all the
    way up to a fully certified professional controller can be in
    the 145 to 150 range.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. And that depends upon how large the
    airport is, how busy it is, et cetera?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Correct. There are levels, yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Where is the Newark airport in that
    sort of----
        Mr. Rocheleau. I will have to take the IOU on what level
    the controllers are at Newark. I should know that. But I do
    know that that is well understood for the tower specifically, I
    am not sure the level of the tower there. And then obviously we
    have the controllers at Philadelphia Area C, which is
    controlling some of the incoming to Newark.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. The problems with the Newark airport
    delays----
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. What percentage of that
    delay or those delays were due to staffing issues, staffing
    shortages, and what percentage of it is due to infrastructure
    that is old and needs to be replaced?
        Mr. Rocheleau. There are three primary reasons for the
    delays.
        First and foremost is weather, and that is the constant
    one. The second is the outages that we were experiencing that
    we are working through and fixing now. And then the third is
    staffing.
        Staffing continues to be a challenge for us. We have 27
    certified controllers that are operating in Philadelphia Area C
    now to manage the air traffic going into Newark. And we have
    22, including six new people going through training now.
        So, we will be healthier towards the end of this summer for
    Newark specifically and that Area C. I am confident that the
    delays will be reduced going in there.
        In fact, we have been working with the airlines through our
    recent delay reduction effort. We will be here shortly,
    probably next week, at a 34 rate, which we will be able to
    manage safely through that air traffic system with the
    controllers.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. So is it infrastructure, is it
    congestion, or is it staffing that is going to delay Newark
    being up and ready at its capacity in October as opposed to
    July, August, September?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would say I am confident that by the
    October timeframe, the technology issues will be resolved. The
    Secretary has been very clear with me that we need to fix this,
    and we are fixing this now. The second piece to that is the
    staffing. By October, we will be very healthy in there at
    staffing levels that we need. And then, of course, the weather
    is always going to be one of those challenges.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. So I know, sir, that there were not
    cuts to the air traffic controllers, but as my colleague
    mentioned, there were cuts to the staff that support it, those
    functions. And I am wondering, to what extent--I understand
    that in February Elon Musk's DOGE folks came there with their
    chainsaw, and as a result, 400 people were let go or went on
    their own. Is that accurate?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would clarify by saying that there were
    400 probationary employees that were terminated, 360 of which
    returned to the FAA.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Why did they return, because they
    were--because it was wrong to let them go? It was----
        Mr. Rocheleau. It was a court case. My understanding, the
    court case ended up having those probationary employees be
    returned to duty.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. So I know that you have been in
    service in your capacity for quite a while. Were you at all
    consulted when those 400 people were identified to be released,
    and did you have any input on whether or not that was going to
    impact your ability to do what we all agree is your primary
    function, is to make sure planes don't crash----
        Mr. Rocheleau. Right.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. Into one another or into
    grounds.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Right. I certainly was in the chair. I have
    been in the chair for 4 months. I was in the chair when those
    decisions were made and was consulted as to how we were going
    to manage through that period of time. Again, I would say that
    we preserved the safety critical positions, and we made sure
    that as we were working through the probationary employee
    situation that we were managing the workload. These folks were
    there for probably less than a year, obviously for the
    probationary terminations. But at the end of the day, what we
    did was we consulted with the leadership teams in each one of
    those lines of business.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Administrator.
    Apparently they are needed, though, in that capacity, and so I
    am glad that they are back.
        I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Sheriff Rutherford.
        Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.
        And, Acting Administrator Rocheleau, thank you for being
    here this afternoon to talk about some of this. I want to go
    back to the ATCs and talk a little bit about that as well,
    because it is very important to my district where we have the
    Jacksonville air route traffic control center for all of
    northeast Florida, which has that funnel effect and it is
    incredibly busy, 160,000 square miles of airspace, 20 military
    installations, 200 civilian airports. How these folks do it, I
    have no idea. It really is--incredibly proud of those guys and
    gals and what they do.
        I was really happy to see this $97 million to hire 2,500.
    Question though, how much of that are we going to be able to
    accomplish? I am concerned about that. One of the things that I
    would like to ask in finding those people, the DEI biologics
    assessments that were being used previously for selection of
    ATCs, air traffic controllers, that, you know, were part of the
    DEI process before, which I think 1,000 that were proficient
    but refused hiring because of their biologics were then--filed
    a lawsuit. Of that 1,000, are we going back to those folks? I
    know we have gone back to performance-based selecting, correct?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, that is correct.
        Mr. Rutherford. Okay.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Merit-based approach to hiring.
        Mr. Rutherford. Right. Right. And so, have we gone back to
    those that were rejected who were proficient but rejected
    simply because of their race back, you know, 3 years ago,
    whenever that was?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am not specifically aware of those
    individuals, or an effort to go back to them. I will be happy
    to take the IOU and get back to you and your staff to make sure
    that we follow up on that.
        Mr. Rutherford. I mean, if they are still willing to come,
    that would be a great source to tap into, I would think. And I
    think what you are going to find also is that 35 percent
    failure rate in the academy is going to go down significantly
    when it is more based on merit than biological information. So
    I am glad to see you all moving in that direction.
        Can you talk a little bit about--a little more on--what
    specifically can we do to help you with this process? I mean,
    we are talking about $39,000 per student of the--you know, you
    take $97 million, that ain't a lot of money for 2,500 students.
    That is $39,000 a head. Is that going to be enough, and are
    there other things that we can do to help you in this process?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Well, first and foremost, I appreciate the
    support. Clearly, working with Congress is going to be critical
    to our success going forward. We have budgeted--we have
    programmed for up to 2,500 in our current budget request with
    the $97.3 million.
        I would also make a very important point here as it relates
    to the throughput. We have truncated the process to get
    additional people into the Academy itself, and we have added
    instructors to provide the basic instruction, as we continue to
    use the certified controllers to do the evaluation piece. We
    are confident that we are going to see a better graduation rate
    coming out of there. Part of that is the tutoring piece that I
    talked about earlier as well. I am confident in what we have
    put in place to be able to meet our goals this year. It is
    aggressive, I will acknowledge that.
        Mr. Rutherford. Is that going to be official tutoring over
    the weekends and that sort of thing that you mentioned earlier?
        Mr. Rocheleau. We will have tutors available, but we will
    also have the high-definition simulators for people to go and
    practice.
        Mr. Rutherford. Right.
        Mr. Rocheleau. I learned that in the military when we did a
    lot of that. Those simulators will be very valuable to those
    people who want to put in the extra work.
        Mr. Rutherford. Let me switch over to some of the work that
    they are going to be dealing with. You know, particularly
    looking at your long career at FAA and in the Air Force, I am
    sure you have seen, you know, areas where there is a lot of
    progress as well as a lot of stagnation within the aviation
    sector. And part of the future of aviation is drone and how
    that is going to fit into the commercial space.
        Now, I see the budget deals with some of that in a modest
    amount, and I am appreciative of that. But let me ask you: Can
    you share with this subcommittee a bit about your vision for
    how the drone commercial space is going to fit together,
    because it is coming quickly.
        Mr. Womack. I will give you a few seconds to answer the
    question.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
        Mr. Rutherford. Oh, I am sorry.
        Mr. Rocheleau. It is coming quickly, and it was one of the
    reasons why I was so excited to come back to the FAA bringing
    new innovative technologies into the airspace. That includes
    drones; that includes advanced air mobility, the eVTOLs or air
    taxis; and it includes commercial space as well.
        Mr. Rutherford. Thank you.
        I am sorry, Mr. Chairman. I went over my time. I yield
    back.
        Mr. Womack. No worries.
        Mr. Espaillat.
        Mr. Espaillat. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Acting Administrator Rocheleau, for being here.
        I think we all acknowledge here that the stakes are very
    high with regards to air safety, and the FAA is in the business
    of air safety. I myself, in addition to other Members, I would
    say a bipartisan group of five Members were on a plane whose
    wing was clipped at Reagan while taxiing. This is just a few
    months after the horrible accident that took so many lives, so
    safety is really in danger for the American public.
        And we had Secretary Duffy testify, and he acknowledged
    that the skinny budget fell severely short of the kind of
    investment that is needed to meet the challenge of safety, and
    we see an increase, but it still falls short of the $31 billion
    that are required to ensure that the American public is safe
    while traveling.
        As we approach the holiday season and other important
    seasons, we approach the World Cup, the Olympics, there is
    going to be a substantial increase in travel here, and we are
    not ready. In fact, some of the changes that need to be made
    are going to take some time, so we may even--they may even
    require a supplemental budget.
        So my question first is, do you acknowledge that we are
    short at the $22 billion level, and do you feel that we need a
    supplemental to meet the demand?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thanks for the question. There is a lot of
    activity. Looking forward to the World Cup and a number of
    other things.
        As we have programmed here in the budget request, I believe
    this is appropriate for what we need to do with respect to
    moving from copper wire to fiber optic. I believe it is
    appropriate to supercharge controllers to get in the system,
    and it will take some time.
        Mr. Espaillat. How much time will it take?
        Mr. Rocheleau. For?
        Mr. Espaillat. For us to meet the demand, you know, for the
    World Cup, for the Olympics, for heavy travel during the
    holidays.
        Mr. Rocheleau. I should have started with this: The system
    is safe and will continue to be safe. We will make sure of
    that. The 45,000 people at the FAA will make sure of that.
        Mr. Espaillat. I know we have gaps in air traffic
    controller supervision of air travel and landing and takeoff in
    Newark, and severely putting people in danger. How long is the
    overall plan to be ready and really at an optimum?
        Mr. Rocheleau. We will maintain the safety of the system.
    We may slow it down, but we will maintain the safety of the
    system.
        Mr. Espaillat. Can you give me a timeframe?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I believe, particularly engaging with
    Congress here, when we talk about the Secretary's plan for a
    big, bold--and the President is a champion of this as well--for
    a new air traffic system, we are looking at a three to four
    year period. I believe we can get there even quicker.
        Mr. Espaillat. Do you think that will require a
    supplemental budget--that I think will be bipartisan. I think
    everybody wants safety here.
        Mr. Rocheleau. I wouldn't disagree. We are going to need
    Congress' help for additional funding.
        Mr. Espaillat. So you will need a supplemental, okay.
        My next question is, Elon Musk brazenly pushed for the FAA
    to use his Starlink satellite for air traffic control, as has
    been reported. Do you ever have--have you ever had a
    conversation with Mr. Musk or personnel at the White House or
    DOGE staff about potentially using Starlink for air traffic
    control systems?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I have never had a conversation with Elon
    Musk. I have worked very closely to make sure that as we
    experiment with new capabilities, including satellite
    technologies like Starlink----
        Mr. Espaillat. Well, have you had a conversation with the
    White House staff or even with DOGE staff about using Starlink?
        Mr. Rocheleau. No, sir.
        Mr. Espaillat. Okay. Thank you so much.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales.
        Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman.
        Thank you, Administrator, for testifying today.
        I want to talk about safety. We often talk about aircrafts
    falling out of the sky, which is important, or getting clipped
    as you are taxiing, but I am worried about these increased
    amounts of unmanned aircraft systems, UAS, drones, that are
    falling out of the sky. We just saw Ukraine conduct one of the
    most significant operations of the Russian-Ukraine war.
        And with a small amount of money, with a small amount of
    quadcopters, they were able to decimate Russia's long-range
    strategic bombers, okay, to the tune of billions of dollars. I
    am worried about that. I mean, that is not a what-if. That is
    now. That is currently, right now, what is happening. My
    question is pretty simple: Is our U.S. airspace safe from drone
    threats?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would refer that question to our national
    security partners, but our airspace today is capable of
    managing safe integration of UAS.
        Mr. Gonzales. Because this is what I worry about, is after
    9/11 everyone is pointing fingers and everyone saw this coming,
    but it is always somebody else's preview, right. And I am
    trying to figure out--everyone has a piece of it, and I am
    trying to figure out what role FAA plays in this when it comes
    to drone technology, when it comes to drone interaction, when
    it comes to that piece to it.
        Mr. Rocheleau. It is a great question, and I should
    highlight the close coordination, collaboration, and
    communication between the FAA, the DOT, the Department of
    Defense, the Department of Homeland Security for the things you
    are talking about. As we work through integrating UAS into the
    airspace, we are working alongside our national security
    partners every day.
        Mr. Gonzales. Let me ask you another question. How many
    drones were in U.S. airspace yesterday?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I will have to take an IOU on that one for
    you. I know we fly thousands of drones every day in the
    airspace. I don't have an accurate count for you today.
        Mr. Gonzales. We should absolutely know what drones are in
    our airspace every single day, and that is what I want us to
    get to. Who is in the air? What are they doing in the air? What
    are the intentions? And I don't want to wait until it is after
    the fact. I want to get ahead of that.
        To that point, what resources do you need--does FAA need
    from Congress to ensure that critical infrastructure from
    future drone threats is safe?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Our budget, in fact, does incorporate our
    need from Congress, our support from Congress to make sure that
    as we work through the safe integration into the airspace that
    we are working specifically on things like drone detection,
    drone mitigation, again, working with our national security
    partners who do this for a living.
        Mr. Gonzales. I think this is important.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Gonzales. Once again, this isn't the future. We are
    here, right. And guess what, every drone that is up in the air
    isn't necessarily going to cause harm, but there may be some
    that do, and we are at a point where very soon, you know,
    Amazon packages are going to be delivered, it is going to be a
    very busy airspace. It already is. And the fact--we need to
    know how many drones are in the air, and we need to know what
    those drones' intentions are. And we also need to have counter-
    UAS incentives--our mitigations involved in that, and I think
    FAA plays a role in that.
        I understand. I understand you are working with other
    partners, but the airspace belongs to you, right, in many
    cases. So how do we continue to work with that? A big part of
    that is the budget on that. I would love to continue to work
    with you and hear back on some of your answers.
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would be happy to do that. We are very
    much in favor of the drone detection and, of course, the
    mitigation, when appropriately utilized.
        Mr. Gonzales. I have 1 minute left.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Gonzales. My last question is on this: Section 570 of
    FAA Reauthorization Act directs the Department to partner with
    National Academies to assess the loss of commercial air service
    in small communities and identify options for restoring it. And
    I appreciate the directive, and I think it comes at a critical
    time for Del Rio. Del Rio is a border community. Del Rio is
    central to Laughlin Air Force Base as well as the Del Rio
    Border Patrol sector.
        Can you speak to how the Department is--and we are
    currently without an airline, right. That community has no
    access to an airline. Can you speak to how the Department is
    implementing the section 570 study, and whether Del Rio, given
    its proximity to international trade, military installations,
    and key trade corridors, will be considered in this assessment.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. And appreciate the question,
    because having just returned from the general aviation and
    business aviation community, I understand the importance of
    small community air service. I know that our team has been
    working intensely on doing the analysis that you talk about
    that reauthorization directs us to do. I will circle back with
    you with the latest on that effort.
