[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 195 (Tuesday, November 17, 2020)]
[House]
[Pages H5835-H5847]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          AIRCRAFT CERTIFICATION REFORM AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 8408) to direct the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
Administration to require certain safety standards relating to 
aircraft, and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 8408

       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 ``Aircraft 
     Certification Reform and Accountability Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Safety management systems.
Sec. 3. Expert review of organization designation authorizations for 
              transport airplanes.
Sec. 4. Certification oversight staff.
Sec. 5. Disclosure of safety-critical information.
Sec. 6. Periodic reviews of organization designation authorizations.
Sec. 7. Limitations on delegation.
Sec. 8. Oversight of organization designation authorization unit 
              members.
Sec. 9. Integrated project teams.
Sec. 10. Oversight integrity briefing.
Sec. 11. Appeals of certification decisions.
Sec. 12. Employment restrictions.
Sec. 13. Professional development and skills enhancement.
Sec. 14. Voluntary safety reporting program.
Sec. 15. Compensation limitation.
Sec. 16. System safety assessments and other requirements.
Sec. 17. Flight crew alerting.
Sec. 18. Amended type certificates.
Sec. 19. Whistleblower protections.
Sec. 20. Pilot training.
Sec. 21. Nonconformity with approved type design.
Sec. 22. Implementation of recommendations.
Sec. 23. Oversight of FAA compliance program.
Sec. 24. Settlement agreement.
Sec. 25. Human factors.
Sec. 26. Technical corrections.
Sec. 27. Definitions.

     SEC. 2. SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate a 
     rulemaking proceeding to require each person who holds both a 
     type certificate and a production certificate issued under 
     section 44704 of title 49, United States Code, to adopt, not 
     later than the earlier of the date that is 180 days after the 
     issuance of the regulation required under this subsection or 
     the date that is 4 years after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, a safety management system consistent with the standards 
     and recommended practices contained in annex 19 to the 
     Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180) in 
     effect on the earlier of the date of the issuance of such 
     regulations or the date that is 4 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Contents of Regulations.--The regulations issued under 
     subsection (a) shall, at a minimum, include provisions for 
     the Administrator's approval of, and regular oversight of 
     adherence to, a certificate holder's safety management system 
     adopted pursuant to such regulations.
       (c) Deadline.--Not later than 12 months after the end of 
     the comment period for the proposed rule issued pursuant to 
     subsection (a), the Administrator shall issue a final rule 
     with respect to such proposed rule.
       (d) Safety Reporting Program.--The regulations issued under 
     subsection (a) shall require a safety management system to 
     include a confidential employee reporting system through 
     which employees can report hazards, issues, concerns, 
     occurrences, and incidents. A reporting system under this 
     subsection shall include provisions for non-punitive 
     reporting of such items by employees in a manner consistent 
     with other confidential employee reporting systems 
     administered by the Administrator. Such regulations shall 
     also require a certificate holder described in subsection (a) 
     to submit a summary of reports received under this subsection 
     to the Administrator at least twice per year.
       (e) Code of Ethics.--The regulations issued under 
     subsection (a) shall require a safety management system to 
     include establishment of a code of ethics applicable to all 
     employees of a certificate holder, including officers, which 
     clarifies that safety is the organization's highest priority.
       (f) Protection of Safety Information.--Section 44735(a) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``title 5 if the report'' and inserting the 
     following: ``title 5--
       ``(1) if the report'';
       (2) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) if the report, data, or other information is 
     submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration pursuant to 
     section 2(d) of the Aircraft Certification Reform and 
     Accountability Act.''.

     SEC. 3. EXPERT REVIEW OF ORGANIZATION DESIGNATION 
                   AUTHORIZATIONS FOR TRANSPORT AIRPLANES.

       (a) Expert Review.--

[[Page H5836]]

       (1) Establishment.--Not later than 30 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall convene an 
     expert panel (in this section referred to as the ``review 
     panel'') to review and make findings and recommendations on 
     the matters listed in paragraph (2).
       (2) Contents of review.--With respect to each holder of an 
     organization designation authorization for the design and 
     production of transport airplanes, the review panel shall 
     review the following:
       (A) The extent to which the holder has implemented a safety 
     culture consistent with the principles of the International 
     Civil Aviation Organization Safety Management Manual, Fourth 
     Edition (International Civil Aviation Organization Doc. No. 
     9589) or any similar successor document.
       (B) The effectiveness of measures instituted by the holder 
     to instill, among employees and contractors of such holder 
     that support organization designation authorization 
     functions, a commitment to safety above all other priorities.
       (C) The holder's capability, based on the holder's 
     organizational structures, requirements applicable to 
     officers and employees of such holder, and safety culture, of 
     making reasonable and appropriate decisions regarding 
     functions delegated to the holder pursuant to the 
     organization designation authorization.
       (D) Any other matter determined by the Administrator for 
     which inclusion in the review would be consistent with the 
     public interest in aviation safety.
       (3) Composition of review panel.--The review panel shall 
     consist of--
       (A) 2 representatives of the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration;
       (B) 2 employees of the Administration's Aircraft 
     Certification Service with experience conducting oversight of 
     persons not involved in the design or production of transport 
     airplanes;
       (C) 1 employee of the Administration's Aircraft 
     Certification Service with experience conducting oversight of 
     persons involved in the design or production of transport 
     airplanes;
       (D) 2 employees of the Administration's Flight Standards 
     Service with experience in oversight of safety management 
     systems;
       (E) 1 appropriately qualified representative, designated by 
     the applicable represented organization, of each of--
       (i) a labor union representing airline pilots involved in 
     both passenger and all-cargo operations;
       (ii) a labor union, not selected under clause (i), 
     representing airline pilots with expertise in the matters 
     described in paragraph (2);
       (iii) a labor union representing employees engaged in the 
     assembly of transport airplanes;
       (iv) the certified bargaining representative under section 
     7111 of title 5, United States Code, for field engineers 
     engaged in the audit or oversight of an organization 
     designation authorization within the Aircraft Certification 
     Service of the Administration; and
       (v) the certified bargaining representative for safety 
     inspectors of the Administration;
       (F) 2 independent experts who have not served as a 
     political appointee in the Administration and--
       (i) who hold either a baccalaureate or postgraduate degree 
     in the field of aerospace engineering or a related 
     discipline; and
       (ii) who have a minimum of 20 years of relevant applied 
     experience;
       (G) 4 air carrier employees whose job responsibilities 
     include administration of a safety management system; and
       (H) 4 individuals representing 4 different holders of 
     organization designation authorizations, with preference 
     given to individuals representing holders of organization 
     designation authorizations for the design or production of 
     aircraft other than transport airplanes or for the design or 
     production of aircraft engines, propellers, or appliances.
       (4) Recommendations.--The review panel shall make 
     recommendations to the Administrator regarding suggested 
     actions to address any deficiencies found after review of the 
     matters listed in paragraph (2).
       (5) Report.--
       (A) Submission.--Not later than 270 days after the date on 
     which the review panel is established, the review panel shall 
     transmit to the Administrator and the congressional 
     committees of jurisdiction a report containing the findings 
     and recommendations of the review panel regarding the matters 
     listed in paragraph (2), except that such report shall 
     include--
       (i) only such findings endorsed by 10 or more individual 
     members of the review panel; and
       (ii) only such recommendations described in paragraph (4) 
     endorsed by 18 or more of the individual members of the 
     review panel.
       (B) Dissenting views.--In submitting the report required 
     under this paragraph, the review panel shall append to such 
     report the dissenting views of any individual member or group 
     of members of the review panel regarding the findings or 
     recommendations of the review panel.
       (C) Publication.--Not later than 5 days after receiving the 
     report under subparagraph (A), the Administrator shall 
     publish such report, including any dissenting views appended 
     to the report, on the website of the Administration.
       (D) Termination.--The review panel shall terminate upon 
     submission of the report under subparagraph (A).
       (6) Administrative provisions.--
       (A) Access to information.--The review panel shall have 
     authority to perform the following actions if a majority of 
     the total number of review panel members consider each action 
     necessary and appropriate:
       (i) Entering onto the premises of an organization 
     designation authorization holder described in subsection (a) 
     for access to and inspection of records or other purposes.
       (ii) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, accessing 
     and inspecting unredacted records in the possession of an 
     employee or appointed political official of the 
     Administration.
       (iii) Interviewing employees of such organization 
     designation authorization holder or the Administration as 
     necessary for the panel to complete its work.
       (B) Disclosure of financial interests.--Each individual 
     serving on the review panel shall disclose to the 
     Administrator any financial interest held by such individual, 
     or a spouse or dependent of such individual, in a business 
     enterprise engaged in the design or production of transport 
     airplanes, aircraft engines designed for transport airplanes, 
     or major systems, components, or parts thereof. The 
     Administrator shall publicly post such disclosure on the 
     website of the Administration in a de-identified form.
       (C) Protection of proprietary information; trade secrets.--
       (i) Marking.--The custodian of a record accessed under 
     subparagraph (A) may mark such record as proprietary or 
     containing a trade secret. A marking under this subparagraph 
     shall not be dispositive with respect to whether such record 
     contains any information subject to legal protections from 
     public disclosure.
       (ii) Nondisclosure for non-federal government 
     participants.--

       (I) Non-federal government participants.--Prior to 
     participating on the review panel, each individual serving on 
     the review panel representing a non-Federal entity, including 
     a labor union, shall execute an agreement with the 
     Administrator in which the individual shall be prohibited 
     from disclosing at any time, except as required by law, to 
     any person, foreign or domestic, any non-public information 
     made accessible to the panel under subparagraph (A).
       (II) Federal employee participants.--Federal employees 
     serving on the review panel as representatives of the Federal 
     Government and who are required to protect proprietary 
     information and trade secrets under section 1905 of title 18, 
     United States Code, shall not be required to execute 
     agreements under this subparagraph.

       (iii) Protection of voluntarily submitted safety 
     information.--Information subject to protection from 
     disclosure by the Administration in accordance with sections 
     40123 and 44735 of title 49, United States Code, is deemed 
     voluntarily submitted to the Administration under such 
     sections when shared with the review panel and retains its 
     protection from disclosure (including protection under 
     section 552(b)(3) of title 5, United States Code). The 
     custodian of a record subject to such protection may mark 
     such record as subject to statutory protections. A marking 
     under this subparagraph shall not be dispositive with respect 
     to whether such record contains any information subject to 
     legal protections from public disclosure. Members of the 
     review panel will protect voluntarily submitted safety 
     information and other otherwise exempt information to the 
     extent permitted under applicable law.
       (iv) Protection of proprietary information and trade 
     secrets.--Members of the review panel will protect 
     proprietary information, trade secrets, and other otherwise 
     exempt information to the extent permitted under applicable 
     law.
       (v) Resolving classification of information.--If the review 
     panel and an organization designation authorization holder 
     subject to review under this section disagree as to the 
     proper classification of information described in this 
     subparagraph, then the deputy chief counsel of the 
     Administration shall determine the proper classification of 
     such information and whether such information will be 
     redacted.
       (D) Applicable law.--Public Law 92-463 shall not apply to 
     the panel established under this subsection.
       (E) Financial interest defined.--In this paragraph, the 
     term ``financial interest''--
       (i) excludes securities held in an index fund; and
       (ii) includes--

       (I) any current or contingent ownership, equity, or 
     security interest;
       (II) an indebtedness or compensated employment 
     relationship; or
       (III) any right to purchase or acquire any such interest, 
     including a stock option or commodity future.

