[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 14694-14760]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           AVIATION INVESTMENT AND REVITALIZATION VISION ACT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time of 12:15 
having arrived, the Senate will proceed to consideration of S. 824, 
which the clerk will report by title.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 824) to reauthorize the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, and for other purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 824) to reauthorize the 
Federal Aviation Administration, and for other purposes, which had been 
reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 
with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause and inserting 
in lieu thereof the following:
  [Strike the part shown in black brackets and insert the part shown in 
italic.]

                                 S. 824

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

[[Page 14695]]



     [SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF TITLE 49.

       [(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Aviation 
     Investment and Revitalization Vision Act''.
       [(b) Amendment of Title 49.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or a repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of title 49, 
     United States Code.

     [SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       [The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

[Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of title 49.
[Sec. 2. Table of contents.

               [TITLE I--REAUTHORIZATIONS; FAA MANAGEMENT

[Sec. 101. Airport improvement program.
[Sec. 102. Airway facilities improvement program.
[Sec. 103. FAA operations.
[Sec. 104. Research, engineering, and development.
[Sec. 105. Other programs.
[Sec. 106. Reorganization of the Air Traffic Services Subcommittee.
[Sec. 107. Clarification of responsibilities of chief operating 
              officer.

                     [TITLE II--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

[Sec. 201. National capacity projects.
[Sec. 202. Categorical exclusions.
[Sec. 203. Alternatives analysis.
[Sec. 204. Increase in apportionment for, and flexibility of, noise 
              compatibility planning programs.
[Sec. 205. Secretary of Transportation to identify airport congestion-
              relief projects and forecast airport operations annually.
[Sec. 206. Design-build contracting.
[Sec. 207. Special rule for airport in Illinois.
[Sec. 208. Elimination of duplicative requirements.
[Sec. 209. Streamlining the passenger facility fee program.
[Sec. 210. Quarterly status reports.
[Sec. 211. Noise disclosure requirements.
[Sec. 212. Prohibition on requiring airports to provide rent-free space 
              for FAA or TSA.
[Sec. 213. Special rules for fiscal year 2004.

                [TITLE III--AIRLINE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT

[Sec. 301. Delay reduction meetings.
[Sec. 302. Reauthorization of essential air service program.
[Sec. 303. Small community air service development pilot program.
[Sec. 304. DOT study of competition and access problems at large and 
              medium hub airports.
[Sec. 305. Competition disclosure requirement for large and medium hub 
              airports.
[Title IV--Aviation Security
[Sec. 401. Study of effectiveness of transportation security system.
[Sec. 402. Aviation security capital fund.
[Sec. 403. Technical amendments related to security-related airport 
              development.
[Title V--Miscellaneous
[Sec. 501. Extension of war risk insurance authority.
[Sec. 502. Cost-sharing of air traffic modernization projects.
[Sec. 503. Counterfeit or fraudulently represented parts violations.
[Sec. 504. Clarifications to procurement authority.

               [TITLE I--REAUTHORIZATIONS; FAA MANAGEMENT

     [SEC. 101. AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       [(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 48103 is 
     amended--
       [(1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The'';
       [(2) by striking ``and'' in paragraph (4);
       [(3) by striking ``2003.'' in paragraph (5) and inserting 
     ``2003;'';
       [(4) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
       [``(6) $3,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       [``(7) $3,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       [``(8) $3,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''; and
       [(5) by adding at the end the following:
       [``(b) Administrative Expenses.--From the amounts 
     authorized by paragraphs (6) through (8) of subsection (a), 
     there shall be available for administrative expenses relating 
     to the airport improvement program, passenger facility fee 
     approval and oversight, national airport system planning, 
     airport standards development and enforcement, airport 
     certification, airport-related environmental activities 
     (including legal service), to remain available until 
     expended--
       [``(1) for fiscal year 2004, $69,737,000;
       [``(2) for fiscal year 2005, $71,816,000; and
       [``(3) for fiscal year 2006, $74,048,000.''.
       [(b) Obligational Authority.--Section 47104(c) is amended 
     by striking ``2003,'' and inserting ``2006,''.

     [SEC. 102. AIRWAY FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       [Section 48101(a) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       [``(6) $2,916,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.
       [``(7) $2,971,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
       [``(8) $3,030,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.

     [SEC. 103. FAA OPERATIONS.

       [Section 106(k)(1) is amended--
       [(1) by striking ``and'' in subparagraph (C);
       [(2) by striking ``2003.'' in subparagraph (D) and 
     inserting ``2003;''; and
       [(3) by adding at the end the following:
       [``(E) $7,591,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       [``(F) $7,732,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       [``(G) $7,889,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.

     [SEC. 104. RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT.

       [Section 48102 is amended--
       [(1) by striking paragraphs (1) through (8) of subsection 
     (a) and inserting:
       [``(1) For fiscal year 2004, $289,000,000.
       [``(2) For fiscal year 2005, $204,000,000.
       [``(3) For fiscal year 2006, $317,000,000.''; and
       [(2) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (g).

     [SEC. 105. OTHER PROGRAMS.

       [Section 106 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and 
     Reform Act for the 21st Century is amended--
       [(1) by striking ``2003'' in subsection (a)(1)(A) and 
     subsection (c)(2) and inserting ``2006''; and
       [(2) by striking ``2003,'' in subsection (a)(2) and 
     inserting ``2006,''.

     [SEC. 106. REORGANIZATION OF THE AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES 
                   SUBCOMMITTEE.

       [(a) In General.--Section 106 is amended--
       [(1) by redesignating subsections (q) and (r) as 
     subsections (r) and (s), respectively; and
       [(2) by inserting after subsection (p) the following:
       [``(q) Air Traffic Management Committee.--
       [``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary of Transportation 
     shall establish an advisory committee which shall be known as 
     the Air Traffic Services Committee (in this subsection 
     referred to as the `Committee').
       [``(2) Membership.--
       [``(A) Composition and appointment.--The Committee shall be 
     composed of--
       [``(i) the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, who shall serve as chair; and
       [``(ii) 4 members, to be appointed by the Secretary, after 
     consultation with the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
     Senate.
       [``(B) No federal officer or employee.--No member appointed 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) may serve as an officer or 
     employee of the United States Government while serving as a 
     member of the Committee.
       [``(C) Eligibility.--Members appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) shall--
       [``(i) have a fiduciary responsibility to represent the 
     public interest;
       [``(ii) be citizens of the United States; and
       [``(iii) be appointed without regard to political 
     affiliation and solely on the basis of their professional 
     experience and expertise in one or more of the following 
     areas:

       [``(I) Management of large service organizations.
       [``(II) Customer service.
       [``(III) Management of large procurements.
       [``(IV) Information and communications technology.
       [``(V) Organizational development.
       [``(VI) Labor relations.

     At least one of such members should have a background in 
     managing large organizations successfully. In the aggregate, 
     such members should collectively bring to bear expertise in 
     all of the areas described in subclauses (I) through (VI).
       [``(D) Prohibitions on members of committee.--No member 
     appointed under subparagraph (A)(ii) may--
       [``(i) have a pecuniary interest in, or own stock in or 
     bonds of, an aviation or aeronautical enterprise, except an 
     interest in a diversified mutual fund or an interest that is 
     exempt from the application of section 208 of title 18;
       [``(ii) engage in another business related to aviation or 
     aeronautics; or
       [``(iii) be a member of any organization that engages, as a 
     substantial part of its activities, in activities to 
     influence aviation-related legislation.
       [``(E) Claims against members.--
       [``(i) In general.--A member appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) shall have no personal liability under Federal law 
     with respect to any claim arising out of or resulting from an 
     act or omission by such member within the scope of service as 
     a member of the Air Traffic Services Committee.
       [``(ii) Effect on other law.--This subparagraph shall not 
     be construed--

       [``(I) to affect any other immunity or protection that may 
     be available to a member of the Committee under applicable 
     law with respect to such transactions;
       [``(II) to affect any other right or remedy against the 
     United States under applicable law; or
       [``(III) to limit or alter in any way the immunities that 
     are available under applicable law for Federal officers and 
     employees.

       [``(F) Ethical considerations.--
       [``(i) Financial disclosure.--During the entire period that 
     an individual appointed under subparagraph (A)(ii) is a 
     member of the Committee, such individual shall be treated as 
     serving as an officer or employee

[[Page 14696]]

     referred to in section 101(f) of the Ethics in Government Act 
     of 1978 for purposes of title I of such Act; except that 
     section 101(d) of such Act shall apply without regard to the 
     number of days of service in the position.
       [``(ii) Restrictions on post-employment.--For purposes of 
     section 207(c) of title 18, an individual appointed under 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be treated as an employee referred 
     to in section 207(c)(2)(A)(i) of such title during the entire 
     period the individual is a member of the Committee; except 
     that subsections (c)(2)(B) and (f) of section 207 of such 
     title shall not apply.
       [``(G) Terms for air traffic services committee members.--A 
     member appointed under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be 
     appointed for a term of 5 years.
       [``(H) Reappointment.--An individual may not be appointed 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) to more than two 5-year terms.
       [``(I) Vacancy.--Any vacancy on the Committee shall be 
     filled in the same manner as the original appointment. Any 
     member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the 
     expiration of the term for which the member's predecessor was 
     appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of that term.
       [``(J) Continuation in office.--A member whose term expires 
     shall continue to serve until the date on which the member's 
     successor takes office.
       [``(K) Removal.--Any member appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) may be removed for cause by the Secretary.
       [``(3) General responsibilities.--
       [``(A) Oversight.--The Committee shall oversee the 
     administration, management, conduct, direction, and 
     supervision of the air traffic control system.
       [``(B) Confidentiality.--The Committee shall ensure that 
     appropriate confidentiality is maintained in the exercise of 
     its duties.
       [``(4) Specific responsibilities.--The Committee shall have 
     the following specific responsibilities:
       [``(A) Strategic plans.--To review, approve, and monitor 
     the strategic plan for the air traffic control system, 
     including the establishment of--
       [``(i) a mission and objectives;
       [``(ii) standards of performance relative to such mission 
     and objectives, including safety, efficiency, and 
     productivity; and
       [``(iii) annual and long-range strategic plans.
       [``(B) Modernization and improvement.--To review and 
     approve--
       [``(i) methods to accelerate air traffic control 
     modernization and improvements in aviation safety related to 
     air traffic control; and
       [``(ii) procurements of air traffic control equipment in 
     excess of $100,000,000.
       [``(C) Operational plans.--To review the operational 
     functions of the air traffic control system, including--
       [``(i) plans for modernization of the air traffic control 
     system;
       [``(ii) plans for increasing productivity or implementing 
     cost-saving measures; and
       [``(iii) plans for training and education.
       [``(D) Management.--To--
       [``(i) review and approve the Administrator's appointment 
     of a Chief Operating Officer under section 106(s);
       [``(ii) review the Administrator's selection, evaluation, 
     and compensation of senior executives of the Administration 
     who have program management responsibility over significant 
     functions of the air traffic control system;
       [``(iii) review and approve the Administrator's plans for 
     any major reorganization of the Administration that would 
     impact on the management of the air traffic control system;
       [``(iv) review and approve the Administrator's cost 
     accounting and financial management structure and 
     technologies to help ensure efficient and cost-effective air 
     traffic control operation; and
       [``(v) review the performance and compensation of managers 
     responsible for major acquisition projects, including the 
     ability of the managers to meet schedule and budget targets.
       [``(E) Budget.--To--
       [``(i) review and approve the budget request of the 
     Administration related to the air traffic control system 
     prepared by the Administrator;
       [``(ii) submit such budget request to the Secretary; and
       [``(iii) ensure that the budget request supports the annual 
     and long-range strategic plans.
       [``(5) Congressional review of pre-omb budget request.--The 
     Secretary shall submit the budget request referred to in 
     paragraph (4)(E)(ii) for any fiscal year to the President who 
     shall transmit such request, without revision, to the 
     Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     Appropriations of the Senate, together with the President's 
     annual budget request for the Federal Aviation Administration 
     for such fiscal year.
       [``(6) Committee personnel matters.--
       [``(A) Compensation of members.--Each member of the 
     Committee, other than the chair and vice chair, shall be 
     compensated at a rate of $25,000 per year.
       [``(B) Staff.--The chairperson of the Committee may appoint 
     and terminate any personnel that may be necessary to enable 
     the Committee to perform its duties.
       [``(C) Procurement of temporary and intermittent 
     services.--The chairperson of the Committee may procure 
     temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of 
     title 5, United States Code.
       [``(7) Administrative matters.--
       [``(A) Powers of chair.--Except as otherwise provided by a 
     majority vote of the Committee, the powers of the chairperson 
     shall include--
       [``(i) establishing subcommittees;
       [``(ii) setting meeting places and times;
       [``(iii) establishing meeting agendas; and
       [``(iv) developing rules for the conduct of business.
       [``(B) Meetings.--The Committee shall meet at least 
     quarterly and at such other times as the chairperson 
     determines appropriate.
       [``(C) Quorum.--Three members of the Committee shall 
     constitute a quorum. A majority of members present and voting 
     shall be required for the Committee to take action.
       [``(D) Application of subsection (p) provisions.--The 
     following provisions of subsection (p) apply to the Committee 
     to the same extent as they apply to the Management Advisory 
     Council:
       [``(i) Paragraph (4)(C) (relating to access to documents 
     and staff).
       [``(ii) Paragraph (5) (relating to nonapplication of 
     Federal Advisory Committee Act).
       [``(iii) Paragraph (6)(G) (relating to travel and per 
     diem).
       [``(iv) Paragraph (6)(H) (relating to detail of personnel).
       [``(8) Reports.--
       [``(A) Annual.--The Committee shall each year report with 
     respect to the conduct of its responsibilities under this 
     title to the Administrator, the Management Advisory Council, 
     the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the 
     House of Representatives, and the Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation of the Senate.
       [``(B) Comptroller general's report.--Not later than April 
     30, 2003, the Comptroller General of the United States shall 
     transmit to the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
     Senate a report on the success of the Committee in improving 
     the performance of the air traffic control system.''.
       [(b) Conforming Amendments.--
       [(1) Subsection (p) of section 106 is amended--
       [(A) by striking ``18'' in paragraph (2) and inserting 
     ``13'';
       [(B) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon in 
     subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2);
       [(C) by striking ``Transportation; and'' in subparagraph 
     (D) of paragraph (2) and inserting ``Transportation.'';
       [(D) by striking subparagraph (E) of paragraph (2);
       [(E) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       [``(3) No federal officer or employee.--No member appointed 
     under paragraph (2)(C) may serve as an officer or employee of 
     the United States Government while serving as a member of the 
     Council.'';
       [(F) by striking subparagraphs (C), (D), (H), and (I) of 
     paragraph (6) and redesignating subparagraphs (E), (F), (G), 
     (J), (K), and (L) as subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), 
     and (H), respectively; and
       [(G) by striking paragraphs (7) and (8).
       [(2) Section 106(s) (as redesignated by subsection (a) of 
     this section) is amended--
       [(A) by striking ``Air Traffic Services Subcommittee of the 
     Aviation Management Advisory Council.'' and inserting ``Air 
     Traffic Services Committee.'' in paragraphs (1)(A) and 
     (2)(A); and
       [(B) by striking ``Air Traffic Services Subcommittee of the 
     Aviation Management Advisory Council,'' and inserting ``Air 
     Traffic Services Committee,'' in paragraph (3).
       [(3) Section 106 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       [``(t) Air Traffic Control System Defined.--In this 
     section, the term `air traffic control system' has the 
     meaning such term has under section 40102(a).''.
       [(c) Transition from Air Traffic Service Subcommittee to 
     Air Traffic Service Committee.--
       [(1) Termination of management advisory council 
     membership.--Effective on the day after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, any member of the Management Advisory Council 
     appointed under section 106(p)(2)(E) of title 49, United 
     States Code, (as such section was in effect on the day before 
     such date of enactment) who is a member of the Council on 
     such date of enactment shall cease to be a member of the 
     Council.
       [(2) Commencement of membership on Air Traffic Services 
     Committee.--Effective on the day after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, any member of the Management Advisory Council 
     whose membership is terminated by paragraph (1) shall become 
     a member of the Air Traffic Services Committee as provided by 
     section 106(q)(2)(G) of title 49, United States Code, to 
     serve for the remainder of the term to which that member was 
     appointed to the Council.

[[Page 14697]]



     [SEC. 107. CLARIFICATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF CHIEF 
                   OPERATING OFFICER.

       [Section 106(s) (as redesignated by section 106(a)(1) of 
     this Act) is amended--
       [(1) by striking ``Transportation and Congress'' in 
     paragraph (4) and inserting ``Transportation, the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives, and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate,'';
       [(2) by striking ``develop a strategic plan of the 
     Administration for the air traffic control system, including 
     the establishment of--''
     in paragraph (5)(A) and inserting ``implement the strategic 
     plan of the Administration for the air traffic control system 
     in order to further--'';
       [(3) by striking ``To review the operational functions of 
     the Administration,'' in paragraph (5)(B) and inserting ``To 
     oversee the day-to-day operational functions of the 
     Administration for air traffic control,'';
       [(4) by striking ``system prepared by the Administrator;'' 
     in paragraph (5)(C)(i) and inserting ``system;'';
       [(5) by striking ``Administrator and the Secretary of 
     Transportation;'' in paragraph (5)(C)(ii) and inserting 
     ``Administrator;''; and
       [(6) by striking paragraph (5)(C)(iii) and inserting the 
     following:
       [``(iii) ensure that the budget request supports the 
     agency's annual and long-range strategic plans for air 
     traffic control services.''.

                     [TITLE II--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

     [SEC. 201. NATIONAL CAPACITY PROJECTS.

       [(a) In General.--Part B of subtitle VII is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

               [``CHAPTER 477. NATIONAL CAPACITY PROJECTS

[``47701. Capacity enhancement
[``47702. Designation of national capacity projects
[``47703. Expedited coordinated environmental review process; project 
              coordinators and environment impact teams.
[``47704. Compatible land use initiative for national capacity projects
[``47705. Air traffic procedures at national capacity projects
[``47706. Pilot program for environmental review at national capacity 
              projects
[``47707. Definitions

     [``Sec. 47701. Capacity enhancement

       [``(a) In General.--Within 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Aviation Investment and Revitalization 
     Vision Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall identify 
     those airports among the 31 airports covered by the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's Airport Capacity Benchmark Report 
     2001 with delays that significantly affect the national air 
     transportation system.
       [``(b) Task Force; Capacity Enhancement Study.--
       [``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall direct any airport 
     identified by the Secretary under subsection (a) that is not 
     engaged in a runway expansion process and has not initiated a 
     capacity enhancement study (or similar capacity assessment) 
     since 1996--
       [``(A) to establish a delay reduction task force to study 
     means of increasing capacity at the airport, including air 
     traffic, airline scheduling, and airfield expansion 
     alternatives; or
       [``(B) to conduct a capacity enhancement study.
       [``(2) Scope.--The scope of the study shall be determined 
     by the airport and the Federal Aviation Administration, and 
     where appropriate shall consider regional capacity solutions.
       [``(3) Recommendations submitted to secretary.--
       [``(A) Task force.--A task force established under this 
     subsection shall submit a report containing its findings and 
     conclusions, together with any recommendations for capacity 
     enhancement at the airport, to the Secretary within 9 months 
     after the task force is established.
       [``(B) CES.--A capacity enhancement study conducted under 
     this subsection shall be submitted, together with its 
     findings and conclusions, to the Secretary as soon as the 
     study is completed.
       [``(c) Runway Expansion and Reconfiguration.--If the report 
     or study submitted under subsection (b)(3) includes a 
     recommendation for the construction or reconfiguration of 
     runways at the airport, then the Secretary and the airport 
     shall complete the planning and environmental review process 
     within 5 years after report or study is submitted to the 
     Secretary. The Secretary may extend the 5-year deadline under 
     this subsection for up to 1 year if the Secretary determines 
     that such an extension is necessary and in the public 
     interest. The Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of any such extension.
       [``(d) Airports That Decline To Undertake Expansion 
     Projects.--
       [``(1) In general.--If an airport at which the construction 
     or reconfiguration of runways is recommended does not take 
     action to initiate a planning and environmental assessment 
     process for the construction or reconfiguration of those 
     runways within 30 days after the date on which the report or 
     study is submitted to the Secretary, then--
       [``(A) the airport shall be ineligible for planning and 
     other expansion funds under subchapter I of chapter 471, 
     notwithstanding any provision of that subchapter to the 
     contrary;
       [``(B) no passenger facility fee may be approved at that 
     airport during the 5-year period beginning 30 days after the 
     date on which the report or study is submitted to the 
     Secretary, for--
       [``(i) projects that, but for subparagraph (A), could have 
     been funded under chapter 471; or
       [``(ii) any project other than on-airport airfield-side 
     capacity or safety-related projects.
       [``(2) Safety-related and environmental projects 
     excepted.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to the use of funds 
     for safety-related, security, or environment projects.
       [``(e) Airports That Take Action.--The Secretary shall take 
     all actions possible to expedite funding and provide options 
     for funding to any airport undertaking runway construction or 
     reconfiguration projects in response to recommendations by 
     its task force.

     [``Sec. 47702. Designation of national capacity projects

       [``(a) In General.--In response to a petition from an 
     airport sponsor, or in the case of an airport on the list of 
     airports covered by the Federal Aviation Administration's 
     Airport Capacity Benchmarks study, the Secretary of 
     Transportation may designate an airport development project 
     as a national capacity project if the Secretary determines 
     that the project to be designated will significantly enhance 
     the capacity of the national air transportation system.
       [``(b) Designation To Remain in Effect for 5 Years.--The 
     designation of a project as a national capacity project under 
     paragraph (1) shall remain in effect for 5 years. The 
     Secretary may extend the 5-year period for up to 2 additional 
     years upon request if the Secretary finds that substantial 
     progress is being made toward completion of the project.

     [``Sec. 47703. Expedited coordinated environmental review 
       process; project coordinators and environment impact teams.

       [``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     implement an expedited coordinated environmental review 
     process for national capacity projects that--
       [``(1) provides for better coordination among the Federal, 
     regional, State, and local agencies concerned with the 
     preparation of environmental impact statements or 
     environmental assessments under the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
       [``(2) provides for an expedited and coordinated process in 
     the conduct of environmental reviews that ensures that, where 
     appropriate, the reviews are done concurrently and not 
     consecutively; and
       [``(3) provides for a date certain for completing all 
     environmental reviews.
       [``(b) High Priority for Airport Environmental Reviews.--
     Each department and agency of the United States Government 
     with jurisdiction over environmental reviews shall accord any 
     such review involving a national capacity project the highest 
     possible priority and conduct the review expeditiously. If 
     the Secretary finds that any such department or agency is not 
     complying with the requirements of this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure immediately.
       [``(c) Project Coordinators; EIS Teams.--
       [``(1) Designation.--For each project designated by the 
     Secretary as a national capacity project under subsection (a) 
     for which an environmental impact statement or environmental 
     assessment must be filed, the Secretary shall--
       [``(A) designate a project coordinator within the 
     Department of Transportation; and
       [``(B) establish an environmental impact team within the 
     Department.
       [``(2) Function.--The project coordinator and the 
     environmental impact team shall--
       [``(A) coordinate the activities of all Federal, State, and 
     local agencies involved in the project;
       [``(B) to the extent possible, working with Federal, State 
     and local officials, reduce and eliminate duplicative and 
     overlapping Federal, State, and local permit requirements;
       [``(C) to the extent possible, eliminate duplicate Federal, 
     State, and local environmental review procedures; and
       [``(D) provide direction for compliance with all applicable 
     Federal, State, and local environmental requirements for the 
     project.

     [``Sec. 47704. Compatible land use initiative for national 
       capacity projects

       [``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     make grants under chapter 471 to States and units of local 
     government for land use compatibility plans directly related 
     to national capacity projects for the purposes of making the 
     use of land areas around the airport compatible with aircraft 
     operations if the land use plan or project meets the 
     requirements of this section.

[[Page 14698]]

       [``(b) Conditions.--A land use plan or project meets the 
     requirements of this section if it--
       [``(1) is sponsored by the public agency that has the 
     authority to plan and adopt land use control measures, 
     including zoning, in the planning area in and around the 
     airport and that agency provides written assurances to the 
     Secretary that it will work with the affected airport to 
     identify and adopt such measures; eddie
       [``(2) does not duplicate, and is not inconsistent with, an 
     airport noise compatibility program prepared by an airport 
     owner or operator under chapter 475 or with other planning 
     carried out by the airport.
       [``(3) is subject to an agreement between the public agency 
     sponsor and the airport owner or operator that the 
     development of the land use compatibility plan will be done 
     cooperatively;
       [``(4) is consistent with the airport operation and 
     planning, including the use of any noise exposure contours on 
     which the land use compatibility planning or project is 
     based; and
       [``(5) has been approved jointly by the airport owner or 
     operator and the public agency sponsor.
       [``(c) Assurances from Sponsors.-- The Secretary may 
     require the airport sponsor, public agency, or other entity 
     to which a grant may be awarded under this section to provide 
     such additional assurances, progress reports, and other 
     information as the Secretary determines to be necessary to 
     carry out this section.

     [``Sec. 47705. Air traffic procedures at national capacity 
       projects

       [``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     consider prescribing flight procedures to avoid or minimize 
     potentially significant adverse noise impacts of the project 
     during the environmental planning process for a national 
     capacity project that involves the construction of new 
     runways or the reconfiguration of existing runways. If the 
     Secretary determines that noise mitigation flight procedures 
     are consistent with safe and efficient use of the navigable 
     airspace, then, at the request of the airport sponsor, the 
     Administrator may, in a manner consistent with applicable 
     Federal law, commit to prescribing such procedures in any 
     record of decision approving the project.
       [``(b) Modification.--Notwithstanding any commitment by the 
     Secretary under subsection (a), the Secretary may initiate 
     changes to such procedures if necessary to maintain safety 
     and efficiency in light of new information or changed 
     circumstances.

     [``Sec. 47706. Pilot program for environmental review at 
       national capacity projects

       [``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     initiate a 5-year pilot program funded by airport sponsors--
       [``(1) to hire additional fulltime-equivalent environmental 
     specialists and attorneys, or
       [``(2) to obtain the services of such specialists and 
     attorneys from outside the United States Government, to 
     assist in the provision of an appropriate nationwide level of 
     staffing for planning and environmental review of runway 
     development projects for national capacity projects at the 
     Federal Aviation Administration.
       [``(b) Eligible Participants.--Participation in the pilot 
     program shall be available, on a voluntary basis, to airports 
     with an annual passenger enplanement of not less than 3 
     million passengers. The Secretary shall specify the minimum 
     contribution necessary to qualify for participation in the 
     pilot program, which shall be not less than the amount 
     necessary to compensate the Department of Transportation for 
     the expense of a fulltime equivalent environmental specialist 
     and attorney qualified at the GS-14 equivalent level.
       [``(c) Retention of Revenues.--The salaries and expenses 
     account of the Federal Aviation Administration shall retain 
     as an offsetting collection such sums as may be necessary 
     from such proceeds for the costs of developing and 
     implementing the program required by subsection (a). Such 
     offsetting collections shall be available for obligation 
     subject to the terms and conditions of the receiving 
     appropriations account, and shall be deposited in such 
     accounts on a quarterly basis. Such offsetting collections 
     are authorized to remain available until expended for such 
     purpose.

     [``Sec. 47707. Definitions

       [``In this chapter:
       [``(1) National capacity project.--The term `national 
     capacity project' means a project designated by the Secretary 
     under section 44702.
       [``(2) Other terms.--The definitions in section 47102 apply 
     to any terms used in this chapter that are defined in that 
     section.''.
       [(b) Additional Staff Authorized.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation is authorized to hire additional environmental 
     specialists and attorneys needed to process environmental 
     impact statements in connection with airport construction 
     projects and to serve as project coordinators and 
     environmental impact team members under section 47703 of 
     title 49, United States Code.
       [(c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for subtitle VII is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 475 
     the following:

      [``477. National capacity projects.......................47701''.

     [SEC. 202. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS.

       [Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall report to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on 
     the categorical exclusions currently recognized and provide a 
     list of proposed additional categorical exclusions from the 
     requirement that an environmental assessment or an 
     environmental impact statement be prepared under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for 
     projects at airports. In determining the list of additional 
     proposed categorical exclusions, the Secretary shall include 
     such other projects as the Secretary determines should be 
     categorically excluded in order to ensure that Department of 
     Transportation environmental staff resources are not diverted 
     to lower priority tasks and are available to expedite the 
     environmental reviews of airport capacity enhancement 
     projects at congested airports.

     [SEC. 203. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.

       [(a) Notice Requirement.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     date on which the Secretary of Transportation identifies an 
     airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport 
     under section 47171(c) of title 49, United States Code, the 
     Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register 
     requesting comments on whether reasonable alternatives exist 
     to the project.
       [(b) Certain Reasonable Alternatives Defined.--For purposes 
     of this section, an alternative shall be considered 
     reasonable if--
       [(1) the alternative does not create an unreasonable burden 
     on interstate commerce, the national aviation system, or the 
     navigable airspace;
       [(2) the alternative is not inconsistent with maintaining 
     the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace;
       [(3) the alternative does not conflict with a law or 
     regulation of the United States;
       [(4) the alternative would result in at least the same 
     reduction in congestion at the airport or in the national 
     aviation system as the proposed project; and
       [(5) in any case in which the alternative is a proposed 
     construction project at an airport other than a congested 
     airport, firm commitments to provide such alternate airport 
     capacity exists, and the Secretary determines that such 
     alternate airport capacity will be available no later than 4 
     years after the date of the Secretary's determination under 
     this section.
       [(c) Comment Period.--The Secretary shall provide a period 
     of 60 days for comments on a project identified by the 
     Secretary under this section after the date of publication of 
     notice with respect to the project.
       [(d) Determination of Existence of Reasonable 
     Alternatives.--Not later than 90 days after the last day of a 
     comment period established under subsection (c) for a 
     project, the Secretary shall determine whether reasonable 
     alternatives exist to the project. The determination shall be 
     binding on all persons, including Federal and State agencies, 
     acting under or applying Federal laws when considering the 
     availability of alternatives to the project.
       [(e) Limitation on Applicability.--This section does not 
     apply to--
       [(1) any alternatives analysis required under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et. seq.); 
     or
       [(2) a project at an airport if the airport sponsor 
     requests, in writing, to the Secretary that this section not 
     apply to the project.

     [SEC. 204. INCREASE IN APPORTIONMENT FOR, AND FLEXIBILITY OF, 
                   NOISE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING PROGRAMS.

       [Section 47117(e)(1)(A) is amended--
       [(1) by striking the first sentence and inserting: ``At 
     least 35 percent for grants for airport noise compatibility 
     planning under section 47505(a)(2) for a national capacity 
     project, for carrying out noise compatibility programs under 
     section 47504(c) of this title, and for noise mitigation 
     projects approved in an environmental record of decision for 
     an airport development project designated as a national 
     capacity project under section 47702.''; and
       [(2) by striking ``or not such 34 percent requirement'' in 
     the second sentence and inserting ``the funding level 
     required by the preceding sentence''.

     [SEC. 205. SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION TO IDENTIFY AIRPORT 
                   CONGESTION-RELIEF PROJECTS AND FORECAST AIRPORT 
                   OPERATIONS ANNUALLY.

       [(a) Identification of Projects.--
       [(1) In general.--Within 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     provide--
       [(A) a list of planned air traffic and airport-capacity 
     projects at congested Airport Capacity Benchmark airports the 
     completion of which will substantially relieve congestion at 
     those airports; and
       [(B) a list of options for expanding capacity at the 8 
     airports on the list at which the most severe delays are 
     occurring, to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, and to the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Secretary shall 
     provide updated lists to those Committees 2

[[Page 14699]]

     years after the date of enactment of this Act.
       [(2) Delisting of projects.--The Secretary shall remove a 
     project from the list provided to the Committees under 
     paragraph (1) upon the request, in writing, of an airport 
     operator if the operator states in the request that 
     construction of the project will not be completed within 10 
     years from the date of the request.

     [SEC. 206. DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTING.

       [(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 471 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     [``Sec.  47138. Design-build contracting

       [``(a) In General.--The Administrator may approve an 
     application of an airport sponsor under this section to 
     authorize the airport sponsor to award a design-build 
     contract using a selection process permitted under applicable 
     State or local law if--
       [``(1) the Administrator approves the application using 
     criteria established by the Administrator;
       [``(2) the design-build contract is in a form that is 
     approved by the Administrator;
       [``(3) the Administrator is satisfied that the contract 
     will be executed pursuant to competitive procedures and 
     contains a schematic design adequate for the Administrator to 
     approve the grant;
       [``(4) use of a design-build contract will be cost 
     effective and expedite the project;
       [``(5) the Administrator is satisfied that there will be no 
     conflict of interest; and
       [``(6) the Administrator is satisfied that the selection 
     process will be as open, fair, and objective as the 
     competitive bid system and that at least three or more bids 
     will be submitted for each project under the selection 
     process.
       [``(b) Reimbursement of Costs.--The Administrator may 
     reimburse an airport sponsor for design and construction 
     costs incurred before a grant is made pursuant to this 
     section if the project is approved by the Administrator in 
     advance and is carried out in accordance with all 
     administrative and statutory requirements that would have 
     been applicable under this chapter 471, if the project were 
     carried out after a grant agreement had been executed.
       [``(c) Design-Build Contract Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `design-build contract' means an agreement that provides 
     for both design and construction of a project by a 
     contractor.''.
       [(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for 
     chapter 471 is amended by inserting after the item relating 
     to section 47137 the following:

[``47138. Design-build contracting.''.

     [SEC. 207. SPECIAL RULE FOR AIRPORT IN ILLINOIS.

       [(a) In General.--Nothing in this title shall be construed 
     to preclude the application of any provision of this Act to 
     the State of Illinois or any other sponsor of a new airport 
     proposed to be constructed in the State of Illinois.
       [(b) Authority of the Governor.--Nothing in this title 
     shall be construed to preempt the authority of the Governor 
     of the State of Illinois as of August 1, 2001, to approve or 
     disapprove airport development projects.

     [SEC. 208. ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATIVE REQUIREMENTS.

       [(a) In General.--Section 47106(c)(1) is amended--
       [(1) by inserting ``and'' after ``project;'' in 
     subparagraph (A)(ii);
       [(2) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       [(3) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
       [(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 47106(c) of such title 
     is amended--
       [(1) by striking paragraph (4);
       [(2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); and
       [(3) by striking ``(1)(C)'' in paragraph (4), as 
     redesignated, and inserting ``(1)(B)''.

     [SEC. 209. STREAMLINING THE PASSENGER FACILITY FEE PROGRAM.

       [Section 40117 is amended--
       [(1) by striking from ``finds--'' in paragraph (4) of 
     subsection (b) through the end of that paragraph and 
     inserting ``finds that the project cannot be paid for from 
     funds reasonably expected to be available for the programs 
     referred to in section 48103.'';
       [(2) by adding at the end of subsection (c)(2) the 
     following:
       [``(E) The agency will include in its application or notice 
     submitted under subsection (1) copies of all certifications 
     of agreement or disagreement received under subparagraph (D).
       [``(F) For the purpose of this section, an eligible agency 
     providing notice and consultation to an air carrier and 
     foreign air carrier is deemed to have satisfied this 
     requirement if it limits such notices and consultations to 
     air carriers and foreign air carriers that have a significant 
     business interest on the airport. In developing regulations 
     to implement this provision, the Secretary shall consider a 
     significant business interest to be defined as an air carrier 
     or foreign air carrier that has no less than 1.0 percent of 
     boardings at the airport in the prior calendar year, except 
     that no air carrier or foreign air carrier may be considered 
     excluded under this section if it has at least 25,000 
     boardings at the airport in the prior calendar year, or if it 
     operates scheduled service, without regard to such percentage 
     requirements.'';
       [(3) by redesignating paragraph (3) of subsection (c) as 
     paragraph (4) and inserting after paragraph (2) the 
     following:
       [``(3) Before submitting an application, the eligible 
     agency must provide reasonable notice and an opportunity for 
     public comment. The Secretary shall prescribe regulations 
     that define reasonable notice and provide for at least--
       [``(A) a requirement that the eligible agency provide 
     public notice of intent to collect a passenger facility fee 
     so as to inform those interested persons and agencies who may 
     be affected, including--
       [``(i) publication in local newspapers of general 
     circulation;
       [``(ii) publication in other local media; and
       [``(iii) posting the notice on the agency's website;
       [``(B) a requirement for submission of public comments no 
     sooner than 30 days after publishing of the notice and not 
     later than 45 days after publication; and
       [``(C) a requirement that the agency include in its 
     application or notice submitted under paragraph (1) copies of 
     all comments received under subparagraph (B).'';
       [(4) by striking ``shall'' in the first sentence of 
     paragraph (4), as redesignated, of subsection (c) and 
     inserting ``may''; and
       [(5) by adding at the end the following:
       [``(l) Pilot Program for Passenger Facility Fee 
     Authorizations at Small Airports.--
       [``(1) There is established a pilot program for the 
     Secretary to test alternative procedures for authorizing 
     small airports to impose passenger facility fees. An eligible 
     agency may impose a passenger facility fee at a non-hub 
     airport (as defined in section 47102 of this title) that it 
     controls for use on eligible airport-related projects at that 
     airport, in accordance with the provisions of this 
     subsection. These procedures shall be in lieu of the 
     procedures otherwise specified in this section.
       [``(2) The eligible agency must provide reasonable notice 
     and an opportunity for consultation to air carriers and 
     foreign air carriers in accordance with subsection (c)(2), 
     and must provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public 
     comment in accordance with subsection (c)(3).
       [``(3) The eligible agency must submit to the Secretary a 
     notice of intention to impose a passenger facility fee, which 
     notice shall include--
       [``(A) information that the Secretary may require by 
     regulation on each project for which authority to impose a 
     passenger facility charge is sought;
       [``(B) the amount of revenue from passenger facility 
     charges that is proposed to be collected for each project; 
     and
       [``(C) the level of the passenger facility charge that is 
     proposed.
       [``(4) The Secretary shall acknowledge receipt of the 
     notice and indicate any objection to the imposition of a 
     passenger facility fee for any project identified in the 
     notice within 30 days after receipt of the eligible agency's 
     notice.
       [``(5) Unless the Secretary objects within 30 days after 
     receipt of the eligible agency's notice, the eligible agency 
     is authorized to impose a passenger facility fee in 
     accordance with the terms of its notice.
       [``(6) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 
     of this subsection, the Secretary shall propose such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out this subsection.
       [``(7) The authority granted under this subsection shall 
     expire three years after the issuance of the regulation 
     required by paragraph (6).
       [``(8) An acknowledgement issued under paragraph (4) shall 
     not be considered an order of the Secretary issued under 
     section 46110 of this title.''.

     [SEC. 210. QUARTERLY STATUS REPORTS.

       [Beginning with the second calendar quarter ending after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall provide quarterly status reports to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on the status of construction of each major 
     runway project undertaken at the largest 40 commercial 
     airports in terms of annual enplanements.

     [SEC. 211. NOISE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

       [(a) Definitions.--Section 47501 is amended by adding at 
     the end--
       [``(3) `Federal agency' means any department, agency, 
     corporation, or other establishment or instrumentality of the 
     executive branch of the Federal Government, and includes the 
     Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home 
     Loan Mortgage Corporation.
       [``(4) `Federal entity for lending regulation' means the 
     Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Comptroller of the 
     Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the National 
     Credit Union Administration, and the Farm Credit 
     Administration, and with respect to a particular regulated 
     lending institution means the entity primarily responsible 
     for the supervision of the institution.
       [``(5) `Federal agency lender' means a Federal agency that 
     makes direct loans secured

[[Page 14700]]

     by improved real estate or a mobile home, to the extent such 
     agency acts in such capacity.
       [``(6) `residential real estate' means real estate upon 
     which a residential dwelling is located.
       [``(7) `noise exposure map' means a noise exposure map that 
     complies with section 47503 of this title and part 150 of 
     title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
       [``(8) `regulated lending institution' means any bank, 
     savings and loan association, credit union, farm credit bank, 
     Federal land bank association, production credit association, 
     or similar institution subject to the supervision of a 
     Federal entity for lending regulation.''.
       [(b) Noise Exposure Maps.--Section 47503(b) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       [``(b) Revised Maps.--If, in an area surrounding an 
     airport, a change in the operation of the airport would 
     establish a substantial new noncompatible use, or would 
     significantly reduce noise over existing noncompatible uses, 
     beyond the forecast year, the airport operator shall submit a 
     revised noise exposure map to the Secretary showing the new 
     noncompatible use or noise reduction.''.
       [(c) Notification of Noise Exposure.--Chapter 457 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     [``Sec. 47511. Notification of noise exposure

       [``(a) Noise Exposure Map.--An airport operator shall make 
     available to lending institutions, upon request, the most 
     recent noise exposure map submitted under section 47503 of 
     this title.
       [``(b) List of Airports.--The Secretary shall maintain a 
     list of airports for which the airport operators have 
     submitted a noise exposure map under section 47503 of this 
     title.
       [``(c) Regulated Lending Institutions.--Each Federal entity 
     for lending regulation (after consultation and coordination 
     with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council) 
     shall direct by regulation that a regulated lending 
     institution may not make, increase, extend or renew any loan 
     secured by residential real estate or a mobile home that is 
     located or to be located in the vicinity of an airport on the 
     Secretary's list described in subsection (b), unless the loan 
     applicant's purchase agreement for the residential real 
     estate or mobile home provides notice to the purchaser (or 
     satisfactory assurances are provided that the seller has 
     provided written notice to the purchaser prior to the 
     purchaser's signing of the purchase agreement) that the 
     property is within the area of the noise contours on a noise 
     exposure map submitted under section 47503 of this chapter. 
     The notice to the purchaser shall be acknowledged by the 
     purchaser's signing of the purchase agreement or other 
     notification document and the regulated lending institution 
     shall retain a record of the receipt of the notice by the 
     purchaser.
       [``(d) Federal Agency Lenders.--Each Federal agency lender 
     shall by regulation require notification in the manner 
     provided in subsection (c) with respect to any loan that is 
     made by the Federal agency lender and secured by residential 
     real estate or a mobile home located or to be located in the 
     vicinity of an airport on the Secretary's list described in 
     subsection (b).
       [``(e) Contents of Notice.--The notice required under this 
     section shall disclose--
       [``(1) that the property is located within the noise 
     contours depicted on the most recent noise exposure map 
     submitted by the airport operator according to section 47503 
     of this chapter, and is subject to aircraft noise exposure; 
     and
       [``(2) the name and telephone number of the airport where 
     the purchaser may obtain more information on the aircraft 
     noise exposure.''.

     [SEC. 212. PROHIBITION ON REQUIRING AIRPORTS TO PROVIDE RENT-
                   FREE SPACE FOR FAA OR TSA.

       [(a) In General.--Chapter 401 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     [``Sec.  40129. Prohibition on rent-free space requirements 
       for FAA or TSA

       [``(a) In General.--Neither the Secretary of Transportation 
     nor the Secretary of Homeland Security may require airport 
     sponsors to provide building construction, maintenance, 
     utilities and expenses, or space in airport sponsor-owned 
     buildings to the Federal Aviation Administration or the 
     Transportation Security Administration without cost for 
     services relating to air traffic control, air navigation, 
     aviation security, or weather reporting.
       [``(b) Negotiated Agreements.--Subsection (a) does not 
     prohibit--
       [``(1) the negotiation of agreements between either 
     Secretary and an airport sponsor to provide building 
     construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space 
     in airport sponsor-owned buildings to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or the Transportation Security Administration 
     without cost or at below-market rates; or
       [``(2) either Secretary from requiring airport sponsors to 
     provide land without cost to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration for air traffic control facilities or space 
     without cost to the Transportation Security Administration 
     for necessary security checkpoints.''.
       [(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for 
     chapter 401 is amended by adding at the end the following:

[``40129. Prohibition on rent-free space requirements for FAA or 
              TSA.''.

     [SEC. 213. SPECIAL RULES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004.

       [(a) Apportionment to certain airports with declining 
     boardings.--
       [(1) In general.--For fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of 
     Transportation may apportion funds under section 47114 of 
     title 49, United States Code, to the sponsor of an airport 
     described in paragraph (2) in an amount equal to the amount 
     apportioned to that airport under that section for fiscal 
     year 2002, notwithstanding any provision of section 47114 to 
     the contrary.
       [(2) Airports to which paragraph (1) applies.--Paragraph 
     (1) applies to any airport determined by the Secretary to 
     have had--
       [(A) less than one-half of 1 percent of the total United 
     States passenger boardings (as defined in section 47102(10) 
     of title 49, United States Code) for the calendar year used 
     for determining apportionments under section 47114 for fiscal 
     year 2004;
       [(B) less than 10,000 passenger boardings in calendar year 
     2002; and
       [(C) 10,000 or more passenger boardings in calendar year 
     2000.
       [(b) Temporary Increase in Government Share of AIP Project 
     Costs at Certain Airports.--Notwithstanding section 
     47109(a)(3) of title 49, United States Code, the Government's 
     share of allowable project costs for a grant made in fiscal 
     year 2004 under chapter 471 of that title to an airport 
     described in that section shall be 95 percent.

                [TITLE III--AIRLINE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT

     [SEC. 301. DELAY REDUCTION MEETINGS.

       [(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 417 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     [``Sec. 41723. Delay reduction actions

       [``(a) Delay Reduction Meetings.--
       [``(1) Scheduling reduction meetings.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation may request that air carriers meet with the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to 
     discuss flight reductions at severely congested airports to 
     reduce overscheduling and flight delays during hours of peak 
     operation if--
       [``(A) the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration determines that it is necessary to convene 
     such a meeting; and
       [``(B) the Secretary determines that the meeting is 
     necessary to meet a serious transportation need or achieve an 
     important public benefit.
       [``(2) Meeting conditions.--Any meeting under paragraph 
     (1)--
       [``(A) shall be chaired by the Administrator;
       [``(B) shall be open to all scheduled air carriers; and
       [``(C) shall be limited to discussions involving the 
     airports and time periods described in the Administrator's 
     determination.
       [``(3) Flight reduction targets.--Before any such meeting 
     is held, the Administrator shall establish flight reduction 
     targets for the meeting and notify the attending air carriers 
     of those targets not less than 48 hours before the meeting.
       [``(4) Delay reduction offers.--An air carrier attending 
     the meeting shall make any delay reduction offer to the 
     Administrator rather than to another carrier.
       [``(5) Transcript.--The Administrator shall ensure that a 
     transcript of the meeting is kept and made available to the 
     public not later than 3 business days after the conclusion of 
     the meeting.
       [``(b) Stormy Weather Agreements Limited Exemption.--
       [``(1) In general.--The Secretary may establish a program 
     to authorize by order discussions and agreements between 2 or 
     more air carriers for the purpose of reducing flight delays 
     during periods of inclement weather.
       [``(2) Requirements.--An authorization issued under 
     paragraph (1)--
       [``(A) may only be issued by the Secretary after a 
     determination by the Federal Aviation Administration that 
     inclement weather is likely to adversely and directly affect 
     capacity at an airport for a period of at least 3 hours;
       [``(B) shall apply only to discussions and agreements 
     concerning flights directly affected by the inclement 
     weather; and
       [``(C) shall remain in effect for a period of 24 hours.
       [``(3) Procedure.--The Secretary shall establish procedures 
     within 30 days after such date of enactment for--
       [``(A) filing requests for an authorization under paragraph 
     (1);
       [``(B) participation under paragraph (5) by representatives 
     of the Department of Transportation in any meetings or 
     discussions held pursuant to such an order; and
       [``(C) the determination by the Federal Aviation 
     Administration about the impact of inclement weather.
       [``(4) Copy of participation request filed with 
     secretary.--Before an air carrier may request an order under 
     paragraph (1), it shall file a request with the Secretary, in 
     such

[[Page 14701]]

     form and manner as the Secretary may prescribe, to 
     participate in the program established under paragraph (1).
       [``(5) DOT Participation.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     the Department is represented at any meetings authorized 
     under this subsection.
       [``(c) Exemption Authorized.--When the Secretary finds that 
     it is required by the public interest, the Secretary, as part 
     of an order issued under subsection (b)(1), shall exempt a 
     person affected by the order from the antitrust laws to the 
     extent necessary to allow the person to proceed with the 
     activities approved in the order.
       [``(d) Antitrust Laws Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `antitrust laws' has the meaning given that term in the first 
     section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12).
       [``(e) Sunset.--The authority of the Secretary to issue an 
     order under subsection (b)(1) of this section expires at the 
     end of the 2-year period that begins 45 days after the date 
     of enactment of the Aviation Investment and Revitalization 
     Vision Act. The Secretary may extend the 2-year Period for an 
     additional 2 years if the Secretary determines that such an 
     extension is necessary and in the public interest. The 
     Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of any such extension.''.
       [(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for 
     chapter 417 is amended by inserting after the item relating 
     to section 41722 the following new item:

[``41723. Delay reduction actions.''.

     [SEC. 302. REAUTHORIZATION OF ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM.

       [There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
     of Transportation to carry out the essential air service 
     program under subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, 
     United States Code, $113,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 
     2004, 2005, and 2006.

     [SEC. 303. SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PILOT 
                   PROGRAM.

       [(a) 3-year Extension.--Section 41743(e)(2) of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       [(1) by striking ``There is'' and inserting ``There are'';
       [(2) by striking ``2001 and'' and inserting ``2001,''; and
       [(3) by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``2003, and 
     $27,500,000 for the 3 fiscal year period beginning with 
     fiscal year 2004.''.
       [(b) Additional Communities.--Section 41743(c)(4) of such 
     title is amended by striking ``program.'' and 
     inserting``program each year. No community, consortia of 
     communities, or combination thereof may participate in the 
     program twice.''.

     [SEC. 304. DOT STUDY OF COMPETITION AND ACCESS PROBLEMS AT 
                   LARGE AND MEDIUM HUB AIRPORTS.

       [(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     study competition and airline access problems at hub airports 
     (as defined in section 41731(a)(3)) of title 49, United 
     States Code, and medium hub airports (as defined in section 
     41714(h)(9) of that title). In the study, the Secretary shall 
     examine, among other matters--
       [(1) gate usage and availability; and
       [(2) the effects of the pricing of gates and other 
     facilities on competition and access.
       [(b) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit a report of the 
     Secretary's findings and conclusions together with any 
     recommendations, including legislative recommendations, the 
     Secretary may have for improving competition and airline 
     access at such airports to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure within 6 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act.

     [SEC. 305. COMPETITION DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR LARGE AND 
                   MEDIUM HUB AIRPORTS.

       [Section 47107 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       [``(q) Competition Disclosure Requirement.--
       [``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     approve an application under this subchapter for an airport 
     development project grant for a hub airport or a medium hub 
     airport only if the Secretary receives assurances that the 
     airport sponsor will provide the information required by 
     paragraph (2) at such time and in such form as the Secretary 
     may require.
       [``(2) Competitive access.--If an airport denies an 
     application by an air carrier to receive access to gates or 
     other facilities at that airport in order to provide service 
     to the airport or to expand service at the airport, then, 
     within 30 days after denying the request, the airport sponsor 
     shall--
       [``(A) notify the Secretary of the denial; and
       [``(B) transmit a report to the Secretary that--
       [``(i) describes the request;
       [``(ii) explains the reasons for the denial; and
       [``(iii) provides a time frame within which, if any, the 
     airport will be able to accommodate the request.
       [``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       [``(A) Hub airport.--The term `hub airport' has the meaning 
     given that term by section 41731(a)(3).
       [``(B) Medium hub airport.--The term `medium hub airport' 
     has the meaning given that term by section 41714(h)(9).''.

                      [TITLE IV--AVIATION SECURITY

     [SEC. 401. STUDY OF EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 
                   SYSTEM.

       [(a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     study the effectiveness of the aviation security system, 
     including the air marshal program, hardening of cockpit 
     doors, and security screening of passengers, checked baggage, 
     and cargo.
       [(b) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit a report of the 
     Secretary's findings and conclusions together with any 
     recommendations, including legislative recommendations, the 
     Secretary may have for improving the effectiveness of 
     aviation security to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure within 6 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act. In the report 
     the Secretary shall also describe any redeployment of 
     Transportation Security Administration resources based on 
     those findings and conclusions. The Secretary may submit the 
     report to the Committees in classified and redacted form.

     [SEC. 402. AVIATION SECURITY CAPITAL FUND.

       [(a) In General.--There is established within the 
     Department of Transportation a fund to be known as the 
     Aviation Security Capital Fund. There are appropriated to the 
     Fund to $500,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2004 
     through 2007, such amounts to be derived from fees received 
     under section 44940 of title 49, United States Code. Amounts 
     in the fund shall be allocated in such a manner that--
       [(1) 40 percent shall be made available for hub airports;
       [(2) 20 percent shall be made available for medium hub 
     airports;
       [(3) 15 percent shall be made available for small hub 
     airports and non-hub airports; and
       [(4) 25 percent may be distributed at the Secretary's 
     discretion.
       [(b) Purpose.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available to 
     the Secretary of Transportation, after consultation with the 
     Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Border and 
     Transportation Security to provide financial assistance to 
     airport sponsors to defray capital investment in 
     transportation security at airport facilities in accordance 
     with the provisions of this section. The program shall be 
     administered in concert with the airport improvement program 
     under chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code.
       [(c) Apportionment.--Amounts made available under 
     subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) shall be apportioned 
     among the airports in each category in accordance with a 
     formula based on the ratio that passenger emplanements at 
     each airport in the category bears to the total passenger 
     emplanements at all airports in the that category.
       [(d) Matching Requirements.--
       [(1) In general.--Not less than the following percentage of 
     the costs of any project funded under this section shall be 
     derived from non-Federal sources:
       [(A) For hub airports and medium hub airports, 25 percent.
       [(B) For airports other than hub airports and medium hub 
     airports, 10 percent.
       [(2) Use of bond proceeds.--In determining the amount of 
     non-Federal sources of funds, the proceeds of State and local 
     bond issues shall not be considered to be derived, directly 
     or indirectly, from Federal sources without regard to the 
     Federal income tax treatment of interest and principal of 
     such bonds.
       [(e) Letters of Intent.--The Secretary of Transportation, 
     or his delegate, may execute letters of intent to commit 
     funding to airport sponsors from the Fund.
       [(f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 44940(a)(1) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       [``(H) The costs of security-related capital improvements 
     at airports.''.
       [(g) Definitions.--Any term used in this section that is 
     defined or used in chapter 417 of title 49 United States Code 
     has the meaning given that term in that chapter.

     [SEC. 403. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATED TO SECURITY-RELATED 
                   AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT.