        Mr. Gonzales. Right. Thank you.
        I yield back, Chairman.
        Mr. Womack. Mr. Gonzales in his previous question asked a
    good question, so I am going to follow up real quick. Would it
    even be possible for the FAA to know how many drones were in
    U.S. airspace in a given period of time?
        Mr. Rocheleau. In a given day total?
        Mr. Womack. Based on our current requirements, based on
    current law, is it even possible?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I don't believe the FAA would know every
    single drone in the sky today. But we do, in fact, work with
    legal operators, and we would be able to collect that data. A
    child with a drone would be more challenging. I just returned
    from Texas, and watching some of the demonstrations there,
    utilizing what we call UAS traffic management. It is an
    incredible system, and it will keep count of the drones you are
    talking about.
        Mr. Womack. Well, while it may be impossible to know if a
    child getting a Christmas present is launching a drone, I think
    Tony's question is more relative to the nefarious actor out
    there who wouldn't be adhering to any rules and regulations
    that we have.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. And that is why I would just
    highlight our constant effort with our law enforcement
    assistance program to go after the clueless, the careless, and
    the criminal to make sure that we are interdicting as quickly
    as possible to change that behavior.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Aguilar.
        Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Administrator. I wanted to ask, I understand and
    I know there have been questions about staffing, Administrator.
    I understand the FAA has continued processing airport
    applications for Federal grants, but review times have
    increased as the agency loses staffing expertise at its
    headquarters and district offices. This is troublesome for many
    airports as these airports work to keep their construction
    projects on schedule, as you understand.
        How has DOGE's efforts to downsize the FAA impacted the
    agency's grant review time and processing to date?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. I don't believe
    that any DOGE activities, which have not directly related to
    any FAA activities, have had any impacts on the grant
    specifically. When we first came in, there was a backlog, a
    serious backlog of grant announcements that we had to work
    through. As I look at my sheet here, we are looking at $1.7
    billion here getting out over 465 grants. So, we have got our
    momentum going back, but with respect to DOGE specifically, I
    would say there were no impacts.
        Mr. Aguilar. You don't think a loss of head count has had
    any effort in the timing and the delays of implementing the
    grants?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I don't believe there was a loss in head
    count that impacted grants, just to be specific to the
    question.
        Mr. Aguilar. We could run through the head-count losses
    that you have had, but you are--so you are saying at the
    district level or at the HQ level you don't believe any of the
    loss of head count has had a direct impact on processing and
    implementing grants?
        Mr. Rocheleau. No, sir. I think the delay has been related
    to the backlog and us working through it. I don't believe it
    had to do with any change in the staffing.
        Mr. Aguilar. How has the downsizing impacted the FAA's
    ability to approve airport projects in a timely manner?
        Mr. Rocheleau. The opportunity really is to go from what we
    will call traditional or paper-based types of processing and
    using a more streamlined process. One of the things we are
    looking at specific to airport grants is the use of AI. Much
    like we do in the safety realm, now we are looking at
    processing grants and using categorical exclusions, for
    instance, when we talk about specific projects as it relates to
    environmental issues.
        We are using a number of different tools that we have today
    that we probably didn't have a year ago in order to expedite
    that. But again, I go back to it is not about the change in the
    workforce specifically; it is more along the lines of building
    out a more efficient process going forward.
        Mr. Aguilar. And we would love to be partners in building
    an efficient process. I think that is what the chairman and the
    ranking member have indicated they are focused on, and we want
    to be willing partners here. I think what is frustrating is
    when actions happen or grants don't get out and we just see the
    impacts and the results, not just of safety concerns, but of
    actual dollars getting out on the streets, back home, closer to
    our district.
        But since you mentioned projects or since we are talking
    about projects, the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 included
    provisions to speed up airport infrastructure projects by
    reducing regulatory overreach and land use approvals. You
    talked about categorical exemptions and streamlining the
    process for approving these projects with local user fees. Can
    you give an update on the FAA's progress in simplifying airport
    land use approvals and launching fully streamlined passenger
    facility charge approval process?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yeah. Again, I appreciate that question
    simply because of what we described earlier as backlogs. We
    have looked at the opportunity, in addition to what
    reauthorization has directed, for our staff to be able to look
    for like opportunities, whether it is in the West Coast or the
    East Coast and be able to streamline that.
        Specific to environmental issues, that is obviously a
    little bit more challenging, but one of the ways we are doing
    that is, in fact, using the categorical exclusions to expedite
    the projects out there. Because I understand getting that money
    out there, particularly in an important building season, is
    critical to the local communities.
        Mr. Aguilar. When will the locals see that benefit? When
    will they see the projects, and when will they see the delays
    cease?
        Mr. Rocheleau. The delays have begun to decrease
    significantly, and they will continue to see more money coming
    out. Again, in the next few weeks we are going to see hundreds
    of millions of dollars coming out through those grants.
        Mr. Aguilar. I have got a local issue. We will put it into
    the record for you to get back to us on San Bernardino
    International Airport is a Federal contract tower, and we have
    had some language that we secured in the reauth, and we would
    love your attention to this and your help with this. We will
    send it to the record as well.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Joyce.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you, Chairman.
        Mr. Rocheleau, thank you for being here today. I would like
    to follow up on my distinguished colleague, Mr. Aguilar's
    comments there, and all of us here are among those who travel
    through DCA on a pretty regular basis, and we wait at DCA
    with--most of the traveling public does--for reasons
    unbeknownst to us. But can you share with the committee any
    specific steps that is being taken to improve the operational
    performance at DCA, particularly during these peak travel
    periods?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir. There are a handful of ways we
    have tackled that. First and foremost, after the tragic
    collision, we cleared that airspace. We made it less complex by
    removing the helicopter traffic. That really did contribute to
    the ability for the controllers to manage our traffic in a
    safer, more efficient manner.
        Second, we focused on the controllers themselves. We had an
    authorized staffing at 28. We are now at 30, and we are going
    to 31. We have prioritized hiring for DCA traffic specifically
    and getting people up to speed there.
        And then we work with the carriers. At the end of the day,
    you have to work with the airports and you have to work with
    the airlines to make sure that as we have traffic surges, that
    we are able to spread that out throughout the day to make sure
    there aren't these peaks, which contribute to delays
    themselves, and add workload to the controllers.
        Mr. Joyce. Having sat on the runway, whether because we
    missed our slot because we were a little late taking off----
        Mr. Rocheleau. I apologize for that.
        Mr. Joyce [continuing]. Getting into DCA is an issue as
    well, I understand.
        What aspects of the FAA's 2026 request are directly aimed
    at addressing those challenges? Are there further measures or
    plans under consideration to enhance reliability and efficiency
    with this critical airport while continuing to prioritize the
    safety?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I would point you directly to the staffing
    piece. The staffing piece, whether it is at DCA, and we are
    focused on DCA, obviously, in addition to places like Newark
    and other locations, that money that we are requesting for
    staffing is going to make a difference. We are not waiting for
    that money to come. We are working towards staffing
    appropriately as we can with the money that we do have.
        But I would say that the staffing is a big piece. When we
    think about introducing new technologies, we are in a good
    place as it relates specifically to DCA with respect to our
    fiber and our communications efforts. But, again, I go back to
    how it integrates within the larger system, within the Potomac
    TRACON and the Command Center and some of these other
    locations, it is going to be critical for us to make these
    investments into the technologies in addition to the controller
    workforce itself.
        Mr. Joyce. As we discuss this modernization efforts of the
    national airspace more broadly, it is important to ensure that
    the smaller airports, like those in Ohio, were not left behind.
    These airports do not have 24/7 air traffic control staffing
    and, therefore, rely mostly on automated systems, like the
    automated weather observing system and the automated surface
    observing system for weather reporting to ensure that
    operations can be carried out safely at all hours.
        Investing in the infrastructure and technology at these
    smaller airports is essential to maintain this sufficient and
    accessible airspace for all Americans. With this in mind, how
    do you plan to ensure that the smaller airports, those outside
    of the core 30 largest airports that rely on these automated
    systems the most, are adequately prioritized with any system
    with modernization efforts that are moving forward?
        Mr. Rocheleau. That is a great question, because again, I
    certainly appreciate, having just come from the industry, the
    importance of being able to have that connectivity with local
    regional airports. The technology specifically is part of our
    ongoing refresh, if you will. And when we think about surface
    monitoring or airborne monitoring, all of these technologies,
    they may not have the same thing that, say, a JFK or a Newark
    would. But we want to make sure the tools are there, whether it
    is a staff tower or an uncontrolled airport, that they have
    those technologies in place. And so, part of this effort is to
    ensure the continuing refresh of the technologies there and the
    enhancements as they come available.
        Mr. Joyce. So how will your 26 requests ensure all the
    airports, regardless of size, have access to the needed funding
    so they are able to operate at full capacity?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Certainly that is part of the ongoing
    process as we look at rolling out what we have today, and that
    is separate from what we are talking about with respect to a
    whole new modern air traffic plan. It goes back to what I
    mentioned, where we identify these airports through our NPIAS,
    through our system, through our approach, and make sure that as
    these refreshes are necessary that we are devoting the
    resources that are critical to get them back up to speed.
        Mr. Joyce. I had the opportunity, as I addressed Secretary
    Duffy a few weeks back, back in 2017, to go with then-Chairman
    Shuster and Secretary Chao up to Canada to see the system that
    they have there. And when you go into our towers and you see
    the paper and the floppy disk and the other thing, that's not
    the way it should be, and I appreciate the efforts that you are
    going to take to fix that. I won't bore you with any more
    NextGen questions.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you very much, Chairman.
        Mr. Womack. And, finally, the distinguished vice chair of
    this subcommittee, Mrs. Bice.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Administrator, for being with us this
    morning.
        I want to follow up on a comment that you made in response
    to Mr. Joyce's question, and that was after the DCA accident
    that you took a good look at all of the incoming traffic paused
    helicopter traffic in. But subsequent to the accident there was
    another incursion--or close call, I should say. I am sorry, not
    an incursion--a close call that happened with two aircraft
    leaving DCA. Interestingly enough, I was on the tarmac and saw
    that happen. So my question to you is, do you believe that you
    are able to effectively communicate with DOD on military
    traffic coming in and out of the DCA airspace?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I do believe we have a very good
    communication link with our Department of Defense partners. I
    would also say they are not flying right now, because we are
    revisiting the letter of authorization that we have going.
    Unless it is a mission critical operation----
        Mrs. Bice. Who defines mission critical?
        Mr. Rocheleau. We have protocols set up through this letter
    of agreement that a national security mission, a law
    enforcement intervention, something along those lines, a
    medevac-type thing, those would be coordinated with the
    controllers and there are certain codes they use to talk back
    and forth.
        But in terms of what we will call priority transport or
    some of the other more routine activities that the Army was
    conducting, we have shut those down until such time as we are
    comfortable with what we will call new rules of the road.
        Mrs. Bice. And you do believe that the airspace in DCA is
    safe?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Absolutely.
        Mrs. Bice. Okay. Earlier we talked about the Mike Monroney
    Aeronautical Center. When I was elected in 2020, that was
    actually in my congressional district. It is now not after
    redistricting, but I am very conscientious of what happens at
    that facility. One of the things that surprised me is the
    length of time it takes to actually get an air traffic
    controller into a tower. They apply. They have to have an
    initial screening. Then they have to do testing. Then there is
    a medical evaluation. This process takes some time.
        And the one thing that surprised me the most is how long
    the medical eval can take. Can you talk a little bit about what
    you are doing to address that specifically?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes. Thank you. It did take too long, and
    that is one of the reasons why the Secretary has tasked us with
    supercharging this hiring process, cutting 5 months out of the
    process in general.
        Specific to medicals though, one of the ways we truncated
    that process was by looking at security and medicals in tandem
    to make sure we process them efficiently, effectively, and not
    waiting in line. We are doing it concurrently. That made a big
    difference in reducing that timeline.
        Also, the medical certification piece of this, whether it
    is for the controllers or the pilots that we talk about, I meet
    with the airspace surgeon on a regular basis to track that. We
    have just recently provided some additional information for
    people to, essentially, educate themselves to bring the proper
    paperwork. It is over 90 percent of the people that come in,
    and they get that medical certificate when they walk out. That
    is a real tribute to, again, the Secretary and the team that
    has put an emphasis on this.
        Mrs. Bice. Let's talk about air traffic controllers for a
    moment. Certainly, you have talked about an increase in hiring,
    which we all agree is necessary. There are people that are, you
    know, maybe, you know, want to leave the profession because
    they have been in it for many, many years, and it is a high-
    stress position, a lot of expectation. It is a zero-failure
    mission.
        Can you talk a little bit about the overtime that has been
    potentially placed on air traffic controllers, particularly at
    larger airports due to maybe shortages and how that is
    impacting their ability to, you know--maybe longevity in that
    role?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I work very closely with the controller
    union president. We have a number of engagements to basically
    keep a finger on the pulse of the health and the welfare of the
    controllers. There are indeed facilities that require overtime
    simply because of staffing and we make sure that we do that. At
    the same time, we have a number of safety reporting systems in
    place that if someone is feeling that stress or someone needs
    that time off, we allow that person to take that time. So, we
    are very focused on the safety, the health, and the welfare of
    the controllers themselves.
        As it relates to additional staffing, that is part of what
    we are going through here with hiring new controllers, and in
    those facilities that are most critically understaffed
    prioritizing them for controllers that can come in and hit the
    ground running.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you for that.
        My time is almost up, but I just want to offer you the
    opportunity, when you have time, to come to Oklahoma City,
    visit the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center. I am sure that the
    full committee chairman, Mr. Cole, and I, along with
    Congressman Lucas, would love the opportunity to just visit
    with you and see what we can do to continue to strengthen the
    facility. It is a large facility. It has a lot of, I think,
    infrastructure needs that we need to invest in. And so,
    certainly, we are here to help you make sure that the facility
    meets the needs of the next century.
        So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
        Mr. Womack. I thank the gentlelady.
        As I recognize the final member of our panel here this
    morning, the chair notices a young man in the audience with a
    similar tie to Mr. Ciscomani.
        Mr. Ciscomani, do you have a guest here?
        Mr. Ciscomani. I do, my son, Kenny. He is here joining us.
    I already told press that he's not available for questions just
    yet, but he will be at some point.
        Mr. Womack. You are recognized.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Administrator Rocheleau, for being with us
    today. I first want to ask about an issue that is top of mind
    for many airports around the country, including Tucson
    International Airport in southern Arizona, and that is
    regarding PFAS remediation. In my district, the presence of
    PFAS is a major public health threat. The FAA has previously
    mandated the use of PFAS containing foams for commercial
    airports. And while many airports like Tucson International
    Airport are now transitioning to foams that do not contain
    PFAS, they are still burdened with the cost of remediation for
    previously used foams. How does your agency plan to assist
    commercial airports in these critical remediation efforts?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. Tucson has a
    special place in my heart. It was my first assignment as a
    second lieutenant in the Air Force, and so I am familiar with
    the airport and the importance of it.