       (b) FAA Authority.--
       (1) In general.--After reviewing the findings of the review 
     panel submitted under subsection (a)(5), the Administrator 
     may limit, suspend, or terminate an organization designation 
     authorization subject to review under this section.
       (2) Reinstatement.--The Administrator may condition 
     reinstatement of a limited, suspended, or terminated 
     organization designation authorization on the holder's 
     implementation of any corrective actions determined necessary 
     by the Administrator.
       (3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall 
     be construed to limit the Administrator's authority to take 
     any action with respect to an organization designation 
     authorization, including limitation, suspension, or 
     termination of such authorization.

[[Page H5837]]

       (c) Organization Designation Authorization Process 
     Improvements.--Not later than 1 year after receipt of the 
     recommendations submitted under subsection (a)(5), the 
     Administrator shall--
       (1) report to the congressional committees of jurisdiction 
     on--
       (A) whether the Administrator has concluded that such 
     holder is able to safely and reliably perform all delegated 
     functions in accordance with all applicable provisions of 
     chapter 447 of title 49, United States Code, title 14, Code 
     of Federal Regulations, and other orders or requirements of 
     the Administrator, and, if not, the Administrator shall 
     outline--
       (i) the risk mitigations or other corrective actions, 
     including the implementation timelines of such mitigations or 
     actions, the Administrator has established for or required of 
     such holder as prerequisites for a conclusion by the 
     Administrator under subparagraph (A); or
       (ii) the status of any ongoing investigatory actions; and
       (B) the status of implementation of each of the 
     recommendations of the review panel, if any, with which the 
     Administrator concurs; and
       (2) report to the congressional committees of jurisdiction 
     on--
       (A) the status of procedures under which the Administrator 
     will conduct focused oversight of such holder's processes for 
     performing delegated functions with respect to the design of 
     new and derivative transport airplanes and the production of 
     such airplanes; and
       (B) the Administrator's efforts, to the maximum extent 
     practicable and subject to appropriations, to increase the 
     number of engineers, inspectors, and other qualified 
     technical experts, as necessary to fulfill the requirements 
     of this section, in--
       (i) each office of the Administration responsible for 
     dedicated oversight of such holder; and
       (ii) the System Oversight Division, or any successor 
     division, of the Aircraft Certification Service.
       (d) Non-Concurrence With Recommendations.--Not later than 6 
     months after receipt of the recommendations submitted under 
     subsection (a)(5), with respect to each recommendation of the 
     review panel with which the Administrator does not concur, if 
     any, the Administrator shall publish on the website of the 
     Administration and submit to the congressional committees of 
     jurisdiction a detailed explanation as to why, including if 
     the Administrator believes implementation of such 
     recommendation would not improve aviation safety.

     SEC. 4. CERTIFICATION OVERSIGHT STAFF.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator $27,000,000 for each 
     of fiscal years 2021 through 2023 to recruit and retain 
     engineers, safety inspectors, human factors specialists, and 
     software and cybersecurity experts and other qualified 
     technical experts who perform duties related to the 
     certification of aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and 
     appliances.
       (b) Recruitment and Retention.--
       (1) Bargaining units.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall begin 
     collaboration with the exclusive bargaining representatives 
     of engineers, safety inspectors, systems safety specialists, 
     and other qualified technical experts certified under section 
     7111 of title 5, United States Code, to improve recruitment 
     of employees for, and to implement retention incentives for 
     employees holding, positions with respect to the 
     certification of aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, and 
     appliances. If the Administrator and such representatives are 
     unable to reach an agreement collaboratively, the 
     Administrator and such representatives shall negotiate in 
     accordance with section 40122(a) of title 49, United States 
     Code, to improve recruitment and implement retention 
     incentives for employees described in subsection (a) who are 
     covered under a collective bargaining agreement.
       (2) Other employees.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
     of law, not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Administration shall improve recruitment of, 
     and implement retention incentives for, any individual 
     described in subsection (a) who is not covered under a 
     collective bargaining agreement.
       (3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to vest in any exclusive bargaining representative 
     any management right of the Administrator, as such right 
     existed on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
       (4) Availability of appropriations.--Any action taken by 
     the Administrator under this section shall be subject to the 
     availability of appropriations authorized under subsection 
     (a).

     SEC. 5. DISCLOSURE OF SAFETY-CRITICAL INFORMATION.

       (a) Prohibition.--Section 44704 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by striking subsection (e) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(e) Disclosure of Safety-Critical Information.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding a delegation described 
     in section 44702(d), the Administrator shall require an 
     applicant for, or holder of, a type certificate for a 
     transport-category aircraft covered under part 25 of title 
     14, Code of Federal Regulations, to submit safety-critical 
     information with respect to such aircraft to the 
     Administrator in such form, manner, or time as the 
     Administrator may require. Such safety-critical information 
     shall include--
       ``(A) any design and operational details, intended 
     functions, and failure modes of any system that, without 
     being commanded by the flight crew, commands the operation of 
     any safety-critical function or feature required for control 
     of an aircraft during flight or that otherwise changes the 
     flight path or airspeed of an aircraft;
       ``(B) the design and operational details, intended 
     functions, failure modes, and mode annunciations of autopilot 
     and autothrottle systems, if applicable;
       ``(C) any failure or operating condition that the applicant 
     or holder anticipates or has concluded would result in an 
     outcome with a severity level of hazardous or catastrophic, 
     as defined in the appropriate Administration airworthiness 
     requirements and guidance applicable to transport-category 
     aircraft defining risk severity;
       ``(D) any adverse handling quality that fails to meet the 
     requirements of applicable regulations without the addition 
     of a software system to augment the flight controls of the 
     aircraft to produce compliant handling qualities; and
       ``(E) a system safety assessment with respect to a system 
     described in subparagraph (A) or (B) or with respect to any 
     component or other system for which failure or erroneous 
     operation of such component or system could result in an 
     outcome with a severity level of hazardous or catastrophic, 
     as defined in the appropriate Administration airworthiness 
     requirements and guidance applicable to transport-category 
     aircraft defining risk severity.
       ``(2) Ongoing communications.--
       ``(A) Newly discovered information.--The Administrator 
     shall require that an applicant for, or holder of, a type 
     certificate disclose to the Administrator, in such form, 
     manner, or time as the Administrator may require, any newly 
     discovered information or design or analysis change that 
     would materially alter any submission to the Administrator 
     under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Aircraft system development changes.--The 
     Administrator shall establish multiple milestones throughout 
     the certification process at which a proposed aircraft system 
     will be assessed to determine whether any change to such 
     system during the certification process is such that such 
     system should be considered novel or unusual by the 
     Administrator.
       ``(3) Flight manuals.--The Administrator shall ensure that 
     an aircraft flight manual and a flight crew operating manual 
     (as appropriate or applicable) for an aircraft contains a 
     description of the operation of a system described in 
     paragraph (1)(A) and flight crew procedures for responding to 
     a failure or aberrant operation of such system.
       ``(4) Civil penalty.--
       ``(A) Amount.--Notwithstanding section 46301, an applicant 
     for, or holder of, a type certificate that knowingly violates 
     paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of this subsection shall be liable 
     to the Administrator for a civil penalty of not more than 
     $1,000,000 for each violation.
       ``(B) Penalty considerations.--In determining the amount of 
     a civil penalty under subparagraph (A), the Administrator 
     shall consider--
       ``(i) the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the 
     violation, including the length of time that such safety-
     critical information was known but not disclosed; and
       ``(ii) with respect to the violator, the degree of 
     culpability, any history of prior violations, and the size of 
     the business concern.
       ``(5) Revocation and civil penalty for individuals.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall revoke any 
     airline transport pilot certificate issued under section 
     44703 held by any individual who, while acting on behalf of 
     an applicant for, or holder of, a type certificate, knowingly 
     makes a false statement with respect to any of the matters 
     described in subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Authority to impose civil penalty.--The Administrator 
     may impose a civil penalty under section 46301 for each 
     violation described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(6) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall be construed to affect or otherwise inhibit the 
     authority of the Administrator to deny an application by an 
     applicant for a type certificate or to revoke a type 
     certificate of a holder of such certificate.
       ``(7) Definition of type certificate.--In this subsection, 
     the term `type certificate'--
       ``(A) means a type certificate issued under subsection (a) 
     or an amendment to such certificate; and
       ``(B) does not include a supplemental type certificate 
     issued under subsection (b).''.
       (b) Civil Penalty Authority.--Section 44704 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is further amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(f) Hearing Requirement.--The Administrator may find that 
     a person has violated subsection (a)(6) or paragraph (1), 
     (2), or (3) of subsection (e) and impose a civil penalty 
     under the applicable subsection only after notice and an 
     opportunity for a hearing. The Administrator shall provide a 
     person--
       ``(1) written notice of the violation and the amount of 
     penalty; and
       ``(2) the opportunity for a hearing under subpart G of part 
     13 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.''.

[[Page H5838]]

  


     SEC. 6. PERIODIC REVIEWS OF ORGANIZATION DESIGNATION 
                   AUTHORIZATIONS.

       Section 44736 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (d); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) Periodic Reviews.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not less than once every 7 years, the 
     Administrator shall conduct a comprehensive review of the 
     capability of each ODA holder for the design of an aircraft, 
     aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance pursuant to a 
     delegation by the Administrator under section 44702(d) to 
     meet the requirements of subpart D of part 183 of title 14, 
     Code of Federal Regulations, based on the holder's 
     organizational structures, requirements applicable to 
     officers and employees, and safety culture.
       ``(2) Contents of review.--A comprehensive review under 
     this subsection shall include an assessment of the 
     effectiveness of, and organization-wide adherence to, an ODA 
     holder's procedures manual and voluntary safety reporting 
     system.''.

     SEC. 7. LIMITATIONS ON DELEGATION.

       Section 44702(d) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Administrator may not delegate a matter under this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) with respect to the certification of the design of a 
     novel or unusual design feature that results in a major 
     change to a type design, except when the Administrator 
     determines--
       ``(i) a matter is a routine task; or
       ``(ii) during the course of the certification process, that 
     a matter no longer relates to a novel or unusual design 
     feature; or
       ``(B) on the sole basis that the Federal Aviation 
     Administration lacks a sufficient number of personnel 
     qualified or with the requisite expertise to perform the 
     function.''.

