[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 45 (Thursday, March 31, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H2130-H2198]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FAA REAUTHORIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2011
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 189 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 658.
{time} 1458
In the Committee of the Whole
Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill
(H.R. 658) to amend title 49, United States Code, to authorize
appropriations for the Federal Aviation Administration for fiscal years
2011 through 2014, to streamline programs, create efficiencies, reduce
waste, and improve aviation safety and capacity, to provide stable
funding for the national aviation system, and for other purposes, with
Mrs. Emerson in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the
first time.
General debate shall be confined to the bill and amendments specified
in House Resolution 189 and shall not exceed 1 hour, with 40 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 10 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, and 10 minutes
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member
of the Committee on Ways and Means.
The gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and the gentleman from West
Virginia (Mr. Rahall) each will control 20 minutes. The gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Hall), the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Edwards), the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Camp) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Levin) each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
{time} 1500
Mr. MICA. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chairman, the legislation before us now, as the Chair has
indicated, is the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.
During the discussion on the rule which brought the measure to the
floor, I had an opportunity to speak on the fairness of the rule, and
again I'll cite: Having been here for a number of years and observed
the process for three decades, I rarely find any time in which everyone
has had a fair opportunity to offer amendments. Some 48 amendments were
offered before the Rules Committee. Thirty-three were accepted. Nine
were withdrawn. So there are only six that were not considered--some
for germaneness reasons, some for being duplicative--and also, in
fairness, for Members to have an opportunity to participate. So, again,
I think the process that we have come forward with is very, very fair.
The process has been fair and bipartisan in the committee.
In the last 4 years, as the ranking Republican, Republican leader of
the committee, I can count on probably less than three fingers the
number of votes that we had over the 4 years. We had many more votes
than that in the committee. It was an open process and people had the
opportunity to participate.
I also spoke in the rule of how we got ourselves in this predicament.
I had
[[Page H2131]]
the honor and privilege of being the chair of the Aviation Subcommittee
after the beginning of 9/11 and through the fateful time of 9/11 for 6
years. In 2003, we passed the last authorization for FAA. Now, in order
to operate the Federal Government and each of its agencies and
activities, the Congress must authorize the programs, the policies, the
agencies, the funding formulas, and the projects that are eligible for
Federal participation.
As I also stated, the other side of the aisle for 4 years had huge
majorities, could pass anything that they wanted to. Very large
majority in the House, large majority in the Senate. And the last 2
years, indeed, they controlled the White House, the House, and the
Senate. They could pass anything they wanted.
In 2007, the bill that I helped author, a 4-year authorization,
expired. They did 17 extensions in 4 years. It's no wonder people don't
have jobs. It's no wonder that people in the aviation industry don't
know which way the Federal Government is coming or going. It's no
wonder that you have some disarray in one of our most important
agencies, the FAA. They had 4 years; we've had less than 4 months.
We're bringing the bill out.
We've had a fair process in the committee, and we've had opportunity
for people to offer amendments and will spend most of today and maybe
part of tomorrow going through those amendments in, I think, an
adequate time for debate. The bill does make some reductions in
spending and it does take us back to the 2008 level of spending.
Now, the first thing you will hear from the other side is, Oh, the
Republicans are cutting and slashing important FAA programs and safety
and security and everything under the sun will be at risk. I can tell
you that that's not the case. I can tell you that you can do more with
less, and we can prioritize. In fact, in this bill, to make certain
that safety is our primary concern--and it must be our primary
concern--we have put specific provisions in here that if there are cuts
or reductions--and heaven knows the FAA and the Department of
Transportation certainly can have reductions in bureaucratic staffing.
My dad used to say when he was alive, ``Son, it's not how much you
spend; it's how you spend it.'' And it's just like that with personnel.
People say, well, we're not going to have enough air traffic
controllers. We just had the incident out at Reagan. We had an air
traffic controller with some 20 years' experience, 17 years at DCA,
came to work I guess at 10 o'clock. There was somebody there until
almost 10:30. So I understand he was there an hour and 28 minutes and
either fell asleep or wasn't doing his duty. So, in Washington, what do
they do? We've got to double up. We've got to have more employees.
Listen to this statistic. Since before 2001, we have a 21 percent
decrease. If we go to 2001 to today, we have a 21 percent decrease in
air traffic movements. Why? Because the industry has consolidated. We
don't have as many flights. The economy is down. At the same time, we
have an increase in 20 percent of staffing. If you look at airports
around the country, you will see some with huge reductions in air
traffic and still the same number of air traffic controllers. In this
bill, we give some flexibility so you can hopefully move people around.
Now, I know there are labor agreements and it's hard to get people to
move, and some people might not like the warm climes and beauty of
Florida where the population has expanded--and Arizona and wherever
else we need them--but, for heaven's sake, do we need to double up? Do
we need to double up when there's no air traffic at these airports
between midnight and 5 a.m.? That's the Washington big spending, big
government. Let's add more.
So I can tell you that there's plenty of room for doing things
responsibly, doing things with safety in mind. Now let's try a new
approach with the best interests of the taxpayer.
They've spent some $5.3 billion in about 24 months more than we take
in. We're on the verge of having our financial security of this Nation
at risk and also threatening even the defense security of this Nation.
Again, 17 times they did these little hiccup extensions, costing
millions of dollars. Just ask the FAA administrator; the recalculation,
all the things that had to be done; the inability to move forward with
safety programs, for that matter.
So I just want to make the point that we can accomplish what we've
set out: a reduction in spending and, actually, better performance and
better safety. I could give more examples. I don't have a lot of time.
We used to chase developmental programs, and the government would try
to develop technology for air traffic control, and they take forever.
And the private sector would develop technologies. They do it sooner,
faster, better, with more capability, while we're still spending
billions of dollars recklessly. And we reduced, actually, the amount of
money in those developmental programs, and we actually have put out
there the technology faster, better. So there are many areas, and I
can't spend all my time talking about them.
This is a job creation bill. 9.2 percent of the gross domestic
activity in this Nation depends on this industry. We count on this. As
I said, in less than 4 months, the other body, the Senate, has already
passed the bill. We're ready to go to conference. We've asked for one
extension to accomplish this. And this bill has excellent provisions.
Finally, you will hear them moan and groan about some labor provision
that someone described that we're taking away democratic rights and all
of this for union members. It couldn't be further from the truth. We
have had 70-some years of rules organizing for labor where we've always
had a majority of those who were affected have to vote in a union. Now
they want to change it to whoever shows up. They have multiple
elections. And that's what they're asking for.
The little caveat here--and I hope everyone is listening, Madam
Chair. What they didn't do is to decertify to get out of the union.
They left the old rule in place. There has to be a majority of everyone
who's affected.
They'll tell you that they didn't let women vote and all this a long
time ago, try to mix up the topic at hand and confuse people, but you
can't think of a more unfair rule than a packed National Mediation
Board has enacted. Unfair, easy to enter in, cut the provisions for
entering in, and then put a barrier up to get out.
Again, I think this is an excellent program. It gives us
opportunities to look at contract towers and then air traffic control,
NextGen, the next generation of air traffic control. We can do better.
We can get technology in place. We'll probably have to use fewer
people. And we'll always know where the planes are if we can move this
legislation forward that, again, has been on the shelf for some 4
years.
There are excellent provisions in this legislation. I feel confident
that it deserves the support of the House, and we'll have fair and open
debate on amendments.
House of Representatives, Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology,
Washington, DC, March 29, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology in H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and
Reform Act of 2011.
H.R. 658 was favorably reported by the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure on March 10, 2011 and
sequentially referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology. I recognize and appreciate your desire to bring
this legislation before the House of Representatives in an
expeditious manner, and, accordingly, I will waive further
consideration of this bill in Committee. This, of course,
being conditional on our mutual understanding that Title X of
the legislation reported by your Committee will be removed
from the legislation and provisions regarding research and
development activities at the Federal Aviation Administration
developed by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
will be included in the legislation considered on the Floor.
However, agreeing to waive consideration of this bill should
not be construed as waiving, reducing or affecting the
jurisdiction of the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology.
Further, I request your support in the appointment of
conferees from the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology during any House-Senate conference convened on
this, or any similar legislation. I also ask that a copy of
this letter and your response be placed in the Congressional
Record during consideration of the bill on the House floor.
[[Page H2132]]
I look forward to working with you as we prepare to pass
this important legislation.
Sincerely,
Ralph M. Hall,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, March 29, 2011.
Hon. Ralph M. Hall,
Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
658, the ``FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.'' The
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure recognizes the
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology has a
jurisdictional interest in H.R. 658, and I appreciate your
effort to facilitate consideration of this bill.
As you wrote in your letter, we have agreed to strike Title
X from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
reported H.R. 658. Provisions regarding research and
development activities at the Federal Aviation Administration
developed by the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
will be included in the legislation considered on the House
Floor.
I also concur with you that forgoing action on this bill
does not in any way prejudice the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology with respect to its jurisdictional
prerogatives on this bill or similar legislation in the
future, and I would support your effort to seek appointment
of an appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate
conference involving this legislation.
I will include our letters on H.R. 658 in the Congressional
Record during House Floor consideration of the bill. Again, I
appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and I
look forward to working with the Committee on Science, Space,
and Technology as the bill moves through the legislative
process.
Sincerely,
John L. Mica,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC, March 23, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica, I am writing concerning H.R. 658, the
``FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011,'' which is
scheduled for floor consideration next week. As a result of
your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R. 658 that
fall within the Rule X jurisdiction of the Committee on the
Judiciary, we are able to agree to forego action on this bill
in order that it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor
for consideration.
The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual
understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 658 at
this time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject
matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our
Committee will be appropriately consulted and involved as the
bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may
address any remaining issues in our jurisdiction. Our
Committee also reserves the right to seek appointment of an
appropriate number of conferees to any House-Senate
conference involving this or similar legislation, and
requests your support for any such request.
I would appreciate your response to this letter confirming
this understanding with respect to H.R. 658, and would ask
that a copy of our exchange of letters on this matter be
included in the Congressional Record during floor
consideration.
Sincerely,
Lamar Smith,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, March 23, 2011.
Hon. Lamar Smith,
Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R.
658, the ``FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.'' The
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure recognizes the
Committee on the Judiciary has a jurisdictional interest in
H.R. 658, and I appreciate your effort to facilitate
consideration of this bill.
I also concur with you that forgoing action on this bill
does not in any way prejudice the Committee on the Judiciary
with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this bill
or similar legislation in the future, and I would support
your effort to seek appointment of an appropriate number of
conferees to any House-Senate conference involving this
legislation.
I will include our letters on H.R. 658 in the Congressional
Record during House Floor consideration of the bill. Again, I
appreciate your cooperation regarding this legislation and I
look forward to working with the Committee on the Judiciary
as the bill moves through the legislative process.
Sincerely,
John L. Mica,
Chairman.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1510
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, it was just last week two airliners landed at Washington
National Airport without landing clearances because apparently the
single person in charge of the control tower fell asleep. While
investigations are ongoing, we certainly have seen accidents in the
past where controller staffing and fatigue were implicated, such as the
August 2006 crash of Comair Flight 5191 in Lexington, Kentucky.
So I was surprised when some of my Republican colleagues used this
most recent incident at Washington National Airport as an opportunity
to argue that the FAA should ``do more with less.'' Do more with less:
that's how the Republicans think the FAA will operate under this bill.
When we're talking about investing in air traffic control modernization
or regulating safety or hiring a sufficient number of safety
inspectors, there's no such thing as ``doing more with less.''
Under this bill, the FAA will have to do less with less, and you
would have to be asleep at the controls not to see that.
The FAA is primarily a safety agency, and virtually all of its
activities are safety related. As last week's incident should make
clear, now is not the time to arbitrarily cut almost $4 billion from
the FAA programs and argue that the agency can do more with less on
safety. A long-term FAA reauthorization bill must move the aviation
system into the 21st century, create jobs, strengthen our economy, and
provide the resources necessary to enhance safety. This legislation,
unfortunately, does not meet those goals. It will require significant
changes before it can be enacted into law, and therefore I cannot
support it.
One thing we should all be honest about right now: this is not a jobs
bill. The bill cuts FAA funding by billions of dollars, back to 2008
levels. You cannot cut funding so dramatically without destroying tens
of thousands of jobs: Federal jobs, State jobs, local jobs, public and
private sector jobs.
In addition to costing jobs, the bill's funding cuts would cause
delays to air traffic control modernization, meaning more delayed
flights, a reduction of FAA's safety workforce and delays to FAA safety
rules.
Now, aside from the funding levels, there are two particular issues
that preclude my support for this bill. The first is that the bill
sunsets the Essential Air Service program for the lower 48 States in
2013, leaving behind about 110 communities across the country. Yet at
the same time, the bill extends airport improvements to the Marshall
Islands, Micronesia, and Palau. We do not even own them. They are
independent countries.
Now, I do understand the reasons for providing airport improvement
funds to these island nations. We do have a compact with them. But in
seeking to keep faith with our agreements with those countries, the
majority is more than willing to break the promise to rural America
right here at home that was made under the Airline Deregulation Act and
the FAA reauthorization bills that followed.
EAS is a vital lifeline between rural communities and the global
network of commerce. Small and rural communities have grown up around
EAS, which directly supports local jobs. It creates a flow of goods and
commerce into and out of small-town America. It brings families
together. It links four communities in my home State of West Virginia
with other cities and towns around the country and around the world.
Essential Air Service is an investment; it's not a handout. It is an
investment in jobs and economic growth for small towns. The majority is
turning its back on small towns and rural America.
I will continue to work with my colleagues in a bipartisan fashion to
honor the promise that Congress has made to the people in rural
America. I recognize the job-protecting benefits of the EAS program and
the value of critical Federal investment for rural communities.
Now, before I conclude, there's another section that has no business
whatsoever being in this bill, and that is a provision that seeks to
overturn a rule finalized by the National Mediation Board on fair union
representation in elections. The rule did away
[[Page H2133]]
with an unjust and undemocratic requirement under which a supermajority
of airline and railroad workers had to vote in favor of union
representation before a union could be certified to represent them at
the bargaining table. Non-votes were counted as ``no'' votes, even
though there was no reason to conclude workers were against union
representation because they were sick or on furlough and did not vote.
The new rule, which this bill would overturn, says that the mediation
board must count the votes among those employees who voted and must
determine the will of the workers according to the ``yes'' and ``no''
votes actually cast. Now, just as congressional elections turn on a
majority of those who voted, union representation elections should
reflect the will of the voters.
This is a poison pill provision. A provision to overturn that rule
simply has no business being in this legislation. It has nothing to do
with safety. It has nothing to do with improving our air transportation
system. And it has absolutely nothing to do with making air service
more efficient. Rather, it is a lightning rod of controversy, part of a
concerted assault, as we've seen too often this year, on collective
bargaining. Republicans and Democrats alike have opposed it. It barely
survived in the committee markup by a single vote. This unprovoked and
unnecessary provision has no place in such critically needed
legislation to keep the FAA moving forward and the flying public safe.
When it comes to doing more with less, my friends on the other side
of the aisle are correct about a few things, I have to admit, when it
comes to the pending legislation:
More than 70,000 jobs lost with less funding for the AIP program.
More risks to the traveling public with less safety personnel and
initiatives. More assaults on collective bargaining rights for American
workers. More controversial poison pill provisions with less focus on
job creation and safety enhancements.
Yep, that's doing more with less.
With warning lights flashing and alarm bells ringing, we cannot
afford to go to sleep at the controls at such an important time for our
aviation system.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Reminding everyone that we're borrowing 42 cents out of
every dollar, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the chair of the
Aviation Subcommittee, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
Mr. PETRI. I thank my chairman.
The legislation before us, H.R. 658, reauthorizes the safety and
research programs, operations, airport grants, and funding for the
Federal Aviation Administration for budget years 2011 through 2014.
It's a 4-year reauthorization, with no earmarks, that will result in
savings and in greater efficiencies.
The bill funds the FAA at the fiscal year 2008 funding levels and
will save $4 billion compared to the current levels. These funding
levels recognize the state of the Federal budget, but should not affect
vital safety functions.
The FAA Administrator is directed to achieve required cost savings
without cutting safety critical activities. The bill requires the FAA
to find and eliminate wasteful processes, duplicative programs, and
unnecessary practices.
{time} 1520
Given current economic times, there is a need to put our limited
resources where they are most needed and use them efficiently. Although
we cannot do all that we may have wanted to, when facing budget cuts,
difficult decisions have to be made. We have worked to preserve the
ability of the FAA to conduct its safety functions--its most important
mission and our number one priority.
The bill will phase out the Essential Air Service Program by 2013,
resulting in $400 million in savings. The Essential Air Service Program
was originally created in 1970 as a temporary program in the wake of
airline deregulation. It was intended to allow airports to adapt to the
change in the aviation industry and to plan accordingly. However, over
the years, this program has resulted in taxpayers having to pay
millions of dollars in subsidies to provide air service to communities
even as passenger enplanements have declined as other modes of
transportation have become available.
With regard to NextGen, H.R. 658 streamlines processes and provides
sufficient funding, with FAA pursestring tightening, to fund NextGen
projects planned in the next 4 years. H.R. 658 sets strict goals and
benchmarks, and includes other measures to accelerate NextGen in order
to keep the momentum going. NextGen is critical to the U.S.'s ability
to compete in the global aviation system by providing safer and more
efficient and environmentally friendly operations.
The bill allows for the expansion of the cost-effective Contract
Tower Program, which has the potential to save, roughly, $400 million
over 4 years. In addition, the legislation provides a clear and
efficient process for the FAA to rapidly achieve benefits associated
with the consolidation of old, obsolete and unnecessary FAA facilities,
with enormous potential savings.
I would like to commend Chairman Mica for his efforts in developing
this bill and moving it through the committee.
Also, while we may have differences on a few provisions, there is
much in this bill that has bipartisan support. I look forward to
continuing to work with my aviation partner, Representative Jerry
Costello, and with our ranking member, Representative Nick Rahall, in
getting agreement with the Senate so that we can finally send a bill to
the President.
I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 658.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello), our leading Democrat on the
Aviation Subcommittee who has been in the trenches, on the runways, and
in the towers of this legislation for many years. He has been with the
takeoffs and the landings of so many extensions.
Mr. COSTELLO. I thank the ranking member for yielding to me and for
his kind remarks.
Madam Chair, we all agree that we need a long-term FAA
Reauthorization Act. The FAA and the aviation community need stability
and direction that a multi-year authorization will provide. However,
it's not this bill.
It is important for Members to know that H.R. 658 is a different FAA
reauthorization bill from the bipartisan legislation that my colleagues
and I worked together on and that passed the House three times during
the 110th and 111th Congresses. That legislation would have created
jobs, improved aviation safety, and provided the FAA with the resources
necessary to modernize airport and air traffic control infrastructure.
However, while some aspects of H.R. 658 were in prior House-passed
bills and reflect some of my priorities, there are many troubling
omissions and newly added provisions in the bill that are unacceptable.
I think we all agree that we must make every effort to be fiscally
responsible and cut Federal spending where it makes sense given the
size of the deficit. At the same time, we also have a responsibility to
the American people to keep our aviation system safe and secure, to
make needed improvements to our infrastructure, to strengthen the
economy, to create jobs, and to remain competitive. However, I share
the concerns of those in the industry that this legislation includes
funding cuts that will affect safety and put the flying public at risk,
devastate the FAA's Next Generation Air Transportation System air
traffic control modernization effort, and ignore the need to strengthen
our economy by creating jobs.
On the jobs issue, let me make it clear. Mr. Rahall said it and I'll
say it again: This bill does not create jobs. Instead, it cuts,
roughly, $2 billion over the next 4 years in the FAA's Airport
Improvement Program. The AIP provides funding to airports across the
country for infrastructure projects, such as runways and air traffic
control towers, and these projects create well-paying construction
jobs. A $2 billion decrease in funding in this bill means about 70,000
jobs will be lost. I will repeat that: 70,000 jobs will be lost because
of the $2 billion cut in AIP funds. In fact, it leaves so little AIP
discretionary funding available that even the most important projects,
such as completing runway safety areas by the congressionally mandated
deadline, cannot be funded.
[[Page H2134]]
Second, my Republican colleagues argue that H.R. 658 directs the FAA
to prioritize and to protect safety-related activities within the
bill's reduced funding levels. That sounds great, but all the evidence
suggests that it can't be done.
In February, the House Aviation Subcommittee held an FAA
reauthorization hearing to listen to the aviation industry's
stakeholders. The unified message from the industry was loud and clear:
Congress cannot roll back FAA funding to 2008 levels without harming
safety programs or hampering the industry. President Bush's former FAA
administrator, Marion Blakey, stated, ``The prospect is really
devastating to jobs and to our future if we really have to roll back to
2008 levels and stop NextGen in its tracks.''
A jobs bill? I don't think so--and neither does the person who ran
the FAA under the Bush administration.
The FAA is primarily a safety agency, and virtually all of its
activities are safety-related. This Congress and the American people
need to know that, if we arbitrarily cut $1 billion a year out of the
FAA's budget, it absolutely will affect safety. The agency will not do
more with less. It will be forced to do less with less, and cuts to
these funding levels will have serious consequences.
According to the FAA, the funding reductions in this bill will cause
the agency to furlough the aviation safety workforce by hundreds of
employees. Fewer safety inspectors, engineers, and support personnel
will adversely impact air traffic services, aviation safety
certifications and the implementation of NextGen, which will end up
costing the taxpayers more in the long run and cause our aviation
industry to be less competitive globally.
In addition, a reduction in the workforce will likely mean the delay
of important safety regulations, such as those mandated by Congress in
the new aviation safety law that was enacted last year in a bipartisan
vote in response to the Colgan Flight 3407 tragedy in Buffalo, New
York. Further, this legislation will force important safety-related
airport improvement projects to be delayed or abandoned, such as
wildlife hazard assessment. These types of assessments would help
airports mitigate hazards like the one that brought down U.S. Airways
Flight 1549 in 2009 in which Captain Sullenberger and First Officer
Skiles were forced to land in the Hudson River because a flock of geese
damaged the plane's engines.
As Mr. Rahall indicated, just last week, two planes landed safely,
without clearance, at Washington National Airport because, reportedly,
a single person in charge at the control tower apparently fell asleep.
While investigations are ongoing, we have certainly seen accidents in
the past where air traffic control staffing and fatigue were a factor,
such as in the August 2006 crash of Comair Flight 5191 in Lexington,
Kentucky.
I applaud Secretary LaHood's decision to reevaluate staffing needs
throughout the country. Congress will also need to closely examine air
traffic control staffing and fatigue going forward; but this incident
should make it clear: Now is not the time to arbitrarily cut almost $4
billion from FAA programs and argue that the agency can do more with
less without compromising safety.
I know Mr. Rahall and others have talked about a provision in the
legislation that I believe, too, is a ``poison pill.'' I will not go
into all of the details as we will have an amendment later; but let me
just say that the LaTourette-Costello amendment, I hope, will be
supported by the Members of this body. It is a ``poison pill''
provision, section 903 in this legislation, that is certain to hold the
legislation up in the Senate. There is no way that I see the Senate
will act on that provision, and the White House, of course, has already
issued a statement saying that the President will receive
recommendations from his advisers to veto the bill.
{time} 1530
If we are serious about passing a long-term FAA bill, this provision
must come out. If it remains in the bill, it will be rejected by the
Senate and the White House.
Madam Chair, I will again say--and I have said many times before--I
will work with my colleagues across the aisle to produce a fair bill
that cannot only pass the House but also pass the Senate and be signed
into law by the President. H.R. 658 in its current form will not pass
the Senate or be signed into law by the President and will require
significant changes before it's enacted.
Finally, Madam Chair, let me address a couple of comments that my
friend the chairman of the full committee led off with in his remarks.
He indicated that the Democrats when we were in charge for all of these
years and we weren't able to pass legislation, we had to have 17
extensions. I would remind my friend that both in 2007, 2009, and in
2010 we passed bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the FAA. It was
our friends in the Senate, in fairness, that held the legislation up.
It took them 3 years to pass an FAA reauthorization bill, and in fact,
as my friend from Florida will remember, it was the two Senators from
Tennessee that held the bill up in the Senate, and it was two issues
that were held up in the Senate, and those issues involved both PFCs
and DCA, the number of slots at Washington Reagan National airport.
Madam Chair, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on H.R. 658, the FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act, and hope that after we reject this bill
we can go back and get a bill that accomplishes what we set out to do
in the legislation, the bipartisan legislation that we passed last
year.
Mr. MICA. Madam Chair, can I inquire as to the amount of time
remaining on each side?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida has 5\1/2\ minutes remaining.
The gentleman from West Virginia has 4 minutes remaining.
Mr. MICA. Madam Chair, I would ask unanimous consent to yield 2\1/2\
minutes of my time to the gentleman from Pennsylvania and allow him to
control it for the purpose of a colloquy.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania will control the time, 2\1/2\ minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, as you know the EAS program was
established to ensure that smaller communities across the country,
including those in my congressional district, retain a link to the
national air transportation system. I also understand that we have a
severely constrained Federal budget, and I agree with the chairman that
we must do more with less and we need to ensure that Federal programs
actually make sense.
As a member of the committee, I look forward to working with the
chairman to get this long overdue FAA bill to the President's desk for
signature, and I look forward to working with the chairman to make the
needed changes to the EAS program.
I would now yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Thompson).
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Essential Air Service assists over 140
communities throughout the United States. EAS, Essential Air Service,
works.
Let me talk about two airports, real quick. Williamsport,
Pennsylvania. It was on EAS. It needed it to get their deployments up,
and frankly, what's happened, it's been successful. It's now off of
EAS. The program works. These folks are now operating without that.
Dubois, Pennsylvania. Their deployments are growing at this point,
and they are on the right track. The EAS is serving the correct purpose
of what it has. If EAS stops and ends, here is what ends in Dubois,
Pennsylvania: private sector jobs totaling $9 million in payroll and
$28.8 million in economic activity.
I just do my best to encourage the support of the Essential Air
Service. I do think it's very important for rural America.
Mr. SHUSTER. I agree with the gentleman.
I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg).
Mr. BERG. This bill will ensure the much-needed long-term stability
and development of our Nation's aviation infrastructure. However, I am
incredibly concerned about the provision in this bill that would phase
out Essential Air Service. EAS is critical to large States like my own.
Rural regions rely on EAS for vital air transportation. In North
Dakota, airports like Jamestown
[[Page H2135]]
and Devil's Lake would not be able to provide critical air service
without this support.
I've spoken with Chairman Mica, and I understand the need for the
process to keep moving forward with this bill. This bill contains many
good provisions that I support. I also know how vital rural access to
essential aviation is. So I would ask the gentlemen from Florida and
Pennsylvania if they'd commit to working with me and other Members to
support the EAS program.
Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman from North Dakota.
I yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem).
Mrs. NOEM. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Madam Chair, we have spent the last 3 months debating the need to get
spending under control, and it's a good thing. That's why my
constituents sent me here, and that's what I plan to continue to do.
But we also need to remember that we need to look to get spending
under control and help our economy and create jobs. A large part of
that is providing certainty for the American people, and like many of
my colleagues, I represent the rural parts of America. Many of them are
concerned with the uncertainty that removing this program, Essential
Air Service, too quickly would bring. Many of the communities in rural
America, including those in South Dakota, that rely on this program use
it as an economic development tool. They understand that they won't be
using EAS forever.
But I'm concerned, Madam Chair, that we may not be providing them
with the time that they need to plan under this bill. This issue
deserves additional consideration. I hope that as we move forward with
conference conversations with our Senate colleagues that this is given
much more careful consideration, and I look forward to working on it
with them.
Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentlelady from South Dakota.
I look forward to working with the chairman, the gentlelady from
South Dakota, and the gentlemen from Pennsylvania and North Dakota as
the bill moves forward on EAS.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I would defer to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. I would claim the time for Ways and Means.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I have appreciated the debate here on the floor talking about the
essential services that are included in the FAA reauthorization, but
sadly, some of the consequences are for significant cuts in vital
services--I hear some of my friends talking about Essential Air
Service. It impacts my State. We're looking at significant reduction in
airport construction, and as we've heard, it would stop NextGen, as the
former administrator under the Bush administration was quoted as
saying, ``in its tracks.'' But Madam Chairman, it doesn't need to be
this way. We can, in fact, respect the concerns about not adding to the
deficit without shortchanging these essential programs.
Our friends in the Senate, have provided one of those rare occasions
where the other body has shown us the way. They have passed in the last
year, with 93 votes last year and 87-8 votes already in this session, a
reauthorization that actually adds revenues, but not general taxes, but
there's been an agreement that has reached overwhelming consensus. You
don't get 87 votes out of the other body for raising revenue unless
there's broad acceptance with the industry, with those who are
regulated and those who are concerned about preserving these essential
services. There's an agreement within a broad swath of the industry to
increase the fuel tax, a user fee for the people who benefit.
Another critical area that the bill is silent on, and in fact we
haven't adjusted for 10 years, is the ceiling on the passenger facility
charge. This isn't even a tax that Congress imposes. It is simply an
authorization for what local authorities can decide makes sense for
their vital programs.
Madam Chair, we don't have to choose between tens of thousands of
jobs lost, putting the traveling public at risk, delaying essential
efficiency improvements, and cuts to vital programs or increasing the
deficit. We can simply move forward with simple, commonsense, broadly
agreed upon proposals to adjust revenues to have the flexibility, to
make the investment that's going to make a difference for years to
come, and make the difficult job of the chair and the ranking member
and the two subcommittees, to make that difficult job much easier.
{time} 1540
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the very
distinguished gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Duncan), the chair of the
Highways Subcommittee of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee.
Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. I thank the gentleman from Florida for
yielding me this time.
I rise in support of this bill and commend Chairman Mica and Chairman
Petri because, as a former chair of the Aviation Subcommittee, I know
how difficult it is to bring all the competing interests together to
produce a bill such as this.
However, I would like to raise one issue that I still have some
concerns about. It has been brought to my attention by a former
outstanding Member of this body, Jim Coyne, a former Congressman from
Pennsylvania who has been the long-time head of the National Air
Transportation Association, that some airports are engaging in
activities that compete with privately owned fixed-base operators. I
did not file an amendment because the chairman has graciously agreed to
hold a formal roundtable discussion about this matter and begin working
to make sure that this does not become commonplace.
I hope that this is not a trend that will continue because privately
owned businesses should not have to compete with the government or
quasi-governmental agencies, such as airport authorities, which do not
pay taxes and are not subject to all of the rules and regulations that
private businesses are.
Each time there has been a White House Conference on Small Business--
and they have held one on average every 5 years since 1955--either the
number one concern or one of the top three concerns at all these White
House Conferences on Small Business has been freedom from government
competition.
Madam Chair, since the Eisenhower administration in 1955, it has been
U.S. policy--or was supposed to have been--that ``government should not
start or carry on any commercial activity to provide a service or
product for its own use if such a product or service can be procured
from private enterprise through ordinary business channels.'' So that
is my concern, and we are going to continue working on that.
I also want to mention a very commonsense amendment that will be
filed later by Mr. Shuster on behalf of myself and Mr. Meehan, my two
colleagues from Pennsylvania. This amendment that we will be filing
does two very simple things: it states that the FAA should not use a
one-size-fits-all approach when considering new regulations. It also
requires the FAA to take into consideration the cost it is imposing on
the private sector when issuing new regulations.
This amendment simply codifies much of an executive order issued by
President Obama on January 18 of this year. Quoting from the
President's executive order, it said our regulatory system ``must be
based on the best available science. It must allow for public
participation and an open exchange of ideas. It must promote
predictability and reduce uncertainty. It must identify and use the
best, most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving
regulatory ends. It must take into account benefits and costs, both
quantitative and qualitative.''
In addition, FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt has stated that a one-
size-fits-all approach to rulemaking can make aviation less safe. There
are different segments of the aviation industry that face very
different challenges. I believe that by tailoring the regulations
toward these different segments of the industry, we can make aviation
safer by helping address the different challenges that different types
of businesses face.
[[Page H2136]]
Finally, I would like to say that I agree with the chairman about
overstaffing with regard to our aviation regulation. I am amazed, Madam
Chair, at how many Members and private citizens have expressed concerns
about TSA overstaffing and have mentioned the lines of thousands
standing around. The number of screeners has gone up, as I understand
it, from 16,000 prior to 9/11 to 61,000 now. That is simply far, far
too many; and that needs to be looked into. And I know the chairman
intends to do that. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, may I inquire as to the amount of time
remaining for Ways and Means.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Madam Chair, I would ask unanimous consent that these
2 minutes be assigned to the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from West Virginia will
control the time.
There was no objection.
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio), the lead Democrat on our Highways
and Transit Subcommittee.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Unfortunately, this legislation, under the guise of
being fiscally prudent, is going to delay vital safety and capacity
needs and enhancements to our aviation system, condemning future air
travelers to even more congestion, more delays, more wasted fuel. It's
going to cut an already inadequate inspection force--again, threatening
safety. And then there are other provisions that are problematic.
The gentleman from Arizona may ask for a vote on an amendment to
change the very fair and competitive slot language for National Airport
in the bill into an unfair earmarked anti-competitive amendment that
would give potentially 70 percent of long distance flights out of
National Airport to two airlines, about 50 percent to one airline. And
he calls it competition. Now I don't know what planet he's from, but
that's not competition where I come from, an underserved west coast
market that has very few opportunities for my people to access National
Airport.
And then, finally, a labor provision that was thrown in rather
gratuitously that says that anyone who chooses not to vote in an
election will be counted as a ``no.'' The interesting thing is, if we
had that same standard for elections to the United States House of
Representatives, not one single Member now sitting would have won their
election because it's not just the people who are registered to vote.
It's anybody who is eligible to vote. And if they don't vote or don't
register to vote, they count as a ``no.'' I mean, some people might be
happy, there would be no House of Representatives. But at least the
sitting Members would not be here. They want to apply that standard to
representation for labor unions. That's incredibly unfair,
shortsighted, and would overrule the National Labor Relations Board.
Finally, Essential Air Service. We are supposed to have a system of
universal air transport. It is critical to many small and developing
communities, rural communities like I represent, to have a continuation
of Essential Air Service.
Mr. MICA. Madam Chairman, I understand that the Ways and Means
Committee is in markup. I would like to ask unanimous consent to claim
their time, I believe that is 5 minutes on our side, that the
Transportation and Infrastructure majority be permitted to claim that
time.
The CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Florida will control
the 5 minutes allotted to the Ways and Means Committee.
There was no objection.
Mr. MICA. Madam Chairman, I am so pleased to yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), one of the
senior members of the T&I Committee and a leader on the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. COBLE. I thank the chairman for yielding.
I rise in support of this bill, which is financially sound and with
no tax or fee increases. Simply put, the measure is long overdue, and
the aviation sector needs certainty. We need to finish the task at
hand. The manager's amendment considered later today includes language
that will provide clarity for musicians who travel with small
instruments. And I'm not talking, Madam Chair, about stand-up basses or
harps.
Current policy varies from airline to airline as to what instruments
are permitted onboard. The amendment strikes a delicate balance to
ensure musicians can attain certainty and safety is ensured. I am
appreciative to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) and the gentleman
from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall) and to all staff who worked with me on
this provision, and I thank them for its inclusion.
I also support an amendment offered by the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Shuster) that will help FAA regulations conform to
reasonableness and reality. This amendment requires the FAA to
recognize distinctions between sectors of the aviation industry and
tailor regulations to each sector's facts. It also conforms FAA
rulemaking to a number of good-government principles, such as cost-
benefit analysis, use of the best available information, and
consideration of regulatory impacts on the economy.
Finally, later today there will likely be vigorous debate on recent
action by the National Mediation Board on labor elections. Under
previous guidelines, a majority of the eligible electorate must vote in
favor of unionization. Under the new rules, this majority is defined by
those who actually vote in elections. This action overturns precedent
that has been in place for the past 70 years that worked well. This
issue is about fairness to all parties and, in my opinion, the
appropriate way forward is past policy, not those in place today.
{time} 1550
Mr. RAHALL. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New
York (Mr. Nadler), a distinguished member of our Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure.
Mr. NADLER. Madam Chairman, this bill drastically cuts funding for
FAA programs, threatening the development of the NextGen air traffic
control system and requiring the furlough of hundreds of safety-related
employees.
The bill also would change the National Mediation Board's election
rules. Airline and railroad workers would no longer vote for union
representation by a majority of those voting but by a majority of all
those eligible to vote. It would be extremely undemocratic to thus
count votes not cast as ``no'' votes. No election in any free country
does so. And I urge my colleagues to support the LaTourette-Costello
amendment to strike this provision.
I also oppose provisions in the manager's amendment providing
liability immunity for the airlines and limitations on discovery.
Section 336 would block access to safety-related data through discovery
and would block use of such information in court. It is virtually
unheard of for Congress to simply declare that broad categories of
information cannot be obtained by a party to a lawsuit or even used as
evidence in a legal proceeding.
Section 337 provides immunity to airlines and their agents for any
type of damage resulting from an event contemplated by a safety
management system. These systems are designed to analyze virtually
every kind of risk, so granting this immunity would make it virtually
impossible to hold an airline or individual accountable for negligence
causing almost any accident. This liability shield would deprive
injured victims of their rights and would also preempt State tort law.
We haven't held any hearings on this in the Transportation Committee
or in the Judiciary Committee, which, frankly, has jurisdiction and the
proper expertise with which to analyze such grants of immunity, and we
haven't heard any evidence to justify these dangerous restrictions.
I find it hard to believe that anybody thinks that airlines should be
allowed to act with negligence and be free from liability should you or
I or any other American be injured or maimed or killed as a result of
the negligence.
For all these reasons, I must oppose the bill.
However, I do want to thank Chairman Mica and Congressman Coble for
including language in the manager's amendment to strengthen the
provisions guaranteeing the right to carry or check musical instruments
onto an
[[Page H2137]]
airline. This is an issue I've worked on for many years, and I am very
pleased to see it finally moving forward.
I hope that we can continue to find areas of agreement, since passage
of a long-term FAA authorization bill is long overdue. I look forward
to working with my colleagues in that spirit. But until the funding
levels are increased, the safety and worker provisions are in place,
the poison pill provisions about union votes are removed, I cannot
support this bill.
Mr. MICA. Might I inquire as to how much time remains?
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida has 3\1/2\ minutes remaining.
The gentleman from West Virginia has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. MICA. I would like to reserve my time that I acquired on behalf
of the Ways and Means Committee to close and, I believe, if it's
appropriate, have the Science Committee, which I think is yielded 5
minutes on each side, go forward prior to my close.
Mr. HALL. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HALL. Madam Chair, I rise in strong support of H.R. 658,
legislation reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration through
fiscal year 2014.
Title X of H.R. 658 reauthorizes the agency's research and
development programs. It was drafted by the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology as H.R. 970, the Federal Aviation Research and
Development Reauthorization Act of 2011. On March 17, the committee
met, amended and approved H.R. 970. The rule accompanying H.R. 658
fully incorporates the language from our amended bill into title X,
which we support.
With regard to funding, title X adheres to the same principles of the
larger bill, providing authorization levels for the Research,
Engineering and Development account at the fiscal year 2008 level for
the fiscal years 2012 through 2014. For fiscal year 2011, the
authorization is a hybrid of current spending under the continuing
resolution and the FY 2008 level.
Further, our bill authorizes spending for research and development
activities that are funded through the agency's Facilities and
Equipment and Airports accounts. None of our members relish cutting R&D
funding, but members on our side of the aisle were passionate in their
belief, as I am, that we must reduce Federal spending, and the FAA,
like every other Federal agency, must bear some burden and some measure
of burden.
Research and development plays a critical role at FAA, providing the
agency with the tools and technologies it needs to carry out a diverse
set of missions. The largest R&D program currently underway supports
development of a whole host of technologies required to ensure
successful deployment of the Next Generation Air Transportation System.
R&D also is fundamental to FAA's role in the safety of air travel,
giving the agency the insight and data required to develop tools and
policies guiding the introduction, use and the maintenance of new
materials and systems incorporated in the modern jet aircraft.
These technologies are necessary if we're to continue improving the
national airspace system's safety, efficiency and security, especially
considering the critical role now played by aviation in our Nation's
economy and public safety.
In addition, title X directs FAA to undertake research in a number of
areas, including the safe operation of unmanned aircraft systems in the
national airspace, research on runways and engineered material
restraining systems, research on developing unleaded fuel for the use
in general aviation piston engine aircraft and on the development and
certification of jet fuel from alternative sources, and research on the
effects of aviation on the environment.
There are many other activities too numerous to mention here, but I
did want to provide examples to Members of the broad sweep of FAA-
sponsored R&D.
Finally, I understand Chairman Mica's amendment offered to the bill
seeks to modify certain provisions while also adding a few. A specific
provision amends existing law found in title 51 of the United States
Code regarding the Office of Commercial Space Transportation. I support
the goal of this language with the understanding that the inclusion of
this language does not alter the jurisdiction of my committee on this
issue and that the chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee will work with us to ensure this provision or similar
provisions are preserved, they are preserved as we continue to move
through the legislative process on H.R. 658, including any negotiations
or conference with the other body.
Madam Chair, in closing, I want to urge all Members to support this
bill.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. EDWARDS. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maryland is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. EDWARDS. The need for a long-term Federal Aviation
Administration, FAA, reauthorization act is clear; but H.R. 658
reauthorizes the FAA for 4 years, and the arbitrary spending cuts that
our Republican colleagues have imposed on the agency in H.R. 658 will
devastate FAA's ability to improve flying safety and to modernize the
Nation's air traffic control system. For this reason, unfortunately, I
cannot support the bill.
H.R. 658 proposes a 23 percent--an unbelievable 23 percent--cut to
FAA's research, engineering and development accounts from the funding
levels enacted by Congress for fiscal year 2010. These cuts are not
related in any way to a lack of need for the research. In fact, the
committee, in multiple hearings, acknowledged the need for the
research. The Congress heard expert testimony from witnesses who have
stressed the importance of investing in both research and development
and in the NextGen modernization initiative, and have warned of the
negative impact that cuts will have on the Nation's air traffic control
system and the flying public.
To cut FAA's R&D efforts so drastically while we're trying to recover
from a recession and while oil prices every day climb higher risks
stifling this industry and the millions of jobs it supports.
But I also want to be clear that the research and development work
that is done at FAA helps to protect the safety of all the flying
public. These cuts to aviation safety-related research have a high
probability of reducing the safety of our air transformation system.
These effects may not be felt today or tomorrow, but they will be felt,
and they will have serious consequences for the flying public.
Madam Chair, Democratic members of the committee attempted to prevent
the cuts to three key safety research initiatives at our committee's
markup of H.R. 970. These amendments, if adopted, would have increased
the 4-year authorization amount by a total of $16 million, or less than
3 percent of the $600 million authorization in the bill--a small amount
for such a huge payoff.
{time} 1600
As noted in the committee markup, these costs really pale in
comparison to even a single major aircraft accident both in terms of
money and the horrible loss of life. Unfortunately, our Republican
colleagues voted to reject each of these key safety amendments and
research amendments that go to safety. And the choice couldn't be more
clear. Our colleagues chose to make the flying public less safe in
order to meet a very arbitrary goal for cutting Federal spending.
I share our colleagues' concern about the Nation's deficit, but we
reject any notion that addressing the Nation's deficit requires us to
make our Nation's transportation system less safe.
As we move forward in the negotiations with the Senate over a final
FAA reauthorization, I remain committed to ensuring the safety of our
Nation's air transportation system and hope that our Republican
colleagues will join in this effort.
In conclusion, I would like to speak to a measure in the provision of
the underlying bill that has me greatly troubled, and that has to do
with union elections. It is staggering to me that we have decided that
we are going to count not voting as a ``no'' vote.
I just took a look at the winning numbers for our leadership. Our
Speaker was elected in 2010 with 142,700 votes. His opponents and those
who weren't
[[Page H2138]]
registered totaled 482,170 votes. If we had used this same theory, this
same strategy for our own elections and for the election of Speaker
Boehner, he would have lost that election by 339,000 votes. And that
goes for each of us. And perhaps the public wants that. Maybe we should
all be counting nonvoting as ``no'' votes, and then we could completely
change this House of Representatives. But that is not the way we run
elections, and that is not the way we should run union elections. So it
is unfortunate that the majority has decided to put this poison pill
into the underlying legislation that makes it unsupportable on this
side of the aisle.
With that, I would ask unanimous consent to yield the balance of my
time to the ranking member on Transportation and Infrastructure, the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall).
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Bass of New Hampshire). Is there objection to
the request of the gentlewoman from Maryland?
There was no objection.
Ms. EDWARDS. And how much time remains?
The Acting CHAIR. There is 30 seconds remaining for the gentlewoman
from Maryland.
Mr. HALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Mississippi
(Mr. Palazzo) such time as he may consume.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 1 minute.
Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join Mr. Hall, chairman of the
House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, to urge all Members to
support passage of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. This is a good and balanced bill that will help advance important
modernization of safety programs at the FAA, and do so in a fiscally
responsible manner.
The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, which I chair, held an
oversight hearing on February 16 that focused on FAA's research and
development activities. Witnesses from FAA, industry, an external
advisory panel to FAA, and the DOT Inspector General spoke in general
agreement about the importance of FAA's research and development
portfolio, with the non-agency witnesses also offering constructive
suggestions for improvement.
Of chief importance to the agency and industry is development and
implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System
program. NextGen will modernize our Nation's air traffic control
system, increasing its capacity, safety, security, and efficiency. But
this ambitious program will not succeed without a well structured, well
managed research and development program that will deliver appropriate
technologies when and where they are required.
To offer a few examples, currently there is NextGen-related research
focused on increasing our weather prediction capability, research to
better understand human factors in a highly automated environment, wake
turbulence prediction, and research on aircraft technologies.
What we are asking FAA to do is to prioritize and make choices. Most
folks in Washington and at home acknowledge that we cannot afford
business as usual by routinely increasing Federal spending year after
year. This bill is a responsible approach to pushing the FAA forward,
but doing so wisely.
Mr. Chair, I rise to join with Mr. Hall, Chairman of the House
Science, Space, and Technology Committee, to urge all Members to
support passage of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of
2011. This is a good and balanced bill that will help advance important
modernization and safety programs at the FAA, and to do so in a
fiscally responsible manner.
The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, which I chair, held an
oversight hearing on February 16 that focused on FAA's research and
development activities. Witnesses from FAA, industry, an external
advisory panel to FAA, and the DOT Inspector General spoke in general
agreement about the importance of FAA's research and development
portfolio, with the non-agency witnesses also offering constructive
suggestions for improvement.
Of chief importance to the agency and industry is development and
implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System
program. NextGen will modernize our nation's air traffic control
system, increasing its capacity, safety, security, and efficiency, but
this ambitious program will not succeed without a well-structured,
well-managed research and development program that will deliver
appropriate technologies when and where they're required. To offer a
few examples, currently there is NextGen-related research focused on
increasing our weather prediction capability; research to better
understand human factors in a highly automated environment; wake
turbulence prediction; and research on aircraft technologies.
Ultimately, tens of billions of dollars are at stake both by government
and industry if we're to enable the full realization of NextGen, and
ensure its success the agency needs a strong R&D program.
Title X of H.R. 658 also supports FAA's traditional safety research,
and it directs the agency--in coordination with NASA--to assess the
environmental impact of aviation. To be clear, the environmental
research will help FAA better measure the effects of aviation, and
where warranted, to develop technologies to mitigate them. For example,
using biomass-based feedstock to develop jet fuel. But just as
importantly, an environmental assessment will also give industry a
baseline against which progress on impacts can be measured, which is a
metric we do not have today.
There are some Members who may argue that this bill is
counterproductive because it reduces FAA's authorization levels,
asserting, for instance, that it imperils public safety by eliminating
safety-related research. To those who raise such claims, I respectfully
disagree. In this bill, we're not eliminating any program. What we are
asking FAA to do is to prioritize and make choices. Most folks in
Washington and at home acknowledge that we cannot afford `business as
usual' by routinely increasing federal spending year after year. This
bill is a responsible approach to pushing the FAA forward, but doing so
wisely.
The Acting CHAIR. All time has expired for the Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from West Virginia has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Florida has 3\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me applaud the work of this committee,
and particularly Mr. Rahall and Mr. Costello, whom we work very closely
with. I serve as a ranking member on the Transportation Security
Committee, and I can't imagine a more perfect fit than the question of
safety and security for our traveling public, and I thank the chairman
of the full committee and others associated with this legislation,
however disappointed I am in having to come to the floor and raise
questions about our next steps. And I am particularly devastated about
the cuts in the FAA's Next Generation Air Traffic System, the NextGen.
Whenever you think of air traffic controllers, I want you to think of
them as first responders, of which I will discuss in an amendment that
I have regarding the issue of ensuring the kind of staffing needs
necessary to engage in security. But further, since I have one of the
largest airports in the country, Bush Intercontinental Airport, of
which we were proud to name, I am disappointed that the FAA Improvement
Program has been cut and, therefore, construction improving runways,
taxiways, terminals. There's one thing about getting up and getting in
the air and having that beautiful feeling. But what about coming down
and not being able to work?
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. RAHALL. I yield an additional 15 seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. And let me say I am disappointed that we
would have a Shuster amendment that would really put a dent in the
pilot fatigue rulemaking. That is very important. And then of course
the issue dealing with the Costello-LaTourette amendment, which I
support. How can you win by 70,000, then you count the people who
didn't vote, and you lose by 150,000? Let's be fair. Let's have a bill
that responds to the needs of all.
Mr. RAHALL. I yield myself the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I really appreciate the sincere efforts of the chairman
of my committee Mr. Mica, the subcommittee chairman Mr. Petri, and our
ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, Mr. Costello.
There have been serious efforts to work in a bipartisan way, but I
fully realize that on the majority's side a lot of these decisions, a
lot of these funding levels are not necessarily made by
[[Page H2139]]
the chairman of the full committee and the chairman of the
subcommittee, but rather by other forces that are out there on the
majority's side. I also recognize that a lot of these decisions are
made at levels higher than the chairman's, at levels higher than even
that at which airplanes fly. So this is not all necessarily the
chairman's fault.
I think it would be fair to warn the body that the administration has
issued their position on this legislation. And they say that if the
funding were appropriated at the levels proposed in the bill, the safe
and efficient movement of air traffic, on the ground and in the air,
would be degraded today and in the future.
And, more importantly, the administration has reiterated its
opposition to the poison pill labor provisions in this bill, and has
said if the President is presented with a bill that would not safeguard
the ability of railroad and airline workers to decide whether or not
they would be represented by a union based upon a majority of the
ballots cast in election, or that would degrade safe and efficient air
travel, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I urge that the House do not accept this bill. We have
even further degrading amendments to safety that will come later in the
amendment process that I want to reference very quickly at this point,
including one that would allow more flyovers at sports events.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. MICA. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
Mr. RAHALL. I appreciate it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This would go against a ban instituted after 9/11 that prohibited
flyovers at sports events for safety reasons. So that comes later on in
the amendment process. I think it just shows the threats that we are
posing to the safety of the air traveling public if this bill were to
pass as it is. I urge its opposition.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, as we close debate on the long overdue FAA
reauthorization, first I have to thank my copartner in this, the
gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Rahall). He is a gentleman. It is
great to work with him. I have to thank also Mr. Petri, the chair of
the Aviation Subcommittee, he and Mr. Costello, two gentlemen who have
worked hard to bring the bill to this point. It has been a struggle for
4 years, and now, to get here. But I am pleased that we are at this
point. There are differences of opinion about the bill.
I have to take a moment to thank staff on both sides. They are great,
and have been working together to get us to this point. And we will
debate the amendments and the differences, and then we will hopefully
pass this and get people working and get our aviation policies secure
for the Nation.
{time} 1610
I have to thank Mr. Hall, the chairman of the Science and Technology
Committee, for his provisions to make certain that research in aviation
is done. Mr. Camp brought a proposal here from Ways and Means that
doesn't raise taxes, that doesn't increase fees. There are no passenger
facility increases. So those kinds of things.
We brought a bill. It does have $59 billion over 4 years--this isn't
small potatoes--and it can, if properly expended and wisely applied,
can do well for the Nation, ensuring safety in programs that are so
important and moving jobs that are so critical. 9.3 percent of our
economy depends on this legislation.
The colloquy between Mr. Shuster and the gentlelady from South Dakota
(Mrs. Noem) and the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Berg) and the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Thompson) on Essential Air Service, I
understand their concerns and their great advocacy for their
constituents and making certain that service is there. We do have a
sunset provision. We will work with them and we will do our best. But I
agreed to work with them, and I reconfirm that here.
Finally, letters of support. You heard the other side state that
nobody supports this. I have a list of 45 major associations, every
major organization in the aviation industry, and I will submit that for
the record. On the question of AIA support, I have a letter of support
from Marion Blakey, showing their support of this legislation.
In conclusion, we are doing here something that needs to be done.
This is very important. It has been left aside. Seventeen extensions.
When the other side, of course, had huge majorities, they could have
done this almost by unanimous consent with the President.
Now, the President threatened to veto this. I am not going to say,
``Make my day,'' but I want to say that this is a fair provision, fair
to everyone in labor, fair to everyone who wants to join a labor union,
to keep 70 years of law that has been on the books and not change it
because you have jerry-rigged the membership of the National Mediation
Board. So let's be fair, fair going in and fair coming out. This
provision that we have in the bill creates fairness.
Broad Support for H.R. 658--FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011
Aerospace Industries Association (AIA); General Aviation
Manufacturers Association (GAMA); Air Transport Association
(ATA); Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA); International
Association of Fire Chiefs; Air Medical Operators Association
(AMOA); Association of Air Medical Services (AAMS);
Aeronautical Repair Station Association (ARSA); U.S. Chamber
of Commerce; Cargo Airline Association (CAA); National
Business Aviation Association (NBAA); National Air Transport
Association (NATA); National Air Carrier Association (NACA);
Association of Unmanned Vehicle Systems International
(AUVSI); Alliance for Worker Freedom; AdvaMed; Airforwarders
Association; Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers;
AT&T; Boston Scientific; Consumer Electronics Association.;
Consumer Electronics Retailers Coalition; CTIA--The Wireless
Association.
Dangerous Goods Advisory Council; DHL; Express Association
of America; FedEx Corporation; Garmin; Hewlett-Packard;
International Air Transport Association (IATA); Information
Technology Industry Council; Johnson Controls; Motorola
Mobility; Motorola Solutions; National Association of
Manufacturers; National Electrical Manufacturers Association;
National Retail Federation; Power Tool Institute; PRBA--The
Rechargeable Battery Association; Retail Industry Leaders
Association; Samsung SDI; Security Industry Association;
Sony; UPS; The International Air Cargo Association.
Aerospace Industries Association,
Arlington, VA, February 16, 2011.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall,
Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives.
Chairman Mica, and Ranking Member Rahall; I write today to
express the Aerospace Industries Association's (AIA) support
for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization
and Reform Act of 2011 (H.R. 658), as introduced by the House
Transportation and Infrastructure Aviation Subcommittee
February 11, 2011.
