[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
CONNECTING RURAL AMERICA TO THE
NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM
=======================================================================
(119-44)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
AVIATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 4, 2026
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
64-295 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington, Ranking
Member
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,
District of Columbia Arkansas,
Jerrold Nadler, New York Vice Chairman
John Garamendi, California Daniel Webster, Florida
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiaomas Massie, Kentucky
Andre Carson, Indiana Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Dina Titus, Nevada Brian Babin, Texas
Jared Huffman, California David Rouzer, North Carolina
Julia Brownley, California Mike Bost, Illinois
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Mark DeSaulnier, California Brian J. Mast, Florida
Salud O. Carbajal, California Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Greg Stanton, Arizona Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Sharice Davids, Kansas Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts Tracey Mann, Kansas
Marilyn Strickland, Washington Burgess Owens, Utah
Patrick Ryan, New York Eric Burlison, Missouri
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon Mike Collins, Georgia
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio, Mike Ezell, Mississippi
Vice Ranking Member Kevin Kiley, California
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan Vince Fong, California
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina Tony Wied, Wisconsin
Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania Tom Barrett, Michigan
Robert Garcia, California Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska
Nellie Pou, New Jersey Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr.,
Kristen McDonald Rivet, Michigan Pennsylvania
Laura Friedman, California Jeff Hurd, Colorado
Laura Gillen, New York Jefferson Shreve, Indiana
Shomari Figures, Alabama Addison P. McDowell, North
Maxwell Frost, Florida Carolina
David J. Taylor, Ohio
Brad Knott, North Carolina
Kimberlyn King-Hinds,
Northern Mariana Islands
Mike Kennedy, Utah
Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri
Jimmy Patronis, Florida
Clay Fuller, Georgia
Subcommittee on Aviation
Troy E. Nehls, Texas, Chairman
Andre Carson, Indiana, Ranking
Member
Sharice Davids, Kansas Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Robert Garcia, California Brian J. Mast, Florida
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiate Stauber, Minnesota
Julia Brownley, California Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
Mark DeSaulnier, California Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina Tracey Mann, Kansas
Christopher R. Deluzio, Pennsylvania Burgess Owens, Utah
Nellie Pou, New Jersey, Tony Wied, Wisconsin, Vice
Vice Ranking Member Chairman
Laura Gillen, New York Tom Barrett, Michigan
Eleanor Holmes Norton, Nicholas J. Begich III, Alaska
District of Columbia Robert P. Bresnahan, Jr.,
Dina Titus, Nevada Pennsylvania
Salud O. Carbajal, California Jeff Hurd, Colorado
Greg Stanton, Arizona Jefferson Shreve, Indiana
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois Addison P. McDowell, North
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon Carolina
Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) Brad Knott, North Carolina
Kimberlyn King-Hinds,
Northern Mariana Islands
Robert F. Onder, Jr., Missouri
Jimmy Patronis, Florida
Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vii
STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE
Hon. Troy E. Nehls, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Texas, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation, opening
statement...................................................... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 2
Hon. Andre Carson, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Indiana, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation, opening
statement...................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 4
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
WITNESSES
Faye Malarkey Black, President and Chief Executive Officer,
Regional Airline Association, oral statement................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Shawn Dobberstein, A.A.E., Executive Director, Hector
International Airport, Fargo, North Dakota, on behalf of the
American Association of Airport Executives, oral statement..... 23
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Derrick Collins, Director, Physical Infrastructure, U.S.
Government Accountability Office, oral statement............... 26
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Gregory Pecoraro, President and Chief Executive Officer, National
Association of State Aviation Officials, oral statement........ 37
Prepared statement........................................... 38
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls:
Letter of June 4, 2026, to Members of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on
Aviation, from Molly Grover, President and Chief Executive
Officer, Dubuque Area Chamber of Commerce, Dubuque, Iowa... 73
Letter and Attachment of June 9, 2026, from Jack Waldorf,
Executive Director, Western Governors' Association, to Hon.
Troy E. Nehls, Chairman, and Hon. Andre Carson, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Aviation........................... 74
APPENDIX
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to Faye Malarkey Black,
President and Chief Executive Officer, Regional Airline
Association, from:
Hon. Sharice Davids.......................................... 79
Hon. Greg Stanton............................................ 83
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to Shawn Dobberstein,
A.A.E., Executive Director, Hector International Airport,
Fargo, North Dakota, on behalf of the American Association of
Airport Executives, from Hon. Greg Stanton..................... 85
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
May 29, 2026
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER
TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Aviation
FROM: LStaff, Subcommittee on Aviation
RE: LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Connecting Rural
America to the National Airspace System''
_______________________________________________________________________
I. PURPOSE
The Subcommittee on Aviation of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure will meet on Thursday, June
4, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. ET in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building
to receive testimony at a hearing entitled, ``Connecting Rural
America to the National Airspace System.'' The hearing will
examine current trends, opportunities, and challenges facing
small communities and rural commercial service airports. The
hearing will provide Members with the opportunity to discuss
their priorities to ensure their constituents maintain options
for commercial air service. The Subcommittee will receive
testimony from witnesses representing the Regional Airline
Association (RAA), airports, the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), and the National Association of State Aviation
Officials (NASAO).
II. BACKGROUND
Each year, hundreds of millions of passengers move through
our Nation's airports, connecting our communities and driving
economic development across major cities and rural towns alike.
In those communities, approximately 46 million Americans,
comprising almost 14 percent of the United States population,
live in rural counties.\1\ Moreover, following a decade of
population decline from 2010 to 2020, rural America is again
experiencing growth as well as a reduction in poverty
levels.\2\ At the same time, the cost of domestic air fare from
most small communities has increased at a faster rate than the
average cost of domestic air fare, adjusted for inflation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Tracey Farrigan et al., Rural America at a Glance: 2025
Edition, U.S. Dep't of Agric. Econ. Research Serv., EIB-295 (Jan.
2026), available at https://ers.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
_laserfiche/publications/113657/EIB-295.pdf?v=59682.
\2\ Id.
\3\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Average Domestic Air Fares (last visited
May 29, 2026), available at https://transtats.bts.gov/AIRFARES/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA),
there are approximately 14,400 private and 5,000 public-use
airports, heliports, and seaplane bases in the United
States.\4\ Of those, there are 3,247 National Plan of
Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS) airports, of which 37
percent provide rural areas with access to the National Airport
System (NAS).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Fed. Aviation Admin., Airport Categories (last updated Dec. 7,
2022), available at https://www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/
categories.
\5\ Fed. Aviation Admin., Nat'l Plan of Integrated Airport Systems
(NPIAS) 2025-2029 (Sept. 30, 2024) [hereinafter NPIAS 2025-2029],
available at https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/airports/
planning_capacity/npias/current/ARP-NPIAS-2025-2029-Narrative.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While recent events have forced the United States aviation
industry to largely focus on system safety, modernization
efforts, and manufacturing quality, access to safe aviation
service itself--especially for smaller communities--must not be
overlooked.
III. THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF AIRPORTS
The FAA's NPIAS contains 3,247 airports; only 64 are
classified as large or medium hub airports.\6\ In 2024, there
were 450 small hub, nonhub, and nonprimary commercial service
airports, collectively accounting for over 122 million
enplanements.\7\ According to the latest available data from
2022, commercial service airports reported total airport
revenue of $35.8 billion, with small and nonhub airports
contributing 21 percent.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id.
\7\ Fed. Aviation Admin., CY2024 Enplanements at All Commercial
Service Airports (By Rank) (Sept. 15, 2025), available at https://
www.faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/passenger_allcargo_stats/
passenger/arp-cy2024-commercial-service-enplanements.pdf.
\8\ NPIAS 2025-2029, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to the latest economic study by the Airports
Council International-North America, commercial service
airports in the United States employ over 1.3 million people
and pay over $115 billion in wages annually. These airports
claim a total impact of supporting over 12.8 million jobs, $618
billion in wages, and $1.8 trillion in economic output.
Additionally, for every increase of 1,000 enplanements,
airports generate an additional $677,700 in economic output,
and an additional 5.8 jobs are supported.\9\ Therefore, when
airports and commercial air service grow, so do their local
economies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Airports Council Int'l-North America, The Economic Impact of
U.S. Commercial Service Airports in 2024 (Mar. 2025), available at
https://airportscouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/ACI-NA-The-
Economic-Impact-of-U.S.-Commercial-Service-Airports-in-2024.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. TRENDS AND ISSUES FACING AIR SERVICE TO SMALL AND RURAL COMMUNITIES
Unfortunately, small airports and small communities have
experienced declining scheduled passenger air service for
decades. From 2000 to 2018, departures from small and nonhub
airports fell 32 percent and 47 percent, respectively, compared
to a seven percent decrease in departures from large hub
airports.\10\ From 2018 to 2024, the average daily departures
per route at nonhub airports were down 19 percent, while at
large hubs, they were only down nine percent. During this
timeframe, non-Essential Air Service (EAS) nonhub airports
experienced the greatest decline at 21 percent, while nonhub
airports with EAS-subsidized service experienced a more modest
decrease of five percent.\11\ From 2018 to 2023, the 218
smallest communities with a commercial airport (both small and
nonhub) saw average departures decrease by 14 percent, with 25
experiencing more than 50 percent loss.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-26-107751, Commercial
Aviation: Certain Nonhub Airports Face Significant Challenges in
Securing and Maintaining Air Service, (Dec. 2025) [hereinafter GAO
Nonhub Airports Report], available at https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-
26-107751.pdf.
\11\ Id.
\12\ U.S. Gov't Accountability Off., GAO-24-106681, Commercial
Aviation: Trends in Air Service to Small Communities (2024)
[hereinafter GAO Small Communities Report], available at https://
www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-106681.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
INCREASED REGIONAL AIRLINE OPERATING COSTS
The rising cost of labor, fuel, and fleet maintenance has
increased the operating costs for all airlines. This has a
disproportional impact on services to small communities and
makes air service to small communities less economically
feasible. Operating costs for all airlines have steadily
increased from an average of 12.8 cents per available seat mile
(CASM) in 2016 to 17.2 cents in 2023.\13\ For regional
airlines, CASM has increased from 12 cents in 2018 to 16 cents
in 2023.\14\ Meanwhile, according to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics inflation calculator, for that timeframe, 12.8 and
12 cents should have only increased to 15.45 and 15 cents
respectively.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ E-mail from Josh Saltzman, Airlines for America, to Senior
Professional Staff, H. Comm. on Transp. & Infrastructure (July 8, 2025,
8:11 AM) (on file with Comm.).
\14\ GAO Small Communities Report, supra note 10.
\15\ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, CPI Inflation Calculator
(last visited May 25, 2026), available at https://www.bls.gov/data/
inflation_calculator.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PILOT SUPPLY
In 2017, the Working Group on Improving Air Service to
Small Communities identified two areas of need for special
attention. First was a nationwide pilot shortage, and second
was strengthening the EAS Program.\16\ According to a GAO
study, the pilot shortage persisted from 2018 through 2023 (the
timeframe of the study), but was particularly exacerbated by
the COVID-19 pandemic, with a disproportional impact on small
communities served by regional airlines. In response to the
pandemic and the subsequent reduction in demand for air travel,
airlines tried to reduce their costs by, among other things,
offering pilots early retirement. As the industry then
rebounded from the pandemic, larger airlines filled those pilot
vacancies by hiring from regional airlines, thus
disproportionately impacting the small communities regional
airlines tend to serve.\17\ Some stakeholders argue that pilot
supply issues have eased as airlines retire smaller regional
aircraft, shift to larger aircraft, and reduce flight
frequencies. Unfortunately, this reduction in flight
frequencies once again further reduces service to small
communities.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Report of the Working Group on
Improving Air Service to Small Communities (May 9, 2017), available at
https://smallcommunityairservice.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/dot-
working-group-on-small-community-air-service-report.pdf
\17\ GAO Small Communities Report, supra note 10.
\18\ GAO Nonhub Airports Report, supra note 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRAVELERS CHOOSING TO DRIVE
According to the GAO, a persistent challenge for small
communities is ``passenger leakage,'' which occurs when
residents near smaller airports choose to drive to their
destination or to a larger airport. This diversion is primarily
driven by competitive market factors, including lower fares
from ultra-low-cost carriers, more nonstop service options,
greater flight frequency, and larger aircraft.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. FEDERAL SUPPORT
ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM (EAS)
EAS was established by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978
(P.L. 95-504) and provides Federal subsidies to air carriers to
maintain a minimum level of scheduled air service to eligible
communities. Since the establishment of the program, air
carriers have coalesced around a model that uses subsidies to
operate two round-trip flights per day with 30- to 50-seat
twin-engine aircraft, usually to a large or medium hub airport.
To be eligible for the subsidy, communities must meet the
``eligible place'' requirement in statute:
(a) Lbe an eligible place before October 1, 1988, and
received scheduled service after January 1, 1990,
(b) Lthey must have had an average of 10 enplanements per
service day during the more recent fiscal year (communities
more than 175 driving miles from a large or medium hub airport
are exempt),
(c) Lhad a subsidy rate of less than $1,000 per passenger,
and
(d) Lreceived subsidized service between September 30,
2010, and September 30, 2011.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 41731.
The latter three requirements do not apply to communities
in Alaska and Hawaii. Currently, 110 communities across 33
states and territories are eligible, excluding Alaska and
Hawaii.\21\ Of those 110 eligible communities, 108 are
receiving subsidies, while 69 communities in Alaska, four
communities in Hawaii, and one in Puerto Rico are receiving
subsidies.\22\ \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Eligible Essential Air Service (EAS)
Communities (Excluding Alaska and Hawaii) (Dec. 2021), available at
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/
Current%20list%20of%20EAS-Eligible%20communities%20excl%20AK%20%20HI_
Dec2021_0.pdf.
\22\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Subsidized Essential Air Service
Communities (48 Contiguous States, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico), (Oct.
2025), available at https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/
2025-10/WEBISTE%20Subsidized%20EAS%20report%20for%2048
%20states_HI_PR_Oct2025.pdf.
\23\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Essential Air Service, (last updated
Nov. 4, 2024), available at https://www.transportation.gov/policy/
aviation-policy/small-community-rural-air-service/essential-air-
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The program is funded through a combination of
appropriations from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (AATF)
and overflight fees collected by the FAA from foreign aircraft
traveling over United States airspace. In general,
appropriations have been climbing since 2000. In 2024 dollars,
the cost of the program has increased more than fivefold from a
low of under $100 million annually in the 1990s to $598 million
in fiscal year (FY) 2025.\24\ Recognizing the need for reforms,
the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (FAARA24) (P.L. 118-63)
lowered the maximum overall per passenger subsidy cap to $850
starting in FY 2027 and set the per passenger subsidy cap at
$650 for communities that are less than 175 miles from a medium
or large hub airport. Further, it placed a limitation on the
waivers that the Department of Transportation (DOT) can give
communities that don't meet the enplanement requirements.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ GAO Small Communities Report, supra note 12; GAO Nonhub
Airports Report 2025, supra note 8.
\25\ FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-63, Sec.
561.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALTERNATE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM (AEAS)
AEAS was established in 2003 by the Vision 100--Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176) as a pilot program
to provide greater flexibility in meeting rural air service
needs. Under AEAS, communities may opt out of traditional EAS
in exchange for a grant to tailor transportation solutions to
local needs. This can include subsidizing air carriers
operating smaller aircraft, on-demand air taxi services, or
surface transportation to another airport.\26\ However,
participation has been limited; only 15 communities are
currently enrolled. FAARA24 requires the GAO to study the
effectiveness of AEAS and impediments to community adoption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 41745.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (SCASDP)
SCASDP was established in 2000 by the Wendell H. Ford
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (P.L.
106-181). Unlike EAS, it offers broader eligibility and more
flexible use of funds, allowing applicants the opportunity to
identify their communities' specific air service deficiencies
and propose tailored solutions. Any public entity or consortium
of communities can apply to enhance service to any small hub or
smaller airport, including those without current commercial air
service.\27\ Typically, the DOT has not considered communities
that currently participate in EAS or AEAS as eligible. Grants
can be used to subsidize air carriers, assist airports in
initiating service, or enhance existing services. Eligible uses
include recruiting air carriers, offering revenue guarantees,
conducting economic air service studies, and marketing
commercial air services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 49 U.S.C. Sec. 41743.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCASDP is unique in encouraging local financial
involvement. While not required, applications that include
local cash contributions (including those from local
governments, businesses, or other private organizations) are
considered more favorably.\28\ Demand for SCASDP consistently
exceeds available funding, with less than half of eligible
communities receiving grant awards. From 2018 to 2023, the
number of communities that applied ranged from 40 to 71,
seeking between $31 million to $58 million, with only $12
million to $18 million awarded annually. Simultaneously,
increasing airline operating costs diminishes the effectiveness
of the grants and their revenue guarantees.\29\ FAARA24
increased the program's annual authorization level from $10
million to $15 million, authorized certain ways to amend grant
agreements based on communities' needs, and required DOT to
prioritize applications that restore scheduled passenger
service that has been lost or substantially reduced.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ U.S. Dep't of Transp., Order Soliciting Small Community Grant
Applications, Order 2024-6-8 (June 10, 2024), available at https://
www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-06/
FY23CY24.Order%202024-6-8%20FINAL.SCASDP.NOFO_..pdf.
\29\ GAO Nonhub Airports Report, supra note 8.
\30\ FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-63, Sec.
562.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (AIP)
In general, the AIP provides grants to public agencies for
the planning and development of the public-use airports
identified in the NPIAS.\31\ Funds obligated for the program
are drawn from the AATF, which is supported by user fees, fuel
taxes, and similar revenue sources.\32\ Predominantly, AIP
grants can be used by an airport to enhance airport safety,
capacity, security, and address environmental concerns. Airport
sponsors can also use AIP funds, in most cases, on airfield
capital improvements or repairs and, in some specific
situations, for terminals and hangars.\33\ Additionally,
certain professional services that are required prior to an
airport engaging in construction, such as planning, surveying,
or design, may also be eligible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Fed. Aviation Admin., Overview: What is AIP & What is
Eligible, (last updated Aug. 2, 2022), available at https://
www.faa.gov/airports/aip/overview.
\32\ Id.
\33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing the need for additional capital and the fact
that the funding levels for AIP had not kept pace with
inflation, FAARA24 authorized AIP at $4 billion \34\ per fiscal
year from 2025 through 2028. In addition to the increased
authorization, added significant new flexibility for the use of
AIP funds and revised apportionment formulas, which increased
annual formula funding levels for both large and small
airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-63, tit. IIV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. WITNESSES
Ms. Faye Malarkey Black, President and CEO,
Regional Airline Association
LMr. Shawn Dobberstein, Executive Director, Fargo
Hector International Airport, on behalf of American Association
of Airport Executives
LMr. Derrick Collins, Director, Physical
Infrastructure, United States Government Accountability Office
LMr. Gregory Pecoraro, President and CEO, National
Association of State Aviation Officials
CONNECTING RURAL AMERICA TO THE NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2026
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Aviation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:24 a.m., in
Room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Troy E. Nehls
(Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mr. Nehls. The Subcommittee on Aviation will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
today's hearing and ask questions.
Without objection, so ordered.
And as a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document
into the record, please email it to [email protected].
I now recognize myself for the purpose of an opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TROY E. NEHLS OF TEXAS, CHAIRMAN,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION
Mr. Nehls. Good morning, and thank you to our panel of
witnesses for being here today. Good to see you. Each of you
brings a unique perspective to this important discussion on the
state of America's small airports and rural communities' access
to the National Airspace System, or the NAS.
Airports are more than transportation hubs; they are
economic engines supporting Americans' livelihoods, connecting
communities, and enhancing quality of life.
There are nearly 5,000 public-use airports and heliports
across the United States, and almost 3,300 of these facilities
are on the FAA's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.
These numbers are certain to grow as advanced air mobility
technologies emerge and become integrated into the aviation
system. Yet, of all of these facilities, only 64 are large- or
medium-hub airports. Understandably, they get a lot of
attention.
But there are another 450 airports providing critical
commercial passenger service across the country. While they are
well known within their communities, these airports deserve
greater attention and stronger support from Congress. For the
46 million Americans living in rural communities, these
facilities provide the same critical access to the NAS as
larger airports do for urban Americans.
All of you are here today to help us better highlight the
value of these facilities, the role they play in their
communities, and the challenges they face in maintaining and
expanding access.
According to a recent study by the Airports Council
International-North America, commercial airports in the United
States support over 12.8 million jobs, $618 billion in wages,
and $1.8 trillion--with a ``T''--in economic output. Notably,
every additional 1,000 enplanements generate nearly $700,000 in
economic output and supports six additional jobs. We should be
working together to increase enplanements at these airports so
all Americans can share these economic benefits.
Fortunately, there are strong Federal programs designed to
support communities maintaining existing service, expanding
service, and attracting new carriers, ultimately increasing
enplanements. Essential Air Service is the most well known of
these programs. In the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024,
Congress strengthened and reformed EAS to improve
accountability, restore fiscal discipline, and better target
limited resources to the communities most in need.
The Small Community Air Service Development Program grant
also gives communities the opportunity to identify their own
air service needs, recruit carriers, offer revenue guarantees,
conduct studies, and market new service. Importantly, this
program encourages local business investment. This skin-in-the-
game approach incentivizes services that are more likely to
succeed long term without subsidies.
Lastly, the Airport Improvement Program, or AIP,
distributes resources generated by user fees and fuel taxes by
formula to all new public-use airports in the NPIAS.
I would be remiss not to recognize the significant progress
the Trump administration has made in modernizing the air
traffic control system. Under Secretary Duffy and Administrator
Bedford's leadership, more than 2,000 air traffic controllers
were hired last year, more than 12,000 applied to become
controllers this year, 612 new radar systems are being
deployed, half of the outdated copper wiring has already been
replaced with modern fiber optics, 17 control towers
transitioned from paper flight strips to electronic systems,
and 54 airports now have surface awareness systems.
Clearly, the future of American aviation is bright.
[Mr. Nehls' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Troy E. Nehls of Texas, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Aviation
Airports are more than transportation hubs, they are economic
engines supporting Americans' livelihoods, connecting communities, and
enhancing quality of life.
There are nearly 5,000 public-use airports and heliports across the
United States and almost 3,300 of these facilities are on the FAA's
National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems. These numbers are certain
to grow as advanced air mobility technologies emerge and become
integrated into the aviation system. Yet, of all these facilities, only
64 are large or medium-hub airports. Understandably, they get a lot of
attention.
But there are another 450 airports providing critical commercial
passenger service across the country. While they are well known within
their communities, these airports deserve greater attention and
stronger support from Congress. For the 46 million Americans living in
rural communities, these facilities provide the same critical access to
the National Airspace System (NAS) as larger airports do for urban
Americans.
You all are here today to help us better highlight the value of
these facilities, the role they play in their communities, and the
challenges they face in maintaining and expanding access.
According to a recent study by the Airports Council International-
North America, commercial service airports in the United States support
over 12.8 million jobs, $618 billion in wages, and $1.8 trillion in
economic output. Notably, every additional 1,000 enplanements generate
nearly $700,000 in economic output and support six additional jobs. We
should be working together to increase enplanements at these airports
so all Americans can share these economic benefits.
Fortunately, there are strong federal programs designed to support
communities maintaining existing service, expanding service, and
attracting new carriers, ultimately increasing enplanements. Essential
Air Service (EAS) is the most well-known of these programs. In the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024, Congress strengthened and reformed EAS to
improve accountability, restore fiscal discipline, and better target
limited resources to the communities most in need.
The Small Community Air Service Development Program also gives
communities the opportunity to identify their own air service needs,
recruit carriers, offer revenue guarantees, conduct studies, and market
new service. Importantly, this program encourages local business
investment. This skin-in-the-game approach incentivizes services that
are more likely to succeed long-term without subsidies.
Lastly, the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) distributes resources
generated by user fees and fuel taxes by formula to all public-use
airports in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS).
I would be remiss to not recognize the significant progress the
Trump administration has made in modernizing the system that safely
manages America's air traffic.
Under Secretary Duffy's and Administrator Bedford's leadership,
more than 2,000 air traffic controllers were hired last year, more than
12,000 applied to become controllers this year, 612 new radar systems
are being deployed, half of the outdated copper wiring has already been
replaced with modern fiberoptics, 17 control towers transitioned from
paper flight strips to electronic systems, and 54 airports now have
surface awareness systems. Clearly, the future of American aviation is
bright.
Mr. Nehls. And, with that, I again thank our witnesses for
traveling here today, and I look forward to your testimony.
I will now recognize Ranking Member Carson for a 5-minute
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ANDRE CARSON OF INDIANA, RANKING
MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AVIATION
Mr. Carson. Good morning, and thank you, Chairman Nehls,
Chairman Graves, and Ranking Member Larsen. It is an honor to
be here for our first Aviation Subcommittee hearing this year.
Welcome to our witnesses again for joining today's hearing on
trends, opportunities, and challenges facing small communities
and rural commercial service airports.
Air service for small and rural communities is important to
many members of this committee. While Indianapolis
International Airport is one of the busiest in the country,
there are four airports in Indiana that have Essential Air
Service determinations for routes that connect through Chicago
O'Hare Airport.
The 2024 FAA reauthorization is actively creating a
positive economic impact on small and rural communities through
the preservation of EAS programs and raising the per-passenger
subsidy caps, improving the Alternative EAS program, increasing
the Small Community Air Service Development Program annual
authorization level from $10 million to $15 million while
prioritizing applications that restore flights that have been
lost or substantially reduced, and boosting Airport Improvement
Program funding to $4 billion per year and revising the
apportionment formulas which increased annual formula funds for
both large and small airports.
Finally, we can all agree that airline passengers,
regardless of whether they are flying into a major hub or a
nonhub airport in their small communities, deserve one level of
safety. This means maintaining and improving the similar pilot
training requirements, aircraft certification standards, air
traffic control staffing and technology, safety data tracking,
and other tools that we use to keep the National Airspace
System safe.
Thank you again to our witnesses. You all play a very
critical role in ensuring continued service to small and rural
communities.
And I yield back.
[Mr. Carson's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Andre Carson of Indiana, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Aviation
Good morning. Chairman Nehls, Chairman Graves, and Ranking Member
Larsen, it's an honor to be here for our first Aviation Subcommittee
hearing this year. Welcome to our witnesses for joining today's hearing
on current trends, opportunities and challenges facing small
communities and rural commercial service airports.
Air service for small and rural communities is important to many
Members on this Committee. While Indianapolis International Airport is
the 46th busiest airport in the United States, there are four airports
in Indiana that have Essential Air Service (EAS) determinations for
routes that connect through Chicago O'Hare Airport.
The 2024 FAA Reauthorization is actively creating a positive
economic impact on small and rural communities through:
the preservation of the EAS Program and raising the per
passenger subsidy caps;
improving the Alternative EAS program;
increasing the Small Community Air Service Development
Program (SCASDP) annual authorization level from $10 million to $15
million while prioritizing applications that restore flights that have
been lost or substantially reduced; and
boosting Airport Improvement Program (AIP) funding to $4
billion per year and revising apportionment formulas which increased
annual formula funds for both large and small airports.
Unfortunately, the administration's FY27 budget request guts EAS
funding and proposes changes that have not been fully vetted or
approved by this Committee. Congress appropriated $513.6 million for
EAS in FY26. Yet, the administration's FY27 budget request is just $142
million--that's a $371.2 million cut.
This is despite the fact that Congress has continued to demonstrate
its bipartisan support for EAS and the critical service it provides to
communities that need it most. For example, the House Appropriations
Committee is currently proposing an increase of almost $25 million to
the EAS program. This is because Congress has listened to these
communities and wants to preserve this critical lifeline that benefits
communities all across this country.
Today's hearing will also address the impact of workforce issues on
small and rural communities. To start with, the pilot pipeline is in a
much different place today than it was a few years ago. Regional
airlines, as well as larger airlines, have listened to pilots and
increased pay and benefits leading to better hiring and retention.
Getting hired by airlines is more competitive today as a result.
Nonetheless, we must not decrease our standards to increase the
supply for this increased demand. Instead, we must address the rising
costs associated with training that have made becoming a qualified
pilot harder. The current commercial pilot training requirements are
critical to aviation safety, which is why I support initiatives to make
it a level playing field and remove cost as a barrier through grants
and reforms to student loan eligibility, and why I oppose the
administration's proposals to limit federal student loans for some of
the programs that produce the most qualified pilots.
We also have huge gaps in other parts of the aviation workforce
like aircraft mechanics, ground crews and air traffic controllers. In
mid-May, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced that it is
accepting applications for Aviation Workforce Development Grants for
Aircraft Pilots and Aviation Maintenance Technical Workers--also known
as the Section 625 grants. Congress reauthorized these grants in the
2024 FAA Reauthorization Act, and we are happy to finally see this
Notice of Funding Opportunity--even though it took 18 months too long.
I encourage eligible applicants to apply by the June 22 deadline.
Finally, we can all agree that all airline passengers--regardless
of whether they are flying into a major hub or a non-hub airport in
their small community--deserve one level of safety. This means
maintaining and improving the similar pilot training requirements,
aircraft certification standards, air traffic control staffing and
technology, safety data tracking and other tools that we use to keep
the National Airspace System safe.
Thank you again to today's witnesses; you all play an important
role in ensuring continued service to small and rural communities. I
look forward to our discussion, and I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize the chairman of the full committee, Mr.
Graves, for 5 minutes.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SAM GRAVES OF MISSOURI, CHAIRMAN,
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Graves. Thank you, Chairman Nehls.
And I want to thank our witnesses for all being here.
Last year, Congress passed and the President signed into
law a historic $12\1/2\ billion investment in our Nation's
aviation infrastructure, an accomplishment that I was very
proud to have led in the House. That investment is already
delivering meaningful results, as has been pointed out today:
deploying new radars, replacing communications infrastructure,
deploying airport surveillance systems, and hiring a record
number of air traffic controllers.
There is more to be done, and additional investments are
needed to complete this modernization effort. I am committed to
working with the administration and my colleagues to identify
the remaining needs and find a vehicle to secure those
resources that are going to be needed to finish the job.