     SEC. 8. OVERSIGHT OF ORGANIZATION DESIGNATION AUTHORIZATION 
                   UNIT MEMBERS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 447 of title 49, United States 
     Code, as amended by this Act, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``Sec. 44741. Approval of organization designation 
       authorization unit members

       ``(a) In General.--Beginning on the date that is 1 year 
     after the date of enactment of the Aircraft Certification 
     Reform and Accountability Act, each individual who is 
     selected on or after such date to become a member of an ODA 
     unit by an ODA holder engaged in the design of an aircraft, 
     aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance and performs an 
     authorized function pursuant to a delegation by the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration under 
     section 44702(d)--
       ``(1) shall be an employee, a contractor, or the employee 
     of a supplier of the ODA holder; and
       ``(2) may not become a member of such unit unless approved 
     by the Administrator pursuant to this section.
       ``(b) Process and Timeline.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall maintain an 
     efficient process for the review and approval of an 
     individual to become a member of an ODA unit under this 
     section.
       ``(2) Process.--An ODA holder described in subsection (a) 
     may submit to the Administrator an application for an 
     individual to be approved to become a member of an ODA unit 
     under this section. The application shall be submitted in 
     such form and manner as the Administrator determines 
     appropriate. The Administrator shall require an ODA holder to 
     submit with such an application information sufficient to 
     demonstrate an individual's qualifications under subsection 
     (c).
       ``(3) Timeline.--The Administrator shall approve or reject 
     an individual that is selected by an ODA holder to become an 
     ODA unit member under this section not later than 30 days 
     after the receipt of an application by an ODA holder.
       ``(4) Documentation of approval.--Upon approval of an 
     individual to become a member of an ODA unit under this 
     section, the Administrator shall provide such individual a 
     letter confirming that such individual has been approved by 
     the Administrator under this section to be an ODA unit 
     member.
       ``(5) Reapplication.--An ODA holder may submit an 
     application under this subsection for an individual to become 
     a member of an ODA unit under this section regardless of 
     whether an application for such individual was previously 
     rejected by the Administrator.
       ``(c) Qualifications.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall issue minimum 
     qualifications for an individual to become a member of an ODA 
     unit under this section. In issuing such qualifications, the 
     Administrator shall consider existing qualifications for 
     Administration employees with similar duties and whether such 
     individual--
       ``(A) is technically proficient and qualified to perform 
     the authorized functions sought;
       ``(B) has no recent record of serious enforcement action, 
     as determined by the Administrator, taken by the 
     Administrator with respect to any certificate, approval, or 
     authorization held by such individual;
       ``(C) is of good moral character (as such qualification is 
     applied to an applicant for an airline transport pilot 
     certificate issued under section 44703);
       ``(D) possesses the knowledge of applicable design or 
     production requirements in this chapter and in title 14, Code 
     of Federal Regulations, necessary for performance of the 
     authorized functions sought;
       ``(E) possesses a high degree of knowledge of applicable 
     design or production principles, system safety principles, or 
     safety risk management processes appropriate for the 
     authorized functions sought; and
       ``(F) meets such testing, examination, training, or other 
     qualification standards as the Administrator determines are 
     necessary to ensure the individual is competent and capable 
     of performing the authorized functions sought.
       ``(2) Previously rejected application.--In reviewing an 
     application for an individual to become a member of an ODA 
     unit under this section, if an application for such 
     individual was previously rejected, the Administrator shall 
     ensure that the reasons for the prior rejection have been 
     resolved or mitigated to the Administrator's satisfaction 
     before making a determination on the individual's 
     reapplication.
       ``(d) Rescission of Approval.--The Administrator may 
     rescind an approval of an individual as a member of an ODA 
     unit granted pursuant to this section at any time and for any 
     reason the Administrator considers appropriate. The 
     Administrator shall develop procedures to provide for notice 
     and opportunity to appeal rescission decisions made by the 
     Administrator. Such decisions by the Administrator are not 
     subject to judicial review.
       ``(e) Records and Briefings.--
       ``(1) In general.--Beginning on the date described in 
     subsection (a), an ODA holder shall maintain, for a period to 
     be determined by the Administrator and with proper 
     protections to ensure the security of sensitive and personal 
     information--
       ``(A) any data, applications, records, or manuals required 
     by the ODA holder's approved procedures manual, as determined 
     by the Administrator;
       ``(B) the names, responsibilities, qualifications, and 
     example signature of each member of the ODA unit who performs 
     an authorized function pursuant to a delegation by the 
     Administrator under section 44702(d);
       ``(C) training records for ODA unit members and ODA 
     administrators; and
       ``(D) any other data, applications, records, or manuals 
     determined appropriate by the Administrator.
       ``(2) Congressional briefing.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of the Aircraft Certification Reform 
     and Accountability Act, and every 90 days thereafter through 
     September 30, 2023, the Administrator shall provide to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate a briefing on the implementation 
     and effects of this section, including--
       ``(A) the Administration's performance in completing 
     reviews of individuals and approving or denying such 
     individuals within the timeline required under subsection 
     (b)(3);
       ``(B) for any individual rejected by the Administrator 
     under subsection (b) during the preceding 90-day period, the 
     reasoning or basis for such rejection; and
       ``(C) any resource, staffing, or other challenges within 
     the Administration associated with implementation of this 
     section.
       ``(f) Special Review of Qualifications.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     issuance of minimum qualifications under subsection (c), the 
     Administrator shall initiate a review of the qualifications 
     of each individual who on the date on which such minimum 
     qualifications are issued is a member of an ODA unit of a 
     holder of a type certificate for a transport airplane to 
     ensure such individual meets the minimum qualifications 
     issued by the Administrator under subsection (c).
       ``(2) Unqualified individual.--For any individual who is 
     determined by the Administrator not to meet such minimum 
     qualifications pursuant to the review conducted under 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator--
       ``(A) shall determine whether the lack of qualification may 
     be remedied and, if so, provide such individual with an 
     action plan or schedule for such individual to meet such 
     qualifications; or
       ``(B) may, if the Administrator determines the lack of 
     qualification may not be remedied, take appropriate action, 
     including prohibiting such individual from performing an 
     authorized function.
       ``(3) Deadline.--
       ``(A) The Administrator shall complete the review required 
     under paragraph (1) not later than 18 months after the date 
     on which such review was initiated.
       ``(B) If the Administrator fails to complete the review in 
     compliance with subparagraph (A), the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall assume the responsibility for completing 
     the review.
       ``(C) The Secretary's completion of the review under 
     subparagraph (B)--
       ``(i) may not be delegated to the Administration; and
       ``(ii) shall be completed within 120 days of the date the 
     Secretary's assumption of responsibility following the 
     Administrator's failure to complete the review in compliance 
     with subparagraph (A).
       ``(4) Savings clause.--An individual approved to become a 
     member of an ODA unit of a holder of a type certificate for a 
     transport airplane under subsection (a) shall not be subject 
     to the review under this subsection.

[[Page H5839]]

       ``(g) Prohibition.--The Administrator may not authorize an 
     organization or ODA holder to approve an individual selected 
     by an ODA holder to become an ODA unit member under this 
     section.
       ``(h) Definitions.--
       ``(1) General applicability.--The definitions contained in 
     section 44736 shall apply to this section.
       ``(2) Transport airplane.--The term `transport airplane' 
     means a transport-category airplane designed for operation by 
     an air carrier or foreign air carrier type-certificated with 
     a passenger seating capacity of 30 or more or an all-cargo or 
     combi derivative of such an airplane.
       ``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $3,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2021 through 2023.

     ``Sec. 44742. Interference with the duties of organization 
       designation authorization unit members

       ``(a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration shall continuously seek to eliminate 
     or minimize interference by an ODA holder that affects the 
     performance of authorized functions by members of an ODA 
     unit.
       ``(b) Prohibition.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any individual 
     who is employed by an ODA holder to commit an act of 
     interference with an ODA unit member's performance of 
     authorized functions.
       ``(2) Civil penalty.--
       ``(A) Individuals.--An individual shall be subject to a 
     civil penalty under section 46301(a)(1) for each violation 
     under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Savings clause.--Nothing in this paragraph shall be 
     construed as limiting or constricting any other authority of 
     the Administrator to pursue an enforcement action against an 
     individual or organization for violation of applicable 
     Federal laws or regulations of the Administration.
       ``(c) Reporting.--
       ``(1) Reports to oda holder.--A member of an ODA unit shall 
     promptly report any instances of interference experienced or 
     witnessed by such member to the office of the ODA holder that 
     is designated to receive such reports.
       ``(2) Reports to the faa.--
       ``(A) In general.--The ODA holder office described in 
     paragraph (1) shall submit to the office of the 
     Administration designated by the Administrator to accept and 
     review such reports any credible instances of interference 
     reported under paragraph (1).
       ``(B) Contents.--A report to the Administration under this 
     paragraph shall be submitted in a manner, at a time, and in a 
     form prescribed by the Administrator. Such report shall 
     include the results of any investigation conducted by the ODA 
     holder in response to a report of interference, a description 
     of any action taken by the ODA holder as a result of the 
     report of interference, and any other information or 
     potentially mitigating factors the ODA holder or the 
     Administrator deems appropriate.
       ``(C) Use of report.--The Administrator may use the 
     information submitted in a report under this paragraph, 
     including the actions taken by an ODA holder in response to a 
     report under paragraph (1), in determining whether to issue a 
     civil penalty pursuant to subsection (b) or whether such 
     civil penalty should be subject to a setoff or compromised.
       ``(3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall be construed to preclude a member of an ODA unit from 
     reporting an instance of interference reported under 
     paragraph (1) directly to the Administration. Each ODA holder 
     shall provide notice to each member of such holder's ODA unit 
     stating that such individual may report an instance of 
     interference reported under paragraph (1) directly to the 
     Administration.
       ``(d) Definitions.--
       ``(1) General applicability.--The definitions contained in 
     section 44736 shall apply to this section.
       ``(2) Interference.--In this section, the term 
     `interference' means--
       ``(A) blatant or egregious statements or behavior, such as 
     harassment, beratement, or threats, that a reasonable person 
     would conclude was intended to improperly influence or 
     prejudice an ODA unit member's performance of his or her 
     duties; or
       ``(B) the presence of non-ODA unit duties or activities 
     that conflict with the performance of authorized functions by 
     ODA unit members.''.
       (b) Lateral Communications.--
       (1) Contact with administration.--The Administrator shall 
     ensure that employees of the Administration with 
     responsibility for aircraft certification functions may 
     directly contact non-managerial employees of an aircraft 
     manufacturer for consultation regarding the certification of 
     aircraft design, production, and other matters.
       (2) Prohibition.--It shall be a violation of section 
     44736(a)(2)(C) of title 49, United States Code, for a 
     manufacturer to prohibit employees from contacting any 
     employee of the Administration or otherwise impose any 
     condition, restriction, or penalty (including by requiring 
     prior notice to or the approval of any supervisor or manager) 
     with respect to such contact, except that such manufacturer 
     may institute reasonable, company-wide policies requiring 
     documentation of communications regarding aircraft design or 
     production between the manufacturer's employees and 
     Administration employees.
       (c) ODA Program Enhancements.--Section 44736 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is further amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A) by striking the semicolon and 
     inserting ``; and'';
       (ii) by striking subparagraph (B);
       (iii) in subparagraph (C) by striking ``; and'' and 
     inserting a period;
       (iv) by striking subparagraph (D); and
       (v) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B); 
     and
       (B) in paragraph (3) by striking ``shall--'' and all that 
     follows through the end and inserting ``shall conduct regular 
     oversight activities by inspecting the ODA holder's delegated 
     functions and taking action based on validated inspection 
     findings.''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking clause (i) and redesignating clauses (ii), 
     (iii), and (iv) as clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), 
     respectively;
       (ii) in clause (i) as redesignated by inserting ``, as 
     appropriate,'' after ``require'';
       (iii) in clause (ii) as redesignated by inserting ``, as 
     appropriate,'' after ``require''; and
       (iv) in clause (iii) as redesignated by inserting ``when 
     appropriate,'' before ``make a reassessment'';
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B);
       (C) in subparagraph (F) by inserting ``, when 
     appropriate,'' before ``approve''; and
       (D) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), and (F) 
     as subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and (E), respectively.
       (d) Technical Corrections.--
       (1) Section 44737.--Chapter 447 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is further amended by redesignating the second section 
     44737 (as added by section 581 of the FAA Reauthorization Act 
     of 2018) as section 44740.
       (2) Analysis.--The analysis for chapter 447 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (A) by striking the item relating to the second section 
     44737 (as added by section 581 of the FAA Reauthorization Act 
     of 2018); and
       (B) by inserting after the item relating to section 44739 
     the following new items:

``44740. Special rule for certain aircraft operations.
``44741. Approval of organization designation authorization unit 
              members.
``44742. Interference with the duties of organization designation 
              authorization unit members.''.
       (3) Special rule for certain aircraft operations.--Section 
     44740 of title 49, United States Code (as redesignated by 
     paragraph (1)), is amended--
       (A) in the heading by striking the period at the end;
       (B) in subsection (a)(1) by striking ``chapter'' and 
     inserting ``section'';
       (C) in subsection (b)(1) by striking ``(1)'' the second 
     time it appears; and
       (D) in subsection (c)(2) by adding a period at the end.