During my February 9 testimony, I outlined a number of
initiatives the FAA may undertake to reduce duplicative
efforts, measure the effectiveness of existing processes, and
capitalize on the experience and efficiency of the private
sector. These efficiencies are paramount to ensuring the
FAA's ability to maintain the highest level of safety,
provide oversight responsibilities without delaying
manufacturers' ability to compete internationally, and
aggressively advance the Next Generation Air Transportation
System (NextGen).
AIA is pleased with the Committee's decision to address key
policies such as environmental streamlining, third party
performance based navigation procedure design, and the
establishment of NextGen performance metrics. Further, the
Committee's acknowledgement of the benefits of bilateral
aviation safety agreements and a risk based inspection regime
when applied to repair station oversight cannot be
overstated. These carefully negotiated agreements increase
FAA's efficiency, enhance FAA's international safety
oversight and help protect U.S. jobs.
FAA is the global gold standard for aviation safety and
standards. U.S. civil aviation manufacturers are the world
leaders in advanced aerospace technology, innovative
satellite-based procedures and airspace design. The policies
outlined in H.R. 658 permit the FAA to not only pursue
efficiencies for the flying public but also protect the
investment of the American taxpayer.
If AIA can provide any technical assistance or answer any
questions, please do not hesitate to call me directly.
Sincerely,
Marion C. Blakey.
____
General Aviation
Manufacturers Association,
Washington, DC.
Statement of Pete Bunce on Introduction of H.R. 658, the FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011
We welcome the leadership of Chairmen Mica and Petri in
developing and introducing this legislation and look forward
to
[[Page H2140]]
working with them and ranking members Rahall and Costello on
its passage. There have been far too many delays in
reauthorizing the programs of the FAA and we hope that timely
action will continue. H.R. 658 contains many provisions
important to general aviation manufacturers including:
(1) strengthening the ability of FAA to implement the
procedures, policies, and technology necessary for the
success of NextGen;
(2) enhancing repair station safety oversight through a
risk-based approach and leveraging safety resources
efficiently;
(3) supporting a critical safety agreement between the U.S.
and Europe;
(4) reviewing and reforming existing FAA certification
processes to streamline and make more efficient the current
system without compromising safety; and
(5) establishing an FAA-industry group to ensure consistent
interpretation of regulations and effective communication
about potential changes.
We look forward to continuing to work with all members of
Congress to ensure that the funding levels in the bill will
support critical NextGen investments and the certification
resources necessary to create jobs in this country and
maintain our global competitiveness.
____
Chamber of Commerce
of the United States of America,
Washington, DC, March 31, 2011.
To The Members of the U.S. House of Representatives: The
U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business
federation representing the interests of more than three
million businesses and organizations of every size, sector,
and region, urges Congress to reauthorize federal aviation
programs. H.R. 658, the ``Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA) Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011'' is an
important step toward achieving this goal. The Chamber
strongly supports several provisions of H.R. 658 and
provisions expected to be included in the manager's
amendment. However, the Chamber strongly opposes amendments
that have been filed regarding lithium-ion batteries and
repeal a National Mediation Board rule and supports an
amendment to improve the FAA rulemaking process.
Improving and modernizing the air traffic control system,
which is at the heart of America's aviation woes, must be a
national priority. The U.S. aviation system must transform to
meet the expected 36 percent increase in fliers by 2015 by
expediting air traffic control modernization and providing
the necessary investment to increase national aviation system
capacity. Moreover, investment in America's transportation
system is important to U.S. productivity and economic
competitiveness in the long run, and investment in
transportation infrastructure supports jobs in the near term.
The Chamber supports several policy related provisions of
H.R. 658 and the manager's amendment that would:
Strengthen the ability of FAA to implement the policies,
procedures and technologies needed to fully implement the
Next Generation Air Traffic Control system (NextGen).
Assist the aviation community with aircraft equipage
necessary to move NextGen forward. Without ensuring that air
infrastructure--advanced technologies installed in aircraft,
commonly referred to as equipage--is aligned with ground
infrastructure, the benefits of NextGen cannot be realized
fully and the return on the investment in the air
transportation system will be delayed. Because of the
significant costs associated with aircraft equipage,
assistance is needed. According to the Air Transport
Association, the equipage cost for ADS-B could total between
$3.5 and $5 billion. For the aviation community to benefit
from these technologies, the FAA must implement more
efficient routings and changed procedures and provide federal
funding assistance to achieve implementation of such a
requirement.
Preserve the effective and efficient Block Aircraft
Registration Request (BARR) program, which allows business
aircraft operators with privacy or security concerns for
their operations to request that Aircraft Situation Display
to Industry (ASDI) data provided to the Federal Aviation
Administration be blocked from public dissemination. These
requests are routinely honored, and FAA has provided no data
to demonstrate that changes to the BARR program are
necessary.
With respect to funding levels, the Chamber strongly
supports provisions of the bill that would provide a robust
General Fund contribution to aviation programs. Historically,
the general fund has been used to pay for a significant
portion of the FAA's costs, which provides important public
interests including: national defense; emergency
preparedness; postal delivery; medical emergencies; and full
implementation of a national passenger and freight air
transportation system.
However, the Chamber is concerned with overall reduced
funding levels in H.R. 658. Of particular concern are cuts to
the Airport Improvement Program. The Airport Improvement
Program is an important source of funding for capital
projects and contributes to safe, secure, and efficient
airport facilities. The proposed funding levels fall short of
the amounts needed to maintain, modernize and expand critical
aviation infrastructure. In addition, decreased funding for
this program would reduce jobs supported by these projects.
We urge Congress to address this important issue during the
conference.
The Chamber is concerned with several amendments that may
be considered during floor debate of H.R. 658 related to:
FAA Rulemaking: The Chamber strongly supports an amendment
filed by Rep. Shuster that would require FAA to consider
different industry segments in its rulemaking proceedings and
to perform comprehensive cost-benefit analyses. FAA practice
in certain rulemakings has been to overlook significant
operational differences within the industry and promulgate
rules that impose substantial costs without producing
commensurate benefits.
National Mediation Board: The Chamber strongly opposes an
amendment filed by Rep. LaTourette that would remove Section
903 of H.R. 658. This section of the bill would repeal recent
revisions the National Mediation Board made to its
regulations concerning union organizing under the Railway
Labor Act. The National Mediation Board's revisions, which
were made at the request of the AFL-CIO, overturned more than
70 years of precedent and make it possible for a union to be
organized without the support of a majority of employees in
the craft or class. Strong policy arguments favor the time-
tested rule jettisoned by the Board. Further, while the Board
has made it much easier to form a union it has not addressed
the double standard that makes it nearly impossible for
employees to decertify an unwanted union. In addition, the
regulatory process that led to the adoption of the rule was
little more than a sham. The Board majority not only excluded
the single minority member from deliberations over the rule,
but it censored her dissent. Furthermore, while the rule was
contentious enough to draw thousands of comments, the Board
did not change a single word of the proposed rule when it was
finalized. Simply put, the Board's regulatory process on this
process was egregiously flawed. Congress should not permit an
agency to set policy in such a manner.
Lithium Ion batteries: The Chamber strongly opposes an
amendment by Rep. Filner, which would prevent harmonization
of federal regulations with international standards
concerning the shipment of lithium ion batteries. Provisions
of the manager's amendment would help ensure that U.S.
regulations governing air shipments of lithium batteries and
products containing them conform to international standards
established by the International Civil Aviation Organization.
Such harmonization would enhance safety and minimize the
harsh economic consequences and other burdens of complying
with multiple or inconsistent requirements for transporting
our products to and from the U.S.
The Chamber urges Congress to approve a multi-year aviation
bill, and H.R. 658 is an important step towards achieving
this goal. The Chamber will consider including votes on or in
relation to the Filner, LaTourette and Shuster amendments in
our annual How They Voted Scorecard.
Sincerely,
R. Bruce Josten,
Executive Vice President,
Government Affairs.
Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chair, the Essential Air Service
Program (EAS) assists 140 rural communities across the country that
otherwise would not have scheduled air service.
As a long-time proponent of the program, I believe Congress has an
obligation to provide a level playing field for rural Americans when it
comes to transportation and the economic opportunities that the
national transportation system provides.
Opponents of the program claim that it is wasteful or that it does
not work. Well, I disagree with them on several accounts.
Pennsylvania along with the rest of the country had suffered from
severe downsizing of connecting airports, followed by the unfortunate
impacts of the current recession. Despite these factors, the
Commonwealth is beginning to see increased economic output as a result
of the Marcellus Shale natural gas play. The Marcellus has the
potential to revitalize industry and ancillary businesses throughout
the region, resulting in amplified air service. In other regions of the
country the economic climate is also beginning to pick up.
A prime success story of the EAS program has been the Williamsport-
Lycoming County Airport, which first entered into the program in 2008.
Today, the airport is no longer participating in the program because of
increased economic output in the region and the availability of flights
that make sense for business travelers. This is largely a direct result
in the community investment in the EAS program, which has lifted them
out of the program. Today, their direct flight to Houston, Texas lends
ancillary support to the emerging natural gas industry in Pennsylvania.
Another pending success story in Pennsylvania's 5th congressional
district is the Dubois Regional Airport. Dubois Regional has greatly
benefitted from the EAS program and as a direct result of the air
service, the airport is responsible for contributing to the local
workforce with 132 jobs and a payroll of over $9 million, which creates
a total economic benefit of over $28 million to the region and state.
Mr. Chair, these stories are not unusual. These stories are
replicated throughout the communities the EAS Program serves.
[[Page H2141]]
Let me put it this way; there is not an airport in America that does
not receive some sort of federal assistance for operations or capital
improvements. Why should this be any different for our rural
communities?
The program is not perfect. I believe we need to insert into the law
incentives which allow for more community involvement. But, Mr. Chair,
I cannot in good faith support a sunset of the program as included in
H.R. 658.
As the legislative process moves forward, I will join with those
members who share my belief that this program works in weighing in with
the conferees, to ensure the language which sunsets the program is not
included in the final product of the FAA authorization.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chair, I come to the floor to speak about basic
notions of fairness and democracy.
As a former member of the House Transportation Committee, let me
acknowledge that I understand the importance of a strong and robust FAA
Reauthorization Bill. Historically, it has been our shared goal of
modernizing our system, expanding capacity, and putting people to work.
Unfortunately, by nickel and diming the system, the bill on the floor
today falls short of achieving these important goals.
Furthermore, today's bill contains a poison pill for those Americans
working hard on our airways and railways that would change the method
of counting votes in a union election.
Last year, the National Mediation Board rightly decided that union
elections for workers in the airline and rail industries would be
counted just as we count every other vote, whether for President,
Congress or even when voting on legislation here in the House of
Representatives.
It's simple: if you show up and vote ``yes,'' it's a yes. If you show
up and vote ``no,'' it's a no.
But this legislation would repeal the ruling of the NMB and count
ghost votes, because if you do not show up, you're considered a ``no.''
We cannot continue to attack hard working employees across this
country for political purposes. I urge my colleagues to support the
LaTourette/Costello Amendment to strike this misguided section of the
bill and preserve fairness in union elections.
I am also happy that my friend, Mr. LoBiondo's amendment for the
NextGen Center of Excellence was agreed to. I have been with my
colleague from south Jersey to the FAA Tech Center and know that it
does a fantastic job. Supporting these employees also means providing
the best training possible, which in turn will make our skies safer and
the flow of commerce better.
Finally, I would like to stand with the families of the victims of
Flight 3407, and oppose the amendment from my friend Mr. Shuster. We
need to stand behind the law we passed last year to improve safety
standards, and continue to demand one strong level of safety for the
entire aviation industry.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 658 as it
currently stands. While I support a long-term reauthorization of the
Federal Aviation Administration, this bill is the wrong approach to
doing so. I was extremely disappointed in the decision of my Republican
colleagues to slash funding levels for the FAA by $4 billion over the
next four years. These proposed cuts would jeopardize the Next
Generation Air Transportation System air traffic control modernization
efforts and devastate safety-sensitive programs.
Worse yet, H.R. 658 slashes the FAA's Airport Improvement Program
(AIP) by $2 billion through 2014. The AIP program is essential for
airports to handle current traffic levels as well as build
infrastructure to address future demand. Not only does it help airports
build and improve runways, taxiways, and terminals, but it also helps
airports mitigate noise levels, and improve safety and security at
their facilities. Please allow me to give you an example of how this
program has helped the people of Michigan's 15th congressional
district, and why it deserves proper levels of funding. My district
contains Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport (DTW), which serves
over 35 million passengers annually and is one of the newest, most
operationally-capable, customer-friendly and efficient airports in
North America with more than 1,200 non-stop flights per day to over 160
destinations worldwide. Since 2009, DTW airport has received over $21
million in federal grants from the FAA through the AIP program. These
grants helped DTW rehabilitate the runaways and taxiways, reduce noise
levels, install taxiway lighting, install guidance signs, and install
perimeter fencing. If DTW had not received these grants, it would not
have made these upgrades.
Thus, the $4 billion in cuts contained in H.R. 658 will prevent
airports like DTW from making necessary upgrades to their facilities,
prevent the implementation of new safety standards, reduce safety
personnel, and cost 70,000 jobs around the nation. If this bill passes
with these budget cuts intact, then passengers at airports across the
nation can expect increased delays, overcrowded airports, decreased
safety, and crumbling infrastructure. I therefore urge my colleagues to
reject these cuts, and to protect the critical and successful Airport
Improvement Program.
The FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act, as it stands, is nothing more
than a job loss bill that will inflict serious turbulence on our
nation's airline industry and transportation infrastructure. I
understand the need to reduce the deficit, but we should not do so in
such a way that threatens passenger safety, airport security, and
airfield maintenance. If my colleagues across the aisle are serious
about investing in our nation's infrastructure and creating jobs, then
they should vote to rescind these harmful cuts and maintain funding for
the FAA at FY 2010 levels.
Mr. Chair, I strongly urge my colleagues to vote against this bill
unless the proper funding levels are restored.
Mr. Van HOLLEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 658. While we
need a Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill, today's
legislation takes us in the wrong direction.
Our nation's aviation infrastructure critically needs rehabilitation.
On its 2009 Report Card on America's Infrastructure, the American
Society of Civil Engineers gave aviation infrastructure a ``D.''
Investments in improvements--to renovate runways, taxiways, and
terminals and to implement the Next Generation Air Transportation
System (NextGen) to modernize air traffic control--would enhance
passenger safety and reduce delays. They also create jobs--
approximately 35,000 jobs per $1 billion of investment.
However, rather than making the improvements our aviation system
requires, this bill cuts funding back to FY2008 levels--a $1 billion
cut in the first year alone. And funding would stay level, despite
increasing need, each year until FY2014. Cuts to the Airport
Improvement Program alone would cost our nation 70,000 jobs over the
next four years.
This bill's funding reductions have a very real impact for
passengers. Cutbacks to FAA operations could result in furloughs for
hundreds of safety inspectors and slow certification of new equipment.
A reduced budget could also postpone needed investments in air traffic
control towers, lighting systems, and navigational aids. And the delays
to NextGen implementation will result in more delays, more gridlock,
and more runway incursions that endanger passengers.
Additionally, this bill contains a poison pill--one that neither the
President nor the Senate will accept. It repeals a National Mediation
Board rule, finalized last year, which allows workers to organize based
on a majority of votes cast--the same way members of Congress are
elected. Under this legislation, if a worker does not cast a ballot in
a union election, he or she would be counted as a ``no'' vote. This is
unfair and undemocratic.
Mr. Chair, our aviation infrastructure has serious needs. We need a
serious bill to address them. Let's end arbitrary and damaging cuts and
poison pill provisions and consider a bill that puts Americans to work
rebuilding our nation.
Mr. MICA. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment
under the 5-minute rule.
In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure printed in the bill,
it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of
amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a
substitute consisting of the text of the Rules Committee Print dated
March 22, 2011. The amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be
considered as read.
The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as
follows:
H.R. 658
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011''.
(b) Table of Contents.--
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Amendments to title 49, United States Code.
Sec. 3. Effective date.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Funding of FAA Programs
Sec. 101. Airport planning and development and noise compatibility
planning and programs.
Sec. 102. Air navigation facilities and equipment.
Sec. 103. FAA operations.
Sec. 104. Funding for aviation programs.
Sec. 105. Delineation of Next Generation Air Transportation System
projects.
Sec. 106. Funding for administrative expenses for airport programs.
[[Page H2142]]
Subtitle B--Passenger Facility Charges
Sec. 111. Passenger facility charges.
Sec. 112. Airport access flexibility program.
Sec. 113. GAO study of alternative means of collecting PFCs.
Sec. 114. Qualifications-based selection.
Subtitle C--Fees for FAA Services
Sec. 121. Update on overflights.
Sec. 122. Registration fees.
Subtitle D--Airport Improvement Program Modifications
Sec. 131. Airport master plans.
Sec. 132. Aerotropolis transportation systems.
Sec. 133. AIP definitions.
Sec. 134. Recycling plans for airports.
Sec. 135. Contents of competition plans.
Sec. 136. Grant assurances.
Sec. 137. Agreements granting through-the-fence access to general
aviation airports.
Sec. 138. Government share of project costs.
Sec. 139. Allowable project costs.
Sec. 140. Veterans' preference.
Sec. 141. Standardizing certification of disadvantaged business
enterprises.
Sec. 142. Special apportionment rules.
Sec. 143. Apportionments.
Sec. 144. Marshall Islands, Micronesia, and Palau.
Sec. 145. Designating current and former military airports.
Sec. 146. Contract tower program.
Sec. 147. Resolution of disputes concerning airport fees.
Sec. 148. Sale of private airports to public sponsors.
Sec. 149. Repeal of certain limitations on Metropolitan Washington
Airports Authority.
Sec. 150. Midway Island Airport.
Sec. 151. Miscellaneous amendments.
Sec. 152. Extension of grant authority for compatible land use planning
and projects by State and local governments.
Sec. 153. Priority review of construction projects in cold weather
States.
Sec. 154. Study on national plan of integrated airport systems.
Sec. 155. Transfers of terminal area air navigation equipment to
airport sponsors.
Sec. 156. Airport privatization program.
TITLE II--NEXTGEN AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
MODERNIZATION
Sec. 201. Definitions.
Sec. 202. NextGen demonstrations and concepts.
Sec. 203. Clarification of authority to enter into reimbursable
agreements.
Sec. 204. Chief NextGen Officer.
Sec. 205. Definition of air navigation facility.
Sec. 206. Clarification to acquisition reform authority.
Sec. 207. Assistance to foreign aviation authorities.
Sec. 208. Next Generation Air Transportation System Joint Planning and
Development Office.
Sec. 209. Next Generation Air Transportation Senior Policy Committee.
Sec. 210. Improved management of property inventory.
Sec. 211. Automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast services.
Sec. 212. Expert review of enterprise architecture for NextGen.
Sec. 213. Acceleration of NextGen technologies.
Sec. 214. Performance metrics.
Sec. 215. Certification standards and resources.
Sec. 216. Surface systems acceleration.
Sec. 217. Inclusion of stakeholders in air traffic control
modernization projects.
Sec. 218. Siting of wind farms near FAA navigational aids and other
assets.
Sec. 219. Airspace redesign.
TITLE III--SAFETY
Subtitle A--General Provisions
Sec. 301. Judicial review of denial of airman certificates.
Sec. 302. Release of data relating to abandoned type certificates and
supplemental type certificates.
Sec. 303. Design and production organization certificates.
Sec. 304. Aircraft certification process review and reform.
Sec. 305. Consistency of regulatory interpretation.
Sec. 306. Runway safety.
Sec. 307. Improved pilot licenses.
Sec. 308. Flight attendant fatigue.
Sec. 309. Flight Standards Evaluation Program.
Sec. 310. Cockpit smoke.
Sec. 311. Safety of air ambulance operations.
Sec. 312. Off-airport, low-altitude aircraft weather observation
technology.
Sec. 313. Feasibility of requiring helicopter pilots to use night
vision goggles.
Sec. 314. Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight
deck.
Sec. 315. Noncertificated maintenance providers.
Sec. 316. Inspection of foreign repair stations.
Sec. 317. Sunset of line check.
Subtitle B--Unmanned Aircraft Systems
Sec. 321. Definitions.
Sec. 322. Commercial unmanned aircraft systems integration plan.
Sec. 323. Special rules for certain unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 324. Public unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 325. Unmanned aircraft systems test ranges.
Subtitle C--Safety and Protections
Sec. 331. Postemployment restrictions for flight standards inspectors.
Sec. 332. Review of air transportation oversight system database.
Sec. 333. Improved voluntary disclosure reporting system.
Sec. 334. Aviation Whistleblower Investigation Office.
Sec. 335. Duty periods and flight time limitations applicable to flight
crewmembers.
TITLE IV--AIR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
Subtitle A--Essential Air Service
Sec. 401. Essential air service marketing.
Sec. 402. Notice to communities prior to termination of eligibility for
subsidized essential air service.
Sec. 403. Essential air service contract guidelines.
Sec. 404. Essential air service reform.
Sec. 405. Small community air service.
Sec. 406. Adjustments to compensation for significantly increased
costs.
Sec. 407. Repeal of EAS local participation program.
Sec. 408. Sunset of essential air service program.
Subtitle B--Passenger Air Service Improvements
Sec. 421. Smoking prohibition.
Sec. 422. Monthly air carrier reports.
Sec. 423. Flight operations at Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport.
Sec. 424. Musical instruments.
Sec. 425. Passenger air service improvements.
Sec. 426. Airfares for members of the Armed Forces.
Sec. 427. Review of air carrier flight delays, cancellations, and
associated causes.
Sec. 428. Denied boarding compensation.
Sec. 429. Compensation for delayed baggage.
Sec. 430. Schedule reduction.
Sec. 431. DOT airline consumer complaint investigations.
Sec. 432. Study of operators regulated under part 135.
Sec. 433. Use of cell phones on passenger aircraft.
TITLE V--ENVIRONMENTAL STREAMLINING
Sec. 501. Overflights of national parks.
Sec. 502. State block grant program.
Sec. 503. NextGen environmental efficiency projects streamlining.
Sec. 504. Airport funding of special studies or reviews.
Sec. 505. Noise compatibility programs.
Sec. 506. Grant eligibility for assessment of flight procedures.
Sec. 507. Determination of fair market value of residential properties.
Sec. 508. Prohibition on operating certain aircraft weighing 75,000
pounds or less not complying with stage 3 noise levels.
Sec. 509. Aircraft departure queue management pilot program.
Sec. 510. High performance, sustainable, and cost-effective air traffic
control facilities.
Sec. 511. Sense of Congress.
Sec. 512. Aviation noise complaints.
TITLE VI--FAA EMPLOYEES AND ORGANIZATION
Sec. 601. Federal Aviation Administration personnel management system.
Sec. 602. Presidential rank award program.
Sec. 603. FAA technical training and staffing.
Sec. 604. Safety critical staffing.
Sec. 605. FAA air traffic controller staffing.
Sec. 606. Air traffic control specialist qualification training.
Sec. 607. Assessment of training programs for air traffic controllers.
Sec. 608. Collegiate training initiative study.
Sec. 609. FAA facility conditions.
Sec. 610. Frontline manager staffing.
TITLE VII--AVIATION INSURANCE
Sec. 701. General authority.
Sec. 702. Extension of authority to limit third-party liability of air
carriers arising out of acts of terrorism.
Sec. 703. Clarification of reinsurance authority.
Sec. 704. Use of independent claims adjusters.
TITLE VIII--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 801. Disclosure of data to Federal agencies in interest of
national security.
Sec. 802. FAA access to criminal history records and database systems.
Sec. 803. Civil penalties technical amendments.
Sec. 804. Realignment and consolidation of FAA services and facilities.
Sec. 805. Limiting access to flight decks of all-cargo aircraft.
Sec. 806. Consolidation or elimination of obsolete, redundant, or
otherwise unnecessary reports; use of electronic media
format.
Sec. 807. Prohibition on use of certain funds.
Sec. 808. Study on aviation fuel prices.
Sec. 809. Wind turbine lighting.
Sec. 810. Air-rail code sharing study.
Sec. 811. D.C. Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules Area.
Sec. 812. FAA review and reform.
Sec. 813. Cylinders of compressed oxygen or other oxidizing gases.
TITLE IX--NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD
Sec. 901. Authority of Inspector General.
Sec. 902. Evaluation and audit of National Mediation Board.
Sec. 903. Repeal of rule.
TITLE X--FEDERAL AVIATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT
OF 2011
Sec. 1001. Short title.
Sec. 1002. Definitions.
Sec. 1003. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 1004. Unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 1005. Research program on runways.
Sec. 1006. Research on design for certification.
[[Page H2143]]
Sec. 1007. Airport cooperative research program.
Sec. 1008. Centers of excellence.
Sec. 1009. Center of excellence for aviation human resource research.
Sec. 1010. Interagency research on aviation and the environment.
Sec. 1011. Aviation fuel research and development program.
Sec. 1012. Research program on alternative jet fuel technology for
civil aircraft.
Sec. 1013. Review of FAA's energy- and environment-related research
programs.
Sec. 1014. Review of FAA's aviation safety-related research programs.
TITLE XI--AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND FINANCING
Sec. 1101. Short title.
Sec. 1102. Extension of Airport and Airway Trust Fund expenditure
authority.
Sec. 1103. Extension of taxes funding Airport and Airway Trust Fund.
TITLE XII--COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO ACT OF 2010
Sec. 1201. Compliance provision.
SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE.
Except as otherwise expressly provided, whenever in this
Act an amendment or repeal is expressed in terms of an
amendment to, or a repeal of, a section or other provision,
the reference shall be considered to be made to a section or
other provision of title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
Except as otherwise expressly provided, this Act and the
amendments made by this Act shall take effect on the date of
enactment of this Act.
TITLE I--AUTHORIZATIONS
Subtitle A--Funding of FAA Programs
SEC. 101. AIRPORT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AND NOISE
COMPATIBILITY PLANNING AND PROGRAMS.
(a) Authorization.--Section 48103 is amended to read as
follows:
``Sec. 48103. Airport planning and development and noise
compatibility planning and programs
``(a) In General.--There shall be available to the
Secretary of Transportation out of the Airport and Airway
Trust Fund established under section 9502 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 to make grants for airport planning and
airport development under section 47104, airport noise
compatibility planning under section 47505(a)(2), and
carrying out noise compatibility programs under section
47504(c)--
``(1) $3,176,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(2) $3,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(3) $3,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
``(4) $3,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.
``(b) Availability of Amounts.--Amounts made available
under subsection (a) shall remain available until expended.
``(c) Limitation.--Amounts made available under subsection
(a) may not be used for carrying out the Airport Cooperative
Research Program or the Airports Technology Research
Program.''.
(b) Obligational Authority.--Section 47104(c) is amended by
striking ``March 31, 2011'' and inserting ``September 30,
2014''.
SEC. 102. AIR NAVIGATION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 48101(a) is
amended by striking paragraphs (1) through (6) and inserting
the following:
``(1) $2,700,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.
``(2) $2,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.
``(3) $2,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2013.
``(4) $2,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.''.
(b) Set-Asides.--Section 48101 is amended--
(1) by striking subsections (c), (d), (e), (h), and (i);
and
(2) by redesignating subsections (f) and (g) as subsections
(c) and (d), respectively.
SEC. 103. FAA OPERATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 106(k)(1) is amended by striking
subparagraphs (A) through (F) and inserting the following:
``(A) $9,403,000,000 for fiscal year 2011;
``(B) $9,168,000,000 for fiscal year 2012;
``(C) $9,168,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; and
``(D) $9,168,000,000 for fiscal year 2014.''.
(b) Authorized Expenditures.--Section 106(k)(2) is
amended--
(1) by striking subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D);
(2) by redesignating subparagraphs (E), (F), and (G) as
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively; and
(3) in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) (as so redesignated)
by striking ``2004 through 2007'' and inserting ``2011
through 2014''.
(c) Authority To Transfer Funds.--Section 106(k) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(3) Administering program within available funding.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in each of fiscal
years 2011 through 2014, if the Secretary determines that the
funds appropriated under paragraph (1) are insufficient to
meet the salary, operations, and maintenance expenses of the
Federal Aviation Administration, as authorized by this
section, the Secretary shall reduce nonsafety-related
activities of the Administration as necessary to reduce such
expenses to a level that can be met by the funding available
under paragraph (1).''.
SEC. 104. FUNDING FOR AVIATION PROGRAMS.
(a) Airport and Airway Trust Fund Guarantee.--Section
48114(a)(1)(A) is amended to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--The total budget resources made
available from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund each fiscal
year pursuant to sections 48101, 48102, 48103, and 106(k)
shall--
``(i) in fiscal year 2011, be equal to 90 percent of the
estimated level of receipts plus interest credited to the
Airport and Airway Trust Fund for that fiscal year; and
``(ii) in fiscal year 2012 and each fiscal year thereafter,
be equal to the sum of--
``(I) 90 percent of the estimated level of receipts plus
interest credited to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund for
that fiscal year; and
``(II) the actual level of receipts plus interest credited
to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund for the second preceding
fiscal year minus the total amount made available for
obligation from the Airport and Airway Trust Fund for the
second preceding fiscal year.
Such amounts may be used only for aviation investment
programs listed in subsection (b).''.
(b) Additional Authorizations of Appropriations From the
General Fund.--Section 48114(a)(2) is amended by striking
``2007'' and inserting ``2014''.
(c) Estimated Level of Receipts Plus Interest Defined.--
Section 48114(b)(2) is amended--
(1) in the paragraph heading by striking ``Level'' and
inserting ``Estimated level''; and
(2) by striking ``level of receipts plus interest'' and
inserting ``estimated level of receipts plus interest''.
(d) Enforcement of Guarantees.--Section 48114(c)(2) is
amended by striking ``2007'' and inserting ``2014''.
SEC. 105. DELINEATION OF NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEM PROJECTS.
Section 44501(b) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (3) by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (4)(B) by striking ``defense.'' and
inserting ``defense; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) a list of capital projects that are part of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System and funded by amounts
appropriated under section 48101(a).''.
SEC. 106. FUNDING FOR ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES FOR AIRPORT
PROGRAMS.
(a) In General.--Section 48105 is amended to read as
follows:
``Sec. 48105. Airport programs administrative expenses
``(a) In General.--Of the funds made available under
section 48103, the following amounts may be available for
administrative expenses of the Federal Aviation
Administration described in subsection (b):
``(1) $85,987,000 for fiscal year 2011.
``(2) $80,676,000 for fiscal year 2012.
``(3) $80,676,000 for fiscal year 2013.
``(4) $80,676,000 for fiscal year 2014.
``(b) Eligible Administrative Expenses.--Amounts made
available under subsection (a) may be used for administrative
expenses relating to the airport improvement program,
passenger facility charge approval and oversight, national
airport system planning, airport standards development and
enforcement, airport certification, airport-related
environmental activities (including legal services), and
other airport-related activities.
``(c) Availability of Amounts.--Amounts made available
under subsection (a) shall remain available until
expended.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 481 is
amended by striking the item relating to section 48105 and
inserting the following:
``48105. Airport programs administrative expenses.''.
Subtitle B--Passenger Facility Charges
SEC. 111. PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES.
(a) PFC Defined.--Section 40117(a)(5) is amended to read as
follows:
``(5) Passenger facility charge.--The term `passenger
facility charge' means a charge or fee imposed under this
section.''.
(b) Pilot Program for PFC Authorizations at Nonhub
Airports.--Section 40117(l) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (7); and
(2) by redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (7).
(c) Correction of References.--
(1) Section 40117.--Section 40117 is amended--
(A) in the section heading by striking ``fees'' and
inserting ``charges'';
(B) in the heading for subsection (e) by striking ``Fees''
and inserting ``Charges'';
(C) in the heading for subsection (l) by striking ``Fee''
and inserting ``Charge'';
(D) in the heading for paragraph (5) of subsection (l) by
striking ``fee'' and inserting ``charge'';
(E) in the heading for subsection (m) by striking ``Fees''
and inserting ``Charges'';
(F) in the heading for paragraph (1) of subsection (m) by
striking ``fees'' and inserting ``charges'';
(G) by striking ``fee'' each place it appears (other than
the second sentence of subsection (g)(4)) and inserting
``charge''; and
(H) by striking ``fees'' each place it appears and
inserting ``charges''.
(2) Other references.--Subtitle VII is amended by striking
``fee'' and inserting ``charge'' each place it appears in
each of the following sections:
(A) Section 47106(f)(1).
(B) Section 47110(e)(5).
(C) Section 47114(f).
(D) Section 47134(g)(1).
(E) Section 47139(b).
(F) Section 47524(e).
(G) Section 47526(2).
(3) Clerical amendment.--The analysis for chapter 401 is
amended by striking the item relating to section 40117 and
inserting the following:
``40117. Passenger facility charges.''.
SEC. 112. AIRPORT ACCESS FLEXIBILITY PROGRAM.
Section 40117 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
[[Page H2144]]
``(n) Airport Access Flexibility Program.--
``(1) PFC eligibility.--Subject to the requirements of this
subsection, the Secretary shall establish a pilot program
under which the Secretary may authorize, at no more than 5
airports, a passenger facility charge imposed under
subsection (b)(1) or (b)(4) to be used to finance the
eligible cost of an intermodal ground access project.
``(2) Intermodal ground access project defined.--In this
subsection, the term `intermodal ground access project' means
a project for constructing a local facility owned or operated
by an eligible agency that is directly and substantially
related to the movement of passengers or property traveling
in air transportation.
``(3) Eligible costs.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
eligible cost of an intermodal ground access project at an
airport shall be the total cost of the project multiplied by
the ratio that--
``(i) the number of individuals projected to use the
project to gain access to or depart from the airport; bears
to
``(ii) the total number of the individuals projected to use
the facility.
``(B) Determinations regarding projected project use.--
``(i) In general.--Except as provided by clause (ii), the
Secretary shall determine the projected use of a project for
purposes of subparagraph (A) at the time the project is
approved under this subsection.
``(ii) Public transportation projects.--In the case of a
project approved under this section to be financed in part
using funds administered by the Federal Transit
Administration, the Secretary shall use the travel
forecasting model for the project at the time the project is
approved by the Federal Transit Administration to enter
preliminary engineering to determine the projected use of the
project for purposes of subparagraph (A).''.
SEC. 113. GAO STUDY OF ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF COLLECTING PFCS.
(a) In General.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a
study of alternative means of collecting passenger facility
charges imposed under section 40117 of title 49, United
States Code, that would permit such charges to be collected
without being included in the ticket price. In conducting the
study, the Comptroller General shall consider, at a minimum--
(1) collection options for arriving, connecting, and
departing passengers at airports;
(2) cost sharing or allocation methods based on passenger
travel to address connecting traffic; and
(3) examples of airport charges collected by domestic and
international airports that are not included in ticket
prices.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a report on
the study, including the Comptroller General's findings,
conclusions, and recommendations.
SEC. 114. QUALIFICATIONS-BASED SELECTION.
(a) Qualifications-based Selection Defined.--In this
section, the term ``qualifications-based selection'' means a
competitive procurement process under which firms compete for
capital improvement projects on the basis of qualifications,
past experience, and specific expertise.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that
airports should consider the use of qualifications-based
selection in carrying out capital improvement projects funded
using passenger facility charges collected under section
40117 of title 49, United States Code, with the goal of
serving the needs of all stakeholders.
Subtitle C--Fees for FAA Services
SEC. 121. UPDATE ON OVERFLIGHTS.
(a) Establishment and Adjustment of Fees.--Section 45301(b)
is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Establishment and Adjustment of Fees.--
``(1) In general.--In establishing and adjusting fees under
this section, the Administrator shall ensure that the fees
are reasonably related to the Administration's costs, as
determined by the Administrator, of providing the services
rendered.
``(2) Services for which costs may be recovered.--Services
for which costs may be recovered under this section include
the costs of air traffic control, navigation, weather
services, training, and emergency services that are available
to facilitate safe transportation over the United States and
the costs of other services provided by the Administrator, or
by programs financed by the Administrator, to flights that
neither take off nor land in the United States.
``(3) Limitations on judicial review.--Notwithstanding
section 702 of title 5 or any other provision of law, the
following actions and other matters shall not be subject to
judicial review:
``(A) The establishment or adjustment of a fee by the
Administrator under this section.
``(B) The validity of a determination of costs by the
Administrator under paragraph (1), and the processes and
procedures applied by the Administrator when reaching such
determination.
``(C) An allocation of costs by the Administrator under
paragraph (1) to services provided, and the processes and
procedures applied by the Administrator when establishing
such allocation.
``(4) Adjustment of overflight fees.--In accordance with
section 106(f)(3)(A), the Administrator shall adjust the
overflight fees established by subsection (a)(1) by issuing a
final rule with respect to the notice of proposed rulemaking
published in the Federal Register on September 28, 2010 (75
Fed. Reg. 59661).
``(5) Aircraft altitude.--Nothing in this section shall
require the Administrator to take into account aircraft
altitude in establishing any fee for aircraft operations in
en route or oceanic airspace.
``(6) Costs defined.--In this subsection, the term `costs'
includes operation and maintenance costs, leasing costs, and
overhead expenses associated with the services provided and
the facilities and equipment used in providing such services.
``(7) Special rule for fiscal years 2011 through 2015.--In
each of fiscal years 2011 through 2015, section 45303(c)
shall not apply to any increase in fees collected pursuant to
a final rule described in paragraph (4).''.
(b) Adjustment of Fees.--Section 45301 is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(e) Adjustment of Fees.--In addition to adjustments under
subsection (b), the Administrator may periodically adjust the
fees established under this section.''.
SEC. 122. REGISTRATION FEES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 453 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 45305. Registration, certification, and related fees
``(a) General Authority and Fees.--Subject to subsection
(b), the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
shall establish and collect a fee for each of the following
services and activities of the Administration that does not
exceed the estimated costs of the service or activity:
``(1) Registering an aircraft.
``(2) Reregistering, replacing, or renewing an aircraft
registration certificate.
``(3) Issuing an original dealer's aircraft registration
certificate.
``(4) Issuing an additional dealer's aircraft registration
certificate (other than the original).
``(5) Issuing a special registration number.
``(6) Issuing a renewal of a special registration number
reservation.
``(7) Recording a security interest in an aircraft or
aircraft part.
``(8) Issuing an airman certificate.
``(9) Issuing a replacement airman certificate.
``(10) Issuing an airman medical certificate.
``(11) Providing a legal opinion pertaining to aircraft
registration or recordation.
``(b) Limitation on Collection.--No fee may be collected
under this section unless the expenditure of the fee to pay
the costs of activities and services for which the fee is
imposed is provided for in advance in an appropriations Act.
``(c) Fees Credited as Offsetting Collections.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding section 3302 of title
31, any fee authorized to be collected under this section
shall--
``(A) be credited as offsetting collections to the account
that finances the activities and services for which the fee
is imposed;
``(B) be available for expenditure only to pay the costs of
activities and services for which the fee is imposed,
including all costs associated with collecting the fee; and
``(C) remain available until expended.
``(2) Continuing appropriations.--The Administrator may
continue to assess, collect, and spend fees established under
this section during any period in which the funding for the
Federal Aviation Administration is provided under an Act
providing continuing appropriations in lieu of the
Administration's regular appropriations.
``(3) Adjustments.--The Administrator shall adjust a fee
established under subsection (a) for a service or activity if
the Administrator determines that the actual cost of the
service or activity is higher or lower than was indicated by
the cost data used to establish such fee.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 453 is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``45305. Registration, certification, and related fees.''.
(c) Fees Involving Aircraft Not Providing Air
Transportation.--Section 45302(e) is amended--
(1) by striking ``A fee'' and inserting the following:
``(1) In general.--A fee''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Effect of imposition of other fees.--A fee may not be
imposed for a service or activity under this section during
any period in which a fee for the same service or activity is
imposed under section 45305.''.
Subtitle D--Airport Improvement Program Modifications
SEC. 131. AIRPORT MASTER PLANS.
Section 47101(g)(2) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D);
and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) consider passenger convenience, airport ground
access, and access to airport facilities; and''.
SEC. 132. AEROTROPOLIS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS.
Section 47101(g) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) Aerotropolis transportation systems.--Encourage the
development of aerotropolis transportation systems, which are
planned and coordinated multimodal freight and passenger
transportation networks that, as determined by the Secretary,
provide efficient, cost-effective, sustainable, and
intermodal connectivity to a defined region of economic
significance centered around a major airport.''.
SEC. 133. AIP DEFINITIONS.
(a) Airport Development.--Section 47102(3) is amended--
[[Page H2145]]
(1) in subparagraph (B)(iv) by striking ``20'' and
inserting ``9'';
(2) in subparagraph (G) by inserting ``and including
acquiring glycol recovery vehicles,'' after ``aircraft,'';
and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(M) construction of mobile refueler parking within a fuel
farm at a nonprimary airport meeting the requirements of
section 112.8 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.
``(N) terminal development under section 47119(a).
``(O) acquiring and installing facilities and equipment to
provide air conditioning, heating, or electric power from
terminal-based, nonexclusive use facilities to aircraft
parked at a public use airport for the purpose of reducing
energy use or harmful emissions as compared to the provision
of such air conditioning, heating, or electric power from
aircraft-based systems.''.
(b) Airport Planning.--Section 47102(5) is amended to read
as follows:
``(5) `airport planning' means planning as defined by
regulations the Secretary prescribes and includes--
``(A) integrated airport system planning;
``(B) developing an environmental management system; and
``(C) developing a plan for recycling and minimizing the
generation of airport solid waste, consistent with applicable
State and local recycling laws, including the cost of a waste
audit.''.
(c) General Aviation Airport.--Section 47102 is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (23) through (25) as
paragraphs (25) through (27), respectively;
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (22) as
paragraphs (9) through (23), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after paragraph (7) the following:
``(8) `general aviation airport' means a public airport
that is located in a State and that, as determined by the
Secretary--
``(A) does not have scheduled service; or
``(B) has scheduled service with less than 2,500 passenger
boardings each year.''.
(d) Revenue Producing Aeronautical Support Facilities.--
Section 47102 is amended by inserting after paragraph (23)
(as redesignated by subsection (c)(2) of this section) the
following:
``(24) `revenue producing aeronautical support facilities'
means fuel farms, hangar buildings, self-service credit card
aeronautical fueling systems, airplane wash racks, major
rehabilitation of a hangar owned by a sponsor, or other
aeronautical support facilities that the Secretary determines
will increase the revenue producing ability of the
airport.''.
(e) Terminal Development.--Section 47102 (as amended by
subsection (c) of this section) is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(28) `terminal development' means--
``(A) development of--
``(i) an airport passenger terminal building, including
terminal gates;
``(ii) access roads servicing exclusively airport traffic
that leads directly to or from an airport passenger terminal
building; and
``(iii) walkways that lead directly to or from an airport
passenger terminal building; and
``(B) the cost of a vehicle described in section
47119(a)(1)(B).''.
SEC. 134. RECYCLING PLANS FOR AIRPORTS.
Section 47106(a) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (5) by striking ``proposed.'' and
inserting ``proposed; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) if the project is for an airport that has an airport
master plan, the master plan addresses issues relating to
solid waste recycling at the airport, including--
``(A) the feasibility of solid waste recycling at the
airport;
``(B) minimizing the generation of solid waste at the
airport;
``(C) operation and maintenance requirements;
``(D) the review of waste management contracts; and
``(E) the potential for cost savings or the generation of
revenue.''.
SEC. 135. CONTENTS OF COMPETITION PLANS.
Section 47106(f)(2) is amended--
(1) by striking ``patterns of air service,'';
(2) by inserting ``and'' before ``whether''; and
(3) by striking ``, and airfare levels'' and all that
follows before the period.
SEC. 136. GRANT ASSURANCES.
(a) General Written Assurances.--Section
47107(a)(16)(D)(ii) is amended by inserting before the
semicolon at the end the following: ``, except in the case of
a relocation or replacement of an existing airport facility
that meets the conditions of section 47110(d)''.
(b) Written Assurances on Acquiring Land.--
(1) Use of proceeds.--Section 47107(c)(2)(A)(iii) is
amended by striking ``paid to the Secretary'' and all that
follows before the semicolon and inserting ``reinvested in
another project at the airport or transferred to another
airport as the Secretary prescribes under paragraph (4)''.
(2) Eligible projects.--Section 47107(c) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(4) In approving the reinvestment or transfer of proceeds
under paragraph (2)(A)(iii), the Secretary shall give
preference, in descending order, to the following actions:
``(A) Reinvestment in an approved noise compatibility
project.
``(B) Reinvestment in an approved project that is eligible
for funding under section 47117(e).
``(C) Reinvestment in an approved airport development
project that is eligible for funding under section 47114,
47115, or 47117.
``(D) Transfer to a sponsor of another public airport to be
reinvested in an approved noise compatibility project at such
airport.
``(E) Payment to the Secretary for deposit in the Airport
and Airway Trust Fund.''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--Section 47107(c)(2)(B)(iii) is
amended by striking ``the Fund'' and inserting ``the Airport
and Airway Trust Fund established under section 9502 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986''.
(d) Extension of Competitive Access Reports.--Section
47107(s) is amended by striking paragraph (3).
SEC. 137. AGREEMENTS GRANTING THROUGH-THE-FENCE ACCESS TO
GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORTS.
(a) In General.--Section 47107 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(t) Agreements Granting Through-The-Fence Access to
General Aviation Airports.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), a sponsor of a
general aviation airport shall not be considered to be in
violation of this subtitle, or to be in violation of a grant
assurance made under this section or under any other
provision of law as a condition for the receipt of Federal
financial assistance for airport development, solely because
the sponsor enters into an agreement that grants to a person
that owns residential real property adjacent to the airport
access to the airfield of the airport for the following:
``(A) Aircraft of the person.
``(B) Aircraft authorized by the person.
``(2) Through-the-fence agreements.--
``(A) In general.--An agreement described in paragraph (1)
between an airport sponsor and a property owner shall be a
written agreement that prescribes the rights,
responsibilities, charges, duration, and other terms the
airport sponsor determines are necessary to establish and
manage the airport sponsor's relationship with the property
owner.
``(B) Terms and conditions.--An agreement described in
paragraph (1) between an airport sponsor and a property owner
shall require the property owner, at minimum--
``(i) to pay airport access charges that, as determined by
the airport sponsor, are comparable to those charged to
tenants and operators on-airport making similar use of the
airport;
``(ii) to bear the cost of building and maintaining the
infrastructure that, as determined by the airport sponsor, is
necessary to provide aircraft located on the property
adjacent to the airport access to the airfield of the
airport;
``(iii) to maintain the property for residential,
noncommercial use for the duration of the agreement; and
``(iv) to prohibit access to the airport from other
properties through the property of the property owner.''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to an agreement between an airport sponsor and a
property owner entered into before, on, or after the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 138. GOVERNMENT SHARE OF PROJECT COSTS.
Section 47109 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``provided in subsection
(b) or subsection (c) of this section'' and inserting
``otherwise provided in this section''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Special Rule for Transition From Small Hub to Medium
Hub Status.--If the status of a small hub airport changes to
a medium hub airport, the Government's share of allowable
project costs for the airport may not exceed 90 percent for
the first 2 fiscal years following such change in hub status.
``(f) Special Rule for Economically Depressed
Communities.--The Government's share of allowable project
costs shall be 95 percent for a project at an airport that--
``(1) is receiving subsidized air service under subchapter
II of chapter 417; and
``(2) is located in an area that meets one or more of the
criteria established in section 301(a) of the Public Works
and Economic Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3161(a)), as
determined by the Secretary of Commerce.''.
SEC. 139. ALLOWABLE PROJECT COSTS.
(a) Allowable Project Costs.--Section 47110(b)(2)(D) is
amended to read as follows:
``(D) if the cost is for airport development and is
incurred before execution of the grant agreement, but in the
same fiscal year as execution of the grant agreement, and
if--
``(i) the cost was incurred before execution of the grant
agreement due to climactic conditions affecting the
construction season in the vicinity of the airport;
``(ii) the cost is in accordance with an airport layout
plan approved by the Secretary and with all statutory and
administrative requirements that would have been applicable
to the project if the project had been carried out after
execution of the grant agreement, including submission of a
complete grant application to the appropriate regional or
district office of the Federal Aviation Administration;
``(iii) the sponsor notifies the Secretary before
authorizing work to commence on the project;
``(iv) the sponsor has an alternative funding source
available to fund the project; and
``(v) the sponsor's decision to proceed with the project in
advance of execution of the grant agreement does not affect
the priority assigned to the project by the Secretary for the
allocation of discretionary funds;''.
(b) Inclusion of Measures To Improve Efficiency of Airport
Buildings in Airport Improvement Projects.--Section 47110(b)
is amended--
(1) in paragraph (5) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
semicolon;
[[Page H2146]]
(2) in paragraph (6) by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) if the cost is incurred on a measure to improve the
efficiency of an airport building (such as a measure designed
to meet one or more of the criteria for being considered a
high-performance green building as set forth under section
401(13) of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
(42 U.S.C. 17061(13))) and--
``(A) the measure is for a project for airport development;
``(B) the measure is for an airport building that is
otherwise eligible for construction assistance under this
subchapter; and
``(C) if the measure results in an increase in initial
project costs, the increase is justified by expected savings
over the life cycle of the project.''.
(c) Relocation of Airport-Owned Facilities.--Section
47110(d) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) Relocation of Airport-Owned Facilities.--The
Secretary may determine that the costs of relocating or
replacing an airport-owned facility are allowable for an
airport development project at an airport only if--
``(1) the Government's share of such costs will be paid
with funds apportioned to the airport sponsor under section
47114(c)(1) or 47114(d);
``(2) the Secretary determines that the relocation or
replacement is required due to a change in the Secretary's
design standards; and
``(3) the Secretary determines that the change is beyond
the control of the airport sponsor.''.
(d) Nonprimary Airports.--Section 47110(h) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``construction'' before ``costs of revenue
producing''; and
(2) by striking ``, including fuel farms and hangars,''.
SEC. 140. VETERANS' PREFERENCE.
Section 47112(c) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``separated from'' and
inserting ``discharged or released from active duty in''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(C) `Afghanistan-Iraq war veteran' means an individual
who served on active duty (as defined in section 101 of title
38) in the Armed Forces in support of Operation Enduring
Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, or Operation New Dawn for
more than 180 consecutive days, any part of which occurred
after September 11, 2001, and before the date prescribed by
presidential proclamation or by law as the last day of
Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, or
Operation New Dawn (whichever is later), and who was
discharged or released from active duty in the armed forces
under honorable conditions.
``(D) `Persian Gulf veteran' means an individual who served
on active duty in the Armed Forces in the Southwest Asia
theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War for more
than 180 consecutive days, any part of which occurred after
August 2, 1990, and before the date prescribed by
presidential proclamation or by law, and who was discharged
or released from active duty in the armed forces under
honorable conditions.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``Vietnam-era veterans and
disabled veterans'' and inserting ``Vietnam-era veterans,
Persian Gulf veterans, Afghanistan-Iraq war veterans,
disabled veterans, and small business concerns (as defined in
section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)) owned
and controlled by disabled veterans''.
SEC. 141. STANDARDIZING CERTIFICATION OF DISADVANTAGED
BUSINESS ENTERPRISES.
Section 47113 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(e) Mandatory Training Program.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date
of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall
establish a mandatory training program for persons described
in paragraph (3) to provide streamlined training on
certifying whether a small business concern qualifies as a
small business concern owned and controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged individuals under this section and
section 47107(e).
``(2) Implementation.--The training program may be
implemented by one or more private entities approved by the
Secretary.
``(3) Participants.--A person referred to in paragraph (1)
is an official or agent of an airport sponsor--
``(A) who is required to provide a written assurance under
this section or section 47107(e) that the airport owner or
operator will meet the percentage goal of subsection (b) of
this section or section 47107(e)(1), as the case may be; or
``(B) who is responsible for determining whether or not a
small business concern qualifies as a small business concern
owned and controlled by socially and economically
disadvantaged individuals under this section or section
47107(e).''.
SEC. 142. SPECIAL APPORTIONMENT RULES.
(a) Eligibility To Receive Primary Airport Minimum
Apportionment Amount.--Section 47114(d) is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(7) Eligibility to receive primary airport minimum
apportionment amount.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this subsection, the Secretary may apportion to an airport
sponsor in a fiscal year an amount equal to the minimum
apportionment available under subsection (c)(1)(B) if the
Secretary finds that the airport--
``(A) received scheduled or unscheduled air service from a
large certificated air carrier (as defined in part 241 of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, or such other
regulations as may be issued by the Secretary under the
authority of section 41709) in the calendar year used to
calculate the apportionment; and
``(B) had more than 10,000 passenger boardings in the
calendar year used to calculate the apportionment.''.
(b) Special Rule for Fiscal Years 2011 and 2012.--Section
47114(c)(1) is amended--
(1) by striking subparagraphs (F) and (G); and
(2) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) Special rule for fiscal years 2011 and 2012.--
Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), for an airport that had
more than 10,000 passenger boardings and scheduled passenger
aircraft service in calendar year 2007, but in either
calendar year 2009 or 2010, or in both years, the number of
passenger boardings decreased to a level below 10,000
boardings per year at such airport, the Secretary may
apportion in each of fiscal years 2011 and 2012 to the
sponsor of such airport an amount equal to the amount
apportioned to that sponsor in fiscal year 2009.''.
SEC. 143. APPORTIONMENTS.
Chapter 471 is amended by striking ``$3,200,000,000'' and
inserting ``$3,000,000,000'' in each of the following
sections:
(1) 47114(c)(1)(C).
(2) 47114(c)(2)(C).
(3) 47114(d)(3).
(4) 47114(e)(4).
(5) 47117(e)(1)(C).
SEC. 144. MARSHALL ISLANDS, MICRONESIA, AND PALAU.
Section 47115(j) is amended by striking ``fiscal years 2004
through 2010, and for the portion of fiscal year 2011 ending
before April 1, 2011,'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2010
through 2014,''.
SEC. 145. DESIGNATING CURRENT AND FORMER MILITARY AIRPORTS.
(a) Considerations.--Section 47118(c) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (2) by striking ``delays.'' and inserting
``delays; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) preserve or enhance minimum airfield infrastructure
facilities at former military airports to support emergency
diversionary operations for transoceanic flights in
locations--
``(A) within United States jurisdiction or control; and
``(B) where there is a demonstrable lack of diversionary
airports within the distance or flight-time required by
regulations governing transoceanic flights.''.
(b) Designation of General Aviation Airports.--Section
47118(g) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading by striking ``Airport'' and
inserting ``Airports''; and
(2) by striking ``one of the airports bearing a designation
under subsection (a) may be a general aviation airport that
was a former military installation'' and inserting ``3 of the
airports bearing designations under subsection (a) may be
general aviation airports that were former military
installations''.
(c) Safety-Critical Airports.--Section 47118 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(h) Safety-Critical Airports.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this chapter, a grant under section
47117(e)(1)(B) may be made for a federally owned airport
designated under subsection (a) if the grant is for a project
that is--
``(1) to preserve or enhance minimum airfield
infrastructure facilities described in subsection (c)(3); and
``(2) necessary to meet the minimum safety and emergency
operational requirements established under part 139 of title
14, Code of Federal Regulations.''.
SEC. 146. CONTRACT TOWER PROGRAM.