We must continue to build upon the momentum initiated by
last year's historic investment and expeditiously roll out the
most modern and safest aviation system possible. Whether they
support commercial passenger service or provide publicly
accessible facilities for general aviation pilots, airports are
pillars of our community that drive economic growth and improve
the quality of life in all of our communities.
Critically, small airports are also the primary training
ground for pilots. We must protect and preserve our freedom to
fly for everyone, whether they are operating a personal
aircraft, or conducting business aviation, or traveling as
passengers on commercial airlines.
That is why I am proud that this committee worked in a very
bipartisan fashion to pass the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024,
and we continue to conduct strong oversight of its
implementation. This bipartisan law made important reforms to
the aviation sector by addressing workforce challenges,
improving passenger experience, establishing the first-ever
general aviation title, and increasing financial support for
our airports nationwide.
And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
[Mr. Graves' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves of Missouri, Chairman, Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure
Last year, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law a
historic $12.5 billion investment in our nation's aviation
infrastructure--an accomplishment I am proud to have led in the House.
That investment is already delivering meaningful results--deploying new
radars, replacing communications infrastructure, deploying airport
surveillance systems, and hiring record numbers of air traffic
controllers.
There is more work to be done, and additional investments are
needed to complete this modernization effort. I am committed to working
with the Trump administration and my colleagues to identify the
remaining needs and a vehicle to secure the resources required to
finish the job.
We must continue to build upon the momentum initiated by last
year's historic investment and expeditiously roll out the most modern
and safest aviation system possible. Whether they support commercial
passenger service or provide publicly accessible facilities for general
aviation pilots, airports are pillars of communities that drive
economic growth and improve quality of life in their communities.
Critically, small airports are also the primary training ground for
pilots. We must protect and preserve the freedom to fly for everyone--
whether they are operating a personal aircraft, conducting business
aviation, or traveling as passengers on commercial airlines.
That is why I am proud this committee worked in a bipartisan
fashion to pass the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, and we continue to
conduct strong oversight of its implementation.
This bipartisan law made important reforms across the aviation
sector by addressing workforce challenges, improving passenger
experience, establishing the first ever general aviation title, and
increasing financial support for airports nationwide.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee,
Mr. Larsen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING
MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Chair Nehls and
Ranking Member Carson, for holding today's hearing,
``Connecting Rural America to the National Airspace System.''
I want to thank the witnesses for joining us today, and we
have plenty to discuss, so I look forward to your testimony.
Airports are vital economic engines that power our local
communities, especially in small and rural ones--many of the
ones I represent. They serve as critical transportation hubs to
safely bring people together. This will be important in the
coming weeks as fans travel across the country and from around
the world to watch their favorite teams in the World Cup. We
look forward to welcoming them to the Pacific Northwest, where
Seattle and Vancouver will be hosting 13 of those games.
Airports also generate good jobs, stimulate local
businesses, and attract financial investment. A 2025 Airports
Council International-North America study found that airports
with commercial service support 12.8 million jobs and produce
$1.8 trillion of annual output.
In my district, we have a few small airports, ranging from
Arlington Municipal Airport in my hometown, which dates to
1934; Orcas Island Airport; Lopez Island Airport; Friday Harbor
Airport; Skagit Regional Airport--I don't want to forget--
Concrete Airport. There are a few more as well. They are all
going to call me and tell me I forgot to name them.
Congress recognized the importance of small and rural
airports when we passed the 2024 FAA reauthorization. The law
increases funding for the Airport Improvement Program to $4
billion annually, of which at least $150 million must be spent
on airport climate, noise, or other environmental projects. The
law also improves the lives of neighboring airport communities
by requiring the FAA to develop a plan to transition away from
leaded fuel in general aviation by 2030.
So, whether connected via regional airlines, charter
flights, or general aviation, these small and rural hubs serve
as alternatives to overburdened metropolitan airports.
Unfortunately, regional and value airlines face specific
challenges, ranging from workforce issues to surging fuel
prices.
Many of you mentioned in your testimony that increased
demands on the NAS have also increased demand for a skilled
aviation workforce.
Mr. Collins, you specifically mentioned the need for more
aviation maintenance technicians, while other witnesses
referenced the increased competition for pilots.
To meet these needs without decreasing our safety
standards, Congress, the FAA, and stakeholders must expand the
talent pipeline and improve efforts to recruit, train, and
retain a robust U.S. aerospace workforce from every part of our
society.
To address this, the 2024 reauthorization invests $60
million annually in Aviation Workforce Development Grants to
train the next generation of aviation manufacturing workers,
airport maintenance technicians, and pilots. In the Pacific
Northwest and across this country, aviation means jobs that pay
well and are key to long-term economic growth, and I encourage
the FAA to quickly implement these programs and distribute
these grants in a timely manner.
Ms. Black, your testimony also touches upon small aircraft
economics and how increased operation costs have led regional
carriers to use larger, more efficient planes.
Mr. Collins and Mr. Pecoraro, you both explained that a
factor contributing to this trend is the lack of regional jet
manufacturing pipelines. There just aren't as many options for
new fuel-efficient regional jets. It is a challenge that the
Pacific Northwest is up to tackling.
To help meet these regional aircraft needs, the 2024 bill
directed the FAA to bring on much-needed expertise in its
Aircraft Certification Office. We have to maintain the
certification office's institutional knowledge to meet the
requirements of the aircraft certification reform law and grow
the agency's technical expertise to better assess new designs.
In this way, when new regional aircraft are designed and
proposed, staff at the FAA are there to support that
innovation.
Finally, we can't talk about the small and rural
connectivity of airports without discussing how the President's
actions in Iran have spiked fuel prices, specifically jet fuel.
In general, fuel expenses account for a larger share of air
carrier budgets than most other industries, making them
particularly vulnerable to price fluctuations. Exacerbating
this issue, smaller regional and value air carriers have fewer
resources than their larger counterparts to absorb these rising
operational costs.
Consequently, the drastic increase in jet fuel prices
places a unique financial burden on regional and value
airlines, often forcing these carriers to reduce flight
frequencies, further eliminate routes, or increase ticket
prices. This directly impacts small and rural communities
through rising travel costs or a loss of service altogether.
We can't allow this to happen, and the President needs to
resolve this fuel price crisis of his own making.
As this committee considers the future of rural aviation
and small community connectivity, we have to continue investing
in the airports, in the workforce, and in the innovation that
keeps our communities connected to the NAS. We can't ignore the
economic pressures facing regional carriers, including rising
fuel costs that threaten service to the very communities that
depend upon it most.
So, I look forward to the hearing today and hearing from
today's witnesses on how we can help strengthen rural
connectivity, uphold our safety standards, and support American
aviation and innovation.
Thank you.
[Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen of Washington, Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chairman Nehls and Ranking Member Carson, for holding
today's hearing on ``Connecting Rural America to the National Airspace
System.''
Thank you to the witnesses for joining us today. We have plenty to
discuss, and I look forward to your testimony.
Airports are vital economic engines that power our local
communities--especially small and rural ones--and serve as critical
transportation hubs to safely bring people together.
This will be important in the coming weeks as fans travel across
the country to watch their favorite teams in the World Cup. We look
forward to welcoming them to the Pacific Northwest, where Seattle and
Vancouver will be hosting games.
Airports also generate good jobs, stimulate local businesses and
attract financial investment.
A 2025 Airports Council International-North America study found
that airports with commercial service support 12.8 million jobs and
produce $1.8 trillion of annual output.
In my district, we have a few small airports, ranging from
Arlington Municipal Airport--which dates to 1934--to Orcas Island
Airport, which serves the communities of San Juan and Island Counties.
Congress recognized the importance of small and rural airports when
we passed the 2024 FAA reauthorization.
The law increases funding for the Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
to $4 billion annually, of which at least $150 million must be spent on
airport climate, noise and other environmental projects.
The law also improves the lives of neighboring airport communities
by requiring the FAA to develop a plan to transition away from leaded
fuel in general aviation by 2030.
Whether connected via regional airlines, charter flights, or
general aviation, these small and rural hubs serve as alternatives to
overburdened metropolitan airports.
Unfortunately, regional and value airlines face specific challenges
ranging from workforce issues to surging fuel prices.
Many of you mention in your testimony that increased demands on the
NAS have also increased demand for a skilled aviation workforce.
Mr. Collins, you specifically mention the need for more aviation
maintenance technicians, while other witnesses reference the increased
competition for pilots.
To meet these needs without decreasing our safety standards,
Congress, the FAA and stakeholders must expand the talent pipeline and
improve efforts to recruit, train and retain a robust U.S. aerospace
workforce from every part of our society.
To address this, the 2024 reauthorization invests $60 million
annually in aviation workforce development grants to train the next
generation of aviation manufacturing workers, aircraft maintenance
technicians and pilots.
In the Pacific Northwest and across the country, aviation means
jobs that pay well and are key to long-term economic growth--I
encourage the FAA to quickly implement these programs and distribute
these grants in a timely manner.
Ms. Black, your testimony also touches upon small aircraft
economics--and how increased operation costs have led regional carriers
to use larger more efficient planes.
Mr. Collins and Mr. Pecoraro, you both explain that a factor
contributing to this trend is the lack of a regional jet manufacturing
pipeline--there just aren't as many options for new fuel-efficient
regional jets.
This is a challenge the Pacific Northwest is up to tackling.
To help meet these regional aircraft needs, the 2024 FAA
Reauthorization directed the FAA to bring on much needed expertise in
its aircraft certification office.
We have to maintain the certification office's institutional
knowledge to meet the requirements of the aircraft certification reform
law and grow the agency's technical expertise to better assess new
designs.
This way, when new regional aircraft are designed and proposed,
staff at the FAA are there to support that innovation.
Finally, we can't talk about small and rural connectivity without
discussing how the President's actions in Iran have spiked fuel
prices--specifically jet fuel.
In general, fuel expenses account for a larger share of air carrier
budgets than most other industries, making them particularly vulnerable
to price fluctuations.
Exacerbating this issue, smaller regional and value air carriers
have fewer resources than their larger counterparts to absorb these
rising operating costs.
Consequently, the drastic increase in jet fuel prices places a
unique financial burden on regional and value airlines, often forcing
these carriers to reduce flight frequencies, further eliminate routes
or increase ticket prices.
This directly impacts small and rural communities through rising
travel costs or a loss of service altogether.
We can't allow this to happen. The President needs to resolve this
fuel price crisis of his own making.
As this committee considers the future of rural aviation and small
community connectivity, we must continue investing in the airports,
workforce and innovation that keep our communities connected to the
NAS.
We also cannot ignore the economic pressures facing regional
carriers, including the rising fuel costs that threaten service to the
very communities that depend on it most.
I look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about how we can
help strengthen rural connectivity, uphold our safety standards and
support American aviation.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I will briefly take a moment to explain our lighting
system--you guys have been here before. Just keep your remarks
to 5 minutes, okay?
I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements
be included in the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that the record of today's
hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have
provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to them
in writing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open
for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record
of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
And as your written testimony has been made part of the
record, the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks,
again, to 5 minutes.
With that, Ms. Black, you are recognized.
TESTIMONY OF FAYE MALARKEY BLACK, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, REGIONAL AIRLINE ASSOCIATION; SHAWN DOBBERSTEIN,
A.A.E., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HECTOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,
FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
AIRPORT EXECUTIVES; DERRICK COLLINS, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; AND
GREGORY PECORARO, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE AVIATION OFFICIALS
TESTIMONY OF FAYE MALARKEY BLACK, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, REGIONAL AIRLINE ASSOCIATION
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you, Chairman, Ranking Member,
members of the subcommittee. Thanks for holding this hearing
today, and thanks for the opportunity to be here.
Last year, regional airlines flew one in three departures
and served almost all U.S. airports. We fly to communities of
all sizes, but for two-thirds of the Nation's airports, we
provide the only source of scheduled commercial air service.
That service connects people to healthcare, colleges, military
bases, and loved ones. It supports $153 billion in yearly
economic output and about 1 million jobs.
But rural America still doesn't have the air service that
it needs. A pilot shortage that predated the pandemic worsened
after it, forcing regional airlines to park about one-quarter
of the fleet and pushing small community air service into
crisis.
Today, overall service is up, but passengers don't
experience air service in the aggregate; they experience
whether their local airport still has the schedules and
destinations that meet their needs.
Today, 193 airports have fewer flights than before the
pandemic, and the average loss at those airports is 31 percent
of their flights. Thirty-five have lost more than half their
flights, 14 airports have gone dark completely, and smaller
airports are fairing the worst.
Several forces are driving this.
First, infrastructure. Safety is a foundation of everything
we do, and air traffic control modernization is foundational to
safety. I am a member of the Modern Skies Coalition, and I
support its goals. We cannot leave rural airports behind.
The focus on DCA is necessary. The families who lost loved
ones last year deserve nothing less. That same vigilance
belongs everywhere.
Each day, our members fly into small airports, contract
towers, and nontowered fields with GA, medical, and military
flights and without the situational-awareness tools that are
standard elsewhere.
We ask Congress to extend risk-based airport safety
reviews, equip contract towers with digital tools so
controllers don't separate traffic solely by looking out the
window. And we ask Congress to require radio communication at
nontowered fields, where it is recommended today but not
required.
I thank this committee for embracing ACAS X. It is the
future of collision-avoidance technology. It depends on ADS-B
In, which gives pilots a real-time picture of nearby traffic.
We support both.
And we need to be clear-eyed about the timeline. Some
suggest ADS-B In is ready fleetwide now and that only ACAS X is
the long-lead technology. That is not accurate. Both need
aircraft-specific development, certification, installation, and
supply chains that carriers don't control.
That is why we support a right-now safety bridge through
electronic flight bags that are mounted in the flight deck.
They can be used on every flight, fixed in the pilot's line of
sight, and an aircraft cannot dispatch without one. EFBs can
deliver ADS-B In with traffic awareness and surface awareness
and visual and audible alerts as in-panel systems mature. We
should not wait years for safety we can deploy almost now.
Second, workforce. Communities can't get air service
without pilots. Supply is more stable now than before, but the
underlying shortage remains. Earlier this year, mainline hiring
again outpaced new pilot certifications, and we haven't yet
fully rebuilt lost air service. And more than one-quarter of
the workforce must retire within a decade.
The pipeline is not keeping up, and one reason is cost.
Flight education inherently costs more than other degrees, and
Federal loans fall about $80,000 short, on average. Students
without wealth are locked out. Congress can help by aligning
Federal student aid with the cost of flight training and
allowing GI benefits to cover private pilot certificates.
We also support raising the pilot retirement age. It was
last raised in 2007 with no safety harm, and pilots already
undergo frequent, rigorous testing. This won't end the
shortage, but it will help, and it is the right thing to do.
Safety depends on pilots being prepared for commercial
flight. We are pleased the FAA advanced the congressionally
directed Enhanced Qualification Program. Its safety value lies
in the quality, relevance, and rigor of the training, and FAA
should implement it with clear, standardized guidance.
Next, aircraft. Small communities need aircraft size to
their markets. Oversized aircraft reduce frequency and reduce
routes. Congress should be aware that scope clauses do restrict
the size, weight, and number of aircraft regionals can fly.
Finally, Federal programs. EAS preserves service to many
rural communities, and it drove $2.3 billion in economic
activity per year before the pandemic. We urge full funding,
stable contracts, and timely transitions. SCASDP is another
tool to attract and keep air service, and we support it.
We appreciate your focus on rural connectivity, and we hope
you see us as a partner in the work ahead. Thank you for
holding this hearing and for including me in it. I look forward
to your questions.
[Ms. Malarkey Black's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Faye Malarkey Black, President and Chief
Executive Officer, Regional Airline Association
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the
Regional Airline Association.
The Importance of Rural Air Service
Last year, regional airlines operated approximately one in three
scheduled passenger departures in the United States and served 94
percent of the nation's commercially served airports. By contrast,
larger, mainline carriers directly served just 36 percent. This means
that for two-thirds of our nation's airports, regional airlines provide
the only scheduled, commercial air service available. Without them,
much of the country would lose access to the national air
transportation system altogether.
Regional aviation is how residents in smaller communities reach
medical specialists, universities, military installations, customers,
suppliers, and family members. It is how businesses stay connected to
markets, how employers recruit, how rural communities remain
accessible, and how smaller cities participate in the national economy.
Figure 1. Regional Airlines and the National Air Service Footprint (48
Contiguous States)
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Regional air service to small communities also generates
substantial national economic activity. Across hundreds of communities
nationwide, regional air service supports approximately $152.8 billion
in annual economic output, 1.1 million jobs, and $41.3 billion in wages
and earnings.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Lindemuth, Z., Meehan, D., Swelbar, W., & Zhong, A. (2021,
August). Economic Impact of Small Community Airports [Report].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional air service also provides value beyond the local market
itself. Many passengers traveling from smaller communities ultimately
connect through larger hub airports before continuing elsewhere in the
network. Those passengers help support the hub-and-spoke system that
underpins air transportation in the United States. As a result,
decisions about regional air service are not just local, but relate to
the flow of passengers throughout the network and the ability of
airlines to connect smaller communities to the hubs and beyond.
Over the past fifteen years, and most acutely after the pandemic,
regional aviation absorbed a major structural shock. A severe,
sustained pilot shortage that was present before the pandemic became a
crisis in its aftermath. Regional airlines are typically the career
entry point for the pilot workforce, and mainline carriers hired
aggressively from regional airline ranks when rebuilding their own
workforce after pandemic exits. Because the pilot pipeline had already
been straining, regional operators lost pilots faster than the system
could replace them, leading to multiple bankruptcies, liquidations and
an enormous fleet contraction.
Figure 2. Thirteen Regional Airline Bankruptcies or Liquidations Since
2009
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As regional airlines parked more than a quarter of the industry's
fleet without enough pilots available to operate them, departures and
destinations plunged at individual communities across the nation, most
pronouncedly at small and rural airports. These communities watched
their access to the national network erode, even while aggregate
numbers showed recovery.
Much of that lost service has not come back. Sometimes, we hear
that loss being characterized through a deceptively simple lens: if
passengers truly valued the service, every traveler would use it, and
the market would sustain it. That explanation overlooks many of the
forces that shape air service decisions and connectivity. Passengers
respond to the network available to them. When departures fall,
frequency falls. When destination options are eliminated, connectivity
is weakened. When schedules no longer support convenient connections,
travel behavior changes. Some trips are never taken, and some
passengers with the time, means, and flexibility to do so drive farther
to larger airports. Those outcomes are sometimes mistaken for consumer
preference, but often the reality is the system lost operational
capacity first, airports lost meaningful connectivity next, and
passenger behavior and industry economics evolved in response.
Unfortunately, long-distance driving is often portrayed as a neutral
substitute for lost air service, even when it means several hours on
the road in difficult weather, reduced access for elderly or medically
vulnerable passengers, economic stagnation for rural communities, and
substantially weaker connectivity for the Americans who live there.
Air service connectivity also has safety implications. When
communities lose practical access to air service, more travel is
shifted onto the highway system, where NHTSA data indicates 39,254
people lost their lives in 2024.\2\ This impact is worse for rural
citizens. In 2023, the most recent year for which rural breakdowns are
available, NHTSA found that rural roads carried a fatality rate
approximately 1.5 times higher than urban roads, and that 41 percent of
highway fatalities occurred on rural roads despite only 20 percent of
Americans living in rural areas.\3\ Maintaining air service in smaller
communities is therefore not only an economic issue; it is also part of
a safer transportation system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ National total: NHTSA, early/annual traffic fatality data for
2024 (39,254 fatalities; rate 1.19 per 100M VMT).
\3\ Rural figures: NHTSA, Rural/Urban Traffic Fatalities: 2023
Data, Report No. DOT HS 813 728.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of Recommendations
The following is a summary of RAA's recommendations to ensure air
service connectivity for rural America, which are outlined in greater
detail in my written statement:
Extend Air Traffic Control (ATC) Modernization and Safety Enhancements
to Airports of All Sizes
Extend risk-based, comprehensive airport safety reviews to all
airports with a substantial mix of commercial, general aviation,
business, and military traffic. Close-proximity events have occurred at
smaller airports that lack radar, Automatic Dependent Surveillance-
Broadcast-In (ADS-B In), or other situational-awareness tools.
Pass H.R. 8597, the Air Traffic Situational Awareness Enhancement
Act. This would mandate installation of Airborne Position Reference
Tools (APRT) at contract towers lacking advanced situational-awareness
systems.
Require Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF) communication near
mixed-use airports. Such communication is recommended but not required
today, creating risk at smaller airports.
Require use of ADS-B In and authorize the use of Electronic Flight
Bag (EFB) based ADS-B In as in-panel ADS-B In and Airborne Collision
Avoidance System X (ACAS-X) are developed and commercialized for all
commercial aircraft. EFB solutions can deliver safety improvements
near-term, while in-panel ADS-B In and ACAS-X depend on manufacturing
and certification timelines outside carrier control.
Protect Small Community Air Service
Fully fund the Essential Air Service (EAS) program. EAS preserves a
baseline of critical air service connectivity for many communities.
Reassess whether Small Community Air Service Development Program
(SCASDP) funding levels remain adequate. Rising costs have meant grant
dollars to help communities attract service do not go as far as they
once did.
Examine tools to sustain service aber SCASDP grants end. SCASDP
helps build the market, but some communities struggle to sustain
service when margins remain fragile. Expanded funding, stronger
transition tools, or other targeted connectivity supports could help
communities maintain service once an initial grant period closes.
Support Tomorrow's Aviation Workforce
Build on the FAA Reauthorization Act's maintenance workforce
foundation. Maintenance shortages affect aircraft utilization,
reliability, and small-community service.
Align federal student aid with the cost of accredited flight
training. Flight training costs exceed current federal student loan
limits by $80,000 on average, blocking capable students without wealth
or credit from pilot careers.
Modernize GI Bill eligibility for pilot training. Current rules
disallow use of earned benefits for the private pilot certificate--the
first required certificate.
Regional Airline Partnerships
Regional airlines reach communities that larger mainline aircraft
often cannot economically or operationally serve directly. Most
regional airline flying in the United States occurs under Capacity
Purchase Agreements (CPAs), where regional airlines operate flights on
behalf of larger network carriers. Under CPAs, the major airline
partner generally controls network planning, ticket pricing,
scheduling, and fuel purchasing, while the regional carrier provides
the crews, maintenance, and operational execution using aircraft that
may be owned or leased by either the major airline partner or the
regional airline itself. Other regional airlines operate under a pro-
rate model, where the airline retains ticket revenue directly and bears
substantially greater exposure to fuel prices, demand fluctuation, and
rising operating costs.
Figure 3. Regional Airline Partnerships
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Small Aircraft Economics
The economics of serving smaller communities differ from those of
larger hub markets. Smaller aircraft have fewer seats over which to
distribute operating costs, making lower-density routes inherently more
sensitive to changes in labor, maintenance, airport, financing, fuel,
and infrastructure costs on a per-passenger basis.
The pilot shortage intensified those pressures. Regional airlines
made substantial increases in pilot compensation to attract qualified
aviators in an extraordinarily competitive labor market. These
investments were positive and helped to attract more candidates, but
also materially increased the cost of operating smaller aircraft
serving lower-density markets.
Fuel costs present another challenge. While the major airline
partner purchases fuel under CPA flying, prices still influence broader
network economics and decisions regarding aircraft deployment. Carriers
operating under prorate arrangements face more direct exposure to fuel
price volatility. Rising costs do not always result in the complete
elimination of service, but they can affect the economics of operating
smaller aircraft in lower-density markets, weakening margins that are
already thin.
When starting or restoring regional air service after a disruption,
the economics are not limited to the route itself. Airlines must build
local operations, secure facilities and ground equipment, establish
fuel and handling arrangements, staff the station, support marketing
and community awareness, and integrate the service into the broader
network. These startup and transition costs can be substantial,
particularly in rural markets served by one or only a few carriers. For
these same reasons, once service is lost, restoring it is often more
difficult and more expensive than preserving it in the first place.
Decisions about regional deployment are almost always made by the
network carrier, including where and how flights are scheduled. But
regional airlines view these communities as far more than just assigned
destinations. We know that when small communities lose service, it
disrupts lives, isolates communities, and weakens the well-being of
working families across the country. When regional air service is
added, travel opportunities expand for the same population, rural
economies benefit, and the people who live there become better
connected with the world around them.
An Uneven Recovery
For more than a decade, RAA has tracked changes in small-community
and rural air service connectivity, and published quarterly updates as
the pilot shortage deepened, to better understand how individual
communities were being affected. We tracked a sharp deterioration in
air service alongside regional airline industry contraction during the
height of the pilot shortage and post-pandemic recovery period. By
2023, the number of airports receiving scheduled regional airline
service had fallen to its lowest level in years.
Figure 4. Airports Receiving Scheduled Airline Service
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
More recently, service levels have improved from that nadir,
although the recovery has been uneven. In May 2026, overall departures
and seats were up compared with May 2019, yet 193 airports still had
less service than before the pandemic, down by an average of 31
percent. Ninety airports lost at least a quarter of their service, 35
lost more than half, and 14 lost service entirely. Small hubs as a
category gained departures, but one in five small hub airports still
had less service in May 2026 than in May 2019.
Nonhub airports as a category are down just 2.5 percent, yet more
than half of nonhub airports lost service, often significantly. Sixty-
three nonhub airports lost at least a quarter of their flights, 20 lost
more than half of their flights, and two lost all air service.
Nonprimary airports, the smallest commercial category, took the largest
hit.
Down as a category by 14.4 percent, 80 nonprimary airports lost
service, with an average loss of 48.3 percent of flights.
Figure 5. Recovery Is Underway_But Communities Are Still Down
Meaningful Service
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Seat counts can mask a subtler form of loss: a community can gain
seats while losing the frequency and destinations that make air service
useful. We began tracking this trend in 2009. Since then, seats have
increased across every airport category, but departures have decreased
in all of them. Destination options declined at all but the largest
airports. The losses were sharpest at the smallest airports--nonprimary
airports lost 32.2 percent of departures and 29.5 percent of their
routes.
Figure 6. Larger Aircraft Mean Fewer Departures and Routes
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Ultimately, passengers do not experience air service in the
aggregate--they experience whether the network still meets their needs.
By that measure, the nation's air service network does not serve rural
America nearly as well as it serves our urban centers.
Pilot Supply and Small Community Air Service
While costs, fleet availability, and network economics all played a
role, workforce availability was the most significant constraint on
regional air service during this period. The more closely RAA tracked
service patterns, the clearer it became that the availability of pilots
shaped the availability of air service--in both directions. As staffing
pressures eased and regional airlines returned aircraft and crews to
service, communities began to recover connectivity. Ultimately,
communities cannot receive air service that airlines do not have the
crews to operate.
Today's environment continues to be more stable than the peak
disruption period. But the underlying pilot shortage has not been
resolved. As of May 2026, there were 128,161 Airline Transport Pilot,
Airplane Multi-Engine Land (ATP AMEL) pilots with valid first-class
medicals. More than 13 percent will reach mandatory retirement age
within five years, and 41 percent within fifteen years.
That retirement wave arrives before accounting for growth or even
full restoration of communities' previously lost service. Current
mainline hiring moderation has been influenced by temporary conditions,
including delayed aircraft deliveries and slower fleet growth. Major
airline hiring dropped 60 percent from 2023 to 2024 and 7 percent from
2024 to 2025. However, in the first months of 2026, major airline
hiring again began outpacing production of new qualified pilots.
Meanwhile, the post-pandemic surge in pilot certification proved
temporary, as predicted. New ATP AMEL issuances fell two years
running--2025 produced 19 percent fewer than 2024 and 32 percent fewer
than the 2023 peak. Early 2026 data points to a modest rebound: a 12-
month rolling average projects full-year output of roughly 7,984, above
2025 but still below the 2022 pace and well short of the 2023 peak.
While an influx of displaced Spirit pilots and other conditions may
continue to ease pressure this year, they do not solve the long-term
imbalance.
Figure 7. Major Carrier Hiring vs. Qualified Pilot Production \4\
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
New\\ pilot certification numbers also need careful interpretation.
Since March 2020, 49,671 new ATP AMEL certificates have been issued,
yet there are just 17,403 more ATP AMEL pilots in today's qualified
pilot pool. In other words, only one in three new ATP certificates was
net growth in the pilot pool.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ FAA Registry: AFB-730, Federal Aviation Administration; Hiring
data: fapa.aero/pilot-hiring-history
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 8. ATP-Certified Pilot Retirement Outlook
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Workforce demand has also evolved. Airlines now keep larger reserve
staffing pools to cover weather, maintenance, illness, or other
disruptions even when they are not scheduled to fly a particular trip.
Training duties draw pilots out of revenue service for initial
training, upgrades, recurrent training, instructor duties, and check
airman responsibilities. And when aircraft are scheduled less
intensively, the airline may need more aircraft and crew resources to
produce the same number of trips due to increased non-productive time.
Together, these changes mean the industry must produce more pilots just
to sustain a level of service that once required fewer.
Fleet modernization is also central to small-community connectivity.
While the pilot shortage was the dominant constraint reshaping
regional aviation over the last decade, the aircraft available to serve
smaller markets also changed significantly as older regional aircraft
aged and replacement options became increasingly limited.
Scope Clause Constraints
Regional airlines and their major airline partners have operated
for years within a constrained aircraft environment shaped by scope
clauses in major airline pilot-union contracts, which cap regional
aircraft at 50, 70, or 76 seats, with an 86,000-lb takeoff weight
limit. Today's most advanced, fuel-efficient jets have cleaner-burning,
more efficient engines, which are heavier. The added weight causes
modern regional jets to exceed the weight limits of every major airline
scope clause.
This has effectively frozen regional fleets at older propulsion
technology and has deterred the broader development of next-generation
regional aircraft outright. Aircraft manufacturers respond rationally
to the market available to them. The United States is the largest
regional jet market, and all regional flying operates under scope
clause restrictions. Saab, Bombardier, British Aerospace, Beech,
Fairchild-Dornier, and most recently Mitsubishi have all stopped
investing in new regional aircraft, citing scope as the primary
reason.\5\ The result is a structural gap in the regional fleet at
exactly the aircraft size small communities need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Leeham News, ``The regional market and scope clauses'' (Jan.