     SEC. 9. INTEGRATED PROJECT TEAMS.

       (a) In General.--Upon receipt of an application for a type 
     certificate for a new transport airplane, the Administrator 
     shall convene an interdisciplinary integrated project team 
     responsible for coordinating review of such application.
       (b) Membership.--In convening an interdisciplinary 
     integrated project team under subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall appoint employees of the Administration 
     with specialized expertise and experience in the fields of 
     engineering, systems design, human factors, and pilot 
     training, including, at a minimum--
       (1) not less than 1 designee of the Associate Administrator 
     for Aviation Safety whose duty station is in the 
     Administration's headquarters;
       (2) representatives of the Aircraft Certification Service 
     of the Administration;
       (3) representatives of the Flight Standards Service of the 
     Administration;
       (4) experts in the fields of human factors, aerodynamics, 
     flight controls, software, and systems design; and
       (5) any other subject matter expert whom the Administrator 
     determines appropriate.

     SEC. 10. OVERSIGHT INTEGRITY BRIEFING.

       Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Administrator shall brief the congressional 
     committees of jurisdiction on specific measures the 
     Administrator has taken to reinforce that each employee of 
     the Administration responsible for overseeing an organization 
     designation authorization with respect to the certification 
     of aircraft perform such responsibility in accordance with 
     safety management principles and in the public interest of 
     aviation safety.

     SEC. 11. APPEALS OF CERTIFICATION DECISIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 44704, of title 49, United States 
     Code, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Certification Dispute Resolution.--
       ``(1) Dispute resolution process and appeals.--
       ``(A) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this subsection, the Administrator shall issue 
     an order establishing--
       ``(i) an effective, timely, and milestone-based issue 
     resolution process for type certification activities under 
     subsection (a); and
       ``(ii) a process by which a decision, finding of compliance 
     or noncompliance, or other act of the Administration, with 
     respect to compliance with design requirements, may be 
     appealed by a covered person directly involved with the 
     certification activities in dispute on the basis that such 
     decision, finding, or act is erroneous or inconsistent with

[[Page H5840]]

     this chapter, regulations, or guidance materials promulgated 
     by the Administrator, or other requirements.
       ``(B) Escalation.--The order issued under subparagraph (A) 
     shall provide for--
       ``(i) resolution of technical issues at pre-established 
     stages of the certification process, as agreed to by the 
     Administrator and the type certificate applicant;
       ``(ii) automatic elevation to appropriate management 
     personnel of the Administration and the type certificate 
     applicant of any major certification process milestone that 
     is not completed or resolved within a specific period of time 
     agreed to by the Administrator and the type certificate 
     applicant;
       ``(iii) resolution of a major certification process 
     milestone elevated pursuant to clause (ii) with a specific 
     period of time agreed to by the Administrator and the type 
     certificate applicant;
       ``(iv) initial review by appropriate Administration 
     employees of any appeal described in subparagraph (A)(ii); 
     and
       ``(v) subsequent review of any further appeal by 
     appropriate management personnel of the Administration and 
     the Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety.
       ``(C) Disposition.--
       ``(i) Written decision.--The Associate Administrator for 
     Aviation Safety shall issue a written decision on each appeal 
     submitted under subparagraph (A)(ii), stating the grounds for 
     the decision of the Associate Administrator.
       ``(ii) Report to congress.--Not later than December 31 of 
     each calendar year through calendar year 2025, 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 summarizing each appeal resolved under this 
     subsection.
       ``(D) Final review.--
       ``(i) In general.--A written decision of the Associate 
     Administrator under subparagraph (C) may be appealed to the 
     Administrator for a final review and determination.
       ``(ii) Decline to review.--The Administrator may decline to 
     review an appeal initiated pursuant to clause (i).
       ``(iii) Judicial review.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, neither a final determination of the 
     Administrator under clause (i) nor a decision to decline to 
     review an appeal under clause (ii) shall be subject to 
     judicial review.
       ``(2) Prohibited contacts.--
       ``(A) Prohibition generally.--During the course of an 
     appeal under this subsection, no covered official may engage 
     in an ex parte communication with an individual representing 
     or acting on behalf of an applicant for, or holder of, a 
     certificate under this section in relation to such appeal 
     unless such communication is disclosed pursuant to 
     subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Disclosure.--If, during the course of an appeal under 
     this subsection, a covered official engages in, receives, or 
     is otherwise made aware of an ex parte communication, the 
     covered official shall disclose such communication in the 
     public record at the time of the issuance of the written 
     decision in accordance with subsection (g)(1)(C), including 
     the time and date of the communication, subject of 
     communication, and all persons engaged in such communication.
       ``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Covered person.--The term `covered person' means 
     either--
       ``(i) an employee of the Administration whose 
     responsibilities relate to the certification of aircraft, 
     engines, propellers, or appliances; or
       ``(ii) an applicant for, or holder of, a type certificate 
     or amended type certificate issued under this section.
       ``(B) Covered official.--The term `covered official' means 
     the following officials:
       ``(i) The Executive Director or any Deputy Director of the 
     Aircraft Certification Service.
       ``(ii) The Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory 
     Operations of the Aircraft Certification Service.
       ``(iii) The Director or Deputy Director of the Compliance 
     and Airworthiness Division of the Aircraft Certification 
     Service.
       ``(iv) The Director or Deputy Director of the System 
     Oversight Division of the Aircraft Certification Service.
       ``(v) The Director or Deputy Director of the Policy and 
     Innovation Division of the Aircraft Certification Service.
       ``(vi) The Executive Director or any Deputy Executive 
     Director of the Flight Standards Service.
       ``(vii) The Associate Administrator or Deputy Associate 
     Administrator for Aviation Safety.
       ``(viii) The Deputy Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration.
       ``(ix) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration.
       ``(x) Any similarly situated or successor FAA management 
     position, as determined by the Administrator.
       ``(C) Major certification process milestone.--The term 
     `major certification process milestone' means a milestone 
     related to the type certification basis, type certification 
     plan, type inspection authorization, issue paper, or other 
     major type certification activity agreed to by the 
     Administrator and the type certificate applicant.
       ``(4) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall apply to the communication of a good-faith complaint by 
     any individual alleging--
       ``(A) gross misconduct;
       ``(B) a violation of title 18; or
       ``(C) a violation of any of the provisions of part 2635 or 
     6001 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 44704(a) is amended by 
     striking paragraph (6).

     SEC. 12. EMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS.

       (a) Disqualification Based on Prior Employment.--An 
     employee of the Administration with supervisory 
     responsibility may not direct, conduct, or otherwise 
     participate in oversight of a holder of a certificate issued 
     under section 44704 that previously employed such employee in 
     the preceding 1-year period.
       (b) Post-Employment Restrictions.--Section 44711(d) of 
     title 49, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(d) Post-Employment Restrictions for Inspectors and 
     Engineers.--
       ``(1) Prohibition.--A person holding a certificate issued 
     under part 21 or 119 of 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 such person in any matter before the 
     Administration if the individual, in the preceding 2-year 
     period--
       ``(A) served as, or was responsible for oversight of--
       ``(i) a flight standards inspector of the Administration; 
     or
       ``(ii) an employee of the Administration with 
     responsibility for certification functions with respect to a 
     holder of a certificate issued under section 44704(a); and
       ``(B) had responsibility to inspect, or oversee inspection 
     of, the operations of such person.
       ``(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 an individual 
     covered under paragraph (1).''.

     SEC. 13. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND SKILLS ENHANCEMENT.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator shall--
       (1) develop a program for regular recurrent training of 
     engineers, inspectors, and other subject-matter experts 
     employed in the Aircraft Certification Service of the 
     Administration in accordance with the training strategy 
     developed pursuant to section 231 of the FAA Reauthorization 
     Act of 2018 (Public Law 115-254; 132 Stat. 3256); and
       (2) to the maximum extent practicable, implement measures, 
     including assignments in multiple divisions of the Aircraft 
     Certification Service, to ensure that such engineers and 
     other subject-matter experts in the Aircraft Certification 
     Service have access to diverse professional opportunities 
     that expand their knowledge and skills.
       (b) Implementation.--The Administrator shall, to the 
     maximum extent practicable, ensure that actions taken 
     pursuant to subsection (a)--
       (1) permit engineers, inspectors, and other subject matter 
     experts to continue developing knowledge of, and expertise 
     in, new and emerging technologies in systems design, flight 
     controls, principles of aviation safety, system oversight, 
     and certification project management;
       (2) minimize the likelihood of an individual developing an 
     inappropriate bias toward a designer or manufacturer of 
     aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, or appliances;
       (3) are consistent with any applicable collective 
     bargaining agreements; and
       (4) account for gaps in knowledge and skills between 
     Administration employees and private-sector employees, as 
     identified by the exclusive bargaining representatives 
     certified under section 7111 of title 5, United States Code, 
     for each group of Administration employees covered under this 
     section.

     SEC. 14. VOLUNTARY SAFETY REPORTING PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall begin 
     collaboration with the exclusive bargaining representatives 
     of engineers, safety inspectors, systems safety specialists, 
     and other subject matter experts certified under section 7111 
     of title 5, United States Code, to implement a confidential 
     voluntary safety reporting program, in a manner that is 
     consistent with other voluntary reporting programs 
     administered by the Administrator. The program shall include 
     provisions addressing, at a minimum--
       (1) participation in all facets of the program by the 
     exclusive bargaining representatives for employees identified 
     in the matter preceding this paragraph;
       (2) protections for frontline employees from adverse 
     employment actions related to their participation in the 
     program;
       (3) identification of exclusionary criteria; and
       (4) creation of a corrective action process in order to 
     address safety issues that are identified through the 
     program.
       (b) Negotiations.--If the Administrator and the 
     representatives described in subsection (a) are unable to 
     reach an agreement

[[Page H5841]]

     collaboratively, the Administrator and such representatives 
     shall negotiate in accordance with section 40122(a) of title 
     49, United States Code, to reach agreement on the terms and 
     conditions of such a program.

     SEC. 15. COMPENSATION LIMITATION.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an employee of 
     the Administration may not receive an adjustment to the 
     employee's compensation solely on the basis of the employee's 
     performance in meeting or exceeding a deadline related to the 
     completion of certification functions.