        With respect to PFAS and the mitigations there, I connected
    with my Airports office yesterday, and I understand we have
    ongoing dialogue with how we are going to manage through that.
    I know that there was an authorization to further mitigate PFAS
    that we are talking about, not just in Tucson but in other
    locations. An appropriation will be particularly critical to
    being able to move forward on some of those mitigations.
        At Tucson, and a few other airports, the plan to mitigate
    that is ongoing with respect to ensuring that the airports have
    the information they need to follow that up when the funding
    appears.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Yeah. And I think that is critical, so I
    will certainly advocate for you all to receive the funds that
    are needed to clean up PFAS in our community without creating
    the undue burden on the airports themselves that already have
    limited budgets, as you know. So I appreciated your attention
    on this critical issue.
        Next, I would like to highlight a key facility in my
    district, Pinal Airpark. If you have been in southern Arizona,
    you probably are familiar with Pinal Airpark. This general
    aviation and military facility, originally known as Marana Army
    Airfield, is notably where more than 10,000 pilots trained
    during World War II. Today the airpark supports a mix of
    military and commercial aviation activities with over 100,000
    flight operations annually. Pinal Airpark is among the busiest
    multiuse airports in the Nation operating without an air
    traffic control tower.
        Last year, Congress passed the FAA reauthorization bill
    with the provision prioritizing the construction of air traffic
    control towers that support safety at multiuse airports. Pinal
    Airpark fits this description perfectly and was recently
    accepted as a candidate for the FAA contract tower program. Can
    I have your agency's commitment to fully considered Pinal
    Airpark as a candidate for a new tower under this program?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, you can.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Perfect. Thank you. That is critical here
    for us. On the air traffic control tower at Pinal Airpark is
    greatly needed, and I look forward to working with you to make
    that tower a reality.
        Here with the last minute or so that I have, I want to ask
    about something that you touched on in your testimony and some
    of my colleagues have mentioned as well is the air traffic
    control tower staffing side of it as well. What specific steps
    is the FAA taking to ensure adequate staffing levels at
    critical facilities across the country on that matter?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Again, I can't emphasize enough the
    importance of making sure that under the Secretary's
    leadership, that we do, in fact, realize the supercharge goal
    that we are attempting. Right now, we are focused on making
    sure that we get up to 2,500 through Oklahoma City, as well as
    through our enhanced CTI training schools and the collegiate
    partnerships that we have. In addition to that, we are
    incentivizing people to come to the FAA and go to tougher to
    staff locations with financial incentives.
        I think one of the things that is really going to help us
    in this effort, though, and it is critical, is we are giving 20
    percent more per year to experienced controllers to stay on as
    certified controllers, whether that is in an operational role
    or is in a training role, and make sure that we have that
    bridge to get healthy again in our controller staff. We are
    3,000 down, and we are working to make sure that within the
    next couple years that we have got that back healthy.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Real quick here, what do you think the
    shortage--what is the reason for it? I mean, it pays well, you
    know, high training. Now you have incentives to stay. Just real
    quick, what do you think highlights of the shortage is?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I think there were a variety of reasons.
    Part of it is advertising. We are trying to make sure people
    understand, this is an exciting, very rewarding career field. I
    also think that the time to get people into the Academy was too
    long. We were at a year and a half in some cases, and a 25-
    year-old is not going to wait around for a year and a half to
    get a job. They are going to go do something. Truncating the
    process and getting them into the school quicker, is going to
    help us.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, sir. We would love to welcome you
    back to your old stomping grounds----
        Mr. Rocheleau. All right.
        Mr. Ciscomani [continuing]. In Tucson and have you there
    soon. Thank you so much.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Ciscomani.
        If it pleases the subcommittee, we are going to do one more
    round of just a single question, so be thinking about your
    question.
        But before I go to my last question, I am going to
    recognize the overall chairman of the committee once again, Mr.
    Cole, who has been gracious enough to sit through this entire
    hearing today.
        Mr. Cole, I am going to recognize you for any final
    comments you would like to make, because I know you have an
    agenda and you have got to escape.
        Mr. Cole. I do. Thank you.
        I just want to compliment you, Mr. Chairman, you, Mr.
    Ranking Member, and every member of this committee.
        And I particularly want to single out you, Mr.
    Administrator.
        This is the way a hearing ought to work. This is a really
    good hearing. All the questions were substantive. All of them
    focused on real needs. All of you had real concerns. You put
    them out there. I want to compliment the leadership of this
    committee on both sides of the aisle for the manner in which
    this was done.
        And I want to compliment you, Mr. Administrator. You are a
    terrific witness. You know your stuff. And you have been very
    candid and forthcoming with the committee and very helpful in
    us understanding.
        And I am serious, I do think this is one of the areas we
    can and should cooperate on. I don't see much in the way of
    partisanship that deals with this or even profound
    disagreement. We mostly agree on what needs to get done here.
    And again, I want to thank the members of the committee,
    because everybody came here with a legitimate concern and very
    legitimate questions. And I didn't think, with all due respect,
    anybody was looking for a television moment. They just wanted
    to know the stuff and figure out what they could do to help you
    and the mission you have in keeping our skies, in particular,
    safe.
        A lot more committee meetings are like this than we get
    credit for in the media. And I want to thank all of you, again,
    on each side of the aisle and our witness for making it a
    really excellent and useful committee hearing. So thank you,
    Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Ranking Member. I appreciate it.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Cole. And
    you have honored us with your presence here today, and we truly
    appreciate it.
        My final question goes back to staffing. You have a lot of
    things that you are responsible for, and it is good that on the
    mission-critical safety required things, that people have been
    excluded from the DRP and efforts to downsize. But the fact is,
    you do so many other things that are not directly related to
    aviation safety. And I am talking about certifications and lots
    of other different programs, reevaluation of airspace as an
    example and things like rulemaking beyond the visual line of
    sight.
        Can you confirm that our staffing reductions are not going
    to interfere with your ability to conduct some of these other
    lesser-known functions of the FAA?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I can. Again, safety critical, we
    will always continue, where we find need, to bring people back.
    The Secretary has been very clear with me, if I have a need for
    something, whether it is aeronautical services or an engineer--
    and by the way, we continue to hire engineers to do our
    oversight--I have that ability to do that. We will be solid on
    staffing.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Clyburn.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
    Chairman, I do have a question.
        Mr. Administrator, you have had a long career in the United
    States Air Force. Do you know--this is more rhetorical. If you
    don't know, I won't be insulted--the name of Daniel ``Chappie''
    James?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I do.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much. Do you remember who he
    was?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir, I do.
        Mr. Clyburn. Well, Daniel--I knew Daniel ``Chappie'' James.
    When you have been around as long as I have, you would know
    these people. He was a good buddy. He became the first African
    American in this country to be a four-star general. He got that
    generalship because of a DEI program that was put in place that
    became known as the Tuskegee Airmen.
        Now, there seems to be some preoccupation with DEI on this
    subcommittee, so I am not going to be able to sleep with myself
    if I don't raise this issue. Now, in his first administration,
    President Trump put in place a DEI program for people with
    disabilities and it was successful. Now, in this
    administration, he has gotten rid of that program. Are you
    familiar with that program that brought people with
    disabilities into the FAA?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am generally familiar with it.
        Mr. Clyburn. It was a very successful program, but we have
    gotten rid of that program now because of this notion of DEI.
    Mr. Chairman, I know that every time--this comes up in these
    subcommittees, but every time it comes up, I am going to always
    rebut with facts. Chappie James is one of the most successful
    air fighter pilots, not a Red Tail because he became a real
    fighter pilot, and he helped us to win that war. And I yield
    back.
        Mr. Womack. Mr. Ciscomani.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And one of the things that I talked to Secretary Duffy
    about as well, Administrator Duffy, was about a midair crash
    that happened on February 19 in Miranda, Arizona. Two people
    died in that terrible accident. You know, Mr. Duffy called it
    tragic. I agree. I know there is a report being compiled on
    that with more details on it. I know that we briefly talked
    about some of the potential reasons for that incident, but I am
    just, you know, just to comment more than anything that I am
    looking forward to receiving the report here from the FAA
    hopefully soon.
        Do you have any idea of a timeline that we could
    potentially be looking at? Are you familiar with the incident
    or----
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am familiar----
        Mr. Ciscomani. Yeah.
        Mr. Rocheleau [continuing]. With the incident. It was
    indeed a tragedy. I am not familiar with the status of the
    report. I will certainly take that as an IOU and get back to
    you. It is one of those things where I continue to encourage,
    coming from business general aviation, there is some very
    important equipment that I think people have an opportunity to
    equip their aircraft with that can increase safety in those
    circumstances. I understand it was an uncontrolled airfield at
    the time.
        Mr. Ciscomani. It was, yeah, uh-huh.
        Mr. Rocheleau. But I commit to you to getting you the
    update on that report.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Excellent. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes.
        Mr. Womack. Mr. Quigley.
        Mr. Quigley. Mr. Chairman, I will abide by your one
    question. This will be a five-point question----
        Mr. Rocheleau. Okay.
        Mr. Quigley [continuing]. If that is all right. I am just
    kidding. There is a bipartisan Quiet Skies Caucus, and on a
    bipartisan basis got provisions into the last reauthorization,
    including creation of an aviation noise officer, regional noise
    officers, and then a requirement that you review and revise the
    FAA noise standards. Where are we at with that, and will the
    budgetary issues affect that as well?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am aware of it. I understand that we
    regularly engage in Quiet Skies Caucus efforts, not to mention
    community engagement. I can't tell you today--again, I will
    commit to getting back to you--where we are specifically. But I
    can tell you that the budget that we are requesting goes
    directly to supporting those activities.
        Mr. Quigley. And I would appreciate--we don't have the time
    today, but I would appreciate you or your staff, they can
    engage with myself or my staff, to talk about this further, and
    perhaps have an ongoing discussion with that bipartisan Quiet
    Skies Caucus. Thank you.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Womack. Mr. Strong.
        Mr. Strong. Mr. Administrator, I know that you mentioned
    earlier that 35--you had a 35 percent failure rate in the
    training of air traffic controllers. I encourage you to
    maintain the highest of standards, never lower those standards.
    It was interesting for you to mention that.
        In 2021, Huntsville International Airport was selected as
    one of the five locations of UAS detection and mitigation
    testing. Section 383 of the 2018 FAA Reauthorization Act
    directed the FAA to test and evaluate technologies and systems
    that can detect and mitigate potential safety risk posed by UAS
    at and near airports. Mr. Administrator, what is the status of
    that testing, and what feedback have you received from DHS,
    DOJ, or other law enforcement partners?
        Mr. Rocheleau. Thank you for the question. Yes, in fact,
    the testing at Huntsville was very valuable. In fact, my
    understanding from my team is that 48 different UAS were
    tested, and 30 different types of detection equipment were
    tested at five different airports, most recently up in New
    Jersey, but Huntsville was a particularly important part of
    that effort. What we learned from that effort was that the
    detection capabilities are there today, and whether it is
    airports or law enforcement, and certainly DOD and DHS, we are
    working closely with them to make sure that those detection
    equipment capabilities are there for the right people.
        In addition to that, since we are responsible for the
    safety of operating in the skies, we want to make sure that
    those mitigation efforts are carefully put in place, because
    mitigation can, in fact, affect civil aviation traffic. And so,
    that is part of that effort that we are going through, both on
    the detection side, critically important, and then we partner
    with the appropriate law enforcement security agencies to do
    the mitigation piece.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you, Mr. Rocheleau.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Bring us home, Mrs. Torres.
        Mrs. Torres. Thank you, Chairman.
        And there is two things that I want to ask of you, but I am
    going to put them in writing to you. I just want to let you
    know about them today, because they are critically important
    for some of my constituents. One is an update on where the six
    studies stand, included in the 2024 FAA reauthorization studies
    on cabin air quality, temperature, radiation, and modern
    evacuation training; and the other is on the PAPI system. You
    know it as the Position Approach Path Indicator. It is a
    bipartisan supported program that requires substantial updates.
    It saves a lot of money on energy by replacing the bulbs. Can
    you give us an update on the progress of this program for the
    runways that still need to be updated?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I am familiar with the PAPI program. I do
    commit to getting you the status on both of those issues.
        Mrs. Torres. Thank you, and I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. And just in time, Pete, welcome back. You have
    got just a few seconds to ask your last question.
        Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You told me it was
    the best for last. You are not saying that in public anymore,
    but that is fine.
        Mr. Womack. Well, I kind of inferred that with Mrs. Torres,
    but you made it back.
        Mr. Aguilar. I wanted to build--thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Appreciate your indulgence.
        Mr. Administrator, I wanted to build off of what Ranking
    Member Clyburn discussed, and one of the programs that exists
    within your agency and within DOT broadly is the DBE program,
    the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise program. The FAA
    Reauthorization Act included a bill that was mine that was
    specific for DBE supportive services expansion. It created DBE
    supportive services program at the FAA. I appreciate that the
    FAA budget justification highlights that the FAA is
    prioritizing implementing DBE programs in fiscal year 2026.
        However, the budget justification did not request funding
    for DBE programs. Just as a refresh here, these are small, for-
    profit businesses and at least 51 percent owned and controlled
    by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals: women,
    minorities, other socially and economically disadvantaged
    groups. Oftentimes, our Federal programs reward prime
    contractors and very big folks who have more compliance people
    than they know what to do with. And making sure that smaller
    businesses have an opportunity to bid on contracts and to
    procure is an incredibly important part of what we do. How does
    the FAA plan to implement the DBE program in this new
    supportive services program without requesting any funding?
        Mr. Rocheleau. I understand the importance of this. As you
    mentioned, there are certainly those vendors out there that
    have subs, and that is how they conduct this. I know that both
    our disadvantaged business office as well as our Airports
    office work together in executing these plans, working with
    airports, working with associations that support these as well.
        With respect to what we are doing as it relates to today's
    activities, I will take the IOU to get back to you and come in
    and give a briefing to you and your staff. I know we have a
    subject matter expert on that topic itself, and I am happy to
    get him engaged.
        Mr. Aguilar. Specifically related to the funding, this is
    the Appropriations Committee.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Yeah.
        Mr. Aguilar. And the funding and the resources that you
    decide to use as you implement this program, I would be
    interested in seeing it. If you want to work with our office, I
    would definitely take you up on that. Thank you.
        Mr. Rocheleau. Very good. Thank you.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you.
        Mr. Administrator, thank you so much for being here today.
        I want to echo the sentiments that Mr. Cole made earlier
    about the quality of the hearing, and certainly, the quality of
    the witness, but I am also mindful of the fact that you have a
    good staff of great people behind you. And Kate and Julie and
    Hannah, and others across that spectrum, do yeoman's work and
    are dedicated to the service of the general public and the
    taxpaying public.