       [(a) Definition of Airport Development.--Section 
     47102(3)(B) is amended--
       [(1) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon in clause 
     (viii);
       [(2) by striking ``circular; and'' in clause (ix) and 
     inserting ``circular.''; and
       [(3) by striking clause (x).
       [(b) Improvement of Facilities and Equipment.--Section 
     301(a) of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 
     (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) is amended by striking ``travel.'' and 
     inserting ``travel if the improvements or equipment will be 
     owned and operated by the airport.''.

                        [TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

     [SEC. 501. EXTENSION OF WAR RISK INSURANCE AUTHORITY.

       [(a) Extension of Policies.--Section 44302(f)(1) is amended 
     by striking ``2003,'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``2006,''.
       [(b) Extension of Liability Limitation.--Section 44303(b) 
     is amended by striking ``2003,'' and inserting ``2006,''.
       [(c) Extension of Authority.--Section 44310 is amended by 
     striking ``2003.'' and inserting ``2006.''.

[[Page 14702]]



     [SEC. 502. COST-SHARING OF AIR TRAFFIC MODERNIZATION 
                   PROJECTS.

       [(a) In General.--Chapter 445 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     [``Sec.  44517. Program to permit cost-sharing of air traffic 
       modernization projects

       [``(a) In General.--Subject to the requirements of this 
     section, the Secretary may carry out a program under which 
     the Secretary may make grants to project sponsors for not 
     more than 10 eligible projects per fiscal year for the 
     purpose of improving aviation safety and enhancing mobility 
     of the Nation's air transportation system by encouraging non-
     Federal investment in critical air traffic control facilities 
     and equipment.
       [``(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of an 
     eligible project carried out under the program shall not 
     exceed 33 percent. The non-Federal share of the cost of an 
     eligible project shall be provided from non-Federal sources, 
     including revenues collected pursuant to section 40117 of 
     this title.
       [``(c) Limitation on Grant Amounts.--No eligible project 
     may receive more than $5,000,000 in Federal funds under the 
     program.
       [``(d) Funding.--The Secretary shall use amounts 
     appropriated under section 48101(a) of this title to carry 
     out this program.
       [``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
       [``(1) Eligible project.--The term `eligible project' means 
     a project relating to the Nation's air traffic control system 
     that is certified or approved by the Administrator and that 
     promotes safety, efficiency, or mobility. Such projects may 
     include--
       [``(A) airport-specific air traffic facilities and 
     equipment, including local area augmentation systems, 
     instrument landing systems, weather and wind shear detection 
     equipment, lighting improvements, and control towers;
       [``(B) automation tools to effect improvements in airport 
     capacity, including passive final approach spacing tools and 
     traffic management advisory equipment; and
       [``(C) facilities and equipment that enhance airspace 
     control procedures, including consolidation of terminal radar 
     control facilities and equipment, or assist in en route 
     surveillance, including oceanic and offshore flight tracking.
       [``(2) Project sponsor.--The term `project sponsor' means 
     any major user of the National Airspace System, as determined 
     by the Secretary, including a public-use airport or a joint 
     venture between a public-use airport and one or more air 
     carriers.
       [``(f) Transfers of Equipment.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, and upon agreement by the Administrator of 
     the Federal Aviation Administration, project sponsors may 
     transfer, without consideration, to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, facilities, equipment, or automation tools, 
     the purchase of which was assisted by a grant made under this 
     section, if such facilities, equipment or tools meet Federal 
     Aviation Administration operation and maintenance criteria.
       [``(g) Guidelines.--The Administrator shall issue advisory 
     guidelines on the implementation of the program, which shall 
     not be subject to administrative rulemaking requirements 
     under subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5.''.
       [(b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analyses for 
     chapter 445 is amended by adding at the end the following:

[``44517. Program to permit cost-sharing of air traffic modernization 
              projects.''.

     [SEC. 503. COUNTERFEIT OR FRAUDULENTLY REPRESENTED PARTS 
                   VIOLATIONS.

       [Section 44726(a)(1) is amended --
       [(1) by striking ``or'' after the semicolon in subparagraph 
     (A);
       [(2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (D);
       [(3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       [``(B) who knowingly, and with intent to defraud, carried 
     out or facilitated an activity punishable under a law 
     described in subparagraph (A);
       [``(C) whose certificate is revoked under subsection (b) of 
     this section; or''; and
       [(4) by striking ``convicted of such a violation.'' in 
     subparagraph (D), as redesignated, and inserting ``described 
     in subparagraph (A), (B) or (C).''.

     [SEC. 504. CLARIFICATIONS TO PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY.

       [(a) Update and Clarification of Authority.--
       [(1) Section 40110(c) is amended to read as follows:
       [``(c) Duties and Powers.--When carrying out subsection (a) 
     of this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration may--
       [``(1) notwithstanding section 1341(a)(1) of title 31, 
     lease an interest in property for not more than 20 years;
       [``(2) consider the reasonable probable future use of the 
     underlying land in making an award for a condemnation of an 
     interest in airspace; and
       [``(3) dispose of property under subsection (a)(2) of this 
     section, except for airport and airway property and technical 
     equipment used for the special purposes of the 
     Administration, only under sections 121, 123, and 126 and 
     chapter 5 of title 40.''.
       [(2) Section 40110(d)(1) is amended by striking 
     ``implement, not later than January 1, 1996,'' and inserting 
     ``implement''.
       [(b) Clarification.--Section 106(f)(2)(A)(ii) is amended by 
     striking ``property'' and inserting ``property, services,''.]

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF TITLE 49.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Aviation 
     Investment and Revitalization Vision Act''.
       (b) Amendment of Title 49.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or a repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of title 49, 
     United States Code.

     SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       The table of contents for this Act is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of title 49.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.

               TITLE I--REAUTHORIZATIONS; FAA MANAGEMENT

Sec. 101. Airport improvement program.
Sec. 102. Airway facilities improvement program.
Sec. 103. FAA operations.
Sec. 104. Research, engineering, and development.
Sec. 105. Other programs.
Sec. 106. Reorganization of the Air Traffic Services Subcommittee.
Sec. 107. Clarification of responsibilities of chief operating officer.

                     TITLE II--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 201. National capacity projects.
Sec. 202. Categorical exclusions.
Sec. 203. Alternatives analysis.
Sec. 204. Increase in apportionment for, and flexibility of, noise 
              compatibility planning programs.
Sec. 205. Secretary of Transportation to identify airport congestion-
              relief projects and forecast airport operations annually.
Sec. 206. Design-build contracting.
Sec. 207. Special rule for airport in Illinois.
Sec. 208. Elimination of duplicative requirements.
Sec. 209. Streamlining the passenger facility fee program.
Sec. 210. Quarterly status reports.
Sec. 211. Noise disclosure requirements.
Sec. 212. Prohibition on requiring airports to provide rent-free space 
              for FAA or TSA.
Sec. 213. Special rules for fiscal year 2004.
Sec. 214. Agreements for operation of airport facilities.
Sec. 215. Public agencies.
Sec. 216. Flexible funding for nonprimary airport apportionments.

                 TITLE III--AIRLINE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT

                    Subtitle A--Program Enhancements

Sec. 301. Delay reduction meetings.
Sec. 302. Small community air service development pilot program.
Sec. 303. DOT study of competition and access problems at large and 
              medium hub airports.
Sec. 304. Competition disclosure requirement for large and medium hub 
              airports.

    Subtitle B--Small Community and Rural Air Service Revitalization

Sec. 351. Reauthorization of essential air service program.
Sec. 352. Incentive program.
Sec. 353. Pilot programs.
Sec. 354. EAS program authority changes.

                      TITLE IV--AVIATION SECURITY

Sec. 401. Study of effectiveness of transportation security system.
Sec. 402. Aviation security capital fund.
Sec. 403. Technical amendments related to security-related airport 
              development.
Sec. 404. Armed forces charters.

                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

Sec. 501. Extension of war risk insurance authority.
Sec. 502. Cost-sharing of air traffic modernization projects.
Sec. 503. Counterfeit or fraudulently represented parts violations.
Sec. 504. Clarifications to procurement authority.
Sec. 505. Judicial review.
Sec. 506. Civil penalties.
Sec. 507. Miscellaneous amendments.
Sec. 508. Low-emission airport vehicles and infrastructure.
Sec. 509. Low-emission airport vehicles and ground support equipment.
Sec. 510. Pacific emergency diversion airport.
Sec. 511. Gulf of Mexico aviation service improvements.
Sec. 512. Air traffic control collegiate training initiative.
Sec. 513. Increase in certain slots.
Sec. 514. Air transportation oversight system plan.
Sec. 515. National small community air service development ombudsman.
Sec. 516. National commission on small community air service.
Sec. 517. Training certification for cabin crew.
Sec. 518. Aircraft manufacturer insurance.
Sec. 519. Ground-based precision navigational aids.
Sec. 520. Standby power efficiency program.

                   TITLE VI--SECOND CENTURY OF FLIGHT

Sec. 601. Findings.

        Subtitle A--The Office of Aerospace and Aviation Liaison

Sec. 621. Office of Aerospace and Aviation Liaison.

[[Page 14703]]

Sec. 622. National Air Traffic Management System Development Office.
Sec. 623. Report on certain market developments and government 
              policies.

                     Subtitle B--Technical Programs

Sec. 641. Aerospace and Aviation Safety workforce initiative.
Sec. 642. Scholarships for service.

         Subtitle C--FAA Research, Engineering, and Development

Sec. 661. Research program to improve airfield pavements.
Sec. 662. Ensuring appropriate standards for airfield pavements.
Sec. 663. Assessment of wake turbulence research and development 
              program.
Sec. 664. Cabin air quality research program.
Sec. 665. International role of the FAA.
Sec. 666. FAA report on other nations' safety and technological 
              advancements.
Sec. 667. Development of analytical tools and certification methods.
Sec. 668. Pilot program to provide incentives for development of new 
              technologies.
Sec. 669. FAA center for excellence for applied research and training 
              in the use of advanced materials in transport aircraft.
Sec. 670. FAA certification of design organizations.
Sec. 671. Report on long term environmental improvements.

               TITLE I--REAUTHORIZATIONS; FAA MANAGEMENT

     SEC. 101. AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 48103 is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``(a) In General.--'' before ``The'';
       (2) by striking ``and'' in paragraph (4);
       (3) by striking ``2003.'' in paragraph (5) and inserting 
     ``2003;'';
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
       ``(6) $3,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(7) $3,500,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       ``(8) $3,600,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Administrative Expenses.--From the amounts authorized 
     by paragraphs (6) through (8) of subsection (a), there shall 
     be available for administrative expenses relating to the 
     airport improvement program, passenger facility fee approval 
     and oversight, national airport system planning, airport 
     standards development and enforcement, airport certification, 
     airport-related environmental activities (including legal 
     service), to remain available until expended--
       ``(1) for fiscal year 2004, $69,737,000;
       ``(2) for fiscal year 2005, $71,816,000; and
       ``(3) for fiscal year 2006, $74,048,000.''.
       (b) Obligational Authority.--Section 47104(c) is amended by 
     striking ``2003,'' and inserting ``2006,''.

     SEC. 102. AIRWAY FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 48101(a) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(6) $2,916,000,000 for fiscal year 2004.
       ``(7) $2,971,000,000 for fiscal year 2005.
       ``(8) $3,030,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.
       (b) Biannual Reports.--Beginning 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall transmit a report to the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure every 6 months that describes--
       (1) the 10 largest programs funded under section 48101(a) 
     of title 49, United States Code;
       (2) any changes in the budget for such programs;
       (3) the program schedule; and
       (4) technical risks associated with the programs.

     SEC. 103. FAA OPERATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 106(k)(1) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' in subparagraph (C);
       (2) by striking ``2003.'' in subparagraph (D) and inserting 
     ``2003;''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(E) $7,591,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(F) $7,732,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       ``(G) $7,889,000,000 for fiscal year 2006.''.
       (b) Annual Report.--Beginning with the submission of the 
     Budget of the United States to the Congress for fiscal year 
     2004, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall transmit a report to the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the 
     House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure that describes the overall air traffic 
     controller staffing plan, including strategies to address 
     anticipated retirement and replacement of air traffic 
     controllers.

     SEC. 104. RESEARCH, ENGINEERING, AND DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) Amounts Authorized.--Section 48102(a) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (8) and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) for fiscal year 2004, $289,000,000, including--
       ``(A) $200,000,000 to improve aviation safety, including 
     icing, crashworthiness, and aging aircraft;
       ``(B) $18,000,000 to improve the efficiency of the air 
     traffic control system;
       ``(C) $27,000,000 to reduce the environmental impact of 
     aviation;
       ``(D) $16,000,000 to improve the efficiency of mission 
     support; and
       ``(E) $28,000,000 to improve the durability and 
     maintainability of advanced material structures in transport 
     airframe structures;
       ``(10) for fiscal year 2005, $304,000,000, including--
       ``(A) $211,000,000 to improve aviation safety;
       ``(B) $19,000,000 to improve the efficiency of the air 
     traffic control system;
       ``(C) $28,000,000 to reduce the environmental impact of 
     aviation;
       ``(D) $17,000,000 to improve the efficiency of mission 
     support; and
       ``(E) $29,000,000 to improve the durability and 
     maintainability of advanced material structures in transport 
     airframe structures; and
       ``(11) for fiscal year 2006, $317,000,000, including--
       ``(A) $220,000,000 to improve aviation safety;
       ``(B) $20,000,000 to improve the efficiency of the air 
     traffic control system;
       ``(C) $29,000,000 to reduce the environmental impact of 
     aviation;
       ``(D) $18,000,000 to improve the efficiency of mission 
     support; and
       ``(E) $30,000,000 to improve the durability and 
     maintainability of advanced material structures in transport 
     airframe structures.''.

     SEC. 105. OTHER PROGRAMS.

       Section 106 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and 
     Reform Act for the 21st Century is amended--
       (1) by striking ``2003'' in subsection (a)(1)(A) and 
     subsection (c)(2) and inserting ``2006''; and
       (2) by striking ``2003,'' in subsection (a)(2) and 
     inserting ``2006,''.

     SEC. 106. REORGANIZATION OF THE AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES 
                   SUBCOMMITTEE.

       (a) In General.--Section 106 is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (q) and (r) as subsections 
     (r) and (s), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (p) the following:
       ``(q) Air Traffic Management Committee.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     establish an advisory committee which shall be known as the 
     Air Traffic Services Committee (in this subsection referred 
     to as the `Committee').
       ``(2) Membership.--
       ``(A) Composition and appointment.--The Committee shall be 
     composed of--
       ``(i) the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, who shall serve as chair; and
       ``(ii) 4 members, to be appointed by the Secretary, after 
     consultation with the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the 
     Senate.
       ``(B) No federal officer or employee.--No member appointed 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) may serve as an officer or 
     employee of the United States Government while serving as a 
     member of the Committee.
       ``(C) Eligibility.--Members appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) shall--
       ``(i) have a fiduciary responsibility to represent the 
     public interest;
       ``(ii) be citizens of the United States; and
       ``(iii) be appointed without regard to political 
     affiliation and solely on the basis of their professional 
     experience and expertise in one or more of the following 
     areas:

       ``(I) Management of large service organizations.
       ``(II) Customer service.
       ``(III) Management of large procurements.
       ``(IV) Information and communications technology.
       ``(V) Organizational development.
       ``(VI) Labor relations.

     At least one of such members should have a background in 
     managing large organizations successfully. In the aggregate, 
     such members should collectively bring to bear expertise in 
     all of the areas described in subclauses (I) through (VI).
       ``(D) Prohibitions on members of committee.--No member 
     appointed under subparagraph (A)(ii) may--
       ``(i) have a pecuniary interest in, or own stock in or 
     bonds of, an aviation or aeronautical enterprise, except an 
     interest in a diversified mutual fund or an interest that is 
     exempt from the application of section 208 of title 18;
       ``(ii) engage in another business related to aviation or 
     aeronautics; or
       ``(iii) be a member of any organization that engages, as a 
     substantial part of its activities, in activities to 
     influence aviation-related legislation.
       ``(E) Claims against members.--
       ``(i) In general.--A member appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) shall have no personal liability under Federal law 
     with respect to any claim arising out of or resulting from an 
     act or omission by such member within the scope of service as 
     a member of the Air Traffic Services Committee.
       ``(ii) Effect on other law.--This subparagraph shall not be 
     construed--

       ``(I) to affect any other immunity or protection that may 
     be available to a member of the Committee under applicable 
     law with respect to such transactions;
       ``(II) to affect any other right or remedy against the 
     United States under applicable law; or
       ``(III) to limit or alter in any way the immunities that 
     are available under applicable law for Federal officers and 
     employees.

       ``(F) Ethical considerations.--
       ``(i) Financial disclosure.--During the entire period that 
     an individual appointed under

[[Page 14704]]

     subparagraph (A)(ii) is a member of the Committee, such 
     individual shall be treated as serving as an officer or 
     employee referred to in section 101(f) of the Ethics in 
     Government Act of 1978 for purposes of title I of such Act; 
     except that section 101(d) of such Act shall apply without 
     regard to the number of days of service in the position.
       ``(ii) Restrictions on post-employment.--For purposes of 
     section 207(c) of title 18, an individual appointed under 
     subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be treated as an employee referred 
     to in section 207(c)(2)(A)(i) of such title during the entire 
     period the individual is a member of the Committee; except 
     that subsections (c)(2)(B) and (f) of section 207 of such 
     title shall not apply.
       ``(G) Terms for air traffic services committee members.--A 
     member appointed under subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be 
     appointed for a term of 5 years.
       ``(H) Reappointment.--An individual may not be appointed 
     under subparagraph (A)(ii) to more than two 5-year terms.
       ``(I) Vacancy.--Any vacancy on the Committee shall be 
     filled in the same manner as the original appointment. Any 
     member appointed to fill a vacancy occurring before the 
     expiration of the term for which the member's predecessor was 
     appointed shall be appointed for the remainder of that term.
       ``(J) Continuation in office.--A member whose term expires 
     shall continue to serve until the date on which the member's 
     successor takes office.
       ``(K) Removal.--Any member appointed under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) may be removed for cause by the Secretary.
       ``(3) General responsibilities.--
       ``(A) Oversight.--The Committee shall oversee the 
     administration, management, conduct, direction, and 
     supervision of the air traffic control system.
       ``(B) Confidentiality.--The Committee shall ensure that 
     appropriate confidentiality is maintained in the exercise of 
     its duties.
       ``(4) Specific responsibilities.--The Committee shall have 
     the following specific responsibilities:
       ``(A) Strategic plans.--To review, approve, and monitor the 
     strategic plan for the air traffic control system, including 
     the establishment of--
       ``(i) a mission and objectives;
       ``(ii) standards of performance relative to such mission 
     and objectives, including safety, efficiency, and 
     productivity; and
       ``(iii) annual and long-range strategic plans.
       ``(B) Modernization and improvement.--To review and 
     approve--
       ``(i) methods to accelerate air traffic control 
     modernization and improvements in aviation safety related to 
     air traffic control; and
       ``(ii) procurements of air traffic control equipment in 
     excess of $100,000,000.
       ``(C) Operational plans.--To review the operational 
     functions of the air traffic control system, including--
       ``(i) plans for modernization of the air traffic control 
     system;
       ``(ii) plans for increasing productivity or implementing 
     cost-saving measures; and
       ``(iii) plans for training and education.
       ``(D) Management.--To--
       ``(i) review and approve the Administrator's appointment of 
     a Chief Operating Officer under section 106(s);
       ``(ii) review the Administrator's selection, evaluation, 
     and compensation of senior executives of the Administration 
     who have program management responsibility over significant 
     functions of the air traffic control system;
       ``(iii) review and approve the Administrator's plans for 
     any major reorganization of the Administration that would 
     impact on the management of the air traffic control system;
       ``(iv) review and approve the Administrator's cost 
     accounting and financial management structure and 
     technologies to help ensure efficient and cost-effective air 
     traffic control operation; and
       ``(v) review the performance and compensation of managers 
     responsible for major acquisition projects, including the 
     ability of the managers to meet schedule and budget targets.
       ``(E) Budget.--To--
       ``(i) review and approve the budget request of the 
     Administration related to the air traffic control system 
     prepared by the Administrator;
       ``(ii) submit such budget request to the Secretary; and
       ``(iii) ensure that the budget request supports the annual 
     and long-range strategic plans.
       ``(5) Congressional review of pre-omb budget request.--The 
     Secretary shall submit the budget request referred to in 
     paragraph (4)(E)(ii) for any fiscal year to the President who 
     shall transmit such request, without revision, to the 
     Committees on Transportation and Infrastructure and 
     Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the 
     Committees on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     Appropriations of the Senate, together with the President's 
     annual budget request for the Federal Aviation Administration 
     for such fiscal year.
       ``(6) Committee personnel matters.--
       ``(A) Compensation of members.--Each member of the 
     Committee, other than the chair and vice chair, shall be 
     compensated at a rate of $25,000 per year.
       ``(B) Staff.--The chairperson of the Committee may appoint 
     and terminate any personnel that may be necessary to enable 
     the Committee to perform its duties.
       ``(C) Procurement of temporary and intermittent services.--
     The chairperson of the Committee may procure temporary and 
     intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       ``(7) Administrative matters.--
       ``(A) Powers of chair.--Except as otherwise provided by a 
     majority vote of the Committee, the powers of the chairperson 
     shall include--
       ``(i) establishing subcommittees;
       ``(ii) setting meeting places and times;
       ``(iii) establishing meeting agendas; and
       ``(iv) developing rules for the conduct of business.
       ``(B) Meetings.--The Committee shall meet at least 
     quarterly and at such other times as the chairperson 
     determines appropriate.
       ``(C) Quorum.--Three members of the Committee shall 
     constitute a quorum. A majority of members present and voting 
     shall be required for the Committee to take action.
       ``(D) Application of subsection (p) provisions.--The 
     following provisions of subsection (p) apply to the Committee 
     to the same extent as they apply to the Management Advisory 
     Council:
       ``(i) Paragraph (4)(C) (relating to access to documents and 
     staff).
       ``(ii) Paragraph (5) (relating to nonapplication of Federal 
     Advisory Committee Act).
       ``(iii) Paragraph (6)(G) (relating to travel and per diem).
       ``(iv) Paragraph (6)(H) (relating to detail of personnel).
       ``(8) Annual report.--The Committee shall each year report 
     with respect to the conduct of its responsibilities under 
     this title to the Administrator, the Management Advisory 
     Council, the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 
     of the House of Representatives, and the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Subsection (p) of section 106 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``18'' in paragraph (2) and inserting 
     ``13'';
       (B) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon in 
     subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2);
       (C) by striking ``Transportation; and'' in subparagraph (D) 
     of paragraph (2) and inserting ``Transportation.'';
       (D) by striking subparagraph (E) of paragraph (2);
       (E) by striking paragraph (3) and inserting the following:
       ``(3) No federal officer or employee.--No member appointed 
     under paragraph (2)(C) may serve as an officer or employee of 
     the United States Government while serving as a member of the 
     Council.'';
       (F) by striking subparagraphs (C), (D), (H), and (I) of 
     paragraph (6) and redesignating subparagraphs (E), (F), (G), 
     (J), (K), and (L) as subparagraphs (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), 
     and (H), respectively; and
       (G) by striking paragraphs (7) and (8).
       (2) Section 106(s) (as redesignated by subsection (a) of 
     this section) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``Air Traffic Services Subcommittee of the 
     Aviation Management Advisory Council.'' and inserting ``Air 
     Traffic Services Committee.'' in paragraphs (1)(A) and 
     (2)(A); and
       (B) by striking ``Air Traffic Services Subcommittee of the 
     Aviation Management Advisory Council,'' and inserting ``Air 
     Traffic Services Committee,'' in paragraph (3).
       (3) Section 106 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(t) Air Traffic Control System Defined.--In this section, 
     the term `air traffic control system' has the meaning such 
     term has under section 40102(a).''.
       (c) Transition From Air Traffic Service Subcommittee to Air 
     Traffic Service Committee.--
       (1) Termination of management advisory council 
     membership.--Effective on the day after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, any member of the Management Advisory Council 
     appointed under section 106(p)(2)(E) of title 49, United 
     States Code, (as such section was in effect on the day before 
     such date of enactment) who is a member of the Council on 
     such date of enactment shall cease to be a member of the 
     Council.
       (2) Commencement of membership on air traffic services 
     committee.--Effective on the day after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, any member of the Management Advisory Council 
     whose membership is terminated by paragraph (1) shall become 
     a member of the Air Traffic Services Committee as provided by 
     section 106(q)(2)(G) of title 49, United States Code, to 
     serve for the remainder of the term to which that member was 
     appointed to the Council.

     SEC. 107. CLARIFICATION OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF CHIEF 
                   OPERATING OFFICER.

       Section 106(s) (as redesignated by section 106(a)(1) of 
     this Act) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Transportation and Congress'' in 
     paragraph (4) and inserting ``Transportation, the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives, and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate,'';
       (2) by striking ``develop a strategic plan of the 
     Administration for the air traffic control system, including 
     the establishment of--'' in paragraph (5)(A) and inserting 
     ``implement the strategic plan of the Administration for the 
     air traffic control system in order to further--'';
       (3) by striking ``To review the operational functions of 
     the Administration,'' in paragraph (5)(B) and inserting ``To 
     oversee the day-to-day operational functions of the 
     Administration for air traffic control,'';
       (4) by striking ``system prepared by the Administrator;'' 
     in paragraph (5)(C)(i) and inserting ``system;'';

[[Page 14705]]

       (5) by striking ``Administrator and the Secretary of 
     Transportation;'' in paragraph (5)(C)(ii) and inserting 
     ``Administrator;''; and
       (6) by striking paragraph (5)(C)(iii) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(iii) ensure that the budget request supports the 
     agency's annual and long-range strategic plans for air 
     traffic control services.''.

                     TITLE II--AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT

     SEC. 201. NATIONAL CAPACITY PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--Part B of subtitle VII is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

               ``CHAPTER 477. NATIONAL CAPACITY PROJECTS

``47701. Capacity enhancement.
``47702. Designation of national capacity projects.
``47703. Expedited coordinated environmental review process; project 
              coordinators and environment impact teams.
``47704. Compatible land use initiative for national capacity projects.
``47705. Air traffic procedures at national capacity projects.
``47706. Pilot program for environmental review at national capacity 
              projects.
``47707. Definitions.

     ``Sec. 47701. Capacity enhancement

       ``(a) In General.--Within 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Aviation Investment and Revitalization 
     Vision Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall identify 
     those airports among the 31 airports covered by the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's Airport Capacity Benchmark Report 
     2001 with delays that significantly affect the national air 
     transportation system.
       ``(b) Task Force; Capacity Enhancement Study.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall direct any airport 
     identified by the Secretary under subsection (a) that is not 
     engaged in a runway expansion process and has not initiated a 
     capacity enhancement study (or similar capacity assessment) 
     since 1996--
       ``(A) to establish a delay reduction task force to study 
     means of increasing capacity at the airport, including air 
     traffic, airline scheduling, and airfield expansion 
     alternatives; or
       ``(B) to conduct a capacity enhancement study.
       ``(2) Scope.--The scope of the study shall be determined by 
     the airport and the Federal Aviation Administration, and 
     where appropriate shall consider regional capacity solutions.
       ``(3) Recommendations submitted to secretary.--
       ``(A) Task force.--A task force established under this 
     subsection shall submit a report containing its findings and 
     conclusions, together with any recommendations for capacity 
     enhancement at the airport, to the Secretary within 9 months 
     after the task force is established.
       ``(B) CES.--A capacity enhancement study conducted under 
     this subsection shall be submitted, together with its 
     findings and conclusions, to the Secretary as soon as the 
     study is completed.
       ``(c) Runway Expansion and Reconfiguration.--If the report 
     or study submitted under subsection (b)(3) includes a 
     recommendation for the construction or reconfiguration of 
     runways at the airport, then the Secretary and the airport 
     shall complete the planning and environmental review process 
     within 5 years after report or study is submitted to the 
     Secretary. The Secretary may extend the 5-year deadline under 
     this subsection for up to 1 year if the Secretary determines 
     that such an extension is necessary and in the public 
     interest. The Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of any such extension.
       ``(d) Airports That Decline To Undertake Expansion 
     Projects.--
       ``(1) In general.--If an airport at which the construction 
     or reconfiguration of runways is recommended does not take 
     action to initiate a planning and environmental assessment 
     process for the construction or reconfiguration of those 
     runways within 30 days after the date on which the report or 
     study is submitted to the Secretary, then--
       ``(A) the airport shall be ineligible for planning and 
     other expansion funds under subchapter I of chapter 471, 
     notwithstanding any provision of that subchapter to the 
     contrary; and
       ``(B) no passenger facility fee may be approved at that 
     airport during the 5-year period beginning 30 days after the 
     date on which the report or study is submitted to the 
     Secretary, for--
       ``(i) projects that, but for subparagraph (A), could have 
     been funded under chapter 471; or
       ``(ii) any project other than on-airport airfield-side 
     capacity or safety-related projects.
       ``(2) Safety-related and environmental projects excepted.--
     Paragraph (1) does not apply to the use of funds for safety-
     related, security, or environment projects.
       ``(e) Airports That Take Action.--The Secretary shall take 
     all actions possible to expedite funding and provide options 
     for funding to any airport undertaking runway construction or 
     reconfiguration projects in response to recommendations by 
     its task force.

     ``Sec. 47702. Designation of national capacity projects

       ``(a) In General.--In response to a petition from an 
     airport sponsor, or in the case of an airport on the list of 
     airports covered by the Federal Aviation Administration's 
     Airport Capacity Benchmarks study, the Secretary of 
     Transportation may designate an airport development project 
     as a national capacity project if the Secretary determines 
     that the project to be designated will significantly enhance 
     the capacity of the national air transportation system.
       ``(b) Designation To Remain in Effect for 5 Years.--The 
     designation of a project as a national capacity project under 
     paragraph (1) shall remain in effect for 5 years. The 
     Secretary may extend the 5-year period for up to 2 additional 
     years upon request if the Secretary finds that substantial 
     progress is being made toward completion of the project.

     ``Sec. 47703. Expedited coordinated environmental review 
       process; project coordinators and environment impact teams

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     implement an expedited coordinated environmental review 
     process for national capacity projects that--
       ``(1) provides for better coordination among the Federal, 
     regional, State, and local agencies concerned with the 
     preparation of environmental impact statements or 
     environmental assessments under the National Environmental 
     Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.);
       ``(2) provides for an expedited and coordinated process in 
     the conduct of environmental reviews that ensures that, where 
     appropriate, the reviews are done concurrently and not 
     consecutively; and
       ``(3) provides for a date certain for completing all 
     environmental reviews.
       ``(b) High Priority for Airport Environmental Reviews.--
     Each department and agency of the United States Government 
     with jurisdiction over environmental reviews shall accord any 
     such review involving a national capacity project the highest 
     possible priority and conduct the review expeditiously. If 
     the Secretary finds that any such department or agency is not 
     complying with the requirements of this subsection, the 
     Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure immediately.
       ``(c) Project Coordinators; EIS Teams.--
       ``(1) Designation.--For each project designated by the 
     Secretary as a national capacity project under subsection (a) 
     for which an environmental impact statement or environmental 
     assessment must be filed, the Secretary shall--
       ``(A) designate a project coordinator within the Department 
     of Transportation; and
       ``(B) establish an environmental impact team within the 
     Department.
       ``(2) Function.--The project coordinator and the 
     environmental impact team shall--
       ``(A) coordinate the activities of all Federal, State, and 
     local agencies involved in the project;
       ``(B) to the extent possible, working with Federal, State 
     and local officials, reduce and eliminate duplicative and 
     overlapping Federal, State, and local permit requirements;
       ``(C) to the extent possible, eliminate duplicate Federal, 
     State, and local environmental review procedures; and
       ``(D) provide direction for compliance with all applicable 
     Federal, State, and local environmental requirements for the 
     project.

     ``Sec. 47704. Compatible land use initiative for national 
       capacity projects

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may make 
     grants under chapter 471 to States and units of local 
     government for land use compatibility plans directly related 
     to national capacity projects for the purposes of making the 
     use of land areas around the airport compatible with aircraft 
     operations if the land use plan or project meets the 
     requirements of this section.
       ``(b) Conditions.--A land use plan or project meets the 
     requirements of this section if it--
       ``(1) is sponsored by the public agency that has the 
     authority to plan and adopt land use control measures, 
     including zoning, in the planning area in and around the 
     airport and that agency provides written assurances to the 
     Secretary that it will work with the affected airport to 
     identify and adopt such measures;
       ``(2) does not duplicate, and is not inconsistent with, an 
     airport noise compatibility program prepared by an airport 
     owner or operator under chapter 475 or with other planning 
     carried out by the airport;
       ``(3) is subject to an agreement between the public agency 
     sponsor and the airport owner or operator that the 
     development of the land use compatibility plan will be done 
     cooperatively;
       ``(4) is consistent with the airport operation and 
     planning, including the use of any noise exposure contours on 
     which the land use compatibility planning or project is 
     based; and
       ``(5) has been approved jointly by the airport owner or 
     operator and the public agency sponsor.
       ``(c) Assurances From Sponsors.--The Secretary may require 
     the airport sponsor, public agency, or other entity to which 
     a grant may be awarded under this section to provide such 
     additional assurances, progress reports, and other 
     information as the Secretary determines to be necessary to 
     carry out this section.

     ``Sec. 47705. Air traffic procedures at national capacity 
       projects

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     consider prescribing flight procedures to avoid or minimize 
     potentially significant adverse noise impacts of the project 
     during the environmental planning process for a national 
     capacity project that involves the construction of new 
     runways or the reconfiguration

[[Page 14706]]

     of existing runways. If the Secretary determines that noise 
     mitigation flight procedures are consistent with safe and 
     efficient use of the navigable airspace, then, at the request 
     of the airport sponsor, the Administrator may, in a manner 
     consistent with applicable Federal law, commit to prescribing 
     such procedures in any record of decision approving the 
     project.
       ``(b) Modification.--Notwithstanding any commitment by the 
     Secretary under subsection (a), the Secretary may initiate 
     changes to such procedures if necessary to maintain safety 
     and efficiency in light of new information or changed 
     circumstances.

     ``Sec. 47706. Pilot program for environmental review at 
       national capacity projects

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     initiate a 5-year pilot program funded by airport sponsors--
       ``(1) to hire additional fulltime-equivalent environmental 
     specialists and attorneys, or
       ``(2) to obtain the services of such specialists and 
     attorneys from outside the United States Government, to 
     assist in the provision of an appropriate nationwide level of 
     staffing for planning and environmental review of runway 
     development projects for national capacity projects at the 
     Federal Aviation Administration.
       ``(b) Eligible Participants.--Participation in the pilot 
     program shall be available, on a voluntary basis, to airports 
     with an annual passenger enplanement of not less than 3 
     million passengers. The Secretary shall specify the minimum 
     contribution necessary to qualify for participation in the 
     pilot program, which shall be not less than the amount 
     necessary to compensate the Department of Transportation for 
     the expense of a fulltime equivalent environmental specialist 
     and attorney qualified at the GS-14 equivalent level.
       ``(c) Retention of Revenues.--The salaries and expenses 
     account of the Federal Aviation Administration shall retain 
     as an offsetting collection such sums as may be necessary 
     from such proceeds for the costs of developing and 
     implementing the program required by subsection (a). Such 
     offsetting collections shall be available for obligation 
     subject to the terms and conditions of the receiving 
     appropriations account, and shall be deposited in such 
     accounts on a quarterly basis. Such offsetting collections 
     are authorized to remain available until expended for such 
     purpose.

     ``Sec. 47707. Definitions

       ``In this chapter:
       ``(1) National capacity project.--The term `national 
     capacity project' means a project designated by the Secretary 
     under section 44702.
       ``(2) Other terms.--The definitions in section 47102 apply 
     to any terms used in this chapter that are defined in that 
     section.''.
       (b) Additional Staff Authorized.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation is authorized to hire additional environmental 
     specialists and attorneys needed to process environmental 
     impact statements in connection with airport construction 
     projects and to serve as project coordinators and 
     environmental impact team members under section 47703 of 
     title 49, United States Code.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The analysis for subtitle VII is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 475 
     the following:

      ``477. National capacity projects........................47701''.

     SEC. 202. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS.

       Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall report to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation on 
     the categorical exclusions currently recognized and provide a 
     list of proposed additional categorical exclusions from the 
     requirement that an environmental assessment or an 
     environmental impact statement be prepared under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) for 
     projects at airports. In determining the list of additional 
     proposed categorical exclusions, the Secretary shall include 
     such other projects as the Secretary determines should be 
     categorically excluded in order to ensure that Department of 
     Transportation environmental staff resources are not diverted 
     to lower priority tasks and are available to expedite the 
     environmental reviews of airport capacity enhancement 
     projects at congested airports.

     SEC. 203. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS.

       (a) Notice Requirement.--Not later than 30 days after the 
     date on which the Secretary of Transportation identifies an 
     airport capacity enhancement project at a congested airport 
     under section 47171(c) of title 49, United States Code, the 
     Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register 
     requesting comments on whether reasonable alternatives exist 
     to the project.
       (b) Certain Reasonable Alternatives Defined.--For purposes 
     of this section, an alternative shall be considered 
     reasonable if--
       (1) the alternative does not create an unreasonable burden 
     on interstate commerce, the national aviation system, or the 
     navigable airspace;
       (2) the alternative is not inconsistent with maintaining 
     the safe and efficient use of the navigable airspace;
       (3) the alternative does not conflict with a law or 
     regulation of the United States;
       (4) the alternative would result in at least the same 
     reduction in congestion at the airport or in the national 
     aviation system as the proposed project; and
       (5) in any case in which the alternative is a proposed 
     construction project at an airport other than a congested 
     airport, firm commitments to provide such alternate airport 
     capacity exists, and the Secretary determines that such 
     alternate airport capacity will be available no later than 4 
     years after the date of the Secretary's determination under 
     this section.
       (c) Comment Period.--The Secretary shall provide a period 
     of 60 days for comments on a project identified by the 
     Secretary under this section after the date of publication of 
     notice with respect to the project.
       (d) Determination of Existence of Reasonable 
     Alternatives.--Not later than 90 days after the last day of a 
     comment period established under subsection (c) for a 
     project, the Secretary shall determine whether reasonable 
     alternatives exist to the project. The determination shall be 
     binding on all persons, including Federal and State agencies, 
     acting under or applying Federal laws when considering the 
     availability of alternatives to the project.
       (e) Limitation on Applicability.--This section does not 
     apply to--
       (1) any alternatives analysis required under the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); or
       (2) a project at an airport if the airport sponsor 
     requests, in writing, to the Secretary that this section not 
     apply to the project.

     SEC. 204. INCREASE IN APPORTIONMENT FOR, AND FLEXIBILITY OF, 
                   NOISE COMPATIBILITY PLANNING PROGRAMS.

       Section 47117(e)(1)(A) is amended--
       (1) by striking the first sentence and inserting: ``At 
     least 35 percent for grants for airport noise compatibility 
     planning under section 47505(a)(2) for a national capacity 
     project, for carrying out noise compatibility programs under 
     section 47504(c) of this title, and for noise mitigation 
     projects approved in an environmental record of decision for 
     an airport development project designated as a national 
     capacity project under section 47702.''; and
       (2) by striking ``or not such 34 percent requirement'' in 
     the second sentence and inserting ``the funding level 
     required by the preceding sentence''.

     SEC. 205. SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION TO IDENTIFY AIRPORT 
                   CONGESTION-RELIEF PROJECTS AND FORECAST AIRPORT 
                   OPERATIONS ANNUALLY.

       (a) Identification of Projects.--
       (1) In general.--Within 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall provide--
       (A) a list of planned air traffic and airport-capacity 
     projects at congested Airport Capacity Benchmark airports the 
     completion of which will substantially relieve congestion at 
     those airports; and
       (B) a list of options for expanding capacity at the 8 
     airports on the list at which the most severe delays are 
     occurring, to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation, and to the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Secretary shall 
     provide updated lists to those Committees 2 years after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Delisting of projects.--The Secretary shall remove a 
     project from the list provided to the Committees under 
     paragraph (1) upon the request, in writing, of an airport 
     operator if the operator states in the request that 
     construction of the project will not be completed within 10 
     years from the date of the request.

     SEC. 206. DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACTING.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 471 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 47138. Design-build contracting

       ``(a) In General.--The Administrator may approve an 
     application of an airport sponsor under this section to 
     authorize the airport sponsor to award a design-build 
     contract using a selection process permitted under applicable 
     State or local law if--
       ``(1) the Administrator approves the application using 
     criteria established by the Administrator;
       ``(2) the design-build contract is in a form that is 
     approved by the Administrator;
       ``(3) the Administrator is satisfied that the contract will 
     be executed pursuant to competitive procedures and contains a 
     schematic design adequate for the Administrator to approve 
     the grant;
       ``(4) use of a design-build contract will be cost effective 
     and expedite the project;
       ``(5) the Administrator is satisfied that there will be no 
     conflict of interest; and
       ``(6) the Administrator is satisfied that the selection 
     process will be as open, fair, and objective as the 
     competitive bid system and that at least three or more bids 
     will be submitted for each project under the selection 
     process.
       ``(b) Reimbursement of Costs.--The Administrator may 
     reimburse an airport sponsor for design and construction 
     costs incurred before a grant is made pursuant to this 
     section if the project is approved by the Administrator in 
     advance and is carried out in accordance with all 
     administrative and statutory requirements that would have 
     been applicable under this chapter 471, if the project were 
     carried out after a grant agreement had been executed.
       ``(c) Design-Build Contract Defined.--In this section, the 
     term `design-build contract' means an agreement that provides 
     for both design and construction of a project by a 
     contractor.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     471 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 47137 the following:

``47138. Design-build contracting.''.

     SEC. 207. SPECIAL RULE FOR AIRPORT IN ILLINOIS.

       (a) In General.--Nothing in this title shall be construed 
     to preclude the application of any provision of this Act to 
     the State of Illinois or any other sponsor of a new airport 
     proposed to be constructed in the State of Illinois.

[[Page 14707]]

       (b) Authority of the Governor.--Nothing in this title shall 
     be construed to preempt the authority of the Governor of the 
     State of Illinois as of August 1, 2001, to approve or 
     disapprove airport development projects.

     SEC. 208. ELIMINATION OF DUPLICATIVE REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 47106(c)(1) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and'' after ``project;'' in subparagraph 
     (A)(ii);
       (2) by striking subparagraph (B); and
       (3) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 47106(c) of such title 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (4);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (4); and
       (3) by striking ``(1)(C)'' in paragraph (4), as 
     redesignated, and inserting ``(1)(B)''.

     SEC. 209. STREAMLINING THE PASSENGER FACILITY FEE PROGRAM.

       Section 40117 is amended--
       (1) by striking from ``finds--'' in paragraph (4) of 
     subsection (b) through the end of that paragraph and 
     inserting ``finds that the project cannot be paid for from 
     funds reasonably expected to be available for the programs 
     referred to in section 48103.'';
       (2) by adding at the end of subsection (c)(2) the 
     following:
       ``(E) The agency will include in its application or notice 
     submitted under subsection (1) copies of all certifications 
     of agreement or disagreement received under subparagraph (D).
       ``(F) For the purpose of this section, an eligible agency 
     providing notice and consultation to an air carrier and 
     foreign air carrier is deemed to have satisfied this 
     requirement if it limits such notices and consultations to 
     air carriers and foreign air carriers that have a significant 
     business interest on the airport. In developing regulations 
     to implement this provision, the Secretary shall consider a 
     significant business interest to be defined as an air carrier 
     or foreign air carrier that has no less than 1.0 percent of 
     boardings at the airport in the prior calendar year, except 
     that no air carrier or foreign air carrier may be considered 
     excluded under this section if it has at least 25,000 
     boardings at the airport in the prior calendar year, or if it 
     operates scheduled service, without regard to such percentage 
     requirements.'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (3) of subsection (c) as 
     paragraph (4) and inserting after paragraph (2) the 
     following:
       ``(3) Before submitting an application, the eligible agency 
     must provide reasonable notice and an opportunity for public 
     comment. The Secretary shall prescribe regulations that 
     define reasonable notice and provide for at least--
       ``(A) a requirement that the eligible agency provide public 
     notice of intent to collect a passenger facility fee so as to 
     inform those interested persons and agencies who may be 
     affected, including--
       ``(i) publication in local newspapers of general 
     circulation;
       ``(ii) publication in other local media; and
       ``(iii) posting the notice on the agency's website;
       ``(B) a requirement for submission of public comments no 
     sooner than 30 days after publishing of the notice and not 
     later than 45 days after publication; and
       ``(C) a requirement that the agency include in its 
     application or notice submitted under paragraph (1) copies of 
     all comments received under subparagraph (B).'';
       (4) by striking ``shall'' in the first sentence of 
     paragraph (4), as redesignated, of subsection (c) and 
     inserting ``may''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(l) Pilot Program for Passenger Facility Fee 
     Authorizations at Small Airports.--
       ``(1) There is established a pilot program for the 
     Secretary to test alternative procedures for authorizing 
     small airports to impose passenger facility fees. An eligible 
     agency may impose a passenger facility fee at a non-hub 
     airport (as defined in section 47102 of this title) that it 
     controls for use on eligible airport-related projects at that 
     airport, in accordance with the provisions of this 
     subsection. These procedures shall be in lieu of the 
     procedures otherwise specified in this section.
       ``(2) The eligible agency must provide reasonable notice 
     and an opportunity for consultation to air carriers and 
     foreign air carriers in accordance with subsection (c)(2), 
     and must provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public 
     comment in accordance with subsection (c)(3).
       ``(3) The eligible agency must submit to the Secretary a 
     notice of intention to impose a passenger facility fee, which 
     notice shall include--
       ``(A) information that the Secretary may require by 
     regulation on each project for which authority to impose a 
     passenger facility charge is sought;
       ``(B) the amount of revenue from passenger facility charges 
     that is proposed to be collected for each project; and
       ``(C) the level of the passenger facility charge that is 
     proposed.
       ``(4) The Secretary shall acknowledge receipt of the notice 
     and indicate any objection to the imposition of a passenger 
     facility fee for any project identified in the notice within 
     30 days after receipt of the eligible agency's notice.
       ``(5) Unless the Secretary objects within 30 days after 
     receipt of the eligible agency's notice, the eligible agency 
     is authorized to impose a passenger facility fee in 
     accordance with the terms of its notice.
       ``(6) Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment 
     of this subsection, the Secretary shall propose such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out this subsection.
       ``(7) The authority granted under this subsection shall 
     expire three years after the issuance of the regulation 
     required by paragraph (6).
       ``(8) An acknowledgement issued under paragraph (4) shall 
     not be considered an order of the Secretary issued under 
     section 46110 of this title.''.

     SEC. 210. QUARTERLY STATUS REPORTS.

       Beginning with the second calendar quarter ending after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall provide quarterly status reports to the 
     Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and 
     the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on the status of construction of each major 
     runway project undertaken at the largest 40 commercial 
     airports in terms of annual enplanements.

     SEC. 211. NOISE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 47501 is amended by adding at the 
     end--
       ``(3) `Federal agency' means any department, agency, 
     corporation, or other establishment or instrumentality of the 
     executive branch of the Federal Government, and includes the 
     Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home 
     Loan Mortgage Corporation.
       ``(4) `Federal entity for lending regulation' means the 
     Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal 
     Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Comptroller of the 
     Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the National 
     Credit Union Administration, and the Farm Credit 
     Administration, and with respect to a particular regulated 
     lending institution means the entity primarily responsible 
     for the supervision of the institution.
       ``(5) `Federal agency lender' means a Federal agency that 
     makes direct loans secured by improved real estate or a 
     mobile home, to the extent such agency acts in such capacity.
       ``(6) `residential real estate' means real estate upon 
     which a residential dwelling is located.
       ``(7) `noise exposure map' means a noise exposure map that 
     complies with section 47503 of this title and part 150 of 
     title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
       ``(8) `regulated lending institution' means any bank, 
     savings and loan association, credit union, farm credit bank, 
     Federal land bank association, production credit association, 
     or similar institution subject to the supervision of a 
     Federal entity for lending regulation.''.
       (b) Noise Exposure Maps.--Section 47503(b) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(b) Revised Maps.--If, in an area surrounding an airport, 
     a change in the operation of the airport would establish a 
     substantial new noncompatible use, or would significantly 
     reduce noise over existing noncompatible uses, beyond the 
     forecast year, the airport operator shall submit a revised 
     noise exposure map to the Secretary showing the new 
     noncompatible use or noise reduction.''.
       (c) Notification of Noise Exposure.--Chapter 457 is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 47511. Notification of noise exposure

       ``(a) Noise Exposure Map.--An airport operator shall make 
     available to lending institutions, upon request, the most 
     recent noise exposure map submitted under section 47503 of 
     this title.
       ``(b) List of Airports.--The Secretary shall maintain a 
     list of airports for which the airport operators have 
     submitted a noise exposure map under section 47503 of this 
     title.
       ``(c) Regulated Lending Institutions.--Each Federal entity 
     for lending regulation (after consultation and coordination 
     with the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council) 
     shall direct by regulation that a regulated lending 
     institution may not make, increase, extend or renew any loan 
     secured by residential real estate or a mobile home that is 
     located or to be located in the vicinity of an airport on the 
     Secretary's list described in subsection (b), unless the loan 
     applicant's purchase agreement for the residential real 
     estate or mobile home provides notice to the purchaser (or 
     satisfactory assurances are provided that the seller has 
     provided written notice to the purchaser prior to the 
     purchaser's signing of the purchase agreement) that the 
     property is within the area of the noise contours on a noise 
     exposure map submitted under section 47503 of this chapter. 
     The notice to the purchaser shall be acknowledged by the 
     purchaser's signing of the purchase agreement or other 
     notification document and the regulated lending institution 
     shall retain a record of the receipt of the notice by the 
     purchaser.
       ``(d) Federal Agency Lenders.--Each Federal agency lender 
     shall by regulation require notification in the manner 
     provided in subsection (c) with respect to any loan that is 
     made by the Federal agency lender and secured by residential 
     real estate or a mobile home located or to be located in the 
     vicinity of an airport on the Secretary's list described in 
     subsection (b).
       ``(e) Contents of Notice.--The notice required under this 
     section shall disclose--
       ``(1) that the property is located within the noise 
     contours depicted on the most recent noise exposure map 
     submitted by the airport operator according to section 47503 
     of this chapter, and is subject to aircraft noise exposure; 
     and
       ``(2) the name and telephone number of the airport where 
     the purchaser may obtain more information on the aircraft 
     noise exposure.''.

[[Page 14708]]



     SEC. 212. PROHIBITION ON REQUIRING AIRPORTS TO PROVIDE RENT-
                   FREE SPACE FOR FAA OR TSA.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 401 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     ``Sec. 40129. Prohibition on rent-free space requirements for 
       FAA or TSA

       ``(a) In General.--Neither the Secretary of Transportation 
     nor the Secretary of Homeland Security may require airport 
     sponsors to provide building construction, maintenance, 
     utilities and expenses, or space in airport sponsor-owned 
     buildings to the Federal Aviation Administration or the 
     Transportation Security Administration without cost for 
     services relating to air traffic control, air navigation, 
     aviation security, or weather reporting.
       ``(b) Negotiated Agreements.--Subsection (a) does not 
     prohibit--
       ``(1) the negotiation of agreements between either 
     Secretary and an airport sponsor to provide building 
     construction, maintenance, utilities and expenses, or space 
     in airport sponsor-owned buildings to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration or the Transportation Security Administration 
     without cost or at below-market rates; or
       ``(2) either Secretary from requiring airport sponsors to 
     provide land without cost to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration for air traffic control facilities or space 
     without cost to the Transportation Security Administration 
     for necessary security checkpoints.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     401 is amended by adding at the end the following:

``40129. Prohibition on rent-free space requirements for FAA or TSA.''.

     SEC. 213. SPECIAL RULES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004.

       (a) Apportionment to Certain Airports With Declining 
     Boardings.--
       (1) In general.--For fiscal year 2004, the Secretary of 
     Transportation may apportion funds under section 47114 of 
     title 49, United States Code, to the sponsor of an airport 
     described in paragraph (2) in an amount equal to the amount 
     apportioned to that airport under that section for fiscal 
     year 2002, notwithstanding any provision of section 47114 to 
     the contrary.
       (2) Airports to which paragraph (1) applies.--Paragraph (1) 
     applies to any airport determined by the Secretary to have 
     had--
       (A) less than 0.05 percent of the total United States 
     passenger boardings (as defined in section 47102(10) of title 
     49, United States Code) for the calendar year used for 
     determining apportionments under section 47114 for fiscal 
     year 2004;
       (B) less than 10,000 passenger boardings in calendar year 
     2002; and
       (C) 10,000 or more passenger boardings in calendar year 
     2000.
       (b) Temporary Increase in Government Share of Certain AIP 
     Project Costs.--Notwithstanding section 47109(a) of title 49, 
     United States Code, the Government's share of allowable 
     project costs for a grant made in fiscal year 2004 under 
     chapter 471 of that title for a project described in 
     paragraph (2) or (3) of that section shall be 95 percent.

     SEC. 214. AGREEMENTS FOR OPERATION OF AIRPORT FACILITIES.

       Section 47124 is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``a qualified entity or'' after ``with'' 
     in subsection (a);
       (2) by inserting ``entity or '' after ``allow the'' in 
     subsection (a);
       (3) by inserting ``entity or'' before ``State'' the last 
     place it appears in subsection (a);
       (4) by striking ``contract,'' in subsection (b)(2) and 
     inserting ``contract with a qualified entity, or'';
       (5) by striking ``the State'' each place it appears in 
     subsection (b)(2) and inserting ``the entity or State'';
       (6) by striking ``pilot'' in the caption of subsection 
     (b)(3);
       (7) by striking ``pilot'' in subsection (b)(3)(A);
       (8) by striking ``pilot'' in subsection (b)(3)(D);
       (9) by striking ``$6,000,000 per fiscal year'' in 
     subsection (b)(3)(E) and inserting ``$6,500,000 for fiscal 
     2004, $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and $7,500,000 for 
     fiscal year 2006''; and
       (10) by striking ``$1,100,000.'' in subsection (b)(4)(C) 
     and inserting ``$1,500,000.''.

     SEC. 215. PUBLIC AGENCIES.

       Section 47102(15) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' after the semicolon in subparagraph 
     (B);
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
       ``(C) the Department of the Interior with respect to an 
     airport owned by the Department that is required to be 
     maintained for commercial aviation safety at a remote 
     location; or''.