     SEC. 16. SYSTEM SAFETY ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue such 
     regulations as are necessary to amend title 14, Code of 
     Federal Regulations, and any associated advisory circular, 
     guidance, or policy of the Administration, in accordance with 
     this section.
       (b) System Safety Assessments and Other Requirements.--In 
     developing regulations under subsection (a), the 
     Administrator shall--
       (1) require an applicant for an amended type certificate 
     for a transport airplane to--
       (A) perform a system safety assessment with respect to each 
     proposed design change that the Administrator determines is 
     significant, with such assessment considering the airplane-
     level effects of individual errors, malfunctions, or failures 
     and realistic pilot response times to such errors, 
     malfunctions, or failures related to such change;
       (B) update such assessment to account for each subsequent 
     proposed design change that the Administrator determines is 
     significant; and
       (C) provide appropriate employees of the Administration 
     with the data and assumptions underlying each assessment and 
     amended assessment; and
       (2) work with other civil aviation authorities representing 
     states of design to ensure such regulations remain harmonized 
     internationally.
       (c) FAA Review.--Appropriate employees of the Aircraft 
     Certification Service and the Flight Standards Service of the 
     Administration shall review each system safety assessment 
     required under subsection (b)(1)(A), updated assessment 
     required under subsection (b)(1)(B), and supporting data and 
     assumptions required under subsection (b)(1)(C), to ensure 
     that each such assessment sufficiently considers the matters 
     listed under subsection (b)(1).

     SEC. 17. FLIGHT CREW ALERTING.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall fully 
     implement National Transportation Safety Board 
     recommendations A-19-11 and A-19-12 (as contained in the 
     safety recommendation report adopted on September 9, 2019).
       (b) Prohibition.--Beginning on the date that is 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator 
     may not issue a type certificate for a transport-category 
     aircraft unless--
       (1) in the case of a transport airplane, such airplane 
     incorporates a flight crew alerting system that, at a 
     minimum, displays and differentiates among warnings, 
     cautions, and advisories, and includes functions to assist 
     the flight crew in prioritizing corrective actions and 
     responding to systems failures; or
       (2) in the case of a transport-category aircraft other than 
     a transport airplane, the type certificate applicant provides 
     a means acceptable to the Administrator to assist the flight 
     crew in prioritizing corrective actions and responding to 
     systems failures (including by cockpit or flight manual 
     procedures).

     SEC. 18. AMENDED TYPE CERTIFICATES.

       (a) Review and Reevaluation of Amended Type Certificates.--
       (1) International leadership.--The Administrator shall 
     exercise leadership in the creation of international policies 
     and standards relating to the issuance of amended type 
     certificates within the group of international civil aviation 
     authorities known as the Certificate Management Team.
       (2) Reevaluation of amended type certificates.--In carrying 
     out this subsection, the Administrator shall--
       (A) encourage Certificate Management Team members to 
     examine and address any relevant covered recommendations (as 
     defined in section 22) relating to the issuance of amended 
     type certificates;
       (B) reevaluate existing assumptions and practices inherent 
     in the amended type certificate process and assess whether 
     such assumptions and practices are valid; and
       (C) ensure, to the greatest extent practicable, that 
     Federal regulations relating to the issuance of amended type 
     certificates are harmonized with the regulations of other 
     international states of design.
       (b) Amended Type Certificate Report and Rulemaking.--
       (1) Report on certificate management team efforts.--Not 
     later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Administrator shall submit a report to the congressional 
     committees of jurisdiction on the efforts by the Certificate 
     Management Team to modify and harmonize policies and 
     regulations relating to the issuance of amended type 
     certificates.
       (2) Initiation of action.--Not later than 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall revise 
     and improve the process of issuing amended type certificates 
     in accordance with this section. Such action may include the 
     revision of guidance, the initiating of a rulemaking, or such 
     other action as the Administrator determines necessary to 
     implement this section.
       (3) Contents.--In taking an action required under paragraph 
     (2), the Administrator shall--
       (A) consider--
       (i) the findings and work of the Certificate Management 
     Team and other similar international harmonization efforts;
       (ii) any relevant covered recommendations (as defined in 
     section 22); and
       (iii) whether a fixed time beyond which a type certificate 
     may not be amended would improve aviation safety; and
       (B) establish the extent to which the following design 
     characteristics should preclude the issuance of an amended 
     type certificate:
       (i) A new or revised flight control system.
       (ii) Any substantial changes to aerodynamic stability 
     resulting from a physical change that may require a new or 
     modified software system or control law in order to produce 
     positive and acceptable stability and handling qualities.
       (iii) A flight control system or augmented software to 
     maintain aerodynamic stability in any portion of the flight 
     envelope that was not required for a previously certified 
     derivative.
       (iv) A change in structural components (other than a 
     stretch or shrink of the fuselage) that results in a change 
     in structural load paths or the magnitude of structural loads 
     attributed to flight maneuvers or cabin pressurization.
       (v) A novel or unusual system, component, or other feature 
     whose failure would present a hazardous or catastrophic risk.
       (4) Deadline.--The Administrator shall finalize the actions 
     initiated under paragraph (2) not later than 3 years after 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) International Leadership.--The Administrator shall 
     exercise leadership within the International Civil Aviation 
     Organization and among other civil aviation regulators 
     representing states of aircraft design to advocate for the 
     adoption of requirements equivalent to those described in 
     this section.

     SEC. 19. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS.

       Section 42121 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) Prohibited Discrimination.--A holder of a certificate 
     under section 44704 or 44705 of this title, or contractor or 
     subcontractor of such holder, may not discharge an employee 
     or otherwise discriminate against an employee with respect to 
     compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment 
     because the employee (or any person acting pursuant to a 
     request of the employee)--
       ``(1) provided, caused to be provided, or is about to 
     provide (with any knowledge of the employer) or cause to be 
     provided to the employer or Federal Government information 
     relating to any violation or alleged violation of any order, 
     regulation, or standard of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or any other provision of Federal law relating 
     to aviation safety under this subtitle or any other law of 
     the United States;
       ``(2) has filed, caused to be filed, or is about to file 
     (with any knowledge of the employer) or cause to be filed a 
     proceeding relating to any violation or alleged violation of 
     any order, regulation, or standard of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or any other provision of Federal law relating 
     to aviation safety under this subtitle or any other law of 
     the United States;
       ``(3) testified or is about to testify in such a 
     proceeding; or
       ``(4) assisted or participated or is about to assist or 
     participate in such a proceeding.'';
       (2) by striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
       ``(d) Nonapplicability To Deliberate Violations.--
     Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to an employee of 
     a holder of a certificate issued under section 44704 or 
     44705, or a contractor or subcontractor thereof, who, acting 
     without direction from such certificate-holder, contractor, 
     or subcontractor (or such person's agent), deliberately 
     causes a violation of any requirement relating to aviation 
     safety under this subtitle or any other law of the United 
     States.''; and
       (3) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following:
       ``(e) Contractor Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `contractor' means--
       ``(1) a person that performs safety-sensitive functions by 
     contract for an air carrier or commercial operator; or
       ``(2) a person that performs safety-sensitive functions 
     related to the design or production of an aircraft, aircraft 
     engine, propeller, appliance, or component thereof by 
     contract for a holder of a certificate issued under section 
     44704.''.

     SEC. 20. PILOT TRAINING.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 447 of title 49, United States 
     Code, as amended by section 8, is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 44743. Pilot training requirements

       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Administrator's determination.--In establishing any 
     pilot training requirements with respect to a new transport 
     airplane, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall independently review any proposal by the 
     manufacturer of such airplane with respect to the scope, 
     format, or minimum level of training required for operation 
     of such airplane.

[[Page H5842]]

       ``(2) Assurances and marketing representations.--Before the 
     Administrator has established applicable training 
     requirements, an applicant for a new or amended type 
     certificate for an airplane described in paragraph (1) may 
     not, with respect to the scope, format, or magnitude of pilot 
     training for such airplane--
       ``(A) make any assurance, whether verbal or in writing, to 
     a potential purchaser of such airplane unless a clear and 
     conspicuous disclaimer (as defined by the Administrator) is 
     included regarding the status of training required for 
     operation of such airplane; or
       ``(B) provide financial incentives (including rebates) to a 
     potential purchaser of such airplane regarding the scope, 
     format, or magnitude of pilot training for such airplane.
       ``(b) Pilot Response Time.--Beginning on the day after the 
     date on which regulations are issued under section 20(b)(5) 
     of the Aircraft Certification Reform and Accountability Act, 
     the Administrator may not issue a new or amended type 
     certificate for an airplane described in subsection (a) 
     unless the applicant for such certificate has demonstrated to 
     the Administrator that the applicant has accounted for 
     realistic assumptions regarding the time for pilot responses 
     to non-normal conditions in designing the systems and 
     instrumentation of such airplane. Such assumptions shall--
       ``(1) be based on test data, analysis, or other technical 
     validation methods; and
       ``(2) account for generally accepted scientific consensus 
     among experts in human factors regarding realistic pilot 
     response time.
       ``(c) Definition.--In this section, the term `transport 
     airplane' means a transport-category airplane designed for 
     operation by an air carrier or foreign air carrier type-
     certificated with a passenger seating capacity of 30 or more 
     or an all-cargo or combi derivative of such an airplane.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 447 of 
     title 49, United States Code, is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