18, 2017); Reuters, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, ``Notice of
Discontinuation of SpaceJet Development Activities'' (Feb. 7, 2023);
Bombardier, ``Bombardier Concludes Sale of the CRJ Series Regional Jet
Program to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries'' (June 1, 2020); Saab, ``Saab
340B''; Aviation Week, ``BAE Systems Cancels RJX'' (Nov. 28, 2001);
Forecast International, ``Beech 1900'' (Aug. 2003), ``The Future of
Regional Jets Dims as Mitsubishi Walks Away'' (Feb. 2016), et al.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When airlines cannot access the right aircraft for the mission, the
system tends to upgauge. That often means less frequency, fewer
destinations, and reduced practical connectivity for some smaller
communities. But larger, 76-seat aircraft are not a universal
substitute for smaller regional aircraft: scope limitations restrict
how many may be operated, and runway constraints, airport
infrastructure, market size, and operating economics make them
unsuitable for some communities, which simply lose air service
altogether.
In fact, many communities would be well-served by aircraft that
fall between the smallest commercial aircraft and larger regional jets,
particularly in the 19- to 30-seat range, yet the range of aircraft
available in that segment has narrowed considerably over time. Emerging
technologies may help in the future, but communities facing air service
challenges today need aircraft that are available, certifiable, and
economically viable now.
Scope is a private-sector constraint with public-interest
consequences. While we recognize that Congress does not dictate private
contracts, scope clause constraints deserve greater attention in any
serious discussion of small-community air service. They limit the
industry's ability to modernize the regional fleet, improve fuel
efficiency, reduce emissions, and serve small and rural routes with
right-sized aircraft. Communities feel the consequences when the
aircraft needed to serve them are no longer being built.
Policy and the Aviation Workforce
RAA is grateful for this Committee's leadership on aviation
workforce development, as well as your support for initiatives designed
to strengthen aviation career pathways earlier in the education
process.
Pilot training is particularly expensive because flight education
requires aircraft, fuel, maintenance, insurance, simulators,
instructors, and FAA-regulated training infrastructure. These are not
ordinary classroom costs. Flight training alone routinely costs well
into six figures, and when combined with a degree program can leave
students facing $200,000 or more in total education and training costs.
While federal student aid can be used for accredited flight education
programs, current loan limits were not designed to meet these costs,
which exceed current federal student loan limits by roughly $80,000 on
average, even where students are enrolled in accredited training
programs and even where airlines provide substantial financing support
and subsidy. Students using student loans will exhaust available
financing long before completing the certifications and ratings
necessary to enter the profession. For students without family wealth
or access to private credit, that gap can be decisive. Capable young
people are blocked from high-wage, high-demand aviation careers for no
other reason than they cannot finance their education.
Access to a pilot career should be determined by ability,
discipline, and commitment, not family wealth or private financing.
Congress has recognized this problem before, and bipartisan lawmakers
and aviation stakeholders urged the Department of Education, through
its RISE rulemaking, to make a targeted fix to increase federal loan
access for flight education. Unfortunately, the Department declined to
make changes to any program. RAA therefore asks Congress to send a
clear signal through flight education access legislation aligning
federal student aid with the real cost of accredited flight training.
Veterans also represent an important aviation workforce pathway.
Yet current GI Bill rules often prevent veterans from using earned
educational benefits for all phases of training required to become
professional pilots. RAA supports modernizing GI Bill eligibility so
veterans can fully utilize earned benefits throughout the professional
pilot training pathway, including for the private pilot certificate,
which serves as the entry point to professional pilot training.
The aviation maintenance workforce requires sustained attention as
well. Aircraft maintenance technicians are foundational to aviation
safety and operational reliability, and workforce shortages in
maintenance increasingly affect aircraft utilization, operational
resilience, and smaller-community connectivity.
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 took important steps to
strengthen aviation maintenance workforce development through expanded
grant eligibility and support for technician pipeline programs.
Congress should continue building on that foundation through sustained
funding, expanded testing access, stronger STEM integration, and
policies that help veterans transition into civilian maintenance
careers.
RAA also supports raising the mandatory pilot retirement age to 67.
The pilot retirement age was last raised in 2007 to age 65 with no
negative safety impact. Raising it again would not solve the pilot
shortage alone, but it would help preserve experienced aviators, soften
near-term retirement pressure, and give the training pipeline more time
to catch up. Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Argentina, the UK,
and IATA are leading the effort at the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO). The U.S., one of ICAO's largest members, should
retake our leadership mantle.
Pilot Training Advancement
The industry needs a healthy pilot supply, and even more
importantly, safety depends on pilots being prepared for the demands of
modern commercial airline operations. RAA was pleased to see the FAA
advance the Congressionally directed Enhanced Qualification Program
(EQP) last month, reflecting the first material update to first officer
training and qualifications since 2013. We applaud the FAA for moving
this important safety work forward. As aircraft, technology, and
operating environments continue to evolve, training and qualification
pathways must keep pace. Complacency is not compatible with aviation
safety.
Today, many pilots complete highly structured foundational training
and then spend a year or more accumulating additional aeronautical
experience before entering airline training. During that period, pilots
can spend extended time away from the structured, scenario-based, crew-
oriented training environment. Airlines have responded by expanding
portions of initial training when pilots arrive with less recency of
structured training.
The EQP builds on these solutions by implementing recommendations
from the FAA's Air Carrier Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ACT
ARC), an expert ARC charged with evaluating how pilot training can
better prepare pilots for modern airline operations. As described in
the FAA's draft Advisory Circular, the EQP is designed for pilots
seeking a Restricted Airline Transport Pilot certificate and includes
substantial prerequisites, rigorous pilot assessment, and intensive
integrated academic and flight training.
The safety value of the EQP lies in the quality, relevance, and
rigor of the training itself. The FAA should implement the program
through clear, standardized guidance that provides carriers and
training providers with consistent expectations, including how
aeronautical experience credit is earned and applied. Consistent
implementation standards will help ensure safety advancement, while
ensuring the pathway can be adopted and administered as Congress and
the FAA intended.
ATC Modernization and Safety Enhancements for All Airports and Airspace
As a proud member of the Modern Skies Coalition, RAA strongly
supports the historic investments Congress has made in ATC
modernization this year and urges additional funding to complete the
job. Replacing aging infrastructure, improving communications
resiliency, installing modern surface awareness tools, and rebuilding
the controller workforce are all essential steps toward strengthening
the national airspace system. Because our members operate at more
airports and in more categories of airspace than any other commercial
airline sector, we hold a uniquely comprehensive view of the
modernization needs in every category of airspace.
Recent attention to aviation safety has understandably focused on
high-profile events near major metropolitan airports. But risk in the
national airspace system is not confined to large hubs. Every day, our
members provide air service to mixed-use airports, contract tower
airports, limited-service airports, and non-towered operational
environments that still lack situational-awareness tools that are
standard elsewhere in the system.
RAA urges Congress to ensure modernization does not stop at the
largest hubs. We strongly support a comprehensive approach to
modernization and small-airport safety enhancement that reaches every
part of the system serving commercial passengers. That includes
equipping smaller and rural airports with practical situational-
awareness tools, modernizing contract towers that currently lack radar
capability, strengthening communications infrastructure, and improving
surface-detection and traffic-awareness technologies.
RAA specifically supports deployment of Airborne Position Reference
Tools (APRT) and similar ADS-B-based situational awareness technologies
at contract towers that currently operate without radar displays. Many
regional airline operations occur at airports where controllers are
providing commercial traffic separation without access to the same
tools available elsewhere in the system. H.R. 8597, the Air Traffic
Situational Awareness Enhancement Act, is bipartisan legislation
sponsored by Congressman Nick Begich (R-AK) and Congresswoman Laura
Gillen (D-NY) that would require the FAA to install APRT at contract
towers that lack advanced situational awareness systems, establish
controller training requirements, authorize funding for the technology,
and reimburse airports that have already invested in APRT systems. RAA
urges Committee members to support H.R. 8597 and advocate for the
inclusion of this important safety measure in legislation moving
forward.
RAA also supports improving operational awareness and communication
standards at non-towered airports serving commercial traffic. Clear
communication over Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF) can
materially improve situational awareness in mixed-traffic environments
where commercial aircraft, general aviation aircraft, military
operations, medical flights, and other users may all be operating
simultaneously. Today, pilots in Class D and E airspace are
recommended, but not required, to communicate their position when
operating near or at nontowered, mixed-use airports. This has led to
close-proximity events requiring evasive maneuvers when pilots have
failed to communicate their position. RAA supports legislative
direction to require such CTAF communication.
Beyond this specific gap, RAA urges Congress to extend federal
safety reviews to the airports where mixed-traffic risk is present.
Many airports with scheduled commercial service handle a substantial
mix of commercial, general aviation, business, and military traffic.
Many are non-towered, and some towered airports operate without radar,
ADS-B In, or other situational-awareness tools.
Modernization should also include practical pathways for
implementing advanced safety technologies across regional fleets,
including deployment of advanced collision-avoidance technologies
across the National Airspace System. RAA applauds both the House-passed
ALERT Act and the Senate-passed ROTOR Act and appreciates the
leadership of the committees that advanced these important safety
initiatives. Both bills recognize the value of expanding situational
awareness and collision-avoidance capabilities following the tragic
midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. While
the two bills take different approaches, the House proposal merits
special recognition for addressing the full range of National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) safety recommendations and charting
a path toward broader deployment of advanced collision-avoidance
technology.
ADS-B In and ACAS-X serve different but complementary safety
functions. ADS-B In improves pilot situational awareness by providing
better information about nearby traffic and airport-surface activity.
ACAS-X builds on that foundation by providing automated collision-
avoidance protection. We believe ACAS-X presents the stronger safety
advantage and represents the future of collision-avoidance protection
for the commercial fleet.
Achieving that objective requires a realistic implementation
pathway. ACAS-X depends on ADS-B In, and both technologies require
aircraft-specific product development, certification, integration,
installation, testing, and training. For the regional fleet, integrated
ADS-B In solutions are still being developed, just as ACAS-X solutions
are still being developed. These are not simple software updates. Many
regional aircraft were not originally designed around these systems,
and integration, panel space, avionics architecture, aircraft-specific
engineering, and supply-chain constraints can all affect deployment
timelines. Those factors are outside carrier control.
At the same time, meaningful safety improvements can and should
begin immediately. Electronic Flight Bag-based ADS-B In solutions can
provide weather and traffic situational awareness at all altitudes,
visual and aural conflict alerting, and runway and surface awareness
almost immediately. EFBs are FAA-approved, proven, and scalable, and
pilots are trained and proficient on their applications. Aircraft may
not take off without a fully functional EFB in the flight deck. While
we believe EFB solutions should not replace integrated tools on a
permanent basis, deploying them as a time-limited bridge today will
produce meaningful safety improvement almost immediately while
aircraft-specific ADS-B In and ACAS-X systems are developed. RAA asks
that Congress and the FAA require a time-limited means of compliance
through these near-term capabilities. We additionally ask that Congress
require all aircraft, including military, business, and general
aviation, to use this technology at all times, with reasonable, narrow
exceptions for genuine national security concerns.
Figure 9. Electronic Flight Bag Mounted in CRJ700 Aircraft
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As ROTOR and ALERT move toward conference, it is important that the
final law delivers both immediate safety benefits and a full
integration timeline grounded in certification, engineering, and
supply-chain realities. Those factors are outside carrier control and
cannot be solved by operator effort alone. An unworkable safety or
fleet mandate can unintentionally reduce the small-community air
service Congress is trying to protect. At the same time, the challenge
of getting the pathway right should not become a reason to delay or
abandon these safety improvements. Congress can and should conference
and pass a final collision-avoidance bill that delivers real,
deployable safety benefits across the system.
Essential Air Service
In 1978, Congress established the Essential Air Service (EAS)
program to preserve scheduled air service to small and isolated
communities in a deregulated market. Nearly five decades later, that
need has not disappeared and the program continues to maintain a
safeguard for many communities that would otherwise lose access to the
national air transportation system. EAS is also a proven economic force
multiplier. Before the pandemic, commercial air service at EAS airports
generated approximately $2.3 billion in economic activity and supported
more than 17,000 jobs nationwide.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Lindemuth et al., Small Community Airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We appreciate this Committee's longstanding, bipartisan support for
the program and note that the House's Fiscal Year 2027 THUD bill again
fully funds EAS. RAA urges committee members to support final passage
of a Transportation appropriations bill that maintains full funding for
the program.
The experience of the past several years demonstrates both the
value and the limits of EAS. The program helped preserve a baseline of
connectivity for many communities that would have lost scheduled air
service entirely during a period of intense disruption. But EAS
communities were not immune to pilot shortages, reliability challenges,
carrier exits, service gaps, or difficult transitions. That experience
underscores the importance of protecting, fully funding, and
administering the program in ways that support stable, reliable
service.
Most EAS contracts are awarded for a fixed term, often two years,
with the Department of Transportation (DOT) setting a subsidy rate for
that period. That structure preserves competition and lets communities
and DOT revisit service options, but short terms can be challenging
given the substantial startup costs described earlier, which a carrier
must absorb before service can begin in a smaller market. Longer
contract terms can help carriers spread those fixed costs over a more
realistic period and give communities greater continuity. However,
longer terms work best when contracts account for changing operating
conditions. Fuel, labor, and other costs can increase significantly
during the life of a contract. While Congress has previously authorized
DOT to adjust EAS rates when those increases occur, our understanding
is that it has not been meaningfully used in practice.
Our members have also identified the timing of DOT contract awards
and carrier transitions as an area where the program could be improved.
Prolonged bidding timelines create uncertainty for communities and
carriers, particularly when transitions are anticipated in advance, but
decisions are delayed. Timely contract awards and well-managed
transitions help communities and carriers plan effectively and reduce
the risk of service disruptions.
EAS works best when carriers can plan responsibly, communities can
rely on continuity, and contract structures reflect the real costs of
providing safe, reliable air service in smaller markets. Continued
congressional funding remains the foundation of that stability, and RAA
will continue to be a strong ally in protecting and strengthening the
program.
Not every struggling community can participate in EAS, so we
believe Congress should continue to explore programs to support
vulnerable communities that fall outside existing programs.
Small Community Air Service Development Program
One such tool is the Small Community Air Service Development
Program (SCASDP), which helps communities, airports, airlines, and
local stakeholders work together to attract, restore, and strengthen
air service. Communities have used the program to support route
development, marketing initiatives, revenue guarantees, and other
partnerships that improve the viability of local air service. Its
flexibility allows communities to pursue solutions tailored to their
geographic, economic, and operational circumstances.
The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 increased authorized funding
for SCASDP to $15 million annually and directed DOT to prioritize
communities that have experienced reductions in air service. That focus
is well placed. The SCASDP program helps communities and airlines work
together to prove a market, allowing stakeholders to share risk, build
demand, and address connectivity challenges.
Congress should consider whether additional funding would allow
more communities to participate in this promising program, and whether
funding levels have kept pace with rising costs associated with
initiating new air service. Additionally, Congress might consider
longer grants that would provide more time to allow markets to mature.
While SCASDP helps communities prove and build a market, service can
falter when grants end, if the underlying economics remain fragile.
Congress should examine whether a brief funding extension, stronger
transition tools, or other targeted supports could help communities
sustain service after a grant period ends.
State and Local Partnership Models
Several states have experimented with innovative public-private
partnership models to support air service development. Wyoming and New
Mexico, for example, have used programs that help communities and
states share a portion of the financial risk associated with launching
or rebuilding service. These approaches recognize that establishing
service in a smaller market often requires time for passenger demand to
mature. While not every route succeeds, risk-sharing models can help
communities compete for service and create opportunities for markets to
demonstrate their long-term viability.
The Path Forward
Regional airlines have adapted through repeated periods of
disruption, and air service has begun to recover in many places. But
rural America still does not have the connectivity it needs.
Regional airlines remain critical to restoring reliable access to
the national air transportation system, and success in that effort will
require continued commitment to aviation safety, a strong aviation
workforce, modern infrastructure, and aircraft suited to smaller
markets. Congress has an important role in each of these areas and the
choices you make, as you lay the groundwork for the next FAA
Reauthorization, will help determine whether small and rural
communities can regain and sustain meaningful air service in the years
ahead.
RAA appreciates the Committee's focus on rural connectivity and
hopes you will continue to view us as a committed partner in advocating
for these communities.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to
your questions.
Mr. Nehls. Yes. Thank you, Ms. Black. And thank you for
bringing up the pilot shortage. No question about it, but we--
we choose--Congress fires people at 65 and can't justify it for
any reason whatsoever. There is nothing--no reason to justify
terminating qualified pilots at 65.
Anyway, I would like to next recognize Mr. Dobberstein.
You are recognized, sir.
TESTIMONY OF SHAWN DOBBERSTEIN, A.A.E., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
HECTOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA, ON BEHALF OF
THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF AIRPORT EXECUTIVES
Mr. Dobberstein. Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today.
My name is Shawn Dobberstein, and I serve as the executive
director of Hector International Airport in Fargo, North
Dakota, and as vice chair of the American Association of
Airport Executives' Air Service Committee.
I am here on behalf of airports that depend on reliable
rural air service to connect their communities to the national
economy, healthcare, education, and commerce.
Thank you for the committee's dedication to addressing
important aviation matters, especially your contributions to
the 2024 FAA reauthorization law. This hearing is another
example of this committee's commitment to improving aviation in
communities both large and small. Thank you for your continued
efforts.
Rural air service remains under pressure. Recovery at many
small communities lagged after the pandemic, and pilot
shortages, higher operating costs, including fuel and airline
fleet changes, have all made service harder to sustain.
In many markets, airlines are using larger aircraft and
offering fewer departures, which means fewer connection
options, less schedule flexibility, and greater disruption when
flights are delayed or canceled.
At the same time, rural airports face a major
infrastructure challenge. The Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act provided historic airport funding, but that support
ends after fiscal year 2026. Without follow-on investment,
airports will face a sharp funding drop just as they are trying
to modernize facilities, improve safety, and prepare for future
demand, including new technologies and new entrants into the
airspace.
Congress took important steps in the FAA Reauthorization
Act of 2024 to support small community air service and the
modernization of the National Airspace System. The next step is
to make sure rural airports and the communities they serve are
not left behind as the system evolves.
To address these challenges and to protect rural
connectivity, I would urge Congress to focus on six priorities.
The first: Fully fund Essential Air Service. EAS remains
the core Federal program providing access for communities that
would otherwise lose commercial service.
Second, strengthen the Small Community Air Service
Development Program. SCASDP helps communities attract and
retain service, but demand continues to outpace available
funding.
Third, provide stable airport infrastructure funding.
Congress should protect AIP and extend IIJA-style airport
investments so smaller airports can address safety, terminal,
runway, and tower needs without facing a funding cliff after
fiscal year 2026.
Fourth, support contract towers. Contract towers improve
safety and access to smaller airports.
Fifth, support aviation workforce programs. Continued
investment in pilots, technicians, and controllers is essential
to sustaining and growing service.
Sixth, accelerate modernization of the air traffic control
system. A safer, more efficient system benefits the entire
country but is especially important for smaller communities,
which are often the first to lose service when the system is
constrained.
In conclusion, rural aviation is not a local issue alone;
it is a national connectivity issue. If we want a strong and
resilient aviation system, we must ensure rural communities
remain connected to it.
Thank you for your time and your attention to rural
aviation issues. I look forward to your questions.
[Mr. Dobberstein's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Shawn Dobberstein, A.A.E., Executive Director,
Hector International Airport, Fargo, North Dakota, on behalf of the
American Association of Airport Executives
Chairman, Ranking Member, and Members of the Subcommittee: Thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today. My name is Shawn
Dobberstein. I am the Executive Director of Hector International
Airport located in Fargo, North Dakota. I also serve as vice chair of
the American Association of Airport Executives' Air Service Committee.
I am here to represent a vital and often overlooked segment of our
nation's aviation system: rural air service. America's aviation system
is the gold standard of the world. However, that standard must apply to
every American, regardless of their zip code. Connecting rural
communities to the National Airspace System (NAS) ensures that small-
town America is not left behind in our modern, global economy.
The Economic Lifeline of Rural Airports
For rural and isolated communities, commercial air service is not
merely a convenience. It is an economic driver that creates local jobs,
attracts businesses, and provides residents with essential access to
specialized medical care and larger economic hubs. When small community
airports are linked to the national network, they bridge the economic
disparity that can exist between urban and rural regions. Without them,
regional isolation deepens, and local economies inevitably suffer.
Challenges Facing Rural Aviation
Currently, rural air service faces a number of significant
headwinds. Small community air service recovery from COVID lagged
compared to larger airports and was further impacted by the acute pilot
shortage coming out of the pandemic. The aviation industry is still
navigating localized pilot shortages and shifting carrier economics,
including the reduction of smaller regional aircraft in favor of larger
aircraft. This may result in reduced frequencies for some communities.
Reduced frequency means fewer backup options when flights are delayed
or canceled. Additionally, limited service can create scheduling
challenges as poorly scheduled flights can make connections unworkable.
Finally, the current threat of high jet fuel prices hits small
communities hardest as airlines reduce flights or end service
altogether.
A further challenge for small and rural communities is the pending
expiration of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) funding
at the end of fiscal year 2026. Without an extension, $4 billion in
annual airport funding--half of airport infrastructure funding over the
last five years--will evaporate. Airports continue to have significant
infrastructure needs and while we may face some air service headwinds
today, it takes years to build the infrastructure needed to support
anticipated growth in demand and operations in the coming decades.
Without adequate funding--particularly for smaller airports that have
less access to capital--runways, gates and terminals will not be
adequate to support future growth, including new entrants. A lack of
appropriate infrastructure may also further constrain the system.
We appreciate the work of this committee in the FAA Reauthorization
Act of 2024 to wisely reauthorize crucial programs that support small
and rural community air service. Without these programs, many airlines
would be forced to abandon smaller markets. Furthermore, as the Federal
Aviation Administration modernizes the NAS--transitioning to new
technologies that improve safety and efficiency and integrate unmanned
aircraft--we must ensure rural airports are not left behind in this
technological leap. Infrastructure modernization funding must reach
non-hub and general aviation airports so they can safely manage all
operations, including new entrants in the airspace.
Protecting and Enhancing Critical Programs
To maintain this critical connectivity, Congress must prioritize
six actionable pillars:
1. Fully Fund the Essential Air Service (EAS) Program: The EAS
program is the bedrock of rural air connectivity, ensuring that remote
communities maintain a baseline of scheduled air service. Proposals to
drastically cut EAS funding threaten to sever the lifelines of dozens
of rural communities. While we are open to considering improvements to
the program, we appreciate the strong support for EAS by this committee
and the Congress.
2. Expand the Small Community Air Service Development Program
(SCASD): SCASD grants provide small communities with essential support
to address air service and airfare challenges and to attract new
carriers. We appreciate the continued support for this program by the
committee and the Congress as well. Even with that support, demand for
these grants consistently exceeds available funding. Increasing funding
for this program would enable rural airports to develop new service
opportunities and strengthen their long-term sustainability.
3. Invest in Rural Aviation Infrastructure: The Airport
Improvement Program provides critical funding to rural and regional
airports, and Congress must continue to provide stable funding for this
program. Thank you again to this committee for increasing the funding
for AIP to $4 billion annually. Additionally, we also urge Congress to
extend the IIJA aviation funding programs beyond fiscal year 2026 to
avoid a $4 billion annual funding cliff and to support critical airport
infrastructure needs including safety projects, terminal upgrades, and
air traffic control tower improvements.
4. Support the Contract Tower Program: The FAA Contract Tower
Program provides 266 smaller airports in 46 states with cost-effective
ATC services that enhance aviation safety and help connect smaller
airports and rural communities with our national air transportation
system. Without this program, many small airports would not have tower
operations that enhance aviation safety. We urge Congress to provide
funding for this critical program at existing and prospective
locations.
5. Workforce Programs and Controller Staffing: While the pilot and
technician shortage may not be as acute as it has been in recent years
and while the administration is focused on increasing controller
staffing, it is critical that we continue to invest in recruitment,
education and training of aviation professionals across the workforce.
Existing programs like Aviation Workforce Development Grants, potential
changes to student loan programs for pilots and expansion of the
Enhanced Collegiate Training Initiative (ECTI) will help to ensure we
have the workforce ready for the future, supporting service to
communities large and small.
6. Modernization of the ATC System: The aviation industry strongly
supports modernizing the ATC system. Small communities know all too
well the impact that restrictions on the system can have on operations.
Chicago, Newark, and San Francisco are all currently experiencing
constrained operations due to limitations of the ATC system. These
constraints impact smaller communities as they are likely the first
markets to be cut when capacity is limited. Ensuring we have a modern,
safe ATC system will also enable efficiency and future growth,
improving connectivity into smaller, rural communities.
Conclusion
Our national aviation system is only as strong as its weakest link.
Connecting rural America to the broader system isn't just a matter of
equity; it is an investment in the geographic and economic resilience
of our entire country.
Thank you for your time, your leadership, and your continued
commitment to rural aviation and air service. I look forward to your
questions.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you.
Mr. Collins, you are recognized.
TESTIMONY OF DERRICK COLLINS, DIRECTOR, PHYSICAL
INFRASTRUCTURE, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Mr. Collins. Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
discuss GAO's work related to air service to small communities
in the United States.
Communities of all sizes seek access to air service as a
driver for attracting investment, generating employment, and
providing mobility for citizens. However, the economics of the
airline industry has traditionally made it difficult to
establish or sustain viable air service in some smaller
communities.
My remarks will highlight recent trends in air service to
small communities, market factors that have contributed to
changes in air service to small communities and their effects
on Federal air service programs, and suggestions from
stakeholders and recent studies to improve air service to small
communities.
In general, small communities continue to face declining
passenger air service. From 2018 to 2023, on average, small
communities had fewer total departures annually and fewer daily
departures per route. Over the same time period, small
communities' connectivity--a measure of a passenger's degree of
access to the national aviation system--also decreased.
These trends are more acute at nonhub airports that do not
receive Essential Air Service program support. For example,
from 2018 to 2024, over 70 percent of these airports
experienced a decline in the average daily departures per
route.
Several market factors have affected air service to small
communities. First, consumers have shown that they are willing
to drive for cheaper flights or better service.
In addition, stakeholders reported that increased airline
operating costs made air service to small communities less
economically feasible, contributing to reductions in the air
service. These costs have also affected Federal air service
programs targeted at small communities.
From 2018 through 2023, increased airline operating costs
contributed to a 31-percent increase in total EAS subsidies for
communities in the lower 48 States. These costs have also
affected the Small Community Air Service Development Program by
limiting the impact of the grants that communities use to jump-
start new air service.
Options that selected stakeholders and recent studies
identified to improve air service to small communities include
increasing the aviation workforce supply and supporting other
transportation modes, such as bus service, or new technologies,
such as electric aircraft.
In addition, stakeholders identified a range of options to
change the Essential Air Service program, such as focusing
assistance on more remote communities or expanding the program
to better ensure small airports do not lose air service.
Stakeholders also identified options to modify the Small
Community Air Service Development Program, including allocating
funding to fewer communities per cycle or shifting the focus of
the program away from revenue guarantees.
In conclusion, given limited resources, airlines may
allocate those resources for the highest return. Because of the
unique circumstances of each small community airport and market
factors, a combination of creative approaches will be needed to
ensure connectivity for small communities.
This concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer any
questions.
[Mr. Collins' prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Derrick Collins, Director, Physical
Infrastructure, U.S. Government Accountability Office
Commercial Aviation: Air Service to Small Communities
Continues to Face Challenges
GAO-26-109182
GAO Highlights
What GAO Found
In general, small communities continue to face declining scheduled
passenger air service, especially at nonhub airports--airports that
have more than 10,000 annual commercial passenger boardings but less
than 0.05 percent of the annual total of U.S. commercial passenger
boardings. At these airports, the average number of daily departures
per route in 2024 was 19 percent lower than the 2018 level. Over 70
percent of nonhub airports that were not receiving federal support from
the Essential Air Service (EAS) program experienced a decline in
average daily departures per route from 2018 to 2024.
According to GAO's prior work, stakeholders have cited pilot and
maintenance workforce supply challenges, increased airline operating
costs, and heightened airline expectations for revenue guarantees as
among the market factors contributing to changes in air service to
small communities in recent years. Some of these factors also
contributed to higher EAS subsidy costs, which increased about 31
percent from 2018 to 2023. Higher airline operating costs also limited
the effect of Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP)
grants that communities used to incentivize airlines to initiate air
service.
As GAO has previously reported, selected stakeholders and recent
studies have identified options to improve air service to small
communities. These include increasing aviation workforce supply and
supporting other transportation modes, such as bus service, or new
technologies, such as electric aircraft, that could lower airline
operating costs. Stakeholders also identified options to change EAS--
such as focusing EAS assistance on more remote communities or expanding
EAS to better ensure small airports do not lose air service--and to
modify SCASDP in response to rising airline operating costs.
Why GAO Did This Study
Communities of all sizes seek access to air transportation
services. However, the economics of the airline industry have
traditionally made it difficult to establish or sustain viable air
service in small communities.
Small communities are generally served by small airports, which for
scheduled passenger air service typically include small hub, nonhub,
and non-primary nonhub airports. The Department of Transportation
administers federal programs that provide subsidies and grants to help
eligible small communities retain a link to the national aviation
system.
This testimony discusses (1) changes in scheduled passenger air
service to small communities in recent years; (2) market factors
affecting air service to small communities and related federal
programs; and (3) options that aviation stakeholders and recent studies
identified to improve air service to small communities. It draws from
GAO's September 2024 report on air service to small communities (GAO-
24-106681), December 2025 report on nonhub airports (GAO-26-107751),
and April 2026 report on regional airline pilots (GAO-26-107856).
Details about the scope and methodology for each report are included in
those reports.
What GAO Recommends
In April 2026, GAO made two recommendations that could help
strengthen pilot supply. Specifically, GAO recommended that FAA
establish and publicly communicate timelines for finalizing two pilot
training initiatives that were provided for in statute. DOT agreed with
the recommendations.
__________
Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today on the
issues affecting air service to small communities in the United States.