     SEC. 216. FLEXIBLE FUNDING FOR NONPRIMARY AIRPORT 
                   APPORTIONMENTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 47117(c)(2) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(2) Waiver.--A sponsor of an airport may make an 
     agreement with the Secretary of Transportation waiving the 
     sponsor's claim to any part of the amount apportioned for the 
     airport under sections 47114(c) and 47114(d)(2)(A) of this 
     title if the Secretary agrees to make the waived amount 
     available for a grant for another public-use airport in the 
     same State or geographical area as the airport, as determined 
     by the Secretary.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 47108(a) is amended by inserting ``or section 
     47114(d)(2)(A)'' after ``under section 47114(c)''.
       (2) Section 47110 is amended--
       (A) by inserting ``or section 47114(d)(2)(A)'' in 
     subsection (b)(2)(C) after ``of section 47114(c)'';
       (B) by inserting ``or section 47114(d)(2)(A)'' in 
     subsection (g) after ``of section 47114(c)'';
       (C) by striking ``of project.'' in subsection (g) and 
     inserting ``of the project.''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Nonprimary Airports.--The Secretary may decide that 
     the costs of revenue producing aeronautical support 
     facilities, including fuel farms and hangars, are allowable 
     for an airport development project at a nonprimary airport 
     and for which the Government's share is paid only with funds 
     apportioned to a sponsor under section 47114(d)(2)(A), if the 
     Secretary determines that the sponsor has made adequate 
     provision for financing airside needs of the airport.''.
       (3) Section 47119(b) is amended by--
       (A) striking ``or'' after the semicolon in paragraph (3);
       (B) striking ``1970.'' in paragraph (4) and inserting 
     ``1970; or''; and
       (C) adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) to a sponsor of a nonprimary airport referred to in 
     subparagraph (A) or (B) paragraph (2), any part of amounts 
     apportioned to the sponsor for the fiscal year under section 
     47114(d)(3)(A) of this title for project costs allowable 
     under section 47110(d) of this title.''.
       (c) Apportionment for All-Cargo Airports.--Section 
     47114(c)(2)(A) is amended by striking ``3'' and inserting 
     ``3.5''.
       (d) Considerations for Cargo Operations.--Section 47115(d) 
     is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (5);
       (2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (6) and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) the ability of the project to foster United States 
     competitiveness in securing global air cargo activity at a 
     United States airport.''.

                 TITLE III--AIRLINE SERVICE DEVELOPMENT

                    Subtitle A--Program Enhancements

     SEC. 301. DELAY REDUCTION MEETINGS.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 417 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 41723. Delay reduction actions

       ``(a) Delay Reduction Meetings.--
       ``(1) Scheduling reduction meetings.--The Secretary of 
     Transportation may request that air carriers meet with the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to 
     discuss flight reductions at severely congested airports to 
     reduce overscheduling and flight delays during hours of peak 
     operation if--
       ``(A) the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration determines that it is necessary to convene 
     such a meeting; and
       ``(B) the Secretary determines that the meeting is 
     necessary to meet a serious transportation need or achieve an 
     important public benefit.
       ``(2) Meeting conditions.--Any meeting under paragraph 
     (1)--
       ``(A) shall be chaired by the Administrator;
       ``(B) shall be open to all scheduled air carriers; and
       ``(C) shall be limited to discussions involving the 
     airports and time periods described in the Administrator's 
     determination.
       ``(3) Flight reduction targets.--Before any such meeting is 
     held, the Administrator shall establish flight reduction 
     targets for the meeting and notify the attending air carriers 
     of those targets not less than 48 hours before the meeting.
       ``(4) Delay reduction offers.--An air carrier attending the 
     meeting shall make any delay reduction offer to the 
     Administrator rather than to another carrier.
       ``(5) Transcript.--The Administrator shall ensure that a 
     transcript of the meeting is kept and made available to the 
     public not later than 3 business days after the conclusion of 
     the meeting.
       ``(b) Stormy Weather Agreements Limited Exemption.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may establish a program to 
     authorize by order discussions and agreements between 2 or 
     more air carriers for the purpose of reducing flight delays 
     during periods of inclement weather.
       ``(2) Requirements.--An authorization issued under 
     paragraph (1)--
       ``(A) may only be issued by the Secretary after a 
     determination by the Federal Aviation Administration that 
     inclement weather is likely to adversely and directly affect 
     capacity at an airport for a period of at least 3 hours;
       ``(B) shall apply only to discussions and agreements 
     concerning flights directly affected by the inclement 
     weather; and
       ``(C) shall remain in effect for a period of 24 hours.
       ``(3) Procedure.--The Secretary shall establish procedures 
     within 30 days after such date of enactment for--
       ``(A) filing requests for an authorization under paragraph 
     (1);
       ``(B) participation under paragraph (5) by representatives 
     of the Department of Transportation in any meetings or 
     discussions held pursuant to such an order; and
       ``(C) the determination by the Federal Aviation 
     Administration about the impact of inclement weather.
       ``(4) Copy of participation request filed with secretary.--
     Before an air carrier may request an order under paragraph 
     (1), it shall file a request with the Secretary, in such form 
     and manner as the Secretary may prescribe, to participate in 
     the program established under paragraph (1).

[[Page 14709]]

       ``(5) DOT participation.--The Secretary shall ensure that 
     the Department is represented at any meetings authorized 
     under this subsection.
       ``(c) Exemption Authorized.--When the Secretary finds that 
     it is required by the public interest, the Secretary, as part 
     of an order issued under subsection (b)(1), shall exempt a 
     person affected by the order from the antitrust laws to the 
     extent necessary to allow the person to proceed with the 
     activities approved in the order.
       ``(d) Antitrust Laws Defined.--In this section, the term 
     `antitrust laws' has the meaning given that term in the first 
     section of the Clayton Act (15 U.S.C. 12).
       ``(e) Sunset.--The authority of the Secretary to issue an 
     order under subsection (b)(1) of this section expires at the 
     end of the 2-year period that begins 45 days after the date 
     of enactment of the Aviation Investment and Revitalization 
     Vision Act. The Secretary may extend the 2-year Period for an 
     additional 2 years if the Secretary determines that such an 
     extension is necessary and in the public interest. The 
     Secretary shall notify the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, and to the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure of any such extension.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     417 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 41722 the following new item:

``41723. Delay reduction actions.''.

     SEC. 302. SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PILOT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) 3-Year Extension.--Section 41743(e)(2) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``There is'' and inserting ``There are'';
       (2) by striking ``2001 and'' and inserting ``2001,''; and
       (3) by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``2003, and 
     $27,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006''.
       (b) Additional Communities.--Section 41743(c)(4) of such 
     title is amended by striking ``program.'' and 
     inserting``program each year. No community, consortia of 
     communities, or combination thereof may participate in the 
     program twice.''.

     SEC. 303. DOT STUDY OF COMPETITION AND ACCESS PROBLEMS AT 
                   LARGE AND MEDIUM HUB AIRPORTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     study competition and airline access problems at hub airports 
     (as defined in section 41731(a)(3)) of title 49, United 
     States Code, and medium hub airports (as defined in section 
     41714(h)(9) of that title). In the study, the Secretary shall 
     examine, among other matters--
       (1) gate usage and availability; and
       (2) the effects of the pricing of gates and other 
     facilities on competition and access.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit a report of the 
     Secretary's findings and conclusions together with any 
     recommendations, including legislative recommendations, the 
     Secretary may have for improving competition and airline 
     access at such airports to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure within 6 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 304. COMPETITION DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR LARGE AND 
                   MEDIUM HUB AIRPORTS.

       Section 47107 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(q) Competition Disclosure Requirement.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     approve an application under this subchapter for an airport 
     development project grant for a hub airport or a medium hub 
     airport only if the Secretary receives assurances that the 
     airport sponsor will provide the information required by 
     paragraph (2) at such time and in such form as the Secretary 
     may require.
       ``(2) Competitive access.--If an airport denies an 
     application by an air carrier to receive access to gates or 
     other facilities at that airport in order to provide service 
     to the airport or to expand service at the airport, then, 
     within 30 days after denying the request, the airport sponsor 
     shall--
       ``(A) notify the Secretary of the denial; and
       ``(B) transmit a report to the Secretary that--
       ``(i) describes the request;
       ``(ii) explains the reasons for the denial; and
       ``(iii) provides a time frame within which, if any, the 
     airport will be able to accommodate the request.
       ``(3) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Hub airport.--The term `hub airport' has the meaning 
     given that term by section 41731(a)(3).
       ``(B) Medium hub airport.--The term `medium hub airport' 
     has the meaning given that term by section 41714(h)(9).''.

    Subtitle B--Small Community and Rural Air Service Revitalization

     SEC. 351. REAUTHORIZATION OF ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE PROGRAM.

       Section 41742(a) of title 49, United States Code, is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to the Secretary of Transportation to carry out the essential 
     air service under this subchapter, $113,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 2004 through 2007, $50,000,000 of which for each 
     such year shall be derived from amounts received by the 
     Federal Aviation Administration credited to the account 
     established under section 45303 of this title or otherwise 
     provided to the Administration.''.

     SEC. 352. INCENTIVE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 417 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:

              ``SUBCHAPTER IV--MARKETING INCENTIVE PROGRAM

``Sec. 41781. Purpose.
``Sec. 41782. Marketing program.
``Sec. 41783. State marketing assistance.
``Sec. 41784. Definitions.
``Sec. 41785. Authorization of appropriations.

     ``Sec. 41781. Purposes

       ``The purposes of this subchapter are--
       ``(1) to enable essential air service communities to 
     increase boardings and the level of passenger usage of 
     airport facilities at an eligible place by providing 
     technical, financial, and other marketing assistance to such 
     communities and to States;
       ``(2) to reduce subsidy costs under subchapter II of this 
     chapter as a consequence of such increased usage; and
       ``(3) to provide such communities with opportunities to 
     obtain, retain, and improve transportation services.

     ``Sec. 41782. Marketing program

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     establish a marketing incentive program for eligible 
     essential air service communities receiving assistance under 
     subchapter II under which the airport sponsor in such a 
     community may receive a grant of not more than $50,000 to 
     develop and implement a marketing plan to increase passenger 
     boardings and the level of passenger usage of its airport 
     facilities.
       ``(b) Matching Requirement; Success Bonuses--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and 
     (3), not less than 25 percent of the publicly financed costs 
     associated with the marketing plan shall come from non-
     Federal sources. For purposes of this paragraph--
       ``(A) the non-Federal portion of the publicly financed 
     costs may be derived from contributions in kind; and
       ``(B) State or local matching contributions may not be 
     derived, directly or indirectly, from Federal funds, but the 
     use by a state or local government of proceeds from the sale 
     of bonds to provide the matching contribution is not 
     considered to be a contribution derived directly or 
     indirectly from Federal funds, without regard to the Federal 
     income tax treatment of interest paid on those bonds or the 
     Federal income tax treatment of those bonds.
       ``(2) Bonus for 25-percent increase in usage.--Except as 
     provided in paragraph (3), if, after any 12-month period 
     during which a marketing plan has been in effect, the 
     Secretary determines that the marketing plan has increased 
     average monthly boardings, or the level of passenger usage, 
     at the airport facilities at the eligible place, by 25 
     percent or more, then only 10 percent of the publicly 
     financed costs associated with the marketing plan shall be 
     required to come from non-Federal sources for the following 
     12-month period.
       ``(3) Bonus for 50-percent increase in usage.--If, after 
     any 12-month period during which a marketing plan has been in 
     effect, the Secretary determines that the marketing plan has 
     increased average monthly boardings, or the level of 
     passenger usage, at the airport facilities at the eligible 
     place, by 50 percent or more, then no portion of the publicly 
     financed costs associated with the marketing plan shall be 
     required to come from non-Federal sources for the following 
     12-month period.

     ``Sec. 41783. State marketing assistance

       ``The Secretary of Transportation may provide up to $50,000 
     in technical assistance to any State within which an eligible 
     essential air service community is located for the purpose of 
     assisting the State and such communities to develop methods 
     to increase boardings in such communities. At least 10 
     percent of the costs of the activity with which the 
     assistance is associated shall come from non-Federal sources, 
     including contributions in kind.

     ``Sec. 41784. Definitions

       ``In this subchapter:
       ``(1) Eligible place.--The term `eligible place' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 41731(a)(1).
       ``(2) Eligible essential air service community.--The term 
     `eligible essential air service community' means an eligible 
     place that--
       ``(A) submits an application to the Secretary in such form, 
     at such time, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may require, including a detailed marketing plan, 
     or specifications for the development of such a plan, to 
     increase average boardings, or the level of passenger usage, 
     at its airport facilities; and
       ``(B) provides assurances, satisfactory to the Secretary, 
     that it is able to meet the non-Federal funding requirements 
     of section 41782(b)(1).
       ``(3) Passenger boardings.--The term `passenger boardings' 
     has the meaning given that term by section 47102(10).
       ``(4) Sponsor.--The term `sponsor' has the meaning given 
     that term in section 47102(19).

     ``Sec. 41785. Authorization of appropriations

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
     of Transportation $12,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 
     through 2007, not more than $200,000 per year of which may be 
     used for administrative costs.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     417 of such title is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 41767 the following:

[[Page 14710]]

               ``SUBCHAPTER IV--MARKETING INCENTIVE PROGRAM

``41781. Purpose.
``41782. Marketing program.
``41783. State marketing assistance.
``41784. Definitions.
``41785. Authorization of appropriations.''.

     SEC. 353. PILOT PROGRAMS.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 41745. Other pilot programs

       ``(a) In General.--If the entire amount authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation by section 
     41785 is appropriated for fiscal years 2004 through 2007, the 
     Secretary of Transportation shall establish pilot programs 
     that meet the requirements of this section for improving 
     service to communities receiving essential air service 
     assistance under this subchapter or consortia of such 
     communities.
       ``(b) Programs Authorized.--
       ``(1) Community flexibility.--The Secretary shall establish 
     a pilot program for not more than 10 communities or consortia 
     of communities under which the airport sponsor of an airport 
     serving the community or consortium may elect to forego any 
     essential air service assistance under preceding sections of 
     this subchapter for a 10-year period in exchange for a grant 
     from the Secretary equal in value to twice the annual 
     essential air service assistance received for the most 
     recently ended calendar year. Under the program, and 
     notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, the 
     Secretary shall make a grant to each participating sponsor 
     for use by the recipient for any project that--
       ``(A) is eligible for assistance under chapter 471;
       ``(B) is located on the airport property; or
       ``(C) will improve airport facilities in a way that would 
     make such facilities more usable for general aviation.
       ``(2) Equipment changes.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a pilot 
     program for not more than 10 communities or consortia of 
     communities under which, upon receiving a petition from the 
     sponsor of the airport serving the community or consortium, 
     the Secretary shall authorize and request the essential air 
     service provider for that community or consortium to use 
     smaller equipment to provide the service and to consider 
     increasing the frequency of service using such smaller 
     equipment. Before granting any such petition, the Secretary 
     shall determine that passenger safety would not be 
     compromised by the use of such smaller equipment.
       ``(B) Alternative services.--For any 3 aiport sponsors 
     participating in the program established under subparagraph 
     (A), the Secretary may establish a pilot program under 
     which--
       ``(i) the Secretary provides 100 percent Federal funding 
     for reasonable levels of alternative transportation services 
     from the eligible place to the nearest hub airport or small 
     hub airport;
       ``(ii) the Secretary will authorize the sponsor to use its 
     essential air service subsidy funds provided under preceding 
     sections of this subchapter for any airport-related project 
     that would improve airport facilities; and
       ``(iii) the sponsor may make an irrevocable election to 
     terminate its participation in the pilot program established 
     under this paragraph after 1 year.
       ``(3) Cost-sharing.--The Secretary shall establish a pilot 
     program under which the sponsors of airports serving a 
     community or consortium of communities share the cost of 
     providing air transportation service greater than the basic 
     essential air service provided under this subchapter.
       ``(4) EAS local participation program.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     establish a pilot program under which designated essential 
     air service communities located in proximity to hub airports 
     are required to assume 10 percent of their essential air 
     service subsidy costs for a 3-year period.
       ``(B) Designation of communities.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Secretary may not designate any 
     community under this paragraph unless it is located within 
     100 miles by road of a hub airport and is not located in a 
     noncontiguous State. In making the designation, the Secretary 
     may take into consideration the total traveltime between a 
     community and the nearest hub airport, taking into account 
     terrain, traffic, weather, road conditions, and other 
     relevant factors.
       ``(ii) One community per state.--The Secretary may not 
     designate--

       ``(I) more than 1 community per State under this paragraph; 
     or
       ``(II) a community in a State in which another community 
     that is eligible to participate in the essential air service 
     program has elected not to participate in the essential air 
     service program.

       ``(C) Appeal of designation.--A community may appeal its 
     designation under this section. The Secretary may withdraw 
     the designation of a community under this paragraph based 
     on--
       ``(i) the airport sponsor's ability to pay; or
       ``(ii) the relative lack of financial resources in a 
     community, based on a comparison of the median income of the 
     community with other communities in the State.
       ``(D) Non-federal share.--
       ``(i) Non-federal amounts.--For purposes of this section, 
     the non-Federal portion of the essential air service subsidy 
     may be derived from contributions in kind, or through 
     reduction in the amount of the essential air service subsidy 
     through reduction of air carrier costs, increased ridership, 
     pre-purchase of tickets, or other means. The Secretary shall 
     provide assistance to designated communities in identifying 
     potential means of reducing the amount of the subsidy without 
     adversely affecting air transportation service to the 
     community.
       ``(ii) Application with other matching requirements.--This 
     section shall apply to the Federal share of essential air 
     service provided this subchapter, after the application of 
     any other non-Federal share matching requirements imposed by 
     law.
       ``(E) Eligibility for other programs not affected.--Nothing 
     in this paragraph affects the eligibility of a community or 
     consortium of communities, an airport sponsor, or any other 
     person to participate in any program authorized by this 
     subchapter. A community designated under this paragraph may 
     participate in any program (including pilot programs) 
     authorized by this subchapter for which it is otherwise 
     eligible--
       ``(i) without regard to any limitation on the number of 
     communities that may participate in that program; and
       ``(ii) without reducing the number of other communities 
     that may participate in that program.
       ``(F) Secretary to report to congress on impact.--The 
     Secretary shall transmit a report to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on--
       ``(i) the economic condition of communities designated 
     under this paragraph before their designation;
       ``(ii) the impact of designation under this paragraph on 
     such communities at the end of each of the 3 years following 
     their designation; and
       ``(iii) the impact of designation on air traffic patterns 
     affecting air transportation to and from communities 
     designated under this paragraph.
       ``(c) Code-Sharing.--Under the pilot program established 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary is authorized to require 
     air carriers providing service to participating communities 
     and major air carriers (as defined in section 41716(a)(2)) 
     serving large hub airports (as defined in section 
     41731(a)(3)) to participate in multiple code-share 
     arrangements consistent with normal industry practice 
     whenever and wherever the Secretary determines that such 
     multiple code-sharing arrangements would improve air 
     transportation services. The Secretary may not require air 
     carriers to participate in such arrangements under this 
     subsection for more than 10 such communities.
       ``(d) Track Service.--The Secretary shall require essential 
     air service providers to track changes in service, including 
     on-time arrivals and departures.
       ``(e) Administrative Provisions.--In order to participate 
     in a pilot program established under this section, the 
     airport sponsor for a community or consortium of communities 
     shall submit an application to the Secretary in such form, at 
     such time, and containing such information as the Secretary 
     may require.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     417 of such title is amended by inserting after the item 
     relating to section 41744 the following:

``41745. Other pilot programs.''.

     SEC. 354. EAS PROGRAM AUTHORITY CHANGES.

       (a) Rate Renegotiation.--If the Secretary of Transportation 
     determines that essential air service providers are 
     experiencing significantly increased costs of providing 
     service under subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, 
     United States Code, the Secretary of Transportation may 
     increase the rates of compensation payable under that 
     subchapter within 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act without regard to any agreements or requirements relating 
     to the renegotiation of contracts. For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term ``significantly increased costs'' means 
     an average monthly cost increase of 10 percent or more.
       (b) Returned Funds.--Notwithstanding any provision of law 
     to the contrary, any funds made available under subchapter II 
     of chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, that are 
     returned to the Secretary by an airport sponsor because of 
     decreased subsidy needs for essential air service under that 
     subchapter shall remain available to the Secretary and may be 
     used by the Secretary under that subchapter to increase the 
     frequency of flights at that airport.
       (c) Small Community Air Service Development Pilot 
     Program.--Section 41743(h) of such title is amended by 
     striking ``an airport'' and inserting ``each airport''.

                      TITLE IV--AVIATION SECURITY

     SEC. 401. STUDY OF EFFECTIVENESS OF TRANSPORTATION SECURITY 
                   SYSTEM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security shall 
     study the effectiveness of the aviation security system, 
     including the air marshal program, hardening of cockpit 
     doors, and security screening of passengers, checked baggage, 
     and cargo.
       (b) Report.--The Secretary shall transmit a report of the 
     Secretary's findings and conclusions together with any 
     recommendations, including legislative recommendations, the 
     Secretary may have for improving the effectiveness of 
     aviation security to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure within 6 
     months after the date of enactment of this Act. In the report 
     the Secretary shall also describe any redeployment of 
     Transportation Security Administration resources based on 
     those findings and conclusions. The Secretary may submit the 
     report to the Committees in classified and redacted form.

[[Page 14711]]



     SEC. 402. AVIATION SECURITY CAPITAL FUND.

       (a) In General.--There is established within the Department 
     of Transportation a fund to be known as the Aviation Security 
     Capital Fund. The first $500,000,000 derived from fees 
     received under section 44940(a)(1) of title 49, United States 
     Code, in each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006 shall be 
     available to the Fund. The Under Secretary of Homeland 
     Security for Border and Transportation Security shall impose 
     the fee authorized by section 44940(a)(1) of such title so as 
     to collect at least $500,000,000 in each of fiscal years 
     2004, 2005, and 2006 for deposit into the fund. Amounts in 
     the fund shall be allocated in such a manner that--
       (1) 40 percent shall be made available for hub airports;
       (2) 20 percent shall be made available for medium hub 
     airports;
       (3) 15 percent shall be made available for small hub 
     airports and non-hub airports; and
       (4) 25 percent shall be distributed by the Secretary on the 
     basis of aviation security risks.
       (b) Purpose.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available to the 
     Secretary of Transportation, after consultation with the 
     Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Border and 
     Transportation Security to provide financial assistance to 
     airport sponsors to defray capital investment in 
     transportation security at airport facilities in accordance 
     with the provisions of this section. The program shall be 
     administered in concert with the airport improvement program 
     under chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code.
       (c) Apportionment.--Amounts made available under subsection 
     (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) shall be apportioned among the 
     airports in each category in accordance with a formula based 
     on the ratio that passenger emplanements at each airport in 
     the category bears to the total passenger emplanements at all 
     airports in the that category.
       (d) Matching Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--Not less than the following percentage of 
     the costs of any project funded under this section shall be 
     derived from non-Federal sources:
       (A) For hub airports and medium hub airports, 25 percent.
       (B) For airports other than hub airports and medium hub 
     airports, 10 percent.
       (2) Use of bond proceeds.--In determining the amount of 
     non-Federal sources of funds, the proceeds of State and local 
     bond issues shall not be considered to be derived, directly 
     or indirectly, from Federal sources without regard to the 
     Federal income tax treatment of interest and principal of 
     such bonds.
       (e) Letters of Intent.--The Secretary of Transportation, or 
     his delegate, may execute letters of intent to commit funding 
     to airport sponsors from the Fund.
       (f) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Use of passenger fee funds.--Section 44940(a)(1) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H) The costs of security-related capital improvements at 
     airports.''.
       (2) Limitation on collection.--Section 44940(d)(4) is 
     amended by striking ``Act.'' and inserting ``Act or in 
     section 402(a) of the Aviation Investment and Revitalization 
     Vision Act.''.
       (g) Definitions.--Any term used in this section that is 
     defined or used in chapter 417 of title 49 United States Code 
     has the meaning given that term in that chapter.

     SEC. 403. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS RELATED TO SECURITY-RELATED 
                   AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT.

       (a) Definition of Airport Development.--Section 47102(3)(B) 
     is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon in clause 
     (viii);
       (2) by striking ``circular; and'' in clause (ix) and 
     inserting ``circular.''; and
       (3) by striking clause (x).
       (b) Improvement of Facilities and Equipment.--Section 
     301(a) of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 
     (49 U.S.C. 44901 note) is amended by striking ``travel.'' and 
     inserting ``travel if the improvements or equipment will be 
     owned and operated by the airport.''.

     SEC. 404. ARMED FORCES CHARTERS.

       Section 132 of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act 
     (49 U.S.C. 44903 note) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Exemption for Armed Forces Charters.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subsections (a) and (b) of this section, 
     and chapter 449 of title 49, United States Code, do not apply 
     to passengers and property carried by aircraft when employed 
     to provide charter transportation to members of the armed 
     forces.
       ``(2) In general.--The Secretary of Defense, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the 
     Secretary of Transportation, shall establish security 
     procedures relating to the operation of aircraft when 
     employed to provide charter transportation to members of the 
     armed forces to or from an airport described in section 
     44903(c) of title 49, United States Code.
       ``(3) Armed forces defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     `armed forces' has the meaning given that term by section 
     101(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code.''.

                         TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS

     SEC. 501. EXTENSION OF WAR RISK INSURANCE AUTHORITY.

       (a) Extension of Policies.--Section 44302(f)(1) is amended 
     by striking ``2004,'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``2006,''.
       (b) Extension of Liability Limitation.--Section 44303(b) is 
     amended by striking ``2004,'' and inserting ``2006,''.
       (c) Extension of Authority.--Section 44310 is amended by 
     striking ``2004.'' and inserting ``2006.''.

     SEC. 502. COST-SHARING OF AIR TRAFFIC MODERNIZATION PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 445 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     ``Sec. 44517. Program to permit cost-sharing of air traffic 
       modernization projects

       ``(a) In General.--Subject to the requirements of this 
     section, the Secretary may carry out a program under which 
     the Secretary may make grants to project sponsors for not 
     more than 10 eligible projects per fiscal year for the 
     purpose of improving aviation safety and enhancing mobility 
     of the Nation's air transportation system by encouraging non-
     Federal investment in critical air traffic control facilities 
     and equipment.
       ``(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of an 
     eligible project carried out under the program shall not 
     exceed 33 percent. The non-Federal share of the cost of an 
     eligible project shall be provided from non-Federal sources, 
     including revenues collected pursuant to section 40117 of 
     this title.
       ``(c) Limitation on Grant Amounts.--No eligible project may 
     receive more than $5,000,000 in Federal funds under the 
     program.
       ``(d) Funding.--The Secretary shall use amounts 
     appropriated under section 48101(a) of this title to carry 
     out this program.
       ``(e) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Eligible project.--The term `eligible project' means 
     a project relating to the Nation's air traffic control system 
     that is certified or approved by the Administrator and that 
     promotes safety, efficiency, or mobility. Such projects may 
     include--
       ``(A) airport-specific air traffic facilities and 
     equipment, including local area augmentation systems, 
     instrument landing systems, weather and wind shear detection 
     equipment, lighting improvements, and control towers;
       ``(B) automation tools to effect improvements in airport 
     capacity, including passive final approach spacing tools and 
     traffic management advisory equipment; and
       ``(C) facilities and equipment that enhance airspace 
     control procedures, including consolidation of terminal radar 
     control facilities and equipment, or assist in en route 
     surveillance, including oceanic and offshore flight tracking.
       ``(2) Project sponsor.--The term `project sponsor' means 
     any major user of the National Airspace System, as determined 
     by the Secretary, including a public-use airport or a joint 
     venture between a public-use airport and one or more air 
     carriers.
       ``(f) Transfers of Equipment.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, and upon agreement by the Administrator of 
     the Federal Aviation Administration, project sponsors may 
     transfer, without consideration, to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, facilities, equipment, or automation tools, 
     the purchase of which was assisted by a grant made under this 
     section, if such facilities, equipment or tools meet Federal 
     Aviation Administration operation and maintenance criteria.
       ``(g) Guidelines.--The Administrator shall issue advisory 
     guidelines on the implementation of the program, which shall 
     not be subject to administrative rulemaking requirements 
     under subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analyses for chapter 
     445 is amended by adding at the end the following:

``44517. Program to permit cost-sharing of air traffic modernization 
              projects.''.

     SEC. 503. COUNTERFEIT OR FRAUDULENTLY REPRESENTED PARTS 
                   VIOLATIONS.

       Section 44726(a)(1) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' after the semicolon in subparagraph 
     (A);
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (D);
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
       ``(B) who knowingly, and with intent to defraud, carried 
     out or facilitated an activity punishable under a law 
     described in subparagraph (A);
       ``(C) whose certificate is revoked under subsection (b) of 
     this section; or''; and
       (4) by striking ``convicted of such a violation.'' in 
     subparagraph (D), as redesignated, and inserting ``described 
     in subparagraph (A), (B) or (C).''.

     SEC. 504. CLARIFICATIONS TO PROCUREMENT AUTHORITY.

       (a) Update and Clarification of Authority.--
       (1) Section 40110(c) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Duties and Powers.--When carrying out subsection (a) 
     of this section, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration may--
       ``(1) notwithstanding section 1341(a)(1) of title 31, lease 
     an interest in property for not more than 20 years;
       ``(2) consider the reasonable probable future use of the 
     underlying land in making an award for a condemnation of an 
     interest in airspace; and
       ``(3) dispose of property under subsection (a)(2) of this 
     section, except for airport and airway property and technical 
     equipment used for the special purposes of the 
     Administration, only under sections 121, 123, and 126 and 
     chapter 5 of title 40.''.
       (2) Section 40110(d)(1) is amended by striking ``implement, 
     not later than January 1, 1996,'' and inserting 
     ``implement''.
       (b) Clarification.--Section 106(f)(2)(A)(ii) is amended by 
     striking ``property'' and inserting ``property, services,''.

[[Page 14712]]



     SEC. 505. JUDICIAL REVIEW.

       Section 46110(c) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, 
     judicial review of an order issued, in whole or in part, 
     pursuant to this part, part B of this subtitle , or 
     subsection (l) or (s) of section 114 of this title, shall be 
     in accordance with the provisions of this section.''.

     SEC. 506. CIVIL PENALTIES.

       (a) Increase in Maximum Civil Penalty.--Section 46301(a) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``$1,000'' in paragraph (1) and inserting 
     ``$25,000'';
       (2) by striking ``or'' the last time it appears in 
     paragraph (1)(A);
       (3) by striking ``section )'' in paragraph (1)(A), and 
     inserting ``section), or section 47133'';
       (4) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), (6), and (7) and 
     redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (8) as paragraphs (2), 
     (3), and (4), respectively; and
       (5) by striking ``paragraphs (1) and (2)'' in paragraph 
     (4), as redesignated, and inserting ``paragraph (1)''.
       (b) Increase in Limit on Administrative Authority and Civil 
     Penalty.--Section 46301(d) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$50,000;'' in paragraph (4)(A) by 
     inserting ``$50,000, if the violation occurred before the 
     date of enactment of the Aviation Authorization Act of 2003, 
     or $1,000,000, if the violation occurred on or after that 
     date;''; and
       (2) by striking ``$50,000.'' in paragraph (8) and inserting 
     ``$50,000, if the violation occurred before the date of 
     enactment of the Aviation Authorization Act of 2003, or 
     $1,000,000, if the violation occurred on or after that 
     date.''.

     SEC. 507. MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS.

       (a) Amounts Subject to Apportionment Under Chapter 471.--
       (1) In general.--Section 47102 is amended--
       (A) by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the following:
       ``(6) `amount newly made available' means the amount newly 
     made available under section 48103 of this title as an 
     authorization for grant obligations for a fiscal year, as 
     that amount may be limited in that year by a provision in an 
     appropriations Act, but as determined without regard to grant 
     obligation recoveries made in that year or amounts covered by 
     section 47107(f).''; and
       (B) by redesignating paragraphs (7) through (20) as 
     paragraphs (8) through (21), and inserting after paragraph 
     (6) the following:
       ``(7) `amount subject to apportionment' means the amount 
     newly made available, less the amount made available for the 
     fiscal year for administrative expenses under section 
     48105.''.
       (2) Conforming Amendments.--
       (A) Section 41742(b) is amended by striking 
     ``Notwithstanding section 47114(g) of this title, any'' and 
     inserting ``Any''.
       (B) Section 47104(b) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(b) Incurring Obligations.--The Secretary may incur 
     obligations to make grants from the amount subject to 
     apportionment as soon as the apportionments required by 
     sections 47114(c) and (d)(2) of this title have been 
     issued.''.
       (C) Section 47107(f)(3) is amended by striking ``made 
     available to the Secretary under section 48103 of this title 
     and'' and inserting ``subject to apportionment, and is''.
       (D) Section 47114 is amended--
       (i) by striking subsection (a);
       (ii) by striking ``apportionment for that fiscal year'' in 
     subsection (b) and inserting ``apportionment'';
       (iii) by striking ``total amount made available under 
     section 48103'' in subsections (c)(2)(C), (d)(3), and (e)(4) 
     and inserting ``amount subject to apportionment'';
       (iv) by striking ``each fiscal year'' in subsection 
     (c)(2)(A); and
       (v) by striking ``for each fiscal year'' in subsection 
     (d)(2).
       (E) Subsection 47116(b) is amended by striking ``amounts 
     are made available under section 48103 of this title'' and 
     inserting ``an amount is subject to apportionment''.
       (F) Section 47117 is amended--
       (i) by striking ``amounts are made available under section 
     48103 of this title.'' in subsection (a) and inserting ``an 
     amount is subject to apportionment.'';
       (ii) by striking ``a sufficient amount is made available 
     under section 48103.'' in subsection (f)(2)(A) and inserting 
     ``there is a sufficient amount subject to apportionment.'';
       (iii) in subsection (f)(2)(B), by inserting ``in'' before 
     ``the succeeding'';
       (iv) by striking ``Newly available'' in the caption of 
     subsection (f)(3) and inserting ``Restored'';
       (v) by striking ``newly available under section 48103 of 
     this title,'' in subsection (f)(3)(A) and inserting ``subject 
     to apportionment,'';
       (vi) by striking ``made available under section 48103 for 
     such obligations for such fiscal year.'' in subsection (f)(4) 
     and inserting ``subject to apportionment.''; and
       (vii) by striking ``enacted after September 3, 1982,'' in 
     subsection (g).
       (b) Recovered Funds.--Section 47117 is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(g) Crediting of Recovered Funds.--For the purpose of 
     determining compliance with a limitation on the amount of 
     grant obligations that may be incurred in a fiscal year 
     imposed by an appropriations Act, an amount that is recovered 
     by canceling or reducing a grant obligation--
       ``(1) shall be treated as a negative obligation that is to 
     be netted against the gross obligation limitation, and
       ``(2) may permit the gross limitation to be exceeded by an 
     equal amount.''.
       (c) Airport Safety Data Collection.--Section 47130 is 
     amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 47130. Airport safety data collection

       ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration may 
     award a contract, using sole source or limited source 
     authority, or enter into a cooperative agreement with, or 
     provide a grant from amounts made available under section 
     48103 to, a private company or entity for the collection of 
     airport safety data. If a grant is provided, the United 
     States Government's share of the cost of the data collection 
     shall be 100 percent.''.
       (d) Statute of Limitations.--Section 47107(l)(5)(A) is 
     amended by inserting ``or any other governmental entity'' 
     after ``sponsor''.
       (e) Audit Certification.--Section 47107(m) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``promulgate regulations that'' in 
     paragraph (1) and inserting ``include a provision in the 
     compliance supplement provisions to'';
       (2) by striking ``and opinion of the review'' in paragraph 
     (1); and
       (3) by striking paragraph (3).
       (f) Noise Exposure Maps.--Section 47503(a) is amended by 
     striking ``1985,'' and inserting ``a forecast year that is at 
     least 5 years in the future,''.
       (g) Clarification of Applicability of PFCs to Military 
     Charters.--Section 40117(e)(2) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon in subparagraph 
     (D);
       (2) by striking ``passengers.'' in subparagraph (E) and 
     inserting ``passengers; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) enplaning at an airport if the passenger did not pay 
     for the air transportation which resulted in such enplanement 
     due to charter arrangements and payment by the United States 
     Department of Defense.''.

     SEC. 508. LOW-EMISSION AIRPORT VEHICLES AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to permit the 
     use of funds made available under subchapter 471 to encourage 
     commercial service airports in air quality nonattainment and 
     maintenance areas to undertake projects for gate 
     electrification, acquisition or conversion of airport 
     vehicles and airport-owned ground support equipment to 
     acquire low-emission technology, low-emission technology fuel 
     systems, and other related air quality projects on a 
     voluntary basis to improve air quality and more aggressively 
     address the constraints that emissions can impose on future 
     aviation growth. Use of those funds is conditioned on 
     airports receiving credits for emissions reductions that can 
     be used to mitigate the air quality effects of future airport 
     development. Making these projects eligible for funding in 
     addition to those projects that are already eligible under 
     section 47102(3)(F) is intended to support those projects 
     that, at the time of execution, may not be required by the 
     Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7501 et seq.), but may be needed in 
     the future.
       (b) Activities Added to Definition of ``Airport 
     Development''.--Section 47102(3) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(K) work necessary to construct or modify airport 
     facilities to provide low-emission fuel systems, gate 
     electrification, and other related air quality improvements 
     at a commercial service airport, if the airport is located in 
     an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area (as defined 
     in sections 171(2) and 175(A) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
     7501(2), 7505a) and if such project will result in an airport 
     receiving appropriate emission credits, as described in 
     section 47139 of this title. The Secretary, in consultation 
     with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 
     Agency, shall issue guidance describing eligible low-emission 
     modifications and improvements and stating how airport 
     sponsors will demonstrate benefits.
       ``(L) a project for the acquisition or conversion of 
     vehicles and ground support equipment, owned by a commercial 
     service airport, to low-emission technology, if the airport 
     is located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance 
     area (as defined in sections 171(2) and 175(A) of the Clean 
     Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7501(2), 7505a) and if such project will 
     result in an airport receiving appropriate emission credits 
     as described in section 47139 of this title. The Secretary, 
     in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, shall issue guidance describing eligible 
     low-emission vehicle technology and stating how airport 
     sponsors will demonstrate benefits. For airport-owned 
     vehicles and equipment, the acquisition of which are not 
     otherwise eligible for assistance under this subchapter, the 
     incremental cost of equipping such vehicles or equipment with 
     low-emission technology shall be treated as eligible for 
     assistance.''.
       (c) Low-emission Technology Defined.--Section 47102 is 
     amended by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (20), as 
     paragraphs (11) through (21) respectively, and inserting 
     after paragraph (9) the following:
       ``(10) `low-emission technology' means technology for new 
     vehicles and equipment whose emission performance is the best 
     achievable under emission standards established by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency and that relies exclusively 
     on alternative fuels that are substantially non-petroleum 
     based, as defined by the Department of Energy, but not 
     excluding hybrid systems.''.
       (d) Emissions Credits.--
       (1) In general.--Subchapter I of chapter 471, as amended by 
     section 206 of this Act, is further amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

[[Page 14713]]



     ``Sec. 47139. Emission credits for air quality projects

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary and the Administrator of 
     the Environmental Protection Agency shall jointly agree on 
     how to assure that airport sponsors receive appropriate 
     emission credits for projects described in sections 
     40117(a)(3)(G), 47102(3)(K), or 47102(3)(L) of this title. 
     The agreement must, at a minimum, include provisions to 
     ensure that--
       ``(1) the credits will be consistent with the Clean Air Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 7402 et seq.);
       ``(2) credits generated by the emissions reductions in 
     criteria pollutants are kept by the airport sponsor and may 
     be used for purposes of any current or future general 
     conformity determination or as offsets under the New Source 
     Review program;
       ``(3) there is national consistency in the way credits are 
     calculated and are provided to airports;
       ``(4) credits are provided to airport sponsors in a timely 
     manner; and
       ``(5) there is a method by which the Secretary can be 
     assured that, for any specific project for which funding is 
     being requested, the appropriate credits will be granted.
       ``(b) Assurance of Receipt of Credits.--
       ``(1) In general.--As a condition for making a grant for a 
     project described in section 47102(3)(K), 47102(3)(L), or 
     47140 of this title, or as a condition for granting approval 
     to collect or use a passenger facility fee for a project 
     described in sections 40117(a)(3)(G), 47102(3)(K), 
     47102(3)(L), or 47140 of this title, the Secretary must 
     receive assurance from the State in which the project is 
     located, or from the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency where there is a Federal Implementation 
     Plan, that the airport sponsor will receive appropriate 
     emission credits in accordance with the conditions of this 
     subsection.
       ``(2) Credits for certain existing projects.--The Secretary 
     and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency 
     shall jointly agree on how to provide emission credits to 
     projects previously approved under section 47136 of this 
     title during fiscal years 2001 through 2003, under terms 
     consistent with this section.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     471 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 47138 the following:

``47139. Emission credits for air quality projects.''.

       (e) Airport Ground Support Equipment Emissions Retrofit 
     Pilot Program.--
       (1) In general.--Subchapter I of chapter 471 is further 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``Sec. 47140. Airport ground support equipment emissions 
       retrofit pilot program

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     carry out a pilot program at not more than 10 commercial 
     service airports under which the sponsors of such airports 
     may use an amount subject to apportionment to retrofit 
     existing eligible airport ground support equipment which 
     burns conventional fuels to achieve lower emissions utilizing 
     emission control technologies certified or verified by the 
     Environmental Protection Agency.
       ``(b) Location in Air Quality Nonattainment or Maintenance 
     Areas.--A commercial service airport shall be eligible for 
     participation in the pilot program only if the airport is 
     located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area 
     (as defined in sections 171(2) and 175(A) of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7501(2), 7505a)).
       ``(c) Selection Criteria.--In selecting applicants for 
     participation in the pilot program, the Secretary shall give 
     priority consideration to applicants that will achieve the 
     greatest air quality benefits measured by the amount of 
     emissions reduced per dollar of funds expended under the 
     pilot program.
       ``(d) Maximum Amount.--Not more than $500,000 may be 
     expended under the pilot program at any single commercial 
     service airport.
       ``(e) Guidelines.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall 
     establish guidelines regarding the types of retrofit projects 
     eligible under this pilot program by considering remaining 
     equipment useful life, amounts of emission reduction in 
     relation to the cost of projects, and other factors necessary 
     to carry out this section. The Secretary may give priority to 
     ground support equipment owned by the airport and used for 
     airport purposes.
       ``(f) Eligible Equipment Defined.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term `eligible equipment' means ground service 
     or maintenance equipment that--
       ``(1) is located at the airport;
       ``(2) used to support aeronautical and related activities 
     on the airport; and
       ``(3) will remain in operation at the airport.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     471 is further amended by inserting after the item relating 
     to section 47139 the following:

``47140. Airport ground support equipment emissions retrofit pilot 
              program.''.

     SEC. 509. LOW-EMISSION AIRPORT VEHICLES AND GROUND SUPPORT 
                   EQUIPMENT.

       Section 40117(a)(3) is amended by inserting at the end the 
     following:
       ``(G) A project for the acquisition or conversion of ground 
     support equipment or airport-owned vehicles used at a 
     commercial service airport with, or to, low-emission 
     technology or cleaner burning conventional fuels, or the 
     retrofitting of such equipment or vehicles that are powered 
     by a diesel or gasoline engine with emission control 
     technologies certified or verified by the Environmental 
     Protection Agency to reduce emissions, if the airport is 
     located in an air quality nonattainment or maintenance area 
     (as defined in sections 171(2) and 175(A) of the Clean Air 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 7501(2), 7505a), and if such project will 
     result in an airport receiving appropriate emission credits 
     as described in section 47139 of this title. The Secretary, 
     in consultation with the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency, shall issue guidance for eligible projects 
     and for how benefits must be demonstrated. The eligible cost 
     is limited to the incremental amount that exceeds the cost of 
     acquiring other vehicles or equipment that are not low-
     emission and would be used for the same purpose, or to the 
     cost of low-emission retrofitting. For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term ``ground support equipment'' means 
     service and maintenance equipment used at an airport to 
     support aeronautical operations and related activities.''.

     SEC. 510. PACIFIC EMERGENCY DIVERSION AIRPORT.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation shall 
     enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretaries 
     of Defense, the Interior, and Homeland Security to facilitate 
     the sale of aircraft fuel on Midway Island, so that the 
     revenue from the fuel sales can be used to operate Midway 
     Island Airport in accordance with Federal Aviation 
     Administration airport standards. The memorandum shall also 
     address the long term potential for promoting tourism as a 
     means of generating revenue to operate the airport.
       (b) Navigational Aids.--The Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration may support and be responsible for 
     maintaining all aviation-related navigational aids at Midway 
     Island Airport.

     SEC. 511. GULF OF MEXICO AVIATION SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     develop and carry out a program designed to expand and 
     improve the safety, efficiency, and security of--
       (1) air traffic control services provided to aviation in 
     the Gulf of Mexico area; and
       (2) aviation-related navigational, low altitude 
     communications and surveillance, and weather services in that 
     area.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation such 
     sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for the 4 
     fiscal year period beginning with fiscal year 2004.

     SEC. 512. AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL COLLEGIATE TRAINING INITIATIVE.

       The Secretary of Transportation may use, from funds 
     available to the Secretary and not otherwise obligated or 
     expended, such sums as may be necessary to carry out and 
     expand the Air Traffic Control Collegiate Training 
     Initiative.

     SEC. 513. INCREASE IN CERTAIN SLOTS.

       (a) In General.--Section 41714(d)(1)(C) is amended by 
     striking ``2'' and inserting ``3''.
       (b) Beyond-Perimeter Exemptions.--Section 41718(a) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by striking ``12'' and 
     inserting ``24''.

     SEC. 514. AIR TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT SYSTEM PLAN.

       (a) In General.--Within 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall transmit to the Senate Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure an action plan, with an implementation 
     schedule--
       (1) to provide adequate oversight of repair stations (known 
     as Part 145 repair stations) and ensure that Administration-
     approved repair stations outside the United States are 
     subject to the same level of oversight and quality control as 
     those located in the United States; and
       (2) for addressing problems with the Air Transportation 
     Oversight System that have been identified in reports by the 
     Comptroller General and the Inspector General of the 
     Department of Transportation.
       (b) Plan Requirements.--The plan transmitted by the 
     Administrator under subsection (a)(2) shall set forth the 
     action the Administration will take under the plan--
       (1) to develop specific, clear, and meaningful inspection 
     checklists for the use of Administration aviation safety 
     inspectors and analysts;
       (2) to provide adequate training to Administration aviation 
     safety inspectors in system safety concepts, risk analysis, 
     and auditing;
       (3) to ensure that aviation safety inspectors with the 
     necessary qualifications and experience are physically 
     located where they can satisfy the most important needs;
       (4) to establish strong national leadership for the Air 
     Transportation Oversight System and to ensure that the System 
     is implemented consistently across Administration field 
     offices; and
       (5) to extend the Air Transportation Oversight System 
     beyond the 10 largest air carriers, so it governs oversight 
     of smaller air carriers as well.

     SEC. 515. NATIONAL SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT 
                   OMBUDSMAN.

       (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 417, as amended 
     by section 353 of this Act, is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:

     ``Sec. 41746. National Small Community Air Service 
       Development Ombudsman

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established in the 
     Department of Transportation the position of National Small 
     Community Air Service Ombudsman (in this section referred to 
     as the `Ombudsman'). The Secretary of Transportation

[[Page 14714]]

     shall appoint the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman shall report to 
     the Secretary.
       ``(b) Purpose.--The Ombudsman, in consultation with 
     officials from small communities in the United States, State 
     aviation agencies, and State and local economic development 
     agencies, shall develop strategies for retaining and 
     enhancing the air service provided to small communities in 
     the United States.
       ``(c) Outreach.--The Ombudsman shall solicit and receive 
     comments from small communities regarding strategies for 
     retaining and enhancing air service, and shall act as a 
     liaison between the communities and Federal agencies for the 
     purpose of developing such strategies.''
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     417 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 47145 the following:

``47146. National small community air service development ombudsman.''.

     SEC. 516. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established a commission to be 
     known as the ``National Commission on Small Community Air 
     Service'' (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Commission'').
       (b) Membership.--
       (1) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of 9 
     members of whom--
       (A) 3 members shall be appointed by the Secretary;
       (B) 2 members shall be appointed by the Majority Leader of 
     the Senate;
       (C) 1 member shall be appointed by the Minority Leader of 
     the Senate;
       (D) 2 members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the 
     House of Representatives; and
       (E) 1 member shall be appointed by the Minority Leader of 
     the House of Representatives.
       (2) Qualifications.--Of the members appointed by the 
     Secretary under paragraph (1)(A)--
       (A) 1 member shall be a representative of a regional 
     airline;
       (B) 1 member shall be a representative of an FAA-designated 
     small-hub airport; and
       (C) 1 member shall be a representative of a State aviation 
     agency.
       (3) Terms.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the 
     Commission.
       (4) Vacancies.--A vacancy in the Commission shall be filled 
     in the manner in which the original appointment was made.
       (5) Travel expenses.--Members shall serve without pay but 
     shall receive travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of 
     subsistence, in accordance with subchapter I of chapter 57 of 
     title 5, United States Code.
       (c) Chairperson.--The member appointed by the Secretary 
     under subsection (b)(2)(B) shall serve as the Chairperson of 
     the Commission (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Chairperson'').
       (d) Duties.--
       (1) Study.--The Commission shall undertake a study of--
       (A) the challenges faced by small communities in the United 
     States with respect to retaining and enhancing their 
     scheduled commercial air service; and
       (B) whether the existing Federal programs charged with 
     helping small communities are adequate for them to retain and 
     enhance their existing air service.
       (2) Essential air service communities.--In conducting the 
     study, the Commission shall pay particular attention to the 
     state of scheduled commercial air service in communities 
     currently served by the Essential Air Service program.
       (e) Recommendations.--Based on the results of the study 
     under subsection (d), the Commission shall make such 
     recommendations as it considers necessary to--
       (1) improve the state of scheduled commercial air service 
     at small communities in the United States, especially 
     communities described in subsection (d)(2); and
       (2) improve the ability of small communities to retain and 
     enhance their existing air service.
       (f) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date on 
     which initial appointments of members to the Commission are 
     completed, the Commission shall transmit to the President and 
     Congress a report on the activities of the Commission, 
     including recommendations made by the Commission under 
     subsection (e).
       (g) Commission Panels.--The Chairperson shall establish 
     such panels consisting of members of the Commission as the 
     Chairperson determines appropriate to carry out the functions 
     of the Commission.
       (h) Commission Personnel Matters.--
       (1) Staff.--The Commission may appoint and fix the pay of 
     such personnel as it considers appropriate.
       (2) Staff of federal agencies.--Upon request of the 
     Chairperson, the head of any department or agency of the 
     United States may detail, on a reimbursable basis, any of the 
     personnel of that department or agency to the Commission to 
     assist it in carrying out its duties under this section.
       (3) Other staff and support.--Upon the request of the 
     Commission, or a panel of the Commission, the Secretary shall 
     provide the Commission or panel with professional and 
     administrative staff and other support, on a reimbursable 
     basis, to assist the Commission or panel in carrying out its 
     responsibilities.
       (i) Obtaining Official Data.--The Commission may secure 
     directly from any department or agency of the United States 
     information (other than information required by any statute 
     of the United States to be kept confidential by such 
     department or agency) necessary for the Commission to carry 
     out its duties under this section. Upon request of the 
     Chairperson, the head of that department or agency shall 
     furnish such nonconfidential information to the Commission.
       (j) Termination.--The Commission shall terminate on the 
     30th day following the date of transmittal of the report 
     under subsection (f).
       (k) Applicability of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.--
     The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not 
     apply to the Commission.

     SEC. 517. TRAINING CERTIFICATION FOR CABIN CREW.

       Section 44935 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(g) Training Standards for Cabin Crew.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator shall establish 
     standards for cabin crew training, consistent with the 
     Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the issuance of 
     certification. The Administrator shall require cabin crew 
     members to complete a cabin crew training course approved by 
     the Federal Aviation Administration and the Transportation 
     Security Administration.
       ``(2) Certification.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administrator shall provide for the 
     issuance of an appropriate certificate to each individual who 
     successfully completes such a course.
       ``(B) Contents.--The cabin crew certificate shall--
       ``(i) be numbered and recorded by the Administrator of the 
     Federal Aviation Administration;
       ``(ii) contain the name, address, and description of the 
     individual to whom the certificate is issued; and
       ``(iii) contain the name of the current air carrier 
     employer of the certificate holder;
       ``(iv) contain terms the Administrator determines are 
     necessary to ensure safety in air commerce, including terms 
     that the certificate shall remain valid unless the 
     Administrator suspends or revokes the certificate; and
       ``(v) designate the type and model of aircraft on which the 
     certificate holder cabin crew member has successfully 
     completed all Federal Aviation Administration and 
     Transportation Security Administration required training in 
     order to be assigned duties on board such type and model of 
     aircraft.
       ``(3) Cabin crew defined.--In this subsection, the term 
     `cabin crew' means individuals working in an aircraft cabin 
     on board a transport category aircraft with 20 or more 
     seats.''.

     SEC. 518. AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURER INSURANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 44302(f) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(3) Aircraft manufacturers.--The Secretary may offer to 
     provide war and terrorism insurance to aircraft manufacturers 
     for loss or damage arising from the operation of an American 
     or foreign-flag aircraft, in excess of $50,000,000 in the 
     aggregate or in excess of such other amounts of available 
     primary insurance, on such terms and conditions as the 
     Secretary may prescribe.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Definition of aircraft manufacturer.--Section 44301 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) `aircraft manufacturer' means any company or other 
     business entity the majority ownership and control of which 
     is by United States citizens that manufactures aircraft or 
     aircraft engines.''.
       (2) Coverage.--Section 44304(a) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:
       ``(6) war and terrorism losses or damages of an aircraft 
     manufacturer arising from the operation of an American or 
     foreign-flag aircraft.''.

     SEC. 519. GROUND-BASED PRECISION NAVIGATIONAL AIDS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may 
     establish a program for the installation, operation, and 
     maintenance of ground-based precision navigational aids for 
     terrain-challenged airports. The program shall include 
     provision for--
       (1) preventative and corrective maintenance for the life of 
     each system of such aids; and
       (2) requisite staffing and resources for the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's efficient maintenance of the 
     program.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation to 
     carry out the program established under subsection (a) such 
     sums as may be necessary.

     SEC. 520. STANDBY POWER EFFICIENCY PROGRAM.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary of Transportation, in 
     cooperation with the Secretary of Energy and, where 
     applicable, the Secretary of Defense, may establish a program 
     to improve the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and 
     environmental performance of standby power systems at Federal 
     Aviation Administration sites, including the implementation 
     of fuel cell technology.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation such 
     sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2004 
     through 2008 to carry out the provisions of this section.