``44743. Pilot training requirements.''.
       (c) Expert Safety Review.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate an 
     expert safety review of assumptions relied upon by the 
     Administration and manufacturers of transport-category 
     aircraft in the design and certification of such aircraft.
       (2) Contents.--The expert safety review required under 
     paragraph (1) shall include--
       (A) a review of Administration regulations, guidance, and 
     directives related to pilot response assumptions relied upon 
     by the FAA and manufacturers of transport-category aircraft 
     in the design and certification of such aircraft;
       (B) a focused review of the assumptions relied on regarding 
     the time for pilot responses to non-normal conditions in 
     designing such aircraft's systems and instrumentation;
       (C) a review of revisions made to the airman certification 
     standards for certificates over the last four years, 
     including any possible effects on pilot competency in basic 
     manual flying skills;
       (D) consideration of the global nature of the aviation 
     marketplace, varying levels of pilot competency, and 
     differences in pilot training programs worldwide; and
       (E) a process for aviation stakeholders, including pilots, 
     airlines, inspectors, engineers, test pilots, human factors 
     experts, and other aviation safety experts, to provide and 
     discuss any observations, feedback, and best practices.
       (3) Report and recommendations.--Not later than 30 days 
     after the conclusion of the expert safety review pursuant to 
     paragraph (1), the Administrator shall submit to the 
     congressional committees of jurisdiction a report on the 
     results of the review, any recommendations for actions or 
     best practices to ensure the FAA and the manufacturers of 
     transport-category aircraft have accounted for pilot response 
     assumptions to be relied upon in the design and certification 
     of transport-category aircraft.
       (4) Termination.--The expert safety review shall end upon 
     submission of the report required pursuant to paragraph (3).
       (5) Regulations.--The Administrator shall issue such 
     regulations as are necessary to implement the recommendations 
     of the expert safety review that the Administrator determines 
     are necessary to improve aviation safety.
       (d) Call to Action on Airman Certification Standards.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall initiate a 
     call to action safety review of pilot certification standards 
     in order to bring stakeholders together to share lessons 
     learned, best practices, and implement actions to address any 
     safety issues identified.
       (2) Contents.--The call to action safety review required 
     under paragraph (1) shall include--
       (A) a review of Administration regulations, guidance, and 
     directives related to the pilot certification standards, 
     including the oversight of those processes;
       (B) a review of revisions made to the pilot certification 
     standards for certificates over the last four years, 
     including any possible effects on pilot competency in manual 
     flying skills and effectively managing automation to improve 
     safety; and
       (C) a process for aviation stakeholders, including aviation 
     students, instructors, designated pilot examiners, pilots, 
     airlines, labor, and aviation safety experts, to provide and 
     discuss any observations, feedback, and best practices.
       (3) Report and recommendations.--Not later than 90 days 
     after the conclusion of the call to action safety review 
     pursuant to paragraph (1), the Administrator shall submit to 
     the congressional committees of jurisdiction a report on the 
     results of the review, any recommendations for actions or 
     best practices to ensure pilot competency in basic manual 
     flying skills and in effective management of automation, and 
     actions the Administrator will take in response to the 
     recommendations.
       (e) International Pilot Training.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation, the 
     Administrator, and other appropriate officials of the 
     Government shall exercise leadership in setting global 
     standards to improve air carrier pilot training and 
     qualifications for--
       (A) monitoring and managing the behavior and performance of 
     automated systems;
       (B) controlling the flightpath of aircraft without 
     autoflight systems engaged;
       (C) effectively utilizing and managing autoflight systems, 
     when appropriate;
       (D) effectively identifying situations in which the use of 
     autoflight systems is appropriate and when such use is not 
     appropriate; and
       (E) recognizing and responding appropriately to non-normal 
     conditions.
       (2) International leadership.--The Secretary, the 
     Administrator, and other appropriate officials of the 
     Government shall exercise leadership under subsection (a) by 
     working with--
       (A) foreign counterparts of the Administrator in the 
     International Civil Aviation Organization and its subsidiary 
     organizations;
       (B) other international organizations and fora; and
       (C) the private sector.
       (3) Considerations.--In exercising leadership under 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary, the Administrator, and other 
     appropriate officials of the Government shall consider--
       (A) the latest information relating to human factors;
       (B) aircraft manufacturing trends, including those relating 
     to increased automation in the cockpit;
       (C) the extent to which cockpit automation improves 
     aviation safety and introduces novel risks;
       (D) the availability of opportunities for pilots to 
     practice manual flying skills;
       (E) the need for consistency in maintaining and enhancing 
     manual flying skills worldwide;
       (F) recommended practices of other countries that enhance 
     manual flying skills and automation management; and
       (G) whether a need exists for initial and recurrent 
     training standards for improve pilots' proficiency in manual 
     flight and in effective management of autoflight systems.
       (4) Congressional briefing.--The Secretary, the 
     Administrator, and other appropriate officials of the 
     Government shall provide to the congressional committees of 
     jurisdiction regular briefings on the status of efforts 
     undertaken pursuant to this section.

     SEC. 21. NONCONFORMITY WITH APPROVED TYPE DESIGN.

       Section 44704(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     further amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) Nonconformity with approved type design.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (D), 
     a holder of a production certificate for an aircraft may not 
     present a nonconforming aircraft to the Administrator for 
     issuance of an airworthiness certificate.
       ``(B) Civil penalty.--Notwithstanding section 46301, a 
     production certificate holder who knowingly violates 
     subparagraph (A) shall be liable to the Administrator for a 
     civil penalty of not more than $1,000,000 for each 
     nonconforming aircraft.
       ``(C) Penalty considerations.--In determining the amount of 
     a civil penalty under subparagraph (B), the Administrator 
     shall consider--
       ``(i) the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the 
     violation, including the length of time the nonconformity was 
     known but not disclosed; and
       ``(ii) with respect to the violator, the degree of 
     culpability, any history of prior violations, and the size of 
     the business concern.
       ``(D) Remedial action.--The Administrator may permit a 
     production certificate holder to present a nonconforming 
     aircraft to the Administrator for an airworthiness 
     certificate if--
       ``(i) the Administrator determines the nonconformity, when 
     compared to the configuration approved as part of the type 
     design, does not diminish by any degree the aircraft's safe 
     operation without any change in flight crew operating 
     procedures;
       ``(ii) the Administrator determines the nonconformity was 
     not the product of an intentional decision by the production 
     certificate holder to alter the aircraft's configuration from 
     the approved type design;
       ``(iii) the production certificate holder has fully 
     complied with subparagraph (E);
       ``(iv) the production certificate holder agrees to correct 
     the nonconformity on all nonconforming aircraft within a 
     timeframe that is--

       ``(I) prescribed by the Administrator; and
       ``(II) commensurate with the severity of the nonconformity;

[[Page H5843]]

       ``(v) the production certificate holder informs a person 
     who is to take delivery of the nonconforming aircraft of the 
     nonconformance prior to its delivery; and
       ``(vi) the production certificate holder agrees not to 
     impose any penalty, financial or otherwise, on a person that 
     chooses to delay the delivery of a nonconforming aircraft 
     until the production certificate holder, to the 
     Administrator's satisfaction, conforms the aircraft to the 
     approved type design of such aircraft.
       ``(E) Notification and proposed remedial action.--A 
     production certificate holder shall, within 5 days of 
     determining that such production certificate holder delivered 
     a nonconforming aircraft, notify the Administrator, the 
     purchaser of the airplane, and (if the purchaser is a lessor) 
     the intended operator of the airplane, if known. A 
     notification under this clause shall describe--
       ``(i) the nonconformity in detail; and
       ``(ii) the production certificate holder's initial proposal 
     for actions necessary to eliminate the nonconformity.
       ``(F) Nonconforming aircraft defined.--In this paragraph, 
     the term `nonconforming aircraft' means an aircraft that does 
     not conform to the approved type design for such aircraft 
     type.''.

     SEC. 22. IMPLEMENTATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall submit a 
     report to the congressional committees of jurisdiction on the 
     status of the Administration's implementation of covered 
     recommendations.
       (b) Contents.--The report required under subsection (a) 
     shall contain, at a minimum--
       (1) a list and description of all covered recommendations;
       (2) a determination of whether the Administrator concurs, 
     concurs in part, or does not concur with each covered 
     recommendation;
       (3) an implementation plan and schedule for all covered 
     recommendations the Administrator concurs or concurs in part 
     with; and
       (4) for each covered recommendation with which the 
     Administrator does not concur (in whole or in part), a 
     detailed explanation as to why.
       (c) Covered Recommendations Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``covered recommendations'' means recommendations made 
     by the following entities in any review initiated in response 
     to the accident of Lion Air flight 610 on October 29, 2018, 
     or Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 on March 10, 2019, that 
     recommend Administration action:
       (1) The National Transportation Safety Board.
       (2) The Joint Authorities Technical Review.
       (3) The inspector general of the Department of 
     Transportation.
       (4) The Safety Oversight and Certification Advisory 
     Committee, or any special committee thereof.
       (5) Any other entity the Administrator may designate.

     SEC. 23. OVERSIGHT OF FAA COMPLIANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall establish an 
     Executive Council within the Administration to oversee the 
     use and effectiveness across program offices of the 
     Administration's Compliance Program, described in Order 
     8000.373A dated October 31, 2018.
       (b) Compliance Program Oversight.--The Executive Council 
     established under this section shall--
       (1) monitor, collect, and analyze data on the use of the 
     Compliance Program across program offices of the 
     Administration, including data on enforcement actions and 
     compliance actions pursued against regulated entities by such 
     program offices;
       (2) conduct an evaluation of the Compliance Program, not 
     less frequently than annually each calendar year through 
     2023, to assess the functioning and effectiveness of such 
     program in meeting the stated goals and purpose of the 
     program;
       (3) provide reports to the Administrator containing the 
     results of any evaluation conducted under paragraph (2), 
     including identifying in such report any nonconformities or 
     deficiencies in the implementation of the program and 
     compliance of regulated entities with safety standards of the 
     Administration;
       (4) make recommendations to the Administrator on 
     regulations, guidance, performance standards or metrics, or 
     other controls that should be issued by the Administrator to 
     improve the effectiveness of the Compliance Program in 
     meeting the stated goals and purpose of the program and to 
     ensure the highest levels of aviation safety; and
       (5) carry out any other oversight duties with respect to 
     implementation of the Compliance Program and assigned by the 
     Administrator.
       (c) Executive Council.--
       (1) Executive council membership.--The Compliance Program 
     Executive Council shall be comprised of representatives from 
     each program office with regulatory responsibility as 
     provided in Order 8000.373A.
       (2) Chairperson.--The Executive Council shall be chaired by 
     a person, who shall be appointed by the Administrator and 
     shall report directly to the Administrator.
       (3) Independence.--The Secretary of Transportation, the 
     Administrator, or any officer or employee of the 
     Administration may not prevent or prohibit the chair of the 
     Executive Council from performing the activities described in 
     this section or from reporting to Congress on such 
     activities.
       (4) Duration.--The Executive Council shall terminate on 
     October 1, 2023.
       (d) Annual Briefing.--Each calendar year through 2023, the 
     chair of the Executive Council shall provide a briefing to 
     the congressional committees of jurisdiction on the 
     effectiveness of the Administration's Compliance Program in 
     meeting the stated goals and purpose of the program and the 
     activities of the office described in subsection (b), 
     including any reports and recommendations made by the office 
     during the preceding calendar year.

     SEC. 24. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT.

       (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Administrator should fully exercise all rights and pursue 
     all remedies available to the Administrator under any 
     settlement agreement between the Administration and the 
     holder of a type certificate and production certificate for 
     transport airplanes executed on December 18, 2015, including 
     a demand for full payment of any applicable civil penalties 
     deferred under such agreement, if the Administrator concludes 
     that such holder has not fully performed all obligations 
     incurred under such agreement.
       (b) Congressional Briefing.--Not later than February 1, 
     2021, and every 6 months thereafter until a certificate 
     holder described in subsection (a) has fully performed all 
     obligations incurred by such certificate holder under such 
     settlement agreement, the Administrator shall brief the 
     congressional committees of jurisdiction on action taken 
     consistent with subsection (a).

     SEC. 25. HUMAN FACTORS.

       (a) Aircraft Certification Process.--
       (1) Evaluation.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator (acting through the 
     Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety of the 
     Administration) shall--
       (A) conduct an evaluation of the development of tools and 
     methods to support the integration of human factors 
     assessment and system safety assessments of human interaction 
     with flight deck and flight control systems for transport 
     airplanes into the aircraft certification process under 
     section 44704 of title 49, United States Code; and
       (B) develop a framework to better integrate human factors 
     throughout such aircraft certification process with the 
     objective of improving safety by designing systems and 
     training pilots in a manner that accounts for contemporary 
     knowledge to reduce the possibility of an accident resulting 
     in whole or in part from the pilot's interaction with the 
     aircraft.
       (2) Report to congress.--Not later than 60 days after the 
     completion of the evaluation required under paragraph (1), 
     the Administrator shall submit to Congress a report detailing 
     the findings of such report and a plan for implementation 
     based on such findings of such report.
       (3) Implementation.--Upon submission of the report required 
     under paragraph (2), the Administrator shall implement the 
     findings of such evaluation.
       (b) Human Factors Education Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator shall develop a human 
     factors education program that addresses the effects of 
     modern flight deck systems, including automated systems, on 
     human performance for transport airplanes and the approaches 
     for better integration of human factors in aircraft design 
     and certification.
       (2) Target audience.--The human factors education program 
     shall be integrated into the training protocol in existence 
     as of the date of the enactment of this Act such that such 
     program is routinely administered to the following:
       (A) Appropriate employees within the Flight Standards 
     Service.
       (B) Appropriate employees within the Aircraft Certification 
     Service.
       (C) Other employees or authorized representatives 
     determined to be necessary by the Administrator.
       (c) Transport Airplane Manufacturer Information Sharing.--
     The Administrator shall--
       (1) require each transport airplane manufacturer to provide 
     the Administrator with the information or findings necessary 
     for flight crew to be trained on flight deck systems;
       (2) ensure the information or findings under paragraph (1) 
     adequately includes consideration of human factors; and
       (3) ensure that each transport airplane manufacturer 
     identifies any technical basis, justification or rationale 
     for the information and findings under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 26. TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.

