[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 25 (Wednesday, March 8, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1247-S1254]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
WENDELL H. FORD AVIATION INVESTMENT AND REFORM ACT FOR THE 21ST
CENTURY--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will now
proceed to the consideration of the conference report accompanying H.R.
1000 which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The committee on conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill, H.R.
1000, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their
respective Houses this report, signed by a majority of the
conferees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to
the consideration of the conference report.
(The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the
Record of today, March 8, 2000.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 60
minutes of debate with 20 minutes under the control of the majority
leader, 20 minutes under the control of the Democratic leader, and 20
minutes under the control of the Senator from New Jersey, Mr.
Lautenberg.
The Senator from Washington.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that I appear
here today with my friend and colleague from West Virginia, Senator
Rockefeller, to present to the Senate the
[[Page S1248]]
conference report on the Federal Aviation Administration
reauthorization measure. The compromise reached in this legislation is
not only fair but constructive. It will provide necessary increases
especially in capital funds for our aviation infrastructure and does
provide a reasonable balance with the needs of that system and our
limited Federal resources.
I went to the conference committee on this bill with a unique
perspective because I sit on the Budget and Appropriations Committees
as well as serving as the chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee. My
duties on these committees allowed me to see the hard choices that must
be made to stay within our tight budgets.
The final agreement reached with Chairman Shuster in the House
ensures the trust fund revenues will be used for aviation spending. I
joined Senator Domenici in supporting the Senate position on this
issue, a position that allows for expenditure of these revenues for
their intended purposes without tying the hands of the Appropriations
Committee. That was an integral part of the final passage, and I
commend Senator Domenici for his hard work on this issue, together with
the tremendous contributions we received from Senator Stevens.
One issue with which I have some reservations is amending the Death
on the High Seas Act. I am pleased that the resolution amends the
statute to bring the anachronistic law more up to date by allowing the
recovery of certain types of non-economic damages. The resolution
removes the cap on these damages contained in the Senate bill. I am
also pleased that we have clearly retained the prohibition on punitive
damages, which are not designed to compensate and which are so often
abused. I think the resolution is good insofar as it reflects the
Senate approach of keeping most aviation accidents on the high seas
within the statute, thereby providing some semblance of certainty and
uniformity. I have reservations, however, about the change demanded by
the House conferees retroactively to change, from three to twelve
nautical miles, the distance from the U.S. shore at which the Death on
the High Seas act applies. Those who have wanted to take commercial
aviation accident cases on the high seas out of DOHSA altogether have
argued that this will cure the unfairness of different recoveries based
on the chance of the accident happening over land or over the high
seas. I have strongly disagreed with that proposition. Eliminating
DOHSA leaves you with a dizzying array of State, Federal, foreign, or
perhaps, no, law about which lawyers can fight endlessly, further
postponing recovery. I trust those who have demanded that we complicate
the federal law retroactively to take TWA Flight 800 litigation out of
the coverage of DOHSA have fully considered the effects of that change.
My concerns with this issue are balanced with the positive aspects of
this bill such as the removal of slot restrictions at Chicago O'Hare,
Washington National, and the two New York airports. These provisions
will improve competition, reduce fares, and provide additional service
to small communities.
Another provision which will stimulate competition and help to bridge
the funding gap that currently exists is an increase in the cap on the
passenger facility charge. This provision gets to the heart of my
guiding philosophy, which is to give local officials more decision-
making power.
Although I favor an increase in the cap on the PFC, I realize that
this is just one piece of the puzzle. We must look at the issues of our
national aviation system in a larger context if we are going to meet
the capacity demands of the 21st century. We cannot rely on unlimited
federal funding to solve all of our problems. We must stretch our
finite resources as far as possible.
A prime example of this is the modernization of the air traffic
control system. This process has been ongoing for more than 15 years.
We can no longer allow the program to continue the ``stops and starts''
of the past. Improvements must get on track, or, as the National Civil
Aviation Review Commission warned us, the growing demand for air
services combined with outdated equipment will soon bring gridlock and
serious concerns about safety.
The Federal Aviation Commission needs to spare no effort over the
next few years to modernize the air traffic control system. All of this
needs to be done right, and be done now, to ensure continued safety and
efficiency in the aviation industry.
Reforming the way in which the Federal Aviation Administration does
business, and ensuring it is as efficient as possible, is a positive
first step. This bill contains provisions, which I worked on with
Senator Rockefeller, to move the Federal Aviation Administration in the
direction of being a more business-like entity. Positive reforms, not
just increased funding, are integral to achieving our goal.
Although these reforms are a positive first step, I will continue to
explore other possible options such as corporatization of the air
traffic control system as the 2nd session of the 106th Congress
continues. I believe we can learn from the work of countries such as
Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, which have moved to privately run
systems. The concerns of general aviation will be of paramount
importance to me as this debate continues, and I welcome the input of
all interested parties.
In summary, this agreement will allow both sides to reach our common
goal, which is to ensure that we continue to have the safest, most
efficient aviation system well into the 21st century.
I would like to take a minute to thank the Senate staff who worked
tirelessly on this issue: Aviation subcommittee staff, Ann Choiniere,
Mike Reynolds, Sam Whitehorn, and Julia Krauss ably tended the
technical provisions of the bill. Wally Burnett with Senator Stevens,
and Cheryle Tucker with Senator Domenici were vital in negotiations
over budgetary issues.
I also thank Jim Sartucci and Keith Hennessey from Senator Lott's
staff for assisting with the final negotiations.
Last but certainly not least are my own staff members. I thank Jeanne
Bumpus for her diligent efforts on the Death on the High Seas Act, and
Brett Hale, who is with me today, and who left his name out of these
printed remarks. He deserves thanks for the hundreds and hundreds of
hours he has put in on this bill from beginning to end.
Finally, as I began, I want to say it has been a great pleasure to me
to work with my friend from West Virginia, Senator Rockefeller, whose
interest in this subject is very high and whose competence in coming up
with correct answers is equally high.