                   TITLE VI--SECOND CENTURY OF FLIGHT

     SEC. 601. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Since 1990, the United States has lost more than 
     600,000 aerospace jobs.
       (2) Over the last year, approximately 100,000 airline 
     workers and aerospace workers have lost their jobs as a 
     result of the terrorist attacks in the United States on 
     September 11, 2001, and the slowdown in the world economy.
       (3) The United States has revolutionized the way people 
     travel, developing new technologies and aircraft to move 
     people more efficiently and more safely.

[[Page 14715]]

       (4) Past Federal investment in aeronautics research and 
     development have benefited the economy and national security 
     of the United States and the quality of life of its citizens.
       (5) The total impact of civil aviation on the United States 
     economy exceeds $900 billion annually--9 percent of the gross 
     national product--and 11 million jobs in the national 
     workforce. Civil aviation products and services generate a 
     significant surplus for United States trade accounts, and 
     amount to significant numbers of America's highly skilled, 
     technologically qualified work force.
       (6) Aerospace technologies, products and services underpin 
     the advanced capabilities of our men and women in uniform and 
     those charged with homeland security.
       (7) Future growth in civil aviation increasingly will be 
     constrained by concerns related to aviation system safety and 
     security, aviation system capabilities, aircraft noise, 
     emissions, and fuel consumption.
       (8) The United States is in danger of losing its aerospace 
     leadership to international competitors aided by persistent 
     government intervention. Many governments take their funding 
     beyond basic technology development, choosing to fund product 
     development and often bring the product to market, even if 
     the products are not fully commercially viable. Moreover, 
     international competitors have recognized the importance of 
     noise, emission, fuel consumption, and constraints of the 
     aviation system and have established aggressive agendas for 
     addressing each of these concerns.
       (9) Efforts by the European Union, through a variety of 
     means, will challenge the United States' leadership position 
     in aerospace. A recent report outlined the European Union's 
     goal of becoming the world's leader in aviation and 
     aeronautics by the end of 2020, utilizing better coordination 
     among research programs, planning, and funding to accomplish 
     this goal.
       (10) Revitalization and coordination of the United States' 
     efforts to maintain its leadership in aviation and 
     aeronautics are critical and must begin now.
       (11) A recent report by the Commission on the Future of the 
     United States Aerospace Industry outlined the scope of the 
     problems confronting the aerospace and aviation industries in 
     the United States and found that--
       (A) Aerospace will be at the core of America's leadership 
     and strength throughout the 21st century;
       (B) Aerospace will play an integral role in our economy, 
     our security, and our mobility; and
       (C) global leadership in aerospace is a national 
     imperative.
       (12) Despite the downturn in the global economy, Federal 
     Aviation Administration projections indicate that upwards of 
     1 billion people will fly annually by 2013. Efforts must 
     begin now to prepare for future growth in the number of 
     airline passengers.
       (13) The United States must increase its investment in 
     research and development to revitalize the aviation and 
     aerospace industries, to create jobs, and to provide 
     educational assistance and training to prepare workers in 
     those industries for the future.
       (14) Current and projected levels of Federal investment in 
     aeronautics research and development are not sufficient to 
     address concerns related to the growth of aviation.

        Subtitle A--The Office of Aerospace and Aviation Liaison

     SEC. 621. OFFICE OF AEROSPACE AND AVIATION LIAISON.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Department of Transportation an Office of Aerospace and 
     Aviation Liaison.
       (b) Function.--The Office shall--
       (1) coordinate aviation and aeronautics research programs 
     to achieve the goal of more effective and directed programs 
     that will result in applicable research;
       (2) coordinate goals and priorities and coordinate research 
     activities within the Federal Government with United States 
     aviation and aeronautical firms;
       (3) coordinate the development and utilization of new 
     technologies to ensure that when available, they may be used 
     to their fullest potential in aircraft and in the air traffic 
     control system;
       (4) facilitate the transfer of technology from research 
     programs such as the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration program established under section 681 and the 
     Department of Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency 
     program to Federal agencies with operational responsibilities 
     and to the private sector;
       (5) review activities relating to noise, emissions, fuel 
     consumption, and safety conducted by Federal agencies, 
     including the Federal Aviation Administration, the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of 
     Commerce, and the Department of Defense;
       (6) review aircraft operating procedures intended to reduce 
     noise and emissions, identify and coordinate research efforts 
     on aircraft noise and emissions reduction, and ensure that 
     aircraft noise and emissions reduction regulatory measures 
     are coordinated; and
       (7) work with the National Air Traffic Management System 
     Development Office to coordinate research needs and 
     applications for the next generation air traffic management 
     system.
       (c) Public-Private Participation.--In carrying out its 
     functions under this section, the Office shall consult with, 
     and ensure participation by, the private sector (including 
     representatives of general aviation, commercial aviation, and 
     the space industry), members of the public, and other 
     interested parties.
       (d) Reporting Requirements.--
       (1) Initial status report.--Not later than 90 days after 
     the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of 
     Transportation shall submit a report to the Senate Committee 
     on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure on the status of the establishment of the 
     Office of Aerospace and Aviation Liaison, including the name 
     of the program manager, the list of staff from each 
     participating department or agency, names of the national 
     team participants, and the schedule for future actions.
       (2) Plan.--The Office shall submit to the Senate Committee 
     on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Science a plan for implementing 
     paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (b) and a proposed 
     budget for implementing the plan.
       (3) Annual report.--The Office shall submit to the Senate 
     Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, the House 
     of Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure, and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Science an annual report that--
       (A) contains a unified budget that combines the budgets of 
     each program coordinated by the Office; and
       (B) describes the coordination activities of the Office 
     during the preceding year.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Secretary of Transportation 
     $2,000,000 for fiscal years 2004 and 2005 to carry out this 
     section, such sums to remain available until expended.

     SEC. 622. NATIONAL AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT 
                   OFFICE.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established within the Federal 
     Aviation Administration a National Air Traffic Management 
     System Development Office, the head of which shall report 
     directly to the Administrator.
       (b) Development of Next Generation Air Traffic Management 
     System.--
       (1) In general.--The Office shall develop a next generation 
     air traffic management system plan for the United States that 
     will--
       (A) transform the national airspace system to meet air 
     transportation mobility, efficiency, and capacity needs 
     beyond those currently included in the Federal Aviation 
     Administration's operational evolution plan;
       (B) result in a national airspace system that can safely 
     and efficiently accommodate the needs of all users;
       (C) build upon current air traffic management and 
     infrastructure initiatives;
       (D) improve the security, safety, quality, and 
     affordability of aviation services;
       (E) utilize a system-of-systems, multi-agency approach to 
     leverage investments in civil aviation, homeland security, 
     and national security;
       (F) develop a highly integrated, secure architecture to 
     enable common situational awareness for all appropriate 
     system users; and
       (G) ensure seamless global operations for system users, to 
     the maximum extent possible.
       (2) Multi-agency and stakeholder involvement.--In 
     developing the system, the Office shall--
       (A) include staff from the Federal Aviation Administration, 
     the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the 
     Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, 
     the Department of Commerce, and other Federal agencies and 
     departments determined by the Secretary of Transportation to 
     have an important interest in, or responsibility for, other 
     aspects of the system; and
       (B) consult with, and ensure participation by, the private 
     sector (including representatives of general aviation, 
     commercial aviation, and the space industry), members of the 
     public, and other interested parties.
       (3) Development criteria and requirements.--In developing 
     the next generation air traffic management system plan under 
     paragraph (1), the Office shall--
       (A) develop system performance requirements;
       (B) select an operational concept to meet system 
     performance requirements for all system users;
       (C) ensure integration of civil and military system 
     requirements, balancing safety, security, and efficiency, in 
     order to leverage Federal funding;
       (D) utilize modeling, simulation, and analytical tools to 
     quantify and validate system performance and benefits;
       (E) develop a transition plan, including necessary 
     regulatory aspects, that ensures operational achievability 
     for system operators;
       (F) develop transition requirements for ongoing 
     modernization programs, if necessary;
       (G) develop a schedule for aircraft equipment 
     implementation and appropriate benefits and incentives to 
     make that schedule achievable; and
       (H) assess, as part of its function within the Office of 
     Aeronautical and Aviation Liaison, the technical readiness of 
     appropriate research technological advances for integration 
     of such research and advances into the plan.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration $300,000,000 for the period beginning 
     with fiscal year 2004 and ending with fiscal year 2010 to 
     carry out this section.

     SEC. 623. REPORT ON CERTAIN MARKET DEVELOPMENTS AND 
                   GOVERNMENT POLICIES.

       Within 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Department of Transportation's Office of Aerospace and 
     Aviation liaison, in cooperation with appropriate Federal 
     agencies, shall submit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation, the House

[[Page 14716]]

     of Representatives Committee on Science, and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure a report about market developments and 
     government policies influencing the competitiveness of the 
     United States jet transport aircraft industry that--
       (1) describes the structural characteristics of the United 
     States and the European Union jet transport industries, and 
     the markets for these industries;
       (2) examines the global market factors affecting the jet 
     transport industries in the United States and the European 
     Union, such as passenger and freight airline purchasing 
     patterns, the rise of low-cost carriers and point-to-point 
     service, the evolution of new market niches, and direct and 
     indirect operating cost trends;
       (3) reviews government regulations in the United States and 
     the European Union that have altered the competitive 
     landscape for jet transport aircraft, such as airline 
     deregulation, certification and safety regulations, noise and 
     emissions regulations, government research and development 
     programs, advances in air traffic control and other 
     infrastructure issues, corporate and air travel tax issues, 
     and industry consolidation strategies;
       (4) analyzes how changes in the global market and 
     government regulations have affected the competitive position 
     of the United States aerospace and aviation industry vis-a-
     vis the European Union aerospace and aviation industry; and
       (5) describes any other significant developments that 
     affect the market for jet transport aircraft.

                     Subtitle B--Technical Programs

     SEC. 641. AEROSPACE AND AVIATION SAFETY WORKFORCE INITIATIVE.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Administrator of 
     the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a joint 
     program of competitive, merit-based grants for eligible 
     applicants to increase the number of students studying toward 
     and completing technical training programs, certificate 
     programs, and associate's, bachelor's, master's, or doctorate 
     degrees in fields related to aerospace and aviation safety.
       (b) Increased Participation Goal.--In selecting projects 
     under this paragraph, the Director shall consider means of 
     increasing the number of students studying toward and 
     completing technical training and apprenticeship programs, 
     certificate programs, and associate's or bachelor's degrees 
     in fields related to aerospace and aviation safety who are 
     individuals identified in section 33 or 34 of the Science and 
     Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (42 U.S.C. 1885a or 
     1885b).
       (c) Supportable Projects.--The types of projects the 
     Administrators may consider under this paragraph include 
     those that promote high quality--
       (1) interdisciplinary teaching;
       (2) undergraduate-conducted research;
       (3) mentor relationships for students;
       (4) graduate programs;
       (5) bridge programs that enable students at community 
     colleges to matriculate directly into baccalaureate aerospace 
     and aviation safety related programs;
       (6) internships, including mentoring programs, carried out 
     in partnership with the aerospace and aviation industry;
       (7) technical training and apprenticeship that prepares 
     students for careers in aerospace manufacturing or 
     operations; and
       (8) innovative uses of digital technologies, particularly 
     at institutions of higher education that serve high numbers 
     or percentages of economically disadvantaged students.
       (d) Grantee Requirements.--In developing grant requirements 
     under this section, the Administrators shall consider means, 
     developed in concert with applicants, of increasing the 
     number of students studying toward and completing technical 
     training and apprenticeship programs, certificate programs, 
     and associate's or bachelor's degrees in fields related to 
     aerospace and aviation safety.
       (e) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Eligible applicant defined.--The term ``eligible 
     applicant'' means--
       (A) an institution of higher education;
       (B) a consortium of institutions of higher education; or
       (C) a partnership between--
       (i) an institution of higher education or a consortium of 
     such institutions; and
       (ii) a nonprofit organization, a State or local government, 
     or a private company, with demonstrated experience and 
     effectiveness in aerospace education.
       (2) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given 
     that term by subsection (a) of section 101 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)), and includes an 
     institution described in subsection (b) of that section.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) NASA.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     2004 to carry out this section.
       (2) FAA.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration such 
     sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2004 to carry out 
     this section.
       (g) Report, Budget, and Plan.--Within 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrators jointly 
     shall submit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure a report setting forth--
       (1) recommendations as to whether the program authorized by 
     this section should be extended for multiple years;
       (2) a budget for such a multi-year program; and
       (3) a plan for conducting such a program.

     SEC. 642. SCHOLARSHIPS FOR SERVICE.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Administrator of 
     the Federal Aviation Administration shall develop a joint 
     student loan program for fulltime students enrolled in an 
     undergraduate or post-graduate program leading to an advanced 
     degree in an aerospace-related or aviation safety-related 
     field of endeavor.
       (b) Internships.--The Administrators may provide temporary 
     internships to such students.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       (1) NASA.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 
     2004 to carry out this section.
       (2) FAA.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration such 
     sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2004 to carry out 
     this section.
       (g) Report, Budget, and Plan.--Within 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrators jointly 
     shall submit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure a report setting forth--
       (1) recommendations as to whether the program authorized by 
     this section should be extended for multiple years;
       (2) a budget for such a multi-year program; and
       (3) a plan for conducting such a program.

         Subtitle C--FAA Research, Engineering, and Development

     SEC. 661. RESEARCH PROGRAM TO IMPROVE AIRFIELD PAVEMENTS.

       The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 
     shall continue the program to consider awards to nonprofit 
     concrete and asphalt pavement research foundations to improve 
     the design, construction, rehabilitation, and repair of rigid 
     concrete airfield pavements to aid in the development of 
     safer, more cost-effective, and more durable airfield 
     pavements. The Administrator may use grants or cooperative 
     agreements in carrying out this section. Nothing in this 
     section requires the Administrator to prioritize an airfield 
     pavement research program above safety, security, Flight 21, 
     environment, or energy research programs.

     SEC. 662. ENSURING APPROPRIATE STANDARDS FOR AIRFIELD 
                   PAVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall review and determine whether the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's standards used to determine the 
     appropriate thickness for asphalt and concrete airfield 
     pavements are in accordance with the Federal Aviation 
     Administration's standard 20-year-life requirement using the 
     most up-to-date available information on the life of airfield 
     pavements. If the Administrator determines that such 
     standards are not in accordance with that requirement, the 
     Administrator shall make appropriate adjustments to the 
     Federal Aviation Administration's standards for airfield 
     pavements.
       (b) Report.--Within 1 year after the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the Administrator shall report the results of the 
     review conducted under subsection (a) and the adjustments, if 
     any, made on the basis of that review to the Senate Committee 
     on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of 
     Representatives Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure.

     SEC. 663. ASSESSMENT OF WAKE TURBULENCE RESEARCH AND 
                   DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

       (a) Assessment.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall enter into an arrangement with the 
     National Research Council for an assessment of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration's proposed wake turbulence research 
     and development program. The assessment shall include--
       (1) an evaluation of the research and development goals and 
     objectives of the program;
       (2) a listing of any additional research and development 
     objectives that should be included in the program;
       (3) any modifications that will be necessary for the 
     program to achieve the program's goals and objectives on 
     schedule and within the proposed level of resources; and
       (4) an evaluation of the roles, if any, that should be 
     played by other Federal agencies, such as the National 
     Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National Oceanic 
     and Atmospheric Administration, in wake turbulence research 
     and development, and how those efforts could be coordinated.
       (b) Report.--A report containing the results of the 
     assessment shall be provided to the Committee on Science of 
     the House of Representatives and to the Committee on 
     Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate not later 
     than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration $500,000 for fiscal year 2004 to 
     carry out this section.

[[Page 14717]]



     SEC. 664. CABIN AIR QUALITY RESEARCH PROGRAM.

       In accordance with the recommendation of the National 
     Academy of Sciences in its report entitled ``The Airliner 
     Cabin Environment and the Health of Passengers and Crew'', 
     the Federal Aviation Administration shall establish a 
     research program to address questions about improving cabin 
     air quality of aircraft, including methods to limit airborne 
     diseases.

     SEC. 665. INTERNATIONAL ROLE OF THE FAA.

       Section 40101(d) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(8) Exercising leadership with the Administrator's 
     foreign counterparts, in the International Civil Aviation 
     Organization and its subsidiary organizations, and other 
     international organizations and fora, and with the private 
     sector to promote and achieve global improvements in the 
     safety, efficiency, and environmental effect of air 
     travel.''.

     SEC. 666. FAA REPORT ON OTHER NATIONS' SAFETY AND 
                   TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENTS.

       The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 
     shall review aviation and aeronautical safety, and research 
     funding and technological actions in other countries. The 
     Administrator shall submit a report to the Committee on 
     Science of the House of Representatives and to the Committee 
     on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate, 
     together with any recommendations as to how such activities 
     might be utilized in the United States.

     SEC. 667. DEVELOPMENT OF ANALYTICAL TOOLS AND CERTIFICATION 
                   METHODS.

       The Federal Aviation Administration shall conduct research 
     to promote the development of analytical tools to improve 
     existing certification methods and to reduce the overall 
     costs for the certification of new products.

     SEC. 668. PILOT PROGRAM TO PROVIDE INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT 
                   OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration may conduct a limited pilot program to provide 
     operating incentives to users of the airspace for the 
     deployment of new technologies, including technologies to 
     facilitate expedited flight routing and sequencing of take-
     offs and landings.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator $500,000 for fiscal 
     year 2004.

     SEC. 669. FAA CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE FOR APPLIED RESEARCH AND 
                   TRAINING IN THE USE OF ADVANCED MATERIALS IN 
                   TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall develop a Center for Excellence focused 
     on applied research and training on the durability and 
     maintainability of advanced materials in transport airframe 
     structures, including the use of polymeric composites in 
     large transport aircraft. The Center shall--
       (1) promote and facilitate collaboration among academia, 
     the Federal Aviation Administration's Transportation 
     Division, and the commercial aircraft industry, including 
     manufacturers, commercial air carriers, and suppliers; and
       (2) establish goals set to advance technology, improve 
     engineering practices, and facilitate continuing education in 
     relevant areas of study.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator $500,000 for fiscal 
     year 2004 to carry out this section.

     SEC. 670. FAA CERTIFICATION OF DESIGN ORGANIZATIONS.

       (a) General Authority To Issue Certificates.--Section 
     44702(a) is amended by inserting ``design organization 
     certificates,'' after ``airman certificates,''.
       (b) Design Organization Certificates.--
       (1) In general.--Section 44704 is amended--
       (A) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 44704. Design organization certificates, type 
       certificates, production certificates, and airworthiness 
       certificates'';

       (B) by redesignating subsections (a) through (d) as 
     subsections (b) through (e);
       (C) by inserting before subsection (b) the following:
       ``(a) Design Organization Certificates.--
       ``(1) Plan.--Within 3 years after the date of enactment of 
     the Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall 
     submit a plan to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure for the development and 
     oversight of a system for certification of design 
     organizations under paragraph (2) that ensures that the 
     system meets the highest standards of safety.
       ``(2) Implementation of plan.--Within 5 years after the 
     date of enactment of the Aviation Investment and 
     Revitalization Vision Act, the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration may commence the issuance of design 
     organization certificates under paragraph (3) to authorize 
     design organizations to certify compliance with the 
     requirements and minimum standards prescribed under section 
     44701(a) for the type certification of aircraft, aircraft 
     engines, propellers, or appliances.
       ``(3) Issuance of certificates.--On receiving an 
     application for a design organization certificate, the 
     Administrator shall examine and rate the design organization 
     in accordance with the regulations prescribed by the 
     Administrator to determine that the design organization has 
     adequate engineering, design, and testing capabilities, 
     standards, and safeguards to ensure that the product being 
     certificated is properly designed and manufactured, performs 
     properly, and meets the regulations and minimum standards 
     prescribed under that section. The Administrator shall 
     include in a design organization certificate terms required 
     in the interest of safety.
       ``(4) No effect on power of revocation.--Nothing in this 
     subsection affects the authority of the Secretary of 
     Transportation to revoke a certificate.'';
       (D) by striking subsection (b), as redesignated, and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(b) Type Certificates.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Administrator may issue a type 
     certificate for an aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller, 
     or for an appliance specified under paragraph (2)(A) of this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) when the Administrator finds that the aircraft, 
     aircraft engine, or propeller, or appliance is properly 
     designed and manufactured, performs properly, and meets the 
     regulations and minimum standards prescribed under section 
     44701(a) of this title; or
       ``(B) based on a certification of compliance made by a 
     design organization certificated under subsection (a).
       ``(2) Investigation and hearing.--On receiving an 
     application for a type certificate, the Administrator shall 
     investigate the application and may conduct a hearing. The 
     Administrator shall make, or require the applicant to make, 
     tests the Administrator considers necessary in the interest 
     of safety.''.
       (c) Reinspection and Reexamination.--Section 44709(a) is 
     amended by inserting ``design organization, production 
     certificate holder,'' after ``appliance,''.
       (d) Prohibitions.--Section 44711(a)(7) is amended by 
     striking ``agency'' and inserting ``agency, design 
     organization certificate,''.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Chapter analysis.--The chapter analysis for chapter 447 
     is amended by striking the item relating to section 44704 and 
     inserting the following:

``44704. Design organization certificates, type certificates, 
              production certificates, and airworthiness 
              certificates.''.

       (2) Cross reference.--Section 44715(a)(3) is amended by 
     striking ``44704(a)'' and inserting ``44704(b)''.

     SEC. 671. REPORT ON LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, in consultation with the Administrator of the 
     National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the head of 
     the Department of Transportation's Office of Aerospace and 
     Aviation Liaison, shall conduct a study of ways to reduce 
     aircraft noise and emissions and to increase aircraft fuel 
     efficiency. The study shall--
       (1) explore new operational procedures for aircraft to 
     achieve those goals;
       (2) identify both near term and long term options to 
     achieve those goals;
       (3) identify infrastructure changes that would contribute 
     to attainment of those goals;
       (4) identify emerging technologies that might contribute to 
     attainment of those goals;
       (5) develop a research plan for application of such 
     emerging technologies, including new combuster and engine 
     design concepts and methodologies for designing high bypass 
     ratio turbofan engines so as to minimize the effects on 
     climate change per unit of production of thrust and flight 
     speed; and
       (6) develop an implementation plan for exploiting such 
     emerging technologies to attain those goals.
       (b) Report.--The Administrator shall transmit a report on 
     the study to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure within 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration $500,000 for fiscal year 2004 to 
     carry out this section.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I believe Senator McCain will arrive 
momentarily to manage this legislation.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. May I ask what the pending Senate business is?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. S. 824.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues, Senator Hollings, 
Senator Lott, and Senator Rockefeller, for their hard work on this very 
important legislation. Senator Lott and Senator Rockefeller held 
extensive hearings in the Aviation Subcommittee. They have come up with 
a product that has addressed many of the

[[Page 14718]]

concerns and very important issues associated with aviation. I believe 
what they have done is a very agreeable product.
  I note that our friends on the other side of the Capitol have 
completed their work on this bill, so if we could complete this 
legislation and go quickly to conference, I think we could have this 
done pretty quickly.
  I am pleased the Senate is now considering S. 824, the Aviation 
Investment and Revitalization Vision Act, AIR-V. This legislation was 
introduced by Senators Lott, Hollings, Rockefeller, and myself on April 
8, 2003, and approved by the Senate Commerce Committee on May 1, 2003.
  I don't think that anyone could have predicted 100 years ago, when 
the Wright Brothers first flew their Wright Flyer over Kitty Hawk, NC, 
that air travel would become such a significant part of our Nation's 
economy. Aviation has evolved from the first controlled flight that 
traveled about 120 feet, to a system that has reached more than 550 
million enplanements annually. Air travel has revolutionized the world. 
We are becoming a global culture for which air travel has contributed 
significantly. The United States has played a critical role in the 
explosion in air travel, with nearly two-thirds of world aviation 
travelers taking off or landing on U.S. soil.
  Mr. President, 4 years ago, the Congress approved the Aviation 
Investment Reform Act for the 21st Century, known as AIR-21. That 
reauthorization measure provided for far reaching changes to our 
Federal aviation policies, coupled with significant investment in 
aviation. We increased airport spending by significant amounts and 
greatly improved our aviation system. At the same time, a great deal 
has happened in aviation during the past few years. The airlines have 
gone through several cycles of good and bad times.
  The tragic events of September 11, 2001, forced a major restructuring 
of aviation transportation security. As a result of September 11 and 
other economic factors, Congress has twice voted to provide the airline 
industry aid totaling $8 billion in cash and the potential for $11 
billion in other benefits. We have taken unprecedented actions to help 
ensure the continued viability of the airlines. I recognize that 
intervening events have been the cause of many of the industry's 
problems, which is why I was a strong supporter of these initiatives. 
However, I do believe that the industry must begin to solve its own 
problems and not come back to Congress when confronted with new 
challenges.
  It is time for Congress to now focus its efforts on the Federal 
Aviation Administration. We must continue to ensure the safety and 
efficiency of our aviation system. We must address the continued 
modernization of our air traffic control system. We must continue our 
oversight of the FAA so that it continues to move towards more 
efficient operation. We must continue the expansion of our 
infrastructure. And, we must continue to strive to promote the security 
of our traveling public.
  I believe the legislation before us, S. 824, the Aviation Investment 
and Revitalization Vision Act, AIR-Vision, meets these objectives. This 
bill would reauthorize FAA programs for 3 years and continue the 
investments in the aviation system that began under AIR 21. 
Specifically, it would authorize funding for FAA Operations at $7.6 
billion for fiscal year 2004; $7.7 billion for fiscal year 2005; and 
$7.9 billion for fiscal year 2006, and it would authorize funding for 
the Airport Improvement Program at $3.4 billion in fiscal year 2004; 
$3.5 billion in fiscal year 2005; and $3.6 billion in fiscal year 2006. 
The bill also authorizes $2.9 billion in fiscal year 2004; $2.97 
billion in fiscal year 2005; and $3 billion in fiscal year 2006 for the 
Airway Facilities Improvement Program and requires a report on major 
FAA modernization programs.
  The funding levels in this bill do not require any new or increased 
taxes or user fees. The taxes currently paid by air travelers and 
others into the Aviation Trust Fund are in place through fiscal year 
2007 and are sufficient to pay for this bill.
  We also must ensure that the FAA manages its resources wisely. The 
bill includes provisions, first proposed by former FAA Administrator 
Garvey and endorsed by the current Administrator, to improve FAA 
management. The FAA's management of its programs, especially its 
modernization efforts, continue to be of particular interest to 
Congress. I note that the FAA has finally hired its first Chief 
Operating Officer, Russ Chew, three and one-half years after the office 
was authorized. This bill would provide additional clarification of the 
FAA's Chief Operating Officers' responsibilities for managing the FAA's 
air traffic control system.
  The bill would create a process to enhance airport capacity at 
certain large hub airports that significantly add to delays in the 
national aviation system by ensuring that these airports' needs are 
continually reviewed. It also attempts to streamline the environmental 
review process by coordinating the reviews by different agencies. This 
is important as this process is sometimes used to unnecessarily delay 
airport expansion.
  The bill makes several improvements and reforms to services to small 
communities and the essential air service program by continuing 
programs created in AIR-21 to incentivize communities to take a greater 
ownership role in their service. It also allows the communities 
flexibility to opt out of the program in return for payment or to look 
at alternate services for the community.
  The bill extends the small community air service development pilot 
program, established in AIR-21, until 2006, and provides funding of 
$27.5 million per year during the 3-year extension. It also clarifies 
that 40 communities per year may participate in the program and that no 
community may participate twice. This program has been well-received 
for the innovative ideas that have sprung from it regarding the 
provision of and payment for air service to small communities, and we 
believe it is important for the program to continue in the near term.
  Regarding competition, the bill instructs the Secretary of 
Transportation to study competition and airline access problems at hub 
airports. Specifically, the Department of Transportation is to look at 
gate usage and availability, and the effects of pricing of gates and 
other facilities on competition and access. Within 6 months, the 
Secretary's findings, conclusions, and recommendations are to be 
submitted to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
Transportation and Infrastructure.
  In addition, the bill requires that airports which deny applications 
by an air carrier for access to gates or other facilities submit to the 
Secretary notification of the denial and a report explaining the 
reasons for the denial and a time line, if any, for when the request 
will be accommodated.
  For security, the bill establishes the Aviation Security Capital Fund 
which is financed with $500 million annually in security service fees 
which are already collected by the Transportation Security 
Administration. The fund will be administered by the TSA and the TSA 
will make grants to airports to assist with capital security costs. The 
fund will allocate 40 percent to hub airports; 20 percent to medium hub 
airports; 15 percent to small hub airports; and 25 percent is to be 
distributed at the Secretary's discretion to address security risks. At 
the same time, the bill protects the AIP funding from continued raids 
on what was created for capital improvement funding, but which in 
recent years has been used for security funding.
  The bill also directs the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
Security to study the effectiveness of the aviation security system. 
Within 6 months, the Secretary's findings, conclusions, and 
recommendations are to be submitted to the Senate Committee on 
Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The Secretary is 
directed to redeploy the department's resources based on the results of 
the study.
  For aviation modernization, the bill establishes a new Office of 
Aerospace

[[Page 14719]]

and Aviation Liaison within the DOT. This office will be charged with 
coordinating aviation and aeronautics research programs, activities, 
goals, and priorities within the Federal Government. Areas of 
responsibility include air traffic control, technology transfer from 
government programs to private sector, noise, emissions, fuel 
consumption, and safety. This office will work with the FAA and the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration to ensure that aviation 
and aerospace research is coordinated and funds are well spent.
  This bill also establishes a National Air Traffic Management System 
Development Office within the FAA with the mission of developing a next 
generation air traffic management system plan for the United States. 
This plan is required to focus on transforming the national airspace 
system to meet air transportation mobility, efficiency, and capacity 
needs beyond those currently included in the FAA's Operational 
Evolution Plan in an effort to build on existing capabilities while 
improving the security, safety, quality, and affordability of the 
system.
  Finally, we have developed a manager's amendment which has been 
agreed to by myself and Senator Lott, Hollings, and Rockefeller. It 
includes a number of technical changes and improvements recommended by 
the executive agencies affected by this bill. It also includes some 
substantive changes to the bill, including: extending whistle blower 
protections to the employees of contractors doing business with the 
FAA; requiring that the GAO periodically report to Congress on the 
economic state of the airline industry and on airline executives' 
compensation; clarifying that the war risk insurance provision only 
applies to U.S. air carriers; moving the new security capital fund from 
the FAA to the TSA; and removing the provision adding additional 
``outside the perimeter'' slots at Reagan National Airport.
  I yield to my colleague from South Carolina and perhaps the Senator 
from Mississippi.
  I say to my colleagues, if they are prepared to bring forward an 
amendment, we would like to consider that quickly and move forward with 
the amending process as it would be our intention to try to finish this 
legislation this evening.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise today in support of legislation 
that will reauthorize the programs of the Federal Aviation 
Administration for the next 3 years, S. 824, the Aviation Investment 
and Revitalization Vision Act, AIR-V. I would like to thank Chairman 
McCain, Senator Lott and Senator Rockefeller for their hard work in 
helping to craft this bipartisan bill that seeks to address the needs 
of the Nation's air transportation system.
  The troubled state of the aviation industry has made FAA 
reauthorization a high priority of the 108th Congress. From the start, 
the Senate Commerce Committee pursued an ambitious schedule, and held 
several hearings on this matter in the first few months of the year. 
Our focus on this matter permitted all involved parties to express 
their concerns about the aviation system in the United States, and 
helped us develop a constructive approach to improve the work of the 
FAA as we move into an unclear future. We have crafted a strong bill 
that focuses properly on safety, security, efficiency and environmental 
friendliness in the realm of aviation.
  AIR-V is a good starting point, but we have a long way to go to make 
certain that the FAA's budget adequately supports the agency's ability 
to oversee an increasingly complex system to ensure safe flying. Recent 
reports have pointed to the FAA's laxity on plane maintenance as 
airlines have increasingly farmed out repair work to trim more 
expensive in-house operations over the past decade. The Department of 
Transportation Inspector General found that major air carriers paid 
contractors $2.9 billion for maintenance in 2001, which was 80 percent 
more than in 1996. While maintenance responsibility has shifted, the 
FAA's policies have not, and the DOT IG is currently conducting an 
audit of repair stations and the FAA's oversight of them. We must take 
steps to provide FAA needed funding to improve outdated oversight, 
monitor gaps in overseas repair service, and update training methods 
which have not changed significantly in almost 50 years. It is vital 
that we adequately fund to FAA's budget to ensure the safest aviation 
system possible.
  The impact of the aviation industry on our Nation is clear. Prior to 
September 11, 2001, the total impact of civil aviation on the national 
economy exceeded $900 billion and 11 million jobs, representing 9 
percent of the U.S. gross domestic product. Since that time, the 
airline industry has faced consecutive years of record multibillion 
dollar losses while our national economy continues to struggle. This 
has made reauthorization of the FAA that much more critical, and I 
believe AIR-V strikes the proper balance among key FAA programs to 
advance our Nation's air transportation system.
  After September 11, 2001, Congress created the Transportation 
Security Administration, which has taken charge of a massive 
restructuring of transportation security, which has led to a greater 
confidence in the traveling public. Even with the vast downturn in 
aviation traffic over the past couple of years, the FAA's Aerospace 
Forecast anticipates that enplanements in the U.S. are expected to 
increase over the next 10 years by roughly 50 percent, with as many as 
1 billion passenger boardings expected annually by 2013.
  Knowing of the expected growth in airline traffic, we must press our 
efforts to make system-wide improvements that will allow the U.S. 
aviation industry to flourish in the coming years and beyond. Air-V 
promotes airport development with increased funding for the Airport 
Improvement Program, and additional support for vital components of the 
National Airspace System through the designation of certain essential 
undertakings as ``national capacity'' projects. When the Bush 
Administration's FAA reauthorization proposal was unveiled it was 
criticized by Aviation Week for not providing enough long-term support 
for AIP at a time when the FAA is in a tight budget situation and the 
Nation's airports are looking for increased funding to pursue needed 
projects to improve their facilities. AIR-V also takes steps to resolve 
the bleeding of hundred of millions of dollars from AIP for security 
purposes and seeks to expedite the installation of EDS machines at 
airports across the country while diverting none of the AIP funds away 
from important infrastructure projects through the creation of an 
Aviation Security Capital Fund to be financed with $500 million 
annually in security service fees to allow TSA to make grants to 
airports to assist with capital security costs.
  I have had increasing concerns that the European Community will 
continue its bold efforts to surpass the American aerospace industry in 
the coming years. We must recognize the importance of the FAA's 
Research, Engineering and Development program in maintaining our 
position as the worldwide leader in the aviation and aerospace 
industries. AIR-V will significantly increase funding for the R,E&D 
program with the understanding that long term planning will be needed 
to keep up with the rapidly changing dynamic of this industry. The EC 
has already introduced a ``2020 plan'' aimed at surpassing America--
FAA, NASA and our aerospace industry--as the world's aerospace leaders 
within the next two decades. We must respond to this challenge with an 
emphasis on technology, and public-private cooperation that will ensure 
our advantage over the EC by strengthening our R,E&D programs and U.S. 
education and interest in aerospace.
  I am pleased that key components of S. 788, the Second Century of 
Flight Act, legislation I introduced along with Senators Brownback, 
Rockefeller, Inouye, Cantwell, and Kerry have been included in this 
reauthorization effort. Among the most important steps that the bill 
takes to promote FAA, R,E&D is the creation of a national office to 
coordinate aviation and aerospace research activities within

[[Page 14720]]

the U.S. Government tasked with coordinating programs and developing 
goals to facilitate the nation's R,E&D technologies, and a national 
office to focus on a next generation air traffic management system. Of 
equal importance is the establishment of a new educational program to 
train the next generation of aeronautics engineers and mechanics. 
According to the Commission Report on Aerospace, more than a quarter of 
the U.S. science, engineering and manufacturing workforce will be 
eligible to retire in the next 5 years. This workforce initiative is 
aimed at increasing participation of U.S. students in fields related to 
aerospace and aviation safety through the use of grants and 
scholarships for service to ensure the growth of interest in the United 
States and increase the talent pool of American students.
  To ensure that the U.S. continues to have the safest aviation system 
possible we must also make improvements to the FAA's Facilities and 
Equipment program which contains financing for the purchase, 
installation and construction of equipment and facilities required to 
maintain the NAS. Through this bill we should boost the F&E program so 
that it will be a better complement to the improved AIP program in 
preparation for increased passenger levels. However, we must consider 
ways to make further advances to this program to ensure our ability to 
provide crucial enhancements to the safety of our aviation system.
  AIR-V will have an enormous impact on the future of our entire air 
transportation system, and makes a strong statement about the direction 
that we want our air transportation system to go. Please support this 
effort and work with us to help the FAA take real steps forward and 
maintain our strength in aviation for the future.
  I yield to our distinguished leader who really held the hearings and 
led for this particular measure.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. LOTT. I thank the distinguished Senator from South Carolina for 
those comments. He and Senator McCain certainly have been very 
interested in this important issue. A couple of hearings we had on this 
legislation were in the full committee because of the importance of the 
issues involved.
  I also particularly thank Senator Rockefeller, who is the ranking 
member on the Aviation Subcommittee, for his work and his cooperation 
on this legislation. This is truly bipartisan legislation: Senator 
McCain, Senator Hollings, Senator Rockefeller and I all have worked on 
it. Where we have had problems we have been able to work out most of 
them. I think we have a really good product.
  I want to say at the beginning we are hoping to move this legislation 
through rapidly. Hopefully we could even complete it today. We have a 
few issues that have not been resolved yet. Two or three of them may 
require votes. We ask our colleagues to come to the floor, let's have a 
debate and, if we have to, we will have a vote. There are not that many 
amendments that I think would actually require a vote.
  I also want to emphasize the importance of this legislation. Because 
we have moved it fast, and because we have been able to get an 
agreement worked out to bring it to the floor, and because we may be 
able to handle it in a brief period of time, it should not diminish at 
all the importance of passing this legislation. Transportation in 
America is unique. If we are going to have a strong economy, we have to 
have good transportation systems--not just roads and bridges, which are 
very important, and not just a good railroad system, freight and 
passenger, and not just good ports and harbors, but we also need a 
strong aviation system in America.
  We all know the industry has been having difficult times for a 
variety of reasons. In some cases it was bad management decisions. 
Obviously all of them have been affected by high fuel costs. There have 
been some difficult management-labor decisions. But also probably no 
other industry was as dramatically and directly affected by 9/11 as the 
aviation industry. Aircraft were involved on that infamous day, used as 
weapons of destruction, as missiles--both in New York and, of course, 
one plane that hit the Pentagon and the one that went down in 
Pennsylvania. We saw the industry basically shut down that day--for 
days. We are still having fallout, the ramifications of that day and 
those decisions in terms of access to airports, including Washington 
Reagan National. General aviation is still dealing with the problems as 
a result.
  There is no question the industry has had difficulties and some of 
those difficulties have been related to 9/11. Government decisions were 
made that needed to be made. We had to deal with security 
considerations on our airplanes and at our airports. So a lot of costs 
have been put on the industry that have caused them additional 
problems.
  We have taken action immediately after 9/11, of course, to provide 
some assistance to the aviation industry. We did it again in the 
supplemental appropriations this year. But this is the third step and 
in some respects maybe the most important step in helping the airline 
industry, helping aviation get back to where they can see blue skies 
and begin to make profits and provide the kind of service the American 
people are entitled to.
  I do think it is important we get this bill done, that we get into 
conference and see if we can come to a reasonable and relatively quick 
agreement with the House. That will allow this bill to be completed 
before we get into the time-consuming and very important TEA-21 
extension, and the appropriations process.
  This bill's title is Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision 
Act--AIR-V. Our intent is to go all the way from stabilizing the 
industry, giving them dependability and reliability of what they can 
expect from FAA, from the Airport Improvement Program, to all the 
different programs that are involved in aviation including service to 
small communities. I think we do have the fundamental provisions we 
need to make sure that happens. We will ensure the Airport Improvement 
Program will continue uninterrupted for the next 3 years. We also are 
going to make sure the funds that go into Airport Improvement Programs 
are actually used for their original purpose, and that is to improve 
our airports, the runways, the terminals, and the services our 
constituents need and deserve.
  On that note, this legislation also no longer allows AIP funds to be 
used for security mandates. Up to this point approximately $500 million 
has been skimmed off the top of the AIP fund to pay for security 
mandates that the Federal government placed on our local airports. The 
Transportation Security Administration--TSA--predicts that an 
additional $500 million will be needed to complete these capital 
improvements that have been deemed necessary for security purposes. 
This bill proposes that these unfunded mandates be paid for by 
directing the passenger security fee into a separate fund to cover 
these costs. The first $500 million of these fees that is collected 
will be directed to this fund.
  This legislation also looks at excessiveness at TSA. It will require 
TSA to do a study to look at the efficiency of their employees and then 
redeploy them as necessary based on the results of the study. I am 
pleased that TSA is already reassessing their workforce. While it is 
not the goal of this Congress to have less than adequate security at 
any airport, it is important for TSA to recognize the areas in which 
they have gold-plated security.
  In another effort to help the industry, this legislation also makes 
permanent a provision already in the annual appropriations bill that 
requires TSA to pay fair market value for the space they occupy at 
airports. The bill also keep AIP funding at the fiscal year 2003 level 
for FY04, but changes the match requirement from 10 percent to 5 
percent for that 1 year. AIP funding will then be increased by $100 
million for the out years. This is very important to local communities 
that are hard pressed to make that local match, because their funds 
have been depleted due to these unfunded mandates. AIR-V also maintains 
the budget firewalls

[[Page 14721]]

that were put in place during the debate over Air-21. These firewalls 
require that the trust fund continues to be spent down.
  Of particular importance to my home state of Mississippi is language 
in this legislation that continues the authorization of the Small 
Community Pilot Program. This provision will allow 40 new communities 
to be eligible to receive one-time money each year. This is a good 
program that requires innovative thinking on the part of airports and 
their local communities.
  Another important issue to rural States such as mine and Senator 
Rockefeller's is the Essential Air Service Program. The two of us 
introduced legislation that works to improve this program, while not 
implementing the drastic change the administration has pushed. In 
short, it provides incentive to the local communities to get involved 
in determining the quality and type of air service their community 
receives. We have included that legislation in this bill.
  Transportation infrastructure spending is important, and it is one of 
my top priorities. I want to continue the Republican congressional 
majority's commitment to transportation infrastructure. Our Nation's 
growing economy demands attention to this issue. Passage of this bill 
will be a step in that direction.
  I say again, in Senator McCain's presence, I appreciate his attention 
to this and his interest and his desire to move forward. Without his 
tenacity we would not be here now. I believe we have a good bill that 
we can complete in short order.
  I am glad to yield the floor at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator from Mississippi for his kind 
comments.
  Mr. President, we are awaiting the appearance of Senator Lautenberg, 
who has an amendment we will be considering shortly. Until then, I 
remind my colleagues we would like to move forward with amendments.
  I understand that Senator Cochran may have an amendment, and several 
others. But I don't think there are many. We could go ahead and move 
forward as quickly as possible with the legislation.
  Pending their arrival, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 889

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 889.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Text of 
Amendments.'')
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this is a managers' amendment which we 
have developed working with Senators Lott, Hollings, and Rockefeller. 
It includes a number of technical changes and improvements recommended 
by the executive agencies affected by the bill. It also includes some 
substantive changes, including whistleblower protections for the 
employees of contractors doing business with the FAA; requiring the GAO 
to periodically report to Congress on the economic state of the airline 
industry; airline executives' compensation; clarifying that the war 
risk insurance provision only applies to U.S. air carriers; moving the 
new security capital fund from FAA to TSA; and removing a provision--I 
emphasize ``removing''--a provision that was added in the markup 
concerning outside-the-perimeter slots at Reagan National Airport.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, these particular modifications have been 
checked through by both the chairman and ranking member of our Aviation 
Subcommittee. Let the Record show that the distinguished Senator from 
West Virginia, Senator Rockefeller, our ranking member, is at an 
important Finance Committee markup at the moment with respect to 
prescription drugs and Medicare. I have checked it through with him, 
and it has been checked through on this side. We ask for support of the 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? If not, without 
objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 889) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I wanted to alert my colleagues that I 
intend to offer an amendment to this bill this afternoon. I have talked 
to several people about it. I will not take a lot of time. I don't 
intend to delay the bill at all. But there is an important piece of 
policy in this legislation.
  Before I explain it, I should congratulate my colleagues, Senator 
McCain, chairman of the full committee, and Senator Hollings, ranking 
member, for their work on this bill. It is really important for us to 
complete this legislation. Hopefully, perhaps we can complete it today, 
in fact.
  On page 145, there is an aviation security capital fund of $500 
million. I think that is an important fund which it establishes in the 
Department of Transportation. I think that is perhaps transferred in 
the managers' amendment in fact to homeland security.
  This capital fund provides funds for the security needs at airports 
around the country, and for investment in the construction and 
infrastructure for security purposes.
  All of us know in the shadow of 9/11 and the terrorist attacks that 
occurred in our country that security, especially aviation security, is 
critically important.
  This provision, as important as it is, however, has a local match 
requirement. My great concern is that this money will not be invested 
in aviation security because many communities and States around the 
country simply won't have the capability of coming up with the local 
match. That is why we put money in legislation previously. In the tax 
bill that passed the Congress, we included a substantial amount of 
money to try to help State and local governments, many of which are 
flat on their backs financially. They are having trouble funding their 
own needs.
  I think having a security capital fund is very important. But having 
that fund available only if there is matching money available for it 
locally will mean that much of it will not be spent, much of it will 
not be invested, and much of it will not contribute anything to this 
country's security.
  What I propose to do on this occasion, because it deals with 
security, which is a national issue, and because the State and local 
governments are in a pretty precarious fiscal position, is eliminate 
the local match so we could expect that this money would be invested. 
The construction and the infrastructure that will be completed with 
this money will contribute, in fact, to aviation security in this 
country.
  I have visited with my colleague, the Senator from Mississippi. I 
think he has some persuasive reasons for not eliminating the local 
match. But, on the other hand, I think there is a persuasive argument 
that the only way we will see this money truly invested in airports 
around the country is if we eliminate the local match.
  Perhaps I should offer this amendment now and have it pending. I have 
to chair a luncheon in a few minutes and will have to leave the floor.
  If it is all right with the chairman and ranking member, I will offer 
the amendment. We will have it pending.


                           Amendment No. 890

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Dorgan] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 890.


[[Page 14722]]

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To delete the matching requirement for airport security 
                   related capital investment grants)

       On page 146, beginning with line 20, strike through line 8 
     on page 147.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from North Dakota 
has to leave at this time. We will be glad to discuss this amendment at 
his convenience, hopefully later this afternoon, and perhaps we can get 
something worked out on it.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I have explained my amendment already. 
What I would like to do is work with my colleagues, Senator McCain, 
Senator Lott, Senator Hollings, and others. I think this is an 
important amendment. I am not suggesting this be a precedent forever, 
for all time. At this moment, in this place, for this reason, I believe 
if we want to invest $500 million in aviation security in this country, 
it is likely the only way that will be invested is to eliminate the 
State and local match. I think there are good reasons to do that. So if 
I can work with my colleagues in the next several hours, I hope we can 
make some progress on this amendment.
  I do want to make one final point. It is not my intention in any way 
to hold up this bill. I do not expect this would be a lengthy debate, 
in any event. I would agree to a short time agreement. But my hope is 
perhaps we could support this by a voice vote at some point.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senator Lautenberg is in the Chamber to 
offer an extremely important amendment. He will be ready to do that in 
a matter of a few minutes.
  In the meantime, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
pending amendment be set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 891

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 891.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To clarify the apportionment of funds from the Aviation 
                         Security Capital Fund)

       On page 146, line 17, insert ``origination and 
     destination'' before ``emplanements''.
       On page 146, line 19, insert ``origination and 
     destination'' before ``emplanements''.

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, the events of September 11, 2001, have been 
catastrophic on the aviation and travel industry. And that is an 
understatement. I strongly supported the formation of the 
Transportation Security Administration because I believed then and 
believe now it is critical that the public has confidence in the safety 
and security of our airports and airlines.
  This enhanced security will save jobs, protect Americans' ability to 
travel freely and safely, and boost business for the travel and tourism 
industries.
  The need for capital security costs, such as explosives detection and 
screeners, should be based on real need. Unfortunately, the formula in 
this bill that allocates grants in the aviation security fund to assist 
with capital security costs is not based on real needs. It does not 
accurately account for the number of passengers who must be carefully 
screened as they enter airport terminals at their point of origin. That 
is where delays occur and additional security equipment is always badly 
needed.
  My amendment corrects the language in section 402 of this bill that 
allocates funding for capital security costs based on ``emplanements.'' 
This is wrong.
  My amendment would change the formula for allocating funding in the 
aviation security fund from ``emplanements'' to ``origination and 
destination emplanements.''
  My amendment allocates resources to airports that are screening the 
largest number of passengers and not at airports where passengers 
simply connect to another flight. As an example: Someone flies from New 
York to Chicago and they have a connection to go to Des Moines, IA. 
They don't leave the airport. The problem in Las Vegas is people come 
to Las Vegas. They go downtown or to the strip and then they come back 
and have to get back through all the screening. That is where the need 
should be, for people who enter and leave the airport not simply the 
fact that people land at the airport.
  My amendment would allocate resources, as I said, to airports that 
are screening the largest number of passengers, and not at airports 
where passengers simply connect to another flight.
  At large hub airports many passengers simply change flights. They 
don't enter and leave the terminal where security is most needed. These 
passengers have already been screened.
  This is especially important in Las Vegas but it is a bigger issue. 
It is important that we prevent another terrorist attack on our 
airlines. Terrorists will search for the weakest link in our security 
and try to exploit it.
  Capital security resources must be allocated fairly and equitably and 
correctly. Las Vegas McCarran Airport has the second largest number of 
origination and destination passengers in the entire Nation, second 
only to LAX. This means that McCarran processes more people through TSA 
security checkpoints than every other airport, except Los Angeles.
  Under the present formula, other airports would get far more security 
resources even though they screen fewer passengers. McCarran clearly 
needs more resources than many hub airports where a great number of 
passengers emplane but do not need to be screened.
  Nothing could be worse for the Nation than allocating its precious 
security resources in the wrong manner. We need additional security at 
origination and destination airports--and we need it now--where 
passengers are actually screened. We do not want resources allocated 
where they are unnecessary, especially at a time when Congress is 
asking TSA to get its costs under control.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Ensign be added 
as a cosponsor of this amendment with the Senator now speaking.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment for the 
safety of the flying public and the health of our economy. We need to 
put our security resources in the right place. Let's keep the skies 
safe.
  Now, Mr. President, I have spoken----
  Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question?
  Mr. REID. I am happy to yield.
  Mr. McCAIN. It is my understanding, from talking with you and your 
colleague, that at McCarran Airport--for example, on a Sunday--a 3-hour 
delay is a routine kind of experience. That is a normal experience 
rather than an exception, which is remarkably different from almost 
every other airport in America. Is that true?
  Mr. REID. That is absolutely right. It is based upon the formula I 
have just given.
  I say to the managers of this bill--the chairman of the Commerce 
Committee and the ranking member of the Commerce Committee--I have 
spoken to their staffs, I have spoken to them, as has Senator Ensign. 
We have been given an assurance by these two fine men and their staffs 
that this is something the conference will look at as soon as the bill 
leaves this body. The staff will start reviewing this.
  They have a concern now that they may not have adequate figures to 
justify what Senator Ensign and I are saying. We want them to have 
adequate numbers so that what we are saying is valid.
  We want, as I have indicated in my statement, there to be a fair 
allocation

[[Page 14723]]

of resources. We believe, as the Senator from Arizona has indicated, 
that Las Vegas is a very unique place. It is not like Chicago O'Hare. 
It is not like the airports in New York. It is similar to what we have 
in Phoenix. Phoenix has a problem similar to us. I believe Phoenix 
would benefit from the formula I am suggesting.
  But I have been given an assurance, as I have indicated, by the two 
managers of this very important committee, that they will do what they 
can in conference to allocate the resources fairly.
  The language I have in this amendment may not be perfect. There may 
be some need to look at other issues to have a fair apportionment of 
these resources.
  So based upon the assurances I have been given by the two managers of 
this bill, I will withdraw this amendment, on behalf of Senators Reid 
and Ensign, and look to the good offices of these two gentlemen to make 
sure that, for our country, there is a fair allocation of resources.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Before the Senator from Nevada leaves the Chamber, I 
would like to ask him another question.
  So that my colleagues will understand this problem--and it is a 
serious one--if I fly from here to the Atlanta Airport, or the Dallas/
Fort Worth Airport, which I will do tomorrow, and then change airplanes 
but stay within the terminal, not having to go through security again, 
and then I go on to the Phoenix, AZ, airport, that, for the purposes of 
the present formula, would be counted as the same as someone who enters 
an airport, flies and lands at another airport, leaves that airport, 
and then later on has to reenter the airport to leave that area.
  In other words, what we are saying is, we have a formula now where 
someone who remains within the airport and does not have to go through 
security is basically counted the same as a person who does have to go 
through security.
  Mr. REID. That is right.
  Mr. McCAIN. So that, obviously, is an incredible burden if you have 
to put every passenger through security where a large majority of them, 
particularly at hub airports, do not have to send passengers through 
security. Is that basically the problem we are trying to confront here?
  Mr. REID. The Senator is absolutely right. We have places, such as at 
McCarran Airport, where, if we had additional help, we could move 
people into the airport more quickly but we simply don't have the TSA 
people to do that. We have some of our hub airports where, as the 
Senator has indicated, they have people standing around looking at each 
other because they are not having people coming in and out of the 
airport like we have at McCarran.
  Mr. McCAIN. I say to the Senator, I think your concern is legitimate. 
I think the formula needs to be changed. We will work on it.
  First, we will get a letter over to communications with TSA and tell 
them we need to look at this formula again. I have been told they are 
already doing that, but I want to assure the Senator from Nevada, we 
will try to do everything in our power to address this clear inequity 
that exists in the formula as we go to conference.
  I thank the Senator.
  Mr. REID. If I could say one additional thing before I sit down. I do 
not have the opportunity very often to talk about the good work of the 
committee but, as far as this Senator is concerned, some of the best 
work of this committee is to allow flights from National Airport to Las 
Vegas, to Phoenix, to Salt Lake. I would suggest that the Senator from 
Arizona--and I am sure he will check with his staff--I think he might 
find a better flight than going from Dallas to Phoenix.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank the Senator from Nevada. But I have done many 
foolish things in my life--many. One of those that ranks up in the top 
10 is when I was being accused by the local newspaper for attempting to 
seek some relief from the perimeter rule in hopes that I might then 
have the convenience of flying direct from Reagan National Airport to 
Phoenix. I swore I would never fly direct from Reagan National Airport. 
Many years have gone by, and I had hoped that people's memories had 
grown dim on that, but now I will probably have to go another 5 years 
since the Senator has raised that.
  Mr. REID. Well, the statute of limitations has run.
  Mr. McCAIN. I thank my colleague.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada is correct. The 
money is for security, and a security check is what we are trying to 
fund, finance. It just hasn't been vetted at FAA. It is very logical to 
this particular Senator that the Senator from Nevada is correct, and I 
will make every effort in the conference to change the particular 
formula or rather embellish the word emplanement, so as to get 
destinations and takeoffs considered as going just through the security 
and the money be allocated thereof.
  So I assure the Senator from Nevada that I will support it in every 
way I can.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.