(a) Cost-Benefit Requirement.--Section 47124(b) is
amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) Contract tower program.--
``(A) Continuation and extension.--The Secretary shall
continue the low activity (Visual Flight Rules) Level I air
traffic control tower contract program established under
subsection (a) for towers existing on December 30, 1987, and
shall extend the program to other low activity air traffic
control towers for which a qualified entity (as determined by
the Secretary), a State, or a subdivision of the State
meeting the requirements set forth by the Secretary has
requested to participate in the program.
``(B) Special rule.--If the Secretary determines that a
tower already operating under the program continued under
this paragraph has a benefit-to-cost ratio of less than 1.0,
the airport sponsor or State or local government having
jurisdiction over the airport shall not be required to pay
the portion of the costs that exceeds the benefit for a
period of 18 months after such determination is made.
``(C) Use of excess funds.--If the Secretary finds that all
or part of an amount made available to carry out the program
continued under this paragraph is not required during a
fiscal year, the Secretary may use, during such fiscal year,
the amount not so required to carry out the program
established under paragraph (3).''; and
(2) by striking ``(2) The Secretary'' and inserting the
following:
``(2) General authority.--The Secretary''.
(b) Costs Exceeding Benefits.--Section 47124(b)(3)(D) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``If the costs'' and inserting the
following:
``(i) Cost sharing.--If the costs''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) Maximum local cost share.--The maximum allowable
local cost share allocated under clause (i) for an airport
certified under part 139 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, with fewer than 50,000 annual passenger
enplanements shall be capped at 20 percent of the cost of
operating an air traffic tower under the program.
[[Page H2147]]
``(iii) Sunset.--Clause (ii) shall not be in effect after
September 30, 2014.''.
(c) Funding; Use of Excess Funds.--Section 47124(b)(3) is
amended by striking subparagraph (E) and inserting the
following:
``(E) Funding.--Of the amounts appropriated pursuant to
section 106(k)(1), not more than $8,500,000 for each of
fiscal years 2011 through 2014 may be used to carry out this
paragraph.
``(F) Use of excess funds.--If the Secretary finds that all
or part of an amount made available under this paragraph is
not required during a fiscal year, the Secretary may use,
during such fiscal year, the amount not so required to carry
out the program continued under paragraph (1).''.
(d) Federal Share.--Section 47124(b)(4)(C) is amended by
striking ``$1,500,000'' and inserting ``$2,000,000''.
(e) Safety Audits.--Section 47124 is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(c) Safety Audits.--The Secretary shall establish uniform
standards and requirements for regular safety assessments of
air traffic control towers that receive funding under this
section.''.
SEC. 147. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES CONCERNING AIRPORT FEES.
(a) In General.--Section 47129 is amended--
(1) by striking the section heading and inserting the
following:
``Sec. 47129. Resolution of disputes concerning airport
fees'';
(2) by inserting ``and Foreign Air Carrier'' after
``Carrier'' in the heading for subsection (d);
(3) by inserting ``and foreign air carrier'' after
``carrier'' in the heading for subsection (d)(2);
(4) by striking ``air carrier'' each place it appears and
inserting ``air carrier or foreign air carrier'';
(5) by striking ``air carrier's'' each place it appears and
inserting ``air carrier's or foreign air carrier's'';
(6) by striking ``air carriers'' and inserting ``air
carriers or foreign air carriers''; and
(7) by striking ``(as defined in section 40102 of this
title)'' in subsection (a) and inserting ``(as those terms
are defined in section 40102)''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 471 is
amended by striking the item relating to section 47129 and
inserting the following:
``47129. Resolution of disputes concerning airport fees.''.
SEC. 148. SALE OF PRIVATE AIRPORTS TO PUBLIC SPONSORS.
(a) In General.--Section 47133(b) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Subsection (a) shall not apply if'' and
inserting the following:
``(1) Prior laws and agreements.--Subsection (a) shall not
apply if''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(2) Sale of private airport to public sponsor.--In the
case of a privately owned airport, subsection (a) shall not
apply to the proceeds from the sale of the airport to a
public sponsor if--
``(A) the sale is approved by the Secretary;
``(B) funding is provided under this subchapter for any
portion of the public sponsor's acquisition of airport land;
and
``(C) an amount equal to the remaining unamortized portion
of any airport improvement grant made to that airport for
purposes other than land acquisition, amortized over a 20-
year period, plus an amount equal to the Federal share of the
current fair market value of any land acquired with an
airport improvement grant made to that airport on or after
October 1, 1996, is repaid to the Secretary by the private
owner.
``(3) Treatment of repayments.--Repayments referred to in
paragraph (2)(C) shall be treated as a recovery of prior year
obligations.''.
(b) Applicability to Grants.--The amendments made by
subsection (a) shall apply to grants issued on or after
October 1, 1996.
SEC. 149. REPEAL OF CERTAIN LIMITATIONS ON METROPOLITAN
WASHINGTON AIRPORTS AUTHORITY.
Section 49108, and the item relating to section 49108 in
the analysis for chapter 491, are repealed.
SEC. 150. MIDWAY ISLAND AIRPORT.
Section 186(d) of the Vision 100--Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act (117 Stat. 2518) is amended by striking
``October 1, 2010, and for the portion of fiscal year 2011
ending before April 1, 2011,'' and inserting ``October 1,
2014,''.
SEC. 151. MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS.
(a) Technical Changes to National Plan of Integrated
Airport Systems.--Section 47103 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking ``each airport to--'' and inserting ``the
airport system to--'';
(B) in paragraph (1) by striking ``system in the particular
area;'' and inserting ``system, including connection to the
surface transportation network; and'';
(C) in paragraph (2) by striking ``; and'' and inserting a
period; and
(D) by striking paragraph (3);
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1) by striking the semicolon and
inserting ``; and'';
(B) by striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph
(3) as paragraph (2); and
(C) in paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) by striking ``,
Short Takeoff and Landing/Very Short Takeoff and Landing
aircraft operations,''; and
(3) in subsection (d) by striking ``status of the''.
(b) Consolidation of Terminal Development Provisions.--
Section 47119 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) as
subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e), respectively;
(2) by inserting before subsection (b) (as so redesignated)
the following:
``(a) Terminal Development Projects.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation may
approve a project for terminal development (including
multimodal terminal development) in a nonrevenue-producing
public-use area of a commercial service airport--
``(A) if the sponsor certifies that the airport, on the
date the grant application is submitted to the Secretary,
has--
``(i) all the safety equipment required for certification
of the airport under section 44706;
``(ii) all the security equipment required by regulation;
and
``(iii) provided for access by passengers to the area of
the airport for boarding or exiting aircraft that are not air
carrier aircraft;
``(B) if the cost is directly related to moving passengers
and baggage in air commerce within the airport, including
vehicles for moving passengers between terminal facilities
and between terminal facilities and aircraft; and
``(C) under terms necessary to protect the interests of the
Government.
``(2) Project in revenue-producing areas and nonrevenue-
producing parking lots.--In making a decision under paragraph
(1), the Secretary may approve as allowable costs the
expenses of terminal development in a revenue-producing area
and construction, reconstruction, repair, and improvement in
a nonrevenue-producing parking lot if--
``(A) except as provided in section 47108(e)(3), the
airport does not have more than .05 percent of the total
annual passenger boardings in the United States; and
``(B) the sponsor certifies that any needed airport
development project affecting safety, security, or capacity
will not be deferred because of the Secretary's approval.'';
(3) in subsection (b)(4)(B) (as redesignated by paragraph
(1) of this subsection) by striking ``Secretary of
Transportation'' and inserting ``Secretary'';
(4) in subsections (b)(3) and (b)(4)(A) (as redesignated by
paragraph (1) of this subsection) by striking ``section
47110(d)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)'';
(5) in subsection (b)(5) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)
of this subsection) by striking ``subsection (b)(1) and (2)''
and inserting ``subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2)'';
(6) in subsections (c)(2)(A), (c)(3), and (c)(4) (as
redesignated by paragraph (1) of this subsection) by striking
``section 47110(d) of this title'' and inserting ``subsection
(a)'';
(7) in subsection (c)(2)(B) (as redesignated by paragraph
(1) of this subsection) by striking ``section 47110(d)'' and
inserting ``subsection (a)'';
(8) in subsection (c)(5) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)
of this subsection) by striking ``section 47110(d)'' and
inserting ``subsection (a)''; and
(9) by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Limitation on Discretionary Funds.--The Secretary may
distribute not more than $20,000,000 from the discretionary
fund established under section 47115 for terminal development
projects at a nonhub airport or a small hub airport that is
eligible to receive discretionary funds under section
47108(e)(3).''.
(c) Annual Report.--Section 47131(a) is amended--
(1) by striking ``April 1'' and inserting ``June 1''; and
(2) by striking paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4) and
inserting the following:
``(1) a summary of airport development and planning
completed;
``(2) a summary of individual grants issued;
``(3) an accounting of discretionary and apportioned funds
allocated;
``(4) the allocation of appropriations; and''.
(d) Correction to Emission Credits Provision.--Section
47139 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a) by striking ``47102(3)(F),''; and
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking ``47102(3)(F),''; and
(B) by striking ``47103(3)(F),''.
(e) Conforming Amendment to Civil Penalty Assessment
Authority.--Section 46301(d)(2) is amended by inserting
``46319,'' after ``46318,''.
(f) Other Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 40117(a)(3)(B) is amended by striking ``section
47110(d)'' and inserting ``section 47119(a)''.
(2) Section 47108(e)(3) is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 47110(d)(2)'' and inserting
``section 47119(a)''; and
(B) by striking ``section 47110(d)'' and inserting
``section 47119(a)''.
(g) Correction to Surplus Property Authority.--Section
47151(e) is amended by striking ``(other than real property''
and all that follows through ``(10 U.S.C. 2687 note))''.
(h) Definitions.--
(1) Congested airport.--Section 47175(2) is amended by
striking ``2001'' and inserting ``2004 or any successor
report''.
(2) Joint use airport.--Section 47175 is amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(7) Joint use airport.--The term `joint use airport'
means an airport owned by the Department of Defense, at which
both military and civilian aircraft make shared use of the
airfield.''.
SEC. 152. EXTENSION OF GRANT AUTHORITY FOR COMPATIBLE LAND
USE PLANNING AND PROJECTS BY STATE AND LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS.
Section 47141(f) is amended by striking ``March 31, 2011''
and inserting ``September 30, 2014''.
SEC. 153. PRIORITY REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN COLD
WEATHER STATES.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration,
to the extent practicable, shall
[[Page H2148]]
schedule the Administrator's review of construction projects
so that projects to be carried out in States in which the
weather during a typical calendar year prevents major
construction projects from being carried out before May 1 are
reviewed as early as possible.
SEC. 154. STUDY ON NATIONAL PLAN OF INTEGRATED AIRPORT
SYSTEMS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall
begin a study to evaluate the formulation of the national
plan of integrated airport systems (in this section referred
to as the ``plan'') under section 47103 of title 49, United
States Code.
(b) Contents of Study.--The study shall include a review of
the following:
(1) The criteria used for including airports in the plan
and the application of such criteria in the most recently
published version of the plan.
(2) The changes in airport capital needs as shown in the
2005-2009 and 2007-2011 plans, compared with the amounts
apportioned or otherwise made available to individual
airports between 2005 and 2010.
(3) A comparison of the amounts received by airports under
the airport improvement program in airport apportionments,
State apportionments, and discretionary grants during such
fiscal years with capital needs as reported in the plan.
(4) The effect of transfers of airport apportionments under
title 49, United States Code.
(5) An analysis on the feasibility and advisability of
apportioning amounts under section 47114(c)(1) of title 49,
United States Code, to the sponsor of each primary airport
for each fiscal year an amount that bears the same ratio to
the amount subject to the apportionment for fiscal year 2009
as the number of passenger boardings at the airport during
the prior calendar year bears to the aggregate of all
passenger boardings at all primary airports during that
calendar year.
(6) A documentation and review of the methods used by
airports to reach the 10,000 passenger enplanement threshold,
including whether such airports subsidize commercial flights
to reach such threshold, at every airport in the United
States that reported between 10,000 and 15,000 passenger
enplanements during each of the 2 most recent calendar years
for which such data is available.
(7) Any other matters pertaining to the plan that the
Secretary determines appropriate.
(c) Report to Congress.--
(1) Submission.--Not later than 36 months after the date
that the Secretary begins the study under this section, the
Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a report on the results of the study.
(2) Contents.--The report shall include--
(A) the findings of the Secretary on each of the issues
described in subsection (b);
(B) recommendations for any changes to policies and
procedures for formulating the plan; and
(C) recommendations for any changes to the methods of
determining the amounts to be apportioned or otherwise made
available to individual airports.
SEC. 155. TRANSFERS OF TERMINAL AREA AIR NAVIGATION EQUIPMENT
TO AIRPORT SPONSORS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 445 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 44518. Transfers of terminal area air navigation
equipment to airport sponsors
``(a) In General.--Subject to the requirements of this
section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administrator may carry out a pilot program under which the
Administrator may transfer ownership, operating, and
maintenance responsibilities for terminal area air navigation
equipment at an airport to the airport sponsor.
``(b) Participation.--The Administrator may select the
sponsors of not more than 3 nonhub airports, 3 small hub
airports, 3 medium hub airports, and 1 large hub airport to
participate in the pilot program.
``(c) Terms and Conditions of Transfer for Airport
Sponsors.--As a condition of participating in the pilot
program, the airport sponsor shall provide assurances
satisfactory to the Administrator that the sponsor will--
``(1) operate and maintain the terminal area air navigation
equipment transferred to the sponsor under this section in
accordance with standards to be established by the
Administrator;
``(2) permit the Administrator (or a person designated by
the Administrator) to conduct inspections of such terminal
area air navigation equipment under a schedule established by
the Administrator; and
``(3) acquire and maintain new terminal area air navigation
equipment at the airport as needed to replace equipment at
the end of its useful life or to meet new standards
established by the Administrator.
``(d) Terms and Conditions of Transfer for Administrator.--
When the Administrator approves an airport sponsor's
participation in the pilot program, the Administrator shall
transfer, at no cost to the sponsor, all rights, title, and
interests of the United States in and to the terminal area
air navigation equipment to be transferred to the sponsor
under the program, including the real property on which the
equipment is located.
``(e) Treatment of Airport Costs.--Any costs incurred by an
airport sponsor for ownership and maintenance of terminal
area air navigation equipment transferred under this section
shall be considered a cost of providing airfield facilities
and services under standards and guidelines issued by the
Secretary of Transportation under section 47129(b)(2) and may
be recovered in rates and charges assessed for use of the
airport's airfield.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Sponsor.--The term `sponsor' has the meaning given
that term in section 47102.
``(2) Terminal area air navigation equipment.--The term
`terminal area air navigation equipment' means an air
navigation facility as defined in section 40102 that exists
to provide approach and landing guidance to aircraft, but
does not include buildings used for air traffic control
functions.
``(g) Guidelines.--The Administrator shall issue guidelines
on the implementation of the program.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 445 is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``44518. Transfers of terminal area air navigation equipment to airport
sponsors.''.
SEC. 156. AIRPORT PRIVATIZATION PROGRAM.
(a) Approval of Applications.--Section 47134(b) is
amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking ``5
airports'' and inserting ``10 airports''; and
(2) paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(A) In general.--The Secretary may grant an exemption to
an airport sponsor from the requirements of sections 47107(b)
and 47133 (and any other law, regulation, or grant assurance)
to the extent necessary to permit the sponsor to recover from
the sale or lease of the airport such amount as may be
approved by the Secretary after the sponsor has consulted--
``(i) in the case of a primary airport, with each air
carrier and foreign air carrier serving the airport, as
determined by the Secretary; and
``(ii) in the case of a nonprimary airport, with at least
65 percent of the owners of aircraft based at that airport,
as determined by the Secretary.''; and
(B) by striking subparagraph (C).
(b) Terms and Conditions.--Section 47134(c) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (4), (5), and (9);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (6), (7), and (8) as
paragraphs (4), (5), and (6), respectively; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(7) A fee imposed by the airport on an air carrier or
foreign air carrier may not include any portion for a return
on investment or recovery of principal with respect to
consideration paid to a public agency for the lease or sale
of the airport unless that portion of the fee is approved by
the air carrier or foreign air carrier.''.
(c) Participation of Certain Airports.--Section 47134 is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (d); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (e) through (m) as
subsections (d) through (l), respectively.
(d) Applicability.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply with respect to an exemption issued to an airport
under section 47134 of title 49, United States Code, before,
on, or after the date of enactment of this Act.
TITLE II--NEXTGEN AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
MODERNIZATION
SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS.
In this title, the following definitions apply:
(1) Nextgen.--The term ``NextGen'' means the Next
Generation Air Transportation System.
(2) ADS-B.--The term ``ADS-B'' means automatic dependent
surveillance-broadcast.
(3) ADS-B out.--The term ``ADS-B Out'' means automatic
dependent surveillance-broadcast with the ability to transmit
information from the aircraft to ground stations and to other
equipped aircraft.
(4) ADS-B in.--The term ``ADS-B In'' means automatic
dependent surveillance-broadcast with the ability to transmit
information from the aircraft to ground stations and to other
equipped aircraft as well as the ability of the aircraft to
receive information from other transmitting aircraft and the
ground infrastructure.
(5) RNAV.--The term ``RNAV'' means area navigation.
(6) RNP.--The term ``RNP'' means required navigation
performance.
SEC. 202. NEXTGEN DEMONSTRATIONS AND CONCEPTS.
In allocating amounts appropriated pursuant to section
48101(a) of title 49, United States Code, the Secretary of
Transportation shall give priority to the following NextGen
activities:
(1) NextGen demonstrations and infrastructure.
(2) NextGen trajectory-based operations.
(3) NextGen reduced weather impact.
(4) NextGen high-density arrivals/departures.
(5) NextGen collaborative air traffic management.
(6) NextGen flexible terminals and airports.
(7) NextGen safety, security, and environmental reviews.
(8) NextGen networked facilities.
(9) The Center for Advanced Aviation System Development.
(10) NextGen system development.
(11) Data communications system implementation.
(12) ADS-B infrastructure deployment and operational
implementation.
(13) Systemwide information management.
(14) NextGen facility consolidation and realignment.
(15) En route automation modernization.
(16) National airspace system voice switch.
(17) NextGen network enabled weather.
SEC. 203. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO
REIMBURSABLE AGREEMENTS.
Section 106(m) is amended in the last sentence by inserting
``with or'' before ``without reimbursement''.
[[Page H2149]]
SEC. 204. CHIEF NEXTGEN OFFICER.
Section 106 is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(s) Chief NextGen Officer.--
``(1) In general.--
``(A) Appointment.--There shall be a Chief NextGen Officer
appointed by the Administrator. The Chief NextGen Officer
shall report directly to the Administrator and shall be
subject to the authority of the Administrator.
``(B) Qualifications.--The Chief NextGen Officer shall have
a demonstrated ability in management and knowledge of or
experience in aviation and systems engineering.
``(C) Term.--The Chief NextGen Officer shall be appointed
for a term of 5 years.
``(D) Removal.--The Chief NextGen Officer shall serve at
the pleasure of the Administrator, except that the
Administrator shall make every effort to ensure stability and
continuity in the leadership of the implementation of
NextGen.
``(E) Vacancy.--Any individual appointed to fill a vacancy
in the position of Chief NextGen Officer occurring before the
expiration of the term for which the individual's predecessor
was appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of that
term.
``(2) Compensation.--
``(A) In general.--The Chief NextGen Officer shall be paid
at an annual rate of basic pay to be determined by the
Administrator. The annual rate may not exceed the annual
compensation paid under section 102 of title 3. The Chief
NextGen Officer shall be subject to the postemployment
provisions of section 207 of title 18 as if the position of
Chief NextGen Officer were described in section
207(c)(2)(A)(i) of that title.
``(B) Bonus.--In addition to the annual rate of basic pay
authorized by subparagraph (A), the Chief NextGen Officer may
receive a bonus for any calendar year not to exceed 30
percent of the annual rate of basic pay, based upon the
Administrator's evaluation of the Chief NextGen Officer's
performance in relation to the performance goals set forth in
the performance agreement described in paragraph (3).
``(3) Annual performance agreement.--The Administrator and
the Chief NextGen Officer, in consultation with the Federal
Aviation Management Advisory Council, shall enter into an
annual performance agreement that sets forth measurable
organization and individual goals for the Chief NextGen
Officer in key operational areas. The agreement shall be
subject to review and renegotiation on an annual basis.
``(4) Annual performance report.--The Chief NextGen Officer
shall prepare and transmit to the Secretary of
Transportation, the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, the Committee
on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives,
and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of
the Senate an annual management report containing such
information as may be prescribed by the Secretary.
``(5) Responsibilities.--The responsibilities of the Chief
NextGen Officer include the following:
``(A) Implementing NextGen activities and budgets across
all program offices of the Federal Aviation Administration.
``(B) Coordinating the implementation of NextGen activities
with the Office of Management and Budget.
``(C) Reviewing and providing advice on the
Administration's modernization programs, budget, and cost
accounting system with respect to NextGen.
``(D) With respect to the budget of the Administration--
``(i) developing a budget request of the Administration
related to the implementation of NextGen;
``(ii) submitting such budget request to the Administrator;
and
``(iii) ensuring that the budget request supports the
annual and long-range strategic plans of the Administration
with respect to NextGen.
``(E) Consulting with the Administrator on the Capital
Investment Plan of the Administration prior to its submission
to Congress.
``(F) Developing an annual NextGen implementation plan.
``(G) Ensuring that NextGen implementation activities are
planned in such a manner as to require that system
architecture is designed to allow for the incorporation of
novel and currently unknown technologies into NextGen in the
future and that current decisions do not bias future
decisions unfairly in favor of existing technology at the
expense of innovation.
``(H) Coordinating with the NextGen Joint Planning and
Development Office with respect to facilitating cooperation
among all Federal agencies whose operations and interests are
affected by the implementation of NextGen.
``(6) Exception.--If the Administrator appoints as the
Chief NextGen Officer, pursuant to paragraph (1)(A), an
Executive Schedule employee covered by section 5315 of title
5, then paragraphs (1)(B), (1)(C), (2), and (3) of this
subsection shall not apply to such employee.
``(7) Nextgen defined.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `NextGen' means the Next Generation Air
Transportation System.''.
SEC. 205. DEFINITION OF AIR NAVIGATION FACILITY.
Section 40102(a)(4) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E);
(2) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and inserting the
following:
``(B) runway lighting and airport surface visual and other
navigation aids;
``(C) apparatus, equipment, software, or service for
distributing aeronautical and meteorological information to
air traffic control facilities or aircraft;
``(D) communication, navigation, or surveillance equipment
for air-to-ground or air-to-air applications;'';
(3) in subparagraph (E) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)
of this section)--
(A) by striking ``another structure'' and inserting ``any
structure, equipment,''; and
(B) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``;
and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) buildings, equipment, and systems dedicated to the
national airspace system.''.
SEC. 206. CLARIFICATION TO ACQUISITION REFORM AUTHORITY.
Section 40110(c) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon in paragraph
(3);
(2) by striking paragraph (4); and
(3) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4).
SEC. 207. ASSISTANCE TO FOREIGN AVIATION AUTHORITIES.
Section 40113(e) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``(whether public or private)'' after
``authorities''; and
(B) by striking ``safety.'' and inserting ``safety or
efficiency. The Administrator is authorized to participate
in, and submit offers in response to, competitions to provide
these services, and to contract with foreign aviation
authorities to provide these services consistent with section
106(l)(6).'';
(2) in paragraph (2) by adding at the end the following:
``The Administrator is authorized, notwithstanding any other
provision of law or policy, to accept payments for services
provided under this subsection in arrears.''; and
(3) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
``(3) Crediting appropriations.--Funds received by the
Administrator pursuant to this section shall--
``(A) be credited to the appropriation current when the
amount is received;
``(B) be merged with and available for the purposes of such
appropriation; and
``(C) remain available until expended.''.
SEC. 208. NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM JOINT
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OFFICE.
(a) Redesignation of JPDO Director to Associate
Administrator.--
(1) Associate administrator for next generation air
transportation system planning, development, and interagency
coordination.--Section 709(a) of the Vision 100--Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 note; 117 Stat.
2582) is amended--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), and (4) as
paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) The head of the Office shall be the Associate
Administrator for Next Generation Air Transportation System
Planning, Development, and Interagency Coordination, who
shall be appointed by the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration. The Administrator shall appoint the
Associate Administrator after consulting with the Chairman of
the Next Generation Senior Policy Committee and providing
advanced notice to the other members of that Committee.''.
(2) Responsibilities.--Section 709(a)(3) of such Act (as
redesignated by paragraph (1) of this subsection) is
amended--
(A) in subparagraph (G) by striking ``; and'' and inserting
a semicolon;
(B) in subparagraph (H) by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(I) establishing specific quantitative goals for the
safety, capacity, efficiency, performance, and environmental
impacts of each phase of Next Generation Air Transportation
System planning and development activities and measuring
actual operational experience against those goals, taking
into account noise pollution reduction concerns of affected
communities to the extent practicable in establishing the
environmental goals;
``(J) working to ensure global interoperability of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System;
``(K) working to ensure the use of weather information and
space weather information in the Next Generation Air
Transportation System as soon as possible;
``(L) overseeing, with the Administrator and in
consultation with the Chief NextGen Officer, the selection of
products or outcomes of research and development activities
that should be moved to a demonstration phase; and
``(M) maintaining a baseline modeling and simulation
environment for testing and evaluating alternative concepts
to satisfy Next Generation Air Transportation System
enterprise architecture requirements.''.
(3) Cooperation with other federal agencies.--Section
709(a)(4) of such Act (as redesignated by paragraph (1) of
this subsection) is amended--
(A) by striking ``(4)'' and inserting ``(4)(A)''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) The Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Secretary
of Commerce, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the head
of any other Federal agency from which the Secretary of
Transportation requests assistance under subparagraph (A)
shall designate a senior official in the agency to be
responsible for--
``(i) carrying out the activities of the agency relating to
the Next Generation Air Transportation System in coordination
with the Office, including the execution of all aspects of
the work of the agency in developing and implementing the
integrated work plan described in subsection (b)(5);
``(ii) serving as a liaison for the agency in activities of
the agency relating to the Next Generation Air Transportation
System and coordinating with other Federal agencies involved
in activities relating to the System; and
[[Page H2150]]
``(iii) ensuring that the agency meets its obligations as
set forth in any memorandum of understanding executed by or
on behalf of the agency relating to the Next Generation Air
Transportation System.
``(C) The head of a Federal agency referred to in
subparagraph (B) shall--
``(i) ensure that the responsibilities of the agency
relating to the Next Generation Air Transportation System are
clearly communicated to the senior official of the agency
designated under subparagraph (B);
``(ii) ensure that the performance of the senior official
in carrying out the responsibilities of the agency relating
to the Next Generation Air Transportation System is reflected
in the official's annual performance evaluations and
compensation;
``(iii) establish or designate an office within the agency
to carry out its responsibilities under the memorandum of
understanding under the supervision of the designated
official; and
``(iv) ensure that the designated official has sufficient
budgetary authority and staff resources to carry out the
agency's Next Generation Air Transportation System
responsibilities as set forth in the integrated plan under
subsection (b).
``(D) Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment
of this subparagraph, the head of each Federal agency that
has responsibility for carrying out any activity under the
integrated plan under subsection (b) shall execute a
memorandum of understanding with the Office obligating that
agency to carry out the activity.''.
(4) Coordination with omb.--Section 709(a) of such Act (117
Stat. 2582) is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(6)(A) The Office shall work with the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget to develop a process whereby
the Director will identify projects related to the Next
Generation Air Transportation System across the agencies
referred to in paragraph (4)(A) and consider the Next
Generation Air Transportation System as a unified, cross-
agency program.
``(B) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
to the extent practicable, shall--
``(i) ensure that--
``(I) each Federal agency covered by the plan has
sufficient funds requested in the President's budget, as
submitted under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States
Code, for each fiscal year covered by the plan to carry out
its responsibilities under the plan; and
``(II) the development and implementation of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System remains on schedule;
``(ii) include, in the President's budget, a statement of
the portion of the estimated budget of each Federal agency
covered by the plan that relates to the activities of the
agency under the Next Generation Air Transportation System;
and
``(iii) identify and justify as part of the President's
budget submission any inconsistencies between the plan and
amounts requested in the budget.
``(7) The Associate Administrator of the Next Generation
Air Transportation System Planning, Development, and
Interagency Coordination shall be a voting member of the
Joint Resources Council of the Federal Aviation
Administration.''.
(b) Integrated Plan.--Section 709(b) of such Act (117 Stat.
2583) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``meets air'' and inserting ``meets
anticipated future air''; and
(B) by striking ``beyond those currently included in the
Federal Aviation Administration's operational evolution
plan'';
(2) at the end of paragraph (3) by striking ``and'';
(3) at the end of paragraph (4) by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) a multiagency integrated work plan for the Next
Generation Air Transportation System that includes--
``(A) an outline of the activities required to achieve the
end-state architecture, as expressed in the concept of
operations and enterprise architecture documents, that
identifies each Federal agency or other entity responsible
for each activity in the outline;
``(B) details on a year-by-year basis of specific
accomplishments, activities, research requirements,
rulemakings, policy decisions, and other milestones of
progress for each Federal agency or entity conducting
activities relating to the Next Generation Air Transportation
System;
``(C) for each element of the Next Generation Air
Transportation System, an outline, on a year-by-year basis,
of what is to be accomplished in that year toward meeting the
Next Generation Air Transportation System's end-state
architecture, as expressed in the concept of operations and
enterprise architecture documents, as well as identifying
each Federal agency or other entity that will be responsible
for each component of any research, development, or
implementation program;
``(D) an estimate of all necessary expenditures on a year-
by-year basis, including a statement of each Federal agency
or entity's responsibility for costs and available resources,
for each stage of development from the basic research stage
through the demonstration and implementation phase;
``(E) a clear explanation of how each step in the
development of the Next Generation Air Transportation System
will lead to the following step and of the implications of
not successfully completing a step in the time period
described in the integrated work plan;
``(F) a transition plan for the implementation of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System that includes date-
specific milestones for the implementation of new
capabilities into the national airspace system;
``(G) date-specific timetables for meeting the
environmental goals identified in subsection (a)(3)(I); and
``(H) a description of potentially significant operational
or workforce changes resulting from deployment of the Next
Generation Air Transportation System.''.
(c) NextGen Implementation Plan.--Section 709(d) of such
Act (117 Stat. 2584) is amended to read as follows:
``(d) NextGen Implementation Plan.--The Administrator shall
develop and publish annually the document known as the
NextGen Implementation Plan, or any successor document, that
provides a detailed description of how the agency is
implementing the Next Generation Air Transportation
System.''.
(d) Contingency Planning.--The Associate Administrator for
the Next Generation Air Transportation System Planning,
Development, and Interagency Coordination shall, as part of
the design of the System, develop contingency plans for
dealing with the degradation of the System in the event of a
natural disaster, major equipment failure, or act of
terrorism.
SEC. 209. NEXT GENERATION AIR TRANSPORTATION SENIOR POLICY
COMMITTEE.
(a) Meetings.--Section 710(a) of the Vision 100--Century of
Aviation Reauthorization Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 note; 117 Stat.
2584) is amended by inserting before the period at the end
the following ``and shall meet at least twice each year''.
(b) Annual Report.--Section 710 of such Act (117 Stat.
2584) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Annual Report.--
``(1) Submission to congress.--Not later than one year
after the date of enactment of this subsection, and annually
thereafter on the date of submission of the President's
budget request to Congress under section 1105(a) of title 31,
United States Code, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a
report summarizing the progress made in carrying out the
integrated work plan required by section 709(b)(5) and any
changes in that plan.
``(2) Contents.--The report shall include--
``(A) a copy of the updated integrated work plan;
``(B) a description of the progress made in carrying out
the integrated work plan and any changes in that plan,
including any changes based on funding shortfalls and
limitations set by the Office of Management and Budget;
``(C) a detailed description of--
``(i) the success or failure of each item of the integrated
work plan for the previous year and relevant information as
to why any milestone was not met; and
``(ii) the impact of not meeting the milestone and what
actions will be taken in the future to account for the
failure to complete the milestone;
``(D) an explanation of any change to future years in the
integrated work plan and the reasons for such change; and
``(E) an identification of the levels of funding for each
agency participating in the integrated work plan devoted to
programs and activities under the plan for the previous
fiscal year and in the President's budget request.''.
SEC. 210. IMPROVED MANAGEMENT OF PROPERTY INVENTORY.
Section 40110(a) is amended by striking paragraphs (2) and
(3) and inserting the following:
``(2) may construct and improve laboratories and other test
facilities; and
``(3) may dispose of any interest in property for adequate
compensation, and the amount so received shall--
``(A) be credited to the appropriation current when the
amount is received;
``(B) be merged with and available for the purposes of such
appropriation; and
``(C) remain available until expended.''.
SEC. 211. AUTOMATIC DEPENDENT SURVEILLANCE-BROADCAST
SERVICES.
(a) Review by DOT Inspector General.--
(1) In general.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation shall conduct a review concerning the Federal
Aviation Administration's award and oversight of any
contracts entered into by the Administration to provide ADS-B
services for the national airspace system.
(2) Contents.--The review shall include, at a minimum--
(A) an examination of how the Administration manages
program risks;
(B) an assessment of expected benefits attributable to the
deployment of ADS-B services, including the Administration's
plans for implementation of advanced operational procedures
and air-to-air applications, as well as the extent to which
ground radar will be retained;
(C) an assessment of the Administration's analysis of
specific operational benefits, and benefit/costs analyses of
planned operational benefits conducted by the Administration,
for ADS-B In and ADS-B Out avionics equipage for airspace
users;
(C) a determination of whether the Administration has
established sufficient mechanisms to ensure that all design,
acquisition, operation, and maintenance requirements have
been met by the contractor;
(D) an assessment of whether the Administration and any
contractors are meeting cost, schedule, and performance
milestones, as measured against the original baseline of the
Administration's program for providing ADS-B services;
(E) an assessment of how security issues are being
addressed in the overall design and implementation of the
ADS-B system; and
(F) any other matters or aspects relating to contract
implementation and oversight that the Inspector General
determines merit attention.
(3) Reports to congress.--The Inspector General shall
submit, periodically (and on at
[[Page H2151]]
least an annual basis), to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a report on the results of the review conducted under
this subsection.
(b) Rulemakings.--
(1) ADS-B in.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall initiate a rulemaking
proceeding to issue guidelines and regulations relating to
ADS-B In technology that--
(A) identify the ADS-B In technology that will be required
under NextGen;
(B) subject to paragraph (2), require all aircraft
operating in capacity constrained airspace, at capacity
constrained airports, or in any other airspace deemed
appropriate by the Administrator to be equipped with ADS-B In
technology by 2020; and
(C) identify--
(i) the type of avionics required of aircraft for all
classes of airspace;
(ii) the expected costs associated with the avionics; and
(iii) the expected uses and benefits of the avionics.
(2) Readiness verification.--Before the date on which all
aircraft are required to be equipped with ADS-B In technology
pursuant to rulemakings conducted under paragraph (1), the
Chief NextGen Officer shall verify that--
(A) the necessary ground infrastructure is installed and
functioning properly;
(B) certification standards have been approved; and
(C) appropriate operational platforms interface safely and
efficiently.
(c) Use of ADS-B Technology.--
(1) Plans.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop, in
consultation with appropriate employee and industry groups, a
plan for the use of ADS-B technology for surveillance and
active air traffic control.
(2) Contents.--The plan shall--
(A) include provisions to test the use of ADS-B technology
for surveillance and active air traffic control in specific
regions of the United States with the most congested
airspace;
(B) identify the equipment required at air traffic control
facilities and the training required for air traffic
controllers;
(C) identify procedures, to be developed in consultation
with appropriate employee and industry groups, to conduct air
traffic management in mixed equipage environments; and
(D) establish a policy in test regions referred to in
subparagraph (A), in consultation with appropriate employee
and industry groups, to provide incentives for equipage with
ADS-B technology, including giving priority to aircraft
equipped with such technology before the 2020 equipage
deadline.
SEC. 212. EXPERT REVIEW OF ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE FOR
NEXTGEN.
(a) Review.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall enter into an arrangement with the
National Research Council to review the enterprise
architecture for the NextGen.
(b) Contents.--At a minimum, the review to be conducted
under subsection (a) shall--
(1) highlight the technical activities, including human-
system design, organizational design, and other safety and
human factor aspects of the system, that will be necessary to
successfully transition current and planned modernization
programs to the future system envisioned by the Joint
Planning and Development Office of the Administration;
(2) assess technical, cost, and schedule risk for the
software development that will be necessary to achieve the
expected benefits from a highly automated air traffic
management system and the implications for ongoing
modernization projects; and
(3) determine how risks with automation efforts for the
NextGen can be mitigated based on the experiences of other
public or private entities in developing complex, software-
intensive systems.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report containing the
results of the review conducted pursuant to subsection (a).
SEC. 213. ACCELERATION OF NEXTGEN TECHNOLOGIES.
(a) Airport Procedures.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall publish a report, after
consultation with representatives of appropriate
Administration employee groups, airport operators, air
carriers, general aviation representatives, flight path
service providers, and aircraft manufacturers that includes
the following:
(A) RNP/RNAV operations.--The required navigation
performance and area navigation operations, including the
procedures to be developed, certified, and published and the
air traffic control operational changes, to maximize the
efficiency and capacity of NextGen commercial operations at
the 35 operational evolution partnership airports identified
by the Administration.
(B) Coordination and implementation activities.--A
description of the activities and operational changes and
approvals required to coordinate and utilize those procedures
at those airports.
(C) Implementation plan.--A plan for implementing those
procedures that establishes--
(i) clearly defined budget, schedule, project organization,
and leadership requirements;
(ii) specific implementation and transition steps; and
(iii) baseline and performance metrics for--
(I) measuring the Administration's progress in implementing
the plan, including the percentage utilization of required
navigation performance in the national airspace system; and
(II) achieving measurable fuel burn and carbon dioxide
emissions reductions compared to current performance; and
(iv) expedited environmental review procedures for timely
environmental approval of area navigation and required
navigation performance that offer significant efficiency
improvements as determined by baseline and performance
metrics under clause (iii).
(D) Additional procedures.--A process for the
identification, certification, and publication of additional
required navigation performance and area navigation
procedures that may be required at such airports in the
future.
(2) Implementation schedule.--The Administrator shall
certify, publish, and implement--
(A) 30 percent of the required procedures not later than 18
months after the date of enactment of this Act;
(B) 60 percent of the procedures not later than 36 months
after the date of enactment of this Act; and
(C) 100 percent of the procedures before June 30, 2015.
(b) Establishment of Priorities.--The Administrator shall
extend the charter of the Performance Based Navigation
Aviation Rulemaking Committee as necessary to establish
priorities for the development, certification, publication,
and implementation of the navigation performance and area
navigation procedures based on their potential safety and
efficiency benefits to other airports in the national
airspace system, including small and medium hub airports.
(c) Coordinated and Expedited Review.--Navigation
performance and area navigation procedures developed,
certified, published, and implemented under this section
shall be presumed to be covered by a categorical exclusion
(as defined in section 1508.4 of title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations) under chapter 3 of FAA Order 1050.1E unless the
Administrator determines that extraordinary circumstances
exist with respect to the procedure.
(d) Deployment Plan for Nationwide Data Communications
System.--Not later than one year after the date of enactment
of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives a plan for implementation of a
nationwide data communications system. The plan shall
include--
(1) clearly defined budget, schedule, project organization,
and leadership requirements;
(2) specific implementation and transition steps; and
(3) baseline and performance metrics for measuring the
Administration's progress in implementing the plan.
(e) Improved Performance Standards.--
(1) Assessment of work being performed under nextgen
implementation plan.--The Administrator shall clearly outline
in the NextGen Implementation Plan document of the
Administration the work being performed under the plan to
determine--
(A) whether utilization of ADS-B, RNP, and other
technologies as part of NextGen implementation will display
the position of aircraft more accurately and frequently so as
to enable a more efficient use of existing airspace and
result in reduced consumption of aviation fuel and aircraft
engine emissions; and
(B) the feasibility of reducing aircraft separation
standards in a safe manner as a result of the implementation
of such technologies.
(2) Aircraft separation standards.--If the Administrator
determines that the standards referred to in paragraph (1)(B)
can be reduced safely, the Administrator shall include in the
NextGen Implementation Plan a timetable for implementation of
such reduced standards.
(f) Third-Party Usage.--The Administration shall establish
a program under which the Administration will use third
parties in the development, testing, and maintenance of
flight procedures.
SEC. 214. PERFORMANCE METRICS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall establish and begin tracking
national airspace system performance metrics, including, at a
minimum, metrics with respect to--
(1) actual arrival and departure rates per hour measured
against the currently published aircraft arrival rate and
aircraft departure rate for the 35 operational evolution
partnership airports;
(2) average gate-to-gate times;
(3) fuel burned between key city pairs;
(4) operations using the advanced navigation procedures,
including performance based navigation procedures;
(5) the average distance flown between key city pairs;
(6) the time between pushing back from the gate and taking
off;
(7) continuous climb or descent;
(8) average gate arrival delay for all arrivals;
(9) flown versus filed flight times for key city pairs;
(10) implementation of NextGen Implementation Plan, or any
successor document, capabilities designed to reduce emissions
and fuel consumption;
(11) the Administration's unit cost of providing air
traffic control services; and
(12) runway safety, including runway incursions,
operational errors, and loss of standard separation events.
(b) Baselines.--The Administrator, in consultation with
aviation industry stakeholders,
[[Page H2152]]
shall identify baselines for each of the metrics established
under subsection (a) and appropriate methods to measure
deviations from the baselines.
(c) Publication.--The Administrator shall make data
obtained under subsection (a) available to the public in a
searchable, sortable, and downloadable format through the Web
site of the Administration and other appropriate media.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives a report that contains--
(1) a description of the metrics that will be used to
measure the Administration's progress in implementing NextGen
capabilities and operational results;
(2) information on any additional metrics developed; and
(3) a process for holding the Administration accountable
for meeting or exceeding the metrics baselines identified in
subsection (b).
SEC. 215. CERTIFICATION STANDARDS AND RESOURCES.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
shall develop a plan to accelerate and streamline the process
for certification of NextGen technologies, including--
(1) establishment of updated project plans and timelines;
(2) identification of the specific activities needed to
certify NextGen technologies, including the establishment of
NextGen technical requirements for the manufacture of
equipage, installation of equipage, airline operational
procedures, pilot training standards, air traffic control
procedures, and air traffic controller training;
(3) identification of staffing requirements for the Air
Certification Service and the Flight Standards Service,
taking into consideration the leveraging of assistance from
third parties and designees;
(4) establishment of a program under which the
Administration will use third parties in the certification
process; and
(5) establishment of performance metrics to measure the
Administration's progress.
SEC. 216. SURFACE SYSTEMS ACCELERATION.
(a) In General.--The Chief Operating Officer of the Air
Traffic Organization shall--
(1) evaluate the Airport Surface Detection Equipment-Model
X program for its potential contribution to implementation of
the NextGen initiative;
(2) evaluate airport surveillance technologies and
associated collaborative surface management software for
potential contributions to implementation of NextGen surface
management;
(3) accelerate implementation of the program referred to in
paragraph (1); and
(4) carry out such additional duties as the Administrator
of the Federal Aviation Administration may require.
(b) Expedited Certification and Utilization.--The
Administrator shall--
(1) consider options for expediting the certification of
Ground-Based Augmentation System technology; and
(2) develop a plan to utilize such a system at the 35
operational evolution partnership airports by September 30,
2012.
SEC. 217. INCLUSION OF STAKEHOLDERS IN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS.
(a) Process for Employee Inclusion.--Notwithstanding any
other law or agreement, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall establish a process or
processes for including qualified employees to serve in a
collaborative and expert capacity in the planning and
development of air traffic control modernization projects,
including NextGen.
(b) Adherence to Deadlines.--Participants in these
processes shall adhere to all deadlines and milestones
established pursuant to this title.
(c) No Change in Employee Status.--Participation in these
processes by an employee shall not--
(1) serve as a waiver of any bargaining obligations or
rights;
(2) entitle the employee to any additional compensation or
benefits; or
(3) entitle the employee to prevent or unduly delay the
exercise of management prerogatives.
(d) Working Groups.--Except in extraordinary circumstances,
the Administrator shall not pay overtime related to work
group participation.
(e) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall report to
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate concerning the disputes
between participating employees and Administration management
that have led to delays to the implementation of NextGen,
including information on the source of the dispute, the
resulting length of delay, and associated cost increases.
SEC. 218. SITING OF WIND FARMS NEAR FAA NAVIGATIONAL AIDS AND
OTHER ASSETS.
(a) Survey and Assessment.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, in order to address safety and
operational concerns associated with the construction,
alteration, establishment, or expansion of wind farms in
proximity to critical Federal Aviation Administration
facilities, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall complete a survey and assessment of
leases for critical Administration facility sites,
including--
(A) an inventory of the leases that describes, for each
such lease--
(i) the periodic cost, location, site, terms, number of
years remaining, and lessor;
(ii) other Administration facilities that share the
leasehold, including surveillance and communications
equipment; and
(iii) the type of transmission services supported,
including the terms of service, cost, and support contract
obligations for the services; and
(B) a list of those leases for facilities located in or
near areas suitable for the construction and operation of
wind farms, as determined by the Administrator in
consultation with the Secretary of Energy.
(2) Memorandum of understanding.--The Administrator and the
Secretary of Energy shall enter into a memorandum of
understanding regarding the use and distribution of the list
referred to in paragraph (1)(B), including considerations of
privacy and proprietary information, database development, or
other relevant applications.
(3) Report.--Upon completion of the survey and assessment,
the Administrator shall submit a report to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General containing
the Administrator's findings, conclusions, and
recommendations.
(b) GAO Assessment.--Not later than 180 days after
receiving the Administrator's report under subsection (a)(3),
the Comptroller General, in consultation with the
Administrator and other interested parties, shall report on--
(1) the current and potential impact of wind farms on the
national airspace system;
(2) the extent to which the Department of Defense and the
Administration have guidance, processes, and procedures in
place to evaluate the impact of wind farms on the
implementation of the NextGen air traffic control system; and
(3) potential mitigation strategies, if necessary, to
ensure that wind farms do not have an adverse impact on the
implementation of the Next Generation air traffic control
system, including the installation of navigational aids
associated with that system.
(c) Issuance of Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after
the Administrator receives the Comptroller's recommendations,
the Administrator shall consult with State, Federal, and
industry stakeholders and publish guidelines for the
construction and operation of wind farms that are to be
located in proximity to critical Administration facilities.
The guidelines may include--
(1) the establishment of a zone system for wind farms based
on proximity to critical Administration assets;
(2) the establishment of turbine height and density
limitations on such wind farms; and
(3) any other requirements or recommendations designed to
address Administration safety or operational concerns related
to the construction, alteration, establishment, or expansion
of such wind farms.
(d) Reports.--The Administrator and the Comptroller General
shall provide a copy of reports under subsections (a) and
(b), respectively, to--
(1) the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs,
the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, the
Committee on Homeland Security, the Committee on Armed
Services, and the Committee on Science and Technology of the
House of Representatives.
SEC. 219. AIRSPACE REDESIGN.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The airspace redesign efforts of the Federal Aviation
Administration will play a critical near-term role in
enhancing capacity, reducing delays, transitioning to more
flexible routing, and ultimately saving money in fuel costs
for airlines and airspace users.
(2) The critical importance of airspace redesign efforts is
underscored by the fact that they are highlighted in
strategic plans of the Administration, including Flight Plan
2009-2013 and the NextGen Implementation Plan.
(3) Funding cuts have led to delays and deferrals of
critical capacity enhancing airspace redesign efforts.
(4) Several new runways planned for the period of fiscal
years 2011 and 2012 will not provide estimated capacity
benefits without additional funds.
(b) Noise Impacts of New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia
Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign.--
(1) Monitoring.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, in conjunction with the Port Authority of New
York and New Jersey and the Philadelphia International
Airport, shall monitor the noise impacts of the New York/New
Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign.
(2) Report.--Not later than one year following the first
day of completion of the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia
Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign, the Administrator shall
submit to Congress a report on the findings of the
Administrator with respect to monitoring conducted under
paragraph (1).
TITLE III--SAFETY
Subtitle A--General Provisions
SEC. 301. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DENIAL OF AIRMAN CERTIFICATES.
(a) Judicial Review of NTSB Decisions.--Section 44703(d) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(3) A person who is substantially affected by an order of
the Board under this subsection, or the Administrator if the
Administrator decides that an order of the Board will have a
significant adverse impact on carrying out this subtitle, may
seek judicial review of the order under section 46110. The
Administrator shall be made a
[[Page H2153]]
party to the judicial review proceedings. The findings of
fact of the Board in any such case are conclusive if
supported by substantial evidence.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1153(c) is amended by
striking ``section 44709 or'' and inserting ``section
44703(d), 44709, or''.
SEC. 302. RELEASE OF DATA RELATING TO ABANDONED TYPE
CERTIFICATES AND SUPPLEMENTAL TYPE
CERTIFICATES.
Section 44704(a) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(5) Release of data.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Administrator may make available upon request, to a
person seeking to maintain the airworthiness or develop
product improvements of an aircraft, engine, propeller, or
appliance, engineering data in the possession of the
Administration relating to a type certificate or a
supplemental type certificate for such aircraft, engine,
propeller, or appliance, without the consent of the owner of
record, if the Administrator determines that--
``(i) the certificate containing the requested data has
been inactive for 3 or more years, except that the
Administrator may reduce this time if required to address an
unsafe condition associated with the product;
``(ii) after using due diligence, the Administrator is
unable to find the owner of record, or the owner of record's
heir, of the type certificate or supplemental type
certificate; and
``(iii) making such data available will enhance aviation
safety.
``(B) Engineering data defined.--In this section, the term
`engineering data' as used with respect to an aircraft,
engine, propeller, or appliance means type design drawing and
specifications for the entire aircraft, engine, propeller, or
appliance or change to the aircraft, engine, propeller, or
appliance, including the original design data, and any
associated supplier data for individual parts or components
approved as part of the particular certificate for the
aircraft, engine, propeller, or appliance.
``(C) Requirement to maintain data.--The Administrator
shall maintain engineering data in the possession of the
Administration relating to a type certificate or a
supplemental type certificate that has been inactive for 3 or
more years.''.
SEC. 303. DESIGN AND PRODUCTION ORGANIZATION CERTIFICATES.
(a) In General.--Section 44704(e) is amended to read as
follows:
``(e) Design and Production Organization Certificates.--
``(1) Issuance.--Beginning January 1, 2013, the
Administrator may issue a certificate to a design
organization, production organization, or design and
production organization to authorize the organization to
certify compliance of aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers,
and appliances with the requirements and minimum standards
prescribed under section 44701(a). An organization holding a
certificate issued under this subsection shall be known as a
certified design and production organization (in this
subsection referred to as a `CDPO').
``(2) Applications.--On receiving an application for a CDPO
certificate, the Administrator shall examine and rate the
organization submitting the application, in accordance with
regulations to be prescribed by the Administrator, to
determine whether the organization has adequate engineering,
design, and production capabilities, standards, and
safeguards to make certifications of compliance as described
in paragraph (1).
``(3) Issuance of certificates based on cdpo findings.--The
Administrator may rely on certifications of compliance by a
CDPO when making determinations under this section.
``(4) Public safety.--The Administrator shall include in a
CDPO certificate terms required in the interest of safety.
``(5) No effect on power of revocation.--Nothing in this
subsection affects the authority of the Secretary of
Transportation to revoke a certificate.''.
(b) Applicability.--Before January 1, 2013, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may
continue to issue certificates under section 44704(e) of
title 49, United States Code, as in effect on the day before
the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Clerical Amendments.--Chapter 447 is amended--
(1) in the heading for section 44704 by striking ``and
design organization certificates'' and inserting ``, and
design and production organization certificates''; and
(2) in the analysis for such chapter by striking the item
relating to section 44704 and inserting the following:
``44704. Type certificates, production certificates,
airworthiness certificates, and design and production
organization certificates.''.
SEC. 304. AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION PROCESS REVIEW AND REFORM.
(a) General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, in consultation with representatives of the
aviation industry, shall conduct an assessment of the
certification and approval process under section 44704 of
title 49, United States Code.
(b) Contents.--In conducting the assessment, the
Administrator shall consider--
(1) the expected number of applications for product
certifications and approvals the Administrator will receive
under section 44704 of such title in the 1-year, 5-year, and
10-year periods following the date of enactment of this Act;
(2) process reforms and improvements necessary to allow the
Administrator to review and approve the applications in a
fair and timely fashion;
(3) the status of recommendations made in previous reports
on the Administration's certification process;
(4) methods for enhancing the effective use of delegation
systems, including organizational designation authorization;
(5) methods for training the Administration's field office
employees in the safety management system and auditing; and
(6) the status of updating airworthiness requirements,
including implementing recommendations in the
Administration's report entitled ``Part 23--Small Airplane
Certification Process Study'' (OK-09-3468, dated July 2009).
(c) Recommendations.--In conducting the assessment, the
Administrator shall make recommendations to improve
efficiency and reduce costs through streamlining and
reengineering the certification process under section 44704
of such title to ensure that the Administrator can conduct
certifications and approvals under such section in a manner
that supports and enables the development of new products and
technologies and the global competitiveness of the United
States aviation industry.
(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the assessment, together with an explanation of how the
Administrator will implement recommendations made under
subsection (c) and measure the effectiveness of the
recommendations.
(e) Implementation of Recommendations.--Not later than one
year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall begin to implement the recommendations
made under subsection (c).
SEC. 305. CONSISTENCY OF REGULATORY INTERPRETATION.
(a) Establishment of Advisory Panel.--Not later than 90
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
establish an advisory panel comprised of both Government and
industry representatives to--
(1) review the October 2010 report by the Government
Accountability Office on certification and approval processes
(GAO-11-14); and
(2) develop recommendations to address the findings in the
report and other concerns raised by interested parties,
including representatives of the aviation industry.
(b) Matters To Be Considered.--The advisory panel shall--
(1) determine the root causes of inconsistent
interpretation of regulations by the Administration's Flight
Standards Service and Aircraft Certification Service;
(2) develop recommendations to improve the consistency of
interpreting regulations by the Administration's Flight
Standards Service and Aircraft Certification Service; and
(3) develop recommendations to improve communications
between the Administration's Flight Standards Service and
Aircraft Certification Service and applicants and certificate
and approval holders for the identification and resolution of
potentially adverse issues in an expeditious and fair manner.
(c) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
findings of the advisory panel, together with an explanation
of how the Administrator will implement the recommendations
of the advisory panel and measure the effectiveness of the
recommendations.
SEC. 306. RUNWAY SAFETY.
(a) Strategic Runway Safety Plan.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall develop and submit to Congress
a report containing a strategic runway safety plan.