Communities of all sizes seek access to air transportation services as
a driver for attracting investment, generating employment, and
providing mobility for citizens. However, the economics of the airline
industry have traditionally made it difficult to establish or sustain
viable air service in some smaller communities.
The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 phased out the government's
control over fares and service and allowed market forces to determine
the price and level of domestic airline service in the United
States.\1\ Since then, airlines have largely been free to decide where
in the United States they want to operate, how often they want to fly
there, the type of aircraft they want to fly to or from a community,
and how much they want to charge passengers. The act also created the
Essential Air Service (EAS) program, to help eligible smaller
communities retain a link to the national aviation system through
subsidies paid to airlines. In 2000, the Small Community Air Service
Development Program (SCASDP) was established to help eligible
communities with insufficient air carrier service or unreasonably high
airfares improve their air service through discretionary grants. Both
programs are administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT). Although subsidies and grants from these programs can assist
eligible smaller communities in retaining a link to the national
aviation system, the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to a significant
reduction in passenger traffic and financial losses for a variety of
aviation businesses and airports, especially in small communities. As
we reported in December 2025, the smaller airports impacted by declines
in air service included certain nonhub airports that had not regained
pre-pandemic service levels by 2024.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Pub. L. No. 95-504, 92 Stat. 1705.
\2\ GAO, Commercial Aviation: Certain Nonhub Airports Face
Significant Challenges in Securing and Maintaining Air Service, GAO-26-
107751 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 17, 2025). Nonhub airports are defined
in statute as those that have less than 0.05 percent of annual U.S.
commercial enplanements (i.e., passenger boardings) but have more than
10,000 annual enplanements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This testimony discusses (1) changes in scheduled passenger air
service to small communities in recent years; (2) market factors
affecting air service to small communities and related federal
programs; and (3) options that aviation stakeholders and recent studies
have identified to improve air service to small communities. This
statement is drawn from several GAO reports issued since 2024.\3\ The
reports cited in this statement contain more detailed explanations of
the methods used to conduct our work. DOT reviewed a draft of this
statement and provided technical comments, which we incorporated where
appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See GAO, Commercial Aviation: Trends in Air Service to Small
Communities, GAO-24-106681 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 25, 2024;
Commercial Aviation: Certain Nonhub Airports Face Significant
Challenges in Securing and Maintaining Air Service, GAO-26-107751
(Washington, D.C.: Dec. 17, 2025); and Aviation Workforce: FAA Could
Strengthen Regional Pilot Pipeline by Establishing Timelines for
Training Initiatives, GAO-26-107856 (Washington, D.C.: April 30, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The work upon which this testimony is based was conducted in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Background
Air Service to Small Communities
Although there is no common definition of ``small community'' in
the context of aviation, we have previously reported that small
communities are generally served by small airports, which for scheduled
passenger air service typically include small hub, nonhub, and non-
primary nonhub airports. These airports by definition serve
comparatively fewer passengers than medium and large hub airports.
Federal law divides commercial service airports into various categories
based on the annual number of passenger boardings (i.e., enplanements);
categories range from large hub airports to non-primary nonhub airports
(see fig. 1).
Figure 1: Commercial Service Airport Categories for U.S. Airports Based
on Calendar Year 2024 Passenger Boardings
Source: GAO analysis of Federal Aviation Administration enplanement
data. GAO-26-109182
Federal Programs that Support Air Service to Small Communities
Two federal programs administered by DOT support air service to
small communities.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) Airport Improvement
Program (AIP) also provides funding to airports, including those
serving small communities. AIP generally focuses on capital and
infrastructure projects and does not provide funding directly for air
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Essential Air Service (EAS). EAS was established by the Airline
Deregulation Act of 1978 and provides federal subsidies to air carriers
to serve certain eligible communities.\5\ The program is funded through
a combination of appropriations from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund
and overflight fees collected by FAA from foreign aircraft traveling
over U.S. airspace. According to DOT, in November 2025 EAS supported
air service at 108 airports in eligible communities within the
contiguous United States. EAS also served 70 communities in Alaska,
four communities in Hawaii, and one community in Puerto Rico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ To be eligible for EAS (in communities other than in Hawaii and
Alaska), a community must require a subsidy per passenger of less than
$650 during the most recent fiscal year, unless the community is 175
miles or more from the nearest large or medium hub airport or DOT
issues a waiver; have had a subsidy per passenger of less than $1,000
during the most recent fiscal year regardless of the distance from a
large or medium hub airport (lowered to $850 effective October 2026);
have had an average of 10 or more enplanements per service day during
the most recent fiscal year, unless the community is more than 175
driving miles from the nearest medium or large hub airport or unless
DOT is satisfied that any decrease below 10 enplanements is due to a
temporary decline in demand and issues a waiver; and have received
subsidized EAS, or received a 90-day notice of intent to terminate
essential air service and the Secretary required the air carrier to
continue to provide such service to the community, at any time during
the period between September 30, 2010, and September 30, 2011.
Beginning in 2022, annual appropriations laws have waived certain EAS
eligibility criteria, including the enplanements minimum and per-
passenger subsidy cap. Communities in Alaska and Hawaii have different
eligibility requirements than those in the contiguous U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Community Air Service Development Program. SCASDP was
established in 2000 to, among other things, provide federal
discretionary grants to fund strategies to improve air service and
address issues at eligible communities that DOT determines have
insufficient air carrier service or unreasonably high airfares, among
other factors. Communities that receive EAS-subsidized service are not
eligible for SCASDP funds. DOT is authorized to award up to 40 SCASDP
grants per fiscal year to communities (not more than four per state)
with underserved airports that seek to obtain airline service or to
implement other measures to lower the cost and improve availability of
air service.\6\ Grantees often use the award for marketing or to fund a
minimum revenue guarantee (revenue guarantee).\7\ SCASDP offers some
flexibilities that DOT may use to amend grants in response to changing
industry conditions, which include modifications to limit a grant scope
to only the grant funded-elements or elements achieved if DOT
determines that the amendment is reasonably consistent with the
original purpose of the project or the community's current air service
needs. According to DOT, this flexibility may increase future project
eligibility or support grant modification to address new hub
destination opportunities.\8\ These flexibilities were expanded in the
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. SCASDP grants are time-limited, and
once a grant has ended, communities must find other means of support
for air service.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Pursuant to statute and FAA policy, airports that receive
federal funding are not able to use airport revenue to provide revenue
guarantees. See 49 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 47107(b)(1), 47133; FAA Policy
Regarding Air Carrier Incentive Program, 88 Fed. Reg. 85,344 (Dec. 7,
2023) (stating that airport revenues must be used for the capital and
operating costs of the airport or local airport system, and air carrier
operations are not a capital or operating cost).
\7\ Revenue guarantees are designed to limit an airline's risk in
initiating air service by guaranteeing that the airline will generate a
specified amount of revenue from the ticket sales associated with new
service over a specified time frame. When offering a revenue guarantee,
the community agrees to pay the airline the difference between ticket
sales and the guaranteed minimum if ticket sales do not meet the
guaranteed minimum amount.
\8\ No community may participate in SCASDP in support of the same
project more than once in a 5-year period, but any community may apply
to participate in the program in support of a different project at any
time.
\9\ For example, SCASDP grants can provide funding for revenue
guarantees to subsidize service for a period of no more than 3 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Communities Lost Departing Flights but Gained More Seats per
Departing Flight in Recent Years
In September 2024 and December 2025, we reported on the following
changes in air service to small communities in recent years:
Departures. We found that, on average, small communities had fewer
total departures annually and fewer daily departures per route from
2018 to 2023 (see fig. 2).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ GAO-24-106681.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 2: Mean Total Departures from Communities of All Sizes, 2018
2023
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Transportation data. GAO-26-
109182
Note: We assigned communities into five size groups (small, medium-
small, medium, medium-large, and large) based on their population, such
that each size group represents roughly 20 percent of the population of
the contiguous U.S.
For nonhub airports specifically, the average number of daily
departures per route in 2024 was 19 percent lower than the 2018 level,
and over 70 percent (123 of 170) of non-EAS nonhub airports experienced
a decline in average daily departures per route (see fig. 3).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ GAO-26-107751. Our analysis of nonhub airports excludes non-
primary nonhub airports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 3: Percentage Change from 2018 to 2024 in Average Daily
Departures per Route for Nonhub Airports Not Receiving Subsidized
Essential Air Service
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Transportation data. Base map
from MapInfo. GAO-26-109182
Note: Our analysis includes average daily departures per route for
nonhub primary airports not receiving subsidized service under the
Essential Air Service (EAS) program. We conducted our analysis for
calendar years 2018-2024. Nonhub primary airports have less than 0.05
percent of annual U.S. commercial enplanements but have more than
10,000 annual enplanements. We used Federal Aviation Administration
enplanement data for 2018 to determine airport size.
Seats. Flights from small communities generally had more seats, an
indication that airlines were using larger aircraft (see fig. 4).
Figure 4: Mean Number of Seats on Departures from Small Communities,
2018 2023
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Transportation data. GAO-26-
109182
Note: We assigned communities into five size groups (small, medium-
small, medium, medium-large, and large) based on their population, such
that each size group represents roughly 20 percent of the population of
the contiguous U.S.
Connectivity. On average, small communities' connectivity, a
measure of a passenger's degree of access to the national aviation
system, decreased slightly from 2018 to 2023.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ We analyzed the connectivity index introduced by Wittman and
Swelbar. The connectivity index is a function of the frequency of
available scheduled flights, the quantity and quality of nonstop
destinations serviced, and the quantity and quality of connecting
destinations. Michael Wittman and William Swelbar, ``Modeling Changes
in Connectivity at U.S. Airports: A Small Community Perspective,''
Report No. ICAT-2013-05 (June 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-EAS versus EAS. Air service trends varied by airport size and
by whether the airport received support through EAS. We found that from
2018 to 2024, non-EAS nonhub airports generally experienced a greater
decrease in average daily departures per route (falling 21 percent)
than EAS nonhub airports (falling 5 percent). Similarly, during this
period, the mean connectivity index score of non-EAS nonhub airports
declined 8.9 percent, while the mean connectivity index score of EAS
nonhub airports declined 2.6 percent.
Market Factors Affected Air Service to Small Communities and Federal
Air Service Programs
In interviews we conducted for our prior work, aviation
stakeholders identified a range of market factors that have affected
air service to small communities in recent years.
Market Factors
Pilot supply. We have previously reported on aviation industry
concerns that there is an insufficient supply of qualified pilots to
support current and future demand from U.S. regional and mainline
airlines. In our 2024 work, aviation stakeholders identified a shortage
of pilots as a factor affecting air service to small communities in
recent years at the time, as larger airlines rebounded from the COVID-
19 pandemic by filling pilot vacancies with pilots hired from regional
airlines. This hiring exacerbated regional airlines' pre-pandemic pilot
shortages. However, in April 2026 we reported that pilot supply had
been rebounding in more recent years, as regional airlines have
significantly increased pilot pay and pilot certifications have grown.
Aviation maintenance worker supply. Airlines have also faced
shortages of aviation maintenance workers, including aircraft mechanics
and aviation maintenance technicians, according to stakeholders we
interviewed for our September 2024 report. Representatives from one
airline told us shortages among these workers have affected the
airline's ability to operate its fleet of aircraft. FAA administers
Aviation Workforce Development Grants to projects that aim to generate
and increase interest in aviation maintenance careers and to prepare
students for aviation maintenance programs. FAA is accepting
applications for the current grant cycle through June 22, 2026. We have
ongoing work examining high school aviation maintenance programs, which
have the potential to bolster the pipeline of individuals interested in
aviation maintenance careers.
Increased airline operating costs and switch to larger planes.
Rising costs of labor, fuel, and fleet maintenance have increased
airline operating costs and made air service to small communities less
economically feasible, contributing to reductions in air service,
according to stakeholders we have interviewed. Recent increases in jet
fuel prices have also affected airline operating costs, according to
the trade association Airlines for America. Our 2025 report on nonhub
airports noted that airlines have sought to lower costs by replacing
smaller planes across their fleet with larger planes and reducing
frequency of flights at smaller airports (i.e., upgauging). Our
analysis of aircraft seats per departure reflected this shift, as
flights from small communities generally had more seats in 2023,
compared to 2018, an indication that airlines were using larger
aircraft.
Travelers choosing to drive. Another long-standing challenge for
small community air service is when residents that live close to a
smaller airport either drive to their destination instead of flying or
drive to a larger airport. Residents of small communities are often
willing to drive or take a bus to a larger airport to take advantage of
the fares offered by low-cost or ultra-low-cost carriers and for
nonstop service, according to our 2025 report on nonhub airports.
Heightened airline expectation for revenue guarantees. As airlines
seek to increase revenue and reduce costs, many smaller communities not
receiving service through EAS find themselves in a ``pay-to-play''
environment for air service, according to our 2025 report on nonhub
airports. According to DOT, in 2024 airline expectations for minimum
revenue guarantees ranged from $1.5 to 2 million for a year of service,
up from $500,000 to $800,000 before the COVID-19 pandemic. In response,
communities may have to leverage various sources of funding, including
state or local funding and SCASDP grants, to secure or maintain air
service. For example, in 2023, Wenatchee, WA used public funding from
the local regional port authority and contributions from entities
including local municipalities and businesses to pay a 1-year, $500,000
revenue guarantee to Alaska Airlines for a second daily flight to
Seattle. A second example is Wyoming's capacity purchase agreement with
SkyWest Airlines to serve some airports in the state, including the
airport in Rock Springs. Communities that have received funding for a
revenue guarantee through a SCASDP grant may need to find other means
to support air service once the grant has ended. Dubuque, IA lost
commercial air service entirely in early 2026 when the community's
revenue guarantee--that had been partially funded with a SCASDP grant--
was expended.
Effects on Federal Air Service Programs
In turn, some of these market factors affected federal air service
programs.
EAS. From 2018 through 2023, increased airline operating costs
contributed to a 31 percent increase in total EAS subsidies for
communities in the lower 48 states in real 2023 dollars. As we
previously reported, according to DOT, factors contributing to the
increase in EAS subsidies included higher aviation labor and fuel
costs, inflation, and an increase in the use of regional jets, which
consume more fuel than smaller turboprop aircraft, to serve
communities.\13\ We have ongoing work examining EAS costs in response
to a provision in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ GAO-24-106681.
\14\ See FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, Pub. L. No. 118-63, Sec.
567, 138 Stat. 1025, 1219.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The way airlines serve EAS communities has also changed in recent
years. For example, the number of EAS communities served by a Part 135
public charter operator more than doubled (8 to 20) from 2018 to 2023.
In our 2024 work, representatives from Contour Airlines, the public
charter operator serving those 20 communities, told us operating under
Part 135 enables them to hire from a larger pool of pilots than under
Part 121.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Under Part 121, captains and first officers must hold an
airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate, which requires a minimum of
1,500 hours of flight time. In contrast, under Part 135, captains must
hold an ATP certificate, but first officers do not have to meet the
1,500-hour requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, over this time period, more EAS communities
participated in the Alternate EAS program (which allows them to forego
subsidized air service for a period of time in exchange for a grant)
and all of them used the grant to receive public charter service.\16\
DOT told us that participation in Alternate EAS has grown as
communities have been dissatisfied with airline proposals under
traditional EAS, as well as communities' desire for air service from
regional jets versus smaller turboprop aircraft.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ As of October 2025, 12 communities were participating in the
Alternate EAS program. Alternate EAS allows communities to forego their
EAS in exchange for receiving a grant to spend in a variety of ways
that might better suit their individual needs. These options are
spelled out in statute and include more frequent service with smaller
aircraft, on-demand air taxi service, scheduled or on-demand surface
transportation, or regionalized air service. 49 U.S.C. Sec. 41745.
\17\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 includes a provision for
GAO to conduct a study on effectiveness of the Alternate EAS program.
Pub. L. No. 118-63, Sec. 563.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCASDP. Higher airline operating costs have also affected SCASDP by
limiting the effect of the grants that communities use for revenue
guarantees, according to airport and airline representatives we
interviewed in our September 2024 report. Representatives from airlines
told us that SCASDP grants intended to fund revenue guarantees cover
less of the cost of serving small communities than in the past.
Additionally, our recent work on nonhub airports found that
applications for grant assistance continue to exceed the support SCASDP
offers. For the most recent grant opportunity, for example, 40
communities applied for more than $30 million to support air service at
their local airports for fiscal year 2023, and DOT awarded SCASDP
grants totaling nearly $12 million to 14 communities (see table 1).\18\
DOT has announced that it awarded up to $12 million in grants for
fiscal year 2024.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ In fiscal year 2023, DOT received $10 million in
appropriations for the program and awarded nearly $12 million in
grants. According to DOT officials, the amount of funds available in a
given fiscal year has at times exceeded the appropriated amount for
that year. For example, in certain years, funds recovered from prior
grant awards became available and supplemented the appropriated
funding.
\19\ In March 2026, DOT issued an order soliciting applications
from communities or consortia of communities for fiscal year 2024
SCASDP grants (utilizing FY 2024 and a portion of FY 2025 funding);
applications were to be submitted by May 4, 2026.
Table 1: Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) Grant Applications and Awards, Fiscal Years
2018-2023
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
eligible
Award cycle (fiscal year) communities Total amount Number of awards Total amount
(of total requested \a\ granted
applications)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2018........................................ 54 (of 57) > $37 million 18 $12,242,000
2019........................................ 71 (of 78) > $58 million 22 $17,972,111
2020........................................ No grants awarded
\b\
2021........................................ 45 (of 48) > $33 million 25 $16,931,000
2022........................................ 45 (of 48) > $34 million 20 $14,815,000
2023........................................ 40 (of 46) > $31 million 14 $11,955,000
\c\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Transportation data. GAO-26-109182
\a\ In its SCASDP award announcements, Department of Transportation (DOT) provides the minimum amount requested.
\b\ DOT did not award SCASDP grants for fiscal year 2020. According to agency officials, DOT instead combined no-
year funds provided by Congress in fiscal year 2020 for grant awards in fiscal year 2021.
\c\ Fiscal year 2023 total amount requested is based on eligible communities; requests for other years are based
on applicant communities.
Selected Stakeholders and Recent Studies Identified Various Options to
Improve Air Service to Small Communities
Aviation stakeholders we interviewed and recent studies we reviewed
in our prior work identified a number of options to improve air service
to small communities.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ For a detailed discussion of the various stakeholder views on
each of these options, see GAO-24-106681 and GAO-26-107751.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modifying EAS. Aviation stakeholders we interviewed for our
September 2024 report identified options for modifying the EAS program.
These options were identified before the FAA Reauthorization Act of
2024 was enacted, and, for the most part, were not included in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024. For many of these options, statutory
amendments would be required, should Congress choose to adopt them. To
focus assistance on more remote communities, stakeholders suggested 1)
eliminating the waivers DOT may allow for communities that do not
maintain certain eligibility requirements; 2) requiring communities to
provide a local match to the EAS subsidy; or 3) providing funding to
the states for distribution, rather than direct subsidies to the
airlines.\21\ Stakeholders also suggested that DOT be required to
consider the cost of the subsidy when awarding airline contracts--a
requirement that was included in the FAA Reauthorization Act of
2024.\22\ Stakeholders noted that Congress could also expand EAS by
loosening requirements, such as by raising the per-passenger subsidy
caps, or allowing previously eligible communities to regain
eligibility.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 limited the circumstances
under which DOT may waive certain EAS eligibility requirements.
Beginning in fiscal year 2027, DOT may not provide a waiver of the
minimum enplanements or certain per passenger subsidy cap requirements
to any location in more than two consecutive fiscal years or in more
than five fiscal years within 25 consecutive years. However, beginning
in 2022, annual appropriations laws have waived certain EAS eligibility
criteria, including the enplanements minimum and per-passenger subsidy
caps. For suggestions (2) and (3), the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
did not include a cost-sharing requirement for EAS communities or
provide EAS funding to the states.
\22\ According to information provided by DOT, although DOT was not
previously required to consider cost, DOT has considered the relative
subsidy requirements of the various options when selecting an EAS
carrier since the inception of the program. Furthermore, prior to the
FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, DOT was authorized by Congress to
consider the relative subsidy requirements of applicant air carriers.
\23\ Prior to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, the per-
passenger subsidy cap was $200, unless the community was more than 210
miles from the nearest large or medium hub airport or unless DOT issued
a waiver. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 raised the per-passenger
subsidy cap to $650 for locations that are less than 175 miles from the
nearest large or medium hub airport, unless DOT waives the requirement
based on a temporary decline in demand. The FAA Reauthorization Act of
2024 did not modify the program to allow ineligible communities not in
Alaska to re-enter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Modifying SCASDP. We and others have found that SCASDP grants have
a mixed record of success in attracting air service.\24\ In interviews
for our 2024 report, aviation stakeholders identified a range of
options for modifying SCASDP in response to rising airline operating
costs. These options were identified before the FAA Reauthorization Act
of 2024 was enacted. Some of these options Congress might consider
would require statutory amendments, such as increasing total funding
for the program or allowing more flexibility in how grants may be used
when a community's circumstances change.\25\ Stakeholders also
suggested allocating funding to fewer communities per cycle or shifting
the focus of the program away from revenue guarantees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ In 2019, we reported that half of the 66 grantees that
received awards for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 were successful in
achieving their goals during the award period, and that just over a
third sustained their results for at least 24 months after the award
period had ended. Additionally, a 2014 article calculated that of the
115 grantees from 2006 through 2011 that requested funds to attract new
service or achieve other outcomes, fewer than half were ultimately
successful in meeting the goals of their proposal within 28 months of
accepting the grant. See GAO, Small Community Air Service Development:
Process for Awarding Grants Could Be Improved, GAO-19-172 (Washington,
D.C.: Mar. 26, 2019) and Michael D. Wittman, ``Public Funding of
Airport Incentives in the United States: The Efficacy of the Small
Community Air Service Development Grant Program,'' Transport Policy,
vol. 35 (September 2014).
\25\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 increased the
authorization of funding for SCASDP to $15 million annually. The FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 gave DOT the authority to amend the scope
of a grant agreement at the request of the community or consortium and
any participating air carrier, and limit the scope of a grant agreement
to only the elements using grant assistance or to only the elements
achieved, if the Secretary determines that the amendment is reasonably
consistent with the community's current air service needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increasing pilot supply. Aviation stakeholders we interviewed for
our September 2024 report identified a number of options that Congress
could consider to increase pilot supply. These include, for Part 121
pilots, 1) revising the statutory requirement that captains and first
officers have 1,500 hours of flight time to hold an Airline Transport
Pilot certificate; and 2) raising the statutory mandatory retirement
age from 65 to 67.\26\ To help strengthen the pilot pipeline, the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 required FAA to take action on two pilot
training initiatives by November 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 did not amend the 1,500
flight-hour training requirement for Part 121 pilots or raise the
retirement age for Part 121 U.S. airline pilots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enhanced Qualification Program. Requires FAA to establish
requirements so that qualified air carriers, among others, may provide
enhanced training to eligible pilots seeking a restricted-privileges
airline transport pilot certificate.\27\ This enhanced training
includes instruction on fundamental aviation subjects as well as
airline operations and procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ FAA allows pilots with fewer than 1,500 hours of total time as
a pilot to obtain a restricted-privileges airline transport pilot (R-
ATP) certificate when they meet certain requirements. The R-ATP
certificate allows pilots to serve as first officers in certain
operations until they obtain the necessary 1,500 hours of total time as
a pilot needed for an ATP certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nationwide office for Designated Pilot Examiners.
Requires FAA to establish a nationwide office for oversight of
Designated Pilot Examiners--experienced pilots designated by the FAA to
conduct tests with student pilots. The act also requires FAA to submit
reports to congressional committees evaluating the use of Designated
Pilot Examiners.
In April 2026, we recommended that FAA establish and publicly
communicate timelines for issuing 1) the Enhanced Qualification Program
requirements and 2) the first required report to Congress on the
Designated Pilot Examiner's national office. DOT concurred with the
recommendations. We are continuing to monitor FAA's efforts to address
the recommendations.
Using alternative transportation modes or technologies. Aviation
stakeholders we interviewed and recent studies we reviewed in our prior
work also identified options to address higher airline operating
costs--namely, the use of bus service and electric aircraft. We have
previously reported that a multimodal approach, including bus service
to larger airports, is an alternative to providing scheduled passenger
service to small communities. For example, the Landline Company
currently provides short-haul bus service from certain smaller airports
to large hub airports in a manner that substitutes for a connecting
flight offered by a regional airline. Stakeholders we previously
interviewed have had mixed views on bus service as a feasible
alternative. While some were supportive, others cited obstacles like
the length of time of bus trips and airport resistance because bus
passengers do not count toward the minimum 10,000 annual passenger
enplanements that airports must maintain to qualify for Airport
Improvement Program funding.
Additionally, aircraft with electric propulsion technologies may
have the potential to lower operating costs for airlines, according to
publications we reviewed for our September 2024 report. We previously
reported that regional air mobility--an application of advanced air
mobility--could use electric or hybrid-electric aircraft to carry
passengers to adjoining regions and cities, and could open up new
regional corridors.\28\ In interviews for our December 2025 report on
nonhub airports, stakeholders also told us that electric or hybrid-
electric aircraft--which include short-range aircraft in development
that would accommodate nine, 30, or 100 passengers--may be more
suitable for some smaller communities than the larger jets that
airlines currently use. However, some aviation stakeholders we
interviewed were skeptical of electric aircraft as a viable near-term
option for air service to small communities due to the cost and
feasibility of installing charging infrastructure and the need for FAA
regulatory approval of such aircraft, among other things.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 defines advanced air
mobility as a transportation system that comprises urban air mobility
and regional mobility. Both of these mobilities involve the use of
advanced technologies such as fully electric and hybrid-electric
aircraft for passenger transport, cargo transport, and emergency
services, inside and outside of cities. According to DOT officials,
fully electric aircraft have utility over shorter distances, such as
trips up to 40 miles, and hybrid-electric aircraft can fly up to 300
miles before charging. For more information, see GAO-24-106681.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Planning at the state level. Based on interviews with officials
from certain state DOTs for our December 2025 report, we identified
examples of state-level air service development and planning. For
example, two of the selected nonhub airports we reviewed--in Rock
Springs, Wyoming and Traverse City, Michigan--are located in states
that provided funding for air service through their state aviation
programs. In addition, while not directly funding air service
development, Washington State DOT was part of a regional effort funded
through SCASDP to assist smaller airports--like the one in Wenatchee--
with local air service issues in Oregon and Washington. In interviews
for our December 2025 report, officials from the state DOTs in
Michigan, Washington, and Wyoming told us that state or regional
support for air service development can be limited by funding and other
constraints. Our prior analysis of SCASDP grants found several other
examples of SCASDP funding being used to support state or regional
planning efforts, although such uses were infrequent. While the statute
enables--and according to agency officials, DOT encourages--
applications by groups of communities, DOT most frequently receives
individual applications for SCASDP funding, rather than applications
that are part of a more holistic assessment of state or regional needs.
Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, and Members of the
Subcommittee, this completes my prepared statement. I would be pleased
to respond to any questions that you may have at this time.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, sir.
I now recognize Mr. Pecoraro for 5 minutes.
TESTIMONY OF GREGORY PECORARO, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE AVIATION OFFICIALS
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you, Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member
Carson, and Ranking Member Larsen, members of the subcommittee.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of
the National Association of State Aviation Officials. I
appreciate your continued commitment to small community air
service, and from your opening statements, it is clear that
this committee gets it.
State agencies directly support small and rural air service
in many ways, including financially. Several States provide
incentive programs to help communities attract and retain
scheduled passenger service. These efforts complement Federal
programs, providing locally responsive support shaped by each
community's needs.
The challenges facing small community air service are
bigger than any one Federal program. The Nation needs a
coordinated strategy. Small and rural communities face
longstanding pressures: aging infrastructure, airline
economics, security requirements, limited workforce, and the
shrinking availability of appropriately sized aircraft. Unless
these are addressed together, communities will continue to lose
service.
We need Congress to direct the U.S. DOT and the FAA, in
coordination with other agencies and State and local
governments, to develop and implement a national strategy for
small community air service. That effort should review existing
Federal programs, identify actionable recommendations, and
define clear responsibilities across Government.
Continued Federal support is indispensable. The EAS program
is an important lifeline for many communities, but it has not
kept pace with changes in the airline industry and the broader
economy.
Communities that successfully exited EAS before the
pandemic are now unable to sustain service under current
conditions, yet existing law makes it extremely difficult for
them to reenter.
Congress should preserve full funding for both EAS and the
Small Community Air Service Development Program and update
eligibility rules so communities who have lost service have a
realistic path back.
Infrastructure needs are equally pressing. Many small
community terminals are aging, undersized, and unable to meet
current needs. General aviation airports face similar funding
challenges even though they may provide some of the most
practical near-term platforms for emerging aviation
technologies and future service opportunities.
Congress should continue robust Airport Improvement Program
funding at the full authorized level and examine long-term
changes to better support nonprimary entitlements and general
aviation infrastructure.
The regional aircraft fleet, vital to many small
communities, is in decline. Airlines are moving to fewer,
larger aircraft with more favorable economics, while many 50-
seat regional jets are reaching the end of their useful lives.
When right-sized aircraft disappear, access disappears with
them. It becomes harder for smaller markets to maintain
frequency, affordability, and reliable connectivity to the
national system. We must identify and repair and fix the
barriers preventing new regional aircraft from entering the
market.
Finally, workforce shortages continue to affect the entire
aviation ecosystem, especially pilot recruitment and retention.
NASAO encourages Congress to continue to support pathways that
improve the pilot pipeline.
In closing, the challenges facing small community air
service are structural, compounding, and urgent--but not beyond
solving. With a strategic national approach, continued Federal
assistance, sustained infrastructure investment, support for
right-sized aircraft manufacturing, and expanded workforce
development, Congress could help ensure that small communities
remain connected to the national aviation system.
NASAO and the States stand ready to work with you to ensure
that small and rural communities have access to the NAS.
Thank you again for your leadership and your continued
attention to this important issue. I would be pleased to answer
any questions you may have.