                           Amendment No. 890

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, while discussions are taking place on other 
issues or amendments, I wanted to go back and comment briefly on the 
statement by Senator Dorgan and his amendment.
  First of all, I appreciate his membership on the committee and his 
interest in this aviation hearing. Most of the time we agree on how we 
can be helpful to the aviation industry. I appreciated the fact that he 
said he thought it was important we have this revolving fund for TSA 
security. There are those who are going to speak against that fund 
later today.
  The appropriators feel as if the fund is not a positive thing, that 
it is taking funds from their bottom line. My concern is, if we have 
these fees collected for airport security and there is no specification 
that it go into that area, then it may be spread all over the place. If 
you go into port security, Coast Guard, or any number of programs--
which may be very important and may be needed--if fees are collected 
for a purpose, they should not be spread out into other areas. It is 
like the highway trust fund. You collect gasoline taxes for highways, 
and to let it be spent for airports or ports--that is not the intended 
purpose and what people think they are paying for.
  This fund is not intended in any way to get into the appropriators' 
job. They have a tough job. I know my colleague from Mississippi and 
Senator Stevens will work hard to help our homeland security. We will 
continue to work to see if we can come up with some compromise 
agreement that will accommodate all concerned. Our goal is to just make 
sure we have these fees that are collected for airport security and 
security for the TSA used for that purpose.
  With regard to the local share, I have a State that, obviously, is 
not a wealthy State. We have a limited number of airports. Several of 
them are relatively small. So any kind of cost share is not easy for 
them, plus the airline industry will tell you very quickly that in a 
lot of airports--particularly the bigger ones--any kind of a local cost 
share, the airlines will wind up having to pick up the cost because 
airports cannot get money from the local government. So they will say, 
all right, we have to get it from the airlines and they will pass it on 
to the airlines. That is a legitimate concern. It is really not fair.
  I know it is not easy for the local airports sometimes to get a 
match. But we are talking about a small match here. Even if we can have 
the match 10 percent, it would still have the principle that the local 
governments are doing their share. Airports and airline service is a 
very important part of the economy in these smaller towns. It creates 
jobs, helps attract industry, and it

[[Page 14724]]

is a big plus. Yet the cities or counties, even the big cities--
Detroit, Chicago, New York--get tremendous benefits from their 
international airports, but they don't want to participate or pay any 
of the costs. Of course not. The trend in America is just let the 
Federal Government do it. Let the Federal Government do it all. Let the 
Federal Government pay for all of the airport costs, pay for all the 
housing costs, pay for all of the farming costs--just let the Federal 
Government do it. That is why we are going to have a $500 billion 
deficit this year, and probably the same next year, and it may come 
down some in 2005, but it is still going to be really ugly. Let Uncle 
Sam do it.
  All I am saying is, let the local communities do a little bit, 
participate some, help a little in the cost of this huge benefit. I 
promote local airports in my State, such as Tupelo, Meridian, Golden 
Triangle, Biloxi, Pine Belt, and others. We have small airports that 
mean a lot. For them to help a little bit looks to me like a good idea. 
So I realize maybe that is not the way to do things around here. I am 
arguing on principle and some degree of responsibility for everybody to 
pay a little bit. Why should the Federal Government always have to pay 
the first and the last dollar?
  We will work with Senator Dorgan, a very valuable member of the 
committee. I understand his concerns in these smaller communities. But 
the problem is not really the smaller communities; it is actually the 
bigger airports that will be inclined to pass them along to the 
airlines. I realize they have plenty of burdens of their own.
  I wanted to respond and make it clear why I feel that some small 
amount of local participation is a responsible thing to do. It makes 
good, common sense. We may have a way to work it out. I wanted to get 
that on the record before we got too far away from Senator Dorgan's 
remarks.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                           Amendment No. 892

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The pending amendments are set 
aside and the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 892.

(Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate with respect to air fares 
                provided to members of the Armed Forces)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.   . AIR FARES FOR MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES.

       It is the sense of the Senate that each United States air 
     carrier should--
       (1) make every effort to allow active duty members of the 
     armed forces to purchase tickets, on a space-available basis, 
     for the lowest fares offered for the flights desired, without 
     regard to advance purchase requirements and other 
     restrictions; and
       (2) offer flexible terms that allow members of the armed 
     forces on active duty to purchase, modify, or cancel tickets 
     without time restrictions, fees, or penalties.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, this is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment. 
Frankly, I would like to see it in law, but I am not sure whether it 
would be constitutional and in keeping with existing law.
  Basically, it says that the airlines should do whatever they can to 
make sure that members of the Armed Forces can get the lowest fare even 
if they are late; that they will offer them the lowest fare available; 
and that when there are cancellations or other reasons they have to 
change their travel plans, the airlines will show the flexibility that 
will afford them the lowest possible cost for their airfare.
  We have a lot of transience amongst the men and women in the military 
and their families, not just being transferred from one place to 
another but, generally speaking, they are not based where they grew up 
and where their families or friends are located.
  There are a lot of men and women in the military who make use of the 
airlines and many times on short notice. We are simply urging the 
airlines to show the kind of patriotism that is necessary to provide 
these very low income Americans the ability to move from one place to 
another.
  I might add, this amendment was offered by Senator Kay Bailey 
Hutchison on the DOD authorization bill as well. I hope the airlines 
will react positively to this sense-of-the-Senate resolution. I yield 
the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman and 
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison for this initiative. It is well deserved. 
Whether or not it can be worked out--as the Senator indicates, we hope 
it can be. It has been cleared on our side, and I urge its adoption.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further debate on the 
amendment?
  If not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 892.
  The amendment (No. 892) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                           Amendment No. 893

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I commend the chairman and the ranking 
member of the Commerce Committee for moving this reauthorization 
forward. It is critical. The FAA is an essential part of our travel and 
aviation system. I encourage its consideration promptly.
  A principal issue these days in aviation is security. How do we best 
protect those who are flying and those who are working in the 
airplanes, the cockpit crew, the cabin crew? How do we best protect all 
of those people? Well, we review the passenger lists. We review the 
baggage. We look at what anybody brings aboard. One of the things that 
does not always get the attention it deserves is what happens with the 
FAA. What kind of people are they? Are they up to snuff in their 
training? Have we a reservoir, a reserve, of people who are trained and 
ready to take over when we are looking forward to a fairly large 
retirement possibility for those people who came in after some of the 
labor problems were resolved?
  I send an amendment to the desk to make certain that FAA is going to 
be able to maintain its integrity, and I ask for its immediate 
consideration.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the pending 
amendments are set aside.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Lautenberg] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 893.

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from transferring 
  certain air traffic control functions to non-governmental entities)

       On page 193, after line 23, insert the following:

     SEC. 624. TRANSFER OF CERTAIN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL FUNCTIONS 
                   PROHIBITED.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may not 
     authorize the transfer to a private entity or to a public 
     entity other than the United States Government of--
       (1) the air traffic separation and control functions 
     operated by the Federal Aviation Administration on the date 
     of enactment of this Act; or
       (2) the maintenance of certifiable systems and other 
     functions related to certification of national airspace 
     systems and services operated by the Federal Aviation 
     Administration on the date of enactment of this Act or flight 
     service station personnel.

[[Page 14725]]

       (b) Contract Tower Program.--Subsection (a)(1) shall not 
     apply to a Federal Aviation Administration air traffic 
     control tower operated under the control tower program as of 
     the date of enactment of this Act.
       On page 69, after the item relating to section 623, insert 
     the following:

Sec. 624. Transfer of certain air traffic control functions prohibited.

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I rise to offer a critical safety and security 
amendment to this FAA bill. My amendment would ensure that the air 
traffic control system and its personnel remain a government function.
  There is an attempt underway right now in the executive branch to 
open up air traffic control to private contractors. I believe we in the 
Congress must put a stop to this. There are some areas where it makes 
sense to contract work out to private entities, but air traffic control 
is not one of them. The safety of our skies should not be put in the 
hands of the lowest bidder. We should not be looking to buy security on 
the cheap.
  I believe those who operate and maintain our air traffic control 
system are almost like a wing of the military. They keep us safe. They 
police our skies.
  On September 11, 2001, we had a tragic day for all Americans. In my 
State of New Jersey, nearly 700 people lost their lives. As my 
colleagues know, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta ordered all 
aircraft in the U.S. airspace grounded that day. They wanted those 
airplanes safely out of the sky. It was a massive undertaking.
  I have a visual of 9/11 at 12:30 p.m. The assault took place around 
the 9 hour. This is a picture of the traffic, each one of these 
denoting an airplane, that was in the sky at 12:30. Many planes had 
already landed, but there were still thousands in the air, as we can 
see. The bulk of this traffic was in the East, as it was still early 
morning on the west coast. My home State of New Jersey is all but 
covered in air traffic in this picture.
  In the next visual, we will see what the skies looked like roughly an 
hour later, at 1:45. We see some reduction in the cluster, but there 
are still hundreds, if not thousands, of airplanes in the sky. Planes 
are being rapidly grounded in the Northeast, and they are headed to the 
points in the Midwest to try to land safely, to take care of their 
passengers.
  We have the next picture, which is only half an hour later, and look 
at this. Look at how empty the space, on a relative basis, is compared 
to where it was. The first one, this is now 3 to 3\1/2\ hours after the 
terrible assault on our buildings and our people took place. There is a 
cluster. We cannot even see the ground. But the air traffic controllers 
went to work, the system went to work, and now at 2:15, an hour and 
three-quarters later, they have cleared the skies, which is not an 
insignificant job.
  We did not have one accident that day. We had the attacks with the 
aircraft on the towers, but all other aircraft that were in the sky 
that day got to the ground safely. People were able to call their 
families and say: Do not worry about me. I was flying. I am here. I am 
safe. I am well. I will be home tonight. I will be home this weekend. 
To the children: Daddy is alive and well, and we will be there.
  We can see a massive number of planes were landing in that last half 
hour. Meanwhile, we can see the clusters of airplanes circling major 
airports, waiting for clearance to land, making sure the separations 
were maintained. The airports were at Dallas, Fort Worth, Atlanta, 
Kansas City, Denver, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Minneapolis-St. Paul. 
That was the extent of the impact of this attack and the need to 
disperse the airplanes in the sky. And out west, Phoenix, Salt Lake 
City, Las Vegas, NV, Los Angeles, San Francisco, all of these planes 
landed safely in an amazingly short amount of time.
  Let's look at the picture at 3:45. The sky almost looks clear, and 
thank goodness. Those were tense moments for everybody, for those who 
saw the smoke coming out of the Trade Center buildings and noted the 
absence of these two giant towers that were built, this testimonial to 
man, gone.
  We did what we had to in the rest of the country to make sure those 
planes got on the ground safely. There were still some government 
planes in the air. We can see the military aircraft in the blue--they 
are a little hard to discern--as they patrolled the near empty skies.
  On September 11, those who operated our Federal air traffic system 
demonstrated great heroism and dedication. Air traffic controllers 
across the Nation performed heroically as they guided thousands of 
aircraft out of the sky.
  I wish to point out a bit of a technicality. They think of the air 
traffic control group sometimes as just the people in the tower who 
have the microphones at that moment, but we have specialists who keep 
this equipment going, and it is a complicated network. We have those 
flight service people who are on the ground giving advice, watching the 
separation, making sure that the system is in an orderly condition. It 
is a package. It is one part of it. It is very obvious that we in this 
body need lots of people around to make the system work, such as our 
staff people who are very good. We could not take part of them and have 
them working for one entity while we worked for another. It would not 
make sense, especially if there is a moment of need when the owner of 
the company says we are cutting back on some of the company benefits. 
It does not work. This is a unified system.
  In my home State, from the tower of Newark International Airport, the 
air traffic controllers looking out the window could see the World 
Trade Center on fire as they worked to return tens of thousands of 
Americans to the ground safely. Like many public servants on that day, 
they were heroes, along with the police and firefighters and other 
emergency personnel. These public employees gave 110 percent of their 
ability to secure the safety of the American people.
  In the aftermath of these tragic events, our people demanded one 
thing in particular of their government. They wanted government 
personnel, not private contracting firms, to perform security screening 
of baggage at our Nation's airports. If the American people demanded 
that baggage screeners become Federal employees at substantially 
increased salaries, this was an enormous cost burden we picked up. We 
took it out of the hands of the private sector, away from the airlines, 
to say: You were not buying security appropriately; you were not 
spending the money needed to keep the people interested, trained, and 
functioning.
  Why in the world, if we wanted the baggage screeners to become 
Federal employees, would we contract out air traffic control to the 
lowest bidder? It does not make sense. One bag getting through at the 
wrong time could be a terrible tragedy. But one airplane in the wrong 
place at the wrong time would dwarf many of the opportunities others 
have to attack an airplane with a piece of baggage.
  The safety and security of the American people should not be the 
responsibility of the lowest bidder. It is a core responsibility of our 
Government. To be able to muster the forces we need for our military 
endeavors, we have to know the people in the towers and their support 
system are always on the job, that they are reliable, that there is no 
dispute between a company or corporate headquarters and the need of the 
people.
  That is why it is so shocking the FAA is being asked to take steps to 
privatize air traffic control in this country. It makes no sense, 
especially after September 11. It is the opposite of what the public 
wants.
  Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I yield.
  Mr. LOTT. My questions and my comments are related to your subject.
  First of all, I appreciate Senator Lautenburg and what he is doing 
here. I understand his point. I indicated to him on the committee we 
would work with him and see if we could come up with compromise 
language that we could agree to. Unfortunately, we could not get that 
done. However, the Senator knows I have tried to act in good faith. I 
know he has, too. I appreciate that.
  My concern is, I, like you, have concern about privatizing the air 
traffic

[[Page 14726]]

controllers themselves. I also have sympathy for the flight weather 
service people because, in effect, in some areas I am familiar with, 
they are the air traffic controllers. But the amendment, as I 
understand it, and I think the Senator admitted, goes beyond demanding 
the tower or demanding the actual person looking at the screen and the 
flight weather service, it does expand to the other employees who are 
employed in the area--the service people, the repairmen, and perhaps 
even further than that.
  My question is, is that a fact? Would your amendment expand beyond 
the professional air traffic controller or even the FWS employee and 
other employees? Could you perhaps specify some of the areas that might 
be covered, just for the edification of myself and the other Senators.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. The Senator from Mississippi is a sincere advocate of 
safety in our skies and has been very supportive of introductions of 
technology. The Senator has had a long period of service as chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Aviation. There is mutual respect.
  We are including all parts of the FAA, of the controller system, 
systems specialists, and the safety inspectors. As I tried to 
demonstrate, it is a whole unit. One thing and is quite apparent. Very 
often when you have an organization the size of FAA, when functions are 
parceled out, very often the segment you have taken out--look at 
railroads where you have different unions that control different parts. 
If one of those unions has a disagreement with the management or with 
the operations of the company, they go out and can tie the whole thing 
up.
  Keeping this team together--the nurses in the operating room, the 
orderlies, all those people, beside the doctor and the guy now who is 
the person developing the equipment that in many cases now is doing the 
surgery--is all one thing. Would you think of splitting off parts of 
that and saying one part ought to be here, one part ought to be there? 
I think not. We include them all. We say this is one integrated system.
  I come out of the technology business--of course, it was 20 years 
ago--but there are certain buttons you have to push to connect 
everything. You have to make sure the equipment is working properly. If 
one asks the distinguished Senator from Alaska, Senator Stevens--and I 
take this from recall so I am not giving his statement--he talked about 
the value of the flight service people in the State of Alaska and 
remote places. The Senator from Mississippi said it himself; very often 
they turn into controllers.
  It is our intention to keep this package together. If we want to talk 
about it at another time in the future, certainly I would like to do 
so.
  Mr. LOTT. If the Senator will continue to yield, we will continue to 
work on this. I know Senator McCain will have something to say about it 
later. Regardless of how it works here, we will continue to work 
together.
  I want to make note of the fact for the record that Secretary Mineta 
has determined that air traffic control is a core function of the FAA 
and as such the administration would not consider outsourcing beyond 
the current contract tower program. I note that is a program that is in 
place, the contract towers, and it has broad general support. Twenty-
five percent of all takeoffs and landings, mainly general aviation in 
the United States, occur at these traffic towers. There is an example 
of how contracting out has been done and is working.
  We will continue to work with the Senator. While I have some sympathy 
with what the Senator is trying to do as the amendment presently 
exists, it is too broad and I would have to oppose it.
  I thank the Senator for yielding.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. We are leaving out the contract tower program. We do 
not touch that at all. Those are special situations, smaller airports 
where more is demanded from the operation than can be given as part of 
the FAA. We have no problem with those.
  The amendment we offer now is smaller in scope than my original bill. 
It covers only air traffic control, separation functions, system 
specialists, and flight service station controllers.
  There is a world far larger than that, that could be included which 
we have not included.
  The administration has already changed the designation of air traffic 
control from ``inherently governmental'' to ``commercial.'' It is more 
than a technical change. It opens the door to privatizing the air 
traffic control system.
  We currently have the best air traffic control system in the world, 
with 15,000 dedicated Federal air traffic controllers who guide home 
safely more than 2 million passengers a day. They are expert 
professionals who perform under pressure every day to keep our skies 
safe.
  Air traffic controllers play a major role in homeland security. When 
President Bush gave his State of the Union speech this year, it was the 
flight service station air traffic controllers who sent alerts to 
pilots around here to avoid the expanded no-fly zone around Washington. 
We wanted to keep the President safe. We wanted the security to be 
maintained. It takes a certain skill and dedication and experience to 
make sure it gets done, that it gets done in a timely fashion.
  When the Space Shuttle Columbia tragically exploded in the skies over 
Texas, it was the air traffic controllers who directed the aircraft 
away from the falling debris field.
  These men and women perform a critical function. Our security ought 
not be up for bid. Some claim privatization will save money, but we 
have to take a look at other countries' experiments with air traffic 
control privatization. When you do, you see financial messes and safety 
hazards. Australia, Canada, and Great Britain have all privatized 
systems that are now in crisis. Costs have gone up and safety has gone 
down. Since Great Britain adopted privatization, near misses have 
increased. That means near misses in the sky. When I told someone this, 
he said, You mean people missed more flights? I said, No, no, airplanes 
missing one another. Near misses have increased by 50 percent, and 
delays have increased by 20 percent. The British government has already 
had to bail out the privatized air traffic control company twice.
  Look at this quote from a Member of the British Parliament.

       The privatization of the UK's air traffic control system 
     was a grave mistake, and one that the United States can still 
     avoid making. British Air Traffic Controllers are among the 
     best in the world, and they fought tooth and nail to keep ATC 
     in the public sector. They insisted that the sale of the 
     National Air Traffic Services--NATS--would lead to a collapse 
     in morale, the unwise introduction of inadequate and 
     unreliable equipment, and an increasing danger of 
     catastrophic accidents. The Government did not listen and 
     went ahead. They were wrong and the air traffic controllers 
     were right.

  This is from Gwyneth Dunwoody, a British MP in the House of Commons.
  Why should we jeopardize the public's safety in the skies? We have 
the best system in the world now. Why should we risk making it more 
dangerous and costly. We should not repeat the mistake other countries 
have already made.
  I want to make clear to my colleagues my amendment does not affect 
the expansion of the contract tower program. That is one that is 
contracted out away from the FAA, typically in smaller communities, and 
that service seems to function very well. It has been in place a long 
time. That program, which affects the small visual-flight-rules 
airports, can be expanded to any of the 4,000 airports that are 
eligible. My amendment only affects FAA towers.
  Our luggage is important, important enough to be screened by trained 
Federal workers. But once you are up in the sky, it seems the 
administration believes your safety should be in the hands of the 
lowest bidder. It makes no sense.
  My amendment declares air traffic control functions to be 
``inherently governmental'' and therefore it means they ought to stay 
with the Government and they are therefore not eligible for 
outsourcing.
  I want to point out the Member of the British Parliament, Gwyneth

[[Page 14727]]

Dunwoody, the MP, is the equivalent of our distinguished Senator McCain 
in this body. So we have a considered opinion from someone who has the 
responsibility and has been through it.
  I urge my colleagues to support safety and security in our skies by 
voting for the amendment, keeping the FAA as a body in the hands of the 
Government.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I oppose this amendment and I think we 
ought to understand this amendment does more than tie FAA's hands with 
respect to air traffic control management. It would prevent a host of 
broader measures as well. Certain FAA responsibilities are best 
fulfilled by contract, using a combination of Government and private 
services, as is the case today.
  Congress gave the FAA unique procurement authority for exactly this 
reason and the amendment would compromise that authority. For example, 
the FAA's air traffic control systems are increasingly composed of 
commercial components and software that build upon privately developed 
computer programs. If this amendment passes, the FAA's costs to 
maintain and install its systems would most likely increase 
significantly as the FAA tries to acquire needed data rights to 
maintain the equipment or forgoes the advantages of using commercial 
products.
  Furthermore, the FAA would pay ever-escalating training costs to 
provide its workforce with the changing skills needed to maintain 
multiple systems.
  The amendment prevents the FAA's ability to reduce its operating 
costs by contracting out certain operations--such as providing weather 
information to pilots. Congress has been very critical of the FAA's 
continually increasing operating costs. This amendment would take a 
very important tool for controlling costs away from the FAA.
  The FAA is currently conducting a competition to evaluate the 
performance of its 61 flight service stations, which provide needed 
services, such as weather briefings, to general aviation pilots. The 
FAA expects that the competition will identify innovations and lead to 
greater value for America's pilots at a lower cost to the taxpayer. The 
bottom line is that the legislation would stop this study--a study that 
encourages the FAA.
  Finally, this amendment prevents the FAA from expanding the existing 
contract tower program. This program allows smaller airports to 
continue to have air traffic control where an FAA tower might not be 
fully justified.
  The Transportation Department's Inspector General has examined this 
program. He found that contract towers are just as safe and effective 
as FAA towers and on average cost $800 thousand a year less. This 
amendment would prohibit any other existing towers from becoming 
contract towers.
  FAA continues to operate about 71 towers that are similar in traffic 
and complexity to towers currently in the contract program. For 
example, in Virginia, the tower at Manassas Regional Airport, which has 
general aviation only, is FAA-operated but the tower at 
Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, which has frequent commercial 
service, is a contract tower. Converting these towers could save the 
FAA about $57 million dollars per year in operating costs and free up 
900 controllers that could be used in more complex facilities and help 
meeting the pending wave of controller retirements.
  The Administration is adamantly opposed to this amendment or any 
other provisions that would reduce the FAA's flexibility and ability to 
control costs. In a letter to the House, Secretary Mineta indicated 
that he will recommend a veto of any bill that contained provisions 
similar to this amendment.
  We will hear today a lot of discussion about how admirably the air 
traffic controllers performed on September 11, and it is true. It is 
absolutely true. They did a magnificent job. It is also true that the 
air traffic controllers in Canada worked extremely well with their 
partners, the counterparts in the U.S., and they are not government 
employees. They are privatized air control providers.
  All of us appreciate the enormous contributions and terrific jobs 
that our air traffic controllers did, and do. The question is, Will the 
administration be able to have the flexibility necessary to do such 
things as contract towers that operate without the complexities and 
difficulties that are associated with major air traffic control 
centers?
  I ask unanimous consent that a letter dated June 12 from the Office 
of Management and Budget, Statement of Administration Policy, be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         Executive Office of the President, Office of Management 
           and Budget,
                                    Washington, DC, June 12, 2003.

                   Statement of Administration Policy


       s. 824--aviation investment and revitalization vision act

       The Administration strongly supports Senate passage of S. 
     824. Like the Administration's proposal, S. 824 would 
     authorize federal aviation programs without increasing taxes 
     or fees on an industry that has been severely impacted since 
     the attacks on September 11th. The bill contains important 
     environmental provisions including voluntary air quality 
     initiatives; environmental streamlining elements for safety 
     and airport capacity projects, and a more flexible use of the 
     Airport Improvement Program (AIP) noise setaside. The bill 
     also adopts structural changes to the Federal Aviation 
     Administration (FAA) that were included in the 
     Administration's bill, as well as important clarifications in 
     the area of judicial review of both airport environmental and 
     agency acquisition decisions.
       The Administration will work with Congress to ensure, in 
     the version of the bill presented to the President, that: (1) 
     spending during the authorization period conforms to the 
     amounts requested by the Administration; (2) environmental 
     streamlining provisions include safety projects and are 
     optimized to promote their intended goals; (3) the Aviation 
     War Risk Insurance program remains focused on aircraft used 
     to support U.S. military and foreign policy objectives; (4) 
     responsibility for transportation security expenditures is 
     consolidated in the Department of Homeland Security and fees 
     collected for security activities are not diverted to 
     purposes other than the provision of direct security 
     services; (5) the appointment of members and the operation of 
     any committees or commissions created by the bill are 
     consistent with the appointments clause of the Constitution 
     and the President's constitutional authority to supervise the 
     unitary executive branch and make recommendations to 
     Congress; (6) any provision for airline collaboration or 
     coordinated capacity reduction preserves competition to the 
     maximum extent possible; (7) maximum flexibility is provided 
     in the use of AIP funds for security costs, noise set-aside 
     and emissions research and mitigation; (8) provisions 
     regarding the use of space by the FAA at airports do not 
     impose costs which preclude the continued provision of 
     essential services by FAA; and (9) mandates which might 
     interfere with the FAA's ability to optimize its organization 
     or research programs are minimized.
       The Administration is aware that an amendment may be 
     offered to S. 824 that would inappropriately prohibit the 
     conversion of any FAA facilities or function from the Federal 
     Government to the private sector. Such restrictions are 
     unnecessary and would hinder the FAA's ability to manage the 
     air traffic control system. If such an amendment were 
     included in the final legislation presented to the President, 
     his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill.


                         pay-as-you-go-scoring

       The Budget Enforcement Act's Pay-As-You-Go requirements and 
     discretionary spending caps expired on September 30, 2002. 
     The Administration supports the extension of these budget 
     enforcement mechanisms in a manner that ensures fiscal 
     discipline and is consistent with the President's Budget. OMB 
     scoring of the bill is under development.

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I will not bother with the entire letter 
except to say that the administration strongly supports passage of the 
bill. It talks about all the good things which will happen as a result 
of the bill, most of which we have already covered. I am sure we will 
cover it again. But it also says the administration is aware that an 
amendment may be offered to S. 824 that would inappropriately prohibit 
conversion of any FAA facilities or functions from the Federal 
Government to the private sector. They say that such restrictions are 
unnecessary and would hinder the FAA's ability to manage the air 
traffic control system;

[[Page 14728]]

and, if such an amendment were included in the final legislation 
presented to the President, his senior advisers would recommend that he 
veto the bill.
  I very much dislike having all the work that has been done on this 
legislation for literally months be negated by one amendment. Although 
it may be emotionally an important issue, I would hate to see that 
provision destroy all the hard work and important programs that are 
included in this bill.
  I don't know what the plans are for the other side. We would 
obviously like to have a vote on the Lautenberg amendment. I think 
there are negotiations going on and conversations concerning that. In 
the meantime, I note the presence of the Senator from Texas.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Arizona. I 
also thank the Senator from South Carolina for making sure that we have 
an FAA reauthorization bill on the floor in a timely manner.
  There has been so much impact on the aviation industry over the last 
2 years that I think we have had to refocus our efforts from capacity 
issues which we were trying to address before 9/11 to now security 
issues. Certainly, the parts of the bill that deal with capacity are 
still here. I think it is warranted that we look ahead. The aviation 
industry is going to come back, and we need to make sure we have the 
expedited environmental procedures for building new runways and help 
communities be able to meet the needs of increased demand when that 
occurs. If we can do that before a crisis, it will help us allow 
airports to grow in an environmentally positive way. In a way, that can 
be handled by the community effectively.
  I think this bill is a good bill. I have worked on it as the former 
chairman of the Aviation Subcommittee and now as a member of the 
Aviation Subcommittee. I think it is very important that we look at the 
major issues of security.
  I commend the committee for keeping the Security Trust Fund, which I 
think is so important. People pay a ticket tax for security. I want to 
make sure this ticket tax goes for security purposes. That is what this 
bill does. If we start having a shoestring for the Transportation 
Security Agency, they are going to start cutting corners, and we are 
not going to have an airtight system that a number of us want to 
ensure. We have a safer aviation system today than we had on 9/10 in 
2001. We want to make sure it stays that way. We should not let our 
guard down. The kind of enemies there are today are looking for 
vulnerabilities, and we are not going to allow them to have that.
  I think that is why this reauthorization discusses and handles the 
security issues, the capacity issues, and the issues of air traffic 
control and safety all in a way that I think is quite positive.
  I appreciate the chairman of the committee and the ranking member 
working to get this bill out. It came out of our Commerce Committee, 
and I look forward to supporting it.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I listened carefully to comments made 
by our leader, the distinguished colleague from Arizona. I want to say 
that there are places where the contract tower process can be used. 
There are some 4,000 airports across the country where the contract 
tower program might apply. I have no objection to those smaller 
airports converting to that system. But we are grandfathering those 
that are presently FAA controlled to continue in that vein to make sure 
that the system is intact, and that the integrity of the functioning is 
as planned. If there is a point in time at some future date when we 
want to look at this, I am more than willing to discuss it. But I want 
to know exactly what the implications are to the total system, and not 
simply look at this as a financial gain because in the long run, the 
financial gains are ephemeral. We saw it in the British experience. We 
saw it in the Canadian experience.
  The Senator from Arizona talked about how nobly the controllers from 
Canada performed on 9/11. Yes, we give them credit for that. But still 
in all, their system falls into higher costs all the time, and it is in 
financial despair, if I can use the terminology. We believe we take 
care of the issues concerned.
  I think we would like to see what our colleagues have to say about 
that. In due time, I hope we will bring it to a vote.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from New Jersey for 
offering this amendment, which I am proud to cosponsor. This amendment 
will bar the use of funds to privatize the functions of the air traffic 
control system in the United States, which will ensure that air traffic 
control will remain a Government function under the control of the 
Federal Aviation Administration.
  I believe that there are few functions of Government more inherent to 
our responsibility than guaranteeing the safety and security of 
consumers of transportation in our country. Since September 11, 2001, 
we have worked to increase the Federal role in improving air security. 
Air traffic control is essential to our Nation's security and it is 
vital that we keep air traffic control within the Government's function 
in order to ensure a safe aviation system on a day-to-day basis. It is 
also vital in the case of a terrorist attack. This was demonstrated 
vividly on September 11, when central Government control of air traffic 
proved essential in quickly clearing our skies and possibly preventing 
further casualties.
  Furthermore, it is clear that the intention of those who oppose this 
amendment is to open the door for privatization of air traffic control. 
This would be a disaster. An extensive Columbia University study that 
looked at air traffic control privatization in other countries found 
that there are no operational or economic advantages to privatizing air 
traffic control. In fact, there is some evidence that suggests 
privatization can lead to an increase in incidents, as fewer 
controllers are used in an attempt to cut costs. For example, 
privatization in Canada has led to an operational irregularity rate 
twice ours despite the fact that their air system is 7 percent the size 
of ours. Privatization may also increase costs. The British Government 
has twice had to bail out its privatized system for $131 million, about 
two-thirds of what they originally sold it for.
  I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment in order to 
ensure the continued safety of our aviation system. Let us focus on how 
to improve our air traffic control system without compromising safety.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the pending 
amendment be set aside so I may offer an amendment to the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, if my friend from Mississippi would not 
mind, the Senator from Wyoming has a brief statement counter to the 
Lautenberg amendment.
  So that we can be agreeable, I ask unanimous consent that immediately 
following the Senator from Wyoming, we set aside the Lautenberg 
amendment for the purpose of the Senator from Mississippi proposing an 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. THOMAS. I thank the President, and I thank the Senator from 
Mississippi. I will not take long. In fact, I just came from a markup 
in health care. I was very much interested in the discussion that was 
going on here. We are all involved, of course, in one way or another in 
air traffic control. I am a former private pilot and have experienced a 
great deal over the years. I don't fly anymore because I don't get

[[Page 14729]]

enough opportunity to be safe. Nevertheless, I have listened.
  First of all, I am very much interested in doing all we can in 
government to modernize and make it as efficient as can be. That is 
what the administration seeks to do in various kinds of activities, 
taking a look at those to see if there is something that can be done 
governmentally. If they can do it just as well or better in the private 
sector, there ought to be some competition for that. I believe that. I 
believe that very strongly.
  I am always sort of surprised at the efforts made to keep the 
government from doing that. If they study it and come up with the right 
answer, I think that is a good idea, instead of saying we ought not to 
be doing any of those things.
  I am an advocate of trying to have competition to see how we can do 
the best thing.
  Currently, the FAA is reviewing the jobs done by the flight services 
staff to determine if these jobs could indeed be done better by the 
private sector.
  I think most everyone knows that President Bush and his Secretary 
have no intention of having private competition for the air traffic 
controllers.
  What we are talking about here is the flight service function, which 
is quite different. Currently provided for in general aviation, of 
course, is that pilots currently review it to see if flight service 
functions could be modernized by allowing the private sector to provide 
some of these services.
  So it seems to me that is reasonable. And to come in with an 
amendment that says you cannot take a look at doing something better is 
a surprise to me.
  The commercial airlines rely on the private sector for weather and 
all kinds of things. There is really no reason to think that is 
something that is done better by Government people than it is by 
private sector people. Who is flying the airplane, for example? That is 
where the real test comes.
  So it seems to me we ought not to adopt this kind of an amendment. 
Remember, this is a current A-76 study that is underway. It is a study, 
and we ought to give that an opportunity to happen.
  The FAA has categorized air traffic controllers as noninherently 
governmental. They have shielded the air traffic controllers from the 
A-76 study.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Will the Senator from Wyoming yield for a question?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I asked if the Senator from Wyoming 
would yield for a question.
  Mr. THOMAS. Sure. Yes.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I ask if the Senator from Wyoming is aware of the 
fact that some $20 million has already been spent on a survey or a 
study of this process?
  Mr. THOMAS. I am not aware of that. Are you aware of the outcome?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. No.
  Mr. THOMAS. No.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. The outcome is one we see that says perhaps we ought 
to put the security of the FAA out to the cheapest bidder. I am aware 
that is where it comes out. And can the distinguished Senator from 
Wyoming explain why it is we took this very comfortable, privately 
managed sector of our aviation system, the baggage screeners, and 
brought them into Government at three times the wage they were working? 
There are 33,000 or 28,000 of those people.
  Mr. THOMAS. May I answer the question, please?
  I do know why that is, and I would think you do, too.
  We decided it right here. I voted against it. I voted for having the 
private sector continue. That is why it was done, because it is a 
political thing, and you know it and I know it.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I am delighted--I always enjoy the comments of my 
friend from Wyoming. We talk the same language in New Jersey.
  But to say it was a political decision, then it sounds relatively 
meritoriousless. But I hear people say things are better with the folks 
working for Government. Of course, we have started to lay off a lot of 
baggage screeners already. And so, to me, the chances of baggage 
screening being of the same danger as changing the system that now----
  Mr. THOMAS. Is there a question?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I am sorry. Forgive me. I did not mean 
to use the time of the Senator from Wyoming. I was just trying to 
respond to his answer.
  Mr. THOMAS. I understand, and you will probably have an opportunity 
to do that. Let me respond to what you are saying.
  You talk about how much better it is. I think if you had spent that 
many billions of dollars doing it on the other side, it perhaps would 
have been better as well.
  So I urge Senators to not accept this amendment and to let us 
continue to have a study of what might better be done rather than 
saying, flatly, we cannot even take a look at a possible modernization.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Mississippi.


                           Amendment No. 898

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, under the unanimous consent agreement 
propounded by the distinguished Senator from Arizona, I ask unanimous 
consent that the pending amendments be set aside, and I send an 
amendment to the desk and ask it be reported. The amendment is at the 
desk.
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, I missed the 
unanimous consent request. What is it? What is the request?
  Mr. COCHRAN. The request is that the pending amendments be set aside 
and that I may be permitted to offer an amendment to the bill.
  Mr. REID. I would agree to that if we have a time set for a vote on 
the Lautenberg amendment. Other than that, because I don't want his 
amendment to----
  Mr. McCAIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. When would the Senator like to have that vote?
  Mr. REID. We would like to have it as soon as possible.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that pending the 
discussion of the Cochran amendment, we move then to a vote.
  Mr. REID. Well, I know we have two of our most senior Members here 
involved in this debate, Senator Cochran and Senator Byrd, and they 
usually do not talk for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I do not 
intend to talk long. I do hope we can permit Senator Byrd to make a 
statement on this amendment. I do not know how much time he would need 
for that purpose.
  Mr. BYRD. Five minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. The Senator says 5 minutes.
  Mr. President, I say, we are prepared to accept the amendment by 
Senator Cochran.
  Mr. REID. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Cochran] for himself and 
     Mr. Byrd, proposes an amendment numbered 898.

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To provide authorization for an Aviation Security Capital 
                                 Fund)

       On page 145, beginning with line 8, strike all down through 
     and including line 24 on page 147, and insert the following:

     ``SEC. 402. AVIATION SECURITY CAPITAL FUND.

       ``(a) In General.--There may be established within the 
     Department of Homeland Security a fund to be known as the 
     Aviation Security Capital Fund. There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Fund up to $500,000,000 for each of the 
     fiscal years 2004 through 2007, such amounts to be derived 
     from fees received under section 44940 of title 49, United 
     States Code. Amounts in the fund shall be allocated in such a 
     manner that--
       ``(1) 40 percent shall be made available for hub airports;
       ``(2) 20 percent shall be made available for medium hub 
     airports;
       ``(3) 15 percent shall be made available for small hub 
     airports and non-hub airports; and
       ``(4) 25 percent may be distributed at the Secretary's 
     discretion.

[[Page 14730]]

       ``(b) Purpose.--Amounts in the Fund shall be available to 
     the Secretary of Homeland Security to provide financial 
     assistance to airport sponsors to defray capital investment 
     in transportation security at airport facilities in 
     accordance with the provisions of this section. The program 
     shall be administered in concert with the airport improvement 
     program under chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code.
       ``(c) Apportionment.--Amounts made available under 
     subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) shall be apportioned 
     among the airports in each category in accordance with a 
     formula based on the ratio that passenger enplanements at 
     each airport in the category bears to the total passenger 
     enplanements at all airports in that category.
       ``(d) Matching Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not less than the following percentage 
     of the costs of any project funded under this section shall 
     be derived from non-Federal sources:
       ``(A) For hub airports and medium hub airports, 25 percent.
       ``(B) For airports other than hub airports and medium hub 
     airports, 10 percent.
       ``(2) Use of bond proceeds.--In determining the amount of 
     non-Federal sources of funds, the proceeds of State and local 
     bond issues shall not be considered to be derived, directly 
     or indirectly, from Federal sources without regard to the 
     Federal income tax treatment of interest and principal of 
     such bonds.
       ``(e) Letters of Intent.--The Secretary of Homeland 
     Security, or his delegate, may execute letters of intent to 
     commit funding to airport sponsors from the Fund.
       ``(f) Conforming Amendment.--Section 44940(a)(1) of title 
     49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       `(H) The costs of security-related capital improvements at 
     airports.'.
       ``(g) Definitions.--Any term used in this section that is 
     defined or used in chapter 417 of title 49 United States Code 
     has the meaning given that term in that chapter.''.

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I also note that Senator Byrd is a 
cosponsor of the amendment. I appreciate very much hearing the 
assurance of the Senator from Arizona that this amendment will be 
accepted, so I am not going to talk long. I do not want to talk our way 
out of getting this amendment accepted, but I do briefly want to say 
what it does, and then I will be happy to yield to Senator Byrd for 
whatever comments he would like to make.
  This amendment seeks to amend section 402 of the bill. Section 402 
creates a new entitlement program, in effect, and it is a capital fund 
program that would permit the Transportation Security Administration to 
use up to $500 million--the first $500 million collected each year from 
the emplanement fee; $2.50 per passenger that is now collected under 
current law--and transfer those funds to the Department of 
Transportation for administration of this capital fund.
  The Department of Transportation could then allocate those funds to 
airports for security improvements. There are provisions in the 
amendment about how much hub airports would be entitled to--40 percent; 
20 percent to medium hub airports, and the like. But the problem with 
it is the CBO says that, unlike the arrangement under current law, 
where the Transportation Security Administration spends these funds for 
airport screeners and other activities under the jurisdiction of the 
Transportation Security Administration, it would no longer be able to 
have those activities offset by the funds that are collected from the 
passengers, which means we would have to appropriate additional money 
each year to pay for those purposes that are now being paid for out of 
the emplanement fund that is designated and earmarked for that purpose 
now.
  So what we are doing is saying, it is OK to set up this new capital 
fund, and it is OK to authorize the Transportation Security Agency to 
collect the money and make it available, but we need to make that 
subject to appropriations. That is the point because we are going to 
divert money from the Department of Homeland Security for this new 
purpose, and we have a letter from Secretary Ridge explaining that. I 
ask unanimous consent that a copy of his letter dated June 11 to me be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office of the 
           Secretary,
                                                    June 11, 2003.
     Hon. Thad Cochran,
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Homeland Security, Committee on 
         Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: The Administration appreciates the 
     continued support of Congress for improvements in the 
     security of the Nation's civil aviation system and supports 
     Senate passage of S. 824, the Aviation Investment and 
     Revitalization Vision Act (Air-V). However, the 
     Administration opposes a provision in S. 824 that would 
     divert fees collected for security activities for purposes 
     other than the provision of direct security services.
       With the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Congress identified 
     the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as the focal point 
     of the federal government's homeland security efforts, with 
     the mission of preventing terrorist attacks and reducing the 
     nation's vulnerability to terrorism. While the Department 
     welcomes and appreciates the assistance of other agencies in 
     improving security, any diversion of security fees, such as 
     that proposed in S. 824, would directly undermine the 
     Department's ability to fulfill its mission. Air-V would 
     establish an Aviation Security Capital Fund that is both 
     outside the control of the Department and funded by diverting 
     $500 million per year of passenger and air carrier security 
     fees collected by the Transportation Security Administration 
     (TSA). This would diminish the Department's funding capacity. 
     As you know, the direct annual costs of operating the 
     aviation security system are not fully offset by these fees, 
     and diverting fee revenue for other purposes clearly weakens 
     the intended financing structure of TSA set forth in the 
     Aviation and Transportation Security Act. Diversion of the 
     fees into a fund outside of DHS undermines the ability of the 
     Administration to apply these resources to the most pressing 
     security needs.
       The Administration looks forward to working with Congress 
     to ensure that the version of the bill presented to the 
     President eliminates this objectionable provision.
       The Office of Management and Budget has advised that there 
     is no objection, from the standpoint of the Administration's 
     program, to the submission of these views for the 
     consideration of the Congress.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Tom Ridge.

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am hopeful we can go forward. I 
appreciate very much the assurance of the Senator from Arizona that the 
amendment will be included in the bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my friend and the 
Chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator 
Cochran, in offering this amendment today. At the same time, I deeply 
regret the fact that we are being forced to have to come to this floor 
and offer this amendment.
  S. 824 contains a brand new $500 million entitlement program. This 
legislation would earmark $500 million of existing aviation security 
fees for grants to airports for construction.
  The Transportation Security Administration was created by the 
Congress in response to the attacks of September 11. It was a failure 
of our airport screening procedures that allowed 19 men to board 
domestic airliners with weapons and turn four planes into instruments 
of death and destruction. With the creation of the Department of 
Homeland Security, the TSA was transferred from the Department of 
Transportation to the new Homeland Security Department. The 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security, which is so ably 
chaired by the senior Senator from Mississippi, is charged with funding 
the TSA--one of many agencies now in the Department of Homeland 
Security.
  The President's Fiscal Year 2004 budget request for the TSA assumes 
that $2 billion and $70 million in aviation security fees will go to 
the TSA to meet its security requirements. These fees are used to fund 
the thousands of screeners at our airports, for purchasing security 
equipment such as explosives detection equipment, and for the Federal 
Air Marshals program, all of which help secure our airports and the 
millions of travelers who use them. The provision in this bill that 
Senator Cochran and I are seeking to modify would take $500 million of 
those fees that the President has requested for the TSA and instead 
earmark the $500 million for a new entitlement program for airport 
construction grants.
  This new mandatory program purports to ``solve'' an airport security

[[Page 14731]]

construction problem. However, the provision actually creates a 
homeland security problem. The provision will create a $500 million 
hole in the TSA budget--a hole that the Homeland Security Subcommittee 
will be unable to fill without creating other holes in our homeland 
security budget.
  How should we fill that $500 million hole? Should we take Border 
Patrol agents off our Southwest border? Should we cut port security 
programs? Should we further slow down the Coast Guard's modernization 
program? Should we reduce the numbers of inspectors at our ports of 
entry on our borders and increase the waiting time for agricultural 
produce to enter the U.S. from Mexico and Canada? Should we cut grants 
to our States and cities to equip and train first responders? These are 
the very real choices we on the Homeland Security Appropriations 
Subcommittee will have to face if the provision in this bill is 
permitted to pass.
  I sympathize with the dilemma facing the members of the Commerce 
Committee. They are attempting to relieve the security construction 
burden facing our Nation's airports. I support these airport security 
programs and have provided funds in the past to begin to meet these 
airport security needs. However, the President did not request one dime 
for airport security construction in his budget, not one dime. So if 
this provision became law, we would need to cut $500 million from 
homeland security priorities requested by the President.
  Our amendment is a simple one. Instead of creating a new entitlement 
program, instead of creating a colossal new $500 million earmark, 
instead of putting airport construction grants at the front of the 
line, ahead of border security, port security or first responder 
grants, this amendment would simply turn this new $500 million program 
into an authorization. It would allow the Senate to use the 
appropriations process to make careful choices among the competing 
homeland security priorities.
  I urge my colleagues to join us on this amendment and strike this 
ill-advised provision.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, we are ready to accept the amendment on 
this side.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. It has been cleared on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 898) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. BYRD. If the Senator will yield briefly, I thank the Senator from 
Arizona and the comanager on this side of the aisle for their accepting 
the amendment. I think it is a real service.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I understand it is the agreement of the 
Senator from Nevada that we will have a vote at 2:30 on the pending 
amendment.
  Mr. REID. Yes.
  Mr. McCAIN. Could I have a small modification, a technical amendment?
  Mr. REID. Yes.


                     Amendment No. 889, as modified

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have a modification of amendment No. 889 
at the desk. It is a technical correction concerning the sale of 
airline tickets that was inadvertently included in the managers' 
package.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is so 
modified.
  The modification is as follows:

       On page 10, strike lines 11 through 18

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote in 
relation to the Lautenberg amendment No. 893 occur at 2:30 today, with 
no amendments in order to the amendment prior to the vote; further, 
that the remaining time until 2:30 be equally divided in the usual 
form.
  Mr. REID. No objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I wish to mention to my colleagues that we 
are moving along on the amendments on this side. I know there is an 
amendment by the Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Inhofe, which I hope we can 
consider rather quickly. It is a very interesting amendment on raising 
the age from 60 to 65. There are several amendments by Senator Burns.
  I say to my friend on this side that I think we can probably agree to 
at least a majority of them. I know of no other amendments that would 
be pending on this side. If there are, we hope that during the vote 
that takes place at 2:30 we can get pending amendments at least brought 
to our attention so we can schedule them. I still believe there is a 
very good opportunity to finish this legislation tonight.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                      Amendment No. 891, Withdrawn

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask that my amendment No. 891 which I 
offered earlier today be withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays on the Lautenberg amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 893.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Edwards), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Jeffords), and the Senator from 
Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman), are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 56, nays 41, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 222 Leg.]

                              YEAS --- 56

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Graham (FL)
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Talent
     Voinovich
     Wyden

                                NAYS--41

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     Dole
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Thomas
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Edwards
     Jeffords
     Lieberman
  The amendment (No. 893) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

[[Page 14732]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. If I may have the attention of the managers of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order.
  Mr. REID. One of the important amendments on this bill is the Inhofe 
amendment that has been discussed at some length, on both sides, off 
the floor. But both have agreed that the Inhofe amendment will be 
handled in 40 minutes, equally divided.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Inhofe amendment be the next in 
order and that the time for the amendment be 40 minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. Equally divided.
  Mr. REID. And no second-degree amendments be in order prior to the 
vote, on or in relation to the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. McCAIN. Forty minutes equally divided.
  Mr. REID. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, before we move to the Inhofe amendment, I 
wish to state for the benefit of my colleagues, we have a Dorgan 
amendment which is being worked on. We have a Bunning amendment which 
is being worked on.
  I believe a Burns amendment is being worked on as well. I think we 
are close to completion of work on the amendments. If our colleagues 
have additional amendments, we would certainly like to see them during 
this 40 minutes of debate on the Inhofe amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.


                           Amendment No. 986

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Inhofe], for himself, Mr. 
     Kyl, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Enzi, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 986.

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

           (Purpose: To establish age limitations for airmen)

       At the end of title V, add the following new section:

     SECTION 521. AGE LIMITATIONS.

       (a) General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     beginning on the date that is 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act--
       (1) section 121.383(c) of title 14, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, shall not apply;
       (2) no certificate holder may use the services of any 
     person as a pilot on an airplane engaged in operations under 
     part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, if that 
     person is 65 years of age or older; and
       (3) no person may serve as a pilot on an airplane engaged 
     in operations under part 121 of title 14, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, if that person is 65 years of age or older.
       (b) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     provisions of this section shall take effect on the date that 
     is 30 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Interim limitation.--During the period that begins on 
     the date that is 30 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act and ending on the date that is one year after such date--
       (A) subsection (a)(2) shall be applied by substituting 
     ``64'' for ``65''; and
       (B) subsection (a)(3) shall be applied by substituting 
     ``64'' for ``65''.
       (c) Certificate Holder.--For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``certificate holder'' means a holder of a certificate 
     to operate as an air carrier or commercial operator issued by 
     the Federal Aviation Administration.
       (d) Reservation of Safety Authority.--Nothing in this 
     section is intended to change the authority of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration to take steps to ensure the safety of 
     air transportation operations involving a pilot who is 60 
     years of age or older.

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, I would like to say this is 
a noncontroversial amendment which everyone is for.
  That is not true. But it is a very old subject. I say that in two 
ways.
  It is a subject that has been around for a long time and one that 
needs to be addressed one way or another.
  Second, I am offering an amendment that passed out of the Commerce 
Committee last year. It does one very simple thing. Currently, the age 
limit for a commercial pilot is age 60. That was established some 40 
years ago. The life expectancy since that time has increased by about 
12 years. There is no medical reason that anyone has ever put forward 
why a pilot should have to stop flying at age 60. Quite frankly, I know 
pilots who are too old to fly at age 50. I am an exception. I am age 
68, and I am a better pilot than I was 40 years ago. But age is 
arbitrary. There are no two people alike.
  For that reason, age 60 being an arbitrary number and having been 
around for some 40 years, my preference would be not to have any age 
limit at all. Frankly, I think we should have very strong, stringent 
medical requirements. That is in the law today. And we should have very 
strong proficiency requirements. That is in the law today. So long as a 
person is able to do that, that person should be able to continue. But, 
realistically, I believe people are going to say, well, that could lead 
up to very old ages--even my age. They do not want that to happen.
  So we are putting an arbitrary age limit of 65 so we can at least 
look at it for a period of time. There have been a lot of studies. 
Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene did a study as to what age 
someone would not have the proficiency in flying an airplane. They came 
back and said age has absolutely nothing to do with it. There are other 
predictors that are much more important. In fact, some studies have 
shown that airline pilots exceed population norms for physical health 
and mental ability. I believe that is true because they are required to 
take physicals on a regular basis.
  I am a commercially rated pilot. I have been for some 40 years. I can 
tell you from personal experience in my particular case. Some of you in 
this Chamber will remember this. I had an experience just a couple of 
years ago with a single-engine airplane where the front end of the 
airplane came off in flight. Normally, with that situation you are 
through. However, drawing upon experience, I was able to determine 
where the new stalling speed was, which was three times what the 
stalling speed normally would be for that aircraft, and come back and 
made somewhat of a crash landing, I guess, only because I didn't have 
any gears down there. But, nonetheless, quite frankly, I wonder if I 
would have been able to do that before.
  At this time, I would like to yield the floor so I can see what type 
of opposition is here today.
  I would like to tell you that everyone is for it. Quite frankly, 
ALPA, the Airline Pilots Association, is not for it. There is a very 
good reason. It is not a safety reason. It is not an age reason. It is 
a monetary reason. I have a great deal of respect for younger pilots 
who are commercial pilots working for the airlines. By getting rid of 
older pilots, that leaves more upward mobility. That is true. I think 
that is one of the reasons they are opposed to it. In fact, I think 
that is the only reason they are opposed to it. Many of the airlines 
are for it, and some are against it. Some of them are in opposition to 
my amendment as an economic issue. As a pilot becomes older, he is paid 
more money. Consequently, the payrolls in an ailing industry would go 
up. I am sensitive to that. I have weighed that carefully and have 
determined this is the best thing.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me take such time as I may consume on 
our side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. I intend to oppose the amendment. In many ways, I regret 
opposing my friend from Oklahoma. He is quite a remarkable pilot. I 
have had the opportunity to ride with him. I believe he flew around the 
world in a single-engine airplane at one point.
  Mr. INHOFE. It was actually a twin-engine plane.
  Mr. DORGAN. Nonetheless, he is a pilot who has flown around the 
world. He knows a bit about flying.