(2) Contents of plan.--The strategic runway safety plan--
(A) shall include, at a minimum--
(i) goals to improve runway safety;
(ii) near and long term actions designed to reduce the
severity, number, and rate of runway incursions, losses of
standard separation, and operational errors;
(iii) time frames and resources needed for the actions
described in clause (ii);
(iv) a continuous evaluative process to track performance
toward the goals referred to in clause (i); and
(v) a review of every commercial service airport (as
defined in section 47102 of title 49, United States Code) in
the United States and proposed action to improve airport
lighting, provide better signs, and improve runway and
taxiway markings; and
(B) shall address the increased runway safety risk
associated with the expected increased volume of air traffic.
(b) Process.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall develop a
process for tracking and investigating operational errors,
losses of standard separation, and runway incursions that
includes procedures for--
(1) identifying who is responsible for tracking operational
errors, losses of standard separation, and runway incursions,
including a process for lower level employees to report to
higher supervisory levels and for frontline managers to
receive the information in a timely manner;
(2) conducting periodic random audits of the oversight
process; and
(3) ensuring proper accountability.
(c) Plan for Installation and Deployment of Systems To
Provide Alerts of Potential Runway Incursions.--Not later
than December 31, 2011, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report containing a plan for the installation and
deployment of systems the Administrator is installing to
alert controllers or flight
[[Page H2154]]
crewmembers, or both, of potential runway incursions. The
plan shall be integrated into the annual NextGen
Implementation Plan document of the Administration or any
successor document.
SEC. 307. IMPROVED PILOT LICENSES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 9 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall begin to issue improved pilot
licenses consistent with the requirements of title 49, United
States Code, and title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
(b) Requirements.--Improved pilot licenses issued under
subsection (a) shall--
(1) be resistant to tampering, alteration, and
counterfeiting;
(2) include a photograph of the individual to whom the
license is issued; and
(3) be capable of accommodating a digital photograph, a
biometric identifier, and any other unique identifier that
the Administrator considers necessary.
(c) Tampering.--To the extent practical, the Administrator
shall develop methods to determine or reveal whether any
component or security feature of a license issued under
subsection (a) has been tampered with, altered, or
counterfeited.
(d) Use of Designees.--The Administrator may use designees
to carry out subsection (a) to the extent feasible in order
to minimize the burdens on pilots.
(e) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a report on the issuance of improved pilot licenses
under this section.
(2) Expiration.--The Administrator shall not be required to
submit annual reports under this subsection after the date on
which the Administrator begins issuing improved pilot
licenses under this section or December 31, 2015, whichever
occurs first.
SEC. 308. FLIGHT ATTENDANT FATIGUE.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration, acting through the Civil Aerospace Medical
Institute, shall conduct a study on the issue of flight
attendant fatigue.
(b) Contents.--The study shall include the following:
(1) A survey of field operations of flight attendants.
(2) A study of incident reports regarding flight attendant
fatigue.
(3) A review of international policies and practices
regarding flight limitations and rest of flight attendants.
(4) An analysis of potential benefits of training flight
attendants regarding fatigue.
(c) Report.--Not later than September 30, 2012, the
Administrator shall submit to Congress a report on the
results of the study.
SEC. 309. FLIGHT STANDARDS EVALUATION PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall modify the Flight Standards
Evaluation Program--
(1) to include periodic and random reviews as part of the
Administration's oversight of air carriers; and
(2) to prohibit an individual from participating in a
review or audit of an office with responsibility for an air
carrier under the program if the individual, at any time in
the 5-year period preceding the date of the review or audit,
had responsibility for inspecting, or overseeing the
inspection of, the operations of that carrier.
(b) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the date
of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter, the
Administrator shall submit to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report on the Flight Standards Evaluation
Program, including the Administrator's findings and
recommendations with respect to the program.
(c) Flight Standards Evaluation Program Defined.--In this
section, the term ``Flight Standards Evaluation Program''
means the program established by the Federal Aviation
Administration in FS 1100.1B CHG3, including any subsequent
revisions thereto.
SEC. 310. COCKPIT SMOKE.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a study
on the effectiveness of oversight activities of the Federal
Aviation Administration relating to the use of new
technologies to prevent or mitigate the effects of dense,
continuous smoke in the cockpit of a commercial aircraft.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to Congress a report on the results of the study.
SEC. 311. SAFETY OF AIR AMBULANCE OPERATIONS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 44730. Helicopter air ambulance operations
``(a) Compliance Regulations.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
section, part 135 certificate holders providing air ambulance
services shall comply, whenever medical personnel are onboard
the aircraft, with regulations pertaining to weather minimums
and flight and duty time under part 135.
``(2) Exception.--If a certificate holder described in
paragraph (1) is operating, or carrying out training, under
instrument flight rules, the weather reporting requirement at
the destination shall not apply until such time as the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
determines that portable, reliable, and accurate ground-based
weather measuring and reporting systems are available.
``(b) Rulemaking.--The Administrator shall conduct a
rulemaking proceeding to improve the safety of flight
crewmembers, medical personnel, and passengers onboard
helicopters providing air ambulance services under part 135.
``(c) Matters To Be Addressed.--In conducting the
rulemaking proceeding under subsection (b), the Administrator
shall address the following:
``(1) Flight request and dispatch procedures, including
performance-based flight dispatch procedures.
``(2) Pilot training standards, including--
``(A) mandatory training requirements, including a minimum
time for completing the training requirements;
``(B) training subject areas, such as communications
procedures and appropriate technology use; and
``(C) establishment of training standards in--
``(i) crew resource management;
``(ii) flight risk evaluation;
``(iii) preventing controlled flight into terrain;
``(iv) recovery from inadvertent flight into instrument
meteorological conditions;
``(v) operational control of the pilot in command; and
``(vi) use of flight simulation training devices and line-
oriented flight training.
``(3) Safety-enhancing technology and equipment,
including--
``(A) helicopter terrain awareness and warning systems;
``(B) radar altimeters;
``(C) devices that perform the function of flight data
recorders and cockpit voice recorders, to the extent
feasible; and
``(D) safety equipment that should be worn or used by
flight crewmembers and medical personnel on a flight,
including the possible use of shoulder harnesses, helmets,
seatbelts, and fire resistant clothing to enhance crash
survivability.
``(4) Such other matters as the Administrator considers
appropriate.
``(d) Minimum Requirements.--In issuing a final rule under
subsection (b), the Administrator, at a minimum, shall
provide for the following:
``(1) Flight risk evaluation program.--The Administrator
shall ensure that a part 135 certificate holder providing
helicopter air ambulance services--
``(A) establishes a flight risk evaluation program, based
on FAA Notice 8000.301 issued by the Administration on August
1, 2005, including any updates thereto;
``(B) as part of the flight risk evaluation program,
develops a checklist for use by pilots in determining whether
a flight request should be accepted; and
``(C) requires the pilots of the certificate holder to use
the checklist.
``(2) Operational control center.--The Administrator shall
ensure that a part 135 certificate holder providing
helicopter air ambulance services using 10 or more
helicopters has an operational control center that meets such
requirements as the Administrator may prescribe.
``(e) Rulemaking.--The Administrator shall--
``(1) not later than 180 days after the date of enactment
of this section, issue a notice of proposed rulemaking under
subsection (b); and
``(2) not later than 16 months after the last day of the
comment period on the proposed rule, issue a final rule.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Part 135.--The term `part 135' means part 135 of
title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
``(2) Part 135 certificate holder.--The term `part 135
certificate holder' means a person holding a certificate
issued under part 135.
``Sec. 44731. Collection of data on helicopter air ambulance
operations
``(a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall require a part 135 certificate
holder providing helicopter air ambulance services to submit
to the Administrator, not later than one year after the date
of enactment of this section, and annually thereafter, a
report containing, at a minimum, the following data:
``(1) The number of helicopters that the certificate holder
uses to provide helicopter air ambulance services and the
base locations of the helicopters.
``(2) The number of flights and hours flown, by
registration number, during which helicopters operated by the
certificate holder were providing helicopter air ambulance
services.
``(3) The number of flight requests for a helicopter
providing air ambulance services that were accepted or
declined by the certificate holder and the type of each such
flight request (such as scene response, interfacility
transport, organ transport, or ferry or repositioning
flight).
``(4) The number of accidents, if any, involving
helicopters operated by the certificate holder while
providing air ambulance services and a description of the
accidents.
``(5) The number of flights and hours flown under
instrument flight rules by helicopters operated by the
certificate holder while providing air ambulance services.
``(6) The time of day of each flight flown by helicopters
operated by the certificate holder while providing air
ambulance services.
``(7) The number of incidents, if any, in which a
helicopter was not directly dispatched and arrived to
transport patients but was not utilized for patient
transport.
``(b) Reporting Period.--Data contained in a report
submitted by a part 135 certificate holder under subsection
(a) shall relate to such reporting period as the
Administrator determines appropriate.
[[Page H2155]]
``(c) Database.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this section, the Administrator shall develop a
method to collect and store the data collected under
subsection (a), including a method to protect the
confidentiality of any trade secret or proprietary
information provided in response to this section.
``(d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 24 months after
the date of enactment of this section, and annually
thereafter, the Administrator shall submit to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report containing a summary of
the data collected under subsection (a).
``(e) Part 135 Certificate Holder Defined.--In this
section, the term `part 135 certificate holder' means a
person holding a certificate issued under part 135 of title
14, Code of Federal Regulations.''.
(b) Authorized Expenditures.--Section 106(k)(2)(C) (as
redesignated by this Act) is amended by inserting before the
period the following: ``and the development and maintenance
of helicopter approach procedures''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 447 is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``444730. Helicopter air ambulance operations.
``444731. Collection of data on helicopter air ambulance operations.''.
SEC. 312. OFF-AIRPORT, LOW-ALTITUDE AIRCRAFT WEATHER
OBSERVATION TECHNOLOGY.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall conduct a review of off-airport, low-
altitude aircraft weather observation technologies.
(b) Specific Review.--The review shall include, at a
minimum, an examination of off-airport, low-altitude weather
reporting needs, an assessment of technical alternatives
(including automated weather observation stations), an
investment analysis, and recommendations for improving
weather reporting.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report containing the results of the review.
SEC. 313. FEASIBILITY OF REQUIRING HELICOPTER PILOTS TO USE
NIGHT VISION GOGGLES.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall carry out a study on the feasibility of
requiring pilots of helicopters providing air ambulance
services under part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, to use night vision goggles during nighttime
operations.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the study, the
Administrator shall consult with owners and operators of
helicopters providing air ambulance services under such part
135 and aviation safety professionals to determine the
benefits, financial considerations, and risks associated with
requiring the use of night vision goggles.
(c) Report to Congress.--Not later than one year after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
results of the study.
SEC. 314. PROHIBITION ON PERSONAL USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES
ON FLIGHT DECK.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 44732. Prohibition on personal use of electronic
devices on flight deck
``(a) In General.--It is unlawful for a flight crewmember
of an aircraft used to provide air transportation under part
121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, to use a
personal wireless communications device or laptop computer
while at the flight crewmember's duty station on the flight
deck of such an aircraft while the aircraft is being
operated.
``(b) Exceptions.--Subsection (a) shall not apply to the
use of a personal wireless communications device or laptop
computer for a purpose directly related to operation of the
aircraft, or for emergency, safety-related, or employment-
related communications, in accordance with procedures
established by the air carrier and the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration.
``(c) Enforcement.--In addition to the penalties provided
under section 46301 applicable to any violation of this
section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration may enforce compliance with this section under
section 44709 by amending, modifying, suspending, or revoking
a certificate under this chapter.
``(d) Personal Wireless Communications Device Defined.--In
this section, the term `personal wireless communications
device' means a device through which personal wireless
services (as defined in section 332(c)(7)(C)(i) of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 332(c)(7)(C)(i))) are
transmitted.''.
(b) Penalty.--Section 44711(a) is amended--
(1) by striking ``or'' after the semicolon in paragraph
(8);
(2) by striking ``title.'' in paragraph (9) and inserting
``title; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(10) violate section 44732 or any regulation issued
thereunder.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 447 (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44732. Prohibition on personal use of electronic devices on flight
deck.''.
(d) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall initiate a rulemaking procedure
for regulations to carry out section 44733 of title 49,
United States Code, and shall issue a final rule thereunder
not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act.
(e) Study.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall review relevant air carrier data and
carry out a study--
(A) to identify common sources of distraction for the
flight crewmembers on the flight deck of a commercial
aircraft; and
(B) to determine the safety impacts of such distractions.
(2) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives a report that contains--
(A) the findings of the study conducted under paragraph
(1); and
(B) recommendations regarding how to reduce distractions
for flight crewmembers on the flight deck of a commercial
aircraft.
SEC. 315. NONCERTIFICATED MAINTENANCE PROVIDERS.
(a) Regulations.--Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall issue regulations requiring
that covered work on an aircraft used to provide air
transportation under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, be performed by persons in accordance with
subsection (b).
(b) Persons Authorized To Perform Certain Work.--A person
may perform covered work on aircraft used to provide air
transportation under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, only if the person is employed by--
(1) a part 121 air carrier;
(2) a part 145 repair station or a person authorized under
section 43.17 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations; or
(3) subject to subsection (c), a person that--
(A) provides contract maintenance workers, services, or
maintenance functions to a part 145 repair station or part
121 air carrier; and
(B) meets the requirements of the part 121 air carrier or
the part 145 repair station.
(c) Terms and Conditions.--Covered work performed by a
person who is employed by a person described in subsection
(b)(3) shall be subject to the following terms and
conditions:
(1) The part 121 air carrier or the part 145 repair station
shall be directly in charge of the covered work being
performed.
(2) The covered work shall be carried out in accordance
with the part 121 air carrier's maintenance manual.
(d) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
(1) Covered work.--The term ``covered work'' means a
required inspection item, as defined by the Administrator.
(2) Part 121 air carrier.--The term ``part 121 air
carrier'' means an air carrier that holds a certificate
issued under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.
(3) Part 145 repair station.--The term ``part 145 repair
station'' means a repair station that holds a certificate
issued under part 145 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.
SEC. 316. INSPECTION OF FOREIGN REPAIR STATIONS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 44733. Inspection of foreign repair stations
``(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date
of enactment of this section, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration shall establish and implement
a safety assessment system for each part 145 repair station
based on the type, scope, and complexity of work being
performed by the repair station, which shall--
``(1) ensure that repair stations outside the United States
are subject to appropriate inspections that are based on
identified risks and consistent with United States
requirements;
``(2) accept consideration of inspection results and
findings submitted by foreign civil aviation authorities
operating under a maintenance safety or maintenance
implementation agreement with the United States in meeting
the requirements of the safety assessment system; and
``(3) require all maintenance safety or maintenance
implementation agreements with the United States to provide
an opportunity for the Federal Aviation Administration to
conduct independent inspections of covered part 145 repair
stations when safety concerns warrant such inspections.
``(b) Notice to Congress of Negotiations.--The
Administrator shall notify the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives on or before the 30th day after initiating
formal negotiations with a foreign aviation authority or
other appropriate foreign government agency on a new
maintenance safety or maintenance implementation agreement.
``(c) Annual Report.--Not later than one year after the
date of enactment of this section, and annually thereafter,
the Administrator shall publish a report on the
Administration's oversight of part 145 repair stations and
implementation of the safety assessment system required by
subsection (a), which shall--
``(1) describe in detail any improvements in the Federal
Aviation Administration's ability to identify and track where
part 121 air carrier repair work is performed;
``(2) include a staffing model to determine the best
placement of inspectors and the number of inspectors needed
for the oversight and implementation;
[[Page H2156]]
``(3) describe the training provided to inspectors with
respect to the oversight and implementation;
``(4) include an assessment of the quality of monitoring
and surveillance by the Federal Aviation Administration of
work provided by its inspectors and the inspectors of foreign
authorities operating under a maintenance safety or
maintenance implementation agreement with the United States;
and
``(5) specify the number of sample inspections performed by
Federal Aviation Administration inspectors at each repair
station that is covered by a maintenance safety or
maintenance implementation agreement with the United States.
``(d) Alcohol and Controlled Substance Testing Program
Requirements.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary of State and the Secretary
of Transportation shall request, jointly, the governments of
foreign countries that are members of the International Civil
Aviation Organization to establish international standards
for alcohol and controlled substances testing of persons that
perform safety-sensitive maintenance functions on commercial
air carrier aircraft.
``(2) Application to part 121 aircraft work.--Not later
than one year after the date of enactment of this section,
the Administrator shall promulgate a proposed rule requiring
that all part 145 repair station employees responsible for
safety-sensitive maintenance functions on part 121 air
carrier aircraft are subject to an alcohol and controlled
substances testing program that is determined acceptable by
the Administrator and is consistent with the applicable laws
of the country in which the repair station is located.
``(e) Inspections.--The Administrator shall require part
145 repair stations to be inspected as frequently as
determined warranted by the safety assessment system required
by subsection (a), regardless of where the station is
located, and in a manner consistent with United States
obligations under international agreements.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Part 121 air carrier.--The term `part 121 air
carrier' means an air carrier that holds a certificate issued
under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
``(2) Part 145 repair station.--The term `part 145 repair
station' means a repair station that holds a certificate
issued under part 145 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 447 (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44733. Inspection of foreign repair stations.''.
SEC. 317. SUNSET OF LINE CHECK.
Section 44729(h) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) Sunset of line check.--Paragraph (2) shall cease to
be effective following the one-year period beginning on the
date of enactment of the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act
of 2011 unless the Secretary certifies that the requirements
of paragraph (2) are necessary to ensure safety.''.
Subtitle B--Unmanned Aircraft Systems
SEC. 321. DEFINITIONS.
In this subtitle, the following definitions apply:
(1) Certificate of waiver; certificate of authorization.--
The term ``certificate of waiver'' or ``certificate of
authorization'' means a Federal Aviation Administration grant
of approval for a specific flight operation.
(2) Sense and avoid capability.--The term ``sense and avoid
capability'' means the capability of an unmanned aircraft to
remain a safe distance from and to avoid collisions with
other airborne aircraft.
(3) Public unmanned aircraft system.--The term ``public
unmanned aircraft system'' means an unmanned aircraft system
that meets the qualifications and conditions required for
operation of a public aircraft, as defined by section 40102
of title 49, United States Code.
(4) Small unmanned aircraft.--The term ``small unmanned
aircraft'' means an unmanned aircraft weighing less than 55
pounds.
(5) Test range.--The term ``test range'' means a defined
geographic area where research and development are conducted.
(6) Unmanned aircraft.--The term ``unmanned aircraft''
means an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of
direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.
(7) Unmanned aircraft system.--The term ``unmanned aircraft
system'' means an unmanned aircraft and associated elements
(including communication links and the components that
control the unmanned aircraft) that are required for the
pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the
national airspace system.
SEC. 322. COMMERCIAL UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
PLAN.
(a) Integration Plan.--
(1) Comprehensive plan.--Not later than 270 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Transportation, in consultation with representatives of the
aviation industry and the unmanned aircraft systems industry,
shall develop a comprehensive plan to safely integrate
commercial unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system.
(2) Minimum requirements.--In developing the plan under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall, at a minimum--
(A) review technologies and research that will assist in
facilitating the safe integration of commercial unmanned
aircraft systems into the national airspace system;
(B) provide recommendations or projections for the
rulemaking to be conducted under subsection (b)--
(i) to define the acceptable standards for operations and
certification of commercial unmanned aircraft systems;
(ii) to ensure that commercial unmanned aircraft systems
include a sense and avoid capability, if necessary for safety
purposes; and
(iii) to develop standards and requirements for the
operator and pilot of a commercial unmanned aircraft system,
including standards and requirements for registration and
licensing;
(C) recommend how best to enhance the technologies and
subsystems necessary to provide for the safe and routine
operations of commercial unmanned aircraft systems in the
national airspace system; and
(D) recommend how a phased-in approach for the integration
of commercial unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system can best be achieved and a timeline upon
which such a phase-in shall occur.
(3) Deadline.--The plan to be developed under paragraph (1)
shall provide for the safe integration of commercial unmanned
aircraft systems into the national airspace system not later
than September 30, 2015.
(4) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall submit to
Congress--
(A) not later than one year after the date of enactment of
this Act, a copy of the plan developed under paragraph (1);
and
(B) annually thereafter, a report on the activities of the
Secretary under this section.
(b) Rulemaking.--Not later than 18 months after the date on
which the integration plan is submitted to Congress under
subsection (a)(4), the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall publish in the Federal Register a notice
of proposed rulemaking to implement the recommendations of
the integration plan.
SEC. 323. SPECIAL RULES FOR CERTAIN UNMANNED AIRCRAFT
SYSTEMS.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall determine if
certain unmanned aircraft systems may operate safely in the
national airspace system. The Secretary may make such
determination before completion of the plan and rulemaking
required by section 322 of this Act or the guidance required
by section 324 of this Act.
(b) Assessment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems.--In making the
determination under subsection (a), the Secretary shall
determine, at a minimum--
(1) which types of unmanned aircraft systems, if any, as a
result of their size, weight, speed, operational capability,
proximity to airports and population areas, and operation
within visual line-of-sight do not create a hazard to users
of the national airspace system or the public or pose a
threat to national security; and
(2) whether a certificate of waiver, certificate of
authorization, or airworthiness certification under section
44704 of title 49, United States Code, is required for the
operation of unmanned aircraft systems identified under
paragraph (1).
(c) Requirements for Safe Operation.--If the Secretary
determines under this section that certain unmanned aircraft
systems may operate safely in the national airspace system,
the Secretary shall establish requirements for the safe
operation of such aircraft systems in the national airspace
system.
SEC. 324. PUBLIC UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
(a) Guidance.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidance
regarding the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems
to--
(1) expedite the issuance of a certificate of authorization
process;
(2) provide for a collaborative process with public
agencies to allow for an incremental expansion of access to
the national airspace system as technology matures. the
necessary safety analysis and data become available, and
until standards are completed and technology issues are
resolved; and
(3) facilitate the capability of public agencies to develop
and use test ranges, subject to operating restrictions
required by the Federal Aviation Administration, to test and
operate unmanned aircraft systems.
(b) Standards for Operation and Certification.--Not later
than December 31, 2015, the Secretary shall develop and
implement operational and certification standards for
operation of public unmanned aircraft systems.
SEC. 325. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS TEST RANGES.
(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall establish a program to
integrate unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system at 4 test ranges.
(b) Program Requirements.--In establishing the program
under subsection (a), the Administrator shall--
(1) safely designate nonexclusionary airspace for
integrated manned and unmanned flight operations in the
national airspace system;
(2) develop certification standards and air traffic
requirements for unmanned flight operations at test ranges;
(3) coordinate with and leverage the resources of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the
Department of Defense;
(4) address both commercial and public unmanned aircraft
systems;
(5) ensure that the program is coordinated with the Next
Generation Air Transportation System; and
(6) provide for verification of the safety of unmanned
aircraft systems and related navigation procedures before
integration into the national airspace system.
(c) Test Range Locations.--In determining the location of
the 4 test ranges of the program under subsection (a), the
Administrator shall--
(1) take into consideration geographic and climatic
diversity; and
[[Page H2157]]
(2) after consulting with the Administrator of the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Secretary of the
Air Force, take into consideration the location of available
research radars.
Subtitle C--Safety and Protections
SEC. 331. POSTEMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS FOR FLIGHT STANDARDS
INSPECTORS.
(a) In General.--Section 44711 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(d) Postemployment Restrictions for Flight Standards
Inspectors.--
``(1) Prohibition.--A person holding an operating
certificate issued under title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, may not knowingly employ, or make a contractual
arrangement that permits, an individual to act as an agent or
representative of the certificate holder in any matter before
the Federal Aviation Administration if the individual, in the
preceding 2-year period--
``(A) served as, or was responsible for oversight of, a
flight standards inspector of the Administration; and
``(B) had responsibility to inspect, or oversee inspection
of, the operations of the certificate holder.
``(2) Written and oral communications.--For purposes of
paragraph (1), an individual shall be considered to be acting
as an agent or representative of a certificate holder in a
matter before the Administration if the individual makes any
written or oral communication on behalf of the certificate
holder to the Administration (or any of its officers or
employees) in connection with a particular matter, whether or
not involving a specific party and without regard to whether
the individual has participated in, or had responsibility
for, the particular matter while serving as a flight
standards inspector of the Administration.''.
(b) Applicability.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall not apply to an individual employed by a certificate
holder as of the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 332. REVIEW OF AIR TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT SYSTEM
DATABASE.
(a) Reviews.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall establish a process by which the air
transportation oversight system database of the
Administration is reviewed by regional teams of employees of
the Administration, including at least one employee on each
team representing aviation safety inspectors, on a monthly
basis to ensure that--
(1) any trends in regulatory compliance are identified; and
(2) appropriate corrective actions are taken in accordance
with Administration regulations, advisory directives,
policies, and procedures.
(b) Monthly Team Reports.--
(1) In general.--A regional team of employees conducting a
monthly review of the air transportation oversight system
database under subsection (a) shall submit to the
Administrator, the Associate Administrator for Aviation
Safety, and the Director of Flight Standards Service a report
each month on the results of the review.
(2) Contents.--A report submitted under paragraph (1) shall
identify--
(A) any trends in regulatory compliance discovered by the
team of employees in conducting the monthly review; and
(B) any corrective actions taken or proposed to be taken in
response to the trends.
(c) Biannual Reports to Congress.--The Administrator, on a
biannual basis, shall submit to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of the
reviews of the air transportation oversight system database
conducted under this section, including copies of reports
received under subsection (b).
SEC. 333. IMPROVED VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE REPORTING SYSTEM.
(a) Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program Defined.--In
this section, the term ``Voluntary Disclosure Reporting
Program'' means the program established by the Federal
Aviation Administration through Advisory Circular 00-58A,
dated September 8, 2006, including any subsequent revisions
thereto.
(b) Verification.--The Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall modify the Voluntary Disclosure
Reporting Program to require inspectors to--
(1) verify that air carriers are implementing comprehensive
solutions to correct the underlying causes of the violations
voluntarily disclosed by such air carriers; and
(2) confirm, before approving a final report of a
violation, that a violation with the same root causes, has
not been previously discovered by an inspector or self-
disclosed by the air carrier.
(c) Supervisory Review of Voluntary Self-disclosures.--The
Administrator shall establish a process by which voluntary
self-disclosures received from air carriers are reviewed and
approved by a supervisor after the initial review by an
inspector.
(d) Inspector General Study.--
(1) In general.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation shall conduct a study of the Voluntary
Disclosure Reporting Program.
(2) Review.--In conducting the study, the Inspector General
shall examine, at a minimum, if the Administration--
(A) conducts comprehensive reviews of voluntary disclosure
reports before closing a voluntary disclosure report under
the provisions of the program;
(B) evaluates the effectiveness of corrective actions taken
by air carriers; and
(C) effectively prevents abuse of the voluntary disclosure
reporting program through its secondary review of self-
disclosures before they are accepted and closed by the
Administration.
(3) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Inspector General shall submit to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the study conducted under this section.
SEC. 334. AVIATION WHISTLEBLOWER INVESTIGATION OFFICE.
Section 106 (as amended by this Act) is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(t) Aviation Safety Whistleblower Investigation Office.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established in the Federal
Aviation Administration (in this section referred to as the
`Agency') an Aviation Safety Whistleblower Investigation
Office (in this subsection referred to as the `Office').
``(2) Director.--
``(A) Appointment.--The head of the Office shall be the
Director, who shall be appointed by the Secretary of
Transportation.
``(B) Qualifications.--The Director shall have a
demonstrated ability in investigations and knowledge of or
experience in aviation.
``(C) Term.--The Director shall be appointed for a term of
5 years.
``(D) Vacancy.--Any individual appointed to fill a vacancy
in the position of the Director occurring before the
expiration of the term for which the individual's predecessor
was appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of that
term.
``(3) Complaints and investigations.--
``(A) Authority of director.--The Director shall--
``(i) receive complaints and information submitted by
employees of persons holding certificates issued under title
14, Code of Federal Regulations, and employees of the Agency
concerning the possible existence of an activity relating to
a violation of an order, regulation, or standard of the
Agency or any other provision of Federal law relating to
aviation safety;
``(ii) assess complaints and information submitted under
clause (i) and determine whether a substantial likelihood
exists that a violation of an order, regulation, or standard
of the Agency or any other provision of Federal law relating
to aviation safety has occurred; and
``(iii) based on findings of the assessment conducted under
clause (ii), make recommendations to the Administrator in
writing for further investigation or corrective actions.
``(B) Disclosure of identities.--The Director shall not
disclose the identity of an individual who submits a
complaint or information under subparagraph (A)(i) unless--
``(i) the individual consents to the disclosure in writing;
or
``(ii) the Director determines, in the course of an
investigation, that the disclosure is required by regulation,
statute, or court order, or is otherwise unavoidable, in
which case the Director shall provide the individual
reasonable advanced notice of the disclosure.
``(C) Independence of director.--The Secretary, the
Administrator, or any officer or employee of the Agency may
not prevent or prohibit the Director from initiating,
carrying out, or completing any assessment of a complaint or
information submitted under subparagraph (A)(i) or from
reporting to Congress on any such assessment.
``(D) Access to information.--In conducting an assessment
of a complaint or information submitted under subparagraph
(A)(i), the Director shall have access to all records,
reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations,
and other material necessary to determine whether a
substantial likelihood exists that a violation of an order,
regulation, or standard of the Agency or any other provision
of Federal law relating to aviation safety may have occurred.
``(4) Responses to recommendations.--Not later than 60 days
after the date on which the Administrator receives a report
with respect to an investigation, the Administrator shall
respond to a recommendation made by the Director under
subparagraph (A)(iii) in writing and retain records related
to any further investigations or corrective actions taken in
response to the recommendation.
``(5) Incident reports.--If the Director determines there
is a substantial likelihood that a violation of an order,
regulation, or standard of the Agency or any other provision
of Federal law relating to aviation safety has occurred that
requires immediate corrective action, the Director shall
report the potential violation expeditiously to the
Administrator and the Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation.
``(6) Reporting of criminal violations to inspector
general.--If the Director has reasonable grounds to believe
that there has been a violation of Federal criminal law, the
Director shall report the violation expeditiously to the
Inspector General.
``(7) Annual reports to congress.--Not later than October 1
of each year, the Director shall submit to Congress a report
containing--
``(A) information on the number of submissions of
complaints and information received by the Director under
paragraph (3)(A)(i) in the preceding 12-month period;
``(B) summaries of those submissions;
``(C) summaries of further investigations and corrective
actions recommended in response to the submissions; and
``(D) summaries of the responses of the Administrator to
such recommendations.''.
SEC. 335. DUTY PERIODS AND FLIGHT TIME LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE
TO FLIGHT CREWMEMBERS.
(a) Rulemaking on Applicability of Part 121 Duty Periods
and Flight Time Limitations to Part 91 Operations.--Not later
than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
initiate a rulemaking proceeding, if such a proceeding has
not already been initiated, to require a flight crewmember
who is employed by an air carrier conducting
[[Page H2158]]
operations under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, and who accepts an additional assignment for
flying under part 91 of such title from the air carrier or
from any other air carrier conducting operations under part
121 or 135 of such title, to apply the period of the
additional assignment (regardless of whether the assignment
is performed by the flight crewmember before or after an
assignment to fly under part 121 of such title) toward any
limitation applicable to the flight crewmember relating to
duty periods or flight times under part 121 of such title.
(b) Rulemaking on Applicability of Part 135 Duty Periods
and Flight Time Limitations to Part 91 Operations.--Not later
than one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall initiate a rulemaking proceeding to
require a flight crewmember who is employed by an air carrier
conducting operations under part 135 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, and who accepts an additional assignment
for flying under part 91 of such title from the air carrier
or any other air carrier conducting operations under part 121
or 135 of such title, to apply the period of the additional
assignment (regardless of whether the assignment is performed
by the flight crewmember before or after an assignment to fly
under part 135 of such title) toward any limitation
applicable to the flight crewmember relating to duty periods
or flight times under part 135 of such title.
(c) Separate Rulemaking Proceedings Required.--The
rulemaking proceeding required under subsection (b) shall be
separate from the rulemaking proceeding required under
subsection (a).
TITLE IV--AIR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
Subtitle A--Essential Air Service
SEC. 401. ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE MARKETING.
Section 41733(c)(1) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (F);
(2) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D); and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following:
``(E) whether the air carrier has included a plan in its
proposal to market its services to the community; and''.
SEC. 402. NOTICE TO COMMUNITIES PRIOR TO TERMINATION OF
ELIGIBILITY FOR SUBSIDIZED ESSENTIAL AIR
SERVICE.
Section 41733 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(f) Notice to Communities Prior to Termination of
Eligibility.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall notify each
community receiving basic essential air service for which
compensation is being paid under this subchapter on or before
the 45th day before issuing any final decision to end the
payment of such compensation due to a determination by the
Secretary that providing such service requires a rate of
subsidy per passenger in excess of the subsidy cap.
``(2) Procedures to avoid termination.--The Secretary shall
establish, by order, procedures by which each community
notified of an impending loss of subsidy under paragraph (1)
may work directly with an air carrier to ensure that the air
carrier is able to submit a proposal to the Secretary to
provide essential air service to such community for an amount
of compensation that would not exceed the subsidy cap.
``(3) Assistance provided.--The Secretary shall provide, by
order, to each community notified under paragraph (1)
information regarding--
``(A) the procedures established pursuant to paragraph (2);
and
``(B) the maximum amount of compensation that could be
provided under this subchapter to an air carrier serving such
community that would comply with the subsidy cap.
``(4) Subsidy cap defined.--In this subsection, the term
`subsidy cap' means the subsidy cap established by section
332 of Public Law 106-69 (113 Stat. 1022).''.
SEC. 403. ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE CONTRACT GUIDELINES.
(a) Compensation Guidelines.--Section 41737(a)(1) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B);
(2) in subparagraph (C) by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) include provisions under which the Secretary may
encourage an air carrier to improve air service for which
compensation is being paid under this subchapter by
incorporating financial incentives in an essential air
service contract based on specified performance goals,
including goals related to improving on-time performance,
reducing the number of flight cancellations, establishing
convenient connections to flights providing service beyond
hub airports, and increasing marketing efforts; and
``(E) include provisions under which the Secretary may
execute a long-term essential air service contract to
encourage an air carrier to provide air service to an
eligible place if it would be in the public interest to do
so.''.
(b) Deadline for Issuance of Revised Guidance.--Not later
than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Secretary of Transportation shall issue revised guidelines
governing the rate of compensation payable under subchapter
II of chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, that
incorporate the amendments made by this section.
(c) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
issuance of revised guidelines pursuant to subsection (b),
the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Transportation
and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a report on the extent to which the revised guidelines
have been implemented and the impact, if any, such
implementation has had on air carrier performance and
community satisfaction with air service for which
compensation is being paid under subchapter II of chapter 417
of title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 404. ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE REFORM.
(a) Authorization.--Section 41742(a)(1) is amended--
(1) by striking ``the sum of $50,000,000 is'' and inserting
``the following sums are''; and
(2) by striking ``subchapter for each fiscal year.'' and
inserting ``subchapter:
``(A) $50,000,000 for each fiscal year through fiscal year
2013.
``(B) The amount necessary, as determined by the Secretary,
to carry out the essential air service program in Alaska and
Hawaii for fiscal year 2014 and each fiscal year
thereafter.''.
(b) Additional Funds.--Section 41742(a)(2) is amended by
striking ``there is authorized to be appropriated $77,000,000
for each fiscal year'' and inserting ``there is authorized to
be appropriated out of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund
established under section 9502 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 $97,500,000 for fiscal year 2011, $60,000,000 for
fiscal year 2012, and $30,000,000 for fiscal year 2013''.
(c) Administering Program Within Available Funding.--
Section 41742(b) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Administering Program Within Available Funding.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary is
authorized to take such actions as may be necessary to
administer the essential air service program under this
subchapter within the amount of funding made available for
the program.''.
SEC. 405. SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE.
(a) Priorities.--Section 41743(c)(5) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
(2) in subparagraph (E) by striking ``fashion.'' and
inserting ``fashion; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) multiple communities cooperate to submit a regional
or multistate application to consolidate air service into one
regional airport.''.
(b) Authority To Make Agreements.--Section 41743(e) is
amended to read as follows:
``(e) Authority To Make Agreements.--Subject to the
availability of amounts made available under section
41742(a)(4)(A), the Secretary may make agreements to provide
assistance under this section.''.
SEC. 406. ADJUSTMENTS TO COMPENSATION FOR SIGNIFICANTLY
INCREASED COSTS.
(a) Emergency Across-The-Board Adjustment.--Subject to the
availability of funds, the Secretary of Transportation may
increase the rates of compensation payable to air carriers
under subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, United States
Code, to compensate such carriers for increased aviation fuel
costs without regard to any agreement or requirement relating
to the renegotiation of contracts or any notice requirement
under section 41734 of such title.
(b) Expedited Process for Adjustments to Individual
Contracts.--
(1) In general.--Section 41734(d) is amended by striking
``continue to pay'' and all that follows through
``compensation sufficient'' and inserting ``provide the
carrier with compensation sufficient''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall apply to compensation to air carriers for air service
provided after the 30th day following the date of enactment
of this Act.
(c) Subsidy Cap.--Subject to the availability of funds, the
Secretary may waive, on a case-by-case basis, the subsidy-
per-passenger cap established by section 332 of Public Law
106-69 (113 Stat. 1022). A waiver issued under this
subsection shall remain in effect for a limited period of
time, as determined by the Secretary.
SEC. 407. REPEAL OF EAS LOCAL PARTICIPATION PROGRAM.
Section 41747, and the item relating to section 41747 in
the analysis for chapter 417, are repealed.
SEC. 408. SUNSET OF ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 417 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 41749. Sunset
``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b),
the authority of the Secretary of Transportation to carry out
the essential air service program under this subchapter shall
sunset on October 1, 2013.
``(b) Alaska and Hawaii.--The Secretary may continue to
carry out the essential air service program under this
subchapter in Alaska and Hawaii following the sunset date
specified in subsection (a).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 417 is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 41748
the following:
``41749. Sunset.''.
Subtitle B--Passenger Air Service Improvements
SEC. 421. SMOKING PROHIBITION.
(a) In General.--Section 41706 is amended--
(1) in the section heading by striking ``scheduled'' and
inserting ``passenger''; and
(2) by striking subsections (a) and (b) and inserting the
following:
``(a) Smoking Prohibition in Interstate and Intrastate Air
Transportation.--An individual may not smoke--
``(1) in an aircraft in scheduled passenger interstate or
intrastate air transportation; or
``(2) in an aircraft in nonscheduled passenger interstate
or intrastate air transportation, if a flight attendant is a
required crewmember on the aircraft (as determined by the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration).
``(b) Smoking Prohibition in Foreign Air Transportation.--
The Secretary of Transportation shall require all air
carriers and foreign air carriers to prohibit smoking--
[[Page H2159]]
``(1) in an aircraft in scheduled passenger foreign air
transportation; and
``(2) in an aircraft in nonscheduled passenger foreign air
transportation, if a flight attendant is a required
crewmember on the aircraft (as determined by the
Administrator or a foreign government).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 417 is
amended by striking the item relating to section 41706 and
inserting the following:
``41706. Prohibitions against smoking on passenger flights.''.
SEC. 422. MONTHLY AIR CARRIER REPORTS.
(a) In General.--Section 41708 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(c) Diverted and Cancelled Flights.--
``(1) Monthly reports.--The Secretary shall require an air
carrier referred to in paragraph (2) to file with the
Secretary a monthly report on each flight of the air carrier
that is diverted from its scheduled destination to another
airport and each flight of the air carrier that departs the
gate at the airport at which the flight originates but is
cancelled before wheels-off time.
``(2) Applicability.--An air carrier that is required to
file a monthly airline service quality performance report
pursuant to part 234 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, shall be subject to the requirement of paragraph
(1).
``(3) Contents.--A monthly report filed by an air carrier
under paragraph (1) shall include, at a minimum, the
following information:
``(A) For a diverted flight--
``(i) the flight number of the diverted flight;
``(ii) the scheduled destination of the flight;
``(iii) the date and time of the flight;
``(iv) the airport to which the flight was diverted;
``(v) wheels-on time at the diverted airport;
``(vi) the time, if any, passengers deplaned the aircraft
at the diverted airport; and
``(vii) if the flight arrives at the scheduled destination
airport--
``(I) the gate-departure time at the diverted airport;
``(II) the wheels-off time at the diverted airport;
``(III) the wheels-on time at the scheduled arrival
airport; and
``(IV) the gate-arrival time at the scheduled arrival
airport.
``(B) For flights cancelled after gate departure--
``(i) the flight number of the cancelled flight;
``(ii) the scheduled origin and destination airports of the
cancelled flight;
``(iii) the date and time of the cancelled flight;
``(iv) the gate-departure time of the cancelled flight; and
``(v) the time the aircraft returned to the gate.
``(4) Publication.--The Secretary shall compile the
information provided in the monthly reports filed pursuant to
paragraph (1) in a single monthly report and publish such
report on the Internet Web site of the Department of
Transportation.''.
(b) Effective Date.--Beginning not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of
Transportation shall require monthly reports pursuant to the
amendment made by subsection (a).
SEC. 423. FLIGHT OPERATIONS AT RONALD REAGAN WASHINGTON
NATIONAL AIRPORT.
(a) Beyond-Perimeter Exemptions.--Section 41718(a) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``Secretary'' the first place it appears
and inserting ``Secretary of Transportation''; and
(2) by striking ``24'' and inserting ``34''.
(b) Limitations.--Section 41718(c)(2) is amended by
striking ``3 operations'' and inserting ``5 operations''.
(c) Slots.--Section 41718(c) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(4) and (5), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Slots.--The Secretary shall reduce the hourly air
carrier slot quota for Ronald Reagan Washington National
Airport under section 93.123(a) of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, by a total of 10 slots that are available for
allocation. Such reductions shall be taken in the 6:00 a.m.,
10:00 p.m., or 11:00 p.m. hours, as determined by the
Secretary, in order to grant exemptions under subsection
(a).''.
(d) Scheduling Priority.--Section 41718 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections
(f) and (g), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Scheduling Priority.--Operations conducted by new
entrant air carriers and limited incumbent air carriers shall
be provided a scheduling priority over operations conducted
by other air carriers granted exemptions pursuant to this
section, with the highest scheduling priority provided to
beyond-perimeter operations conducted by the new entrant air
carriers and limited incumbent air carriers.''.
SEC. 424. MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 417 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 41724. Musical instruments
``(a) Instruments in Passenger Compartment.--An air carrier
providing air transportation shall permit a passenger to
carry a musical instrument in a closet, baggage compartment,
or cargo stowage compartment (approved by the Administrator
of the Federal Aviation Administration) in the passenger
compartment of the aircraft used to provide such
transportation if--
``(1) the instrument can be stowed in accordance with the
requirements for carriage of carry-on baggage or cargo set
forth by the Administrator; and
``(2) there is space for such stowage on the aircraft.
``(b) Large Instruments in Passenger Compartment.--An air
carrier providing air transportation shall permit a passenger
to carry a musical instrument that is too large to be secured
in a closet, baggage compartment, or cargo stowage
compartment pursuant to subsection (a) in the passenger
compartment of the aircraft used to provide such
transportation if--
``(1) the instrument can be stowed in accordance with the
requirements for carriage of carry-on baggage or cargo set
forth by the Administrator; and
``(2) the passenger has purchased a seat to accommodate the
instrument.
``(c) Instruments as Checked Baggage.--An air carrier
providing air transportation shall transport as baggage a
musical instrument that may not be carried in the passenger
compartment of the aircraft used to provide such
transportation pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) and that is
the property of a passenger on the aircraft if--
``(1) the sum of the length, width, and height of the
instrument (measured in inches of the outside linear
dimensions of the instrument, including the case) does not
exceed 150 inches or the size restrictions for that aircraft;
``(2) the weight of the instrument does not exceed 165
pounds or the weight restrictions for that aircraft; and
``(3) the instrument can be stowed in accordance with the
requirements for carriage of baggage or cargo set forth by
the Administrator.
``(d) Air Carrier Terms.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed as prohibiting an air carrier from limiting the
carrier's liability for carrying a musical instrument or
requiring a passenger to purchase insurance to cover the
value of a musical instrument transported by the carrier.''.
(b) Regulations.--The Secretary of Transportation may
prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate
to implement the amendment made by subsection (a).
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for such subchapter
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``41724. Musical instruments.''.
SEC. 425. PASSENGER AIR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Subtitle VII is amended by inserting after
chapter 421 the following:
``CHAPTER 423--PASSENGER AIR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
``Sec.
``42301. Emergency contingency plans.
``42302. Consumer complaints.
``42303. Use of insecticides in passenger aircraft.
``Sec. 42301. Emergency contingency plans
``(a) Submission of Air Carrier and Airport Plans.--Not
later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this
section, each of the following air carriers and airport
operators shall submit to the Secretary of Transportation for
review and approval an emergency contingency plan in
accordance with the requirements of this section:
``(1) An air carrier providing covered air transportation
at a large hub or medium hub airport.
``(2) An operator of a large hub or medium hub airport.
``(3) An operator of an airport used by an air carrier
described in paragraph (1) for diversions.
``(b) Air Carrier Plans.--
``(1) Plans for individual airports.--An air carrier shall
submit an emergency contingency plan under subsection (a)
for--
``(A) each large hub and medium hub airport at which the
carrier provides covered air transportation; and
``(B) each large hub and medium hub airport at which the
carrier has flights for which the carrier has primary
responsibility for inventory control.
``(2) Contents.--An emergency contingency plan submitted by
an air carrier for an airport under subsection (a) shall
contain a description of how the carrier will--
``(A) provide food, potable water, restroom facilities, and
access to medical treatment for passengers onboard an
aircraft at the airport that is on the ground for an extended
period of time without access to the terminal;
``(B) allow passengers to deplane following excessive
tarmac delays; and
``(C) share facilities and make gates available at the
airport in an emergency.
``(c) Airport Plans.--An emergency contingency plan
submitted by an airport operator under subsection (a) shall
contain a description of how the operator, to the maximum
extent practicable, will--
``(1) provide for the deplanement of passengers following
excessive tarmac delays;
``(2) provide for the sharing of facilities and make gates
available at the airport in an emergency; and
``(3) provide a sterile area following excessive tarmac
delays for passengers who have not yet cleared U.S. Customs
and Border Protection.
``(d) Updates.--
``(1) Air carriers.--An air carrier shall update the
emergency contingency plan submitted by the carrier under
subsection (a) every 3 years and submit the update to the
Secretary for review and approval.
``(2) Airports.--An airport operator shall update the
emergency contingency plan submitted by the operator under
subsection (a) every 5 years and submit the update to the
Secretary for review and approval.
``(e) Approval.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of
the receipt of an emergency contingency plan submitted under
subsection (a) or an update submitted under subsection (d),
the Secretary shall review and approve or, if necessary,
[[Page H2160]]
require modifications to the plan or update to ensure that
the plan or update will effectively address emergencies and
provide for the health and safety of passengers.
``(2) Failure to approve or require modifications.--If the
Secretary fails to approve or require modifications to a plan
or update under paragraph (1) within the timeframe specified
in that paragraph, the plan or update shall be deemed to be
approved.
``(3) Adherence required.--An air carrier or airport
operator shall adhere to an emergency contingency plan of the
carrier or operator approved under this section.
``(f) Minimum Standards.--The Secretary may establish, as
necessary or desirable, minimum standards for elements in an
emergency contingency plan required to be submitted under
this section.
``(g) Public Access.--An air carrier or airport operator
required to submit an emergency contingency plan under this
section shall ensure public access to the plan after its
approval under this section on the Internet Web site of the
carrier or operator or by such other means as determined by
the Secretary.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Covered air transportation.--The term `covered air
transportation' means scheduled or public charter passenger
air transportation provided by an air carrier that operates
an aircraft that as originally designed has a passenger
capacity of 30 or more seats.
``(2) Tarmac delay.--The term `tarmac delay' means the
period during which passengers are on board an aircraft on
the tarmac--
``(A) awaiting takeoff after the aircraft doors have been
closed or after passengers have been boarded if the
passengers have not been advised they are free to deplane; or
``(B) awaiting deplaning after the aircraft has landed.
``Sec. 42302. Consumer complaints
``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
establish a consumer complaints toll-free hotline telephone
number for the use of passengers in air transportation and
shall take actions to notify the public of--
``(1) that telephone number; and
``(2) the Internet Web site of the Aviation Consumer
Protection Division of the Department of Transportation.
``(b) Notice to Passengers on the Internet.--An air carrier
or foreign air carrier providing scheduled air transportation
using any aircraft that as originally designed has a
passenger capacity of 30 or more passenger seats shall
include on the Internet Web site of the carrier--
``(1) the hotline telephone number established under
subsection (a);
``(2) the email address, telephone number, and mailing
address of the air carrier for the submission of complaints
by passengers about air travel service problems; and
``(3) the Internet Web site and mailing address of the
Aviation Consumer Protection Division of the Department of
Transportation for the submission of complaints by passengers
about air travel service problems.
``(c) Notice to Passengers on Boarding Documentation.--An
air carrier or foreign air carrier providing scheduled air
transportation using any aircraft that as originally designed
has a passenger capacity of 30 or more passenger seats shall
include the hotline telephone number established under
subsection (a) on--
``(1) prominently displayed signs of the carrier at the
airport ticket counters in the United States where the air
carrier operates; and
``(2) any electronic confirmation of the purchase of a
passenger ticket for air transportation issued by the air
carrier.
``Sec. 42303. Use of insecticides in passenger aircraft
``(a) Information To Be Provided on the Internet.--The
Secretary of Transportation shall establish, and make
available to the general public, an Internet Web site that
contains a listing of countries that may require an air
carrier or foreign air carrier to treat an aircraft passenger
cabin with insecticides prior to a flight in foreign air
transportation to that country or to apply an aerosol
insecticide in an aircraft cabin used for such a flight when
the cabin is occupied with passengers.
``(b) Required Disclosures.--An air carrier, foreign air
carrier, or ticket agent selling, in the United States, a
ticket for a flight in foreign air transportation to a
country listed on the Internet Web site established under
subsection (a) shall refer the purchaser of the ticket to the
Internet Web site established under subsection (a) for
additional information.''.
(b) Penalties.--Section 46301 is amended in subsections
(a)(1)(A) and (c)(1)(A) by inserting ``chapter 423,'' after
``chapter 421,''.
(c) Applicability of Requirements.--Except as otherwise
provided, the requirements of chapter 423 of title 49, United
States Code, as added by this section, shall begin to apply
60 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
(d) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for subtitle VII is
amended by inserting after the item relating to chapter 421
the following:
``423. Passenger Air Service Improvements..................42301''.....
SEC. 426. AIRFARES FOR MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the Armed Forces is comprised of approximately
1,450,000 members who are stationed on active duty at more
than 6,000 military bases in 146 different countries;
(2) the United States is indebted to the members of the
Armed Forces, many of whom are in grave danger due to their
engagement in, or exposure to, combat;
(3) military service, especially in the current war against
terrorism, often requires members of the Armed Forces to be
separated from their families on short notice, for long
periods of time, and under very stressful conditions;
(4) the unique demands of military service often preclude
members of the Armed Forces from purchasing discounted
advance airline tickets in order to visit their loved ones at
home; and
(5) it is the patriotic duty of the people of the United
States to support the members of the Armed Forces who are
defending the Nation's interests around the world at great
personal sacrifice.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) all United States commercial air carriers should seek
to lend their support with flexible, generous policies
applicable to members of the Armed Forces who are traveling
on leave or liberty at their own expense; and
(2) each United States air carrier, for all members of the
Armed Forces who have been granted leave or liberty and who
are traveling by air at their own expense, should--
(A) seek to provide reduced air fares that are comparable
to the lowest airfare for ticketed flights and that eliminate
to the maximum extent possible advance purchase requirements;
(B) seek to eliminate change fees or charges and any
penalties;
(C) seek to eliminate or reduce baggage and excess weight
fees;
(D) offer flexible terms that allow members to purchase,
modify, or cancel tickets without time restrictions, and to
waive fees (including baggage fees), ancillary costs, or
penalties; and
(E) seek to take proactive measures to ensure that all
airline employees, particularly those who issue tickets and
respond to members of the Armed Forces and their family
members, are trained in the policies of the airline aimed at
benefitting members of the Armed Forces who are on leave.
SEC. 427. REVIEW OF AIR CARRIER FLIGHT DELAYS, CANCELLATIONS,
AND ASSOCIATED CAUSES.
(a) Review.--The Inspector General of the Department of
Transportation shall conduct a review regarding air carrier
flight delays, cancellations, and associated causes to update
its 2000 report numbered CR-2000-112 and titled ``Audit of
Air Carrier Flight Delays and Cancellations''.
(b) Assessments.--In conducting the review under subsection
(a), the Inspector General shall assess--
(1) the need for an update on delay and cancellation
statistics, including with respect to the number of
chronically delayed flights and taxi-in and taxi-out times;
(2) air carriers' scheduling practices;
(3) the need for a reexamination of capacity benchmarks at
the Nation's busiest airports;
(4) the impact of flight delays and cancellations on air
travelers, including recommendations for programs that could
be implemented to address the impact of flight delays on air
travelers;
(5) the effect that limited air carrier service options on
routes have on the frequency of delays and cancellations on
such routes;
(6) the effect of the rules and regulations of the
Department of Transportation on the decisions of air carriers
to delay or cancel flights; and
(7) the impact of flight delays and cancellations on the
airline industry.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Inspector General shall submit to
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
results of the review conducted under this section, including
the assessments described in subsection (b).
SEC. 428. DENIED BOARDING COMPENSATION.
(a) Evaluation of Denied Boarding Compensation.--Not later
than 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, and
every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary of Transportation
shall evaluate the amount provided by air carriers for denied
boarding compensation.
(b) Adjustment of Amount.--If, upon completing an
evaluation required under subsection (a), the Secretary
determines that the amount provided for denied boarding
compensation should be adjusted, the Secretary shall issue a
regulation to adjust such compensation.
SEC. 429. COMPENSATION FOR DELAYED BAGGAGE.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a study
to--
(1) examine delays in the delivery of checked baggage to
passengers of air carriers; and
(2) assess the options for and examine the impact of
establishing minimum standards to compensate a passenger in
the case of an unreasonable delay in the delivery of checked
baggage.
(b) Consideration.--In conducting the study, the
Comptroller General shall take into account the additional
fees for checked baggage that are imposed by many air
carriers and how the additional fees should improve an air
carrier's baggage performance.
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall transmit
to Congress a report on the results of the study.
SEC. 430. SCHEDULE REDUCTION.
(a) In General.--If the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration determines that--
(1) the aircraft operations of air carriers during any hour
at an airport exceed the hourly maximum departure and arrival
rate established by the Administrator for such operations;
and
(2) the operations in excess of the maximum departure and
arrival rate for such hour at such airport are likely to have
a significant adverse
[[Page H2161]]
effect on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace,
the Administrator shall convene a meeting of such carriers to
reduce pursuant to section 41722 of title 49, United States
Code, on a voluntary basis, the number of such operations so
as not to exceed the maximum departure and arrival rate.