This bill is a true partnership, and I have enjoyed working with him
on coming up with these solutions on that score.
I ask unanimous consent a summary of the major issues included in the
FAA conference report be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Summary of Major Issues Included in the FAA Conference Report
length of authorization
4 years (2000-2003) except Research title.
aip authorization
$2.475 billion in 2000.
$3.2 billion in 2001.
$3.3 billion in 2002.
$3.4 billion in 2003.
F&E authorization
$2.68 billion in 2000.
$2.66 billion in 2001.
$2.799 billion in 2002.
$2.981 billion in 2003.
faa operations
$6.6 billion in 2001.
$6.886 billion in 2002.
$7.357 billion in 2003.
re&d (3 year authorization)
$224 million in 2000.
$237 million in 2001.
$249 million in 2002.
passenger facility charge (PFC)
House provision, but would allow FAA to approve a PFC only
up to $4.50. Basically, it increases PFCs by $1.50. Medium or
large hub airports charging the higher PFC must give back 75%
of their entitlement.
airline customer service
Plans to be submitted to DOT which in turn transmits a copy
to the authorizing committees. DOTIG to monitor the
implementation of each plan, evaluate and report on how each
airline is living up to its commitment. DOT IG status report
due to Congress on 6/15/00 and final report due 12/31/00.
Directs DOT to initiate a rulemaking within 30 days of
enactment to increase the domestic baggage liability limit;
penalty for violations of aviation consumer laws and
regulations are increased from $1100 to $2500 per
[[Page S1249]]
violation; GAO directed to study ``hidden city'' and ``back
to back'' ticketing. The Conference also added a reference
preventing discrimination against the handicapped as one of
the responsibilities of the DOT consumer office. The DOTIG
final report will also include a comparison of the customer
service of airlines that submitted plans to DOT with those
that did not submit such plans.
commission to ensure consumer information and choice in the airline
industry (Travel Agents)
Establishes a commission to study the financial condition
of travel agents, especially small travel agents. The
Commission should study whether the financial condition of
travel agents is declining, what effects this will have on
consumers, if any, and what, if anything, should be done
about it.
slots in new york
New York specific provisions
Slot restrictions are eliminated after January 1, 2007.
In the interim, DOT is directed to provide exemptions to
any airline flying to the 2 New York airports if it will use
aircraft with 70 seats or less and will (1) provide service
to a small hub or non-hub that it did not previously serve,
(2) provide additional flights to a small hub or non-hub that
it currently serves, or (3) provide service with a regional
jet to a small hub or a non-hub as a replacement for a prop
plane.
DOT is directed to grant exemptions to new entrant and
limited incumbents for service to New York.
Exemptions are only for Stage 3 aircraft.
General Provisions
DOT must act on slot exemption requests within 60 days.
Exemptions may not be bought, sold, leased or otherwise
transferred. For purposes of determining whether an airline
qualifies as a new entrant or limited incumbents for
receiving slot exemptions, DOT shall count the slots and slot
exemptions of both that airline and any other airline that it
has a code-share agreement at that airport. The maximum
number of slots or slot exemptions that an airline can have
and still qualify as limited incumbent is raised from 12 to
20.
slots at chicago o'hare
Chicago specific provisions
In addition, slot restrictions at Chicago are eliminated
after July 1, 2002.
On July 1, 2001, slot restrictions will apply only between
2:45 pm and 8:14 pm. DOT is directed to provide exemptions
from the slot rules to any airline flying to Chicago O'Hare
airport if it will use aircraft with 70 seats or less and
will (1) provide service to a small hub or non-hub that it
did not previously serve, (2) provide additional flights to a
small hub or non-hub that it currently serves, or (3) provide
service with a regional jet to a small hub or non-hub as a
replacement for a prop plane.
DOT is also directed to grant 30 slot exemptions to new
entrants and limited incumbents for service to Chicago. These
new entrant exemptions must be granted within 45 days.
Slots will not longer be needed in order to provide
international service at O'Hare. However, the Secretary may
limit access in those cases where the foreign country
involved does not provide the same kind of open access for
U.S. airlines. DOT is prohibited from withdrawing slots from
U.S. airlines in order to give them to foreign airlines. Any
slot previously withdrawn from U.S. airlines and given to a
foreign airline must be returned to the U.S. airline. Slots
held by U.S. airlines to provide international service can be
converted to domestic use.
Exemptions are only for Stage 3 aircraft.
General Provisions
Same as described above for New York.
slots and the perimeter rule at reagan national
DOT is directed is grant 12 slot exemptions within the
perimeter, and 12 slot exemptions outside the perimeter.
These slots could go to more than one airline.
Exemptions must be for flights between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m.
There can be no more than 2 additional flights per hour.
Of the flights within the perimeter, 4 must be to small
hubs or non-hubs and 8 must be to medium, small or non-hubs.
All requests for exemptions must be submitted within 30 days
of enactment. 15 days are allowed to comment. After that, 45
days are allowed for DOT to make a decision.
Ten percent of the entitlement money at Reagan National
Airport must go to noise abatement. Priority shall be given
to applications from the 4 slot-controlled airports for noise
set-aside money. DOT shall do a study comparing noise at
these 4 airports now as compared to 10 years ago.
The definition of limited incumbent air carrier includes
slots and slot exemptions held or operated by that carrier.
However, slots that are on a long-term lease for a period of
10 years or more, being used for international service, and
that the current holder releases and renounces any right to
subject to the terms of the lease shall not be counted as
slots either held or operated for the purposes of determining
whether the holder is a limited incumbent.
Exemptions are only for Stage 3 aircraft.
mwaa
Extends the deadline for reauthorizing MWAA from 2001 to
2004. Also eliminates the requirement that the additional
federal Directors be appointed before MWAA can receive AIP
grants or impose a new PFC.
dohsa
The territorial sea for aviation accidents is extended from
3 nautical miles to 12 nautical miles. The affect of this is
that DOHSA will not apply to planes that crash into the ocean
within 12 miles from the shore of the U.S. The law governing
accidents that occur between a 3 nautical miles and 12
nautical miles from land will be the same as those that now
occur less than 3 nautical miles from the land.