        And so to the staff, I want to thank you for the work that
    you do as well.
        I want to remind our members that you have 7 days to submit
    any questions that you would like submitted to the record with
    our subcommittee staff.
        Again, I want to thank everybody for being here today.
        Mr. Clyburn, as always, good to share the dais with you,
    and I hope it is a good week for you.
        Mr. Clyburn. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
    you for what I consider to be a very substantive hearing. I do
    and will always reiterate that we aren't asking--I have never
    asked--for any standards to be lowered. I only ask for what I
    call fair--not preferential but fair--treatment. And so as a
    member of this committee, I am going to always insist upon the
    record carrying that notion.
        Mr. Chairman, when I was studying in college, I studied a
    man named Alexis de Tocqueville. I am sure you are familiar
    with Mr. Tocqueville.
        Mr. Womack. Very familiar. French nobleman, yes.
        Mr. Clyburn. Absolutely. He wrote a two-volume work called
    ``Democracy in America.'' And de Tocqueville wrote in that book
    that America's greatness is not that it is more enlightened
    than any other nation, but rather because she has always been
    able to repair her faults. That is what makes this country
    great. We find a fault and we repair it. That is how Daniel
    ``Chappie'' James, Jr., became great, repairing a fault. Thank
    you, and I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. And on that note, this subcommittee stands
    adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:58 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, HUD, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
                                    FOR 2026

                                  ----------

                                                Tuesday, June 10, 2025.

                U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                                    WITNESS

    HON. SCOTT TURNER, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
        DEVELOPMENT
        Mr. Womack. The subcommittee will come to order. Today, I
    welcome the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban
    Development, the Honorable Scott Turner, a Big Ten champion in
    a previous life. Mr. Secretary, I want to thank you for being
    here to discuss HUD's fiscal year 2026 budget request. I also
    want to thank you for your visit recently to my district in
    April. It was great to have you on the ground to see the impact
    of HUD programs in my district. Let me add, we caught a
    Razorback baseball game while we were there, and in a shameless
    plug, I will give my Razorbacks some credit for making it to
    Omaha, where they will play Saturday evening against those
    Bengal Tigers of LSU.
        It is this committee's responsibility to complete our work
    on time. I believe we can achieve this goal, and I am pleased
    that under Chairman Cole's leadership, we have already begun
    marking up 12 appropriation bills for fiscal year 2026. At the
    same time, it is our expectation that the departments under our
    jurisdiction spend the funds consistently with the way we
    appropriate them. We appreciate your partnership as you
    continue to fully implement the funds Congress made available
    to HUD for fiscal 2025. HUD's request for new budget authority
    in fiscal year 2026 is $33.2 billion. That is a $35.5 billion
    decrease. Let me say that again. That is not a typo. $35.5
    billion decrease from the fiscal year 2025 enacted. HUD also
    uses mortgage guarantee fees from the Federal Housing
    Administration and the Government National Mortgage Association
    to offset its spending. The Congressional Budget Office
    estimates $6.9 billion in offsetting receipts for fiscal year
    2026. That is a billion and a half dollars less than receipts
    in 2025. Regardless of what the administration sent over in its
    budget request, the CBO score is what we have to live with,
    which means we are in an even deeper hole than the President's
    budget, which suggests, to state the obvious, this is a
    significant reduction in the discretionary budget authority for
    the department.
        Mr. Secretary, you heard in April in my district that many
    Arkansans are struggling to afford the rising cost of housing.
    Of course, it is not unique to Northwest Arkansas. The Census
    Bureau's American Community Survey found that 31 percent of
    American households were cost-burdened due to rising housing
    costs in 2023, including 27 percent of households with a
    mortgage and 50 percent of households with rent. This is why
    HUD's impact is felt in every district. Through its rental
    assistance programs, HUD ensures that the poor, veterans, the
    elderly, and those with disabilities can live with dignity. It
    provides economic development dollars for local governments,
    helps fight home-based hazards, and provides a hand-up for
    communities recovering from disasters.
        Because of your department's important mission, Secretary
    Turner, I am deeply concerned about the deep cuts the
    administration's budget makes to HUD. These proposed cuts would
    radically affect HUD's mission and operations. I am interested
    in hearing how a $27.6 billion reduction to HUD's rental
    assistance programs will help HUD serve our Nation's most
    vulnerable. Your proposal is light on details on how the
    formula for your proposed state rental assistance program will
    ultimately work. I am also curious how HUD will support
    community development in low-and moderate-income communities
    when some of its most important and popular programs, like
    community development block grants, have been zeroed out. These
    programmatic changes need to go through the authorizing
    committees, particularly the proposals to block grant
    assistance to the states and the dramatic changes on how we
    combat homelessness in America. These ambitious proposals
    require an all-in effort. I welcome ongoing dialogue with our
    authorizing colleagues.
        HUD's program should work better for the American people.
    You and I have discussed how there is fat to cut at HUD. But if
    we cut too deep and if we cut too fast, HUD's programs will not
    serve the communities you and I have pledged to help. I look
    forward to learning about your goals for HUD for this upcoming
    fiscal year and beyond. This subcommittee stands ready to work
    with you to better serve all Americans as we write this year's
    THUD bill.
        I would now like to recognize the Ranking Member and my
    partner in this effort, the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr.
    Clyburn, for his opening statement.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much Mr. Chairman, and welcome
    Mr. Secretary. I think we can all agree that housing is a basic
    human need and serves as a foundation for education, health,
    and financial outcomes for nearly every family in America. And
    where you live matters. Without a safe and stable place to
    live, it is difficult for families to improve educational
    outcomes, maintain good health, or increase their earnings and
    build wealth.
        Across the country, more than 771,000 people are
    experiencing homelessness, and 75 percent of low-income renters
    spend more than half of their income on rent. According to the
    Census Bureau, last year, the annual cost of renting grew
    faster, 3.8 percent, than home values, 1.8 percent, for the
    first time since 2011. This comes at a time when more than 56
    percent of African American households and 53 percent of
    Hispanic households pay more than 30 percent of their income on
    rent, compared to less than 47 percent of White Americans.
    Meanwhile, because of existing budget constraints, only one in
    five families can receive Federal rental assistance. Despite
    these despairing realities, your department's 2026 budget
    request proposes to cut HUD funding by more than half. This is
    not only unacceptable but unrealistic, given the dire need to
    lower the cost of living for Americans.
        As the Secretary of your budget proposal to eliminate
    Section 8 public housing, housing for the elderly, housing for
    persons with disabilities, housing for persons with HIV/AIDS,
    and the continuum of care programs. Instead, you are proposing
    to establish a so-called state rental assistance program to
    block grant rent payments via a formula you have yet to define.
    Your budget also proposes to eliminate nearly all of HUD's
    housing construction, supply, and preservation programs. Time
    does not permit me to enumerate all of them. These so-called
    reforms would shift HUD program costs onto low-income
    residents. And I have yet to see from your budget evidence that
    funding that we could save in these time limits and work
    requirements if they become law. This doesn't help families who
    already are working multiple jobs to become self-sufficient.
    Instead, it creates chaos and financial uncertainty and pushes
    these families into more severe trade-offs. A choice of feeding
    your family, paying for medications, or paying rent.
        Lastly, I would be remiss if I did not highlight the cuts
    to fair housing enforcement and your attempts to deregulate
    long-standing civil rights law. Mr. Secretary, let's remember
    the long and painful history that led to the creation of the
    Fair Housing Law. The Federal Housing Administration, banks,
    and insurance companies literally drew red lines on maps around
    the neighborhoods where they refused to provide home loans and
    insurance to otherwise qualified home buyers. I know. I was
    born in one of them, and I currently live in one of them.
        This discrimination extended to Black veterans returning
    from World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. These men and women had
    served their country yet were excluded from the GI Bill's
    housing benefits that were transformational for White families.
    Black Veterans were denied VA-backed loans. Of the first 3,350
    VA home loans in Mississippi, only two went to blacks. Not 2
    percent. Two out of 3,350. Not even fighting for our country
    abroad earned Blacks a fair shot at the American Dream here at
    home.
        Black families were denied the primary path to building
    generational wealth, and that created a racial wealth gap that
    persists to this day. I know this as well. I serve on two of
    the boards of the predecessor banks to what is now Bank of
    America. I chaired the Community Reinvestment Act Committee,
    and I served on the Audit Committee. I led the investigations
    into my own bank for its discrimination. The Fair Housing Law
    of 1968 represents a simple but crucial promise that every
    American would have an equal opportunity to secure safe, decent
    housing.
        Unfortunately, since the start of this administration, we
    have seen an attack on long-standing laws that were enacted to
    stop excluding Blacks from the drapelessness of this country.
    The current state of housing and the cost of living in America
    calls on us to question our National priorities. Unfortunately,
    Mr. Secretary, this budget proposal ignores far too many
    realities, and it is not a reflection of what should be the
    values of our country. It is an exploitation of our most
    vulnerable.
        Mr. Chairman, I implore my colleagues on this panel to work
    together to find some real solutions to the housing crisis and
    drive down the cost of living, not increase the economic
    burdens on every American. And I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. I thank the ranking member. Before I introduce
    our witness this morning, the chair recognizes a very familiar
    face in the front row on the HUD staff, Graydon Daubert, former
    staffer for this subcommittee. Mr. Secretary, you got a really
    good one there.
        Secretary Turner. Indeed, sir.
        Mr. Womack. But stop the poaching.
        Secretary Turner. It is a team. We are all one team.
        Mr. Womack. He is a good man and a valuable asset. And I
    know you will enjoy his service to your organization.
        At this time, I am going to recognize you for your opening
    statement. The entire prepared statement will be included in
    the record.
        Secretary Turner. Yes.
        Mr. Womack. But we are going to give you 5 minutes to
    briefly summarize your comments, and then we will open our
    question and answer period. And with that, Mr. Secretary, the
    floor is yours.

                     STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT TURNER

        Secretary Turner. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. And good
    morning to you, Chairman Womack, Vice Chair Bice, Ranking
    Member Clyburn, and all the distinguished members of this
    subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to testify today
    in support of President Trump's 2026 budget for the United
    States Department on Housing and Urban Development. And again,
    thank you, Chairman Womack, for having me in Arkansas and
    showing me innovative housing solutions there in your district
    in April.
        Members, we have a small window of opportunity to help
    every American achieve the dream of home ownership. And the
    clock is indeed ticking. As of this past April, the National
    median home price is $414,000, up from more than $341,000 in
    April of 2021. And this is a dramatic increase of more than 21
    percent. It became very hard for Americans to afford homes due
    to the policies of the Biden administration, which have been
    marked by negligence and a lack of stewardship of American
    taxpayer dollars.
        We cannot keep running the same plays that are causing
    Americans to lose. It is time to run new plays and get a new
    playbook, and this budget, the President's fiscal year 2026, is
    indeed that new playbook. It requests $43.5 billion for the
    Department of Housing and Urban Development to fund critical
    programs and provide greater fiscal responsibility and
    restraint. It carries out President Trump's Day One directive
    to increase housing supply and make it affordable again. This
    budget supports HUD's mission, and we will indeed maximize the
    funds Congress, and you and your colleagues provide to us, no
    matter what the amount, be it $10 billion or $10.
        We have been taking inventory of every program and found
    HUD's rental assistance to be full of waste, fraud, and abuse.
    It is broken and deviated from its original purpose, which is
    to temporarily help Americans in need. HUD assistance is not
    supposed to be permanent. It should be a trampoline, not a
    hammock, not a resting place. It is supposed to be like a
    Treadway, which is a military bridge which is used temporarily
    to get over obstacles and then is removed.
        We are also eliminating radical political agendas and
    wasteful spending at HUD. We identified as an example $260
    million in savings for taxpayers. We canceled $4 million in DEI
    contracts that had nothing to do with HUD and recovered an
    additional $1.9 billion from inactive contracts that should
    have been closed out during the Biden administration. We have
    seen that pouring money into programs just fuels its existing
    status, which is not good. No. Here we are, reversing course to
    be efficient and effective, not bloated and bureaucratic. We
    want to be efficient and effective, not bloated and
    bureaucratic.
        We are also undoing harmful regulations, including the
    Obama-Biden era, affirmatively furthering fair housing rule,
    which effectively turned HUD into a National zoning board. We
    are cutting red tape, and that is important. But we are also
    increasing the housing stock and opportunities for first-time
    home buyers. The Federal Housing Administration, FHA, which
    insures mortgages on more than 7 million homes and has insured
    mortgages for more than 140,000 first-time home buyers since
    January when President Trump returned to the White House. In
    addition, we are ending taxpayer-funded subsidies for HUD
    programs for illegal aliens entering our country.
        But HUD is more than just housing. We streamline the
    disaster recovery process to help funding to get to communities
    more quickly and efficiently. For our tribal communities, we
    announced $2.2 million under the expansion of the Tribal HUD-
    VASH program to address veteran homelessness. And for our rural
    communities, we have convened roundtables in states around the
    country and discussed solutions for workforce housing.
    Returning HUD to its intended purpose, serving Americans
    through localized solutions.
        The President's budget continues this approach by limiting
    the size and the spending of Federal programs. It proposes a
    state-based formula grant to encourage states to have skin in
    the game for the funding and design of their own rental
    assistance. The block grant will empower states to be more
    thoughtful and precise in their stewardship.
        HUD currently has 30,000 program awardees and recipients.
    No wonder the system is plagued by abuse. Empowering states
    through this reimagined system would prone the administrative
    burden and maintain necessary assistance for the elderly and
    the abused. The budget also continues our commitment to promote
    economic independence and adopt compassionate common sense and
    historically a bipartisan conversation around reforms like time
    limits and work limits to encourage able-bodied residents to
    move up and get out of assisted housing.
        It addresses our Nation's homelessness crisis by returning
    solutions to the local authorities. The President's budget
    saves billions of taxpayer dollars and helps restore fiscal
    responsibility. And Mr. Chairman, in order to properly serve
    the American people, we must care about our mission, care about
    the ones that we serve, and care about this country. And that
    is what HUD is, and that is what we have returned to do, sir.
    So, the 2026 HUD budget request will allow us to operate at a
    standard of excellence that we have not in previous years and
    return the President's golden age. I am in support of this and
    look forward to Mr. Chairman talking to you and your
    distinguished colleagues. Thank you, sir, for your time.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. There is at least one
    other committee meeting that is underway this morning that will
    carry some of our members away, including the ranking member of
    the full committee and the Chairman of the full committee, who
    may or may not come in time here. If they do, I want to
    recognize them----
        Secretary Turner. Okay.
        Mr. Womack [continuing]. When they get here so that we can
    maximize their appearance.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Womack. But the Defense Subcommittee is meeting this
    morning with the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the
    Joint Chiefs in order to get the posture hearing for that
    budget framework.