[Mr. Pecoraro's prepared statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gregory Pecoraro, President and Chief Executive
Officer, National Association of State Aviation Officials
Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, and Members of the
Subcommittee on Aviation, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today. On behalf of the National Association of State
Aviation Officials (NASAO), we greatly appreciate your continued
commitment to small community air service and the strong legislative
framework established by the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-
63), which guides today's conversation.
NASAO represents state government aviation agencies in all 50
states, Guam, and Puerto Rico. These agencies oversee aviation systems
at the state level, including planning, development, safety, and
regulation of airports and aviation activities. In communities large
and small, NASAO's members provide financial and technical support to
airports, conduct safety inspections, and advocate for the needs of
airports that are essential to local mobility, economic opportunity,
and public service. Together, state government aviation agencies help
oversee and support thousands of public-use airports that are the
nation's small community air service network.
State government aviation agencies play a direct, though varying,
role in supporting air service in small and rural communities, shaped
by each state's statutory authority, resources, and priorities. They
provide financial support and technical expertise to small and general
aviation airports that often lack the staffing and expertise available
to large airports. In addition, eight states have initiated targeted
incentive programs to help airports attract and retain scheduled
passenger air service. These efforts complement federal programs by
offering flexible, locally responsive support tailored to the needs of
individual communities.
State government aviation agencies are on the front lines of the
infrastructure and service challenges facing small community airports,
and NASAO's perspective reflects the direct experience of those
agencies working every day to support aviation access in communities
across the country.
Continued Support Needed for Federal Programs for Small Community Air
Service
Small community air service is under growing strain, and continued
federal support is critical. The Essential Air Service (EAS) program
remains an important resource for many communities, but it has not
evolved in step with changes in the economy and airline industry.
Aircraft economics, airport connectivity, airline cost structures, and
infrastructure realities have changed substantially since the program
was designed. As a result, some communities that once successfully
exited EAS prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and its disruption of air
travel, now find themselves unable to maintain commercial air service
under current market conditions yet they face major barriers to
reentering the program.
The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-95) locked
many of these communities out of EAS, leaving them with no path back
when air service is reduced, suspended, or lost. In effect, communities
that did the right thing and grew beyond the need for EAS can now be
penalized for that success when market conditions shift against them.
When EAS works as intended, the results are significant. Jackson
Regional Airport in Tennessee is a clear example. Prior to EAS-
supported service, the airport struggled with unreliable service that
pushed business travelers, healthcare professionals, and residents to
drive to larger airports rather than depend on local flights. Through
EAS, dependable air service has since allowed local businesses to
expand into new markets, improved physician recruitment for the
regional healthcare system, and given residents reliable access to the
national air transportation network. In its first full year of service,
the airport recorded over 10,000 enplanements, a 224 percent increase
over the prior year, and is on pace to reach nearly 16,000 in 2026. The
airport is now looking at terminal and infrastructure expansions to
meet continued growth.
At the same time, the Small Community Air Service Development
(SCASD) program remains a valuable complement to EAS because many
communities do not have the local resources needed to proactively
attract or retain service on their own. Elko, Nevada, demonstrates
precisely why the SCASD program is essential for communities that fall
outside the EAS program's eligibility criteria but still need federal
support to sustain meaningful air service. SCASD enabled the Elko
Regional Airport to restore its midday flight, which had been
eliminated during the COVID-19 pandemic due to reduced demand and the
broader disruptions that reshaped air service across small markets.
Without SCASD, Elko would not be able to sustain its current twice-
daily schedule. The SCASD program continues to provide grants to help
communities address air service and airfare challenges. However, the
U.S. Government Accountability Office recently found that small
communities generally experienced fewer departing flights between 2018
and 2023 even as average seats per departure increased, underscoring
the pressure these markets continue to face.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Government Accountability Office, Commercial Aviation:
Certain Nonhub Airports Face Significant Challenges in Securing and
Maintaining Air Service, GAO-26-107751, December 2025
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, Congress should continue funding both EAS and
SCASD at no less than their full authorized levels in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-63). Congress should also amend
the EAS eligibility provisions in the FAA Modernization and Reform Act
of 2012 (P. L. 112-95) so that communities that exited the program, but
later lost service have a reasonable path to reenter. Any reentry
framework should reflect today's airline industry and market
environment rather than assumptions that existed when a community first
left the program.
Continued Support for Federal Airports to Address Infrastructure Gaps
Infrastructure is another major obstacle. At many small community
airports, commercial terminals are aging, undersized, and increasingly
unable to accommodate larger aircraft or meet current Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) security requirements. Modernization
costs are substantial, and unlike at large commercial airports,
airlines serving small regional airports rarely share significantly in
those capital costs. Meanwhile, airlines have increasingly moved toward
larger aircraft and less frequent service.
That trend creates real challenges for passengers and communities.
Replacing smaller, more frequent flights with larger, less frequent
flights can make service less useful for business travelers, reduce
schedule flexibility, and leave passengers with fewer options when
delays or cancellations occur. Small communities are often stuck in a
chicken-and-egg dilemma: growth in passenger demand is needed to
justify larger aircraft, but the infrastructure needed to support those
aircraft must already be in place before that growth can happen. At the
same time, the aging regional jet fleet is becoming less reliable,
making it harder to sustain consistent service and eroding confidence
in smaller markets.
General aviation airports face parallel infrastructure challenges.
These airports are among the most underutilized and underfunded assets
in the national aviation system, yet they may be the most practical
near-term platforms for early advanced air mobility (AAM) deployment,
which, when integrated into the broader transportation system, could
expand access for people in communities that have long been
underserved. Realizing that potential, however, will require
investment.
State government aviation agencies collectively invest in planning,
operations, infrastructure development, maintenance, and navigational
aids at approximately 5,000 airports across the country, illustrating
the scale of the system that depends on sustained support. The
Nonprimary Entitlement (NPE) program currently provides eligible
general aviation, reliever, and nonprimary commercial service airports
up to $150,000 annually to airports in the National Plan of Integrated
Airport Systems (NPIAS). In practice, that amount falls far short of
the cost of most pavement, safety, and utility projects, which can
easily begin at $1 million or more. As a result, many airports must
carry over multiple years of funds just to address a single need,
delaying safety improvements and limiting their ability to plan for
future technologies.
Preparing these airports for electric and hybrid-electric aircraft
will require even more investment. Electrical capacity upgrades, new
communications systems, and updated navigational aids will all be
necessary. Current funding levels are insufficient to meet today's
needs, let alone future demands.
For these reasons, NASAO urges Congress to continue supporting
robust Airport Improvement Program funding at the full $4 billion
authorized level under the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-
63). This funding is essential, but long-term sustainability will also
require updates to the NPE program. NASAO encourages Congress to raise
the maximum annual NPE apportionment above the current $150,000 cap. At
the same time, we must not rely solely on annual appropriations to
address these infrastructure challenges. It will be critical for
Congress, the Administration, and state, tribal, local, and territorial
governments to work together to create a sustainable, long-term funding
model for general aviation airport infrastructure.
Integrating Advanced Air Mobility as Part of the Broader Rural
Transportation Solution
Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) presents a significant long-term
opportunity for small and rural communities to connect to the broader
transportation network. AAM should be viewed as a mobility tool that
can be combined with both traditional aviation and surface
transportation systems. Electric battery, hydrogen-fueled, and hybrid
aircraft may eventually provide a replacement for aging 50-to-70-seat
regional aircraft and reshape air service options for smaller markets,
but realizing the potential will require coordinated planning across
agencies and modes.
Small airports are not currently positioned to support AAM
operations. Charging and fueling infrastructure, upgraded power
systems, and new navigational aids will all be required before these
aircraft can operate at scale. These investments present an opportunity
to align Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Federal Transit
Administration (FTA) programs, and other U.S. Department of
Transportation programs to support more integrated cost-effective rural
mobility solutions.
While AAM is not a near-term solution to current small community
air service challenges, the planning and infrastructure decisions made
today will determine whether small and rural communities can benefit
from it when the technology matures. Communities that do not begin
preparing now risk being left behind as deployment concentrates in
better-funded and better-prepared areas.
That is why Congress should ensure full and timely implementation
of AAM-related provisions in the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L.
118-63), including support for electric, hydrogen, and hybrid aircraft
infrastructure. Congress should also fully fund the AAM Infrastructure
Pilot Program (Sec. 101 of division Q of P.L. 117-328), which provides
planning support for state, tribal, and local governments preparing for
AAM infrastructure needs. Early planning is critical to ensure these
communities are positioned to fully leverage emerging AAM technologies.
The House Appropriations Committee included funding for this program in
the FY 2027 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related
Agencies appropriations bill, and NASAO urges Congress to support that
funding in a final spending bill.
Rebuilding the Regional Aircraft Pipeline for Long-Term Connectivity
Another structural challenge that deserves much greater attention
is the decline of the regional aircraft fleet that underpins service to
many small communities. Without a viable next-generation aircraft in
the 19-to-76-seat range, long-term connectivity for many communities is
at serious risk, regardless of how well federal programs are funded.
Larger aircraft generally offer lower seat-mile costs, making them more
attractive to airlines. At the same time, the 50-seat regional jet
fleet is aging toward the end of its useful life, and there is no true
replacement currently in production ready to fill that gap. Meanwhile,
labor and gate constraints at hub airports are reinforcing this trend,
further encouraging airlines to operate fewer, larger aircraft instead
of maintaining more frequent, small-aircraft service. Together, these
issues are systematically narrowing the pathway for small and rural
communities to maintain reliable air service. If left unaddressed, this
shift will accelerate the loss of connectivity in rural and smaller
regions.
Congress and the Administration should engage aerospace
manufacturers to identify the specific barriers preventing new regional
aircraft from entering the market. While some next-generation concepts
are under development, including aircraft that incorporate some aspects
of AAM technologies, progress has been slow and uncertain. A targeted
federal effort is needed to assess certification hurdles, production
challenges, and market disincentives.
That assessment should lead to a focused review of regulatory and
policy options that could reduce barriers to entry or provide
meaningful incentives for manufacturers, including certification
support, regulatory reform, and other targeted actions. A coordinated
effort across the U.S. Department of Transportation, the FAA, and
industry stakeholders is necessary if we are serious about preserving
connectivity for small communities over the long term.
Addressing the Pilot Shortage
Recruitment of commercial pilots has remained a challenge across
the industry. Regional airlines had already been facing a pilot
shortage for several years before the COVID-19 pandemic, but the
pandemic fueled a wave of pilot retirements that caused the shortage to
become an acute problem.
As air travel demand rebounded, major airlines began hiring pilots
quickly, many of whom came from regional airlines. This acute pilot
shortage severely limited regional airlines' ability to serve small
communities, leading to small markets losing a portion or all their
service.
NASAO urges Congress to continue its oversight of the FAA
Reauthorization of 2024 (P.L. 118-63) to ensure the timely
implementation of key provisions, including Section 372, which requires
the FAA to establish requirements for the Enhanced Qualification
Program (EQP) under which air carriers are certified to provide
enhanced training for pilots seeking to obtain restricted airline
transport certificates. NASAO also urges Congress to support increased
opportunities for pilot training, including making pilot training
eligible for federal loan programs.
A National Strategy is Needed to Fully Address These Challenges
At the same time, these individual issues point to a broader truth:
the nation needs a coordinated strategy for small community air
service. Many of the challenges facing small and rural communities have
persisted for years because they are structural. Manufacturing
limitations, infrastructure shortfalls, funding constraints, security
requirements, and workforce shortages all interact with one another. No
single program can solve them in isolation. Addressing these challenges
requires a whole-of-government approach that aligns policy and funding
across agencies. State government aviation agencies must have a
meaningful seat at the table because they are essential implementation
partners.
Congress should direct the U.S. Department of Transportation and
the FAA, working with TSA and other relevant agencies, to develop and
implement a coordinated national strategy for small community air
service. This effort should include a review of existing federal
programs, identify actionable recommendations, and define clear roles
for each federal entity. It should also be informed by input from state
and local governments and private-sector stakeholders who understand
these operational realities firsthand. This is a process that worked
well leading up to the U.S. Department of Transportation's recent
promulgation of the AAM National Strategy. A similar level of focus and
cross-agency coordination is now urgently needed to ensure that small
and rural communities are not left behind in the nation's aviation
system.
In closing, the challenges facing small community air service are
structural, compounding, and urgent, but they are not beyond solving.
With the right mix of near-term investment, policy reform, and long-
term strategy, Congress can help ensure that smaller communities remain
connected to the national aviation system. NASAO is committed to
working with Congress and the FAA to advance these priorities on behalf
of state government aviation agencies and the communities they serve.
Thank you again for your leadership and your continued focus on the
needs of small communities in our national aviation system. I would be
happy to answer any questions and discuss further any of the issues
raised in this testimony.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, sir.
Thank you all for your testimony.
We will now turn to questions from the panel. I will
recognize myself.
I think, just for awareness--I think, Ms. Black, you
brought it up--but the FAA Administrator, Bryan Bedford,
testified last week at the Senate Commerce hearing that any new
integrated system--ACAS X or ADS-B In--is 10 years away. Ten
years.
The electronic flight bag option that you mentioned, Faye,
can be deployed--it can be done immediately.
So I just wanted to bring that point up.
Ms. Black, too, in addition to guaranteeing a safely
operated national airspace, we have a responsibility to ensure
that rural Americans have an accessible national airspace. The
necessity of access for regional aircraft is indisputable.
Can you describe any obstacles on the horizon for your
carriers? And how can Congress hurt--we can hurt--or help?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question.
I think that the obstacles on the horizon are related to
workforce--certainly we need to have pilots to operate the
flights--and aircraft-related. We need to have the aircraft to
operate the flights as well.
The risks to each: Workforce, obviously, is that we don't
have enough. We see that pipeline is thinning. There are things
that we can do to fix it, including right-sizing student loans
so more people from working-class backgrounds can get into this
career.
And with respect to the fleet, it is important that, as we
advance safety, that we bring it to communities of every size,
but we do it in a way that works with the fleet and not against
the fleet or in a way that could ground the fleet.
So, to your point of the electronic flight bag, that is a
way for us, right now, to create that level of safety while we
pursue integrated systems that the supply chain may not keep up
with.
Those are the biggest, I think, risks right now.
Mr. Nehls. Fair enough.
Do you have an estimate on how many pilots the regionals
will lose to the major carriers over the next 12 months?
Ms. Malarkey Black. The next 12 months, did you say?
I think I actually saw estimates from 7,500 to 8,500 or so.
And to put that into context, the pipeline actually produced
about that amount last year--a little bit less, actually--and,
using a 12-month rolling average, it looks to produce about
8,000 or 8,300. So we are already behind.
Mr. Nehls. Sure. So what that really means is that--the
regionals serve 94 percent of our commercial airports--94
percent.
Ms. Malarkey Black. Correct.
Mr. Nehls. The mainline carriers serve just 36 percent. So
that means regionals serve two-thirds. They are the only mode
of transportation, two-thirds of our Nation's airports. But yet
you are going to lose all these pilots. And we could see that
even--we are going to lose more service to more smaller
airports as a result of the pilot shortage. It must be
addressed this year. It has to be addressed.
Mr. Dobberstein, Fargo--haven't been there, haven't been
there--has received a few SCASDP grant awards. The program is
appealing because it incentivizes local support of new air
services that have the potential to continue unsubsidized.
How have you been successful, and how has the local economy
benefited? And do you have any suggestions to strengthen the
program?
Mr. Dobberstein. Thank you for the question.
Yes, we have been the recipient of four SCASDP grants,
dating back to 2005.
The first grant was awarded to us when Delta Airlines
implemented service to Salt Lake City. That was done in 2006.
But unfortunately, the service was suspended in 2008 as Delta
reallocated aircraft to Seattle and Los Angeles for other
competitive reasons.
Our second grant was awarded for service to Dallas back in
2011. And that service is thriving today. It is doing
extremely, extremely well.
Our third grant was for Seattle service, working with
Alaska Airlines. Fargo had a large population of Microsoft
employees in our community that were traveling back and forth
to Seattle. Unfortunately, the pandemic resulted in more
virtual use of their time and less air travel, so we terminated
that grant.
And, currently, today, we have a grant on the table right
now for implementing service to Charlotte, and we are working
with American Airlines on that.
My suggestions would be to increase the amount of funding
for the SCASDP program, maybe reduce the number of recipients
to increase the amount of money each recipient would receive
due to the higher costs that are in place today with workforce,
fuel, and other things.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you.
Mr. Collins, we are aware of the ballooning cost of EAS. We
have lowered the subsidy cap in the FAA reauthorization. It
will help.
You have talked about the successes of SCASDP, where
projects with a local match are more competitive.
Two questions: Would the solvency of EAS benefit from the
same sort of small, local investment? And what else can be done
to reduce costs and increase our return on investment in the
EAS?
Mr. Collins. So, with respect to EAS costs, we do have
ongoing work related to looking at ideas that stakeholders have
for reducing those costs.
Mr. Nehls. I will now recognize Mr. Carson for 5.
Mr. Carson. Thank you, Chairman.
I am curious--I opposed the administration's proposal to
limit the Federal student loans for some of the programs that
produce the most qualified pilots.
Can you talk about the financial costs to becoming a
commercial pilot and how updating Federal student loan
eligibility could level the playing field and attract more
diverse talent?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question and for the
interest.
The first step to becoming a professional pilot is a
private pilot license. So one thing we can do, which is
actually outside the student loan program, is allow the GI bill
to fund that. Today, the rules exclude that. So that is just a
commonsense fix that we can make, to allow the GI bill, those
earned benefits, to cover the full spectrum of pilot training.
With respect to student loans, right now, it can cost
almost $200,000 or so. And flight training is inherently
expensive. If you think about it, you have aircraft, insurance,
fuel, specialized instructors. So these are not ordinary
college costs, and the Federal student loan apparatus was just
not designed to support those costs.
These are great money, good opportunities; they are
transformational careers, but you have to be able to get there.
The gulf that exists between the caps of student loans and the
actual cost is upwards of $80,000. And so, with families
without access to wealth or private capital, that gap is
decisive.
Mr. Carson. What are the biggest infrastructure needs
small-hub and small airports have? Do small airport
infrastructure needs evolve because of changes in airline
services, i.e., airlines upgauging from smaller planes to
larger planes?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Sorry. The question was to me about the
economics of small aircraft?
Mr. Carson. Everyone.
Ms. Malarkey Black. Yes.
I think this is--this is a complex, cyclical kind of
conversation. Sometimes we hear that the reason that these
smaller aircraft are not in the market anymore is that the
economics don't support it. In reality, we had a pilot shortage
that absolutely collapsed capacity, and, as a result, the
economics changed on those smaller markets.
You have different pilot compensation costs--and, by the
way, I think that was a good and valuable investment, but it
did change the economics. And you also have network carriers
that are trying to parse a limited supply. And so they do that
by upgauging, by seeking to move more passengers at once.
The problem is, when you upgauge because you have to,
because you are trying to fill a need, not because the demand
requires it, you lose destination options and you lose
frequency. And then even fewer passengers use that route,
because if they have the option to drive, they might. Of
course, not everybody can drive. But those are the ways that
something starting with a pilot shortage can weaken those
economics and undermine the market.
Mr. Carson. And, lastly, I authored Federal requirements
for secondary barriers--controversial at first--in commercial
passenger aircraft. Airlines and aircraft manufacturers have
been making progress, but, in the last few weeks, there have
been multiple attempts by unruly passengers to try to gain
access to the cockpit or other doors.
Where are your member airlines in installing secondary
barriers? Is it still controversial? Has it been more embraced
over the years?
Ms. Malarkey Black. I think there is no controversy about
the requirement. We understand the rule, and we intend to
comply.
What you may be referencing is the fact that--and, again,
this speaks to the supply chain--in the timeline that was
provided to comply with this, our manufacturer came up with a
solution, but the facts are, regional aircraft don't look like
mainline aircraft. We have a different forward lav, different
setup. And so installing a door works on a narrow body or a
wide body, but you can't install a door on a regional.
So, when that actually came to market and was installed, we
did find some safety and some occupational issues that had to
be worked through. And so that is why you see some of these
requests for an additional period of time to comply.
But the goal is to get those secondary barriers installed
and complete and trained.
Mr. Carson. Thank you, ma'am. I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize Mr. Larsen.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr.--just a moment. I thought I had a little more time.
Yes. Mr. Pecoraro, I would like to ask you the same
question that was just asked of Ms. Black about the cost-
efficiency, fuel-efficiency of a 50- to 100-seater and whether
or not you think that helps to solve the issues.
Is that a beneficial option for regional airports, the
smaller airports?
Mr. Pecoraro. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Larsen.
I think when we look at the economics of air travel, I
think it is pretty clear that if you have larger aircraft going
into a community less frequently, what that does is it drives
people who wanted to travel on a Tuesday but the aircraft
doesn't leave until Wednesday to make the choice to drive 6 or
8 hours or whatever it is to the next commercial airport that
they need to get to.
That is going to result in fewer people actually taking
that aircraft, so instead of having reasonably full 50-seat
aircraft, you are going to have maybe a one-third-full larger
aircraft. The airlines are going to find that less sustainable,
and it creates a cycle where people are going to make the
choice that they are going to find other ways to get places.
What that does to the community is it decreases their
access to air service, it decreases their access to business
opportunities, economic development, healthcare delivery
services, other professional services, tourism. And so it
creates a vicious cycle, and so, it is self-defeating in a
larger sense.
So that is why I think that if aircraft were available and
the market could choose the right-sized aircraft that were
available to fit different communities, we would see much more
robust activity in these communities.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. Thanks.
Mr. Collins, I noted in your testimony that you have
started or you are studying the high school programs that
support aviation maintenance technicians. And, thinking about
the workforce, do you have a timeline for when you expect to
finish that?
Mr. Collins. We hope to have that work completed in 2027. I
can reach out to your staff and give you a more direct
timeframe.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. All right.
And related, then: Have we asked you to look at the
Aviation Workforce Development Grant Program? I noted that the
administration has come out with a NOFO on it. I am a little
disappointed with the NOFO. But have you looked at the grant
program that we first created in 2018, those section 625
grants?
Mr. Collins. I will need to get back with your staff to see
if we have had any prior work and then to see if that grant
program will be a part of any upcoming work.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. Great. Thanks. I appreciate
that very much.
Ms. Black, please explain how this unexpected fuel shock
has impacted carriers.
Ms. Malarkey Black. Absolutely.
So there are two business models that govern regional
airlines--the way that we bring passengers to larger airlines
and through the system. One is capacity purchase agreement.
That is where, essentially, we operate the flight with our
aircraft and our crews and maintenance but the major airline
sets the fare and pays the fuel.
So we are not necessarily directly impacted under those
business relationships, but the market dynamics are. And on a
smaller flight, again, with fewer seats over which to absorb
costs, in a thin market that is already fragile in terms of
margins, those economics can get upside-down pretty quickly.
And that is why, even though we don't necessarily write the
checks for the fuel, it can impact the communities that we
serve.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Great.
And, Mr. Dobberstein, have you seen the impact of that
experience in the last 12 to 13 weeks, on the fuel prices?
Mr. Dobberstein. Definitely. Certainly, increased cost to
our passengers in our region has had an impact on their
financial ability and so forth. But, yes, we definitely have
seen an impact on that as well.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Has that meant fewer enplanements
out of Fargo?
Mr. Dobberstein. Not necessarily. We have been fortunate to
have record enplanements so far since January of this year. But
we do expect----
Mr. Larsen of Washington [interrupting]. Just more----
Mr. Dobberstein [continuing]. It going forward.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Just more complaints.
Mr. Dobberstein. More complaints. Yes, that is correct,
sir.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes. Sure. Thank you.
So, when we increased the--sorry. I will be quick here.
When we increased the AIP to $4 billion annually, a large
portion of the increase went to smaller airports. Have you been
able to take advantage of that particular set of dollars?
Mr. Dobberstein. Yes, sir. We are in the middle of a major
terminal expansion project in Fargo. It is about $110 million.
And we have been working with our congressional delegation and
the FAA to obtain those funds, yes.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. That's great. I appreciate it.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Dobberstein. Thank you.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize Mr. Perry.
Mr. Perry. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
And I thank the witnesses for being here.
The purpose of this hearing is to highlight some of the
issues hindering air service to small communities and look at
the Federal programs intended to support those services.
Unfortunately, I think--I would just like to have a
discussion about this--we keep on throwing money after what
seems to be economically unfeasible routes. And these market
interventions have, in turn, created additional problems that
we want to address, but the answer always seems to be ``throw
more money at it.'' And I am not sure that is the best answer,
and certainly I don't believe that is the sustainable answer.
It is the inevitable result of a program like EAS--and I
know each one of you, I think, has supported it and said that
we should actually do more of it. But it does allow the
Government to choose winners and losers based on what are
oftentimes political calculations as opposed to actual service
needs.
The program was created by the Airline Deregulation Act of
1978 as a temporary--I will remind everybody--a temporary
program as the industry was deregulated. It is the perfect
example of no Government program really being temporary. It is
nearly 50 years later, and the program remains in place,
receiving $687.5 million in fiscal year 2026.
In recent years, the program costs have skyrocketed,
increasing 31 percent from 2018 to 2024. And there seems to be
little incentive to maximize productivity, because the
Government just pays for it.
The subsidy does pick winners and losers among airports and
communities, as neighboring airports compete against those that
are subsidized by taxpayers at the Federal Government level for
essentially the same market, in many cases. Making matters
worse, the DOT has approved subsidies for EAS-funded leisure
routes, creating even more Government-funded competition for
non-EAS airports.
Moreover, the EAS program as well as the SCASDP program
have created perverse incentives for airlines that damage the
ability of non-EAS airports to compete with their subsidized
neighbor airports, as they are forced into a pay-to-play
revenue-guarantee scheme just to attract the service.
Now, Congress has acknowledged the unfairness of these
subsidies for neighboring airports when creating the program,
and it structured it to alleviate the most obvious economic
harm created by the issue, which is banning access to EAS
subsidies within 70 miles of medium- and large-hub airports and
placing reasonable restrictions within 175 miles.
Those restrictions have not applied to small-hub airports,
however. And those are the ones that have far more limited
financial resources to withstand the competition, and they
could actually benefit from additional enplanement.
As a result, we end up with absurd outcomes like you have
in the district that I am honored to represent, where
Harrisburg International Airport is forced to compete with an
EAS-subsidized airport 32 miles away.
And I am not trying to punish that airport. I mean, I am
happy for those folks, and I have landed at that airport. We
are happy that it is there. But I have to defend the airport
and the airport system that I represent.
This is to Mr. Collins: Do you think applying the
preexisting restrictions to small-hub airports would help
foster a more fair environment that doesn't force airports to
compete with neighbors that are funded by their own tax
dollars?
Mr. Collins. So we have not taken a position on that
particular issue. Ultimately, those are----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. Yes, but I have to take a
position on that issue. So we are here to discuss that, and it
would be great if the experts, so to speak, would weigh in with
something other than, ``Yes, the situation sucks, but we don't
have an answer, so you all figure it out.'' That is why we are
having the discussion--like, that is essentially what we are
saying here, right?
So can you--you are saying you don't take--does anybody
take----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. So what I can say is, in our
discussions with stakeholders, some have noted that perhaps,
with EAS, it should be targeted to those communities that are,
quote/unquote, ``truly remote,'' which, again, is a decision
for Congress to make.
But, to your point, there are voices that understand that
the subsidies can create distortions in the market. And
ultimately, again, it is up to you all to decide which----
Mr. Perry [interrupting]. Well, it would be good to have,
like, some information from you folks that live this day-in and
day-out.
Look, I am a fan of airports. I used to fly and land at
them. We are not building any new ones, so we want to retain
the ones that we have. We all get that.
But what market-based reforms do you think could be made to
help these airports grow, without throwing more tax dollars to
make them compete against the very money that they earned
against their competitors just a few miles away?
And, like I said, we are not mad at their competitors. We
want them to remain, too. But there has to be some market-based
approaches, because the Government has sought to fix this
problem, they haven't fixed the problem, and the answer is to
throw more money at it, which tends to make either the problem
worse for the airport that is not participating or create a
whole new problem which we are not addressing.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman has run out of time. You may have
to send him an email.
I now recognize Ms. Scholten for 5 minutes.
Ms. Scholten. Thank you so much, Chair Nehls and Ranking
Member Carson, for holding this really important hearing.
The Essential Air Service program is truly a lifeline in my
district and throughout other portions of rural America.
Muskegon County Airport is a key connector to west
Michigan, and since changing EAS providers, the airport and
surrounding region has seen incredible growth. In just 1 year,
MKG has seen a 55-percent increase in passenger activity.
Through support from the EAS program, enplanement at the
airport has increased by nearly 200 percent, putting it on a
clear path to return to primary airport status.
Additionally, the airport has made measurable progress in
reducing its EAS support, from $484 per passenger in 2025 to an
expected $300 or less in 2026. This is significant progress,
and it is why I am so concerned about proposed statutory
changes to the EAS program outlined in the President's fiscal
year 2027 budget.
The proposed changes would eliminate EAS budget eligibility
for communities within 75 miles of small-, medium-, or large-
hub airports. Additionally, the language would eliminate
program eligibility for communities whose per-passenger subsidy
exceeds $350 in the most recent fiscal year, regardless of
distance from the hub.
If the President's proposals were enacted, rural
communities, including Muskegon, would be cut off from critical
aviation and, effectively, the rest of the country.
The demands for these services are real and will not simply
disappear. Costs will be displaced onto residents and
businesses looking to grow their workforce.
Mr. Pecoraro, can you please speak to the economic impacts
associated with successful use of the EAS program, as well as
how limiting access to the program would hurt local job growth
and tourism?
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you, Ms. Scholten.
First, let me thank you for mentioning Muskegon County
Airport. It is a great success story in Michigan, and we are
very pleased at how well they are doing there.
I would note that, in Michigan, in addition to that,
Michigan DOT's Office of Aeronautics operates a commercial air
service development program providing annual grants to
commercial service airports across four areas: capital
improvements to the equipment, air carrier recruitment and
retention, airport marketing, aircraft rescue/firefighting
training.