[[Page 14733]]

  I learned to fly at one point in my life. I know something about the 
wonders of it. I know something about the time the instructor steps out 
of the plane and says: It is your turn. Take it up alone. That is one 
of the moments in your life you will always remember.
  The issue here is about an age limit for commercial pilots. I don't 
stand here as an expert on this subject. I don't expect there is an 
expert in the Senate on this subject. The question of the age rule is a 
question that the FAA has dealt with, and they have dealt with it 
repeatedly.
  The history of this rule goes back many years. It is a rule that has 
been around for a long while. It was established by the FAA as a matter 
of safety. I know this rule has actually been considered by the Senate 
previously as well.
  At one point during its consideration in the Senate, it was 
considered and proposed that we had a shortage of pilots, and, 
therefore, we should remove this age restriction and increase it some. 
Of course, now we have exactly the opposite. We have many pilots who 
are furloughed and laid off and would like to come to work. That is not 
the issue. The issue is one of safety.
  I think the FAA has always erred on the side of safety. I expect that 
all of us want them to err on the side of safety.
  My judgment about this is that the decision about age requirements 
for commercial pilots ought to be left to the regulatory agency, the 
FAA. They are the experts in this area. We are not. They know more 
about this subject than we do.
  I just feel uncomfortable substituting our judgment, with an 
arbitrary number, for the judgment of the FAA.
  Let me say I am sure the Senator from Oklahoma would agree, the FAA 
has the opportunity and the discretion and the ability right now this 
afternoon to make that age change, if they wish to do that. The FAA has 
the authority under law, as I understand it, to change the rule as they 
see fit. They have continuously, however, kept the 60-year age rule 
because they want to maintain the highest degree of safety in air 
transportation.
  There have been a number of studies dealing with this issue. In 1979, 
Congress mandated a study conducted under the auspices of the NIH. In 
1990, the House Committee on Public Works asked the Office of 
Technology Assessment to examine the medical aspects of the Federal 
requirement that airline pilots retire at age 60 and to assess the 
state of the art medical risk assessment. There have been a number of 
these studies.
  I chose not to go into the conclusions of all the studies except to 
say that the FAA, in reviewing the body of information in those 
studies, decided that they believed the 60-year age retirement rule was 
appropriate.
  Again, in April 2000, the FAA reaffirmed its position and decision to 
maintain the 60-year retirement age. That decision was appealed to the 
courts actually in 2001, and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals 
upheld the FAA's decision.
  Once again, I say I am not an expert. I would expect, perhaps, the 
Senator from Oklahoma would make the same statement. The question of 
safety and the question of the proper retirement age given medical 
circumstances with respect to commercial flight and the commercial 
license that one needs to fly is a decision that is enormously 
complicated. It is a decision that has been studied and restudied by 
the FAA folks whose job it is to provide the assurance of safety. I 
frankly am comfortable with whatever decision they make.
  If they were to decide this afternoon, look, we have studied this 
from six more angles and here is what we have concluded, and it came up 
with a different number, that would be fine with me. But I must say, I 
am not comfortable with the Senate arbitrarily deciding there is a 
number that we know better than the FAA which represents the risk 
assessment with respect to this mandatory retirement age. For that 
reason, I regret I have to oppose the amendment.
  Again, let me finish by saying this is not a new subject and not a 
new debate. We may not know much more about it than we did the last 
time we debated it, but I believed then and believe now it is 
appropriate to allow the Federal Aviation Administration--the 
regulatory agency that has the experts and has the charge to make these 
decisions--to make this judgment.
  Again, it is my contention, if they decided this afternoon to 
increase that mandatory retirement age, that would be fine with me. And 
they have that capability under current law to do so, but they have not 
because they believe it not advisable. I think the Senate would be well 
advised to listen to the FAA on this subject.
  I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, I have a great deal of 
respect for the Senator from North Dakota, and some of the things he 
says certainly do make sense. I would have to say this, though. There 
is not a bureaucracy out there that, now and then, does not have to be 
prodded a little bit because it is the very nature of a bureaucracy not 
to change. They do not want to change.
  Not long ago, I had a bill, on which I believe the Senator from North 
Dakota supported me, called the emergency revocation bill. It took 3 
years before we got the votes to pass it. It was something that should 
have been done, I believe, by the FAA; and I think most of them would 
agree. Many of them in the field have told me since then that it was 
something they should have done. They are very busy, they have their 
hands full, and probably the furthest thing from their minds is making 
a change.
  When it gets down to age, when you talk about 60, age 60, when this 
rule was put in, is the same as age 72 today. Everything that is tied 
to an index--whether it is retirement, Social Security--they all have 
increased in age, except this one issue.
  As far as safety is concerned, I do not think the FAA would tell you 
the arbitrary age of 60 or 65 is going to relate to safety. But what 
they relate to safety is the medical and proficiency requirements, 
which are very stringent. And the older you get, I suggested to my 
friend from North Dakota, the more stringent they become, because I 
have had to live through this myself.
  On the argument that there is not a shortage of pilots, now we are 
going through a temporary phase. I think, as everyone in this Chamber 
knows, we are going through a rebuilding process of our military, and 
the supply and demand of pilots is something that is going to change. I 
just hope that does not influence a person into making that decision on 
a vote.
  I say to the Senator, he is right, safety is the big issue. But we 
can show--and have testimony, a lot of which I have already talked 
about--that safety is not related to age; it is related to medical 
conditions and proficiency.
  With that, I yield the floor to see if there are those who want to be 
heard. If not, I will yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I have been on the Commerce Committee for 
quite a few years, not nearly as long as my friend from South Carolina, 
but long enough to know that this issue has been around for a long 
time.
  When it was first presented to me, it was presented to my office by a 
group of pilots who were nearing the age of 60. And they said: Gee, we 
are in great shape. We fly planes that have two pilots in the cockpit. 
We would be willing to take three or four physicals every year if 
necessary. We all know people are living longer. We know that fewer and 
fewer people smoke. We have rigorous physicals.
  I said: Gee, it makes good sense to me. And as I grow older, it makes 
even more sense to me, I might add to my friend from Oklahoma.
  But here is the problem. The airlines do not want it because they do 
not want to pay senior pilots the amount of money they have to pay 
them, and so they want to get rid of them at age 60 and bring in lower 
salaried pilots. And, of course, then, incredibly, the younger members 
of ALPA, the Airline

[[Page 14734]]

Pilots Association, want the old geezers gone so they can move up more 
rapidly. It is really kind of an incredible scenario, when you think 
about it.
  We all know that people live longer and are healthier longer. And the 
Senator from Oklahoma probably knows when this rule went into effect. I 
am not sure.
  Mr. INHOFE. Forty years ago.
  Mr. McCAIN. Forty years ago. The demographics have changed, and 
everything else has changed. It argues for at least allowing pilots to 
fly longer.
  By the way, I might say, also--again, maybe I have a little senior's 
bias here--more experienced pilots are better pilots. And if they are 
in good health, and there are two of them in almost every commercial 
airliner, why in the world are we opposed to allowing them to fly 
longer? Southwest Airlines supports the efforts. SWAPA and other 
organizations and individuals allow pilots to fly commercial jet 
aircraft beyond age 60. JetBlue supports it. The low-cost airlines all 
support it. The most expensive airlines, the more established ones--
most of them are rotating in and out of bankruptcy because of their 
outstanding management practices--are opposed to it.
  So this is really a no-brainer, Mr. President. We should allow these 
pilots to serve longer and fly longer and be able to realize an income 
that comes from serving these airlines and the American public for a 
long time.
  Having said that, we will probably lose because right now, ALPA, the 
Airline Pilots Association, and the executives and lobbyists for the 
major airlines are on the phone saying: Don't do this. This could be 
really dangerous.
  It is hard for me to believe that someone 61 years old, who passed a 
physical, who is flying with another qualified pilot, plus, in many 
cases, a flight engineer, is in any way a danger. Not only that, in 
case there is some kind of emergency, that pilot is probably better 
qualified to handle that emergency by virtue of that pilot's experience 
than a much younger individual would be.
  So I will clearly be supporting the amendment of the Senator from 
Oklahoma. I appreciate his courage in bringing up this issue. Maybe 
someday we will be able to allow these young men and women to serve 
past age 60 if they are physically and mentally qualified to do so.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, I thank the Senator from 
Arizona. I would suggest that this is exactly like the bill that came 
out of the Commerce Committee last year or the year before, the 107th 
Congress. I really believe it is time for us to do this. I know where 
the pressures are against it.
  If there is no one else on the other side who wants to be heard, I 
will yield back.
  Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me make one final point.
  It is not quite so simple to say it is ALPA, the airlines. The fact 
is, the Federal Aviation Administration, the FAA, has the authority 
today to make a decision about increasing this retirement age. It has 
chosen not to, I assume because the experts there have taken a look at 
the OTA study, the accident rates, and whole series of things.
  I agree, people are living longer, better lives. I have an 81-year-
old uncle who runs in the Senior Olympics. He runs the 400 and the 800 
at age 81. People are living longer. I understand all that.
  The issue is, what the proper age is for retirement of commercial 
airline pilots is not a function of the Senate, making a judgment on 
the floor of the Senate. In my judgment, it is a function of people who 
know, the medical experts at the FAA, looking through the data and 
making a considered judgment on behalf of the American people of what 
constitutes their best safety.
  So that is the basis of this position. It is not, in my judgment, 
about ALPA or the airlines; it is just saying, look, whatever the 
judgment is, let it be, but let's have the experts make it. That is my 
whole point.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I think we have responded to everything 
the Senator from North Dakota has said. I would only say that there are 
a lot of forces out there against it. But every argument that is 
against it that is a legitimate argument, is an economic argument.
  I believe everyone in this Chamber has to understand that what was 
being age 60, 40 years ago, is not the same as being age 60 today. And 
everything else, every other schedule we have written into law, has 
changed more than this amount during that 40-year period.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I yield as much time as the Senator from 
Mississippi wants from the time remaining.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, how much time remains?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 12 minutes 55 seconds remaining.
  Mr. LOTT. I don't believe I will need the entire time. I will take a 
few minutes to say that, in this case, I do feel the need to oppose 
this amendment by Senator Inhofe. Our Commerce Committee has discussed 
this issue several times in the past and at various times we have gone 
different ways on it. In this case, I think you need to look at how we 
got where we are.
  The Federal Aviation Administration has the responsibility that is 
mandated to ensure aviation safety. In 1959, they concluded, after 
concerns developed of potential detrimental effects of aging and the 
risk of acute and incapacitating medical conditions, that commercial 
pilots need to be required to retire at age 60. Today I believe there 
is sufficient evidence to keep that rule. There is not enough evidence 
to reverse that. There is a case here where I believe most of the 
airlines, although not all, support keeping it at 60. There is no 
question that the representatives of the pilots prefer to keep it at 
60. So you have an agreement.
  Also, I do feel as if, particularly in the aviation area, there is a 
need right now to have some opportunity for retirement at 60, to bring 
in newer, young pilots or, as a matter of fact, to decide they don't 
need all those pilots. This is a unique time in the aftermath of 9/11, 
where at this time I am inclined not to think we should raise the age 
to 65, whereas some time down the road I might be so inclined.
  I do worry about age discrimination. As I get older, I worry about it 
more than I used to. I think in this case, with medical science and the 
acknowledgement of the current situation in the industry, we should 
keep it at 60.
  I don't like to be on the other side of my good friend, the Senator 
from Oklahoma, but I think, all things considered, we should stick with 
what the rule has been.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, the three arguments used by the 
distinguished Senator from Mississippi are, first, economic. The 
pilots' union is opposed to it. I said that in my opening statement. 
There is a justified reason for that. If I were a young pilot and a 
member of the union, I might feel the same way because they want more 
upward mobility. As far as the airlines are concerned, yes, they are 
going to have to pay a little more. The average older pilots have 
greater salaries and benefits. These are economic reasons.
  I think we should consider these reasons but I don't want anybody 
voting on this and believing in their heart that they are doing it for 
safety or because of the supply and demand of pilots. We all know that 
will change; we know that with the restructuring of our military.
  As I said, if it is a good age--first, it should not be an age at 
all. It ought to be based on medical tests and proficiency tests. If 40 
years ago 60 was a good age, 65 would be better now.
  We will have a chance to look at this. I think there are a lot of 
people who would like to see a realistic approach to this. I think we 
used the same thing for 40 years and certainly it is justified to raise 
that at this time.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DORGAN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

[[Page 14735]]


  Mr. INHOFE. Yes.
  Mr. DORGAN. The Senator talked about a proficiency test. We would not 
have difficulty if the FAA could find a device that is appropriate to 
deal with that. I think they have evaluated that for a long period of 
time and have not been able to come to that conclusion. I don't think 
even those of us who would agree with your amendment believe there is a 
magic number here. I am not qualified to set the number.
  I am not suggesting that it is ever appropriate to increase the age 
limit. I would prefer someone with the capabilities of the FAA to 
evaluate the medical histories to be able to do that.
  Mr. INHOFE. In terms of proficiency tests, I am a flight instructor. 
I test people, and I think everybody doing that takes into 
consideration age, and they are more stringent with them as they get 
older.
  Again, a person could be more proficient at age 70 than at age 40. 
This happens to some people. That is why age should not be the 
determining factor; proficiency and health should be. Certainly, 
economic factors should not.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Are they prepared to yield back their time?
  Mr. INHOFE. I yield back my time.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. We yield back our time on this side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If all time is yielded back, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. 
Edwards), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Jeffords), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from MA 
(Mr. Kerry) would vote ``nay''.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Smith). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 52, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 223 Leg.]

                                YEAS--44

     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nelson (FL)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Smith
     Specter
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--52

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chambliss
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dole
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murray
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Shelby
     Snowe
     Stabenow
     Talent
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--4

     Edwards
     Jeffords
     Kerry
     Lieberman
  The amendment (No. 896) was rejected.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, we have four Members here who have pending 
amendments which are going to be accepted. All four Members want to 
have their amendment proposed and discussed. I ask unanimous consent 
Senator Bingaman be recognized for his amendment, and Senator Bunning, 
Senator Dorgan, and Senator Inhofe, in that order. I know all will 
speak briefly.
  Mr. LOTT. Reserving the right to object, I want to clarify there were 
no time agreements included, just the order that they would discuss the 
amendments briefly.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 906

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows.

       The Senator from New Mexico [Mr. Bingaman], for himself, 
     and Mr. Inhofe, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Jeffords, Ms. Collins, Mr. 
     Specter, Mr. Harkin, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Pryor, 
     Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Grassley, 
     proposes amendment No. 906.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

        (Purpose: To preserve the essential air service program)

       Beginning on page 138, line 15, strike all through page 
     142, line 11.

  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak briefly about the 
Bingaman-Inhofe amendment to preserve the Essential Air Service 
Program. Our amendment is cosponsored by Senators Snowe, Jeffords, 
Collins, Specter, Harkin, Clinton, Schumer, Pryor, Ben Nelson, Lincoln, 
and Grassley. I thank them for their support.
  I first want to compliment Commerce Committee Chariman McCain, 
Aviation Subcomittee Chairman Lott, and Ranking Members Hollings and 
Rockefeller for their good work on this bill to reauthorize FAA. The 
bill the Senate is now considering, S. 824, will do much to assure the 
safety and security of the traveling public.
  I am also pleased S. 824 includes a number of provisions that will 
help improve commercial air service in rural areas, including a 
reauthorization of the Small Community Air Service Development Pilot 
Program.
  However, we do take issue with one provision in this bill that would 
for the first time impose new costs on some communities that 
participate in the EAS program.
  As the bill now stands, some communities would be required to pay to 
continue to receive scheduled air service. I believe this arbitrary 
proposal could eliminate scheduled air service from many rural 
communities. Yesterday, the House of Representatives voted to eliminate 
all mandatory cost sharing language from the FAA reauthorization bill. 
I hope the Senate will do the same.
  Congress established the Essential Air Service Program in 1978 to 
ensure that communities that had commercial air service before airline 
deregulation could continue to receive scheduled service. Without EAS, 
many rural communities would have no commercial air service at all.
  All across America, small communities face ever-increasing hurdles to 
promoting their economic growth and development. Today, many rural 
areas lack access to interstate or even four-lane highways, railroads 
or broadband telecommunications. Business development in rural areas 
frequently hinges on the availability of scheduled air service. For 
small communities, commercial air service provides a critical link to 
the national and international transportation system.
  A recent study from the Department of Agriculture, titled ``How 
Important Is Airport Access for Rural Businesses'' underscores the 
importance of commercial air service to rural communities. In a survey 
of rural businesses, access to airport facilities and air service was 
frequently cited as one of the top problems for businesses in most 
rural counties. Air facilities, services, and fares were also found to 
be important to tourist-related and service businesses in rural areas. 
Not surprisingly, airport access was one of the least cited concerns of 
manufacturers in large- and medium-sized cities.
  The Essential Air Service Program currently ensures commercial air 
service to over 100 communities in thirty-four states. EAS supports an 
additional 33 communities in Alaska. Because of increasing costs and 
the current financial turndown in the aviation industry,

[[Page 14736]]

particularly among commuter airlines, about 28 additional communities 
have been forced into the EAS program since the terrorist attacks in 
2001.
  Congress already limits the eligibility of the EAS program to 
communities more than 70 miles from a major airport. In addition, the 
amount of the subsidy must be less than $200 per passenger for 
communities less than 210 miles from a major airport. These 
requirements serve to limit the cost to the government of the EAS 
program. In fact, in the past two years, about a dozen airports, 
including one in New Mexico, have been eliminated from EAS because the 
cost per passenger has exceeded the limit. We feel the additional 
requirements imposed in this bill are not appropriate and could force a 
number of communities to lose their commercial air service.
  In my State of New Mexico, five cities currently rely on EAS for 
their commercial air service. The communities are Clovis, Hobbs, 
Carlsbad, Alamogordo and my hometown of Silver City. In each case 
commercial service is provided to Albuquerque, the State's largest city 
and business center.
  I hope that all Senators recognize the vast distances between 
communities in my State. If you drive, Hobbs is 320 miles from 
Albuquerque, Carlsbad is 283 miles, Silver City 233, Clovis 216, and 
Alamogordo 210 miles. None of these cities are on interstate highways, 
so the driving times to Albuquerque can be 4, 5, and even 6 hours. 
Commercial air service is the only practical way to make the trip for 
business people or community leaders going to Albuquerque or to the 
nearby state capital in Santa Fe. Though so called ``hub'' airports may 
be located a hundred miles away in another state, it is just not 
practical to drive the long distance to another airport in order to fly 
to Albuquerque. However, that's exactly what is likely to happen if the 
Congress imposes new costs on our communities to maintain their 
commercial air service.
  As I understand it, under the proposal in this bill communities in 16 
states could be affected by the mandatory cost-sharing requirements in 
the Senate bill. These States are, Alabama, Arkansas, Colorado, 
Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico, 
New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Vermont.
  The House-reported bill--H.R. 2115--also requires some rural 
communities to pay or lose their commercial air service. We believe 
this ill-conceived proposal could not come at a worse time for small 
communities already facing depressed economies and declining tax 
revenues.
  The Governor of my state of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, said in a 
letter to me supporting this amendment: The cost sharing provision has 
the potential to affect the economic welfare of small communities in 
over 35 states---particularly those in New Mexico.
  I also have a letter of support from the New Mexico State Aviation 
Director, Mike Rice, who said this: This significant additional 
financial burden would have profound negative impacts on both current 
sir service and economic development efforts in several of our cities. 
Changes to current EAS funding could very well jeopardize existing air 
service in our state.
  Mayor Donald Carroll of Alamogordo, writes that it is improbable that 
funding will be available to locally subsidize air service. He also 
notes that the city is actively working with the commercial carrier, 
Rio Grande Air, to increase enplanements.
  The National Association of Development Organizations says:

       During these challenging economic times, Congress should be 
     working to improve and enhance air service to rural and 
     underserved communities, instead of adding new requirements 
     that would further isolate hundreds of our nation's smaller 
     communities.

  I'm not entirely sure that the proposal to charge the communities to 
continue their air service has been thoroughly thought out. The 
chairman's report on this bill from the Commerce Committee indicates 
that the Secretary will select 10 EAS communities to pay for their air 
service. However, the way I read the reported bill, only a one city in 
each of 8 states would be required to pay. Now, the chairman has 
offered an amendment that ups that total to 16 states with about 27 
communities that could be impacted.
  At the same time, the bill isn't clear on what exactly is a ``hub'' 
airport. As I understand it, the FAA compiles one set of data on annual 
enplanements, but the Department of Transportation currently uses a 
different set of data from the department's Bureau of Transportation 
Statistics to determine eligibility for EAS. These data produce a 
different list of ``hub'' airports, which could change which airports 
would be required to pay, simply because of the source of the data the 
government chooses to use. Finally, new cities are coming into the EAS 
program, so that additional states could have cities that would be 
required to pay for their air service.
  Just one last point on the impacts of this proposal. I think we 
should make clear this isn't about saving the Government a lot of 
money. We estimate the payments from the communities would amount to 
less than $2 million a year out of a $113 million annual program.
  Advocates of this proposal may claim they've made it as easy as 
possible for the communities to provide the mandatory 10 percent match. 
I just don't believe these alternatives will be all that effective. I 
understand, none of the five EAS cities in New Mexico currently charge 
the commercial carrier any fees to land at the airport. In this way, 
our cities are already contributing to the cost of their commercial air 
service.
  I think we all appreciate the current concerns about the aviation 
industry and the EAS program. Ridership levels to rural cities are 
down. Meanwhile operating costs continue to increase, resulting in 
ticket prices that fewer people can afford. There are too many commuter 
aircraft flying at less than half capacity. Clearly, some improvements 
are needed.
  But what are some better options? Well, I think senators need only 
look in this same bill for the answer. In my view the bill already 
includes a number of excellent improvements in the EAS program that I 
believe will significantly enhance commercial air service in rural 
communities.
  For example, section 352 of the bill authorizes a new Marketing 
Incentive Program to increase ridership, reduce the Federal subsidies, 
and improve service. Section 353 provides for a number of pilot 
programs to help communities improve their commercial air service. One 
option is to allow communities to receive service with a smaller 
airplane. In my State, Alamogordo has decided to try service with a 
nine-passenger plane. In addition, communities may opt to convert their 
EAS service to alternative transportation, which might include bus or 
vans. I think these ideas represent a better approach to improving 
commercial air service in rural areas. I support these proposals and 
want to thank the chairman and ranking member for including them.
  The choice here is clear: If we do not preserve the Essential Air 
Service Program today, we could well see the end of all commercial air 
service in rural areas. The EAS program provides vital resources that 
help link rural communities to the national and global aviation system. 
Our amendment will help ensure affordable, reliable, and safe air 
service remains available in rural America.
  The House of Representatives has already voted to eliminate the 
mandatory cost sharing language from the FAA reauthorization bill. I 
hope all Senators will vote for this amendment.
  I ask unanimous consent that a listing of the communities that could 
be affected and a letter of support for the amendment by the Governor 
of New Mexico, a letter of support for the amendment from the Director 
of the New Mexico Aviation Division of the New Mexico Department of 
Transportation, a letter from the Mayor of Alamogordo, NM, and a letter 
from the National Association of Development Organizations, all in 
support of this amendment, be printed in the Record.

[[Page 14737]]

  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 TABLE I--100 MILES FROM A SMALL OR HUB AIRPORT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                State                          EAS city          Distance to small hub   Distance to hub airport
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama..............................  Muscle Shoals..........  Huntsville, AL 69 miles  Nashville, TN 122
                                                                                          miles.
Arkansas.............................  Hot Springs............  Little Rock 53 miles...  Memphis 197 miles.
                                       Harrison...............  Fayetteville, AR 77      Tulsa 183 miles.
                                                                 miles.
                                       Jonesboro..............  .......................  Memphis 79 miles.
Colorado.............................  Pueblo.................  Colorado Springs 43      Denver 125 miles.
                                                                 miles.
Georgia..............................  Athens.................  .......................  Atlanta 80 miles.
Iowa.................................  Fort Dodge.............  Des Moines 94 miles....  Minneapolis 208 miles.
                                       Burlington.............  Moline, IL. 73 miles...  St. Louis 186.
Kansas...............................  Salina.................  Wichita 93 miles.......  Kansas City 182 miles.
Maine................................  Augusta................  Portland, ME 68 miles..  Manchester 153, Boston
                                                                                          172 miles.
                                       Rockland...............  Portland, ME 80 miles..  Manchester 176, Boston
                                                                                          183 miles.
Mississippi..........................  Laurel.................  Gulfport-Biloxi 85       New Orleans 137 miles.
                                                                 miles.
New Hampshire........................  Lebanon................  .......................  Manchester 76 miles.
New Mexico...........................  Hobbs..................  Midland/Odessa 88 miles  Albuquerque 320.
                                       Alamogordo.............  .......................  El Paso 91 miles.
New York.............................  Saranac Lake...........  Burlington 63 miles....  Boston 266 miles.
                                       Watertown..............  Syracuse 65 miles......  Buffalo 190 miles.
                                       Jamestown..............  .......................  Buffalo 76 miles.
                                       Plattsburgh............  Burlington 30 miles....  *
Oklahoma.............................  Ponca City.............  Wichita, KS 81 miles...  Oklahoma City 102
                                                                                          miles.
                                       Enid...................  .......................  Oklahoma City 84 miles.
Pennsylvania.........................  Johnstown..............  .......................  Pittsburgh 82 miles.
                                       Oil City...............  .......................  Pittsburgh 86 miles.
                                       Bradford...............  .......................  Buffalo NY 79 miles.
Tennessee............................  Jackson................  .......................  Memphis 85 miles.
Texas................................  Victoria...............  Corpus Christi 94 miles  San Antonio 122 miles.
Vermont..............................  Rutland................  Burlington 69 miles....  Manchester 125, Boston
                                                                Albany 90..............   159 miles.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hub classification based on TBTS's 2001 ``Airport Activity Statistics of Certificated Air Carriers: Summary
  Tables,'' instead of FAA's enplanement activity data. BTS's data don't include commuter, intrastate, and
  foreign flag carriers.
Hub airports have at least 0.25% of enplanements, small hubs have at least 0.05% but less than 0.25% (49 USC
  41731).
*TBD.

                                              State of New Mexico,


                                       Office of the Governor,

                                       Santa Fe, NM, May 22, 2003.
     Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
     U.S. Senator, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bingaman: I am writing regarding S. 824, the 
     Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act that 
     reauthorizes the Federal Aviation Administration. Although 
     several aspects of this reauthorization bill are to be 
     commended, I am opposed to one specific provision, which 
     calls for a 10 percent cost-sharing requirement for selected 
     Essential Air Service (EAS) communities. This provision has 
     the potential to affect the economic welfare of small 
     communities in over 35 states--particularly those in New 
     Mexico.
       During my tenure in Congress I understood the importance, 
     which the EAS program played within our small communities by 
     preserving the scheduled air service and ensuring that these 
     communities would retain a link to the national air 
     transportation system. As Governor, I recognize the economic 
     benefits associated with this program, which is integral to 
     the economic development of our small rural communities.
       The language calling for the Secretary to arbitrarily 
     select 10 EAS communities that are within 100 miles of a hub 
     airport and requiring them to pay a 10 percent cost share for 
     a three year period is not only unfair but unpractical given 
     the current economic conditions in states and within the 
     airline industry. It is my hope that you will work with your 
     colleagues in the Senate to amend this language, which only 
     serves to impose new costs on EAS communities.
       Last March, I announced the formation of a task force to 
     improve and increase intrastate air service, and air cargo 
     activity in New Mexico. Air service to and within New Mexico 
     is vital to strengthening our economy and those of our 
     communities. Your leadership and support for the EAS program 
     as well as the Small Community Air Service Development 
     Program will go along way to improving and increasing air 
     service in New Mexico.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Bill Richardson,
     Governor.
                                  ____



                                 New Mexico Aviation Division,

                                        Santa Fe, NM, May 8, 2003.
     Re essential air service rule changes.
     Senator Jeff Bingaman,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bingaman: I am writing to express my 
     opposition to proposed Essential Air Service (EAS) rule 
     changes (Section 353) of Senate Bill 824, the FAA 
     Reauthorization legislation. While this bill does have many 
     favorable aspects, Section 353 contains major program funding 
     changes. As written, affected EAS pilot program communities 
     would be required to assume ten percent (10%) of their 
     subsidy costs for a three year period. This could very easily 
     cost a community $80,000--$90,000 per year! If approved, this 
     significant additional financial burden would have profound 
     negative impacts on both current air service and economic 
     development efforts in several of our cities (Alamogordo and 
     Hobbs) that would be affected. Any changes to current EAS 
     funding could very well jeopardize existing air service in 
     our state.
       The timing of this change could not have come at a worst 
     time for us. Just recently, Governor Bill Richardson 
     established a high level task force (three Cabinet 
     Secretaries) to determine ways to improve intra-state air 
     service for New Mexicans. I am concerned that the basic 
     foundation of the EAS program, as we know it, could be 
     further weakened by these types of rule changes, and in turn 
     defeat our Governor's initiative.
       I am well aware of the need to adjust the current EAS 
     program but firmly believe that both the states and 
     communities participating in the program should have an input 
     to the reconstruction process.
       I am respectfully requesting your assistance in removing 
     the EAS Local Program cost sharing provisions from Senate 
     Bill 824.
           Sincerely,

                                        John D. ``Mike'' Rice,

                                                         Director,
     New Mexico Aviation Division.
                                  ____



                                           City of Alamogordo,

                                     Alamogordo, NM, May 15, 2003.
     Re essential air service rule changes.

     Senator Jeff Bingaman,
     Hart Senate Office,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bingaman: On behalf of the City of Alamogordo, 
     I am writing to express my concerns and opposition to the 
     proposed Essential Air Service (EAS) rule changes (Section 
     353) of Senate Bill 824, the FAA Reauthorization Legislation. 
     Although this bill has many favorable aspects, the program 
     funding changes are not an alternative for the City of 
     Alamogordo and the surrounding communities the airport 
     serves. In pertinent part, Section 353(4)(A) would require 
     the City of Alamogordo to assume ten percent (10%) of the 
     subsidy cost or approximately Eight-Five Thousand Dollars 
     ($85,000) annually for the next three (3) years.
       This change could not have come at a more inappropriate 
     time for the City. With City revenues declining from a 
     depressed economy, and capital desperately needed to repair 
     Alamogordo's water problems, it is improbable funding will be 
     available to locally subsidize air service. The airport 
     relies solely on City revenue to operate since eighty-eight 
     percent (88%) of Otero County land is Federally and Tribally 
     owned and generates no revenue for the City. However, we have 
     taken measures which we believe will ultimately permit air 
     service in Alamogordo to be a stand alone enterprise. As you 
     know, Alamogordo was the first EAS community nationwide to 
     request smaller commercial aircraft in an effort to stabilize 
     federal subsidy and ticket costs. Additionally, our air 
     carrier, Rio Grande Air, reduced fares by sixty percent (60%) 
     last month in an effort to increase enplanements at the 
     airport. We have noted a marked increase in ridership

[[Page 14738]]

     since implementation of this low fare. If the EAS rule 
     changes are passed as proposed, the City of Alamogordo may be 
     forced to discontinue commercial air service and thus, 
     sacrifice all Airport Improvement Program (AIP) entitlement/
     grant funds.
       Otero County is below the State average for median income. 
     The County has no passenger train service and is not located 
     near a freeway making the airport and air service a vital 
     link to the national transportation system.
       I am respectfully requesting your assistance in removing 
     the EAS local program cost sharing provisions from Senate 
     Bill 824.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Donald Carroll,
     Mayor of Alamogordo.
                                  ____

                                           National Association of


                                    Development Organizations,

                                    Washington, DC, June 12, 2003.
     Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
     U.S. Senate, Senate Hart Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Bingaman: On behalf of the National 
     Association of Development Organizations (NADO), I am writing 
     to express our strong support for your amendment to preserve 
     rural air service as part of the FAA reauthorization bill (S. 
     824).
       The national transportation network functions properly when 
     it helps form vital social and economic connections. This is 
     especially true in small metropolitan and rural America where 
     distance and a scattered population make these connections 
     even more important. The national aviation system is 
     essential not only for linking people to jobs, health care 
     and family in a way that enhances their quality of life, but 
     also for contributing to regional economic growth and 
     development by linking business to customers, goods to 
     markets and tourists to destinations.
       Within the transportation system, the aviation network 
     plays an enormous role in transporting goods and people. In 
     2001, 542 million people flew domestically and another 52 
     million flew internationally on US carriers, according to the 
     US Department of Transportation. Unfortunately, since the 
     deregulation of the aviation industry in the late 1970s the 
     availability of affordable and reliable air service in most 
     rural and small metropolitan areas has dramatically declined.
       During these challenging economic times, Congress should be 
     working to improve and enhance air service to rural and 
     underserved communities, instead of adding new requirements 
     that would further isolate hundreds of our nation's smaller 
     communities. While the Essential Air Service (EAS) program is 
     small by Washington standards, we believe it offers vital 
     resources for linking rural communities to the national and 
     global aviation systems. By adopting your amendment, the US 
     Senate would be reinforcing its support of maintaining 
     affordable, reliable and safe air service to rural America.
       Thank you for your leadership on this important issue.
           Sincerely,
                                               Aliceann Wohlbruck,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Bingaman-
Inhofe amendment to strike language requiring certain communities 
enrolled in the Essential Air Service to provide a local cost-share.
  We are asking our towns and communities, our local governments, 
hardest hit by difficult economic times to suddenly find thousands of 
dollars in their already overstretched budgets to replace a significant 
source of Federal funding, for a critical economic function.
  In this time of economic uncertainty, rural communities are 
struggling to maintain their daily ways of life. With an added burden 
placed upon them, survival and the opportunity for further rural 
development will be nearly impossible.
  Local airports and the commercial air service they provide are 
extremely important to small towns, and a strong component of a State's 
economy. By enacting a cost-share provision, we run the risk of losing 
these airports, and cutting off a vital economic lifeline to rural 
America.
  In my State, airports in Jonesboro, Hot Springs, and Harrison provide 
affordable and reliable service to over 10,000 customers a year. The 
EAS funding they receive is a sound investment in our State's 
transportation network. Cost share provisions, however, could put those 
airports out of business.
  We are already putting enough strain on our small towns and local 
governments. We do not need to add to that by eliminating a vital 
source of funding for a vital function. This amendment would prevent 
that from happening, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 906) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 903

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from 
Kentucky is recognized.
  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senator Boxer, 
to offer the Arming Cargo Pilots Against Terrorism Act as an amendment 
to this bill. This amendment closes a loophole to better protect our 
homeland against terrorists. As a result of the airplane hijackings on 
September 11, 2001, Congress took the appropriate action to prevent the 
use of airliners being used as missiles. Last year, large majorities of 
the Senate and House of Representatives voted to arm both cargo and 
passenger pilots who voluntarily went for stringent training as part of 
a program of homeland security which was in the Homeland Security bill. 
Arming these pilots served to protect the pilots and crew, passengers, 
and those on the ground from ever being victims of another airline 
hijacking. It was the right thing to do.
  However, during conference of the Homeland Security bill, the cargo 
pilots were yanked out of the bill. This amendment will return them and 
close the loophole created when they were left out last year.
  This provision enjoys broad support and has already passed the Senate 
as part of the Air Cargo Security Act earlier this year.
  Obviously, I would not be offering it had not the bill gotten tied up 
in conference and we need another vehicle to get it back to the House, 
so that is the reason we are offering it on this bill.
  Not too many people realize that cargo space is usually not secured 
as well as passenger space. There are no air marshals, there are no 
passengers to help protect against terrorists, and there are sometimes 
invasions of privacy on these planes. In fact, someone from North 
Dakota actually broke the security and entered an aircraft. Thank God 
she was found out before the aircraft took off.
  We would like this to be added to this bill so we can get it back to 
the House and a new conference. The whole area of cargo aircraft is not 
secured by the TSA and many other people who secure passenger terminals 
or commercial flights. I hope we can agree and get this bill over to 
the House.
  I hope the rest of my colleagues here in the Senate will support this 
amendment.
  Mr. President, I ask for a voice vote.
  Mr. McCAIN. Will the Senator yield for a question? Isn't it the case 
the Senator has added language that indicates that nonlethal weapons--
--
  Mr. BUNNING. Nonlethal weapons, and totally voluntary.
  Mr. McCAIN. I support the amendment.
  Mr. BUNNING. They are called Tasers.
  Mr. BOXER. Mr. President, this amendment is to close a loophole in 
the Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
  Last year, in response to the September 11 attacks, I worked along 
with our former colleague Senator Bob Smith to pass the Arming Pilots 
Against Terrorism and Cabin Defense Act, which allowed passenger and 
cargo pilots who volunteer and receive special training to have guns in 
the cockpit as a last line of defense.
  The bill passed the Senate 87-6 as an amendment to the Homeland 
Security bill.
  Unfortunately, during the Homeland Security conference, cargo pilots 
were left out of the program.
  This amendment will close this dangerous loophole in the law and add 
an important new layer to our homeland security by allowing cargo 
pilots to participate in the Federal Flight Deck Officer program.
  With less security than passenger aircraft, cargo planes are tempting 
targets for terrorists. These planes do not have strengthened cockpit 
doors, Federal Air Marshals, trained cabin crew, or alert passengers on 
board.

[[Page 14739]]

  Cargo planes are usually more vulnerable on the tarmac than passenger 
aircraft. Most cargo planes are parked in remote areas with relatively 
easy access; many operate at airfields that do not have the same level 
of security as passenger airports.
  Late last year in Fargo, ND, a mentally unbalanced woman walked 
across a runway, boarded a cargo aircraft, entered the cockpit, and 
asked the crew to fly her to California.
  Just think what a terrorist could do. A terrorist could hijack a 
cargo plane and fly it into a building, nuclear power plant, or other 
target on the ground.
  Cargo pilots must be given a last line of defense to keep terrorists 
from gaining control of their aircraft.
  We need to close this gap in our homeland security.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Bunning] for himself and 
     Mrs. Boxer, proposes an amendment numbered 903.

  The amendment is as follows.

(Purpose: To amend title 49, United States Code, to allow the arming of 
                       pilots of cargo aircraft)

       At the appropriate place insert the following new section:

     SEC. __. ARMING CARGO PILOTS AGAINST TERRORISM.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Arming 
     Cargo Pilots Against Terrorism Act''.
       (b) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) During the 107th Congress, both the Senate and the 
     House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed measures that 
     would have armed pilots of cargo aircraft.
       (2) Cargo aircraft do not have Federal air marshals, 
     trained cabin crew, or determined passengers to subdue 
     terrorists.
       (3) Cockpit doors on cargo aircraft, if present at all, 
     largely do not meet the security standards required for 
     commercial passenger aircraft.
       (4) Cargo aircraft vary in size and many are larger and 
     carry larger amounts of fuel than the aircraft hijacked on 
     September 11, 2001.
       (5) Aircraft cargo frequently contains hazardous material 
     and can contain deadly biological and chemical agents and 
     quantities of agents that cause communicable diseases.
       (6) Approximately 12,000 of the nation's 90,000 commercial 
     pilots serve as pilots and flight engineers on cargo 
     aircraft.
       (7) There are approximately 2,000 cargo flights per day in 
     the United States, many of which are loaded with fuel for 
     outbound international travel or are inbound from foreign 
     airports not secured by the Transportation Security 
     Administration.
       (8) Aircraft transporting cargo pose a serious risk as 
     potential terrorist targets that could be used as weapons of 
     mass destruction.
       (9) Pilots of cargo aircraft deserve the same ability to 
     protect themselves and the aircraft they pilot as other 
     commercial airline pilots.
       (10) Permitting pilots of cargo aircraft to carry firearms 
     creates an important last line of defense against a terrorist 
     effort to commandeer a cargo aircraft.
       (c) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     members of a flight deck crew of a cargo aircraft should be 
     armed with a firearm and taser to defend the cargo aircraft 
     against an attack by terrorists that could result in the use 
     of the aircraft as a weapon of mass destruction or for other 
     terrorist purposes.
       (d) Arming Cargo Pilots Against Terrorism.--Section 44921 
     of title 49, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``passenger'' each place 
     that it appears; and
       (2) in subsection (k)--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by striking ``or,'' and all that follows; and
       (ii) by inserting ``or any other flight deck crew 
     member.''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) All-cargo air transportation.--For the purposes of 
     this section, the term air transportation includes all-cargo 
     air transportation.''.
       (e) Time for Implementation.--The training of pilots as 
     Federal flight deck officers required in the amendments made 
     by subsection (d) shall begin as soon as practicable and no 
     later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (f) Effect on Other Laws.--The requirements of subsection 
     (e) shall have no effect on the deadlines for implementation 
     contained in section 44921 of title 49, United States Code, 
     as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this 
     Act.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 903) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Is my amendment the amendment pending before the Senate?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is not pending but it is in order.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask it be considered at this point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct, the amendment is now 
pending.


                           Amendment No. 890

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I visited with my colleagues Senator Lott 
and Senator McCain on this amendment. I believe they are prepared to 
accept it. This deals with the creation of an aviation security capital 
fund. Many of us know both revenues and passenger boardings are down in 
airports. We have gone through a pretty difficult time. The creation of 
this aviation security capital fund is very important in order for 
these funds to be invested in what that will make aviation safer and 
deal with the security issues we intend to have dealt with with this 
fund.
  I think it appropriate at this point to waive the local match, State 
and local match, which I believe in most cases cannot be raised because 
of the circumstances I mentioned earlier.
  I believe accepting this amendment will give us the assurance that 
this investment in security will be made across this country. It will 
be a wise investment. I think it ought not be borne by the carriers at 
this point, nor the local airports that can least afford it.
  I appreciate very much the fact this will now be accepted by the 
Senate. I want to especially say thanks to the Senator from 
Mississippi. We have talked about this, I suppose, 10 times in recent 
days. He is a tireless advocate for what makes sense for our aviation 
system in this country. Of course, he is chairing the subcommittee here 
in the Senate on those issues.
  I thank him for his cooperation in allowing us to move forward with 
this amendment at this stage.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. LOTT. Has Senator Dorgan completed his remarks?
  Mr. DORGAN. I have.
  Mr. LOTT. I think the order was for Senator Inhofe to be next, but 
since he is not here, I ask unanimous consent I be permitted to speak 
at this time, despite the previous agreement.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, certainly I always enjoy working with 
Senator Dorgan on these issues. I think he has a legitimate point.
  He does note that we need a fund to make sure these security fees go 
for the purpose they were intended. But he does think, at least in this 
instance because of the security aspect, we should waive the local 
requirement.
  It should also be noted that, in fact, local communities, 
particularly with bigger airports, are probably not going to get or 
could not get a cost share, and, even if they did in some ways, it 
would be passed on to the airlines, therefore undermining a lot of what 
we are trying to do now.
  We are trying to get the priorities set where the people who are 
getting certain parts of the security should be the ones who pay for 
it, and we shouldn't always try to find a way to pass it off to the 
airlines. Sometimes it is a Federal responsibility. In other instances, 
other people--I think also local governments--should have some part of 
this pie. But we agreed for a variety of reasons to accept Senator 
Dorgan's amendment.
  But I want colleagues to know and the American people to know the 
Bingaman amendment does the same thing but in a different category. I 
think, in fact, it is even worse. In the essential air service area, 
where special help goes to small airports and a lot of rural airports--
that affects airports in West Virginia, North Dakota, and probably in 
my State of Mississippi--with

[[Page 14740]]

this additional Federal assistance to keep airports functioning, there 
would be some small local match. The administration recommended, by the 
way, that we eliminate the EAS problem; or, if we had EAS, you have the 
local match required for all of the airports.
  The language in the bill specifies that there would be 10 airports 
where we would have this local match to see how it would work, and if 
it would work.
  We now are agreeing to accept the Bingaman amendment because right 
now, I think out of concern for local communities and trying to have 
this essential air service, the amendment would probably pass.
  But I want to say, again, I think for us to set the precedent and 
require not even a dollar from local communities when they are getting 
additional security, particularly where they are getting essential air 
service which is vital to their communities and which is important from 
an economic standpoint for the local cities and counties to put up no 
money--and in the case of the Dorgan amendment--at least in the bigger 
airports, it could create definite problems in terms of costs being 
passed on to the airlines. In this case, it is just a question of these 
local communities not wanting to have to share at all.
  I think we should continue to look at some small amount--10 percent 
or 5 percent, some amount of local share.
  But for now, we will accept it. We will continue to work on these 
issues. It is important for us to get this important legislation 
completed so that the airlines, the airports, general aviation, and the 
American people will know what they can count on in terms of the 
Federal Aviation Administration and their programs over the next 3 
years. I thank my colleagues for allowing me to interject my remarks at 
this point.
  I believe Senator Inhofe is next in order to speak.
  I yield the floor, unless Senator Dorgan would like me to yield to 
him. Does he want to get action on his amendment?
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me ask the Senator to yield for a 
moment.
  I think there is great merit in local matching, by and large, because 
you need local support. We ought not just create pools of money here in 
the Congress to send out around the country unless there is evidence of 
local support.
  The Senator from Mississippi made the point, and I think it is an 
important point.
  First, I ask unanimous consent that a letter from the American 
Association of Airport Executives, and a letter from the Air Transport 
Association be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     Hon. Byron L. Dorgan,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Dorgan: We are writing to express our support 
     for an amendment that you may offer to S. 824, the Aviation 
     Investment and Revitalization Vision Act, that will help 
     airports in North Dakota and throughout the country pay for 
     their increased capital security costs.
       As you know, S. 824 would establish an aviation security 
     capital fund to pay for installation of Explosive Detection 
     Systems (EDS) and other capital security costs at airports. 
     Specifically, the bill calls for $500 million every year 
     between 2004 and 2007 to pay for the security capital costs. 
     The funds would be derived from revenue generated by the 
     $2.50 passenger security fee.
       Airports Council International-North America and The 
     American Association of Airport Executives strongly support 
     the creation of an aviation security capital fund. Without a 
     separate source of funds to pay for capacity security 
     projects, airports will be forced to continue to divert their 
     Airport Improvement Program funds, which they traditionally 
     use for much-needed safety and capacity projects.
       The Senate proposal calls for large- and medium-hub 
     airports to pay a 25 percent match, and smaller airports to 
     pay a 10 percent match. While we are grateful that S. 824 
     would create the aviation security capital fund, we strongly 
     support your proposal to eliminate the matching requirement. 
     Installing explosive detection machines is a federal national 
     security mandate, and we think the federal government should 
     reimburse airports for those and other new security costs.
       Airports like others in the aviation industry have been 
     struggling since September 11. It would be difficult for 
     airports to cover the proposed match at a time when their 
     revenues and passenger boarding are down, and their costs 
     have skyrocketed due to a host of unfunded federal security 
     mandates. Again, we strongly believe that airports should not 
     be forced to divert critical safety and capacity funds to pay 
     for security.
       Moreover, airports are reluctant to pass additional costs 
     on to airport users including airlines that are facing their 
     own financial challenges. Since September 11, airports around 
     the country have been taking numerous steps to reduce costs 
     in an effort to pass those savings on to the airlines. 
     Eliminating the matching requirement is just one more way 
     that airports can help their partners in the aviation 
     industry.
       Thank for your leadership on this and other aviation 
     issues.
           Sincerely,
     David Z. Plavin,
       President, ACI-NA.
     Charles Barclay,
       President, AAAE.
                                  ____

     Hon. Byron Dorgan,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Dorgan: On behalf of ATA member airlines, I am 
     writing in support of your efforts to remove the ``local 
     match'' requirement in the Security Capital Fund found in the 
     Senate FAA reauthorization bill. Your amendment will ensure 
     that airport security projects will not be subject to an 
     unworkable funding scheme.
       As you are aware, the Aviation and Transportation Security 
     Act of 2001 imposed sweeping security mandates on the 
     airlines and airports, many of which were unfunded. Today, in 
     this constrained, unsettled financial environment, our 
     members continue to incur substantial costs to meet these 
     mandates. While the airlines have been and will continue to 
     fully support efforts by the U.S. Government, particularly 
     the Transportation Security Administration, to assume primary 
     responsibility for aviation security, the airlines simply 
     cannot continue to absorb additional costs. Sufficient 
     federal funding for mandated airport security projects, such 
     as installation of Explosive Detection Systems and additional 
     law enforcement personnel makes common sense and is 
     absolutely critical.
       If, as is provided in the current bill, local airports must 
     provide 25% matching funds at large and medium hub airports 
     and 10% matching at smaller airports, the airports (also 
     experiencing declining reserves) will have no option other 
     than to pass through these costs to the airlines. On top of 
     existing security costs, airlines will see significant 
     increases in airport rates and charges, as well as other 
     airport costs, to fund these mandatory contributions. 
     Although the airlines, of course, support security 
     enhancements, the industry can ill afford hundreds of 
     millions of dollars in additional unfunded mandates as the 
     aviation system struggles to survive economically.
       Thank you for your efforts on this critical issue. I look 
     forward to working with you as we work to maintain a viable, 
     safe, and efficient air transportation system.
           Sincerely,
                                                     James C. May.

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, the American Association of Airport 
Executives and the Air Transport Association, and others, have told us 
it is unlikely we would see the security investment--after all, this is 
national security--we would not see the security investment in airport 
improvement and safety with this money if we did not waive the local 
match.
  I continue to believe we ought to make this habit forming. The value 
expressed by the Senator from Mississippi is on the mark in many cases. 
I appreciate very much the ability to work this out and be able to move 
this amendment. If appropriate, I think it has been agreed to by both 
sides. I ask if we can have the amendment considered at this point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? Without objection, 
the amendment was agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 890) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma is recognized.


                   Amendment Nos. 894 and 895 En Bloc

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I have two technical amendments. They have 
been agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Inhofe] proposes amendments 
     numbered 894 and 895 en bloc.

  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page 14741]]

  The amendments en bloc are as follows:

 (Purpose: To amend the provisions dealing with security measures for 
                   general aviation and air charters)

       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. 405. GENERAL AVIATION AND AIR CHARTERS.

       Section 132(a) of the Aviation and Transportation Security 
     Act (49 U.S.C. 44944 note) is amended by striking ``12,500 
     pounds or more'' and inserting ``more than 12,500 pounds''.

 (Purpose: To establish reporting requirements with respect to the Air 
                      Defense Identification Zone)

       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. 405. AIR DEFENSE IDENTIFICATION ZONE.

       (a) In General.--If the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration establishes an Air Defense 
     Identification Zone (in this section referred as an 
     ``ADIZ''), the Administrator shall, not later than 60 days 
     after the date of establishing the ADIZ, transmit to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House 
     of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation of the Senate, a report containing an 
     explanation of the need for the ADIZ. The Administrator shall 
     provide the Committees an updated report every 60 days until 
     the establishment of the ADIZ is rescinded. The reports and 
     updates shall be transmitted in classified form.
       (b) Existing ADIZ.--If an ADIZ is in effect on the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit an 
     initial report under subsection (a) to the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation of the Senate not later than 30 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Reporting Requirements.--If a report required under 
     subsection (a) or (b) indicates that the ADIZ is to be 
     continued, the Administrator shall outline changes in 
     procedures and requirements to improve operational efficiency 
     and minimize the operational impacts of the ADIZ on pilots 
     and air traffic controllers.
       (d) Definition.--In this section, the terms ``Air Defense 
     Identification Zone'' and ``ADIZ'' mean a zone established by 
     the Administrator with respect to airspace under 18,000 feet 
     in approximately a 15 to 38 mile radius around Washington, 
     District of Columbia, for which security measures are 
     extended beyond the existing 15-mile-no-fly zone around 
     Washington and in which general aviation aircraft are 
     required to adhere to certain procedures issued by the 
     Administrator.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, we have considered these amendments and we 
find no problem with them at this point. They have been cleared on both 
sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on amendments? If not, 
without objection, the amendments are agreed to en bloc.
  The amendments (Nos. 894 and 895) were agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 908

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the distinguished chairman, Senator 
McCain, and myself have four amendments that we will send to the desk 
in due time. One is a Wyden amendment which is a privacy study of the 
CAPP Program, Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening.
  I send it to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Wyden, proposes an amendment numbered 908.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to report to 
    the Congress in writing on the impact of the Computer Assisted 
   Passenger Prescreening System, proposed to be implemented by the 
   Transportation Security Administration, on the privacy and civil 
                  liberties of United States citizens)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.  . REPORT ON PASSENGER PRESCREENING PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Within 90 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, after 
     consultation with the Attorney General, shall submit a report 
     in writing to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
     Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure on the potential impact of 
     the Transportation Security Administration's proposed 
     Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening system, commonly 
     known as CAPPS II, on the privacy and civil liberties of 
     United States Citizens.
       (b) Specific Issues To Be Addressed.--The report shall 
     address the following:
       (1) Whether and for what period of time data gathered on 
     individual travelers will be retained, who will have access 
     to such data, and who will make decisions concerning access 
     to such data.
       (2) How the Transportation Security Administration will 
     treat the scores assigned to individual travelers to measure 
     the likelihood they may pose a security threat, including how 
     long such scores will be retained and whether and under what 
     circumstances they may be shared with other governmental, 
     non-governmental, or commercial entities.
       (3) The role airlines and outside vendors or contractors 
     will have in implementing and operating the system, and to 
     what extent will they have access, or the means to obtain 
     access, to data, scores, or other information generated by 
     the system.
       (4) The safeguards that will be implemented to ensure that 
     data, scores, or other information generated by the system 
     will be used only as officially intended.
       (5) The procedures that will be implemented to mitigate the 
     effect of any errors, and what procedural recourse will be 
     available to passengers who believe the system has wrongly 
     barred them from taking flights.
       (6) The oversight procedures that will be implemented to 
     ensure that, on an ongoing basis, privacy and civil liberties 
     issues will continue to be considered and addressed with high 
     priority as the system is installed, operated and updated.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, are we going to dispose of that amendment 
now?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Yes, we are going to go ahead and vote on it.
  Mr. LOTT. It has been cleared. It may save some time if we could go 
ahead and agree to it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 908) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 909

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I also have another amendment by the 
distinguished Senator from Florida, Mr. Nelson, which deals with the 
background checks of new pilots on the smaller planes.
  Mr. LOTT. Has this been approved on both sides?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Yes, it has been approved.
  I send the amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Nelson of Florida, proposes an amendment numbered 909.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

    (Purpose: To modify requirements regarding training to operate 
                               aircraft)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.   . MODIFICATION OF REQUIREMENTS REGARDING TRAINING TO 
                   OPERATE AIRCRAFT.

