FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. PALAZZO. Mr. Chairman, I rise to join Mr. Hall, chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, to urge all Members to support passage of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011. This is a good and balanced bill that will help advance important modernization of safety programs at the FAA, and do so in a fiscally responsible manner.

The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, which I chair, held an oversight hearing on February 16 that focused on FAA's research and development activities. Witnesses from FAA, industry, an external advisory panel to FAA, and the DOT Inspector General spoke in general agreement about the importance of FAA's research and development portfolio, with the non-agency witnesses also offering constructive suggestions for improvement.

Of chief importance to the agency and industry is development and implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System program. NextGen will modernize our Nation's air traffic control system, increasing its capacity, safety, security, and efficiency. But this ambitious program will not succeed without a well structured, well managed research and development program that will deliver appropriate technologies when and where they are required.

To offer a few examples, currently there is NextGen-related research focused on increasing our weather prediction capability, research to better understand human factors in a highly automated environment, wake turbulence prediction, and research on aircraft technologies.

What we are asking FAA to do is to prioritize and make choices. Most folks in Washington and at home acknowledge that we cannot afford business as usual by routinely increasing Federal spending year after year. This bill is a responsible approach to pushing the FAA forward, but doing so wisely.

Mr. Chair, I rise to join with Mr. HALL, Chairman of the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, to urge all Members to support passage of H.R. 658, the FAA Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2011. This is a good and balanced bill that will help advance important modernization and safety programs at the FAA, and to do so in a fiscally responsible manner.

The Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee, which I chair, held an oversight hearing on February 16 that focused on FAA's research and development activities. Witnesses from FAA, industry, an external advisory panel to FAA, and the DOT Inspector General spoke in general agreement about the importance of FAA's research and development portfolio, with the non-agency witnesses also offering constructive suggestions for improvement.

Of chief importance to the agency and industry is development and implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System program. NextGen will modernize our nation's air traffic control system, increasing its capacity, safety, security, and efficiency, but this ambitious program will not succeed without a well-structured, well-managed research and development program that will deliver appropriate technologies when and where they're required. To offer a few examples, currently there is NextGen-related research focused on increasing our weather prediction capability; research to better understand human factors in a highly automated environment; wake turbulence prediction; and research on aircraft technologies. Ultimately, tens of billions of dollars are at stake both by government and industry if we're to enable the full realization of NextGen, and ensure its success the agency needs a strong R&D program.

Title X of H.R. 658 also supports FAA's traditional safety research, and it directs the agency--in coordination with NASA--to assess the environmental impact of aviation. To be clear, the environmental research will help FAA better measure the effects of aviation, and where warranted, to develop technologies to mitigate them. For example, using biomass-based feedstock to develop jet fuel. But just as importantly, an environmental assessment will also give industry a baseline against which progress on impacts can be measured, which is a metric we do not have today.

There are some Members who may argue that this bill is counterproductive because it reduces FAA's authorization levels, asserting, for instance, that it imperils public safety by eliminating safety-related research. To those who raise such claims, I respectfully disagree. In this bill, we're not eliminating any program. What we are asking FAA to do is to prioritize and make choices. Most folks in Washington and at home acknowledge that we cannot afford `business as usual' by routinely increasing federal spending year after year. This bill is a responsible approach to pushing the FAA forward, but doing so wisely.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source