For those aviation accidents that occur more than 12 miles
form land, the DOHSA will continue to apply. However, in
those cases, the Act is modified as in the Senate bill
except that there is no $750,000 cap on damages.
Unruly Passenger
Imposes fine of $25,000 on a person who assaults or
threatens to assault the crew or another passenger, or poses
a threat to the safety of the aircraft or its passengers.
Also requires the Justice Department to notify the House and
Senate authorizing Committees within 90 days as to whether it
plans to set up the program to deputize local law
enforcement.
animal transportation
Modifies the Senate provision to ensure that airlines will
continue to be able to carry animals while information is
collected to determine whether there is a problem that
warrants strong legislative remedies. Toward this end,
scheduled airlines will be required to provide monthly
reports to DOT describing any incidents involving animals
that they carry.
DOT and the Department of Agriculture must enter into a MOU
to ensure that DOA receives this information. DOT must
publish data on incidents and complaints involving animals in
its monthly consumer reports or other similar publications.
In the meantime, DOT is directed to work with the airlines
to improve the training of employees so that (1) they will be
better able to ensure the safety of animals being flown and
(2) they will be better able to explain to passengers the
conditions under which their pets are being carried. People
should know that their pets might be in a cargo hold that may
not be air-conditioned or may differ from the passenger cabin
in other respects.
national parks overflights
Commercial air tour operators must conduct commercial air
tours over national parks or tribal lands in accordance with
applicable air tour management plans (ATMP). Before beginning
air tours over a National Park or tribal land, a tour
operator must apply to the FAA for the authority to conduct
tours. No applications shall be approved until an ATMP is
developed and implemented. FAA shall make every effort to act
on an application within 24 months of receiving it. Priority
shall be given to applications from new entrant air tour
operators. Air tours may be conducted at a park without an
ATMP if the tour operator secures a letter of agreement from
the FAA and the park involved and the total number of flights
is limited to 5 flights in a 30 day period.
FAA in cooperation with the Park Service shall establish an
ATMP for any park at which someone wants to provide
commercial air tours. The ATMP shall be developed with public
participation. It could ban air tours or establish
restrictions on them. It will apply within a half a mile
outside the boundary of the park. The plan should include
incentives to use quiet aircraft.
Prior to the establishment of the ATMP, the FAA shall grant
interim authority to operators that are providing air tours.
This interim authority may limit the number of flights.
Interim operating authority may also be granted for new
entrants if (1) it is needed to ensure competition in the
provision of air tours over the park and (2) 24 months have
passed since enactment of this Act and no ATMP has been
developed for the park involved. Interim operating authority
should not be granted to new entrants if it will create a
safety or a noise problem.
The above shall not apply to the Grand Canyon, tribal lands
abutting the Grand Canyon, or to flights over Lake Mead that
are on the way to the Grand Canyon.
FAA shall establish standards for quiet aircraft within 1
year or explain to Congress why it will be unable to do so.
Quiet aircraft may get special routes for Grand Canyon air
tours and may not be subject to the cap on the number of
flights there.
Air tours over the Rocky Mountain National Park are
prohibited.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, the words of my friend from the State
of Washington are not justified except if they are returned to him and
to his staff.
The process of working legislation is extraordinary. This has been a
very long process, more or less a 2-year process. Working with Senator
Slade Gorton from the State of Washington over the years has been a
great privilege for me and continues on this bill, which is the Wendell
H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century, which
is a long title, but we had to give it a long title in order to be able
to give it an acronym, which is FAIR-21. FAIR, that is what the bill
is.
[[Page S1250]]
Wendell Ford, should he be listening, should be very proud.
We have had half a dozen temporary extensions on this bill. It has
been 2 years in the making. When Senator Gorton talks about the
enormous number of hours spent by Sam Whitehorn of the committee staff,
Kerry Ates of my own staff, and members of his own committee and
personal staff, he is exactly right. It has been an extraordinary and
frustrating process but a successful one.
There are many Members of the Senate and the House to thank. It was
one of those situations where you had the authorizing committees, the
budget committees, the appropriations committees, in both Houses,
coming to an agreement--which is very rare in something of this sort,
and all in a fairly short period of time. Frankly, including obviously
Senator Gorton, I think I really want to thank the majority leader,
Senator Trent Lott, for stepping in in a most remarkable way, most
forcefully, at a critical time, to bring the parties together and make
sure we pushed toward a solution.
In the end, I think we have achieved a bipartisan House-Senate
compromise of which I, for one at least, am very proud. We have a final
bill that will set us on an entirely new path in terms of the FAA, and
in a larger sense for aviation in this country, which has enormous
impact. For the aviation community, and those of us who work with
them--and I thank them for their help on this bill, also; not all of
them being happy about all aspects of it, but that is in the nature of
things--hopefully this good economic news, of the passage of this bill,
is, however, entirely overshadowed by fear that most of us have about
the state of our system as it is now, of our aviation system
particularly in regard to air traffic control and other matters in our
infrastructure.
At current levels, our system is already so overburdened we are
suffocating from congestion and delays. The country suffers through it.
Is there a popular uprising? There does not seem to be one. But the
fact is, it is a suffocating situation, a dangerous situation. We are
increasingly concerned about safety, with every single reason to be,
given the doubling of the number of air passengers and many more cargo
planes and passenger planes to be built in the future. Whatever you see
today, try to double it in your mind and then figure the same number of
runways. How on Earth are people going to accept a situation where
delays are growing longer and it becomes more dangerous unless we do
something about it? This bill does. Delays have increased by 50
percent. Today, one in four flights is delayed more than 15 minutes.
That is not what passengers want. That is not what airlines want.