(b) No Agreement.--If the air carriers participating in a
meeting with respect to an airport under subsection (a) are
not able to agree to a reduction in the number of flights to
and from the airport so as not to exceed the maximum
departure and arrival rate, the Administrator shall take such
action as is necessary to ensure such reduction is
implemented.
SEC. 431. DOT AIRLINE CONSUMER COMPLAINT INVESTIGATIONS.
The Secretary of Transportation may investigate consumer
complaints regarding--
(1) flight cancellations;
(2) compliance with Federal regulations concerning
overbooking seats on flights;
(3) lost, damaged, or delayed baggage, and difficulties
with related airline claims procedures;
(4) problems in obtaining refunds for unused or lost
tickets or fare adjustments;
(5) incorrect or incomplete information about fares,
discount fare conditions and availability, overcharges, and
fare increases;
(6) the rights of passengers who hold frequent flyer miles
or equivalent redeemable awards earned through customer-
loyalty programs; and
(7) deceptive or misleading advertising.
SEC. 432. STUDY OF OPERATORS REGULATED UNDER PART 135.
(a) Study Required.--The Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration, in consultation with interested
parties, shall conduct a study of operators regulated under
part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
(b) Contents.--In conducting the study under subsection
(a), the Administrator shall analyze the part 135 fleet in
the United States, which shall include analysis of--
(1) the size and type of aircraft in the fleet;
(2) the equipment utilized by the fleet;
(3) the hours flown each year by the fleet;
(4) the utilization rates with respect to the fleet;
(5) the safety record of various categories of use and
aircraft types with respect to the fleet, through a review of
the database of the National Transportation Safety Board;
(6) the sales revenues of the fleet; and
(7) the number of passengers and airports served by the
fleet.
(c) Report.--
(1) Initial report.--Not later than 18 months after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
results of the study conducted under subsection (a).
(2) Updates.--Not later than 3 years after the date of the
submission of the report required under paragraph (1), and
every 2 years thereafter, the Administrator shall update the
report required under that paragraph and submit the updated
report to the committees specified in that paragraph.
SEC. 433. USE OF CELL PHONES ON PASSENGER AIRCRAFT.
(a) Cell Phone Study.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration shall conduct a study on the
impact of the use of cell phones for voice communications in
an aircraft during a flight in scheduled passenger air
transportation where currently permitted by foreign
governments in foreign air transportation.
(b) Contents.--The study shall include--
(1) a review of foreign government and air carrier policies
on the use of cell phones during flight;
(2) a review of the extent to which passengers use cell
phones for voice communications during flight; and
(3) a summary of any impacts of cell phone use during
flight on safety, the quality of the flight experience of
passengers, and flight attendants.
(c) Comment Period.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall publish in
the Federal Register the results of the study and allow 60
days for public comment.
(d) Cell Phone Report.--Not later than 270 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
results of the study.
TITLE V--ENVIRONMENTAL STREAMLINING
SEC. 501. OVERFLIGHTS OF NATIONAL PARKS.
(a) General Requirements.--Section 40128(a)(1)(C) is
amended by inserting ``or voluntary agreement under
subsection (b)(7)'' before ``for the park''.
(b) Exemption for National Parks With 50 or Fewer Flights
Each Year.--Section 40128(a) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``(5) Exemption for national parks with 50 or fewer flights
each year.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a
national park that has 50 or fewer commercial air tour
operations over the park each year shall be exempt from the
requirements of this section, except as provided in
subparagraph (B).
``(B) Withdrawal of exemption.--If the Director determines
that an air tour management plan or voluntary agreement is
necessary to protect park resources and values or park
visitor use and enjoyment, the Director shall withdraw the
exemption of a park under subparagraph (A).
``(C) List of parks.--
``(i) In general.--The Director and Administrator shall
jointly publish a list each year of national parks that are
covered by the exemption provided under this paragraph.
``(ii) Notification of withdrawal of exemption.--The
Director shall inform the Administrator, in writing, of each
determination to withdraw an exemption under subparagraph
(B).
``(D) Annual report.--A commercial air tour operator
conducting commercial air tour operations over a national
park that is exempt from the requirements of this section
shall submit to the Administrator and the Director a report
each year that includes the number of commercial air tour
operations the operator conducted during the preceding one-
year period over such park.''.
(c) Air Tour Management Plans.--Section 40128(b) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(7) Voluntary agreements.--
``(A) In general.--As an alternative to an air tour
management plan, the Director and the Administrator may enter
into a voluntary agreement with a commercial air tour
operator (including a new entrant commercial air tour
operator and an operator that has interim operating
authority) that has applied to conduct commercial air tour
operations over a national park to manage commercial air tour
operations over such national park.
``(B) Park protection.--A voluntary agreement under this
paragraph with respect to commercial air tour operations over
a national park shall address the management issues necessary
to protect the resources of such park and visitor use of such
park without compromising aviation safety or the air traffic
control system and may--
``(i) include provisions such as those described in
subparagraphs (B) through (E) of paragraph (3);
``(ii) include provisions to ensure the stability of, and
compliance with, the voluntary agreement; and
``(iii) provide for fees for such operations.
``(C) Public.--The Director and the Administrator shall
provide an opportunity for public review of a proposed
voluntary agreement under this paragraph and shall consult
with any Indian tribe whose tribal lands are, or may be,
flown over by a commercial air tour operator under a
voluntary agreement under this paragraph. After such
opportunity for public review and consultation, the voluntary
agreement may be implemented without further administrative
or environmental process beyond that described in this
subsection.
``(D) Termination.--
``(i) In general.--A voluntary agreement under this
paragraph may be terminated at any time at the discretion
of--
``(I) the Director, if the Director determines that the
agreement is not adequately protecting park resources or
visitor experiences; or
``(II) the Administrator, if the Administrator determines
that the agreement is adversely affecting aviation safety or
the national aviation system.
``(ii) Effect of termination.--If a voluntary agreement
with respect to a national park is terminated under this
subparagraph, the operators shall conform to the requirements
for interim operating authority under subsection (c) until an
air tour management plan for the park is in effect.''.
(d) Interim Operating Authority.--Section 40128(c) is
amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (2)(I) and inserting the
following:
``(I) may allow for modifications of the interim operating
authority without further environmental review beyond that
described in this subsection, if--
``(i) adequate information regarding the existing and
proposed operations of the operator under the interim
operating authority is provided to the Administrator and the
Director;
``(ii) the Administrator determines that there would be no
adverse impact on aviation safety or the air traffic control
system; and
``(iii) the Director agrees with the modification, based on
the professional expertise of the Director regarding the
protection of the resources, values, and visitor use and
enjoyment of the park.''; and
(2) in paragraph (3)(A) by striking ``if the Administrator
determines'' and all that follows through the period at the
end and inserting ``without further environmental process
beyond that described in this paragraph, if--
``(i) adequate information on the proposed operations of
the operator is provided to the Administrator and the
Director by the operator making the request;
``(ii) the Administrator agrees that there would be no
adverse impact on aviation safety or the air traffic control
system; and
``(iii) the Director agrees, based on the Director's
professional expertise regarding the protection of park
resources and values and visitor use and enjoyment.''.
(e) Operator Reports.--Section 40128 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (d), (e), and (f) as
subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Commercial Air Tour Operator Reports.--
``(1) Report.--Each commercial air tour operator conducting
a commercial air tour operation over a national park under
interim operating authority granted under subsection (c) or
in accordance with an air tour management plan or voluntary
agreement under subsection (b) shall submit to the
Administrator and the Director a report regarding the number
of commercial air tour operations over each national park
that are
[[Page H2162]]
conducted by the operator and such other information as the
Administrator and Director may request in order to facilitate
administering the provisions of this section.
``(2) Report submission.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act
of 2011, the Administrator and the Director shall jointly
issue an initial request for reports under this subsection.
The reports shall be submitted to the Administrator and the
Director with a frequency and in a format prescribed by the
Administrator and the Director.''.
SEC. 502. STATE BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) General Requirements.--Section 47128(a) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence by striking ``prescribe
regulations'' and inserting ``issue guidance''; and
(2) in the second sentence by striking ``regulations'' and
inserting ``guidance''.
(b) Applications and Selection.--Section 47128(b)(4) is
amended by inserting before the semicolon the following: ``,
including the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), State and local environmental policy
acts, Executive orders, agency regulations and guidance, and
other Federal environmental requirements''.
(c) Environmental Analysis and Coordination Requirements.--
Section 47128 is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Environmental Analysis and Coordination
Requirements.--A Federal agency, other than the Federal
Aviation Administration, that is responsible for issuing an
approval, license, or permit to ensure compliance with a
Federal environmental requirement applicable to a project or
activity to be carried out by a State using amounts from a
block grant made under this section shall--
``(1) coordinate and consult with the State;
``(2) use the environmental analysis prepared by the State
for the project or activity if such analysis is adequate; and
``(3) as necessary, consult with the State to describe the
supplemental analysis the State must provide to meet
applicable Federal requirements.''.
SEC. 503. NEXTGEN ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY PROJECTS
STREAMLINING.
(a) Aviation Project Review Process.--Section 47171(a) is
amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by striking
``and aviation security projects'' and inserting ``aviation
security projects, and NextGen environmental efficiency
projects''.
(b) Aviation Projects Subject to a Streamlined
Environmental Review Process.--Section 47171(b) is amended--
(1) by amending paragraph (1) to read as follows:
``(1) Airport capacity enhancement projects at congested
airports and certain nextgen environmental efficiency
projects.--The following projects shall be subject to the
coordinated and expedited environmental review process
requirements set forth in this section:
``(A) An airport capacity enhancement project at a
congested airport.
``(B) A NextGen environmental efficiency project at an
Operational Evolution Partnership airport or any congested
airport.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the heading by striking ``and aviation security
projects'' and inserting ``projects, aviation security
projects, and any nextgen environmental efficiency
projects'';
(B) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``or aviation security
project'' and inserting ``, an aviation security project, or
any NextGen environmental efficiency project''; and
(C) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``or aviation security
project'' and inserting ``, aviation security project, or
NextGen environmental efficiency project''.
(c) High Priority for Environmental Reviews.--Section
47171(c)(1) is amended by striking ``an airport capacity
enhancement project at a congested airport'' and inserting
``a project described in subsection (b)(1)''.
(d) Identification of Jurisdictional Agencies.--Section
47171(d) is amended by striking ``each airport capacity
enhancement project at a congested airport'' and inserting
``a project described in subsection (b)(1)''.
(e) Lead Agency Responsibility.--Section 47171(h) is
amended by striking ``airport capacity enhancement projects
at congested airports'' and inserting ``projects described in
subsection (b)(1)''.
(f) Alternatives Analysis.--Section 47171(k) is amended by
striking ``an airport capacity enhancement project at a
congested airport'' and inserting ``a project described in
subsection (b)(1)''.
(g) Definitions.--Section 47171 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(n) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Congested airport.--The term `congested airport'
means an airport that accounted for at least one percent of
all delayed aircraft operations in the United States in the
most recent year for which data is available and an airport
listed in table 1 of the Federal Aviation Administration's
Airport Capacity Benchmark Report 2004.
``(2) Nextgen environmental efficiency project.--The term
`NextGen environmental efficiency project' means a Next
Generation Air Transportation System aviation project that--
``(A) develops and certifies performance-based navigation
procedures; or
``(B) develops other environmental mitigation projects the
Secretary may designate as facilitating a reduction in noise,
fuel consumption, or emissions from air traffic operations.
``(3) Performance-based navigation.--The term `performance-
based navigation' means a framework for defining performance
requirements in navigation specifications that--
``(A) can be applied to an air traffic route, instrument
procedure, or defined airspace; or
``(B) provides a basis for the design and implementation of
automated flight paths, airspace design, and obstacle
clearance.''.
SEC. 504. AIRPORT FUNDING OF SPECIAL STUDIES OR REVIEWS.
Section 47173(a) is amended by striking ``services of
consultants in order to'' and all that follows through the
period at the end and inserting ``services of consultants--
``(1) to facilitate the timely processing, review, and
completion of environmental activities associated with an
airport development project;
``(2) to conduct special environmental studies related to
an airport project funded with Federal funds;
``(3) to conduct special studies or reviews to support
approved noise compatibility measures described in part 150
of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations;
``(4) to conduct special studies or reviews to support
environmental mitigation in a record of decision or finding
of no significant impact by the Federal Aviation
Administration; and
``(5) to facilitate the timely processing, review, and
completion of environmental activities associated with new or
amended flight procedures, including performance-based
navigation procedures, such as required navigation
performance procedures and area navigation procedures.''.
SEC. 505. NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAMS.
Section 47504(a)(2) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon in subparagraph
(D);
(2) by striking ``operations.'' in subparagraph (E) and
inserting ``operations; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) conducting comprehensive land use planning (including
master plans, traffic studies, environmental evaluation, and
economic and feasibility studies), jointly with neighboring
local jurisdictions undertaking community redevelopment in an
area in which land or other property interests have been
acquired by the operator pursuant to this section, to
encourage and enhance redevelopment opportunities that
reflect zoning and uses that will prevent the introduction of
additional incompatible uses and enhance redevelopment
potential.''.
SEC. 506. GRANT ELIGIBILITY FOR ASSESSMENT OF FLIGHT
PROCEDURES.
Section 47504 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(e) Grants for Assessment of Flight Procedures.--
``(1) In general.--In accordance with subsection (c)(1),
the Secretary may make a grant to an airport operator to
assist in completing environmental review and assessment
activities for proposals to implement flight procedures at
such airport that have been approved as part of an airport
noise compatibility program under subsection (b).
``(2) Additional staff.--The Administrator may accept funds
from an airport operator, including funds provided to the
operator under paragraph (1), to hire additional staff or
obtain the services of consultants in order to facilitate the
timely processing, review, and completion of environmental
activities associated with proposals to implement flight
procedures at such airport that have been approved as part of
an airport noise compatibility program under subsection (b).
``(3) Receipts credited as offsetting collections.--
Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, any funds accepted
under this section--
``(A) shall be credited as offsetting collections to the
account that finances the activities and services for which
the funds are accepted;
``(B) shall be available for expenditure only to pay the
costs of activities and services for which the funds are
accepted; and
``(C) shall remain available until expended.''.
SEC. 507. DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET VALUE OF RESIDENTIAL
PROPERTIES.
Section 47504 (as amended by this Act) is further amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Determination of Fair Market Value of Residential
Properties.--In approving a project to acquire residential
real property using financial assistance made available under
this section or chapter 471, the Secretary shall ensure that
the appraisal of the property to be acquired disregards any
decrease or increase in the fair market value of the real
property caused by the project for which the property is to
be acquired, or by the likelihood that the property would be
acquired for the project, other than that due to physical
deterioration within the reasonable control of the owner.''.
SEC. 508. PROHIBITION ON OPERATING CERTAIN AIRCRAFT WEIGHING
75,000 POUNDS OR LESS NOT COMPLYING WITH STAGE
3 NOISE LEVELS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 475 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 47534. Prohibition on operating certain aircraft
weighing 75,000 pounds or less not complying with stage 3
noise levels
``(a) Prohibition.--Except as otherwise provided by this
section, after December 31, 2014, a person may not operate a
civil subsonic jet airplane with a maximum weight of 75,000
pounds or less, and for which an airworthiness certificate
(other than an experimental certificate) has been issued, to
or from an airport in the United States unless the Secretary
of Transportation finds that the aircraft complies with stage
3 noise levels.
``(b) Aircraft Operations Outside 48 Contiguous States.--
Subsection (a) shall not apply to aircraft operated only
outside the 48 contiguous States.
``(c) Temporary Operations.--The Secretary may allow
temporary operation of an aircraft
[[Page H2163]]
otherwise prohibited from operation under subsection (a) to
or from an airport in the contiguous United States by
granting a special flight authorization for one or more of
the following circumstances:
``(1) To sell, lease, or use the aircraft outside the 48
contiguous States.
``(2) To scrap the aircraft.
``(3) To obtain modifications to the aircraft to meet stage
3 noise levels.
``(4) To perform scheduled heavy maintenance or significant
modifications on the aircraft at a maintenance facility
located in the contiguous 48 States.
``(5) To deliver the aircraft to an operator leasing the
aircraft from the owner or return the aircraft to the lessor.
``(6) To prepare, park, or store the aircraft in
anticipation of any of the activities described in paragraphs
(1) through (5).
``(7) To provide transport of persons and goods in the
relief of an emergency situation.
``(8) To divert the aircraft to an alternative airport in
the 48 contiguous States on account of weather, mechanical,
fuel, air traffic control, or other safety reasons while
conducting a flight in order to perform any of the activities
described in paragraphs (1) through (7).
``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary may prescribe such
regulations or other guidance as may be necessary for the
implementation of this section.
``(e) Statutory Construction.--
``(1) AIP grant assurances.--Noncompliance with subsection
(a) shall not be construed as a violation of section 47107 or
any regulations prescribed thereunder.
``(2) Pending applications.--Nothing in this section may be
construed as interfering with, nullifying, or otherwise
affecting determinations made by the Federal Aviation
Administration, or to be made by the Administration, with
respect to applications under part 161 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations, that were pending on the date of
enactment of this section.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 47531 is amended--
(A) in the section heading by striking ``for violating
sections 47528-47530''; and
(B) by striking ``47529, or 47530'' and inserting ``47529,
47530, or 47534''.
(2) Section 47532 is amended by inserting ``or 47534''
after ``47528-47531''.
(3) The analysis for subchapter II of chapter 475 is
amended--
(A) by striking the item relating to section 47531 and
inserting the following:
``47531. Penalties.''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``47534. Prohibition on operating certain aircraft weighing 75,000
pounds or less not complying with stage 3 noise
levels.''.
SEC. 509. AIRCRAFT DEPARTURE QUEUE MANAGEMENT PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall
carry out a pilot program at not more than 5 public-use
airports under which the Federal Aviation Administration
shall use funds made available under section 48101(a) to test
air traffic flow management tools, methodologies, and
procedures that will allow air traffic controllers of the
Administration to better manage the flow of aircraft on the
ground and reduce the length of ground holds and idling time
for aircraft.
(b) Selection Criteria.--In selecting from among airports
at which to conduct the pilot program, the Secretary shall
give priority consideration to airports at which improvements
in ground control efficiencies are likely to achieve the
greatest fuel savings or air quality or other environmental
benefits, as measured by the amount of reduced fuel, reduced
emissions, or other environmental benefits per dollar of
funds expended under the pilot program.
(c) Maximum Amount.--Not more than a total of $2,500,000
may be expended under the pilot program at any single public-
use airport.
SEC. 510. HIGH PERFORMANCE, SUSTAINABLE, AND COST-EFFECTIVE
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FACILITIES.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may implement, to the extent practicable, sustainable
practices for the incorporation of energy-efficient design,
equipment, systems, and other measures in the construction
and major renovation of air traffic control facilities of the
Administration in order to reduce energy consumption at,
improve the environmental performance of, and reduce the cost
of maintenance for such facilities.
SEC. 511. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the European Union directive extending the European
Union's emissions trading proposal to international civil
aviation without working through the International Civil
Aviation Organization (in this section referred to as the
``ICAO'') in a consensus-based fashion is inconsistent with
the Convention on International Civil Aviation, completed in
Chicago on December 7, 1944 (TIAS 1591; commonly known as the
``Chicago Convention''), and other relevant air services
agreements and antithetical to building international
cooperation to address effectively the problem of greenhouse
gas emissions by aircraft engaged in international civil
aviation; and
(2) the European Union and its member states should instead
work with other contracting states of ICAO to develop a
consensual approach to addressing aircraft greenhouse gas
emissions through ICAO.
SEC. 512. AVIATION NOISE COMPLAINTS.
(a) Telephone Number Posting.--Not later than 90 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, each owner or operator of
a large hub airport (as defined in section 40102(a) of title
49, United States Code) shall publish on an Internet Web site
of the airport a telephone number to receive aviation noise
complaints related to the airport.
(b) Summaries and Reports.--Not later than 15 months after
the date of enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter,
an owner or operator that receives noise complaints from 25
individuals during the preceding year under subsection (a)
shall submit to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration a report regarding the number of complaints
received and a summary regarding the nature of such
complaints. The Administrator shall make such information
available to the public by electronic means.
TITLE VI--FAA EMPLOYEES AND ORGANIZATION
SEC. 601. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.
(a) Dispute Resolution.--Section 40122(a) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs
(4) and (5), respectively; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
``(2) Dispute resolution.--
``(A) Mediation.--If the Administrator does not reach an
agreement under paragraph (1) or the provisions referred to
in subsection (g)(2)(C) with the exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees, the Administrator and the
bargaining representative--
``(i) shall use the services of the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service to attempt to reach such agreement in
accordance with part 1425 of title 29, Code of Federal
Regulations (as in effect on the date of enactment of the FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011); or
``(ii) may by mutual agreement adopt alternative procedures
for the resolution of disputes or impasses arising in the
negotiation of the collective-bargaining agreement.
``(B) Mid-term bargaining.--If the services of the Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service under subparagraph (A)(i)
do not lead to the resolution of issues in controversy
arising from the negotiation of a mid-term collective-
bargaining agreement, the Federal Service Impasses Panel
shall assist the parties in resolving the impasse in
accordance with section 7119 of title 5.
``(C) Binding arbitration for term bargaining.--
``(i) Assistance from federal service impasses panel.--If
the services of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation
Service under subparagraph (A)(i) do not lead to the
resolution of issues in controversy arising from the
negotiation of a term collective-bargaining agreement, the
Administrator and the exclusive bargaining representative of
the employees (in this subparagraph referred to as the
`parties') shall submit their issues in controversy to the
Federal Service Impasses Panel. The Panel shall assist the
parties in resolving the impasse by asserting jurisdiction
and ordering binding arbitration by a private arbitration
board consisting of 3 members.
``(ii) Appointment of arbitration board.--The Executive
Director of the Panel shall provide for the appointment of
the 3 members of a private arbitration board under clause (i)
by requesting the Director of the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service to prepare a list of not less than 15
names of arbitrators with Federal sector experience and by
providing the list to the parties. Not later than 10 days
after receiving the list, the parties shall each select one
person from the list. The 2 arbitrators selected by the
parties shall then select a third person from the list not
later than 7 days after being selected. If either of the
parties fails to select a person or if the 2 arbitrators are
unable to agree on the third person in 7 days, the parties
shall make the selection by alternately striking names on the
list until one arbitrator remains.
``(iii) Framing issues in controversy.--If the parties do
not agree on the framing of the issues to be submitted for
arbitration, the arbitration board shall frame the issues.
``(iv) Hearings.--The arbitration board shall give the
parties a full and fair hearing, including an opportunity to
present evidence in support of their claims and an
opportunity to present their case in person, by counsel, or
by other representative as they may elect.
``(v) Decisions.--The arbitration board shall render its
decision within 90 days after the date of its appointment.
Decisions of the arbitration board shall be conclusive and
binding upon the parties.
``(vi) Matters for consideration.--The arbitration board
shall take into consideration such factors as--
``(I) the effect of its arbitration decisions on the
Federal Aviation Administration's ability to attract and
retain a qualified workforce;
``(II) the effect of its arbitration decisions on the
Federal Aviation Administration's budget;
``(III) the effect of its arbitration decisions on other
Federal Aviation Administration employees; and
``(IV) any other factors whose consideration would assist
the board in fashioning a fair and equitable award.
``(vii) Costs.--The parties shall share costs of the
arbitration equally.
``(3) Ratification of agreements.--Upon reaching a
voluntary agreement or at the conclusion of the binding
arbitration under paragraph (2)(C), the final agreement,
except for those matters decided by an arbitration board,
shall be subject to ratification by the exclusive bargaining
representative of the employees, if so requested by the
bargaining representative, and the final agreement shall be
subject to approval by the head of the agency in accordance
with the provisions referred to in subsection (g)(2)(C).''.
SEC. 602. PRESIDENTIAL RANK AWARD PROGRAM.
Section 40122(g)(2) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (G) by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
[[Page H2164]]
(2) in subparagraph (H) by striking ``Board.'' and
inserting ``Board; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(I) subsections (b), (c), and (d) of section 4507
(relating to Meritorious Executive or Distinguished Executive
rank awards) and subsections (b) and (c) of section 4507a
(relating to Meritorious Senior Professional or Distinguished
Senior Professional rank awards), except that--
``(i) for purposes of applying such provisions to the
personnel management system--
``(I) the term `agency' means the Department of
Transportation;
``(II) the term `senior executive' means a Federal Aviation
Administration executive;
``(III) the term `career appointee' means a Federal
Aviation Administration career executive; and
``(IV) the term `senior career employee' means a Federal
Aviation Administration career senior professional;
``(ii) receipt by a career appointee or a senior career
employee of the rank of Meritorious Executive or Meritorious
Senior Professional entitles the individual to a lump-sum
payment of an amount equal to 20 percent of annual basic pay,
which shall be in addition to the basic pay paid under the
Federal Aviation Administration Executive Compensation Plan;
and
``(iii) receipt by a career appointee or a senior career
employee of the rank of Distinguished Executive or
Distinguished Senior Professional entitles the individual to
a lump-sum payment of an amount equal to 35 percent of annual
basic pay, which shall be in addition to the basic pay paid
under the Federal Aviation Administration Executive
Compensation Plan.''.
SEC. 603. FAA TECHNICAL TRAINING AND STAFFING.
(a) Study.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall conduct a study to assess the adequacy
of the Administrator's technical training strategy and
improvement plan for airway transportation systems
specialists (in this section referred to as ``FAA systems
specialists'').
(2) Contents.--The study shall include--
(A) a review of the current technical training strategy and
improvement plan for FAA systems specialists;
(B) recommendations to improve the technical training
strategy and improvement plan needed by FAA systems
specialists to be proficient in the maintenance of the latest
technologies;
(C) a description of actions that the Administration has
undertaken to ensure that FAA systems specialists receive up-
to-date training on the latest technologies; and
(D) a recommendation regarding the most cost-effective
approach to provide training to FAA systems specialists.
(3) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the study.
(b) Workload of Systems Specialists.--
(1) Study by national academy of sciences.--Not later than
90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
make appropriate arrangements for the National Academy of
Sciences to conduct a study of the assumptions and methods
used by the Federal Aviation Administration to estimate
staffing needs for FAA systems specialists to ensure proper
maintenance and certification of the national airspace system
in the most cost effective manner.
(2) Consultation.--In conducting the study, the National
Academy of Sciences shall interview interested parties,
including labor, government, and industry representatives.
(3) Report.--Not later than one year after the initiation
of the arrangements under paragraph (1), the National Academy
of Sciences shall submit to Congress a report on the results
of the study.
SEC. 604. SAFETY CRITICAL STAFFING.
(a) In General.--Not later than October 1, 2011, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
implement, to the extent practicable and in a cost-effective
manner, the staffing model for aviation safety inspectors
developed pursuant to the National Academy of Sciences study
entitled ``Staffing Standards for Aviation Safety
Inspectors''. In doing so, the Administrator shall consult
with interested persons, including aviation safety
inspectors.
(b) Report.--Not later than October 1 of each fiscal year
beginning after September 30, 2011, the Administrator shall
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, the
staffing model described in subsection (a).
(c) Safety Critical Positions Defined.--In this section,
the term ``safety critical positions'' means--
(1) aviation safety inspectors, safety technical
specialists, and operational support positions in the Flight
Standards Service (as such terms are used in the
Administration's fiscal year 2011 congressional budget
justification); and
(2) manufacturing safety inspectors, pilots, engineers,
chief scientific and technical advisors, safety technical
specialists, and operational support positions in the
Aircraft Certification Service (as such terms are used in the
Administration's fiscal year 2011 congressional budget
justification).
SEC. 605. FAA AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER STAFFING.
(a) Study by National Academy of Sciences.--Not later than
90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
enter into appropriate arrangements with the National Academy
of Sciences to conduct a study of the air traffic controller
standards used by the Federal Aviation Administration (in
this section referred to as the ``FAA'') to estimate staffing
needs for FAA air traffic controllers to ensure the safe
operation of the national airspace system in the most cost
effective manner.
(b) Consultation.--In conducting the study, the National
Academy of Sciences shall interview interested parties,
including employee, Government, and industry representatives.
(c) Contents.--The study shall include--
(1) an examination of representative information on
productivity, human factors, traffic activity, and improved
technology and equipment used in air traffic control;
(2) an examination of recent National Academy of Sciences
reviews of the complexity model performed by MITRE
Corporation that support the staffing standards models for
the en route air traffic control environment; and
(3) consideration of the Administration's current and
estimated budgets and the most cost-effective staffing model
to best leverage available funding.
(d) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the National Academy of Sciences shall
submit to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report
on the results of the study.
SEC. 606. AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SPECIALIST QUALIFICATION
TRAINING.
Section 44506 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Air Traffic Control Specialist Qualification
Training.--
``(1) Appointment of air traffic control specialists.--The
Administrator is authorized to appoint a qualified air
traffic control specialist candidate for placement in an
airport traffic control facility if the candidate has--
``(A) received a control tower operator certification
(referred to in this subsection as a `CTO' certificate); and
``(B) satisfied all other applicable qualification
requirements for an air traffic control specialist position.
``(2) Compensation and benefits.--An individual appointed
under paragraph (1) shall receive the same compensation and
benefits, and be treated in the same manner as, any other
individual appointed as a developmental air traffic
controller.
``(3) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011,
the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report that
evaluates the effectiveness of the air traffic control
specialist qualification training provided pursuant to this
section, including the graduation rates of candidates who
received a CTO certificate and are working in airport traffic
control facilities.
``(4) Additional appointments.--If the Administrator
determines that air traffic control specialists appointed
pursuant to this subsection are more successful in carrying
out the duties of an air traffic controller than air traffic
control specialists hired from the general public without any
such certification, the Administrator shall increase the
number of appointments of candidates who possess such
certification.
``(5) Reimbursement for travel expenses associated with
certifications.--
``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the
Administrator may accept reimbursement from an educational
entity that provides training to an air traffic control
specialist candidate to cover reasonable travel expenses of
the Administrator associated with issuing certifications to
such candidates.
``(B) Treatment of reimbursements.--Notwithstanding section
3302 of title 31, any reimbursement authorized to be
collected under subparagraph (A) shall--
``(i) be credited as offsetting collections to the account
that finances the activities and services for which the
reimbursement is accepted;
``(ii) be available for expenditure only to pay the costs
of activities and services for which the reimbursement is
accepted, including all costs associated with collecting such
reimbursement; and
``(iii) remain available until expended.''.
SEC. 607. ASSESSMENT OF TRAINING PROGRAMS FOR AIR TRAFFIC
CONTROLLERS.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall conduct a study to assess the adequacy
of training programs for air traffic controllers, including
the Administrator's technical training strategy and
improvement plan for air traffic controllers.
(b) Contents.--The study shall include--
(1) a review of the current training system for air traffic
controllers, including the technical training strategy and
improvement plan;
(2) an analysis of the competencies required of air traffic
controllers for successful performance in the current and
future projected air traffic control environment;
(3) an analysis of the competencies projected to be
required of air traffic controllers as the Federal Aviation
Administration transitions to the Next Generation Air
Transportation System;
(4) an analysis of various training approaches available to
satisfy the controller competencies identified under
paragraphs (2) and (3);
(5) recommendations to improve the current training system
for air traffic controllers, including the technical training
strategy and improvement plan; and
(6) the most cost-effective approach to provide training to
air traffic controllers.
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
[[Page H2165]]
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the study.
SEC. 608. COLLEGIATE TRAINING INITIATIVE STUDY.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a study
on training options for graduates of the Collegiate Training
Initiative program (in this section referred to as ``CTI''
programs) conducted under section 44506(c) of title 49,
United States Code.
(b) Contents.--The study shall analyze the impact of
providing as an alternative to the current training provided
at the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center of the Federal
Aviation Administration a new controller orientation session
at the Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center for graduates of CTI
programs followed by on-the-job training for newly hired air
traffic controllers who are graduates of CTI programs and
shall include an analysis of--
(1) the cost effectiveness of such an alternative training
approach; and
(2) the effect that such an alternative training approach
would have on the overall quality of training received by
graduates of CTI programs.
(c) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate a report on the
results of the study.
SEC. 609. FAA FACILITY CONDITIONS.
(a) Study.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a study
of--
(1) the conditions of a sampling of Federal Aviation
Administration facilities across the United States, including
offices, towers, centers, and terminal radar air control;
(2) reports from employees of the Administration relating
to respiratory ailments and other health conditions resulting
from exposure to mold, asbestos, poor air quality, radiation,
and facility-related hazards in facilities of the
Administration;
(3) conditions of such facilities that could interfere with
such employees' ability to effectively and safely perform
their duties;
(4) the ability of managers and supervisors of such
employees to promptly document and seek remediation for
unsafe facility conditions;
(5) whether employees of the Administration who report
facility-related illnesses are treated appropriately;
(6) utilization of scientifically approved remediation
techniques to mitigate hazardous conditions in accordance
with applicable State and local regulations and Occupational
Safety and Health Administration practices by the
Administration; and
(7) resources allocated to facility maintenance and
renovation by the Administration.
(b) Facility Condition Indices.--The Comptroller General
shall review the facility condition indices of the
Administration for inclusion in the recommendations under
subsection (c).
(c) Recommendations.--Based on the results of the study and
review of facility condition indices under subsection (a),
the Comptroller General shall make such recommendations as
the Comptroller General considers necessary to--
(1) prioritize those facilities needing the most immediate
attention based on risks to employee health and safety;
(2) ensure that the Administration is using scientifically
approved remediation techniques in all facilities; and
(3) assist the Administration in making programmatic
changes so that aging facilities do not deteriorate to unsafe
levels.
(d) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the Administrator, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate, and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report on results of the study, including
the recommendations under subsection (c).
SEC. 610. FRONTLINE MANAGER STAFFING.
(a) Study.--Not later than 45 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall commission an independent study
on frontline manager staffing requirements in air traffic
control facilities.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the study, the
Administrator may take into consideration--
(1) the managerial tasks expected to be performed by
frontline managers, including employee development,
management, and counseling;
(2) the number of supervisory positions of operation
requiring watch coverage in each air traffic control
facility;
(3) coverage requirements in relation to traffic demand;
(4) facility type;
(5) complexity of traffic and managerial responsibilities;
(6) proficiency and training requirements; and
(7) such other factors as the Administrator considers
appropriate.
(c) Participation.--The Administrator shall ensure the
participation of frontline managers who currently work in
safety-related operational areas of the Administration.
(d) Determinations.--The Administrator shall transmit any
determinations made as a result of the study to the heads of
the appropriate lines of business within the Administration,
including the Chief Operating Officer of the Air Traffic
Organization.
(e) Report.--Not later than 9 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
of the House of Representatives a report on the results of
the study and a description of any determinations submitted
to the Chief Operating Officer under subsection (c).
(f) Definition.--In this section, the term ``frontline
manager'' means first-level, operational supervisors and
managers who work in safety-related operational areas of the
Administration.
TITLE VII--AVIATION INSURANCE
SEC. 701. GENERAL AUTHORITY.
(a) Extension of Policies.--Section 44302(f)(1) is amended
by striking ``shall extend through'' and all that follows
through ``the termination date'' and inserting ``shall extend
through September 30, 2013, and may extend through December
31, 2013, the termination date''.
(b) Successor Program.--Section 44302(f) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(3) Successor program.--
``(A) In general.--After December 31, 2021, coverage for
the risks specified in a policy that has been extended under
paragraph (1) shall be provided in an airline industry
sponsored risk retention or other risk-sharing arrangement
approved by the Secretary.
``(B) Transfer of premiums.--
``(i) In general.--On December 31, 2021, and except as
provided in clause (ii), premiums collected by the Secretary
from the airline industry after September 22, 2001, for any
policy under this subsection, and interest earned thereon, as
determined by the Secretary, shall be transferred to an
airline industry sponsored risk retention or other risk-
sharing arrangement approved by the Secretary.
``(ii) Determination of amount transferred.--The amount
transferred pursuant to clause (i) shall be less--
``(I) the amount of any claims paid out on such policies
from September 22, 2001, through December 31, 2021;
``(II) the amount of any claims pending under such policies
as of December 31, 2021; and
``(III) the cost, as determined by the Secretary, of
administering the provision of insurance policies under this
chapter from September 22, 2001, through December 31,
2021.''.
SEC. 702. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO LIMIT THIRD-PARTY
LIABILITY OF AIR CARRIERS ARISING OUT OF ACTS
OF TERRORISM.
The first sentence of section 44303(b) is amended by
striking ``ending on'' and all that follows through ``the
Secretary may certify'' and inserting ``ending on December
31, 2013, the Secretary may certify''.
SEC. 703. CLARIFICATION OF REINSURANCE AUTHORITY.
The second sentence of section 44304 is amended by striking
``the carrier'' and inserting ``any insurance carrier''.
SEC. 704. USE OF INDEPENDENT CLAIMS ADJUSTERS.
The second sentence of section 44308(c)(1) is amended by
striking ``agent'' and inserting ``agent, or a claims
adjuster who is independent of the underwriting agent,''.
TITLE VIII--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 801. DISCLOSURE OF DATA TO FEDERAL AGENCIES IN INTEREST
OF NATIONAL SECURITY.
Section 40119(b) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(4) Section 552a of title 5 shall not apply to
disclosures that the Administrator may make from the systems
of records of the Administration to any Federal law
enforcement, intelligence, protective service, immigration,
or national security official in order to assist the official
receiving the information in the performance of official
duties.''.
SEC. 802. FAA ACCESS TO CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORDS AND DATABASE
SYSTEMS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 401 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 40130. FAA access to criminal history records and
database systems
``(a) Access to Records and Database Systems.--
``(1) Access to information.--Notwithstanding section 534
of title 28, and regulations issued to implement such
section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration may have direct access to a system of
documented criminal justice information maintained by the
Department of Justice or by a State, but may do so only for
the purpose of carrying out civil and administrative
responsibilities of the Administration to protect the safety
and security of the national airspace system or to support
the missions of the Department of Justice, the Department of
Homeland Security, and other law enforcement agencies.
``(2) Release of information.--In accessing a system
referred to in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall be
subject to the same conditions and procedures established by
the Department of Justice or the State for other governmental
agencies with direct access to the system.
``(3) Limitation.--The Administrator may not use the direct
access authorized under paragraph (1) to conduct criminal
investigations.
``(b) Designated Employees.--The Administrator shall
designate, by order, employees of the Administration who
shall carry out the authority described in subsection (a).
The designated employees may--
``(1) have direct access to and receive criminal history,
driver, vehicle, and other law enforcement information
contained in the law enforcement databases of the Department
of Justice, or any jurisdiction of a State, in the same
manner as a police officer employed by a State or local
authority of that State who is certified or commissioned
under the laws of that State;
``(2) use any radio, data link, or warning system of the
Federal Government, and of any jurisdiction in a State, that
provides information about wanted persons, be-on-the-lookout
notices, warrant status, or other officer safety information
to which a police officer employed by
[[Page H2166]]
a State or local authority in that State who is certified or
commissioned under the laws of that State has direct access
and in the same manner as such police officer; and
``(3) receive Federal, State, or local government
communications with a police officer employed by a State or
local authority in that State in the same manner as a police
officer employed by a State or local authority in that State
who is commissioned under the laws of that State.
``(c) System of Documented Criminal Justice Information
Defined.--In this section, the term `system of documented
criminal justice information' means any law enforcement
database, system, or communication containing information
concerning identification, criminal history, arrests,
convictions, arrest warrants, wanted or missing persons,
including the National Crime Information Center and its
incorporated criminal history databases and the National Law
Enforcement Telecommunications System.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 401 is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``40130. FAA access to criminal history records and database
systems.''.
SEC. 803. CIVIL PENALTIES TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.
Section 46301 is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(1)(A) by inserting ``chapter 451,''
before ``section 47107(b)'';
(2) in subsection (a)(5)(A)(i)--
(A) by striking ``or chapter 449'' and inserting ``chapter
449''; and
(B) by inserting after ``44909)'' the following: ``, or
chapter 451'';
(3) in subsection (d)(2)--
(A) by inserting after ``44723)'' the following: ``,
chapter 451 (except section 45107)'';
(B) by inserting after ``44909),'' the following: ``section
45107,'';
(C) by striking ``46302'' and inserting ``section 46302'';
and
(D) by striking ``46303'' and inserting ``section 46303'';
and
(4) in subsection (f)(1)(A)(i)--
(A) by striking ``or chapter 449'' and inserting ``chapter
449''; and
(B) by inserting after ``44909)'' the following: ``, or
chapter 451''.
SEC. 804. REALIGNMENT AND CONSOLIDATION OF FAA SERVICES AND
FACILITIES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 445 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following new
section:
``Sec. 44519. Realignment and consolidation of FAA services
and facilities
``(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to establish
a fair process that will result in the realignment and
consolidation of FAA services and facilities to help reduce
capital, operating, maintenance, and administrative costs and
facilitate Next Generation Air Transportation System air
traffic control modernization efforts without adversely
affecting safety.
``(b) General Authority.--Subject to the requirements of
this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall realign and consolidate FAA services and
facilities pursuant to recommendations made by the Aviation
Facilities and Services Board established under subsection
(g).
``(c) Administrator's Recommendations.--
``(1) Proposed criteria.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall develop proposed
criteria for use by the Administrator in making
recommendations for the realignment and consolidation of FAA
services and facilities under this section.
``(B) Publication; transmittal to congress.--Not later than
30 days after the date of enactment of this section, the
Administrator shall publish the proposed criteria in the
Federal Register and transmit the proposed criteria to the
congressional committees of interest.
``(C) Notice and comment.--The Administrator shall provide
an opportunity for public comment on the proposed criteria
for a period of at least 30 days and shall include notice of
that opportunity in the Federal Register.
``(2) Final criteria.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall establish final
criteria based on the proposed criteria developed under
paragraph (1).
``(B) Publication; transmittal to congress.--Not later than
90 days after the date of enactment of this section, the
Administrator shall publish the final criteria in the Federal
Register and transmit the final criteria to the congressional
committees of interest.
``(3) Recommendations.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall make
recommendations for the realignment and consolidation of FAA
services and facilities under this section based on the final
criteria established under paragraph (2).
``(B) Contents.--The recommendations shall consist of a
list of FAA services and facilities for realignment and
consolidation, together with a justification for each service
and facility included on the list.
``(C) Publication; transmittal to board and congress.--Not
later than 120 days after the date of enactment of this
section, the Administrator shall publish the recommendations
in the Federal Register and transmit the recommendations to
the Board and the congressional committees of interest.
``(D) Information.--The Administrator shall make available
to the Board and the Comptroller General all information used
by the Administrator in establishing the recommendations.
``(E) Additional recommendations.--The Administrator is
authorized to make additional recommendations under this
paragraph every 2 years.
``(d) Board's Review and Recommendations.--
``(1) Public hearings.--Not later than 30 days after the
date of receipt of the Administrator's recommendations under
subsection (c), the Board shall conduct public hearings on
the recommendations.
``(2) Board's recommendations.--
``(A) Report to congress.--Based on the Board's review and
analysis of the Administrator's recommendations and any
public comments received under paragraph (1), the Board shall
develop a report containing the Board's findings and
conclusions concerning the Administrator's recommendations,
together with the Board's recommendations for realignment and
consolidation of FAA services and facilities. The Board shall
explain and justify in the report any recommendation made by
the Board that differs from a recommendation made by the
Administrator.
``(B) Publication in federal register; transmittal to
congress.--Not later than 60 days after the date of receipt
of the Administrator's recommendations under subsection (c),
the Board shall publish the report in the Federal Register
and transmit the report to the congressional committees of
interest.
``(3) Assistance of comptroller general.--The Comptroller
General shall assist the Board, to the extent requested by
the Board, in the Board's review and analysis of the
Administrator's recommendations.
``(e) Realignment and Consolidation of FAA Services and
Facilities.--Subject to subsection (f), the Administrator
shall--
``(1) realign or consolidate the FAA services and
facilities recommended for realignment or consolidation by
the Board in a report transmitted under subsection (d);
``(2) initiate all such realignments and consolidations not
later than one year after the date of the report; and
``(3) complete all such realignments and consolidations not
later than 3 years after the date of the report.
``(f) Congressional Disapproval.--
``(1) In general.--The Administrator may not carry out a
recommendation of the Board for realignment or consolidation
of FAA services and facilities that is included in a report
transmitted under subsection (d) if a joint resolution of
disapproval is enacted disapproving such recommendation
before the earlier of--
``(A) the last day of the 30-day period beginning on the
date of the report; or
``(B) the adjournment of Congress sine die for the session
during which the report is transmitted.
``(2) Computation of 30-day period.--For purposes of
paragraph (1)(A), the days on which either house of Congress
is not in session because of an adjournment of more than 3
days to a day certain shall be excluded in computation of the
30-day period.
``(g) Aviation Facilities and Services Board.--
``(1) Establishment.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this section, the Secretary of
Transportation shall establish an independent board to be
known as the `Aviation Facilities and Services Board'.
``(2) Composition.--The Board shall be composed of the
following members:
``(A) The Secretary (or a designee of the Secretary), who
shall be the Chair of the Board.
``(B) Two members appointed by the Secretary, who may not
be officers or employees of the Federal Government.
``(C) The Comptroller General (or a designee of the
Comptroller General), who shall be a nonvoting member of the
Board.
``(3) Duties.--The Board shall carry out the duties
specified for the Board in this section.
``(4) Term.--The members of the Board to be appointed under
paragraph (2)(B) shall each be appointed for a term of 3
years.
``(5) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Board shall be filled in
the same manner as the original appointment was made, but the
individual appointed to fill the vacancy shall serve only for
the unexpired portion of the term for which the individual's
predecessor was appointed.
``(6) Compensation and benefits.--A member of the Board may
not receive any compensation or benefits from the Federal
Government for serving on the Board, except that--
``(A) a member shall receive compensation for work injuries
under subchapter I of chapter 81 of title 5; and
``(B) a member shall be paid actual travel expenses and per
diem in lieu of subsistence expenses when away from the
member's usual place of residence in accordance with section
5703 of title 5.
``(7) Staff.--The Administrator shall make available to the
Board such staff, information, and administrative services
and assistance as may be reasonably required to enable the
Board to carry out its responsibilities under this section.
The Board may employ experts and consultants on a temporary
or intermittent basis with the approval of the Secretary.
``(8) Federal advisory committee act.--The Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Board.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to the Administrator for each of fiscal years 2011 through
2014 $200,000 for the Board to carry out its duties.
``(2) Availability of amounts.--Amounts appropriated
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall remain available until
expended.
``(i) Effect on Other Authorities.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to affect the authorities provided in
section 44503 or the existing authorities or responsibilities
of the Administrator under this title to manage the
operations of the Federal Aviation Administration, including
realignment or consolidation of facilities or services.
``(j) Definitions.--In this section, the following
definitions apply:
[[Page H2167]]
``(1) Board.--The term `Board' means the Aviation
Facilities and Services Board established under subsection
(g).
``(2) Congressional committees of interest.--The term
`congressional committees of interest' means the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.
``(3) FAA.--The term `FAA' means the Federal Aviation
Administration.
``(4) Realignment.--The term `realignment' includes any
action that relocates functions and personnel positions but
does not include an overall reduction in personnel resulting
from workload adjustments.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 445 (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44519. Realignment and consolidation of FAA services and
facilities.''.
SEC. 805. LIMITING ACCESS TO FLIGHT DECKS OF ALL-CARGO
AIRCRAFT.
(a) Study.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration, in consultation with appropriate air
carriers, aircraft manufacturers, and air carrier labor
representatives, shall conduct a study to assess the
feasibility of developing a physical means, or a combination
of physical and procedural means, to prohibit individuals
other than authorized flight crewmembers from accessing the
flight deck of an all-cargo aircraft.
(b) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the study.
SEC. 806. CONSOLIDATION OR ELIMINATION OF OBSOLETE,
REDUNDANT, OR OTHERWISE UNNECESSARY REPORTS;
USE OF ELECTRONIC MEDIA FORMAT.
(a) Consolidation or Elimination of Reports.--Not later
than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, and
every 2 years thereafter, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall submit to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives a report containing--
(1) a list of obsolete, redundant, or otherwise unnecessary
reports the Administration is required by law to submit to
the Congress or publish that the Administrator recommends
eliminating or consolidating with other reports; and
(2) an estimate of the cost savings that would result from
the elimination or consolidation of those reports.
(b) Use of Electronic Media for Reports.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Administration--
(A) may not publish any report required or authorized by
law in printed format; and
(B) shall publish any such report by posting it on the
Administration's Internet Web site in an easily accessible
and downloadable electronic format.
(2) Exception.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to any report
with respect to which the Administrator determines that--
(A) its publication in printed format is essential to the
mission of the Federal Aviation Administration; or
(B) its publication in accordance with the requirements of
paragraph (1) would disclose matter--
(i) described in section 552(b) of title 5, United States
Code; or
(ii) the disclosure of which would have an adverse impact
on aviation safety or security, as determined by the
Administrator.
SEC. 807. PROHIBITION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS.
The Secretary of Transportation may not use any funds made
available pursuant to this Act (including any amendment made
by this Act) to name, rename, designate, or redesignate any
project or program authorized by this Act (including any
amendment made by this Act) for an individual then serving in
Congress as a Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or
Senator.
SEC. 808. STUDY ON AVIATION FUEL PRICES.
(a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall conduct
a study and report to Congress on the impact of increases in
aviation fuel prices on the Airport and Airway Trust Fund and
the aviation industry in general.
(b) Contents.--The study shall include an assessment of the
impact of increases in aviation fuel prices on--
(1) general aviation;
(2) commercial passenger aviation;
(3) piston aircraft purchase and use;
(4) the aviation services industry, including repair and
maintenance services;
(5) aviation manufacturing;
(6) aviation exports; and
(7) the use of small airport installations.
(c) Assumptions About Aviation Fuel Prices.--In conducting
the study required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General
shall use the average aviation fuel price for fiscal year
2010 as a baseline and measure the impact of increases in
aviation fuel prices that range from 5 percent to 200 percent
over the 2010 baseline.
SEC. 809. WIND TURBINE LIGHTING.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall conduct a study on wind turbine lighting
systems.
(b) Contents.--In conducting the study, the Administrator
shall examine the following:
(1) The aviation safety issues associated with alternative
lighting strategies, technologies, and regulations.
(2) The feasibility of implementing alternative lighting
strategies or technologies to improve aviation safety.
(3) Any other issue relating to wind turbine lighting.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report on the results of the study, including
information and recommendations concerning the issues
examined under subsection (b).
SEC. 810. AIR-RAIL CODE SHARING STUDY.
(a) Code Share Study.--Not later than 180 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall
initiate a study regarding--
(1) the existing airline and intercity passenger rail code
sharing arrangements; and
(2) the feasibility, costs to taxpayers and other parties,
and benefits of increasing intermodal connectivity of airline
and intercity passenger rail facilities and systems to
improve passenger travel.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the study, the
Comptroller General shall consider--
(1) the potential costs to taxpayers and other parties and
benefits of the implementation of more integrated scheduling
between airlines and Amtrak or other intercity passenger rail
carriers achieved through code sharing arrangements;
(2) airport and intercity passenger rail operations that
can improve connectivity between airports and intercity
passenger rail facilities and stations;
(3) the experience of other countries with airport and
intercity passenger rail connectivity; and
(4) such other issues the Comptroller General considers
appropriate.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after commencing the
study required by subsection (a), the Comptroller General
shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report on the results of the study,
including any conclusions of the Comptroller General
resulting from the study.
SEC. 811. D.C. METROPOLITAN AREA SPECIAL FLIGHT RULES AREA.
(a) Submission of Plan to Congress.--Not later than 180
days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, in
consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the
Secretary of Defense, shall submit to the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure and the Committee on
Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the
Senate a plan for the D.C. Metropolitan Area Special Flight
Rules Area.
(b) Contents of Plan.--The plan shall outline specific
changes to the D.C. Metropolitan Area Special Flight Rules
Area that will decrease operational impacts and improve
general aviation access to airports in the National Capital
Region that are currently impacted by the zone.
SEC. 812. FAA REVIEW AND REFORM.
(a) Agency Review.--Not later than 60 days after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall undertake a thorough review of
each program, office, and organization within the
Administration, including the Air Traffic Organization, to
identify--
(1) duplicative positions, programs, roles, or offices;
(2) wasteful practices;
(3) redundant, obsolete, or unnecessary functions;
(4) inefficient processes; and
(5) ineffectual or outdated policies.
(b) Actions To Streamline and Reform FAA.--Not later than
120 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the
Administrator shall undertake such actions as may be
necessary to address the Administrator's findings under
subsection (a), including--
(1) consolidating, phasing-out, or eliminating duplicative
positions, programs, roles, or offices;
(2) eliminating or streamlining wasteful practices;
(3) eliminating or phasing-out redundant, obsolete, or
unnecessary functions;
(4) reforming and streamlining inefficient processes so
that the activities of the Administration are completed in an
expedited and efficient manner; and
(5) reforming or eliminating ineffectual or outdated
policies.
(c) Authority.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law,
the Administrator shall have the authority to undertake the
actions required under subsection (b).
(d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 150 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit
to Congress a report on the actions taken by the
Administrator under this section, including any
recommendations for legislative or administrative actions.
SEC. 813. CYLINDERS OF COMPRESSED OXYGEN OR OTHER OXIDIZING
GASES.
(a) In General.--Subject to subsection (b), the
transportation within the State of Alaska of cylinders of
compressed oxygen or other oxidizing gases aboard aircraft
shall be exempt from compliance with the regulations
described in subsection (c) to the extent that the
regulations require that oxidizing gases transported aboard
aircraft be enclosed in outer packaging capable of passing
the flame penetration and resistance test and the thermal
resistance test, without regard to the end use of the
cylinders.
(b) Applicability of Exemption.--The exemption provided by
subsection (a) shall apply in circumstances in which
transportation of the
[[Page H2168]]
cylinders by ground or vessel is unavailable and
transportation by aircraft is the only practical means for
transporting the cylinders to their destination.
(c) Description of Regulatory Requirements.--The
regulations referred to in subsection (a) are the regulations
of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
contained in sections 173.302(f)(3), 173.302(f)(4),
173.302(f)(5), 173.304(f)(3), 173.304(f)(4), 173.304(f)(5),
and 175.501(b) of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations.
TITLE IX--NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD
SEC. 901. AUTHORITY OF INSPECTOR GENERAL.
Title I of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``authority of inspector general
``Sec. 15. (a) In General.--The Inspector General of the
Department of Transportation, in accordance with the mission
of the Inspector General to prevent and detect fraud and
abuse, is authorized to review the financial management,
property management, and business operations of the Mediation
Board, including internal accounting and administrative
control systems, to determine compliance with applicable
Federal laws, rules, and regulations.
``(b) Duties.--In carrying out this section, the Inspector
General shall--
``(1) keep the chairman of the Mediation Board and Congress
fully and currently informed about problems relating to
administration of the internal accounting and administrative
control systems of the Mediation Board;
``(2) issue findings and recommendations for actions to
address such problems; and
``(3) report periodically to Congress on any progress made
in implementing actions to address such problems.