       Section 46301 of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)(A) by striking ``(except sections 
     44717 and 44719-44723)'' and inserting ``(except sections 
     44704(a)(6), 44704(e)(4), 44717, and 44719-44723)'';
       (2) in subsection (a)(5)(A) by striking ``(except sections 
     44717-44723)'' and inserting ``(except sections 44704(a)(6), 
     44704(e)(4), and 44717-44723)'';
       (3) in subsection (d)(2) by striking ``(except sections 
     44717 and 44719-44723)'' and inserting ``(except sections 
     44704(a)(6), 44704(e)(4), 44717, and 44719-44723)''; and
       (4) in subsection (f)(1)(A)(i) by striking ``(except 
     sections 44717 and 44719-44723)'' and inserting ``(except 
     sections 44704(a)(6), 44704(e)(4), 44717, and 44719-44723)''.

     SEC. 27. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:

[[Page H5844]]

       (1) Administration; faa.--The terms ``Administration'' and 
     ``FAA'' mean the Federal Aviation Administration.
       (2) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the FAA.
       (3) Organization designation authorization.--The term 
     ``organization designation authorization'' has the same 
     meaning given such term in section 44736 of title 49, United 
     States Code.
       (4) Congressional committees of jurisdiction.--The term 
     ``congressional committees of jurisdiction'' means the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation of the Senate.
       (5) Human factors.--The term ``human factors'' means a 
     multidisciplinary set of principles developed to holistically 
     explain and predict pilot behavior in relation to the 
     management of the operation of an aircraft, including the 
     pilot's management of aircraft systems and response to 
     systems failures and non-normal conditions.
       (6) Transport airplane.--The term ``transport airplane'' 
     means a transport-category airplane designed for operation by 
     an air carrier or foreign air carrier type-certificated with 
     a passenger seating capacity of 30 or more or an all-cargo or 
     combi derivative of such an airplane.
       (7) Type certificate.--The term ``type certificate''--
       (A) means a type certificate issued pursuant to section 
     44704(a) of title 49, United States Code, or an amendment to 
     such certificate; and
       (B) does not include a supplemental type certificate issued 
     under section 44704(b) of such section.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) and the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Graves) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oregon.


                             General Leave

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 8408, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Oregon?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 8408, the bipartisan Aircraft 
Certification Reform Accountability Act, today because a U.S. 
commercial airplane manufacturer and, candidly, the Federal Aviation 
Administration broke the public trust. 346 innocent people died on two 
Boeing 737 MAX airplanes in October 2018 and March 2019.
  Despite the crashes, both Boeing and the FAA found that the 
certification of the 737 MAX was compliant with FAA regulations. It was 
compliant with regulations, yet 346 people died. I believe that that 
shows that there are problems with the regulatory system that need to 
be addressed.
  Ranking Member Graves, Aviation Subcommittee Chair Larsen, Aviation 
Subcommittee Ranking Member Graves, and I actively worked on this bill 
over a number of months. I think I can speak for all of us when I say 
our intent is to ensure a U.S.-manufactured airplane never again 
crashes due to design issues or regulatory failures.
  The Boeing 737 MAX has been grounded since the second crash, that of 
Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 on March 10, 2019. This has been the 
longest grounding of a transport plane in the history of commercial 
aviation and will likely end this week when the FAA judges that 
Boeing's modifications to the deadly system that caused the crashes are 
sufficient.
  The FAA and Boeing have spent the last 20 months doing what they 
should have done before the 737 MAX ever entered service, so 
consideration of this bill is timely.
  There is a long litany of negligence, recklessness, corporate greed--
particularly at the executive level--and errors in the design and 
certification of the 737 MAX that culminated in the crashes of Lion Air 
flight 610 and Ethiopian Airlines flight 302 and, ultimately, this 
legislation.
  I am not going to go over all of the stunning acts and omissions 
within Boeing and the regulatory capture that prevented the FAA from 
detecting and correcting those acts and omissions because they have 
been laid bare in numerous reports since the accidents, including those 
of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, which recently 
concluded the longest and most comprehensive investigation in the 
committee's history with a nearly 250-page report on the technical and 
regulatory failures in this story; the Joint Authorities Technical 
Review, a team of U.S. and international safety regulators who assessed 
the design and certification of the 737 MAX; the National 
Transportation Safety Board; a special committee convened by the 
Department of Transportation to evaluate the FAA's certification 
process with respect to the 737 MAX; the Indonesian National 
Transportation Safety Committee, which investigated the crash of Lion 
Air flight 610; and the Ethiopian Civil Aviation Authority, which 
investigated the crash of Ethiopian Airlines flight 302.
  Lion Air 610 and Ethiopian flight 302 crashed, ultimately, because of 
a system called the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, or 
MCAS, which forced the airplane into dives with forces so great the 
pilots were physically unable to counteract them. Through numerous 
investigations, we know Boeing intentionally concealed the existence of 
MCAS in cases from the airlines and pilots, partly to save money on 
pilot training and partly to avoid increased regulatory scrutiny by the 
FAA.
  Level B non-simulator pilot training was a design objective for the 
737 MAX from the outset, according to Boeing's former chief project 
engineer; and as early as 2014, 2 years before the FAA made a pilot 
training determination, a Boeing press release and marketing materials 
declared this level of training for prospective 737 MAX customer 
airlines. In one case, they promised to pay a penalty of $1 million per 
plane to a purchaser if a higher level of training was necessary.
  We also know that Boeing's safety assessment with respect to MCAS was 
horribly incomplete. MCAS activated on both flights because of a tiny, 
fragile vane, called an alpha vane, protruding from the left side of 
the nose. The alpha vane measures the angle of attack between the 
airplane and oncoming air.
  When it failed, as these tiny, fragile vanes are wont to do, it 
triggered a complex computerized response, which included a jarring 
stick shaker, which vibrates the column so violently that if you are 
holding onto it, your teeth are going to rattle to warn of a stall; 
unrelated other cautions and warnings, and this plane has a primitive 
alert system unlike all Boeings made in the last 25 years, as the 
dozens of prioritized things; and warnings that airspeed, altitude is 
unreliable.
  More importantly, the MCAS system, an invisible system, left out of 
the first manual, or deleted from the first manuals distributed with 
the plane, forced the nose down repeatedly and inexorably toward the 
Earth.
  Now, Boeing assumed pilots would respond to all that and apply the 
proper corrective procedure within 4 seconds. I would challenge most 
experienced pilots to sort through that blizzard of alerts in 4 
seconds, not knowing of the existence of the system, to determine what 
is going on and apply proper procedure.
  A Boeing test pilot in a simulator in 2012 couldn't do that, as the 
committee staff investigation revealed. It took that pilot more than 10 
seconds to respond correctly and found the condition to be 
``catastrophic,'' meaning the situation would have been unsalvageable. 
The plane would have crashed. The simulator crashed. And it did not 
share that information with the FAA or its MAX customers.

  But Boeing and the FAA never assessed the airplane-level effects of 
an alpha vane failure, how it would trigger erroneous MCAS activation, 
and how pilots would respond; not that there wasn't plenty of 
opportunity within Boeing to stop and think about MCAS and the 
hazardous situations it would create.
  At one juncture, a Boeing employee was authorized by the FAA as part 
of the ODA, Organization Designation Authorization, to determine the 
plane's compliance with the FAA requirements, asked in an email if the 
airplane was vulnerable to a single alpha vane failure. The employee 
was given a summary assurance that MCAS was not vulnerable, but that 
assurance was incorrect. The eyes and ears of the FAA on the ground at 
Boeing left the FAA largely in the dark regarding issues that affected 
the airplane certification.

[[Page H5845]]

  We uncovered numerable instances of similar missed opportunities in 
our investigation. The culture of profits at any cost with the company 
may well have been a factor in the failure to root out safety problems.
  According to a 2016 internal survey of similar Boeing employees, who, 
at the time, were called authorized representatives of the FAA, 39 
percent said they felt undue pressure from Boeing management to make 
decisions in the company's interest.
  And then there was the FAA, whose complacency rendered the agency 
virtually a nonpresence in this story until then-Acting Administrator 
Elwell grounded the airplane after the second one crashed and after 
virtually every other agency in the world had grounded these airplanes.
  The FAA was either unable or unwilling to conduct rigorous oversight 
of Boeing during the certification process. A Boeing employee wrote an 
internal email in 2015 that, during a presentation of the 737 MAX, FAA 
officials were like ``dogs watching TV.'' And they hid the mention of 
MAX in two lines in a very lengthy presentation of MCAS.
  Throughout our investigation, we learned the FAA and Boeing 
separately performed an analysis after the first crash, that of Lion 
Air, which concluded that, if left uncorrected, the design flaw in the 
737 MAX could result in as many as 15 future crashes. And despite the 
calculations and the agency's own Transport Airplane Risk Assessment 
Methodology, or TARAM, the FAA let it continue to fly.
  In fact, the head of safety for the FAA came to my office in February 
after the first crash and said that was a one-off, there is no problem 
with this plane. But that report had been produced before he came to 
see me. Now, when we finally got him to a 7-hour recorded testimony, he 
said he never heard of anything that said 15 of the planes would crash.
  Well, what does the head of safety do at the FAA? Seriously.
  Now, here is the most outrageous indication of a broken safety 
culture within the very agency that is supposed to be the leading 
champion of strong safety cultures. In a recent survey of FAA aviation 
safety employees, 56 percent of those involved in certification 
activities believed there was too much external influence on the agency 
and that this influence was affecting FAA safety decisions.
  This is 25 years after the horrible crash of Value Jet in Florida, 
when I finally got the law changed to say that the FAA is not to 
promote and regulate in the public interest and safety; it is only to 
regulate in the public interest and safety, not to promote the 
industry.
  All of these factors alone, and more, all part of a broken system 
that broke the public's trust culminated in 2018 and 2019 MAX 
accidents. And the bill we are considering today will fix that broken 
system.
  It requires the FAA to approve authorized representatives at all 
aviation manufacturers by examining their qualifications and character 
so that, when they are considering a proposed design, they will 
remember that public safety rests on their shoulders.
  Any person who interferes with an authorized representative's 
performance of his or her critical duties on behalf of the FAA will be 
subject to civil penalties going forward.
  It also imposes civil penalties for a manufacturer's failure to 
disclose the details of a system like MCAS that manipulate flight 
controls without direct pilot input and for a manufacturer's delivery 
of an airplane that does not conform to an FAA-approved design.
  The bill requires two FAA rulemakings that, together, will require 
manufacturers to provide the agency with thorough assessments measuring 
the risk created by changes to existing aircraft designs so FAA can 
ascertain whether a manufacturer has sufficiently minimized any given 
risk.
  The bill requires the FAA to hire more staff to rigorously review new 
designs and authorizes enough funding for 100 of them.
  It also requires the FAA to implement a nonpunitive voluntary safety 
reporting system for FAA employees to report safety concerns, prohibits 
agency officials from talking with manufacturers about formal 
objections to FAA career employees' decisions unless publicly 
disclosing information about those communications, and it extends to 
manufacturers' employees the same whistleblower protections that apply 
to airline employees today, and much more.
  I want to make it clear that this bill is not meant in any way to 
interfere with the victims or their families' access to the judicial 
system and all available remedies when tragedies occur. Compliance with 
the provisions of H.R. 8408 will not adversely affect any existing 
remedies available to families of the Boeing victims and any other 
future victims under State, Federal, statutory, or common law. Families 
who have already suffered tragic loss must be able to seek compensation 
when their loved ones are injured or killed in aircraft crashes due to 
negligence or other wrongdoing.
  The 346 sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers who died 
on Lion Air flight 610 and Ethiopian flight 302 placed their trust in a 
broken system. Today, we take the next big step toward fixing that 
system.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank Ranking Member Graves, Aviation Subcommittee 
Chair Larsen, and Subcommittee Ranking Member Graves for their 
partnership in advancing this legislation, and I look forward to 
continuing to work with them and our Senate colleagues, and hopefully 
we can get it enacted into law this year.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 8408, the Aircraft 
Certification Reform and Accountability Act.
  I want to thank Chairman DeFazio and Chairman Larsen for working with 
us to put together this bipartisan bill.
  The Committee's response following the Lion Air and Ethiopian 
Airlines tragedies has been to take the time that is necessary to 
understand all the contributing factors in these accidents.