        And so, now, let's go to the Q&A portion of our meeting
    this morning. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your commitment to
    reforming our Federal rental assistance programs. The current
    system, as you have already articulated, is rife with
    inefficiency. The Administration's request proposes placing the
    major HUD rental assistance programs, tenant-based, project-
    based, and public housing, into a single state rental
    assistance block grant program that you referenced in your
    opening. This is a substantial change to business as usual.
        Now, as we consider this proposal, I want to make sure that
    we are good stewards of taxpayer dollars while still meeting
    our obligation to help those most in need. I would also note
    that an overhaul of these programs would need the work of the
    authorizing committee, that of financial services. I support
    reforms that promote work, that reduce dependency and give
    state and local governments more control.
        But I want to ensure that we are not creating gaps that
    could lead to increased homelessness or hardship for vulnerable
    populations.
        So, Mr. Secretary, can you walk us through the concept of
    how proposed block grant programs like this would maintain
    assistance to the approximate 10 million Americans currently
    served by these programs?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman, and
    thank you for your question. As you stated, and I stated in my
    opening remarks, you know, the status quo is not good enough.
    And the way that we have been going about serving the American
    people from a HUD perspective is no longer good enough.
        And so, with this new paradigm,--it is indeed a paradigm
    shift. It is a culture shift. The goal here is not to serve
    less Americans. The goal here is to serve Americans better. And
    so, to give states an opportunity to have skin in the game, to
    identify their unique need, and then to be very deliberative
    about how they put the resources out as it pertains to rental
    assistance, as it pertains to taking care of the most
    vulnerable in their state. And there is a focus in this budget,
    Mr. Chairman, to take care of the elderly and those that are
    disabled.
        And when you look at HUD, HUD has had record funding over
    the past few years. In the last 8 years, HUD's budget went from
    $42 billion to $77 billion. And yet, HUD lost focus of its most
    basic mission. We are only able, currently, to serve one out of
    four eligible families at HUD. And that is unacceptable when
    you have a $70 to $77 billion budget. And so, this is a
    paradigm shift.
        You know, playing in the NFL and playing in sports, you
    know, when you have a playbook, or you are running plays that
    are not, that are not working, the best teams that I have seen
    are those that go in, they make adjustments, say, well, we can
    no longer run this play because it is causing us to lose. So,
    let's run a new play. Let's reimagine what we are doing. I
    don't like to lose, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member. I don't
    like to lose, and I don't like the American people to lose. And
    so, we have to do something different in this country.
        It is not about just throwing money at situations. It is
    about what we do with the money that we have to best serve
    effectively and efficiently the people of our country. And that
    is my mindset. That is my heart. It is not about the money for
    me. It is about the people. And we are returning HUD to that
    focus, mission minded. We understand what our call is, we
    understand who we have been called to serve, and we understand
    the critical mission. And so, at HUD, currently, that is what
    we are focused on.
        Mr. Womack. So, to use a football vernacular, when we break
    huddle on this block grant program, what conditions will be in
    place? What will you do to ensure that we have adequate service
    levels for, you mentioned, the elderly, for the disabled,
    people that are very vulnerable in their lives? What assurances
    do we have? What can we do to ensure that there is a service
    level that is fitting for these individuals?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir, and that is a great
    question. So, in this SRAP, State Rental Assistance Program,
    there is money in the budget from our PD&R program office at
    HUD to make sure that we work with states to implement an
    appropriate strategy and also to work with you and your
    colleagues on this committee to make sure that this strategy is
    serving the most vulnerable in our country.
        HUD is a great facilitator of this, and we are very
    focused. And as you see in the budget, there is money set aside
    so that we don't just say there is a new program, but we can
    say this is how we are going to join in with states and join in
    with stakeholders to implement and execute this program. And
    so, those conversations have begun and will continue, and we
    welcome your input, you and your colleague's input, to make
    sure that this new strategy works effectively for the people we
    serve.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, sir. Mr. Clyburn.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me, if
    I might consider--I am not going to do football. I played the
    game, not at the level you played it, but I am a pretty good
    golfer, and I know that If I have got 150 yards to get to the
    green, it doesn't matter what club I use. What matters is what
    skill I have got. That is what matters. And I always hear
    people say, what club do you use? What does it mean to you? You
    are not the same as I am. So therefore, at soon to be 85 years
    old, it is going to cost me a little more with a 6 iron that is
    going to cost this young man over here. So, get the right
    equipment.
        Now, so if you tell me that HUD has been ineffective, do
    you cure ineffectiveness by refocusing or do you cure it by
    eliminating? So, if you say, well, I have been ineffective, you
    eliminate the funds, how does that make HUD effective? Tell me
    about refocus.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And I have heard that you are a
    great golfer. I do look forward to playing with you. Your 8
    iron might be a different club than mine, but you are right; it
    is a skill.
        I am reminded that during the previous administration,
    during COVID with a $70 billion budget, sir, HUD hired 2,000
    people during COVID, most of which stayed home. And there was
    continuous waste, fraud, and abuse. And so, when you have that
    many people and still not carry out the job, and you have that
    much funding and still not carry out the job for the American
    people, then we have to refocus. And part of that refocus is
    taking inventory of staff, taking inventory of the budget,
    taking inventory where the budget is going. And currently, in
    the programs we have, we don't have a lot of purview, if you
    will, and transparency, if you will, where the money is going,
    is it serving those that are supposed to be serving. And so
    part of this refocus is to bring that back to house and bring
    it to the stage to say, now, let's have more transparency.
    Let's have more accountability. And so, when I look at refocus,
    and I look at the skill set, all of that, to me, is in the same
    bucket.
        Mr. Clyburn. Don't you----
        Secretary Turner. When you look at your people, are you
    doing a job you have been called to do? Are you doing at the
    level you have been called to do it? And is there transparency
    in the process that we have? And at HUD, that is what they are
    doing. And, sir, I said it in my confirmation process that we
    are going to take inventory of every program office at HUD, we
    are going to maximize the budget that we do have, and we are
    going to serve the people that we are supposed to be serving.
    So, the amount of people, the amount of money, that is not the
    deal here. Because with the tremendous amount of money and a
    tremendous amount of people, we haven't, prior to us getting
    here, carried out the job we have been called to carry out.
        Mr. Clyburn. I agree with you, but I think that to deal
    with COVID is a false. This is a false narrative here. I
    chaired the Select Subcommittee for the Coronavirus. I knew
    where the fraud was, and it wasn't in housing. The billions and
    billions and billions of fraudulent money went to some pretty
    wealthy people, at least one of whom is in this administration
    right now. So, that is not the criteria that we ought to use
    here. Let's look at what the needs are and how we need to equip
    ourselves for these needs.
        Now, you mentioned the Obama-Biden administration. If you
    want to cure what you see to be the problem of the Obama-Biden
    administration, why would you advocate the Andrew Johnson and
    the Woodrow Wilson administrations? And I used those two
    administrations because I disliked them immensely, and they
    were Democrats. So, I want you to think this is policy. Woodrow
    Wilson was a Democrat and, I think, one of the worst presidents
    we ever had. So this is not policy here. This is whether or not
    we are going to have a program to meet the needs of the
    American people or whether we are going to just get rid of and
    throw out the baby with the bathwater. And that is what you
    seem to be doing here with half of the budget. And then you
    tell me you want to refocus the agency with what? With what
    equipment? The five iron, or will you leave it in the bag?
        Secretary Turner. Well, I think it is the right equipment
    for the situation. And right now, prior to us being here, we
    haven't been using the right equipment for the right situation.
        Mr. Clyburn. So, what is the right equipment?
        Secretary Turner. Well, the right equipment, sir, is called
    transparency. It is called inventory. It is called, you know,
    let's refocus and let's have a new paradigm. And, you know, you
    talk about the Biden-Obama administration, and I make note to
    them just because that is what----
        Mr. Clyburn. No, you did.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Because that is where the rule
    came, not politics. And so, sir, I will assure you that my
    heart and my focus is on serving the American people. And we
    are refocusing in order to do that appropriately. Thank you,
    sir.
        Mr. Clyburn. Okay. I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Womack. You will get a mulligan here and in another
    little while when we do a second round.
        Mr. Clyburn. I look forward to it.
        Mr. Womack. How's that?
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you.
        Mr. Womack. Sheriff.
        Mr. Rutherford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, ranking member.
    Mr. Secretary, you know we are facing historic shortages of
    affordable housing. And one of the, I thought, one of the best
    programs that HUD had was the SHOP program, where nonprofits
    would actually assist people in home ownership. And I can tell
    you, as a former sheriff, everywhere in my community, and we
    did this on purpose in Jacksonville, Florida, we went into the
    most challenged neighborhoods, working with these nonprofit
    groups who would then bring homeownership into these areas,
    these most challenged public safety areas, and everywhere that
    home ownership went up, violent crime went down. And so, that
    is why I love this SHOP program because it puts people into
    home ownership. I like SRAP, but I really want people to own
    homes because I know it changes the whole community. So can you
    tell me a little bit about, you know, how are we going to
    address this issue if we are doing away with SHOP?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, Sheriff. I really appreciate
    it--sorry, Congressman. Thank you for your service in law
    enforcement. You know, again, I reiterate that this is a new
    way of looking at how we distribute funds. And by bringing in
    the states and bringing in localities and giving them the
    flexibility to identify programs, such as you stated, that have
    been successful, then they'll have the ability to continue to
    fund and work with those programs. I, too, am for the
    workforce. I, too, am for skills training and home ownership.
    Moving from rent to home ownership, moving from being
    subsidized to now living a life of self-sufficiency. And that
    is the heart here.
        Mr. Rutherford. So, if I could interrupt. So, you have
    SRAP, which is going to be basically a block grant for rental
    assistance programs. And you are saying there is going to be
    another block grant process where programs like SHOP can be
    funded out of if the state or the city decides that is how they
    want to use those funds?
        Secretary Turner. No, sir. Not an additional block grant
    but included with.
        Mr. Rutherford. Included in the SRAP?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, include with. When I say this,
    meaning that the states will have the authority and the
    flexibility to identify programs that are doing well and be
    able to not just fund those but support those opportunities in
    the states that you are talking about in particular, like SHOP,
    that you mentioned.
        Mr. Rutherford. Yeah, but all of those others are rental
    assistance programs.
        Secretary Turner. They are. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Rutherford. You are saying that those dollars will also
    be used for home ownership, affordable home ownership?
        Secretary Turner. No, sir. What I am saying is that when
    you have--when you have programs that promote home ownership,
    when you have programs that promote----
        Mr. Rutherford. They won't promote----
        Secretary Turner. [continuing]. Individuals being able to
    buy homes, states will now be able to identify those better
    than the Federal Government. The Federal Government is not the
    one that identifies those unique needs like states. And so,
    this, the whole paradigm is to return that back to the states
    as it pertains to rental assistance that we talked about. And
    so, this is a refocusing of taking the Federal Government out
    of it and putting the states in charge and in control of how
    they want to distribute the funds.
        Mr. Rutherford. Okay. Let me ask one more question in this
    round. In Jacksonville, we had a project-based rental
    assistance program, Eureka Gardens. I don't know if you are
    familiar with that, but this is dealing with public housing
    units and basic safety and quality standards and how those
    complaints and inspections are handled. What sort of oversight
    do you see HUD having for those--for those rental facilities?
    You know, this one got so bad that we actually had an
    explosion, and I mean, it was horrible. How do we improve the
    inspector training and accountability to make sure those
    inspections are consistent and reliable across the board?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And HUD will still be involved,
    obviously, when it comes to inspections such as this. You know,
    I have traveled around the country and visited public housing
    authorities and seen some of the conditions that people are
    living in across our country. And some of them are deplorable.
    And so obviously, HUD will continue to be involved as such so
    that those public housing authorities are safe, that they are
    secure for the residents that are living there.
        Mr. Rutherford. Okay. So even with the block grant, you are
    still going to be in the inspection business?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Rutherford. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I see my time is
    up. I yield back.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Sheriff. Mr. Quigley.
        Mr. Quigley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, I
    don't know if you really believe all this stuff or you are just
    parroting what you are told to say because--let me begin. I
    wrote reports on this that were detailed about how to
    streamline and consolidate government and make it more
    effective. Not because I hate it, but because it is so
    important and the resources are scarce. But there is absolutely
    no details. So, when you just say refocus and reform, it falls
    on deaf ears. It doesn't mean anything. You can talk about
    compassion, but no reform measures are going to be able to
    allow us to cut HUD by 50 percent and not have our most
    vulnerable people, seniors, kids, and people with HIV/AIDS on
    the street.
        Mr. Secretary, you have to understand that housing is
    everything. Housing for people with HOPWA. HOPWA is health
    care. These people will die. There is no way you can believe
    that a 50 percent cut won't mean a dramatic increase in people
    being put on the street. So just--you can say what you want,
    but it is when you cut the programs like pro, which is designed
    to remove regulations, something you seem to be focused on,
    that are stopping localities from building more housing. It is
    just, it defies credibility. So, if you just want to say we got
    to cut these things because that is our plan, I would respect
    you a lot more than telling us that you care about people as
    you put them on the street.
        So, let's just talk about HOPWA for a second. It zeros out
    HOPWA and says they currently can receive emergency short-term
    and medium-term assistance through the emergency grants
    program. But 64 percent of the people on HOPWA are not short-
    term folks. 2 years isn't enough for them. And the Emergency
    Solutions Grant, which is going to solve all the problems, is
    now supposed to absorb seven existing programs, including this,
    and a cut of $532 million.
        I don't know if you have known anybody who died from HIV/
    AIDS. I have, so it is personal for people in my district and
    myself. So, what is the detailed plan that says those folks
    aren't going to go on the street where they won't get their
    medication and they'll die?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir. And I will say, sir, I am
    not just speaking. I do actually care, and I do actually
    believe in what I am saying. If I didn't believe it, I wouldn't
    say it. You know, as a Christian, as a pastor, I care about all
    people. And when you talk about HOPWA, and you talk about the
    Emergency Solutions Grant, you know, this will help us to
    better serve people in the community. This will help us to more
    effectively and efficiently serve people in the community.
        Mr. Quigley. How?
        Secretary Turner. HUD had record funding. 770,000 people
    were homeless in January of 2024. And the point-in-time report,
    on one single night, January 2024, 770,000 people were
    homeless. And so, when I say refocus, I really mean to refocus
    because that is unacceptable when you have record funding and
    yet you have almost 800,000 people on the streets. Why would we
    continue to do the same thing that we have been doing, and it
    is not working appropriately?
        Mr. Quigley. So, the alternative is besides just saying we
    are going to refocus, you are going to find a place for these
    folks to stay overnight. Okay, let's just talk us, Christians.
    There is something about the story of the Bible in Christ
    having not a place to stay, right? So that is on your mind.
    Faith without acts is dead.
        Secretary Turner. That is right.
        Mr. Quigley. What is your detail?