State engagement in these opportunities is critical for
airports. And I think that in Michigan, we are seeing great
examples of how that works. And we love to see it when State
aviation agencies have the resources to be able to support
those types of programs.
And I think that that is a great example of what is
necessary, to the point of your question, is that we need a
holistic approach to solving this problem. It is bigger than
any one airport, any one Federal program, any one State. There
needs to be a larger approach to this to really try and get to
this whole range of problems in order to make an airport
ecosystem healthy.
And so that is what we are encouraging, and that is what we
support today.
Ms. Scholten. It is absolutely what we are seeing on the
ground as well. So thank you for that.
Keeping on with the economic development, families across
the Nation are feeling the pain at the gas pump as the
President continues unauthorized military action in Iran. And
we are so proud of the War Powers Resolution that we got passed
in the House of Representatives yesterday to give the people
their voice over this issue.
In the aviation sector, fuel is a major operating expense,
so increased prices could drive up costs. While higher fuel
prices may not always result in a complete loss of service,
they can absolutely make it more difficult to operate smaller
aircraft on routes that already have really thin margins.
You know I am coming to you, Ms. Black. You are already
nodding.
In your written testimony, you touch on the threat of jet
fuel prices to small communities. Can you describe how fuel
costs influence decisions about route frequency, aircraft
deployment, and service to smaller communities?
Ms. Malarkey Black. I am going to start with the mechanics
of the cost, because that is the part that we control.
And when you deploy a small aircraft, whether that is 50 or
76 seats, you don't amortize the costs, whether it is labor or
fuel, the same way that you do over 135, 150, 300 seats, right?
So the math is just very different.
And when you are going into small communities, they have
fewer passengers traveling, so these are already fragile
markets. And, in that way, it can become unprofitable very
quickly. So it is not just a matter of our costs are lower
here, but we are actually in the red.
Where those actual deployment decisions lie are with our
major airline partners. But we can tell you that, when capacity
is extracted from the system, it is typically regional
capacity, and it is typically the smaller communities that are
impacted first, in part because that inconveniences the fewest
amount of travelers. But, unfortunately, for those in rural
communities, it can be very painful.
Ms. Scholten. Okay. Thank you.
I am over my time, so I will yield back. Thanks for the
response.
Mr. Nehls. Mr. Stauber, you are recognized.
Mr. Stauber. Chairman Nehls, Ranking Member Carson, let's
get some spice into this meeting. We are talking about rural
America, rural airports--Fargo, Duluth, Hibbing, Bemidji,
Brainerd, International Falls. They matter. Our rural
communities matter.
I am so proud of each and every one of you talking about
rural America and rural aviation. Our communities need it. And
this is a bipartisan issue. The vast majority of us support
rural America, rural aviation, the connection therefore. We are
not taking a back seat. None of you at that dais are taking a
back seat, and I am so proud of you.
Mr. Dobberstein, $100 million in Fargo--that is
spectacular. We have a $20 million investment in the third
oldest control tower in America, the Duluth air traffic control
tower. We are getting a brandnew one, 21st century.
I am excited about these programs, and I am excited to
invest in rural America. We have taken a back seat long enough.
I know each and every one of you are proud of your rural
airports--in Michigan. They matter to those communities. We
shouldn't have to drive 6 or 8 hours. We shouldn't have the
airline saying, ``We are going to bring bigger aircraft, 300-
seat aircraft, and we are not filling them, so we are only
going to come every third day.'' We need everyday service in
our rural communities.
And one of the questions that was asked was the 50-seat
passenger aircraft. Maybe we should talk to the aircraft
manufacturers and work on getting more, because our rural
airports serve the metro, the major ones.
The value that rural aviation brings to our economies and
to the United States of America is incredible. You folks are
the best spokespersons for that, and I am proud of you.
Mr. Dobberstein, how do Federal investments in rural and
regional airport infrastructures, like the Duluth air traffic
control tower, help grow surrounding communities and ensure the
viability of regional flights for the foreseeable future?
Mr. Dobberstein. Thank you, Congressman, for the question.
Well, it is imperative. My mantra has always been that it
takes three entities to support infrastructure investment in
rural airports. It is the Federal Government. It is the State
government, as well as the local community. Without those three
working together, it would be impossible to fund airport
infrastructure projects of the magnitude that we are doing in
Fargo and other small rural communities around the country.
Mr. Stauber. Yes. It is that partnership that you see in
local, State, and Federal. That is exactly what we did in
Duluth's ATC.
Mr. Pecoraro, in what ways can programs like the Essential
Air Service and the Small Community Air Service Development
Program adapt to meet the needs of the community, the specific
issues within the communities?
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you, Mr. Stauber. That is an important
question. I think that the way that we would like to see both
EAS and Small Community Air Service Development Program work
together is to look at the larger needs of these communities
and figure out in the many years since these programs have been
created, how has the industry changed? And I think that is a
critical point to make. The way that the airline industry
operated 40 years ago or more when these programs were created
is very different than it is today.
And so the way we are going to serve these communities and
support them is going to be very different than it was back
then. So that is what is necessary, is to bring together all
the stakeholders, including State and local governments, to sit
down with Federal agencies to figure out exactly what we need
to do to retool these programs to make them more cost-
efficient, to make sure that there is local support for them
because we don't expect the Federal Government to do it all by
itself, and to make sure that we are able to provide the type
of service that all these communities need.
Mr. Stauber. I appreciate that answer. I like the ability
for our local community regional airports to make some of the
decisions themselves, not be tied so tight to demands. I think
you would agree. Allow our local communities to have some
flexibility in their design or passenger experience. Would you
agree with that?
Mr. Pecoraro. Yes, sir. And we also think that, looking to
the future, that general aviation airports also have an
important role to play, particularly as emerging aeronautical
technologies provide some new opportunities for people to
access the aviation system.
Mr. Stauber. Yes. Well, listen. I am so excited. I couldn't
wait for this hearing because you are all proponents of what we
believe in, rural aviation. We are not going to take a back
seat, okay? We are going to be loud and proud, supporting our
small rural communities, because we matter. Those of us who
live in rural America matter, and you guys are in the fight
with us, and I know that the chairman and ranking member are as
well. I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. Love the passion, Pete. I love it.
Ms. Gillen, you are recognized.
Ms. Gillen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Ranking
Member.
And thank you to our witnesses for being here today.
I am proud to represent New York's Fourth Congressional
District on the South Shore of Long Island, which is the home
to TRACON N90, which manages the most complex and congested
airspace in our country. As I saw firsthand when I visited,
this facility relies on outdated technology, posing serious
safety risk for the region and for our skies across the
country. We must do more to invest in the safety of our
airspace and give our controllers the resources that they need.
It is equally important that we invest resources in our
airport towers, large and small. My district abuts to the most
busy hubs in the country, JFK and LaGuardia Airport, but also
smaller airports on the East End of Long Island. And I believe
all of these airports deserve our support.
The smaller airports participate in the FAA's Contract
Tower Program, which allows the airports to contract out
operation of their towers to save these systems money and
enhance safety. Unfortunately, many of these contract towers
lack access to real-time situational awareness tools that are
now the standard at the larger airports and that enhance the
controller's visibility of aircraft operations.
Last month, my colleague Congressman Begich and I worked
together to introduce the bipartisan Air Traffic Situational
Awareness Enhancement Act, which would help close this gap by
requiring the FAA to acquire and install these tools at
contract towers and establish a training program to ensure
controllers can effectively integrate and use them. I
appreciated Ms. Black mentioning this important initiative in
her testimony.
So, Ms. Black, I would like to give you a chance to speak a
little bit about this important issue and how critical it is
that we address the safety gap and move our legislation through
Congress.
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you, Congressman, and thank you
very much for your bill.
When we talk about air traffic control modernization at
smaller communities, sometimes that just means doing the
basics. And, as you recognized, some of the towers don't have
radar. They don't have ADS-B In in the tower. They don't have
that advanced digital situational awareness. And so they are
looking out the window to separate aircraft visually. That is
risk in the system, and it is something that we can mitigate
right now. Your bill would do it. We are strong supporters. And
count on us to help you advance it, because it should be
passed.
Ms. Gillen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that.
And, as I mentioned, TRACON N90, the air traffic control
facility for managing the New York airspace, is located in my
district, and N90 controllers are responsible for managing air
traffic in and out of two of the busiest airports in the world,
JFK and LaGuardia, in addition to the smaller regional airports
in the region like Republic Airport in Farmingdale and
MacArthur Airport in Islip.
Despite their role managing the busiest airspace in the
country, the N90 facility is among the most outdated and
understaffed. While our aerospace industry continues to
innovate and evolve, our controllers at N90 still work with
floppy disks and paper strips. Mr. Dobberstein, in your
testimony, you mentioned the impact of air traffic control
constraints on smaller communities like yours. Can you
elaborate more on the problems that these smaller communities
face today because of our lack of investment?
Mr. Dobberstein. Well, one example would be the reduction
in our frequencies to Chicago. Earlier this year, one of our
carriers announced that they were going to add service to
Chicago, additional capacity opportunities for our passengers.
And then, as the cap came in place between the FAA at Chicago
O'Hare, those flights were taken out. So our community is going
to miss out on that additional frequencies and opportunities
for our traveling public in our region.
Ms. Gillen. Thank you.
Mr. Pecoraro, you spoke in your testimony about the
potential of advanced air mobility to transform how people and
goods are moved. I have met with AAM companies and am excited
by the opportunities that their aircraft present to reduce
airplane noise and traffic congestion in my community on Long
Island and across our country. Can you briefly talk about the
potential for these new aircraft and the barriers that smaller
airports like Republic and MacArthur may face in supporting
their operations?
Mr. Pecoraro. Sure. Thank you, Ms. Gillen. Yes.
Briefly, I will just say that we think that, while AAM is
not a short-term solution, certainly it has tremendous
potential in the longer term to provide a great deal of
additional access for people in a cleaner and quieter fashion.
And we think that is certainly going to be important,
particularly in districts like yours where that is a concern of
many residents.
We think that one of the most exciting parts in the shorter
term of providing this type of access is for fixed-wing hybrid
aircraft to be able to provide regional aircraft--as we are
talking about access to smaller communities--to maybe support
or replace some of the aircraft that we were talking about
earlier that are phasing out of their life cycle.
Ms. Gillen. Thank you. I look forward to working with you
on this going forward.
Mr. Nehls. The gentlelady yields. I now recognize Mr.
Owens.
Mr. Owens. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member. I appreciate today's hearing on connecting rural
America to the National Airspace System and the chance to look
hard at whether our policies actually deliver for small
communities. We rightly tout the safest, most advanced airspace
in the world. But for too many of our rural families, the more
basic question is whether they can access it at all.
When smalltown airports lose meaningful service, the only
option becomes hours on the road to reach a hub. It means lost
jobs, missed medical appointments, and young people simply stay
home instead of chasing opportunity. And small businesses and
local economies that depend on these flights feel it
immediately.
In the 2024 FAA reauthorization, Congress and President
Trump laid out a roadmap for rural aviation strengthening
Essential Air Service and increasing airport improvement
funding for airports that keep rural America connected. The FAA
now has more authority and resources to support small
communities than it has had in years, and I appreciate the
professionals that are there who are trying to put these tools
to work.
Folks back home assess by what they see on the departure
board, not by what is written in statute. They see flights
disappearing from small and nonhub airports. They see fares
that climb faster in smaller markets than big hubs. And they
see airlines consolidating services into a handful of major
airports. The message we hear is simple: If Federal support and
subsidies are on the table, we need to translate it to real
opportunities for rural travelers, not just good intentions. I
look forward to hearing from our witnesses today what target
steps this subcommittee and the Trump administration should
take next to make sure rural Americans get more than just a few
promises on paper.
With that, I move on to my questions.
Ms. Black, in rural States like Utah, many small airports
may never see a regional jet again, but they could receive
supportive advanced air mobility, port-to-port connectivity
that underserved communities need. With companies like BETA
Technologies already active in Utah, ahead of Olympics and DOT
leadership, publicly highlighting these opportunities, what
does the regional airport industry need to see from Congress to
ensure small airports are not left behind as AAM scales, and
are we putting the right infrastructure and certification
framework in place to make that happen?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question.
We are very excited about AAM technology. Unlike a lot of
investments, this is coming to market on the smaller side and
capacity, on the regional side. So we are excited about it.
At the same time, some of these developments are 5, 10
years away. So we do still need to have investment in the fleet
to conserve markets right now.
In terms of helping airports prepare for bringing this
technology online, I think some of the support may be
financial. They need to be able to meet the needs of the new
aircraft, having charging infrastructure, change the way that
we are dealing with propulsion and the maintenance. And so, I
think continuing to look at that would be really important. At
the FAA, it is important that they have the ability to certify
these new technologies as they come online and help to
integrate them into the system safely.
Mr. Owens. Mr. Collins, GAO has been tracking small
community air service for years. When you look strictly at the
data since the 2024 FAA reauthorization, including new subsidy
caps, SCASDP increases, and AIP changes, do you see any early
signs that these reforms are stabilizing the service at small
and nonhub airports, or are we still on the same downward
trajectory in terms of departure and connectivity?
Mr. Collins. Our work has shown that we are still on the
same downward trajectory. I think one of the challenges with
the SCASDP grants is they are facing cost pressures and can't
always provide the minimum revenue guarantees that airlines are
demanding. And that makes it difficult for them to attract and
then, once they attract, continue service.
Mr. Owens. Okay.
Mr. Pecoraro, setting Federal policy aside for a moment,
what is the most effective thing State aviation agencies can do
right now with the tools already in hand to strengthen rural
air service, whether it's targeted State grant programs,
coordinated marketing, or smarter system planning, what does a
gold standard State playbook look like, in your view?
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you, Mr. Owens.
Certainly, system planning is always critical. To be able
to look ahead and understand what the changing needs of the
community are going to be so that we can help those local
airports plan for that service is always critical.
The second most important thing, I think, is the
partnership that State aviation agencies have with the FAA.
State agencies who work closely with the FAA from the
headquarters to the regional offices to the airport district
offices to make sure that the right funds are flowing to
airports in accordance with that system plan so that we can try
and meet the infrastructure needs of those airports. And that
is a great deal of what State agencies are concerned with, is
trying to make sure that the infrastructure is right.
Beyond that, and I would say, looking to the future, we
have got to look to how we want to develop the airports of the
future. And so we appreciate this committee in the
reauthorization bill creating planning grants so that airports
and State aviation agencies are going to be looking at those
issues in the near term so that we will be prepared for the
future.
Mr. Owens. Thank you. And I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Ms. Titus.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I represent the First Congressional District in Nevada.
That is the heart of southern Nevada, including Las Vegas. But
you also have the Henderson Airport and the Boulder City
Airport, and traffic is increasing to both of those general
aviation as people come in to Las Vegas for all these big
events that we are anticipating. We have got 40 million
visitors a year, and travel and tourism contribute $86 billion
to our economy. So this is the key to our success and survival.
As a member of this committee, I have always had a priority
to be sure that everybody has access. We want people to come
from everywhere to Las Vegas. So small town, rural, big city,
we want them to have that kind of access that is convenient and
affordable. And we know that their experience in Las Vegas
begins the minute they get to the airport or get on the plane.
It doesn't start once they get to the Strip.
So Federal assistance like the Small Community Air
Service--let me get this right--Small Community Air Service
Development Program has helped people from all kinds of
different regions. I think a couple of years ago, both Salem,
Oregon, and Corpus Christi, Texas, received some of this
funding that supported marketing and revenue sharing for Las
Vegas routes.
So can I ask you, Ms. Black, how would you speak to the
contribution of regional airlines to supporting travel and
tourism? How does travel and tourism impact your members'
decisions of what routes to add, and are there any emerging
markets that you all are looking at or changing up, like
southern Nevada?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question.
Regional air service to the smallest communities alone, I
will start with the big one, is the economic impact. It drives
$153 billion in yearly economic activity. And that's probably a
conservative estimate, because we weren't able to capture all
of the downstream that you are talking about that really does
generate.
But the part that is missing from that equation is quality
of life and the ability to connect to places like Las Vegas
from wherever you are. Sometimes we treat driving and flying
like it's neutral exchange, and it's not. It's actually--there
is a safety benefit as well, because last year, almost 40,000
people lost their lives on the highways. Flying is much safer.
So air transportation is part of a safer transportation system.
When it comes to the programs that support it, EAS
similarly is a force multiplier. It drove $2.3 billion of
economic activity before the pandemic, supported 17,000 jobs.
These are just some of the ways that air service is extremely
valuable. We should continue to keep supporting it.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Part of this access, too, is affordability. And so I ask
you, Mr. Collins, we have seen the domestic airfare for most of
the small communities has increased at a higher rate than from
the major carriers. Is there a reason for that domestically and
something we need to be doing to address it to help with that
situation?
Mr. Collins. So we have not done specific work looking at
the changes in airfares. What I can say is that generally, the
increased operating cost is having an effect for all routes
within the country.
Ms. Titus. I know that's true, but I think there are some
statistics that show it has increased more for these small
regional airlines than for the bigger ones, and I thought maybe
there is a reason for that.
Mr. Collins. Yes. We have not done any work to----
Ms. Titus [interrupting]. Economies of scale, maybe.
Okay. Well, domestic travel is more important than ever
right now because international tourism is down. We certainly
see it from Canada and Mexico in Las Vegas. And all across the
country people aren't coming here. It is more expensive. The
gas is higher. The rhetoric is negative. The visa process is
lengthy and complicated. We are adding fees to national parks.
That is not helping with tourism. Adding requirements for
looking at your social media to get a visa, that is not helpful
for tourism. So the more you all can do internally, the better.
I would just mention real briefly getting the TIFIA
eligibility in the recent moved 250 bill seems to be something
that will perhaps help you with the infrastructure of your
airports. Are you all involved in that or aware of that or----
Mr. Pecoraro [interrupting]. Yes, ma'am. That's certainly a
valuable tool that many airports use.
Ms. Titus. Okay.
Mr. Pecoraro. And I would just say, if I could, Elko
Airport in Nevada, I am not sure if that is in your district--
--
Ms. Titus [interrupting]. No, it's not, but I am aware of
it.
Mr. Pecoraro. That has been one of the real success stories
using the Small Community Air Service Development Program to
restore midday service to the airport.
Ms. Titus. Great. And I have to drive all that way on the
loneliest highway to get from Elko to Reno. It's a long way.
Mr. Pecoraro. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Titus. Thank you very much. I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentlelady yields. I now recognize Mr.
Barrett.
Mr. Barrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for your testimony. And I think, as we look
at the nature of what we are discussing today, too often we
talk about rural communities--like the area that I serve or
other small towns and medium-sized communities across our
country, especially in the Midwest--we call those flyover
country. Well, those aren't flyover country. They are areas
where people take off and land and go about their business that
they need to connect to the national airspace and get to their
destination.
I take the flight from Lansing here to Washington, DC,
right, from my district close to home and can arrive here
safely and in time for the responsibilities and the business of
the day that I have here as a Member of Congress. And that is
an important thing that I appreciate. And other people are on
that flight; they are connecting to somewhere else at
Washington, DC, or whether they have business here, connecting
our State capital with our Nation's Capital is an important
piece. But that is true of every regional airport we have
throughout our country, that it connects people to the places
they need to go or to the next stop in their travel, ultimately
to their final destination.
Mr. Pecoraro, right? Did I say that correctly? I know you
were talking to my colleague, Ms. Scholten, about some of the
synergy between the State of Michigan and our aviation office
there and some of the Federal programs and everything. I was
curious, one of the things we are proud of in Michigan, in
Lansing in particular, is there is the shared collaboration
with Lansing Community College around their maintenance program
they have through Lansing Community College at a municipal
airport outside of Lansing that they train students on for
aircraft maintenance. That can be a tremendous career and can
help kind of break through some of that shortage that we have
now. I was curious if you had any thoughts on that or any of
the work that is being done through, kind of, an innovative way
that we have seen in my district.
Mr. Pecoraro. Sure. Thank you, Mr. Barrett.
I don't know the specifics of that particular relationship,
but I do know that, as I have traveled around the country
visiting with State aviation agencies and talking with them,
that is not an uncommon relationship. And you find frequently
that State aviation agencies, local airports, local educational
facilities, particularly those who are providing that type of
aeronautical training, have developed really valuable
partnerships, because nowhere more so than in aviation do
people appreciate the tremendous importance of building that
pipeline for the workforce early on in trying to bring young
people into the industry and bring them into these really good-
paying jobs----
Mr. Barrett [interposing]. Yes.
Mr. Pecoraro [continuing]. And keep them in the community
doing those jobs.
Mr. Barrett. Yes. Great careers that they can do at an
affordable tuition rate, close to home. Maybe they can still
live at home while they are completing this program.
Mr. Pecoraro. Absolutely.
Mr. Barrett. It is ranked currently as the best in the
Midwest. That is something we are very proud of and would
encourage any time you would like to come visit. We would love
to have you see it.
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you. I would love that.
Mr. Barrett. And appreciate that.
Ms. Black, I had a question for you. I know you mentioned
earlier in your testimony about the Montgomery GI bill and some
of the limitations around flight training there. I know that we
do have an ability right now to use the GI bill for flight
training, but there are annual caps around that. I happen to
also serve on the VA Committee, which, of course, is not the
subject directly of jurisdiction, but just last month, we
reported a bill favorably out of committee that would increase
that cap to where it is not running on an annual basis. It
would be a cap for the entirety of the benefit. With that, it
would be a $100,000 lifetime cap, more or less, that you could
take at your own pace to achieve the flight training that you
need. Obviously there are limitations on that. We want
accredited programs so that people are getting real benefit out
of that. Would that help resolve the issue that you have
described?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Yes, it does help. Anything that starts
to right-size the ability to finance the education for the
actual cost of the education is very helpful. One of the most
important things that can be helpful there, though, is allowing
that GI bill to be used for the first phase of certification,
which is a private pilot certificate. Right now, the rules
preclude using for that, and that is the gateway, and that can
cost $20,000 or more. So it is a prohibitive expense for people
to cover out of pocket just to get in. So that is something
that would be very effective.
And, if I may, no flyover country. We have built our
business around landing at the places where other people fly
over. So thank you for saying that.
Mr. Barrett. Yes. Thank you.
Last question with the time I have left. I know you
mentioned some of the issues with ADS-B and other things. We
have taken on a considerable amount of effort here after the
tragedy that we had here over Washington, DC's airport about a
year and a half ago. Yesterday, I had a meeting with some
airline pilots who are from my district who said that ACAS
technology could be a considerable number of years away,
whereas we seem to be taking testimony that it is far closer
than that, maybe within the next year. Do you have any thoughts
on where that stands? If it is a technology gap, if it is a
hardware gap, or if it is something that we can integrate more
quickly.
Ms. Malarkey Black. I would start with saying ACAS X is the
end goal. We support it. We thought that the committee looked
at the advanced technology. There is a misconception out there
that only ACAS X is the long-lead technology. In fact, for a
lot of the fleet, including almost all of the regional airline
fleet, there is not right now certified product for ADS-B In
for regional, so we support that. But what we suggest is a
bridge that allows us to get right now those safety
improvements rather than waiting until 2031 or, in reality,
likely after that, because the supply chain is not positioned
to get us there by 2031; to use the electronic flight bags is
an interim measure that will immediately start providing a
safety increase and enormously increase situational awareness
compared to where it is now.
Mr. Barrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Apologies for running
late.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognized Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you.
I have been working for years to combat aviation noise in
the District of Columbia. The 2024 Federal Aviation
Administration reauthorization law included my provision
requiring the Government Accountability Office to conduct a
study of helicopter noise in the National Capital region. The
study, which was published in March of this year, recommended
that the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Department of Homeland
Security develop and implement awareness and outreach programs
for communities affected by helicopter noise in the National
Capital region.
Mr. Collins, what progress have these agencies made in
implementing this recommendation?
Mr. Collins. So, DoD agreed with our recommendations, and
they are planning to provide us with a corrective action plan
later this month. And that plan will outline the steps that
each service will take to implement the recommendations. And so
we can keep you and your staff apprised once we receive the
plan.
Ms. Norton. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentlelady yields.
I now recognize Mr. Bresnahan.
Mr. Bresnahan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This hearing hits home for Pennsylvania's Eighth
Congressional District. Northeastern Pennsylvania is home to
the Wilkes-Barre/Scranton International Airport, as well as
smaller general aviation hubs like Hazleton Regional, Mount
Pocono, Cherry Ridge, Flying Dollar, and Wyoming Valley.
Nonairport hubs, like AVP, don't always make it into national
conversations but are just as critical to the region's
connectivity and economic vitality.
Northeastern Pennsylvania interstate rail service--not
yet--has limited intercity bus options, which means aviation
isn't just a convenience for my constituents. It is a lifeline.
I am glad the subcommittee has taken the time today to
focus on the challenges facing small and rural communities and
make sure they are not left behind.
One of the most pressing issues facing AVP--Wilkes-Barre/
Scranton International Airport--is the FAA has proposed the
decommissioning of the MALSR approach lighting system on
popular runway 4. Ms. Black, regional carriers like Piedmont
are the ones actually flying into airports like Wilkes-Barre/
Scranton. AVP has shared concerns that the decommissioning of
these MALSRs will lead to higher approach minimums, reduce
capacity, more cancellations, and ultimately lost service. From
your perspective, how does degraded approach infrastructure or
safety infrastructure in general factor into an airline's
decision to maintain or reduce service at nonhub airports? And
is this a pattern that you are seeing at other small community
airports across the country?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Mr. Bresnahan, thank you for the
question.
I am going to avoid commenting on the specifics of that
because I am not very well aware of it. But I will talk
generally. Having that infrastructure at small airports is
critical. And ensuring that we bring--not just decommissioning
but we actually bring modernization to airports of all sizes,
it is very important. Small airports that have limited runway
size, that impacts the kind of aircraft that you can attract to
the airports. So we want to make sure that we are moving in the
right direction and making investments in our small community
airports.
Mr. Bresnahan. Are you seeing any other airports that any
of your membership companies operate out of that have seen
disruptions because of inadequate upgrades to a specific
facility?
Ms. Malarkey Black. I will give you an example of a public-
private partnership that developed in response to exactly that
kind of a disruption in Coeur d'Alene, which I believe just has
cargo. And this specific airport needed to have a tower. And,
for years, they petitioned to get the tower, and then they took
matters into their own hands. And the airline and the community
came together, and they actually constructed a tower. So the
answer is yes, and there are some examples that show it.
Mr. Bresnahan. I appreciate it. And I know we were all
excited about the massive downpayment this committee has made
in ATC modernization. Billions of dollars are currently being
invested to, and we have seen real capacity and efficiency
gains where these upgrades have been made.
Mr. Dobberstein, from your perspective as an airport
operator, are nonhub airports getting their fair share of those
investments?
Mr. Dobberstein. Thank you for the question, Congressman.
I don't believe so. I think there is more that can be done
for the nonhub and small-hub airports around the country to
invest in that infrastructure, Fargo being one of them. We are
coming up on an aging air traffic control facility in our
community and are looking for ways to make improvements or
replace that control tower, just as they are in Duluth,
Minnesota, right now.
Mr. Bresnahan. What does the modernization picture look
like on the ground at smaller airports? And where do you see
the biggest gaps? And what do you think Congress, and
specifically this committee, could be doing a better job to
help those small community airports?
Mr. Dobberstein. In terms of technology, just making
certain that the most up-to-date technology is available in
terms of radar coverage; the equipment that is in the control
towers that the controllers are working with is up to date and
the most efficient that can be available for them; that the
training for those controllers is efficient for the size
airport that they are working and the airspace that they are
responsible for.
And, in terms of things on the ground, we are looking at
VMAT as well, the transponders for our vehicles, for aircraft
and our tower. We are working with suppliers right now on
trying to implement that yet this summer so that we can become
more safe as well. So anything to improve safety. This
committee has done a lot of work to improve safety, both the
House and the Senate, and we certainly appreciate that
investment and look forward to more investment in those
technologies that can improve safety, whether it is at the
tower or on the ground, that protect my employees as well as
those that are on the aircraft patronizing our airport.
Mr. Bresnahan. Well, I appreciate the feedback. And, to all
the witnesses, thank you for being here.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I now recognize Mr. Hurd.
Mr. Hurd of Colorado. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to circle back on something that my colleague from
Nevada had mentioned about airport infrastructure financing. I
represent Colorado's Third District. It is about half of the
State's geographic footprint. It is quite large, and airports
are a critical part not just for transportation, but also they
are economic lifelines in western and southern Colorado.
We have heard discussion about the $175 billion
infrastructure gap at airports across the country in large
cities as well as in communities like those that I represent.
And I worked with my colleague Mr. Garamendi across the aisle
on the Airport TIFIA Financing Certainty Act. I am pleased that
that was a part of the Build America 250 Act that we passed out
of this committee just a few weeks ago.
Mr. Dobberstein, can you talk a little bit about rural
airports taking advantage of financing tools such as TIFIA? How
important is this to ensure that important projects go from
ideas to reality?
Mr. Dobberstein. Congressman, thank you for the question.
First of all, thank you and the committee for including
TIFIA in the highway bill. That is very important. I believe
and AAA believes that the program needs to be extended. It is a
critical tool for airports to have at their disposal as they
look to finance important and critical infrastructure projects
at their airport, to improve safety and capacity and enhance
the experience for our traveling public. I also do believe that
possibly more education needs to be provided to airports so
that they understand the TIFIA program and what is available to
them as this is a tool in their tool kit to finance important
projects.
Mr. Hurd of Colorado. All right. Not everyone is aware of
it or aware of how it might be used.
Mr. Dobberstein. Correct.
Mr. Hurd of Colorado. Okay. Great. We can definitely do a
better job in that regard.
Mr. Pecoraro, next question for you. Workforce development
and retention are one of the most critical issues in aviation,
and rural communities like those that I represent feel that the
hardest. Oftentimes, pilot workforce shortages are forcing
communities to see reduced service as a result. They also have
challenges keeping key staff beyond pilots. Air traffic
controllers, specialists, TSA security specialists, aircraft
maintenance is another issue, gate agents and so on. Having a
strong workforce pipeline is key to ensuring that we have the
strong supply of employees needed to support expanded
opportunities for passenger service.