``(c) Access to Information.--In carrying out this section,
the Inspector General may exercise authorities granted to the
Inspector General under subsections (a) and (b) of section 6
of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.).
``(d) Authorizations of Appropriations.--
``(1) Funding.--There is authorized to be appropriated to
the Secretary of Transportation for use by the Inspector
General of the Department of Transportation not more than
$125,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 through 2014 to cover
expenses associated with activities pursuant to the authority
exercised under this section.
``(2) Reimbursable agreement.--In the absence of an
appropriation under this subsection for an expense referred
to in paragraph (1), the Inspector General and the Mediation
Board shall have a reimbursable agreement to cover such
expense.''.
SEC. 902. EVALUATION AND AUDIT OF NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD.
Title I of the Railway Labor Act (as amended by section 901
of this Act) is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``evaluation and audit of mediation board
``Sec. 16. (a) In General.--In order to promote economy,
efficiency, and effectiveness in the administration of the
programs, operations, and activities of the Mediation Board,
the Comptroller General shall evaluate and audit the programs
and expenditures of the Mediation Board. Such an evaluation
and audit shall be conducted at least annually, but may be
conducted as determined necessary by the Comptroller General
or the appropriate congressional committees.
``(b) Responsibility of Comptroller General.--The
Comptroller General shall evaluate and audit Mediation Board
programs, operations, and activities, including at a
minimum--
``(1) information management and security, including
privacy protection of personally identifiable information;
``(2) resource management;
``(3) workforce development;
``(4) procurement and contracting planning, practices, and
policies;
``(5) the extent to which the Mediation Board follows
leading practices in selected management areas; and
``(6) the processes the Mediation Board follows to address
challenges in--
``(A) initial investigations of representation
applications;
``(B) determining and certifying representatives of
employees; and
``(C) ensuring that the process occurs without
interference, influence, or coercion.
``(c) Appropriate Congressional Committees Defined.--In
this section, the term `appropriate congressional committees'
means the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate.''.
SEC. 903. REPEAL OF RULE.
Effective January 1, 2011, the rule prescribed by the
National Mediation Board relating to representation election
procedures published on May 11, 2010 (95 Fed. Reg. 26062) and
revising sections 1202 and 1206 of title 29, Code of Federal
Regulations, shall have no force or effect.
TITLE X--FEDERAL AVIATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT
OF 2011
SEC. 1001. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Federal Aviation Research
and Development Reauthorization Act of 2011''.
SEC. 1002. DEFINITIONS.
In this title, the following definitions apply:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
(2) FAA.--The term ``FAA'' means the Federal Aviation
Administration.
(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the same meaning
given the term in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)).
(4) NASA.--The term ``NASA'' means the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration.
(5) National research council.--The term ``National
Research Council'' means the National Research Council of the
National Academies of Science and Engineering.
(6) NOAA.--The term ``NOAA'' means the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Transportation.
SEC. 1003. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 48102(a) is amended--
(1) in the matter before paragraph (1) by striking ``of
this title'' and inserting ``of this title and, for each of
fiscal years 2011 through 2014, under subsection (g)'';
(2) in paragraph (11)--
(A) in subparagraph (K) by inserting ``and'' at the end;
and
(B) in subparagraph (L) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(3) in paragraph (13) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(4) in paragraph (14) by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(5) by adding at the end the following:
``(15) for fiscal year 2011, $165,020,000; and
``(16) for each of the fiscal years 2012 through 2014,
$146,827,000.''.
(b) Specific Program Limitations.--Section 48102 is amended
by inserting after subsection (f) the following:
``(g) Specific Authorizations.--The following programs
described in the research, engineering, and development
account of the national aviation research plan required under
section 44501(c) are authorized:
``(1) Fire Research and Safety.
``(2) Propulsion and Fuel Systems.
``(3) Advanced Materials/Structural Safety.
``(4) Atmospheric Hazards--Aircraft Icing/Digital System
Safety.
``(5) Continued Airworthiness.
``(6) Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research.
``(7) Flightdeck/Maintenance/System Integration Human
Factors.
``(8) System Safety Management.
``(9) Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human
Factors.
``(10) Aeromedical Research.
``(11) Weather Program.
``(12) Unmanned Aircraft Systems Research.
``(13) NextGen--Alternative Fuels for General Aviation.
``(14) Joint Planning and Development Office.
``(15) NextGen--Wake Turbulence Research.
``(16) NextGen--Air Ground Integration Human Factors.
``(17) NextGen--Self Separation Human Factors.
``(18) NextGen--Weather Technology in the Cockpit.
``(19) Environment and Energy Research.
``(20) NextGen Environmental Research--Aircraft
Technologies, Fuels, and Metrics.
``(21) System Planning and Resource Management.
``(22) The William J. Hughes Technical Center Laboratory
Facility.''.
(c) Program Authorizations.--If the other accounts
described in the national aviation research plan required
under section 44501(c) of title 49, United States Code, are
authorized for each of the fiscal years 2011 through 2014,
the following research and development activities are
authorized:
(1) Runway Incursion Reduction.
(2) System Capacity, Planning, and Improvement.
(3) Operations Concept Validation.
(4) NAS Weather Requirements.
(5) Airspace Management Program.
(6) NextGen--Air Traffic Control/Technical Operations Human
Factors.
(7) NextGen--Environment and Energy--Environmental
Management System and Advanced Noise and Emissions reduction.
(8) NextGen--New Air Traffic Management Requirements.
(9) NextGen--Operations Concept Validation--Validation
Modeling.
(10) NextGen--System Safety Management Transformation.
(11) NextGen--Wake Turbulence--Recategorization.
(12) NextGen--Operational Assessments.
(13) NextGen--Staffed NextGen Towers.
(14) Center for Advanced Aviation System Development.
(15) Airports Technology Research Program--Capacity.
(16) Airports Technology Research Program--Safety.
(17) Airports Technology Research Program--Environment.
(18) Airport Cooperative Research--Capacity.
(19) Airport Cooperative Research--Environment.
(20) Airport Cooperative Research--Safety.
SEC. 1004. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
(a) Research Initiative.--Section 44504(b) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (6) by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (7) by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) in conjunction with other Federal agencies, as
appropriate, to develop technologies and methods to assess
the risk of and prevent defects, failures, and malfunctions
of products, parts, and processes for use in all classes of
unmanned aircraft systems that could result in a catastrophic
failure of the unmanned aircraft that would endanger other
aircraft in the national airspace system.''.
[[Page H2169]]
(b) Systems, Procedures, Facilities, and Devices.--Section
44505(b) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4) by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in paragraph (5)(C) by striking the period at the end
and inserting a semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) to develop a better understanding of the relationship
between human factors and unmanned aircraft system safety;
and
``(7) to develop dynamic simulation models for integrating
all classes of unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system without any degradation of existing levels of
safety for all national airspace system users.''.
SEC. 1005. RESEARCH PROGRAM ON RUNWAYS.
Section 44505(c) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (6) as
paragraphs (5) through (8); and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) improved runway surfaces;
``(4) engineered material restraining systems for runways
at both general aviation airports and airports with
commercial air carrier operations;''.
SEC. 1006. RESEARCH ON DESIGN FOR CERTIFICATION.
Section 44505 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:
``(d) Research on Design for Certification.--
``(1) Research.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of the Federal Aviation Research and Development
Reauthorization Act of 2011, the Administrator shall conduct
research on methods and procedures to improve both confidence
in and the timeliness of certification of new technologies
for their introduction into the national airspace system.
``(2) Research plan.--Not later than 6 months after the
date of enactment of the Federal Aviation Research and
Development Reauthorization Act of 2011, the Administrator
shall develop a plan for the research under paragraph (1)
that contains the objectives, proposed tasks, milestones, and
5-year budgetary profile.
``(3) Review.--The Administrator shall enter into an
arrangement with the National Research Council to conduct an
independent review of the plan developed under paragraph (2)
and shall provide the results of that review to the Committee
on Science, Space, and Technology of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate not later than 18 months after
the date of enactment of the Federal Aviation Research and
Development Reauthorization Act of 2011.''.
SEC. 1007. AIRPORT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM.
Section 44511(f) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1) by striking ``establish a 4-year
pilot'' and inserting ``maintain an''; and
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by striking ``Not later than 6 months after the
expiration of the program under this subsection,'' and
inserting ``Not later than September 30, 2012,''; and
(B) by striking ``program, including recommendations as to
the need for establishing a permanent airport cooperative
research program'' and inserting ``program''.
SEC. 1008. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.
(a) Government's Share of Costs.--Section 44513(f) is
amended to read as follows:
``(f) Government's Share of Costs.--The United States
Government's share of establishing and operating a center and
all related research activities that grant recipients carry
out shall not exceed 50 percent of the costs, except that the
Administrator may increase such share to a maximum of 75
percent of the costs for any fiscal year if the Administrator
determines that a center would be unable to carry out the
authorized activities described in this section without
additional funds.''.
(b) Annual Report.--Section 44513 is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(h) Annual Report.--The Administrator shall transmit
annually to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology
of the House of Representatives and the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate at the
time of the President's budget request a report that lists--
``(1) the research projects that have been initiated by
each center in the preceding year;
``(2) the amount of funding for each research project and
the funding source;
``(3) the institutions participating in each project and
their shares of the overall funding for each research
project; and
``(4) the level of cost-sharing for each research
project.''.
SEC. 1009. CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR AVIATION HUMAN RESOURCE
RESEARCH.
(a) Establishment.--Using amounts made available under
section 48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the
Administrator may establish a center of excellence to conduct
research on--
(1) human performance in the air transportation
environment, including among air transportation personnel
such as air traffic controllers, pilots, and technicians; and
(2) any other aviation human resource issues pertinent to
developing and maintaining a safe and efficient air
transportation system.
(b) Activities.--Activities conducted under this section
may include the following:
(1) Research, development, and evaluation of training
programs for air traffic controllers, aviation safety
inspectors, airway transportation safety specialists, and
engineers.
(2) Research and development of best practices for
recruitment into the aviation field for mission critical
positions.
(3) Research, in consultation with other relevant Federal
agencies, to develop a baseline of general aviation
employment statistics and an analysis of future needs in the
aviation field.
(4) Research and the development of a comprehensive
assessment of the airframe and powerplant technician
certification process and its effect on employment trends.
(5) Evaluation of aviation maintenance technician school
environments.
(6) Research and an assessment of the ability to develop
training programs to allow for the transition of recently
unemployed and highly skilled mechanics into the aviation
field.
SEC. 1010. INTERAGENCY RESEARCH ON AVIATION AND THE
ENVIRONMENT.
(a) In General.--Using amounts made available under section
48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator,
in coordination with NASA and after consultation with other
relevant agencies, may maintain a research program to assess
the potential effect of aviation on the environment and, if
warranted, to evaluate approaches to address any such effect.
(b) Research Plan.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator, in coordination with
NASA and after consultation with other relevant agencies,
shall jointly develop a plan to carry out the research under
subsection (a).
(2) Contents.--Such plan shall contain an inventory of
current interagency research being undertaken in this area,
future research objectives, proposed tasks, milestones, and a
5-year budgetary profile.
(3) Requirements.--Such plan--
(A) shall be completed not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act;
(B) shall be submitted to Congress for review; and
(C) shall be updated, as appropriate, every 3 years after
the initial submission.
SEC. 1011. AVIATION FUEL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Using amounts made available under section
48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator,
in coordination with the NASA Administrator, shall continue
research and development activities into the qualification of
an unleaded aviation fuel and safe transition to this fuel
for the fleet of piston engine aircraft.
(b) Requirements.--In carrying out the program under
subsection (a), the Administrator shall, at a minimum--
(1) not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, develop a research and development plan containing
the specific research and development objectives, including
consideration of aviation safety, technical feasibility, and
other relevant factors, and the anticipated timetable for
achieving the objectives;
(2) assess the methods and processes by which the FAA and
industry may expeditiously certify and approve new aircraft
and recertify existing aircraft with respect to unleaded
aviation fuel;
(3) assess technologies that modify existing piston engine
aircraft to enable safe operation of the aircraft using
unleaded aviation fuel and determine the resources necessary
to certify those technologies; and
(4) develop recommendations for appropriate policies and
guidelines to facilitate a transition to unleaded aviation
fuel for piston engine aircraft.
(c) Collaborations.--In carrying out the program under
subsection (a), the Administrator shall collaborate with--
(1) industry groups representing aviation consumers,
manufacturers, and fuel producers and distributors; and
(2) other appropriate Federal agencies.
(d) Report.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall provide a
report to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation of the Senate on the plan,
information obtained, and policies and guidelines developed
pursuant to subsection (b).
SEC. 1012. RESEARCH PROGRAM ON ALTERNATIVE JET FUEL
TECHNOLOGY FOR CIVIL AIRCRAFT.
(a) Research Program.--Using amounts made available under
section 48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the
Secretary shall conduct a research program related to
developing and certifying jet fuel from alternative sources
(such as coal, natural gas, biomass, ethanol, butanol, and
hydrogen) through grants or other measures authorized under
section 106(l)(6) of such title, including reimbursable
agreements with other Federal agencies.
(b) Participation by Stakeholders.--In conducting the
program, the Secretary shall provide for participation by
educational and research institutions and by industry
partners that have existing facilities and experience in the
research and development of technology for alternative jet
fuels.
(c) Collaborations.--In conducting the program, the
Secretary may collaborate with existing interagency
programs--
(1) to further the research and development of alternative
jet fuel technology for civil aircraft, including feasibility
studies; and
(2) to exchange information with the participants in the
Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative.
SEC. 1013. REVIEW OF FAA'S ENERGY- AND ENVIRONMENT-RELATED
RESEARCH PROGRAMS.
(a) Review.--Using amounts made available under section
48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator
shall conduct a review of FAA energy-related and environment-
related research programs. The review shall assess whether--
(1) the programs have well-defined, prioritized, and
appropriate research objectives;
(2) the programs are properly coordinated with the energy-
and environment-related research programs at NASA, NOAA, and
other relevant agencies;
[[Page H2170]]
(3) the programs have allocated appropriate resources to
each of the research objectives; and
(4) there exist suitable mechanisms for transitioning the
research results into FAA's operational technologies and
procedures and certification activities.
(b) Report.--A report containing the results of such review
shall be provided to the Committee on Science, Space, and
Technology of the House of Representatives and the Committee
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate not
later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 1014. REVIEW OF FAA'S AVIATION SAFETY-RELATED RESEARCH
PROGRAMS.
(a) Review.--Using amounts made available under section
48102(a) of title 49, United States Code, the Administrator
shall conduct a review of the FAA's aviation safety-related
research programs. The review shall assess whether--
(1) the programs have well-defined, prioritized, and
appropriate research objectives;
(2) the programs are properly coordinated with the safety
research programs of NASA and other relevant Federal
agencies;
(3) the programs have allocated appropriate resources to
each of the research objectives;
(4) the programs should include a determination about
whether a survey of participants across the air
transportation system is an appropriate way to study safety
risks within such system; and
(5) there exist suitable mechanisms for transitioning the
research results from the programs into the FAA's operational
technologies and procedures and certification activities in a
timely manner.
(b) Aviation Safety-Related Research Programs To Be
Assessed.--The FAA aviation safety-related research programs
to be assessed under the review shall include, at a minimum,
the following:
(1) Air traffic control/technical operations human factors.
(2) Runway incursion reduction.
(3) Flightdeck/maintenance system integration human
factors.
(4) Airports technology research--safety.
(5) Airport Cooperative Research Program--safety.
(6) Weather Program.
(7) Atmospheric hazards/digital system safety.
(8) Fire research and safety.
(9) Propulsion and fuel systems.
(10) Advanced materials/structural safety.
(11) Aging aircraft.
(12) Aircraft catastrophic failure prevention research.
(13) Aeromedical research.
(14) Aviation safety risk analysis.
(15) Unmanned aircraft systems research.
(c) Report.--Not later than 14 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report on the results of such review.
TITLE XI--AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND FINANCING
SEC. 1101. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Airport and Airway Trust
Fund Financing Reauthorization Act of 2011''.
SEC. 1102. EXTENSION OF AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND
EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 9502(d) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``April 1, 2011'' and inserting ``October
1, 2014'', and
(2) by inserting ``or the FAA Reauthorization and Reform
Act of 2011'' before the semicolon at the end of subparagraph
(A).
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (2) of section 9502(e)
of such Code is amended by striking ``April 1, 2011'' and
inserting ``October 1, 2014''.
SEC. 1103. EXTENSION OF TAXES FUNDING AIRPORT AND AIRWAY
TRUST FUND.
(a) Fuel Taxes.--Subparagraph (B) of section 4081(d)(2) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking
``March 31, 2011'' and inserting ``September 30, 2014''.
(b) Ticket Taxes.--
(1) Persons.--Clause (ii) of section 4261(j)(1)(A) of such
Code is amended by striking ``March 31, 2011'' and inserting
``September 30, 2014''.
(2) Property.--Clause (ii) of section 4271(d)(1)(A) of such
Code is amended by striking ``March 31, 2011'' and inserting
``September 30, 2014''.
TITLE XII--COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO ACT OF 2010
SEC. 1201. COMPLIANCE PROVISION.
The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of
complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, shall
be determined by reference to the latest statement titled
``Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation'' for this Act,
submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the
Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such
statement has been submitted prior to the vote on passage.
The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a
substitute shall be in order except those printed in House Report 112-
46. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the
report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read,
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division
of the question.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Mica
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 30, line 25, insert ``or near'' after ``adjacent to''.
Page 31, line 8, after ``property owner'' insert ``(or an
association representing such property owner)''.
Page 31, line 16, after ``property owner'' insert ``(or an
association representing such property owner)''.
Page 32, line 2, insert ``or near'' after ``adjacent to''.
Page 32, line 12, after ``property owner'' insert ``(or an
association representing such property owner)''.
Page 87, strike lines 16 through 20 and insert the
following:
(2) Readiness verification.--Before the Administrator
completes an ADS-B In equipage rulemaking proceeding or
issues and interim or final rule pursuant to paragraph (1),
the Chief NextGen Officer shall verify that--
Page 106, after line 5, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 220. NEXTGEN PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS.
(a) Development of Plan.--Not later than 120 days after the
date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration shall develop a plan to
expedite the equipage of general aviation and commercial
aircraft with NextGen technologies.
(b) Contents.--At a minimum, the plan shall--
(1) be based on public-private partnership principles; and
(2) leverage the use of private sector capital.
(c) Report.--Not later than 150 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit to
Congress a report containing the plan.
Page 118, strike line 11 and all that follows through line
5 on page 119 (and redesignate subsequent sections, and
conform the table of contents, accordingly).
Page 130, line 24, strike ``44733'' and insert ``44732''.
Page 139, line 21, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil'' (and conform the table of contents accordingly).
Page 140, line 4, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 140, line 12, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 140, lines 18 and 19, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 140, line 20, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 141, line 10, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 141, line 16, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 142, line 10, strike ``Secretary'' and insert
``Secretary of Transportation''.
Page 143, strike line 12, and all that follows through line
10 on page 144 and insert the following:
SEC. 324. PUBLIC UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
(a) Guidance.--Not later than 270 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall
issue guidance regarding the operation of public unmanned
aircraft systems to--
(1) expedite the issuance of a certificate of authorization
process;
(2) provide for a collaborative process with public
agencies to allow for an incremental expansion of access to
the national airspace system as technology matures, as the
necessary safety analysis and data become available, and
until standards are completed and technology issues are
resolved;
(3) facilitate the capability of public agencies to develop
and use test ranges, subject to operating restrictions
required by the Federal Aviation Administration, to test and
operate unmanned aircraft systems; and
(4) provide guidance on a public entity's responsibility
when operating an unmanned aircraft without a civil
airworthiness certificate issued by the Federal Aviation
Administration.
(b) Standards for Operation and Certification.--Not later
than December 31, 2015, the Secretary shall develop and
implement operational and certification requirements for
operational procedures for public unmanned aircraft systems
in the national airspace system.
(c) Agreements With Government Agencies.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into
agreements with appropriate government agencies to simplify
the process for issuing certificates of waiver or
authorization with respect to applications seeking
authorization to operate public unmanned aircraft systems in
the national airspace system.
(2) Contents.--The agreements shall--
(A) with respect to an application described in paragraph
(1)--
(i) provide for an expedited review of the application;
(ii) require a decision by the Administrator on approval or
disapproval within 60 business days of the date of submission
of the application; and
(iii) allow for an expedited appeal if the application is
disapproved;
(B) allow for a one-time approval of similar operations
carried out during a fixed period of time; and
[[Page H2171]]
(C) allow a government public safety agency to operate
unmanned aircraft weighing 4.4 pounds or less, within the
line of sight of the operator, less than 400 feet above the
ground during daylight conditions, within Class G airspace,
outside of 5 statute miles from any airport, heliport,
seaplane base or spaceport, or any location with aviation
activities.
Page 144, line 16, insert ``not fewer than'' before ``4
test ranges''
Page 145, line 4, strike ``commercial'' and insert
``civil''.
Page 157, after line 14, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 336. DISCLOSURE AND USE OF INFORMATION.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 44734. Disclosure and use of information
``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, and except as provided in this section, the following
reports and data shall not be subject to discovery or
subpoena or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State
court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any such
proceeding:
``(1) A report developed under the Aviation Safety Action
Program.
``(2) Data produced or collected under the Flight
Operational Quality Assurance Program.
``(3) A report developed under the Line Operations Safety
Audit Program.
``(4) Hazard identification, risk assessment, risk control,
and safety assurance data produced or collected for purposes
of--
``(A) assessing and improving aviation safety; or
``(B) developing and implementing a safety management
system acceptable to the Administrator.
``(5) Reports, analyses, and directed studies based in
whole or in part on reports or data described in paragraphs
(1) through (4), including those prepared under the Aviation
Safety Information Analysis and Sharing Program.
``(b) Protection of Voluntarily Submitted Information.--Any
report or data described in subsection (a) that is
voluntarily provided to the Federal Aviation Administration
shall be considered to be voluntarily submitted information
within the meaning of section 40123, and shall not be
disclosed to the public pursuant to section 552(b)(3)(B) of
title 5.
``(c) FAA Reports.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration may release documents to the public that
include summaries, aggregations, or statistical analyses
based on reports or data described in subsection (a).
``(d) Safety Recommendations.--Nothing in this section
shall be construed to prevent the National Transportation
Safety Board, in connection with an ongoing accident
investigation, from referring to relevant information
contained in reports or data described in subsection (a) in
making safety recommendations.
``(e) Waiver.--Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect
to a report developed, or data produced or collected, by or
on behalf of a person if that person waives the privileges
provided under subsection (a). A waiver under this subsection
shall be made in writing or occasioned by the person's own
use of the information in presenting a claim or defense.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for such chapter (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44734. Disclosure and use of information.''.
SEC. 337. LIABILITY PROTECTION FOR PERSONS IMPLEMENTING
SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 44735. Liability protection for persons implementing
safety management systems
``(a) Persons Implementing Safety Management Systems.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person that is required by the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration to implement a safety
management system may not be held liable for damages in
connection with a claim filed in a State or Federal court
(including a claim for compensatory, punitive, contributory,
or indemnity damages) relating to the person's preparation or
implementation of, or an event or occurrence contemplated by,
the safety management system.
``(2) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall relieve a
person from liability for damages resulting from the person's
own willful or reckless acts or omissions as demonstrated by
clear and convincing evidence.
``(b) Accountable Executives.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a person who is employed by a person described in
subsection (a) and who is responsible for performing the
functions of an accountable executive pursuant to a safety
management system required by the Administrator--
``(A) shall be deemed to be acting in the person's official
capacity as an officer or employee of the person described in
subsection (a) when performing such functions; and
``(B) except as provided in paragraph (2), may not be held
personally liable for damages in connection with a claim
filed in a State or Federal court (including a claim for
compensatory, punitive, contributory, or indemnity damages)
relating to the person's responsibilities pursuant to the
safety management system.
``(2) Limitation.--Nothing in this subsection shall relieve
a person performing the functions of an accountable executive
pursuant to a safety management system from personal
liability for damages resulting from the person's willful or
reckless acts or omissions as demonstrated by clear and
convincing evidence.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for such chapter (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44735. Liability protection for persons implementing safety
management systems.''.
Page 170, strike line 13 and all that follows before line
22 on page 172 and insert the following:
SEC. 424. MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 417 is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 41724. Musical instruments
``(a) In General.--
``(1) Small instruments as carry-on baggage.--An air
carrier providing air transportation shall permit a passenger
to carry a violin, guitar, or other musical instrument in the
aircraft cabin if--
``(A) the instrument can be stowed safely in a suitable
baggage compartment in the aircraft cabin or under a
passenger seat, in accordance with the requirements for
carriage of carry-on baggage or cargo established by the
Administrator; and
``(B) there is space for such stowage at the time the
passenger boards the aircraft.
``(2) Larger instruments as carry-on baggage.--An air
carrier providing air transportation shall permit a passenger
to carry a musical instrument that is too large to meet the
requirements of paragraph (1) in the aircraft cabin if--
``(A) the instrument is contained in a case or covered so
as to avoid injury to other passengers;
``(B) the weight of the instrument, including the case or
covering, does not exceed 165 pounds or the applicable weight
restrictions for the aircraft;
``(C) the instrument can be stowed in accordance with the
requirements for carriage of carry-on baggage or cargo
established by the Administrator;
``(D) neither the instrument nor the case contains any
object not otherwise permitted to be carried in an aircraft
cabin because of a law or regulation of the United States;
and
``(E) the passenger wishing to carry the instrument in the
aircraft cabin has purchased an additional seat to
accommodate the instrument.
``(3) Large instruments as checked baggage.--An air carrier
shall transport as baggage a musical instrument that is the
property of a passenger traveling in air transportation that
may not be carried in the aircraft cabin if--
``(A) the sum of the length, width, and height measured in
inches of the outside linear dimensions of the instrument
(including the case) does not exceed 150 inches or the
applicable size restrictions for the aircraft;
``(B) the weight of the instrument does not exceed 165
pounds or the applicable weight restrictions for the
aircraft; and
``(C) the instrument can be stowed in accordance with the
requirements for carriage of carry-on baggage or cargo
established by the Administrator.
``(b) Regulations.--Not later than 2 years after the date
of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall issue final
regulations to carry out subsection (a).
``(c) Effective Date.--The requirements of this section
shall become effective on the date of issuance of the final
regulations under subsection (b).''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for such subchapter
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``41724. Musical instruments.''.
Page 205, line 12, strike ``2014'' and insert ``2016''.
Page 210, line 6, strike ``and''.
Page 210, line 11, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 210, after line 11, insert the following:
(3) officials the United States Government, and
particularly the Secretary of Transportation and the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration, should
use all political, diplomatic, and legal tools at the
disposal of the United States to ensure that the European
Union's emissions trading scheme is not applied to aircraft
registered by the United States or the operators of those
aircraft, including the mandates that United States carriers
provide emissions data to and purchase emissions allowances
from or surrender emissions allowances to the European Union
Member States.
Page 211, line 9, strike ``(a) Dispute Resolution.--''.
Page 234, strike line 13 and all that follows before line 7
on page 237 and insert the following (and conform the table
of contents accordingly):
SEC. 802. FAA AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD
CHECKS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 401 is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``Sec. 40130. FAA authority to conduct criminal history
record checks
``(a) Criminal History Background Checks.--
[[Page H2172]]
``(1) Access to information.--The Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration, for certification purposes
of the Administration only, is authorized--
``(A) to conduct, in accordance with the established
request process, a criminal history background check of an
airman in the criminal repositories of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation and States by submitting positive
identification of the airman to a fingerprint-based
repository in compliance with section 217 of the National
Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact Act of 1998 (42 U.S.C.
14616); and
``(B) to receive relevant criminal history record
information regarding the airman checked.
``(2) Release of information.--In accessing a repository
referred to in paragraph (1), the Administrator shall be
subject to the conditions and procedures established by the
Department of Justice or the State, as appropriate, for other
governmental agencies conducting background checks for
noncriminal justice purposes.
``(3) Limitation.--The Administrator may not use the
authority under paragraph (1) to conduct criminal
investigations.
``(4) Reimbursement.--The Administrator may collect
reimbursement to process the fingerprint-based checks under
this subsection, to be used for expenses incurred, including
Federal Bureau of Investigation fees, in providing these
services.
``(b) Designated Employees.--The Administrator shall
designate, by order, employees of the Federal Aviation
Administration to carry out the authority described in
subsection (a).''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 401 is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``40130. FAA authority to conduct criminal history record checks.''.
Page 256, after line 9, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 814. AIR TRANSPORTATION OF LITHIUM CELLS AND BATTERIES.
(a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration may not issue or enforce any regulation or
other requirement regarding the transportation by aircraft of
lithium metal cells or batteries or lithium ion cells or
batteries, whether transported separately or packed with or
contained in equipment, if the requirement is more stringent
than the requirements of the International Civil Aviation
Organization Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of
Dangerous Goods by Air, 2009-2010 edition, as amended
(including amendments adopted after the date of enactment of
this Act).
(b) Exception.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), the
Administrator may enforce the prohibition on transporting
primary (nonrechargeable) lithium batteries and cells aboard
passenger carrying aircraft set forth in special provision
A100 of the table contained in section 172.102(c)(2) of title
49, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on the date of
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 815. USE OF MINERAL REVENUE AT CERTAIN AIRPORTS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
may declare certain revenue derived from or generated by
mineral extraction at a general aviation airport to be
revenue greater than the long-term project, operation,
maintenance, planning, and capacity needs of the airport.
(b) Use of Revenue.--Subject to subsection (c), if the
Administrator issues a declaration with respect to an airport
under subsection (a), the airport sponsor may allocate to
itself (or to a governing body within the geographical limits
of the airport's locality) the revenues identified in the
declaration for use in carrying out a Federal, State, or
local transportation infrastructure project.
(c) Conditions.--Any declaration made under subsection (a)
with respect to an airport shall be subject to the following
conditions:
(1) In generating revenue from mineral rights extraction,
production, lease, or other means, the airport sponsor shall
not charge less than fair market value.
(2) The airport sponsor and the Administrator shall agree
on a 20-year capital improvement program that includes, at a
minimum, 20-year projected charges, costs, and fees for the
development, improvement, operation, and maintenance of the
airport, with consideration for costs and charges adjusted
for inflation.
(3) The airport sponsor shall agree in writing to waive all
rights to receive entitlement funds or discretionary funds to
be used at the airport under section 47114 or 47115 of title
49, United States Code, for a period of 20 years.
(4) The airport sponsor shall comply, during the 20-year
period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, with
all grant assurance obligations in effect as of such date of
enactment for the airport under section 47107 of such title.
(5) The airport sponsor shall agree in writing to comply
with sections 47107(b) and 47133 of such title, except for
any exemptions specifically granted by the Administrator in
accordance with this section, in perpetuity.
(6) The airport sponsor shall agree in writing to operate
the airport as a public-use airport unless the Administrator
specifically grants a request to allow the airport to close.
(7) The airport sponsor shall create a provisional fund for
current and future environmental impacts, assessments, and
any mitigation plans agreed upon with the Administrator.
(d) Completion of Determination.--The Administrator shall
conduct a review and issue a determination under subsection
(a) on or before the 90th day following the date of receipt
of an airport sponsor's application and requisite
documentation.
(e) General Aviation Airport Defined.--In this section, the
term ``general aviation airport'' means an airport that does
not receive scheduled passenger aircraft service.
SEC. 816. LIABILITY PROTECTION FOR VOLUNTEER PILOT NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS THAT FLY FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT AND
TO PILOTS AND STAFF OF SUCH NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS.
Section 4 of the Volunteer Protection Act of 1997 (42
U.S.C. 14503) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(4) by inserting ``(unless the
volunteer was operating an aircraft in furtherance of the
purpose of a volunteer pilot nonprofit organization that
flies for public benefit and was properly licensed and
insured for the operation of such aircraft)'' after
``aircraft'' ; and
(2) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(c) No Effect on Liability of Organization or Entity.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2),
nothing in this section shall be construed to affect the
liability of any nonprofit organization or governmental
entity with respect to harm caused to any person.
``(2) Exception.--A volunteer pilot nonprofit organization
that flies for public benefit, the staff, mission
coordinators, officers, and directors (whether volunteer or
otherwise) of such nonprofit organization, and a referring
agency of such nonprofit organization shall not be liable for
harm caused to any person by a volunteer of such nonprofit
organization while such volunteer--
``(A) is operating an aircraft in furtherance of the
purpose of such nonprofit organization;
``(B) is properly licensed for the operation of such
aircraft; and
``(C) has certified to such nonprofit organization that
such volunteer has insurance covering the volunteer's
operation of such aircraft.''.
SEC. 817. AIRCRAFT SITUATIONAL DISPLAY TO INDUSTRY.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Federal Government's dissemination to the public of
information relating to a noncommercial flight carried out by
a private owner or operator of an aircraft, whether during or
following the flight, does not serve a public policy
objective.
(2) Upon the request of a private owner or operator of an
aircraft, the Federal Government should not disseminate to
the public information relating to noncommercial flights
carried out by that owner or operator, as the information
should be private and confidential.
(b) Aircraft Situational Display to Industry.--Upon the
request of a private owner or operator of an aircraft, the
Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
block, with respect to the noncommercial flights of that
owner or operator, the display of that owner or operator's
aircraft registration number in aircraft situational display
data provided by the Administrator to any entity, except a
government agency.
SEC. 818. CONTRACTING.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
shall conduct a review and submit to the Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives a report describing how the Federal
Aviation Administration weighs the economic vitality of a
region when considering contract proposals for training
facilities under the general contracting authority of the
Federal Aviation Administration.
SEC. 819. FLOOD PLANNING.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration,
in consultation with the Administrator of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, shall conduct a review and
submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives a report on the state of preparedness and
response capability for airports located in flood plains to
respond to and seek assistance in rebuilding after
catastrophic flooding.
Page 280, after line 2, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
TITLE XIII--COMMERCIAL SPACE
SEC. 1301. COMMERCIAL SPACE LAUNCH LICENSE REQUIREMENTS.
Section 50905(c)(3) of title 51, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``the date of enactment of the Commercial
Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004'' and inserting ``the
first licensed launch of a space flight participant''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Florida (Mr. Mica) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
[[Page H2173]]
Mr. MICA. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
The manager's amendment is pretty simple. First of all, we have tried
to accommodate as many Members as we could with their requests and
include on both sides of the aisle provisions that they requested that
weren't in the original submission.
Additionally, the manager's amendment makes technical corrections to
provisions in the underlying bill, including those related to unmanned
aircraft systems, ADS-B readiness verification, flight attendant
fatigue, FAA access to criminal records databases, and also, as Mr.
Coble said, who was with us earlier, just a small accommodation for
another Member who wanted musical instruments, some provisions again in
the bill. So we have tried to accommodate many of the Members who have
had these questions.
The manager's amendment also contains provisions regarding public-
private partnerships to advance NextGen. If the government does it, it
usually doesn't get done. If we have public-private partnerships and
closely monitor that, we can have great success, reduce costs, and
bring technology online that makes it even safer for people to fly at
lower costs and with less personnel.
We have protections for voluntary safety data submissions. We also
have a provision that is very important for the European Union
Emissions Trading scheme. This is very important, because they are
trying to close us down or tax us as we enter some of their airspace.
We have agreements at the airport for new revenue liability
protections for volunteer pilot organizations, for public benefit
flights, and also for privacy protections for airspace users, and also,
finally, the safe shipment of lithium batteries.
House of Representatives, Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform,
Washington, DC, March 31, 2011.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for working with me in
preparing the Manager's amendment to H.R. 658, the ``FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.'' As you know, the
amendment includes provisions related to the Freedom of
Information Act within the jurisdiction of the Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform.
I respectfully request your support for the appointment of
outside conferees from the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform should this bill or a similar bill be
considered in a conference with the Senate. Finally, I
request that you include this letter and your response in the
Congressional Record during consideration of the legislation
on the House floor.
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
Sincerely,
Darrell Issa,
Chairman.
____
House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, March 31, 2011.
Hon. Darrell Issa,
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your letter regarding the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's jurisdictional
interest in the Manager's amendment to H.R. 658, the ``FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.''
Thank you for your willingness to work with me on Freedom
of Information Act provisions within the jurisdiction of the
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Committee. As
you have requested, I will support your request for an
appropriate appointment of outside conferees from your
Committee in the event of a House-Senate conference on this
or similar legislation should such a conference be convened.
Finally, I will include a copy of your letter and this
response in the Congressional Record during the floor
consideration of this bill. Thank you again for your
cooperation.
Sincerely,
John L. Mica,
Chairman.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. RAHALL. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from West Virginia is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. RAHALL. I oppose this amendment because, for me, it raises two
key concerns.
First is that the amendment would basically create a liability shield
for airlines and airports that are negligent and cause airplane
crashes.
Last year, Congress directed the FAA to require airlines to implement
safety management systems. Using these systems, airlines will use data
to identify risk and improve safety. The FAA is likely to require
airports to adopt similar systems.
Under this amendment, adoption of a safety management system would
give airlines and airports a total ``pass'' on liability for their
ordinary negligence. It would deprive passengers and their families of
the right to seek compensation for damage caused by airline crashes.
The right to go to court and seek compensation for damage caused by the
negligence of another person, including an airline or airport, is an
intrinsic part of our law. This amendment would take that right away,
and I cannot support it.
My last concern is about a provision in the amendment dealing with
lithium batteries. The transport of lithium batteries without
appropriate safety checks has been proven to present hazards that could
bring down an airplane. This amendment would lock the United States
into following international standards on transporting lithium
batteries that set the floor, not the bar that we should aspire to. It
would prevent airlines from conducting acceptance checks of battery
shipments and it would derail essential rulemakings by the Department
of Transportation to ensure that lithium batteries are transported
safely.
For these two reasons, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support the amendment.
I yield the balance of my time to the gentlelady from Maryland (Ms.
Edwards).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Maryland is recognized for 3
minutes.
Ms. EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the manager's
amendment. This amendment would extend the moratorium on safety
regulations for human spaceflight launches for 8 years after the first
licensed human spaceflight launch. With these types of flights likely
not to begin until 2013, we are talking about delaying safety
regulations for a decade or more.
Let me first say that I hope that commercial spaceflight, both manned
and unmanned, eventually will become a robust sector of our economy. We
are not quite there yet. But certainly some of these companies in this
emerging industry openly talk about a business model of flying hundreds
of paying passengers to space every year. These are ambitious goals,
and I wish them well. I hope I am one of them.
But if these companies are successful and start carrying paying
passengers like me, then what we are talking about with this amendment
is allowing an entire human transportation system to operate for almost
a decade without any meaningful safety regulation. I find that to be
unconscionable.
I would point out that by rejecting the amendment, Congress is not
dictating that any safety regulations have to be promulgated. On the
contrary, under current law, an absolute prohibition exists until the
end of 2012. Even after that point, the agency would not be required to
move forward with the rulemaking process but would only do so if it saw
a need. But imposing an arbitrarily prohibition on safety regulations
for the remainder of the decade, if not longer, really abdicates our
responsibility to the public.
{time} 1620
If there's a fatal accident later in this decade, if we're carrying
astronauts and there's an accident in the decade, I don't want it to be
said that Congress blocked the establishment of safety regulations that
could have prevented that accident, and I don't think many Members in
this body would either.
I'd note that it's my understanding that the Science, Space, and
Technology Committee is planning on holding hearings this session on
this very topic, with an eye towards moving a bill to address these
issues sometime in this Congress.
So we're really premature here to set in place a moratorium that we
haven't even had a chance to hear debate on and hear from the industry
or the FAA or safety experts on the subject. I hope this isn't the kind
of rush to judgment that we'll come to expect on issues of public
safety.
I have some familiarity with these issues on the Science, Space, and
Technology Committee. The commercial
[[Page H2174]]
space folks argue that the spacecraft designs and operational concepts
are not quite mature enough and that there's been no operational
experience on which to base safety regulation. Fair enough. That may be
true. But these same people are also arguing that the industry is
mature enough for the government to turn over NASA's transport of
astronauts to space to them. You cannot have it both ways.
These notions are mutually exclusive. If the industry is mature
enough to take on tasks currently performed by the government, then the
industry is mature enough to be thinking about a safety regime to
ensure the American public is protected in these activities.
Mr. Chair, I want to note that, once again, there's no reason to rush
to judgment on these issues.
Mr. MICA. To close on the manager's amendment which I have offered
today, first of all, let me just say that the two objections that have
been raised again by the minority--and I appreciate their concerns--as
to the safety reporting, which we put in some years ago, has actually
resulted in probably the safest system that we've had in the world and
the safest safety record in history. If you stop and think about it--I
chaired the Aviation Subcommittee--the last large commercial aircraft
that we had that went down, unfortunately, was near Veterans Day of
2001, after 9/11.
Safety reporting is so important and is done on a voluntary basis,
and it's so important that the people who collect this data are not
held liable. They're collecting the data that benefits us to make this
safe. This has worked. It's kept us safe. And we want to ensure, again,
that this continues. Some will say we had commuter. Yes, we did have
commuter. We also passed commuter safety legislation to deal with
problems we had there. So we have a safe system. We don't want to stop
that. We don't want the recording of the data to stop or those held
liable that are collecting the data. That's the first point.
The second point: lithium batteries. This is a lithium battery. This
has a lithium battery. This is a pacemaker. This keeps your heart
going. This has a lithium battery. Laptops have lithium batteries.
Almost everything has lithium batteries. Leave it to the DOT to try to
put in place rules that would create stopping granny and grandpa and
others that need this pacemaker from getting it. If we didn't have this
provision in here, it would be a $1.1 billion impact on industry. We'd
reroute the shipment of this stuff through other countries to avoid
paying and going through the onerous regulations that our government
would create.
Countless consumers would be forced to pay more because of silly
regulations that don't make any sense. A severe supply chain issue and
limitations on supply would be imposed. We would have delays in
shipping lifesaving equipment. This little thing here that saves
hearts, that's what they want to mess up. One more Federal regulation
to delay shipping. Even our troops, who rely on these lithium
batteries--their receiving them would be put at risk, the way DOT is
doing.
This is a good provision. It needs to be in the bill. We've got to
keep some of the regulation, those that put us out of business, put
jobs overseas and put people at risk, out of our way.
I urge the House to pass the manager's amendment with these sound
provisions that will make a big difference.
Alliance for Worker Freedom,
Washington, DC, February 15, 2011.
Dear Representative: On behalf of the Alliance for Worker
Freedom (AWF), an organization established in 2003 to combat
anti-worker legislation and promote free and open labor
markets, I urge you to support the Title IX provision in the
FAA Reauthorization bill which repeals last year's the
unprecedented National Mediation Board (NMB) voting rule
change.
I write this letter in anticipation of an amendment which
looks to strip this essential provision from FAA
Reauthorization.
Last year, the National Mediation Board reversed 75 years
worth of precedent and numerous Supreme Court rulings,
implementing elections rules whereby a majority of voters in
a union election are now able to determine whether a
collective bargaining unit has been formed. Prior to this
ruling, a majority of a workforce was required to certify a
union--a long held and well understood practice. The so-
called ``minority rule'' ruling reveals a contempt for
workers' preferences, as well as a clear bias towards union
interests.
The three member NMB is comprised of two former union
officials, both President Obama appointees, giving them a
stranglehold over the agency's rulemaking process. It is
essential that this obscure agency, beholden to union
interests, have its power checked via Congressional action.
Title IX of the FAA Reauthorization legislation addresses
the inappropriateness of this administratively imposed rule
which aims to facilitate unionization at the expense of
workers' preference. Union complaints that it has become too
difficult to unionize workers, thus necessitating the NMB's
change, are largely unfounded: majority rule has been used in
more than 1,850 elections, and unions have won more than 65%
of the time.
Title IX looks to reinstate longstanding union election
rules which require a majority of the workplace's consent to
certify a union.
It is for these reasons that I hope you will help ensure
that Title IX remains in the final version of the FAA
Reauthorization legislation and oppose any amendments that
look to remove this provision.
Sincerely,
Christopher Prandoni,
Executive Director.
____
Cargo Airline Association Urges Passage of H.R. 658
March 1, 2011.--The Cargo Airline Association, the voice of
the nation's all-cargo air carriers, applauds the efforts in
the House of Representatives to enact legislation
reauthorizing the programs of the Federal Aviation
Administration (H.R. 658). Association president, Steve
Alterman, noted that, ``This legislation ensures that
modernization of our aviation infrastructure can now move
forward, with satellite-based technology replacing our
decades-old ground-based systems.'' The bill will also
authorize important environmental programs that are critical
to ensuring that environmental goals can be met and that
alternative fuels research and development can continue.
Mr. Alterman further noted that the provisions of the bill
will allow U.S. Carriers to remain competitive in a worldwide
economy thereby protecting U.S. jobs and enabling the United
States to retain its leadership in aviation technology. He
stated that, ``The House proposal provides a long term
funding stream for the FAA that will enable the Agency to
prioritize and implement the improvements so badly needed by
everyone who depends on our aviation system.''
____
National Air Carrier Association,
Arlington, VA, March 1, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Nick Rahall,
Ranking Member, House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica and Ranking Member Rahall, I wish to
take this opportunity to express my strong support for
passage of the House's version of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011--
HR. 658. Our members appreciate your willingness to move H.R.
658 at such a speedy pace. It has been far too long since
Congress has passed a long term Reauthorization bill which is
critical to the needs of all aspects of aviation.
Among the many positive aspects of this legislation is the
authorization of an appropriate level of funds to help get
``NextGen'' moving and a part of aviation's future sooner
rather than later. While NextGen equipage is a challenge for
many aspects of the industry, including NACA carriers, we
believe the funding levels authorized in this legislation is
a good starting point for the program. NextGen represents
tremendous opportunities for airlines and the traveling
public to travel in a safer, faster, and more environmentally
friendly aviation system.
Our members also greatly appreciate the risk-based approach
to handling the sensitive issue of foreign repair stations.
We believe our bilateral agreements demanded a different
approach from past versions of FAA Reauthorization and H.R.
658 strikes the right balance.
Thank you for all of your efforts on behalf of the aviation
industry. We stand ready to work with you on this legislation
as well as all other future challenges facing our industry.
Sincerely,
A. Oakley Brooks,
President.
____
Association for Unmanned
Vehicle Systems International,
Arlington, VA, March 2, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, House of Representatives, Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica: As the President and CEO of the
Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International
(AUVSI), the world's largest non-profit organization
dedicated to the advancement of unmanned systems, I thank you
for including important provisions in the House Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization and Reform Act
of 2011 (H.R. 658) on integrating Unmanned Aircraft Systems
(UAS) into the National Airspace System (NAS).
The UAS market, both defense and civil, is a promising
segment in the U.S. aerospace industry, and one that has the
potential to create tens of thousands of new jobs in the
coming years. However, for these jobs to materialize, federal
regulations on the use of
[[Page H2175]]
UAS in the NAS must be addressed. H.R. 658 requires the FAA
to create a comprehensive plan on integrating UAS into the
NAS and to have it implemented by September 30, 2015.
Although many in the unmanned systems industry would like to
see this timeline shortened, the industry is encouraged that
the bill also includes language allowing for the expedited
integration of certain types of UAS.
The bill also includes important provisions on the
development and implementation of the Next Generation Air
Transportation System (NextGen). Like all other users of the
NAS, UAS will benefit from the implementation of NextGen, as
it will allow manned and unmanned systems to fly in the same
airspace.
Without a doubt, UAS integration will have a tremendous
impact on the aerospace industry and aid in driving economic
development in many regions across the country. How quickly
new job creation and economic benefits become a reality,
however, depends on the progress and timeliness of UAS
integration efforts.
The unmanned systems community applauds your efforts to
pass this long-overdue piece of legislation, and we look
forward to continuing to work with Congress and the FAA on
implementing these important UAS provisions. If you have any
questions, or need any additional information, please contact
AUVSI's Executive Vice President, Gretchen West, at
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Michael Toscano,
President and CEO AUVSI.
____
Experimental Aircraft Association,
Oshkosh, WI, March 15, 2011.
Hon. Thomas Petri,
Chairman, Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on
Aviation, House of Representatives.
Hon. Jerry Costello,
Ranking Member, Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Aviation, House of Representatives.
Chairman Petri and Ranking Member Costello: The
Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), representing the
aviation interests of more than 165,000 members who
passionately engage in aviation for the purposes of sport,
recreation, and personal transportation, supports the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization and Reform Act
of 2011 (H.R. 658), as passed by the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee on March 10, 2011.
EAA has long held the view that the FAA needs a stable
source of funding based on the well-established, fair, cost-
effective and successful model of excise taxes on aviation
fuels as opposed to the implementation of new user fees. We
also maintain that the prolonged period of continuing
resolutions funding the agency on short-term extensions has
been harmful to the agency, its efforts to modernize the air
traffic system, and to the aviation community as a whole. We
applaud your leadership in making the FAA reauthorization a
top priority in the 112th Congress.
EAA is particularly pleased with the Committee's decision
to address policies of importance to EAA members such as
funding of general aviation airports through the Airport
Improvement Program, release of vintage aircraft design data
in support of aviation safety, and permitting adjacent
residential through-the-fence access to airports where
appropriate. Above all, we are thrilled that the Committee
agrees that the best way for general aviation to fund its
share of FAA operations and capital investment is through the
use of fuel taxes as opposed to new user fees.
Thank you for your efforts and EAA stands ready to assist
you and your staff in any manner necessary.
Respectfully,
Douglas C. Macnair.
____
International Association of
Fire Chiefs,
Fairfax, VA, March 29, 2011.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall II,
Ranking Member, House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica and Ranking Member Rahall, On behalf of
its nearly 13,000 members, the International Association of
Fire Chiefs (IAFC) would like to commend your leadership and
efforts to improve aviation and, in particular, air medical
transport safety.
The IAFC represents public safety agencies that provide the
public with the highest level of service by delivering air
medical transport or helicopter emergency medical services
(HEMS), search and rescue, homeland security and wildfire
suppression in an effective, efficient and safe manner. We
appreciate the language in Section 311 of H.R. 658, the FAA
Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011, which demonstrates an
understanding that public safety aviation operators operate a
mixed fleet of aircraft that in some cases cannot be deemed
``civil aircraft'' due to its origin, type and configuration.
We hope that this language remains clear through the
legislative process so that public safety agencies performing
HEMS operations utilizing agency owned and operated aircraft
will not be harmed. In addition, the IAFC appreciates the
provision in H.R. 658 which provides the FAA Administrator
with the responsibility to ``conduct a rulemaking proceeding
to improve the safety of flight crewmembers, medical
personnel, and passengers onboard helicopters providing air
ambulance services under part 135.''
Although we believe additional language is needed in
conference committee to clarify that the regulations on
helicopter air ambulance operations applies to current part
135 certificate holders only and not to public safety
agencies performing HEMS operations utilizing agency owned
and operated aircraft, the IAFC supports the provisions
related to the safety of air ambulance operations in H.R.
658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011. Once
again, the IAFC would like to thank you and your staffs for
your ongoing efforts to effectively address the need to
improve safety in the air medical transport industry.
Sincerely,
Chief Jack Parow, MA, EFO, CFO,
President and Chairman
of the Board.
Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the managers
amendment.
Currently, the Department of Transportation is working on a rule that
would require finished medical devices and other products containing
lithium batteries to be shipped as hazardous cargo.
The rule would prevent medical devices, like this pacemakers,
implantable defibrillators, and blood glucose monitors, from being
shipped by air, until special packaging can be developed. We don't know
when this would be developed.
These medical devices are heavily regulated by the Food and Drug
Administration and undergo extensive testing to assure safety--
including testing to ensure devices withstand the rigors of shipping.
If the DOT rule passes, it would severely disrupt the medical device
industry's just-in-time delivery system, lead to bottlenecks in the
supply chain, and prevent overnight or same-day shipping to patients
all over the country even though these devices pose no demonstrable
safety risk.
It is important to note that the rule wouldn't just negatively impact
medical devices. It will also have a significant impact on shipping
everyday technologies such as laptops and cell phones. All in all, the
rule will cost more than a billion dollars annually.
The rule would have a devastating impact on patient access to life-
saving medical devices and will increase health care costs. Thankfully,
the managers amendment remedies this situation, and I applaud Chairman
Mica for his work.
Mr. BUCSHON. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of Chairman Mica's
manager's amendment to the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011.
Indiana is the second largest producer of medical devices in the
country with 20,000 jobs in this industry.
There are 1,200 employees at a Boston Scientific plant in the town of
Spencer, Indiana which is located in my district. These are Hoosiers
who work hard every day to make components that are found in
pacemakers. As a cardiothoracic surgeon, I implanted numerous
pacemakers into patients that ended up saving their lives.
A recent rule proposed by the Obama Administration would restrict the
method in which these pacemakers are shipped across the country because
of the very small lithium battery they contain. This rule is expected
to cost Boston Scientific $30 million and it is a cost that will be
passed onto the consumer.
This is a device that is safe enough to put in the human body, but
the Obama Administration does not believe that it's currently safe
enough to ship across the country, specifically on an airplane. These
restrictions will result in hospitals waiting longer to receive
pacemakers and could put human lives in danger.
There is no evidence that the transport of lithium batteries has ever
lead to a fire on an aircraft.
I fully support Chairman Mica's Manager's amendment which would
require the shipping of lithium batteries to comply with international
standards which have proven to be very safe and eliminate President
Obama's proposed rule and I encourage my colleagues to support the
Manager's Amendment.
Mr. BRALEY of Iowa. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the Managers
Amendment, because this amendment is an unprecedented attack on states.
The amendment gives complete federal government control over air travel
safety, by radically reducing a state's ability to protect its own
citizens. Passengers, crew, ground workers, and others have no recourse
under state law, under this amendment. For those concerned about an
expansion of the federal government over ordinary activities of
American citizens--this is it.
In fact, the amendment gives broad immunity to an entire industry,
severely limiting every Americans' freedoms under the 7th amendment.
The 7th amendment is intended as a check on potential abuse of power by
the government. This amendment injects the government into courthouses
and into juries. Blanket immunity to an entire industry is simply
unprecedented.
[[Page H2176]]
Here's what this means: If you or your family gets injured or even
killed in an airline accident, and it's even clear that airline safety
professionals were completely negligent in their safety preparations,
you have no recourse. In that situation, following events even as
tragic as plane crashes, the United States Government simply leaves you
and your family behind, contrary to your 7th Amendment rights under the
Constitution. This type of immunity is completely inappropriate for
crashes caused by the negligence of those charged with maintaining
safety.
I believe that we should be working to improve air safety, not weaken
it. We should fight to do whatever we can for families who face the
terrible tragedy of plane crashes, not abandoning them. I oppose this
amendment, because I stand with American travelers and American
families, and I urge my colleagues to vote against this attack on the
7th Amendment to the Constitution.
Mr. MICA. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. RAHALL. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 2 Offered by Ms. Waters
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2
printed in House Report 112-46.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 29, after line 2, insert the following (and conform
subsequent subsections accordingly):
(b) Consultation With Communities.--Section 47107(a) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (20) by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (21) by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(22) the airport owner or operator will consult on a
regular basis regarding airport operations and the impact of
such operations on the community with representatives of the
community surrounding the airport, including--
``(A) residents who are impacted by airport noise and other
airport operations; and
``(B) any organization, the membership of which includes at
least 20 individuals who reside within 10 miles of the
airport, that notifies the owner or operator of its desire to
be consulted pursuant to this paragraph.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Waters) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. WATERS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment requires airport operators, as
a condition for receiving grants under the Airport Improvement Program,
to consult on a regular basis with representatives of the local
community regarding airport operations and their impact on the
community.