        Secretary Turner. Yeah, faith.
        Mr. Quigley. Besides saying that you have--your faith won't
    put a house over their head?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Faith, what I was going to say,
    faith without action is dead. And this is the action that we
    are going to take.
        Mr. Quigley. What?
        Secretary Turner. To do it better.
        Mr. Quigley. How?
        Secretary TURNER. Because what we have been doing is not
    working. And I believe that----
        Mr. Quigley. What is plan B?
        Secretary Turner. I believe that you all, your committee,
    we should have been asking what and how way before today.
        Mr. Quigley. I wrote those reports.
        Secretary Turner. Yeah.
        Mr. Quigley. I am with you if you have details and how.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Quigley. But all you are doing is cutting and there is
    not even a transition period.
        Secretary Turner. Sir, we are going to be more effective
    and more efficient.
        Mr. Quigley. How?
        Secretary Turner. We are not just cutting. It is a new
    paradigm.
        Mr. Quigley. How?
        Secretary Turner. It is a new way to do things.
        Mr. Quigley. Let's come up with more words than compassion
    and paradigm. Detailed plans where these----
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Quigley [continuing]. Folks are going to stay in the
    meantime.
        Secretary Turner. And we look forward to working with you
    and your staff on--on those strategies, and I commit to that.
    It is not just words. We will be happy to work with you, sir,
    if you are willing to work with us.
        Mr. Womack. Thank you, Mr. Quigley.
        Secretary Turner. Okay.
        Mr. Womack. Before I recognize Mr. Gonzales, who is our
    next questioner, I am going to be stepping aside from the gavel
    here for the remainder of this hearing so that I can get to the
    Defense Subcommittee and ask some appropriate questions there.
    I will be yielding the gavel to Ms. Bice here after this line
    of questioning. Mr. Gonzales.
        Mr. Gonzales. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
    Secretary, for your service to our--to our great country. I am
    a military veteran. I served 20 years in the military. Chairman
    Womack's a veteran. Secretary Zinke is a veteran. My question
    is on homeless veterans. My first question. One of the issues I
    care deeply about is homeless veterans. Back in 2024, HUD
    identified that on any given night, there are more than 32,000
    homeless veterans. That is 32,000 too many. This issue hits
    close to home in my district in rural parts like Alpine and Van
    Horn, where there is little to no affordable housing supply,
    and in urban areas like San Antonio and El Paso, the housing
    availability for homeless veterans through HUD is often
    substandard or inadequate. Secretary Turner, would you be
    willing to visit my district so we can work together on this
    issue and find solutions to address the challenges facing both
    rural and urban homeless veterans?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir, Congressman Gonzales, thank
    you. It is great to meet you. I do commit to visiting you and
    your district to come up with these viable solutions and also
    working with my colleague, Secretary Collins, as it pertains to
    veterans and veterans homelessness.
        Mr. Gonzales. Thank you for that. My next--well, will be a
    comment on the Community Development Block Grants. The
    Community Development Block Grants have been a vital tool in my
    district, especially in the Colonias. I mean, these are
    communities that don't have running water. It is absolutely
    atrocious the conditions they are in. They are in predominantly
    rural, unincorporated communities that often lack less than
    basic infrastructure like running water, waste system,
    electricity, and paved roads. But I would also urge the HUD to
    take a serious look at preserving this program or making sure
    that it just isn't completely removed with the right safeguards
    in place. I believe we got to find the waste and the abuse, and
    I love the idea of how do you change it, right? It is not
    working. How do you fix it? So, to that, continuing to find
    critical and infrastructure improvements in this community
    through that program I think is important.
        My next question is on--is on foster youth. One of the
    things I encouraged--I was encouraged to see in HUD's budget
    request was the inclusion of $25 million for foster youth to
    independence grants. As a member of the Congressional Caucus on
    Foster Youth, I recognize how critical these programs are for--
    how critical these programs are for helping youth transition
    out of the foster care system. Last year, I passed a bill in
    the House Find and Protect Your Foster Act. So clearly, it is
    important. Is HUD--my question is this, is HUD actively helping
    to track the number of fostered youth who experience
    homelessness, and what steps is HUD taking to ensure vulnerable
    populations don't fall through these cracks?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. Thank you, Congressman. And we,
    too, are glad and excited that we have money in the budget to
    make sure that our youth that are aging out of foster care have
    a solid ground to land on, as we know that being in foster care
    is very difficult for our youth. And when I was in the House of
    Representatives sitting on the committee dealing with foster
    care and our youth in foster care, so I, too, have a heart for
    this and so happy to be working with the First Lady and her
    team and you and your team on how we help, from a HUD
    perspective, these youth that are aging out of foster care to
    make sure that they have safe and sustainable places to stay
    and get on a good trajectory for their lives.
        Mr. Gonzales. I appreciate you making it a priority, and I
    look forward. Once again, I like the idea of, hey, how do we--
    how do we reimagine things? And I think this is a positive part
    of that reimagination. Very personal to me. My wife was a
    foster child, and so I want to make sure that we work together
    to see that program get off the ground and grow and be
    productive.
        My last question is on law enforcement housing. I represent
    nearly half of the overall Southern border places like Eagle
    Pass, Del Rio, El Paso. My district has been ground zero for
    this border crisis. As a result, we have seen a large surge of
    law enforcement personnel from CBP, and the National Guard
    deployed to this area. But in many cases, these are small rural
    communities, and there is simply not enough housing supply to
    meet the need. Out in West Texas, for example, I have been
    fighting to secure housing for first responders. My question is
    this, given the President's commitment to supporting first
    responders, what is HUD doing to ensure that first responders
    and those that are deployed to these areas have affordable and
    adequate housing?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir, Congressman, and thank you for
    that. You know, I, too, have a heart, and it is top priority of
    our first responders and all Americans to make sure that they
    have affordable, sustainable places to stay. And obviously, you
    know, we have our FHA program, and the President, too, is a
    priority of his. And so, we look forward to working with you
    and your colleagues and your staff on how we can ensure and
    help our first responders as they, too, look for housing to
    purchase and rent in your district and around the country.
        Mr. Gonzales. Thank you for that. Because as we surge these
    people to these areas, there is just--there is just no housing.
    And that is, that has been one of the take-backs. You can't
    just put pieces on a board that you got to drill down a little
    bit. So, thank you again for your testimony. I look forward to
    working with you. And Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you.
        Mrs. Bice [Presiding]. Thank you. Next up we have Mrs.
    Watson Coleman. You have 5 minutes, Mrs. Coleman.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. Welcome, Mr. Secretary. You
    have said a lot today. You have not answered one question, but
    you are consistent. You have not answered the how's, all the
    questions that the Republicans have asked. And you certainly
    haven't asked--answered how you are going to make something
    happen on this side either. What I am concerned about is how
    you could even open your mouth and say that you care about this
    population or these populations when you are willing to come
    here and advocate for a 51 percent reduction in the budget. And
    so, I want to go over a little bit of this stuff with you
    because I don't think you are refocusing. I think you are
    devastating, and this is a ludicrous proposal.
        I am sure you know that 74 percent of Americans are
    concerned about housing, and 771,000, you mentioned it, are
    currently homeless. I know you know the 7.6 million, including
    2.9 million children, are facing the threat of eviction. I know
    that you know that this budget does not usher us into any
    alleged golden age but perhaps a gilded age. I am unsure how
    you and this administration arrived at the decision to cut HUD
    by 51 percent, specifically $45.6 billion, during a period of
    rising homelessness and housing insecurity. I want to remind
    you that 4 years ago you were here.
        You and the administration are going to try to sell the
    American people a story that these cuts are justified. And you
    are giving--while you want to give your money back to very
    wealthy donors. It is my job to show the American people that
    these are unjustifiable cuts. And so here, let us go with this.
        A 40 percent cut to rental and homeless assistance programs
    totaling $27.25 billion. A $53 billion cut to Section 8 rental
    assistance. An $8.8 billion cut to public housing. A $1.2
    billion cut to Sections 202 and 811 programs for the elderly
    and disabled. A $505 million cut to HOPWA. A $22 billion cut to
    HUD's Housing Construction Supply and Preservation program. A
    $1.25 billion cut to the HOME program. You care about home
    ownership? I don't think so.
        A $75 billion cut to the Choice Neighborhoods program. A
    $12 million cut to the SHOP program. A $6 million cut to Rural
    Capacity Building grants. A $10 million cut to the PRICE
    program. A $296 million cut to the Lead Hazard Reduction and
    Healthy Home program's grant. A $3.3 billion cut to Community
    Development Block Grants. A $100 million cut to PRO Housing. A
    $196 million cut to Family Self-Sufficiency programs. A $58
    million cut to housing counseling. A $101.4 million cut to fair
    housing.
        Now, Secretary, I am sure you know that these cuts will
    successfully increase housing instability and evictions. I am
    sure you know that those facing evictions don't have a right to
    counsel. I am sure you also know that your budget is making
    massive cuts to legal aid for those facing evictions and
    homelessness. So I am sure you know that cutting rental
    assistance, eliminating fair housing protections, and defunding
    legal aid will not reduce homelessness and eviction in this
    country.
        I am sure you are aware that you are worsening the housing
    crisis with your budget proposal. If you really believe that
    you would not, you would not slash your agency's budget by over
    50 percent.
        And by the way, you talk about giving the authority back to
    the state. You want to give them authority, but you don't want
    to give them resources. You can't do anything with your
    rhetoric and your narrative. You got to show with your actions
    and with your resources.
        And last but not least, I want you to tell me what DEI
    contracts you have terminated. What does that mean? Did you
    terminate contracts to veterans? Did you terminate contracts to
    disability organizations? Did you terminate contracts to Black
    contractors? Did you terminate to Latino or Asian or whatever?
    What the heck are you talking about eliminating DEI contracts
    in HUD? Who is your population? Who should you be looking
    after? It is shameful and you ought to be ashamed of being
    here.
        You don't have to answer any question because you haven't
    answered one yet.
        Secretary Turner. Ms. Vice Chairman, I would actually like
    to answer her.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. I yield back. I don't need your
    answer.
        Secretary Turner. Okay. Thank you, Congress lady. You know,
    and thank you for stating all the stats of our budget. We
    really appreciate that because it just reiterates my point that
    with record funding, HUD has still not carried out its most
    basic mission. And I have answered questions.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Don't act like you haven't been here,
    sir. Just 4 years ago, you were here. Don't act like you care--
    --
        Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Watson Coleman.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. About this population.
        Mrs. Bice. Mrs. Watson Coleman, if you will let him answer
    the question.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. I don't need----
        Mrs. Bice. Your time has expired.
        Mrs. Watson Coleman. Listen, I reclaimed my time back. I
    yielded my time. You want to let him waste your time? You let
    him.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. And thank
    you, Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you for reiterating my point
    that status quo is not good enough, that also homelessness has
    gone up in spite of record funding. And----
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. If we could move on.
        Secretary Turner. Oh, sure.
        Mrs. Bice. The gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Strong, is
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Secretary Turner. Okay, thank you.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you, Chairwoman Bice and Ranking Member
    Clyburn, for holding this hearing today, and to our hardworking
    subcommittee staff. Secretary Turner, thank you for joining us
    today.
        During my 26 years on the Madison County Commission, the
    second largest county in the state of Alabama, I became
    extremely familiar with the benefits and bureaucratic burdens
    of HUD dollars. Something I hear consistently from local
    communities in North Alabama is that HUD's regulatory burdens
    are often delay projects. Some projects are delayed to the
    point where they are penalized for not spending funds they
    couldn't access due to HUD's review timelines.
        Secretary Turner, how are you working with local
    communities to ensure that HUD acts as a partner, not a barrier
    in project delivery?
        Secretary Turner. And thank you, Congressman Strong.
    Appreciate your service, sir.
        You know, we have a tremendous staff at HUD that is very
    communicative and open, has open lines of communication with
    constituencies around the country to make sure that we are
    being efficient and effective as it pertains to getting
    resources out of the door and working with yourself, your
    staff, and this committee is a goal that I commit to continue
    doing to making sure the resources are going out, sir, in an
    effective and efficient manner.
        And as we have taken inventory and as you alluded to, to
    take down the burdensome and the bureaucracy and the red tape
    is a goal of ours, to make sure that we are serving the
    American people properly.
        Mr. Strong. What is your plan to streamline permitting
    review and compliance processes to prevent these punishing
    penalties for Federal inefficiencies?
        Secretary Turner. Sir, so right now, you know, we have a
    tremendous CFO team, and our CFO, Irv Dennis, is second to none
    in our country. And he and his team are putting in financial
    controls to make sure that we are streamlining properly as it
    pertains to the question that you asked in all of the processes
    that we have at HUD working with our constituency around
    America.
        Mr. Strong. Next, I would like to discuss the
    accountability and flexibility with HUD grant programs. Local
    communities, including the growing mid-sized urban centers
    found in North Alabama, often have the most accurate
    understanding of their unique housing and development needs.
    The administration's budget proposal to consolidate multiple
    housing programs into block grants, such as the State Rental
    Assistance Program, appear to be a bold step forward in
    increasing efficiency and allowing states greater flexibility
    in addressing their unique housing needs.
        Secretary Turner, could you elaborate on how these
    consolidations will help local communities to better allocate
    resources and reduce administrative burdens, ultimately leading
    to more effective outcomes for low- and moderate-income
    Americans?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And so, as you alluded to, you
    know, the streamline and the effectiveness, putting the
    resources back to the states will allow them to not only
    identify their unique needs, but also to be very deliberative
    and precise in how they distribute those funds around their
    state and in their localities. And so I am looking forward to
    this new strategy to put it back in the state's hands. While
    HUD obviously is a great convener and facilitator, but to give
    the states that flexibility, I believe, will help us to operate
    more efficiently and serve people better than we have in the
    past.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you. How are you implementing
    performance-based criteria that reward communities that
    responsibly leverage Federal funding?
        Secretary Turner. Sir, and that is a good conversation that
    we are having, an ongoing conversation that we are having right
    now. And we would welcome your ideas to how we can better do
    this from a performance base. I know at HUD internally we have
    a great performance-based strategy to where we make sure that
    people inside of HUD are performing the way that the American
    people have called us and expect us to perform. But, sir, I
    welcome your ideas as it pertains to that strategy.
        Mr. Strong. Thank you. Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Mrs. Bice. The gentleman yields.
        The gentlewoman from California, Mrs. Torres, is recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Torres. Thank you. Secretary Turner, I represent
    California's 35th Congressional District, a region that was
    severely hit by flooding and the recent Los Angeles wildfires.
    They have had a devastating impact not just my community, but
    the entire region. These fires displaced thousands of people,
    destroying homes, and devastated critical infrastructure. Yet
    the administration's budget for fiscal year 2026 proposes zero
    funding for the Community Development Block Grant, CDBG, money.