I wanted to ask you specifically about a particular
technology that is of interest to us in the West, which is--and
it could be promising on the air traffic control front--which
is remote towers, which allow air traffic control officials to
remotely direct traffic to nontowered rural airports. In my
mind, this allows for the extra layer of security and certainty
that ATC provides, but also gives some flexibility to rural
airports to meet their individual needs.
How can Congress leverage innovative technologies like
remote air traffic control to better serve small and rural
airports like those in western and southern Colorado?
Mr. Pecoraro. Thank you very much for that question, Mr.
Hurd.
We at NASAO think that those types of towers are a critical
part of the future and are going to be very important to
aviation safety going forward. As you know, Colorado is a
leader in this area, and we were very disappointed when the
earlier round of research into these towers didn't work out
with the FAA. There was a great facility in Colorado where they
were working on it, as well as one in Leesburg, Virginia. Both
showed tremendous potential. We are glad that it is in the
reauthorization bill that you all passed. We are glad that the
FAA is moving forward again on relaunching that effort. And we
think that there is a tremendous potential for creating safety
at a lot of airports that can't afford a regular tower or a
contract tower, that this can provide avenues for aviation
safety and for people to understand what's happening on the
ground at these airports.
Mr. Hurd of Colorado. Amen, and agreed. We need to keep
pushing. Thank you very much for that.
Ms. Malarkey Black, as I mentioned earlier, airports are a
gateway to jobs. They are an economic lifeline, healthcare,
education, tourism, business opportunities, all those things.
They are not only home to regional airline services but also
business: aviation operators, air ambulances, agricultural
aviation, flight schools, and other users as well. From your
perspective, how does the loss of regional airline service
affect the long-term viability of these smaller airports and
their economic outlook?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question.
If you look at the headlines from when regional airlines
had to park one-quarter of our fleet and capacity dropped out,
it was ``Communities Are in Crisis,'' and you saw airport
directors that were talking to the press, talking about what a
calamity it was. This is not just an economic impact, but it is
a real decisive change to the quality of life of the people who
live there. So I think it is very harmful when there is a
problem with the regional service and with the air service at
the airport.
Mr. Hurd of Colorado. Thank you very much for that. And,
Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired.
Mr. Nehls. Yes, sir.
Mr. Knott, you are recognized.
Mr. Knott. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. It is great to
be here. This is an important topic.
I represent, sort of, the Triangle Region of North Carolina
and east, which is a fertile ground for rural airports. And I
have an interesting story. My grandfather, a number of years
ago, actually came back from World War II and sent a request to
Mr. Cessna about how to construct an airport. He had put
together various parcels of land, and Mr. Cessna wrote him back
with a ``how to'' manual. So my grandfather contracted all of
the necessary components. He graded the airfield. And that
airport is still in existence today in eastern Wake County,
North Carolina. And it sort of hits on what I want to talk to
you all about.
There are obviously a lot of headwinds for the rural
aviation industry. Cost is certainly a component, but it is not
necessarily the cost of material and labor. It is the
regulatory cost that comes with the delays, the permitting, the
frivolous lawsuits. And it is a tragedy whenever a decades-old
or even older airport will close because they cannot maintain
compliance because of the bureaucratic overhangs or the
regulatory cost imposed with that.
So, Mr. Dobberstein, I want to talk to you first. What are
ways that we in Congress can streamline and can make it more
economical to maintain existence as a rural airport? I am
talking about small rural airports.
Mr. Dobberstein. Certainly efficiencies in the
environmental process would be very beneficial. Working with
our State agencies, the department of health in our State, our
local engineers who are experts in those environmental
concerns----
Mr. Knott [interposing]. Right.
Mr. Dobberstein [continuing]. We all want to be safe in the
environment and everything that we do. But, certainly, trying
to expedite the environmental reviews for these important
infrastructure projects that we are trying to complete in our
airport and other airports across the State and country would
be vital for us.
Mr. Knott. And, in regards to the--I would say, the
challenges that you face currently to maintain your economic
vitality, how would you order those in terms of the top three
that Congress can help you with? What are the biggest
challenges that you have?
Mr. Dobberstein. Certainly funding is one, to have
available funding. And, as I said before, that is a Federal,
State, and local community partnership.
Relief with those environmental regulations and policies
that we are trying to fight through with the FAA and other
Federal agencies would be of benefit.
And then also just trying to provide the extra funds for
safety improvements at our airports and airports across the
country to make it safe not only for my employees that are out
in the airfield, but for those that are arriving/departing on
aircraft.
Mr. Knott. And is the funding that you are talking about,
is it primarily from Washington? Or are you talking about
private funding as well?
Mr. Dobberstein. It could be a combination of both, but
certainly at the Federal level----
Mr. Knott [interposing]. Yes.
Mr. Dobberstein [continuing]. I think it most critical. And
our State has been very generous at our airports in North
Dakota. We are very fortunate in that regard in their
investment through the legislature and Aeronautics Commission
and also with the local community.
Mr. Knott. Sure.
Mr. Collins, I want to talk to you briefly. I see that your
group has recommended an increase in the mandatory retirement
age from 65 to 67. Do you know how that calculus was arrived
at, to go up to 67 as opposed to, let's say, 70, 72?
Mr. Collins. I am not aware of us making that
recommendation.
Mr. Knott. Are you aware of the statutory requirement----
Mr. Collins [interrupting]. I am aware of the requirement--
--
Mr. Knott [interrupting]. Yes. Let me ask you, then, this
angle: What are your thoughts about that requirement?
Mr. Collins. So, to this point, there hasn't been a safety
assessment behind the requirement. So it might make sense to
have an assessment to see if there are any safety effects of
having the age range.
Mr. Knott. Do you think that private businesses, States, or
other bodies are incapable of determining who can be a safe
operator of an airplane? I am not trying to be hostile. I am
just curious. The 65 age requirement just seems entirely
arbitrary to me. I know pilots who have been forced to retire
that are perfectly able to continue their career, and it is
something that, again--it is just a question at the top of my
mind.
Mr. Collins. Yes. I think it is worth researching whether
or not it makes sense and if there are any safety
considerations behind that.
Mr. Knott. Okay. Mr. Pecoraro, do you have any thoughts
about that?
Mr. Pecoraro. No, sir. I am sorry. We don't have a position
on that.
Mr. Knott. Okay.
In regards to the remote towers, I do want to continue that
conversation. There are numerous airports in my district that
are waiting for tower approvals and to get the FAA on board
with expanding their footprint, and the tower piece is their
last component. How can we expedite the use of these remote
towers to the more up and coming airports?
Mr. Pecoraro. I think lighting a fire under the FAA to move
forward with these is the best way to do that. The technology
is proven.
Mr. Knott. Yes.
Mr. Pecoraro. I saw it in Leesburg where it worked great. I
know that they have got other contracts that are looking at
working with right now, who are different from the ones who
were doing it before. But the technology worked 6 years ago
when I saw it. It can only have improved since then.
Mr. Knott. The situation that I have is a county called
Johnston County, and they have one of the busiest airports in
the State. The only thing they need is increased tower
functionality. And they have the funding----
Mr. Pecoraro [interrupting]. For a fraction of the cost of
a regular tower.
Mr. Knott. Exactly. They just can't get the approval.
Thank you so much. Mr. Chairman, I am over. I appreciate
it.
Mr. Nehls. All right. I now recognize Mr. Stanton.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you
to our witnesses for being here for this important hearing.
For rural communities, reliable air service isn't a
convenience. It is essential infrastructure in Arizona. Small
airports support our robust tourism industry as well as
connecting residents to healthcare, education, and the broader
national economy. Take, for example, Flagstaff Pulliam Airport,
the primary gateway for nearly half a million people in
northern Arizona, a key gateway for visitors traveling to the
Grand Canyon.
Yet despite strong demand, Flagstaff ranks among the most
expensive airports in the contiguous United States. Passengers
face fewer flight options, higher fares. They can't just choose
a different airport. The next closest commercial airport is
more than 90 miles away, an hour and a half in a car.
Flagstaff is seeking relief through the Small Community Air
Service Development Program, applying for grants to expand
connectivity to hubs like Denver and Salt Lake City.
Mr. Pecoraro, are there specific changes to the Small
Community Air Service Development Program that we should be
considering to improve air service in these communities,
particularly those like Flagstaff, which have challenges in
generating local financial support to be competitive for
Federal funding?
Mr. Pecoraro. I don't have any specific recommendations
today. What I would say, and as I said earlier, is that I think
that what is critical is these programs have been in existence
for a long time. Market conditions have changed. Economics have
changed. Conditions on the ground have changed. What we need to
do is for the U.S. DOT and FAA to sit down and develop a
national strategy on how we are going to retool all of this,
working with all the stakeholders, as they did recently with
the National Strategy on Advanced Air Mobility, which is a
terrific effort, and it is going to yield real results. And we
think an approach like that would really help benefit these
types of programs.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much.
Families in Arizona, as they plan their summer travel,
unfortunately the war in Iran and the closure of the Strait of
Hormuz has sent jet fuel prices through the roof, doubling
since the conflict began. That is showing up in ticket prices
for travelers in Metro Phoenix and everywhere. And, for many in
rural communities, limited air service and fewer competitive
options make those costs especially difficult to avoid.
Ms. Malarkey Black, if higher fuel costs persist, do you
anticipate airlines reducing service in certain markets and, if
so, are smaller rural communities likely to feel those impacts
more acutely than larger metropolitan areas?
Ms. Malarkey Black. The economics of small community roots
make them uniquely vulnerable to cost increases, whether it is
labor or fuel, simply because of the math. We have got smaller
aircraft and fewer passengers traveling. So, while we don't set
the fares and we don't set the schedules, we would expect to
see those kinds of consequences coming from our mainline
partners.
Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much. Those are all my
questions. So I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields. I now recognize Mr.
Johnson.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member, for organizing this important hearing. And thank you to
the witnesses for your time and your testimony today.
In a lot of small communities, missing a flight doesn't
just change travel plans. It changes what people can reach and
what opportunities reach them. That is because when the nearest
major airport is hours away, air service becomes part of the
community's lifeline. And, right now, too many of these
communities are watching that lifeline fray, not because they
don't matter, but because the economics of aviation don't
always treat them like they do.
That is exactly why Congress stepped in with the bipartisan
2024 FAA reauthorization law. We protected the Essential Air
Service program, the Small Community Air Service Development
Program, and Airport Improvement Program funding because safety
and infrastructure shouldn't depend on the size of your tax
base.
But a program on paper doesn't mean much if people can't
feel it in their daily lives. If flights keep disappearing, if
prices keep rising, if workforce shortages keep pushing service
away, then we still have work to do.
My hope is today that we make sure these programs are doing
what Congress intended: keeping small and rural communities
connected to opportunity, not cut off from it. Whether you live
in a rural community or in a growing suburb of Metro Atlanta,
you deserve to be connected. People just want a fair shot, and
that is what they deserve.
And that is really what this comes down to, making sure
that folks in smaller communities aren't treated like an
afterthought. These programs exist because Congress made a
commitment. And commitments must mean something. I am looking
forward to hearing more from you all in response to my
questions. I only have a limited amount of time, however.
Mr. Pecoraro, I would characterize some goals of any small
community as growing their demand, investing in their airport,
and showing they can sustain reliable service. Most folks would
look at that and say, ``That is success.'' But, in your
testimony, you said some communities end up penalized for that
success when market conditions shift against them.
Mr. Pecoraro, can you further explain what it looks like
when those market conditions turn, and does that kind of shift
end up undoing the progress the communities work so hard to
build?
Mr. Pecoraro. It certainly can. A great example of that is
what happened to a lot of communities during and after the
pandemic, when conditions shifted. People worked from home.
People traveled less. They weren't able to travel. Demand
dropped significantly. Airlines shut down service. Pilot
shortage was exacerbated. And we saw a lot of communities lose
service.
And, under the current rules of the EAS program, it is very
difficult to get back in and use that program to rebuild
successful service that you once had prior to the pandemic. So
one of the things we are encouraging Congress to do is to look
at some kind of a path for some of those communities to get
back in and be able to rebuild that service.
I also note along those lines that the Georgia DOT recently
completed--it used a SCASDP grant very successfully. Focused on
small community air service development to fund marketing,
social media campaigns, advertising to try and build that type
of service across a wide number of airports in Georgia. There
was also increased community awareness of local airports, and
we saw a measurable rise in ticketed passengers in each of the
participating airports. So these programs do work when they are
applied properly.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you.
Ms. Black, you have made it clear in your testimony that
what looks like low demand is often really the result of the
system pulling back first with fewer departures, fewer
destinations, and schedules that no longer work for people. Ms.
Black, where should we begin to stop this pattern of the system
pulling back first?
Ms. Malarkey Black. I think we have to start with two
things at once. First is the fleet. Making sure that we have
the right-sized aircraft to serve smaller communities. And,
equally important, the workforce. We need to have the people to
operate the fleets, to connect these smaller communities to the
hubs and through them and beyond.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. I am surprised I have
got time to yield back, but I shall do so. Thank you.
Mr. Nehls. Very well, Hank.
I now recognize Mr. McDowell.
Mr. McDowell. Thank you, Chairman, and thank you to the
witnesses for being here to testify before our subcommittee
today.
Mr. Pecoraro, what would you say are the top two or three
challenges that threaten small community air service?
Mr. Pecoraro. Pilot shortage, the aging out of regional
aircraft that are appropriately sized for those communities,
and the rising cost of travel.
Mr. McDowell. So you would say that the Essential Air
Service program is vital to rural air connectivity, correct?
Mr. Pecoraro. Absolutely.
Mr. McDowell. So, prior to the Airline Deregulation Act of
1978, the U.S. Government managed the aviation industry, and
the deregulation changed all that and introduced an aviation
based on the free market. I guess my question for you is, why
do you disagree with the criticisms of the EAS program?
Mr. Pecoraro. I don't know that it's so much that I
disagree with the criticism of the program. It's just that I
think that the program, in the 40, almost 50 years since it was
created, hasn't really been updated, and the airline industry
has changed dramatically from what Congress thought it was
going to be when it was deregulated. And I think that that is
why we need to take a hard look at what the program is
accomplishing right now and think about ways to reform it.
I am not saying--I think support continues to be important.
What that support looks like certainly can change. I think it's
foolish to think that everything remains the same, and you
don't need to change things and modify them. But I think that's
where we are today, that we have allowed a certain complacency
to exist when we haven't made those difficult changes.
Mr. McDowell. Ms. Black, how did the airlines' struggle to
find pilots impact regional aviation more than the rest of the
industry?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Regional airlines are the career entry
point. That's normal. We hire the pilots that are coming from
the pipeline. We were in an existing pilot shortage before the
pandemic. And, after the pandemic, when demand sprang back so
much faster than anybody anticipated, our major airline
partners hired voraciously, and they find the best and
brightest working for us.
So, as a result, we parked about one-quarter of our fleet.
We didn't have the pilots to fly them. More specifically, we
didn't have the captains to fly them, because when a major
airline hires, they take a captain, and then we can pull a
first officer from the pipeline. Not only were there not enough
first officers, but we obviously needed to have captains.
So, as a result, one-quarter of the fleet was parked, and
small communities went into crisis. I mean, the amount of air
service that small communities lost was stunning and
devastating.
Mr. McDowell. To that point, how does the loss of air
connectivity materially hurt rural areas and economies?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Well, if you think about it from a
business perspective, you need to be able to get in and out
reasonably. I go and visit small communities as part of my job.
I speak at small community air service associations in States
with smaller service, and it takes a long time to get there.
I go there because it's my job. But, if you are a
recruiter, if you are somebody that's trying to get parts, if
you are trying to see a sick loved one, you need to have
schedules and departures and routes that meet your needs. And,
when we lose the frequency and we lose the destination options,
then suddenly that's not as workable.
Mr. McDowell. So you argue that declining departures from
regional airports can be an imperfect measure of consumer
preference. Why is that?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Specifically, the decline in seats. You
can have an increase in seats, meaning you are actually able to
carry more passengers, but departures and the destination
options are shrinking because you are moving to bigger
airplanes. They take more passengers at once. But they
necessarily have to go to fewer places and less often because
of the way they are doing it.
Mr. McDowell. Mr. Collins, based on your work at the GAO,
do you agree with the other witnesses' statements on the value
of the Essential Air Service program?
Mr. Collins. The Essential Air Service program does provide
a valuable service in that it gives a floor of service to that
community.
Mr. McDowell. So yes.
Mr. Collins. Correct.
Mr. McDowell. All right. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. The gentleman yields.
I thank you so much. Any further questions from any members
of the subcommittee who have not been recognized? I don't see
any.
Listen. I appreciate you all being here. This will conclude
our hearing today. I thought you all did a hell of a job. Great
job.
All right. We will get my dentist friend out of Jersey--all
right. Do you need 30 seconds to prepare, Mr. Van Drew? Are you
set? He is set.
Mr. Van Drew, you are recognized.
Dr. Van Drew. Chairman, I am sorry. I was running around in
between committees, and I apologize to all of you, but I am
glad I made it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me.
As we discuss the future of our rural and small community
air service, I wanted to highlight a provision in the Build
America 250 Act that will provide a real boost to regional
airports and rural airports. I was happy to work with
Representatives Rob Bresnahan and Chris Deluzio on the
Motorcoach Enplanement Pilot Program. You might be familiar
with it. It ensures passengers who begin their trip on an
airline-operated motorcoach connection count as enplanements
for an airport funding purposes. For example, in my airport,
Atlantic City International, if you get on a bus there and you
go to Philadelphia Airport, that counts for Atlantic City,
especially with critical funding.
For many small regional airports, passenger boarding
numbers are critical. They help determine eligibility for
Federal funding and support the infrastructure investments
needed to maintain service. For airports facing service
reductions or airline withdrawals, which we just went through
recently, as you saw with Spirit Airlines--we have got good
news, though. We just met with Breeze, and they are going to
fill in the gaps. Motorcoach enplanements will help preserve
access to the national aviation system. In my district,
Atlantic City International Airport has faced significant
challenges following the closure and reduction of service
associated, as I mentioned, with Spirit.
Airports across the country are experiencing similar
pressures as airlines consolidate service and focus operations
on larger hubs. The Motorcoach Enplanement Pilot Program will
help ensure that smaller communities remain connected, which is
so important. And you saw Pete just speak about that a little
while ago, and it is important for him--Pete Stauber--it is
important for all of us that are in the regional areas, smaller
areas, rural areas, for economic opportunity, for healthcare,
for education, for tourism, and the broader transportation
network, as you all know. And I thank you for your work.
Ms. Black, thank you for being here today. Regional
airlines continue to face pilot supply constraints and rising
operating costs. To what extent are those pressures still
driving service reductions at smaller airports, like all of
ours, and what policy changes would be most effective to
restoring service to underserved communities? Thank you.
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question.
Right now, what we are seeing is that we are seeing a
slight increase in departures nationwide. But it's mixed. And
you can--it just shows that you can have good national numbers
while the individual communities like Lansing and many, many
others are still far, far behind. So it's not so much a
question of if we are still cutting. We have moved up from the
nadir of the pilot shortage in 2023, and we are starting to
rebuild. But that recovery has not reached communities
everywhere, and we still have a long way to go before it does.
Our nonhubs and our nonprimary airports that serve the
smallest rural communities are still down by an enormous
amount. We have a lot of work to do to make sure that the pilot
pipeline can catch up and the fleet is there so we can continue
to reconnect those communities.
Dr. Van Drew. Yes. It is a big issue. We are going to fight
with you shoulder to shoulder to do everything----
Ms. Malarkey Black [interposing]. Thank you.
Dr. Van Drew [continuing]. We can to connect these
communities, because it's a big deal. And it is a big chunk of
America. Not everybody lives in Philly, New York City--I know I
don't have to go through--or Atlanta.
Mr. Dobberstein, thank you for being here today as well.
How will programs that better integrate airports with air
carrier-operated ground transportation help smaller airports
retain relevance and maintain passenger volumes?
Mr. Dobberstein. It is critically important. We were the
recipient of Landline service from Fargo to Minneapolis-St.
Paul, which is about a 4-hour bus ride. It was extremely
successful, but then Landline took our bus and moved it to
Philadelphia for other opportunities there, I think, through
American Airlines. But it worked extremely well for us. The
traveling public embraced it. But I think the ground
transportation is an opportunity for other rural communities to
connect to the national air transportation system.
Dr. Van Drew. I think it is, too. I think it really can
help, and it makes a difference and is relatively convenient.
It is still easier--again, I will just give my own parochial
example. If you have to go to Philly Airport--I would much
rather go out of Atlantic City--but if you have to, certainly,
you just jump on the bus. Everything is prepared, baggage
check, all that, and you go to Philly and you are done. But it
is a much quicker and easier way to do it. And that is
throughout the country for these smaller airports.
Mr. Collins, last question. GAO has documented passenger
leakage from smaller airports to larger hubs. In your view,
have motorcoach enplanements shown promise in helping smaller
communities compete and retain travelers? I know you know the
answer. I know the answer, but I want to hear it.
Mr. Collins. That is a definite yes. In our work,
stakeholders have told us that bus service is a great
opportunity to make sure that rural communities are connected
to the NAS. It may not fit every rural community, but it is an
option for many.
Dr. Van Drew. Thank you. And, to the great chairman, who I
am going to miss a lot when he leaves us in the House of
Representatives, I yield back.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you.
Dr. Van Drew. Thank you, Chairman. We appreciate you.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, sir.
I now recognize Mr. Shreve. Good to see you.
Dr. Van Drew. Mr. Shreve should be happy that I showed up,
or he would have been done for.
Mr. Nehls. That's correct.
Mr. Shreve. Well, I thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
And Ranking Member Carson and I are fellow Hoosiers. I
represent a part of Indianapolis that the airport, IND, is
located in. Mr. Carson has a portion of it, too. I think I have
got the better portion of IND, it includes the FedEx air cargo
operations. The second largest FedEx air hub in the world.
And Indiana is the home of Republic Airways. It is
headquartered there in the metro. And, of course, folks here,
but some of my colleagues may not know that Administrator Bryan
was the very recent former CEO of Republic Airways, and so he
brings that subject matter expertise in the regional feeder
system to the table at both large airports, and, of course,
midsize and smaller ones that are so important to the passenger
infrastructure that we have got in this country.
I appreciate the opportunity to parachute back in. This is
my third time in the room, and I appreciate our four witnesses'
testimony and what you shared with all of us today. I don't
want to retrace ground that may well have been covered by my
colleagues, but maybe tie it off, if I could, with just a
couple of closing questions for consideration that any of the
four of you might have.
If we stay the course from a funding standpoint, if we do
nothing different over the next few years, what is Essential
Air Service into many of the smaller communities that folks
like I represent in Indiana--and I have dozens of public access
airport communities, like Mr. Stauber passionately spoke to--if
we stay the course, funding level and otherwise, what does the
future look like from your four perspectives, your agency
perspectives, in particular, Ms. Black or Mr. Pecoraro?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Thank you for the question. I think our
environment is not static, and our response to the environment
can't be either. And, whether that's air traffic control
modernization, bringing that to all airports of all sizes,
including the digital situational awareness tools they need;
the workforce. You mentioned Republic, they have got Lyft, that
is an incredible investment that the private sector is making
in the future of our workforce. But making sure that more
people from working class backgrounds can afford it through
accessible student loans that cover the full cost of flight
training, making sure that we encourage manufacturing of the
fleet that serve these smaller communities, that is a big one;
and, making sure when we bring safety to airports of all sizes,
that we do it in a way that works with the fleet so that we can
comply, and we can continue to preserve those airports.
Mr. Pecoraro. If we do nothing but leave the funding at the
current levels, which is much appreciated, of course, I think
that you will see communities continue to see a decline in
service, because we won't be attacking the fundamental problems
that they face right now. So that is why we are here to urge
Congress to encourage the U.S. DOT and the FAA to develop a
strategy that can do a better job of providing access to the
national system.
Mr. Shreve. Is the migration away from the smaller regional
jets, the 135s, 145s, primarily a function of insufficient
numbers of pilots, that more than anything else?
Ms. Malarkey Black. Let me make sure I understand your
question. Are you saying the migration away from 135 airports--
or, excuse me, 135 airlines at airports service?
Mr. Shreve. Yes. Ms. Black, I think, in your earlier
testimony, you noted that there were fewer 50-seat passenger
jets in service. And I am not sure if that was from you. But is
that a function of not enough trained crews? And so, where you
have got pilots, you need to put them behind the stick or the
oak of larger regional jets. Is that what is driving that? At
Purdue Airport, they just landed, flagged as United Service,
and they are operating those 50-seat aircraft. So they are
still out there, but there are fewer and fewer of them.
Ms. Malarkey Black. There are fewer. It is a math question.
When you have a limited supply of pilots, the network carriers
try to serve as many passengers at once, and that typically
means deploying larger aircraft, whether that is larger
regionals or, in some cases, mainline. But, of course, not all
communities can support a 76-seat jet, let alone a narrow-body
jet. So we still need that 50-seat fleet.
Unfortunately, that is the exact gap right now. We have got
some scope clause constraints that are labor union contracts
with the major airlines that actually limit the manufacturing
of new regional jets because they limit what kind of jets we
can deploy, including the weight. So it's a complicated issue
for us. But, yes, those are some of the many constraints that
are facing the 50-seat market.
And I will say, with respect to part 135 carriers, they do
have pilot issues because they are a source of great experience
for pilots to come in, but they attrit very quickly to larger
regionals, and then move on through the system.
Mr. Shreve. I appreciate that. My time has expired. But I
just want to clarify: I was referring to the Embraer 135, not
the part 135, with respect to smaller aircraft.
I appreciate the witnesses' testimony, and, Mr. Chairman, I
appreciate the indulgence with the time. Thank you, everyone.
Mr. Nehls. Yes, sir. The gentleman yields. Are there any
further questions from the members of the subcommittee?
Seeing none, this concludes our hearing today. Again, I
want to thank each and every one of you for being here. This
subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:34 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
Submissions for the Record
----------
Letter of June 4, 2026, to Members of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation, from Molly
Grover, President and Chief Executive Officer, Dubuque Area Chamber of
Commerce, Dubuque, Iowa, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
June 4, 2026.
The Honorable Members of the Aviation Subcommittee
Re: Challenges Facing Rural Commercial Air Service
Dear Chair and Members of the Subcommittee:
On behalf of the Dubuque Area Chamber of Commerce and working with
partners Dubuque Air (a public/private partnership representing the
City of Dubuque, Iowa, Dubuque Regional Airport, Dubuque County,
Greater Dubuque Development Corporation, Travel Dubuque, the Chamber
and the Dubuque Racing Association), we appreciate the opportunity to
provide comments regarding the challenges facing rural commercial air
service and the importance of maintaining reliable air transportation
connections for small and mid-sized communities across the United
States.
Commercial air service is an essential component of the economic
vitality, competitiveness, and quality of life of rural America. For
communities such as Dubuque, dependable air service connects residents
to business opportunities, tourism, healthcare, education, and family
networks. It also enables local employers to recruit and retain talent
and provides critical access to national and international markets.
Like many rural airports, Dubuque Regional Airport has experienced
significant challenges in recent years. Industry-wide pilot shortages,
workforce constraints, regional fleet changes, shifting airline network
strategies, and most critically, exponentially rising operating costs
that have reduced service options and increased uncertainty for rural
communities. These challenges have disproportionately affected smaller
markets that rely on regional air service to connect with larger hub
airports.
The consequences extend beyond inconvenience. Limited air service
can hinder economic development efforts, discourage business
investment, and reduce a community's ability to compete in an
increasingly connected economy. Companies evaluating expansion
opportunities routinely consider transportation accessibility when
making location decisions. Reliable air service is therefore not simply
a transportation issue--it is an economic development imperative.
We respectfully urge Congress and federal aviation policymakers to
consider several priorities:
1. Recognize the Economic Impact of Rural Airports and Need for
Alternate Support to Establish Sustainable Air Service. Federal
transportation policy should acknowledge the significant role rural
airports play in supporting regional economies, tourism, manufacturing,
healthcare access, and workforce mobility. Investment in air service is
recognized at every community level from rural to major metropolitan
areas, and should be recognized as the same at a federal level--an
investment rather than a subsidy that will deliver direct economic
returns.
2. Encourage Airline Service Options and Competition. Policies
that foster sustainable regional airline operations and strengthen
connections between rural communities and hub airports will help
preserve access for travelers and businesses alike.
Currently, EAS supported airports are creating an untenable
playing field for non-supported rural airports. EAS funding skews the
advantage for airline resources to those supported communities and
helps set the cost baseline at an unreachable and unsustainable level
for the self-funded. The rising costs of air service operations
combined with the above create an unsustainable business model for non-
supported communities.
3. Strengthen Federal Support for Rural Air Service. Programs that
support connectivity for small communities remain essential. Continued
investment and modernization of federal programs that help sustain
rural air service provide greater stability for communities facing
limited airline options.
As the costs and investment required to build sustainable air
service have risen sharply, we encourage the exploration of additional
support mechanisms to help the rural communities caught in between full
federal subsidy and complete self-funding. The current skewed
competitive playing field and unsustainable business model outlined
above are prohibiting the successful establishment of service in many
communities. A scaling of the SCASD program by 10x, or a new program
recently proposed using international travel fees, could help create
this added or new level of support to build lasting air service for
these economic regions.
Dubuque and communities like ours are resilient, innovative, and
growing. However, our continued success depends on reliable access to
the national transportation system. Rural airports serve as critical
gateways that connect local economies to broader opportunities. Federal
policies that strengthen rural air service will help ensure that
residents and businesses in communities of all sizes can participate
fully in the nation's economic future.
Thank you for your leadership on this important issue and for your
consideration of the challenges facing rural commercial air service. We
welcome the opportunity to work with Congress, the Federal Aviation
Administration, and industry partners to develop solutions that
preserve and enhance air connectivity for rural America.
Sincerely,
Molly Grover,
President and CEO, Dubuque Area Chamber of Commerce.
Letter and Attachment of June 9, 2026, from Jack Waldorf, Executive
Director, Western Governors' Association, to Hon. Troy E. Nehls,
Chairman, and Hon. Andre Carson, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Aviation, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Troy E. Nehls
June 9, 2026.
