[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 7744-7745]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




   LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW FAA TO CONTINUE WITH ADOPTION OF OEI 
                                CRITERIA

                                  _____
                                 

                          HON. JAMES P. MORAN

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 9, 2014

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring attention to a proposed 
policy that could have a significant adverse effect on jobs, private 
property, tax revenues, and economic development in several major 
American cities that host airports, and their surrounding communities.
  The proposed change seeks to significantly alter current criteria 
used to evaluate structure heights around airports by changing the way 
a single engine failure at the moment of takeoff scenario is 
considered. This more rigorous standard would effectively lower the 
maximum permissible structure height around airports, affecting nearly 
4,000 existing buildings in 48 States that would exceed the new 
criteria, not to mention a number of planned developments.
  No one disputes aviation safety must be the top priority when 
considering these proposals. However, every air carrier is already 
currently required to individually plan for a single engine failure 
scenario. These contingency plans may result in costly measures for the 
carriers such as greater fuel burn, reduced cargo, or reduced numbers 
of passengers. For this reason, FAA has historically considered OEI as 
an economic issue.
  Given the potential far-reaching economic impact of this change and 
the competing economic interest at stake, we believe that this action 
should only be accomplished in accordance with standard rulemaking 
procedures, requiring a cost-benefit analysis with input from OMB and 
other agencies, and taking into consideration the real-world effects of 
such a

[[Page 7745]]

change. A bipartisan, bicameral group of legislators wrote to Secretary 
Foxx and Administrator Huerta earlier this year asking for this very 
thing.
  Last month, FAA posted a notice of policy change to the Federal 
Register announcing their intention to proceed with consideration of 
OEI via a change to policy, thus bypassing the rigors of a formal 
rulemaking. This action allows FAA to circumvent the rigors of cost-
benefit and federalism analysis under Executive Order 12866 by calling 
this significant change to Part 77 a policy change, when it is, in 
fact, a rule change.
  I, along with a bipartisan group of my colleagues, have introduced 
legislation today that would allow FAA to continue with adoption of OEI 
criteria only if the policy is adopted via a formal rulemaking, 
requiring input from OMB, OIRA, and other agencies, as well as a 
comprehensive cost-benefit analysis weighing competing economic 
interest and proposed practices versus current ones. This bill applies 
only to OEI consideration, and would not preempt the agency's ability 
to act in the event of an emergency situation.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

                          ____________________