    And HUD has not requested CDBG disaster recovery funds to help
    California, specifically, and other disaster-stricken states.
        Mr. Secretary, when will HUD, you, submit a request for
    disaster assistance to support recovery efforts in California?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, madam. As you know, California
    has received disaster recovery funds. I myself was in L.A. a
    couple of months ago to visit families there and constituents
    there on the ground as it pertains to the wildfires.
        Mrs. Torres. Okay. California, sir, has not received a
    single penny in recovery funds for the recent wildfires.
    California is still owed $6 billion for wildfires and flooding
    that occurred last year. Do you believe that state and local
    governments, already stretched thin, can fill the massive gap
    alone?
        Secretary Turner. You know, what I do know, ma'am, is that
    there has been a stewardship issue in California as it pertains
    to taxpayer dollars. And as I was there meeting with local
    authorities and leadership there, that is a point that I raised
    is that what are you doing with the resources that you do have?
    Because the people of California are not being served properly.
    And so to throw more money, if I may, ma'am, to throw more
    money at a situation when the money that has been sent has not
    been stewarded well, is something I believe that we need to
    take inventory of.
        Mrs. Torres. So I am going to reclaim my time because you
    are talking about wasting Federal dollars, but yet you are
    coming from an administration that seems to only care about the
    top 1 percent.
        Let me tell you, the Federal minimum wage, in case you
    don't know, is $7.25. Can you tell me where in the U.S. can
    someone making those wages rent a one-bedroom apartment? Let me
    tell you, nowhere. Right now, families who lost their homes in
    wildfires are struggling trying to find a place to live. And
    the Federal Government has a responsibility, you have a
    responsibility to return our Federal dollars back to California
    to help communities in desperate need.
        But here's what makes it even more unconscionable: that you
    are sitting here while California sends $83 billion more in
    Federal taxes than we receive back. We are literally funding
    your salary as well as housing programs in other states while
    our own veterans sleep on the streets, sir.
        I fully support disaster aid request for California and for
    other states. The people rebuilding after a disaster deserve
    better than to be ignored and to have egos speaking words that
    mean nothing. What we need is actual actions. We need funding
    to ensure that we are able to provide the housing that we need.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am. And I would say again,
    and I reiterate, it is a stewardship issue. It is not a funding
    issue.
        Mrs. Torres. You have no proof of stewardship issues. All
    you have been doing is talking around and around and stroking
    your ego, sir. Right here we need dollars and cents and we need
    programs that actually are going to house our veterans and our
    homeless population.
        What you are doing with the cuts that you are demanding in
    this budget is you are destroying every single opportunity that
    we have built up, not just in my community, for people that
    have been severely addicted to narcotics, people recovering
    from those addictions, from illnesses, veterans in the street
    that, by the way, under the Obama administration we managed to
    have zero homeless people and in San Bernardino County living
    in the streets. Okay? So don't come to me and tell me that it
    is an issue of not having accountability.
        Secretary Turner. Ma'am, did you know homeless was up----
        Mrs. Torres. The accountability----
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. 16 percent in California?
        Mrs. Torres. The accountability lies in this most corrupt
    administration----
        Secretary Turner. And we just closed two----
        Mrs. Torres [continuing]. That we have had.
        Secretary Turner. Madam Vice Chair, we just had to close
    two field offices----
        Mrs. Torres. My time has expired, and I yield back to the
    chair.
        Secretary Turner. We just had to close two field offices in
    California----
        Mrs. Bice. The gentlelady yields her time.
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. Due to the unrest going on
    in California. And so, I say it is time for a paradigm shift.
        Mrs. Bice. The gentlelady has yielded her time back.
        The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Ciscomani, is recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you, Chairwoman Bice. And thank you,
    Secretary Turner, for being here today. Really appreciate that.
        I want to first like to ask about an issue that is top
    priority for me as a member of both this committee, but also
    the Veterans' Affairs Committee, and that is veterans
    homelessness. It has been brought up a couple of times, and I
    want to piggyback off what my colleague Tony Gonzales was
    talking about on that issue when he brought it up, but mine's a
    little more specific.
        As you know, the HUD VASH program is a collaborative
    initiative between HUD and the VA that aims to end homelessness
    among veterans. While the HUD VASH program has made meaningful
    progress in reducing veteran homelessness, challenges like
    voucher underutilization and case manager storages persist
    still. So what steps is HUD taking to ensure veterans not only
    receive vouchers, but can successfully use them to secure
    permanent housing with the wraparound service that they need?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, Congressman. Nice to meet you,
    sir. Again, you know, working with my colleague, Secretary
    Collins from the VA, we just met a couple weeks ago, and this
    is of top priority for us, our veterans in our country as it
    pertains to homelessness and housing. And also, to be able to
    have the states working closely with us to prioritize veterans
    I believe is a great strategy going forward. And, sir, we look
    forward to working with you and Representative Gonzales to have
    ideas and strategies to bring to the table where we can best
    serve our veterans.
        Mr. Ciscomani. What are some examples you would say that
    are--will be good to--that maybe HUD hasn't been doing so far
    on the voucher system? Because it is being underutilized, and
    we want to make sure that they have access to that. Is it
    awareness? Is it outreach? How can we get that information to
    our veterans?
        I represent about 80,000 veterans in my district. In terms
    of congressional districts, it ranks about nine of the most
    populated areas for veterans: D-M Air Force Base, Fort
    Huachuca, and Sierra Vista. So I have a large veteran
    population. I want to make sure that they have the access is
    there, but the ability to get it and that we are being
    proactive on reaching out to them with that.
        Secretary Turner. Yes sir. I believe awareness and outreach
    and also to take the bureaucracy out of the program and process
    to take down the red tape, to make sure that we are serving our
    veterans in the manner that we are supposed to be serving. So I
    agree, awareness, outreach, and taking down the burdensome
    regulations and red tape to make sure we prioritize our
    veterans.
        Mr. Ciscomani. A lot of red tape to tackle, that is for
    sure. I have got one more question that I want to fit in here.
        I would like to thank you for mentioning in your testimony
    that HUD will begin to partner with faith-based organizations.
    I will also like to highlight a highly effective organization
    in my district, the Gospel Rescue Mission. The Gospel Rescue
    Mission's Center for Opportunity is one of the most effective
    homelessness providers in Arizona, offering not only shelter
    for homeless individuals, but also substance abuse services,
    faith-based consulting, employment training and placement, and
    much more. They even have a mobile cafe where their program
    training--where the program participants are able to gain on-
    the-job training.
        Since 2019 they have helped 542 people make a full recovery
    from addiction, 2,356 people obtained permanent stable housing,
    assisted 1,960 people with finding a job, and have provided
    over a million meals for those in need, all without a single
    dollar from the government. They can tell us exactly what their
    ratio of success is. They know where their dollars are going.
    They know exactly what is going on without a single dollar from
    the government.
        Can you please elaborate more on how HUD will work to
    support a faith-based provider such as the Gospel Rescue
    Mission? And what role do we do you see faith-based providers
    playing in HUD's mission moving forward?
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir. And you are exactly
    right. You know, the Gospel Rescue Mission, Union Rescue
    Mission in L.A., the Dream Center in L.A., and other faith-
    based and nonprofit organizations are the ones that are
    actually doing the work on the ground with data-driven results.
    And so historically, it is been hard for faith-based
    organizations to work with the government, but they are some of
    our best partners. And so, we want to make sure that we ensure
    that these partnerships are thriving around our country because
    they are the ones that are actually doing the work. And so, HUD
    has prioritized this in these public-private partnerships and
    working with faith-based institutions because they are the ones
    that are actually doing the work.
        And so that is a priority of mine. It is a part of our
    team. And we look forward to working with you, sir, on that.
        Mr. Ciscomani. Thank you. They don't just say they are
    doing the work, their data proves it. Again, they can go to the
    numbers. I have asked many through these hearings about
    specific information and successive programs, data-driven
    results, and government often is not able to give those
    specific numbers and data points like these organizations are.
    The Federal Government has spent $36.6 billion to end
    homelessness and the number of homeless people has only
    skyrocketed. So that issue is not being solved by just throwing
    money at the problem. We need to show accountability here. And
    the way that these programs and these nonprofits have done it
    in faith-based is a great way and example to do that. So I
    really encourage you to look into that and keep on partnering
    with them. Thank you.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir.
        Mrs. Bice. The gentleman's time has expired.
        The gentleman from New York, Mr. Espaillat, is recognized
    for 5 minutes. Mr. Espaillat, your mike, I think.
        Mr. Espaillat. I think it is on now.
        Secretary, I want to ask you some basic questions. Do you
    consider that there is a homelessness crisis in America?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Espaillat. Do you think that there is a housing
    affordability emergency in America?
        Secretary Turner. I do.
        Mr. Espaillat. Mr. Secretary, is the rent too damn high in
    Washington, D.C.?
        Secretary Turner. I believe it is high in a lot of places,
    sir.
        Mr. Espaillat. So there is a homelessness crisis, there is
    an affordable housing emergency, and the rent is too damn high
    in many places across America. And so, what does HUD do? What
    does this administration propose? A 51 percent cut on basic
    services for housing.
        Now, building housing is not a cheap endeavor. It is a
    deep-pocket challenge anywhere in America. It is not cheap to
    build housing. It costs money. And so, you are cutting 51
    percent of the budget while you recognize that there is a
    homelessness crisis, there is an affordable housing emergency,
    and the rent is too damn high in America.
        Now, I represent the district that has probably the biggest
    concentration of NYCHA apartments, that is the New York City
    Housing Authority apartments, in the city. Now there is 570,000
    people live in the city of New York under NYCHA.
        Now, you were born in Richardson, Texas. That town has
    119,000 people. So NYCHA is five times the size of the city
    that you were born in. And they have a $78 billion deficit, a
    deep hole for capital needs: boilers, roof work, pointing work,
    faulty elevators, flooding, mold in the apartments, lead paint
    in the apartment. These are the conditions in NYCHA, a $78
    billion hole for capital needs, and you are cutting the budget
    51 percent. Now I know that you are familiar----
        Secretary Turner. Sir, can I add--can I ask something?
        Mr. Espaillat. I will ask you a question in a minute.
        Secretary Turner. Okay, good. Thank you.
        Mr. Espaillat. I know that you are familiar with some
    football terms. You said so in your testimony. So I am going to
    just highlight some of the cuts: $27.2 billion or 40 percent
    cut to rental and homeless assistance program. To me that
    sounds like roughing the passer. A $2.2 billion or 71 percent
    cut to housing construction, supply, and preservation. That
    sounds to me like pass interference. A $3.4 billion or 100
    percent cut to economic development programs. To me that sounds
    very much like a delay of game. A $254 million or 100 percent
    cut to self-sufficiency and pathways to home ownership
    programs. That is seems that it is a false start.
        Mr. Secretary, you have engaged in personal foul on the
    American people. These cuts are severe and they are going to
    exacerbate the homeless crisis. They are going to further throw
    into crisis the affordable housing emergency and the rent is
    going to continue to be too damn high. You are cutting 51
    percent of the budget. Housing is an expensive endeavor. It is
    no longer a cheap endeavor anywhere in America. Anywhere in the
    world it is a deep pocket issue and people are sleeping on the
    street. And you are doing these cuts so that you can give money
    to people that sleep in mansions, that sleep in Fifth Avenue
    multimillion dollar condos, that have lakeside houses and
    beachfront properties. That is what you are doing.
        You are not doing God's work. That is not God's work.
    Fifty-one percent cut, that is devastating. That is a personal
    foul, Mr. Chairman--Madam Chair. And I yield back. I reclaim my
    time.
        Mrs. Bice. The referee may have to call a timeout moving
    forward.
        Secretary Turner. Ma'am, can I answer? Can I answer this?
        Mrs. Bice. The gentleman has yielded his time.
        The gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Joyce, is recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning.
    I am sorry I was at another hearing, but I am trying to, like
    the chairman, I am trying to work between two of them.
        Secretary Turner, I recognize the administration's efforts
    to make tough but thoughtful budget decisions aimed at
    promoting efficiency and accountability across Federal
    programs. I also appreciate HUD's critical role in long-term
    disaster recovery and their partnership with other agencies in
    helping communities transition from emergency response to
    sustainable rebuilding.
        As you are aware, both FEMA and HUD specifically work in
    tandem to assist communities in recovering and rebuilding after
    natural disasters: FEMA by providing temporary housing, and HUD
    by facilitating the transition to permanent housing solutions.
    In light of the proposed changes to the Community Development
    Block Grant Disaster Recovery program and the fiscal year 2026
    budget, how does HUD plan to uphold its mission in this space,
    particularly as it relates to supporting disaster affected
    families and communities?
        Further, could you share how HUD's plans to maintain its
    critical role in ensuring disaster survivors are successfully
    transitioned from costly temporary FEMA housing into more
    stable long-term housing solutions, even with the proposed
    reductions?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And thank you, Congressman.
    Great to meet you.
        You know, HUD is very focused on our critical mission. We
    are very focused on disaster recovery, we are focused on
    housing, we are focused on homelessness. And that has not been
    lost on us. We understand that this is a different way of the
    distribution of the funds. This is a different paradigm that we
    are speaking about in the budget that the President and myself
    are proposing today. We will not allow disaster recovery and
    those that need assistance in disaster recovery to be lost on
    us. Working with the states, working with our nonprofits,
    working with the faith-based organizations, and obviously, sir,
    you and your colleagues on the committee, it is not that it
    will be lost, it is just that it is a different way of
    distributing these funds. And sir, we believe that this will
    help us to more effectively and efficiently serve those that
    are in need in our country.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you, sir. It was a great answer, but it
    didn't demonstrate a plan.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Joyce. Do you have a plan?
        Secretary Turner. Yes. And so in the budget, there is money
    in our budget to make sure that HUD works with states to
    develop these strategies and develop a plan. The conversations
    have begun. And so we do recognize that it is a new way of
    doing it. We are focused on making sure that the strategy is
    not just implemented but executed in every state and working
    with this committee and with states and stakeholders in those
    states. The money is in our budget to do so. And so that plan
    has begun and is forthcoming. And I do, I look forward to your
    input and how we can best do this new strategy.
        Mr. Joyce. One thing I know is you are right, disasters
    come. All over the country disasters come and you need to be
    ready for them.
        Secretary, the administration has highlighted the
    underutilized lands as one of the strategies to deliver on the
    promise of more affordable housing, including ongoing
    coordination between HUD and the Department of Interior under
    Secretary Burgum's leadership. Can you provide an update on how
    this interagency effort is being implemented and what outcomes
    HUD anticipates in terms of expanding access to affordable
    housing?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. So Secretary Burgum and I, we
    signed an MOU, as you have stated, to create a joint task force
    to identify underutilized Federal lands around our country.
    Department of Interior has about 500 million acres that are
    available to be used to build affordable housing, workforce
    housing, all types of housing around our country. And so HUD's
    priority in this is to identify where housing is needed. DOI,
    their priority is to identify the lands that can be used and
    then work with local states and stakeholders to say what type
    of housing is needed in this particular area.