To be very blunt about it, if there is no change in the way we are
doing business, we will come to a situation before the year 2015 where
there will be, somewhere in this world, a major airplane crash every 7
to 10 days. That is the course. It is a terrible course, a dangerous
course, and one which this Congress cannot allow to go on and which
this Congress, in fact, with this bill, does a great deal about.
We have fallen behind. Unless we get started immediately in the
effort to modernize our air traffic control system, to fix our
airports, we stand a very good chance of never being able to catch up,
never catching up to the curve, much less getting ahead of it. That is
fundamentally what this bill, FAIR-21, is about.
It is about fixing the system. It is about trying to get ahead of the
growth curve with our most significant increase ever in airport and air
traffic control funding, and some fundamental reforms in the way we do
business in our system. It is about improving safety and service for
the traveling public and supporting aviation employees under great
stress in their challenging jobs. Senator Gorton and I have each seen
that on many occasions. These people work under incredible tension all
the time. They work with very old equipment.
It is about increasing competition. It is about giving a leg up,
finally, to small communities such as I have in my State, as does
Senator Gorton, as does every Senator in his or her State--small
communities that were left behind when we did airline deregulation 20
years ago.
So, FAIR-21, this bill, will provide $40 billion for the FAA in
fiscal year 2001 until fiscal year 2003. It is a 25-percent increase in
total aviation funding. The key investments will be fixing aviation
infrastructure, to wit, airport funding will increase by 33 percent,
and air traffic control modernization funding will increase by 40
percent. That is so desperately needed. FAA funding operations will
also increase by approximately 15 percent over the same period. We are
beginning to nudge into the area to start fixing our problems.
This bill represents the will of the Congress, hopefully, and the
will of the American people, to take a dangerous situation and start to
fix it. For the very first time, FAIR-21 establishes that all revenues
and interest paid into the aviation trust fund by airline passengers,
lo and behold, will be spent on aviation. That seems quite fair to me.
That means that $33 billion of the $40 billion will be guaranteed from
the trust fund, not taken off-budget, which this Senator would have
liked to have seen but was not going to happen; so not taken off-budget
but protected through points of order and with a strong commitment from
the Appropriations Committee to fully fund all accounts. This was part
of the magic of the process that Senator Trent Lott, Senator Gorton,
and others worked out to make people satisfied.
All told, this represents--and my colleagues should hear this--the
biggest total increase in aviation investments ever. I know few
problems receive that kind of boost unless the Congress perceives there
is a crisis. What we learned over recent years about aviation was that
a crisis was coming. I am thankful we have the foresight to take action
now.
To move beyond the funding issue for a moment, I want to point out a
few of the key aviation law and policy changes contained in this bill
which I think are very helpful and good:
Whistle-blower protection for aviation and airline employees who
report safety problems;
A $1.50 increase on the cap of the passenger facility charge for
airport projects, which is enormously helpful to local airports;
An Air Service Development Program, with grants up to $500,000 each
for innovative efforts to improve air service in small communities; in
other words, small communities can do something and get a match;
A ban on smoking everywhere, even internationally;
Easing of the slots rule at O'Hare, LaGuardia, and Kennedy Airports.
This carries with it some controversy. Compromises were made. Not
everybody was happy. But resolution was reached;
New criminal background checks and training for airport security
personnel as the pressure on all of that continues to increase;
Increased funding for the essential air service program is enormously
important in my State of West Virginia and every single area where
there are rural airports. The State of the Presiding Officer has its
fair share of those;
Finally, new and increased penalties for airline customer service
violations. That goes along with the effort Senator Gorton and I led to
have a passenger bill of rights, which the airlines could have first
crack at, which seems to be working out very well but, on the other
hand, we are watching very closely.
We have had a lot of time to work on this bill and, in my view, it
has gotten better and better during the process and reached a crescendo
in the last several days. It is a bold conference report designed to
protect our future. I hope my colleagues will join me and the Senator
from the State of Washington in sending this bill to the President.
So much of the work is done not just by Senators willing to
compromise and House Members willing to compromise but, most
importantly, by staff who worked through the night often to make sure
things came out very well.
When we began the effort to enact meaningful legislation to address
the needs of our air transportation system, we knew it would be a
difficult process. Even anticipating that, I can tell you that it has
been more difficult than any of us could have imagined.
This bill has been more than two years in the making, with nearly a
half-dozen temporary extensions in the process. There are many Members
in
[[Page S1251]]
the Senate and House to thank for all of the hard work and effort it
took to bring this to a conclusion. Members on and off the conference
committee have really rolled up their sleeves to work out a very
difficult compromise. And above all others, the majority leader stepped
in during these critical and delicate last few months to push us toward
a final solution.
In the end, we've achieved a bipartisan, House-Senate compromise that
I am very proud of. We have a final bill that I believe will set us on
an entirely new path for the FAA and aviation.
Aviation in this country is at a crossroads. Aviation is a critical
engine of economic development at the national and local levels, and it
has the potential for unprecedented and incomprehensive growth over the
next decade.
The travel and tourism industry employs 1 in 17 Americans.
Air travelers spend over $500 billion each year in the U.S. and
generate more than $70 billion in federal, state and local taxes.
Aviation is the only U.S. industry that has consistently enjoyed a
positive trade balance.
By 2009, enplanements are projected to increase to 1 billion people,
from 650 million in 1999.
In many respects this is good news--it is one of the great success
stories of our booming economy. Yet, for the aviation community and
those of us who work with them, this good news is entirely overshadowed
by fears about the state of our system. At current traffic levels, our
system is already so overburdened that we are suffocating from
congestion and delays, and we are increasingly concerned about safety.
Almost every week, another red flag goes up about the looming crisis
in aviation.
Scheduled flying times have increased 75 percent on the top 200
routes in the nation.
Delays have increased by 50 percent, and today one in four flights is
delayed more than 15 minutes, at a cost to the economy of more than $4
billion.
Recent data shows a rise in runway incidents (so-called runway
incursions), and we read too often about near-misses in the skies.
If there is no change in the current accident rate before the year
2015, there is expected to be a major airline accident somewhere in the
world every 7-10 days.