Airports and airport operations have a profound impact on the
communities that surround them. Airplane takeoffs and landings can make
noise that interrupts families in their homes and workers in their
offices. Daytime takeoffs can interrupt school children who are trying
to learn and teachers who are trying to teach. Nighttime takeoffs can
make it difficult for local residents to sleep. Jet fuel emissions and
other harmful pollutants contribute to air pollution, and traffic
congestion surrounding an airport adds to the noise and to the
pollution.
Needless to say, airports play an important role in our economy and
our society. But airport operators should be good neighbors in their
communities. Being a good neighbor simply means consulting with the
local community regarding airport operations. It means minimizing the
nighttime takeoffs and landings so that residents can sleep. It means
assisting families with residential noise mitigation programs, such as
retrofitting windows, doors, siding, and insulation, to help keep
aircraft noise to a minimum. It means consulting with local residents
and small businesses regarding plans to expand, upgrade or realign
runways and other airport facilities, and listening to their concerns.
My amendment requires airport operators that receive Airport
Improvement Program grants to consult on a regular basis regarding
airport operations and their impact on the community. Airport operators
would be required to include in these consultations local residents who
are impacted by airport operations. Airport operators would
specifically be required to include any organization, the membership of
which includes at least 20 people who reside within 10 miles of the
airport, that notifies the operator of its desire to be consulted.
This amendment is not overly burdensome for airports and does not
cost money for the Federal Government. It merely requires airport
operators to be good neighbors, and it holds them accountable to the
communities that they serve.
Mr. Chairman and Members, I have one of the world's largest airports
in my district--and they do a good job--but I'm constantly contacted by
residents in the surrounding community who are raising questions about
new plans, new operations, airport noise, and other kinds of things
that, if the airport operators were in communication with the
communities in some kind of formalized way, they would have a better
understanding. It's not that these neighbors are saying they don't want
these airports. As a matter of fact, we're pleased that they have LAX
in our community. It is job-intensive, and we like the idea that the
people who work there are able not only to earn a good living but to
live in the community, and they contribute to the economy of the
community.
We're simply talking about urging and encouraging a relationship
where the airport operators share with the schools and with the
residents what they're doing. Oftentimes, it would just make for a
better understanding. It's not always controversial. It's not always
confrontational. But it is shining a light on what is going on and
getting people cooperating and understanding the operations of the
airport.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1630
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PETRI. I would like my colleague from California to know that we
recognize that this is a very well-intended amendment and it is
addressing a concern particularly with the tremendous airport in your
area. You have a later amendment that deals with the same subject that
we think is more workable and better.
The concern we have has to do with the fact that there are a number
of provisions in law already requiring airports to consult with local
communities in a variety of situations. And we're just afraid that this
particular amendment could be more of a one-size-fits-all approach
across the whole country that could create problems rather than solve
them. Therefore, we're looking forward to working with you on amendment
No. 32, but I do oppose the current amendment as being too broad.
Ms. WATERS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. PETRI. I yield to the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. WATERS. Do I understand that the other amendment that I have
coming up that's more specific to Los Angeles is something that you
would be more inclined to cooperate on rather than this amendment?
Mr. PETRI. Yes.
Ms. WATERS. Well, that's fine. Because I do know that this amendment
that I'm offering is a national amendment that would cause all of the
airports to come into compliance with this kind of cooperative
amendment. And if, in fact, the gentleman is offering cooperation on
the next amendment, I would withdraw this one.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Pierluisi
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
[[Page H2177]]
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 40, after line 21, insert the following (and
redesignate subsequent sections, and conform the table of
contents, accordingly):
SEC. 143. PUERTO RICO MINIMUM GUARANTEE.
Section 47114 is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(g) Supplemental Apportionment for Puerto Rico.--The
Secretary shall apportion amounts for airports in Puerto Rico
in accordance with this section. This subsection does not
prohibit the Secretary from making project grants for
airports in Puerto Rico from the discretionary fund under
section 47115.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Puerto Rico (Mr. Pierluisi) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Puerto Rico.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Mr. Chairman, I offer this amendment to codify the
method by which the Secretary of Transportation is to allocate annual
formula grants to airports in Puerto Rico for capital development and
planning. The amendment is simple and straightforward and serves to
clarify current law. It ensures that, at a minimum, the Secretary will
allocate formula grants under the Airport Improvement Program to
airports in Puerto Rico no differently than the Secretary allocates
such grants to other airports throughout the United States. The
amendment also ensures that the Secretary will not be precluded for any
reason from making project grants to airports in Puerto Rico from the
discretionary fund under the Airport Improvement Program. And the
amendment makes clear that formula grants and discretionary grants for
airports in Puerto Rico should not be deemed mutually exclusive.
It is critical to note that the Airport Improvement Program is funded
by a variety of user fees and fuel taxes, all of which apply in Puerto
Rico. So there is no reasonable basis to treat Puerto Rico less than
equally under the program, especially since aviation serves such a
critical role on the island.
Puerto Rico is a non-contiguous U.S. jurisdiction, located over 1,000
flight miles from the nearest large hub airport in the national air
transportation network. Accordingly, Puerto Rico is heavily dependent
on safe and reliable air service to carry passengers and transport
goods to and from the U.S. mainland. The island's main airport, the
Luis Munoz Marin International Airport in San Juan, is ranked among the
top 50 commercial service airports in the United States in terms of the
number of passenger boardings, averaging over 4\1/2\ million boardings
each year.
In addition to travel to and from the mainland United States,
residents of Puerto Rico and visitors to the island rely on air service
to travel to points within the main island of Puerto Rico and between
the main island and the outer island municipalities of Vieques and
Culebra.
Apart from San Juan International Airport, Puerto Rico is home to
five other commercial service airports, located in Aguadilla, Ponce,
Mayaguez, Isla Grande, and Vieques. And we have five other general
aviation airports serving smaller communities. According to the FAA,
approximately $285 million is needed over the next 5 years to bring
Puerto Rico's airports up to current design standards, add capacity to
meet projected needs, and to improve safety. My amendment simply
ensures, Mr. Chairman, that Puerto Rico's public-use airports can
access essential Federal funding on the same terms as airports
elsewhere in the country.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. Although I claim time in opposition, I am going to speak in
support of this amendment.
I have the greatest respect for the delegate Congressman from Puerto
Rico, also the highest esteem for Governor Fortuno, former delegate
representative to this body, two great young leaders, and he's here
today trying to ensure that Puerto Rico is treated like any other
airport in the United States in terms of airport improvement programs.
And I think his amendment clarifies that Puerto Rico also remains
eligible for grants from the AIP discretionary fund.
I also know Mr. Pierluisi is willing to work with me on his other
amendment, which deals with essential air service. I had offered to
work with other Members, and I will state for the record that I will
work with him, and I am hoping that if he offers it, he'll withdraw it
because I'm going to support this amendment. I think he has a good
amendment here, and I would like to work with him on his other
provision, but I would hope that he would work with us in that regard.
So this amendment simply provides clear direction to the FAA that
Puerto Rico Airport should be treated equitably, and I will support
this amendment at this time and urge a ``yes'' vote.
Mr. Chair, how much time is remaining on each side?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida has 3\1/2\ minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Puerto Rico has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. MICA. I reserve the balance of my time. Maybe the gentleman has a
little response to my support for his amendment.
Mr. PIERLUISI. I thank the gentleman from Florida, even though he
rises in opposition. I'm pleased that as the chairman of the committee
of jurisdiction, he's supporting this amendment.
So under these circumstances, I just ask him if he has any further
speakers.
Mr. MICA. I do not. But I was hoping to hear that the gentleman from
Puerto Rico would be willing to work with me on his other amendment.
And I'm sure he will. But I still will support his amendment because
I'm that kind of a guy.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PIERLUISI. I will simply say I will have some time to consider
your offer to work with you on my other amendment, which is not now on
the floor. But until then I simply urge my colleagues to support this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Puerto Rico (Mr. Pierluisi).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 Offered by Ms. Hirono
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 4
printed in House Report 112-46.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 41, after line 5, insert the following (and
redesignate subsequent sections, and conform the table of
contents, accordingly):
SEC. 144. REDUCING APPORTIONMENTS.
Section 47114(f)(1) is amended by striking subparagraphs
(A) and (B) and inserting the following:
``(A) in the case of a charge of $3.00 or less--
``(i) except as provided in clause (ii), 50 percent of the
projected revenues from the charge in the fiscal year but not
by more than 50 percent of the amount that otherwise would be
apportioned under this section; or
``(ii) with respect to an airport in Hawaii, 50 percent of
the projected revenues from the charge in the fiscal year but
not by more than 50 percent of the excess of--
``(I) the amount that otherwise would be apportioned under
this section; over
``(II) the amount equal to the amount specified in
subclause (I) multiplied by the percentage of the total
passenger boardings at the applicable airport that are
comprised of interisland passengers; and
``(B) in the case of a charge of more than $3.00--
``(i) except as provided in clause (ii), 75 percent of the
projected revenues from the charge in the fiscal year but not
by more than 75 percent of the amount that otherwise would be
apportioned under this section; or
``(ii) with respect to an airport in Hawaii, 75 percent of
the projected revenues from the charge in the fiscal year but
not by more than 75 percent of the excess of--
``(I) the amount that otherwise would be apportioned under
this section; over
``(II) the amount equal to the amount specified in
subclause (I) multiplied by the percentage of the total
passenger boardings at the applicable airport that are
comprised of interisland passengers.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Hawaii.
[[Page H2178]]
{time} 1640
Ms. HIRONO. Geographically, Hawaii is the world's most isolated
archipelago. It is the only U.S. State made up completely of islands.
There are four counties in Hawaii, all of which are separated by a body
of water. Air travel is the fastest and most effective means of
transportation between our islands. It is also the mode of
transportation that we rely on most for moving goods and other cargo
and even our daily mail.
The 15 airports operated by the Airports Division of the Hawaii
Department of Transportation are responsible for maintaining safe and
efficient facilities that accommodate approximately 25 million
passengers a year. This is a tremendous responsibility and an ongoing
challenge. It is because of the fundamental role that air travel plays
in the day-to-day lives of the people of Hawaii and in the commerce of
Hawaii that Congress saw fit to provide the State with an exemption
from charging passenger facility fees, or PFCs, on interisland flights.
These are the flights between our islands.
This exemption is important for Hawaii's residents. Without it, for
many, the daily commute would be unduly burdensome. I know many people
who live on O'ahu, for example, who commute to work on one of the other
islands. It would be as if you, or if any of your constituents, got in
your car to go to work and then had to pay $4.50, which is our PFC fee,
just to leave your driveway and then have to pay another $4.50 upon
your return.
While we greatly appreciate and seek to preserve this exemption,
there have been unintended consequences with regard to its impact on
Federal funds for Hawaii's airports. This is because of the way that
PFCs impact the formula funding that is apportioned to each State under
the Airport Improvement Program, or the AIP.
As my colleagues know, AIP grants are awarded to each State based on
a formula. For airports that opt to collect PFCs, formula funds are cut
by either 50 or 75 percent. This reduction depends on the amount
charged. For airports that assess PFCs on 100 percent of their
passengers, this arrangement works well. However, in the case of
Hawaii, the two airports that collect PFCs only collect them on a
portion of the passengers.
At our large hub airport in Honolulu, 38 percent of our passengers
are interisland travelers. Interisland travelers also constitute 51
percent of the passengers served by our medium hub at Kahului Airport
on Maui. Therefore, the $4.50 PFC being assessed at Honolulu is only
being paid by 62 percent of its passengers. On Maui, that number is
only 49 percent.
Based on the current formula, the Hawaii Department of Transportation
calculates that the State is losing approximately $5.7 million this
year in AIP formula entitlement funds. My amendment would change the
formula under which Hawaii's PFCs and entitlements are calculated in
order to correct this inequity.
I want to be clear to my colleagues: This amendment is intended only
to ensure that Hawaii gets its full fair share under the AIP program.
Hawaii's airports would still be subject to the same 75 percent
reduction as any other airport charging a $4.50 PFC. The calculation
would simply take into account the percentage of passengers traveling
interisland and therefore not paying a PFC.
I also want to point out that this is not a windfall for the State
or, in my view, an earmark. In fact, House rule XXI, clause 9(e), the
definition for ``earmark,'' defines an ``earmark'' as essentially any
member-requested Federal assistance to a targeted entity or locality
``other than through a statutory or administrative formula-driven or
competitive award process.''
Mr. PETRI. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. HIRONO. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. PETRI. We've reviewed your amendment. Based on the recommendation
of the FAA, I think Chairman Mica and I are prepared to accept your
amendment.
We would also ask, however, that you consider working with us on the
amendment that you intend to offer later. It's in an area that is
already within the FAA's jurisdiction where they're working but not as
hard as you would like, and we think we could continue to work with you
on that. But we would accept this amendment.
Ms. HIRONO. I want to thank Subcommittee Chair Petri and Mr. Mica for
accepting my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Ms. HIRONO. Thank you very much.
I do want to offer my other amendment, however.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. I actually will support the amendment, but I wanted to give
the gentlelady an additional minute to conclude if she had any remarks.
As I said, we're very willing to work with her on her next amendment,
and hope she would consider working with us. We will support this
amendment.
I would like to yield, if I may, Mr. Chairman, as much time as she
needs to finish her statement.
Ms. HIRONO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
In view of the fact that you are in agreement with my amendment, if
you would be so kind as to yield a minute of your time to my colleague,
Colleen Hanabusa, so she may submit her remarks on this amendment.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to allow them to submit their
remarks. We are taking the amendment, and I know she is going to work
with us.
I would also be pleased to yield to our colleague from Hawaii.
Ms. HANABUSA. I thank the chairman of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee for making this wonderful gesture.
I would like to thank Congresswoman Hirono for offering this
amendment in that it does address the unique nature of Hawaii.
Mr. Chairman, Hawaii's people have, really, only one way for
commercial travel between our islands, and that is by way of air. So
what this has done is it has leveled the playing field for us in terms
of the ability to have our fair share of the airport improvements,
because the best thing we can do is protect our consumers.
Thank you again for agreeing to the amendment, and thank you to Mazie
for offering it.
Mr. MICA. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit
these letters in support of the bill for the record, and unless the
gentlelady needs more time, I am prepared to support this amendment
that is pending.
Air Transport Association,
Washington, DC, February 23, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica: On behalf of the Air Transport
Association, I am writing to thank you for your leadership
and applaud your success as Chairman, House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee, in successfully obtaining the
full Committee's approval of the Federal Aviation
Administration Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011 (H.R.
658). After 17 short-term extensions over many years, the
vote can only be attributed to your extraordinary leadership,
tenacious effort and decisive chairmanship.
America's airline industry knows how important this bill is
to the Federal Aviation Administration and the nation.
Certainly, H.R. 658 will move NextGen and other important
programs forward at this crucial time, when the airline
industry is still rebounding from this nation's devastating
economic recession.
Finally, the Air Transport Association and our airline
members stand ready to assist you and your very capable staff
as you prepare to conference with the Senate. Please do not
hesitate to contact me if I can provide additional support.
Sincerely,
Nicholas E. Calio.
____
Air Medical Operators Association,
Alexandria, VA, March 15, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica: The Air Medical Operators Association
(AMOA) is committed to providing the highest level of safety
in air medical transport and the implementation of
technology, procedures, and operating systems that will help
ensure the continued safe and effective operation of these
services. AMOA is also committed to enhancing current
regulations to improve aviation safety and raise clinical
standards, as well as promoting additional air medical
transport as a life-saving health care intervention and a
safe form of transportation.
[[Page H2179]]
The ``FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011'' (H.R.
658) includes key provisions that will advance the safety of
air medical transportation:
Section 311 includes provisions that will support the
Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) rulemaking that is
underway. AMOA strongly supports these provisions, which
appropriately identify these safety issues as a key
congressional priority while granting the FAA the flexibility
to implement strong, effective rules. On January 10, 2011,
the AMOA submitted its comments to the FAA on its Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking on air ambulance safety issues. In our
comments we stated: ``AMOA fully supports the FAA's intent in
this rulemaking; air medical operators believe many of the
requirements proposed . . . most of which we already are
implementing, will enhance the safety of air medical
transport operations across the air medical operating sector
and enthusiastically support them.''
Section 311 also includes a provision to collect better
data on air ambulance operations. AMOA strongly supports more
comprehensive data collection on the industry and its
operations, and we support the intent and thrust of the
provision included in H.R. 658. We do have some concerns
regarding the specific language as currently drafted, and
would like to work with you and your staff to ensure that the
provision leads to the effective and efficient collection of
industry data.
Section 312 requires the FAA to ``conduct a review of off-
airport, low-altitude aircraft weather observation
technologies.'' Low-altitude weather observation and
reporting infrastructure located outside of airports is a key
tool to enhancing safety for air medical operations.
Currently, less than 2,500 automated weather stations report
reliable weather data for the surrounding 5 miles to the
national database. Based on the area of the United States,
that leaves 3,794,101 square miles of the U.S. without
weather reporting. This lack of current weather data causes
more than 7,000 aborted flights per year due to unknown
weather conditions. AMOA strongly supports the inclusion of
this provision in H.R. 658.
Section 313 requires the FAA to conduct ``a study on the
feasibility of requiring pilots of helicopters providing air
ambulance services . . . to use night vision goggles during
nighttime operations.'' AMOA's member companies have been
aggressively working to implement night vision goggles (NVG).
Our member companies have now equipped more than 80% of their
helicopters with NVGs. AMOA supports inclusion of this
provision in H.R. 658.
As the House works to pass H.R. 658 and move to reconcile
this legislation with the Senate-passed bill (S. 223), we
would like to identify two issues of concern with that
legislation:
Senate language would put a requirement for a terrain
awareness device into law rather than in the Code of Federal
Regulations; this Senate provision references a very narrow
Technical Standard Order (TSO) for Helicopter Terrain Alert
Warning Systems (HTAWS). The way that the provision is
currently drafted, it could limit the ability of operators to
enhance safety with more advanced equipment unless a change
in law (not the applicable federal regulation) occurred. The
rapid evolution of technology calls for specific technical
standards to be set in agency regulations rather than locked
in place in statute.
Senate language potentially creates a statutory requirement
that air medical services abide by Federal Aviation
Regulation (FAR) Part 135 whenever medical crew is onboard.
Air medical services already conduct operations according to
Part 135 flight and duty time requirements and weather
minimums prescribed by Operations Specification A021--the
highest of any aviation operator in the United States.
Unintended by this Senate language is that by requiring
adherence to Part 135 in statute, air medical operators would
be required to abide by Part 135 even if the FAA decides to
change the regulatory structure for air medical services by
adding a new Part.
AMOA hopes to work with you and your Senate colleagues to
address these issues in S. 223 before a final version of FAA
reauthorization legislation is considered.
AMOA appreciates your leadership and hard work in moving an
FAA reauthorization bill through the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee early in the 112th Congress. We
strongly support the air medical safety provisions of the
legislation and look forward to their enactment into law.
AMOA also looks forward to working with you to perfect the
data collection provision in H.R. 658.
Thank you for your efforts to enact strong FAA
reauthorization legislation and for your work to help improve
the safety of air medical operations.
Sincerely,
Howard Ragsdale,
President, AMOA.
Christopher Eastlee,
Managing Director, AMOA.
____
Regional Air Cargo Carriers Association.
Plymouth, MA, March 16, 2011.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Thomas Petri,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation & Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall, II,
Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Jerry F. Costello,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation & Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica, Chairman Petri, Ranking Member Rahall,
and Ranking Member Costello: Regional Air Cargo Carriers
Association (RACCA) represents nearly 50 FAA-certificated air
carriers and about 1,000 airplanes, engaged in transportation
of high priority cargo chiefly to smaller communities
throughout the United States and internationally.
We are greatly concerned about a measure which has been
introduced by Congressmen Schiff, Sherman, and Berman, in
another attempt to impose an overnight curfew at Burbank (Bop
Hope Airport, BUR) and Van Nuys Airport (VNY), California.
This legislation, the Valley-Wide NoiseRelief Act, would
permit the cities of Burbank and Van Nuys, California to
circumvent provisions of the Airport Noise and Capacity Act
of 1990 (ANCA) and the FAA's ruling denying more recent
requests for a curfew at BUR.
While RACCA members are more concerned about BUR, a curfew
at either airport would significantly interfere with commerce
and quite likely violate grant assurances to which those
airports agreed when they accepted federal airport
improvement funds.
At BUR, more than five million dollars were spent upon a
Part 161 study submitted in May of 2009--the second one at
this airport, attempting to impose a blanket nighttime curfew
from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. The Federal Aviation Administration in
both cases concluded that the benefits of an overnight curfew
did not balance the disadvantages. The proposed legislation
makes a mockery of the Part 161 process, overrides the FAA's
ability to regulate aviation in the United States, panders to
a very limited--but vociferous--minority of constituents at
the expense of the majority, and sets a precedent that would
encourage other communities in similar situations to request
similar curfews, with results which would reverberate at
numerous other airports in the country--resulting in
unreasonable access restrictions and abandonment of use
agreements intended to make these important public utilities
reasonably accessible to the public as a whole.
In short, this politically motivated proposal covers ground
which has previously been explored, studied, and analyzed ad
infinitum--with the same conclusion: Overnight curfews at BUR
and VNY are not in the overall public interest. We therefore
respectfully urge you to reject this proposal when it comes
before you.
Sincerely,
Stanley L. Bernstein,
President.
____
Alaska Airlines,
Seattle, WA, March 24, 2011.
Hon. John L. Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Thomas E. Petri,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Hon. Nick J. Rahall,
Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Jerry F. Costello,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, Rayburn House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairmen Mica and Petri and Ranking Members Rahall and
Costello: On behalf of Alaska Airlines, thank you for your
leadership in moving an FAA reauthorization bill out of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. As you prepare
to bring this bill to the House floor, we request your
consideration of our views, as outlined in this letter,
regarding expanding access to Reagan National Airport (DCA).
As a new entrant/limited incumbent air carrier, holding just
three roundtrip flights (six beyond-perimeter slot
exemptions) at DCA, we believe it is important that any
legislative changes to the perimeter rule promote fair
competition at the airport.
Alaska Airlines supports the DCA Perimeter Rule language
contained in section 423 of the FAA Reauthorization and
Modernization Act of 2011 (H.R.658). This proposal creates a
small pool of beyond-perimeter slot exemptions (10 slot
exemptions/5 roundtrips), to be redistributed from non-peak
hours to peak hours, with a scheduling priority given to new
entrant/limited incumbent carriers. This language continues
precedent established in the prior two FAA reauthorization
bills, AIR-21 and VISION-100, and represents an equitable
means by which any carrier, regardless of its size at DCA,
can apply to the Department of Transportation for a beyond-
perimeter route. Also, this language recognizes the
importance of facilitating new entrant/limited incumbent
access to DCA, during commercially viable slot times, in
order to enhance competition at the airport and, in turn,
provide better fares and greater value for the traveling
public. For example,
[[Page H2180]]
the entry of Alaska Airlines' SEA and LAX service to DCA was
the major driver of an 11% and 14% fare decline,
respectively, in the SEA-WAS and LAX-WAS markets. In the
first year of entry in these two DCA markets, Alaska's lower
DCA fares forced other carriers in these same markets to
reduce their fares, producing an aggregate consumer fare
savings in excess of $25 million. Even more significantly,
substantial fare savings continue today because, unlike most
other carriers, Alaska Airlines does not charge a fare
premium for DCA versus IAD (Dulles) service.
Alaska Airlines opposes elimination of the DCA Perimeter
Rule. By definition, only carriers holding within-perimeter
slots can take advantage of such a concept. Similarly, we
oppose any form of slot conversion, i.e. converting within-
perimeter slot exemptions for beyond-perimeter use. Under
either an elimination or slot conversion scenario, the large
within-perimeter slot holders receive a huge competitive
windfall, to the detriment of new entrant/limited incumbent
competition and the lower fares such competition promotes.
In conclusion, we support Section 423 of H.R. 658 regarding
flight operations at Reagan National Airport and oppose any
changes to it that allow for elimination of the Perimeter
Rule or slot conversion. In order to promote the public
interest of lower fares and the pro-consumer market dynamics
created by robust competition, new entrant/limited incumbent
access to DCA must be enhanced.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
Sincerely,
Bill Ayer.
Mr. MICA. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Neugebauer
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 5
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Beginning on page 101, strike line 3 and all that follows
through page 104, line 19 (and redesignate any subsequent
sections accordingly).
Page 106, after line 5, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 2__. STUDY ON FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC
INTERNET WEB-BASED RESOURCE ON LOCATIONS OF
POTENTIAL AVIATION OBSTRUCTIONS.
(a) Study.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration shall carry out a study on the feasibility of
developing a publicly searchable, Internet Web-based resource
that provides information regarding the height and
latitudinal and longitudinal locations of guy-wire and free-
standing tower obstructions.
(b) Considerations.--In conducting the study, the
Administrator shall consult with affected industries and
appropriate Federal agencies.
(c) Report.--Not later than one year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit a
report to the appropriate committees of Congress on the
results of the study.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I want to thank Chairman Mica, Chairman Hall, and
Congressman Graves for their support of this amendment. I appreciate
the work of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and of
various stakeholder groups that have helped throughout this amendment
process.
Mr. Chairman, in recent years, our lives and our world have changed.
We have a much more digital world today, and we have a lot more towers
that provide us cell service and Internet service. We have the new
industry of wind energy that is basically taking over a big part of my
district. So, over the countryside, the landscape has changed. We have
a lot of new towers, windmills, wind turbines, and all sorts of things
that are beneficial to our economy but that also provide a certain
amount of hazard for those people in the aviation industry.
In recent years, we've had a number of fatalities due to low-flying
aviators who didn't know the existence of one of these obstacles, so
this amendment really does a commonsense thing: It would direct the FAA
to conduct a study of how we can put together a database of where these
new obstacles are, giving their GPS locations and allowing people who
are going to be flying in that area or utilizing that area to access
that information. For planning purposes, it would also provide an
opportunity for new infrastructure in those areas.
{time} 1650
So we really think that this is a very commonsense amendment,
provides for safety, and that this study hopefully will yield some very
positive results that will be beneficial to the aviation industry.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, although I am not opposed to the
amendment, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentlewoman is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Chairman Mica and
Ranking Member Rahall for their work in bringing this bill to the
floor. I think the aviation community deserves a long-term aviation
bill so they can plan for the future needs of the traveling public. We
have had 18 extensions already, and it is time for the House and the
Senate to find a compromise and send a bill to the President.
Sadly, we're missing a great opportunity to invest in our airports,
allowing them to prepare for the expected growth in air traffic and put
people to work improving our aviation infrastructure. Without
additional PFC revenues and AMT relief, airports will have little
capital to invest in their facilities. We keep talking about creating
jobs and rebuilding the economy, but we don't do anything about it.
My home State of Florida relies on air service to support our
tourism-based economy. We have 20 primary airports, 22 reliever
airports, and 57 general aviation airports, with our top three airports
alone generating nearly 45 million enplanements a year. These airports
create jobs and help grow the economy, and we're not going to get out
of the recession we're in by starving our airports of funds for our
infrastructure.
This bill does address an important issue in my district by
preserving access to the Military Airport Program, MAP. The MAP program
provides critical support to those communities which have been given
the responsibility of converting closed military bases to civilian use.
The participation of the Cecil Field Airport, which is just outside of
Jacksonville, is a prime example of how this program can successfully
transform former military airfields to commercial service that in turn
help strengthen the Nation's aviation system. In the case of Cecil
Field, continuing to include uses by the Air National Guard and Reserve
units makes this a win-win for the community and for the military. And
I want to add that we have more landings now than we did before we
turned the facility over.
MAP grants also support projects that are generally not eligible for
AIP funds, but which are typical and needed for successful civilian
conversion such as surface parking lots, fuel farms, hangars, utility
systems, access roads, and cargo buildings.
I know this bill still has a long way to go in the process, so I hope
we can make improvements as we move to conference.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished
chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica).
Mr. MICA. I just rise in strong support of the amendment offered by
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).
He has worked with the committee in drafting this amendment, done an
excellent job, and we also have the support of FAA on this amendment.
I ask everyone to join in passage of this well-crafted amendment.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. It is also my pleasure now to yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Farenthold).
Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you very much.
[[Page H2181]]
I rise in support of this amendment as well. With off-the-shelf
available technology, this type of mapping can be done at little or no
cost, increasing safety to aviation, especially those involved in rural
aviation like crop dusters and the like.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the chairman
of the House Small Business Committee, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr.
Graves).
Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, I want to rise in very strong
support of the gentleman's amendment.
Having flown for over 20 years, I've had firsthand experience with
low altitude or low-level obstacles that are out there. I had to make
some last-minute corrections just to avoid them. If we had some way to
understand where those obstacles are, a very simple method, it would
greatly improve safety.
Just in the crop duster world alone, we've had nine deaths in the
last 10 years from obstacles that are unmarked, unlighted, and we don't
have any idea where they are.
I would very much be in support of this amendment. I thank the
gentleman for offering it.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I just would close by saying this is a very
commonsense amendment. I think it uses the technology of today to bring
air safety to our country, and I would encourage all Members to support
this amendment.
Mr. HALL. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of Mr. Neugebauer's amendment
directing the FAA to carry out a feasibility study on using the
internet as an information resource for pilots to locate difficult-to-
see obstructions such as guy-wires and free-standing towers.
As a Navy pilot during World War II, I had firsthand experience
flying fast and low, and while the prevalence of towers then does not
compare to the number that exist today, it still created a lot of
uncertainty to fly low without being fully aware of potential
obstructions.
There are many active pilots today who make their living flying
aircraft at very low altitudes, such as crop dusters, who could make
excellent use of such a database.
Mr. Neugebauer's amendment would be a good first step, simply asking
the FAA to study whether or not an internet-based source of up-to-date
information on obstructions and towers makes good sense.
I support his amendment and ask all Members to support it as well.
Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. LoBiondo
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 6
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 106, after line 5, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 220. NEXTGEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER OF
EXCELLENCE.
(a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration may enter into an agreement, on a competitive
basis, to assist the establishment of a center of excellence
for the research and development of NextGen technologies.
(b) Functions.--The Administrator shall ensure that the
center established under subsection (a)--
(1) leverages resources and partnerships, including
appropriate programs of the Administration, to enhance the
research and development of NextGen technologies by academia
and industry; and
(2) provides educational, technical, and analytical
assistance to the Administration and other Federal
departments and agencies with responsibilities to research
and develop NextGen technologies.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
Mr. LoBIONDO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to start by thanking
Chairman Mica. I'd like to also thank Mr. Petri and Mr. Costello.
This is a very simple amendment. It allows the FAA to assist in
establishing a NextGen Research and Development Center of Excellence.
The center would leverage the FAA's existing Centers of Excellence
Program, a program that relies on university partnerships to address
ongoing FAA research and development challenges.
The NextGen Research and Development Center of Excellence would
provide educational, technical, and analytical assistance to the FAA
and other agencies involved in the development of NextGen. In essence,
it would be a force multiplier.
NextGen is a complete revamping of our National Airspace System from
the current radar-based system to a state-of-the-art satellite, or GPS-
based, technology. Once fully implemented, NextGen will provide a host
of benefits for the more precise tracking of aircraft, fuel savings,
and noise reduction. As a result, the entire aviation community would
be benefited, as would the Nation.
I believe the Centers of Excellence model could be extremely
beneficial to the FAA's NextGen efforts. Centers of Excellence allow
the FAA to partner with universities and industry on important aviation
research issues. Since 1990, 8 Centers of Excellence have been formed
with more than 60 university partners and over 200 industry and
government affiliates.
These Centers have fueled innovative research in a variety of areas
such as noise and emissions mitigation, airworthiness, and the use of
advanced materials.
I believe the FAA would benefit by applying the Centers of Excellence
model to the challenges of NextGen. My amendment would give the FAA the
authority to move in this direction.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
Mr. PETRI. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LoBIONDO. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin, the chairman
of the subcommittee.
Mr. PETRI. I thank my colleague from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).
I rise in support of this amendment, and I know the chairman of the
full committee has looked at it and supports it as well. It gives the
FAA administrator the ability to designate a NextGen center on a
competitive basis, and it would be a good and needed resource for the
FAA; and, therefore, I would urge a ``yes'' vote on the amendment.
Mr. LoBIONDO. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although
I will not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, we support the gentleman's amendment.
This is a provision that was contained in the FAA bill that was
passed, H.R. 915 and H.R. 1586, that passed this Congress with
bipartisan support. We strongly support the gentleman's amendment and
ask our colleagues to support it as well.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LoBIONDO. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. LoBiondo).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Garrett
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. GARRETT. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 106, after line 5, insert the following:
(c) Study.--
(1) In general.--The Administrator shall conduct a study on
additional alternatives to reduce delays at the 4 airports
considered under the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia
Metropolitan Redesign Record of Decision, published September
5, 2007, by the Administration.
(2) Contents.--In conducting the study, the Administrator
shall determine--
(A) the effect on flight delays of the overscheduling of
flights by air carriers; and
(B) whether or not altering the size of aircraft used by
air carriers would reduce flight delays.
(3) Report.--The Administrator shall submit to the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House
of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation of the Senate a report on the results of
the study under paragraph (1).
(d) Prohibition.--The Administrator may not continue with
the implementation of the preferred alternative for the New
York/New
[[Page H2182]]
Jersey/Philadelphia Metropolitan Area Airspace Redesign until
after the last day of the 60-day period beginning on the date
the Administrator submits the report required under
subsection (c)(3).
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey.
{time} 1700
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to support the Garrett-
Himes-Andrews-Engel amendment. In it, the FAA's New York/New Jersey/
Philadelphia airspace redesign plan would redirect thousands of flights
per year over the houses of many of my constituents and, actually, the
constituents of the other sponsors of the bill as well. In looking at
this, we realize this has a very real and negative impact on the
region, including a possible decrease in home values.
The new flight patterns, which would be considered here, over the
region should not be implemented until a thorough study of alternatives
is actually presented to Congress. This amendment prohibits the FAA
from continuing implementation of the airspace redesign until it has
conducted a study on alternative designs to reduce delays at the four
airports considered in the redesign.
Finally, it is imperative that the FAA consider the concerns of the
people that are and have been afflicted by this action.
I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I have the greatest respect for the gentleman
from New Jersey, and I understand his predicament. He has been one of
the strongest advocates for his district on some of the potential
problems that might arise from airspace redesign. I had the opportunity
to travel to the gentleman's district to meet with his constituents. We
have raised great concerns about the New York airspace redesign.
Now, this does put in place another study of the airspace redesign,
and, unfortunately, it delays the implementation of airspace redesign
in the Northeast corridor, in that New York airspace, until that's
complete. So that is why I have to oppose this.
I will work with the gentleman in trying to make certain that FAA
treats them fairly and that there are hearings. We have had 120
hearings. I have been in every jurisdiction from Pennsylvania,
Philadelphia, all the way up into Connecticut, which is part of the New
York airspace, in hearings and public meetings. There have been over
120 FAA meetings. This has been drug through the courts. There were
suits, and they were all consolidated. The issues, again, were
resolved, and FAA should go forward with airspace redesign and continue
to address the concerns of the gentleman.
Why is this important to everyone here? Because more than 70 percent
of the chronically delayed flights around the United States start in
the New York airspace. That means when New York goes down, the whole
country starts going down.
Now, you have got to understand that this battle has been going on
for nearly two decades, in and out of court, and fights and everything
for the redesign. So what we're left with is a corridor for airspace
that is sort of like having U.S. 1 going into New York City 20 or 30
years ago and not expanding or revising the capacity. So that's why we
have this situation. That's why I strongly urge not the adoption of
this.
I am willing to work with the gentlemen to try to, again, make
certain that their concerns are taken into consideration. We do have
quieter aircraft. I don't want him, his constituents, or any of the
others in the New York airspace to suffer. But this has to come to a
conclusion.
Again, it affects everyone in the House of Representatives because
more than 70 percent of our chronically delayed flights start in this
area, and we have not been able to resolve this question.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GARRETT. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Engel).
Mr. ENGEL. I thank the gentleman, and I rise in strong support of the
Garrett-Himes-Andrews-Engel amendment.
This amendment will require the Federal Aviation Administration to
study alternatives for the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia airspace
redesign. It will also prohibit the FAA from continuing with the
implementation of the airspace redesign until the new study is
submitted to Congress.
I have to take issue with what my friend, the chairman, said before.
We have not found that there were hearings for this. They have been
trying to jam this through and want fewer and fewer people to know
about it. I forced them to come into my district; but until that
happened, they didn't want any kind of input from the community.
I have opposed this airspace redesign from day one, and have fought
its implementation every step of the way. Time and time again, the FAA
has pursued the airspace redesign while ignoring the concerns of my
constituents in Rockland County, New York. This plan will only save
minutes on flight time, but it will disrupt the lives of thousands of
residents in my district who live under the new flight path. As my
constituents noted to me, the noise and air pollution in the area will
increase. It's unknown how this increase in air pollution will affect
the disproportionate rate of childhood asthma in my district.
The modernization of our aviation system is necessary to bring it
into the 21st century, to keep pace with the increased number of
flights, and to also maintain our technological advancements by
implementing new equipment to keep our system the safest in the world.
However, there are several alternatives to this plan, and I encourage
my colleagues to support this amendment that would require the FAA to
take them into consideration.
We now learn that not only planes landing into Newark would fly over
my constituents, but planes taking off from Kennedy as well. This is a
double whammy. It's not fair.
So I commend Mr. Garrett. I support this amendment, and I will
continue to oppose the FAA reauthorization until the FAA halts and
revises the airspace design and reports to Congress. After all, we are
the ones that report to the people. FAA should report to us.
Mr. GARRETT. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut
(Mr. Himes).
Mr. HIMES. I thank my good friend from New Jersey for yielding.
Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the amendment at the desk. This
amendment addresses the FAA's redesign of the airspace over New York,
New Jersey, and Philadelphia with noble motives to actually improve our
air travel. But the fact of the matter is that the redesign was badly
implemented from the start and used flawed procedures. Plans for this
redesign have moved forward without proper and appropriate input from
stakeholders and without regard to the parties who are most affected,
notably, many of our constituents.
As planes have been rerouted to fly over southwestern Connecticut
upon descent into New York's airports, my constituents have begun
experiencing unnecessary and unprecedented noise levels. A day does not
go by that I don't hear this concern from my constituents.
I have joined with my colleagues in a bipartisan effort to call upon
the FAA to simply study alternatives. We know that there are good
alternatives. This should be done prudently and carefully. Families who
have moved to my district to find a quiet refuge are now faced with the
prospect of daily disturbances. Alternatives must be considered before
any more action is taken.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman has 2 minutes.
Mr. MICA. Again, I have to say that I have the greatest respect for
the gentlemen from New Jersey, Mr. Garrett and Mr. Andrews, and the
gentleman from New York. They all do have interests here, and they are
trying to protect them. They are concerned about noise with the New
York airspace redesign. But, again, this has been going on for two
decades.
[[Page H2183]]
We have a very narrow corridor. We do need to redesign it. We have
safety questions now. We have chronic delays, and 70 percent of them
emanate from New York. They start in the New York airspace, and then
they ripple across the country. So 70 percent of the Members are
impacted by this particular provision.
I appreciate their concern in asking for an additional study, but
what they do in the provisions they have offered is delay
implementation. We have just finished numerous court cases, which were
consolidated, which ruled against those in question. I know it's
difficult, but we've got to get this done.
Again, I so much appreciate their looking out for their constituents,
stating their concern and expressing in every way possible. I will
continue to work with them and make certain that there is fairness to
the implementation and whatever they adopt does not disturb or unduly
cause distress for their constituents. That's all I can do. But I do
have to oppose this amendment in the interest of the committee, the
country, and the other Members.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1710
Mr. GARRETT. Just to conclude then, Mr. Chairman, the FAA's airspace
redesign plan has not been responsive, as referred to on the floor, to
the concerns of our constituents, and it's not been comprehensive.
Secondly, redesigning airspace would have little effect on delays
while alternatives are considered.
Finally, I ask the consideration of this bipartisan support to
conduct a study on alternative designs. I encourage support for this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Murphy of Pennsylvania). The question is on the
amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. GARRETT. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
will be postponed.
It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 printed in House
Report 112-46.
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 138, after line 9, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 318. CRIMINAL HISTORY RECORD CHECKS IN DOMESTIC AND
FOREIGN REPAIR STATIONS.
(a) In General.--Chapter 447 (as amended by this Act) is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 44734. Employee criminal history record checks in
domestic and foreign repair stations
``(a) In General.--Not later than one year after the date
of enactment of this section, the Administrator of the
Federal Aviation Administration shall modify the
certification requirements under part 145 of title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations, to require each repair station that--
``(1) is certificated by the Administrator under part 145
of such title 14; and
``(2) performs work on air carrier aircraft or components,
to complete a criminal history record check with respect to
any individual who performs a safety-sensitive function at
such repair station.
``(b) Definitions.--In subsection (a), the following
definitions apply:
``(1) Individual.--The term `individual' includes an
individual working at a repair station of a third party with
which an air carrier contracts to perform work on air carrier
aircraft or components.
``(2) Criminal history record check.--The term `criminal
history record check' means an investigation to ascertain an
individual's history of criminal convictions, conducted--
``(A) in a manner consistent with criminal history record
checks carried out under section 44936; and
``(B) in accordance with the applicable laws of the country
in which a repair station is located.
``(c) Regulatory Authority With Respect to Certain Foreign
Repair Stations.--With respect to repair stations that are
located in countries that are party to the agreement titled
`Agreement between the United States of America and the
European Community on Cooperation in the Regulation of Civil
Aviation Safety', dated June 30, 2008, the requirements of
subsection (a) are an exercise of the rights of the United
States under paragraph A of Article 15 of the Agreement,
which provides that nothing in the Agreement shall be
construed to limit the authority of a party to determine,
through its legislative, regulatory, and administrative
measures, the level of protection it considers appropriate
for civil aviation safety.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for such chapter (as
amended by this Act) is further amended by adding at the end
the following:
``44734. Employee criminal history record checks in
domestic and foreign repair stations.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, my amendment is quite simple. It would
require criminal background checks of mechanics at contract aircraft
repair stations, both those domestically and those overseas.
Now, the current law requires that people who repair aircraft at
airports undergo criminal background checks that are quite extensive
because there's a concern that they have access to airplanes, that we
want to know who they are, we want to be sure they don't have a
criminal background, and they can be denied employment for a large
range of former felonies or problems, let alone any affiliation with
terrorist groups.
Not so at domestic contract repair stations or foreign contract
repair stations. The employees there undergo no criminal background
checks, or only criminal background checks at the discretion of the
employer. They can be certified to do the most critical de-check work,
overhauls on airplanes.
Now, just think about it. As John Pistole recently said, he's the
head of the Transportation Security Administration, ``For more than two
decades al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations have sought to do
harm to this country. Many of their plots against the United States
have focused on the aviation system. It is clear that terrorist intent
to strike at American targets has not diminished.''
Yet we're not doing criminal and security background checks of people
who have access to the innards of the plane. They could replace one
critical component, a bolt that holds on an engine with one that looks
like the real bolt but is actually fake and designed to fail. That
could easily happen, and yet we are not requiring that they have
background checks.
Well, why are we requiring it at airports? If it's so critical a
mechanic who can access a plane at the airport, why isn't it critical
for people who can get deep inside a plane in an overhaul, overseas,
far, far away from any prospective oversight by the TSA or the FAA?
Now, some would say, well, the Transportation Security
Administration, rather belatedly, 7 years after the fact, is working on
a rule that will require them to adopt general procedures for security,
but it will not require criminal or terrorist background checks. They
will verify background information through confirmation of prior
employment. Yes, I used to work for Osama bin Laden. You can call him.
Here's his number. But now I don't work there anymore, and I'm here.
This is, I think, a commonsense amendment. Now, the industry can say,
oh, this will drive up the cost of repairs. Come on, it's 60 bucks to
do a TSA background check. $60. Now, don't you think it's worth $60,
and is that going to drive contract repair stations in the U.S. or
overseas out of business if they have to confirm that their employees
are not criminals or are not terrorists? I don't think so.
I urge support of the amendment, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. MICA. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I do appreciate the intent of the gentleman
who is the distinguished ranking member, former chair of the Aviation
Subcommittee, but I think that the
[[Page H2184]]
crafting of this amendment is somewhat flawed in that he does now
require FAA to take their limited resources. FAA is not a security
agency. It's an aviation agency. And again, we have a jurisdictional
question here. We can't put in provisions that require TSA to do
certain things, but that is their responsibility.
I understand this is also already done where the repair station is at
the airport. TSA is in the process of promulgating a rule to address
repair station security. But it, appropriately, is in their realm, not
FAA. And we do get into trouble in trying to carry out some of these
missions when we go to agencies that really this is not their
responsibility, their charter under Congress.
Again, I think the gentleman's intent is good, but it's misapplied.
So with that, I have to oppose the amendment as crafted. I'd be willing
to work with him. There is a possibility of working with him, I think,
and getting it right.
I think his intention is good, but the assignment is misplaced, and
it would cause more problems the way it's crafted than benefit.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. May I request the balance of time remaining on each
side?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon has 2 minutes. The
gentleman from Florida has 3 minutes.
Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr.
Costello), the ranking member of the subcommittee.
Mr. COSTELLO. I rise in support of the gentleman's amendment. The
amendment is very clear. It's simple. It's to the point. It requires
the FAA, when certificating a repair station, whether domestic or
foreign, to make sure that the repair station carries out a consistent
screening of its employees for criminal records. I mean, it is very
clear. It is to the point.
The amendment complies with all of our obligations under
international law, and the amendment will move the FAA forward in
creating one level of safety, both for domestic and international
repair stations.
Mr. MICA. I yield myself the balance of my time.
I believe the gentleman's intention is good. The problem I have is
with the crafting of the amendment. Now, heaven knows that there's
probably been no one that's more critical of TSA. I helped create it
along, actually, with Mr. DeFazio back in 2001. They have a lot of
important responsibilities. One of them is clearly defined as aviation
security, and it should be in repair stations.
Quite frankly, I am concerned about beefing up some of that, getting
some of the 3,700 bureaucrats that work and earn on average $105,000,
just within miles of here, relocated to where they can do their
security function at a place that does pose risk, and that's some of
these foreign locations. But this doesn't do the job. It complicates
the assignment we have for FAA. And TSA is in a rulemaking process to
address this responsibility, which is appropriately located within the
purview of, and again, the jurisdiction of TSA. So I, again, oppose the
opposition, will work with the gentleman.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1720
Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I appreciate the chairman, and I have worked together with him well
and will continue to do that in the future. But we have got to differ
on this.
The TSA is not considering requiring criminal terrorist background
checks as a requirement for overseas repair stations. I think that is
an unbelievable loophole that should send shudders down the spine of
anybody who flies planes that are being totally overhauled overseas.
And all this does--it is very simple. It doesn't require anybody from
the FAA to do anything. It just says if a repair station is to be
certificated by the FAA, the repair station, not the FAA, will have to
perform background checks on its mechanics. It is as simple as that.
Any mechanic at an airport has to undergo these background checks. They
cost $60. How about having the contract repair stations do the same
thing?
Do you want a terrorist who is off the airport property to be working
on an airplane critical component? Do you want a terrorist who is
overseas working under very little supervision, none by the U.S., to
have access to the most critical components of a plane?
The gentleman is an expert on aviation, and he knows you can take a
critical component--and these are problems we have all the time--like a
bolt that holds on an engine. We are trying to keep them out of the
supply chain, because you can make one for $3 that looks real but it
will break, but a real bolt costs $10,000. So they could easily
substitute parts designed to fail in critical components when a plane
has had an overhaul overseas.
I urge adoption of this commonsense amendment. Let's not have the al
Qaeda Full Employment Act.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon will
be postponed.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Ms. Hirono
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10
printed in House Report 112-46.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 138, after line 9, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 318. COCKPIT SMOKE PREVENTION.
(a) Aviation Rulemaking Committee.--Not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of
the Federal Aviation Administration shall convene an aviation
rulemaking committee to make recommendations to the
Administrator to ensure that any aircraft certified by the
Administrator is properly equipped with technology that
maintains pilot visibility when dense, continuous smoke is
present in the cockpit of the aircraft.
(b) Composition.--The aviation rulemaking committee shall
be composed of subject matter experts, aviation labor
representatives, and industry stakeholders.
(c) Deadline for Recommendations.--Not later than one year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the aviation
rulemaking committee shall submit to the Administrator a
report containing the committee's findings and
recommendations for regulatory action.
(d) Report to Congress.--Not later than 60 days following
the date of receipt of the committee's report under
subsection (c), the Administrator shall submit to Congress a
report on--
(1) the recommendations of the aviation rulemaking
committee; and
(2) the actions that will be undertaken by the
Administrator as a result of those recommendations.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. I rise to speak in favor of this amendment, and I
certainly appreciate the opportunity to speak on this amendment.
The basic idea of this amendment is to ensure the safety of the
traveling public and those whose job it is to get them safely to their
destinations, and my amendment has to do with smoke in the cockpit.
I do note that the FAA reauthorization bill that is under
consideration today already acknowledges the concern about smoke in the
cockpit, because it requires the GAO to study what the FAA has done to
address smoke in the cockpit. So my bill takes this concern to a more
focused level by establishing an aviation rulemaking committee, an ARC,
made up of representatives from aviation labor, industry, and other
experts.
Their task would be to carefully examine and provide regulatory
recommendations on the issue of cockpit smoke. This advisory committee
will not cost the taxpayers any money, and this amendment does not
mandate rulemaking. The administrator of the FAA would then review the
recommendations, and report to Congress on the steps that he or she
will take to address them.
The problem of smoke in the cockpit is not new. In fact, my colleague
from Hawaii, Senator Inouye, introduced
[[Page H2185]]
legislation to address this matter as long ago as 1993. And I want to
note his introductory remarks on the bill because, 20 years later, we
still have not adequately addressed this problem.
In introducing his legislation in 1993, he said, ``My colleagues will
be troubled to learn that over the last 20 years there have been a
dozen accidents on commercial aircraft in which dense continuous smoke
in the airline cockpit may have been a factor. In these accidents, over
850 people have died.''
That was in 1993. Almost another 20 years has passed. Since then,
even more lives have been lost in accidents where cockpit smoke was the
cause or a factor.
Some will say that, while tragic, incidents such as these are rare
and that there are already procedures in place to avoid them.
Fortunately, yes, incidents that end in death are rare. However, I
believe the available evidence tells a different story about the number
of times when smoke in the cockpit comes about.
According to a more recent report, the FAA's Information for
Operators Bulletin released October 6, 2010, the FAA noted that they
receive over 900 reports a year of smoke or fumes in the cabin or
cockpit. An average of 900 incidents in 365 days does not seem to me to
be a rare occurrence.
I believe that our national response to this issue has been
inadequate. We need a comprehensive, up-to-date analysis of the issue
and real-action next steps to protect our pilots and passengers.
Therefore, I believe that my amendment is reasonable, logical, does not
cost money, and it takes us toward resolving this issue. I urge my
colleagues to support my amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. PETRI. I understand the intent behind the amendment. We have
checked with the people we as citizens pay at the FAA to develop
expertise in this area, and they advise us that current safety
standards are sufficient to meet the risk posed by cockpit smoke.
According to our contacts, the FAA additionally believes that the
existing performance-based standards for cockpit ventilation
effectively eliminate the unsafe conditions associated with smoke in
the flight deck.
Their current regulations require manufacturers to demonstrate that
continuously generated cockpit smoke can be evacuated within 3 minutes
to levels such that the residual smoke does not distract the flight
crew or interfere with flight operations.
So on that basis, we oppose and urge the membership to join us in
opposing this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. HIRONO. I again note that the underlying FAA reauthorization bill
that we are contemplating tonight acknowledges this concern by asking
the DOA to assess what the FAA has done in this area. So, to me, that
says that this is an ongoing concern that is acknowledged in the
underlying bill.
In addition, I would like to note that there are any number of
private airlines that already have these kinds of systems that I am
talking about in my amendment in their fleets. For example, Jet Blue
has these systems, UPS. And on the Federal side, I think it is really
interesting to note that the FAA's VIP fleet has this kind of system in
its cockpits to make sure that their pilots can see when there is
continuous dense smoke in the cockpit.
So, again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment as being
reasonable and taking us to the next steps to address this issue.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. I would just repeat, current requirements of the FAA
require that smoke be evacuated from a flight deck within 3 minutes.
And the feeling of the FAA is that resources can best be utilized to
focus on the risk that generates the smoke rather than the smoke
itself, and on getting the smoke out of the way rather than the
approach that is being urged by this amendment. So I continue to
recommend opposition.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. HIRONO. I would like to close by reiterating once again that I
think it is interesting that the FAA chooses to focus on the causes of
cockpit smoke. Frankly, if there is smoke in the cockpit, I don't know
that we need to be focusing that much on what causes the smoke. Of
course that is important. But at the same time, what I care about on
behalf of the pilot and the flying public is, what can we do. What
systems are already available, what technology is already available,
being used, I might say, extensively by the private sector as well as
in government airplanes, that would ensure the safety of our pilots and
flying public? This is why I continue to press the adoption of my
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 1730
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Chairman, I would just reiterate that according to the
information provided to the committee by the FAA, no accidents or
catastrophic events have been tied solely to the presence of smoke in
the flight deck. An analysis of accident data for the last 15 years
shows that the equipment that would be required by this amendment would
not have reduced fatal accidents. Therefore, I urge that we listen to
the experts, keep our focus on eliminating the cause of the smoke, and
not adopt the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Ms. HIRONO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Hawaii
will be postponed.
Amendment No. 11 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee of Texas
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11
printed in House Report 112-46.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 138, after line 9, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 318. MINIMUM STAFFING OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall take
such actions as may be necessary to ensure that, at a covered
airport, not fewer than 3 air traffic controllers are on duty
at all times during periods of airfield operations.
(b) Covered Airport.--In this section, the term ``covered
airport'' means the 20 largest airports in the United States,
in terms of annual passenger enplanements for the most recent
calendar year for which data are available.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, at the end of debate, I
intend to ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
First of all, let me indicate to my colleagues the importance of this
issue. I served as the chairperson of the Transportation Security
Committee on Homeland Security and I now serve as the ranking member,
so I have lived through these issues of security for a very long time.
From the tragic moments of 9/11 and the organization of our Homeland
Security Committee as a select committee, and then the final committee,
I have been involved in these issues. So my intent is to discuss why
this is an important safety issue and an important security issue.
Again, it is to recognize that our air traffic controllers are really
our first responders. It is important to note that air traffic
controllers are in rural airports, in small airports, and in our major
airports. My amendment would specifically speak to the busiest
airports, those airports that could document on an annual basis the
amount of passengers at that airport, such as Bush Intercontinental
Airport in Houston, Texas, that is number eight.