        So I just--Secretary Burgum and I were in Nevada meeting
    with the governor and stakeholders there as it pertains to
    affordable housing in that state and working with the
    leadership there, with BLM and others. And so, sir, we are well
    underway on the task force. There is much work to be done, but
    the identification of the land and identification of the
    housing needs is underway. And so we look forward to working
    with states and localities on this strategy.
        Mr. Joyce. Can you elaborate where in your 2026 budget you
    request the department intends to leverage support for that
    effort, in particular as it relates to infrastructure planning
    or technical assistance needed to make these underutilized
    lands viable?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir. And so that is why a joint
    partnership with DOI will come in from HUD's budget, obviously,
    and from DOI, but also technical assistance. HUD still has
    technical assistance where we can help with these development
    of housing and how we implement this around the country as we
    move forward.
        Mr. Joyce. Thank you, sir.
        Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
        Mrs. Bice. The chair recognizes the ranking member of the
    full committee, Ms. DeLauro, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. DeLauro. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. I just would
    like to follow up for one second with my colleague.
        This is the Appropriations Committee. We deal in amounts of
    money. A program, what is the amount, what is it going to do,
    how is it going to accomplish that? So far we can't seem to get
    any information about budget detail, about what it is you all
    are doing. It is a lot of great words, but what are dollars and
    cents?
        So I think you just have to keep in mind that we
    appropriate money based on needs and what the programs are, and
    then we make a decision as to whether or not we ought to be
    doing that or not. So please get us information on the plan,
    the dollar amount, what you plan to do.
        Listen, your budget request, quite honestly, unleashes a
    catastrophe of evictions, homelessness at an unbelievable
    scale. Three-quarters of a million of Americans experience
    homeless on any given night. Cost of housing is out of control.
    Middle-class families, working families are being suffocated.
    Folks in this country today work paycheck to paycheck, one
    emergency or layoff from financial ruin. Yet your budget
    eliminates critical lifelines that keep that help to keep a
    roof over most people's heads in this Nation.
        Let me just say with regard to a question here, we have
    Ansonia, Connecticut, which I represent. Housing authority is
    smaller, public housing authority. They want to expand
    programs, services especially for seniors. Residents have lived
    in this Naugatuck Valley their whole lives. They don't have
    income to sustain their homes, but they lack affordable housing
    options. Based on recent National data, it is becoming clear
    that homelessness among seniors is rising. Some experts expect
    the trend will continue. People over age 50 used to make up 10
    percent of the homeless population. Now it is close to half, a
    particularly vulnerable population with its own set of
    challenges.
        Over 2 million seniors rely on Federal rental assistance to
    age in place. You are cutting HUD rental assistance by 43
    percent. You propose to eliminate dedicated Section 202 housing
    for the elderly program, pushing more responsibility to states.
    Everyone on this committee knows the states don't have the
    wherewithal to be able to do this. There is no assessment of
    whether or not they have the capacity to manage.
        You propose completely upending homelessness programs. You
    are shifting to short-and medium-term assistance with no
    funding for the type of permanent supportive housing that could
    chronically homeless people with age-related infirmities need
    to achieve. We have a program in my district in Connecticut. It
    is called--it is a senior housing program called the Towers.
    And you have frozen their grant and not giving them the
    opportunity to deal with critical renovations to a 55-year-old
    building.
        Given housing affordability, homelessness crisis facing our
    seniors who already live on a fixed income, how are you
    justifying eliminating dedicated programs that support housing
    developments with onsite supportive services tailored to
    seniors' needs?
        Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am. Madam DeLauro, so great to
    meet you, ma'am. And as I said in my opening statement, with
    this new budget proposal under the President's leadership, this
    will help us to more effectively serve----
        Ms. DeLauro. How?
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. The most vulnerable----
        Ms. DeLauro. How?
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. Effectively serve----
        Ms. DeLauro. How?
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. Elderly and disabled.
        Ms. DeLauro. Answer my question.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. DeLauro. How? What is the way in which you are going to
    deal and justify eliminating dedicated programs that support
    onsite supportive services tailored to seniors' needs? How are
    you doing that?
        Secretary Turner. Working with the states, ma'am. And when
    I say working with the states, if I may, states understand
    their unique needs as it pertains to the elderly, as pertains
    to the disabled----
        Ms. DeLauro. What is the program that will address that?
        Secretary Turner [continuing]. As it pertains to the most
    vulnerable.
        Ms. DeLauro. What is the amount of money that is going to
    be required to do this? What portion of it will be Federal?
    What portion will be state? What is the program?
        Secretary Turner. Well, as you said, ma'am, you all are
    appropriators. You control the purse strings. My job is to
    maximize the budget that you do give me. And with maximize this
    budget, we will work with the states to identify, if you will,
    maam, where those needs are.
        Ms. DeLauro. You can't have a budget, with all due
    respect----
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, ma'am.
        Ms. DeLauro [continuing]. You cannot have a budget that
    doesn't have any numbers, that doesn't have any programmatic
    direction----
        Secretary Turner. Ma'am, you have the budget in front of
    you.
        Ms. DeLauro [continuing]. That doesn't tell us what we are
    doing. But what is this specific program on seniors? What are
    you doing? You are eliminating elderly housing, Section 202,
    which has been in place for years. I worked for a city many
    years ago and it was Section 202 in which we worked with
    providers to do this.
        You know, my time has run out. But no, zero. Zero
    programmatic information, zero details on the budget.
        Secretary Turner. Ma'am, status quo is done.
        Mrs. Bice. The ranking member is----
        Secretary Turner. We will do it a different way.
        Ms. Delauro. I would like to ask unanimous consent to put
    my opening statement into the record because I couldn't be
    here.
        Mrs. Bice. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Ms. DeLauro. Thank you.
        Mrs. Bice. I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Secretary, first let me start out by saying
    there is a famous quote that I think all of us here know well,
    and that is the definition of insanity is doing the same thing
    over and over and over and expecting a different outcome. And
    based on your opening statement, you are looking to do
    something different. You are looking to try to find a different
    path to make sure that we are addressing homelessness in our
    country.
        Mr. Secretary, when were you confirmed?
        Secretary Turner. February the 5th.
        Mrs. Bice. So we are talking about 120-plus days ago. Is
    that correct?
        Secretary Turner. Yes.
        Mrs. Bice. Is it safe to say that you have a framework for
    a plan that you want to move forward, but maybe not all of the
    nuts and bolts that you need to be able to present that--those
    details today?
        Secretary Turner. Indeed, the framework is there and we are
    working on the nuts and bolts. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Bice. I want to give you the opportunity to address
    some of the concerns that have been raised here today. But I
    also want to bring up one other point, and that is I was
    surprised to find out that there are approximately 3,000 public
    housing authorities across the country. Do you feel like that
    those housing authorities are working efficiently for HUD?
        Secretary Turner. No, ma'am. And we do have over 3,000
    public housing authorities around our country, many of which
    are not operating appropriately, some are. I have traveled
    extensively in just 120 days that I have been in this
    assignment around our country and visited public housing
    authorities.
        I was just at NYCHA to address the congressman who was
    asking me about NYCHA. NYCHA is $200 million in arrears and
    that is with a $2.3 billion appropriation from the
    appropriators, $2.3 billion in fiscal year 2024. And yet they
    are $200 million in arrears. They have 250,000 people on the
    waiting list.
        Just while I was there last Wednesday, a 21-year-old was
    shot in the neck and killed at a public barbecue. And no arrest
    has been made. So, tell me, how are the residents there safe?
    They are living in deplorable conditions. It is not safe. The
    New York NYPD is not responding the way they should. And so
    that is just one example of a public housing authority not
    being efficient, but yet we want to continue the status quo.
        I am not interested in doing business as usual. The
    President is not interested. And so, the answer is, this is a
    new culture. It is a new paradigm.
        And another housing authority that I visit, the residents
    were even afraid to tell me what was going on in fear of
    repercussions by the board of directors there. There was one
    lady there that has been living there since 1973. That means
    she has been living there her entire life. Her mother, her, and
    now her children, three generational, multiple generations
    living in public housing authority. That is not what it is
    meant for. It is meant for temporary assistance, but then to be
    raised out of public assistance to a life of self-
    sustainability.
        And so no, ma'am, public housing authorities as a whole are
    not operating efficiently.
        Mrs. Bice. The budget proposes charging--I am sorry,
    changing five programs into a singular block grant program. It
    is been mentioned earlier, called the State Rental Assistance
    Program. How can we trust that states with governors, including
    Gavin Newsom, who spent $18.5 billion on affordable housing in
    the past year, or 42.5 percent of HUD's fiscal year 2026 budget
    request, will use the block grant funding appropriately?
    Because they clearly have not been successful in addressing the
    homelessness issue.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, ma'am. And that is a great question
    and it is what I think we should talk about, because, you know,
    this is a new shift, and we have to work with the appropriate
    leaders in the appropriate states. And some states, as you
    know, ma'am, are better than others. Leadership in some states
    is greater than others. We see right now what is going on in
    L.A., you know, with the agitators and the riots and the attack
    on our law enforcement. And so, you know, California is not a
    good example of proper leadership, but there are many around
    our country that do have proper leadership. And so I am looking
    forward to working with them as they implement, you know, the
    funding and distribute it appropriately to take care of the
    needs in their particular state.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Secretary, let me wrap up by saying, first
    of all, we appreciate you being here today. Homelessness is an
    issue. It is an issue across this country, and we want to make
    sure that your organization is addressing it in a thoughtful,
    responsible way. Certainly, you have heard today from members
    of this committee the concerns around foster children aging out
    of the system, veterans' homelessness, which is something that
    I am passionate about as a member of the MilCon-VA Subcommittee
    as well on Appropriations.
        So we all look forward to working with you to make sure
    that we are using taxpayer dollars judiciously, wisely, but
    also trying to find solutions to the problems that we face as
    it relates to homelessness.
        With that, my time has now expired.
        Mr. Quigley. Madam Chair?
        Mrs. Bice. And at this----
        Mr. Quigley. I know we are going to----
        Mrs. Bice. For what purpose does the gentleman seek
    recognition?
        Mr. Quigley. I really appreciate that. I thought we were
    going to have a second round. Just ask unanimous consent to
    submit for the record four pages of stories from women in
    Chicago, who are currently using these vouchers to keep
    themselves and their children safe.
        Mrs. Bice. Without objection----
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Quigley. Thank you.
        Mrs. Bice [continuing]. That will be entered into the
    record.
        And with that, I would like to give the ranking member, Mr.
    Clyburn, the ability to offer a closing statement. Mr. Clyburn,
    you are recognized.
        Mr. Clyburn. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you,
    Mr. Secretary, for being here.
        Secretary Turner. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Clyburn. Mr. Secretary, I grew up in a parsonage and
    when I told my dad that I had decided against going to the
    seminary, he said to me, well, son, I suspect the world would
    much rather see a sermon than to hear one. I have never
    forgotten that. And I try to conduct myself here in such a way
    that people will see in my work a good, productive sermon.
        Now, I have listened to your testimony. I have looked at
    some comments you have made in the past, especially as it
    relates to DEI. You said that DEI is inexcusable propaganda.
    Well, Mr. Secretary, I beg to differ. I grew up in South
    Carolina. I still live in South Carolina. My parents all are
    South Carolinians--were South Carolinians. And what you propose
    today, though, you have been using the word ``refocus,''
    refocus means to change directions. What you have been
    testifying to is retrogression. It means to return to something
    of former, usually something that is worse. And cutting 51
    percent out of a budget will not refocus the budget. It will
    return to what that budget and those plans were when you had
    that 51 percent less.
        So I would say to you today that when you look at States'
    rights, I am not going to be concerned about this if you give
    the right to South Carolina because you are looking at that guy
    that wrote the South Carolina Fair Housing Law and we implement
    that law. I ran it. The guy that wrote the South Carolina Bill
    of Rights for Handicapped Citizens. I was not in the--I have
    never been in the state legislature, so I know how to manage
    stuff. That is all I have ever been in. And the budget you are
    proposing, you cannot possibly meet the needs of the American
    people with that budget.
        We all talk about race and sex discrimination. But the big
    problem, if you look at all of the protected classes in
    housing, you know which one gets the most discrimination? The
    disabled. The disabled. And that is sinful for us to sit here
    and cut the budget for the disabled.
        I want to close with this. I represent North Charleston.
    According to the Princeton study, North Charleston led the
    Nation in evictions. I represent Columbia, South Carolina, and
    I live in Columbia, number six in evictions. There is something
    those two communities got in common that I want you to focus on
    and I want this committee to think about. Those two, Fort
    Jackson is in Columbia, the Charleston Air Force Base in North
    Charleston. The communities that house most of our servicemen
    and -women are leading the Nation in evictions.
        During the coronavirus, I led the investigation into these
    evictions. Servicemen and -women, people serving abroad while
    their children and spouses are back home getting evicted, and
    here we are cutting the money to address those needs.
        Mr. Secretary, I look forward to playing a round of golf
    with you so that we can really discuss this when we have more
    time. So I will close.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Clyburn. If I may, Madam Vice Chair, I once read the
    story of a man who played at a country club and he came upon
    the hole and there was a pond between him and the green. And he
    turned to his caddy, he said, Caddy, what do the members of
    this club use when they are faced with this shot? And the caddy
    says, well, most of them use a six iron for this. So he pulled
    out of the six iron, addressed the ball, hit it perfectly in
    the water. The ball fell in the water. He turned to his caddy
    and said, Caddy, I thought you said that most of the people
    playing from this point use a six iron. He said, most of them
    do. Well, I will just hit this six iron about as sweet as I
    could hit it and the ball is in the water. Most of them do.
        So we have to learn, we can't follow what most people do.
    What we have to do is size up the situation, think about your
    capabilities, and then address the ball. Use the right
    equipment and we might get to the green. Don't do what most of
    them do.
        I yield back.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Ranking Member Clyburn.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you, sir.
        Mrs. Bice. And we have had a lot of sports analogies today.
    We talked about baseball, University of Arkansas, we talked
    football, we talked golf. We did not talk about Thunder
    basketball, so I feel obligated as the Member from Oklahoma
    representing the Oklahoma City Thunder to give a plug to them.
        So, Mr. Secretary, we appreciate your time today. Thank you
    for this robust conversation. We look forward, as I mentioned,
    to working with you in the future to make sure that we are
    addressing the homeless population across this country.
        And with that, we are adjourned.
        Secretary Turner. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 11:34 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                               W I T N E S S E S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Rocheleau, Chris, Federal Aviation Administration................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     8
        Answers to submitted questions...............................    42
    Turner, Hon. Scott, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
      Development....................................................    64
        Prepared statement...........................................    67
        Answers to submitted questions...............................   106

                                      [all]