Yet, from 1998 to 1999, the FAA had to reduce safety inspections by
10 percent and cut 5 percent of its security staff.
All of us--the airlines, the airports, and the Congress--have had a
difficult time keeping up with the pace of growth. The result is that,
as a nation, we've fallen behind. Unless we get started immediately in
the effort to modernize our traffic control system and fix our
airports, we may never catch up.
That's fundamentally what this bill, FAIR-21, is all about. It's
about fixing the system and trying to get ahead of the growth curve--
with our most significant increase ever in airport and air traffic
control funding and some fundamental reforms of our system.
And it's about improving safety and service for the traveling public;
supporting aviation employees in challenging jobs, increasing
competition, and giving a leg up finally to small communities who were
left behind in airline deregulation twenty years ago.
FAIR-21 will provide $40 billion for the FAA for FY 2001-2003--a 25
percent increase in total aviation funding. The key investments will be
fixing aviation infrastructure--airport funding will increase by 33
percent and air traffic control modernization funding will increase by
40 percent. FAA operations funding also will increase, by approximately
15 percent over the same period.
For the first time, FAIR-21 establishes that all revenues and
interest paid into the aviation trust fund by airline passengers will
be spent on aviation. That means that $33 billion of the $40 billion
bill will be guaranteed from the trust fund--not taken off-budget but
protected through points of order and with a strong commitment from the
Appropriations Committee to fully fund all accounts. The remaining $6.7
billion would come from the General Fund, subject to appropriations.
For fiscal year 2001, the bill fully meets the President's budget
request for FAA operations and air traffic control equipment, and it
exceeds the President's budget request for AIP by $1.2 billion.
All told this represents the biggest total increase in aviation
investments ever. I know that few programs receive that kind of boost--
unless a crisis exists. What we have learned about aviation is that a
crisis is coming. And I'm thankful we have the foresight to take action
now.
To move beyond the funding issue for a moment, let me also highlight
a few of the key aviation law and policy changes contained in this bill
that I think are particularly important. I am very pleased that the
bill contains: whistleblower protection for airline and aviation
employees who report safety problems; a $1.50 increase in the cap on
the passenger facility charge for airport projects; an Air Service
Development program, with grants of up to $500,000 each for innovative
efforts to improve air service in small communities; a ban on smoking
on all flights to and from the U.S., including international flights;
an easing of the slot rules at O'Hare, LaGuardia and Kennedy Airports;
a focus on reducing the number of runway incursions that can result in
serious accidents; new criminal background checks and training for
airport security personnel; increased funding for the Essential Air
Service program; and new and increased penalties for airline's customer
service violations.
We have had a lot of time to work on this bill, and in my view it has
gotten better and better. It is a bold conference report designed to
protect our future, and I hope my colleagues will join me in sending it
on to the President for his signature.
Before we end the debate this morning, I want to say a few things.
Again, all of the staff from the Commerce Committee, my office, the
offices of the other conferees, and the House staff, deserve our
thanks. They spent months working on this bill. In fact, this bill was
started almost 2 years ago. Countless hours, late nights, lots of
missed family events. We owe all of them our thanks.
I also want to thank, and I know Senator Hollings and others share
this, Hans Ephramson-Abt. Many of you probably have encountered him. He
is a gentleman, first and foremost, who has worked for years to help
the families of victims of aviation disasters. The conference report
changes the liability laws for accidents offshore, preserving the
ability of people like the children of Montoursville, PA, who vanished
in the TWA flight 800 tragedy. Hans lost his daughter, Alice, on KAL
007, shot down off of Korea in September 1983. He has done a great
service in helping others, and for that we all owe him a debt of
gratitude.
Finally, I want to say that we have had a long debate over the last
several years about FAA reform. For now, that issue has been resolved.
Over the next several years, working with Administrator Garvey, or her
successor, we will look at other ways to improve the FAA. Today, the
bill before you does many creative things for the FAA--giving it the
tools to be more business-like, but retaining its crucial role as
safety arbiter. The bill, for example, gives the FAA the ability to
enter into long-term leases for satellite communications services,
something that will save the FAA money. It establishes a public-private
funding mechanism to expedite the installation of air traffic control
equipment, with the priorities set by the private sector. It structures
the FAA after corporate models, establishing one person to be
accountable for air traffic control operations and plans. It
establishes a Board to oversee those activities. The FAA, because of
actions led by the Commerce Committee and Senator Lautenberg, today has
procurement and personnel flexibility that no other governmental agency
has. We have achieved a lot over the last several years, and with this
bill, continue to make progressive changes to the FAA, without
compromising safety. I know that there are some in the Administration
that are not satisfied, and probably will never be satisfied, but this
is a good bill and one that will do a lot for our aviation system. I
urge my colleagues to fully support this bill.
I ask unanimous consent that a more complete listing of staff who
spent months working on this bill be printed in the Record.
[[Page S1252]]
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
democratic staff
Kevin Kayes, Moses Boyd, Sam Whitehorn, Ellen Doneski,
Julia Krauss, Jonathan Oakman, and Carl Bentzel.
republican staff
Mike Reynolds, Ann Choiniere, Scott Verstandig, Jim
Sartucci, Keith Hennesy, Brett Hale.
budget staff
Bill Hoagland, Cheryl Tucker, and Mitch Warren.
appropriations staff
Wally Burnett and Peter Rogoff.
house republican staff
Jack Shenendorf, Roger Norber, Sharon Barkaloo, Chris
Bertram, Dave Schaeffer, Adam Tsao, Rob Chamberlin and David
Balloff.
house democratic staff
Dave Hymsfeld, Ward McCarriger, Stacy Soumbeniotis, Tricia
Loveland, Paul Feldman, who left last November, and Collen
Corr.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I yield the floor, Mr. President, and reserve the
remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, how much time do the proponents have
remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Twelve and a half minutes.
Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I yield 5 of those minutes to the
distinguished Senator from Iowa.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. L. Chafee). The Senator from Iowa is
recognized.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, the conference report before us has been
a long time in the making. It is a comprehensive bill that successfully
addresses many important aviation issues. Not the least of these is the
eventual elimination of the so-called slot rules at three of our
nation's airports, O'Hare, Kennedy and LaGuardia. It also adds
additional slots at Reagan Washington National Airport. I support these
measures.
I congratulate Senator McCain, the Senate Commerce Committee
Chairman, Senator Gorton, the Aviation Subcommittee Chairman, Senator
Hollings, the full committee ranking member, and Senator Rockefeller,
the subcommittee ranking member, for their efforts to bring about good
public policy. This has not been an easy conference, and all of you
have put forth a tremendous effort to see that it was concluded
successfully. I wish to also thank their staffs.
I also express my thanks and admiration to my good friend, Senator
Domenici, our Budget Committee chairman. Of all the issues before the
conference, the resolution of the budget issues was the most trying and
complex. Senator Domenici and his staff worked tirelessly to seek a
fair and adequate solution to this problem.
I express my admiration for my friend and colleague, Senator Stevens,
the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Senator Stevens
has played a key role in reaching an agreement on spending.
The phase-out of the slot rule at O'Hare and LaGuardia will open a
new era in aviation. Because it is a phase-out and not an immediate
termination, that era should also give smaller airports a better chance
for a piece of the economic pie at the national and international
levels.
While e-commerce may be all the rage currently, people still need to
travel for business purposes. Direct human contact is still the premium
way to do business, and air travel is the fastest way to accomplish
that over long distances and tight time frames.
This compromise follows the direction which my Iowa colleague,
Senator Harkin, and I set forth early in the debate on the slot rule.
We looked at the needs of the airports in Iowa, and came to the
conclusion together that it was time for a change if our State was to
maintain its economic momentum in the national and international
marketplace. Iowa does not have a major hub airport that guarantees
low-cost or frequent flights. Like most States, we have smaller
airports that are greatly affected by the traffic into and out of the
major hub airports. In this case those airports are O'Hare and
LaGuardia.
Our solution was to phase out the slot rule. The first step was to
immediately give increased access to the hub airports by turboprop
aircraft and regional jets. These are the aircraft that primarily serve
our smaller airports. Giving them time before the slot rule is lifted
for large airport-to-large airport competition should give the smaller
airports time to establish the economic and market base needed to
justify service. Otherwise, we would only see increased flights between
major cities, to the exclusion of smaller airports.
We received the support of a large number of Senators who were also
concerned about the future of their small hub and nonhub airports.
Together, all of us have been able to accomplish what was unthinkable
just several years ago, the eventual elimination of the slot rule at
those two airports. I deeply appreciate their faith and support to
accomplish this.
I also thank President Clinton for having the foresight and courage
to recommend the elimination of the slot rule at these airports. He
gave a legitimacy and momentum to the debate that would not have
existed otherwise.
The States attorneys general, lead by Iowa Attorney General Tom
Miller, also played a significant part and should be thanked.
Not everyone is entirely happy with the compromise solution in this
conference report. I look upon that as ratification that it must be a
pretty good compromise. I truly feel that the airlines were treated as
fairly and equally as possible.
Our Nation's airports will be receiving additional funds for their
capital needs under this legislation. I know that these funds are much
needed and will be put to good use. Iowa's airports have rehabilitation
and expansion plans that will be enhanced by these additional funds.
This includes increased disbursements from the Airports and Airways
Trust Fund and the increase in the passenger facility charge, PFC. It
is important to note that the PFC will not increase at an airport until
local authorities have approved an increase. It is entirely within
their realm to grant or deny this increase at the local level.
However, I must again warn the Federal Aviation Administration that
more money will not cure all of the problems facing the FAA and the
aviation industry. Fundamental reform of the way the FAA does business
and on a cultural level is necessary if we are to truly make the
advances which are needed.
As a budget conferee, I believe the budget compromise is the best we
can do at this time. I shall work with Chairman Domenici to secure the
necessary funds through the budget process.
The biggest disappoint to me is the inclusion of a civil fine against
airline employee whistle-blowers. While I am very pleased that whistle-
blower protection has been extended to the aviation industry, I feel
that it is flawed due to the civil penalty. Such a penalty does not
exist in other whistle-blower statutes. I will work to correct this
situation.
Whistle-blower protection adds another, much needed, layer of
protection for the traveling public using our Nation's air
transportation system. I am pleased to have worked with the Association
of Flight Attendants AFL-CIO on this important, ground breaking
legislation. They have worked tirelessly on this provision, and I know
they will continue to work with me to correct this flaw. I call upon
the airlines to do the same and seek the help of the public, also.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote for this conference
report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks recognition?
The Senator from New Jersey.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues who have worked
so hard to get this bill to this point. It is not fun to oppose
something that was reported out of the conference committee with such
strong support.
But I have a different responsibility given the fact that I serve
both as the ranking member of the Budget Committee and the
Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee. In my view, this bill
represents a missed opportunity to fully address the financing needs of
our Nation's aviation system.
To the degree the bill actually guarantees any real funding
increases, it does so in a manner that I consider grossly unbalanced.
Mr. President, if
[[Page S1253]]
you ask the average Senator if they are willing to fund aviation at the
expense of the Coast Guard, I guarantee you they would say no. If you
asked each Senator whether they were willing to fund aviation at the
expense of Amtrak, I guarantee you most would say no. If you asked the
average Senator whether or not they were willing to fund aviation at
the expense of our federal highway safety efforts, they would say:
Certainly not.
But if this conference agreement becomes law, we run the very real
risk of cutting back funds for NHTSA, the National Transportation
Safety Board, Amtrak, the Coast Guard, and other areas just to boost
funding for two aviation capital accounts by almost $2 billion next
year. And those two aviation accounts don't even finance the core
operations of the air traffic control system--the area where the FAA is
facing its most difficult challenges.