       (a) In General.--Section 44939 of title 49, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 44939. Training to operate certain aircraft

       `'(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Waiting period.--A person subject to regulation under 
     this part may provide training in the United States in the 
     operation of an aircraft to an individual who is an alien (as 
     defined in section 101(a)(3) of the Immigration and 
     Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3))) or to any other 
     individual specified by the Under Secretary of Homeland 
     Security for Border and Transportation Security only if--
       ``(A) that person has notified the Under Secretary that the 
     individual has requested such training and furnished the 
     Under Secretary with that individual's identification in such 
     form as the Under Secretary may require; and
       ``(B) the Under Secretary has not directed, within 30 days 
     after being notified under subparagraph (A), that person not 
     to provide the requested training because the Under Secretary 
     has determined that the individual presents a risk to 
     aviation security or national security.
       ``(2) Notification-only individuals.--
       ``(A) In general.--The requirements of paragraph (1) shall 
     not apply to an alien individual who holds a visa issued 
     under title I of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 
     U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) and who--
       ``(i) has earned a Federal Aviation Administration type 
     rating in an aircraft or has undergone type-specific 
     training, or
       ``(ii) holds a current pilot's license or foreign 
     equivalent commercial pilot's license

[[Page 14742]]

     that permits the person to fly an aircraft with a maximum 
     certificated takeoff weight of more than 12,500 pounds as 
     defined by the International Civil Aviation organization in 
     Annex 1 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation,

     if the person providing the training has notified the Under 
     Secretary that the individual has requested such training and 
     furnished the Under Secretary with that individual's visa 
     information.
       ``(B) Exception.--Subparagraph (A) does not apply to an 
     alien individual whose airman's certificate has been 
     suspended or revoked under procedures established by the 
     Under Secretary.
       ``(3) Expedited processing.--the waiting period under 
     paragraph (1) shall be expedited for an individual who--
       ``(A) has previously undergone a background records check 
     by the Foreign Terrorist Tracking Task Force;
       ``(B) is employed by a foreign air carrier certified under 
     part 129 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, that has a 
     TSA 1546 approved security program and who is undergoing 
     recurrent flight training;
       ``(C) is a foreign military pilot endorsed by the United 
     States Department of Defense for flight training; or
       ``(D) who has unescorted access to a secured area of an 
     airport designated under section 44936(a)(1)(A)(ii).
       ``(4) Investigation authority.--In order to determine 
     whether an individual requesting training described in 
     paragraph (1) presents a risk to aviation security or 
     national security the Under Secretary is authorized to use 
     the employment investigation authority provided by section 
     44936(a)(1)(A) for individuals applying for a position in 
     which the individual has unescorted access to a secured area 
     of an airport designated under section 449369(a)(1)(A)(ii).
       ``(5) Fee.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Under Secretary may assess a fee for 
     an investigation under this section, which may not exceed 
     $100 per individual (exclusive of the cost of transmitting 
     fingerprints collected at overseas facilities) during fiscal 
     years 2003 and 2004. For fiscal years 2005 and thereafter, 
     the Under Secretary may adjust the maximum amount of the fee 
     to reflect the costs of such an investigation.
       ``(B) Offset.--Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, 
     United States Code, any fee collected under this section--
       ``(i) shall be credited to the amount in the Treasury from 
     which the expenses were incurred and shall be available to 
     the Under Secretary for those expenses; and
       ``(ii) shall remain available until expended.
       ``(b) Interruption of Training.--If the Under Secretary, 
     more than 30 days after receiving notification under 
     subsection (a)(1)(A) from a person providing training 
     described in subsection (a)(1) or at any time after receiving 
     notice from such a person under subsection (a)(2)(A), 
     determines that an individual receiving such training 
     presents a risk to aviation or national security, the Under 
     Secretary shall immediately notify the person providing the 
     training of the determination and that person shall 
     immediately terminate the training.
       ``(c) Covered Training.--For purposes of subsection (a), 
     the term `training'--
       ``(1) includes in-flight training, training in a simulator, 
     and any other form or aspect of training; but
       ``(2) does not include classroom instruction (also known as 
     ground school training), which may be provided during the 30-
     day period described in subsection (a)(1)(B).
       ``(d) Interagency Cooperation.--The Attorney General, the 
     Director of Central Intelligence, and the Administrator of 
     the Federal Aviation Administration shall cooperate with the 
     Under Secretary in implementing this section.
       ``(e) Security Awareness Training for Employees.--The Under 
     Secretary shall require flight schools to conduct a security 
     awareness program for flight school employees, and for 
     certified instructors who provide instruction for the flight 
     school but who are not employees thereof, to increase their 
     awareness of suspicious circumstances and activities of 
     individuals enrolling in or attending flight school.''.
       (b) Procedures.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary of Homeland 
     Security for Border and Transportation Security shall 
     promulgate an interim final rule to implement section 44939 
     of title 49, United States Code, as amended by subsection 
     (a).
       (2) Use of overseas facilities.--In order to implement 
     section 44939 of title 49, United States Code, as amended by 
     subsection (a), United States Code, as amended by subsection 
     (a), United States Embassies and Consulates that possess 
     appropriate fingerprint collection equipment and personnel 
     certified to capture fingerprints shall provide fingerprint 
     services to aliens covered by that section if the Under 
     Secretary requires fingerprints in the administration of that 
     section, and shall transmit the fingerprints to the Under 
     Secretary or other agency designated by the Under Secretary. 
     The Attorney General and the Secretary of State shall 
     cooperate with the Under Secretary in carrying out this 
     paragraph.
       (3) Use of united states facilities.--If the Under 
     Secretary requires fingerprinting in the administration of 
     section 44939 of title 49, United States Code, the Under 
     Secretary may designate locations within the United States 
     that will provide fingerprinting services to individuals 
     covered by that section.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     takes effect on the effective date of the interim final rule 
     required by subsection (b)(1).
       (d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
     shall submit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 
     and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure a report on the 
     effectiveness of the activities carried out under section 
     44939 of title 49, United States Code, in reducing risks to 
     aviation security and national security.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment 
that will close a serious loophole regarding foreign flight student 
training that was created in the Aviation Security Act of 2001. This 
amendment has passed the Senate twice on other bills since I first 
introduced it in the 107th Congress.
  This amendment is another important step toward fully protecting the 
United States and all Americans from terrorists who intend to use our 
aviation system to commit future attacks.
  We must continue to be vigilant in protecting our Nation. This 
amendment addresses a deep concern regarding foreign citizens coming to 
the United States to receive pilot training on all sizes of aircraft. 
This concern clearly is shared by the administration. In fact, the 
Department of Homeland Security, DHS, released an advisory on May 1, 
2003 titled ``The Continuing Threat to Aviation'' citing that al-Qaida 
operatives may ``attempt to use charter or general aviation aircraft to 
conduct future attacks because of their availability, less stringent 
protective measures, and destructive potential.'' The advisory 
continued on to say that ``[c]harter aircraft also may be attractive 
because terrorists may only need an established line of credit to gain 
access to an aircraft and because some agencies allow the use of 
customer pilots.'' Finally, and of greatest concern, the DHS warns that 
``[r]eliable information . . . indicated al-Qaida might use experienced 
non-Arab pilots to rent three to four light aircraft under the guise of 
flying lessons.'' This threat to our national security is real and 
cannot be understated. I ask unanimous consent that the Department of 
Homeland Security advisory be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 Department of Homeland Security Advisory 03-019--Security Information 
                  for General Aviation Pilots/Airports

       This advisory was produced by the Department of Homeland 
     Security based on information and analysis from the Terrorist 
     Threat Integration Center received during the last 24 hours.


                   the continuing threat to aviation

       Al-Qaida has long considered attacking U.S. Homeland 
     targets using light aircraft. Recent reliable reporting 
     indicates that al-Qaida was in the late stages of planning an 
     aerial suicide attack against the U.S. Consulate in Karachi. 
     Operatives were planning to pack a small fixed-wing aircraft 
     or helicopter with explosives and crash it into the 
     consulate. This plot and a similar plot last year to fly a 
     small explosive-laden aircraft into a U.S. warship in the 
     Persian Gulf demonstrate al-Qaida's continued fixation with 
     using explosive-laden small aircraft in attacks. General 
     aviation aircraft that were loaded with explosives to enhance 
     their destructive potential would make them the equivalent of 
     a medium-sized truck bomb.
       Al-Qaida may attempt to use charter or general aviation 
     aircraft to conduct future attacks because of their 
     availability, less stringent protective measures, and 
     destructive potential. The group has a fair sized pilot cadre 
     and the use of small aircraft requires far less skill and 
     training than some larger aircraft.
       Charter aircraft also may be attractive because terrorists 
     may only need an established line of credit to gain access to 
     an aircraft and because some agencies allow the use of 
     customer pilots. Security procedures typically are not as 
     rigorous as those for commercial airlines and terrorists 
     would not have to control a large number of passengers.
       Reliable information obtained last year indicated al-Qaida 
     might use experienced non-Arab pilots to rent three or four 
     light aircraft under the guise of flying lessons.
       In consideration of the above information, the Department 
     of Homeland Security asks

[[Page 14743]]

     members of the General Aviation community to report all 
     unusual and suspicious activities. If your observe persons, 
     aircraft, and operations that do not fit the customary 
     pattern at your airport, you should immediately advise law 
     enforcement authorities.
       Your immediate action is requested for these items:
       Secure unattended aircraft to prevent unauthorized use.
       Verify the identification of crew and passengers prior to 
     departure.
       Verify that baggage and cargo are known to the persons on 
     board.
       Where identification systems are in place, ensure employees 
     wear proper identification and challenge persons not doing 
     so.
       Increased vigilance should be directed toward the 
     following:
       Unknown pilots and/or clients for aircraft or helicopter 
     rentals or charters.
       Unknown service/delivery personnel.
       Aircraft with unusual or unauthorized modifications.
       Persons loitering in the vicinity of aircraft or air 
     operations areas.
       Persons who appear to be under stress or the control of 
     other persons.
       Persons whose identification appears altered or 
     inconsistent.
       Persons loading unusual or unauthorized payload onto 
     aircraft.
       NOTE: All charter operators subjected to the 12-5 rule, 
     Standard Security Program and the Private Charter Security 
     Program, are reminded to ensure compliance with these 
     security requirements.
       Persons should immediately report such activity to local 
     law enforcement and the TSA General Aviation Hotline at 866-
     GASECUR (866-427-3287).

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Unfortunately, we all have seen what can 
happen when people come to our country with the specific intent to do 
us great harm. It has become painfully clear that many of the September 
11 hijackers learned to fly the planes they used as deadly weapons at 
flight schools here in the United States, some in my home State of 
Florida.
  Section 113 of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act, which 
was enacted in the 107th Congress, requires background checks of all 
foreign flight school applicants seeking training to operate aircraft 
weighing 12,500 pounds or more. While this provision should help 
prevent September 11 style attacks by U.S. trained pilots using 
hijacked jets in the future, it does nothing to prevent different types 
of potential attacks against our domestic security. To rectify this 
problem, I introduced S. 236 together with Senators Corzine, Enzi, 
Feinstein, and Thomas earlier this year.
  Small aircraft can be used by terrorists to attack nuclear 
facilities, carry explosives, or deliver biological or chemical agents. 
For example, if a crop duster filled with a combination of fertilizers 
and explosives were crashed into a filled sporting event stadium 
thousands of people could be seriously injured or killed. We cannot 
allow this to happen. We need to ensure that we are not training 
terrorists to perform these activities. We cannot allow critical 
warnings to go unheeded.
  This bill will close an important loophole and answer these critical 
warnings by extending the background check requirement to all foreign 
applicants to U.S. flight schools, regardless of the size aircraft they 
seek to learn to fly. It also transfers the entire security background 
check program from the Department of Justice to the Department of 
Homeland Security, specifically to the Transportation Security 
Administration. It is my expectation that the Transportation Security 
Administration, which provided excellent advice in the fine tuning of 
this legislation, will apply a stringent level of background screening 
to all foreign nationals who seek flight training here in the United 
States. We cannot allow anyone to slip through the cracks. We cannot 
aid anyone who intends to do harm to Americans and to our Nation.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 909) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 910

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished Senator 
from Vermont, Mr. Jeffords, this amendment takes care of the EAS 
eligibility up in Vermont.
  This has been checked through.
  I send the amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Jeffords, proposes an amendment numbered 910.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide a 1 year extension of essential air service to an 
airport whose eligibility was terminated due to the impact of decreased 
                              air travel)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.   . 1-YEAR EXTENSION OF EAS ELIGIBILITY FOR COMMUNITIES 
                   TERMINATED IN 2003 DUE TO DECREASED AIR TRAVEL.

       Notwithstanding the rate of subsidy limitation in section 
     332 of the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2000, the Secretary of Transportation may 
     not terminate an essential air service subsidy provided under 
     chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, before the end 
     of calendar year 2004 for air service to a community--
       (1) whose calendar year ridership for 2000 was sufficient 
     to keep the per passenger subsidy below that limitation; and
       (2) that has received notice that its subsidy will be 
     terminated during calendar year 2003 because decreased 
     ridership has caused the subsidy to exceed that limitation.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me check with my distinguished 
colleague from Mississippi. This is a Jeffords amendment.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I wanted to make sure I understood what this 
amendment is. I had not had a chance to look at it. It is not specific 
to a particular airport or a particular State.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. That is correct.
  Mr. LOTT. It does change the formula on how these funds will be 
spent. Is that correct?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Eligibility; that is right.
  Mr. LOTT. We have no objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 910) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 911

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the Senator from Indiana, 
Mr. Bayh, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Bayh and Mr. Lugar, proposes an amendment numbered 911.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To expand aviation capacity and alleviate congestion in the 
                   greater Chicago metropolitan area)

       At the end of title II, add the following:

     SEC. 217. GARY/CHICAGO AIRPORT FUNDING.

       The Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration 
     shall, for purposes of chapter 471 of title 49, United States 
     Code, give priority consideration to a letter of intent 
     application for funding submitted by the City of Gary, 
     Indiana, or the State of Indiana, for the extension of the 
     main runway at the Gary/Chicago Airport. The letter of intent 
     application shall be considered upon completion of the 
     environmental impact statement and benefit cost analysis in 
     accordance with Federal Aviation Administration requirements. 
     The Administrator shall consider the letter of intent 
     application not later than 90 days after receiving it from 
     the applicant.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, does the Senator from Arizona approve of 
the amendment?
  Mr. McCAIN. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? 
Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 911) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 912

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the Senator from 
Connecticut, Mr. Dodd, I send an amendment to the desk on the study of 
the shuttle services at Reagan National Airport. It merely requires a 
study with respect to housing of gates used by the shuttle

[[Page 14744]]

services, and as to whether or not that is feasible.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Dodd, proposes an amendment numbered 912.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To require a study on the housing of the gates used by 
 shuttle services within the same terminal at Ronald Reagan Washington 
                           National Airport)

       At the appropriate place insert the following:

     SEC--. LOCATION OF SHUTTLE SERVICE AT RONALD REAGAN 
                   WASHINGTON NATIONAL AIRPORT.

       The Airports Authority (as defined in section 49103(1)) of 
     title 49, United States Code) shall in conjunction with the 
     Department of Transportation conduct a study on the 
     feasibility of housing the gates used by all air carriers 
     providing shuttle service from Ronald Reagan Washington 
     National Airport in the same terminal.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, if there is no further debate----
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, it is my understanding the Dodd amendment 
studies the situation at National Airport where there is some distance 
between both airlines that conduct shuttles along the east coast.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Right.
  Mr. McCAIN. I can see why Senator Dodd might want that looked at as 
he grows older, shuttling himself back and forth from one end of Reagan 
National Airport to the other, which is a bit of a trial. And I 
certainly am in support, having undergone that unique experience.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Particularly becoming a recent father, he is wearing 
down.
  Mr. McCAIN. That is right. Having to carry a small child with him has 
become a bit of a burden. So on behalf of Senator Dodd, and all of us 
who are aging, I ask that this amendment, which asks the airlines to 
take a look at the possibility of making these shuttles closer 
together, be adopted. I think it is appropriate and I support the 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  If there is no further debate, without objection, the amendment is 
agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 912) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, it is my understanding we have a number of 
additional amendments which have been agreed to but have not been 
presented at this time. If the staffs of the Members who have these 
amendments we have discussed and have agreed to--one is a Nelson 
amendment. That has already been accepted. One is a Feinstein 
amendment. We are in agreement with it, but it has not been formally 
offered. One is a Specter amendment that we are considering now, a 
Burns amendment concerning general aviation, a Murkowski amendment 
concerning decision on a tower. We would like to consider those 
amendments as soon as possible, if the sponsors of those amendments 
would come here, while we are preparing to debate a Specter amendment 
at this time.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 913

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I have an amendment I send to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Thomas] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 913.

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

    (Purpose: To permit Jackson Hole Airport to adopt certain noise 
                          reduction measures)

       At the end of title V, add the following new section:

     SEC. 521. EXEMPTION FOR JACKSON HOLE AIRPORT.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding chapter 475 of title 49, 
     United States Code, or any other provision of law, if the 
     Board of the Jackson Hole Airport in Wyoming and the 
     Secretary of the Interior agree that Stage 3 aircraft 
     technology represents a prudent and feasible technological 
     advance which, if implemented at the Jackson Hole Airport, 
     will result in a reduction in noise at Grand Teton National 
     Park--
       (1) the Jackson Hole Airport may impose restrictions on, or 
     prohibit, the operation of Stage 2 aircraft weighing less 
     than 75,000 pounds, with reasonable exemptions for public 
     health and safety;
       (2) the notice, study, and comment provisions of subchapter 
     II of chapter 475 of title 49, United States Code, and part 
     161 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, shall not apply 
     to the imposition of the restrictions;
       (3) the imposition of the restrictions shall not affect the 
     Airport's eligibility to receive a grant under title 49, 
     United States Code; and
       (4) the restrictions shall not be deemed to be 
     unreasonable, discriminatory, a violation of the assurances 
     required by section 47107(a) of title 49, United States Code, 
     or an undue burden on interstate commerce.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section, the terms ``Stage 2 
     aircraft'' and ``Stage 3 aircraft'' have the same meaning as 
     those terms have in chapter 475 of title 49, United States 
     Code.

  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, this is a very short, simple amendment. 
What it deals with is Teton National Park. I think it is probably the 
only park in the country that has in it a commercial airport.
  Some years ago, the airport and the park agreed they could limit 
noise in the park. They had done so with commercial airlines, but they 
have not been able to do so with private jets. This would give them 
that authority.
  It has been approved by the Park Service, by the Interior Department, 
and we would like very much to have the authority for them to be able 
to deal with the noncommercial jets and the noise they create in Teton 
National Park.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Thomas for his sponsorship 
of this amendment. One of the greatest problems we have today in 
America is aircraft noise over national parks. We have been fighting it 
in the Grand Canyon, trying to balance the needs of commercial 
aircraft--not only those taking off and arriving but air tours--and 
that of preserving the incredible park experience.
  I thank Senator Thomas for his effort to try to bring about the 
restoration of that marvelous experience in one of our Nation's crown 
jewels.
  I support the amendment.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, the Department of the Interior and the 
Park Service approved the amendment. We also support its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 913) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.


                           Amendment No. 915

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Specter] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 915.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

[[Page 14745]]


       At the end of Title V, add the following new section:
       (g) Measurement of Highway Mileage for Purposes of 
     Determining Eligibilty for Essential Air Service Subsidies.--
       (1) Determination of eligibility.--Subchapter II of Chapter 
     417 of title 49, United States Code, (as amended by 
     subsection (f) of this bill) is further amended by adding at 
     the end the following new section:

     ``Sec. 41746. Distance requirement applicable to eligibility 
       for essential air service subsidies

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall not provide 
     assistance under this subchapter with respect to a place in 
     the 48 continguous States that--
       ``(1) is less than 70 highway miles from the nearest hub-
     airport; or
       ``(2) requires a rate of subsidy per passenger in excess of 
     $200, unless such place is greater than 210 highway miles 
     from the nearest hub airport.
       ``(b) Determination of Mileage.--For purposes of Lancaster, 
     Pennsylvania, the highway mileage between a place and the 
     nearest hub airport is the highway mileage of the most 
     commonly used route between the place and the hub airport. In 
     identifying such route, the Secretary shall--
       ``(1) promulgate by regulation a standard for calculating 
     the mileage between Lancaster, Pennsylvania and a hub 
     airport, and
       ``(2) identify the most commonly used route for a community 
     by--
       ``(A) consulting with the Governor of a State or the 
     Governor's designee; and
       ``(B) considering the certification of the Governor of a 
     State or the Governor's designee as to the most commonly used 
     route.''.
       ``(b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for subchapter II 
     of chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, (as amended 
     by subsection (f) of this bill) is further amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 41745 the 
     following new item:

``41746. Distance requirement applicable to eligibility for essential 
              air service subsidies.''.

       (h) Repeal.--The following provisions of law are repealed:
       ``(1) Section 332 of the Department of Transportation and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2000 (49 U.S.C. 41731 
     note).
       (2) Section 205 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment 
     and Reform Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 41731 note).
       (3) Section 334 of the Department of Transportation and 
     Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (section 101(g) of 
     division A of the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999) (Public Law 105-277; 
     112 Stat. 2681--471).
       (i) Secretarial Review.--
       (1) Request for review.--Any community with respect to 
     which the Secretary has, between September 30, 1993, and the 
     date of the enactment of this Act, eliminated subsidies or 
     terminated subsidy eligibility under section 332 of the 
     Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2000 (49 U.S.C. 41731 note), Section 205 
     of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for 
     the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 41731 note), or any prior law of 
     similar effect, may request the Secretary to review such 
     action.
       (2) Eligibility determination.--Not later than 60 days 
     after receiving a request under subsection (i), the Secretary 
     shall--
       (A) determine whether the community would have been subject 
     to such elimination of subsidies or termination of 
     eligibility under the distance requirement enacted by the 
     amendment made by subsection (g) of this bill to subchapter 
     II of chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code; and
       (B) issue a final order with respect to the eligibility of 
     such community for essential air service subsidies under 
     subchapter II of chapter 417 of title 49, United States Code, 
     as amended by this Act.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this amendment is an accommodation and 
compromise worked out after discussion with the chairman of the 
committee and the chairman of the subcommittee. I have already filed 
amendment No. 904, which is part of the record. This amendment goes to 
the issue of providing essential air services to Lancaster, 
Pennsylvania. The existing law provides that essential air services 
shall be provided if there is a distance of 70 miles or more to the hub 
of a major airport.
  Lancaster is 66 miles from the Philadelphia International Airport, if 
you travel along Route 30, which is the old Lincoln Highway, where 
there is a traffic light every other block with the most extraordinary 
congestion. Nobody who travels from Lancaster to the Philadelphia 
Airport takes congested Route 30. The commonly used route is to take 
222 to the turnpike and then to the Schuylkill Expressway, and that is 
a distance of some 80 miles. So the route that any rational person 
would use would be the 80-mile route, not the 66-mile route.
  We have worked with the Department of Transportation for several 
years in trying to work out this arrangement, but they have refused to 
listen to reason. The City of Lancaster took an expensive appeal to the 
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and the Court felt bound to 
honor the discretion of the Secretary of Transportation, even though 
the discretion was very unwisely used. The Court found itself 
constrained to let the Secretary determine it.
  The amendment I had intended to offer, which has been denominated as 
904, provides that the determination of the appropriate mileage would 
be determined by the Governor or by the Metropolitan Planning 
Organization. A concern was expressed as to that--to have the State 
make a determination as to what would be done with the Federal 
expenditure of funds. Well, that is not all the time, but I am not 
going to belabor that argument because we have an accommodation.
  Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator yield to me at this point?
  Mr. SPECTER. Yes.
  Mr. LOTT. I note that I have looked at this situation and I am going 
to support what this amendment is trying to do. I think, in this case, 
this area he is referring to has been disadvantaged. We do not want to 
and do not intend to start down the line of making an exception here 
and there. This is a case where, clearly, you have been disadvantaged 
by the way it has been interpreted.
  I appreciate the Senator being willing to work out a fair solution.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania. I 
did have the opportunity to meet with a group of his fellow citizens 
from Lancaster. They made a very compelling case on the burden they 
bear. I think this is a fair and equitable solution. I thank the 
Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, to complete the discussion here regarding 
giving these essential air services to Lancaster, they had one small 
airline that serviced Lancaster. They withdrew because, in the absence 
of a modest subsidy, they could not serve Lancaster anymore. In an era 
when we are helping airlines with loan guarantees and bailouts and so 
many other provisions, this is really minimal.
  This amendment, as provided, will take care of Lancaster. If I may 
say for the record--if I may have the attention of the Senator from 
Mississippi, the chairman of the subcommittee, who will be principal 
conferee--this provision will be fought for in conference. In the 
House, the matter has been handled by Congressman Joe Pitts, a very 
able Congressman who represents the area including Lancaster. I am sure 
Congressman Pitts will be amenable to this amendment, which gives 
further assurance and protection to Lancaster, Pennsylvania. So it is 
in the context of this assurance of our tough position in conference, 
which ought to prevail, that I have agreed to this accommodation.
  I thank the Senator from Mississippi and I thank the Senator from 
Arizona for working out this issue. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the Senator from South Carolina for supporting 
the amendment.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I associate myself with the last remarks 
of Senator Hollings. Like the Senator from South Carolina, I thank the 
Senator from South Carolina.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 915) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, our cloakroom has indicated that Senators 
have had an all-day-long notice that we are trying to complete this 
bill today. Statements have been made on the floor by the managers many 
times to that effect.
  On the Democratic side, the only amendments we know of that people 
wish to offer are by Senators Feinstein, Inouye, Hollings, and Senator 
Rockefeller has an amendment. Other than those, we don't know of any 
other amendments on our side.

[[Page 14746]]

  On the other side, I have been told there is a Burns amendment, a 
Murkowski amendment, and a Stevens amendment. Other than that, I don't 
know of any other amendments.
  My point is, within a relatively short period of time, we will ask 
unanimous consent that these be the only amendments in order. If people 
are out there with amendments, they should come forward in the next 
couple of minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, in about 10 minutes, if that is OK--that 
will give plenty of time for people who have additional amendments--I 
will propose that we have a unanimous consent that no further 
amendments be in order.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I supplement what the Senator from Nevada 
said. I have already given notice that I have another amendment. If I 
may inquire of the manager, the Senator from Arizona. I am prepared to 
proceed at this time with the amendment.
  If I may have the attention of the Senator from Arizona, is it 
agreeable that I may call up my amendment?
  Mr. McCAIN. Yes.


                           Amendment No. 905

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 905, which has 
been filed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Specter], for himself, 
     Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Dayton, proposes an amendment 
     numbered 905.

  Mr. SPECTER. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To provide safety and security with respect to aviation 
                            repair stations)

       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. 405. FOREIGN REPAIR STATION SAFETY AND SECURITY.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration.
       (2) Domestic repair station.--The term ``domestic repair 
     station'' means a repair station or shop that--
       (A) is described in section 44707(2) of title 49, United 
     States Code; and
       (B) is located in the United States.
       (3) Foreign repair station.--The term ``foreign repair 
     station'' means a repair station or shop that--
       (A) is described in section 44707(2) of title 49, United 
     States Code; and
       (B) is located outside of the United States.
       (4) Under secretary.--The term ``Under Secretary'' means 
     the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security of 
     the Department of Homeland Security.
       (b) Applicability of Standards.--Within 180 days after the 
     date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue 
     regulations to ensure that foreign repair stations meet the 
     same level of safety required of domestic repair stations.
       (c) Specific Standards.--In carrying out subsection (b), 
     the Administrator shall, at a minimum, specifically ensure 
     that foreign repair stations, as a condition of being 
     certified to work on United States registered aircraft--
       (1) institute a program of drug and alcohol testing of its 
     employees working on United States registered aircraft and 
     that such a program provides an equivalent level of safety 
     achieved by the drug and alcohol testing requirements that 
     workers are subject to at domestic repair stations;
       (2) agree to be subject to the same type and level of 
     inspection by the Federal Aviation Administration as domestic 
     repair stations and that such inspections occur without prior 
     notice to the country in which the station is located; and
       (3) follow the security procedures established under 
     subsection (d).
       (d) Security Audits.--
       (1) In general.--To ensure the security of maintenance and 
     repair work conducted on United States aircraft and 
     components at foreign repair stations, the Under Secretary, 
     in consultation with the Administrator, shall complete a 
     security review and audit of foreign repair stations 
     certified by the Administrator under part 145 of title 14, 
     Code of Federal Regulations. The review shall be completed 
     not later than 180 days after the date on which the Under 
     Secretary issues regulations under paragraph (6).
       (2) Addressing security concerns.--The Under Secretary 
     shall require a foreign repair station to address the 
     security issues and vulnerabilities identified in a security 
     audit conducted under paragraph (1) within 90 days of 
     providing notice to the repair station of the security issues 
     and vulnerabilities identified.
       (3) Suspensions and revocations of certificates.--
       (A) Failure to carry out effective security measures.--If 
     the Under Secretary determines as a result of a security 
     audit that a foreign repair station does not maintain and 
     carry out effective security measures or if a foreign repair 
     station does not address the security issues and 
     vulnerabilities as required under subsection (d)(2), the 
     Under Secretary shall notify the Administrator of the 
     determination. Upon receipt of the determination, the 
     Administrator shall suspend the certification of the repair 
     station until such time as the Under Secretary determines 
     that the repair station maintains and carries out effective 
     security measures and has addressed the security issues 
     identified in the audit, and transmits the determination to 
     the Administrator.
       (B) Immediate security risk.--If the Under Secretary 
     determines that a foreign repair station poses an immediate 
     security risk, the Under Secretary shall notify the 
     Administrator of the determination. Upon receipt of the 
     determination, the Administrator shall revoke the 
     certification of the repair station.
       (4) Failure to meet audit deadline.--If the security audits 
     required by paragraph (1) are not completed on or before the 
     date that is 180 days after the date on which the Under 
     Secretary issues regulations under paragraph (6), the 
     Administrator may not certify, or renew the certification of, 
     any foreign repair station until such audits are completed.
       (5) Priority for audits.--In conducting the audits 
     described in paragraph (1), the Under Secretary and the 
     Administrator shall give priority to foreign repair stations 
     located in countries identified by the United States 
     Government as posing the most significant security risks.
       (6) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Under Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Administrator, shall issue final 
     regulations to ensure the security of foreign and domestic 
     repair stations. If final regulations are not issued within 
     180 days of the date of enactment of this Act, the 
     Administrator may not certify, or renew the certification of, 
     any foreign repair station until such regulations have been 
     issued.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am offering this amendment on behalf of 
myself and Senators Boxer, Durbin, and Dayton. Senator Inhofe had 
indicated some support, but I think he has a little different approach, 
so I am going to proceed with it on this basis.
  The amendment provides for foreign aircraft repair stations to be 
subject to the same provisions as domestic air stations.
  What we have at the present time is a very different set of standards 
for foreign repair stations than are in effect for domestic stations. 
In foreign stations, for example, there need not be drug and alcohol 
testing. In foreign stations, there are not the kinds of requirements 
and regulations as to the maintenance for safety, and there are no 
requirements as to security.
  I realize this kind of an amendment may result in some higher costs; 
however, I believe these costs are warranted in the interest of the 
traveling public so there is an adequate assurance of safety. If you do 
not have the kinds of requirements that are in effect by the FAA in the 
United States, then we do not have the maintenance of the same kind of 
safety standards.
  With respect to foreign competition, I think it is a fair requirement 
to say that you are not requiring ``Buy American,'' but you are saying 
that the people in the United States who provide these services ought 
to have the same sort of security standards, the same sort of 
maintenance standards, and the same sort of drug testing or alcohol 
testing as in foreign standards. So this goes beyond the idea of 
protectionism. These requirements that are in effect in the United 
States are to provide for the safety of the traveling public. If it 
costs X dollars to provide for the safety of the traveling public, then 
I think that is what we ought to do, and that is the gravamen and the 
thrust behind this amendment.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.


                 Amendment No. 914 To Amendment No. 905

(Purpose: To require the Administrator of the FAA to conduct a study of 
              safety standards at foreign repair stations)

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to the desk 
and ask it be read in its entirety.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:


[[Page 14747]]

       The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Lott] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 914 to amendment No. 905:

       At the end of the amendment add the following:
       (  ) Study.--Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of 
     this section--
       (1) the Administrator shall conduct a study of the need to 
     establish a program to ensure that foreign repair stations 
     meet the conditions and standards described in subsection 
     (c);
       (2) report the results of that study, together with the 
     Administrator's recommendations and conclusions, to the 
     Congress within 180 days after the date of enactment of this 
     Act; and
       (3) the Administrator shall not issue regulations under 
     subsection (h).

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, let me explain why I offered this amendment. 
Senator Specter raises some very legitimate concerns, and we need to 
know what the situation is with regard to safety standards and the 
conditions of the workers in these foreign repair stations.
  First, I was not aware of this amendment or the committee was not 
aware of this amendment until about an hour ago. We have not had a 
chance to find out more about what the ramifications are, the need for 
it, or what we need to do. We have had no hearings on this matter.
  There is no question we need to make sure these foreign repair 
stations for airlines are good ones and the workers at these stations 
meet certain qualifications. They are doing good work basically.
  I am offering this amendment on behalf of Senator Inhofe who has some 
experience in this area, has been to some of these foreign repair 
stations and has some concerns. Being a pilot himself, having served on 
the committee of jurisdiction in the House, this is something we would 
like to know his feelings about and make sure of what the situation is 
today.
  He thought, though, we needed to look into it and understand what is 
happening. For instance, we may, by doing this, be imposing more 
requirements on these foreign repair stations that do not need certain 
laws or regulations in the various countries. We may be taking actions 
that would drive up costs. We may be taking actions that would have a 
dramatic impact on our own domestic airlines, which, by the way, some 
of the most profitable routes are overseas routes. This is a reason 
Northwest was Northwest Orient. There is no question American, Delta--
the big airlines--do have very important overseas routes.
  I would like to know if they think they are getting good service. 
What problems and what costs are going to be the result of this action?
  That is what I say to Senator Specter. It is a legitimate concern. We 
may need to do something more in this area, but I would like to know 
what the ramifications are before we actually put this requirement in 
place.
  This amendment, as I understand it and as it has been read, says the 
Administrator has to have a study of the need to establish this program 
to ensure that foreign repair stations meet the conditions of standards 
described in other sections of the law, that they report the results of 
that study, together with the Administrator's recommendations and 
conclusions, to the Congress within a specified period of time. This is 
not just an open-ended generic thing. That would also give us time on 
the committee to ask questions of all those impacted by the 
requirement.
  I think this is a good solution to a problem we should not ignore, 
but before we act we need to know what the impact is going to be.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I strongly support the Specter amendment 
to S. 824, the Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act, that 
would address safety and security issues at foreign aircraft repair 
stations working on U.S. aircraft.
  For a number of years, I have been working with the AFL-CIO's 
Transportation Trades Department and its mechanic unions--the 
International Association of Machinists, the Transport Workers Union, 
and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters--to close the safety 
loopholes that many foreign stations present.
  I would like to submit for the Record a letter I received from these 
unions expressing their continued opposition to unsafe foreign 
stations.
  I would also like to submit for the Record a letter recently sent 
from the AFL-CIO and its Transportation Trades Department to the 
Administration highlighting their concerns about the security at 
foreign stations.
  As these letters clearly demonstrate, we have legitimate concerns 
with regard to the current rules governing certification and oversight 
of foreign stations. For these reasons, I am cosponsoring the Specter 
amendment and urge my colleagues to support it as well.
  I ask unanimous consent that the aforementioned letters, dated April 
10, 2003, and May 22, 2003, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

         American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial 
           Organizations,
                                   Washington, DC, April 10, 2003.
     Hon. Norman Y. Mineta,
     Secretary of Transportation, Washington, DC.

     Hon. Marion Blakey,
     Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, 
         DC.

     Hon. James M. Loy,
     Under Secretary for Security, Transportation Security 
         Administration, Arlington, VA.
       Dear Secretary Mineta, Administrator Blakey and Admiral 
     Loy: On behalf of the 13 million members of the AFL-CIO and 
     the Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) we urge 
     you to take immediate action to temporarily revoke the 
     certification of certain foreign-based aircraft repair 
     stations until such time as thorough security audits are 
     conducted by responsible agencies and rules are put in place 
     to ensure that these stations do not pose an imminent 
     national and aviation security risk. As you know, there are 
     currently over 600 foreign aircraft repair stations, 
     certified under 14 CFR Part 145 (Subpart C), that are 
     permitted to work on U.S. registered aircraft. Because of the 
     unique combination of national security and economic 
     conditions that currently exist in the aviation industry, as 
     outlined below, we believe that the Department of 
     Transportation (DOT), the Federal Aviation Administration 
     (FAA), and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) 
     are required to act upon this petition in the interest of 
     aviation safety.
       It is well known that this nation continues to be the 
     target of terrorist intentions both domestically and abroad. 
     In fact, the U.S. State Department and other government 
     agencies have frequently warned about threats occurring 
     outside the U.S. but directed at U.S. citizens and interests. 
     We are concerned that certified foreign aircraft repair 
     stations that are eligible to work on U.S. aircraft could 
     provide terrorists with an opportunity to jeopardize U.S. 
     aviation safety without having to physically enter this 
     country. At a time of heightened alert around the globe, our 
     government must do everything possible to protect against 
     terrorist agents infiltrating foreign repair stations and 
     sabotaging air operations headed back to the United States.
       While there is no publicly known evidence that terrorists 
     have pursued this agenda, it makes little sense for the Bush 
     Administration to leave it to chance. In fact, the DOT's 
     Inspector General recently announced that as part of a larger 
     audit of air carriers' use of aircraft repair stations, it 
     found security vulnerabilities at stations located at 
     commercial and general-aviation airports and off airport 
     property. While the IG recommended that the TSA conduct risk-
     based security assessments as a first-step in determining the 
     actions needed to address repair station security, we would 
     maintain that until the security ``fitness'' of foreign 
     stations can be assured, their FAR 145 rights to work on U.S. 
     aircraft should be suspended.
       The security risks posed by foreign stations is compounded 
     by the unprecedented financial distress faced by the 
     commercial aviation industry. Two major carriers have 
     declared bankruptcy, others have announced severe workforce 
     and service cuts, and virtually every airline has been forced 
     to institute dramatic cost cuts to satisfy lenders and to 
     keep flying. In this environment, U.S. carriers will 
     undoubtedly pursue, over the strong objections of the 
     International Association Machinists and Aerospace Workers,

[[Page 14748]]

     the Transport Workers Union and the International Brotherhood 
     of Teamsters, the outsourcing of major overhaul and other 
     repair work to lower cost, potentially substandard third 
     party contractors including those based overseas. A real life 
     illustration of these concerns are the management rights 
     secured by Northwest Airlines in its 2001 collective 
     bargaining agreement with its mechanics union under which the 
     airline can contract out almost 40 percent of repair and 
     overhaul work to outside contractors around the globe. In 
     fact, Northwest Airlines already relies on a Singapore-based 
     repair operation for significant overhaul work on its DC-10 
     aircraft and the carrier could use the freedoms it secured in 
     its 2001 collective bargaining agreement for mechanics to 
     ship significantly more of that work abroad. And with the lax 
     FAA oversight and surveillance of unknown security procedures 
     at many foreign stations, the potential for terrorist 
     security breaches grows as these stations see more work from 
     the U.S.
       It is interesting that in the pursuit of aviation security 
     the FAA and the TSA recently issued rules that require the 
     FAA to revoke the airman certificate, which includes a Part 
     65 mechanic certification, of any individual who the TSA 
     determines poses a threat to aviation security. But from a 
     practical standpoint these rules will only affect mechanics 
     at domestic stations since only domestic stations, and not 
     foreign stations, are required to have FAA-certified 
     employees on premise. Furthermore, there are a number of 
     oversight activities that occur at domestic facilities, both 
     formally and informally, that simply do not occur at foreign 
     facilities.
       Indeed, the AFL-CIO, TTD and its mechanics union affiliates 
     have long been concerned that foreign aircraft repair 
     stations can receive FAA certification and then work on U.S.-
     registered aircraft without meeting the same safety and 
     security standards imposed on domestic facilities and their 
     employees. In addition to regulatory differences, we know 
     that the oversight of foreign stations pales in comparison to 
     the surveillance performed on domestic stations, especially 
     those managed within major air carrier operations. For 
     example, FAA inspectors, represented by the Professional 
     Airways Systems Specialists (PASS), do not have the same type 
     of access to foreign stations as they do with domestic 
     facilities. This reality is complicated by the fact that 
     insufficient FAA inspector staffing levels do not allow for 
     proper oversight of stations located outside the U.S. Given 
     this situation, it is troubling that the effective date for 
     modifications to Part 145 was recently and inexplicably 
     postponed at the request of industry trade groups and that 
     such postponement was granted without giving the public any 
     notice or opportunity to comment.
       For these reasons we urge the DOT, the FAA, and the TSA to 
     issue an emergency order to temporarily prevent certain 
     foreign stations certified under 14 CFR Part 145 from working 
     on U.S. aircraft or components. The FAA should use these 
     temporary revocations to conduct thorough security audits of 
     foreign stations and to promulgate rules that impose security 
     procedures at these facilities. In particular, the FAA should 
     focus on ensuring that mechanics and other workers who come 
     into contact with U.S. aircraft or components do not pose a 
     security risk and that other precautions are taken to ensure 
     the integrity of the aircraft maintenance work performed. We 
     would suggest that Joint Aviation Authority members and 
     certain countries that have current Bilateral Aviation Safety 
     Agreements with the U.S. may already meet many of the 
     security standards needed and would not need to have their 
     FAR 145 rights suspended while rules are being drafted.
       As you know, the Secretary of Transportation is charged 
     with the responsibility of ``assigning and maintaining safety 
     as the highest priority in air commerce.'' 49 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 40101(a)(1). Furthermore, when the Administrator is of 
     the ``opinion that an emergency related to safety in air 
     commerce requires immediate action, the Administrator, on the 
     initiative of the Administrator or on complaint, may 
     prescribe regulations and issue orders immediately to meet 
     the emergency . . .'' 49 U.S.C. Sec. 46105(c). We would 
     maintain that a unique confluence of factors described above 
     create a situation that necessitates federal government 
     action in the public interest and to maintain aviation 
     safety.
       Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter and 
     we look forward to your response.
           Sincerely,
     Richard L. Trumka,
       Secretary-Treasurer, AFL-CIO.
     Sonny Hall,
       President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO.
                                  ____

                                             Transportation Trades


                                          Department, AFL-CIO,

                                     Washington, DC, May 22, 2003.
     Hon. Richard J. Durbin,
     U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Durbin: On behalf of the Transportation Trades 
     Department, AFL- CIO (TTD) and its aircraft mechanics unions, 
     we write to ask for your assistance in protecting the safety 
     and security of our aviation system and the jobs of thousands 
     of aircraft mechanics due to deficient federal government 
     policy and efforts by the major airlines to cut costs through 
     outsourcing of maintenance and heavy overhaul work to 
     foreign-based repair stations.
       As an original cosponsor of the Aircraft Repair Station 
     Safety Act (S. 1089) in the 105th Congress, legislation 
     strongly supported by AFL-CIO unions, we know that you are 
     well aware of this problem and we appreciate your leadership 
     in protecting aviation safety and U.S. jobs. As we have 
     discussed with you over many years, the Federal Aviation 
     Administration (FAA), pursuant to 14 CFR Part 145 (Subpart 
     C), allows foreign stations to receive certification to work 
     on U.S. aircraft even though these stations do not have to 
     meet the same standards as those located in this country. 
     While AFL-CIO mechanics unions have long argued that this 
     situation threatens mechanics' jobs and the safety of the 
     flying public, the current drive by air carriers to ship work 
     overseas, combined with unique security concerns at these 
     stations, has exacerbated this problem and your help is 
     urgently needed to address this issue.
       We know that U.S. carriers will pursue, over the strong 
     objections of the International Association of Machinists and 
     Aerospace Workers, the Transport Workers Union and the 
     International Brotherhood of Teamsters, outsourcing of major 
     overhaul and other repair work to lower cost and potentially 
     substandard third party contractors based overseas. In fact, 
     Northwest Airlines, secured the right in its 2001 collective 
     bargaining agreement with its non-mechanics union (AMFA) to 
     contract out almost 40 percent of repair and overhaul work to 
     outside contractors in Singapore and around the globe. While 
     the mechanics at Northwest are not members of our unions, we 
     are deeply concerned that the carrier will continue to 
     exploit these harmful contract concessions to the detriment 
     of all the nation's professional aircraft mechanics, the vast 
     majority of which are our members. Mechanics at other 
     airlines will face increasing pressure to adopt the dangerous 
     practices of Northwest-AMFA that permit almost four out of 10 
     jobs to be shipped to foreign contractors. Unless Congress 
     steps in aggressively, aviation safety and security will 
     suffer and the jobs of thousands of workers will be at risk.
       For these reasons, we urge you to work with us to address 
     this issue as part of the FAA Reauthorization bill that will 
     be considered by the full Senate in the coming weeks. 
     Together, we can protect the flying public and in the process 
     ensure the future of America's highly skilled and 
     professional aircraft mechanics. Thank you for your attention 
     to this matter.
           Sincerely,
     Robert Roach,
       General Vice President, International Association of 
     Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
     Sonny Hall,
       International President, Transport Workers Union.
     Don Treichler,
       Director, Airline Division, International Brotherhood of 
     Teamsters.
     Edward Wytkind,
       Executive Director, Transportation Trades Dept., AFL-CIO.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, the second-degree amendment proposed by 
the Senator from Mississippi is an improvement over where the record 
stands at the present time, however, I think it does not go far enough. 
When he states that he does not know the consequences of my amendment, 
I would disagree with him.
  The amendment provides that there will be standards on the level of 
inspection, which are of the same type as now promulgated by the 
Federal Aviation Administration. So if you have that level of 
inspection, which they have now, there is no question as to its not 
being onerous, or at least if it is onerous, it is onerous now, 
however, it is the same.
  We should have drug and alcohol testing as a very minimal requirement 
so we know specifically what is involved there. We know people who are 
drug addicts or who are unduly influenced by alcohol to be carrying on 
these inspections.
  When it comes to the third factor, security, the amendment I have 
proposed calls for ensuring the security of maintenance and repair work 
conducted on

[[Page 14749]]

U.S. aircraft and components at foreign repair stations by the Under 
Secretary in consultation with the Administrator.
  Those security arrangements are going to be determined by the 
Department of Transportation. We certainly can rely on them. I think 
the issue has been joined. I think we understand what is involved.
  I ask for the yeas and nays on the pending amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask that the vote be delayed until such 
time--
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield without losing his right to the 
floor? The two leaders want these votes to be stacked. They are in a 
very important Finance Committee meeting which is going on now. I ask 
this be set aside for a later time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I also note that Senator Boxer wishes to 
speak on this amendment for up to 10 minutes.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we withhold 
the vote until such time as the two leaders decide on a time, which I 
do not think will be very long. We have a couple of other amendments 
which are pending that we could dispose of, I would imagine, within the 
next 10 or 15 minutes.
  Also, I ask unanimous consent that no further amendments be 
considered at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. The pending amendments on our side are a Stevens 
amendment, a Burns amendment, and a Santorum amendment.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we want to have a list just as quickly as my 
friend from Arizona. We do need to have floor staff look at the subject 
matter of these amendments because we do not know what they could be. 
We can take the 10 minutes the Senator from Arizona suggested--the only 
addition I know we have is an amendment by Senator Kohl--and have our 
staffs look at these amendments while Senator Boxer is speaking for up 
to 10 minutes.
  Following that, I think we would be in a position to look at the 
amendments and order the closure of the amendment process.
  Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Hagel be added as a 
cosponsor of amendment No. 906.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, as part of the agreement, it is my 
understanding that the Senator from California will be recognized for 
up to 10 minutes. Is that right?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. No agreement has been propounded.
  Mr. REID. Did not the Senator from Arizona ask unanimous consent that 
the vote be put over until later and that request was propounded at 
that time? I thought the agreement was that the Senator from California 
would speak on the amendment that was just set aside for a vote for 10 
minutes. I ask the Senator from California, would that be appropriate?
  Mrs. BOXER. I am sorry. I was concentrating on my remarks.
  Mr. REID. Is 10 minutes sufficient time for the Senator?
  Mrs. BOXER. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Santorum be added 
as an original cosponsor on the Lancaster amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I understand Senator Lott has second-
degreed Senator Specter's amendment, of which I am a proud cosponsor, 
with a study. Something can be studied and studied but, frankly, this 
would gut what we are trying to do in our amendment. I do not mind a 
study, but I think the time for studying this has passed.
  I want to show my colleagues an important op-ed that appeared in the 
USA Today on June 9: ``Evidence Points to FAA's Laxity on Plane 
Maintenance.''
  It specifically cites the overseas gaps that are happening. There are 
629 foreign repair stations certified by the FAA to service U.S. 
aircraft. They point out that they may not be strictly monitored 
because of their distance from U.S.-based airline operations, 
increasing the potential risk for error.
  That is an opinion of an expert on safety, Michael Barr, director of 
the University of Southern California's aviation safety program.
  I think all of us want to see safety. One obvious place is making 
sure that we cut down on the number of aircraft that are overhauled 
abroad. That is why I think Senator Specter's amendment is so 
important, for the safety and security of the flying public. We all 
have worked very hard in the Commerce Committee to improve our aviation 
security, and I do believe our system is more secure than it was.
  We have much more to do. My colleagues have heard me speak about the 
importance of the missile defense system, against shoulder-fired 
missiles, and there will be a lot more on that subject. But while we 
are improving our security at our airports in this country and rooting 
out potential threats among employees in the United States, meaning 
employees who work for the airlines, there are no security regulations 
or standards for foreign repair stations that work on U.S. aircraft.
  I know the Senate is rushing to get through with this very important 
bill, but there is a huge gap in our aviation security. There is a huge 
safety concern that I have that Senator Specter's amendment will 
remedy. It is important to remember that foreign repair stations work 
on planes that not only fly internationally but planes that serve 
domestic routes as well.
  There is a huge gap in our aviation security, and foreign repair 
stations do not have the same standards. Senator Lott wishes to study 
this matter, and I am glad he wishes to study it, but we all know that 
the underlying amendment is the one that would bring about the changes. 
The underlying amendment would require foreign repair stations to meet 
the same safety standards required at domestic repair stations.
  Specifically, under the Specter amendment, foreign repair stations 
would have to institute a drug and alcohol testing program of its 
employees if they want to work on American aircraft.
  I say to my friends in the Senate, the people at these foreign 
stations are not even tested for drugs and alcohol, but American 
workers are required to have drug and alcohol tests.
  There is no drug and alcohol testing program of employees on these 
foreign repair stations. We demand it in our own country. Our employees 
go through it and we do not have it at these foreign repair stations. 
We want these foreign repair stations to agree to FAA inspections.
  In addition, the Under Secretary of Homeland Security must complete a 
security review and audit of all foreign repair stations. The foreign 
repair stations must address security issues identified by the Homeland 
Security Department within 90 days, and if they do not prove to the FAA 
and to the Homeland Security Department that they are not meeting our 
heightened security needs, FAA must revoke the certification of that 
repair station.
  After all of the work that has been undertaken to improve our 
aviation security, and I must say on both sides of the aisle we have 
seen this work, we must not allow this loophole to continue. We do not 
know who is working on our planes at foreign repair stations, and I 
would hate to be a Senator who voted to study the issue but not to move 
quickly to solve the problem if, God forbid, there is an accident 
because some employee in a foreign repair station was either inebriated 
or high on drugs or perhaps even was terrorist connected.
  We owe the American people safe and secure skies, and I think the 
Specter

[[Page 14750]]

amendment is critical to preventing terrorism and unnecessary 
accidents. My colleagues want a study? Then they are saying they do not 
think this is a problem.
  Evidence points to FAA's laxity on plane maintenance, and if we do 
not adopt Senator Specter's amendment, I think we are making a big 
mistake. These planes not only fly internationally but nationally.
  I have a parliamentary inquiry. Are we going to vote on Senator 
Lott's second degree at a time certain?
  Mr. REID. No.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cornyn). The yeas and nays have been 
ordered on that amendment but no time has yet been set for that vote.
  Mrs. BOXER. Another question. If that fails, will we then be voting 
on the Specter amendment? And have the yeas and nays been ordered on 
that?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That would be the normal course of business, 
but the yeas and nays have not yet been ordered on the Specter 
amendment.
  Mrs. BOXER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is not in order at this time.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask unanimous consent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. LOTT. Parliamentary inquiry. This is a request to have the yeas 
and nays on the second-degree amendment?
  Mr. HOLLINGS. You already got that. This is on the Specter amendment, 
the yeas and nays on the Specter amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. REID. We are waiting for the unanimous consent request to be 
typed. I hope during that period of time we will have six or seven more 
people calling for amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. McCAIN. I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending 
amendment so Senator Burns can be recognized for his two amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                     Amendment No. 900, as Modified

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the committee and 
the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member. I submitted 
two amendments. One has to do with general aviation and reimbursement 
to organizations that suffered losses due to September 11. We took care 
of the airlines and a lot of service industries in and around airports, 
but we forgot and left out one very important part of the American 
aviation scene, very important to my State of Montana, those people 
involved in general aviation, in other words, the charter business, as 
they were impacted, too, and received no reimbursement in any way to 
recover the damages or the losses they may have incurred.
  We have talked about this. I ask the amendment which is at the desk 
to be considered. It has been amended and worked on by both sides of 
the aisle. There is agreement on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Burns] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 900, as modified.

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To provide grants to reimburse general aviation entities for 
    the security costs incurred and revenue foregone as a result of 
            terrorism and the military action against Iraq)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. ___. REIMBURSEMENT FOR LOSSES INCURRED BY GENERAL 
                   AVIATION ENTITIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Transportation may make 
     grants to reimburse the following general aviation entities 
     for economic losses as a result of the restrictions imposed 
     by the Federal Government following the terrorist attacks on 
     the United States that occurred on September 11, 2001:
       (1) General aviation entities that operate at Ronald Reagan 
     Washington National Airport.
       (2) Airports that are located within 15 miles of Ronald 
     Reagan Washington National Airport and were operating under 
     security restrictions on the date of enactment of this Act 
     and general aviation entities operating at those airports.
       (5) Any other general aviation entity that is prevented 
     from doing business or operating by an action of the Federal 
     Government prohibiting access to airspace by that entity.
       (b) Documentation.--Reimbursement under this section shall 
     be made in accordance with sworn financial statements or 
     other appropriate data submitted by each general aviation 
     entity demonstrating the costs incurred and revenue foregone 
     to the satisfaction of the Secretary.
       (c) General Aviation Entity Defined.--In this section, the 
     term ``general aviation entity'' means any person (other than 
     a scheduled air carrier or foreign air carrier, as such terms 
     are defined in section 40102 of title 49, United States Code) 
     that--
       (1) operates nonmilitary aircraft under part 91 of title 
     14, Code of Federal Regulations, for the purpose of 
     conducting its primary business;
       (3) provides services necessary for nonmilitary operations 
     under such part 91; or
       (4) operates an airport, other than a primary airport (as 
     such terms are defined in such section 40102), that--
       (A) is listed in the national plan of integrated airport 
     systems developed by the Federal Aviation Administration 
     under section 47103 of such title; or
       (B) is normally open to the public, is located within the 
     confines of enhanced class B airspace (as defined by the 
     Federal Aviation Administration in Notice to Airmen FDC 1/
     0618), and was closed as a result of an order issued by the 
     Federal Aviation Administration in the period beginning 
     September 11, 2001, and ending January 1, 2002, and remained 
     closed as a result of that order on January 1, 2002.