Commercial aircraft, for example, always have at least two pilots for
long hauls. Sometimes there are three for long hauls. Why would we not
have the same standards for air traffic controllers? I believe it is
important to ensure
[[Page H2186]]
the safety of the American public. There are notorious incidents that
involve pilot fatigue, but there are also incidents that reflect upon
the lack of air traffic controllers.
I commend Secretary LaHood for ordering a second air traffic
controller to be on duty, in particular, overnight at the National
Airport. And I want to make the point that we are not demonizing air
traffic controllers, because if you know the story, you know the
individual that fell asleep had been on duty for three nights in a row.
The Secretary's action evidences that there is no current mandate for
multiple air traffic controllers.
There is legislation in the Senate and there is language in the House
bill that deals with the study. I frankly believe that we should have a
more firm assessment, having a minimum of three, and at least two air
traffic controllers to address this question.
Why do I say that? The National Air Traffic Controllers Association
and their president have indicated one-person shifts are unsafe,
period. The most horrifying proof of this, of course, came on August
27, 2006. In addition, it has been in the air traffic controllers'
mission to have at least two people on staff or as air traffic
controllers for most of their existence.
So I stand today saying that it is important that we have trained air
traffic controllers. They are called certified professional
controllers. But in the top 20 airports, I must ask the question: Why
do we have a structure that doesn't require minimally three, at least
two, and at least, if you will, would have the individual there at all
times who has not been on duty for three nights in a row?
I think that this is an important step, and I would ask my colleagues
to work with me as we go forward to ensure the safety and security of
the Nation's skies. We are all working together, and I look forward
prospectively to looking at legislation, long-term, that addresses this
issue of safety and security in the Nation's air traffic control
towers. They are our public servants.
Mr. Chair, my amendment calls for staffing minimums of no fewer than
three air traffic controllers on duty during the period of airfield
operations at the 20 busiest airports in the country.
We have all heard about the air traffic Supervisor who reportedly
fell asleep on the job last week, forcing two airliners carrying more
than 150 passengers and crew to land without direction at National
Airport.
It is a blessing that the pilots had the wherewithal to handle the
situation safely, securely, and without incident, but this has
highlighted a serious safety and security issue in our aviation system.
Although the Supervisor at National Airport was certified to perform
air traffic control, the fact that a Supervisor for the FAA who is
responsible for managing air traffic controllers was working alone
without any frontline air traffic controller(s) on duty, is shocking in
itself. What is more shocking is that this was his fourth 10 p.m. to 6
a.m. shift in a row, according to USA Today.
This is not the first incident at National Airport, where a traffic
control tower was left unmanned for an extended period of time.
The vast majority of air traffic controllers are hard working
dedicated individuals. 365 days a year, air traffic controllers ensure
that we have the safest aviation system in the world.
But Mr. Chair, we are all human and mishaps occur, which is why in
the aviation system we use multiple layers and duplication to ensure
for the safety of the public and the crew.
Commercial aircraft always have at least two pilots, and for long
haul flights, there are three. Why would we not have similar standards
for air traffic controllers performing an equally critical function?
Think about the people flying on the planes across our country. They
our our grandmothers, husbands, wives and babies. They are American
passangers and their lives have value. To ensure their safety we must
insist that Certified Professional Controllers (CPC) are always in the
tower. We must set a reasonable minimum standard.
I commend Secretary LaHood for ordering a second air traffic
controller to be on duty overnight at National Airport. However, the
Secretary's action simply evidences that there is no current mandate
for multiple air traffic controllers. The Secretary stated, ``It is not
acceptable to have just one controller in the tower managing air
traffic in this critical air space. I have also asked FAA Administrator
Randy Babbitt to study staffing levels at other airports around the
country.''
My amendment calls for a minimum of three air traffic controllers in
the tower during hours of airfield operation at the Nation's busiest
airports.
After 9/11, we witnessed the vital importance of air traffic
controllers in protecting our domestic airspace. Air Traffic
Controllers also known as Certified Professional Controllers (CPCs) are
part of our front line of defense to protect and ensure the safety of
our airspace. In the shocking aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, it was air
traffic controllers who monitored the air space above our nation to
help keep us safe from further attacks.
Our system is clearly not impervious to the effects of human error,
and all it takes is one accident for us to regret not taking the proper
action on this amendment.
We must not forget the people who are the passengers in those planes
that fly above American skies. They are our grandmothers, grandfathers,
husbands, wives and children. They are American passengers and their
lives have value. To ensure their safety we must insist that air
traffic controllers are provided with proper staffing levels to do
their important and necessary jobs of keeping Americans safe.
Mr. Chair, let me end by quoting from a statement released by the
National Air Traffic Controllers Association which says:
``One-person shifts are unsafe. Period. The most horrifying proof of
this came on Aug. 27, 2006, when 49 people lost their lives aboard
Comair Flight 191 in Lexington, Ky., when there was only one controller
assigned to duty in the tower handling multiple controllers'
responsibilities alone. One person staffing was wrong then and it's
wrong now.''
Mr. Chair, my amendment is essential to ensure that we continue to
have the safest and most secure aviation system in the world, and I
urge my colleagues to support it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. I claim the time in opposition.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. Again, I think the gentlelady's intentions are honorable,
and I know she is trying to make certain that we are safe and secure.
However, the way the amendment is crafted with actually requiring three
air traffic controllers all the time in the top 20 as far as traffic,
first of all, I would say it doesn't achieve her goals.
First of all, all of those, we have a list of them, have at least two
air traffic controllers. Some of them have very few flights. This
doesn't answer the problem that they had at Ronald Reagan Airport.
There was a period of time when they have no traffic at many of these
airports, so what she would be doing the way this is crafted is
requiring at least three all the time, when we have two already, and
requiring an additional one.
These are not cheap, easy-to-come-by air traffic controllers. They
earn, on average, $163,000. Where I need to put them is where I have
the air traffic. We always are required by labor organizations and by
FAA to staff to traffic.
So her amendment, while maybe well-intended, it actually achieves the
opposite. All of these, every one that she mentioned, has at least two,
and then I would be adding more people when they have no traffic as
opposed to putting them where I need them where they have traffic.
I understand she is going to withdraw the amendment. I would be glad
to work with her. We do have provisions in here that will help us, I
think, with some of the personnel movement and questions of
professionalism and competency and training that will address some of
the shortfalls we have seen from a limited number of FAA air traffic
controllers.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Let me thank the gentleman, and let me
thank Mr. Costello, as well, for working on these issues. I think both
Members know my relationship to the issues of transportation security.
I would argue that having a statutory framework to work from is the
appropriate approach to take. You can assess, then, whether you need
three or two or whether some of the airports already have the standing
amount. But we have to focus on the security of our skies, if you will,
and we don't want any more tragedies to occur without some framework.
I look forward to working with both gentlemen on a framework for our
air traffic controllers. I intend to work on legislation that embodies
safety and security in a jurisdictional manner and working with
Homeland Security, working with the Department of Transportation and
our respective jurisdictional committees.
[[Page H2187]]
We owe this to the American public. It is my commitment to ensure
that professionalism is there, that safety and security are there, and
no more lives are lost because of the potential of an overly tired air
traffic controller.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
{time} 1740
Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mrs. Miller of Michigan
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk made in order under the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 140, line 2, insert after ``industry'' the following:
``, Federal agencies that employ unmanned aircraft systems
technology in the national airspace system,''.
Page 140, line 23, strike ``and''.
Page 140, after line 23, insert the following:
(iii) to develop standards and requirements for unmanned
aircraft systems sense and avoid performance; and
Page 140, line 24, strike ``(iii)'' and insert ``(iv)''.
Page 144, after line 10, insert the following (and
redesignate subsequent sections, and conform the table of
contents, accordingly):
SEC. 325. SAFETY STUDIES.
The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration
shall carry out all safety studies necessary to support the
integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national
airspace system.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from Michigan (Mrs. Miller) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Michigan.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly also
want to thank Chairman Mica, as well as Chairman Petri and also Ranking
Member Costello, for all of their hard work and for putting out a bill
I think will help us move the Nation forward and improve the quality of
aviation in America.
My amendment is designed to help expedite and to improve the process
by which FAA works with government agencies to incorporate unmanned
aerial vehicles, or UAVs as they're commonly called, into the National
Airspace System. Currently, Mr. Chairman, law enforcement agencies
across the country, from Customs and Border Protection to local police
departments, et cetera, are ready to embrace the new technology and to
start utilizing UAVs in the pursuit of enforcing the law and protecting
our border as well.
However, the FAA has been very hesitant to give authorization to
these UAVs due to limited air space and restrictions that they have. I
certainly can appreciate those concerns; but when we're talking about
Customs and Border Protection or the FBI, what have you, we are talking
about missions of national security. And certainly there's nothing more
important than that. It was a very, very lengthy exercise to get the
FAA to authorize the use of UAVs on the southern border. While they're
finally being utilized down there, we are certainly a long way from
fully utilizing these technologies.
So my amendment does three things. First, it makes sure those
stakeholders currently using UAVs have a seat at the table during the
integration process. Second, my amendment would clear up a source of
confusion in this process and direct the FAA to define exactly what it
means by ``sense and avoid technology.'' We think this would provide
very clear-cut criteria in order to ensure compliance.
Finally, my amendment directs the FAA to conduct the safety studies
that it is requiring. Currently, the FAA would direct various agencies
to conduct these studies themselves. However, there is no agency in the
Federal Government that has the expertise and the competency that FAA
has when it comes to studying safety in the air. So I think this would
guarantee that the safety studies that the FAA requires for this
process are as comprehensive as possible.
As I said before, we do have some domestic UAV missions in effect.
There's three in Arizona, there's two in North Dakota, and maritime
guardians as well in both Florida and Texas. We've made some progress,
but when we have a situation in this Nation where we don't have
operational control of either of our borders, either the southern
border or the northern border, I think that the taxpayers are well-
suited to be able to utilize current DOD technology, off-the-shelf
hardware that has already been extremely effectively in theatre with
these UAVs to help us with our border protection.
UAVs are ready. They work. I think it's past time we utilize them. We
need to have the FAA help us with this kind of thing as well.
Mr. PETRI. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. PETRI. I thank my colleague from Michigan for yielding. We've
reviewed her amendment and have no objection to it. We think it's a
step forward, and I would urge my colleagues to join us in supporting
this.
Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I certainly appreciate Chairman Petri's
comments on that.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise to claim time in
opposition to the amendment, although I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, if H.R. 658 passes, this 4-
year FAA reauthorization bill would devastate rural communities across
our great country. This legislation completely phases out the Essential
Air Service program, rolls back critical funding needed for airport
improvement programs, fails to adequately protect the rights of air
passengers, and would cost us close to 70,000 American jobs.
The EAS, the Essential Air Service program, is necessary to provide
air service into our country's most rural communities. This year alone,
110 rural airports in the continental United States were helped by this
important program. These airports, like the one I represent in Crescent
City, California, would simply not be in operation if it weren't for
the EAS program. This legislation would completely phase out the EAS
program for all airports in the Lower 48 by 2014. This would be
devastating for small businesses and a public safety disaster.
I singled out Crescent City Airport in Del Norte County on the west
coast of California because, as we all know, just a couple of weeks ago
we had a tsunami. Crescent City, California, was ground zero for that
tsunami on the Pacific coast. Crescent City received about $40 million
worth of damage. We lost a life. All the roads were closed in and out
of the area. The only way to get people in and out--some of those
people critical public safety individuals, folks who came in to do
assessments and to help out in this devastating time--were through our
small airport. If this program is lost, that small airport would not be
there for my district and all of the other rural districts across the
country.
Mr. Chairman, I agree that we've gone too long without a long-term
FAA reauthorization bill. However, the bill before us, I believe, would
do more harm than good for our aviation system. For that reason, I urge
all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill.
I yield to my friend from Illinois.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, we support the gentlelady's amendment.
Mr. THOMPSON of California. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Woodall
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 157, after line 14, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 3__ CERTAIN EXISTING FLIGHT TIME LIMITATIONS AND REST
REQUIREMENTS.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any interpretation issued
by the Administrator of
[[Page H2188]]
the Federal Aviation Administration, the requirements
regarding sections 263 and 267(d) of part 135 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, for part 135 certificate holders
providing air ambulance services and pilots and flight
crewmembers of all-cargo aircraft regarding certain flight
times and rest periods shall remain in effect as such
requirements were in effect on January 1, 2011.
(b) Restriction on Regulations.--The Administrator may not
issue, finalize, or implement a rule regarding sections 263
and 267(d) of part 135 of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, as proposed in docket No. FAA-2010-1259,
Interpretations of Rest Requirements, published in the
Federal Register on December 23, 2010, or any similar rule
regarding such sections for part 135 certificate holders
providing air ambulance services and pilots and flight
crewmembers of all-cargo aircraft.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Woodall) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. WOODALL. My amendment supports a longstanding FAA regulation of
medical charter flight services under part 135. There's been a lot of
focus on fatigue and pilot rest and duties. I certainly understand that
on the passenger side of the equation, but these medical charter
flights fall into a little different category.
If you chartered a flight to fly down and pick up a heart for a heart
transplant, the lifesaving thing to do is to actually keep that flight
coming back, not to delay it with additional rest and regulations.
Because of the unique circumstances that these air ambulances are in,
that these medical charter flights are in--and we even expanded it to
include cargo because in this increasingly regulatory environment I
didn't want there to be any confusion that if we had a heart on a
plane, that was somehow not a medical ambulance flight because there
was no person there to prevent the FAA from re-regulating this area in
the same way that they have regulated passenger charter flights.
This has long been treated under a special part of the regs for a
special reason because these air ambulance flights provide a critical
addition to our health care delivery system in this country and because
the flights that they are involved in are genuinely a matter of life
and death.
With that, I would ask my colleagues to support this protection of
the current regulatory structure of these medical charter flights and
prevent the reinterpretation of that structure.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. No Member seeking time in opposition, the question
is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Woodall).
The amendment was agreed to.
Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Pierluisi
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 161, line 18, strike ``Alaska and Hawaii'' and insert
``Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico''.
Page 164, line 19, strike ``Alaska and Hawaii'' and insert
``Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico''.
Page 164, line 21, strike ``Alaska and Hawaii'' and insert
``Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Puerto Rico (Mr. Pierluisi) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Puerto Rico.
Mr. PIERLUISI. The Essential Air Service program, enacted in the wake
of airline deregulation in 1978, ensures that smaller communities that
were served by air carriers before deregulation continue to be served
so that residents of these communities can access air travel. Nowhere
is the Essential Air Service program more essential than in
noncontiguous U.S. jurisdictions, like Puerto Rico, that are separate
and distant from the U.S. mainland.
The bill already passed by the other body would make reforms to the
EAS program going forward, but would continue the program, in effect.
The bill before us would phase out the EAS program by October 2013, but
would expressly authorize the Secretary of Transportation, if he or she
deems it appropriate, to continue the program beyond that date in the
noncontiguous jurisdictions of Alaska and Hawaii.
My amendment would provide the Secretary with the same reasonable
discretion in the case of Puerto Rico. The sound arguments that
militate in favor of allowing the Secretary this discretion with
respect to Alaska and Hawaii apply with similar force with respect to
Puerto Rico.
{time} 1750
Like Alaska and Hawaii, Puerto Rico is a non-contiguous jurisdiction,
separated by ocean from the U.S. mainland. Puerto Rico consists of
multiple islands, three of which are home to resident populations and
active airports: namely, the main island of Puerto Rico and the outer
islands of Vieques and Culebra.
As in Alaska and Hawaii, not all communities in Puerto Rico are
connected by road, and the nearly 4 million U.S. citizens residing in
the territory rely heavily on aviation to connect to the national air
transportation network. Federal support under the EAS program has made
this essential connection possible for many of my constituents who face
unique geographic challenges.
Continued operation of the EAS program in Puerto Rico is likely to
cost the Federal Government only about $1 million a year, roughly .06
percent of the total cost of the program in 2010. The EAS program is
funded through FAA overflight fees, which apply to operators of
aircraft that fly in U.S.-controlled airspace, including Puerto Rico.
Mr. Chairman, based on an earlier discussion we had on the floor, I
know my friend, the gentleman from Florida, is willing to work with me
to address this matter as we move forward.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition, although I am not in
opposition. I ask unanimous consent to control the time.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Florida is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. MICA. First of all, I want to thank the gentleman for his
leadership in representing so well the people of Puerto Rico. Also,
again, Governor Fortuno, who preceded the current delegate. I talked to
them about this situation, and they do indeed have an essential air
problem. He cited Vieques and Culebra, for example, and I know even
during the recent season they had ferry boat interruption service.
There's no other way to get back and forth. And this does constitute
Essential Air Service.
As I have said to the gentlewoman and the gentleman from North and
South Dakota and the gentleman from Pennsylvania and now to the
gentleman with Puerto Rico, I commit to work with them and will try to
address their concerns. He has my commitment in that regard.
I understand he's going to withdraw his amendment, and I'm grateful
for his cooperation and pledge to work with him.
I yield back the balance my time.
Mr. PIERLUISI. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from
Florida for his kind words and for the commitment he has made to ensure
that Puerto Rico is not overlooked in the deliberations about the
Essential Air Service program. I cannot overstate the importance of air
service for my constituents, especially those living in Ponce and
Mayaguez, as well as the islands of Vieques and Culebra. Therefore, I
look forward to working with the gentleman from Florida as well as with
the ranking member of the committee of jurisdiction on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Schweikert
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 170, after line 12, insert the following:
[[Page H2189]]
(e) Extending Length of Flights From Ronald Reagan
Washington National Airport.--Section 41718 (as amended by
subsection (d)(1) of this section) is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(h) Use of Airport Slots for Beyond Perimeter Flights.--
Notwithstanding section 49109 or any other provision of law,
any air carrier that holds or operates air carrier slots at
Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport as of January 1,
2011, pursuant to subparts K and S of part 93 of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, which are being used as of that
date for scheduled service between that airport and a large
hub airport may use such slots for service between Ronald
Reagan Washington National Airport and any airport located
outside of the perimeter restriction described in section
49109, except that an air carrier may not use multi-aisle or
widebody aircraft to provide the service authorized by this
subsection.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Arizona (Mr. Schweikert) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arizona.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, first, I really do want to thank the
chairman here for his hard work. Let's face it. This is a tough bill to
put together. There's a lot of moving parts. And I truly appreciate the
diligence that you and your staff have done to ensure that this FAA
authorization continues to move forward.
The current DCA slots language in the bill does offer some relief to
travel restrictions imposed by the DCA perimeter rule. It would make a
handful of additional--what's the proper term?--``beyond perimeter''
opportunities available, and those flying opportunities would probably
go to new carriers or those with limited presence right now at Reagan
National.
But there needs to be, and there really should be, more done. My
amendment would allow carriers which currently have slots at National
Airport to convert flights now servicing large hub airports inside the
perimeter zone into flights serving any airport outside the perimeter
zone. This approach would result in greater access for communities
beyond the perimeter zone without adding any new flights and without
jeopardizing service to small- and medium-sized communities. There is
substantial support for the idea. There are many other ideas worth
considering in this basic concept of dealing with this perimeter zone.
The perimeter rule restriction for flights coming in and out of
Reagan National really are outdated. It's a vestige of a long time ago
when the government thought really it should control and manage and,
shall we say, manipulate markets. Whatever justification there might
have been a long time ago, the perimeter rule has surely outlived its
purpose. Our constituents, particularly those in the western part of
the country, are penalized by continued imposition of this perimeter
rule. Broader relief of this rule, broader definition, broader
expansion--this competition would benefit consumers and allow a better
market to function for all of us.
I would like this opportunity to work with the chairman to achieve
the result of more competition. This is a very important bill. This is
important to us in the West, and I do believe we should broaden the
scope of the perimeter rule.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment. The
gentleman may or may not know that this is the one issue that held us
up from getting an FAA reauthorization bill in the last Congress. In
fact, we could not get the bill out of the Senate because of this
issue. It would, in fact, be an earmark for one airline.
I support the language that is currently in the bill. It's taken
years for us to negotiate where we are with this issue, and I, again,
strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Florida,
the chairman of the Transportation Committee.
Mr. MICA. Again, I do have concerns and share the concerns of Mr.
Costello. This is a hard-fought provision.
I will guarantee the gentleman that I am aware of his concerns. I
will work with him as the bill proceeds hopefully through the
conference process. And I think you're doing an outstanding job in
representing the constituencies who are affected who want those longer-
distance services to come into our Nation's Capital.
Again, he has my strong commitment. I am hoping that he would
withdraw the amendment at this time. I pledge to work with him, and I
know Mr. Costello will also work with the gentleman in that regard.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the chairman of the
committee, Mr. Mica, and the ranking member on this issue.
{time} 1800
As the ranking member pointed out, this was the single issue. The
amendment being offered by the gentleman from Arizona was identical to
the dispute which submarined this bill in the last session of Congress
in the Senate. Essentially, it's a grab by, principally, one airline,
but two airlines would get 70 percent of the benefit of his amendment.
I think that's pretty much an earmark. It's pretty darned targeted.
What we've proposed and what the chairman has proposed is much more
modest and builds upon the consensus of the House, the last two
sessions of this House, and also the last two successful
reauthorizations of the FAA, which said, let's have real competition.
So it put up a small pool of slots to be competitively awarded to areas
that are underserved, not to one airline so it can dictate who will get
service and who won't, which is what the gentleman's amendment would
do. This would be a competition for underserved cities and airlines
which do not now have access to the airport.
This is very similar to what was done in AIR-21 and Vision-100. I
believe it is an elegant solution to this that will not cause
additional noise or problems at the airport, that will not give one
airline a near monopoly or two airlines pretty much a duopoly. The
market at National will give consumers on the west coast more options
in getting to our Nation's capital and in utilizing National Airport.
So I appreciate the gentleman's advocacy for an airline which serves
his State, but that airline doesn't serve mine or many other western
States. I would urge opposition, and let's have a real competitive
position, which is the position of the committee.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Mr. Chairman, in reclaiming whatever time I still may
have remaining, I actually appreciate the comments.
My ultimate goal is: more competition, more options, more choices. In
the quick conversation I just had with the chairman, he assured me that
he'd be willing to work with all of the parties that want to reach this
goal.
And so with unanimous consent, I would like to withdraw the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
There was no objection.
Amendment No. 16 Offered by Ms. Richardson
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16
printed in House Report 112-46.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 173, at the end of the matter following line 2, insert
the following:
``42304. Notification of flight status by text message or email.
Page 179, line 23, strike the closing quotation marks and
the final period and insert the following:
``Sec. 42304. Notification of flight status by text message
or email
``Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of
this section, the Secretary of Transportation shall issue
regulations to require that each air carrier that has at
least one percent of total domestic scheduled-service
passenger revenue provide each passenger of the carrier--
[[Page H2190]]
``(1) an option to receive a text message or email or any
other comparable electronic service, subject to any fees
applicable under the contract of the passenger for the
electronic service, from the air carrier as a means of
notification of any change in the status of the flight of the
passenger whenever the flight status is changed before the
boarding process for the flight commences; and
``(2) the notification if the passenger requests the
notification.''.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentlewoman
from California (Ms. Richardson) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to
bring my amendment forward. I want to point out that I actually brought
forward this amendment back in 2009, and it was passed in this House
back on May 21, 2009.
My amendment directs the FAA administrator to promulgate regulations
within 180 days, giving consumers an option--I want to stress an
``option''--for a text message or an email notification from carriers
in the event of a delayed or a cancelled flight. The amendment would,
consistent with existing regulations, apply only to carriers which earn
at least 1 percent of the domestic passenger service market.
My purpose today is not to tell the airlines how to run their
businesses or to instill any burden on the airlines. It is merely to
ensure that hardworking men and women who are spending their dollars
flying the airlines are given the basic information that they deserve
and, as I would say, what they've already paid for. We can all tell
horror stories of delayed and cancelled flights. Given the advances in
technology and the widespread use of cell phones and smart phones
nationwide, it is only reasonable to consider that we would utilize
21st century solutions for all of the American public, not just for
some who can pay a little bit more for it.
My amendment will help to ensure that the traveling public will
receive timely notifications of any flight delay or cancellation. I
need not tell you that flight delays and cancellations continue to be a
problem. In fact, the Bureau of Transportation reported that, in 2010,
more than one out of every five flights was delayed.
Major choke points for travelers have taken place at large hubs, but
they can occur anywhere. It is not uncommon that the airlines have
prior knowledge of an upcoming delay, and that information should be
shared appropriately with the public. The airlines can simply send each
passenger who has requested it an email or a text message, which would
give those passengers more time to plan alternative routes or to notify
their families.
Earlier this year, snow slammed the east coast and the Midwest. In
the New York region alone, the storm caused thousands of cancelled
flights at the Newark Airport. Customer service does matter, and in
this case, it is something that all Americans deserve. Also, consider
that it is in the economic interest of our country not to have
thousands and thousands of people who are flying and who, unbeknownst
to them, end up sleeping on the floor and running out of baby's milk
and diapers, having a need to get to their final points.
Let me suffice to say that, in consultation with my colleagues on the
other side, with Mr. Mica and others as well as with those in the
industry, I have committed to working with them as we go forward to
make sure that we can eventually get to a point where we can provide
the public with the information but not in a way that is burdensome.
So, today, I will not ask for a recorded vote, but I look forward to
working with my colleagues on the other side to establish a better
process going forward, which the industry has also agreed to work with
me on.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Simpson). The gentleman from Wisconsin is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. PETRI. We really do support the intent of the gentlelady from
California's amendment, but in our opinion and without further work and
review of it, it's not something that is wise to codify into law at
this particular juncture.
It is my understanding that all of the major air carriers do provide
electronic notification of flight status. We want to review it to make
sure of the scope of those, less the major carriers, and as to how this
would work in practice so that it doesn't result in litigation and not
really greater consumer convenience. The industry has been moving.
Since you called this to the attention of the industry back several
years ago, it has been implemented by all of the major carriers. So
progress is being made, and we'd like to work with you to make further
progress, but we do oppose the amendment at this time.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California has 2 minutes
remaining.
Ms. RICHARDSON. I thank the gentleman on the other side for his
willingness to work with me.
As I have just spoken to the industry individuals, actually, not all
of them have implemented it, so there is room to grow. Also, not
necessarily all passengers are aware of the service or have access to
it.
Suffice to say, I agree with your thoughts. Certainly, we're not
looking to do anything burdensome, and we're certainly not looking for
legal issues, but if we can figure out a way to work to get the best
thing for the American public, that's my objective.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. I understand the delegate from the District of Columbia
would like to address this issue. I yield 2 minutes to our colleague,
Eleanor Holmes Norton.
Ms. NORTON. I appreciate my friend yielding me 2 minutes. I did not
get an opportunity to speak on the last amendment. Although I'm from
the region, I did want to reinforce why the compromise fashioned by the
chairman and the ranking member is so important. Whenever this bill
comes up, there is some individual, usually from the other body, who
wants to expand the perimeter.
Dulles and Reagan are essentially airports under congressional
control, and Congress has mandated a balance between Reagan and Dulles,
and has allocated finances accordingly. Reagan is a short-distance
airport. Dulles is the long-distance airport. Reagan has one primary
runway. There were stories in the paper just recently about how hard it
is, therefore, for planes to land there. Dulles has four times as many.
The underuse of Dulles would, in fact, waste substantial investment
that the Congress has put into this balance.
{time} 1810
The compromise language does at least import competition; whereas,
the original amendment would have been a windfall to one or two
airlines.
So I very much appreciate this compromise. Remember, those of us in
the region would prefer nothing outside of the perimeter, but we're
always willing to work with the chairman and with others on the
committee, and I am grateful for the compromise that has been accepted,
and I'm very grateful that the gentleman from Arizona has been kind
enough to withdraw his amendment.
Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Chairman, the flying public should have the peace
of mind of knowing that, if they so choose, they're armed with the
latest information regarding their flight delays. This is what our
American public has right now.
As this bill continues, I pledge to continue to work with Mr. Petri,
Mr. Mica, and our ranking member, Mr. Costello, as we continue to work
to make sure that the airlines can come up with a solution that will
benefit all of the flying public here in America, a solution that does
not burden the consumers or the industry, that can allow us to get to
our objective, which is for people to fly safely and to be
appropriately informed.
I urge my colleagues to continue to work on this issue.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Richardson).
The amendment was rejected.
Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Capuano
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17
printed in House Report 112-46.
[[Page H2191]]
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 189, after line 13, insert the following (and conform
the table of contents accordingly):
SEC. 434. BAGGAGE FEE REFUNDS.
An air carrier that collects a fee from a passenger for
checked baggage on a flight operated by the carrier in
scheduled passenger air transportation or intrastate air
transportation shall refund the fee, not later than 60 days
after the date of the flight, if the baggage is lost,
delayed, or damaged. A refund required under this section
shall be in addition to compensation required under any other
provision of law.
SEC. 435. NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE SALE OF
AIRLINE TICKETS.
(a) Notice of Fees.--Section 41712 is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(d) Notice of Fees.--
``(1) In general.--It shall be an unfair or deceptive
practice under subsection (a) for any ticket agent, air
carrier, foreign air carrier, or other person offering to
sell tickets for air transportation on a flight of an air
carrier or foreign air carrier to fail to disclose, whether
verbally in oral communication or in writing in written or
electronic communication, prior to the purchase of a ticket,
the cost of checking one or more pieces of baggage on the
flight.
``(2) Internet offers.--In the case of an offer to sell
tickets described in paragraph (1) on an Internet Web site,
disclosure of the information required by paragraph (1) shall
be provided by--
``(A) requesting the individual purchasing the ticket to
indicate the number of bags the individual intends to check
on the flight, when the individual is providing other flight
and airport information; and
``(B) informing the individual of the cost associated with
checking such baggage when a fare quote is first provided.''.
(b) Sharing of Information.--To carry out the amendment
made by subsection (a), the Secretary of Transportation shall
prescribe any requirements necessary to ensure that consumers
are provided with information about baggage fees prior to the
sale of a ticket, including requiring that pertinent
information is adequately shared between carriers and ticket
agents with which carriers have an agency appointment or
other contract.
(c) Contractual Relationships.--Nothing in this section,
including the amendments by this section, shall be construed
to require--
(1) an air carrier or foreign air carrier to enter into an
agency appointment or other contract with a ticket agent; or
(2) an air carrier or foreign air carrier to provide
information to a ticket agent with which the carrier does not
have an agency appointment or other contract.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is very simple. It does two
simple things. We worked with the Department of Transportation to make
sure that we don't step on any toes.
Very simply, it requires any airline charging a baggage fee to tell
us what it is so that when you want to go online and get a hundred
dollar ticket, you know it's going to cost you $120 for the baggage or
whatever. Very simple. It also requires them to share that information
with any other aggregator that they already have a contract with. It
does not require them to share that information with people that they
do not do contract work with.
The second thing it does is it simply says, if you collect a baggage
fee and you lose that bag, that you have to refund the baggage fee.
Very simple.
Two items, consumer protection. Everybody who travels, everybody who
flies knows that these two issues have become problems. They are being
unaddressed. DOT is looking at some regulations. They haven't done it
yet. There is nothing in this bill that would interfere with that
activity.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully request that this
amendment be adopted.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. MICA. First of all, I greatly respect the gentleman's intent. I
strongly favor the disclosure of fees by airlines. I think that fees
ought to be refunded when bags arrive late, damaged, or just lost.
However, as drafted, the amendment goes far beyond that and allows,
again, some unfairness to contractual agreements, first of all, with
global distribution systems and ticket agents. This requirement tips
the scales in favor of global distribution systems and their business
relationships with airlines, and global distribution systems are not
charitable organizations. They're owned by private equity firms, hedge
funds, and exist to make money in the travel industry, and we would tip
the balance in this requirement for them.
I favor part of what the gentleman's trying to do, but as crafted, I
have to oppose the amendment because of that provision.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I respect the chairman's opinion, but I
respectfully disagree. There is nothing in this proposal, as drafted at
the moment, that would require anyone to disclose any information to
anyone they are not already giving information to. If an airline is
already doing work with Orbitz or Expedia or KAYAK or any of those,
they're already giving them all of the information.
All this says, if when you go onto one of those Web sites, if they
are already working with them. Some of them don't work with them at
all. That's their prerogative. There's nothing that requires that. It
simply says, if you are working with them, you have to add in the
baggage fee. That's all it does. It's simply allowing people to make
informed decisions as to how much they want to pay to actually travel
with their own bags, not a very difficult thing.
Mr. Chairman, I yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman
from Illinois (Mr. Costello), the ranking member.
Mr. COSTELLO. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I think it is worth pointing out that last July Mr. Petri and I held
a hearing at the Aviation Subcommittee, and we had the GAO come in. It
was on consumer issues, and not only the GAO but also consumer groups
came in, and the message was clear from every witness that had
consumers' interests in mind.
Number one, these fees were excessive. Two, information about baggage
fees should be transparent and immediately disclosed so that consumers
can compare the total cost of flights offered of the different
carriers.
So, this legislation helps bring more equity and transparency to the
process. I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to put into the Record a
letter of support by Flyers Rights, the largest flying public
representative in the country.
March 21, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica: Congressman Michael E. Capuano recently
introduced H.R. 712, which would require air carriers to
refund passenger baggage fees if such baggage is lost,
delayed, or damaged, and require air carriers and ticket
agents to include the actual cost of checked baggage when
quoting an airfare. This bill addresses two serious problems
for air travellers, and the 33,000 members of
FlyersRights.org strongly support this legislation.
The first problem is all too familiar to anyone who flies
frequently. About,10,000 bags a day are mishandled--lost,
damaged, or delayed--and passenger recourse has always been
limited. Lost or damaged bag incidents may result in some
compensation. However, most airlines now charge fees for
checked baggage. When a bag is lost, damaged, or delayed,
they are under no obligation to return those fees, even
though they have failed to perform the contract implied by
passengers' paying for bag delivery to destination. Clearly,
airlines should not profit from performance failures.
The second problem is relatively new. Most airlines
increasingly turn to unbundled, ancillary fees to boost their
profit. These fees, not a part of the advertised ticket
price, make it difficult for travellers to determine true
trip cost. Mr. Capuano's bill would force airlines to
proactively inform consumers of baggage charges before the
travellers purchase tickets. This fee disclosure was made
mandatory by a May, 2008, DOT rulemaking, but needs to become
a part of public law. H.R. 712 complements and builds on
DDT's rulemaking by requiring airlines to ask customers if
they'll be checking baggage when providing a fare quote, and
to then include that fee in their quote. It would also apply
to ticket agents and fare aggregators, where it will probably
be most useful.
I again stress that FlyersRights.org strongly supports this
legislation and views it as a strong step forward for airline
passenger rights.
Sincerely,
Kate Hanni,
Founder and Executive Director,
FlyersRights.org.
[[Page H2192]]
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the noes
appeared to have it.
Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts will be postponed.
Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Gingrey of Georgia
The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18
printed in House Report 112-46.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk
made in order under the rule.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:
Page 216, after line 2, insert the following:
(b) Labor Management Relations.--
(1) Exclusion from the exception.--Section 40122(g)(2)(C)
is amended by inserting after ``chapter 71'' the following:
``(other than subsections (a), (c) and (d) of section
7131)''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1)
shall take effect on the date of enactment of this Act,
except that such amendment shall not have the effect of
causing official time to be denied or otherwise made
unavailable for purposes of--
(A) the negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement,
if commenced before such date of enactment;
(B) any proceeding before the Federal Labor Relations
Authority, if commenced before such date of enactment; or
(C) any other matter pending on such date of enactment, in
connection with which any official time has been used or
granted before such date.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 189, the gentleman
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an
amendment with my good friend Mr. Todd Rokita from Indiana that will
increase efficiency in the FAA and uphold the integrity of taxpayer
dollars.
In fiscal year 2008, the Office of Personnel Management conducted an
extensive survey of 61 Federal agencies and found that nearly 3 million
work-hours and over 120 million taxpayer dollars were spent on union
activities during official work-related time. This amendment prohibits
Federal employees of the FAA from using official taxpayer-sponsored
time on these activities.
By offering this amendment, I intend to limit Federal activity during
normal business hours to the people's work and not for constantly
bargaining with one's employer, arbitrating grievances, or organizing
and carrying out internal union activities. Labor organizations must
participate in these actions outside of official time and without the
use of taxpayers' hard-earned dollars.
Mr. Chairman, the current collective bargaining agreement between the
FAA and air traffic controllers allows for nine Federal employees to
spend their--get this--their entire work year on behalf of the union.
Let me be abundantly clear. Nine Federal employees are paid by
taxpayers for absolutely no official work on their behalf.
So this amendment in no way inhibits an employee's right to
participate in collective bargaining or arbitration even though union
representatives generally drag these activities out for months to
years, costing taxpayers a tremendous amount of money.
Opponents of this amendment will inevitably say that union
representatives cannot use any official time for political activity and
only for work-related purposes. However, Mr. Chairman, during the CR
debate on H.R. 1 two weeks ago, a Federal employee working for the EPA
sent Members an email at 2:47 p.m. in the afternoon with a letter
attached that opposed an amendment, literally stating ``official time
cannot be used for any political activities.'' I find it hard to
believe how this letter does not constitute a political activity for
which this Federal employee clearly evaded his official work
responsibilities, in the middle of the work day, in order to weigh in
on a political matter on behalf of his union.
National Council of EPA Locals Council #238, American
Federation of Government Employees (AFL-CIO),
Chicago, IL, February 18, 2011.
an open letter to congress
Dear Honored Member of Congress: As President of the
American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) National
Council of EPA Locals #238, representing more than 10,000
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Federal civilian
employees across America, I am writing to ask you to oppose
any efforts to include in H.R. 1, the FY2011 Continuing
Resolution, the Gingrey Amendment #185, the Rokita Amendment
#209, or any other amendment to eliminate the use of official
time for union representation across the federal government.
In the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act (the Act), Congress
expressly stated its belief that collective bargaining not
only ``safeguards the public interest,'' but ``contributes to
the effective conduct of public business,'' and ``facilitates
and encourages the amicable settlement of disputes . . .''
Under the provisions of the Act, federal employees
represented by a union can be granted official time, or the
ability to perform representational activities during work
hours, for certain activities that are in the joint interest
of both the union and the agency. Official time is allowed
for negotiating collective bargaining agreements, handling
employee grievances, and conducting and receiving training.
It cannot be used for conducting internal union matters,
organizing workers, soliciting members or any partisan
political activities. It promotes efficiency and efficient
resolution of complaints within the federal workforce.
It is important to note that as part of the Act of 1978,
Congress requires federal employee unions to work on behalf
of all employees in a bargaining unit regardless of whether
or not they pay dues. Moreover, the Congress prohibits
federal employee representatives from even collecting a fair-
share payment or fee when they handle grievances for non-
members or arbitrate cases on their behalf. In other words,
non-members get the proverbial free lunch; they contribute
not a dime, yet they benefit directly from the hard-fought
bargaining gains and skilled representation that
organizations representing federal employees are compelled by
law to provide equally to both members and non-members.
In exchange for being saddled with these responsibilities,
the Congress allowed federal employee unions to bargain with
agencies over official time, by which federal employees who
are also union representatives can fulfill obligations to
their members and non-members while on duty status. Some
Members of Congress have advocated cutting the salaries and
benefits of those who serve the public as employees of the
federal government. These employees are the individuals who
secure our borders, keep terrorists behind bars, get Social
Security checks out on time, ensure a safe food supply, make
sure Americans have clean water and air, and care for our
wounded veterans, but they have been unfairly painted as the
cause of our country's economic troubles.
Use of reasonable amounts of official time has been
supported by government officials of both political parties
for some 50 years. The recent opposition to official time has
nothing to do with deficit reduction and everything to do
with taking away Federal Employees' right to union
representation. It is an attempt to make the grievance
process meaningless so that an employee who has been the
victim of race or gender discrimination, sexual harassment,
unfair denial of Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave, or
unsafe working conditions would have no representative to
contact.
Private industry has known for years that a healthy and
effective relationship between labor and management improves
customer service and is often the key to survival in a
competitive market. The same is true in the federal
government. No effort to improve governmental performance--
whether it's called reinvention, restructuring, or
reorganizing--will thrive in the long haul if labor and
management maintain an arms-length, adversarial relationship.
In an era of downsizing and tight budgets, it is essential
that unions have official time so that management and labor
have a stable and productive working relationship that allows
for collaboration in delivering the highest quality and most
effective services to the American people.
This mean-spirited attack on Federal civilian employees is
not only bad policy and demoralizing, but also erodes the
faith of the American people that Congress can be counted on
to provide them with even basic government services.
I urge you to vote ``no'' on the Gingrey Amendment #185,
the Rokita Amendment #209 and any other amendment to
eliminate the use of official time for union representation
across the federal government.
Respectfully,
Charles (``Chuck O'') Orzehoskie,
President, AFGE Council 238.
John J. O'Grady,
Treasurer, AFGE Council 238.
{time} 1820
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment.
[[Page H2193]]
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. COSTELLO. The amendment unfairly singles out the FAA unionized
employees from all other Federal employees. Under Federal law, an
employee representing a union has a right to receive ``official time''
to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement and participate in
impasse proceedings. In addition, the law permits an agency and a union
to negotiate the availability of official time as long as the time is
``reasonable, necessary, and in the public interest.''
Mr. Chairman, additionally, the purpose of the official time is to
give Federal employees the opportunity to represent their colleagues on
issues ranging from discrimination to managerial misconduct and to
resolve disputes in a cooperative fashion at the lowest level rather
than resorting to the costly litigation. The cost of arbitrating one
case is estimated to be at least $10,000, and that does not include the
salary and expenses for the time spent by the two attorneys the FAA
uses on every case.
Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully submit this is an issue that
should be left to be negotiated between the agency and the employees.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 seconds to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica), the committee chairman.
Mr. MICA. I would like to submit this letter of support for the
Record.
Association of Air Medical
Services,
Alexandria, VA, March 25, 2011.
Hon. John Mica,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Thomas Petri,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Nick Rahall,
Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Hon. Jerry Costello,
Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Aviation, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, House of
Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mica, Ranking Member Rahall, Chairman Petri,
Ranking Member Costello: The Association of Air Medical
Services (AAMS) greatly appreciates your efforts to enact an
overdue, long-term reauthorization of the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA). We are also appreciative of your
comprehensive efforts to address the safety concerns of the
air medical industry within the reauthorization legislation.
Like others in the air medical industry, AAMS is committed
to efforts to improve the safety infrastructure for air
medical providers, crews, and the patients they serve. Your
bill contains a number of provisions that address rapidly-
emerging technology and other practices that will surely
benefit the industry's efforts for increased safety.
As you know, the FAA has been operating without a long-term
authorization since 2007. The uncertainty of operating
without a long-term authorization makes it difficult for the
FAA to move forward with badly needed investments to improve
the aviation infrastructure, and in particular the low-
altitude infrastructure. As such, it is critical the FAA
reauthorization process is completed as quickly as possible.
AAMS urges the House to act on FAA reauthorization as soon as
possible so that the process can expeditiously move toward
completion and bring long-needed stability to FAA operations.
Again, thank you for your efforts on this important issue.
As always, please do not hesitate to call upon AAMS if we can
be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
Daniel G. Hankins, MD,
President.
Dawn Mancuso,
Executive Director/CEO.
____
March 30, 2011.
As proponents of safe and reliable lithium battery
transportation regulations, we urge you to support language
in the Mica Manager's Amendment to H.R. 658, which would
ensure that U.S. regulations governing air shipments of
lithium batteries and products containing them conform to
international standards established by the International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Harmonization of these
regulations will enhance safety and minimize the harsh
economic consequences and other burdens of complying with
multiple or inconsistent requirements for transporting our
products to and from the U.S. For these reasons, we also
strongly oppose the Filner Amendment, which would prevent
harmonization.
Over 81% of laptops, 67% of cellular phones and 69% of the
lithium batteries used to power these devices that are sold
in the U.S. are shipped by air into the U.S. All told,
billions of lithium and lithium battery-containing products
are shipped safely every year. In fact, there has not been a
reported incident in transportation involving such a battery
or battery-powered product that was packaged in accordance
with the ICAO regulations.
These batteries and products containing them are used in
various forms in nearly every aspect of our lives. We depend
on them in our jobs, personal lives, and for life-saving
medical procedures. Moreover, the U.S. military uses a
significant number of lithium battery-powered products to
train soldiers at home and in battlefield operations abroad.
Some everyday use products that contain lithium batteries
include laptops, cellular phones, portable music/video
devices, navigation/GPS systems, cameras, smoke/security
alarms and power tools. In addition, a number of life-saving
and life-enhancing medical devices are powered by these
batteries such as pacemakers, defibrillators, spinal cord
stimulators, portable oxygen concentrators and blood glucose
monitors.
Unfortunately, the Department of Transportation (DOT) has
published a proposed rulemaking that would require consumer-
type lithium batteries and products containing them to be
shipped as fully-regulated hazardous materials when shipped
by air as cargo. We also understand DOT has drafted a second
lithium battery rulemaking that may be published later this
year. Our coalition believes that DOT's proposed rule on
lithium batteries far exceeds what is necessary to achieve
safety benefits and will impose drastic costs on consumers,
retailers, and manufacturers of batteries, electronic
equipment and medical devices. If DOT is allowed to move
forward with their rulemakings, the following consequences
would likely ensue:
$1.1 billion impact on industry in the first year of
implementation
Advantage foreign businesses over U.S. businesses
Delays in shipping lithium batteries and equipment needed
by our military
U.S. consumers will be forced to pay higher prices for
consumer electronics and countless other devices that rely on
safe lithium batteries for their power source
Severe supply chain disruptions and delays as well as
untold job loss
Delays in shipping life-saving medical equipment and
increased medical costs
Re-routing of trade to other countries to avoid complying
with onerous new U.S. regulations
Create safety concerns regarding confusion over which rules
apply when shipping lithium battery products
As our nation works to climb out of an economic downturn,
these anticipated consequences are unacceptable for
manufacturers, technology innovators, retailers, medical-
device manufacturers, air carriers and other impacted
industries. The solution, and the best way to promote safety,
is to harmonize U.S. regulations with the ICAO regulations.
Again, we urge you to support the Mica Manager's Amendment to
H.R. 658 and oppose the Filner Amendment's attempt to prevent
harmonization.
AdvaMed, Airforwarders Association, Air Transport
Association, Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers,
AT&T, Boston Scientific, Cargo Airline Association, Consumer
Electronics Association, Consumer Electronics Retailers
Coalition, CTIA--The Wireless Association, Dangerous Goods
Advisory Council, DHL, Express Association of America, FedEx
Corporation, Garmin, Hewlett-Packard, International Air
Transport Association.
Information Technology Industry Council, Johnson Controls,
Motorola Mobility, Motorola Solutions, National Association
of Manufacturers, National Electrical Manufacturers
Association, National Retail Federation, Power Tool
Institute, PRBA--The Rechargeable Battery Association, Retail
Industry Leaders Association, Samsung SDI, Security Industry
Association, Sony, UPS, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, The
International Air Cargo Association.
Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time
to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 2\1/4\
minutes.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from
Georgia, Dr. Gingrey, for yielding me the time.
The highest honor and privilege of my professional career so far has,
with all due respect, not been in this Chamber but was the 8 years that
I served as Indiana's secretary of State. I have run a government
agency. We run it on 1987 dollars, unadjusted for inflation. The
secretary of State's office in Indiana right now spends no more money
than it did in 1987--again, unadjusted for inflation. We had no more
employees than we did in 1982. From that experience, I can say the
worst thing you can do for government efficiency, if you really are
interested in serving the people, is to have your employees distracted
by anything else but the people's business.
The scope of this problem at the Federal level I find absolutely
stunning. According to the Office of Policy Management, in 2008 the
Federal workers
[[Page H2194]]
were paid 2.9 million hours spent on union business. Let me say that
again. We pay, as American taxpayers, for 2.9 million hours of union
negotiations. That means we have spent $120 million for people to
negotiate for a different or better job, not for them to even do their
actual job.
Certain union representatives at the FAA are allowed to spend 80
hours each pay period doing union business, not the work of the people
of this Nation. Last time I checked, that's 2-weeks' worth of work the
entire pay period. So a union representative could spend each year
being paid by the taxpayers and only working on union business. How is
that fair to the American taxpayers, Mr. Chairman, who are footing this
bill? This must stop.
In case the Members here haven't heard, this country is broke. We are
borrowing money at a record pace and assigning the bill to our children
and grandchildren, Mr. Chairman. We simply cannot continue to waste
taxpayer dollars on work that benefits only a chosen few.
Please support this amendment, I urge my colleagues. Put money back
into the pockets of American families, and let union negotiators work
on their own time.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment,
and yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia will
be postponed.
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 112-46 on
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Mica of Florida.
Amendment No. 7 by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. DeFazio of Oregon.
Amendment No. 10 by Ms. Hirono of Hawaii.
Amendment No. 17 by Mr. Capuano of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 18 by Mr. Gingrey of Georgia.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the time for any electronic vote
after the first vote in this series.
Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Mica
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Florida
(Mr. Mica) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 251,
noes 168, not voting 13, as follows:
[Roll No. 207]
AYES--251
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--168
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Woolsey
Wu
NOT VOTING--13
Barton (TX)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Moran
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Richmond
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
{time} 1848
Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California and Mr. HOLDEN changed their vote from
``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. POLIS and ROSS of Arkansas changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Ms. WILSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 207, had I been
present, I would have voted ``no.''
Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Garrett
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New Jersey
(Mr. Garrett) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
[[Page H2195]]
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 120,
noes 303, not voting 9, as follows:
[Roll No. 208]
AYES--120
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Bartlett
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Boren
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Coffman (CO)
Connolly (VA)
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeGette
DeLauro
Dingell
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Garrett
Gibson
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Harris
Hayworth
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jordan
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
King (IA)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Lofgren, Zoe
Lujan
Lynch
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCotter
McDermott
McNerney
Meehan
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Mulvaney
Murphy (CT)
Nunes
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Payne
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Polis
Reyes
Ribble
Roskam
Rothman (NJ)
Ruppersberger
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Schakowsky
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Sewell
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Thompson (CA)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Walsh (IL)
Watt
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
NOES--303
Ackerman
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Doggett
Dold
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Edwards
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Gibbs
Gingrey (GA)
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heck
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kelly
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Long
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Markey
Matheson
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meeks
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Moore
Moran
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunnelee
Olson
Olver
Owens
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Perlmutter
Peterson
Petri
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Quayle
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Richardson
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Runyan
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schiff
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stark
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Visclosky
Walberg
Walden
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Webster
Weiner
Welch
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--9
Barton (TX)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Pelosi
Richmond
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). Thirty seconds remain in this
vote.
{time} 1856
Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Ms. BROWN of Florida, Ms. RICHARDSON, and Messrs.
RANGEL, WAXMAN, and RUSH changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Ms. SLAUGHTER and Mr. CICILLINE changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated for:
Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Chair, during rollcall vote number 208 on H.R. 658,
on the Garrett of NJ amendment, I mistakenly recorded my vote as ``no''
when I should have voted ``yes.''
Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. DeFazio
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Oregon
(Mr. DeFazio) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 161,
noes 263, not voting 8, as follows:
[Roll No. 209]
AYES--161
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baldwin
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Filner
Fudge
Garamendi
Green, Al
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Mack
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McGovern
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Poe (TX)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richardson
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
NOES--263
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Barrow
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chaffetz
[[Page H2196]]
Chandler
Clay
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Critz
Cuellar
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Doyle
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Farr
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Loebsack
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McDermott
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Myrick
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Watt
Webster
Weiner
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yarmuth
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--8
Barton (TX)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Richmond
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 30 seconds remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1900
Messrs. RUSH and CONYERS changed their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 10 Offered by Ms. Hirono
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Hawaii
(Ms. Hirono) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 174,
noes 241, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 210]
AYES--174
Ackerman
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Myrick
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Reyes
Richardson
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
NOES--241
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boren
Boustany
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Cardoza
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Chandler
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Owens
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOT VOTING--17
Barton (TX)
Berg
Bishop (GA)
Brady (TX)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Herrera Beutler
Kinzinger (IL)
Rangel
Richmond
Rooney
Sanchez, Linda T.
Waxman
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 30 seconds remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1903
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Capuano
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Capuano) on which further proceedings were postponed
and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
[[Page H2197]]
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 187,
noes 235, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 211]
AYES--187
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Bono Mack
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cassidy
Castor (FL)
Chabot
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Griffith (VA)
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Honda
Hoyer
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Jones
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kissell
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McIntyre
McNerney
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Richardson
Rohrabacher
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Wittman
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (IN)
NOES--235
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffin (AR)
Grimm
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Holt
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Landry
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Marino
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Meeks
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Peterson
Petri
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (AR)
Ross (FL)
Rothman (NJ)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Scott, David
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Tonko
Turner
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOT VOTING--10
Barton (TX)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gosar
Myrick
Richmond
Announcement by the Acting Chair
The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There are 30 seconds remaining in
this vote.
{time} 1907
Mr. BOREN changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye''.
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Gingrey of Georgia
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia
(Mr. Gingrey) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.
Recorded Vote
The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 195,
noes 227, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 212]
AYES--195
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Bartlett
Benishek
Berg
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Carney
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crenshaw
Cuellar
Culberson
Denham
DesJarlais
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Farenthold
Fincher
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Landry
Lankford
Latham
Latta
Lewis (CA)
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Marchant
Marino
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Olson
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Ribble
Rigell
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stutzman
Sullivan
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tipton
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NOES--227
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barletta
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Bass (NH)
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
[[Page H2198]]
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crawford
Critz
Crowley
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Farr
Filner
Fitzpatrick
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gibbs
Gibson
Gonzalez
Graves (MO)
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Grimm
Gutierrez
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Heinrich
Higgins
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hultgren
Inslee
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kissell
Kucinich
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
LaTourette
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Manzullo
Markey
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Platts
Polis
Posey
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Reyes
Richardson
Rivera
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Speier
Stark
Stivers
Sutton
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tiberi
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
NOT VOTING--10
Barton (TX)
Bishop (UT)
Burton (IN)
Campbell
Fattah
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Myrick
Richmond
{time} 1911
Mr. CHABOT and Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER changed their vote from ``no'' to
``aye.''
So amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
personal explanation
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Chair, I was unavoidably detained during
the last series of rollcall votes. Had I been here, I would have voted
``yea'' on rollcall vote 207 (Mica Amendment); ``nay'' on rollcall vote
208 (Garrett Amendment); ``nay'' on rollcall vote 209 (DeFazio
Amendment); ``nay'' on rollcall vote 210 (Hirono Amendment); ``nay'' on
rollcall vote 211 (Capuano Amendment); and ``aye'' on rollcall vote 212
(Gingrey Amendment).
Mr. WOODALL. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Fleischmann) having assumed the chair, Mr. Simpson, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 658) to
amend title 49, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for the
Federal Aviation Administration for fiscal years 2011 through 2014, to
streamline programs, create efficiencies, reduce waste, and improve
aviation safety and capacity, to provide stable funding for the
national aviation system, and for other purposes, had come to no
resolution thereon.
____________________