Our national transportation system needs investments in several
areas, not just aviation. Look at what is happening with the Coast
Guard. All of us salute the Coast Guard. We saw in the papers just
yesterday that they do not have enough people to monitor cruise ships
that are dumping their waste in the oceans. They do not have enough
maintenance funding to keep their aircraft in the air. They do not have
enough people to monitor the attempts by illegal immigrants to enter
this country. They don't have enough money for pollution control, for
fisheries enforcement, and for recruiting. But I don't hear my
colleagues on the Commerce Committee, who have jurisdiction over the
Coast Guard, advocating for a Coast Guard ``guarantee.''
Mr. President, throughout my entire Senate career, I have led the
fight for increased investment in transportation. My support for
transportation started when I served as the Commissioner of the Port
Authority of New York/New Jersey. At that time, I learned that you
can't ignore the needs of one transportation mode in favor of another.
Investments need to be made in a balanced way if you are going to avoid
gridlock. You can't ignore the rail system or the highways to focus on
aviation. You need to keep your eye on safety, not just construction.
The requirement to reauthorize our aviation laws presented this
Congress with a great opportunity to address the financing of our
nation's aviation system in a comprehensive and bipartisan manner.
Unfortunately, this bill misses the mark.
This Conference Agreement took so long to produce because so many
Members wanted to provide big funding increases for aviation without
paying for them. Mr. President, the simple fact is that the revenue
stream to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund is not adequate to fund the
substantial funding increases for aviation that many members want.
Because of that basic fact, the aviation conferees have been haggling
for the last year over methods to develop a new mousetrap to produce
those funding increases without adequate revenue. Over the last week,
the Majority Leader and the majority members of the conference
committee reached the agreement that is currently before us. It seeks
to guarantee a 64 percent increase in airport grants, and a 30 percent
increase in modernization funding. These so-called ``guaranteed''
increases come at a time when the Republican Majority is debating among
itself whether to impose a hard freeze on discretionary spending at the
current year's level, or provide for a minuscule 2.4 percent increase.
The arithmetic is simple. The $1.9 billion or 47 percent increase that
this bill seeks to ``guarantee'' for airport grants and modernization
will either require cuts in the rest of the Transportation Department
or the rest of the discretionary budget.
I understand that the Chairman of the Budget Committee was a party to
these negotiations. I am told that he is prepared to state that the
Budget Resolution that he will propose fully funds the needs of these
so-called aviation guarantees. While I have great respect for the
Budget Committee Chairman, I have to say that I would like to know
where the funding is coming from if he plans to impose a freeze on
discretionary spending. That should be a concern to all Members,
whether they care about the Coast Guard, Amtrak, education, health
care, veterans benefits, agriculture, or anything else.
Mr. President, one of the areas that will face greater budget
austerity as a result of these so-called ``guaranteed'' increases is
the operating budget in the FAA. The operating account pays for the
operations of the air traffic control system. It pays the salary of
every air traffic controller and every aviation inspector. It pays for
security at our airports. It pays for the publication of every safety
regulation. Three quarters of the operations budget goes just to pay
the salaries of the people that keep the system safe every day. This
account is where the FAA faces the most severe funding shortfall. So it
is absurd that we are now going to pass a bill that will boost capital
funding while subjecting the operations budget to even greater
austerity. Due to existing shortfalls in its operating budget, the FAA
just canceled all training activities except introductory training for
air traffic controllers for the remainder of the year. We also have
problems with new state-of-the-art equipment sitting in warehouses
because the FAA doesn't have the operating funds to install them. There
aren't even adequate operating funds to train our air traffic
controllers how to use the equipment. FAA has had to delay the
certification of new aircraft and new equipment. Those delays are
hurting our U.S. aircraft manufacturers. The number of aviation safety
inspectors is being allowed to trickle down and FAA can't afford to
hire new inspectors to replace them. With that backdrop, the Republican
Conferees on this bill produced a conference report that loaded all of
the so-called ``guaranteed'' funding increases on capital investment
programs and ignored the operations budget. Just two days ago, the FAA
released its updated forecast for future aviation traffic. That
forecast indicates that domestic airline traffic will increase more
than 60 percent through 2011. That increased traffic will also put
incredible pressure on the operation budget of the FAA. We will need
more safety and security inspectors, not less. We will need better
trained controllers and more of them. But the bill before us ignores
those needs. This bill is simply lopsided and unbalanced. And in time,
Mr. President, I believe the Members championing this bill will realize
that they made a mistake. In fact, they may realize it sooner than they
think.
I am not sure, in the end, that all of these ``guaranteed'' funding
increases will materialize. The point-of-order in the Senate that
protects these funding guarantees is a 50-vote point-of-order. It will
require 51 votes to waive that point-of-order. We all know that it is
impossible to do anything in the Senate without 51 votes. So fiscal
reality may require the Senate to revisit these guarantees sooner
rather than later. It will only require a simple majority of the Senate
to do so.
Maybe that will not happen for a year or two. Maybe it will happen
later this Spring. In my capacity as Ranking Member of the Senate
Transportation Appropriations subcommittee, I will manage only one more
Transportation Appropriations bill. But I promise that I am not going
to silently watch the Amtrak budget, the Coast Guard budget, or the
FAA's own operations budget get ravaged to pay for the so-called
``guarantees'' provided in this bill. I will see to it that every
Member here will have the opportunity to vote on whether we should shut
down Amtrak lines, tie up Coast Guard ships, or lay off aviation
inspectors, in order to pay for these guarantees.
In summary, Mr. President, this bill represents a missed opportunity.
This bill missed the opportunity to provide momentum for funding
increases in the FAA across-the-board to address all the agency's
shortfalls, including the operations budget. By loading all of the so-
called guaranteed funding on the capital accounts, it becomes plain as
day, that the Airport and Airway Trust Fund is not adequate to fund all
of our aviation needs. It will only be a matter of time before we have
to consider a tax increase or new user fees in order to truly meet all
of the FAA's needs.