                              {time}  1515

  Throughout this process, I have taken the position that if the safety 
experts recommend improvement to our certification system, then 
Congress should act.
  We now have the benefit of a number of nonpartisan reviews by 
aviation safety experts confirming that multiple factors were involved. 
There is only so much the United States can do to influence factors 
outside of our borders, but the experts identified issues to address 
those things that are within our control and made recommendations to 
improve our system, and that is the focus of this bill.
  We can all agree that the United States and the Federal Aviation 
Administration has to--must--continue to be the gold standard in 
aviation. The safety of the traveling public depends on that, but so 
does our economy, our competitiveness, and hundreds of thousands of 
American jobs.
  Plain and simple, we can't remain the gold standard if our system 
isn't safe. And one reason for our achievements in aviation has been 
our ability to leave partisan politics at the door and work together on 
critical safety issues, and that is what we have done today in this 
bill.
  This bill before us today is going to require additional improvements 
beyond those which the FAA and Boeing have already undertaken. These 
changes are going to make our safe system even safer.
  To be clear, the experts have concluded that the current system does 
not need to be dismantled, but that we can and should take action to 
improvement.
  H.R. 8408 thoughtfully addresses the multiple contributing factors 
involved in the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines accidents that are 
within our control, as well as the many expert recommendations to 
improve safety within our own system.
  This is a well-reasoned, comprehensive, and bipartisan bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge support for this legislation, and I reserve the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Larsen), the subcommittee chairman.
  Mr. LARSEN of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.R. 8408, the Aircraft Certification Reform and Accountability Act.

[[Page H5846]]

  This comprehensive, bipartisan legislation will help improve the U.S. 
aircraft certification process, strengthen Federal Aviation 
Administration oversight, and ensure the safety of air travel.
  As chair of the Aviation Subcommittee, I am very pleased that this 
critical legislation is now before this Chamber for a vote.
  After two tragic Boeing 737 MAX crashes, the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee launched a thorough investigation into the 
design, development, and certification of the 737 MAX.
  Since March 2019, the committee has received more than 500,000 pages 
of documents, held five oversight hearings, interviewed key employees 
at Boeing and the FAA, and listened to testimony from victims' families 
and from several whistleblowers.
  The resulting Aircraft Certification Reform and Accountability Act 
improves aviation safety culture, enhances transparency and 
accountability, addresses undue pressure on employees acting on behalf 
of the FAA within an aviation manufacturer, and reinforces the 
importance of human factors in aircraft design and certification.
  The 346 victims of the two tragic crashes and their families have 
always remained at the forefront of this committee's work.
  A vital part of the committee's process was the advocacy of the 
victims' families. For nearly 2 years, the families have championed 
necessary reforms to the FAA certification process to ensure that no 
other families experience such unthinkable loss.
  This bill reinforces the integrity of the FAA and U.S. aviation 
manufacturing.
  I thank Chairman DeFazio for his leadership. I thank Ranking Member 
Graves of Missouri of the full committee for his leadership. And I 
thank the ranking member of the Aviation Subcommittee, Mr. Graves of 
Louisiana, for his leadership on coming together in a bipartisan way to 
make this bill a reality.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Graves), the ranking 
member of the Aviation Subcommittee.
  Mr. GRAVES of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I really can't dispute many of 
the previous speakers' comments. The bottom line is that the aviation 
industry, the aviation mode of transportation is the safest mode of 
transportation. It is the safest way to travel. And the United States 
has the gold standard in regard to aviation safety.
  However, we are all aware of two very tragic accidents that resulted 
in 346 lives that were lost, 346. Just because we have the best, we 
have the safest, does not mean that we should ever stop striving for 
better, we should ever stop striving for perfection.
  Mr. Speaker, we had five hearings on this legislation. There were 
numerous expert panels that were put together to review this, to 
extract every single lesson learned.
  I thank the acting administrator at the time, Dan Elwell--and I want 
to congratulate him on his retirement--for his steady hand in ensuring 
that, as we move forward, we base our decisions on facts. I thank him 
for some of the changes within the FAA to ensure that we apply lessons 
learned.
  Mr. Speaker, as previous speakers noted, this legislation is the 
result of all of these nonpartisan, independent expert reviews. We took 
the lessons learned and we adapted it into legislation to make sure 
that we can, as I said, continue to strive for perfection; to continue 
to focus on, as my friend Mr. Larsen noted, the families; to keep a 
face on this; to ensure that we never subject future families to the 
same losses that we had in this case. And that is just what we did.

  I thank Michael Stumo, one of the leaders of the families who called 
us often and reminded us what it was that we were doing. We were 
focusing on safety because this is about people, about real lives.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill has a number of improvements, as I noted, 
including ensuring that safety management systems are applied by 
manufacturers and better controls over project management. The bill 
integrates project review within the FAA to make sure that different 
entities within the FAA are aware of what the others are doing.
  The bill ensures that there is disclosure of safety critical 
information in systems, including close inspection and review of new or 
novel technologies that are introduced into the design to ensure that 
we fully understand the impact of those. It ensures that there is 
conformance with the FAA design type; meaning that you can't come in 
and simply amend the design type if you are making significant changes 
to the aircraft or if the aircraft design evolves over time to where if 
initially it couldn't simply be an amended design.
  Mr. Speaker, it also includes something that is very important. It 
integrates human factors, ensuring that we understand how humans, how 
pilots and others will behave in the instance of some type of safety 
issue on aircraft.
  Mr. Speaker, when an aircraft has a problem, you can't simply pull it 
over to the side of the road and check it out. We have to make sure 
that this continues to be the safest mode of transportation. We have to 
continue to ensure that the United States truly has a gold standard.
  I thank Chairman DeFazio and my friend, Chairman Larsen, as well as 
full committee Ranking Member Graves of Missouri, for the work on this 
bill because this bill didn't start out as something that was 
bipartisan that everybody was on board with, but it did evolve to this 
point. Candidly, there are few perfections in here that I would like to 
see, but this is a really good bill, and it does simply take the 
recommendations, the findings of the expert reports and it does turn 
this into legislation.
  I thank all my friends for working together on this. I thank Holly 
and Hunter, whose baby Theo didn't comply with our schedule in this 
legislation, for all of their hard work here.
  Mr. GRAVES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 8408 addresses the 
nonpartisan expert safety recommendations to improve the FAA's aircraft 
certification process in the aftermath of tragic Lion Air and Ethiopian 
Airlines accidents in 2018 and 2019.
  This bill is responsible, comprehensive, bipartisan, and it is going 
to improve aviation safety.
  I thank again Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Garret Graves and 
the committee staff on both sides, with special thanks to Holly 
Woodruff Lyons, Hunter Presti, Jamie Hopkins, Corey Cooke, Jack Ruddy, 
and Paul Sass for their work on this important piece of legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this legislation, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I, too, want to recognize the staff on both 
sides and the Members. Early on, this did appear like it could be a 
contentious piece of legislation, but in the end we all came together 
in the public safety interest for needed reforms to this Federal agency 
and the process by which we certify aircraft.
  I thank the investigative staff of the committee, who put together an 
extraordinary report. I also thank the aviation staff on both sides of 
the aisle for their work.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, the tragic deaths of 346 people on two 
Boeing 737 MAX jet crashes in October 2018 and March of 2019 were 
entirely preventable. As was said in the final report prepared by the 
Majority Staff of the House Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure on ``The Design, Development & Certification of the 
Boeing 737 Max'' released on September 16, 2020, ``The MAX crashes were 
not the result of a singular failure, technical mistake, or mismanaged 
event. They were the horrific culmination of a series of faulty 
technical assumptions by Boeing's engineers, a lack of transparency on 
the part of Boeing's management, and grossly insufficient oversight by 
the FAA--the pernicious result of regulatory capture on the part of the 
FAA with respect to its responsibilities to perform robust oversight of 
Boeing and to ensure the safety of the flying public.''
  The 737 MAX tragedies require us to make sure that certification 
alone can never become a legal shield for aircraft design or 
manufacturing defects. Even with the enactment of this legislative 
reform, it will be impossible to eliminate all risk. Indeed, as the 
Committee's report shows, ``FAA management has undercut the authority 
and judgment of its own technical experts and sided with Boeing on 
design issues that failed to adequately address safety

[[Page H5847]]

issues and appear to have violated FAA regulations or guidance, in some 
instances.''
  We need to incentivize the industry to do everything possible to 
ensure the safety of their planes and components. H.R. 8408 seeks to 
accomplish this goal by making both manufacturers and regulators 
responsible for updating and upgrading safety and technology standards 
as new systems and information are developed and become available.
  I also want to make it clear that this bill is not meant, in anyway, 
to interfere with victims' or their families' access to the judicial 
system and all available remedies when tragedies occur. Compliance with 
the provisions of H.R. 8408 will not adversely affect any existing 
remedies available to families of the Boeing victims and any other 
future victims under state or Federal statutory or common law. 
Families, who have already suffered tragic loss, must be able to seek 
compensation when their loved ones are injured or killed in aircraft 
crashes due to negligence or other wrongdoing.
  Many of the families of the Boeing 737 MAX crashes attended hearing 
after hearing as the House Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure conducted a comprehensive review of everything that went 
wrong with the 737 MAX. They were there to remind us of the human 
element--that we are here to work for the people. The bill does nothing 
to interfere with or affect the ability of the families of victims of 
air tragedies to hold industry accountable, now or in the future.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 8408, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________