The Honorable Troy Nehls,
Chairman,
Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives, 2251 Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Andre Carson,
Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives, 2164 Rayburn House
Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
Dear Chairman Nehls and Ranking Member Carson:
In light of the Subcommittee's June 4 hearing, ``Connecting Rural
America to the National Airspace System,'' attached please find Western
Governors' Association Policy Resolution 2024-06, Transportation
Infrastructure in the Western United States.
Reliable air service is essential infrastructure for many remote
communities. Western Governors support legislative actions to secure
and maintain the longevity of the Essential Air Service and Small
Community Air Service Development Programs.
I request that you include this document in the permanent record of
the hearing, as it articulates Western Governors' collective and
bipartisan policy recommendations on this important issue.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. Please contact me
if you have any questions or require further information.
Sincerely,
Jack Waldorf,
Executive Director, Western Governors' Association.
Attachment
__________
Attachment
Western Governors' Association
Policy Resolution 2024-06
Transportation Infrastructure in the Western United States
A. BACKGROUND
Jobs, the economy, and quality of life in the West depend on high-
quality transportation infrastructure that efficiently, effectively,
and safely moves goods and people. Western states' national highways,
ports, and railways are essential gateways for our nation's exports
while small and medium airports serve as economic engines and essential
connections for rural western communities.
The infrastructure in the region is under strain from both
increased movement of goods and people and from underinvestment in
preservation, repair, and new infrastructure. Additionally, increasing
fuel efficiency coupled with a commensurate decrease in gas tax revenue
has led to a decrease in the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). Electric
vehicles are simultaneously increasing throughout the West, spurring
new investments in transportation charging, grid enhancement, and other
infrastructure.
B. GOVERNORS' POLICY STATEMENT
1. Western Governors believe there is a strong federal role, in
partnership with states and local governments, for continued investment
in our surface transportation network. This is particularly important
for federal routes and for multimodal transportation networks that are
critical to interstate commerce and a growing economy throughout the
West. These routes and networks traverse hundreds of miles without
traffic densities sufficient to either make public-private partnerships
feasible or allow state and local governments to raise capital beyond
the historic cost share. Many western states also feature vast expanses
of federal lands, which cannot be directly taxed to generate dollars
for transportation improvements.
2. Western Governors believe the current project decision-making
role of state and local governments, with meaningful participation from
affected communities, particularly tribes and other historically
underserved communities, in investment decisions should continue.
Western Governors desire additional flexibility to determine how and
where to deploy investment to maximize the use of scarce resources.
3. Western Governors believe that a viable, long-term funding
mechanism is critical to the maintenance and upgrade of our surface
transportation network and encourage Congress to work together to
identify a workable solution that adequately funds the unique needs of
the West.
4. Western Governors believe in enhancing the ability to leverage
scarce resources by supplementing traditional base funding by creating
and enhancing financing mechanisms and tools that are appropriate for
all areas of the United States, including those with low traffic
densities where tolling and public-private partnerships are not
feasible. Western Governors urge agencies to consider strategies to
streamline and clarify Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to reduce
confusion for small communities. Western Governors also support
reducing barriers to application, specifically for small communities.
5. Western Governors believe using the historic formula-based
approach for the distribution of funds would ensure that both rural and
urban states participate in any infrastructure initiative, and it would
deliver the benefits of an infrastructure initiative to the public
promptly. Alongside supporting robust block grant funding, Western
Governors urge Congress and the United States Department of
Transportation (USDOT) to consider additional ways to provide flexible
funding for states to allow them to quickly address their most pressing
needs.
6. Western Governors believe the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) and the
programs it supports are critically important to the success of efforts
to maintain and improve America's surface transportation
infrastructure. Currently, the HTF is not able to support federal
surface transportation program levels and will not meet the future
needs of the growing country. Congress must be prepared to address
these deficiencies and identify new, non-traditional transportation
revenue streams that can provide consistent and increasing funding
levels for the core transportation infrastructure that keeps this
nation on the move. Congress must provide a long-term solution to
ensure HTF solvency and provide for increased, sustainable federal
transportation investment through the HTF. Western Governors urge
Congress and USDOT to identify and dedicate diverse revenue sources to
fund the HTF.
7. Western Governors believe modern port infrastructure, including
inland ports, is essential to strong national and western economies and
urge Congress to fully fund the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and to
reform the Harbor Maintenance Tax distribution to ensure western ports
remain competitive.
8. Furthermore, Western Governors believe the federal government
must work collaboratively with states, along with ports, local
governments, and key private sector transportation providers like the
railroads, to ensure the necessary public and private investments to
move imports and exports efficiently through the intermodal system, as
well as community organizers and the Environmental Protection Agency's
National Environmental Justice Advisory Council, to effectively
mitigate environmental and public health impacts to port communities.
9. As new sources of transportation investment revenues are
considered, Congress is encouraged to limit narrowly defined
discretionary programs in favor of providing flexibility for states to
direct federal resources to meet their unique needs.
10. Western Governors recognize the benefit of and appreciate the
renewed focus on incorporating American-made products into
transportation projects. However, the availability of American-made
materials and manufactured goods continues to lag behind demand that
has resulted. Western Governors urge Congress and the USDOT to maintain
a robust process for the thoughtful consideration of Buy America
waivers until the resurgence of American production is fully complete.
11. Western Governors have made great strides in the last 20 years
in improving air and water quality as well as preserving resources. In
the case of environmental regulatory issues, the need to exercise care
in protecting the environment is inherent in all public works, and
accountability is held by the citizenry. Congress is encouraged to
consider how best to streamline the deployment of transportation
improvements while accounting for environmental impacts.
12. Efficient and streamlined permitting processes are essential
to ensuring robust transportation systems. Refer to WGA policy
regarding the Governors' collective policy on permitting, including
Policy Resolution 2023-10, Infrastructure Permitting.
13. Western Governors support a flexible federal transportation
program that affords the opportunity to invest in urban and rural
transportation needs including safety, congestion relief, mobility
options, connectivity, and new or innovative transportation solutions
including passenger rail.
14. Western Governors emphasize western states' collaborative
efforts to improve the planning and siting of electric vehicle (EV)
charging infrastructure to promote equitable access, particularly along
highway corridors, freight corridors and hubs, rural areas, underserved
communities, or anywhere that users do not have the ability to charge
at home. We encourage Congress and the Administration to rely on the
on-the-ground knowledge of the states when designing federal programs
and allocating surface transportation and infrastructure funds focused
on EV infrastructure. Coordinating with these multi-state groups would
help promote targeted investments and partnerships that expand
cohesive, regional EV charging networks.
15. Reliable air service is essential infrastructure for many
remote communities. Air service is critical not only for recreation and
tourism, but also for many remote communities, it provides the only
efficient way to bring in critical personnel, such as doctors or
emergency services. Western Governors encourage the executive branch to
include full funding for the Essential Air Service (EAS) and Small
Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) programs in the
President's annual budget request. Western Governors also support
legislative actions to secure and maintain the longevity of these
programs.
C. GOVERNORS' MANAGEMENT DIRECTIVE
1. The Governors direct WGA staff to work with Congressional
committees of jurisdiction, the Executive Branch, and other entities,
where appropriate, to achieve the objectives of this resolution.
2. Furthermore, the Governors direct WGA staff to consult with the
Staff Advisory Council regarding its efforts to realize the objectives
of this resolution and to keep the Governors apprised of its progress
in this regard.
This resolution will expire in June 2027. Western Governors enact new
policy resolutions and amend existing resolutions on a semiannual
basis. Please consult http://www.westgov.org/resolutions for the most
current copy of a resolution and a list of all current WGA policy
resolutions.
Appendix
----------
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to Faye Malarkey Black, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Regional Airline Association, from Hon.
Sharice Davids
Question 1. Ms. Black, we have seen numerous proposed presidential
budgets that either significantly reduce funding for EAS or flat out
scrap the program. Can you walk us through how reducing funding or
eliminating the entire EAS program could negatively impact not just
rural communities but suburban and exurban communities, as well?
Answer. When a community loses its EAS service, the air traffic it
used to send into the network is also reduced. This impacts its
surroundings in multiple ways. First, the loss disconnects communities
directly. Loss of air service can sharply curtail residents' ability to
travel to medical specialists, universities, military installations,
customers, suppliers, and family members, and businesses lose the
ability to recruit talent and stay connected to markets. These effects
extend into the surrounding suburban and exurban economies.
In Kansas, regional airlines provide roughly 75 percent of the
state's scheduled departures, and five Kansas communities depend on
EAS--Dodge City, Garden City, Hays, Liberal, and Salina. Without
regional airlines, these communities would almost certainly lose their
connection to the national air service network. Essential Air Service
flights feed passengers into the medium and large hubs that suburban
and exurban travelers use every day.
The loss of these EAS passengers also weakens the hubs that they
once connected through. For example, in 2024, four of Kansas' five EAS
routes connected through Denver International Airport (DEN), which is a
significant hub for EAS routes across the Western United States, at
which regional airlines operate more than 20 percent of the total
departures. EAS service in one state supports connectivity locally, as
well as elsewhere in the state or even in other states.
Figure 1. RAA 2025 Annual Report Air Service Snapshot of Colorado and
Kansas
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
There is also a safety cost. When air service disappears, many
passengers travel by road instead. NHTSA recorded 39,254 fatalities in
2024, and communities along the rural community-to-airport driving
route are exposed to elevated risk, as rural roads carry a fatality
rate 1.5 times higher than urban roads.
Additionally, Essential Air Service is a powerful force multiplier,
with a return on investment far exceeding program costs. Before the
pandemic, commercial service at EAS airports alone generated
approximately $2.3 billion in economic impact and more than 17,000
jobs. Small community air service overall generated $152.8 billion in
annual economic impact, $41.3 billion in payroll, and 1.1 million jobs
nationwide. In Kansas, small community air service in 2019 generated
$1.3 billion in economic impact, $300 million in payroll, and 10,400
jobs.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Zoe Lindemuth, Deborah Meehan, William Swelbar, and Albert
Zhong, Economic Impact of Small Community Airports (Regional Airline
Association, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the 2025 shutdown, EAS subsidies were funded only weeks at a
time. While our members reassured communities of their continued
commitment despite possible funding lapses, funding uncertainty can
affect passenger confidence in the routes and undermine markets. We're
grateful Congress has consistently protected EAS, and we're encouraged
the House FY27 THUD bill continues that commitment. We urge lawmakers
to avoid future shutdowns that can harm the program.
Question 2. What are RAA's policy recommendations to help
communities attract air service?
Answer:
Fix the pilot pipeline
The single most important thing Congress can do to help communities
attract air service is to rebuild the pilot pipeline. A community can
do everything right and still fail to attract air service if there are
not enough pilots to fly the routes. More than 40% of the qualified
pilot workforce faces mandatory retirement within fifteen years, and
major-airline hiring will resume as aircraft deliveries catch up. The
specific steps to strengthen the pilot pipeline are in my answer to
Question 4.
Support the tools communities use to compete
In the cases where a regional airline decides where it flies, a
strong community partnership behind the route usually supports success.
Local leaders, airports, and elected officials work with carriers,
sometimes backing routes with revenue guarantees or incentive funds
while the market matures.
The Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) helps
communities build these packages. The FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024
raised authorized SCASDP funding to $15 million a year and directed the
Department of Transportation (DOT) to prioritize communities that have
lost service. Congress should consider whether additional funding,
longer grant terms, or stronger transition tools would help communities
sustain service after a grant period ends.
Additionally, certain airports in Wyoming and New Mexico use
successful public-private models to share the risk of launching or
rebuilding service. Congress should consider if similar models might
help support other states, keeping in mind that not every community has
the same resources to pay into these models.
Protect Essential Air Service
For the smallest communities, EAS is what makes service possible at
all. Full funding is a precondition for those communities to hold the
service they have and to attract carriers willing to serve them.
Encourage production of modern, right-sized fleet
Meanwhile, as expenses rise for all airlines, they carry a
disproportionate impact on aircraft with fewer seats to absorb them,
which makes small-community flying harder to sustain.
The regional jets and other aircraft that serve small communities
are aging, and the industry has limited options to replace them with
more efficient and sustainable modern aircraft. Scope clause limits
have discouraged investment in modern regional aircraft.
Congress does not write private labor contracts, but it can examine
the public impact when those limits shape which aircraft are available
to serve small communities. The communities have no seat at that table,
but they feel the result when the aircraft they need are not built or
deployed. Without aircraft scaled to smaller markets, service
concentrates at larger airports and the smallest communities lose
service. We believe examining the constraints that discourage
investment in new right-sized aircraft with enhanced efficiency is part
of keeping small-community routes viable.
Enhance safety and modernize ATC tools at smaller airports
Safety should also reach airports of all sizes: situational-
awareness tools for contract towers, stronger communications, and
required position communication on the Common Traffic Advisory
Frequency (CTAF) at non-towered airports. RAA supports H.R. 8597.
While making these enhancements, Congress should ensure required
integration is designed for all fleet types, and does not inadvertently
exclude the only aircraft serving smaller communities. Regional
airlines strongly support improved collision-avoidance safety. We
believe ACAS-X is the strongest long-term solution. Timelines for in-
panel installation should reflect the certification, integration,
installation, and supply-chain work each fleet requires, much of which
is outside carrier control, but that should not stop Congress from
requiring improvements far more rapidly. We recommend an interim bridge
to deploy Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) based ADS-B In and improve safety
on a rapid timeline.
Question 3. Can you walk the Committee through your perception of
the current state of the workforce in regional aviation--from
technicians to pilots to attendants, where are we doing well and where
do you perceive challenges?
Answer:
Pilots
As of June 2026, 128,733 pilots held an Airline Transport Pilot,
Airplane Multi-Engine Land (ATP AMEL) certificate with a valid first-
class medical. These are the pilots qualified to fly, and they are
aging. Within five years, 13 percent of those qualified pilots will
face mandatory retirement. Within fifteen years, 40.7 percent must
retire.
The pilot supply pipeline has improved compared to the height of
the pandemic-era shortage, which drove thirteen regional airline
bankruptcies or liquidations and forced airlines to park more than a
quarter of the industry's fleet without pilots. Last year, attrition
temporarily slowed in response to delayed aircraft deliveries and a
related, temporary pause in major airline hiring. The underlying
problem has not been solved.
New ATP AMEL issuances fell 19 percent in 2025 compared with 2024
and fell 32 percent vs the peak we saw in 2023. The pipeline is ticking
up modestly in 2026, projected to produce roughly 8,169 new pilots
(using a 12-month rolling average). New certificates also do not
translate into new available pilots. Roughly two out of every three do
not become net growth in the qualified pilot pool.
Meanwhile, the pipeline, while improved, cannot sustain a return to
normal hiring. The largest major airlines alone hired an average of
8,668 pilots per year since 2022, a span that includes post-pandemic
hiring surges as well as the recent suppressed hiring era due to
aircraft delivery delays. Charted against 2026's production pace of
roughly 8,169, normal-era pilot hiring already exceeds current
production, before any growth or service recovery is accounted for.
Before the liquidation of Spirit Airlines and fuel price surges,
major airline hiring was exceeding new pilot production each month. On
May 2, 2026, Spirit Airlines liquidated, releasing more than 2,000
qualified pilots into the pool. Even so, the largest major airlines
have now hired a number equivalent to 79 percent of this year's newly
qualified pilots. Our biggest workforce challenge is that the pilot
pipeline is not keeping up with retirements, let alone the additional
pilots needed to meet airline growth and customer demand. Airlines must
also hire more pilots compared with before, to staff larger reserve
pools for reliability. Intensive hiring years also require pilots to
devote more pilot time to training duties than in the past.
One thing our nation is doing well is reflected in the growth of
structured training pathways. In the first half of 2026, 34.2 percent
of original ATP AMEL issuances carried restricted privileges, meaning
roughly one in three new ATP pilots now comes through a Restricted Air
Transport Pilot (R-ATP) pathway. These are the pilots who use
structured training combined with flight hours to achieve their first
officer qualifications. That share has grown from near zero when the
pathway was created in 2013 and has held steady in recent years. The
Pilot Source Studies found that pilots who come through structured,
accredited training programs perform better in airline training than
those who accumulate hours through less structured routes, and that
matches what our members see. We can increase the pilots using these
training pathways by addressing the financial, geographic, and access
barriers that continue to limit who can reach them.
Maintenance technicians
The maintenance technician shortage is an increasing threat to air
service. Industry forecasts project a North American shortfall of more
than 24,000 technicians, peaking around 2027. Maintenance is the
foundation of safety--no aircraft flies until a technician has found it
airworthy. This is another area where shortages will hit the regional
airlines first, as we are generally the career entry point for
maintenance technicians, and not only do we lose technicians to
attrition by larger airlines but also due to competition from well-
resourced industries outside aviation.
This challenge continues to need Congress's attention, and our full
recommendations are outlined in my response to Question 4.
Additional workforce
While other sectors have been comparatively stable, we do see pain
points. For example, while the flight attendant pipeline remains strong
for most carriers, some have reported increased attrition and highlight
concerns that while many interested candidates present to flight
attendant recruiters, a much smaller subset complete the steps for
successful onboarding. Regional airlines compete for talent with larger
airlines with larger aircraft and longer routes, with vastly higher
revenue to support higher pay. Regionals are investing to narrow this
gap within the realities of smaller aircraft and dramatically lower
revenues. Regionals are also reinforcing a positive airline culture,
communicating with candidates, and refining recruiting processes to
increase successful recruiting to onboarding throughput. Pilots and
technicians are our focus for Congress because the challenges
associated with these workforce sectors present high air service risk.
Question 4. To that end, what are the most important steps in your
estimation Congress can take to address workforce shortages in the
airline industry?
Answer. The steps below strengthen the pilot pipeline and the
maintenance workforce.
Pilots
Open the career path by expanding financial access. Pilot
training adds roughly $100,000 on top of the cost of a college
education, and unlike students headed into medicine or law, students in
accredited professional pilot programs cannot access adequate federal
lending. That barrier keeps qualified people out of the profession for
reasons that have nothing to do with ability. Congress should raise the
federal student loan cap for accredited flight training, paired with
accountability standards for program quality. One way of doing this is
by recognizing eligible professional pilot programs as professional
degree programs, better reflecting the cost of the education, training,
and licensure required for hire. The Wings Act, introduced yesterday by
Representative Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), would do just this and RAA
strongly supports this legislation.
Expand GI Bill coverage for flight training. Today a
veteran must already hold a private pilot license before GI Bill
benefits apply to flight training, and coverage gaps leave high out-of-
pocket costs that stop veterans from using benefits they earned through
service. Congress should amend the GI Bill to cover the private pilot
license and all elements of flight training and should reject efforts
to cap veterans' benefits for this purpose.
Retake U.S. leadership on pilot retirement age. The
mandatory pilot retirement age was raised to 65 in 2007, with no
negative safety impact. Other key aviation nations are leading on this
issue at ICAO, and the United States, as one of ICAO's largest members,
should be a leader on this work. Congress should direct DOT and FAA
leadership to press the issue at ICAO. Raising the age will not solve
the shortage alone, but would help preserve experienced aviators while
allowing the training pipeline more time to catch up.
Oversee FAA's Implementation of the Enhanced
Qualifications Program (EQP). This is first and foremost a safety
measure. Section 372 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 directs the
FAA to establish an EQP with scenario-based training, a structured
curriculum, and modern simulator technology. The EQP gives pilots more
structured, scenario-based, crew-oriented training while reducing the
gap between completion of structured training and airline hiring, where
skills can soften. The program must be rigorous and standardized, and
the FAA should implement it with urgency and consistency. Congress
should also ensure that pilots receive structured training credit on
successful completion, consistent with existing R-ATP pathways.
Maintenance workforce
Sustain and build on the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.
That law quadrupled the aviation maintenance workforce development
grant program and directed the FAA to maintain modern Airman
Certification Standards through industry collaboration. That foundation
needs to be maintained and finished before the shortage peaks around
2027.
Build on the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024's
maintenance workforce development grant program through sustained
funding. Support the creation of more Designated Mechanic Examiners
(DMEs)--expanded access to mechanic certification testing will ensure
that qualified candidates are not held back by testing bottlenecks.
Help veterans transition into civilian maintenance
careers, where their skills are badly needed, by encouraging the FAA to
finish the military competency test pathway required in the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 2024.
We urge recognition of aviation maintenance as a STEM
career pathway, so young people find it earlier.
Taken together, the above steps address the two workforces that
face the biggest structural challenge--pilots and technicians--by
building quality and access into the pipeline rather than lowering the
bar. In an industry where safety comes first, that is the right way to
solve a workforce problem.
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to Faye Malarkey Black, President
and Chief Executive Officer, Regional Airline Association, from Hon.
Greg Stanton
Question 1. In your assessment, what happens to a community's
economic development prospects when reliable air service is reduced or
eliminated?
Answer. Regional air service is a substantial driver of local and
national economic activity. Prior to the pandemic, across hundreds of
communities nationwide, air service to the smallest communities (small,
non-hub and nonprimary airports with commercial service) alone drove
more than $152 billion in annual economic output, 1.1 million jobs, and
$41.3 billion in wages and earnings. In Arizona, that air service
generated $4.2 billion in economic impact, $1.2 billion in payroll, and
34,100 jobs.\1\ When reliable air service is reduced or eliminated, a
community loses practical access to medical specialists, universities,
military installations, customers, suppliers, and family members, and
local businesses lose the ability to recruit talent and stay connected
to markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Zoe Lindemuth, Deborah Meehan, William Swelbar, and Albert
Zhong, Economic Impact of Small Community Airports (Regional Airline
Association, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passengers respond to the network available to them, so reduced
frequency and eliminated destinations change travel behavior; some
trips are never taken, and other travelers with the time and means to
do so drive to more distant airports instead. Both outcomes represent
lost economic activity for the local community, even when it is
sometimes mistaken for a simple lack of demand. Additionally, a
community can lose connectivity even if it still retains air service.
Flagstaff is a useful illustration. The airport lost its Denver service
at the peak of the pilot shortage in 2022, even though its flights had
respectable load factors. The community continues to have air service,
but the connectivity has been reduced by fewer destination options and
less frequency.
Given the substantial fixed costs airlines must absorb to start or
restore service in a smaller market, that lost connectivity is often
more difficult and expensive to recover than it would have been to
preserve in the first place, meaning the economic damage from lost air
service can compound and persist well beyond the initial service
reduction.
The effects also reach beyond the community itself. Arizona's EAS
communities connect to the national network through Phoenix Sky Harbor,
where regional airlines operate roughly 20 percent of departures.
Service in one part of the state supports the health of hubs in another
part of the state.
Question 2. Given that the regional aircraft fleet is aging, what
is the long-term outlook for maintaining adequate service to smaller
markets?
Answer. The long-term outlook is concerning, largely because of
scope clause policy. Scope clause caps are provisions in major airline
pilot-union contracts, which cap regional aircraft at 50, 70, or 76
seats with an 86,000-pound takeoff weight limit. For years, regional
airlines and their major airline partners have operated within a
constrained aircraft environment driven by these limitations.
Today's most advanced, fuel-efficient jet engines burn cleaner but
are heavier, and that added weight causes modern regional jets to
exceed the weight limits of every major airline scope clause. This has
effectively frozen regional fleets at older propulsion technology and
deterred manufacturers from developing next-generation regional
aircraft. Saab, Bombardier, British Aerospace, Beech, Fairchild-
Dornier, and most recently Mitsubishi have all stopped investing in new
regional aircraft, and each has cited scope clause limitations as the
primary reason. The result is a structural gap in the regional fleet at
exactly the aircraft size many small communities need.
Congress does not write private labor contracts, but it can examine
the public impact when those limits shape which aircraft are available
to serve small communities. The communities have no seat at that table,
but they feel the result when the aircraft they need are not built or
deployed.
Larger, 76-seat aircraft are not a universal substitute. Scope
limitations restrict how many can be operated, and runway constraints,
airport infrastructure, market size, and operating economics make them
unsuitable for some communities, which lose air service altogether
rather than receive larger aircraft. Emerging aircraft technologies may
help in the future, but communities facing air service challenges today
need aircraft that are available, certifiable, and economically viable
now.
Question 3. What are the specific factors that make smaller
community air service economically challenging to sustain under the
current model?
Answer:
Pilot supply:
The constrained pilot pipeline is the largest pressure on small-
community service. A community can do everything right and still lose
service. During the worst stages of the pilot shortage, nearly every
major and regional airline CEO discussed, in published reports and in
regulated quarterly earnings calls, how deep air service losses to
otherwise profitable smaller communities were the direct result of the
pilot shortage. Without enough pilots to fly every route, aircraft that
can be crewed are deployed on routes where they can carry more
passengers at once. This consolidates capacity in larger markets and
leaves the thinnest routes most exposed, because they do not have
sufficient passengers to support air service by larger aircraft. When
airlines attempt to deploy oversized aircraft to thin markets, loss of
frequency and destination options can further erode passenger use as
discussed above. This vicious cycle damages the underlying economics of
the route and puts it at even higher risk.
Cost distribution:
Smaller aircraft have fewer seats over which to distribute
operating costs, making lower-density routes inherently more sensitive
to changes in labor, maintenance, airport, financing, fuel, and
infrastructure costs on a per-passenger basis.
Pilot compensation:
The pilot shortage led airlines to substantially increase pilot
compensation to attract qualified aviators in an extraordinarily
competitive labor market. These investments helped attract candidates
but also materially increased the cost of operating smaller aircraft on
lower-density routes.
Fuel price exposure:
While major airline partners typically purchase fuel under Capacity
Purchase Agreements, prices still influence broader network economics;
carriers operating under pro-rate arrangements, where the regional
airline retains ticket revenue and bears more direct cost exposure,
face even greater volatility risk.
Startup and transition costs:
Starting or restoring service after a disruption requires building
local operations, securing facilities and ground equipment,
establishing fuel and handling arrangements, staffing the station,
supporting marketing and community awareness, and integrating the
service into the broader network. These costs can be substantial,
particularly in rural markets served by one or only a few carriers and
must be recovered over a relatively small passenger base.
Aircraft availability:
Scope clause limits on aircraft size and, especially, weight have
narrowed the range of aircraft that manufacturers are willing to build
for the regional segment, particularly smaller aircraft that are the
best fit for small communities.
Community economics:
During the hearing, you used Flagstaff as an example of a community
that struggles to generate the local financial support to compete for
Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) grants, and
that is a reality.
In my written statement, I explained that some very small
communities, including those in Wyoming and New Mexico, use public-
private models that share the risk of launching or rebuilding service.
While there are other ways to partner with carriers than doing so
financially, the reality is that airports that can keep their own costs
down, and communities that can help set revenue guarantees or otherwise
contribute tend to attract more air service because they help to
instill market certainty. Under SCASDP, US Department of Transportation
prioritizes those programs.
At the same time, not every community can partner in the same way.
This is a reality that our organization has discussed for decades,
including in our opposition to a local share requirement for the EAS
program. We believe a community that can't raise local funds shouldn't
be shut out of the chance to compete for federal help for that reason
alone.
Congress might examine SCASDP to see if there is a way to give some
relief to communities that genuinely can't pay in, so that a
community's need for air service, and perhaps its creativity in counts
alongside what it can contribute. Beyond that, we'd recommend
strengthening SCASDP with adequate funding, longer grant terms, and
better tools to help communities hold onto service after the grant
period ends.
Post-Hearing Questions for the Record to Shawn Dobberstein, A.A.E.,
Executive Director, Hector International Airport, Fargo, North Dakota,
on behalf of the American Association of Airport Executives, from Hon.
Greg Stanton
Question 1. In your assessment, what happens to a community's
economic development prospects when reliable air service is reduced or
eliminated?
Answer. Reliable air service is one of the key pieces of economic
infrastructure that allows small and rural communities to compete. When
that service is reduced or eliminated, the effects go beyond passenger
inconvenience. It becomes harder for communities to attract and retain
employers, support tourism, connect local businesses to customers and
suppliers, recruit professionals, and provide residents with access to
other economic centers. Communities without reliable air service can
become less competitive for investment because businesses often look
for dependable connectivity when deciding where to locate or expand.
Reduced service can also create a downward spiral: fewer flights and
poorer schedules push travelers to drive to larger airports, that
passenger leakage weakens the local market, and airlines then have even
less incentive to maintain service.
Question 2. Given that the regional aircraft fleet is aging, what
is the long-term outlook for maintaining adequate service to smaller
markets?
Answer. The long-term outlook for air service to smaller markets is
impacted by the shrinking regional aircraft fleet. Many smaller
communities historically depended on smaller regional aircraft that
could support multiple daily frequencies with right-sized capacity. As
those aircraft age and are retired, airlines are increasingly shifting
to larger, more efficient aircraft. While that may make sense from an
airline cost perspective, it can leave smaller markets with fewer
frequencies, less convenient schedules, or no viable service at all
because those markets may not be able to consistently fill larger
aircraft. Long term, service to smaller communities will likely require
new aircraft types and business models that can economically connect
smaller communities, as well as continued investment in aviation
workforce programs, and support for tools like EAS and SCASDP.
Question 3. What are the specific factors that make smaller
community air service economically challenging to sustain under the
current model?
Answer. Smaller community air service is challenging because the
economics are thin and the risks are high. These markets often have
lower passenger volumes, fewer daily flights, and limited ability to
absorb disruptions. Airlines are facing higher operating costs,
including fuel, labor, maintenance, and aircraft costs, while also
managing pilot, mechanic, ground workforce, and air traffic control
staffing constraints. At the same time, the reduction of smaller
regional aircraft and the shift to larger aircraft can reduce frequency
or make service uneconomic in markets that cannot support larger
planes. Smaller communities also face passenger leakage when travelers
drive to larger airports for lower fares, more nonstop options, or
better schedules. Capacity constraints at major connecting hubs can
make the problem worse, because smaller markets may be the first to
lose service when airlines have to make choices about how to use scarce
aircraft, crews, and slots. That is why AAAE believes Congress should
fully fund EAS, expand SCASDP, extend infrastructure investments,
support the Contract Tower Program, continue aviation workforce
development, and modernize the air traffic control system.
[all]