Mr. President, this bill is shortsighted. It was produced in the back
room without Minority Members present, and I do not believe it
represents a sustainable aviation policy for our nation. The funding
provisions in this bill may not even be sustainable for the coming
fiscal year. For that reason, I cannot support this bill.
[[Page S1254]]
Thank you, Mr. President.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader is recognized.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I intend to use my leader time for
purposes of making a couple of statements this morning. I would like
first to voice my support for the conference report to H.R. 1000,
which, as has already been noted, is the Wendell H. Ford Aviation
Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century.
I hope our former colleague, Senator Wendell Ford, a dear and very
special friend of mine who served as chairman and ranking member of the
Senate Commerce Committee's Aviation Subcommittee for many years, is
watching because this truly is a tribute to his dedication not only to
aviation but to his country and to the Senate for a long time. It is a
very appropriate designation for this legislation.
The conference report we are considering today will help repair our
aviation system for the skyrocketing number of passengers who will
travel in the 21st century. It is also a fitting tribute to Senator
Ford's vision that he expressed to us on many occasions as he was
leading us on this and many other issues.
I thank as well the majority leader, Senator Lott, for his
persistence in providing leadership on this matter and in getting us to
this point. I think the credit also must go to our distinguished
subcommittee chairman and ranking member. It is clear they have the
chemistry and the working relationship it takes to accomplish something
of this complexity, and I pay tribute to both of them for their efforts
and for their arduous work in getting us to this point. We ought to be
celebrating this morning the accomplishments of something that many of
us have been hoping to achieve for a long period of time. Were it not
for their leadership and support, it would not have happened.
I have been reminded oftentimes of the movie ``Groundhog Day'' with
Bill Murray, with the Senate waking up once a year to consider the same
FAA reauthorization bill. The Senate first began considering this bill
in 1998 and passed S. 2279, the Wendell H. Ford National Air
Transportation System Improvement Act, in September of that year.
Although there was overwhelming support for that legislation in the
Senate, House and Senate negotiators could not agree on a multiyear
bill at that time.
Last year, the Senate passed S. 82, the Air Transportation
Improvement Act of 1999, in October. As my colleagues have recalled,
this legislation was almost identical to the FAA reauthorization bill
we approved the year before. Again, there was overwhelming support for
the legislation in the Senate. However, House and Senate negotiators
could not agree on a multiyear FAA reauthorization bill, just as they
were unable to do the year before.
As the Senate has considered and reconsidered the FAA reauthorization
bill in recent years, the FAA has been operating for the most part
under short-term extensions. I have mentioned on many occasions my view
that this is no way to fund such an important Federal agency. Short-
term extension after short-term extension disrupts long-term planning
at the FAA and airports around the country that rely on Federal funds
to improve their facilities and enhance aviation safety. The only thing
worse than passing a short-term extension is allowing funding for FAA
programs to lapse altogether. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the
Congress did when the House again refused to consider the 6-month
extension the Senate passed on November 10 of last year. For the last 4
months, funds for airport improvement projects have been tied up
because Congress has been unable to forge an agreement on the FAA
reauthorization bill.
So today we begin to rectify that mistake and prepare for the
increased demand that will be placed on our aviation system in the 21st
century. This bill will authorize approximately $40 billion for
aviation programs over the next 3 years. In fiscal year 2001, the bill
will authorize $12.7 billion, an increase of $2.7 billion over current
levels. In the next fiscal year, it will enhance aviation safety by
authorizing $3.2 billion for airport improvement projects, $3.3 billion
in fiscal year 2002, and $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2003.
It will also allow airports to increase passenger facility charges
from $3 to $4.50. This PFC increase is expected to generate $700
million for much-needed construction projects that will improve
airports in South Dakota and around the country, in every State.
The conference report to the FAA reauthorization bill also includes a
number of provisions that would encourage competition among the
airlines and ensure quality air service for communities. For instance,
it would authorize funding for a 4-year pilot program to improve
commercial air service in small communities that have not benefited
from deregulation.
Specifically, the bill calls for the establishment of an Office of
Small Community Air Service Development at the Department of
Transportation (DOT) to work with local communities, states, airports
and air carriers and develop public-private partnerships that bring
commercial air service including regional jet service to small
communities.
We have often commented on how critical the Essential Air Service
Program has been to small communities in South Dakota and around the
country in their efforts to retain air service. The Small Community
Aviation Development Program would give DOT the authority to provide up
to $500,000 per year to as many as 40 communities that participate in
the program and agree to pay 25 percent in matching funds. In addition,
the legislation would establish an air traffic control service pilot
program that would allow up to 20 small communities to share in the
cost of building contract control towers.
I am hopeful that South Dakota will have the opportunity to
participate in the Small Community Aviation Development Program. I
think it is one of the better features of this legislation. I commend
my colleagues for their inclusion of it.
Mr. President, I know some of our colleagues may oppose this bill
because it would increase the number of flights at the four slot-
controlled airports. The proposal to increase the number of flights at
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport has been particularly
controversial, and I would again like to commend Senator Robb for being
a strong advocate for his constituents in northern Virginia.
I know some of our colleagues on the Appropriations Subcommittee on
Transportation will also oppose this bill because of the budgetary
treatment of the aviation trust fund. I understand their concerns and
look forward to working with them to ensure that Amtrak, Coast Guard,
the National Transportation Safety Board, and FAA operations are
adequately funded.
Although there may be different provisions in this bill that each of
us may find objectional, I hope my colleagues will join me in
supporting H.R. 1000, the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and
Reform Act for the 21st Century. Spring is just around the corner, and
we cannot afford to delay construction on airport improvement projects
any longer.
It is unfair to FAA, it is unfair to airports in South Dakota and
throughout the country, and it is unfair to passengers who rely on the
aviation system for their travel needs.
I encourage my colleagues to support the conference report to the FAA
reauthorization bill.
Again, I commend my colleagues, especially the chairman and ranking
member, for their work on this bill. I hope we can pass it this
afternoon on a bipartisan basis.
____________________