     Such term includes fixed based operators, persons engaged in 
     nonscheduled air taxi service or aircraft rental.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $100,000,000. 
     Such sums shall remain available until expended.

  Mr. BURNS. It has been worked on by both sides and I ask for its 
adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment numbered 900, as modified.
  The amendment (No. 900), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. BURNS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 899

  Mr. BURNS. The second amendment I have has to do with recommendations 
concerning air travel agents who have been part of a report requested 
of the Transportation Department. This is only language that requires 
the Department of Transportation to recommend the changes they see as a 
result of this report. I ask it be considered at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Burns] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 899.

  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To require the Secretary of Transportation to transmit to 
 Congress a report on any actions that should be taken with respect to 
  recommendations made by the National Commission to Ensure Consumer 
    Information and Choice in the Airline Industry on travel agents)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.  . RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING TRAVEL AGENTS.

       (a) Report.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall 
     transmit to Congress a report on any actions that should be 
     taken with respect to recommendations made by the National 
     Commission to Ensure Consumer Information and Choice in the 
     Airline Industry on--
       (1) the travel agent arbiter program; and
       (2) the special box on tickets for agents to include their 
     service fee charges.
       (b) Consultation.--In preparing this report, the Secretary 
     shall consult with representatives from the airline and 
     travel agent industry.


[[Page 14751]]

  Mr. BURNS. I ask the amendment be agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there no further debate on the amendment?
  Mr. BURNS. By the way, it has been cleared by both sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
numbered 899.
  The amendment (No. 899) was agreed to.
  Mr. BURNS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. BURNS. I appreciate the leadership on both sides of the aisle for 
consideration of the amendments.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, sorry to interrupt. I call attention to 
the Senate that Special Operations is hosting a reception for Members 
of the Senate and staff tonight from 5:30 to 7:30 in room 106 of the 
Dirksen Building. General Holland would be honored if Members could 
stop by. My Defense Subcommittee visited General Holland and saw many 
of the things that are going to be on display in 106 Dirksen. There 
will be members of the armed services who worked with the unified 
commands, Marines, Army, Navy, Air Force. Individual members of the 
service who actually participated in Afghanistan and Iraq are there to 
explain to Members of the Senate and staff some of the engagements they 
were involved in.
  I think every Member and members of the staff would find it very 
interesting. I hope they will stop by.


                           Amendment No. 916

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk that has 
been cleared which I ask the clerk to report.
  It is a cap on the staffing level of the Transportation Security 
Administration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 916.

  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To remove the staffing level limitation imposed on the 
                Transportation Security Administration)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.  . REMOVAL OF CAP ON TSA STAFFING LEVEL.

       The matter appearing under the heading ``Aviation 
     Security'' in the appropriations for the Transportation 
     Security Administration in the Transportation and Related 
     Agencies Appropriate Act, 2003 (Public Law 108-7; 117 Stat. 
     386) is amended by striking the fifth proviso.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
numbered 916.
  The amendment (No. 916) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 917

  Mr. HOLLINGS. On behalf of the distinguished Senator, Senator 
Feinstein, I send an amendment to the desk and ask it be reported. This 
has to do with air quality on new aircraft.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings] for Mrs. 
     Feinstein, proposes an amendment numbered 917.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

        (Purpose: To provide for air quality in aircraft cabins)

       Strike section 664 and insert the following:

     SEC. 664. AIR QUALITY IN AIRCRAFT CABINS.

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall undertake the studies and analysis 
     called for in the report of the National Research Council 
     entitled ``The Airliner Cabin Environment and the Health of 
     Passengers and Crew''.
       (b) Required Activities.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Administrator, at a minimum, shall--
       (1) conduct surveillance to monitor ozone in the cabin on a 
     representative number of flights and aircraft to determine 
     compliance with existing Federal Aviation Regulations for 
     ozone;
       (2) collect pesticide exposure data to determine exposures 
     of passengers and crew;
       (3) analyze samples of residue from aircraft ventilation 
     ducts and filters after air quality incidents to identify the 
     contaminants to which passengers and crew were exposed;
       (4) analyze and study cabin air pressure and altitude; and
       (5) establish an air quality incident reporting system.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 30 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the findings of the Administrator under 
     this section.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an amendment 
to improve the air quality on commercial aircraft.
  In 1986, in response to a National Research Council Report, the FAA 
took several actions to improve aircraft cabin air quality on flights, 
including banning smoking on nearly all domestic flights. However, over 
15 years later, many cabin air quality issues remain and new health 
questions have been raised by passengers and crew.
  More recently, the National Research Council released a study of the 
air quality on commercial airline flights that was funded by the 
Federal Aviation Administration. The National Research Council found 
that:
  There is no operational standard for the ventilation of an aircraft 
cabin, but that such an operation standard should be established to 
ensure that passenger aircraft are properly ventilated;
  Passengers have been exposed to airborne contaminants while onboard 
aircraft, and that such contaminants can originate outside and inside 
the aircraft, and within the aircraft's environmental control system 
itself;
  The environmental control system on a passenger aircraft can become 
contaminated with engine oils, hydraulic fluids, or deicing fluids and 
those fluid contaminants can enter the passenger cabin through the air 
supply system;
  Contaminants in the air of a passenger aircraft may be responsible 
for acute and chronic health effects in crew and passengers;
  Reduced partial oxygen levels in aircraft air may adversely affect 
health-compromised passengers, particularly those with cardiopulmonary 
disease;
  Aircraft passengers may be exposed to ozone during flight, and 
studies suggest that ozone concentrations on some flights can exceed 
the Federal Aviation Administration and Environmental Protection Agency 
ozone levels;
  Air that contains elevated ozone concentrations is associated with 
airway irritation, decreased lung function, exacerbation of asthma, and 
impairments of the immune system;
  Since carbon monoxide is an indicator of mechanical fluids 
contaminating the air supply, the FAA should require aircraft to 
install monitors and establish procedures for responding to elevated 
levels of carbon monoxide; and
  The FAA should establish a passenger aircraft air quality and health 
surveillance program to determine compliance with existing FAA 
regulations and document health effects and complaints so that data is 
collected in a way that allows analysis of the relationship between 
health effects and aircraft air quality.
  The amendment I rise to introduce today addresses several findings on 
cabin air quality. It incorporates the original House language plus two 
additional provisions.
  The House language is as follows:

       (a) In General.--The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall undertake the studies and analysis 
     called for in the report of the National Research Council 
     entitled ``The Airliner Cabin Environment and the Health of 
     Passengers and Crew.''
       (b) Required Activities.--In carrying out this section, the 
     Administrator, at a minimum, shall--
       (1) conduct surveillance to monitor ozone in the cabin on a 
     representative number of flights and aircraft to determine 
     compliance with existing Federal Aviation Regulations for 
     ozone;
       (2) collect pesticide exposure data to determine exposures 
     of passengers and crew; and
       (3) analyze samples of residue from aircraft ventilation 
     ducts and filters after air quality incidents to identify the 
     contaminants to which passengers and crew were exposed.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 30 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall transmit to 
     Congress a report on the findings of the Administrator under 
     this section.


[[Page 14752]]


  My amendment builds on the above language by adding the following two 
provisions:
  Authorizes an FAA study to analyze cabin air pressure and altitude; 
and
  Requires the FAA to establish an air quality incident reporting 
system.
  Poor air quality in flight cabins poses a health risk for the flying 
public and crew members who spend most of their working hours onboard 
commercial aircraft. Passengers should feel confident that they are not 
endangering their health when they fly, and airline industry workers 
should not feel their health is threatened as they earn a living. I 
hope you will join me in supporting this legislation. And finally I 
want to thank Senator McCain and Senator Hollings for allowing me to 
introduce this amendment.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. This has to do with air quality of new equipment that 
has been cleared.
  I urge its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from California.
  The amendment (No. 917) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 918

  Mr. HOLLINGS. On behalf of the distinguished Senator from West 
Virginia, Senator Rockefeller, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
the clerk to report. It has to do with the small carrier sharing and 
the war supplemental.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Rockefeller, proposes an amendment numbered 918.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To require air carriers that received a refund of passenger 
  security fees under title IV of the Emergency Wartime Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2003, to pass-through to their code-share partners 
that portion of the refund attributable to such fees collected and paid 
                           by those partners)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC.   . PASS-THROUGH OF REFUNDED PASSENGER SECURITY FEES TO 
                   CODE-SHARE PARTNERS.

       (a) In General.--Within 30 days after the date of enactment 
     of this Act, each United States flag air carrier that 
     received a payment made under the second proviso of first 
     appropriation in title IV of the Emergency Wartime 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2003 (Pub. L. 108-011; 117 
     Stat. 604) shall transfer to each air carrier with which it 
     had a code-share arrangement during the period covered by the 
     passenger security fees remitted under that proviso an amount 
     equal to that portion of the remittance under the proviso 
     that was attributable to passenger security fees paid or 
     collected by that code-share air carrier and taken into 
     account in determining the amount of the payment to the 
     United States flag air carrier.
       (b) DOT Inspector General Oversight.--The Inspector General 
     of the Department of Transportation shall review the 
     compliance of United States flag air carriers with subsection 
     (a), including determinations of amounts, determinations of 
     eligibility of code-share air carriers, and transfers of 
     funds to such air carriers under subsection (a).
       (c) Certification.--The chief executive officer of each 
     United States flag air carrier to which subsection (a) 
     applies shall certify to the Under Secretary of Homeland 
     Security for Border and Transportation Security, under 
     penalty of perjury, the air carrier's compliance with sub-
     section (a).

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate, the question is 
on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 918) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 919

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the Senator from Hawaii, 
Senator Inouye, and the Senator from Ohio, Senator Voinovich, I send an 
amendment to the desk and ask it be reported. It has to do with credit 
cards, when one of the carriers is in default and the other carrier has 
to pick up or honor the tickets. Since there is a peculiar situation, 
this is taking care of that situation. It has been cleared on both 
sides.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings] for Mr. 
     Inouye and Mr. Voinovich, proposes an amendment numbered 919.

(Purpose: To clarify the criteria for air carriers to honor tickets for 
                           suspended service)

       At the end of subtitle A of title III, insert the 
     following:

     SEC. 305. AIR CARRIERS REQUIRED TO HONOR TICKETS FOR 
                   SUSPENDED SERVICE.

       (a) In General.--Section 145(a) of the Aviation and 
     Transportation Security Act of 2001 (49 U.S.C. 40101 note) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following: ``The Secretary 
     of Transportation shall give favorable consideration to 
     waiving the terms and conditions established by this section, 
     including those set forth in the guidance provided by the 
     Department in notices, dated August 8, 2002, November 14, 
     2002, and January 23, 2003, in cases where remaining carriers 
     operate additional flights to accommodate passengers whose 
     service was suspended, interrupted, or discontinued under 
     circumstances described in the preceding sentence over routes 
     located in isolated areas that are unusually dependent on air 
     transportation.''.
       (b) Extension.--Section 145(c) of such Act (49 U.S.C. 40101 
     note) is amended by striking ``more than'' and all that 
     follows through ``after'' and inserting ``more than 36 months 
     after''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate on the 
amendment, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 919) was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, Senator Stevens is here to offer an 
amendment.
  First, before that, I ask unanimous consent that following the 
disposition of the previously mentioned amendments, which we will 
mention in a minute, the bill be read for the third time, and further, 
the Senate then proceed to the consideration of H.R. 2115, the House 
companion bill; provided further that all after the enacting clause be 
stricken and the text of S. 824, as amended, be inserted in lieu 
thereof; further, that the bill then be read the third time and the 
Senate proceed to a vote on passage of the bill, with no intervening 
action or debate. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that following that 
vote the Senate then insist on its amendment, request a conference with 
the House, and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the 
part of the Senate with a ratio of 5 to 4. I ask unanimous consent that 
following the vote, S. 824 be placed back on the calendar.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. It is my understanding the only amendments also remaining 
are an amendment by Senator Stevens, an amendment by Senator Santorum, 
a Finance Committee amendment, and an amendment by Senator Murkowski.
  Mr. REID. And Senator Harkin?
  Mr. McCAIN. An amendment by Senator Harkin.
  I ask unanimous consent that no amendments be considered other than 
those I just described.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, the subject matter of the 
amendments has been discussed on both sides so there are no surprises 
as to the subject matter of the amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Alaska.


                           Amendment No. 920

(Purpose: To codify the requirement that United States air carriers be 
           effectively controlled by United States citizens)

  Mr. STEVENS. I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 920:
       At the end of title V, insert the following:

     SEC. 521. AIR CARRIER CITIZENSHIP.

       Section 40102(a)(15)(C) of title 49, United States Code is 
     amended by inserting ``which is under the actual control of 
     citizens of the United States,'' before ``and in which''.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, my amendment codifies the existing 
requirement that U.S. air carriers be effectively controlled by U.S. 
citizens. It

[[Page 14753]]

will ensure reciprocity with countries in the European Union which 
codified a comparable requirement.
  The United States has enforced an effective control standard for 
decades.
  DOT's Inspector General recently identified seven factors that DOT 
has relied on to determine whether an airline is effectively controlled 
by foreign entities.
  The I.G. identified ``significant contracts'' as one of the key 
factors in this process.
  A DOT administrative law judge is currently considering whether this 
should be applied to a situation where 7 year guaranteed cost-plus 
contracts that provide virtually all of a carrier's business are 
significant contracts leading to foreign control.
  Ironically, in this same proceeding one carrier has argued that the 
effective control test should not apply at all because it has not been 
codified.
  My amendment will codify the existing standard. It leaves the 
interpretation of effective control up to DOT, but the department can 
draw from its decades of precedents to reach these conclusions. It is 
critical that DOT closely examine the effective control of this 
transaction.
  If the present arrangement is allowed to stand, DOT will set a 
precedent which allows foreign governments to compete with U.S. 
companies for business which, by statute, is reserved to U.S. carriers.
  Mr. McCAIN. I would like to highlight some changes that Senator 
Stevens made to this amendment in response to concerns expressed by the 
Department of Transportation.
  Senator Stevens changed the term ``effective control'' in his 
amendment to ``actual control'' to more accurately represent the test 
that DOT uses in these types of reviews.
  In addition, Senator Stevens removed the limitation of ``at all 
times'' regarding the actual control test it conform with current DOT 
practices.
  DOT has represented to me that these changes accurately reflect the 
current state of law regarding citizenship and assures me that this 
amendment will not in any way affect their determination of what 
constitutes a citizen of the United States.
  I would not have agreed to this amendment without these changes and 
an understanding that this is simply a reflection of current law. The 
terms that I have agreed to will not be altered in conference.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 920) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 907

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Ms. Murkowski] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 907.

  Ms. MURKOWSKI. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment 
be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To require the FAA to complete a study and report regarding 
the feasibility of consolidating the Anchorage Terminal Radar Approach 
      Control and the Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center)

       At the end of title II, add the following:

     SEC. 217. ANCHORAGE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL.

       (a) In General.--Not later than September 30, 2004, the 
     Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration shall 
     complete a study and transmit a report to the appropriate 
     committees regarding the feasibility of consolidating the 
     Anchorage Terminal Radar Approach Control and the Anchorage 
     Air Route Traffic Control Center at the existing Anchorage 
     Air Route Traffic Control Center facility.
       (b) Appropriate Committees.--In this section, the term 
     ``appropriate committees'' means the Committee on Commerce, 
     Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee 
     on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of 
     Representatives.

  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, the amendment I have sent to the desk 
gives the Federal Aviation Administration a year to complete the study 
of the consolidation of the Anchorage Terminal Approach Control, 
TRACON, with the Anchorage Air Route Traffic Control Center at the 
center's existing facility.
  The current physical location will be facing significant demands this 
decade. In order to expand TRACON's current control room, it needs to 
be housed in a larger facility. What we are asking is a year to give 
the FAA ample time to complete this study while the Ted Stevens 
International Airport is undergoing expansion.
  I urge the adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 907) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, as far as I can see, we are waiting for 
Senator Santorum, who has a pending amendment, according to the 
unanimous consent agreement. Then there will be a Finance Committee 
amendment after the disposition of that amendment.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Santorum 
amendment be withheld at this time. That will leave us with the Harkin 
amendment, to my understanding.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 921

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished Senator 
from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, I send the amendment to the desk and ask it be 
reported.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Hollings], for Mr. 
     Harkin, for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Grassley, proposes 
     an amendment numbered 921.

  Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment 
be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To impose a civil penalty for the closure of an airport 
                       without sufficient notice)

       At the end of title II, insert the following:

     SEC. 217. CIVIL PENALTY FOR CLOSURE OF AN AIRPORT WITHOUT 
                   PROVIDING SUFFICIENT NOTICE.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 463 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following:

     ``SEC. 46319. CLOSURE OF AN AIRPORT WITHOUT PROVIDING 
                   SUFFICIENT NOTICE.

       ``(a) Prohibition.--A public agency (as defined in section 
     47102) may not close an airport listed in the national plan 
     of integrated airport systems under section 47103 without 
     providing written notice to the Administrator of the Federal 
     Aviation Administration at least 30 days before the date of 
     the closure.
       ``(b) Publication of Notice.--The Administrator shall 
     publish each notice received under subsection (a) in the 
     Federal Register.
       ``(c) Civil Penalty.--A public agency violating subsection 
     (a) shall be liable for a civil penalty of $10,000 for each 
     day that the airport remains closed without having given the 
     notice required by this section.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The analysis for chapter 463 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

``46319. Closure of an airport without providing sufficient note.''.


[[Page 14754]]

  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, this has to do with the notice, the 60-
day notice of the closing of an airport. It has been cleared on both 
sides. I think.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I offer an amendment with Senators Inhofe 
and Grassley that simply requires that an airport on the National Plan 
of Integrated Airport Systems, (NPIAS), cannot be closed down without 
giving the FAA 30 days' notice.
  That list includes over 3,000 airports including all commercial 
airports and many of the airports only used by general aviation, that 
is nonscheduled private aircraft so important to the efficient 
operation of businesses across our nation.
  Chicago's Meigs Field was included in this integrated system of 
airports until it was dug up in the middle of the night with no notice 
on March 30, leaving a number of airplanes trapped at the unusable 
facility. The city government made a unilateral decision to shut down 
the airport by bulldozing the landing strips, runaway, and taxiways. 
That action by the city was dangerous and at least one aircraft 
carrying State employees had to be turned away from the airport since 
notification that the airport was now closed had not been provided in 
advance.
  I do not dispute that it is within the purview of a local government 
or other operator evaluate the infrastructure needs of an area and move 
to close an airport. But, I do believe that they need to give 
reasonable notice of that intention. I would also note that almost 
every airport on the NPIAS system has received FAA funding for 
facilities and equipment.
  This provision is not retroactive and would not affect the city of 
Chicago for the closure of Meigs Field.
  I urge adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment?
  If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 921) was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 922

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I propose an amendment on behalf of Mr. 
Grassley and Mr. Baucus and others. I ask for its immediate 
consideration. I send the amendment to the desk.
  The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Mr. Grassley, 
     for himself and Mr. Baucus, proposes an amendment numbered 
     922.

  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

   (Purpose: To extend the Airport and Airway Trust Fund expenditure 
                               authority)

       On page 209, after line 13, add the following:

   TITLE VII--EXTENSION OF AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND EXPENDITURE 
                               AUTHORITY

     SEC. 701. EXTENSION OF EXPENDITURE AUTHORITY.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 9502(d) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to expenditures from 
     Airport and Airway Trust Fund) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``October 1, 2003'' and inserting ``October 
     1, 2006'', and
       (2) by inserting before the semicolon at the end of 
     subparagraph (A) the following: ``or the Aviation Investment 
     and Revitalization Vision Act''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (2) of section 9502(f) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``October 1, 2003'' and inserting ``October 1, 2006''.

  Mr. McCAIN. This is an amendment on behalf of the Finance Committee 
to make sure all authorizations here are in line with the jurisdiction 
and proper authorization responsibilities of the Finance Committee. I 
urge its adoption.
  Mr. President, I urge adoption of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 922) was agreed to.


                        REAGAN NATIONAL AIRPORT

  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to an issue of great 
importance to the people of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the 
operations at two airports important to all Senators, and to the issue 
of local control.
  I support the managers' amendment and the legislation before the 
Senate today. This is an important bill. I was very concerned when this 
bill passed the Senate Commerce Committee with an amendment that 
increased the number of flights at Reagan National Airport by 12. Those 
flights were designated to fly beyond the so-called ``perimeter''--a 
rule that restricts the length of flights at Reagan National to a 
maximum 1,250 miles.
  Through the managers' amendment today, the language increasing 
flights at Reagan National has been dropped. I appreciate the chairman 
of the Commerce Committee's willingness to work with me to see that 
this provision was not included in the final bill on the Senate floor.
  I have several very serious concerns about Congress increasing the 
number of flights beyond the perimeter at National Airport, all of 
which were detailed in a letter I submitted to the majority leader on 
May 9, 2003.
  There is a critical principle at stake here that cannot be overlooked 
by the Senate. The right of the people of Virginia to decide what is 
best for their communities without unwarranted Federal intrusion is at 
stake here. The responsibility for operating the airports at Reagan 
National and Dulles is up to the local and regional airport authority, 
not Congress. Yet each time this body considers FAA reauthorization, we 
must revisit attempts at Federal intrusion on an issue of local 
control. There is an extremely delicate balance between how Reagan 
National is designed to operate in conjunction with the international 
hub at Dulles Airport. Congressional intervention, even in the form of 
a few more flights, disrupts that balance and creates a slippery slope 
that undermines this region's ability to determine for itself what is 
in our own best interests.
  I believe that a permanent solution to this continual Federal 
intrusion into local affairs needs to be found. The Senate and House of 
Representatives should strengthen the mandate we have already given to 
the local airport authority to make decisions on whether to increase 
flights at Reagan National or not, especially with respect to flying 
beyond the perimeter.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. ALLEN. I would be glad to yield to the Senator from South 
Carolina.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the Senator. As you know, I voted against this 
amendment when it came before the Senate Commerce Committee. I agree 
with the Senator from Virginia that we should not change the slot rules 
at National whatsoever. It is foolhardy and is bad aviation policy. We 
should not change the rules just because of politics. They have served 
the local community well, enabling the expansion of Dulles while 
protecting those that live near the airport. Short hauls leave from 
National, and long hauls from Dulles. We may not like to drive all the 
way out to Dulles, but we built, with Federal airport grant moneys, 
that highway dedicated to access to Dulles. We used the law to plan for 
growth. We should not change it now at the behest of some. I yield back 
to the Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. ALLEN. I thank the Senator from South Carolina.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Will the Senator yield time?
  Mr. ALLEN. I yield time to the Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I also rise in 
support of the managers' amendment, and particularly for dropping the 
provision on adding long-haul flights at National Airport. The current 
aviation system, as it has evolved, is an intricately connected web of 
hubs, spokes, and direct flights. Some airlines thrive on the hub and 
spoke network, and some derive the ability to operate by flying 
directly between communities. However, I want to make clear a point on 
why it is so important that we maintain this balance between National 
Airport and Dulles Airport that was maintained by Congress in 1987, 
when we leased the facilities to the Metropolitan Washington Airports 
Authority. The slot rules have been in place since 1968 and should not 
be changed now.

[[Page 14755]]

  When the Interstate Highway System was developed in the 1950s, many 
communities located in the path of the new interstates suddenly 
prospered by being directly connected to the rest of the Nation. 
Communities that were once sound economic entities, but were left miles 
from any access to the interstate system suffered, shuttered their 
doors and many times just barely survived. The same is true in the 
aviation system. Not every community in this country can maintain an 
airport. Not every community can enjoy the economic benefits of a hub. 
But hub economics dictate that feed from small- and medium-sized 
communities is necessary for them to survive.
  National Airport is an important asset for those, like my 
constituents in West Virginia, who are trying to reach the capital 
region. Obviously, however, it can never become an international hub. 
The airport has only one runway and no ability to expand. National 
Airport serves a good and valuable purpose. My greatest concern is that 
by changing National Airport, Congress will hurt this area's ability to 
serve small- and medium-sized communities on the east coast, including 
my home State, West Virginia. The slot rule and perimeter rule were put 
in place at National Airport to maintain its important function while 
at the same time allowing the DC area to create a major international 
hub serving both Europe and South America. I would look forward to 
working with the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, the ranking 
member Senator Hollings and Senators Allen and Warner to find a 
permanent solution to this issue. I yield back to the Senator from 
Virginia.
  Mr. ALLEN. I thank the Senator from West Virginia and appreciate his 
support.
  Mr. WARNER. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. ALLEN. I yield to the senior Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator. Let me just say that I associate 
myself with the remarks of Senator Allen. Three years ago, during 
debate over this same bill, I stood on the floor of the Senate and 
fought this battle. I hope that we are not doing this again a few years 
down the road. I understand that despite the best efforts of 
counterparts in the House, Congressmen Wolf, Davis, Moran and Delegate 
Norton, the House of Representatives has unfortunately approved an FAA 
reauthorization bill that would increase flights at Reagan National by 
12 slots beyond the perimeter and 8 slots within the perimeter. I thank 
my colleague from Virginia and join him in agreeing to work with the 
Commerce Committee chairman and ranking member to see that this issue 
is resolved once and for all at Reagan National Airport. I yield back 
to my friend from Virginia.
  Mr. ALLEN. I appreciate the Senator's comments. In sum, let me just 
say that this issue is very important to the people of the Commonwealth 
of Virginia. We have a long and proud tradition of protecting our 
interests and our ability to govern our own actions. I fought those 
battles every step of the way in my public life--from my service in the 
Virginia House of Delegates until now. It is my responsibility as an 
elected official of the Commonwealth of Virginia to adhere to 
principles, fight for the will of Virginia, and protect the sovereignty 
of our people and their rights. I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to strongly 
support the Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act.
  I want to first applaud the tremendous leadership on this bill from 
my chairman on the Commerce Committee, Senator McCain, and Senator 
Hollings, the ranking member.
  This legislation reaffirms our Government's critical commitment to a 
safe, efficient, and state-of-the-art airline system for the 21st 
century--a commitment that is crucially important to my home State.
  The Seattle-Tacoma International Airport is the principal airport for 
the Northwest region, making it the Nation's 16th largest passenger 
airport, with over 26.5 million passengers annually on almost 40 
different airlines going in and out of the Seattle-Tacoma airport.
  Washington State is also the home to the ninth largest airline in the 
country, Alaska Airlines, which employs over 10,000 people and is one 
of the few airlines in the country actually posting growth rates over 
the last few years. In addition, Alaska is nationally recognized for 
its leadership to incorporate technology into its business model.
  As the proud home of Boeing's commercial aviation division, 
Washington State leads the Nation in large civil aircraft 
manufacturing.
  With Boeing and hundreds of smaller businesses in aerospace and 
aviation, we have over 75,000 workers designing and manufacturing the 
present and future of U.S. aircraft industry.
  Obviously, a solid, well functioning, state-of-the-art national air 
traffic system and a strong domestic aircraft manufacturing capability 
are critical to my State and our Nation.
  I am proud to say that this bipartisan legislation takes tremendous 
steps towards this goal in several ways.
  First, this bill increases funding for airport infrastructure 
investments that will help our Nation's airports make the improvements, 
upgrades and expansions necessary to meet our Nation's airline demands 
in the 21st century.
  The bill also increases the funding that will be used to upgrade the 
FAA air traffic control system, to ensure that our traffic controllers 
are given the resources they need to continue getting planes where they 
need to go--in the safest and most efficient manner.
  In addition, this bill addresses a critical resource need facing our 
Nation's airports since 9/11 increased security updates. The 
legislation not only provides $500 million in funding for security 
enhancements, but it ensures that this funding is not taken from the 
airport trust fund money that is already committed to make important 
structural upgrades and airport improvements.
  Last, in what I think is one of the most important contributions of 
this bill, the legislation includes a dramatic expansion in our 
Nation's commitment to aviation research and safety.
  Mr. President, a renewed commitment to research and development in 
the aerospace industry is absolutely necessary--and we need it now.
  The Final Report of the Commission on the Future of the United States 
Aerospace Industry argued that current Federal aerospace R&D is 
``insufficient and unfocused'' and recommended in the Federal 
Government significantly increase its investment in aerospace research 
to foster an efficient, secure, and safe aerospace transportation 
system.
  We must clearly recognize that if we are not willing to make the 
commitments to retain leadership in this realm, our allies on the other 
side of the Atlantic certainly are willing to take our place--in fact, 
this effort has become European policy.
  Indeed, the European Commission has declared in its ``STAR-21'' 
report that it is willing to explore ``all available means'' to ensure 
the competitiveness of the European aerospace sector--including Airbus.
  This support to the European aerospace sector comes in the form of 
substantial research and development, but also in direct product 
development grants, concessionary financing, and other direct 
subsidies.
  While we have chosen, as a matter of Government policy, not to pursue 
such direct subsidies or provide assistance for product development, we 
have been able to help the research and development effort through a 
variety of research programs that both of your agencies have pursued.
  It is time for the United States to reinforce our Nation's place as a 
leader in the aerospace sector--an industry is an absolutely crucial 
component of our domestic industrial base.
  For this reason, I am very proud that this bill includes provisions 
originally introduced by Senator Hollings, that would establish an 
Office of Aerospace and Aviation Liaison in the Department of 
Transportation that will draw upon staff from FAA, NASA, DHS,

[[Page 14756]]

DOD, DOC, and other appropriate agencies to coordinate Federal research 
programs, as well as establish goals and priorities for research.
  Such an office will be well equipped to meet the challenge of the 
Aerospace Commission and bring direction and coordination to our 
Federal support for long-term research and innovation.
  In addition, this bill authorizes almost $3 billion over the next 3 
years for FAA and NASA research priorities. This is a dramatic 
expansion of the research agenda, almost five times more than 
previously authorized funding--previous authorization was approximately 
$600 million over 3 years.
  As part of these research provisions, I am particularly proud to have 
worked with the committee to include funding and authority for future 
work on the durability and maintainability of advanced materials, such 
as composites.
  These next generation materials have been called the aluminum of the 
future. Indeed, given their strength, durability, lightweight and 
unique properties, composites are currently used in most major defense 
aircraft.
  Composites not only make for stronger, safer materials but also 
lighter and more efficient aircraft.
  Already, the Boeing Company has increased its use of composites in 
the production of the 777 and Airbus is also using composites in its 
planes. Additionally, Boeing has plans for even greater use in the 
production of the next generation of commercial airplanes.
  In addition to authorizing funds for general research in advanced 
materials, this legislation would direct the FAA Administrator to 
establish a ``Center for Excellence'' that would harness the great 
engineering research in materials science at path-breaking institutions 
like the University of Washington, which has taken great strides in 
pursuing work on how to advance the maintainability and durability of 
advanced materials and composites in large civilian aircraft.
  While we know that these materials hold tremendous potential, we need 
to be absolutely sure that they are safe and that we have the 
technologies and processes necessary to maintain the materials and 
ensure their durability.
  Such a center, which I have drafted in partnership with the 
University of Washington's Department of Engineering, would address 
these issues by facilitating close, working collaboration among 
industry, the FAA's Transportation Division, and academic institutions, 
to ensure that research matches the practical manufacturing needs.
  This center will advance efforts to capitalize on the potential of 
this field.
  In closing, Mr. President, as a government, we need to step up to the 
plate to ensure that our aerospace industry remains competitive and 
capable of leading the world toward the future for aerospace.
  This bill takes an important step in affirming our Nation's 
leadership in the areas of safety, research, infrastructure, and 
security, and I am proud to support it.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the FAA 
Authorization Act. However, I must express my serious concerns that two 
sections in the bill on streamlining, sections 47701 and 47703, may be 
interpreted in a manner that the committee never intended. The purpose 
of these sections is to cure delays that have occurred because of 
interagency wrangling and bureaucratic disputes. These sections call 
for the relevant agencies to undertake concurrent planning and 
environmental reviews for critical airport projects in order to ensure 
that the projects move forward expeditiously. They are not designed to 
circumvent NEPA and should be so used.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Senate's 
Federal Aviation Administration, FAA, reauthorization bill, S. 824, the 
Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act. Further, I share 
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman McCain's and Ranking Member 
Hollings' goal of enacting this legislation before the end of this 
fiscal year. If airports are going to plan for the future, Congress 
must avoid being forced into passing a series of stopgap measures that 
make such planning difficult.
  This legislation addresses the most critical component of FAA 
reauthorization--how to finance the operation and development of the 
nearly 3,500 airports eligible for Federal assistance. S. 824 
authorizes a total of $10.5 billion over 3 years for the Airport 
Improvement Program, AIP, a critical program that funds airport safety 
and capacity projects, among other programs. Additionally, this bill 
authorizes $23.2 billion for FAA operations through fiscal year 2006.
  At the same time we address the overall aviation funding challenges, 
I am pleased that this bill takes on the individual issues that go to 
the heart of securing commercial aviation against another terrorist 
attack. Installing Explosives Detection System, EDS, machines into 
airports is a necessity that we must grapple with and is part of a 
broader debate on the appropriate level of AIP funding that should go 
towards security-related projects. During fiscal year 2002, airports 
used over $561 million, or 17 percent of all of AIP funds, for security 
projects--this compared with an annual average of less than 2 percent 
through fiscal year 2001. As such, it is encouraging that S. 824 
creates an annual $500 million Aviation Security Capital Fund to help 
airports cope with post-9/11 security requirements like EDS 
installation. Funding for this capital fund would come out of the 
security fees currently levied by the Transportation Security 
Administration, TSA, and not AIP grant funding.
  S. 824 would also extend the Government's authority to issue war-risk 
insurance through fiscal year 2006, which would save the airlines more 
than $800 million annually. The recently enacted fiscal year 2003 Iraq 
supplemental bill authorized a 1-year extension of the program--through 
the end of fiscal year 2004--but by extending it through 2006, we can 
provide a small measure of financial stability to the airlines and not 
have to keep coming back every 6 months to revisit the issue.
  To try to improve FAA management, S. 824 establishes a committee of 
outside experts to oversee the operation and modernization of the air 
traffic control system--which has tripled in cost to an estimated $7.6 
billion since 1996. This bill also contains provisions designed to 
expedite the process for construction of airport capacity and safety 
projects, by allowing DOT to designate certain airport expansion 
proposals as National Capacity Projects, which would receive dedicated 
resources and expedited procedures for environmental reviews. This 
provision is intended to address the fact that, as the General 
Accounting Office, GAO, has reported, it takes anywhere between 10 and 
14 years for new runways to be built--and this has an adverse effect on 
efforts to increase the aviation system's capacity.
  As we consider this bill, I want to turn to the issue of small 
community air service. As we work to address the larger aviation 
issues, we cannot forget the challenges that small communities in 
Maine, and throughout the Nation, face in attracting and retaining air 
service. I have always believed that adequate, reliable air service in 
our Nation's rural areas is not simply a luxury or a convenience. It is 
an imperative. And quite frankly, I have serious concerns about the 
impact deregulation of the airline industry has had on small- and 
medium-sized cities in rural areas, like Maine. The fact is, since 
deregulation, many of these communities, in Maine and elsewhere, have 
experienced a decrease in flights and size of aircraft while seeing an 
increase in fares. More than 300 have lost air service altogether.
  Many air carriers are experiencing an unprecedented financial crisis, 
and the first routes on the chopping block will be those to small- and 
medium-sized communities. This will only increase demand for the two 
existing Federal forms of assistance, Essential Air Service and the 
Small Community Air Service Grant Program.
  Given the challenge faced by small communities in retaining their 
existing air service, I was pleased that, during our May 1 markup, the 
Commerce Committee unanimously accepted two amendments I authored to 
address this

[[Page 14757]]

issue. The first amendment would create a new Small Community Air 
Service Ombudsman within DOT. The ombudsman's mission would be to work 
with carriers and communities to develop air service. This provision is 
intended to give small communities a seat at the table as DOT crafts 
national air transportation policy.
  The second amendment approved by the committee creates a National 
Commission on Small Community Air Service. The 9-member commission 
would report back to Congress after 2 years to describe the problems 
faced by small communities with regard to access to commercial air 
service and suggest legislative solutions. I believe that, given the 
complexity of the issue, having all of the stakeholders sit down and 
consider what can and can't be done will be extremely helpful as 
Congress exercises its aviation oversight authority.
  I also wanted to address the Essential Air Service, EAS, provisions 
in the bill. EAS provides subsidized air service to 125 small 
communities in the country--including 4 in Maine--that would otherwise 
be cut off from the Nation's air transportation network. As approved by 
the committee, S. 824 reauthorized and flat-funds the program for 3 
years, and includes certain changes to the program, which are 
drastically scaled back from what the administration proposed earlier 
this year for EAS ``reform.'' The administration had called for EAS 
towns to provide up to 25 percent matching contributions to keep their 
air service. The committee bill creates a number of new programs to 
help EAS communities grow their ridership, including a marketing 
incentive program that would financially reward EAS towns for achieving 
ridership goals. With regard to local cost-sharing--the centerpiece of 
the administration's EAS proposal--the Commerce bill would create a 
pilot program to allow for a 10 percent annual community match at no 
more than 10 airports within 100 miles of a large airport.
  While the cost-sharing provisions in the committee bill are much less 
strict than the administration proposal, and could only be applied to 
an EAS community under certain specific conditions, I remain concerned 
about the concept of requiring EAS towns--some of which are cash 
strapped and economically depressed--from kicking in hundreds of 
thousands of dollars annually to keep their air service. For example, 
if Augusta or Rockland, ME, were to be chosen for the cost-sharing 
pilot program, they would have to come up with over $120,000 annually 
to retain their air service.
  As such, I strongly supported Senator Bingaman's amendments to strike 
the cost-sharing section from the bill and am pleased that it has been 
approved. The EAS program is not perfect, and Congress certainly needs 
to do all we can to keep subsidy levels as low as possible. I look 
forward to working with members of the Commerce Committee and the 
Senate on the issue, but I believe that requiring cost sharing in 
today's aviation environment is clearly a wrong headed approach.
  In short, when considering this legislation, I believe that we need 
do all we can to help small communities maintain their access to the 
national transportation system during these difficult times.
  Mr. President, in conclusion, I am hopeful that my colleagues will 
join me in taking this step toward strengthening and improving Federal 
aviation policy today. S. 824 enhances the Federal investment in our 
Nation's aviation system, and the funding in the bill is critical to 
the development of America's airports, big and small. Furthermore, 
quick passage of this 3-year legislation is key to allow airports to 
plan for the future. As such, I am pleased to support it.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my friend and 
colleague, the Senator from Arizona, to bring before you S. 824, the 
Aviation Investment and Revitalization Vision Act, which reauthorizes 
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and its programs for the next 
3 years.
  The reauthorization of the FAA is a vitally important piece of 
legislation that the Senate must pass this year. It is the first real 
economic stimulus bill that the Senate has considered this year.
  I cannot emphasize the importance of a vibrant and strong aviation 
industry. It is critical to our Nation's long-term economic growth. It 
is also vitally important to the economic future of countless small and 
local communities that are linked to the rest of the nation and world 
through aviation.
  The significance of aviation to our economy cannot be overstated. 
Over 10 million people are employed directly in the aviation industry. 
For every job in the aviation industry, 15 related jobs are produced. 
The aviation industry accounts for over $800 billion of our gross 
domestic product.
  The growth of the modern aviation system has created vast economic 
efficiencies such as just in time delivery, allowed the air cargo 
industry to grow exponentially, and has opened up the world to millions 
of Americans.
  Just as the aviation industry is a catalyst of growth for the 
national economy, airports are a catalyst of growth for their local 
communities. Airports create over $500 billion in economic activity and 
directly employ 1.9 million people. Almost 2 million people and 38,000 
tons of cargo pass through our Nation's airports each day. In my State 
of West Virginia, aviation represents $3.4 billion of the State's gross 
domestic product and directly and indirectly employs over 51,000 
people.
  Aviation also links our Nation's small and rural citizens and 
communities to the national and world marketplace. My home State of 
West Virginia has been able to attract firms from Asia and Europe 
because of reliable access to their West Virginia investments.
  Without access to an integrated air transportation network, small 
communities can not attract the investment necessary to grow or allow 
home grown businesses to expand. A modern and adequately funded network 
is fundamental to making sure that all Americans can participate in the 
economy.
  No question exists that since the tragedy of September 11, aviation 
in this country has been permanently changed.
  When the Senate debated the last FAA reauthorization bill, capacity 
and competition issues were at the forefront of that debate. We have 
seen a decrease in the demand for air travel, hundreds of thousand of 
aerospace and aviation employees have lost their jobs and the economic 
pain has rippled through the economy. We will not have an economic 
recovery in this country until we have a recovery in the aviation 
industry.
  Even though these issues seem less important today, they will again 
become serious challenges for the industry. In the drive to expand our 
aviation infrastructure to meet future needs, the resources for 
aviation security will also have to increase. More passenger and cargo 
will add strains to aviation security.
  Now is the time to make the investments in air traffic modernization 
and airport development and research. Aviation security must be ready 
to handle the future growth that will occur. We must also continue to 
develop new aviation security processes and technologies to meet future 
challenges.
  The legislation before us builds upon our commitment to improving the 
aviation infrastructure of the nation that started with the landmark 
Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century. I believe that 
this legislation meets the challenges facing the FAA and the aviation 
industry in the years ahead.
  This bill focuses on improving our Nation's aviation safety and 
security, airport and air service development, and aeronautical 
research. While my distinguished colleague has provided an excellent 
overview of the bill, I would like to highlight some areas of the bill 
that I believe are particularly important.
  In this bill, we have created a stable stream of funding for security 
upgrades at our Nation's airports. Not only will these funds allow 
airports to improve security they will allow airports to improve the 
efficiency of these security measures.

[[Page 14758]]

  In addition, the legislation provides for increases in funding for 
airport safety and capacity projects, which are a true economic 
stimulus.
  I am very proud that the bill expands upon our commitment to making 
sure small and rural communities have access to air transportation 
services.
  Finally, we have authorized a significant increase in aeronautical 
and aviation research in order to preserve America's leadership in 
these industries.
  No higher goal exists than the safety and security of the Nation's 
airports and airspace. Over the past 18 months, we have worked every 
day to improve security in our airports and on our airplanes. However, 
until this bill, we have fallen short on providing funding to make sure 
our Nation's airports have the resources available to make the required 
improvements.
  Airports estimate that they have $3 billion in unmet security 
infrastructure needs. The administration's Homeland Security proposal 
did not include any provisions to address this huge need. Airports have 
been forced to tap their expansion and development funds to pay for 
security. It makes no sense to raid funds for safety improvements for 
security improvements. The security of our Nation is a Federal 
responsibility and the Federal Government must pay for it.
  One of the most important provisions in this bill is the creation of 
a $500 million fund, financed by security fees established by the 
Aviation and Transportation Security Act to assist airports with 
capital security costs. This new fund will also stop the diversion of 
airport development funds meant for safety and capacity enhancements. 
We will be able to pay for new security requirements while 
simultaneously improving safety and expanding capacity.
  Even in these difficult budgetary times, we were able to modestly 
increase the Airport Improvement Program funding, which will provide 
the economy a real stimulus through direct and indirect job creation. 
Airport development is economic development as airports are economic 
development for their local communities. It is estimated that U.S. 
Airports are responsible for nearly $507 billion each year in total 
economic activity nationwide. Investment in airport infrastructure is a 
real economic stimulus that creates both immediate jobs and long-term 
economic development.
  In order to facilitate airport development, I am pleased that this 
bill includes much of the text of the legislation that Senator 
Hutchison and I worked on last Congress to streamline and expedite the 
airport development process. This country needs to expand its airport 
infrastructure. Without a substantial increase in this area, aviation 
delays would increase resulting in billions of dollars of costs to the 
economy.
  Today, we also meet the challenge of making sure our small and rural 
communities have access to the nation's air transportation network. I 
am very concerned that air carriers have abandoned small and rural 
markets disproportionately when reducing their service levels. We 
cannot let these communities go without adequate and affordable air 
service--their future depends upon it.
  I am enormously pleased that the bill extends and expands the Small 
Community Air Service Development Program, which I fought for in AIR 
21. One hundred forty communities applied for 40 available grants under 
this initiative. This program has assisted these 40 communities, 
including Charleston, WV, in attracting new air service. This program 
has proven an innovative and flexible tool for communities to address 
air service needs. Under our legislation, another 120 communities will 
be able to participate.
  Many of our most isolated and vulnerable communities whose only 
service is through the Essential Air Service Program have indicated 
that they would like to develop innovative and flexible programs 
similar to those communities who received Small Community Air Service 
Development grants to improve the quality of their air service.
  It is for this reason that I, along with Senator Lott, developed the 
Small Community and Rural Air Service Revitalization Act of 2003, which 
has been included in this legislation. The legislation reauthorizes the 
Essential Air Service (EAS) program and creates a series of new 
innovative pilot programs for EAS communities to participate in to 
stimulate passenger demand for air service in their communities.
  Under the bill, communities are given the option on continuing their 
EAS as is or they may apply to participate in new incentive programs to 
help them develop new and innovative solutions to increasing local 
demand for air service. The EAS Marketing and Community Flexibility 
Programs would provide communities new resources and tools to implement 
locally developed plans to improve their air service. By providing 
communities the ability to design their own service proposals, a 
community has the ability to develop a plan that meets its locally 
determined needs, improves air service choices, and gives the community 
a greater stake in the EAS program.
  Small and rural communities are the first to bear the brunt of bad 
economic times and the last to see the benefits of good times. The 
general economic downturn and the dire straits of the aviation industry 
have placed exceptional burdens on air service to our most isolated 
communities. The Federal Government must provide additional resources 
and tools for small communities to help themselves attract adequate air 
service. The Federal Government must make sure that our most vulnerable 
towns and cities are linked to the rest of the nation. This legislation 
authorizes the tools and resources necessary to attract air service, 
related economic development, and most importantly expand their 
connections to the national and global economy.
  This bill meets the challenges facing our aviation system--increasing 
security, expanding airport safety and capacity, and making sure our 
smallest communities have access to the network. We can all be proud of 
this bill.
  Finally, I would like to again thank Senator McCain, Senator Lott, 
and Senator Hollings for all their hard work and commitment to 
developing and securing passage of this legislation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I understand we are waiting for the 
possibility of one other amendment. Other than that, we will be 
prepared, at the discretion of the leaders, to vote on the second-
degree amendment to the Specter amendment, and then we would be 
prepared to go to final passage.
  In anticipation of that, I would like to thank all who have been 
involved with this legislation, and specifically my dear friend from 
South Carolina. He and I have worked side by side for many years on 
many issues that have come before the Commerce Committee. I thank him 
for his usual extreme courtesy, consideration, and efficiency.
  I thank the staff on both sides for their excellent work.
  Also, I thank Senators Lott and Rockefeller who really did the hard 
labor in bringing this legislation to the floor of the Senate. Senator 
Rockefeller and Senator Lott worked assiduously during numerous 
hearings with a full appreciation and understanding of the impact this 
legislation has on the United States of America. I thank all of them.
  Again, I thank our loyal staff for all the great work they have done.
  I look forward to swift passage of this legislation.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me also thank the distinguished 
chairman of our committee who has led the fight on the floor today. He 
did a most efficient job.
  With respect to, of course, Senator Lott and Senator Rockefeller of 
the Subcommittee on Aviation of the Commerce Committee, they are the 
ones who did the lion's share of the work with the hearings and 
preparing us so that we could handle this with expedition today.
  I thank staff on both sides.
  Let me add this for my good friend, the Senator from Mississippi. I 
happen to favor the Specter amendment for the simple reason that I 
cannot understand the Federal Aviation Administration requiring rules 
of safety for repair facilities in the United States but

[[Page 14759]]

not requiring those same rules of safety for repair facilities by the 
U.S. contractors for U.S. aircraft. I just can't get that separation in 
my mind. I have listened closely. I hate to not come down on the side 
of the Senator from Mississippi because he has been our chairman and 
has led the way all day here.
  I say that publicly because, on the Democratic side of the aisle, 
there could be those who would favor language and the admonition of the 
Senator from Mississippi in the perfecting amendment.
  Senator Boxer has spoken in behalf of Senator Specter's amendment. I 
happen to favor it. Usually we note at the desk the disposition on this 
side. I don't want to mislead.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent, with the 
agreement of both sides, that Senator Stevens be recognized to offer 
one final amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Alaska.


                           Amendment No. 923

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Alaska [Mr. Stevens] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 923.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

 (Purpose: To amend section 41703 of title 49, United States Code, to 
  support the United States presence in the global air cargo industry)

       At the end of title V, add the following new section:

     SEC. 521. UNITED STATES PRESENCE IN GLOBAL AIR CARGO 
                   INDUSTRY.

       Section 41703 is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(e) Cargo in Alaska.--
       ``(1) In general.--For the purposes of subsection (c), 
     eligible cargo taken on or off any aircraft at a place in 
     Alaska in the course of transportation of that cargo by any 
     combination of 2 or more air carriers or foreign air carriers 
     in either direction between a place in the United States and 
     a place outside the United States shall not be deemed to have 
     broken its international journey in, be taken on in, or be 
     destined for Alaska.
       ``(2) Eligible cargo.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the 
     term `eligible cargo' means cargo transported between Alaska 
     and any other place in the United States on a foreign air 
     carrier (having been transported from, or thereafter being 
     transported to, a place outside the United States on a 
     different air carrier or foreign air carrier) that is 
     carried--
       ``(A) under the code of a U.S. air carrier providing air 
     transportation to Alaska;
       ``(B) on an air carrier way bill of U.S. air carrier 
     providing air transportation to Alaska; or
       ``(C) under a term arrangement or block space agreement 
     with an air carrier.''.
       (D) under the code of a U.S. air carrier for purposes of 
     transportation within the U.S.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment deals with protecting 
existing jobs and creating new jobs on the ground in Alaska in 
connection with the airport I am honored to have named after me.
  Mr. President, as I say, this amendment is about jobs--protecting 
existing jobs and creating new jobs on the ground in Alaska.
  Anchorage is the top-ranked cargo airport in North America: 600 wide 
body cargo carriers per week; 19 airlines providing all-cargo main deck 
freighter service through Anchorage; 9 hours by air from 95 percent of 
the industrialized world; 3000 miles from Tokyo; 3000 miles from New 
York city; 4000 miles from London; 4000 miles from Frankfurt; 4400 
miles from Hong Kong.
  Foreign airlines provide much of this international cargo lift to and 
from the U.S. through Anchorage. Federal law allows these planes to 
land in Alaska, creating an enormous number of jobs on the ground.
  But Federal law, as currently interpreted, does not allow U.S. 
carriers to use excess capacity on their foreign partners to move 
international cargo from Anchorage to the lower 48. The foreign carrier 
must make the full trip by itself. It is prohibited from transferring 
cargo to or from a U.S. carrier flying the international leg of the 
journey.
  Anchorage is under attack from foreign cargo hubs seeking to exploit 
this weakness. Cities such as Tashkent, Kharbarovsk, and Anadyr in Asia 
and Calgary and Vancouver in Canada are aggressively pursuing the cargo 
carriers that Anchorage now serves.
  We are losing U.S. jobs to foreign countries because of it.
  This amendment will reverse that decline.
  American carriers, both cargo carriers and passenger carriers, which 
accept cargo will make use of this amendment in various ways: 
relocation of sort and transfer operations from Asia back to the United 
States; enhanced service to U.S., Asian, and European cities; increased 
opportunities for integrated logistics products sold by U.S. companies; 
more opportunities to strengthen U.S. carriers through international 
partnering.
  This requires a narrow modification of title 49.
  My amendment does not create more flights by foreign carriers. It 
does not reduce the number of flights flown by U.S. carriers. All cargo 
moving under this authority must be shipped on a U.S. codeshare or 
similar arrangement, such as a U.S. waybill.
  It preserves and creates American jobs in the increasingly important 
global air cargo sector.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 923.
  The amendment (No. 923) was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that with regard 
to the amendment that was proposed on behalf of Senators Inouye and 
Voinovich, that Senator Voinovich's name be deleted from that 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote on 
the Lott second-degree amendment take place at 5:45, immediately 
followed by either a voice vote or recorded vote on the underlying 
Specter amendment, followed by final passage.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 914

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered on the 
Lott amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have.
  Mr. REID. I thank the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from Mississippi. The yeas and nays have been ordered 
and the clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), 
the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), the Senator from Florida 
(Mr. Graham), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Jeffords), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``nay''.

[[Page 14760]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICE (Mr. Chambliss). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 42, nays 52, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 224 Leg.]

                                YEAS--42

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Inhofe
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Shelby
     Smith
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--52

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Byrd
     Edwards
     Graham (FL)
     Jeffords
     Kerry
     Lieberman
  The Amendment (No. 914) was rejected.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to vitiate the 
yeas and nays on the Specter amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment numbered 905.
  The amendment (No. 905) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee 
substitute, as amended.
  The committee substitute, as amended, was agreed to.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read 
the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the clerk will 
report the House companion bill.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 2115) to amend Title 49, United States Code, 
     to reauthorize programs for the Federal Aviation 
     Administration, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the text of the 
Senate measure is inserted in lieu of the House language and the bill 
is read the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the next vote, final passage of the FAA 
reauthorization, will be the last vote of the evening. We will have a 
vote tomorrow morning at 10 a.m.
  After that 10 a.m. we will not have further votes until Tuesday. No 
votes on Monday. We will be going to Medicare prescription drugs on 
Monday. We will come in early afternoon on Monday for opening 
statements. We will have no votes on Monday. I believe that is pretty 
much it for the schedule.
  Later tonight, after talking to the Democratic leader, if there is 
any change in the schedule, we will let people know. The next vote is 
the last of the evening and we will vote at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. I ask for the yeas and nays on final passage.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall the 
bill pass?
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), 
the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Edwards), the Senator from Florida 
(Mr. Graham), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Jeffords), the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), and the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. 
Lieberman) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``yea''.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 94, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 225 Leg.]

                                YEAS--94

     Akaka
     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Clinton
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Conrad
     Cornyn
     Corzine
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     Dayton
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stabenow
     Stevens
     Sununu
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Byrd
     Edwards
     Graham (FL)
     Jeffords
     Kerry
     Lieberman
  The bill (H.R. 2115), as amended, was passed.
  (The bill will be printed in a future edition of the Record.)
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move 
to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate insists 
on its amendments and requests a conference with the House.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chambliss) appointed Mr. McCain, Mr. 
Stevens, Mr. Burns, Mr. Lott, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Inouye, 
Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Breaux conferees on the part of the Senate.

                          ____________________